August 25, 2008
Can't let it go.
The Campaign for UNHealthy Families continues it's righteous meltdown about the Alpha Center ad that appeared last week in the Sioux Falls School District Directory alongside all the other ads "targeted at kids." (You know, the 100 other kid-targeted ads in the 88 page booklet like the ads including those from area hospitals, heating and cooling companies, real estate agents, car repairs shops and high-speed internet.)
Don't these people realize that they have greatly helped the Alpha Center drive the truth home that "Abortion Hurts Women?" Every time they cry foul they give another opportunity for the ads message to hit a broader audience. In terms of dollars spent, this ad will surely go down as the one with the greatest bang for its buck.
At tonight's school board meeting, the Campaign for UNHealthy Families rallied their 15 or so people for a full-court press against school board members to get them to publicly repent, renounce the ad and change all related policies and procedures. A dozen or so parents on the other side showed up so the school board could judge who is being reasonable and who is not.
Do the anti-life extremists realize they are only making it more difficult in the future for anything related to Planned Parenthood to filter it's way into the schools? But we are dealing with hysteria here not rational reasonable people. Yes, some parents are upset. Good reporting on that part Argus Leader. But, whoops, I noticed you neglected to point out there are scads of parents who aren't offended and outraged in the least.
The hypocrisy of all this is blatant. The same week they have their meltdown over this ad for bringing politics into schools they are forming student UNHealthy Family Campaign groups on our high school campuses.
Here are some highlights from tonight's school board meeting. Board President Darin Daby spoke to the issue first.
"As a board we failed to anticipate all of the possible outcomes on the sale of advertising and partnerships that are viewed as district publications. We understand that it is our responsibility that all of the information put in front of our students is appropriate."
He said the district will reevaluate their policies. People from the community were then allowed five minutes each to voice their opinions.
Leah took five minutes to tell the school board members she wouldn't have been there tonight had not the Alpha Center been there to help her as she struggled with her abortion. She said the ad is a helpful and necessary ad and whether it's viewed by a child or an adult there is no harm that comes from the ad itself. She noted it would have helped her when she was fifteen years old to know that there was an option other than abortion.
South Dakota NARAL leader Casey Murschel spoke against the ad and saying they've received a lot of calls and a lot of comments. She said it's a political ad. She shared her past involvement with PTA's in Sioux Falls and said this is not how it has always been done.
Kimberly Martinez from the Alpha Center clarified they are a 501c3 non-profit and therefore not political. They ran the ad and not the VoteYesForLife.com campaign. She said the purpose of the ad was not political but to do two things 1) help women as they deal with the aftermath of abortion and 2) help women in crisis pregnancy situations. She said the other side is making that political. She reminded the school district of the relationship it has with the Alpha Center in the past working together for abstinence education and a variety of other things. There were two factors that motivated them to place the ad - one being that the publication is geared to parents not students and second is the growing number of middle-aged women who need post-abortive help. She said the Alpha Center has had two women come to them as a result of the ad and they were glad they found the ad because they said they needed help. She said the purpose of the ad was not to tell people how to vote but to tell about their services to the community. She noted that the other side is on a campaign to bully the school board into changing their policy. To quote directly from her statement:
In fact, an organized effort to call the Sioux Falls School District in opposition to this ad was emailed and blogged from Planned Parenthood and others of like mind. I hope that the Sioux Falls School District will see this for what it is: an attempt by a political organization to bully them in an effort to raise public awareness of their issue.Lastly, for those parents represented here tonight who state they might disagree with the placement of this ad or with the message of the ad as a whole, I wholeheartedly understand the sensitivity of this issue and know you will recognize that this is a directory geared primarily at parents and we are an organization trying to serve a growing number of Sioux Falls mothers who are asking for help dealing with emotional trauma after a past abortion. It is not a derogatory ad nor an obscene ad but rather an informational ad for women to know where they can find help.
Further, as you and I and others in this community send our youth to school to be educated, I think we can all agree that it is the important issues of our day, like this, that allow us unique opportunities to educate our children. That’s why we find newspapers, magazines and other similar materials that discuss today’s issues available to children in the schools. The content of these publications are not censored and are targeted directly to youth to utilize for research and reports. A school directory targeted to the parents of our youth should NOT be censored.
Remember, Planned Parenthood keeps no records of what happens to women after they walk out of their abortion appointment and they offer no aftercare of any sort to women post-abortion, nor is there ANY ongoing contact with ANY doctor or staff. Planned Parenthood therefore has NOTHING to contribute to the discussion of whether or not abortion hurts women as they have no expertise in this matter.
Next up was anti-life local vocal Dave Wagner. He talked about being a former teacher and about all his friends still working in the district. He had handouts to give to the school board. He said this greatly upsets "some of us." He had to be stopped by a school board member from continuing because he wanted to argue the validity of abortion. He compared the Alpha Center ad in the yellow ages with the one in the school publication and noted how the latter has campaign slogans in it. He was then interrupted again because his time was spent.
Next was Kristi, a mother of three girls in the Sioux Falls District. She said that she had not seen the ad until she heard all the fuss, but was not offended by it when she did go look at it. She said she talked to her kids about and her high school daughter said that none of the kids at school she talked to about that ad had seen it or heard anything about it. She said there is no need to change the policy and that she is surprised that they are spending valuable time on this when they have so many actual issues that matter on their agenda. She countered Casey Murschel's earlier statement about materials that have gone home in kids' Friday folders from the PTA groups and how they were never scrutinized by the PTA. She sees no problem with it as long as there is a disclaimer, as there was, that this is not being endorsed by the Sioux Falls School District.
Can we put this to bed now? No, let's not. I have one more thought…
Case closed on the question of whether or not abortion hurts women. Those who say otherwise are callous toward women. Science aside, common sense and reason should be enough to show us that people have complications from far less significant medical "procedures" than abortion and here we have one involving pregnancy - which fully engages a woman's physical and emotional capacities (both of which go far past the capacities of men) - to suggest one can just interrupt what is unfolding naturally there and believe there will be no fall out - these folks are delusional at the expense of women's health and public safety. They advocate playing Russian Roulette with a major medical procedure affecting women and remarkably they openly don't care about the women who don't fare so well.
Picture credit: KSFY
Comments on Can't let it go. »
School District apologizes for Abortion Ad » South DaCola @ 7:46 am
[…] Pastor(?) DooHickey over at VoicesCrazy has a hissy fit. « Our Very First South DaCola Fest | […]
four @ 8:28 am
Well, after reading the Argus this morning, it sounds as if Mr. Daby and the school district are acting like puppies with their tails between their legs. To think they would fold that quickly to a special interest group is amazing. (I know you can't always believe the Argus.) But, if the article is true, I guess now the athiests can come forward and object to the First United Methodist Church ad because it appears that the school district is endorsing only Methodists. Or all the protestants of the district please come forward because of the ad from Catholic Family Services- I mean. come on, the public school district endorsing Catholic charities. Don't they have their own school system? Even the ad for organ donation is such a personal decision, one that not everyone believes in. I could find it offensive that my children are exposed to that subject. I hope Casey, PP and UNhealthy Families remember that is what is good for the goose is good for the gander. As a parent you can bet I will be watching very closely from now on everything that comes home in my kids backpack. I think Mr. Daby opened up a can of worms with his apology. Now we will see if the policy gets changed.
Some Dude @ 9:26 am
"She said she talked to her kids about and her high school daughter said that none of the kids at school she talked to about that ad had seen it or heard anything about it."
So the only way the ad worked was because people are upset over it - students didn't even see it? Perhaps the goal was to upset people, not advertise a service. Sounds like a political ad to me.
Some Dude @ 12:39 pm
If they'd have just left out the large font in the middle of the ad that says "abortion hurts women", you'd be fine. You may hold that statement to be true, but to the rest of the world, it's a political message.
Amy @ 1:28 pm
Dude:
You say: "If they'd have just left out the large font in the middle of the ad that says "abortion hurts women", you'd be fine. You may hold that statement to be true, but to the rest of the world, it's a political message."
On the contrary, Here is a portion of the legal opinion on partial birth abortion rendered by the US Supreme Court - you know, the same body that gave you Roe v. Wade - also part of "the rest of the world":
"This Court has confirmed the validity of drawing boundaries to prevent practices that extinguish life and are close to actions that are condemned. Glucksberg, supra, at 732–735, and n. 23. The Act also recognizes that respect for human life finds an ultimate expression in a mother’s love for her child. Whether to have an abortion requires a difficult and painful moral decision, Casey, 505 U. S., at 852–853, which some women come to regret. In a decision so fraught with emotional consequence, some doctors may prefer not to disclose precise details of the abortion procedure to be used." (Note: EMOTIONAL CONSEQUENCE. For a definition of "emotional consequence offered in the 8th Circuit opinion, see below.)
And recently from the 8th Circuit's decision supporting SD's informed consent law - ruling against Planned Parenthood, in which the 8th circuit recognized supported scientific facts: "A consent to an abortion is not voluntary and informed, unless, in addition to any other information that must be disclosed under the common law doctrine, the physician provides that pregnant woman with the following:…(e) A description of all known medical risks of the procedure and statistically significant risk factors to which the pregnant woman would be subjected, including:
(i) Depression and related psychological distress;
(ii) Increased risk of suicide ideation and suicide;"
In other words, by legal findings and medical statistical findings, codified into law - ABORTION HURTS WOMEN.
It is not a political message anymore than "drunk driving kills" is. It is becoming predictable typical behavior for the pro-death camp to divert the discussion to something completely unrelated, such as this most recent case of advertising meltdown and mania. Diversion, diversion, diversion BECAUSE, they can't win in a factual argument. South Dakotans want abortion to go away. We are practical and compassionate people who are not comfortable with the killing of the unborn and Planned Parenthood and Un-healthy families know it.
Yes, we will take the moms and their babies and support them. In case you were going to ask.
So what is with all the ruckus about "Abortion hurts women" being a political statement? It is a fact, recently re-verified by the US Supreme Court and validated by the 8th Circuit.
Some Dude @ 1:59 pm
"In other words, by legal findings and medical statistical findings, codified into law - ABORTION HURTS WOMEN."
Actually, if you wanted to be correct according to the court, you'd say "abortion causes distress for *some* women". That's basically what the brief says. The word "some" is sprinkled throughout the passage. It doesn't say what you think.
Nikole @ 3:44 pm
SOME DUDE -
Ok - So I would like signage to now state "Drunk Driving sometimes causes death" and in fine print "But only if you actually get into an accident". Or "Using Meth could possibly kill you, but only if you use too much." I can come up with hundreds of statements of the like if you wish.
This argument is absurd and you know it. It was an advertisement not funded by or for a politcal group. The Alpha Center has been around for 24 years, long before IM 11 was part of the picture.
Again, as Amy said, the death camp must find something to distract people with as they can't stick to the facts.
Complete Faith @ 4:27 pm
Some Dude, you paint far to easy of a target on your back to be very good at what your are trying to accomplish here.
In your latest argument
"ABORTION HURTS WOMEN" should be changed to "abortion causes distress for *some* women" Because of legal statements listed by Amy.
The simple fact is that the statement "ABORTION HURTS WOMEN" is 100% true. Had the statement said "ABORTION HURTS ALL WOMEN" you might have a leg to stand on.
On a personal note I do believe abortion does hurt all women.
Some Dude @ 5:02 pm
"Some Dude, you paint far to easy of a target on your back to be very good at what your are trying to accomplish here."
What exactly is it that I'm "trying to accomplish"? You've all made up your minds and I've made mine.
So far, I've been accused of wanting to kill babies, of being unable to have a monogamous relationship, of being part of a "death camp", and of being complicit in human sacrifice. What I've accomplished, it seems, is getting you all to expose your US vs. THEM mentality, and your dehumanization of your enemies.
As to the earlier post: ""Drunk Driving sometimes causes death" and in fine print "But only if you actually get into an accident". Or "Using Meth could possibly kill you, but only if you use too much."
Those statements are all true, although even a small dose of meth can be fatal to some people.
We as a society allow public service marketing statements such as "Drunk Driving Kills" because the majority (the vast, vast majority) agrees with that statement and because we want to do everything possible to avoid drunk driving deaths. Nowhere near the vast, vast majority of people seem to believe your statement about abortion, and see it as a political issue. If drunk driving was a divisive political issue, there would be uproar over those ads too.
Nikole @ 11:49 am
How is "Abortion Hurts Women" and offering a counseling service to those who need it political? Again, a close analogy would be, "Depression Hurts People" and following that up with a counseling service for the depressed. I don't see anything political about that.
The only reason that Pro-abort supporters consider it political is because there happens to be IM11 on the ballot this year. What if this ad were run last year or next year? Would it still be referred to as political? This is the same message that they have gone with for 24 years. Again … long before IM11 was part of the story.
Could someone PLEASE explain where in this ad it suggested anything about voting or politics?
Oh and as for the vast, vast majority agreeing with that statement, I think if that were true we wouldn't have such a problem with drunk driving.
And if you agree with the pro-abort stance, then yes, that would be part of the "death camp" we refer to. The pro-abort group is ok with the murdering of innocent lives, therefore; death camp is an appropriate term.
As for it being and "us vs. them" mentality - that happens in any type of a battle and that is what we are in. We as pro-lifers are battling on behalf of the unborn. They have no other voice. We are battling against those who are ok with the slaughtering of the unborn at will. Please do not misunderstand me here. We do not hate people (note, we are fighting for the lives of people) but we do not agree with the beliefs of the other side. So yes it does become an us vs. them - and that is exactly how it is on the pro-abort side as well. It is them vs us.
Complete Faith @ 1:34 pm
Some Dude, in this case it would appear that you are trying to discredit the statement “Abortion Hurts Women”. Here is your statement
"In other words, by legal findings and medical statistical findings, codified into law - ABORTION HURTS WOMEN."
Actually, if you wanted to be correct according to the court, you'd say "abortion causes distress for *some* women". That's basically what the brief says. The word "some" is sprinkled throughout the passage. It doesn't say what you think
I really have to agree with Nikole on this one. If you support abortion then you in fact support “Killing Babies”, are a part of the “Death Camp” and are “Complicit of human sacrifice”. Now it was either your, or Angry Guy who said something to the fact that you don’t agree with abortion, but don’t believe that regulating it will solve any problems. I say anything other then a yes vote on IM11 is in fact supporting abortion.
As far as monogamy goes in your life, I don’t have a clue where you stand on that point.
I would really like to give you a pat on the back for the stoke of genius in which you were able to “Expose the US(YES on IM11) vs. THEM(NO on IM11) mentality”. Brother, if you haven’t noticed this is a Pro-Life blog.
I still can’t understand your argument that the statement “Abortion Hurts Women” is false. Your now trying to make it a majority rules thing. I would ask you this then…
How does abortion NOT hurt women?
What during the procedure does not do some type of physical damage to the woman’s body?
What about removing an unborn child from a mother’s body 1 piece at a times does not cause long term physical and physiological damage?
I know this isn’t part if the Abortion hurts Women statement, but if you answer these questions why not also answer this one, what of the child involved in the abortion? How does it not hurt them?
Complete Faith @ 1:43 pm
In a side note to this issue…
I personally want every young girl either drawing near, or already in her early child bearing years to be fully aware of two facts, and every young man who is in the same age bracket.
1. Being sexually active can lead to pregnancy
2. Abortion Hurts Women
In my early teens and late teens I aware of fact number 1. but had no real understanding of what the ramifications were to that.
I am sad to say that when my oldest son’s mother informed me she was pregnant my first reaction was for her to get an abortion. I also had no clue about the long-term ramifications of that action.
I thank the Lord that she an understanding of life far beyond my own at that time and was unable to even consider the thought of an abortion.