war on women

Dobson: Planned Parenthood Based on 'Evil' and 'Wickedness'

Today on Family Talk James Dobson hosted Students for Life representative Kristan Hawkins. Dobson lauded Lila Rose’s dishonest and edited video “exposé” of Planned Parenthood and claimed that Planned Parenthood is saturated with “wickedness” and “evil,” while Hawkins went on an absurd rant where she explained that Planned Parenthood is an all-powerful “abortion Goliath” that only cares about making money by getting girls pregnant, tricking them into getting breast cancer and ultimately coercing them to have abortions:

Hawkins: I think the videos of Planned Parenthood have really helped to focus and to shed the light on Planned Parenthood because they are the abortion Goliath, I always refer to them as the abortion Goliath, they are the big man on campus, they’re the ones with the lobbyists, they’re getting the government funding, they’re subsidizing their abortions, they’re the ones making the money off all of this. I think the videos are very, very important in exposing their real agenda. You know Planned Parenthood sounds like a nice name, ‘ooh Planned Parenthood, and they’re providing free condoms to me, ooh yay,’ but then when you start peeling back, you know, what’s their method?

We have this new postcard, we make these little flashy postcards and they don’t really give students the answer but they’re there to raise controversy and drive people to our website where they can find out more information. It says, Planned Parenthood’s plan for you: One, give you the lowest ranked condoms that are available on the market today, the lowest ranked by Consumer Reports condoms, so you think Planned Parenthood’s great, they’re giving you bad condoms, then they’re going to give you birth control that can cause breast cancer, they’re going to give you low-dose birth control, and then they’re going to give you an abortion, and this is their plan to make money.



Dobson: If you scratch around anywhere near the Planned Parenthood message and the function of Planned Parenthood, you see wickedness; you see evil.

Never one to be left out of an ill-informed conversation, Ryan Dobson said that he hopes that when abortion is re-criminalized the government will force people who lived near Planned Parenthood clinics to walk through them just as Germans during the post-war occupation had to go through concentration camps:

You know what I hope happens, I hope what happens is what they did in Germany after World War II that the people living near concentration camps, they walk them through those areas. That’s what they did to the Germans, those living near the concentration camps, the government walked them through those places where they were killing people every day saying ‘this is what you let happen.’ Every Planned Parenthood and abortion provider in America, the people living in those communities around them should have to go through and say ‘this is what you let happen.’

Linda Harvey Decries Obama's 'Insulting Rebellion in the Face of God'

Mission America president Linda Harvey today lambasted the Obama administration’s support for gay rights and recent move to require contraceptives coverage by insurance plans, urging listeners to pray for President Obama to repent “because his insulting rebellion in the face of God is breathtaking.” She warned that while “a godless dictator and his minions do not rule this country yet,” Obama is attacking liberty and religion in order to promote “abortion and homosexuality.”

Far from apologizing or changing his mind or respecting both our faith and our First Amendment rights, no, our President has doubled down, he now says this [contraception] mandate stands and will extend even to students, so Christian college insurance plans will now be required to pay for abortion-inducing drugs without any copay for both employees and students. How does a sitting president get away this this? I don’t know and we need to pray for him because his insulting rebellion in the face of God is breathtaking. Pray for his repentance. But just as we have to call out to God for help on these issues, we Christens also need to ask—within lawful means, of course—we have the God-given freedom to make changes in America which not all oppressed people in this world do. A godless dictator and his minions do not rule this country yet, we the people do.



It is clear where this administration stands on respecting liberty, they don’t, or respecting faith, they don’t. We know they’re so committed to abortion and homosexuality that they’re willing to support late term abortion, to undermine national marriage law and to sanction open homosexual behavior in our military. Should we trust this administration? Not with our lives and our faith, and that’s really sad.

Religious Right Groups Plan Rallies to 'Stop the HHS Mandate'

Conservative organizations are planning to hold rallies on March 23rd across the country to “Stand up for Religious Freedom” and “Stop the HHS Mandate” on contraception coverage. Members of the new coalition include the Alliance Defense Fund, American Life League, Christian Defense Coalition, Concerned Women for America, Operation Rescue, Thomas More Society and various anti-choice groups, and they seek to organize demonstrations “outside federal buildings, Congressional offices and historic sites across the country.” In a statement responding to a conciliatory move by the administration which ensures that religious-based organizations won’t have to pay directly for contraceptives, rally organizers doubled down on their criticisms of the Obama administration and said that they are against the insurance mandate’s impact on “all businesses—not just religious institutions”:

"With their March 16 statement, President Obama and Kathleen Sebelius are once again pretending to accommodate employers' conscientious objections to their HHS Mandate. The accounting tricks they're proposing are nothing but smoke and mirrors. At the end of the day, employers are still forced to provide free contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs through their health plans," said Eric Scheidler, co-director of the Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rallies across the United States.



We protest the federal government's definition of what constitutes a religious institution through the narrowly constructed "exemption" to the HHS Mandate, a definition which is both false and beyond the federal government's authority to make.

We protest the fact that religious institutions, even after President Obama's so-called "accommodation," are being forced to facilitate contraception, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs through the health plans they are mandated to provide.

We protest the Mandate forcing all businesses -- not just religious institutions -- to provide coverage of contraception, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs, if even doing so violates their own moral convictions on these matters.

We protest the HHS Mandate because, in requiring all health plans to provide free contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs as "preventative care," it treats pregnancy and childbirth as a disease.

Randall Terry Weighing Third Party Run Against 'Pimp' Obama

While Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry’s challenge to President Obama for the Democratic nomination may have hit a snag recently, his campaign based around running graphic anti-abortion ads may continue into the general election as he is considering a run as a third party candidate and drafting allied congressional candidates. Terry believes that a presidential run won’t draw votes away from the Republican nominee, but from anti-choice Democrats who would otherwise support Obama:

To help carry his message on abortion and possibly expand opportunities to broadcast his anti-abortion television ads, he said that he has also helped recruit almost a half-dozen people running for Congress in swing states across the country who are making abortion the central issue of their campaigns.

“I am going to try to run my ads in Florida, North Carolina, Ohio,” he said. “I am going to try run them in all the swing states. Then on election night, when all the commentators are saying why he lost, it will be because of the images of those dead babies.”

Reacting to the controversy surrounding Rush Limbaugh’s tirades against Sandra Fluke, Terry called Fluke a “political prostitute” and Obama her “Political Pimp,” saying that Obama even had his “daughters pimped for the cause of sexual immorality.” “Obama prostituted Fluke in order to motivate and mobilize a small but important part of his base,” Terry writes, “fornicating college students who want to keep their beer money for beer, and get their birth control and abortifacients for free.”

The “slut” and “prostitute” comments by Rush Limbaugh are still making waves. The Obama administration is now pondering cutting off Rush from the Armed Forces Network radio stations. Is our Commander in Chief now moving toward thought control of the military?

The hubbub surrounding Rush's comments will clearly play a roll in the political debate for the rest of this election cycle. For that reason, it behooves those of us who still possess a functioning ethical compass to defend Rush, and call out the President for his horrific roll in this political drama.

Rush Limbaugh treated Miss Fluke as a worthy adversary. She stepped into the political ring to rumble; she decided – as the seasoned pro-abortion feminist activist that she is – to become the “poster prostitute” of “free love.” She decided – of her own free will – that she would become the lightning rod for all the poor little girls who want to “sleep around,” and have the rest of us pay for their birth control and abortifacients. Rush treated her as a worthy opponent, and responded to her with rhetoric equal to the battle.

Ms. Fluke chose her role as the protagonist/political prostitute. That means she has to take her licks like a big girl, and hold her own. Miss Fluke can’t have it both ways; she can’t be the adult in a fierce debate, and also be the little girl who is getting picked on. She cannot be both sultry superwoman and helpless damsel in distress. She cannot cry foul because a great political voice treated her public and political statements as political "free game."

Enter President Obama. He pretended to be her “Knight in Shining Armor” but in fact acted as her Political Pimp. He has shamelessly used her for his political agenda. By telephoning her and lionizing her he further prostituted her for his sake, not hers. For Ms. Fluke, this is the height of being used, objectified, and “politically pimped.”

But then President Obama really crossed the line: he used his own daughters to further this agenda. Ponder it well: Obama said, “I thought of my daughters when I called Sandra Fluke…I wanted Sandra to know that I thought her parents should be proud of her, and that we want to send a message to all our young people that being part of a democracy involves argument and disagreements and debate.”

I (Randall) raised two little girls. When my daughters were young, neither heaven nor hell could have compelled me to use them in an illustration where they were sexually promiscuous, and then publically demanding that tax payers fund their immoral behavior. I do not know a father who would say this. And I am certain – as one dad to another – that President Obama does not want his daughters as “sexually active” unmarried girls sleeping around, calling out to tax payers to pick up their birth control/abortifacient tab. If they were, he would not be proud, he would be heartbroken. As an intelligent man, President Obama knows the heartache and dangers that attend sexual immorality.

So why did he say it? Because this was about a political agenda for getting votes; it was not about sexual ethics or good parenting. Obama prostituted Fluke in order to motivate and mobilize a small but important part of his base; fornicating college students who want to keep their beer money for beer, and get their birth control and abortifacients for free. Obama had great enthusiasm with young voters for “hope and change” in 2008; since those promises have proved illusory, he is now opting for the lower road of drugs and orgasms.

Rush is a brilliant thinker; he treated Ms. Fluke as a worthy opponent. Obama treated her like a political prostitute. History will bear Rush witness that he was right. And believe me, fathers all over America are hoping they never see their daughters pimped for the cause of sexual immorality, birth control, and drugs that kill the unborn.

Gary Bauer Warns Against Violence Against Women Act

American Values president Gary Bauer demanded Republicans oppose the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act, writing in Human Events today that the bill is a “trap.” Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans all voted against re-authorization and Bauer insisted that they oppose the legislation because of “provisions allowing abused illegal immigrants to claim temporary visas and programs for same-sex couples.” As Legal Momentum’s Lynn Hecht Schafran notes, protections for immigrants and women in same-sex relationships have “always been true about the bill but required clarification.”

Bauer, who regularly rails against the “war on religion,” the “war on Christmas” and the “social, political and cultural war in our country,” also expressed his anger that progressives are using the phrase “war” as part of “painting conservatives as domestic policy war mongers,” and of course didn’t miss an opportunity to criticize Sandra Fluke:

Whether it’s the “war on science” or the “war on labor unions,” the left never tires of painting conservatives as domestic policy war mongers. Now liberals are revisiting another fictitious conservative war, against women.

At the Women in the World Summit in New York last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton blasted tyrants across the globe. “They want to control how we dress, they want to control how we act, they even want to control the decisions we make about our own health and bodies,” Clinton said.

Then she compared Burma’s opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi to Sandra Fluke. “Women and girls…throughout the world,” she said, “are assuming the risks that come with sticking your neck out, whether you are a democracy activist in Burma or a Georgetown law student in the United States.”

It was absurd for America’s top diplomat to compare a chief target of one of the world’s most authoritarian regimes to the law student/abortion activist.



Obama cited Fluke’s “bravery” when he spoke about her. But a more apt word is “shamelessness.”

Speaking of shameless, while Clinton has made advancing women’s rights a major rhetorical theme of her time at State, the Obama administration has ignored and even supported egregious violations against women.



Whining about the “war on women” in a Politico op-ed last week, former Democratic Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm wrote, “Republican obsession with Planned Parenthood alone has become a form of legislative sexual McCarthyism.”

In case there was any doubt about the centrality of the “war on women” theme to the Democratic campaign, Senate Democrats are pushing to extend the Violence Against Women Act, with a vote by the end of March.

Most Republicans support the law, but it’s a trap. The legislation includes not only laudable programs like grants to battered women’s shelters but also provisions allowing abused illegal immigrants to claim temporary visas and programs for same-sex couples.



Allusions to the Republican “war on women” will continue as a major Democratic campaign theme. But they’re just Democrats’ way of diverting voters’ attention from their own failures and injustices toward women.

Update: Concerned Women for America, a consistent opponent of the Violence Against Women Act, in an email to members today claimed that the law “destroys the family”:

VAWA, in its current form, is a boondoggle for feminist groups. It has morphed into a series of rigid and ineffective law enforcement programs that continue to spend approximately $455 million each year. Instead of helping women and children, this legislation creates a large bureaucracy and destroys the family by obscuring real violence in order to promote the feminist agenda.



Finally, this bill creates a new series of expensive and unnecessary programs that further complicate the process of giving aid to these women and push a feminist agenda (such as one $15 million program that attempts to "re-educate" school children into domestic violence ideology [Section 302]).

VAWA harms women by diluting assistance to real victims and by tearing the family apart. Please call your senators today at 202-224-3121, and urge them to oppose VAWA. 

Mississippi Republicans Push to Mandate Transvaginal Ultrasounds, Renew Personhood Amendment Fight

The Mississippi House passed a bill that would require doctors to detect fetal heartbeats, which in many cases would require a transvaginal ultrasound, on women seeking an abortion and without exceptions for survivors of rape or incest. An amendment that would ban men from having vasectomies failed to pass. The group Personhood Mississippi praised the bill’s passage, and said they will begin collecting signatures to put another personhood amendment on the ballot in 2013 despite its failure last November.

The bill appears to be based on Janet Porter’s Heartbeat Bill, which passed the Ohio State House and bans all abortions after a detectable heartbeat, that has been springing up in other states including Kansas and Nebraska.

During the debate over the legislation, a Republican lawmaker responded to claims that the medically-unnecessary procedure is “state-sanctioned rape” by arguing that women “allow ourselves to be vulnerable to a pregnancy”:

The Mississippi House approved a bill that would require women seeking abortions to acknowledge when unborn children have detectable heartbeats, in some cases necessitating invasive transvaginal ultrasounds.

There is no provision in the House Bill 1196 exempting women who have been victims of rape or incest from the transvaginal ultrasound.



Rep. Rita Martinson, R-Madison, rebutted Wooten's statement, specifically addressing her description of the instrument.

"What do we think is used when an abortion is performed?" she asked. "What kind of device goes in and snatches a person from the womb, tears it out, and takes that beating heartbeat and kills it?"

While Hines and Wooten said the bill holds women responsible for an unwanted pregnancy while letting men off the hook, Martinson stressed it should be the woman's responsibility.

"Sometimes it's rape, but most of the time, it's not," she said. "We're the ones who remove our pants, are we not?

"We are the ones who allow ourselves to be vulnerable to a pregnancy," she said.

Matt Barber Bemoans the 'Fornication Fandango' in his Pathetic Attack on Sandra Fluke

Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber has long been one of the most factually-challenged members of the Religious Right to the point of utter absurdity. Take for example Barber’s latest column where the “pro-family” activist defends Rush Limbaugh for calling Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” in his article, “Limbaugh and the, um, Lady,” and to attack Fluke and her “sexual anarchist worldview” with the same falsehoods and innuendos used by Limbaugh:

Still, liberal attempts to sidetrack aside, the cultural issues embedded within this Fluke flap are worthy of discussion. Only a dying culture lionizes a woman who publicly impugns – with pride – her own honor and virtue. Yet, to the left, she’s a hero.

It’s genuinely sad that, as a society, we are no longer appalled that a young, single woman – though very nice, I’m sure – would go on national television nonetheless, to proudly and publicly boast that, to her, while sex is cheap and casual, dealing with the potential consequences is so expensive that those of who disagree must subsidize her bad behavior.

Can someone please explain to me how and why a woman’s “right” to be promiscuous is my financial responsibility? If you refuse to buy your own “preventative medicine,” why not hit up the fellas? Last I heard it takes two to do the fornication Fandango.

This is by design. Secular-“progressives” have been working to deconstruct traditional sexual morality for generations. The goal is to impose – under penalty of law – their own moral relativist, sexual anarchist worldview. (Hence, the unconstitutional ObamaCare mandate requiring that Christian groups cast aside millennia-old church doctrine, and get with the postmodern program.)

But, beyond this assault on religious freedom and the moral implications surrounding the debate, Ms. Fluke has additionally set the true women’s movement back decades. Her public groveling for free contraception and abortifacients reinforces the sexist stereotype that single women can’t survive without welfare. Women’s empowerment? More like patriarchal government dependency.

Still, like so much in its propagandist bag of tricks, the left’s entire “denied access to contraception” premise is built upon a lie. Liberals would have you believe that, for decades, women seeking birth control – already cheap and often free – have been systemically tackled in front of Walgreens by a bevy of white, Republican Catholic Priests.

Name one woman who has been “denied access” to birth control – ever. Show me one Republican politico who wants to “ban contraception.”

There are none.

Actually, if Barber ever read Fluke’s testimony, he would have found examples of women denied access to birth control:

In sixty-five percent of cases, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed these prescriptions and whether they were lying about their symptoms. For my friend, and 20% of women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription, despite verification of her illness from her doctor. Her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted the birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay, so clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy. After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication anymore and had to stop taking it. I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that in the middle of her final exam period she’d been in the emergency room all night in excruciating pain. She wrote, “It was so painful, I woke up thinking I’d been shot.” Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary. On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she sat in a doctor’s office. Since last year’s surgery, she’s been experiencing night sweats, weight gain, and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary. She’s 32 years old. As she put it: “If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no chance at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies, simply because the insurance policy that I paid for totally unsubsidized by my school wouldn’t cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it.” Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at an early age-- increased risk of cancer, heart disease, and osteoporosis, she may never be able to conceive a child.

Perhaps you think my friend’s tragic story is rare. It’s not. One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but it can’t be proven without surgery, so the insurance hasn’t been willing to cover her medication. Recently, another friend of mine told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome. She’s struggling to pay for her medication and is terrified to not have access to it. Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown’s policy, she hasn’t been reimbursed for her medication since last August. I sincerely pray that we don’t have to wait until she loses an ovary or is diagnosed with cancer before her needs and the needs of all of these women are taken seriously.

As for finding a “Republican politico” who wants to ban birth control, we can list every Republican in states like Mississippi, Virginia, Alabama and elsewhere who support so-called personhood legislation, which bans common forms of birth control.

In fact, Liberty Counsel is a strong supporter of personhood legislation, so Barber can look no further than the mirror to find someone who wants to ban birth control.

Fischer: The Left Hates Women

On Monday, Bryan Fischer came to the defense of Rush Limbaugh, saying he was "lexically accurate" to call Georgetown student Sandra Fluke a "slut" on his radio program and that Limbaugh's apology was proof that we are now living under "secular Sharia."

Fischer returned to the topic on his radio program again today, during a segment in which proclaimed that all the misogyny, hatred, and vulgar attacks on women almost always comes from the Left because the Right respects women and treats them with dignity.  In fact, explained Fischer, there is really no difference between the Left and Islamic Radicals, who see women as "something less than human." 

Then, after proclaiming that the Right always treats women respectfully, he then proceeded to again attack Fluke as a someone who is "sleeping with so many guys she can’t keep track [and] doing it three times a day" while wondering if President Obama would be proud if his daughters turned out like that:

Pat Robertson Weighs in on Sandra Fluke's 'Fornication'

Televangelist Pat Robertson on the 700 Club today attacked Sandra Fluke’s testimony at a Democratic hearing, after she was barred from speaking at a GOP-led committee, in support of making religiously-based institutions like universities cover contraception in their insurance plans. Robertson falsely claimed Fluke was asking for “$3,000 a year” for contraceptives, as Fluke actually said that without insurance “contraception can cost a woman over $3,000” over the course of law school, and noted that contraceptives are important not only to prevent unintended pregnancies but also matters such as ovarian cysts, hormonal disorders and early menopause. His guest Jeffrey Bell of the American Principles Project said that Fluke’s testimony was part of a larger left-wing plot from the 1790s, not the 1970s, of “imposing the values of the sexual revolution on everybody else” and trying to “attack organized religion and the traditional family.” Bell later told Robertson, a former presidential candidate and founder of the Christian Coalition who talks about social issues almost every day of his show, that social issues “keep coming up” in political debates “because it’s in the DNA of the left.”

Watch:

Robertson: You know there was a woman, the law student at Georgetown University who appeared before a congressional committee, and she said that students needed $3,000 a year for contraception and that they couldn’t afford it. As I understand, the Catholic school was supposed to pay for it. Now Catholics say that fornication, if you will, sex outside of marriage, is a sin. This woman is saying ‘I’m going to be committing sin but I want you to pay for my sin.’ Now am I overstating that? Rush Limbaugh got a little bit over the top on that thing but is that what it amounted to?

Bell: I honestly think that the left, their greatest achievement is the sexual revolution and they want to complete the job of imposing the values of the sexual revolution on everybody else, including those who have held out and disagree with some aspects of it. They’ve been this way since the 1790s, when the word ‘the left’ was invented, that was all about tearing down the existing social institutions and the political institutions, yes the royalty and nobility, but also the left from the beginning in the 1790s with the Jacobins and Robespierre wanted to attack organized religion and the traditional family and they have never changed in that regard. Every left movement has been about getting rid of traditional institutions.

Robertson: So Obama’s playing right down to that playbook, is that what you’re saying?

Bell: I think he’s being true to it, I don’t think he calculated the potential damage of doing this to the Catholic Church because it’s in the DNA of the left, that’s why the issues are unavoidable and why they’re going to keep coming up, because the left is going to insist on that.

David Limbaugh Laments 'The Radical Display of Hate and Intolerance' Directed at his Brother, Rush

David Limbaugh in his column today defended his far more successful brother, Rush, for his daily sexist diatribes against law student Sandra Fluke, attacking his brothers critics’ “viciousness” and lack of “forgiveness”:

What is a much bigger story is that the left's primary interest here is not in protecting Fluke -- in my humble opinion. Liberals are attempting to exploit this as another opportunity to destroy Rush through a calculated, organized Saul Alinsky-type community organizing campaign to pressure and intimidate his advertisers into discontinuing their sponsorship of his show.

I am watching them operate on Twitter and other social networks, and their viciousness is palpable. They didn't want Rush's apology, which they absolutely refuse to accept. They want his scalp. And they've wanted his scalp for years because he is the most effective and influential spokesman for the conservative cause.

What I am observing is the most radical display of hate and intolerance that I've witnessed in years. It does not surprise me, but it is ironic that the very people who masquerade as exemplars of tolerance, civility and compassion have no room in their hearts for forgiveness.

If this is “the most radical display of hate and intolerance” that he’s “witnessed in years,” then he must not be listening to his brother’s show.

Besides Limbaugh calling Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” who should compete for the “Wilt Chamberlin scholarship” and release a sex-tape, Limbaugh has dubbed a then-13 year old Chelsea Clinton the “White House dog,” told an African American caller to “take that bone out of your nose,” said Democrats who wanted to stop the genocide in Darfur only wanted to win over black voters, imitated President Obama calling Hillary Clinton a “B-I-itch,” and denounced feminists as “whores to liberalism” who established feminism “to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society.”

In another case of irony, the American Family Association is gladly promoting Limbaugh’s column attacking the campaign against Limbaugh’s advertisers as an “organized Saul Alinsky-type community organizing campaign,” even though the AFA and its affiliate OneMillionMoms runs pressure campaigns against Home Depot, JC Penney, Ford Motors, Toys R Us, Hardees, Macy’s, and AARP, and against advertisers on shows such as Degrassi, Glee and Modern Family.

Or maybe David Limbaugh can just tune in to the radio show of AFA spokesman Bryan Fischer if he feels the need to listen to more “hate” and “intolerance.”

Wisconsin Senator Who Introduced Anti-Single Parent Bill Says Women 'Trained' To Lie About Planned Pregnancies

Wisconsin state senator Glenn Grothman went on the Alan Colmes show on Friday to discuss a controversial new bill he authored that would require the state’s Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to officially label single parenthood as “a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect.”

The bill was seen as a slap in the face to single parents in Wisconsin, who are raising 31 percent of children in the state.

Grothman told Colmes that the country’s out-of-wedlock birth rate is the “choice of the women,” who should be “educated that this is a mistake.” When Colmes countered with statistics about the high number of pregnancies that are unintended, Grothman said that many women are “trained” to lie and say that their planned pregnancies are actually unintended:


Grothman: There’s been a huge change over the last 30 years and a lot of that change has been the choice of the women. There’s a reason why in the 50s and the 60s you had less than ten percent of the births illegitimate, and now we’re over 40 percent. It’s not that there weren’t abusive men in the 40s or there was a problem with child support. It is the popular culture, led by the social service professions, who are saying…

Colmes: Well tell me what you would change.

Grothman: I think the first thing we do is that we should educate women that this is a mistake.

Colmes: You think women need to be educated, are they not smart enough on their own?

Grothman: They do have to be educated, because right now the culture encourages a single motherhood lifestyle.

Colmes: You think women choose to be single moms…

Grothman: Oh absolutely

Colmes: You think women want to have homes without fathers? You think women look to the opportunity to have to raise kids and not be able to get work because they have to stay home and take care of the kids. Women want to do this?

Grothman: I think a lot of women are adopting the single motherhood lifestyle because the government creates a situation in which it is almost preferred.

….

Colmes: According to data published in USA Today, at least four in ten pregnancies in every state are unwanted or mistimed. According to the analysis that was released last May, more than half of pregnancies in 29 states and the District of Columbia were unintended, 38 to 50 percent were unintended in the remaining states. This mitigates against the argument that women are purposefully wanting to have kids. Their unintended for the most part. They’re unintended pregnancies, which is the argument for health care services and birth control for women.

Grothman: I think you undersell these women.

Colmes: Undersell them?

Grothman: Undersell them. I think when you have an epidemic of this great proportion, people are not so dumb that it’s surprising when they get pregnant. I think people are trained to say that ‘this is a surprise to me,’ because there’s still enough of a stigma that they’re supposed to say this.

CWA’s Crouse: Violence Against Women Act Funds Feminist ‘Reeducating Programs for Judges’

Last month, the War on Women reached a new level when every single Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee voted against a reauthorization of the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). VAWA has been reauthorized with broad bipartisan support twice since its original passage, but this year, Republicans objected to the inclusion of new provisions to protect LGBT people and immigrant women.

On her radio show last week, Janet Mefferd discussed the battle over VAWA reauthorization with Concerned Women for America’s Janice Crouse.

Crouse charged that VAWA – which grants funds to local communities to develop programs combatting domestic violence – mostly funds “reeducating programs for judges to try to train them in the principles of feminism and so-called ‘women’s rights.’”

Crouse and Mefferd were especially scornful of new provisions protecting immigrants and LGBT people and an eliminated provision making it easier to combat date rape on campuses, with Crouse warning that women would just abuse the system to get green cards and make false accusations of date rape.

Crouse: Quite frankly, much of the Violence Against Women funds reeducating programs for judges to try to train them in the principles of feminism and so-called ’women’s rights.’

Mefferd: Wow, that’s what we need, we need more indoctrination of judges, right?

Crouse: Right. [laughs]

...

Mefferd: So they’ve expanded this to cover more subgroups, but why can’t it just, if you’re going to have a domestic violence piece of legislation, why can’t it just cover anyone who’s affected by domestic violence? Is this just another one where they’re trotting out their typical liberal ways and, you know, ‘We’ve got to emphasize non-discrimination against sexual orientation, etc. etc.’ Is that just kind of the agenda here again?

Crouse: Exactly right. Plus, you have a number of women from other countries who marry Americans to come to this country, and then they want out of the marriage. Well, VAWA provides a way for them to get out, a very easy way for them to get out.

One of the things that I found particularly troubling, and thank goodness the Republicans stood up against this, was the effort to change dating rape to not require clear and convincing evidence, and that’s a legal term, clear and convincing evidence, but instead to require preponderance of evidence, which is a much lower standard and is not clear and convincing. So a girl the next morning could just say, ‘Well, I really made a mistake,’ and accuse a guy of date rape, or have any kind of regrets and accuse a guy of date rape.

Mefferd: Well, isn’t that unconstitutional, to lower the standard there on crime?

Crouse: Well, I’m not a constitutional specialist, but in terms of legal ramifications, it’s disastrous.

 

Conservative 'Pro-Family' Groups Silent on Rush Limbaugh's Sexist Outbursts

The Media Research Center criticized everyone from Perez Hilton and Gossip Girl to the cast of Jersey Shore for using the word “slut,” but after right-wing talk show host tagged law student and women’s rights advocate Sandra Fluke as a “slut” and a “prostitute,” the group that claims to stand up for “people and institutions that hold traditional values” has repeatedly come to Limbaugh’s defense. MRC’s Scott Whitlock said NBC’s depiction of Limbaugh’s sexist remarks as “ugly” represented “a left-wing attack” and Brent Baker dubbed coverage of Limbaugh’s rant a “left-wing effort to impugn and silence Rush Limbaugh.” The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer and Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber even tweeted in defense of Limbaugh, Barber even saying that Limbaugh “showed class.”

Apparently, the word “slut” is only acceptable when it is used by a right-wing ally.

Concerned Women for America, which describes itself as committed to promoting “decency” in the media, has been completely silent about Limbaugh’s tirade. But the group is happy to post a statement regarding the talk show host’s praise for CWA, along with claims about the supposedly sexist treatment of Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin by the media.

Focus on the Family considers the word “slut” a profanity and blamed “hip-hop/rap culture” for making it “become acceptable and even in vogue to be called a ‘slut,’” and urged people to stop buying music with words like “slut” that “objectify women.” But the organization still hasn’t commented on Limbaugh’s misogynist rants. In 2009 the group defended Limbaugh with a video, “When the liberals came for Rush.”

While these so-called “pro-family” organizations love to claim that they promote decency and values on the airwaves, they are either unwilling or uninterested in criticizing a prominent conservative who spent four days straight calling a student a “slut” on national radio

Mefferd Lashes Out at Sandra Fluke, 'If You Want to go out and Fornicate, You Need to Pay for it'

Yesterday Religious Right talk show host Janet Mefferd ranted against Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown law student who was barred from testifying at Darrell Issa’s hearing on the administration’s contraception policy and later spoke at a Democratic panel, for discussing how her university’s refusal to cover contraceptives is harmful to female students. Mefferd first joked about Fluke’s “whining” and then went on to say that Fluke was asking for taxpayers to cover her contraceptive costs, when she was actually just defending the administration’s plan to ensure that religiously-based universities cover contraception in their insurance plans. After twisting and poking fun at Fluke’s remarks, Mefferd told Fluke, “If you want to go out and fornicate, you need to pay for it.”

Democrats said the amendment, over at Politico, was too broad and would’ve been an attack on women’s health. Women’s health, women’s health…. It’s just like Sandra Fluke from yesterday when we were playing audio of that girl from Georgetown who was weeping, well I don’t know if she was weeping, but she was whining at least, you can say she was whining, to Nancy Pelosi and company.

‘Oh, all my friends are going broke at Georgetown Law School because we can’t afford birth control and we spent $3,000 over the course of our law school career on birth control’—$3,000?—‘We just can’t afford it and you need to pay for it, this is about women’s health.’ And of course everybody on the side of common sense is saying, you know what Sandra Fluke and company, nobody’s making you do it, nobody’s making you do it, you’re not asking for some sort of help with cancer drugs, you’re not asking for some sort of help with getting nitroglycerin pills for your heart condition, we would be moved, we would be very sympathetic, we would care, we would find some way to help if this were some dire emergency and you couldn’t afford it.

I got off the air yesterday as we were playing the clips of Sandra Fluke and her whining about needing taxpayers to cover her birth control and I thought; do you not have families? Whatever happened to the concept of a family? I guess that’s a broader issue we should tackle at another time in more detail, and we do talk about the family quite a bit as Christians as we ought to, but have you noticed increasingly the people on the left when they want someone or something to solve their problems it’s always the government, it’s always you, they always want to rob Peter to pay Paul, they always want to take the buck out of your pocket and apply it to whatever need they trump up.

Does anybody have a family anymore? Does anybody have anybody who they’re related to, who they could turn to in a moment of crisis and say ‘hey dad, I just can’t afford my contraception’? Of course not, I would think most people would never do that because it’s too embarrassing and it’s out of line or maybe they don’t have a father, I get all the objections, but why does the government always have to be the go-to-guy?

And it’s not even the government, that’s not even the right way of saying it, because we’re a government of the people, we the people are the people who are running this country, it’s not some king, we don’t live in a theocracy and we’re all going begging for bread from Obama, but that’s what these people are conditioned to do.

You have done a wonderful job Left in training the kids on how to be dependent on you and how to come to brother government and say, ‘please, give me another handout, I just don’t think I can do it on my own, I can’t afford my birth control, you need to pay for it.’ Wrong. Tough love baby, tough love. If you want to go out and fornicate, you need to pay for it.

Karen Handel Plays the Victim in Interview Attacking Planned Parenthood

Former Georgia Secretary of State and Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation vice president Karen Handel appeared on the 700 Club today where she blamed the controversy of Komen’s decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood’s clinical breast cancer screenings and mammogram referrals…on Planned Parenthood. Handel, who as an unsuccessful Republican gubernatorial candidate in Georgia pledged to defund Planned Parenthood, acknowledged her role in convincing the organization to break ties with the women’s health group, but claimed that she was not the sole authority behind the decision.

While speaking with the Christian Broadcasting Network, Handel tried to blame Planned Parenthood for the controversy, even though it was the Komen foundation which ended its partnership with Planned Parenthood following pressure campaigns from anti-choice organizations. She attacked Planned Parenthood for leading a “premeditated, orchestrated attack” on the Komen foundation “not for sake of women’s health but for the sake of politics and a political agenda.” Later in the interview, she said Planned Parenthood’s actions were “nothing short of a shakedown” and that the media was biased in the group’s favor.

Watch:

Colson Rails Against Gay and Reproductive Rights as Threats to Freedom

Another day, another tirade from Chuck Colson about the supposed destruction of freedom in America. On his Breakpoint radio bulletin, Colson warned that Secretary Hillary Clinton’s pledge to fight for gay rights around the world is a threat to religious liberty and, once again, falsely maintained that she and other administration officials never use the phrase “freedom of religion.” In fact, the State Department just over a week ago released a statement calling the “freedom of religion” a “universal human right.” He said that gay rights, along with the President’s support of funding for non-abortion related health care by Planned Parenthood clinics and the mandate for contraception coverage in health insurance plans, are putting freedom in jeopardy. “Whether it’s ‘gay rights’ or ‘reproductive rights,’ Colson said, “the forces of secular liberalism are choosing sexual license over our religious liberty regarding human sexuality.”

For some time I have been warning you that the Obama administration has elevated so-called “gay rights” at the expense of religious liberty.

That may sound like an extreme statement, until you remember that Secretary of State Clinton has said “gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights.” And she and other officials repeatedly use the term “freedom of worship” (a private act) versus “freedom of religion,” (which the Constitution protects, which is the freedom to live out one’s faith in public).

Administration officials have also said that in a contest “between religious liberty and sexual liberty,” sexual liberty triumphs. Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, seeing this trend, is predicting “a national conflict between church and state of enormous proportions and to the detriment of both institutions.”

Friends, I wish I could tell you that gay rights were the only front in this threat to religious liberty. But as you know, the second front was opened up by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who decreed that, under ObamaCare, Catholic institutions will have to violate their religious beliefs and pay for contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs for their employees.



In one of his first acts as president, he rescinded the Mexico City policy, allowing federal dollars to go to organizations that promote abortion overseas, like Planned Parenthood. In the budget showdown with Republicans last summer, the president warned House Speaker John Boehner that he would allow the government to shut down rather than cut Planned Parenthood’s funding. And now, of course, the right to a contraceptive is being advanced over religious liberty.

Again, the question is why? I think Catholic scholar George Weigel has put his finger on it: “What began as a movement to liberate sexuality from the constraints of moral reason, custom, and law,” Weigel says, “has become a movement determined to use the instruments of law to impose its deconstruction of human sexuality and its moral relativism on all of society.” I urge you to read Weigel’s piece.

Friends, this is a clash of worldviews. Whether it’s “gay rights” or “reproductive rights” the forces of secular liberalism are choosing sexual license over our religious liberty regarding human sexuality.

Andy Harris Compares Contraception Coverage Mandate to Communist 'Religious Persecution'

We have documented the extreme reactions to the Obama administration’s decision to ensure that women can receive coverage for contraception in their insurance plans, ranging from comparisons of President Obama to King George III, Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin to warnings that the United States is moving closer to Nazi Germany. Now, freshman Congressman Andy Harris (R-MD) in an interview with the right-wing group Concerned Women for America has likened the contraception mandate to the “religious persecution” found in “Communist countries.”

Harris: What we need is—we need civil action. We need people to be talking about it, really expressing outrage to their friends and neighbors at how this could be happening in America. You know, my parents came from Communist countries, they actually escaped religious persecution like this, only now to have it happen here, right here in America.

Religious Right Groups Enraged after Senate Rejects the Blunt Amendment

Yesterday the US Senate voted 51-48 to kill the Blunt Amendment to the transportation bill that would have given employers the right to deny insurance coverage for any treatment that they objected to for any reason, representing a major setback for Religious Right groups who urged passage of the extreme amendment.

Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family’s CitizenLink called the vote an affront to the First Amendment, although it is hard to see how anyone’s First Amendment right to free exercise of religion is being violated:

“Today the government, this time via Congress, again told Americans they must ‘conform or pay a price’ when it comes to their First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion,” he said. “Americans are speaking out because they understand that they should not be forced to fight to protect what the Constitution already grants them under the First Amendment.”

National Right to Life Committee claimed that the mandate was part of an “abortion-expansionist agenda, even though neither abortions nor abortifacients are included in the new rule:

The Obama Administration has issued an initial mandate that requires nearly all employers to purchase plans that cover all FDA-approved methods of birth control. NRLC has pointed out that the same authority could be employed by the Administration in the future to order virtually all health plans to cover all abortions. The focus now shifts to the House, where the same legislation, introduced as H.R. 1179 by Congressman Jeff Fortenberry (R-Ne.), currently has 220 cosponsors (more than half of all House members). In addition, numerous lawsuits have been filed by religiously affiliated employers, challenging the Obama mandate as a violation of constitutional rights and of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

"National Right to Life will continue to challenge the Obama Administration's abortion-expansionist agenda on Capitol Hill, and we will encourage millions of like-minded Americans to remember this issue when they cast their ballots in November," said Carol Tobias, National Right to Life president.

Eagle Forum president Phyllis Schlafly said that contraceptives “are not really medical care”:

"The contraceptive mandate is an introduction to the real ObamaCare, whereby a handful of leftists in D.C. impose the views of their big-money donors on more than 300 million Americans," said Schlafly. "If the Obama Administration's contraceptive mandate remains intact, then liberals will continue to demand that Americans pay for objectionable items and services that are not really medical care."

Tony Perkins of FRCAction warned that the Constitution has been “sacrificed”:

"Today, 51 senators, led by Sen. Harry Reid, sacrificed the Constitutional right of religious liberty on the altar of the Obama administration's radical big-government agenda. They turned a deaf ear to the very real religious and moral objections of millions of Americans and the First Amendment rights of all.

Concerned Women for America’s Penny Nance maintained that the mandate was part of a growing “oppressive federal bureaucracy”:

"America's women refuse to accept this unconstitutional government order," said Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America. The Obama Administration's HHS Mandate demolishes our constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion and conscience rights."

"Churches, religious organizations, and people of faith and conscience must have the right to choose their own health care and make their own moral decisions without having to submit to the one size fits all policies of President Obama and Secretary Sebelius' oppressive federal bureaucracy," Nance said.

Gingrich Pledges to Fight Gay Rights 'Chaos' and Obama's 'Anti-Christian, Anti-Jewish' Views

Today on a conference call with the Gingrich Faith Leaders Coalition that included guest speakers Jim Garlow and J.C. Watts, Newt Gingrich claimed that he will push for not only a federal marriage amendment to outlaw marriage equality but also a federal law to prohibit states from legalizing same-sex marriage. He claimed that states with marriage equality are contributing to legal “chaos” and said that “if we are going to defend marriage in the end it will probably require a federal law.” After a questioner asked whether same-sex marriage would lead to people seeking to marry dogs and cows, Gingrich, who on an earlier conference call described same-sex marriage as “paganism,” didn’t push back against the offensive comparison to bestiality but instead blamed the country’s teachers for why people are more accepting of such beliefs.

Listen:

Question: I have a question regarding all the laws that people are trying to make for gay rights, I heard what you said about marriage being between a man and a woman and I agree, that’s what God said in the very beginning in the Book of Genesis, but the laws of our land are seeing more and more states allowing gay marriage. How can we stop this? It is so profoundly wrong.

Gingrich: I think ultimately we’re going to have to have a federal amendment because at the rate we’re going, you might be able to pass a federal law, but at the rate we’re going it’s going to be just chaos, you’re going to have some states that say it’s all right and other states that say it’s not all right, how are people going to travel, what are their legal rights, it is a mess. I think if we are going to defend marriage in the end it will probably require a federal law.

Question: What’s the difference, what they’re saying between a woman wants to be with a woman, when is it going to be ‘I want to marry a dog’ or ‘I want to marry a cow,’ that makes as much sense, what they are saying is doing something stupid like that.

Gingrich: I think that you have some people—remember we have now had a whole two generations of teachers who explained to us ‘you shouldn’t render moral judgment, after all it’s all situation ethics, who are we to decide,’ and that’s been a major problem.

Gingrich also maintained that he is “deeply offended” by President Obama’s apology over the burning of Qurans in Afghanistan while “he is attacking the Catholic Church,” and said that Obama’s statement is a clear definition of the “anti-Christian, anti-Jewish” ideology of the “modern secular left”:

Gingrich: I can’t tell you how deeply offended I am by Barack Obama who apologizes to Islam while he is attacking the Catholic Church, you couldn’t ask for a clearer definition of the modern secular left, which I think is anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, but always willing to be sympathetic to any organization which isn’t Christian or Jewish. I really think that is going to be a major theme of the campaign this Fall and it’s a debate I’m looking forward to because I don’t think Obama can defend himself.

He responded to the US Senate’s vote to table the Blunt Amendment and in doing so ensure that women have contraception coverage in their insurance plans by saying that the vote shows “how sick we’ve become” as a country and that the Democratic Party is “anti-religious” and “consolidating in its hostility to religion.” Gingrich accused Obama of trying to “wage war on every right to life organization in America” and intensify “how sick the country’s become.”

Garlow: Where is America, in our journey right now, in terms of radical secularism coming up, where are we as a nation right now? Where does it stand? And what can we do to turn this around?

Gingrich: You saw how sick we’ve become in a vote today in the U.S. Senate where on a party line vote 51 Democrats voted against allowing any exemptions for religious reasons for a government imposed-mandate on contraception and abortion. You couldn’t have a clearer statement. You now got this secular, anti-religious, leftwing party and it’s consolidating in its hostility to religion.



Gingrich: Now to have got a president who is pro-infanticide wage war on every right to life organization in America whether they are Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox Jew, Greek Orthodox, you name it, just tells you how sick the country’s become. I think this is the most important election of our lifetime. I think if we get four more years of Obama, four more years of him picking Supreme Court justices, four more years of these kind of radical rules, we won’t be the country we were in 2008 in terms of our core values.

FRC’s Religious Freedom Expert would Force Raped Woman to Give Birth to Rapist’s Child

The Family Research Council bragged earlier this week that Jeanne Monahan, the head of its Center for Human Dignity, would be testifying today before Congress on how mandatory contraceptive coverage is an affront to Americans’ religious freedom.

However, FRC and allies like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, have an odd of understanding of freedom. It’s really just the freedom for everyone to live according to their religion, and only a very narrow interpretation at that. Monahan, who holds a master’s degree in theology of marriage and family from the Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, is no exception.
 
In a blog post from January entitled “A Pro-Life Hero: Minka Disbrow,” Monahan wrote the following (emphasis mine): 
In 1928, as a young and innocent teenager, Minka Disbrow lived in South Dakota and worked on a dairy farm. One day while enjoying a picnic, Minka and a friend were jumped by three men and raped. Innocent to the degree that she didn’t comprehend how babies were created, months later the 17-year-old Minka was confused and surprised to find her body changing and growing. Her parents soon found an adoption agency. […]
 
In a similar story, Ryan Bomberger, of the Radiance Foundation was conceived in an act rape. Like Minka, Ryan’s mother chose to carry her child to term. Ryan now dedicates his life to promoting and protecting the dignity of every person. For a recent lecture by Ryan on the hope and joy of adoption click here.
 
All can agree that rape is a horrific act of violence that no one should ever undergo. But abortion after a rape robs an innocent victim of a very beautiful life.
While it’s incredible that Monahan would suggest that Minka Disbrow “chose to carry her child to term,” given the description she provided, the bigger issue is that she would force a woman to give birth to her rapist’s child.
 
In a column from last November, Monahan spoke out against providing the full range of medical care to female victims of human trafficking. Her overriding concern was that women who had become pregnant after being raped might choose abortion (emphasis mine):
Evidence exists that shows women who seek an abortion after rape add to their suffering: they now struggle with the coupled pain of the rape and the abortion; the abortion can become what some have termed “a second rape.”
 
Additionally, a recent peer-reviewed meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Psychiatry revealed that women who choose abortion have a significant increase in mental health problems including depression, anxiety and suicidal behaviors. A situation where a woman is trafficked and becomes pregnant is extremely difficult, but such women deserve loving and honest care and attention, and abortion is not part of that.
Monahan’s writing makes it plainly clear that she is far less concerned about helping women and defending human dignity than she is with forcing all of us – women in particular – to live by the narrow religious views of herself and her employer. That’s what they really mean when they talk about religious freedom.
 
UPDATE: Here's a recent video of Monahan, who is testifying now, on her views on reproductive rights:
 
Syndicate content