Pregnancy Centers Found to Give False Information on Abortion
By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 18, 2006; Page A08
Federally funded "pregnancy resource centers" are incorrectly telling women that abortion results in an increased risk of breast cancer, infertility and deep psychological trauma, a minority congressional report charged yesterday.
The report said that 20 of 23 federally funded centers contacted by staff investigators requesting information about an unintended pregnancy were told false or misleading information about the potential risks of an abortion.

The pregnancy resource centers, which are often affiliated with antiabortion religious groups, have received about $30 million in federal money since 2001, according to the report, requested by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.). The report concluded that the exaggerations "may be effective in frightening pregnant teenagers and women and discouraging abortion. But it denies the teenagers and women vital health information, prevents them from making an informed decision, and is not an accepted public health practice."
A spokeswoman for one of the two large networks of pregnancy resource centers, Sterling-based Care Net, said that the report is "a routine attack on us that's nothing new." (…)"We have many studies that show significant medical problems associated with abortion," she said.
Those studies are at odds with mainstream medical opinion. An expert panel of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), for instance, concluded in 2003 that an "abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer." The experts said their conclusion was "well established" by the evidence.
The report, from the Democratic staff of the House Government Reform Committee, found that counselors at eight of the centers told callers that abortion substantially increases the risk of breast cancer. Some counselors also said the psychological effects of abortion are severe and long-lasting, while research generally has found that severe stress reactions are no more common after an abortion than after giving birth. (…)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...referrer=email
For those anti-choice absolutists in the situational ethics debate... are these lies justified?

Thought I misread the title at first. Abortion does result in trauma for many women and it certainly does increase the risk of infertility (depending on the number of abortions). I know two barren women directly caused from abortion. Society is probably better off because of it, but nevertheless, it does increase infertility. So yes, the dirty truth is justified.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

Funny how you don't address the issue that is most pointed out in the article, the claims that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer. That would be called a lie.

But then again, if you are a right winger, someone claiming there is absolute proof of something (wmd) supported by evidence that is later shown to be incredibly suspicious and directly contradicted by other evidence is not a lie either.

So I'm sure that anyone can say anything whatsoever without any evidence and it would not be a lie, as long as it adheres to the right wing agenda.

How you ignore the issue that are true. It would be called a lie all right...by the Washington Post. Add it to the scrap heap of left wing media spin. FYI. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...77/ai_19356368

Or if you are a left winger, any piece of information that contradicts a previous assumption is a lie, not a mistake. Despite the lack information to prove the lie. Unless of course it is a democrat...then it's a mistake.

Correct, just replace "right" with "left" and you are spot on. Or the thread on Michael Moore. Or above.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

Im a male, so I could really care less about abortion. But nothing beats having rhetorical ammunition like the subject of abortion. I got the mass-baby-murder-card in my belt, just like the Jews got the mass-Holocaust-card.

Baby killer left.