Is the United Nations influencing decisions in our federal courts? I’d answer yes based on the details in the enclosed two articles. This excerpt from the first article is quite clear: A federal judge on Friday blocked the parts of Indiana's tough new abortion law that cuts off most of Planned Parenthood's public funding in the state because the organization provides abortions. The second article is about: “UN Women, an agency of the United Nations created last year to promote the advancement of women, . . .” Every UN agency is funded in large part by American tax dollars. In the case of abortion the UN comes at funding abortion from a different direction than does Planned Parenthood: Getting universities on board and securing funding for UN Women is vital to putting its beliefs into practice with programs in the U.S. and abroad. Let me say that I do not think somebody from the United Nations contacted U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt and told her to continue funding abortions. Nevertheless, there is an obvious connection that should raise questions about the UN’s influence among America’s federal judges. Both the United Nations and our federal judges fund abortion with tax dollars. They both force each taxpayer to fund something that is abhorrent to a majority of Americans. Even many pro-choice Americans resent tax dollars paying for abortions. One final observation: This past spring, at the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), a worldwide curriculum for comprehensive sex education was proposed that calls for legalization of prostitution and advocacy of same-sex marriage, and classifies abortion as a human right. In UN-speak every “human right” must be funded by tax dollars; whereas, not one Right in America’s Bill of Rights requires government assistance. Judge Blocks Indiana From Cutting Funds for Planned Parenthood Over Abortions Published June 24, 2011 INDIANAPOLIS -- A federal judge on Friday blocked the parts of Indiana's tough new abortion law that cuts off most of Planned Parenthood's public funding in the state because the organization provides abortions. U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt granted Planned Parenthood's request for an injunction in striking down the law's defunding provision as unconstitutional, and siding with federal Medicaid officials who have said states cannot disqualify Medicaid providers merely because they also offer abortions. The U.S. Justice Department also had filed a brief siding with Planned Parenthood, with attorneys saying the law restricts Medicaid recipients' freedom to choose their health care provider. The state had argued that federal law forbids Medicaid to cover abortions in most circumstances and that the program indirectly funds the procedures because the state has said Planned Parenthood's financial statements show it commingles Medicaid funds with other revenues. The state has said the state-federal health insurance plan for low-income and disabled people might subsidize some of the overhead costs for space where abortions are performed. Planned Parenthood's attorney, Ken Falk of the American Civil Liberties Union, has said the law signed May 10 by Gov. Mitch Daniels made Indiana the first state to deny Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood for general health services such as breast exams and Pap tests. It cut off about $1.4 million to Planned Parenthood, which serves about 9,300 clients in Indiana who are on the state-federal health insurance plan for low-income and disabled people who receive Medicaid. A recent federal Medicaid bulletin said states may not exclude qualified health care providers merely because they also provide abortions. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-funds-for-planned-parenthood-over-abortions/ UN Women Advances Radical Agenda at U.S. Universities by Janie Abel 06/25/2011 UN Women, an agency of the United Nations created last year to promote the advancement of women, has spent the year hard at work getting schools in the United States on board with programs that fail to make progress against serious mistreatment of women but instead focus on a liberal social agenda. They advocate not economic empowerment, but sexual “rights,” including prostitution, abortion and the condemnation of marriage and the family. This past spring, at the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), a worldwide curriculum for comprehensive sex education was proposed that calls for legalization of prostitution and advocacy of same-sex marriage, and classifies abortion as a human right. The curriculum also regards marriage as a “relationship often entered into out of social, religious or economic pressures,” and disregards the connection between marriage and parenthood. While genuine oppression does occur against many women around the world, especially in Muslim countries, the commission fails to address these concerns, and rather degrades women further by suggesting that only sex education issues are of pertinence. This new education policy contains, according to the National Education Association’s Diane Schneider, who spoke at CSW, education on masturbation and orgasms as the only way to “combat gender conformity” among the world’s youngest students. Such a curriculum, tied to UN Women’s goal of identifying women primarily through their sexuality and fertility, advances a radically liberal social agenda with no regard for contradicting values of women worldwide. In nations where mothers want to expand their families to include more children, UN Women looks to decrease fertility through administering birth control as a means of population control. The UN’s Commission on Population and Development explains that in such areas where larger families are desired, family planning services are only one measure used to lower fertility and have to be “buttressed by other strategies to change norms concerning the number of children desired.” UN Women has sent proponents of its secular liberal agenda to the homes of this country’s most impressionable future leaders: college campuses. Executive Director Michelle Bachelet has visited numerous schools this year alone, including UC Berkeley and Hunter College in New York City, to gather support for her organization. She recently taught a series of seminars on democracy and women’s rights for Berkeley’s Center for Latin American Studies (CLAS), and was described by the chair of CLAS as someone who “reflects the values of UC Berkeley.” Undergraduate Emily Tsitrian looked forward to hearing from Bachelet on “[her] place in this increasingly globalized world” as a woman, and assistant professor Mark Healey commented that Bachelet’s advice focused on fighting the “inequalities that come with globalization.” Aside from misleading students, UN Women targets university faculty as potential followers and advocates. Getting universities on board and securing funding for UN Women is vital to putting its beliefs into practice with programs in the U.S. and abroad. At the University of Pennsylvania, Bachelet spoke before the fifth meeting of the Global Colloquium of University Presidents, which included presidents from Columbia, Yale, New York University and Princeton. Bachelet pleaded for universities to “continue to support the groundbreaking research that UN Women can promote in countries worldwide.” She also said that UN Women wants “to link up [its] research and policy unit with key research faculty in the universities,” and told administrators that members “have the power to open doors, to make changes happen for women and girls.” Other colleges that leaders of UN Women, past and present, have visited to promote feminist policies include Wellesley College, the University of Wisconsin-Madison and John Jay College of New York City. The UN National Conference was held at North Carolina State University on June 11, where UN Women pushed for increased birth control abroad and sexual liberalization in the U.S. The influence of groups like UN Women on the minds of university faculty and students can have a profound effect on conservative college students when their teachings trickle down into the classroom. Fighting a radical feminist agenda on campus can be done with the help of Young America’s Foundation, through which students can host conservative women speakers to counter the leftists brought in by organizations such as UN Women. Kate Obenshain, Andrea Tantaros and Michelle Easton are all foundation lecturers who speak out on the failures of feminism. As the Left continues to target campus audiences, it is clear that young conservative activists on college campuses are a key element in defeating radical policies such as those advocated by UN Women. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44437
Good news in the enclosed article. It shows that at least a few corporations are standing up against infanticide. Its a start, a good start; nevertheless, all of the major corporations in the world cannot stop tax dollars from funding abortions so long as elected officials, federal judges, and government bureaucrats continue to find ways to fund the slaughter. Its a losing battle until tax dollars are kept out of every channel that ends in abortion at home and abroad. That includes denying tax dollars to every group, and every institution, that advocates abortion even though they do not perform abortions themselves. Abortion advocacy funded by tax dollars makes everyone equally responsible. Make no mistake on this issue, its not about two private sector groups opposing one another, the fight is against the government. Even though they are in the majority, abortion opponents will always be the underdogs in a fight against the government. Ryder to abortionists: 'Not with our trucks!' Rental firm denies equipment for disposal of aborted babies Posted: June 25, 2011 10:55 pm Eastern By Michael Carl In a major victory for the pro-life movement, Ryder System, Inc., one of the nation's leading truck leasing companies, has notified the Campaign to Stop Stericycle that the corporate giant no longer will allow medical waste disposal company Stericycle to use its trucks to service abortion clinics. Campaign to Stop Stericycle director Michael Marcavage, also the leader of Repent America, says Ryder's decision is a "blessing." "This is another victory for the cause of the unborn and Ryder's decision to distance itself from Stericycle's involvement with the abortion industry is another step towards ending Stericycle's facilitation of the abortion holocaust," Marcavage declared. "We hope the remaining truck leasing [companies] will follow Ryder and Penske's lead to stop providing resources to Stericycle to assist abortion facilities in carrying out their evil deeds," Marcavage said. It was another major truck leasing firm, Penske Truck Leasing, that announced earlier it no longer would allow its trucks to be used to service at abortion clinics. Penske Corp. President Brian Hard told the campaign, "We have been, and you have my word that we will continue to be, proactive in stopping Stericycle from using our trucks to service abortion clinics." Marcavage says his campaign isn't stopping with Ryder and Penske. "Our hope is to keep pressure on the other truck leasing companies to remove themselves as well," Marcavage said. Marcavage gives the truck leasing companies the benefit of the doubt when they are confronted, and so far when notified about Stericycle's connection to the abortion business, the firms ordered their trucks to be removed from abortion clinic service. "Ryder didn't know their trucks were being used for this. Penske didn't know their trucks were being used for this purpose either. When the owner, Roger Penske, found out about it, he said he didn't want any affiliation with that and ultimately had those trucks removed from that service," Marcavage said. "Stericycle, the nation's leading waste management company, depends entirely upon truck leasing companies like Ryder to provide vehicles for its waste collection routes, which include a reported 586 Planned Parenthood locations and hundreds of other abortion facilities nationwide," the campaign said. Ryder was not available for comment by press time, although the campaign announcement quoted Ryder legal officer and Executive Vice President Bob Fatovic as saying that the Ryder-Stericycle relationship will be adjusted. "In approximately 30 days Ryder's trucks will be fully removed from all of Stericycle's routes that service abortion facilities, and may not be used to service the abortion industry 'in any way, shape or form,'" he said. Marcavage emphasizes his conviction that Stericycle is doing something that is morally wrong. "Stericycle is the premier provider of medical waste service pick-up to the abortion industry. Our goal is to get Stericycle to stop collaborating with the abortion industry," Marcavage said. Marcavage believes that companies like Stericycle, other medical waste disposal companies and other related businesses are enabling the abortion business to stay alive. "It's because of Stericycle that the abortion industry is flourishing in this country because they're the company that a lot of abortion facilities are turning to in order to have their aborted babies and medical tools used to be taken to be incinerated," Marcavage explained. "Our hope is that we would see Stericycle remove itself from this whole picture," Marcavage added. Stericycle's website reports it is a "leader" in medical waste disposal. "As the leader in the collection, treatment and disposal of medical and biohazardous waste, we help ensure maximum infection control throughout the entire process. The Stericycle medical waste disposal service provides complete custody documentation, which is essential for accountability and regulatory compliance of biohazardous materials," the website reported. "We provide all necessary containers, then pick them up and safely treat and dispose of the medical waste," the company said. Stericycle's knowledge of the medical waste disposal business is the reason Marcavage says he gives the truck companies the benefit of the doubt, but not Stericycle. WND reported in January when CSS began its campaign to stop medical waste companies like Stericycle that Stericycle Manager Mara Villalobos, who formerly managed Stericycle's contracts with "multiple regions of Planned Parenthood" confirmed that Stericycle does indeed accept fetal remains. In a recording, she explained how the fetal remains go into one box for pickup and disposal, and the other materials, such as blood-soaked towels or gloves, go into another. "She explained the detailed packaging guidelines for abortion mills, in which fetal remains are placed into red 'soft waste' bags, then into secondary boxes, which are labeled with 'incinerate only' stickers. The fetal remains are then taken to Stericycle's incineration plant in Haw River, N.C., where they are burned into ash," the campaign said. "Ryder didn't know that these medical waste companies were using their trucks to make pick-ups at abortion clinics. Stericycle, they're a Goliath in the medical waste industry. They rely entirely on leased trucks to carry out their evil deeds," Marcavage said. Marcavage, believes that hitting the medical supply and support companies, large and small, is an effective way to end abortion. "The pressure hasn't been on these medical waste companies that are not as big as Stericycle but have been having this one stop among all of their other stops on their collection route," Marcavage said. "Our issue is when they make that one stop at an abortion facility." Marcavage hopes that by taking out the bigger Stericycle, there will be a domino effect. "Stericycle is the giant, and once we get them removed, the smaller companies may not want anything to do with that (abortion clinic business)," Marcavage said. "As we put pressure on Stericycle, we've found that other smaller companies were also not aware that some of clinics were putting aborted babies in the boxes. They thought the clinics shouldn't be doing that," Marcavage continued. "So if there's enough public outcry over these companies, I believe that it's going to be difficult for these abortion providers to find medical waste companies that will service them," Marcavage added. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=315189
Good thing too. It is important to stand up to religious and other bigots who feel a desperate need to impose their beliefs on others.
To prometeus: There is no greater imposition than forcing one person to pay for another persons beliefs. These words sound be your starting point: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;. . . Those who insist others pay for abortions are religious bigots in violation of the First Amendment as well as being religious parasites of the worst kind.
Has anyone asked you to pay for their abortion? Do you know anyone who was asked to pay for someone's abortion?
To prometeus: The answer is yes if you consider paying for abortions with tax dollars asking. The answer is no if you believe taking tax dollars by force is not asking. Either way, I, along with the majority, do not want to pay for abortions. Incidentally, the courts have ruled time and time again that the government cannot fund abortions.
Then you don't know what the (*)(*)(*)(*) you are talking about. It is illegal to use tax dollars to fund abortions. If you know of a violator, report them and have them prosecuted for breaking the law. Otherwise educate yourself, it is far better than spewing ignorance.
To prometeus: I love it when characters like you tell someone else they dont what they are talking about. INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: Planned Parenthoods Medicaid Misinformation In Indiana by Lila Rose Planned Parenthoods legal team has been extremely busy these days trying to stop various states from defunding their group. Texas, Wisconsin and New Hampshire joined Indiana, Kansas and North Carolina this week as they decided that taxpayer dollars should not fund the mega abortion chain. But Indiana is Ground Zero in the fight to strip Planned Parenthood of its taxpayer dollars. After Indiana defunded the abortion group in May, President Obama has threatened to withhold billions of dollars in Medicaid funds from the state of Indiana if the state does not continue to funding Planned Parenthood. To make matters worse, an Obama-appointed judge ruled late last week that Indiana had to reinstate funding to Planned Parenthood because it would not be in the public interest if President Obama withheld billions of dollars from the state of Indiana and consequently hurt over a million patients on Medicaid. Forget the merits of that case! Planned Parenthood emphatically defends its public funding by arguing that women have no other place to go for their healthcare needs. According to an official Planned Parenthood press release, the legislation would take away health care from thousands of women in Indiana, leaving them at greater risk for undetected cancers, untreated infections and unintended pregnancies. Oh really? Planned Parenthood in Indiana serves 9,300 Medicaid patients, which only accounts for less than 1% of the total Medicaid patients in the state. And in the counties with Planned Parenthood clinics alone, women can choose from over 800 other qualified Medicaid providers. Live Action is releasing an undercover video today showing that Planned Parenthoods claims of Medicaid women losing their healthcare if they are defunded are bogus and unfounded. View here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UqLL-v0JpY0 Our undercover investigators called 16 of the 28 Indiana Planned Parenthood clinics posing as women on Medicaid concerned about where they could receive services if Planned Parenthoods funding was not restored. In direct contrast to what Planned Parenthood has claimed, every single one of its own employees were quick to refer women to an abundance of other providers, admitting they could easily access Medicaid benefits elsewhere. Dr. Geoffry Cly, a practicing OB/GYN in Ft. Wayne, Indiana told Live Action that his clinic and many others can handle the influx of the small amount of Medicaid patients that went to Planned Parenthood and that the abortion group exists only to perform abortions and the rest of the healthcare that they provide is healthcare thats already available in town. The outcome of this case in Indiana could very well dictate what happens to other states that attempt to defund Planned Parenthood. President Obama is holding low-income patients health hostage, threatening to block all Medicaid funds for vulnerable patients, all in an effort to force Indiana into funding the largest abortion provider in the country. Do you support Indianas decision to defund Planned Parenthood? Then stand with Indiana and sign Live Actions petition, which demands that President Obama and his administration: 1) Withdraw its brief filed in the District Court of Southern Indiana in support of Planned Parenthoods private civil suit against the State of Indiana; 2) Direct CMS to approve Indianas new Medicaid provider standards; 3) Issue a public clarification that Medicaid is a state-run program under which states may determine provider eligibility standards and your administration will not interfere with this state authority. Go to www.IStandWithIndiana.com and sign the petition. Post the video to your Facebook and Twitter pages and email it to your friends. Help spread the word that taxpayer dollars should never go to fund abortions. http://biggovernment.com/lrose/2011...renthoods-medicaid-misinformation-in-indiana/
Please do not pretend that media-whore has any credibility whatsoever. http://ethicaltalia.blogspot.com/2011/03/blog-post_16.html I know it is a strict rule of journalists to never fabricate evidence, make up quotes, create hypothetical stories or individuals or publish misleading information or photos. However, I know of several HUGE instances where these ethical codes were violated. One such instance of media dishonesty that has caught my attention is the extreme and unsupported claims of Lila Rose against the Planned Parenthood Organization and the support of Fox News to continue coverage on this untruthful issue. For a couple years now, Roses organization, Live Action, has been gaining widespread attention through its uses of deceptive editing and blatant lying. In February of this year, Rose released a series of significantly edited videos trying to show that Planned Parenthood engages in frequent criminal activities such as their supposed cover-up of child sex trafficking. Rose continually implies in the videos that Planned Parenthood cooperated with these alleged sex traffickers, however, no where in the video does she bother to state that Planned Parenthood immediately called the FBI and reported the supposed sex offenders. http://jezebel.com/5422576/3-lies-anti+choicers-tell-about-planned-parenthood Anna North Undercover anti-abortion activist Lila Rose has struck again, this time with a video supposedly exposing Planned Parenthood's malfeasance. What it actually exposes: the anti-choice movement's smear tactics http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2011/02/07/give-lila-roses-dishonesty-mainstream-media-attention it didnt take long for the evidence to come out that Live Action is doctoring footage, in this case to reinforce the already-bogus narrative that theres something wrong with informing young people of their full legal rights. But even without this, you can point to multiple ways that Roses videos are dishonest and therefore not fit for mainstream media news, which is supposed to be fact-based. The biggest lies in the videos are lies of omission. Rose implies heavily in the videos that Planned Parenthood cooperated with alleged sex traffickers, but no where in the video does she mention that Planned Parenthood called the FBI and reported the supposed sex traffickers, usually as soon as they left. This is a pretty big lie, since this fact proves that Planned Parenthood did the exact opposite of what Rose claims they did. .......
To OKgrannie: Once again, an abortion advocate zeros in on the messenger rather than the message. This from the article is indisputable fact: Planned Parenthoods legal team has been extremely busy these days trying to stop various states from defunding their group. Texas, Wisconsin and New Hampshire joined Indiana, Kansas and North Carolina this week as they decided that taxpayer dollars should not fund the mega abortion chain. Those states mentioned above signify a movement within the halls of government. Admittedly, pro-life advocates have a long way to go before the government puts an end to infanticide. Not using tax dollars paid by a majority of Americans who oppose abortion, and tax dollar funding, is a good beginning.
Because you can believe NOTHING from that particular messenger. She and her cohorts have been proven to be liars extraordinaire. Because of the Hyde Amendment, government has not paid for abortions for years. Where are people getting the idea that government is paying for abortions?
As I said you don;t know what the (*)(*)(*)(*) you are talking about. How does parroting an article that does not even mention money support your initial assertion?
To OKgrannie: How about six state legislatures for starters: "Texas, Wisconsin and New Hampshire joined Indiana, Kansas and North Carolina this week as they decided that taxpayer dollars should not fund the mega abortion chain. But Indiana is Ground Zero in the fight to strip Planned Parenthood of its taxpayer dollars." To prometeus: Youre kidding me, or you did not read the article, or you did not comprehend what you read. The entire article is predicated on money going to Planned Parenthood aside from the direct references to withholding funding.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suite, that is why you don't know what the (*)(*)(*)(*) you are talking about. Funding for PP is not for abortions. It is illegal for tax dollars to be used for abortions. If you know of a violation report it if not educate yourself instead of spewing ignorance.
You do understand that ending the funding for affordable contraception will cause MORE ABORTIONS, don't you? Why do you think state legislators want to cause more abortions?
To prometeus: Every state that knows of violations stops tax dollars from going to Planned Parenthood. It would be superfluous if I reported it to them. To OKgrannie: Now youve jumped from contraception to pregnancy. They are separate issues. Clarify your positions on both minus the clever questions.
BS. IF they had any evidence they would prosecute. Instead they they use lies to justify they self righteous crusade.
Taxpayers don't pay for abortions except in rare circumstances. Taxpayers funding family planning is cheaper than paying for babies. Every $1 spent on family planning saves $4 on medicaid costs. So the taxpayer IS going to pay, and we may as well pay for the lesser cost. Trying abstinence is fine and dandy, it's just so common that those trying it fail. Ummm, contraception is not a separate issue from pregnancy. It's simple, if people don't have ready and affordable access to contraception, pregnancies result. Reducing ready and affordable access to contraception, results in unwanted pregnancies, which results in abortions. It's a straight line.
To prometeus: Prosecute implies crime and punishment. The question is: How does the government put an organization in jail? Im certain states would prosecute individuals who are guilty of criminal offenses such as embezzling tax dollars, etc. In this case, legislators punished an organization by denying funding. Note that Hussein justified his socialist/communist crusade when he threatened to punish states by withholding Medicaid funds: Quote from article: After Indiana defunded the abortion group in May, President Obama has threatened to withhold billions of dollars in Medicaid funds from the state of Indiana if the state does not continue to funding Planned Parenthood. By the way, your angry defense of the indefensible tells me that you have a vested interest is seeing Planned Parenthood receive tax dollars. Either that, or paying for infanticide with tax dollars gives you a perverse pleasure. To OKgrannie: The only straight line I see is the one that goes from the labors of taxpayers objecting to funding family planning (ABORTION) to the pockets of parasites who very well know they cannot change anything. I hope you can walk a straighter line if you get stopped DWI.
You are truly clueless. I suppose that you believe that mocking the President makes up for the lack of substance in your post. Typical neocon drivel. Punish an organization by depriving the poor who need their services. That is right up there with subsidizing private jets. Brilliant, just brilliant. Indefensible? I am not the one pulling post from my arse. Yes I have an interest in seeing PP funded, it saves me money. You think that this kind of ignorant drivel gives you credibility?
To prometeus: I’m content to let impartial readers who might be following this thread decide which is more credible; your personal attacks or my measured responses?
Federal funding of Planned Parenthootd pays for: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2011/04/07/budget-stalemate-major-media-fail-riders The US can easily fund Planned Parenthood for far less than we send to Israel (nearly $7 billion) every year.
I assume that you are ok with the legality of abortion but just do not want to pay for it. I can understand the rational of folks not wanting to pay for abortion - to some degree on the surface. In the broader scope however this logic would also extend this to folks who do not want to pay for medical treatment of smokers, alcohol related illness, or for those who engage in other high risk activities such as skiing or driving a motor vehicle.
"We", including you (assuming you pay taxes), are going to pay for children's services, we will not let children starve in this country and you will pay your fair share to prevent it. It's cheaper to fund family planning than it is to pay for children. The problems belong to all of us when we have to pay to support children. "Family planning" is NOT synonymous with abortion, no matter what you've been told. Taxpayers are not paying for abortions, haven't you heard of the Hyde Amendment?
To Cady: Planned Parenthood has only to give up performing abortions and it will receive all of the Medicaid funding it is entitled to in every state. The fact is: Hussein would will stop all aid to Medicaid recipients before he abandons Planned Parenthoods abortion factories. To Giftedone: Military personnel excepted, no American should be required to pay a stranger's medical bills no matter how they are incurred. To OKgrannie: It always amazes me when anyone who agrees with slaughtering children, over 40 million since Roe v. Wade, can claim the moral high ground by citing concern for children. Apparently, killing children in the womb is better than feeding them.
