For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Blood Money: The Economics of the Abortion Industry
Written By : Kristia Cavere

On this 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, one aspect that the pro-life community must continually remind our fellow countrymen of is the economics of the abortion industry. Similar to a successful corporation, the billion dollar infanticide business is the result of one of the most successful marketing campaigns in American history.

This “silent holocaust” where 3,500 American babies are aborted daily, is the ultimate exploitation of women. But the people who work at abortion clinics, and the politicians who sustain and encourage such establishments, earn a living by selling abortion through perpetuating the two great lies: a fetus is not a baby, and abortion is good for the woman. For money and power, such individuals are fighting to save themselves by killing innocents.

The pro-life documentary “Blood Money: the Business of Abortion” details how that industry is thriving financially. Carol Everett, the former owner of independent abortion clinics who was interviewed for the film, stated that the primary motivation for those entering that business is a desire to make money, therefore, they skillfully market their product to sell it to women in crisis.

Ms. Everett stated that pro-choice advocates want the breakdown of the family and encourage sexual education, knowing those two situations would increase the likelihood of teenage girls being sexually active. Abortion clinics offer a sense of false security through their distribution of birth control. However, they dispense the cheapest condoms and birth control pills with the lowest dose of hormones knowing that such contraception will have a higher rate of failure. The goal, stated Carol Everett, is “three to five abortions when the girl was between thirteen and eighteen years old.”

For a girl with an unplanned pregnancy, Ms. Everett said that the first step for the clinic counselor was to reassure the girl they would be able to take care of her problem and no one need know. Second, they would identify the fear by reminding the girl that her parents will be very upset, the baby’s father might abandon her, she’ll have to miss school sports, etc. If the girl was hesitant, the counselors were trained to intimidate her by stating that if she doesn’t have an abortion her life will be ruined. And because the majority of abortions are performed in clinics, the doctor-patient relationship, which supposedly provides choices for the woman, is a sham as she wouldn’t see the doctor until he was performing the operation.

Women were coerced up to 80 percent of the time into terminating their pregnancies, admitted Ms. Everett. If the women were asked why they choose an abortion, the number one reason was “they felt they have no choice.” Abortion has never been about choice; it is about despair when a woman feels that she has no freedom and no choices left. But the physical, emotional, and psychological consequences often outlast the nine months for her to carry her baby to term.

Manipulating the message has, sadly, been a triumph of the pro-abortion industry. They have used euphemisms for words, such as “blob of tissue” or “product of conception” in reference to a baby. They have used the positively associated word “choice” for their manipulations, which does not encourage options for women but highlights a singular end, abortion. And, with collaboration of leftist media and academia, they have effectively repressed biology as to when life begins.

The beginning of life is objective science. Medical and scientific writings are unified that at the moment of conception, the fetus is a separate genetic entity. It is a separate life growing inside the mother. Even at conception, the baby’s DNA is different from their mother’s for they are two distinct individuals. Every person has a right to life, and that right should begin the moment they become a human being.

How can the pro-life community increase the success we’ve had in changing the hearts of Americans? By exposing the abortion industry for what it is: a largely unregulated cash industry that exploits a crisis situation of the vulnerable, both the baby and mother. Then by reminding that pro-choice advocates have bypassed our legislative branch and used an unelected judicial branch that is unaccountable to the people.

Through masterful marketing, the abortion industry has deceptively portrayed a heinous act as a constitutional right, and this illusion needs to be dispelled. Life is not defined by size or level of development or ability to defend oneself. During her narration of “Blood Money,” Alveda King restated the famous words of her uncle, Martin Luther King, Jr., that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” No justice can come from the abortion industry, which is based upon lies upon lies, at the expense of innocents.

0
  • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

    World Magazine did a great expose about 15 years ago about how organized crime uses abortion clinics to laundry money, because nobody looks very closely at their books.

  • Don_cos

    Pro-Abortionists always argue that life doesn’t begin at conception but they can never tell you when it does. So I have this to say; When you can show me proof that life does not begin at conception, then and only then will I support abortion. Until then abortion is nothing less than the murder of the most helpless and innocent among us.

  • Anonymous

    I remember when Planned Parenthood got all bent out of shape at a pro-life group for offering free ultrasounds to pregnant women. To the surprise of no one, actually seeing the child growing inside them tends to make women reconsider having an abortion. This, apparently, was something Planned Parenthood could not abide.

    • StanW

      Our tax dollars at work!

  • Guest

    This is a moral issue, not a government nanny state issue to legislate what women will do to their bodies. God is pro-choice, you have the ability to walk out your front door and kill your neighbor. There will be Societal repercussions to your actions, but God is not going to stop you. Ultimately you will have to answer for your actions to God, but he is allowing you the ability to choose. Roe vs. Wade was not the beginning of abortion, but a Societal reaction to a large issue that was being perpetuated even under the established illegality.

    • Mediumheadboy

      Endlessly amusing to see an obvious leftist rail against the “nanny state.” Zero sense of irony, as usual. You’re dismissed.

      • Guest

        The irony of it was exactly why I used the term “nanny state.” Surely you don’t want to stop at the repeal of Roe vs. Wade? What about the mothers that do not seek proper prenatal care? What about the mothers that continue consuming alcohol, smoking, drug use? What about mothers that induce miscarriages from performing strenuous and laborious tasks? What about when those young mothers that do not have the ability to drive? What happens when they need to take the baby for immunization, check ups, Dr. appts? At what point do you want to quit arresting the mothers? Or are you in favor of the government subsidizing all of the needs of the child you forced upon a woman who, if left up to them, would have chosen to terminate the pregnancy? Tell us genius, impress us with your intellect.

        • DrEvil

          Good point.

          But if you comb your hair differently no one will notice. Your solution is to kill real children just so they won’t have imaginary difficult lives with sh!tty mothers. No one is in favor of arresting mothers, why the strwman if you have an actual argument. Face it, you are in favor of killing children and most of the other commentators on this site are oppossed to killing children. Logic, reason, rhetoric, etc, etc, don’t change a damn thing. Live children vs. dead children. Right vs. wrong. Good vs. evil

          Have an Evil day

          • Guest

            This argument only works if you assume that Roe vs. Wade is responsible for abortion.
            “No one is in favor of arresting mothers,”
            The question I pose is; what is the alternative? Some women will choose to terminate their pregnancy irrelevant of the law, and someone will provide the means to an abortion. Are we going to arrest them or not? Surely a pro-life person wouldn’t advocate what was done to Dr. Tiller? You are talking about arresting them, correct?

          • Guest

            This argument only works if you assume that Roe vs. Wade is responsible for abortion.
            “No one is in favor of arresting mothers,”
            The question I pose is; what is the alternative? Some women will choose to terminate their pregnancy irrelevant of the law, and someone will provide the means to an abortion. Are we going to arrest them or not? Surely a pro-life person wouldn’t advocate what was done to Dr. Tiller? You are talking about arresting them, correct?

      • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

        Yeah, its sad watching leftists try to use conservative arguments and concepts because its so blatantly obvious they can’t even begin to comprehend them to begin with.

        • Guest

          What is sad C.T. is watching such short sighted individuals as yourself propel Representatives to power in order to limit the freedoms that a free society enjoys. You posted without answering the questions I posed. At what point will you stop attempting to interject government into our lives?

          • Anonymous

            Which freedoms would those be? The freedom to keep the money you earn? The freedom to not join a union if you so choose? The freedom to hire and fire whomever you choose for your business?

            Don’t pretend you respect freedom, little man. We both know you don’t.

          • Guest

            “The freedom to keep the money you earn?”
            Samantha, ask Washington what was the whole Whiskey Rebellion about?

            “The freedom to not join a union if you so choose?”
            I believe that freedom is current law

            “The freedom to hire and fire whomever you choose for your business?” That is what you are advocating for? Really? Without any regulation?

          • Guest

            “The freedom to keep the money you earn?”
            Samantha, ask Washington what was the whole Whiskey Rebellion about?

            “The freedom to not join a union if you so choose?”
            I believe that freedom is current law

            “The freedom to hire and fire whomever you choose for your business?” That is what you are advocating for? Really? Without any regulation?

          • Anonymous

            “The freedom to keep the money you earn?”
            Samantha, ask Washington what was the whole Whiskey Rebellion about?

            It was about an excise tax on whiskey, chowderhead. Not an income tax.

            “The freedom to not join a union if you so choose?”
            I believe that freedom is current law

            Go to a state without a Right to Work law and say that. Or, Hell, tell that to Barack Obama, who wants to take away workers’ right to the secret ballot which protects them from being intimidated into forming a union.

            “The freedom to hire and fire whomever you choose for your business?” That is what you are advocating for? Really? Without any regulation?

            You’re the one who’s set yourself up as the Noble Defender of Freedom, kiddo. Either you’re against limiting freedoms or you’re not. You don’t get to have it both ways.

          • Guest

            “It was about an excise tax on whiskey, chowderhead. Not an income tax.”
            Is it your claim there was taxation on unearned money?

            “The freedom to keep the money you earn.”
            Where was the “income tax” in to your statement? I believe you are a little confused Samantha.

            Washington set a tone. You are barking up the wrong tree with the “income tax” meme. I don’t believe there should be a personal “income tax.”

          • Anonymous

            Where was the “income tax” in to your statement?

            Oh, I get it now. You’re too stupid to understand a perfectly obvious implied statement. Here’s a hint for you, chuckles. When conservatives say things like “the right to keep the money we earn” we’re talking about the income tax.

            Everyone who knows anything about politics knows that. Except you. Apparently you were, in fact, born yesterday.

      • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

        Yeah, its sad watching leftists try to use conservative arguments and concepts because its so blatantly obvious they can’t even begin to comprehend them to begin with.

    • Mediumheadboy

      Endlessly amusing to see an obvious leftist rail against the “nanny state.” Zero sense of irony, as usual. You’re dismissed.

    • Anonymous

      This is a moral issue, not a government nanny state issue to legislate what women will do to their bodies.

      All issues are moral issues, you silly child. And all laws are legislations of morality.

      If you can’t think of a good argument to justify abortion, just admit it. Don’t jerk around with nonsense like this.

      God is pro-choice, you have the ability to walk out your front door and kill your neighbor.

      That…is the dumbest thing I have ever read in my life.

      Are you retarded?

      • Guest

        Samantha,
        Not all moral issues necessitate intervention from the government. I am fortunate enough to not have to ever make that decision. But in addressing your “argument to justify” comment, yes, there are conditions to which I feel that someone else may be compelled to accept God’s judgment when dealing with rape, incest, or the birth mother’s mortality. And as to your question “Are you retarded?” My answer is no, I am not TriG. Your inability to understand is not to be placed at my feet.

        • Anonymous

          Not all moral issues necessitate intervention from the government.

          So who gets to decide which ones do deserve intervention? You?

          And a refusal to “intervene” is still a legislation of morality. By legalizing abortion to avoid “intervening” you have legislated pro-choice morality.

          Not that you care. You’re perfectly okay with the government intervening on moral issues so long as it’s your morality being legislated.

  • DrEvil

    Right on the money, Don. The right chooses to err on the side that preserves life, while the left chooses to err on the side that ends life.

    Have an Evil day

Advertisement
Featured Video

Who Is Brett Kimberlin?

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info

Users Online