Renew America pundit and pro-lifer Judie Brown, on the subject of Planned Parenthood, in a column entitled "Intentionally Uninhibited":
Frantically scurrying to protect its multi-million dollar birth control enterprise, Planned Parenthood has begun taking aim at pro-life forces with rapid fire rhetoric designed to frighten the uninformed.
Frightening the uninformed is Judie’s job, dammit, a point she will doubtless make very shortly.
In recent days I have read many articles about the battle against birth control that is being waged by American Life League and others.
An honest person at this point might want to inform her readers that you are the President of the American Life League. But not you, Judie.
It seems as though the culture of death is ready to admit that their fascination with sex includes a demand for total, unlimited access to all manner of "protection" — from condoms to infanticide.
"Infanticide"? We assume you are refering to abortions. And abortion isn’t a form of protection, hun. In fact, one purpose of protection is to avoid unwanted pregnancies, and hence, fewer abortions.
Anything that will resolve — by any means necessary — the difficult dilemma created by an "unwanted" pregnancy is for all practical purposes an entitlement that must not and cannot be opposed.
You can oppose whatever you like. That’s not the problem. The problem is you want to institute governmental policies which "resolve" the "dilemna" the way you want it to be resolved, instead of allowing individual women to think for themselves.
If that sounds far-fetched, consider this. In a recent Planned Parenthood webzine commentary, the writer notes: "The great irony in the war on contraception is that the same forces who oppose abortion also oppose expanding access to the tools that prevent unintended pregnancies and reduce the need for abortion. Instead of pushing for policies that promote responsibility, these advocates push for policies that punish women who choose to have sex without the intent of getting pregnant."
The same article also quotes you admitting just that. Here are your words, Judie: "’We see a direct connection between the practice of contraception and the practice of abortion." So Planned Parenthood was right.
Let’s be perfectly clear, shall we?
Yes, let’s.
Those of us who oppose contraception do so out of a sincere respect for the dignity of the human person.
Respect for the human person, but not respect for a human person’s choice.
The so-called "war on contraception" is really a rally in favor of life, affirming every person’s gift of human sexuality, every mother’s blessing when she discovers that she is with child, every person’s duty to act responsibly.
And that’s fine.
But believe it or not, many people have recreational sex, which is separate and apart from procreational sex.
In fact, having recreational sex adds to the quality of life, human sexuality, and requires responsible actions. And it in no way deters from blessings of motherhood — it merely (and temporarily) avoids it.
Truth be told, we are the ones who are providing access to the tools that supply joy rather than sorrow.
Look, maybe non-procreating sex with you involves sorrow, but that’s your cross to bear.
Our tool kit includes self control, mutual respect, health and happiness.
Which makes sense only if one believes — as Judie apparently does — that non-procreating sex is about hedonism, mutual disrespect, sickness and unhappiness.
And truth be told, if Judie believes this, then all the power to her. I have no bone to pick. But again, the problem is that she (and those like her) are imposing their values on everybody else.
Self control elevates one’s perspective on his very being.
Um, okay. I guess. Whatever that means.
The idea of saving sex for marriage is truly liberating for both men and women. It opens the door to loving someone else more than a person loves himself.
It’s not possible to love someone else more than yourself if you have a sexual history? Really?
Or in simple English, it means caring so deeply for someone that one simply would never think of having sex until that day when the two of them are made one in matrimony.
Of course, that logic could be extended to kissing, too. Why not, Judie? What’s the difference?
Mutual respect never admits to defeat.
Please send us an email if you know what that means.
But such a positive outlook is the antithesis of what Planned Parenthood wants for its customer base. The organization’s clientele become full-time consumers because once hooked on birth control, the buyers require regular testing for various diseases as well as an occasional case of "contraceptive failure" (translation: baby); or as Planned Parenthood would put it, a resolution for the unintended accident.
Contraception gets you hooked on sex, and Planned Parenthood is the junkie. Got that?
Nobody at Planned Parenthood would ever admit that motherhood must always trump a continued sexual satisfaction that is devoid of obligation to anyone else.
Of course they wouldn’t admit that. Not because you’re right, but because Planned Parenthood isn’t so rigid and dogmatic as to say that this "always trumps" that for every living being.
In investigating the devastating fruits of Planned Parenthood’s marketing plan we find the dirty details.
Not that Planned Parenthood has a marketing plan that Judie has investigated. She’s just making this part up.
For example, today’s young adults, including teens, are at higher risk of acquiring a sexually transmitted disease than ever before. Just 50 years ago doctors knew of a mere handful of such diseases; today there are at least 50 strains. Why is this so?
Well, according to the CDC, young adults are at higher risk of acquiring STDs "for a number of reasons, including limited access to preventitive and regular health care…". You know, places like Planned Parenthood. So getting rid of Planned Parenthood would only make matters worse.
And as for what doctor "know" compared to 50 years ago, Judie, did it ever enter your mind that there have been significant medical advances in the time span?
You should also know that some STDs are at all-time lows. Syphilis, once the most prevalent sexually transmited disease, is on the verge of being declared dead.
But don’t let facts get in your way, Judie.
Clearly the laissez-faire approach the culture has to all things sexual means bacteria are having a field day. And that’s just for starters.
Clearly. Especially if you use false statistics and "facts".
With young people consistently being told that self control is old hat and that contraception is the ticket to sexual freedom, the consequences couldn’t be worse.
Actually, abstinence is required to be taught. And it’s interesting that Judie fails to recite examples where young people are being told that contraception is the ticket to sexual freedom (although it is supposedly happening "consistently").
A healthy body is never the goal when someone experiments sexually;…
You see, when you engage in premarital sex, you’re just experimenting. When you engage in married sex on your honeymoon, you’re an expert.
…being affected with some incurable condition does not sound like real sexual freedom to me.
Me either. Wouldn’t this be a great world if we could have BOTH? Sexual freedom and some sort of — I don’t know — prophylactic device which prevents the spread of incurable conditions?
Next week, Judie is going to argue that being run over by a car doesn’t sound like a good reason to go out walking.
A healthy mind would never consider such activity to be acceptable in the first place nor would such a mind, if housed in the body of an adult, mislead youngsters into believing that promiscuity has no consequences.
Which would be a fair point IF adults were actually teaching youngster that promiscuity has no consequences.
As Planned Parenthood persists in accusing pro-lifers of waging a war on contraception, its all out sexual saturation blitzkrieg is focused on destroying common sense, morality, health and spiritual wellbeing.
Reasonable people can debate what is morally and spiritually healthy, and what constitutes common sense behavior, but it is clear that Judie’s concern here is NOT health.
There is no form of sexual activity Planned Parenthood doesn’t like, unless of course a child is conceived. At that point, even the youngest ones are fair game.
Well, again, Judie is just making shit up. Does she offer any data points to support this? No, we didn’t think so.
In Planned Parenthood style new-speak, "responsibility" means that one need never be accountable for any manner of risky sexual behavior.
In other words, when Planned Parenthood talks about "responsible" sex, they really mean "risky" sex. I see.
It kind of makes it easier to hate them when you put it that way, Judie.
That is why Planned Parenthood and its cohorts describe the child conceived as a result of such activity in negative terms such as unintended or unplanned or unwanted.
Well, it may be "negative", but isn’t it the truth?
Let’s say that a man and a woman engage in sex. (And so Judie won’t need the fainting couch, we’ll even make them married for purposes of this hypothetical). But let’s say they don’t intend or plan to have a child. Maybe they don’t even want one yet, at least not at this point in their marriage.
Assuming Mrs. Hypothetical gets pregnant, wouldn’t it be accurate to describe the pregnancy as unintended or unplanned or unwanted?
I’m sorry if the use of the "un" prefix strikes you as being "negative". Then again, as the title to your column suggests, you seem to have a problem with uninhibited sex. So who’s being negative here?
While Planned Parenthood would argue that its programs are designed to make every child a wanted child, its consistent rhetoric is focused on making sure that no child escapes death from chemical, medical or surgical abortion.
Judie, honey. Get a grip. A condom means there is no conception. Therefore, there is no "child" or "fetus" in the first place. Nothing dies, because nothing is conceived in the first place.
Besides, aren’t there people working for Planned Parenthood that are mothers themselves? I think it’s clear who is the propogator of hyperbolic rhetoric here.
If this were not the case, Planned Parenthood would refrain from claiming that "women who choose to have sex without the intent of getting pregnant" are being punished by abortion opponents. We prefer to think that those of us who oppose Planned Parenthood’s philosophy recognize that motherhood is a state of life that is to be revered rather than denied or denigrated by the intentional death of a child.
Okay. Then let’s try a thought experiment, Judie.
Suppose there was a woman who was unable to bear children due to some accident or something she experienced as a child herself. According to your last sentence, you would have no problem with this woman having premarital sex, since the "intentional death of a child" cannot conceivably (no pun intended) happen. Right? Right?
But you clearly would have a problem with that. So Planned Parenthood is correct. This isn’t about abortion to you; it’s about your opposition — morally — to premarital sex. Why can’t you just admit that, and then we’ll go forward from there?
Let’s face it. Planned Parenthood’s war on maternity must come to a screeching halt.
Because no woman who works for Planned Parenthood is a mother (or wants to be a mother) themselves, right?
So must its war on our young people, who are told their lives must be sexually saturated.
Told by…?
There is no room in a civilized society for either the wanton killing of preborn children or the brazen promotion of free sex at the high cost of disease, depression and death.
You heard it here first folks — contraception causes disease, depression and death.
Next week: down is up.
Only when the people of our nation put self respect ahead of instant gratification will we see an end to the despicable fruits produced by the culture of death.
News flash, Judie: Much as it probably pains you, most people have sex prior to marriage. And always have. And while there is certainly no dirth of disease, depression and death in today’s society, it’s simply ludicrous to blame it all on safe sex, try as you might.
Our challenge is to persist in exposing evil; to insist on accountability for the dreadful damage that has been wrought; to consistently maintain the moral high ground without apology and without conceding an inch.
Good for you, Maintain your principles, even if it exposes you as a holier-than-thou lying prude who wants to control what other people do in their bedroom.
The intentionally uninhibited lifestyle that Planned Parenthood encourages has destroyed far too many Mother’s says already.
Ladies and gents, presenting the War on Mother’s Day™ . Brought to you by the same people who gave you the War on Christmas™ and the War on Easter™ .
RELATED: If Judie’s column doesn’t convince you that the religious right is conducting a "War on (Premarital) Fucking" and that they don’t give a rat’s ass about womens’ health, maybe this will.
It’s a story about a new vaccine up for FDA approval this month. The vaccine will virtually eliminate the possibility of women getting cervical cancer, a disease which will kill 3,600 women this year alone.
The thing is, in order for the vaccine to be effective, it has to be given to girls between the ages of 10-12.
Who is opposing FDA approval of the vaccine? Focus On the Family and other members of the religous right, under the belief that the use of the vaccine will promote sexual activity in pre-teen girls. Chilling.