Bismarck Tribune - North Dakota News - Family planning access critical

Family planning access critical

Jan 25, 2008 - 04:05:30 CST

By MARDY M. BERLINGER
Grand Forks

Thirty-five years ago this week, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the ruling in the landmark reproductive rights case, Roe v. Wade.

It was the first step in the journey of women to take control of their own reproductive rights.

Now, 35 years later, women still have a long way to go in order to achieve this goal.

Access to comprehensive family planning, contraception and sexuality education is still out of reach for many women and families in North Dakota and across the nation.

Extremists are trying to take away a women's right to choice but are doing next to nothing to educate children and young adults about preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. If these extremists were truly committed to ending the need for abortion, they should band together with organizations like Planned Parenthood to help educate and prevent unwanted pregnancies. Planned Parenthood does more to prevent abortion in one day than the opposition does in its entirety.

This anniversary should be a time for us to take action to ensure that women and families have access to reproductive health care, including contraception, family planning and abortion care as we work to reduce unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion.

A woman who does not have reproductive control over her own body cannot be considered free. We must invest time, money and energy into making sure that all women have the health care they need to stay healthy and plan their families.

Thirty-five years after Roe v. Wade gave women the constitutional right to choose, North Dakotans have an abortion ban on the books.

Instead of banning abortion, leaders must find practical solutions to reduce unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion.

(Berlinger identifies herself as a University of North Dakota law student and president of UND Pro-Choice Voice. - Editor)

News > Opinion

Printer friendly version Family planning access critical

Comments

To: freemarketradical wrote on Feb 12, 2008 10:55 PM:

" Because it is a woman's choice whether or not she wants to be pregnant. If you don't like it right you senators. As for now I'm glad a woman still has the right to choose. I'm sure you're one of those people who think we need to do more to help the homeless too. Sometimes an abortion is necessary. If you were raped would you want to keep the product of such violence? If your baby was going to have a horrible condition such as Tay-Sachs would you still oppose abortion? Men skip out on their children's mother's all the time, and vice-versa. And the possibility of a kid showing up 18 years down the road wanting to know why you gave them up isn't an option to some women. "

freemarketradical wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:02 PM:

" Sorry, sentence structure and sensativity were never my strong points. I will seriously consider your advice to " go back to gramer and learn a few thing about..." .Seems to me the fetus has some rights enjoyed by living humans, if a Dr. hurts a fetus he can be held accountable, if a women takes coke or meth and injures her fetus she can be held accountable, if a man beats up a woman and she loses her baby he can be arrested for for that. Insurance companies pay for treatment of a fetus. If human life dosen't began untill first breath why have all that stuff that protects a fetus ? It seems we are highly conflicted about this. Science, unlike religion or politics, is self correcting. Right now, overwelmingly, science says it is a human life at conception. If you don't think a fetus is a human life, what do you think it is ? "

to freemarketradical wrote on Feb 6, 2008 10:32 PM:

" Forgive me, you are correct about the fetus being an infant once it is outside of the womb. You didn't have to be such a jerk about it. Maybe you should go back to grammar and learn a few thing about sentence structure. "

freemarketradical wrote on Feb 6, 2008 12:24 AM:

" snap. you asked me to "answer your argument". Any one with critical thinking skills knows I can not do that, I can respond to your argument or I could make a counter arguement. However I could answer your question if you should ask one. I asked you one and you refused to answer. To Just Me, if a fetus took a breath it would drowned. A fetus can't exist outside the womb. Once outside the womb it is an infant no matter how premie it is. Why don''t you go take a biology course get some education then come back and join the debate. "

Matt wrote on Feb 1, 2008 11:01 PM:

" Family planning, abortion, birth control, right to life, pro-choice, reproductive rights, etc.etc. Questions about when life begins. This could go on for awhile. If, as one of the the pro choice arguments goes, a embryo, or fetus is not a life at that stage, the question becomes, doesn't it have the right to have a life? Should anybody have the right to not let it have one? Viewing the question of rights from a different angle, whose rights are being denied?

To PPS: Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood advocated the use of birth control, sterilization, abortion, etc. for racial pruification. "

To Just Me wrote on Feb 1, 2008 10:34 PM:

" By law the definition of when life begins is when that little fetus takes its first breath of air outside the womb. If you want to change that write your senators don't post your comments on an internet conversation board. "

To Um wrote on Feb 1, 2008 5:52 PM:

" Actually, contraceptives are not free to anyone who lives anywhere near me. We don't have any type of free clinic. If you're like me - you're not on the dole - you're actually trying to make your way and pay your taxes. I have to live very very frugally - but I get by. There is no where for me to go, that I can get to in a reasonable period of time (2 hours) to get free contraceptives. I have to pay $98.00 for the appointment at the local clinic to see a PA to get a prescription and then pay full price at the pharmacy. So - not all of us have contraceptives available. They should be available to anyone and everyone that wants them - that would help keep unwanted pregnancy numbers down thus causing fewer abortions. But, then, that would make a lot of sense and save everyone a lot of money overall. "

Just Me wrote on Feb 1, 2008 8:55 AM:

" - Ok you tell me, when does life begin. You see you can't answer that one so you provide a neat little word game to twist the truth to suit your needs. And God help us, Snap, if you intellectual, elitists (your term) ever get total control as you wish. I'm sure people like me would be placed first in line for the mind control Cool-aid you're gang would be handing out to the masses. "

SNAP! wrote on Jan 31, 2008 10:04 PM:

" To: FreeMarketRadical

Another typical move, the "Red Herring." You can't answer my argument, so you switch to a different subject, such as demanding that I make a decision on when life begins.

Sigh. I'm through wasting my time. I may as well be shouting at a wall.
This is why the ignorant masses are in charge and the intellectual elites are powerless. There's more of you than there are of us. "

To Just Me wrote on Jan 31, 2008 8:06 PM:

" So you say life begins when "Mr. Sperm meets Ms. Egg." So if you fall down a flight of stairs while pregnant does that constitute you being charged with involuntary manslaughter? "

Um wrote on Jan 31, 2008 8:04 PM:

" News flash: free contraceptives are available if your income is below the poverty level, which is $11 an hour I believe. "

Just Me wrote on Jan 31, 2008 1:51 PM:

" Just a thought - maybe the title of the original article should read ABORTION ACCESS CRITICAL since that is the point of the whole tirade. It’s not the idea of “Family Planning” I object to (heaven know we planned some and had others) it’s putting ABORTION (the killing of an innocent child) in the same category as condoms and the pill. When I was young, I supported abortion and used all the arguments that you are using today. Then I grew up and saw my first daughter born (unplanned), got educated, and realized that ABORTION is not “family planning” it’s infanticide. At what point does life begin? Answer that for certain and we can continue this discussion otherwise I’ll believe it begins when the two become one (mr. sperm meets ms. Egg). "

to Interesting wrote on Jan 31, 2008 7:42 AM:

" You state that "We should be providing free contraception to every female and male that wants it." Why on earth should my taxpayer dollars be used to provide free contraception for everyone who wants it? If they want it, they should go buy it. "

pps wrote on Jan 31, 2008 2:32 AM:

" I wonder, if we allowed abortions for every ethnic group other than white, would that be okay?
Tell the truth---although I know you won't . . . "

SNAP! wrote on Jan 30, 2008 11:39 PM:

" ps--and please pardon me for the incomplete sentence and my misspelling "fallacy." "

freemarketradical wrote on Jan 30, 2008 11:06 PM:

" Snap, why not make it simple for us and tell us when human life begans and what protection human life should be given. What is the difference between a Drunk Driver having an accident causing the loss of a fetus and an abortionist causing the same thing? Also, I have been supportive of gays serving in the military since I was in the military and believe in gay marrige. I think marrige should be protected from the government, not the other way around and having government protecting and deciding what a marrige is. Like you, I don't like having other peoples ideas shoved down my throats, and in my case that includes everything from social security to assault weapon bans. But unlike you I think it is the legitimate function of the government to protect the weakest and most vulnerable amoung us. "

Go Snap! wrote on Jan 30, 2008 10:42 PM:

" Way to go snap!
What some people don't realize is sometimes people get pregnant even though they are taking the necessary precautions, resulting in an unwanted pregnancy. In this case the preliminary method of birth control failed so a woman should be able to have an abortion. They aren't cheap, running $500-$575 in North Dakota. They aren't pain free or an easy fix either. Some women have severe cramping and bleeding for months after the surgery. Not to mention the hormonal imbalance that occurs afterwards and emotional scarring. And I realize it was their choice to have it in the first place but sometimes economic, and maturity issues need to be addressed before a person is ready to bring another life into the world. "

Snap! wrote on Jan 30, 2008 5:10 PM:

" To freemarketradical:

How silly. Again, a non-related logical fallicy is used. I suggest you research what logical fallicy.

Now, DD is against the law, but people still do it. We have a police force to enforce these laws, yet people still do it. Perhaps you can explain to me how caring or not caring or just plain griping about an issue will change that issue to suit your will?
You cannot control others or their behavior, only the way you react to them. If a drunk driver kills someone I feel bad and am sorry, but I cannot possibly have enforced my will and my belief system on every person I meet.
That's what any issue boils down to folks, whether it be a national issue or an issue within a relationship--the odd urge people have to want to enforce their will upon others.

If you believe abortion is murder then don't have an abortion. If you are ashamed of our country because abortion is legal there is no need. YOU are not murdering via abortion so you shouldfeel guilt free.

Someday, when I have super powers and I can right every "wrong" (a slippery word), and make the world a perfect place, I will. In the meantime, I live my life according to my code of ethics and everyday I try to QUIETLY do what I believe is right and just.
I am all I can control. Worrying about what others do is a waste of my time and energy.

Vote the way you want Rebecca

You know, I just had another thought. I have often read in these blogs, messages from people that hate "the homosexual agenda" and wish that "they wouldn't shove their beliefs down our throats," but apparently it's always okay to rant about abortion. The 'ol double-standard I wonder? "

Rebecca wrote on Jan 30, 2008 1:53 PM:

" To SNAP!: The misunderstanding comes from whether or not you define a fetus as a human life or if you define the fetus as a part of the woman. Scientifically speaking, it is a human life (otherwise a woman pregnant with a male fetus would be a hermaphrodite). That is why pro-lifers oppose abortion. The next question is do you believe that it is ever ok to take another human life for any reason. If the answer is "yes, in some circumstances" then I can repect, but disagree with your opinion. If the answer is "no, never", then it makes sense why someone would oppose a legal procedure that is someone else's decision, because they are opposing a law that they find unjust, and that is the taking of a human life. I also believe that arguing about it doesn't change things, so I'd rather support legislation in the meantime that supports pregnant women's rights, thus eliminating the reasons for abortion, which is also what the writer of the article is saying. Common ground is better than divisive arguing, don't you think? "

freemarketradical wrote on Jan 30, 2008 12:11 AM:

" SNAP, how does this sound ?.... If you don't beleve in drunk driving don't do it. If you don't respect people that drive drunk don't associate with them. Why do you care what others are doing. Live the way YOU want and mind your OWN business before sticking your nose into someone elses business. "

SNAP! wrote on Jan 30, 2008 12:05 AM:

" To Analogy:
Wow, talk about a misguided analogy.
First,I did not make an analogy. If you don't understand the definition of a word, then you should look it up before using it.
Second, you have made the misguided analogy. Associating an instance of illegal mass murderering is in no way similar to a single female having a legal procedure performed on herself. The "shooting into a crowd" argument is old, overused, and tired, and merely an overly emotional rhetoric used to stir up the self-righteous masses who are ignorant of how rhetorical manipulation works on them.
Of course we as a society should care and be aghast at a mass murderer's actions. But, he/she is focusing this evil act outwardly. A woman has an operation done to herself. SHE lives with any consequences, NOBODY ELSE, which brings me back to the idea that her business is her business, not yours. "

Analogy wrote on Jan 29, 2008 12:38 PM:

" SNAP! - what a mis-guided analogy. So you are to say that if someone opens fire in a crowed mall we should just ignore them? Right, just mind your own business. Why do I care what others are doing... "

SNAP! wrote on Jan 28, 2008 10:35 PM:

" Why does anyone care? I've never understood the anti-abortion supporters. If you don't believe in abortion, then don't have one. If you don't respect people who have abortions, then don't associate with them. Why do you care what others are doing? Live the way YOU want and mind your own business before sticking your nose into someone else's. "

I have Blue Cross wrote on Jan 28, 2008 12:43 PM:

" And they do cover it on my plan. It depends on what plan your employer picks. "

Judge Judy wrote on Jan 28, 2008 12:05 PM:

" I have also wondered why Blue Cross ND will not cover birth control for women. They will however cover Viagra for men. We've come a long way baby?? NOT! "

Extremist wrote on Jan 28, 2008 11:15 AM:

" Anytime you introduce religion into this topic you loose all credibility and even if you have valid points, nobody will hear them. Conversely, anytime you start throwing around terms like "reproductive rights" you are seen as the opposite end of the same extreme, and nobody will listen to you. My own feeling on the subject is two fold: 1) It's 2008 and only people that wish to be perpetual victims get pregnant "unexpectedly" (ladies, protect yourself with a female form of contraception and require your partners to wear a condom). 2) The only issue I have with abortion is that nobody on either side can definitively tell me when life starts, Until that definition is written in stone, isn't their a chance that you are committing murder? "

MC in Fargo wrote on Jan 27, 2008 8:16 PM:

" Excellent letter Mardy! I commend you for keeping the focus on prevention and reproductive rights and not lowering yourself to the level of name-calling and righteous indignation expressed by others here. "

freemarketradical wrote on Jan 26, 2008 5:41 PM:

" Eve ate the forbidden fruit, nothing in the bible indicates it was a apple. Furthure more, in Hebrews, God approved of sexual relationships between husband and his wives. Not wife. "

Just Some Thoughts wrote on Jan 26, 2008 11:05 AM:

" SInce Beesh likes to do what most controlling fundamentalist do, throw out a lot of confused and misinterpreted Biblical verses, I would like to do something they hate, attack one issue at a time. Let's go with marriage. Prior to 1563, the union of a man and a woman, marriage, as we know it today, didn't exsist. The committemnt was made between the two of them and God. In an effort to control the lives of individuals, The Coucil of Trent decreed that marriages must take place in front of a preist and witnesses, in an effort to control "sin". Prior to that, there was no effort to control how people made committemtns to each other. I wonder why that is? Where in the Bible does it say that man has to approve a marriage? Where does it say that a priest or even a judge must approve your committment to each other and God? Another interesting timeline for this issue is that romance wasn't a factor in sex until the 800's. Answer that for me Beesh and we'll move on to address more of your religiously fanatical confusion. I "

Just Wondering wrote on Jan 26, 2008 10:07 AM:

" Wow Beesh, that's plain English, isn't it? Which Bible are you quoting, KJB, New Living, Lutheran, Koran? Hummm, I wonder why God created man and woman with no effort but it takes 9 months to do it now, and it is a process. Oh yeah, I remember, it's to punish Eve for eating an apple.Your quotes are nothing more than poorly conceived, ill thought out interpretations of who, I have no idea. Very similiar to those of you who claim Jonah was swallowed by a whale, or was it a big fish, or a great fish, I can't remember, too many interpretations. Too many insignificant details for me to remember. But, that's not easy for a fanatic to understand, it challenges thier "faith". Bet you'll really hate my post to today's religious topic in the Tribune. "

Interesting wrote on Jan 26, 2008 9:33 AM:

" To Beesch: I think Just Wondering indicated PLAIN ENGLISH. What you have quoted is not in plain english. It is scripture that is open to interpretation by individuals churches and pastors/priests. No where in the bible does it state "Don't have an abortion" or "Life begins at conception". These are all interpretations of various sentences.

My opinion: We should have planned parenthood in every town and county in the state. We should be providing free contraception to every female and male that wants it. We should be educating people on prevention of pregnancy versus termination of pregnancy. It is criminal that many in this state want to drive us back to the dark ages of ignorance rather than face the facts of life and provide meaningful and affordable alternatives. "

Beesh wrote on Jan 26, 2008 12:02 AM:

" To Just Wondering, you wrote, “As an ordained minister...I am still trying to find that birth begins at conception?" How about these verses: Psalm 139:13 For You formed my inward parts; you wove me in my mother's womb. Job 10:11 Clothe me with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and sinews? Psalm 119:73 Your hands made me and fashioned me. Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, "I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself And spreading out the earth all alone. Paul to the Galatians 1:15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace". God treasures the fruit of the womb, so why would he condone murdering it? You also said, “I would also be interested in learning where it talks about abstinence as the only form of contraception or birth control that God approves of” The Bible doesn’t promote any form of contraception because God doesn’t want us to murder (not kill for you anti-capital punishment people) any unborn child. The only reason this convenient termination of an inconvenient pregnancy would be because of selfish married couples or pre marital pregnancy. Along with all other kinds of sexual immorality, sex before marriage / premarital sex is repeatedly condemned in Scripture (Acts 15:20; Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13,18; 7:2; 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7). The Bible promotes abstinence before marriage. Sex between a husband and his wife is the only form of sexual relations that God approves of (Hebrews 13:4). I would expect that an ordained minister would have a better understanding of the Bible and its teachings. Search for guidance for better understanding. I will pray for you. "

Just Wondering wrote on Jan 25, 2008 2:43 PM:

" As an ordained minister with the beleif that while there are many great teachings in the Bible, it isn't necessarliy healthy to blindly follow one sect or denomination's interpretations of it. I am still trying to find something in this well written book, perhaps one of you folks can direct me to, where it states, in plain English that birth begins at conception? I would also be interested in learning where it talks about abstinance as the only form of contraception or birth control that God approves of? With a strong faith ion a loving God, whose will for me is to be happy, jotous and free, I find it reprehensible that some right wing controlling minister wants to tell anyone what this book says. Blind followers are nothing more than blind slaves, lining the pockers of organized religions. I always look at Martin Luther as one the worst offenders, when he just ommitted books of the Bible because he didn't like them and they didn't fit his idea of morality. "

Dave wrote on Jan 25, 2008 2:39 PM:

" Great letter Mardy. You are spot-on. MamaMia also has many great points. "

Beesh wrote on Jan 25, 2008 11:28 AM:

" Quote, "Extremists are trying to take away a women's right to choice but are doing next to nothing to educate children and young adults about preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases." In reality the abstenence movement that would pretty much eliminate STD and unwanted pregancy was immediately condemned by the wonderful people at Planned Parenthood and other enlightened pro abortion organizations as being unrealistic. You condemn it when it's available then query why there is no options on that side. The shortsightedness and arrogance of those people is deafening. "

okay... wrote on Jan 25, 2008 11:20 AM:

" So, what about girl babies' rights? They should then have a right to free choice, according to your philosphy. But then, I suppose you don't think that a baby in-utero is a baby, right? "

mandan wrote on Jan 25, 2008 11:18 AM:

" This letter is well written and makes perfect sense. To those of you who think otherwise, who gives you the right to tell someone what to do with their own body? Whether or not by some slim chance there would be a ban on abortion it would still happen just as it did before Roe V Wade. There will just be more women that will become infected and possibly die, but to you that would be okay. Sometimes this is done because of a terrible congenital defect the fetus has so who gives you the right to say bring that fetus to term and let that woman and child then deal with the terrible effects and death then? The HIPPA laws are there for a reason and nobody but the woman and her doctor have any rights to see those records of whether she has an abortion or not. So how do these so called pro life people get there info? Illegally I am sure. Some of you think you should always be sticking your nose into someone elses business but I am sure you could spend your time checking your own life and not others. In the cases of rape or incest (which ar more out there than the so called stats say) you are saying women should have to relive that everyday for 9 months just to make you all happy? WRONG!!!! Many women do not tell the doctor it is because of rape or incest because it is a crime the doctor is obligated to report so they say it is just an unwanted pregnancy but for the most part that is not really the case. So get over it unless you are all prepared to actually do something to help before or actually take care of the result. You are the sametype of people that when I decided to go through my pregnancy after a rape and keep my child told me I was stupid and should give up the child to a nice religious couple. Whatever you people are never happy! "

Rebecca wrote on Jan 25, 2008 11:13 AM:

" As a member of the pro-life community, I applaud this article. I believe that abortion is the taking of a human life, but that those who commit it with no alternatives are as much victims as the unborn. Instead of polarizing the issue of abortion, I strongly support open dialogue to reduce abortion. This year marks the lowest rate of abortions in the country since Roe v. Wade, so I'd like to think that maybe, finally, society is doing something to address pregnant women's rights, and by doing so, protecting also the rights of the children who can be given a chance when their mothers are empowered. "

writer bashing wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:55 AM:

" Unless I am missing something, even though the writer references abortion, her intent is to PROVIDE PROTECTION for unwanted pregnancies. I read that her intent is to take control of reproductive right through PREVENTING pregnancy, not advocating abortion. So unless I am on the wrong side of the fence in understanding her message, the rest of you talking abortion should shut up. Men like SCates should never be in positions of power over women. He probably believes women should not even enjoy sex. Abstinence will never be a reality. And it shouldn't. Access to birth control is essential in PREVENTING pregnancy...thereby preventing abortion. "

Can you read!? wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:54 AM:

" Many of you are stating that the writer is basically pro murder-The article clearly states that she is promoting education for women. Does everyone know how their fertility works? Ever notice how many women use fertility clinics? There certainly are many adult women who have very little if any education about their fertility. Simply because sex is "dirty" so we won't talk about it. Come off your high horse-if women are never clearly educated how are they to know what will happen? "

Crock wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:46 AM:

" This has got to be the most spin I've ever read. The very though that "planned" parenthood does more to prevent abortion in one day than the opposition does in its entirety is absurd. Their new buzz word "reproductive rights" makes me absulutely sick. The only choice a woman should have should begin BEFORE any chance of conception. After that it's up to nature.
"

Susan wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:15 AM:

" I, personally, find it abhorant that BCBS is allowed to refuse to insure contraceptives in ND. I really don't know if that is due to state law or BCBS policy. MN BCBS pays. That should be changed. Perhaps the abortion activists should consider the fact that many North Dakotans, me inluded, could not afford to pay the ~50 a month it costs "

MamaMia wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:42 AM:

" Thank you for the well-written and thoughtful letter. You bring out the hypocrisy of the religious right -- no abortion, but we won't help you plan to avoid pregnancy, nor do we care about the baby when it gets here. At that point, honey, you're on your own! "

SCates wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:28 AM:

" Thankfully, Ms. Berlinger, your mother did not find you inconvenient. If she had before your birth, would you be a human today? Assuming that you today, consider yourself human, could you enlighten us as to when was the moment that you obtained your humanity? Based entirely on medical science, an unborn child is a human. A human is a human at all stages of their life cycle. Based on the science how can a logical person not realize this obvious reality? Please, Ms. Berlinger, do not offend people with your diversionary tactics about teaching contraception. Stay on topic, which is, murdering the innocent. Quit the lie of using the term “Pro-Choice”, the correct term, again based on all biological science and true historical context should be “Infanticiders”. That would be the honest description of what you really advocate. Stop with the antiseptic abstract terminology. Calling people who want to protect someone who if left unviolated would live for the next 75 years extremists seems in and of itself extreme. Logically, an extremist would be someone who openly advocates pre-birth infanticide. Is it possible that Ms. Berlinger is an Infanticide Extremist? Distort the language if you need to, but, you cannot change science, history, or logic. "

Tired of dribble wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:25 AM:

" Good Lord...bunch of dribble! You take control of your body and reporductive by saying NO! "

We have rights, but when should we use them wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:10 AM:

" I don't understand why people think that outlawing abortion is taking away a womans reproductive rights. I think that reproductive rights should be exercised before a woman gets pregnant, not after. A woman can exercise her reproductive rights by not having unprotected sex, using conterception, or better yet not having sex if they do not want to chance getting pregnant. If you don't want to get run over in the street, you look both ways before you cross the street, not after, or you just plain stay out of the street. Why doesn't anyone want to take responsibility for their actions? let's make an innocent person pay the price for our actions. That is the american way isn't t? "

It should read: wrote on Jan 25, 2008 7:14 AM:

" Mardy, your second line should instead read: "it was the first step in the journey of babies to lose control of their own right to live". And instead of writing "A woman who does not have reproductive control over her own body cannot be considered free", you should have written "A fetus who does not have the right to it's own life cannot be considered free". You are so worried about the rights of the woman. Who is watching out for the rights of the unborn? Surely not those who want to abort it!!!!! "

Nothing wrote on Jan 25, 2008 6:36 AM:

" Nothing excites the church and also the international bankers than the growing population of foster children throughout the Western world. They are able to be fully indoctrinated into either system, and become lifelong willing slaves for their interests. As David Rockefeller once said about such individuals, "They are but helpless people, who lend themselves to our molding hands." Just a hint for the clueless to contemplate over their morning coffee. "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.