Skip to main content

Pro-life Groups Object--RU-486 Categorized "Medicine."

The WHO is out to harm impovrished women world wide once again. Since when does being pregnant consitute an illness? To make it worst, the evidence is there that RU-486 has serious side effects that can cause even death! Why doesn't the WHO focus on educating women on the importance of making the right choice? Oh, right, there is no such thing as right or wrong!
The World Health Organization (WHO) has added RU-486, also known as the abortion pill, to its "essential medicines list," because it said the drug "satisfies the priority health care needs of the population."

The listing includes the warning that the drugs "require close medical supervision." Pia de Solenni, director of life and women's issues at the Family Research Council, called that an understatement.

"This is another way to make another abortion element part of the standard routine," she said. "That's what they've done by getting it put on this essential drug list. Then we start calling it a medical treatment or medicine as something that suggests it provides health or that it promotes health when the contrary is true."

The International Planned Parenthood Federation lobbied hard to have the abortion drug added to the list. And now is launching a campaign to remove the warnings.
Getting the medication out there, and pushing their anti-choice agenda--no women should have the knowledge or choice of not having an abortion (sarcasm)--is simply not enough. They must eliminate the one warning that could save the life of thousands of poor, unsuspecting women deceived into taking a pill that could kill them, and that will kill their unborn child.


Popular posts from this blog

Hispanic Trending: Leave your name at the border

Most people miss the fact that Hispanics do not consist of a single ethnic group. Besides that, the heritage that each one of the many nationalities represented in our immigrant population is diverse in itself. As I read Manuel Muñoz's post on his assimilation experience, I can tell you mine was nothing like his. But I can relate to this paragraph. My niece's name is Katie Belle (Sierra). It's intriguing to watch "American" names begin to dominate among my nieces and nephews and second cousins, as well as with the children of my hometown friends. I am not surprised to meet 5-year-old Brandon or Kaitlyn. Hardly anyone questions the incongruity of matching these names with last names like Trujillo or Zepeda. The English-only way of life partly explains the quiet erasure of cultural difference that assimilation has attempted to accomplish. A name like Kaitlyn Zepeda doesn't completely obscure her ethnicity, but the half-step of her nam…

Communism: Good Money for the "El Viejo"

I guess Fidel Castro is doing ok. Forbes lists Castro as one of the richest in the world, right up there with the Queen of England. I bet he didn't like the attention. It was hard to figure it out, but it seems they managed to throw some numbers together.
In the past, we have relied on a percentage of Cuba's gross domestic product to estimate Fidel Castro's fortune. This year we have used more traditional valuation methods, comparing state-owned assets Castro is assumed to control with comparable publicly traded companies. A reasonable discount was then applied to compensate for the obvious disclosure issues.

RealClearPolitics: The Democrats Dither on Trade

The backtracking on free trade in South America has been among the frustrating news for me coming out of the beltway. Considering how the economic downturns in Latin America affect us through the increase in illegal immigration, I would think more Americans would be fighting for this one as loudly as they fought for the failed Immigration legislation. Democratic presidential candidates like to talk about "turning a page" in America's relations with the rest of the world. But what does that mean, in practical terms, on bread-and-butter issues such as trade? Are today's Democrats a party of open markets and economic development, or of market restrictions and job protection?The answer is that leading Democrats seem to want both -- they favor economic development overseas but not at the cost of U.S. jobs. That sounds like a coherent position until you begin to look carefully at the political choices in Latin America, a part of the world where …