She fought for unborn to the end - Se...

She fought for unborn to the end - Sentinel & Enterprise

There are 29 comments on the Sentinel & Enterprise story from Nov 27, 2010, titled She fought for unborn to the end - Sentinel & Enterprise. In it, Sentinel & Enterprise reports that:

At a special session of the Fitchburg City Council in February of this year, arguments for and against Planned Parenthood coming to our city were heard.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Sentinel & Enterprise.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Shaking My Head

Gloucester, MA

#1 Nov 27, 2010
Safe, legal abortion is the law of this land.

I pray, privately, every day for women to continue to have the freedom to make safe and legal decisions about their bodies and their reproductive lives.

Mark J. Rollo would prefer enslave women again. However, we won't be enslaved to suit his religious fervor.

Freedom for women now, freedom for women forever.
Really Fitchburg

Swampscott, MA

#2 Nov 27, 2010
This woman, and her followers like Dr Rollo, have attempted to set women's rights back by at least a generation.

Since: Dec 07

Leominster, MA

#3 Nov 27, 2010
Really Fitchburg wrote:
This woman, and her followers like Dr Rollo, have attempted to set women's rights back by at least a generation.
Women's rights to kill? What about the unborn person's right to life? Why not just keep their legs closed or use protection? Take responsibility for their actions and don't make a child suffer by death. A law that allows these death camps is a crime against humanity that stains our souls.

Godspeed Dr. Jefferson.
Shaking My Head

Gloucester, MA

#4 Nov 27, 2010
kamin wrote:
<quoted text>
Women's rights to kill? What about the unborn person's right to life? Why not just keep their legs closed or use protection? Take responsibility for their actions and don't make a child suffer by death. A law that allows these death camps is a crime against humanity that stains our souls.
Godspeed Dr. Jefferson.
Another person who wants to set women's rights back into the 19th century. Why don't you also take away a woman's right to vote while you're at it.

Choice now, Choice forever.

“Beauty on four legs”

Since: Sep 06

Location hidden

#6 Nov 27, 2010
Love 4 Babies wrote:
Choice now, choice forever? Where's the babys choice? You people are an effed up bunch of killers. Use protection instead of abortion, now isn't that simple? Jerks.
Poor moron.
Since abortion kills no babies, your question is even dumber than usual for you. The z/e/f has no right to life, as you know.
BTW, if protection fails, a woman may legally & ethically choose abortion, and there's not a thing in the world you can do about it. Sucks to be you, hater.
Rick W

Nahant, MA

#7 Nov 27, 2010
I prefer to fight for the born.

Since: Dec 07

Leominster, MA

#8 Nov 27, 2010
Shaking My Head wrote:
<quoted text>
Another person who wants to set women's rights back into the 19th century. Why don't you also take away a woman's right to vote while you're at it.
Choice now, Choice forever.
Didn't you know that some women could vote when the country was founded? Just had to own land - same as with anyone else. So don't be so stupid.

Choosing to kill is unfortunately legal. Too bad people can't take responsibility and use simple precautions. But then that's not the liberal way, responsibility. Just slavery and death.
Who is Rolo

Maynard, MA

#9 Nov 27, 2010
Why does this Rolo character get to be able to publicate this hate speach?

First I would like to send my best to this womans family, may she rest in peace and may God be with her family as they grieve their loss.

This being said, I am wondering what this guy Rolo is talking about concerning the founder of planned parenthood?

For one, abortion is the law of the land,it is legal. I would never suggest an abortion to anyone at anytime but on the other hand I have no say in what a woman does with her body! I am not that womans controller,she is in charge of her own body and I feel that it should remain that way.

We can all promote contraceptives and safe sex always. I mean think about it; a woman gets pregnant, she may be scared to death of dying by carying a baby. I just feel that I have no say in another persons life decisions!

This Rolo guy talks like planned parenthood is evil?

Again I respect the woman who has passed. She will be in my prayers as I feel that she is with God today as she has seemed to have good intentions on protecting life. The issue is just so controversial! Of course I am for life! But when it comes to another persons body, I feel that I have no place on deciding for them concerning their health!

So I am pro-life when it concerns my thoughts. Then I am also pro-choice when it concerns an individual making a personal decision in reference to their own body!
IDK

Leominster, MA

#10 Nov 27, 2010
kamin wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't you know that some women could vote when the country was founded? Just had to own land - same as with anyone else. So don't be so stupid.
Choosing to kill is unfortunately legal. Too bad people can't take responsibility and use simple precautions. But then that's not the liberal way, responsibility. Just slavery and death.
Once and for all, abortion is not a form of birth control. Women generally do not choose to get pregnant and go through the heartbreak of abortion as a lark. Abortion is a tough choice to make and a last resort, nearly always due to failure of their birth control or extenuating circumstances. Women cannot get pregnant by themselves, but are always the ones left with the consequences.

Finally, abortion is safe(r) and legal. A cluster of fertilized cells in no way compares to the life of the carrier and decision maker.

If a cluster of fertilized cells can own land, then maybe we have another story.
Shaking My Head

Buzzards Bay, MA

#11 Nov 28, 2010
IDK wrote:
<quoted text> If a cluster of fertilized cells can own land, then maybe we have another story.
Good point. A cluster of cells is not a baby or a human life. Abortion is legal, and a woman's choice should be protected by law.

BTW, if a woman selects NOT to have an abortion, I wonder what Dr. Rollo does to support unwanted children born in this country? Since he wants to force his opinions on others, what is his follow through with support.

I never read him writing about the consequences of enforcing his opinions or what he does to support these women and their babies.

Guess he's simply satisfied with forcing his religious fervor on others.
Shaking My Head

Buzzards Bay, MA

#12 Nov 28, 2010
kamin wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't you know that some women could vote when the country was founded? Just had to own land - same as with anyone else. So don't be so stupid.
Show me where you get your information, if you can.
RenoLady

Reno, NV

#13 Nov 28, 2010
Wow...even the Pope has taken one small step in promoting the use of condoms in certain situations. Who knows what other cracks of light may enter the "dark age" thinking of our fervent religious friends ? Hope springs eternal. Best wishes for a healthy, happy holiday season to all.

Since: Dec 07

Leominster, MA

#14 Nov 28, 2010
Shaking My Head wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me where you get your information, if you can.
Do some research. There are things called libraries and even an Internet with some information. You'll find different colonies and states have different laws and they changed frequently. If you want to be lazy you can listen to noted historian David Barton discuss women's roles in early America.
pbfa wrote:
<quoted text>
Poor ****.
Since abortion kills no babies, your question is even dumber than usual for you. The z/e/f has no right to life, as you know.
BTW, if protection fails, a woman may legally & ethically choose abortion, and there's not a thing in the world you can do about it. Sucks to be you, hater.
50,000,000 people have been killed by the method you love so much since it became legal by judges. You call others "haters." Sad. When will humans advance.

I realize the minds of evil killers wont be changed here but hopefully, some day, enough people that care for life can turn the tide. We may have to teach women how to keep respect themselves and not sell their bodies to keep a man through love but that's okay.
Joe

Gardner, MA

#15 Nov 28, 2010
Many people object to taxpayer funded abortions. We don't feel that it is right that we are made partners to the killing of the most vulnerable beings. Planned Parenthood could do a better job in referring babies for adoption rather than abortion. According to Planned Parenthood's own documents in 2008 they performed 324,008 abortions and referred 2045 for adoptions. I would think they could do much better. Planned Parenthood is the largest recipient of federal Title X money, some $350 million, in the country. In 2008 the head of PP made $397,000 in pay and benefits. Not bad for running a non-profit.
I am not saying close it, but rather take away taxpayer funding and encourage adoption over abortion. How many of you PP supporters have a rational response to that?

“Unborn babies are people too”

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis, MN

#16 Nov 28, 2010
kamin wrote:
<quoted text>

I realize the minds of evil killers wont be changed here but hopefully, some day, enough people that care for life can turn the tide. We may have to teach women how to keep respect themselves and not sell their bodies to keep a man through love but that's okay.
Pro-abortism does indeed have a bleak future. The country is already majority pro-life, and even the death industry's workers, many of whom are increasingly repulsed by their grisly trade, are bailing out.

** http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/mugged... -- "Mugged by Ultrasound: Why so many abortion workers have turned pro-life"

"...In 1990 Judith Fetrow, an aide at a Planned Parenthood clinic, found that disposing of fetal bodies as medical waste was more than she could bear. Soon after she left her position, Fetrow described her experiences:“No one at Planned Parenthood wanted this job. I had to look at the tiny hands and feet. There were times when I wanted to cry.” Finally persuaded to quit by a pro-life protester outside her clinic, Fetrow is now involved in the American Life League.

"Kathy Sparks is another convert formerly responsible for disposing of fetal remains, this time at an Illinois abortion clinic. Her account of the experience that led her to exit the abortion industry (taken from the Pro-Life Action League website in 2004) reads in part:

"The baby’s bones were far too developed to rip them up with [the doctor’s] curette, so he had to pull the baby out with forceps. He brought out three or four major pieces. I took the baby to the clean up room, I set him down and I began weeping uncontrollably... I cried and cried. This little face was perfectly formed.

"A recovery nurse rebuked Sparks for her unprofessional behavior. She quit the next day. Sparks is now the director of a crisis pregnancy center with more than 20 pro-life volunteers....

"Other converts were driven into the pro-life movement by advances in ultrasound technology. The most recent example is Abby Johnson, the former director of Dallas-area Planned Parenthood. After watching, via ultrasound, an embryo “crumple” as it was suctioned out of its mother’s womb, Johnson reported a “conversion in my heart.” Likewise, Joan Appleton was the head nurse at a large abortion facility in Falls Church, Virginia, and a NOW activist. Appleton performed thousands of abortions with aplomb until a single ultrasound-assisted abortion rattled her. As Appleton remembers,“I was watching the screen. I saw the baby pull away. I saw the baby open his mouth. After the procedure I was shaking, literally.”...

"Until very recently, no one in the history of the world has had the routine job of killing well-developed fetuses quite so up close and personal. It is an experiment that was bound to stir pro-life sentiments even in the hearts of those staunchly devoted to abortion rights. Ultrasound and D&E bring workers closer to the beings they destroy. Hern and Corrigan concluded their study by noting that D&E leaves “no possibility of denying an act of destruction.” As they wrote,“It is before one’s eyes. The sensations of dismemberment run through the forceps like an electric current.”

** Abortion clinic says "a lot of doctors aren't pro-choice" --
&fe ature=player_embedded

Live Action investigator: "Why do you [Kentucky] have only one [abortion clinic]?"

Abortion "counselor" [EMW Women's Surgical Center, Louisville, Kentucky]: "Just, you know most doctors don't want to do it."

Live Action investigator: "Why not?"

Abortion "counselor": "Well 'cuz a lot of doctors don't, aren't pro-choice. So it's very hard to find a doctor, you know, that will do abortions. You know, mean--just, a lot of doctors, you know, don't, they're not pro-choice, they don't believe in it, and so they don't do the procedure, and they don't have to."
Rick W

Nahant, MA

#17 Nov 28, 2010
Joe wrote:
Many people object to taxpayer funded abortions. We don't feel that it is right that we are made partners to the killing of the most vulnerable beings. Planned Parenthood could do a better job in referring babies for adoption rather than abortion. According to Planned Parenthood's own documents in 2008 they performed 324,008 abortions and referred 2045 for adoptions. I would think they could do much better. Planned Parenthood is the largest recipient of federal Title X money, some $350 million, in the country. In 2008 the head of PP made $397,000 in pay and benefits. Not bad for running a non-profit.
I am not saying close it, but rather take away taxpayer funding and encourage adoption over abortion. How many of you PP supporters have a rational response to that?
Many people objected to taxpayer funding of the war on Iraq. We didn't feel that it was right that we were made partners to the killing of vulnerable human beings.

Since: Jun 07

Vallejo, CA

#18 Nov 28, 2010
Joe wrote:
Many people object to taxpayer funded abortions. We don't feel that it is right that we are made partners to the killing of the most vulnerable beings. Planned Parenthood could do a better job in referring babies for adoption rather than abortion. According to Planned Parenthood's own documents in 2008 they performed 324,008 abortions and referred 2045 for adoptions. I would think they could do much better. Planned Parenthood is the largest recipient of federal Title X money, some $350 million, in the country. In 2008 the head of PP made $397,000 in pay and benefits. Not bad for running a non-profit.
I am not saying close it, but rather take away taxpayer funding and encourage adoption over abortion. How many of you PP supporters have a rational response to that?
How do you know PP recommends either choice to any woman? I've never heard that before. As far as I know, they inform women about all their choices, and help them from there.
Joe

Gardner, MA

#19 Nov 28, 2010
Rick W
So you are Saddam Hussein and his cronies were vulnerable? That's rich. Had Saddam not continued his bluff he might still be alive. The unborn never get that option.
State the obvious
The figures I gave came from Planned Parenthood's 2008 figures. Instead of questioning me, maybe you should look it up. It's not that hard.
Joe

Gardner, MA

#20 Nov 28, 2010
I meant to say "you are saying" in the first line.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#21 Nov 28, 2010
Rick W wrote:
<quoted text>
Many people objected to taxpayer funding of the war on Iraq. We didn't feel that it was right that we were made partners to the killing of vulnerable human beings.
There's a difference. There is no draft, people who sign up are adults making a conscious decision fully knowing they could die. Babies in the womb have no choice when they are ripped out of the so called mother. You're a dimwit.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Harvard Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
why is there no cell phone reception in Shirley (Feb '13) Jul '15 Gfancy 22
Local Politics Do you approve of Jodie Rachman as Mayor? Jun '15 na 1
News Fitchburg prostitution sting nets five arrests (Oct '13) Jun '15 insider 79
News Shirley man seeks appeal of his 2010 murder con... May '15 Fast and Furious 6
News Bolton call firefighter charged in Lancaster, M... May '15 Just Us 1
News Lawyer is charged in kidnapping of girl, 12 May '15 mcmahan821 1
News Remains found in Lancaster - Sentinel & Enterprise (May '09) May '15 Vinnie 17
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Harvard Mortgages