Judie Brown
Rants, raves, and radicals: the pill kills women!
By Judie Brown
June 9, 2009

At the completion of another successful PILL KILLS http://www.thepillkills.com/ series of events we were somewhat shocked and surprised to see how many pro-promiscuity zealots took our event to heart and whined about it, opined about it and indiscriminately lied about it. I mean really! Everyone from the Huffington Post and some individual known as Progressive Eruptions to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow made it quite obvious that the event was a cause for the most grotesque sort of nastiness. Actually if you read or listen to their words, the squealing actually amounts to great compliments for the hard work of Stop Planned Parenthood International's Marie Hahnenberg and American Life League Communications Director Katie Walker.

If the events had not succeeded, nobody would be howling! Of that, you can be assured.

On the Huffington Post blog, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/05/right-wing-protestors-bir_n_212030.html commentator Jeff Muskus tells readers,

    Unable to turn the public against sex, the pro-life movement will be on the march Saturday trying to convince women that birth-control pills will kill them.

    The right-wing American Life League and a handful of regional organizations will stand around outside U.S. pharmacies and Planned Parenthood chapters this weekend for the second annual "Protest the Pill Day." Dispatches from last year's protests, posted at thepillkills.com, offer a sense of what to expect.

Goodness, what a warped mind this fellow must have! Why else would he accuse us, mothers and fathers, grandparents and young people of attempting to "turn the public against sex?" It would appear that Muskus cannot devise an intelligent argument in defense of what we put forth in our talking points and decided that the best way to respond to us would be to attack us as people who demonize that which the Lord has sanctified within marriage.

Even though there is ample evidence that the birth control pill has killed women, and that the government has done all it can to ignore and avoid telling the truth about the pill, none of this seems to trouble Muskus at all.

Mario Piperni http://mariopiperni.com/abortion/barefoot-and-pregnant.php took a different tactic on his blog, titling his entry "Barefoot and Pregnant," in which he wrote, "I could understand how one could be a pro-lifer — sanctity of life and religious beliefs and all. Fine. But to protest against a means by which women prevent themselves from being put in a position to ever have an abortion is beyond stupid. Really."

Piperni has chosen to accept the misinformation created by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology in 1965 when they intentionally redefined pregnancy so as to protect themselves and the pharmaceutical companies from having to tell the truth to women who wanted to use the birth control pill. Not only that but http://www.all.org/article.php?id=10678

    With biology such a stubborn thing, pill promoters turned to semantics for a solution. Swedish researcher Bent Boving, at a 1959 Planned Parenthood/Population Council symposium, noted that: "Whether eventual control of implantation can be reserved the social advantage of being considered to prevent conception rather than to destroy an established pregnancy could depend upon something so simple as a prudent habit of speech."

    The advice was not isolated. At the 1964 Population Council symposium, Dr. Samuel Wishik pointed out that acceptance or rejection of birth control would depend on whether it caused an early abortion. Dr. Tietze, of Planned Parenthood and the Population Council suggested, as a public relations ploy, "not to disturb those people for whom this is a question of major importance." Tietze added that theologians and jurists have always taken the prevailing biological and medical consensus of their times as factual, and that "if a medical consensus develops and is maintained that pregnancy, and therefore life, begins at implantation, eventually our brethren from the other faculties will listen."

    In 1965, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology responded with its own semantic answer: "CONCEPTION is the implantation of the fertilized ovum."

Piperni needs to define what he means by "beyond stupid."

Oh, and then there's Progressive Eruptions http://progressiveerupts.blogspot.com/2009/06/pill-kills-day-june-6-2009.html which posted this tidbit: "They [American Life League] wanted to roll out this campaign to coincide with the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court, which date would actually be on Sunday, June 7, 2009 ..."

Actually, we plan the PILL KILLS events annually to coincide with the Supreme Court decision in Griswold v. Connecticut, a decision handed down June 7, 1965. This was the case in which the justices created the so-called right to privacy, which was clearly explained by Professor Janet Smith recently: http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2009/jsmith_righttoprivacy_mar09.asp

    In 1965, in Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court found constitutional protection for the sale, distribution and use of contraceptives — by married couples. As is well known, there is no "right to privacy" in the [C]onstitution, nor were the justices clear on which amendment implied a "right to privacy" that would guarantee access to contraception. A short two years later, the court expanded that right to the use of contraceptives by the unmarried. In 1973, the court found that the right to privacy extended to the right to have an abortion. There, too, laws of all fifty states were overturned by the votes of a few justices.

    The right to privacy has become a very elastic right; it has been used to legalize contraception, abortion, assisted suicide and homosexual acts. Virtually no one can give a coherent explanation of what this right is and what it legitimately protects. It has become a wild card that permits the courts to advance a very liberal, not to say libertine, agenda, often overriding the decisions of state legislatures and courts.

Finally, there's MSNBC's Rachel Maddow http://www.rachelmaddow.com/. During her June 5 report on the events surrounding the murder and funeral of Kansas abortionist George Tiller, http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/rachel-maddow-american-life-league-planning Maddow took aim at American Life League's THE PILL KILLS events. Her innuendo was designed to suggest to the audience that American Life League was somehow purposefully disrespectful to the fact that the Tiller funeral was taking place on the same day our Protest the Pill event was occurring in 21 states and three countries.

It would have been obvious to any thinking person that exposing the truth about the birth control pill has nothing to do with the aberrant, vicious acts of a reportedly deranged Kansas resident who murdered Tiller in cold blood, but people like Maddow aren't thinking about the facts. Such individuals will go to extremes, using scare tactics, falsehoods and everything short of character assassination to protect the so-called safe and legal right to all that is part and parcel of the sexually saturated scenario produced by the culture of death.

Maddow's verbal tirade reminded me; perhaps more than anything else I read or heard about the June 4 press conference and the June 6 PILL KILLS events, that we are having a positive impact on men and women by using educational information. This information is based on fact rather than emotion, and can help Americans understand the tragic consequences of birth control chemicals, not only on preborn babies, but on the women who ingest those chemicals as well.

Maddow and those of her ilk should be ashamed. The agenda of death, based on nothing but frenetic gibberish is obvious to anyone who understands what is at stake. Like so many of her cronies, Maddow fails to comprehend the sad reality that, if not for the culture of death and the cult of lies that gave birth to it, we would not be discussing the murders, mayhem and mischief resulting from a total denial that accurate facts have any place in the public debate.

American Life League's commitment is to truth, substantiated and articulated with respect for the human person. We would encourage our opponents to try it as well.

© Judie Brown


The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Judie Brown

Judie Brown is president and co-founder of American Life League, the nation's largest grassroots pro-life educational organization... (more)


Receive future articles by Judie Brown: Click here

More by this author


Stephen Stone
HAPPY EASTER: A message to all who love our country and want to help save it

Stephen Stone
The most egregious lies Evan McMullin and the media have told about Sen. Mike Lee

Siena Hoefling
Protect the Children: Update with VIDEO

Stephen Stone
FLASHBACK to 2020: Dems' fake claim that Trump and Utah congressional hopeful Burgess Owens want 'renewed nuclear testing' blows up when examined

Randy Engel
A documentary: Opus Dei and the Knights of Columbus – The anatomy of a takeover bid, Part VI

Jerry Newcombe
Electoral College dropout?

Curtis Dahlgren
The "Hand of History" writes its own reply to arrogance

Pete Riehm
Our fallen fought not just for freedom but truth

Linda Kimball
Christendom and Protestant America’s apostasy into paganism: A timeline

Jim Wagner
Why the Left loves Allah

Randy Engel
A Documentary: Opus Dei and the Knights of Columbus – The anatomy of a takeover bid, Part V

Peter Lemiska
For Democrats, justice is a one-way street

Rev. Mark H. Creech
Billy Graham’s statue in the Capitol: What does it mean for the country?

Linda Goudsmit
CHAPTER 19: From sex education to sexuality education

Cliff Kincaid
Press Conference on America's 'Reefer Madness'

Jerry Newcombe
Throwing Israel under the bus
  More columns


Click for full cartoon
More cartoons


Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Russ J. Alan
Bonnie Alba
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
Fr. Tom Bartolomeo
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites