I just caught this. Hilarious. Frank, you have a hard time explaining a lot of things. Which is, of course, the larger point here.

Indeed, we’re just posting on a blog. So let’s all lower our standards, shall we? I mean, it’s just a blog. No need to actually try to make valid, supported arguments. Right?

Thank you, Frank. I’ll remember that the next time you back up an argument against health care reform with a link to “Quotable Quotes.”

Nice “article,” Frank. So, is a list of “Ready-to-Use Quotes” from “MojoMom” what constitutes an “article” in your mind?

Don’t forget, Frank: “Please credit quotes to Amy Tiemann, Ph.D. (say TEE-man)”

What an idiot.

Maybe you want to read some of the articles at the end of those links, Frank.

You suggested there are “hundreds of real, known and documented cases of post-abortion trauma, not hypothetical cases of X amount of unwed mothers being unhappy.”

From one of the links you googled up on post-abortion trauma:

Some studies have indicated that those who have undergone abortion have experienced positive or no change to their mental health. A 1989 study of teenagers who sought pregnancy tests found that counting from the beginning of pregnancy until two years later, the level of stress and anxiety of those who had an abortion did not differ from that of those who had not been pregnant or who had carried their pregnancy to term.[26] A study done at the University of Washington found no correlation between a history of abortion and suicide following a subsequent pregnancy.[27]

Another study in 1992 found that having one abortion was positively associated with higher global self-esteem, particularly feelings of self-worth, capability, and not feeling one is a failure, but that this positive association was not significant after controlling for childbearing and resource variables. It also noted that adverse emotional reactions to the abortion are influenced by pre-existing psychological conditions and other negative factors and, furthermore, that well-being was separately and positively related to employment, income, and education, but negatively related to total number of children. The authors concluded that “No evidence of widespread post-abortion trauma was found.”[28]

Some studies suggest that some women experience stress after a miscarriage or abortion. The kind of stress and the amount of stress women experience varies from culture to culture. Studies also suggest that an individual woman’s stress level is influenced by her economic status, family situation and the status of her mental health before the pregnancy. Although no studies have been able to establish a causal relationship between abortion and depression or stress, many studies cite the pre-existence of depression and stress in a sub-set of women who procure abortions. No causal link has been established between abortion and mental illness. Emotional distress may occur in a minority of women who are contemplating or have had an abortion due to a number of factors, including pre-existing mental health problems, the status of the woman’s relationship with her partner, poor economic status, poor social network, or conservative views held on abortion.[16][29][30]

And …

Ultimately, Koop reviewed over 250 studies pertaining to the psychological impact of abortion. Koop wrote in a letter to Reagan that “scientific studies do not provide conclusive data about the health effects of abortion on women.”[32] Koop acknowledged the political context of the question in his letter, writing: “In the minds of some of [Reagan's advisors], it was a foregone conclusion that the negative health effects of abortion on women were so overwhelming that the evidence would force the reversal of Roe vs. Wade.”[33]

and …

In response to Surgeon General Koop’s review, the American Psychological Association prepared and presented a summary of the literature and recommendations for Koop’s report. After Koop refused to issue their findings, the APA panel published a synthesis of their own findings in the journal Science, concluding that “Although there may be sensations of regret, sadness, or guilt, the weight of the evidence from scientific studies indicates that legal abortion of an unwanted pregnancy in the first trimester does not pose a psychological hazard for most women.”[8] The panel also noted that “…women who are terminating pregnancies that are wanted and personally meaningful, who lack support from their partner or parents for the abortion, or who have more conflicting feelings or are less sure of their decision before hand may be a relatively higher risk for negative consequences.”[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_and_mental_health#Post-Abortion_Syndrome

And so on and so forth.

Nice work, Frank. Way to catapult the propaganda.

And, foofaroo: Here’s what I found after one second , googling “post – abortion trauma” :

http://tinyurl.com /yk8reo6

Here’s an article on raising a child and work

PARENTING: Changing Role of Motherhood: Expectation vs. Reality

Here’s one on single parenthood

Shall I go on?

I have to make dinner, but I can come back and do this all night…

When it’s this easy, do I really have to provide you with a link?

There are hundreds of real, known and documented cases of pregnant women being traumatized because of their unwanted pregnancies, not hypothetical cases of X amount of mothers suddenly being happy to have had the child after all.

It goes both ways, Frank.

Funny thing, frank. I didn’t attack you here. I asked you to source your claims. You refuse to. Who’s being unreasonable here?

I provide plenty of sources and plenty of links. Doesn’t help most times.

As for being taken seriously: I firmly believe that there are people here who hear what I say, and people who don’t. That won’t change , I think.

Only if you want to be taken seriously.

He knows what he knows, Frank. You know how that is.

Don’t confuse reading things from differing sources with reading the same thing many times.

I am not surprised when Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity say the same thing.

But I find Micahel Barone and John Leo saying the same thing more credible.

As for “knowing what I know”, first you have to “know”. It can’t be a belief or an opinion, passed off as a fact.

For information on pre-abortion vs post-abortion America, I prefer Bill Baird and Bernard Nathanson to Jaim, any day.

Both Baird and Nathanson regretted their roles in getting abortion legalized, a few years after the fact. “Jane Roe” has become an anti-abortion activist.

There are hundreds of real, known and documented cases of post-abortion trauma, not hypothetical cases of X amount of unwed mothers being unhappy.

Not really a valid argument on its own for claiming something is actually true. For example, someone who watches only Fox News would hear over and over again that Obama’s legitimacy as President is questionable, but it really is not. Someone who grows up in North Korea would hear and read over and over again that people outside North Korea are far worse off, which is not true. To go Godwin for a moment, people in 1930′s Germany heard and read over and over again all sorts of things that I can’t imagine you’d actually want to defend as being true.

It really isn’t that something is said and written a lot that makes it actually true. The assurance you get depends largely on how diverse a group of sources you have and whether you ever hear or read something that presents an opposing view.

Whatta guy!

MWAHAHAhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

Should he also accompany the women to the bathroom to stay consistent?

Just because you think something is true, doesn’t make it so in this game we play called “Reality.”
And tu quoque. This thread seems woefully short on citations from anyone, including anyone. I have played this game too many times before. Just a few days ago, I was asked to document a statement that Darwin made about hospitals. A person said that Darwin had meant something else, and i should prove that Darwin said what I said he said. I found a commentater who recounted basically the same information.

That didn’t count.

I recalled that Margaret Sanger justify espousing forced sterilization by using Darwin as support.

That didn’t count.

Then I supplied the link to the horrifying case of Buck v. Bell, a case which defended eugenics , based on Darwin’ theory of natural selection,so well, that the Germans — the Nazis ! — used that case to support their pleas of innocence at Nuremburg.

But that didn’t count.

You’ve just written a bunch of stuff you think is true When I read something somewhere, and I hear or read something, and I hear it or read it again, yes, I will presume it’s true.

When I believe something to be true , I call it my opinion. When I know something to be true, I call that a fact.

For example, I have read in well over a dozen places, from “women’s magazines” to scholarly journals, that American women are conflicted about their roles: should they work, and then be moms, be moms, and then work, or should be both at the same time. You haven’t? Go look into it. You are apparently reading material that is concealing some important data — that women have bought into the myth of feminism, and are now seriously unhappy because they are conflicted.

I spent years, and time and money reading this material. I should re-research it for you ?

Fat chance .

Oh, Frank. You’ll howl up and down that you’re as colorblind as they come but I guess gender is just something you can’t get beyond.

I am sick of this game you play, where I prove you’re wrong, AND I prove I’m right. Nope, I’m not doing both.

And Frank, saying a bunch of stuff that you believe is true without offering any authoritative evidence in support of it isn’t proof of anything.

You haven’t proved anything in this thread.

You’ve just written a bunch of stuff you think is true. Just because you think something is true, doesn’t make it so in this game we play called “Reality.”