Green Room

The Battle of Fitchburg: Federal Stimulus Money Subsidizes Planned Parenthood

posted at 3:33 pm on January 29, 2010 by

When administration officials are bragging about all those jobs “saved or created” by Obama’s stimulus program, they probably won’t mention the $387,000 grant to Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts, but residents of Fitchburg, Mass., don’t like what it means for their community:

A crowd of about 70 to 80 anti-abortion protesters waved signs and prayed Thursday on both sides of 391 Main St., where the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts plans to open an office this spring. . . .
Christine Hanley, who organized the protest as the chairwoman of the Fitchburg-Leominster Chapter of Mass Citizens for life, had hoped for a minimum of 20 protesters, so she was pleased to find the crowd exceeded her expectations.
“More people are coming all the time,” Hanley said during the protest on a snowy afternoon.
Father Robert Bruso, of St. Anthony de Padua Church in Fitchburg, participated in the protest.
“It’s really nothing the city of Fitchburg stands for,” said Bruso.

Planned Parenthood is the nation’s leading abortion provider, but claims its Fitchburg clinic has nothing to do with that business:

Jesse Mermell, vice president of external relations at Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said because the organization plans to open the Fitchburg office with federal grant money from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, employees cannot arrange appointments for abortions for patients at other offices. They also won’t perform abortions at the Fitchburg office.

Father Bruso isn’t buying that claim:

“They don’t make money by giving out literature. They make money by performing abortions,” Bruso said.

Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek says the Battle of Fitchburg is an example of “the Obama administration subsidizing its pro-abort pals with our money” and gives credit to local conservative blogger Da Tech Guy for calling attention to the issue. He was the first blogger to cover the story, he posted photos of yesterday’s protest, and he interviewed many of those involved, including Father Bruso:

“President Obama’s book is called The Audacity of Hope. Abortion is the abandonment of hope. When a person chooses abortion they are saying they don’t have hope for the future, not for their child or for themselves.”

I met Father Bruso while covering the Massachusetts Senate campaign (and crashing on Da Tech Guy’s sofa in Fitchburg), and the irony is that one of the reasons Scott Brown became the “41st vote” against ObamaCare is because of Martha Coakley’s insistence that the bill should include funding for abortion.

Pollsters identified Fitchburg as a “bellwether” town in the Massachusetts campaign and, based on my interviews with Father Bruso’s parishioners the Sunday before Election Day, I predicted Coakley might be facing “the most brutal Catholic backlash since the Inquisition.”

Coakley lost the election, but thanks to stimulus money from federal taxpayers, her agenda is being implemented anyway. Now Fitchburg is once again a bellwether — and a battlefield.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

So send someone in undercover and see if they can make an appt to get an abortion.

Then report the crime (federal money for abortion).

Daggett on January 29, 2010 at 4:11 PM

Many Planned Parenthood offices don’t perform abortions. Do you have anything that suggests this one is going to do so, or is going to perform referrals?

Father Bruso may not be buying that claim, but unless someone has any good evidence to the contrary, I’ve gotta treat the Father’s suspicions as just suspicions.

Jimbo3 on January 29, 2010 at 4:56 PM

Many Planned Parenthood offices don’t perform abortions. Do you have anything that suggests this one is going to do so, or is going to perform referrals?
Jimbo3 on January 29, 2010 at 4:56 PM

Only everything we know about Planned Parenthood, Jimbo:

In 2007, Planned Parenthood provided nearly 290,000 abortions, accounting for approximately one in five abortions performed nationwide. . . .
According to PPFA’s financial report for 2007-2008, the abortion provider brought in total revenue of $1.038 billion and posted an $85 million profit.

This issue is actually far more complex than most people understand. For decades, Planned Parenthood (and other “pro-choice” organizations) have promoted the idea of contraception as an alternative to abortion. In fact, contraception causes abortion.

Let me explain what I mean by that. First, every method of contraception (other than abstinence and surgical sterilization) has what is called a “failure rate.” If a specific method of contraception is 99% effective — and most methods are far less effective than that — then for every 100 uses, there will be one pregnancy. When people use contraception, obviously don’t they don’t intend to get pregnant, and so the contraceptive failure rate leads to a certain number of unwanted pregnancies. The more widespread the reliance on contraceptives, the more unwanted pregnancies there will be.

Therefore, by promoting contraceptive usage to its clients, Planned Parenthood guarantees that there will be more unwanted pregnancies — and when those pregnancies occur, this creates paying customers for Planned Parenthood’s abortion business.

One doesn’t have to believe Planned Parenthood is cynical (or conspiratorial) in such matters to understand why giving them money to reduce abortions is like trying to prevent fire by giving money to arsonists. The entire philosophy of Planned Parenthood — i.e., the Culture of Death — is contrary to the nature of human sexuality.

Sex causes pregnancy. This is the specific biological purpose of sexual intercourse. Simple common sense would suggest that people should avoid having intercourse in any circumstance where pregnancy (the natural consequence of intercourse) would be a “crisis.” Yet Planned Parenthood, by promoting contraceptive use, encourages people to believe that they can have sex without regard to the possibility of pregnancy. And it is that false belief that routinely leads to the unwanted pregnancies for which Planned Parenthood then provides abortion as the solution.

Furthermore: Money is fungible. You can no more give money to Planned Parenthood without funding abortion than you can give money to the Mafia without funding crime.

And finally, contrary to what Planned Parenthood would like you to believe, there is no Manichean either/or choice between government funding for their agenda — “family planning,” “comprehensive sexuality education,” etc. — and a return to the Dark Ages. For decades, advocates of the Culture of Death have framed the public-policy debate in terms of this false dilemma, as if the slightest reduction in the federal Title X “family planning” budget would automatically lead to an explosion of unwanted pregnancies, or as if anything less than mandatory K-12 sex-ed classes would result in an epidemic of STDs and teen motherhood. If you can’t think outside that particular box, it is because you have been successfully indoctrinated, as Bill Buckley once explained:

In the hands of a skillful indoctrinator, the average student not only thinks what the indoctrinator wants him to think . . . but is altogether positive that he has arrived at his position by independent intellectual exertion. This man is outraged by the suggestion that he is the flesh-and-blood tribute to the success of his indoctrinators . . .

See: Big Money and the Culture of Death

The Other McCain on January 29, 2010 at 6:24 PM

Not necessarily, Other McCain. I was on birth control for 7 years without menstruating, confidant (with good reason) that I was protected from pregnancy. When I discovered that I was pregnant, my husband and I decided that there was no way we were going to terminate, we knew that this was not a simple mistake or accident, it was God’s will.

If you follow your heart and use contraception as a way to prevent pregnancy in a loving relationship that is serious enough to handle the potential failure of birth control, the availability thereof does not increase the likelihood of an abortion.

It’s not the birth control that’s to blame, it’s that sex ed doesn’t come from parents anymore, and people use birth control in lieu of a value system.

I anticipate sending my son to college when he’s older, but I don’t imagine him turning liberal just because his professors are– and similarly, I don’t expect him to use birth control as an excuse to have sex before he feels ready. A traditional view of appropriate sexual relationships (even one not centered on waiting for marriage per se) is not mutually exclusive of assistance from birth control providers like Planned Parenthood.

RachDubya on January 29, 2010 at 9:40 PM

But yes, Planned Parenthood is ideologically evil.

RachDubya on January 29, 2010 at 9:41 PM

Care Net Pregnancy Centers are an alternative to PP. They provide prenatal care, advice and counseling but not abortions. They are faith based and do not receive federal grants. Please consider them as an option.

Kissmygrits on January 30, 2010 at 9:47 AM

Not necessarily, Other McCain. I was on birth control for 7 years without menstruating, confidant (with good reason) that I was protected from pregnancy. When I discovered that I was pregnant, my husband and I decided that there was no way we were going to terminate, we knew that this was not a simple mistake or accident, it was “God’s will”.

RachDubya on January 29, 2010 at 9:40 PM

Just a slight logic disconnect there…

You made the mistake – however reasonable – of thinking you were immune to pregnancy, and found out otherwise.

Dark-Star on January 30, 2010 at 6:18 PM

The one problem with Daggett’s otherwise excellent suggestion is that Massachusetts is a two-party consent state for wiretapping and recording; while we could send someone undercover, it would ultimately be that person’s word against that of Planned Parenthood.

If you follow your heart and use contraception as a way to prevent pregnancy in a loving relationship that is serious enough to handle the potential failure of birth control, the availability thereof does not increase the likelihood of an abortion.

Aside from the fact that your birth control did not work as intended, what about the last (gigantic) qualifier? What kills me about the older generation is that they simply cannot see beyond their own experiences. Yes, you had sex in a loving relationship, although perhaps not a married one. Now, because you promote birth control as a perfect way to avoid any problems that may stem from human sexuality, women my age find ourselves fighting off men who want sex on the first date.

I was talking to one of my friends today who said that her friend, who is a week shy of her 30th birthday, wanted a date for her birthday. Specifically, an actual, adult date, with dinner and good conversation, without the pressure for sex.

How bloody pathetic is it that we’ve become so callous about sexuality that our society does such wrong by young women? How is it that it is older women who have thrown us under the bus like this?

Roxeanne de Luca on February 2, 2010 at 2:58 AM