• Home
  • About
  • BIO
  • Conferences
  • Contact
  • Follow Gerard on FB & Twitter
  • Speaking

Coming Home

Dr. Gerard M. Nadal: Science in Service of the Pro-Life Movement

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Rethinking Ash Wednesday
Was Darwin an Architect of the Culture of Death? (Part II): Young Darwin »

Planned Parenthood and the Video EVERY Parent Must See

February 28, 2012 by Gerard M. Nadal

WARNING!!! This is graphic stuff and NOT meant for children’s eyes.

Planned Parenthood, contrary to their claims, does all they can to break down children’s natural modesty in order to get them addicted to sex. American Life League has done a masterful job at putting it all together.

H/T Jill Stanek

Share this:

  • Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Email

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Planned Parenthood | 11 Comments

11 Responses

  1. on February 28, 2012 at 7:56 PM Leila

    I have been spreading this link far and wide and will continue to do so. It is imperative that the average American see this. Thank you!


  2. on February 28, 2012 at 9:42 PM reflectionsonholiness

    That was one scary video. Good grief.


  3. on February 28, 2012 at 11:13 PM Elizabeth Mills

    WHOA! I had NO idea Planned Parenthood was this perverted! GREAT POST, Gerard! Thank you for making us aware!


  4. on February 29, 2012 at 8:47 AM L.

    If Planned Parenthood is really trying to “encourage increased homosexuality,” then how does this fit into their business model of “hooking kids on sex” to sell more birth control and abortions?
    As far as I know, gay people don’t need any of that.


  5. on February 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM Gerard M. Nadal

    A bit disingenuous of you, L. The birth control/abortion paradigm holds up for girls. For boys, PP knows damned well that gays have frighteningly high STD rates compared to heterosexuals. So they get to do STD testing and treatment, and if PP Gulf Coast is indicative, they double-bill the government for their services.


  6. on February 29, 2012 at 5:09 PM L.

    But lesbians have very low STD rates, and don’t need birth control or abortion — it would seem foolish to cut out a big swatch of their customer base. They should at least encourage bisexuality, since bisexual women have a much higher sexually-transmitted disease rate than lesbians.
    And did you notice that the “restructure family/encourage increased homosexuality” quotation was from back in 1969?Did they have to go back more than 40 years to find something like that?
    Anyway, you know I’m a big fan of PP and I share their values, so I don’t expect you to take anything I say seriously.
    I thought the video was very funny and I posted it on my own blog, but didn’t link to yours, so that none of my sex-positive, femi-Nazi commenters would come here and leave you more comments — mine is enough. More than enough — probably too much. I had stopped commenting, but I guess I gave self-restraint up for Lent. Have a good night!


  7. on February 29, 2012 at 6:37 PM Gerard M. Nadal

    L.,

    Why should PP encourage any particular form of sexual behavior?

    As for your contention that lesbians have very low rates of STD’s, the CDC states otherwise:

    Women Who Have Sex with Women
    Women who have sex with women (WSW) are a diverse group with variations in sexual identity, sexual behaviors, sexual practices, and risk behaviors. Recent studies indicate that some WSW, particularly adolescents, young women, and women with both male and female partners, might be at increased risk for STDs and HIV as a result of certain reported risk behaviors (109–112). WSW are at risk for acquiring bacterial, viral, and protozoal infections from current and prior partners, both male and female. WSW should not be presumed to be at low or no risk for STDs {Emphasis added. GN} based on sexual orientation. Effective screening requires that providers and their female clients engage in a comprehensive and open discussion not only about sexual identify, but sexual and behavioral risks.

    Read the rest here.


  8. on March 1, 2012 at 4:50 AM L.

    The CDC states that women who has sex with women shouldn’t be “presumed” to be at low/no risk — which is a good idea, when you’re treating individuals and not statistics.

    That’s especially true because bisexual women have higher rates than “pure” lesbians. I found the study I was thinking of: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4365/is_14_41/ai_n29455577/

    There’s a difference between “encouraging” and “enabling,” and I think PP does the latter.

    Of course, since I am a very sex-positive person and am raising my children to hopefully share my values, some would say “encouraging” and “enabling” are in fact one and the same. But I see a difference. If my kids want to remain virgins until marriage, that’s up to them — but I let them know why I don’t think that’s a good idea, based on my personal experience.

    Honestly, I don’t think PP needs to “encourage” sex. We humans are pretty capable of working up enthusiasm for it all by ourselves.


  9. on March 1, 2012 at 4:07 PM Jennifer Peyton

    I’m sex positive, too! But only as long as it’s within marriage. Why expose children to heartache, disease and mental instability in the name of “social progress?” This is so sad…I’m sorry that Girl Scouts has any ties to this radical organization. I always thought it was unfair that my church (LDS) didn’t provide a Girl Scout program like it provides Boy Scouts. Now I think I understand why…PP is terrible!


  10. on March 1, 2012 at 7:49 PM LS

    Dr. Nadal,

    What better way to lock people into all manner of confusion by encouraging any and every conceivable form of sexual activity at younger and younger ages? And what better way to reduce the human population by encouraging addictive (which it can be) sexual behavior that doesn’t result in reproduction of the species? Furthermore, the transmission of STDs through wanton sexual contact with multiple-gendered partners further ensures fewer people making it here due to damaged reproductive functioning. If PP’s aim is to reduce the number of people in the world, they are on the way to achieving their goal.

    Yes, people enjoy sexual contact for a reason: God intended for humanity to be fruitful and multiply, and was kind enough to make the process enjoyable. What He didn’t intend was for that process to be skewed into an activity that would actually prevent the original end result…


  11. on March 1, 2012 at 10:09 PM Melika

    Unfortunately, I think the discussion has been hijacked from the true question regarding homosexuality & the overall subject of reproductive health. No one in this country has a right to do whatever they want. That is a ridiculous and childish argument akin to “everyone else is doing it, so it’s OK”. The real question we should be asking is: Are we as a people going to consider homosexuality a mental / genetic disorder or not? It doesn’t really matter what angle the pro-homosexual movement uses (genetic vs. choice, ie. mental), the fundamental question is still the same.

    I’m a heathen, so I have to come at this question from an evolutionary point of view, since we’re all just animals who have evolved intelligence. As far as good ole mother nature is concerned, sex is only to procreate the species, therefor heterosexual sex is the preferred & dominant genetic material. Anything else is considered, by nature, to be anti-thematic to evolution.

    As a society, we have the right to decide if this is a behavior we can afford to tolerate (think post war when a society is trying to rebuild) and/or if this is a behavior we want to consider normal.

    Once we have made this decision, then everything else becomes clear. If the society as a whole (or vast majority) feels this behavior is abnormal and detrimental, then we appropriately treat it as a mental/genetic disorder. If we all decide that it should be normal & isn’t detrimental, then we rearrange some document wordings.



Comments are closed.

  • Archives

    • May 2022 (1)
    • July 2021 (1)
    • January 2021 (7)
    • November 2020 (1)
    • May 2020 (2)
    • September 2019 (1)
    • May 2019 (2)
    • April 2019 (1)
    • February 2019 (1)
    • April 2018 (2)
    • January 2017 (1)
    • December 2016 (1)
    • November 2016 (1)
    • October 2016 (10)
    • July 2016 (2)
    • June 2016 (1)
    • May 2016 (1)
    • April 2016 (1)
    • March 2016 (1)
    • February 2016 (3)
    • December 2015 (1)
    • November 2015 (2)
    • October 2015 (1)
    • September 2015 (1)
    • August 2015 (3)
    • April 2015 (1)
    • February 2015 (1)
    • December 2014 (3)
    • November 2014 (1)
    • October 2014 (4)
    • September 2014 (15)
    • August 2014 (6)
    • June 2014 (5)
    • May 2014 (1)
    • April 2014 (2)
    • March 2014 (2)
    • February 2014 (1)
    • January 2014 (3)
    • December 2013 (17)
    • November 2013 (9)
    • October 2013 (12)
    • September 2013 (4)
    • July 2013 (2)
    • June 2013 (5)
    • May 2013 (2)
    • April 2013 (3)
    • March 2013 (6)
    • February 2013 (2)
    • January 2013 (1)
    • December 2012 (18)
    • November 2012 (6)
    • October 2012 (13)
    • September 2012 (1)
    • July 2012 (10)
    • June 2012 (13)
    • May 2012 (8)
    • April 2012 (1)
    • March 2012 (11)
    • February 2012 (21)
    • January 2012 (5)
    • December 2011 (18)
    • November 2011 (3)
    • October 2011 (23)
    • September 2011 (24)
    • August 2011 (22)
    • July 2011 (22)
    • June 2011 (29)
    • May 2011 (8)
    • April 2011 (11)
    • March 2011 (18)
    • February 2011 (42)
    • January 2011 (26)
    • December 2010 (30)
    • November 2010 (34)
    • October 2010 (33)
    • September 2010 (16)
    • August 2010 (15)
    • July 2010 (7)
    • June 2010 (21)
    • May 2010 (33)
    • April 2010 (14)
    • March 2010 (41)
    • February 2010 (36)
    • January 2010 (59)
    • December 2009 (59)
  • Categories

    • Abortion (258)
    • Advent (26)
    • Biomedical Ethics (82)
    • Birth Control (51)
    • Bishops (87)
    • Black History Month (10)
    • Breast Cancer (65)
    • Christmas (26)
    • Cloning (4)
    • Condoms (16)
    • COVID-19 (1)
    • Darwin (2)
    • Development (6)
    • Dignity (119)
    • Divine Mercy Novenas (10)
    • DNA (3)
    • Embryo Adoption (2)
    • Embryonic Stem Cell Research (6)
    • Eugenics (29)
    • Euthanasia (8)
    • Family (44)
    • Fathers of the Church (11)
    • Fortnight for Freedom (1)
    • Golden Coconut Award (3)
    • Health Care (14)
    • HIV/AIDS (5)
    • Infant Mortality (2)
    • IVF (4)
    • Joseph (6)
    • Lent (17)
    • Margaret Sanger (19)
    • Marriage (6)
    • Maternal Mortality (2)
    • Motherhood (12)
    • Neonates (1)
    • Personhood (20)
    • Physician Assisted Suicide (4)
    • Planned Parenthood (64)
    • Priests (50)
    • Pro-Life Academy (23)
    • Quotes (10)
    • Radio Interviews (3)
    • Right to Life (34)
    • Roots (1)
    • Sex Education (25)
    • Sexually Transmitted Disease (12)
    • Stem Cell Therapy (7)
    • Transgender (1)
    • Uncategorized (207)
  • Pages

    • About
    • BIO
    • Conferences
    • Contact
    • Follow Gerard on FB & Twitter
    • Speaking

Blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Coming Home
    • Join 857 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Coming Home
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d bloggers like this: