Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image


Abortion & Life by Jennifer Baumgardner Selected Quotes Photographs by Tara Todras-Whitehill

September 6, 2010 | By | No Comments

I had an abortion.


Abortion & Life

Jennifer Baumgardner, pregnant on Left

Gillian Aldrich, producer/creator of I Had an Abortion

“By creating a T-shirt so many would see as offensive, the pro-choice movement has intentionally sought to outrage the Christian Right.” p. 174.*

Front: I had an abortion.

Abortion & Life by Jennifer Baumgardner, a pro-abortion feminist, was written in 2008 and published by Akashic Books.

The book begins with a pull quote from Loretta Ross,

The defensiveness that the pro-choice movement has is well-earned. We’ve been shot at, picketed, fought every step. But I’m very glad that the conversation is changing.

Image and imaging are important. The coat hanger “doesn’t evoke memories of barriers that women faced.” P. 10

The book is presented as an even handed “conversation” but devolved by page 10 to ad hominem argument, of, “The fleshy pink faces of Senator Jesse Helms and Representative Henry Hyde…”

The “current symbol of reproductive freedom…?” Could be, “Angels’ wings, to indicate the thousands of women who have abortions and yet believe that a fetus has a soul and is watching over them?” p. 10. Baumgardner is suggesting that the unborn baby might be an eternal being ushered from this world into the next by the “choice” of the mother. This fits with Candace C. Crandall‘s assertion that “The Fetus, Beat Us,”* where pro-aborts had to deal with the pain and loss of the “baby.” This is, of course, merely a tactic to remove or deflect the ‘harm to women’ argument advanced by the pro-lifers.

The author lists “after-abortion counseling groups like Backline and Exhale…the zine Our Truths/Nuestra Verdades to the films Silent Choices and The Abortion Diaries?” p. 11. Baumgardner could have added Racheal’s Vineyard and Silent No More to pro-life counseling services of women who suffer from the trauma of abortion.

“I’ve visited abortion clinics around the country and observed what happens to the remains of eight-week, twelve-week, and fourteen-week aborted fetuses.” P. 12 Baumgardner is silent as to what was seen. Were the remains stuffed down a garbage disposal? Treated as medical waste? Or given a decent burial?

Baumgardner asks herself, “How do women experience abortion?…Why aren’t there more after-abortion resources? And: If you admit you are sad about your abortion, does that mean abortion is wrong?” p. 13. The author asks but does not fully answer the question: If a women feels remorse after an abortion, is it possible the woman now understands that there was a living baby involved? And that the mother regrets her abortion? Polling suggests that women are concerned. Rasmussen reports that 58 per cent of women feel abortion is immoral.

“The number [of abortions] has gone down slightly in recent years…possibly linked to the virginity-abstinence movement…Lack of access and affordability have also been factors.” p. 19. This is confirmed by academic research. Abortion has an elastic demand, where the demand for a product or service is directly tied to a variable: price, 24-hour waiting periods, proximity, viewing a sonogram. (See Michael New, 2010.)

“Although it’s shortsighted, when faced with a slim deadline to raise money and make this decision, some women simply miss the window in which they can have an abortion. P. Baumgardner’s wording is misleading. A woman in the USA can have an abortion at any time even when she goes into labor. She can have an abortion with her child’s feet out of her body with only her child’s head not visible; the child can still be “terminated.” P. 19.

“Abortion is the U.S. is safe. The death rate at all stages is 0.6 per 100,000 abortions…and [is] nearly ten times as safe as carrying a pregnancy to full term.” p. 20.

“Sherri Finkbine, a young mother and television star…host of Romper Room…wanted to warn other women about the dangers of thalidomide to their pregnancies…Finkbine [traveled] to Sweden for her [abortion] procedure. P. 23 Baumgardner is silent on whether the drug thalidomide was a greater danger to pregnancy [re: baby] than abortion.

“My friend got the abortionist to agree to (re)do the procedure–this time for an additional price above his regular price, which was agreeing to his f$cking my friend right after the abortion was performed on her sister.” P. 24. Bumgardner seems to settle the debate that abortion harms women: The mother gets rid of her baby by pimping out her sister-prostitute to the abortionist. All three are without honor and, as a result, there is one less baby in the world. Ramesh Ponnura first wrote of the ‘character’ of the type of person that does the actual abortion baby-removal, “What mother rejoices in proclaiming to the world, loudly, proudly announcing, “Meet my son, The Abortionist!”…?

“The Supreme Court upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act…except to save the life of the mother. This marked the first time any medical procedure was banned, as well as the first time an exception for a woman’s health had been overruled.” P. 34. Baumgardner fails to note that there is no medical justification for a Partial-Birth Abortion, as C. Everett Koop, MD, has written.

“Restrictions [cause] women [to] rarely change their minds about having procedures just because they are forced to jump through hoops.” P. 34. This has been superseded by peer reviewed studies demonstrating that commonsense abortion regulation such as waiting periods reduces the numbers of abortions, suggesting that women, in fact do change their minds. (Michael New, 2010.)

“There is not a link [between having an abortion and breast cancer] at least not according to the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, or major research universities.” P. 37

“Nada L. Stotland, MD, president-elect of the American Psychiatric Association [writes] that “meticulous research shows that there is no causal relationship between abortion and mental illnesses.” P. 37.

“I started allowing myself to understand what is true for me: that I think of pregnancy as “life” but this doesn’t have to mean abortion is murder.” P. 47. This is a non sequitur and reveals the twisted backwards logic pro-abortion-choice advocates must fabricate to justify the taking of innocent human life. Indeed, the killing of a baby by the mother. Note Bumgardner’s odd use of ‘truth.’ Truth to her is not transcendent but dependent on her personal interpretation or perhaps her feelings at the moment…

“[A woman who had an abortion] realized that she…actually needed some help with the aftermath of what had turned out to be a profound experience. She began looking for after-abortion resources…All she could find to offer support were thinly disguised antiabortion groups. As a feminist, she says, “I didn’t see anything that reflected my experience” of having and sad feelings around her abortion, but not wanting to make abortion illegal.” P. 50. It is not disclosed if this woman contacted Rachel’s Vineyard or not. This group does non-judgmental post-abortion counseling.

“[A woman who had an abortion] interned at NARAL Pro-Choice California…But when she raised the issue of the lack of emotional resources for women, she was confronted with blank faces. It was, she says, as if admitting that she was struggling with her feelings meant that she wasn’t really pro-choice.” P. 50.

“Aspen Baker…in 2000…created Exhale, a nonjudgmental post-abortion talkline. In 2007, Exhale created a series of Hallmark-like e-cards that people could send to loved ones who’d had abortions–not to celebrate the abortion, but to acknowledge it and offer comfort.” P. 51.

“This shift in focus in the national conversation from “Keep your laws off my body!” to “Let’s talk about feelings and whether fetal life has value” has bee tough for the pro-choice movement…” p. 51

“Peg Johnston…operating Southern Tier Women’s Services, an independent abortion clinic [would] sit in a counseling session with a woman who’d say, “I feel like I’m killing my baby.” Johnston believes that women were genuinely struggling with the value of life and how to do the right thing and be a good person…using words like “loss” and “baby” and “killing”…” p. 53.

Baumgardner asks but does not answer, “What do you do if a patient wants to baptize the remains?” p. 54, emphasis in original.

Women who had abortions would write, “Don’t think of it as losing a baby, but as gaining a guardian angel. These were women who clearly felt relationships to their pregnancies as children, not as masses of cells.” p. 55 Italics in original.

“Emily Barklow [a college student] “struggled with feelings of deviance, selfishness, and loss [after her abortion]…Four years, lots of counseling [led her to] preparing a presentation about her experience [at a NARAL event]…I was disappointed with the lack of depth in the other presentations–all recycled coat hangers and We’ll never go back signs. I would cite this experience as my first real disconnect from the mainstream abortion rights movement.” p. 59.

“Perhaps younger women, in their own entitlement, will begin to make blasphemous statements even more loudly. The most profane is this: Why are feminists so obsessed with abortion? Some of this lingering fascination is [that] we focus on this right because it is fundamental; having the right to control our bodies is directly associated with the right to control our lives.” p. 59.

The author Baumgardner was five months pregnancy and giving a speech at Barnard College’s Students for Choice when she referred to the contents of her uterus as a “baby” instead of “fetus.” “If I said “baby” [referring to her unborn baby] that meant i wasn’t pro-choice, or with the program, or knowledgeable.” p. 60.

“Hillary Clinton…asserted her belief in [Roe v Wade] but also admitted that abortion can be “tragic” for some women…NARAL President Nancy Keenan confessed that “our community tends to run away every time somebody talks about the many emotions that come with this choice” and “we have not done enough to make people who are ‘pro-choice but struggling’ feel like they are part of this community.” p. 60.

“In March of 2007 Aspen Baker…wanted to celebrate the fact that Exhale was sending out 2,500 e-cards every month.” p. 61. Charmaine and Baker debated on CNN; pull quotes here.

“[Democrats for Life] executive director Kristen Day cites a December 2003 Zogby poll finding that forty-three percent of Democrats oppose abortion except in the case of rape or incest or to save the live of the mother…” p. 64.

“The need for abortion will never be totally eradicated, according to health activist Barbara Seaman, unless society commits to giving vasectomies to all boys after freezing their sperm, and only allowing procreation through in vitro fertilization after demonstrating sufficient income and maturity to support a child for eighteen years.” p. 65. The Alert Student would be tempted to dismiss Baumgardner for including this passage. But Seaman’s concept was advanced by Margaret Sanger who suggested, without humor, that licenses to marry and procreate be awarded to only those deemed “fit” by your local Planned Parenthood affiliate. The late Barbara Seaman is little known outside academic women’s studies programs and should remain so.

“Norma McCorvey [Roe in Roe v Wade] never actually had an abortion…” p. 70.

Baumgardner is concerned about forced adoptions, “I cried for the many women who were conned into relinquishing their children…

I cried remembering how intense it was to be pregnant and to give birth–how hormones and pain and extreme physical duress combined into what felt like a near-death experience [for her as mother-no mention of an aborted baby]. I recalled how I really understood–in my loosened pelvis, my stretched-out ribs, and the kicks to my cervix from tiny limbs–the sensitive factory that is our bodies, arduously creating another human. p. 70.

Baumgardner is lamenting the “choice” women endure when giving up a child for adoption but come precariously close to advancing a pro-life argument. This defines the schizophrenia of the abortion movement: The baby is human, the baby is a person-and the mother can terminate on a whim.

“So, can you be a feminist and pro-life? The answer is a resounding “yes.”” p. 71.

“With many of the women…giving birth seemed to preclude an investment in their own lives; it meant saying goodbye to a fellowship, to a career of their choosing, or being forced to stay in a relationship they didn’t want with the baby’s father.” P. 74. One could wonder that terminating a baby could indeed terminate a relationship: between mother and child(ren) and father(s).

“Gloria Steinem, born March 25, 1934, [could] not see any way that I could possibly give birth to someone else and also give birth to myself.” P. 79. In Steinem’s search for self, “someone else” — her baby — was sacrificed. To advance women.

Baumgardner quotes Barbara Ehrenreich, “Women do use abortion as backup nowadays, but they often don’t acknowledge it. I’m referring to women who get pregnant purposefully, for instance, but assume that legal abortion will be available as a backup should the child they’re carrying have Down’s syndrome or another abnormality they decide they can’t handle.” p. 87

Baumgardner quotes a Marion Banzhaf, a lesbian (Why do I need to know this? Why does she need to tell me?), “[After the abortion] I was thrilled…I was so happy to see the blood. I felt like my life was beginning over again…I saw a little baby in a carriage and a mom and I thought, Oh, I’m so glad that’s not me…I felt like I had control over what I was going to do with the rest of my life.” P. 90. Italics in original, bold emphasis mine.

Baumgardner quotes Giliian Aldrich, “I called my mom and said, “How could you have done that? I could have had this older brother or sister and you killed them…” p. 98. She later decided she was pro-abortion-choice.

At age 30 Gillian Aldrich was pregnant, “I had zero sentimentality, and didn’t want to even open that door [of keeping the baby]. I thought: If there is a baby in here, It’s not staying. I knew it would destroy our relationship [even though boyfriend wanted the child]. p. 99. Italics in original.

“We went to this…[abortion] clinic…The place was kind of a factory. The counseling session was a joke. I thought that there would be more of an emotional support system in the clinic itself, but there wasn’t.” p. 99.

“That Sylvia Ann Hewlett book came out [Creating a Life: Professional Women and the Quest for Children]…There was something retrograde about her attitude, but her facts [demonstrating fertility declines precipitously throughout your thirties] were correct…” p. 100.

Baumgardner quotes Amy Richards, “I was…pregnant with triplets…and made the decision to have a selective reduction…a stand-alone fetus…would continue to term…[the] identical twins were aborted…instant death. After I went through the procedure, my boyfriend Peter was much more traumatized than I was, even though hospital policy didn’t allow him to witness the procedure.” p. 104 The Alert Reader might wonder, What’s to be traumatized about? It’s not a baby. It’s not human. It’s not a person. Or is it?

Richards continues, “I…speak at colleges…I meet so many girls who are trying to make sense of abortion. They really want to support abortion rights…but at the end of the day [they] just can’t say, “I’m pro-choice,” or, “I support abortion,” p. 105.

Men quoted in this book are as ambivalent about abortion as the women. A George is quoted, “For me, I think the abortion [with my girlfriend] will stand as a symbol that I thought of myself as this open, loving guy, but I wasn’t.” p. 110. Emphasis mind.

Baumgardner quotes Ani Difranco, “I want to tell women and men, “You are an animal and it is a beautiful thing.” p. 113. The pro-abortion-choice argument is revealing: human personhood is not transcendent from lower animals. Most religions hold that only humans are eternal beings with a soul. It appears that the human with the religion of feminism (where abortion is a sacrament) would have no soul.

Where do pro-abortion-choice women find these men: “He was an activist and a poet…he was having sex with me, and sometimes choking me. It was horrible.” p. 117. I am sure that the choking was terrible, I guess. But begs the question: How many times did the pro-abortion-choice poet choke you? Sometimes? Just a few times?

Baumgardner quotes a Robin Ringleka, “The doctor was very rushed and didn’t have much of a bedside manner. I was pretty terrified and I began to cry when he entered the room. This seemed to piss him off and he demanded to know why I was crying…[later] The one-year anniversary of my abortion was approaching and I was having bad dreams.” p. 125. Why do these pro-abortion-choice women have bad dreams? Why do they remember the dates of the abortion and “birthday” of the baby terminated? Can a clump of cells, a mere fetus cause so much anguish? Or is the death of a baby painful even to a woman in denial?

Ringleka continues, “I have come to believe that having an abortion can be a very motherly decision.” p. 125. Except for, maybe, her baby.

Baumgardner quotes, Jenny Egan, “I went with my boyfriend…to Planned Parenthood…I had assumed that I …would finally be able to tell someone or talk to someone about how freaked out I was, but I didn’t get to…My boyfriend started the breaking-up process the day after the abortion. He said he wanted to date other people.” p. 127.

Baumgardner wonders, “I recognize that is serious [an unborn baby might be a person], but my own life is too important to sacrifice for an unplanned pregnancy.” p. 133. This is understood to not be an act of selfishness to the pro-abortion-choice supporters.

“[A father] describes, bluntly, how a recent abortion felt “more like murder”…” p. 113.

“Inga Muscio, the author of the contempory feminist classic C@unt: A Declaration of Independence (1998) [available at bookstores everywhere]…said the surgical solution…”sucked.” After Muscio discovered herself pregnant a third time, she vowed not to go back to the clinic and “waltz with the abhorrent machine.”” p. 142.

“Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas…says: “Abortion is not a cerebral or a reproductive issue. Abortion is a matter of the heart…[U]ntil one understands the heart of a woman, nothing else about abortion makes any sense at all.” p.143. Indeed, abortion follows the emotion of the woman’s heart. The logic of the brain, less so.

Baumgardner closes Abortion & Life with a profound and profane quote from,

popular musician and activist Ani DiFranco, who has a strong appreciation of the taboos surrounding abortion, wrote a song lyric that refers to the single cell that is an egg: “To split yourself in two is just the most radical thing you can do.” Life begins in that split–transformative energy is released into the aperture. The Ani adds: “So girl if that sh!t ain’t up to you, then you simply are not free. p. 144. So there.

“By creating a T-shirt so many would see as offensive, the pro-choice movement has intentionally sought to outrage the Christian Right.” p. 174.

One wag suggested a tag line on the reverse of the t-shirt to Baumgardner,

Front: I had an abortion.

Back: Roe v. Wade–Eliminating Future Democrats One Choice at a Time. p. 174.


Baumgardner is not happy about restrictions that help make abortion rare, “Planning a Pro-Choice Event…is…one way to fight the gloom…make the Roe anniversary powerful–a day of consciousness-raising and fundraising.” p. 148. She seems unaware that hundreds of thousands from the pro-life community march in Washington, DC on the Roe anniversary, January 22, each year.

Baumgardner wants the reader to celebrate and to mark your calendars that “the National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers is March 10.” p. 149.

Baumgardner refers to the Reproductive Health Blog:


Be sure to follow Your Business Blogger(R) and Charmaine on Twitter: @JackYoest and @CharmaineYoest

Jack and Charmaine also blog at Reasoned Audacity and at Management Training of DC, LLC.

Thank you (foot)notes,

*Baumgardner’s opening quote is from Rebecca Hyman’s essay Full Frontal Offense: Taking Abortion Rights To The Tees.

*”The fetus beat us” has been incorrectly attributed to Naomi Wolf. She writes us in an email, “I never said The fetus, beat us. I think it is an awful phrase, would never have said something so brutal and trivializing about this issue…Thank you! Take care, Naomi wolf.”

The book was funded by pro-abortion-choice individuals and groups, Amy Ray, Merle Hoffman and the Diana Foundation, Gloria Browning, Karen Burgum and the F-M Area Foundation Women’s Fund and Roberta Schneiderman…” preface page

Gillian Aldrich directed the documentary “I Had an Abortion”… preface page

Charmaine on CNN: Abortion Mourn or Celebrate?

See The Fetal Hand Grasp on Charmaine Debates Abortion on CNN.

Insurance and Pre-Existing Conditions

December 24, 2009 | By | No Comments

Merry Christmas.


Politically Incorrect. At the Yoest house this morning we are getting reading for the health care vote — getting ready to watch government run amuck.

The Senators are advancing the health care bill that covers pre-existing conditions. This is not insurance.

Insurance is the management and calculating for risk. Covering and paying for pre-existing conditions is not insurance — it is charity. Once an adverse health condition is known there is no risk to manage and insurance companies do not need to be involved. The care of the currently sick is the job of health care providers and can be paid and provided for by philanthropy.

Not the insurance companies. Not the taxpayer.

To be precise, if ObamaCare demands to cover pre-existing conditions, then Pelosi-Reid should should remove insurance companies as middle man and force the taxpayers to fund the unfortunate, unwilling and unknowing directly. But.

But this would be charity. Such philanthropy is not the purpose of government. Charity is a test of the human heart — not government coercion. And worse:

The Senate will force taxpayers to pay for abortions through insurance companies — pre-existing or not.

The Senate has confused Health Insurance with Health Care.


Thank you (foot)notes:

Americans United for Life does not take a position on insurance or the insurance industry. AUL is a law firm concerned with protecting Life-at conception, abortion and rights of conscience. AUL and AUL Action opposes abortion and its public funding as written in the Senate’s current proposed legislation. The opinion here is from Jack Yoest and no other.

Be sure to follow Your Business Blogger(R) and Charmaine on Twitter: @JackYoest and @CharmaineYoest

Jack and Charmaine also blog at Reasoned Audacity and at Management Training of DC, LLC.

Healthcare Vote and Christmas Wishes from Americans United for Life

December 24, 2009 | By | No Comments


The Yoest family at

the Supreme Court in DC

Charmaine sends this note along,

Dear Friend of Life,

I wanted to take a break from public policy and wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas.

And yet, even as I write this, the television in my office is tuned to C-SPAN as pro-abortion Senators stand on the Senate floor – Senator Patty Murray just finished and now Senator Al Franken is beginning – two days before Christmas, they are arguing for the passage of the greatest single expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade. It’s simply breathtaking.

My family had dinner last night with my brother and his family, who are here from Alabama to celebrate Christmas with us. Yesterday was also his birthday. As we ate birthday cake, we talked about the strong pull everyone feels to break away and just have Christmas.

But tomorrow morning at 8 am, on Christmas Eve, the Senate will vote. We are paying attention because we must. This is an historic moment and we are honored to be a part of the Life movement that is working to stop this tragedy.

I want to thank you. Frankly, I thought Senator Reid’s strategy to push this legislation through at Christmas-time was appalling, but shrewd. Pro-life Americans are rightly paying attention to family and friends and sacred traditions this week. But you’ve also taken the time to stand with us against this pro-abortion bill.

Thank you!

I also want to thank the AUL team. They’ve been putting in long hours – our legal team worked through the weekend to analyze Senator Reid’s amendment. Their analysis documented that the “compromise” worked out with Senator Nelson actually established the first-ever mandatory abortion tax. Our communications team has been working to get the word out – releasing a statement immediately after the 1 AM vote Monday morning. . . and our database guru, Stanley Bao, is working hard today to get this message to you. I’m privileged to work with a team of people so dedicated to the mission of defending life.

Last weekend, as Reid filed his amendment, it seemed as if even the heavens had opened up in protest, as a blizzard socked in the Nation’s Capital. Dedicated pro-life Hill staffers slept on cots and sofas in their offices over the weekend to work against this unprecedented expansion of abortion.

Having a Christmas blizzard reminded me of the classic story of General George Washington’s Christmas prayer at Valley Forge. In December of 1777, Washington moved the Continental Army to Valley Forge in order to try to survive the hard winter. You know the story I’m sure: the winter was so desperate and conditions so severe, that of the 12,000 men who began that encampment with Washington, 2,000 did not survive.

There is a story that General Washington was observed at prayer, alone in the woods that Christmas, and a famous painting depicting that scene is now hanging on display at Mount Vernon.

While we may never know the exact details of that prayer, this much is beyond dispute: Washington and his men remained faithful to their cause throughout that long winter. They endured, even when a path to victory was unclear and the future appeared hopeless.

May we too stand firm in the great calling of our time: Defending Life.

Merry Christmas, friends.


Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.

President & CEO

Washington, DC: 655 15th St NW, Ste. 410 | Washington, DC 20005

Chicago: 310 S. Peoria Street, Ste. 500 | Chicago, IL 60607

Please support Americans United for Life.


Thank you (foot)notes:

Be sure to follow Your Business Blogger(R) and Charmaine on Twitter: @JackYoest and @CharmaineYoest

Jack and Charmaine also blog at Reasoned Audacity and at Management Training of DC, LLC.

WebCast Debrief & Audio File

December 18, 2009 | By | No Comments

Some 26,000 good-guys registered to listen to the WebCast that was conducted this past Tuesday night in Charmaine’s offices at Americans United for Life.

Following is the follow-up letter from the Stop the Abortion Mandate coalition.

webcast_15-Dec-2009_group_presenters.jpg Webcast presenters: L to R Tony Perkins, Family Research Council; Wendy Wright, Concerned Women for America; Kristan Hawkins, Students for Life; David Bereit, 40 Days for Life; Charmaine Yoest, Americans United for Life Marjorie Dannenfelser, Susan B. Anthony List; and Douglas Johnson, National Right to Life.

Photo Credit: Hannah Yoest

“Help stop the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade…”

Listen to the recording of the URGENT nationwide webcast to prevent Washington D.C. bureaucrats and abortion industry lobbyists from using GOVERNMENT FUNDS to pay for abortions and bailout the failing abortion industry!

Despite the fact that most Americans do NOT want our government to pay for abortion with their money, the Senate caved in to pressure from Planned Parenthood and abortion industry lobbyists.

The Senate health care bill — if passed into law — will result in a MASSIVE government-funded bailout of the abortion industry — and the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade!

To respond swiftly to this crisis, the 70+ pro-life and pro-family organizations that make up the Stop the Abortion Mandate Coalition joined together on Tuesday, December 15, for a huge nationwide webcast, featuring a panel of expert presenters:

Webcast presenters: Tony Perkins, Wendy Wright, Kristan Hawkins, David Bereit, Charmaine Yoest, Marjorie Dannenfelser, and Douglas Johnson

The entire webcast event was recorded, and as you listen to the audio, you will discover:

* The LATEST UPDATES straight from our nation’s capital…

* The shocking implications of the bill that the abortion industry is trying to ram through the United States Senate RIGHT NOW…

* Why respected leaders, national organizations, and pro-life people are joining together in record numbers to BLOCK this attempted power-grab…

* How YOU can make a difference at this crucial moment…

Listen now — click here

Download MP3 file here

Dispel the Myth

The Stupak-Pitts Amendment (see the actual language here) which passed in U.S. House of Representatives verison of health care reform ensures that government money will not be used to fund abortions. The Stupak Amendment clearly maintains the current status quo keeping in line with the already in-place Hyde Amendment. However, some are falsely saying that that the Stupak Amendment goes beyond Hyde. Check out our chart below which compares Stupak to Hyde and read this op-ed by the Con. Bart Stupak on what exactly his amendment does.


Stupak vs Hyde Chart

For more info, see Americans United for Life blog.


Thank you (foot)notes:

Be sure to follow Your Business Blogger(R) and Charmaine on Twitter: @JackYoest and @CharmaineYoest

Jack and Charmaine also blog at Reasoned Audacity and at Management Training of DC, LLC.

09 Dec


Margaret Sanger, Quotes from The Pivot of Civilization

December 9, 2009 | By |


Margaret Sanger has become a parody

of feminism and Planned Parenthood,

“I accepted an invitation to talk

to the women’s branch

of the Ku Klux Klan” from her Autobiography

Authenticity of photo not verified

We prefer the policy of immediate sterilization… p 35

“[O]rganized…charity…reveals…a defect. [Where] organized charity itself is the symptom of a malignant social disease.” p. 38.

The theme of The Pivot of Civilization is summed in Margaret Sanger’s fifth chapter, “The Cruelty of Charity.” p.37. A “debauch of sentimentalism…” p.38.

“[S]chools for the blind, deaf and mute…our eyes should be opened to the terrific cost …of this dead weight of human waste.” p. 39.


The Pivot of Civilization by Margaret Sanger was published by Brentano’s, New York, in 1922. The introduction was graciously provided by H. G. Wells, one of Sanger’s numerous sex partners.

The Dedication is written by another lover, Havelock Ellis.

“This book['s]…central challenge is that civilization is based upon the control…of Sex.” Sex is capitalized in the original. p. 1.

Later Sanger expands the challenge to “Hunger and Sex.” Capitalizations in original. p.1.

Sanger gushes of “…women fired with the glorious vision of a new world…emancipated…a Utopian world,– it glowed in romantic colors…” p. 2.

Margaret Sanger “was driven to ask whether this urging power of sex [not capitalized this time]…was not…responsible…for the widespread misery of our world.” p. 3.

“…Civilization could not solve the problem of Hunger until it recognized the titanic strength of the sexual instinct.” p. 3.

Sanger quotes Lecky, “The greatest of all evils in politics is power without control.” p. 5.

Sanger enjoyed the endorsement of “The neo-Malthusian movement in Great Britain [who] came to our support.” p. 5.

Sanger tells us that “Official moralists” are responsible for the presence of “the moron and the imbecile…” p. 6.

“The lack of balance between the birth-rate of the “unfit” and the “fit,”…the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. The… inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken, [present the need] to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.” p. 9.

This menace demands action, “Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon American society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupid, cruel sentimentalism.” p. 9.

This is Sanger’s religion and gives us her book title-theme, “To effect the salvation of the generations of the future…[for] the formation of a code of sexual ethics…[where] we shall best be serving the pivotal interests of civilization.” p. 9.

“We must temper our emotion and enthusiasm with the impersonal determination of science.” p. 9. Except, perhaps, if science contradicts abortion as Cecile Richards, current president of Planned Parenthood, demands.

Margaret Sanger has an odd definition of Motherhood. It is not a calling. It is not fulfillment of womanhood. It is not joy. “Motherhood, which is not only the oldest but the most important profession…has received few of the benefits of civilization.” p. 10. Indeed Sanger believes that Motherhood is little different from the other “oldest profession” as commonly understood. (See “[P]rostitution legalized by the marriage ceremony.” Woman and the New Race p.112)

Sanger seemingly longs for an ancient, simpler age where, “[P]rimative tribes were rude enough and severe enough to prevent the unhealthy growth of sentimentality, and to discourage the irresponsible production of defective children…[the] results of uncontrolled breeding” p. 10-11.

Much like her modern liberal sisters, Margaret Sanger has a dark interpretation of woman and child. “One searches in vain for some picture of sacred motherhood…[where] chance parenthood [causes] the great social problems of feeble-mindedness, crime and syphilis…[birthed by] slaved-mothers ” p. 12-13.

Sanger was an active supporter of the junk-science of eugenics in the early 1900′s. “[T]he Galton Laboratory for Great Britain, show[ed that] an abnormally high rate of fertility is usually associated with poverty, filth, disease, feeblemindedness and a high infant mortality rate.” p. 16.

Margaret Sanger does not want the government nor philanthropies nor charities to “[A]ssume the responsibility of keeping your [unplanned] babies alive….They tacitly assume that all parenthood is desirable, that all children should be born, and that infant mortality can be controlled by external aid.” p.17.

Sanger sets the stage for the abortion and infanticide debate in our time, “In truth, unfortunate babies who depart [die] during their first twelve months are more fortunate in many respects than those who survive to undergo punishment for their parents’ cruel ignorance and complacent fecundity [the ability to reproduce].” p. 18.

Margaret Sanger, working with the unions, wanted fewer children to keep labor wages high and to keep children out of the labor market. “[C]heap childhood is the inevitable result of chance parenthood. Child labor is organically bound up with the problem of uncontrolled breeding and the large family.” p. 19.

Sanger writes of the “[P]ure American stock” uninfected by immigrant genes. p. 23.

Parents are the epitome of, “[S]inister selfishness…who bring babies into the world to become child-slaves.” p. 23.

The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, quotes approvingly of the National Child Labor Committee, that writes, “It is not only through the lowered power, the stunting and the moral degeneration of its individual members, but in actual expense, through the necessary provision for the human junk, created by…charitable organizations.” p. 24 [Emphasis mine. Quote is attributed to the National Child Labor Committee by Sanger.]

Sanger knew that family size limitation needed the authority figures of physicians and African-American clergy to implement an incremental strategy to stop the “imbeciles” and “Negros” from having children. Here Sanger seems to advocate abortion, not merely contraception,

There is but one practical and feasible program in handling the great problem of the feeble-minded. That is, as the best authorities are agreed [medical doctors], to prevent the birth of those who would transmit imbecility to their descendants…Modern conditions of civilization…furnish the most favorable breeding-ground for the mental defective, the moron, the imbecile. p. 28

“[T]he progress of civilization and of human expression has been hindered and held back by this burden of the imbecile and the moron.” p. 32.

“[T]he menace of the moron…” is harmful also because, “[T]here is a point at which philanthropy may become positively dysgenic [or cacogenics -- the study of factors producing the...perpetuation of defective... genes and traits in offspring], when charity is converted into injustice to the self-supporting citizen, into positive injury to the future of the race.” p. 34

Here sums the Margaret Sanger world view and her course of action,

The emergency problem of segregation and sterilization must be face immediately. Every feeble-minded girl or woman of the hereditary type, especially of the moron class, should be segregated during the reproductive period. Otherwise, she is almost certain to bear imbecile children, who in turn are just as certain to breed other defectives…p. 35

The Sanger final solution,

[W]hen we realize that each feeble-minded person is a potential source of an endless progeny, we prefer the policy of immediate sterilization, of making sure that parenthood [planned or not] is absolutely prohibited to the feeble-minded. p. 35

“Eugenics seems to me to be valuable in its…diagnostic aspects…seeking to re-establish the dominance of the healthy strain over the unhealthy…over the unfit [retarded]” p. 36

Chapter V is entitled, “The Cruelty of Charity,” p.37. Margaret Sanger begins the chapter with an approving quote from Herbert Spencer,

Fostering the good-for-nothing at the expense of the good is extreme cruelty. It is a deliberate storing up of miseries for future generations. There is no greater curse to prosperity than that of bequeathing them an increasing population of imbeciles.

“[O]rganized…charity…reveals…a defect. [Where] organized charity itself is the symptom of a malignant social disease.” Margaret Sanger continues,

Those vast, complex, interrelated organizations aiming to control and to diminish the spread of misery and destitution and all the menacing evils that spring out of this sinisterly fertile soil, are the surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding and is perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents and dependents. My criticism, therefore, is not directed at the “failure” of philanthropy, but rather at its success. p. 38.

“These dangers…in…humanitarianism…produce their full harvest of human waste…[by] the Salvation Army [and its] debauch of sentimentalism…” p.38.

This debauchery includes, “[S]chools for the blind, deaf and mute…our eyes should be opened to the terrific cost …of this dead weight of human waste.” p. 39.

“Such “benevolence”… conceals a stupid cruelty…” p. 40.

And “The most serious charge that can be brought against modern “benevolence” is that it encourages the perpetuation of defectives, delinquents and dependents.” p. 43.

“[T]oday’s disorder and danger…is fundamentally a sexual problem.” p. 45.

“[S]entimental charities, which sprang up like mushrooms, only tended to increase the evils of discriminant breeding.” p. 46.

“Eugenic thus aims to seek out the root of our trouble…cleaning itself of inherent defects…hereditable taints…feeble-minded…breeding an ever-increasing army of under-sized, stuntedand dehumanized slaves…” p. 61.

Margaret Sanger believes that eugenics is necessary to stop, “Insanity, criminality and tuberculosis…” p. 63.

So how does Margaret Sanger want society stop this? “The…feeble-minded…should be…prevented from propagating their kind.” p. 63.

Sanger tells us, “We want, most of all, genius.” p. 64.

But, “Eugenics is chiefly valuable in its negative aspects.” p. 65.

“Eugenics…[with] clear thinking [will provide] the means to racial health.” p. 66.

“[R]ational selection must take the place of natural selection…” p. 71.

Margaret Sanger demands to stop “[T]he hypocrisy of the well-to-do, who are willing to contribute generously to charities and philosophies, who spend thousands annually in the upkeep and sustenance of the delinquent, the defective and the dependent…” p.73.

Margaret Sanger gives voice to the modern pro-abortion feminist, “Woman’s power can only be expressed …when she refuses the task of bringing unwanted children into the world…” p. 73.

Margaret Sanger provides marriage counseling, “More marriages fail from inadequate and clumsy sex love than from too much sex love.” p. 75.

New Age religion is not new. Margaret Sanger is a foremother to Shirley MacLaine. We need not look to “the illusion of some extra-terrestrial Heaven.” No, “The Kingdom of Heaven is in a very definite sense within us.”

Sanger opens Chapter X: Science the Ally begins by quoting Robert G. Ingersoll,

“Science must make woman the owner, the mistress of herself. Science [is] the only possible savior of mankind.” p. 78.

Margaret Sanger wants to, “Remove the moral taboos…[and] free the individual from the slavery of tradition.” p. 82.

“Our approach opens to us a fresh scale of values… [that] frees the mind of sexual prejudice and taboo.” p. 86.

Margaret Sanger says that people should all, “[A]wakened to the realization that the source of life, of happiness, is to be found not outside themselves, but within…” p. 94.

“Our great problem is… to remodel the race…” p. 95.

Margaret Sanger displays little empathy,

Every single case of inherited defect, every malformed child, every congenitally tainted human being brought into this world is of infinite importance to that poor individual; but it is of scarcely less importance to the rest of us and to all of our children who must pay in one way or another for these biological and racial mistakes. p.96.

Sanger has a spiritual mission and concludes in the same God-less, New Age religion reference as in her book Woman and the New Race, “[H]ere close at hand is our paradise…our Heavenly and our eternity…we must seek the secret of eternal life.” p. 97


Thank you (foot)notes:

[Update] The “progressive” philosophy of Margaret Sanger continues to this day. Alert (liberal) Reader milo9 writes, “I’m delightfully surprised that you’re wearing your greed on your sleeves [of requesting a donation to a non-profit]. Such honesty is rarely seen on the Right.” The Sanger premise that donations to charity are a misplaced greed is a tenet of the liberal mind-set.

Link photo credit to Jill Stanek and The Truth About Margaret Sanger.

Be sure to follow Your Business Blogger(R) and Charmaine on Twitter: @JackYoest and @CharmaineYoest

Jack and Charmaine also blog at Reasoned Audacity and at Management Training of DC, LLC.

This work of Margaret Sanger does not have a copyright. The page numbering is from The Echo Library 2006 edition, Complete text at the jump.

Jack Cashill has an outstanding review of The Pivot of Civilization in World Net Daily.

Read More

Americans United for Life Open Letter to Planned Parenthood, and Video Debate on CNN

December 8, 2009 | By | No Comments

Yoest and Richards debate abortion on CNN Charmaine has published an open letter to Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, in The Hill newspaper; must read in Your Nation’s Capital.

Here’s the full page letter. Let us know what you think.

aul action ad.pdf

Charmaine and Cecile debate on CNN.


Thank you (foot)notes:

Be sure to follow Your Business Blogger(R) and Charmaine on Twitter: @JackYoest and @CharmaineYoest

Cecile Richards runs Planned Parenthood founded by Margaret Sanger. See Sanger quotes in Woman and the New Race.

Charmaine Quoted in The Wall Street Journal; Planned Parenthood Forbids the Science of the Sonogram

Jack and Charmaine also blog at Reasoned Audacity and at Management Training of DC, LLC.

Help Wanted, Database Manager and Systems Administrator

October 3, 2009 | By | No Comments

Charmaine at Americans United for Life is looking for senior level talent. Please forward to a experienced management candidate.

Database Manager and Systems Administrator

Job Description

Americans United for Life (, the oldest national pro-life organization in the country, is looking to hire an experienced Database Manager/Systems Administrator to oversee database upgrades and expansion and to operate and administer its growing system and network as it expands its DC operations.

Candidate should have experience with building and managing network systems for a small to medium nonprofit, profit, association, or political organization with multiple locations.

Candidate should also have experience in database management of one or more of the above organizations.

Please send resume, salary requirements/history and cover letter to

Salary commensurate with experience.


Follow Your Business Blogger(R) and Charmaine on Twitter: @JackYoest and @CharmaineYoest

The Jerry Lewis Muscular Dystropy Telethon 2009

September 7, 2009 | By | No Comments

md_telethone_odu_first_1978_078.jpgYour Business Blogger‘s(R) misspent youth involved a number of all-nighters in college.

No, not studying.


So if the night was to be wasted and the students wasted, then it was thought that perhaps it all could be done for a good cause.

Your (much younger) Business Blogger(R) at the MDA Dance Marathon, 1978

We put on a dance marathon, the first Superdance, to raise money at ODU (aka Over Dose University). Back in the day, we raised some $15,102 for The Muscular Dystrophy Association and Jerry’s Kids.

Maybe it wasn’t such a waste of time…

It is not too late to make a pledge. Our family did.

It was easier than dancing all night.



LAS VEGAS, Sept. 3, 2007 — Jerry Lewis today made good on his annual promise to raise at least “one dollar more” for the fight against Muscular Dystrophy.

The Muscular Dystrophy Association’s 42nd Jerry Lewis Labor Day Telethon set a record of $63,759,478 in contributions and pledges, which will fund research, services and information for people with any of the neuromuscular diseases under MDA’s umbrella.

“I’m deeply grateful for the incredible generosity and support of the American public,” MDA National Chairman and Telethon star Jerry Lewis said. “Each year they outdo themselves in supporting our quest for cures for diseases that steal the strength — and the lives — of ‘my kids.’”

The first MDA Dance Marathon fund raiser at Old Dominion University was held in 1978.

From MDA,

The Telethon derives drama from the ever-increasing fundraising total posted on the “tote board” – operated originally by hand in 1966, now electronically. Jerry’s goal of raising “one dollar more” than the previous year’s total has been more than met almost every year, thanks to the generosity and compassion of the American public. Last year’s [2008] total was $65 million.

See The Anchoress “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark”

Follow on Twitter.

The Time Traveler’s Wife & Jeremiah & Longfellow

September 4, 2009 | By | No Comments

Charmaine_Yoest_aul_pub_shot_2009.jpgAmong pro-lifers the words of the ancient prophet Jeremiah have special meaning: ‘I knew you before I formed you in the womb.”

Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.

This tells us that our lives have a transcendent meaning, and sets a frame for all of our work on life. Those words rang in my memory after Jack and I recently went to see the hit summer movie, The Time Traveler’s Wife.

And while I certainly don’t endorse all of the movie’s values, I was drawn in by seeing a Hollywood movie where the title character is a wife.

(I should warn you though that my son, John, thought it was ‘the worst movie ever,” not enough explosions and car chases, I guess.)

Still, I thought the movie made a powerful pro-life statement. . . albeit entirely unintentional, I’m sure.

I’ll confess that I have always loved stories about time travel. I know I’m not the only one because it shows up so often as a plot device. Our fascination with breaking the confines of time reminds me of C.S. Lewis’ observation about the nature of man; he argues that there must be such a thing as “justice” because we feel so keenly outraged by “injustice”:

A man feels wet when he falls into water,

because man is not a water animal:

a fish would not feel wet.

-C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

We feel wet in water . . . and we feel uncomfortable with the passage of time (“Look how you’ve grown!”) because we are eternal beings experiencing a temporal life.

I believe that’s why we are drawn to stories about time travel. . . and particularly those about a love that transcends time. Because it speaks to the deeper reality of eternity that we recognize with some part of our souls. “I knew you. . .

The Time Traveler’s Wife is billed as a love story, and it is. But in many ways, the love story at the heart of the tale is the bond between the couple and their daughter. The scene that stays with me is one where the wife, Clare, pregnant with their daughter, is taking a bath.

Her husband Henry suddenly returns from time-traveling where he has just been with their daughter, ten years in the future. Clare has suffered several miscarriages, so she worries about carrying the baby to term. . . Having now met their daughter, Henry can reassure her.

‘She’s beautiful, Clare,’ he tells her.

Surprised, Clare looks with wonder toward her very advanced pregnancy and says, “You’ve met her?”

They laugh together with joy, with the knowledge that the very same unborn baby with them that day lives in the future as the vibrant ten-year-old that Henry has just met. They knew their daughter, even before they’d met her in real time.

It’s fanciful. But it also reflects a truth about the unique, timeless, value of each life.

My father used to tell me that before my birth I was “a twinkle in my mother’s eye.”


Similarly, our son James, the youngest of our five children, sometimes asks where he was when he sees the pictures of our family before he was born. We tell him he was an angel in heaven watching and waiting his turn to join the family and increase the fun. The notion reassures him that he has always been a part of our family, unbounded by time and space.

This weekend we’ll be packing up the kids in the Suburban and heading south to North Carolina to visit Jack’s mom.

Helena, Sarah and James Yoest

I imagine many of you will be doing something similar.

As we turn our attention to family and friends this weekend, I wanted to take a minute just to thank you for standing with us and enabling us to defend life together.

First thing Tuesday we’ll be back in the fray as Congress returns and health care reform is at the top of the agenda. The President will be giving a major address on health care on Wednesday and the following week we’ll be meeting with his Domestic Policy Advisor at the White House to talk about the abortion mandate in health care. So we will be ready to run hard again next week and the AUL legal team will have new material for you on Tuesday. We’ll be back quickly to our usual policy focus.

But in the meantime, as we slow down for the Labor Day holiday, it’s worth taking a few minutes together to reflect on why we persevere in this fight. Even Hollywood tells the truth when they want to tell a good story. As Longfellow penned in his Psalm of Life:

Life is real! Life is earnest!

And the grave is not its goal;

Dust thou art, to dust returnest,

Was not spoken of the soul.

Life is real. And it’s worth defending.

Thank you for joining me in working to protect and defend life!

Yours For Life,

Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D.

President & CEO

PS: Let me know what you think: you can ‘follow” me on Twitter and Facebook. You can also ‘follow’ AUL on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube! We’re also reachable by email at

Media Alert: Charmaine Quoted in National Journal, Internet Impact on the Supreme Court Nomination

May 14, 2009 | By | No Comments

Amy Harder, writing at the National Journal, interviewed Charmaine on the on-line battle on the up-coming Supreme Court Nomination. Also see nice quote from David All.

Online SCOTUS Rumble Sets Stage For Nomination Fight

Interest Groups And Media Observers Weigh In On What Influence The Internet Will Have On Upcoming High Court Battle, by Amy Harder, Thursday, May 14, 2009,

Americans United For Life says it has already seen an overwhelming response from its online supporters in discussions anticipating a nominee. “We had to upgrade the back end of our computer operation because we’ve seen such an outpouring of interest being more active on these issues,” said Charmaine Yoest, the anti-abortion group’s president. Her organization echoes a common concern on the right that Obama will nominate a judicial activist who will trigger a “dramatic shift in public understanding of the role of the courts,” Yoest said. “When you go down the path of accepting judicial activism as the norm, that dramatically increases the amount of power judges have.”

Yoest said her group will be ready to go right out of the gate once a nominee is announced. She said its “robust” online advocacy program, Facebook community and new IT system will mean “better, faster and cheaper” communication with supporters. “We’re ready whenever they bring it out,” she said. “There won’t be a huge delay.”

Charmaine predicts that the next Supreme Court Justice nominee will be a woman. a pro-choice, abortion advocate. See the AUL analysis here.

See Charmaine’s writing on “The Woman’s Chair.”

Tiny URL:

Follow us on Twitter: @JackYoest @CharmaineYoest