Tuesday, June 27, 2023


By Tim Rohr

Guam's abortion situation is national news...once again, this time in a New York Times story (or here) dated yesterday, June 26, 2023, and titled:

In Isolated Guam, Abortion Is Legal. And Nearly Impossible to Get.

Apparently the writer and the photographer personally visited Guam and one has to wonder why such a big outfit as the New York Times would send two people to little ol' Guam to do this story.

Given how the story goes, with the typical beating up of the Catholic Church, this thing sounds all too familiar and smells very similar to how two doctors from Hawaii suddenly took an interest in Guam, got licensed here, and then sued us with the help of the ACLU. 

A FOIA by the Vigilance Committee turned up evidence that the whole deal with the Hawaii docs and the ACLU was a setup by our own governor with the help of her abortion lieutenant, Jayne Flores, and her taxpayer funded Bureau of Women's Affairs. 

So the Times story stinks the same. It smells like the Times people were "invited" by "someone." It smells even funnier given that the writer, a David Chen, is a sports business writer for the Times:
David W. Chen reports on the business of sports, investigating the corporate, non-profit, and government players with skin in the games. - (byline at the end of the story)

Before I dismantle the story and its laughable cliches, I'm thinking of the bright side of this constant johnny-one-note attack on the Catholic Church relative to this issue, especially since there is absolutely no evidence, here on the ground in Guam, that the local Catholic Church carries any weight on any issue, abortion or otherwise. 

The bright side is that these guys, the pro-aborts, have nothing else. They have no argument to support, justify, promote in any sort of sane way, the killing of the unborn. So all they have is attack, attack, attack. And the most convenient whipping boy is the Catholic Church, not because of anything the Catholic Church actually teaches, but because all too many Catholics are all too willing to "walk into this." In case you're wondering what I mean, Merriam-Webster has a definition for "walk into:"

to become involved in or fooled by (something) because one is not aware of what is really happening

Here is an example from the story:

In an interview at the chancery of the Archdiocese of Agana, where Pope John Paul II stayed overnight in 1981, Father Romeo Convocar, the apostolic administrator, said that abortion pills obtained by telemedicine is now one of his biggest concerns.

Umm, so what did "the pope slept here" have to do with the story other than to further caricature Guam as a rabid Catholic enclave where women are chained to stoves and impregnated against their will? And why did Fr. Convocar even give these jokers an interview? That's a real "walk into this." Seriously, don't even talk to these people. Let them write their stupid stories but don't let them use you to do it.

But more seriously: "abortion pills" are the "concern?" Really? How about a governor who proudly presents herself for communion at our cathedral while radically pursuing every possible avenue to propagate abortion in the community she governs? Is that a "concern?"

What about what's going on in our local Catholic churches and schools that has produced a mentality like the governor's and the thousands of abortions procured by women who identify themselves as Chamorro and who are most likely Catholic? 

And there's this:

"Lou also attributes her becoming pro-choice to her Catholic education…The pro-choice advocates drew strength from the encouragement received behind the scenes from other women, including nuns, who could not express their support publicly…" - Vivian Loyola Dames, in “Chamorro Women, Self-Determination, and the Politics of Abortion on Guam,” (Asian/Pacific Islander American Women - A Historical Anthology, Pg. 375.)

And this:

"(Lourdes) Leon Guerrero recalled that in the 1990s she had Catholic nuns confiding in her their personal understandings of her position. The nuns were adamant about not agreeing with abortion, but they understood the necessity for accessibility as they saw first hand women who had children that were neglected and abused." - A HISTORY OF ACTIVISM OF THE GUAMANIAN WOMEN’S SOCIAL MOVEMENT: FROM THE FOURTH WORLD CONFERENCE ON WOMEN IN BEIJING 1995 TO PRESENT, A final paper by BREANNA G. LAI, January 2016, Pg. 48

I'm having a difficult time trying to get my head to stop shaking but let's move on to the other stupid stuff in this story:

...a pending court case could soon cut off access to abortion pills, the last way for most women on Guam to get legal abortions.

This statement is referring to the ACLU telemedicine suit which is not about abortion pills but about the in-person counseling requirement. There is not a single thing stopping any doctor, or nurse, or "qualified person" (including the governor herself - an RN) from providing the in-person consultation required by law before distributing the death pills. And as far as I know, the requirement remains enjoined by the District Court and any challenge to the injunction appears to be as dead in the water as the babies will be in their amniotic sac once mommy gets her pills in the mail. 

“Guam is a litmus test,” said the territory’s attorney general, Douglas Moylan, a Republican who opposes abortion. “If anti-abortion forces were to succeed anywhere in the United States, I would say Guam would be one of them.”

Once "they" say "Republican," you know exactly where they're going. After the Catholic Church, the next available whipping boy is a "Republican." Beyond that, Doug is wrong. Save for a once a year "wave" and a few folks with signs here and there, there is NOTHING to support Doug's view and much to support the opposite, including the election and re-election of a governor who is Guam's most public and vehement advocate of abortion ever. 

A streak of anti-abortion sentiment runs through Guam, and there are other attempts to further restrict the procedure.

Once again, a big LOL. Said "streak" is a few folks with signs who appear for an hour or two on weekends. (Thank you to them, by the way.) And there are no thunderous lectures from the pulpit. We heard more about the evils of gambling from our church pulpits than we've ever heard about abortion. 

Abortion has long been a taboo topic in Pacific island communities; about 80 percent of Guam’s inhabitants are Catholic, reflecting the island’s Spanish colonial past.

Okay, here we go. False, false, false. While it might be "a taboo topic" - I mean who in the heck talks about their abortion at happy hour anyway - said "taboo" has done nothing to staunch the local appetite for it. (See graphic above - abortion by ethnicity.)

William Freeman, the last doctor who performed abortions when he left Guam, said that when he first arrived on the island 39 years ago, seven doctors performed abortions, and “phone calls threatening to kill us or blow us up” were routine.

Oh, poor Willy. Meanwhile, said "threats" didn't slow him down. He and his buddy, Griley, knocked off hundreds of Guam babies a year for more than thirty years leaving their bodies to rot in dumpsters right in the heart of Tamuning.

Famalao’an Rights, a reproductive rights nonprofit founded in 2019, stepped up its organizing in 2022 when the proposed six-week ban was gaining traction. A legislative committee’s 2,200-page report on the bill crackled with anguished emails and handwritten letters from the public, mostly opposing the ban.

Well then that pretty much upends everything the writer has written so far, doesn't it? The "ban" is in reference to the fetal heartbeat bill. And it's true, opposition to the ban and support for abortion was monstrously overwhelming - demonstrating as has been demonstrated time and time again: GUAM IS OVERWHELMINGLY PRO-ABORTION and has been for decades.  In fact, self-styled history gurus like Bevacqua lecture us as to how abortion is an indigenous practice. So where's that "streak of anti-abortion sentiment?" 

And, given the overwhelming support for abortion in Guam, why won't any of our more than 300 doctors - some of whom have publicly advocated for abortion - do them? In fact, the doctors don't even have to perform abortions, they only have to meet with the prospective patient, go through a checklist, and hand the patient an informational pamphlet. The Hawaii doctors will do the rest. This is the "in-person requirement" that is what the ACLU lawsuit is all about. 

But no one will even do that, not even the governor who as a registered nurse is a "qualified person" pursuant to the informed consent law. Here's a tip governor, instead of spending tens of thousands of our tax dollars trying to recruit abortionists or conspiring to get the ACLU to sue us, spend a few minutes a week with women seeking an abortion and do the in-person stuff so your friends in Hawaii can mail them their damn pills.

(Note: Just my opinion, but I'm thinking that having a battering ram to beat up on the Catholic Church is more important to the pro-aborts than actually providing abortions or even the required information. Should even one doctor or qualified person provide such service, the pro-aborts would lose their stage to scream at the Church - as demonstrated in stories like the present one.)

The Dobbs decision was demoralizing for the activists, who are bracing for more anti-abortion bills and preparing to help women obtain abortions, even if it means breaking the law.

Umm, there is no law to break. Guam remains, as it has always been, one of the easiest places in the nation to procure an abortion. Even the few laws we do have are never enforced. And fat chance we'll get that injunction lifted on PL 20-134. We've already pretty much blown that opportunity. And even fatter chance we'll get anyone in the legislature to even touch this issue. 

Yah, they passed that heartbeat bill, but not because they wanted to. They passed it because it was politically safe to do so. They already knew the governor would veto it and that there wouldn't be the votes to override the veto. So they could safely vote for the bill to say "hey, look at me, I'm pro-life" while knowing the bill would never become law and Guam women could go right on killing their babies. 

In late April, she (Sharon O'Mallan) and Agnes White, a nurse, pointed to a billboard that they had helped to create: “Healing the pain of abortion — one weekend at a time.” The goal, they said, was to recruit women who had abortions to attend a confidential counseling retreat sponsored by an international religious group that opposes abortion.

This is one of the most ridiculous and tell-tale "reaches" by the writer. O'Mallan and White are not - in this context - opposing abortion, they are supporting an outreach to women who have already had an abortion and who may need help in healing. But somehow that's a bad thing. Really? Helping women who have suffered trauma is a bad thing? This slap at O'Mallan and White really clues us in to what the writer was after - or more than likely, told to go after, especially since said writer has to insert that the counseling is "sponsored by an international religious group." Had to fit religion in there somewhere, right?

Women on Guam said they have already been dealing with the difficulty and stigma of abortion for years.

Well, we can tell the guy who wrote this story is a sports writer and not much more. Otherwise, he wouldn't have included that bit about massive opposition to the heartbeat bill and then try to come back to this stigma B.S. What an amateur. Come on governor, you can do better. 

Happy Tingson was working as a hotel housekeeper in 2015, when she became pregnant. She told only two people: her best friend, Rhea Patino, and her boyfriend at the time. “Not a single smile on his face,” said Ms. Tingson, who was comforted by Ms. Patino and another friend when she became emotional during an interview at her sister’s house. “He was pretty much saying, ‘It’s not the right time for us to have it, we’re not financially stable,’ ” Ms. Tingson said.

Well then maybe it wasn't "the right time" for you to be having sex with your boyfriend, was it? But then "her boyfriend at the time," (AT THE TIME) may not have kept that "smile on his face" had you said "NO." Keep those boyfriends smiling, Happy! (That's her name.)

“They said the fact that you came from Guam, and had to fly out here — it’s so sad, because you have no clinic out there,” Ms. Pitino, now 32, recalled. “That’s so dangerous. How can they do that to you guys?”

Yes, how can "they" do that? How can those doctors and other "qualified persons" who write letters to the editor, give speeches at Rotary clubs, and passionately testify at public hearings in favor of abortion, including your own governor, force you to "fly out here?" 

That's who the "they" are. It's not "the church," it's not the laws (which are never enforced), and it's not some stupid stigma. The "they" are all the docs and qualified persons who openly, publicly, and usually vehemently cry "how can they do that to you," and then "do that to you" by refusing to provide the services "they" say you have a right to.

Well, "they" had no problem getting the Times people to "fly out here." I wonder where they stayed. Maybe the 19th floor?

No comments:

Post a Comment