Associated Press Stylebook Proves Pro-Choice Bias

From: jsmith@ctpost.com
To: AfterAbortionBlog@yahoo.com, jsmith@ctpost.com, swinters@ctpost.com, mdaly@ctpost.com
Subject: RE: Seven World-Renowned, Peer-Reviewed, Cancer Journals All Can't Be Wrong (incl. Journal of the Natl Cancer Inst, JNCI)
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 14:19:13 -0700

>Ms. Banno,
The AP Stylebook states: "Use anti-abortion instead of pro-life and abortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice." The Ap sometimes vilates [sic] it [sic] own style.
Yours,
Jim Smith

My reply:

Jim, The AP uses "NARAL Pro-Choice America," the title of that organization, without changing it to "NARAL Abortion Rights America," which is exactly why AP "vilated" its own stylebook in this article as the title of the organization which Deirdre McQuade was director of planning and information for is "Pro-Life Activities at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops." (see http://www.usccb.org/prolife/intro.htm ).

Your paper's bias is still proven by this switch. And about 100 Connecticut Post readers plus all the state's legislators and executive branch officials now know it.

Yet you amazingly still refuse to admit it. And furthermore, you really seem to think we're stupid enough to believe it is just a stylebook issue. You insult me, Jim.

Jim, how do you sleep at night? You post columns with blatant lies from Ellen Goodman (one of which we forced her to print a retraction column about already), in which she still denies long-standing breast-cancer-expert research AND research from pro-choice researchers even, in peer-reviewed medical journals even in today's column.

Did you know that the American Psychological Association actually listed abortion as a cause of PTSD for seven years, in its diagnostic disorders manual DSM-III-R? It did, and you can get your own copy used from Amazon as I did to prove it. Do you know how hard it is to get anything put in that manual?

Did you know that over 25,000 women have attended Rachel's Vineyard retreats alone in the past several years, to recover from the depression brought on by their legal abortions? And that they're just one of a dozen abortion recovery services worldwide? Do you think it's merely "all in our heads," Jim?

Are you going to print my letter? Or are you going to prove me right, that you and this paper really don't care if women increase their breast cancer risk from oral contraceptives? Lawsuits have already been filed by women who had abortions and weren't informed of those risks in advance. Lawsuits that have been won. I don't advocate for litigation, but it's happening, sadly, and it will only start to happen more and more.

There is a whole world of women out here recovering as best they can from the physical and emotional damage of abortion and birth control, and you neither know nor care a whit about it.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.

Annie Banno

My letter to the editor which prompted his transparent reply follows:

March 13, 2006
James Smith, Michael Daly, Stephen Winters
Editors, Connecticut Post, 410 State Street, Bridgeport, CT 06604

Dear Mssrs. Smith, Daly, Winters,

Your bias and your ignorance are showing, Connecticut Post. You perhaps can be forgiven the former, but the latter contributes to costing more women their lives from increased breast cancer risks and earlier deaths. I fear you won’t print this letter as you lack the intestinal fortitude. It could be why, since Mr. Smith became Editor, this paper refused to print my eight letters on abortion issues. Even Smith's predecessor, who disagreed with me heartily, didn’t suppress my voice or my reporting of facts such as these as Smith has done.

Recently we read editorial mocking disdain because some, myself included, accused The Post of being predominantly left-leaning and liberal. Now there’s proof of The Post's ideology-driven reporting. The Post changed—without attribution—Associated Press reporter Susan Haigh’s phrase "pro life" to "anti-abortion" in the Mar. 13th article "Connecticut hospitals wrestle with contraception." [not available online, naturally!] The Post nervelessly omitted its usual "both AP and local reporters contributed" postscript.

In The Post’s version, it reads, "Deirdre McQuade, director of planning and information for anti-abortion activities at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops…" but the actual Associated Press version instead uses "pro life."

However, this paper’s ignorance of the health damage done to women by oral contraceptives is unconscionable and the worse of your two errors. Of eleven (11) published research studies from 1986-2005 (conclusions shown below) that found increased cervical cancer, fatal blood clot and breast cancer risks from using birth control pills (oral contraceptives), not one source is from an "anti-abortion, anti-contraception" source. All came from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), official IARC press releases, WebMD or other unbiased, objective science periodicals.

Seven world-renowned, peer-reviewed, medical journals all can't be wrong.

And since, according to a national licensed pharmacists organization, Morning After Pills are typically "10-20 times the progesterone" and "5 times" the estrogen as in the standard daily Pill, it’s possible that this "very high dose" of the same hormones can increase these health risks even more.

That has never been studied. If you don’t print this letter, it
means The Connecticut Post thinks it shouldn’t be studied. And it means you think we ought to continue to risk victimizing rape victims twice and also do the same to our under-16 daughters and granddaughters who could buy it without a prescription and take it like aspirin if certain Connecticut and U.S. politicians had their way.