Stanek answers Focus on the Family’s “Friday 5” questions
Two weeks ago Focus on the Family’s Citizen Link premiered “an ongoing series of interviews with newsmakers of interest to pro-family Americans. The format is simple: Five questions and answers every Friday.”
I was honored to be asked to answer the Friday 5 last week. You can read them on page 2.
Focus on the Family Citizen Link
Friday Five: Jill Stanek
by Jennifer Mesko, associate editor
A life-changing event catapulted her into the pro-life movement, and now she’s obsessed with it.
(Editor’s Note: This is the second in our series of Friday interviews with people of interest to family advocates. The format is simple: five questions every Friday.)
When Planned Parenthood tried to sneak an abortion clinic into suburban Chicago this year, it forgot to do its homework on local life advocate Jill Stanek. She, along with thousands of other pro-lifers, helped to delay the opening of the nation’s largest abortion clinic for 14 days.
Eight years ago, Stanek was minding her own business, working as a nurse on the southwest side of Chicago. In a moment, her life changed, and she’s been championing the life movement since. In January 2003, World magazine named her one of the 30 most prominent pro-life leaders of the past 30 years.
Stanek is a weekly columnist for WorldNetDaily and a public speaker on life issues. She told her story to CitizenLink.
1. What led you to the pro-life movement, and what keeps you so involved?
I was not actively involved in the pro-life movement, just somebody on the sidelines, until I held a live aborted baby, in my capacity as a registered nurse at Christ Hospital on the southwest side of Chicago, in 1999. The hospital was involved in an abortion procedure called induced-labor abortion. One night, a nursing co-worker was taking one of the live aborted babies to our soiled utility room to die, so I held him for 45 minutes until he died. He was a little baby who had Down syndrome. He was between 21 and 22 weeks old.
Obviously, that was a life-changing event. It instantly catapulted me into becoming a pro-life activist, which I heretofore had thought were pro-life ‘crazies.’ My life segued after that into pro-life apologetics, both speaking and in writing, and I do that full time. I was just an instant convert to the movement. I think about it all the time. I’m obsessed by it, I admit it. I wake up thinking about it. I think about it all day long. I think about it when I go to bed. Sometimes, I have nightmares about it.
2. Explain induced-labor abortion.
The procedure was not known publicly before that time. This is an abortion procedure that’s very often used with moms carrying wanted babies who find out through second-trimester testing that their babies are handicapped in some way. It involves dilating the cervix, before 23 weeks usually, and the baby just falls out of the uterus.
This is an abortion technique that is favored by doctors in hospitals because they don’t have to be actively involved in this abortion. It’s a ‘medical abortion.’ They can relegate. They don’t have to be present when the baby is delivered. They don’t have to get their hands dirty. This allows them to covertly be involved in abortion, not actively kill the baby, because the baby, they say, dies ‘naturally.’
3. For 14 days, Planned Parenthood was kept from opening the nation’s largest abortion clinic. Tell me why that’s significant and what lessons you learned.
This Aurora Planned Parenthood debacle was significant for a lot of reasons. Planned Parenthood built this clinic under cloak of darkness. They created a front company called Gemini Office Development that was deceptive with the city of Aurora, saying they did not know who was going to occupy the building. They were only caught in July.
This kind of created a chink in Planned Parenthood’s armor, because no one likes to be scammed. Even ‘pro-choicers’ don’t like to be hoodwinked. Even if you are ‘pro-choice,’ no one likes an abortion clinic in their backyard. Whenever there were any protests, there would be, literally, a thousand pro-lifers and maybe 17 abortion proponents. I’m sure they (abortion supporters) have trouble getting people to sacrifice a Saturday, or a weeknight, to promote sacrificing children.
The lesson from Aurora really started as a lesson we got in Austin, Texas, back in 2003, when Chris Danze, a concrete contractor, pulled a boycott. He was able to get contractors and workers not to help build a clinic, and that is the reason that Planned Parenthood decided to go stealth with their future buildings. We weren’t entirely successful (in Texas), because I think we only held them up for eight months. But that taught pro-lifers a lesson: On the local level, pro-lifers wield huge influence.
They have so much power that they don’t understand that they have. The power for the pro-aborts is basically in Washington, D.C., and New York. But pro-aborts do not have what we have. In every county, just about, in the United States, there is a pro-life organization. I think there’s a tool we’ve been underusing, and that is ourselves — doing something in our own communities to discourage abortion, discourage abortion clinics, put a stigma on abortion — and also to encourage life.
4. Do you think Americans’ attitudes on abortion are changing?
Definitely. Abortion proponents thought in 1973, ‘OK. It’s settled. It’s legal. And now go away.’ It’s been almost 35 years, and there’s still a tremendous stigma attached with abortion, which will never go away, which only shows that abortion is wrong. They cannot make it into a good thing. Also, 3D and 4D ultrasound has made a huge difference. They can no longer say, and they do no longer say, that preborn babies are blobs of tissue.
It’s becoming something that we’re winning. And these kids that are coming up are important. Anybody under the age of 35 is an abortion survivor, and these kids are conservative on their beliefs on abortion. They know that they’ve had siblings aborted. They’ve had friends that aren’t here because they’ve been aborted.
5. This year, finally, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the partial-birth abortion ban. What do you see as the next battlefront for the pro-life movement?
The Born Alive Infants Protection Act says that any baby born alive — no matter what gestational age, no matter what reason, aborted or not — is a legal person. It doesn’t have any penalties attached to it, and that is one reason it has become difficult to enforce.
Born Alive passed unanimously in the Senate, passed overwhelmingly in the House. Everybody just went along with it, and hoped that by going along with it, it would not get a lot of publicity and kind of die away. And it really has.
I wish the pro-life movement would go back and look at the Born Alive Act, and really work harder on seeing that enforced. It would be such an easy law to get public approval on and to really spotlight the atrocity of abortion.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
To learn more about Jill Stanek, or to invite her to speak in your area, visit her blog.
(NOTE: Referral to Web sites not produced by Focus on the Family is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites’ content.)



Whoop whoop! Congrats Jill!
Great responses!
Congratulations, Jill! Very nicely done, too!
Thank you, all… :)
I have to thank you back, however. Much of what I said to FOTF came to me after having read your comments and answering your questions.
Jill,
I was raised on a ranch and know what it feels like to hold a baby animal that you know is dying in your arms until the end. As hard as that is, I CANNOT IMAGINE having that same experience with a little human who’s just been discarded for not being perfect….my baby brother was born with a genetic retinal tumor that eventually killed him after 6 long years of unsuccessful treatments. He was blind, severely underweight from Chemo, and his face was disfigured from surgery, but he was an angel on earth and touched everyone who met him. I am 37 now (he passed away when I was 9-he was 6) and I still think of him nearly every day. I have so many memories of those precious 6 years that I cannot imagine having been robbed of the opportunity to know him. The loss still affects me deeply, but I cannot fathom life without those memories
Ya done good, Jill. Done good. :)
T, nice story.
Jill,
Great job! (you so pretty!)
T,
Very touching story…I’m tearing up!
Anonymous at October 8, 2007 2:15 PM
—————-
Sorry…that was me..I forgot to fill in the data!
Hi Jacque and PL Laura. *waves*
Hi Heather! *wavin’ back*
Jill, great job.
Heather! *waves back* How’s it going, gorgeous?
T –
What a wonderful story.
My cousin adopted a baby boy who was a “crack baby”. He had all kinds of medical problems. He could never really swallow so he was fed through a tube. He never rolled over or crawled. He never spoke by using his vocal chords. Many would say he should have been euthenized because “they wouldn’t want to live that way”. He was an angel who touched so many people’s hearts in his little 5 1/2 years of life. He was loved by us and he loved us back. What he couldn’t say, we saw in his face. What he wanted, we saw in his body language. When he wanted a hug he would hold his hands up and no one ever refused him a hug! He had the biggest blue eyes I’ve ever seen. My cousin got a picture of those blue eyes when he went to go see The Wiggles in concert. The 4 Wiggles made a big deal about him being there too. Everyone applauded. Why could they applaud one minute and the next say euthenasia is best in these circumstances?
I’m curious, did your Mom get the phone call from heaven?
Oops –
Great job Jill!
It was not a phone call but a dream several days after he died…..he did not even look exactly like my son but I knew it was him and he was “ageless”, not a child but not really an adult either….and he told me that he was happy and he could run like everyone else now because he could see. That was all I needed to know.
Hey–who invited my mom?!!
HI MOM! :)
Dang both of you T and T’s mom (aka my mom to) Now you got me crying at work! Do you have any idea how hard that is to stop when I’m already oozing from a cold! Great interview by the way too.
A lot of us were crying at work this morning.
We saw something horrifying.
It’s Balloon Fiesta time here. The launch site is just north of the place that I work. A bunch of us were out watching the launch this morning waving and shouting out to the balloonists going overhead as they were still very low. One of the balloons had a propane tank go out and attempted to land. The gondola got stuck on an optical line and was frighteningly tllted. A chase vehicle arrived and attempted to secure a guidewire to lower the balloon to the ground. The wire snapped and the balloon rose as it tilted enough to throw a woman out of the gondola. We saw her go hurtling to the ground. She died instantly. The balloon rose but without the faulty propane tank could not sufficiently inflate the envelope and the gondola came crashing to the ground. Two people were scratched and bruised. Two have broken limbs.
I’ve never been up in a balloon and I never will now.
T’s-Mom,
That’s good stuff… Really good.
Joe
Watch this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seBi-QwRQQE
Thank you for tht video, flynn! Sally, I am so sorry to hear that. How awful!
flynn, The first time I watched the video, I did so with the volume off. I watched it again. I love that song! Isn’t that done by Flypside? It makes me tear up.
Yes, heather, only I believe he spells it Flipsyde. yes, it put a lump in my throat and a tear in my eye, too…and gives me some ideas…on that same theme, check out this link for another really poignant song: http://prolifetraining.com/MP3/BlueEyes.htm
Sally, what a terrible thing to witness. I am very sorry.
Sally,
I am so sorry that that happened, and that you witnessed it; it is a horrible thing to see someone perish and be helpless to stop it.
Be gentle with yourself for awhile; you are in my prayers, as are your co-workers, the woman’s survivors, and the others who were hurt.
Yes, that would definitely alter my perception of balloon flying, too; risks ought always to be weighed against the dangers of the alternative…
Take care
Sally, where did this happen? flynn, Yes. It is spelled Flipsyde. Thank you for the other post. The picture of the dead baby[first video] really bothers me.
Sally, what a terrible thing to witness. I am very sorry.
Posted by: Carrie at October 8, 2007 7:33 PM
………………………………
Thank you Carrie. I feel for the woman’s family. The pilot of the balloon and the woman’s friends that witnessed her death and came so very close to the same end.
Go Jill go. Tell us all about how aborting an embryo is just like watching a 60 year old woman diving to the ground from 70 feet head first and meeting the ground, splattering her fully developed brain full of knowledge and memories to oblivion.
Abortion is exactly the same eh?
Sally, what you witnessed was tragic. It took place before your very eyes. Abortion is also tragic. It just takes place behind closed doors, and it’s a dirty secret. I imagine if you had ever seen an aborted baby on a shelf, you just might think that both events were equally tragic.
Jill,
Great job with the 5 questions. And thank you for explaining the induced labor abortion so clearly. I have a question, you’d like to see pro-lifers, “…really work harder on seeing that [BAIPA] enforced.
Can you explain that further? How would we go about doing that? By state legislation?
Thanks.
Sally,
I’m so sorry you had to witness such a tragic accident.
I could see how you would think that this tragedy doesn’t compare with aborting an embryo, if you were looking at it only from the standpoint of what you can see or how you might experience a person. But I think there are two levels going on here.
Like I just mentioned, how we experience the particular human being. The more “developed” they are, where we can love them, talk to them, see them, know that they are loved, etc. is only one level.
But the other level is simply that he or she is a LIFE. She is the same person as an embryo as she will be riding in a hot-air balloon. Regarless of whether we can see her, know her, love her, etc., she still exists. She has an inalienable right to continue living and not have anyone destroy her life. Yes, she is definitely easier to kill and to ignore that she is human because she doesn’t “look” like us or speak or hear or have consciousness yet, but that’s not the point. The point is that that human being has been created and no one, not even a mother, has the right to take her life away.
I think in philosophy they call this accident and substance, and at least I think they apply hear; though I am no philospher.
You are only looking at it from the standpoint of the physical, of what YOU can experience. We consider the fact that no matter what WE experience about that human being, it is their life, and no one has the right to take it away.
So yes, if in one way you are right, seeing someone fall from a balloon in a tragic accident is so much worse than knowing an embryo has been destroyed, based on OUR experience. But at a different level, both are tragic because each life was tragically cut short when it deserved to continue on until a natural death.
“they apply hear…”
ooops, I meant “here”
Goodness, Sally, what an awful thing to witness. I’m so sorry you had to see that. I’m so sorry for that poor woman.
Go Jill go. Tell us all about how aborting an embryo is just like watching a 60 year old woman diving to the ground from 70 feet head first and meeting the ground, splattering her fully developed brain full of knowledge and memories to oblivion.
Abortion is exactly the same eh?
Yes!
Actually, abortion is worse because at least with the woman you saw, it was an accidental death. No one planned to kill her. It happened purely by chance. As tragic as her death was, if you’re going to compare it to abortion, it is actually less tragic, because at least she was given the option to do something (getting into the baloon) that she was aware could cost her her life. The unborn child has no such choice and is killed without his or her consent or without a way to fight back or protect him/herself.
Ellie, great post!!
Sally, I have a question for you. Is it less tragic for a newborn baby to be killed, than a 30 year old woman?
Sally, what you witnessed was tragic. It took place before your very eyes. Abortion is also tragic. It just takes place behind closed doors, and it’s a dirty secret. I imagine if you had ever seen an aborted baby on a shelf, you just might think that both events were equally tragic.
Posted by: heather at October 8, 2007 8:01 PM
………………………..
Honey, I witnessed the death of a person. It wouldn’t be the first time. You haven’t witnessed death or experienced much of anything or you wouldn’t have such unsuportable crap to say.
And it speaks much about you that you expressed nothing over the death of the woman who’s death I witnessed. Oh what? Your PL moronic idiots couldn’t find quite the spin to make it worth news?
Or how about a toddler?
“Your PL moronic idiots ”
Sally, watch the direct insults. Your posts can be deleted if you can’t use some discretion.
T and T’s mom…. I have tears in my eyes. How special you are….
Sally,
I’m so sorry you had to witness such a tragic accident.
I could see how you would think that this tragedy doesn’t compare with aborting an embryo, if you were looking at it only from the standpoint of what you can see or how you might experience a person. But I think there are two levels going on here.
Like I just mentioned, how we experience the particular human being. The more “developed” they are, where we can love them, talk to them, see them, know that they are loved, etc. is only one level.
But the other level is simply that he or she is a LIFE. She is the same person as an embryo as she will be riding in a hot-air balloon. Regarless of whether we can see her, know her, love her, etc., she still exists. She has an inalienable right to continue living and not have anyone destroy her life. Yes, she is definitely easier to kill and to ignore that she is human because she doesn’t “look” like us or speak or hear or have consciousness yet, but that’s not the point. The point is that that human being has been created and no one, not even a mother, has the right to take her life away.
I think in philosophy they call this accident and substance, and at least I think they apply hear; though I am no philospher.
You are only looking at it from the standpoint of the physical, of what YOU can experience. We consider the fact that no matter what WE experience about that human being, it is their life, and no one has the right to take it away.
So yes, if in one way you are right, seeing someone fall from a balloon in a tragic accident is so much worse than knowing an embryo has been destroyed, based on OUR experience. But at a different level, both are tragic because each life was tragically cut short when it deserved to continue on until a natural death.
Posted by: Ellie at October 8, 2007 8:37 PM
Damn that is so talking out of both sides of your mouth. Either death is tragic or god’s plan. You folks wish to decide which is which. Playing god you just further yourself away from humanity. A need for supremecy spawned by a lack of empathy. Sociopathy. Religiosity has been the spawn of the saddist murders outside of the military.
Damn that is so talking out of both sides of your mouth. Either death is tragic or god’s plan. You folks wish to decide which is which. Playing god you just further yourself away from humanity. A need for supremecy spawned by a lack of empathy. Sociopathy. Religiosity has been the spawn of the saddist murders outside of the military.
Death is tragic. If you knew your Bible, Sally, you would know that Death is not God’s plan. God’s plan is victory over death.
Sally,
Everyone was very sympathetic to what you witnessed. Why are you hurling insults? Not that I think you’re trying to win anyone to your side but if you are, you aren’t going to accomplish it this way.
Actually, abortion is worse because at least with the woman you saw, it was an accidental death. No one planned to kill her. It happened purely by chance. As tragic as her death was, if you’re going to compare it to abortion, it is actually less tragic, because at least she was given the option to do something (getting into the baloon) that she was aware could cost her her life. The unborn child has no such choice and is killed without his or her consent or without a way to fight back or protect him/herself.
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 8:57 PM
………………….
God planned to kill her right in front of a skip load of children to prove the evilness of hot air balloons and their sexual implications. @@ Crash and die you bloody minded fools. Emotionaly, spiritually and mentally of course. : ) Puke.
Sally,
You just don’t get it. I was not in any way saying that what you experienced, especially what the woman experienced, wasn’t tragic; it is! It’s horrible!
I was merely pointing out that there is another level that has nothing to do with what we experience.
My understanding is that substance is the human being that is created at conception. The accidents are the things that change about that person…the size, color of hair, skin, eyes, whether they can walk, talk, or hear, whether they are smart, funny, pro-life, pro-chocie, homely, beautiful, etc.
You care only about accidents because it’s all you can see/experience. You are totally ingoring that there is substance….that no matter how that human being changes, no matter how anyone else can experience her, she is and always will be the same person.
Sally,
I am so sorry that that happened, and that you witnessed it; it is a horrible thing to see someone perish and be helpless to stop it.
Be gentle with yourself for awhile; you are in my prayers, as are your co-workers, the woman’s survivors, and the others who were hurt.
Yes, that would definitely alter my perception of balloon flying, too; risks ought always to be weighed against the dangers of the alternative…
Take care
Posted by: flynn at October 8, 2007 7:46 PM
Thank ya flynn.
Abortion is not a part of God’s plan.
Sally, I have worked in LTC as well as hospice. I’ve also worked on an Oncology floor. I have seen plenty of people pass away. I’ve held their hands and talked to them as they drew their last breath.
Sally, I have a question for you. Is it less tragic for a newborn baby to be killed, than a 30 year old woman?
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 8:59 PM
I cannot believe the resaon to ask. Are you without mind, reasoning and experience child?
You don’t actually word for a living do ya chillen?
Bethany wrote: Sally, I have a question for you. Is it less tragic for a newborn baby to be killed, than a 30 year old woman?
Sally responded: I cannot believe the reason to ask. Are you without mind, reasoning and experience child?
You don’t actually word for a living do ya chillen?
Looks like Sally doesn’t have an answer to the question. Tsk tsk tsk….
OOOOOOOHHH! I’m so scared…………If you find a need to totally disrespect your elders, well…… delete me.
Was glad to do it, Sally. Thanks for your “permission”.
I have one. Is it less tragic for a puppy to die, or a person?
Oh, a puppy is adorable. It’s sweet, innocent, and cuddly. But I would still choose a living, breathing, thinking person before a puppy. Because the puppy is not the same thing as a person. Similarly, a fetus may fit our thinking of ‘sweet’ and ‘innocent’ (maybe not cuddly. I don’t think I want to cuddle a fetus.), but it is not a thinking, breathing person.
amn that is so talking out of both sides of your mouth. Either death is tragic or god’s plan. You folks wish to decide which is which. Playing god you just further yourself away from humanity. A need for supremecy spawned by a lack of empathy. Sociopathy. Religiosity has been the spawn of the saddist murders outside of the military.
Death is tragic. If you knew your Bible, Sally, you would know that Death is not God’s plan. God’s plan is victory over death.
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 9:16 PM
If you knew your theology, you would know that death is exactely god’s plan. Freaking on your conconsience after the fact would be Buddist.
ally, I have a question for you. Is it less tragic for a newborn baby to be killed, than a 30 year old woman?
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 8:59 PM
Hmmm. Are is there a plethora of new born babies in danger of being killed outside of a war zone? What is your question?
Sally,
I’m so sorry you had to witness such a tragic accident.
I could see how you would think that this tragedy doesn’t compare with aborting an embryo, if you were looking at it only from the standpoint of what you can see or how you might experience a person. But I think there are two levels going on here.
Like I just mentioned, how we experience the particular human being. The more “developed” they are, where we can love them, talk to them, see them, know that they are loved, etc. is only one level.
But the other level is simply that he or she is a LIFE. She is the same person as an embryo as she will be riding in a hot-air balloon. Regarless of whether we can see her, know her, love her, etc., she still exists. She has an inalienable right to continue living and not have anyone destroy her life. Yes, she is definitely easier to kill and to ignore that she is human because she doesn’t “look” like us or speak or hear or have consciousness yet, but that’s not the point. The point is that that human being has been created and no one, not even a mother, has the right to take her life away.
I think in philosophy they call this accident and substance, and at least I think they apply hear; though I am no philospher.
You are only looking at it from the standpoint of the physical, of what YOU can experience. We consider the fact that no matter what WE experience about that human being, it is their life, and no one has the right to take it away.
So yes, if in one way you are right, seeing someone fall from a balloon in a tragic accident is so much worse than knowing an embryo has been destroyed, based on OUR experience. But at a different level, both are tragic because each life was tragically cut short when it deserved to continue on until a natural death.
Posted by: Ellie at October 8, 2007 8:37 PM
Honey, you are dispicable. Worth spitting upon. I watched a woman hurled to her death and you are so incredibly without human understanding that you find it relative to the inexperience of your idol—the conceptus. Malhevetinen. You represent hell with your lack of compasion.
ally,
Everyone was very sympathetic to what you witnessed. Why are you hurling insults? Not that I think you’re trying to win anyone to your side but if you are, you aren’t going to accomplish it this way.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 8, 2007 9:22 PM
What do you consider an insult? Do you care about what I find isuilting or is the world all about you?
Sally,
I’m so sorry you had to witness such a tragic accident.
I could see how you would think that this tragedy doesn’t compare with aborting an embryo, if you were looking at it only from the standpoint of what you can see or how you might experience a person. But I think there are two levels going on here.
Like I just mentioned, how we experience the particular human being. The more “developed” they are, where we can love them, talk to them, see them, know that they are loved, etc. is only one level.
But the other level is simply that he or she is a LIFE. She is the same person as an embryo as she will be riding in a hot-air balloon. Regarless of whether we can see her, know her, love her, etc., she still exists. She has an inalienable right to continue living and not have anyone destroy her life. Yes, she is definitely easier to kill and to ignore that she is human because she doesn’t “look” like us or speak or hear or have consciousness yet, but that’s not the point. The point is that that human being has been created and no one, not even a mother, has the right to take her life away.
I think in philosophy they call this accident and substance, and at least I think they apply hear; though I am no philospher.
You are only looking at it from the standpoint of the physical, of what YOU can experience. We consider the fact that no matter what WE experience about that human being, it is their life, and no one has the right to take it away.
So yes, if in one way you are right, seeing someone fall from a balloon in a tragic accident is so much worse than knowing an embryo has been destroyed, based on OUR experience. But at a different level, both are tragic because each life was tragically cut short when it deserved to continue on until a natural death.
Posted by: Ellie at October 8, 2007 8:37 PM
Oh Honey! There is no other level. You cry over what you choose to cry over.
T and T’s mom, thank you so much for sharing the story of your brother and son. It was so touching. Words beyond this point would only be cliches. Just thank you. It will stick with me, and it encourages me.
Sally, my Dad lives in Belen. I attended the Balloon Fiesta last year. Everyone should, at least once. Incredible.
Your story is upsetting. I can envision seeing what you saw. The launches are so exciting. The people going up in those balloons are like you and I, yet at the launch they’re rock stars – waving at the cheering crowd, so excited and happy. And for that to so quickly turn to tragedy for one woman and her family, which was surely there and watching, or even in the gondola with her.
I’m reading stories on the accident now. The balloon was Heavenly Ride. Yuck. Which balloon was that? Was it a balloon that had been at the Fiesta before, or was it new?
Ellie, re: Born Alive Infant Protection Act enforcement….
1) BAIPA had mass Senate (unanimous)/House (overwhelming voice vote) support, albeit forced for liberals. It dealt with infanticide, which pro-aborts know crosses the line for most.
2) BAIPA is just a definitions law. No penalties. So it is hard to enforce from the get-go. No teeth.
3) Induced labor abortions are widespread in the US. I know this anecdotally and from a recent British study. (DHHS refuses to conduct its own study. I met with DHHS officials last year, so I know this.)
4) Even in a hostile environment, pro-life congresspersons should push for enforcement laws and make a big stink if and when liberals resist. Easy PR.
5) The White House should do what it can to make agencies like DOJ and DHHS do what they can to enforce BAIPA with what they have or at least loudly rattle cages.
6) BAIPA is low-hanging fruit. Easy to pick, right there, while some pro-lifers don’t see it, and some pro-lifers prefer moving on to slay the next pro-abort dragon without fulling slaying this one. I’d say the problem is more the former.
Jill,
Did you see Sean Hannity interview Dr. James Dobson on Hannity & Colmes last night? It was a terrific 20 minute interview on Social Issues and Republican Presidential Candidates.
Can you post VIDEO of the interview on your website? It’s a MUST SEE!!
Mike
Did you happen to watch the debate between Sean Hannity and Dr. James Dobson on Social Issues last night on Hannity & Colmes? This was an excellent debate you have to see. Attached is a link to the video’s…
http://www.foxnews.com/hannityandcolmes/
Go to Fox News VIDEO on the right hand side of the screen. I believe there are 3 separate videos.
Mike
Is it less tragic for a newborn baby to be killed, than a 30 year old woman?
Bethany, good question. I’d say sometimes, sure. Depends on the situations and depends on who you ask. How many people would rather have a miscarriage versus losing a five year old, ten year old, fifteen year old kid? I realize that many, many people wouldn’t want to have a miscarriage at all, but a lot still would much rather have the miscarriage.
Doug
Jill, as well as a pretty face, you also have a truly kind face.
Doug
Jill, re: Born Alive Infant Protection Act enforcement….your explanation
Thank you.
Jill: “BAIPA had mass Senate (unanimous)/House (overwhelming voice vote) support, *albeit forced for liberals*.”
Jill, “liberals” are supporting a bill that you support and you take a cheap shot at them. Can’t you be happy for their support, asusme they have honest and legitimate motives, and simply try to move them a bit more to your position next time?
Bethany, good question. I’d say sometimes, sure. Depends on the situations and depends on who you ask. How many people would rather have a miscarriage versus losing a five year old, ten year old, fifteen year old kid? I realize that many, many people wouldn’t want to have a miscarriage at all, but a lot still would much rather have the miscarriage.
So people increase in value as they get older, in your opinion, and their value is decreased if they are younger, or if they are less capable of understanding the world around them. Obviously, we disagree.
If my 2 year old died, I wouldn’t consider it “less tragic” than if my 7 year old had died.
To me, that is warped thinking.
I would be just as horrified and saddened over the loss of a newborn baby as I would over the loss of my first born.
I was just as horrified and saddened over the loss of my babies due to miscarriage, as I would have been over the loss of a newborn.
We certainly differ on our beliefs of what makes humans valuable.
but it is not a thinking, breathing person
Thinking starts at 8 weeks post conception and babies breathe amniotic fluid. There are just as much people as you or I.
Source, please, Jacq? EEG does not thought patterns make. Also, the 40 day myth is commonly repeated but has no peer-reviewed scientific backing.
Here is a peer-reviewed published review on fetal brain development.
http://brainmind.com/FetalBrainDevelopment.html
Sure, I’ll find your source, Erin.


But it’s altogether irrelevant. Thinking and breathing does not a human make. Animals think and breathe. Are animals persons because they think and breathe?
You’re associating arbitrary characteristics to personhood. Human offspring are people because they are HUMAN.
But, let’s conceed that you’re right and that brain waves don’t equal “thinking.” Every organ is formed at 12 weeks (the first trimester). At that point, the baby is simply growing and becoming heartier.
Here’s an article of fetal psychology that states that babies respond to noises at 9 weeks.
And by the way, here is a baby at 9 weeks:
Babies dream at 23 weeks, still legal abortion-on-demand age in most states.
By the way, here is a 23 week fetus:
I’d say these kids, regardless of what they breathe and how much or little they think, they BOTH deserve not to be dismembered by their own mommies.
My responses are being held for approval (don’t know why).
But from your article, I excerpt:
Hence, by the 9th gestational week the fetus will display spontaneous movements, one week later takes its first breath.
I rescinded my “thinking at 8 weeks”, are you willing to rescind that the baby doesn’t breathe?
Rather, although capable of learning, the increasingly complex behaviors demonstrated by the fetus and neonate, including head turning, eye movements, startle reactions, crying, screaming, and rudimentary smiling, are probably best described as brainstem reflexes.
If something can “learn,” it is thinking. But like I said, thinking or not, children have the right not to be dismembered.
I concede that they breathe. But they can’t think. The article specifies that until near term, that type of function isn’t present. Reflex isn’t thinking.
Also, if you have more than one link, I think they hold it to make sure that no one can spam the site :-P
It’s happened to me a couple times before too.
I concede that they breathe. But they can’t think. The article specifies that until near term, that type of function isn’t present. Reflex isn’t thinking
Okay. But with all due respect, so the hell what? Those babies certainly would begin thinking if they weren’t torn limb from limb with forceps. Absence of thought does not justify murder. It might make murderers feel a tad better about being murderers, but it’s not an excuse for killing one’s own baby.
Also, if you have more than one link, I think they hold it to make sure that no one can spam the site :-P
Damn! I was about to post some adds for penis enlargement and ink cartridges! :)
“Absence of thought does not justify murder.”
True, but who says they don’t think, and how would they know?
Erin –
” But they can’t think. The article specifies that until near term, that type of function isn’t present. Reflex isn’t thinking. ”
This line of thinking confuses me. What do you think of the people who have brain damage but can survive without artificial life support? Is it okay to kill them too?
Reflex is the beginning of the thought process. In order to have a reflex you have to have a central nervous system that is in place. There is no other way you can “move from stimuli” if your CNS is not working. This is why some people with back injuries cannot feel below the area that got damaged. Because the CNS was damaged. With reflex and the CNS we learn balance, the difference between up and down. A fetus responds to her mother’s voice after birth – how can that be without thought? My son, born 9 weeks early, was cranky and fidgety in the crib in the NICU until I spoke to him. He would calm down by my voice. No one elses. Not even my husband. He knew me. If I can get Jacqueline or Bethany to show me how to post pictures I will show you a pic of my son. The look on his face when I spoke to him and had my hand on his head. (With preemies you can’t touch them like you do a full term baby because the stimulus to much for them, it hurts them. Kinda amazing that something hurts them and that they get upset when too much is going on around them.)
Now some quotes from the article you posted:
It is now well established that the human fetus is capable of some degree of behavioral complexity. In fact, as early as the 9th week of gestation the fetus is able to spontaneously move the extremities, head, and trunk (de Vries, Visser, & Prechtl, 1985).
(T)he behavior of the fetus and newborn is likely a reflection of reflexive brainstem activities which are produced in the absence of forebrain-mediated affective or cognitive processing, i.e. thinking, reasoning, understanding, or true emotionality (Joseph, 1996a, 1999; Levene, 1993; Sroufe, 1996).
At birth and for the ensuing weeks, the forebrain is so immature that its influences are limited to signaling distress in reaction to hunger or thirst; a function of the immature hypothalamus (Joseph, 1982, 1992, 1999) in conjunction with the midbrain periaqueductal gray (e.g. Larson, Yajima, & Ko, 1994; Zhang, Davis, Bandler, & Carrive, 1994). Although various limbic nuclei become functionally mature over the course of the first several postnatal months and years (Benes, 1994; Joseph, 1992, 1999), the neocortex and lobes of the brain take well over seven, ten, and even thirty years to fully develop and myelinate (Blinkov & Glezer, 1968; Conel, 1939, 1941; Flechsig, 1901; Huttenlocher, 1990; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967).
The progression in behavioral complexity that begins with spontaneous fetal movements and which culminates with presumed preferences for the sound of mother’s voice……
Indeed, the brainstem is first fashioned around the 33rd day of gestation (Bayer, 1995; Marin-Padilla, 1988; Sidman & Rakic, 1982) and nearly completes its cycle of development and myelination around the 7th gestational month (Gilles, Leviton, & Dooling, 1983; Langworthy, 1937; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967).
Given its exceedingly long and ancient evolutionary history, not surprisingly, many brainstem functions are present before birth and occur without the aid of thinking, reasoning, or even forebrain/neocortical participation (Blessing, 1997; Joseph, 1996cd; Steriade & McCarley, 1990).
the brainstem continues to mature well after birth, and correspondingly, brainstem reflexes emerge and disappear at different time periods over the course of the first three to six months of postnatal life (Debakan, 1970; see also Capute, Palmer, Accardo, Wachtel, Ross & Palmer, 1984; Piper & Darrah, 1994).
Broadly considered, the brainstem consists of the medulla, pons, and midbrain, and matures in a caudal to rostral arc–a process that begins around the 6th to 7th week of gestation and continues well into the first year of postnatal life (Debakan, 1970; Gilles et al., 1983; Sidman & Rakic, 1982; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967).
The neural tube is first fashioned three weeks after conception and by the 7-8th week of gestation the major structures of the medulla have been established (Gilles et al., 1983; Sidman & Rakic, 1982). These include the hypoglossal, spinal accessory, vagus, and glosopharyngeal cranial nuclei, and the neurons of the reticular activating system. As noted, these nuclei and activating pathways subserve arousal, generalized body movements, head turning, shoulder elevation, heart rate, and breathing.
Hence, since the fetal and neonatal brainstem is capable of perceiving sound it increasingly becomes responsive to those sounds which it is repeatedly exposed to.
the fetal brain appears capable of generating and supporting what might best be described as rudimentary learning-related activity. (from me: this is in a paragraph discussing last 2 months of pregnancy)
These are physiological, reflexive responses which do not necessarily imply cognition.
It is evident that the fetus is capable of considerable behavioral complexity. These complex actions appear to be mediated and governed by the brainstem with minimal forebrain participation, for similar behaviors are demonstrated by anencephalics and following forebrain destruction. However, although forebrain influences are minimal, the late-term fetal brainstem may also be capable of experienced-induced synaptic plasticity, and can become organized to respond selectively to certain auditory stimuli presented up to 6 weeks before birth. These latter findings could be interpreted as evidence for exceedingly rudimentary, learning-related cognitive-like activity.
Nevertheless, the fetus and neonate appears incapable of thinking, reasoning, understanding, comprehending, or experiencing or generating “true” emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity. Rather, although capable of learning, the increasingly complex behaviors demonstrated by the fetus and neonate…. are probably best described as brainstem reflexes.
______________________
That article was awsome by the way.
Look at some of the adjectives that he uses. “likely”; “appears”, “do not necessarily imply”; “may also be”; “could be”; “probably”.
The answer: They do not know. He goes back and forth on the concept of a fetus being able to reason and think. But the simple answer is – they do not know. They are making assumptions based on lack of evidence. Just because we do not have the right technology doesn’t mean their assumptions are right.
Remember: Before ultra sounds we thought the early stages of the fetus was nothing, just a blob of tissue. Now we know better.
Let us not forget that the fetus has “presumed prefernces” to his mothers voice. And the fetus is “capable of perceiving sound”.
How can a fetus have no thought process when he has preferences and can perceive?
Also, the newborn doesn’t seem to have reasoning and is in the same situation as the fetus. What does that mean? oh yea… it means that the worth of the child is based on if one person believes the child wanted or unwanted. Before birth – abortion and death. After birth – adoption and life.
Okay. But with all due respect, so the hell what? Those babies certainly would begin thinking if they weren’t torn limb from limb with forceps. Absence of thought does not justify murder. It might make murderers feel a tad better about being murderers, but it’s not an excuse for killing one’s own baby.
***applause***
Valerie, excellent post! Thank you so much…I need to save all of the info you post, to refer to from time to time!
Why thank you, Bethany!
You’re very welcome. That is exactly how I feel!
Damn that is so talking out of both sides of your mouth. Either death is tragic or god’s plan. You folks wish to decide which is which. Playing god you just further yourself away from humanity. A need for supremecy spawned by a lack of empathy. Sociopathy. Religiosity has been the spawn of the saddist murders outside of the military.
Death is tragic. If you knew your Bible, Sally, you would know that Death is not God’s plan. God’s plan is victory over death.
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 9:16 Pm
If you knew your Bible or had a grip over your theology you would know that death is god’s plan. God invented death.
Sally, I have a question for you. Is it less tragic for a newborn baby to be killed, than a 30 year old woman?
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 8:59 PM
………………………………
What is your freak girl? I watched a 60 year old woman plummet to her death and that somehow relates newborns to an abortion discussion? Oh shut up.
Your PL moronic idiots ”
Sally, watch the direct insults. Your posts can be deleted if you can’t use some discretion.
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 9:02 PM
Here is a direct insult to you. You don’t curtail my right to free speach or calling a moron a moron unless you want your Jilly and her heroes slammed with the same.
Be carefull what you wish for Bethany. You could find yourself without a guide to what to say and an opportunity to say it.
What is your freak girl? I watched a 60 year old woman plummet to her death and that somehow relates newborns to an abortion discussion? Oh shut up.
The question directly related to a statement you made, Sally. Still avoiding answering the question? I’m still waiting for your answer.
Here is a direct insult to you. You don’t curtail my right to free speach or calling a moron a moron unless you want your Jilly and her heroes slammed with the same.
Be carefull what you wish for Bethany. You could find yourself without a guide to what to say and an opportunity to say it.
First, before you call someone a moron, you might want to learn how to spell. Or at least you could learn to use a spell checker.
Secondly, people on the pro-life side must adhere to the same rules as you, so your comment to me means chicken squat.
Bethany –
All of the information I am now posting is part of my research that is going on my website. Hopefully I will be able to get a good portion of the information together so I can get the new website going at the end of this month.
This way anyone can refer to it.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to find unbiased sources on this subject! both for and against abortion? OY!
“Your PL moronic idiots ”
Sally, watch the direct insults. Your posts can be deleted if you can’t use some discretion.
Posted by: Bethany at October 8, 2007 9:02 PM
……
Okey dokey. Let’s resort to vieled insults and dump honesty. The political correctness police might come and get me.
Okey dokey. Let’s resort to vieled insults and dump honesty. The political correctness police might come and get me.
Okie Dokie, Sally. That sounds fine to me. ;)
Do you have any idea how hard it is to find unbiased sources on this subject! both for and against abortion? OY!
It really is difficult! You have done an excellent job at collecting the information. I still have a lot I need to go through that you have emailed me. Such good stuff. Keep up the good work!
Sally, my Dad lives in Belen. I attended the Balloon Fiesta last year. Everyone should, at least once. Incredible.
Your story is upsetting. I can envision seeing what you saw. The launches are so exciting. The people going up in those balloons are like you and I, yet at the launch they’re rock stars – waving at the cheering crowd, so excited and happy. And for that to so quickly turn to tragedy for one woman and her family, which was surely there and watching, or even in the gondola with her.
I’m reading stories on the accident now. The balloon was Heavenly Ride. Yuck. Which balloon was that? Was it a balloon that had been at the Fiesta before, or was it new?
Posted by: Jill Stanek at October 9, 2007 3:41 AM
…………………………………………….
I don’t agree with your stance over abortion but if your dad ever needs anything I’d be happy to lend a hand. What on earth took him from Peoria to Belen?
As for the balloon, they are not simular to condoms. Use once and throw away doesn’t apply. Few balloons are new to the fiesta. The pilot is highly experienced. His balloon sound. But not his propane tanks apparently. Who supplies those? Wanna bet the story gets burried in a few days?
If you knew your Bible or had a grip over your theology you would know that death is god’s plan. God invented death.
Apparently, Sally, you don’t know the Bible or Christian theology.
God’s plan was human immortality (Read Genesis 3:22). Humans (Adam and Eve) invented death when the disobeyed God (Genesis 3:20 and Romans 6:23). God then had to send His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to die for us to defeat death and restore eternal life (John 3:16).
God never intended for us to die. God hates death, so much so that He calls it His enemy (1 Corinthians 15:26). So much that He suffered and endured it Himself to defeat it once and for all so we can have eternal life again through Christ (I Corinthians 15:20).
And might I remind you death-loving pro-aborts what the Bible says “Those who hate God love death” (Proverbs 8:36).
So God did not “invent” death and it was never His plan. At least not according to His own Word.
Okey dokey. Let’s resort to vieled insults and dump honesty. The political correctness police might come and get me.
Okie Dokie, Sally. That sounds fine to me. ;)
Do you have any idea how hard it is to find unbiased sources on this subject! both for and against abortion? OY!
It really is difficult! You have done an excellent job at collecting the information. I still have a lot I need to go through that you have emailed me. Such good stuff. Keep up the good work!
Posted by: Bethany at October 9, 2007 10:24 PM
………………………………
Emailed you? Excuse me? What the H E double hockey sticks are you talking about?
Sally,
You just don’t get it. I was not in any way saying that what you experienced, especially what the woman experienced, wasn’t tragic; it is! It’s horrible!
I was merely pointing out that there is another level that has nothing to do with what we experience.
My understanding is that substance is the human being that is created at conception. The accidents are the things that change about that person…the size, color of hair, skin, eyes, whether they can walk, talk, or hear, whether they are smart, funny, pro-life, pro-chocie, homely, beautiful, etc.
You care only about accidents because it’s all you can see/experience. You are totally ingoring that there is substance….that no matter how that human being changes, no matter how anyone else can experience her, she is and always will be the same person.
Posted by: Ellie at October 8, 2007 9:32 PM
…………………………….
The woman is now a corpse. No longer a person. Until she completely rots, she has substance in some stretch of the imaginanation of what a human is.
Never assume what another thinks. It makes an ass hurumph umtion out of you.
You attempt to give substance to that which only a woman can by the process of gestation. And yes. Women may or may not make a basic blueprint reality. Not a single one should have to provide slave labor to do so. She can volunteer or she can be enslaved to do so. Kinda like those Jews and the pyramids. Can I hear a yessa massa iz likes makin dem peramids? Never mind. It all flys over your head.
Sally,
My family is not from Peoria. I live in Mokena, IL, although my Dad never did. My family is originally from NW IN. He and my Mom divorced in the late 80s and he moved to the Alburquerque area, where we have other family. I love it out there. I have lots of Old West stuff in my home, much which I got at one of the Jackalopes.
I know balloons are not like condoms. That’s why I asked if the downed one was old or new. If old, perhaps I remember it. I couldn’t find a photo online. What did it look like?
My Dad’s lady friend lives and breathes the Fiesta, so I expect this event devastated her/them. She likely saw the catastrophe as well.
What is your freak girl? I watched a 60 year old woman plummet to her death and that somehow relates newborns to an abortion discussion? Oh shut up.
The question directly related to a statement you made, Sally. Still avoiding answering the question? I’m still waiting for your answer.
Here is a direct insult to you. You don’t curtail my right to free speach or calling a moron a moron unless you want your Jilly and her heroes slammed with the same.
Be carefull what you wish for Bethany. You could find yourself without a guide to what to say and an opportunity to say it.
First, before you call someone a moron, you might want to learn how to spell. Or at least you could learn to use a spell checker.
Secondly, people on the pro-life side must adhere to the same rules as you, so your comment to me means chicken squat.
Posted by: Bethany at October 9, 2007 9:46 PM
………………..
I can’t spell to save my life. But I am told that I have a highly developed comprehension capacity. Chicken squat would make sense in poplular vernacular as jack squat. Of course you knew that but couldn’t figure out how to spell jack?
And chicka, I am not bound by PL psuedo religionists in my speach, beliefs or practices. Much to your dismay.
Sally, I have worked in LTC as well as hospice. I’ve also worked on an Oncology floor. I have seen plenty of people pass away. I’ve held their hands and talked to them as they drew their last breath.
Posted by: heather at October 8, 2007 9:39 PM
…………………….
In what capacity were you ‘working’? Health care professional or sin eater/religionist? And who employed you?
Sally finds that “accidents of others” are about herself and her emotions. Once again, Sally demonstrates all motivation for Sally, begins with herself, and returns to herself. Quite the narcissistic personality. Maybe a tear might have been shed by Sally, in her “hysteria” over a accident of a hot air ballon, caused by the free will of a human being. Tell us Sally, did you cry over this accident caused by free will?.
What reason does one cry? What purpose does the act of shedding a tear “over another”, have to do with you Sally? Were you sad or angry about this accident you saw Sally? Do you cry often Sally? And when you do cry, is it about something that “ought” not exist, like accidents? Do you always scapegoat God, for accidents from the use of free will by humans?
Fact is, Sally saw a accident(I question her actually “seeing” the accident in real time) and the “accident” became about Sally, for Sally, and her need to use a accident, caused by free will, at a message board about abortion.
Tell us Sally, when you “saw” the accident unfolding before your dry eyes, did you immediately think about ” Go Jill Go, tell us about abortion is like watching a 60 years old diving into the ground…..”.
When did you decide to use the death of a 60 years old, caused by her free will getting into a hot air ballon, actually become about yourself and your thoughts(and that appeal to emotion by Sally) about abortion? A minute after you “saw” the accident? A hour? A day?
Once again, Sally shows her narcissism, in that all motivation begins with Sally and returns to Sally.
But, the best part of this narcissistic personality, named Sally, is her scapegoating of God for accidents. When Sally sees, hears, or thinks about accidents, she gets angry at God. Do you not blame God for accidents Sally? Of, course you do, it makes you, a “victim of God”. And being a victim means never having to say your sorry, just like a sociopath does not have that personality quality.
Tell us Sally, just how much anger is in you? Do you want to kill God because “accidents” OUGHT NOT TO exist in the failed utopian world you must “see” everyday? The best therapy for Sally, is to not witness or think about accidents, since God is the cause for those accidents according to the personality disorder, known as Sally. You DO want to “get even” with the source of these accidents don’t you Sally? Or maybe Sally should become apathetic towards God and accidents, to lessen that anger in her towards something that Sally might not think exist.
BTW, Sally, did you call the EMS? Or, did you just leave it to others to render aid to the 60 year old women, because you were thinking how to equate death by free will to abortion?
Tell you what Sally, the next time you “see a accident”, call the accident authorties(EMS) and say,” Get over here as quick as possible, because GOD caused another accident”. You could include some “emotive words” also Sally, to show your anger towards the creator of accidents. Such as, Idiot, Moron, Childish.
I can imagine the “accident authorities” taking your call Sally, “mentioning God for the accident”, and thinking what kind of childish, idiotic, moron is calling to report a accident and talking about “death is God’s plan”.
And if you don’t mention God in your next call to the EMS, Sally, your just a big hypocrite like that Erin who does not practice what one preaches.
yallas, Great posts!! I couldn’t help but notice that your screen name is Sally spelled backwards. Is that on purpose?
Emailed you? Excuse me? What the H E double hockey sticks are you talking about?
Well, this really showcases the excellent comprehension skills you were bragging about having.. lol
” I am told that I have a highly developed comprehension capacity. ”
Bethany,
you quoted Doug,
“Bethany, good question. I’d say sometimes, sure. Depends on the situations and depends on who you ask. How many people would rather have a miscarriage versus losing a five year old, ten year old, fifteen year old kid? I realize that many, many people wouldn’t want to have a miscarriage at all, but a lot still would much rather have the miscarriage.”
you responded:
So people increase in value as they get older, in your opinion, and their value is decreased if they are younger, or if they are less capable of understanding the world around them. Obviously, we disagree.
—————————
Of course some people feel that people increase in value as they get older, because they are older. The older they get the more similar they are to themselves and hence the value.
It is no challenge to empathize with someone like yourself,
the challenge is to empathize with someone who is not like you.
Always has been, always will be.
Likewise in the case of your own child the more time you spend with them the more of your own life is invested in them, therefore you can feel you have lost part of your life when they are gone and the relationship with them. This is self referencing and not based on the value of the child rather it is based on the relationship and investment of oneself in the child.
If your grief is based solely on your own investment, then the miscarriage is a smaller loss. If your grief is for the loss of a unique life, the loss is equal.
Honestly, I don’t think anyone is 100% one way or the other, but just leans one way or the other.
Very interesting, Hippie!
Likewise in the case of your own child the more time you spend with them the more of your own life is invested in them, therefore you can feel you have lost part of your life when they are gone and the relationship with them. This is self referencing and not based on the value of the child rather it is based on the relationship and investment of oneself in the child.
If your grief is based solely on your own investment, then the miscarriage is a smaller loss. If your grief is for the loss of a unique life, the loss is equal.
You hit the nail on the head!
Sally –
“Emailed you? Excuse me? What the H E double hockey sticks are you talking about?”
Bethany directed her comment to me which is why she put one of my previous comments before her comment.
Bethany, Hippie always hit the nail on the head!!!
Oops, should read *hits the nail on the head*
Yes, it is on purpose. Sally views the world exactly backwards from me. This occurs since Sally is a vicelord who is a ally of vice. A wise man once said that the whole truth is generally the ally of virtue, while a half truth is always the ally of vice.
Sally exhibits that vice of pride found amongst the person who is mad at virtue. She finds no dignity in chastity, since chastity rebukes her conscience, formed to insure her narcissitic personality is guilt free. This assures Sally to never shed a tear over her alliance with vice.
In fact, Sally has “drown her innocence” years ago in a “ceremony” of narcissism, which now celebrates a “blood dimmed tide” that is loosed upon the innocent “everywhere” that Sally’s vice goes.
Sally, that old vicelord(and she must be old since she appeals to her authority through “seeing” more death then anyone else here), bets upon “the best lacking all convictions”, such as you Heather, while Sally is “full of passionate intensity” for the vice in human nature.
Now, I wonder if Sally is edumacted enough to know why “ceremony”, “blood dimmed tide”, are in quotes? Seems someone more famous then Sally, “saw” that old vicelord Sally “coming” to drown innocence once again.
But, for a laugh at Sally, imagine Sally in the court room defending the ballonist, manufacturer, etc, in a lawsuit which is bound to come.
“You “see”, your honor, and jury, my client is innocent, innocent I say, because DEATH IS GOD’S PLAN for everyone, and of course for that 60 year old women who went “diving to the ground” , and that is the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, so said Sally to the courtroom.
Upon which the judge and jury found her client guilty of a accident that took the life of a women who had accuired 60 years of age.
After the trial, the judge being a more reasoned person then Sally, the scapegoating narcissist, asked the vicelord where she got her law license from. To which Sally replied, you moron, childish idiot, I got my law degree from MADalyn Murray O’hair school of law. Want to make something of it judge?
Thank you, yallas!
Yallas,
I’m the opposite of Sally, too. Wanna be best friends?
-Jacqueline
If I’m not mistaken, yllas has already demonstrated a high level of immaturity in insulting me and also being vulgar and impersonable.
Is yllas a newbie?
I think he/she’s been here once or twice before.
Yes- and she has asked personal questions about my sexual activity as well as Sally’s, thrown around psychological disorders that she clearly has no clue about, and used some rather graphic and inappropriate banter regarding masturbation practices.
Yes- and she has asked personal questions about my sexual activity as well as Sally’s, thrown around psychological disorders that she clearly has no clue about, and used some rather graphic and inappropriate banter regarding masturbation practices.
I’m sorry, Erin.
I was unaware of that.
This occurs since Sally is a vicelord who is a ally of vice.
:: laughing ::
You see this stuff and it’s like…. “put down the Crack pipe…”
Doug
Likewise in the case of your own child the more time you spend with them the more of your own life is invested in them, therefore you can feel you have lost part of your life when they are gone and the relationship with them. This is self referencing and not based on the value of the child rather it is based on the relationship and investment of oneself in the child.
Hippie – agreed that spending time with kids does make a difference to huge numbers of people. For many, miscarriage, however undesirable it might be, is vastly preferable to having a born child die. And this is for wanted pregnancies.
It really is valuation, and that can certainly change over time.
Doug
If your grief is based solely on your own investment, then the miscarriage is a smaller loss. If your grief is for the loss of a unique life, the loss is equal.
Honestly, I don’t think anyone is 100% one way or the other, but just leans one way or the other.
Hippie – agreed – while some might claim that “100%” either way, in reality it’s a mix.
I don’t see it as being “based solely on your own investment” – there is almost always more to it that that (and for the sake of the kid, I hope so).
In the first place, if a pregnancy is continued willingly, then there is some wanting there, and it’s not a matter of just “investment” anyway.
Doug
The defenders of Sally spew the insults and deny nothing of what I post. Sally is a simple vicelord, with no defence of her vice, except to bleat about “death is god’s plan”. Sally is a insulting personality disorder easily defined by her advocacy of vice.
As for Erin, that other suddenly shy vicelord, discussing “sex” should not be a taboo subject. Since “one starts revolutions for personal reasons”, one must ask why one thinks masturbation is a virtue, and another thinks it is a vice. And since one must practice what one preaches,(how are we to know if one is a hypocrite, since hypocrisy is a personal trait) to not be a blatant hypocrite, a “personal” question is not the least bit intrusive. Poor Erin, being awakened, to being a hypocrite about masturbation is suddenly “getting personal” to Erin. And now to use the best of my Sally insults(I did learn them from Sally, personally), what are you Erin? A “moron”? A “childish” prude about being asked about your selfish desires? A “idiot” who thinks that posting “diagnostic criteria” from the DSM4, is worthy to be discussed, only on the idiot Erin’s terms and defintions? Who then completly makes a “moron” of himself by stating that “sociopaths are hard to detect in society”. No, Erin, sociopaths are easily detected by using those criteria you posted from the DSM4. You just can’t arrest, or do anything about a sociopath until he breaks a law that requires his removal from society. Not one of the “symptoms” of APS is a arrestable offence. Psychologist ask questions, which include matters about sexual practices, to those “hiding amongst” you sociopaths(APS). They might even ask about masturbation and even, heaven forbid, sexual fantasies.
Think Dahmer was not asked about when, where, and how young he was when he began his “self love affair”? So Erin, here is another question that makes the study of the mind simple for you Erin. Dogs are neurotic, and cats have personality disorders? True or false, Erin the hypocrite. You know Erin, the joke goes, Dogs are neurotic because they always think it’s their fault;cats are character disorders because they always think it’s your fault. To which leads us to that disorder of desire named Sally, who thinks accidents are God’s plan for humanity. And of course, God’s plan is death too. See any disorder in that thinking Erin? Assigning “fault to another”(God), when the “fault” is in the will/decisions of people(accidents) and the natural fact that people die?
This leads us to a understanding of Sally being incapable of loving nature as it is, which makes her an old fashion Manachaean, prowling about the Earth still, or just another personality disorder “faulting others”(see God) for things which should not exist in Sally’s self made Utopia. A simple failed romantic, who now needs to take the innocence of others, to justify her devotion to a vice of one organ of the body. Then again, maybe Sally is overweight also from gluttony, and blames/faults excess calorie intake on her hormones. It ain’t me, it’s those hormones fault. A victim of God’s plan in any action that does not please this personality disorder, named Sally.
So Erin, whose innocence are you prowling for here? Many people here have had their innocence taken from them by half truth tellers for vice, such as you Erin. And they are now members of the “blood dimmed tide” whose “innocence was drown” by vicelords such as Sally.
I find it disgustingly loutish, to come to a post board, where people might be having sadness and regret from being used to satisfy pleasure, and having to kill because of pleasure.
Sally enjoys the death of the innocent baby in the womb, because the baby in the womb, rebukes her reality where pleasure is the only product of the organs of reproduction.
Or so Sally gets to know herself better, “That virtue may know vice, but vice cannot know evil(for Sally, read wrong, guilt, shame, for evil). The penality for vice is the vice itself, the not seeing the good in its fullness, the good that ought to be there”.
Bet Erin and Sally are having cognitive dissonance reading the above quote from Socrates, while Heather understands what Socrates was trying to get others to understand about vice and virtue.
But we all know how hard it is to get those personality disorders to go get therapy for their vice driven lifes, that end up defending abortion as a virtue. Take Sally, she doesn’t need therapy, she knows that life is death, and death is planned by some evil being who hides so well she can’t see,hear,smell,touch, or talk to this evil being.
Hello EMS, this is Sally calling again, a invisible being is planning my death by accident, can someone get over here quickly and arrest the invisible man? Help, Help, she’s here, I hear her knocking at the door, wailing like a hurricane.
To which the EMS replies, Sally, you do know we are under a hurricane warning, and you might have a accident if you leave the house? Nobody is planning your death Sally from a accident. To which the personality disorder named Sally replies, Thank God, that evil being.
*yawns* Oh, yllas, you have already proven in previous conversations to have nothing whatsoever to say on the actual subject at hand and prefer to run about spewing nonsense about Sally and I. As Mary said earlier, my first mistake was replying to your first crass post. Thank you, have a nice day.
*waves*
Wow, Yllas.
You have a way with words. I’m almost impressed (of course, your sarcasm rather diminishes any impact you thought it should have had). You might be “Sally’s Opposite”, but for someone with such brash opinions of another’s character, one would expect that you, a “bastion of virtue”, would not be afraid to use one’s real name. After all, if you’re the one telling someone of all their vices and how awful said vices are, it must mean that you are without those same vices. So how “opposite” are you? It would, however, just be awfully scandalous if you weren’t free of the vices you insult Erin and Sally of…because, to use a lovely phrase of your own, “how are we to know if one is a hypocrite, since hypocrisy is a personal trait?” We don’t even know your real name, so how much of your “person” do WE really know? So tell us how you’re so much better, virtue-wise, than Sally or Erin. At least they’re honest about how they feel, and aren’t afraid to use their names to show said honesty. And actually use a real name this time…because until then, we’ll assume you have something to hide. And having something to hide might just mean you’re the same type of hypocrite you accuse others of being.
I apologize for approving Yallas’ comment. He’s just throwing out juvenile insults just
like Sally. Hipocrisy!
My apologies to Erin. In the cause of Sally, although two wrongs don’t make a right, there’s certainly a level of justice. She’s been spewing venom knowing we’re too cordial to respond in kind. Finally comes someone who isn’t. One’s own medicine is bitter, eh, Sally?
Let’s ignore Yallas, and maybe he’ll sniff us and go away.
Oh, Erin, your the one who posted some off topic tripe about sociopaths. I simply responded to your “off topic” expertise on APS. When asked about masturbation, which is relevent to the behavior of APS, you made a fool out of yourself by admitting your hypocricsy concerning masturbation. Did Dahmer have a antisocial personality Erin? Think sex, as pleasure only, had nothing to do with his character/personality that murdered for pleasure?
Which brings up the subject of advising people about sexual practices which focus on the self.
Tell us, vicelord Erin, would you have advised Dahmer to masturbate more or less? Dahmer also was a drunk, which is usually another sign that a person takes “objects” over humans. Would you have preached that Dahmer should have drank more or less? Give you a hint, hypocrite Erin, most people would tell a person, who is a drunk, to never take a drink again. You know vicelord Erin, think AA. But, tell us Erin, would more or less masturbation have cured Dahmer, Wilder, or Bundy into soundness, especially of body and mind and freedom from disease or abnormality( defintion of health devoid of Erin’s humpty dumptyism).
I like you Erin, your that simplemind that preaches pleasure is the focus of life, and does not practice one of the most essential acts of a narcissistic personality, masturbation.
You shy, hypocritical vicelord, Erin. Got anymore “health tips” to push your vice of masturbation? Step right up people, Erin has the cure for herpes, masturbate more. Got prostate cancer? Masturbate, that cancer away with the majik elixir of vice sold by Erin.
You don’t even know the defintion of health, from pushing vice so long, it has corrupted your brain into the world of Humpty dumpty, words mean, just what Erin chooses them to mean. Then again, Erin doesn’t even know Erin, since vice never knows vice, it is the penality of vice to not know the vice.
As for that attempt at wit by sarcasm, to wit “yawn”, it reveals more about your lazy mind then you know, vicelord Erin. One who yawns, reveals that their body/brain is tired, sleepy, unable to concentrate, and closed to thinking about anything more complicated then the need to sleep. Were you always finding yourself “getting sleepy” when a demand upon your mental awareness was made Erin? When you were a little vicelord, did your teachers make you sleepy Erin? Maybe you were “yawning” when the defintion of “health” was being defined, Erin. Soo, Erin, insulting yourself seems to be a character trait of you. Is that what made you want to love yourself more then anyone else in your boring/yawning world? Such as, when your mother “insulted you” about your habit of yawning when she was talking to you? Or will Erin now write that Erin never yawned, when a adult, mother, father, was trying to teach the budding onanist something?
As for Lyssie, I am the opposite of Sally. Take that for what it is worth. She is vice personified. But, care to discuss making vice a virtue Lyssie, and how one makes reality seperate from truth, from simple desire of the self? How one arrives at the “knowing” that truth does not have to conform to reality,since the only truth, is that there is no truth to reality. And the fact that the more the mind seperates truth from reality, the one more becomes insane. Ask Sally, she knows truth does not have to conform to reality, since Sally knows her reality has no truth to comform to. That is why Sally never has lied in her vice ridden life. That is why Sally can be a rude lout to others, and think she is not a rude personality disorder centered on herself, as all personality disorders are. That is why Sally has never shed a tear, because vice never has the quality of shame, guilt, or regret. And if that personality disorder, named Sally, has shed a tear, it concerned herself being a victim of something planned by a evil invisible force that manipulates all actions in her life. Or she is just a plain jane paranoid personality disorder compounded with the lack of knowing vice does exist in reality.
Sally has insulted every person here she decides is against her religion of abortion. She is mad, mad, to the point she must come to a post board where others might have shame,guilt, and regrets from seeking pleasure. Then paradoxically killing the result of that pleasure, for more pleasure in life. That is the whisper of vice, that Sally enjoys the most. It cures her anger, sooths her mind, to know others have come to the decision to kill for pleasure. Sally enjoys killing for pleasure, it is how vice ends its story and closes the door on the ability to cry.
Sally’s story about 60 year old dying only mentions “a lot of us crying this morning”; notice Sally did not say she was crying. Sally cannot cry, since vice does not have any reason to cry about. A normal human being would have begun the sentence with “I was crying this morning…”.
But, logic cannot hold in Sally, since Sally cannot even get physics right. One sentence, Sally writes ” had a propane tank go out and attempted to land”. When a propane tank goes out, there is less hot air, as the fire from the propane generates heat, to keep the gondola at its altitude. Right Sally? The hot air ballon was sinking towards the ground with high wires between the ground and the gondola. Then Sally continues her story and creates the paradox of the “rising and sinking gondola”. Yes, Sally writes, ” the ballon rose as it tilted”. Leave something out of your story about ballons which was your way of introducing your truth about God planning accidents Sally? Or have you invented a hot air ballon that was sinking then “rose up” by some magical powers that deny physics? Cooling objects rise in the world of Sally. The cooler the hot air ballon became, the more it rose, right Sally? Or do details get short notice when the object of the story is all about Sally, taking a accident and making it all about Sally advancing the vices of Sally.
:: snicker :: Erin got called a “vicelord.”
Doug
My apologies to Erin. In the cause of Sally, although two wrongs don’t make a right, there’s certainly a level of justice. She’s been spewing venom knowing we’re too cordial to respond in kind. Finally comes someone who isn’t. One’s own medicine is bitter, eh, Sally?
That is how I feel, Jacqueline. Exactly!
…what the hell does masturbation have to do with ANYTHING???
Yes Doug. Bow before me! Muahahaha!
Now, I just need some minions. Any volunteers?
…what the hell does masturbation have to do with ANYTHING???
I don’t know. Maybe that’s his hobby and he likes to talk about it?
Erin, would you rather have your minions address as vicelady instead of vicelord,lol?
Or we could be super PC, and I could be ‘viceperson’!!
Viceperson it is then. Yllas, please refer to Erin as a viceperson next time.
If you knew your Bible or had a grip over your theology you would know that death is god’s plan. God invented death.
Apparently, Sally, you don’t know the Bible or Christian theology.
God’s plan was human immortality (Read Genesis 3:22). Humans (Adam and Eve) invented death when the disobeyed God (Genesis 3:20 and Romans 6:23). God then had to send His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to die for us to defeat death and restore eternal life (John 3:16).
God never intended for us to die. God hates death, so much so that He calls it His enemy (1 Corinthians 15:26). So much that He suffered and endured it Himself to defeat it once and for all so we can have eternal life again through Christ (I Corinthians 15:20).
And might I remind you death-loving pro-aborts what the Bible says “Those who hate God love death” (Proverbs 8:36).
So God did not “invent” death and it was never His plan. At least not according to His own Word.
Posted by: Jacqueline at October 9, 2007 10:44 AM
………………………………..
Attempting to use the Bible to prove that the Bible has relevance to human death is ridiculous to me. It’s all blatant mythology IMO.
Try to work your way out of the paper bag that says that God created everything. God is the ultimate authority. If God didn’t author death who could possibly be more powerful than God and do so. Huh? Skip the ‘free will’ crap. God created evil through free will and the PL love it. It’s still created by God and you have painted yourelf into a corner.
Sally finds that “accidents of others” are about herself and her emotions. Once again, Sally demonstrates all motivation for Sally, begins with herself, and returns to herself. Quite the narcissistic personality. Maybe a tear might have been shed by Sally, in her “hysteria” over a accident of a hot air ballon, caused by the free will of a human being. Tell us Sally, did you cry over this accident caused by free will?.
What reason does one cry? What purpose does the act of shedding a tear “over another”, have to do with you Sally? Were you sad or angry about this accident you saw Sally? Do you cry often Sally? And when you do cry, is it about something that “ought” not exist, like accidents? Do you always scapegoat God, for accidents from the use of free will by humans?
Fact is, Sally saw a accident(I question her actually “seeing” the accident in real time) and the “accident” became about Sally, for Sally, and her need to use a accident, caused by free will, at a message board about abortion.
Tell us Sally, when you “saw” the accident unfolding before your dry eyes, did you immediately think about ” Go Jill Go, tell us about abortion is like watching a 60 years old diving into the ground…..”.
When did you decide to use the death of a 60 years old, caused by her free will getting into a hot air ballon, actually become about yourself and your thoughts(and that appeal to emotion by Sally) about abortion? A minute after you “saw” the accident? A hour? A day?
Once again, Sally shows her narcissism, in that all motivation begins with Sally and returns to Sally.
But, the best part of this narcissistic personality, named Sally, is her scapegoating of God for accidents. When Sally sees, hears, or thinks about accidents, she gets angry at God. Do you not blame God for accidents Sally? Of, course you do, it makes you, a “victim of God”. And being a victim means never having to say your sorry, just like a sociopath does not have that personality quality.
Tell us Sally, just how much anger is in you? Do you want to kill God because “accidents” OUGHT NOT TO exist in the failed utopian world you must “see” everyday? The best therapy for Sally, is to not witness or think about accidents, since God is the cause for those accidents according to the personality disorder, known as Sally. You DO want to “get even” with the source of these accidents don’t you Sally? Or maybe Sally should become apathetic towards God and accidents, to lessen that anger in her towards something that Sally might not think exist.
Posted by: yllas at October 10, 2007 2:35 AM
……………….
You are a baskahostinen. A shitty pants. And quite violent in your defense of the PL. Who do you fantasise of getting ‘even’ with? Weirdo.
Sally,
My family is not from Peoria. I live in Mokena, IL, although my Dad never did. My family is originally from NW IN. He and my Mom divorced in the late 80s and he moved to the Alburquerque area, where we have other family. I love it out there. I have lots of Old West stuff in my home, much which I got at one of the Jackalopes.
I know balloons are not like condoms. That’s why I asked if the downed one was old or new. If old, perhaps I remember it. I couldn’t find a photo online. What did it look like?
My Dad’s lady friend lives and breathes the Fiesta, so I expect this event devastated her/them. She likely saw the catastrophe as well.
Posted by: Jill Stanek at October 9, 2007 11:25 PM
………………………………….
It was a rental balloon. Obviously cost a bunch from the look of it’s design. Extremely experienced pilot.
I doubt if your father’s sex partner witnessed the accident.
Sally,
You’re such a nice person, so kind and full of love. Where do you find this joy you’re experiencing?
BTW, Sally, did you call the EMS? Or, did you just leave it to others to render aid to the 60 year old women, because you were thinking how to equate death by free will to abortion?
Tell you what Sally, the next time you “see a accident”, call the accident authorties(EMS) and say,” Get over here as quick as possible, because GOD caused another accident”. You could include some “emotive words” also Sally, to show your anger towards the creator of accidents. Such as, Idiot, Moron, Childish.
I can imagine the “accident authorities” taking your call Sally, “mentioning God for the accident”, and thinking what kind of childish, idiotic, moron is calling to report a accident and talking about “death is God’s plan”.
And if you don’t mention God in your next call to the EMS, Sally, your just a big hypocrite like that Erin who does not practice what one preaches.
Posted by: yllas at October 10, 2007 3:30 AM
…………………….
Wow! A little rage problem there?
Sally finds that “accidents of others” are about herself and her emotions. Once again, Sally demonstrates all motivation for Sally, begins with herself, and returns to herself. Quite the narcissistic personality. Maybe a tear might have been shed by Sally, in her “hysteria” over a accident of a hot air ballon, caused by the free will of a human being. Tell us Sally, did you cry over this accident caused by free will?.
What reason does one cry? What purpose does the act of shedding a tear “over another”, have to do with you Sally? Were you sad or angry about this accident you saw Sally? Do you cry often Sally? And when you do cry, is it about something that “ought” not exist, like accidents? Do you always scapegoat God, for accidents from the use of free will by humans?
Fact is, Sally saw a accident(I question her actually “seeing” the accident in real time) and the “accident” became about Sally, for Sally, and her need to use a accident, caused by free will, at a message board about abortion.
Tell us Sally, when you “saw” the accident unfolding before your dry eyes, did you immediately think about ” Go Jill Go, tell us about abortion is like watching a 60 years old diving into the ground…..”.
When did you decide to use the death of a 60 years old, caused by her free will getting into a hot air ballon, actually become about yourself and your thoughts(and that appeal to emotion by Sally) about abortion? A minute after you “saw” the accident? A hour? A day?
Once again, Sally shows her narcissism, in that all motivation begins with Sally and returns to Sally.
But, the best part of this narcissistic personality, named Sally, is her scapegoating of God for accidents. When Sally sees, hears, or thinks about accidents, she gets angry at God. Do you not blame God for accidents Sally? Of, course you do, it makes you, a “victim of God”. And being a victim means never having to say your sorry, just like a sociopath does not have that personality quality.
Tell us Sally, just how much anger is in you? Do you want to kill God because “accidents” OUGHT NOT TO exist in the failed utopian world you must “see” everyday? The best therapy for Sally, is to not witness or think about accidents, since God is the cause for those accidents according to the personality disorder, known as Sally. You DO want to “get even” with the source of these accidents don’t you Sally? Or maybe Sally should become apathetic towards God and accidents, to lessen that anger in her towards something that Sally might not think exist.
Posted by: yllas at October 10, 2007 2:35 AM
………………………….
You are a mindless mess. Childish beyond belief and stupid to boot. Pick up your toys and go to your room.
Yes- and she has asked personal questions about my sexual activity as well as Sally’s, thrown around psychological disorders that she clearly has no clue about, and used some rather graphic and inappropriate banter regarding masturbation practices.
Posted by: Erin at October 10, 2007 12:17 PM
…………….
That isn’t a she dear. That would be a pervert that hangs around the boards trolling for tots. Relating the freak to me is a testament to your foolish trust in whomever trolls for tots and your inability to know when you are being trolled for.
Oi now, I’m on your side. Geroff.
Yalls,
While there is no denying that all of us sin, and all have vices, it would do you well to contemplate two of the deadliest sins and their corresponding virtues.
Pride is excessive belief in one’s own abilities, that interferes with the individual’s recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity.
Humilityis a quality or characteristic ascribed to a person who is considered to be humble. “Humility is derived from the Latin word “humilis”, which means low, humble, from earth.[1] A humble person is generally thought to be unpretentious and modest: someone who does not think that he or she is better or more important than others. The concept of humility in various religions is often much more precise and extensive. Humility is not to be confused with humiliation, which is the act of making someone else feel ashamed, and is something completely different.
AND
Wrath Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath.
Charity means taking the tender approach, with patience and compassion. Anger is often our first reaction to the problems of others. Impatience with the faults of others is related to this.
“More people are flattered into virtue than bullied out of vice.”
Well Sally, you keep up those “emotive words”, and yet your logic is scattered all over this board.
Care to discuss your “logic” about God “planning accidents” and how that is a contradiction in terms? I am no more then your words coming back to you. Idiotic,childish, moron Sally,who should be “true to her logic”, and when a call to the EMS is placed by Sally,a mention of God planning accidents and death must be mentioned by you Sally. Anything less would reveal a lack of faith,conviction, and truth in your written words here . But, your ability to turn a tragedy of another person into your mania about abortion and God, simply reveals your narcissistic personality.
Tell us Sally, did you call the EMS, or leave it to others, since you knew the outcome of all events were planned ahead by your vision of God?
No use calling, right Sally, God has settled this matter at creation of the universe. EMS call from Sally? Simple yes or no will do Sally. If you did call the EMS, did you mention God as the cause of the “planned accident” Sally?
When did the idea “to use” the hot air ballon “tragedy” to promote your mania for abortion and God enter your mind Sally? When you were telling your co workers about another “plan of God has come to pass”, as the 60 years old went “diving” to the ground.? Or a minute later, after you collected your “self” from the shock of “seeing” death.? Which must have been less then a minute, since death must not be shocking to one soo experienced in death. “It wouldn’t be the first time” and that body “rotting” remark, makes your “personality here”, appear to have all the qualities of a German health care worker during the mid 1940’s.
But, the childish Sally, using those words “diving to the ground” exposes your loose play on facts about that hot air ballon tragedy you say you “witnessed in real time”. Everything you wrote about the hot air tragedy is accurate and true, right Sally? Yes or No?
As the tragedy unfolded before your eyes, what did you say, Sally? “Another planned tragedy is happening right now before our eyes, Aborticus”(name of Sally’s friend). Tell us Sally, exactly what did you say? You brought the story forward to propagandize yourself.
But, let us reveal the Sally who changes words, about “facts” she witnessed, to suit her ambitions. First, Sally wrote that the woman “fell” from the hot air ballon, then later Sally wrote the woman “dived” from the hot air ballon. The word dive implies a “willfull act”, while the word “fall” denotes a accident.
I fell on the ice, I fell from the ladder, I fell from the hot air ballon. AS opposed to, I dove into the water, I am a skyDIVER, not a skyFALLER.
So Sally, your first post at 6;28 p.m contained the word “fell” in your eyewitness account of the tragi-accident. In a later post, concerning the tragedy of the hot air ballon, you used “dive” to describe the act of a body obeying a law of physics. Why did you “change” those two words Sally?
But, we all know why you changed your “fact” of the “women falling” to the women “diving to the ground”, don”t we? Your narcissism came out and “changed facts” to defend YOUR religion of abortion and YOUR vision of God. Which makes, what you write Sally, about “facts”, have a lack of credibility. And you know the definition of credible, right Sally? Or the etymology of credible, which is, credere,— to believe. Why I give the etymology of the word credible to you Sally, is to assure I am not dealing with a “Humpty Dumpty” personality who cannot communicate with others from having the personality disorder of Humpty Dumpty.
Or Erin, that shy vicelord, who still is ashamed of answering a question(the wrong way) to ascertain the “hypocrisy nature”, of a person. Hypocrisy does have a relationship to Humpty Dumptyism, as both seperate truth from reality, for the defense of their love of oneself.
There are seven direct questions to you Sally, All can be answered to assure the honesty of Sally not being a person without credibility. I have answered some of those questions for you Sally, and you may deny my answers or leave them as facts about your verity and rectitude.
To sum you up Sally, your story, about being a eyewitness(to the complete actions of the falling/diving, “hurtling” women, to the falling/rising ballon) and to the “planned accident of God”, is false, by the fact, you changed facts. My opinion is that you “saw” the planned accident on the media, and decided to use it for your narcissistic personality on a post site. Prove me wrong Sally. To post at a site where women have suffered from your vice ridden, false reality. Where pleasure, is paradoxically used to destroy the innocence of women, and released that tide of blood from abortion that has dimmed all their better convictions. And finally, where Sally comes to display a hideous personality, and thinks Sally is not a “sexual troll”, who actually prowls a site where sexual acts have been used to lessen esteem, worth, and dignity of women. When you introduce yourself Sally to strangers, do you smile and say, I have had x amount of abortions from being disordered from my vice ridden ideas about sex. Or, am I communicating with another hypocrite who preaches for abortion, but does not practice what she preaches for? And if you had a abortion, why did you fail your pleasure/sex education reality soo easily Sally? Kind of makes you a mindless mess Silly Sally, where you failed listening to those propagandizing sex educactors(got a abortion instead of using contraceptives), or your just another plain jane hypocrite. Or, worse, you knew about contraceptives but wanted to have a abortion because it progressed your narcissistic personality into having more pride in abortion.
MK, shouldn’t you be directing that post about pride,etc, to your resident narcissist troll, Silly Sally? AS for flattering Sally into virtue MK, Sally knows that vice is a virtue. Ask Silly Sally. Second, Silly Sally does not understand, or know virtue, from being a vice, which does not know evil(wrong). . Ask Silly Sally, she is humble in the fact that she is unpretentious and modest about abortion. She is a humble person. . She is the virtue of compassion killing unwanted life. Do you really think Silly Sally is humble MK? She does, and if you think Silly Sally is humble MK, you are confused about vice and virtue too. Sally is virtue Mk, ask Sally. So, how do you flatter a virtuous vicelord into not being a bullying virtuous vicelord? Why you try to be virtuous to the virtuous vicelord and call it a virtue when the bullying virtuous vicelord flatters you, right MK.? Which beings up why Jesus’ virtues did not conquer even the “other thief” next to him on the cross. He denied Jesus. Why Jesus was incapable of converting through the virtues of God those who put him on that cross and taunted his virtues as he was being tortured to death. And how you MK, filled with the “authenic Gospel spirit” will find a way to awaken “virtue” in the those blind souls(see Silly Sally) the good that lies hidden within every human creature. Do you believe that Christ was embued with the authenic gospel spirit MK that could awake those blind spirits about him? And you may ask yourself the significance of this question to you MK. Because MK, I wish to know WHY Christ did not use his power of the Gospel Spirit(see virtues of faith,hope,charity, cardinal virutes,etc) to awaken the good hidden in the souls of Judas, Herod, those high priest, and finally that IMPENITENT THIEF? That Jesus remained morally superior, that he chose to not to resist and forgave his enemies is easy to understand. But why, in pardoning his enemies did he not free their souls from the appalling darkness in which they were stagnating? He did not vanquish the wickness of Judas, Herod, or that impenitent thief. Why did He not vanquish their wickness(see Sally and abortion,etc) with his His gentleness? Why did he not enlighten and regenerate their minds and souls? Either He could not “change” even the lowly thief to repentence , or he chose not to. Which one is it MK? Either Jesus had No power to “effect change” in Judas, to the thief who denied him on the cross, or to Sally who prowls this site two thousand years later, or he chose NOT TO.
Put down the Crack pipe.