How low they’ll go to defeat Kline
Well, this one certainly puts U.S. Senator Sam Brownback in a tight spot. Recall Brownback threw Phill Kline under that bus headed to Politicalexpediencyville to endorse Steve Howe in tomorrow’s Republican primary for Johnson County, KS, state attorney.
KS Pro-life leaders attempted to talk sense into Brownback – encouraging him to remain non-commital in the primary if he was afraid to stand with Phill – but no. Word is Brownback wants to inhabit the KS governor’s mansion in 2010 and chose politics over principle.
So be it. Now Brownback may have to decide between the company he keeps. On one side is his new friend Howe and his baggage and on the other side is his close DC ally Family Research Council and its head, Tony Perkins.
The socially liberal group KS Traditional Republican Majority issued this press release August 1:
Read entire press release here and Perkins’ refutation here.
If Howe were truly conservative, he would never associate with a group that would sink so low as to disparage FRC and Perkins.
Meanwhile, there was a great op ed in yesterday’s Washington Times:
Which election this year is most important to the pro-life cause?…
That’s easy: the presidential. Two numbers – 68, the average age in years of justices on the Supreme Court, and 26, the average tenure in years of justices since 1970….
But a much larger number – 290,000, the number of abortions performed at Planned Parenthood facilities in 2006 – gives pro-lifers reason to believe a much smaller election may prove almost as consequential for their cause. That’s because if he wins re-election for district attorney of Johnson County, KS, Phill Kline will proceed with the only abortion criminal case against PP since the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision….
[I]n October 2007, after years of delay tactics by attorneys for both abortion entities, Mr. Kline filed 107 counts, including 23 felonies, against PP for “unlawful late-term abortions” and other violations….
PP’s… annual income surpasses $1 billion, and it receives more than $350 million yearly in tax-payer subsidies.
A conviction in the KS case would jeopardize that public funding. And it would embolden other state and federal law enforcement officers to consider their own investigations of PP….
Mr. Kline told me every judge who has looked at the case has found probable cause to believe that crimes were committed.
That explains why the abortion lobby spent $1.5 million to defeat Mr. Kline in his 2006 re-election bid for attorney general, and why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund plans to spend $10 million on pro-abortion candidates this year, threefold what it spent in 2006.
It also explains why, after Mr. Kline was appointed to his current office, PP sued him in what Mr. Kline calls “the only case we’ve ever seen in the entire nation where the criminal defendant gets to sue the prosecution.”…
If PP manages to avert justice, Mr. Kline says he will become, “an example as to why, politically, other state officials should not [prosecute illegal acts by the abortion industry].” And both Mr. Kline’s Aug. 5 Republican Primary opponent and his potential Democratic general election opponent have signaled they would discontinue the case.
That’s a prospect sure to relieve the abortion industry, and underscore for pro-lifers why Phill Kline’s election may plausibly be called the second-most-consequential for their cause.
Also see this (click to enlarge):
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
In 2001, Perkins addressed the Council of Conservative Citizens (successor organization to the anti-integration White Citizens Council) – a known racist group with an agenda of white supremacy. [3]
What did he address them about? And how is it disparaging if he did in fact address them?
If Howe were truly conservative, he would never associate with a group that would sink so low as to disparage FRC and Perkins.
Keeping quiet about Phill Kline’s dealings with white supremacists = true conservatism???
That “Perkins’ refutation” is pretty weak.
I’m getting flashbacks to the Army-McCarthy hearings of the ’50s. It seems that one encounter with someone who is “suspected” of wrongdoing is enough to convict this man, by Liberal standards.
And yet, Obama’s many, many long time associations with known radicals and terrorists seems not to be a matter of concern for them. Curious, eh?
As I said before, I’ll eat my stethoscope if Kline ever prevents a single abortion. If he succeeds in damaging PP he’ll be responsible for extra ones.
I predict that Dr. Tiller will retire, possibly soon, and it will have nothing to do with Kline or RTLs. He is too responsible to miss it or ignore it when his skills start to deteriorate as everyone’s do at his age or soon after. If he needs money he’ll write a book or have one ghost-written.
Who do you think is qualified enough to replace Tiller?
Do you mean, qualified enough to replace Dr. Tiller AND willing to live in Kansas? Can’t think of anyone offhand. But it’s unlikely that I’d know whoever it is anyway. I guess I won’t be surprised if Dr. Tiller’s share of the small late-term abortion market moves out of Kansas when he retires, but I also won’t be very surprised if someone replaces him, in fact the only thing that would really surprise me would be if it’s someone I’ve heard of.
If all you mean is who could do late-term abortions, there are plenty of ambitious young surgeons for whom every procedure improves employability. The people who worry about a shortage of late-term providers are mistaking the effects of decreasing demand for a crisis, just like the ones who worry about a shortage of ordinary abortion providers.
Don’t think for a second that the irony of Perkins address to a racist group is lost at all. Especially coming from people who constantly harp on Sanger’s similar address. Awesome. According to the narrative coming from this site regarding Sanger, Perkins FRC is now a totally racist organization.
Perkins/KKK.
That’s like saying Obama is a Christian.
What WHAT!?
http://blog.peta.org/archives/2008/08/evangelists_wif.php
On that note:
Is Christianity the only evangelical religion in the world?
Is that why Christianity and the Pro-Life movement seem to go hand in hand?
I’m not actually surprised by Sen. Brownback’s position on this, as I don’t believe he’s as committed to the Right to Life as many think he is.
His “fetal pain” legislation said it would be okay to abort an unborn baby as long as the baby got pain medicine first: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=39308
Some people just don’t understand the fundamentals of the pro-life movement, which is based around the idea killing innocent people is always wrong.
Jill – what are you claiming about that press release is false?
The WCC is one of the most notoriously racist groups in the US that still manages to exist because they changed their name. If Perkins did in fact address them (which he does not deny), then what about this press release is untrue?
For those of you unfamiliar with the WCC, check this out (I don’t buy for a second that changing their name changed their motives and values):
“As school desegregation increased, in some communities “council schools,” sponsored by the WCC, were set up for white children. Derisively referred to by some as “segregation academies,” some exist even today, although they have generally assumed other sponsorship and most have been forced to integrate, at least in theory, in order to maintain the tax-exempt status afforded to non-profit private schools, which is granted only to those which maintain a policy of racial and ethnic nondiscrimination.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Citizens'_Council
If you were truly not a racist person, why on earth would you want to be affiliated in any way with these people???
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-mccain5-2008aug05,0,5460366.story
(no sexually explicit content)
Here’s a story Jill won’t post – it shows how “truly conservative” McCain is – as he panders to a crowd that thinks its women should be topless and leather clad from the waist down. He so disrespects his wife that he suggests she could win a contest that requires this costume.
Conservatives have some real interesting views. And then they accuse liberals of not having family values?
If you were not a misogynistic/pornophiliac person, why would you want to affiliate with a group like this?
The lack of comments on this thread kind of speaks for itself to me. All you’ve got to do is look it up, and wonder to yourself why a person who doesn’t believe in what a racist organization stands for would speak at one of their conferences. Doesn’t take much wondering for me to figure it out.
Phylo – I kinda want to just sit back and wait and let someone explain to me how a biker rally is so much more morally sound than a gay pride parade.
In other news, this morning, while Phil Kline was pandering for votes so he can continue ignoring every other important legal matter in KS to pursue his vendetta, I talked a coworker out of having an abortion.
Good for you, Amanda!
Well praise the Lord, Amanda! We will never know this side of heaven the joy you have helped bring about. God love you.
Wow Amanda! That is so wonderful and I am so proud of you!
Amanda:11:24: I talked a coworker out of having an abortion.
That is so awesome, I’m crying!! God bless you and your co-worker!
Today is the big day. I understand Kline is down in the polls, 44% to Howe’s 52%. I have also just learned who Steve Howe is…he is one of the attorneys that Kline unceremoniously, and without cause, fired on his first day in office. No small amount of irony there, if he wins.
We’ll all know the results by tonight. Here’s hoping that sanity and good judgment prevail.
Phil is an embarrassment to the Republican party and to the state of Kansas…..
I believe Tony Perkins and his rebuttal.
As I said before, Sam Brownback is a sell-out, not much of a backbone there.
We need more Phil Klines, this guy is stand-up.
“If you were truly not a racist person, why on earth would you want to be affiliated in any way with these people???”
Thats a good question to ask Obama about Rev Wright and his church which Obama attended for 20 years.
Jasper,
What about Tony Perkins speaking for a white-supremacist organization? Or does that sit just fine with you?
It baffles my mind that people yell and yell about Margaret Sanger and all her beliefs, but Tony Perkins can speak at a conference for white supremacists, and that’s just peachy.
People use racism when it suits them, they only use it to push their cause. It only bothers us when people on the “wrong” side of the fence do it.
How sad.
No Elizabeth, Perkins addressed the Council of Conservative Citizens (successor organization to the anti-integration White Citizens Council). It’s quite possible he wasn’t aware that of CCC used to be part of the WCC….
he denied any racist accusations and denonced the views David Duke (former kkk).
“People use racism when it suits them, they only use it to push their cause. It only bothers us when people on the “wrong” side of the fence do it.”
It’s too bad you think that, it’s not true. Comparing PP and margert sanger who don’t mind killing black unborn children to Tony Perkins (who attended a conference with a group that use to be part of another group that was racist) is not fair.
Jasper,
All they did was change their name, they were the same organization.
He didn’t just ATTEND a conference, he SPOKE at that conference, Jasper.
I don’t know, I wouldn’t address ANYONE with ANY affiliation to white supremacists, but that’s just me.
You can’t really be pro-life, and support organizations that would deny those very children entrance into schools based on their race. I mean, you could tell yourself you’re pro-life, but you’re really not.
He also didn’t deny speaking at a conference for a group of white supremacists, so I guess that’s open for interpretation. He may have denounced the views of David Duke, but he didn’t say anything about speaking in front of those white supremacists.
“In other news, this morning, while Phil Kline was pandering for votes so he can continue ignoring every other important legal matter in KS to pursue his vendetta”
Yes, I agree Amanda, protecting unborn children from certain death should always be on the bottom of a AG’s list.
Oh, and Jasper, you’re really going to imply that a man who is seemingly intelligent, didn’t KNOW this was a white supremacy group. Please. All I had to do was a google search to find that out, and nobody has ever asked me to speak anywhere. So, sorry, I’m not buying it. You can, but I certainly don’t.
“You can’t really be pro-life, and support organizations that would deny those very children entrance into schools based on their race. I mean, you could tell yourself you’re pro-life, but you’re really not.”
I agree. I mean, he probably shouldn’t have spoken there, but that doesn’t mean he agrees with their views. I don’t see any racist material on the FRC website.
Hillarious:
Your comments are Hillarious and Ludicrous. Keep smokin’.
I suggest you e-mail Mr. Perkins and ask him to directly address his position on this.i.e. are you a racist?
All these slanders being aimed at Tony are laughable.
HisMan,
WHERE IS THE SLANDER?
He spoke at a conference for white supremacists! He DID that. How is stating what someone has actually done SLANDER?
I never called him a racist, but speaking at a conference for white supremacists calls quite a few questions into my mind, enough for me to not take him too seriously in the things he says/does.
Jasper and Laura, Margaret Sanger was the first half of the Twentieth Century. At that time racism was the norm. Non-racists were considered weirdos.
Racism was not the only strange and oppressive idea floating around. For instance, the Catholic Church had this idea that women should not be allowed to vote, and successfully prevented France from extending voting rights to women until the 1940s.
Previously I challenged readers to identify a single medical lie in any current or recent publication by Planned Parenthood. Unsurprisingly, no one did.
I now add the following challenge: identify (with evidence) anything PP does TODAY that is motivated either by racism or by eugenics.
As before, if anyone succeeds, I will stop doing abortions and never do another one as long as I live.
“For instance, the Catholic Church had this idea that women should not be allowed to vote”
I’d be very interested in seeing magisterial documents that confirm this.
SoMG,
PP doesn’t have to be racist or lie. They do abortions, that’s enough of a reason for me not to like them or have anything to do with their organization.
Elizabeth, PP also prevents abortions. Providing minimal-cost contraceptives to indigent sexually-active women is the most effective strategy for lowering both the number of abortions done and the abortion ratio (the abortion ratio is the number of abortions divided by the number of pregnancies, in other words, how likely any given fetus is to be killed by abortion.) I know some of you dispute that, invoking some version of the “contraceptives-cause-sexual-activity” argument, usually wrapped up in pretty-talk about “the Culture of Life” but let’s just say, if you knew for certain (having been directly informed by the Angel Gabriel) that closing down PP would increase the total number of abortions done (by stopping some sexually-active women from contracepting), how many extra abortions would you be willing to tolerate in order to enjoy the satisfaction of shutting PP down because they do abortions?
Now, SoMG, I am not trying to stop women from contracepting. I mean, if PP is such a valuable resource, then WHY do women “need” abortion at all? What with all the birth-control options out there that they provide, why should anyone find themselves pregnant while contracepting? I never said I needed PP to shut down, I just don’t want them to do abortions. They can offer all the breast and pelvic exams, and all the birth control they want to. With all the low-cost birth control they offer, you’d think more women would be taking advantage of it so they didn’t find themselves unexpectedly pregnant. But hey, who cares about that when you can just have an abortion?
Eliz, you wrote: “I mean, if PP is such a valuable resource, then WHY do women “need” abortion at all?”
All together now, girls: because no contraception technique is perfect. Including abstinance, which does not protect from rape and requires more will power than many people are capable of including people who believe very strongly that they are capable of it. In other words, the subject’s prediction of chastity is not predictive).
Eliz, you wrote: “I never said I needed PP to shut down, I just don’t want them to do abortions. ”
Well if you are typical, then why are there so few and underfunded organizations which are both RTL and pro-bc? The RTL organization overlaps (by membership and by fundraising sources) so strongly with the anti-birth-control movement that I would say a pro-bc anti-abortionist should think seriously about whether or not to ally him/herself with the RTL movement or even call himself “pro-life”.
Imagine an organization just like Crisis Pregnancy Centers in its antiabortion activity but which also handed out free condoms with the free pregnancy tests and did everything PP does except abortions. Supposed it recognized, instead of embarrassing itself trying to deny, the fact that providing minimal-cost contraceptives to indigent sexually-active women is the most effective known strategy for lowering both the number of abortions done and the abortion ratio in a pro-choice country and probably also in non-pro-choice countries. Imagine how much more seriously this organization would be taken as an anti-abortion organization by sympathetic neutrals (including those whose job it is to make decisions objectively) than CPC. Imagine how many more women they could lure in to watch anti-abortion propaganda and hold their little fetus-dolls while “waiting for the results”. What does the fact that there is no such organization say about the RTL movement today? To me it says that it is married to authoritarian anti-non-reproductive-sex measures and that the expressed desire to “stop abortion” is the thin edge of a wedge policy whose goal includes both preventing women from contracepting and (at the wide end of the wedge) criminalizing non-reproductive sex.
Preventing sexually-active women from contracepting is a strongly pro-abortion policy as was indisputably demonstrated by the experience in the USSR in the 1980s.
Hate to say I told you so, but – sorry Jill – your pal is getting OBLITERATED…
http://www.kmbc.com/politics/feature.html
nearly double the votes! Whoops!
“For instance, the Catholic Church had this idea that women should not be allowed to vote”
I’d be very interested in seeing magisterial documents that confirm this.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at August 5, 2008 6:41 PM
……………………………………….
Then why don’t you request them from your local priest? Can you provide any evidence that the RCC supported women’s suffrage before it became fact?
“Then why don’t you request them from your local priest?”
Because he isn’t the one making the unsubstantiated claim.
“Can you provide any evidence that the RCC supported women’s suffrage before it became fact?”
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii_en.html
Bobby B., your link turns up no instance of the words “vote” or “elect” or “franchise” or “sufferage”.
I get it–you’re posting the Encyclical just so we’ll read it, even though it has nothing to do with whether or not the Church opposed women’s sufferage. Cute trick.
Bobby B., when I search your link I find no instance of the words “vote” or “elect” or “franchise” or “suffrage” or even the word “woman” in connection with any discussion of voting rights.
I get it–you’re posting the Encyclical thinking that we’ll be impressed by its length, even though it has nothing to do with whether or not the Church opposed women’s sufferage. Cute trick.
Bobby B, true or false?: In 1930 Pope Pius XI condemned women
Steve Howe has been declared the winner, by a 60 – 40 margin, with 100% of precincts reporting!
SoMG,
I believe what he was saying was that the emancipation of women had to be rightly ordered. If by emancipation you mean that she can neglect her duties as wife and mother, leaving these tasks to “other” then yes, emancipation is not a good thing.
BUT, from a Catholic point of view, a woman does not need to be emancipated from her duties of wife and mother. If she has children then this IS the job she chose. It says nothing about unmarried women.
74. The same false teachers who try to dim the luster of conjugal faith and purity do not scruple to do away with the honorable and trusting obedience which the woman owes to the man. Many of them even go further and assert that such a subjection of one party to the other is unworthy of human dignity, that the rights of husband and wife are equal; wherefore, they boldly proclaim the emancipation of women has been or ought to be effected. This emancipation in their ideas must be threefold, in the ruling of the domestic society, in the administration of family affairs and in the rearing of the children. It must be social, economic, physiological:
OK, googling, I’m getting the impression the Church’s opposition to women’s suffrage in the first half of the Twentieth Century was sort of like Her support for Intelligent Design today–the Church doesn’t support it as a matter of written official policy or by name but most Catholics especially devout Catholics especially Church officers believe and profess that their God is capable of, and necessary for, some physical explanations of observed natural phenomena. Which (if you replace the word God with “unidentified intelligent agent”) is the central postulate of ID.
As far as I can tell, a typical Catholic attitude toward women’s suffrage was expressed by Cardinal Gibbons in 1913:
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9E0DEEDB1F3AE633A25751C2A9629C946296D6CF
Summary: “The Church is formally neutral but I’m against it because it contradicts the Essential Nature of Womanhood [which of course is determined by the Church].”
SoMG,
I never said I was “typical.” I am far from typical in any stretch of your imagination. I’m telling you that *I’m* not out to ban birth-control or anything of the sort and I wouldn’t support such efforts to do so. I’m out to stop abortions. That’s it. Any way I can do that, I’m really okay with (aside from using violence or threats of course). I am aware that many “pro-life” organization are also anti-BC. I personally am not going to use BC now or ever, because I plan to not have sex again until I’m married. That is just my CHOICE. Now while I may not personally agree with other’s choices, I am not out to ban their birth control.
All I want is for people to not have abortions, and as such, can not support an organization that performs abortions.
SoMG,
Again, it’s not the equality of women that was being disputed. It’s the idea that a woman that IS a mother and/or a wife, would be choosing to enter the work force at the expense of her family…can’t you see the difference?
It’s the latch key syndrome. It’s the no one home with the kids.
From things that you have said, I gather your mother was one of the “emancipated” women. Either off at work, or wishing she was. Were you “first” in her life, or were you viewed as a burden? Were you a joy, a vocation, or something that was standing in the way of what she really wanted to be doing. If so, how did that make you feel? How do you think it makes other kids feel?
There is nothing wrong with a women entering a “man’s” world, as long as it isn’t at the cost of something so much more precious…her family.
http://www.kansascity.com/383/story/735553.html
Howe beats Kline in Johnson County
Steve Howe defeated incumbent Phill Kline Tuesday night for the Republic nomination for Johnson County district attorney.
Howe collected 60 percent to Kline
Actually SoMG,
That link is hysterical! He’s saying that it would be a shame to take something as beautiful, graceful, and lovely as a women, and defile her by making her like the scum that are in politics…lol.
Very astute, if you ask me.
He is recognizing that women are amazing, and it would be a step down, not up, if they were to enter the world of politics. He also says that our votes by “proxy” (as in husbands doing what they’re told) is invaluable. I love it!
Not bad for a guy that’s never been married!
Counterpoint: apparently some of the opposition to women’s suffrage was from anti-Catholics who feared women would vote more religiously than men.
SoMG,
Was that counterpoint your way of saying “Hmmm…maybe I was wrong”? Cuz if it was, apology accepted.
:)
All right SoMG,
I’m off to bed. Maybe Bobby will come up with some more. G’Night…
MK, you wrote:”it’s not the equality of women that was being disputed. It’s the idea that a woman that IS a mother and/or a wife, would be choosing to enter the work force at the expense of her family…can’t you see the difference?
It’s the latch key syndrome. It’s the no one home with the kids.”
Why can’t Daddy stay home with the kids?
And no, MK, I don’t think I’m wrong about this. Both Catholics and some anti-Catholics opposed WS.
The same argument Cardinal Gibbons made about Woman, I would make about RTLism. The beautiful fairy tale should not pollute itself with politics.
Elizabeth, then the original question stands: how many extra abortions are you willing to put up with for the satisfaction of seeing PP shut down because they do abortions?
Phil Klown has gone down.
Now we know why Brownback went against him: who wants to team up with a loser?
SoMG,
77. As, however, the social and economic conditions of the married woman must in some way be altered on account of the changes in social intercourse, it is part of the office of the public authority to adapt the civil rights of the wife to modern needs and requirements, keeping in view what the natural disposition and temperament of the female sex, good morality, and the welfare of the family demands, and provided always that the essential order of the domestic society remain intact, founded as it is on something higher than human authority and wisdom, namely on the authority and wisdom of God, and so not changeable by public laws or at the pleasure of private individuals.
This would be the Catholic Answer…It goes against both divine and natural law.
From a secular standpoint, back then there weren’t any jobs that would pay a woman enough to let the husband stay home.
Today, if that’s the way the secular world wants to do it, I’d say, for me personally, it’s against divine law, and is not the first choice, the best choice. However, given todays world, it is certainly a better choice than no parent being at home…
28. Again, this subjection of wife to husband in its degree and manner may vary according to the different conditions of persons, place and time. In fact, if the husband neglect his duty, it falls to the wife to take his place in directing the family. But the structure of the family and its fundamental law, established and confirmed by God, must always and everywhere be maintained intact .
SoMG,
“For instance, the Catholic Church had this idea that women should not be allowed to vote”
This was the statement that started this whole conversation…
Nowhere has it been said by the church that women should not have the right to vote. I think I have clearly shown that Pope Pius encyclical, did not address voting one way or another. What it addressed was the demeaning of a woman’s role in life, were she to to enter the work force at the expense of her family…
Remember SoMG, that to the Church, marriage is not a contract, but a sacrament. And entering this sacrament, we take vows, stating that we understand the roles we will play. We do this voluntarily. The encyclical was not written for the secular world. It was written for Catholics, who view women and their divine purpose differently than the secular world.
You were most likely on the Catholics for Choice site, and as we have discussed, those “Catholics” have been excommunicated. So they hardly represent a viable Catholic viewpoint…
Elizabeth, then the original question stands: how many extra abortions are you willing to put up with for the satisfaction of seeing PP shut down because they do abortions?
Well, that implies that I believe PP will be shut down as a whole. For that to happen, a huge, or GIANT shift in morals would have to happen, and if that happens, then that means people’s ideas about abortion have changed. Or at least changed enough to get a huge organization like PP shut down completely for the sole reason being that they provide abortions.
And what do you mean by “extra abortions I’m willing to put up with?” You mean illegal ones or what? I would actually love it if women didn’t feel like they needed abortions, ever. But that is a more complex problem than just ending abortion I believe.
“Steve Cloud of Lenexa, a national committeeman for the Kansas Republican Party, said he thinks there might have been a negative backlash from all of the out-of-state dollars that were spent.”
Wonder if Kline has called to thank Jill for all her help yet? Do let us know if he does.
SoMG:6:37: Previously I challenged readers to identify a single medical lie in any current or recent publication by Planned Parenthood. Unsurprisingly, no one did.
I now add the following challenge: identify (with evidence) anything PP does TODAY that is motivated either by racism or by eugenics.
As before, if anyone succeeds, I will stop doing abortions and never do another one as long as I live.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think you’re looking for an excuse to stop doing abortions. You don’t need an excuse. Just do it.
“Steve Howe has been declared the winner, by a 60 – 40 margin, with 100% of precincts reporting! ”
Amanda,
you can’t contain your glee, can you? Abortion/PP lives another day.
mk,
EXCELLENT comments!
Jasper,
Do you REALLY think this guy would END abortion?
Did you miss the part about how Amanda talked a co-worker OUT of an abortion today?
No pats on the back from you I noticed.
LOL @ jasper. Because if Kline won, abortion was going to end and PP would slam its doors in fear? Hehehehe…
Amanda, not to bug you but can you share your story with us? I’m interested in the conversation.
Lol my friends and I were watching “Secret Life of an American Teen” tonight and they were talking about abortion, my friend said she thought the girl was too far along to get one. I said, “It’s legal up until around 24 weeks, but even if it was longer she could probably find a clinic that would give her a late term one.” Everyone looked at me, my friend said “Wow you know a lot about abortion.” I mentioned this site : )
I also said since it’s our bodies and lives and the bodies and lives of our sisters, mothers, friends, ect we should be well informed.
Everyone looked at me, my friend said “Wow you know a lot about abortion.” I mentioned this site : )
Posted by: Jess at August 5, 2008 11:53 PM
Good job Jess!
its hard for me to give much detail without potentially invading her privacy. Shes in a tough spot with a guy who is not Dad material.
Jess, Are any of your friends pro-life?
Shes in a tough spot with a guy who is not Dad material.
You can give her my facebook address if you want Amanda! I’m always willing to talk as one who’s been THERE!
Jasper and Laura, Margaret Sanger was the first half of the Twentieth Century. At that time racism was the norm. Non-racists were considered weirdos.
In your neighborhood, maybe?
“Do you REALLY think this guy would END abortion?”
Elizabeth,
Phil Kline has many lawsuits waiting against PP for their slaughtering of unborn children (many who could have been birthed). He’s one of a few politicians that have an guts and takes a stand.
But, I wouldn’t except pro-choicers (yourself and Amanda) to support him anyway.
See, being pro-life is not only being personally pro-life. It’s about supporting candidates who will protect the santity of life.
“Did you miss the part about how Amanda talked a co-worker OUT of an abortion today?”
That yes great that she did that and I will congratulate her now. Maybe she can share with why she did it.
I have this friend whose a Baptist and whose really pro-life. She’s so stupid though, she has sex and doesn’t use protection half the time even though she would never get an abortion but doesn’t want a kid right now. She told me I’m a baby killer because I’ve taken Plan B but she takes the pill, so I don’t see the difference. She also talks about being “saved” as in “You don’t know how good it feels to be saved!” My response, “You don’t know how good it feels to have a father who loves you!” She brings out the worst in people and I like that : )
Everyone in my family is pro-life. All like, 175 of them.
Jess, I’m not sure I understand the point you are making. What does it mean to be “really pro-life”? You need to tell your friend to be smarter about her choices. I think she’s confused.
I had a friend who says she’s pro-life but when she had a pregnancy scare she said she would abort. I guess that’s “fake pro-life”?
Jasper, you wrote: “See, being pro-life is not only being personally pro-life. It’s about supporting candidates who will protect the santity of life. ”
As opposed to candidates who will prevent abortions.
Same question to you: how many extra abortions would you be willing to put up with (caused by increasing the cost of contracepting) in order to get the satisfaction of shutting down PP because they do abortions?
Whatever “they” did, it worked. Kline is out.
Too funny.
Jill Stanek political endorsement = kiss of death.
lol @ Jasper calling Elizabeth Pro Choice and lecturing her on how to be pro life. Don’t you get all bent out of shape when people lecture you on being a better Christian? Learn a lesson from that and don’t lecture people on being a better pro lifer. Elizabeth has certainly managed to discuss her pro life views without being a bigot, promoting vigilantiasm, or being crude or offensive. When Elizabeth posts, I read, think about what she’s said, and consider it. I can’t say the same for you.
Thanks Amanda,
Jasper, I would looove for you to enter the real world with me for a second. Yeah, I have no problem with this guy going after PP for the bad things they have done. No.problem.whatsoever. But you seem to think this guy would actually END abortion? Come on, please, get out of your dream world. It would take A LOT more than one guy to end abortion.
And as far as being only personally pro-life, please. I’ve gone out and protested, held the graphic signs, voted for the most pro-life candidates (as there could be in a given election), so REALLY, call me pro-choice if you want to, but I’ll just laugh cause you’re SO close-minded that anybody who doesn’t fit into your little definition of what YOU think pro-life means is automatically pro-choice. Nice try though. :)
Same question to you: how many extra abortions would you be willing to put up with (caused by increasing the cost of contracepting) in order to get the satisfaction of shutting down PP because they do abortions?
Posted by: SoMG at August 6, 2008 2:32 AM
Straw Man alert.
Sorry not taking the bait of this false premise.
According to state statistics, abortions rise whenever Planned Parenthood sets up a facility.
Too funny.
Jill Stanek political endorsement = kiss of death.
Posted by: even more hilarious at August 6, 2008 8:55 AM
Phil Kline is alive and well today, and does not need a political office to make a difference. He may actually be taking a sight of relief that the race is over knowing he can move on. It’s much too soon to dismiss him. (Just a hunch on my part.)
Same question to you: how many extra abortions would you be willing to put up with (caused by increasing the cost of contracepting) in order to get the satisfaction of shutting down PP because they do abortions?
Posted by: SoMG at August 6, 2008 2:32 AM
Maybe that’s a question for the drug companies that manufacture the contraceptives.
Phil Kline is alive and well today, and does not need a political office to make a difference.
Too true! I mean, he held two different offices and didn’t make a whit of difference in either of them! Unless you count the total disdain for his ability to actually do the job he was elected to do that the state of Kansas has for him now…
“Phil Kline is alive and well today, and does not need a political office to make a difference.”
Too true! I mean, he held two different offices and didn’t make a whit of difference in either of them! Unless you count the total disdain for his ability to actually do the job he was elected to do that the state of Kansas has for him now…
Posted by: still giggling at August 6, 2008 1:15 PM
hilarious/giggling: (Can you stick to one name, although it is fun to be creative…)
Only a pro-choicer would not comprehend the positive influence Phil Kline has had on the pro-life movement in the U.S. He has brought the horror of the abortion industry to the attention of millions of people. What else can I say?
Don’t be too hasty to slam Brownback. We need him to replace Sebelius and hold George Tiller accountable.
He has brought the horror of the abortion industry to the attention of millions of people. What else can I say?
Yes, and they were all so horrified that they….refused to vote for him.
Glad you are having so much fun, hilarious.
Phil Kline has been an example to many. Other politicians in other states will feel more empowered to go after abortionists and their clinics. The fight for life continues……
Carla, no offense, but that is an incredibly naive statement. Other politicians will feel more empowered to go after abortion clinics by Phill Kline’s example? Um, only if they don’t care what the electorate has to say about it with their votes.
“Don’t you get all bent out of shape when people lecture you on being a better Christian?”
No, I don’t actually.
again, why don’t you tell why you talked the girl out of an abortion. You phoney you.
Wow, Jasper, you never cease to amaze me with how much of a jerk you can be. You’re such a GREAT pro-life example. Thanks!
Your opinion, Hilarious, doesn’t offend me.
“Wow, Jasper, you never cease to amaze me with how much of a jerk you can be.”
why am I a jerk? I’m asking her why she talked the women out of an abortion? I mean, maybe we just caught her in another lie? why can’t she tell us?
Calling someone a phoney before they even answered the question you’ve asked isn’t exactly promoting conversation now is it, Jasper?
What other “lies” have you caught Amanda in? I talk to Amanda all the time (not on this website) and I find her to be very honest, even though I don’t agree with every single thing she says.
Other politicians will take a lesson from Kline’s defeat: do your job at least halfway decently and don’t be a grandstander; don’t abuse your authority.
jasper, I’m pro-choice and I’ve helped women find options besides abortion. A lot of women feel pressured to abort — they often say things like, “I want this baby but I can’t keep it” — and they need to know that they CAN keep the baby, that they have the right to and that they have access to the resources to. I think that supporting these women is something pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike can get behind.
Thats good Alexandra. Can I ask you why you helped these women out of an abortion?
Amanda, sorry for the “phoney” comment. I’m interested though in why you talked the woman out of an abortion.
jasper, as I said above, many women feel pressured to abort when this is not the choice they would like to make. Why wouldn’t I want to help these women?
Just because I think abortion should be legal doesn’t mean that I think every woman should go out and have one.
“Just because I think abortion should be legal doesn’t mean that I think every woman should go out and have one.”
why not? please explain…
Because many women regret their abortions, so if I see someone saying that they don’t want to have an abortion but that they have no choice, I want to spare them the pain of eventually realizing that they DID have a choice, and that they made the wrong one.
Because many women think they cannot finish school unless they have an abortion, or find someone who will love them unless they have an abortion, or accomplish any of their other goals unless they have an abortion. And that’s not true.
etc.
“I want to spare them the pain of eventually realizing that they DID have a choice, and that they made the wrong one.”
Why do you think they would’ve made the wrong choice?
“Because many women regret their abortions”
why do you think that is?
btw: thanks for answering…
No problem.
Why do you think they would’ve made the wrong choice?
Because if they regret it for the rest of their lives, it’s probably not the right choice. Obviously you can’t know beforehand who will, but there are certainly indications that a woman is feeling pressured, whether directly or indirectly.
I think women who regret their abortions tend to be women who felt like they had no other option. So I’m all for making sure that women know they have other options, in a practical sense rather than just a theoretical sense.
“Because if they regret it for the rest of their lives, it’s probably not the right choice.”
But why? why do think they regret it? what is it about abortion that you think they regret?
But why? why do think they regret it? what is it about abortion that you think they regret?
I think they regret believing that having an abortion would erase everything. I think they regret taking a life. If you listen to women who regret their abortions — like Carla — then I think it’s pretty clear what they regret.
And now I’ve actually got work to do — who would’ve thought? — so I need to step away.
“I think they regret taking a life.”
You believe unborn children are living?
if so,
why do you think it should be legal to take a life?
why do you think it should be legal to take a life?
It basically comes down to the fact that I don’t think you should be able to legally require a person to donate the use of their body to another.
Ok, at least you’re honest that killing people should be legal.
Do I you have to donate my body to provide for my children? feeding them, clothing them and housing them, paying for their medical bills?
Would it be ok if I stopped donating my body for this?
You don’t have to donate your body to provide for your children. If you had the opportunity to donate the use of your body, you probably would — like if one of your kids needed blood or a kidney — but you would not be legally required to.
In addition, you are welcome to not provide for them at all, by transferring the responsibility of their care to another person.
“You don’t have to donate your body to provide for your children.”
why yes I do, my body excerts time/energy for this effort in supporting them.
“In addition, you are welcome to not provide for them at all, by transferring the responsibility of their care to another person.”
But this could take time to do. What if I want to end donating my body to them today, do you mind? you think a pregnant woman should be able to at any time, why can’t I? she is not required to “hand over the responsibility to somebody else” and finish the pregnancy. why the double standard?
jasper, please don’t be offended, but I’ve had this conversation before and I’m a bit worn out to be having it again right now. It will always come down to right to life versus right to deny use of one’s body, and we disagree on how to reconcile that issue. I think the best reconciliation is to allow women the right to deny use of their body, but to make every effort to help them choose alternative measures; you disagree. You asked why a pro-choice person would want to help a woman avoid abortion, and I answered your question. Can we say that’s enough for right now? :)
Yes, thats fine thanks. You can get back to your work now…I have to too :)
That website is just disgusting. I don’t have sound on my speakers but I have seen a couple of their skits and the sickest part about it is that our tax dollars go to pay for that garbage.
Oops, I posted on the wrong thread.
:: bopping Bethany on the head with an enormous styrofoam bat ::