In the wake of Tiller’s murder, pro-abort attempts to intimidate grow fierce
Pro-aborts are continuing to take advantage of late-term abortionist George Tiller’s murder to shut pro-life activists up through intimidation or abortion-friendly political force.
Sorry, Cecile. Requests by the largest chain of abortion mills in the U.S. to stop protesting them are wasted.
Remember, there has never been a more pro-abortion president, and both houses of Congress are currently run by pro-aborts. In addition, the White House is stuffed with members of the abortion industry.
The attempts to intimidate are greater than ever….
And, of course, there is the pro-abortion media.
Add this all together, and these are perilous times for pro-life activism.
I will restate what I wrote the other day. Do not blink. Go on about your pro-life activism business. And don’t let anyone attempt to take away your First Amendment rights.
Sage words from Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life:
I have been asked what I think the biggest negative effect of this killing will be on our pro-life movement. Does it tar the movement’s reputation? Yes, it does, despite the fact that those who kill abortionists are always disconnected from pro-life organizations. Does it make the government reach too far in clamping down on First Amendment activity against abortion? Yes, it does and it will.
But those are not the biggest dangers.
The biggest danger is the enemy within. It is the fear and self-doubt to which we can all too easily fall victim. It is the voice inside that makes us feel guilty for saying “Abortion is murder” or “Abortion is a holocaust” or “The babies who are being killed need to be defended now.” It is the fear inside that keeps us from going out to the abortion mills and intervening to save the children scheduled to be killed there each day.
The biggest danger is that some will listen to those in the pro-abortion movement who try to lay blame for violence on us and who, as one person wrote on my blog, think that saying “Abortion is murder” should be prosecuted because it leads to violence against abortionists….
This is no time to shrink back from the reality of what is going on every day in abortion. Children are being killed, and the reason it continues is that too many of our fellow citizens are blind to it.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail, responded to criticisms that the civil rights activists were fomenting violence. No, he said. That’s like saying the person who owns money is fomenting the activity of the robber. To expose the violence that is already occurring, to call it what it is, and to sound the alarm that it has to stop, is not to foment violence.
The pro-life movement is a movement of non-violence. As Ghandi and Dr. King taught, and as we teach, non-violence is not passivity, and it is not obscurity. It is a force. It is a clear and strong response against violence, in whatever form that violence takes.
Let the outcry against Tiller’s murder be loud and clear. And let the outcry against the murders he committed – and that other abortionists commit – be loud and clear as well.
Here’s a reminder from Fr. Pavone of the caliber of people we’re dealing with, words from George Tiller’s own mouth explaining the late-term abortion procedure he committed, with no qualms whatsoever.
Also hear Tiller himself brag he had murdered over 60,000 preborn babies and that his “area of expertise and major interest” was late-term abortions.
I posted this elsewhere, but I think it is especially important to note that the man who killed George Tiller was suffering from schizophrenia and not taking medication.
He was not in a sane frame of mind. He acted alone, and unannounced. Pro-life groups and individuals denounce the murder and are praying for Tiller’s family.
That’s really all that needs to be said.
“When a right-wing Christian vigilante kills, millions of fingers pull the trigger. When a left-wing Muslim vigilante kills, he kills alone. These are the instantly ossifying narratives in the Sunday shooting death of late-term abortion provider George Tiller of Kansas versus the Monday shootings of two Arkansas military recruiters.” Michelle Malkin
I am so angry at the media coverage, which is completely and totally focused on the pro death side.
Tiller was a saint, abortion is good, and pro lifers are nut cases. That about sums it up.
Tiller has been compared to Martin Luther King and other legitimate and worthy heroes…. all because he was dedicated to “women’s health.”
Apparently we have reached the point now where killing innocent babies isn’t just tolerated but applauded.
Also the “news” media has reported the lack of abortionists and how only three in the entire USA were willing to do late term abortions but in all cases the reason why more doctors wont do them is because they are afraid for themselves or their familes….. absolutely none acknowledge the fact that the more likely reason for most is THEY KNOW LATE TERM ABORTION IS WRONG.
Of courase I belive all abortion is wrong, but even among abortionists many will draw the line.
With the exception of Fox the “news” media is Pravda and absolutely sickening in its bias.
what is disgusting is in my local paper, comments on the article about the killer being caught and jailed have been vicious against pro lifers. One person even said she made a DONATION TO PLANNED PARENTHOOD in Tiller’s name!
And a few of them were THANKING Carhart for being there to kill babies (though they didn’t say “killing babies”. Its disgusting.
I believe there are three groups who have abortions: those who are distraught and think this is their ONLY choice; those who are selfish and abort for any reason (rock concert, surfing, etc), and also abort multiple times; then there are the ones who are coerced into abortions by husbands, boyfriends, parents, the guy’s parents…..
Fetal Development should be a part of biology class by the 6th grade. Many are very ignorant of fetal development until they see ultrasounds or work in a NICU or something.
ummm….How come they can’t even say the “A” word word?? (ABORTIONIST!!!)
Why replace the A-word with words like ‘medical practitioner’, ‘doctors’, ‘hospitals’?
They make it sound like Tiller was an innocent family doctor that everybody loves.
Liz: many young people go into university and college prolife but leave very much proabortion.
The problem is not in the elementary schools. The problem lies in our institutes of “higher” learning and the “culture” that resides there. We still very much have the baby boomer, contracepting liberal elite running things. Kids must not only deal with the contraceptive hook-up culture on campus, but they have a ton of crap in their courses to wade through. For example, one of my college-age children had to read an article on how the world would be different if men could menstruate. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
I think we bear absolutely NO moral culpability at all in Tiller’s death. The man who murdered Tiller is not well and hasn’t been for years. He had no serious ties to any legitimate prolife group.
What the proaborts like Amanda Marcotte want is for us to stop calling abortion what it is – the killing of a very helpless unborn human being. They have based their entire platform of reproductive freedom on the shaky foundation of denying an whole group of persons, humanity.
Angel. Exactly. The man who killed Tiller was schizophrenic. He happened to choose abortion as his pet issue, but it could have been anything. Schizophrenia is a tragic disease.
I hope that he will people to help him get the medicine he needs. I have an aunt with schizophrenia who is doing very well now that she is on the correct medication.
Prior to getting on meds she was driving up to DC to meet with the president! Thankfully she only made it half way before her care broke down and the police realized she was not in her right mind.
what is disgusting is in my local paper, comments on the article about the killer being caught and jailed have been vicious against pro lifers. One person even said she made a DONATION TO PLANNED PARENTHOOD in Tiller’s name!
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 3, 2009 1:20 PM
-Liz, I would hope that if you are this upset about the media coverage then you and other PLers would exercise the free speech allegedly in jeapordy, and write back. Or volunteer more or donate funds. I know I am. These are all options available to both sides, so don’t sure why you are outraged to hear the support of Dr. Tiller?
Sorry, the above should say, ‘not sure why you are outraged…’
The pro aborts would have their hero alive today if he had been found guilty and locked up for his misdemeanors. Talk about “Karma”
He also is facing a loss of license. That is now forgotten.
The drama and fake outrage is tied to the fact that life benefits from his departure. Both sides know that and they want to drive a wedge. I can’t tell you how angry it makes them when they see a huge recent shift in favor of life.
All of this pro-abortion backlash is simply not about women’s rights, it is simply about the lust for power:
Here’s a re-post of my April 2007 post.
“Since abortion makes no sense to any rationally thinking person, there has to be other reasons for pro-aborts’ “death grip” on this so-called “death right” .
It is no secret to me what abortion truly is and why I think it is used as a means to hold political power. I state it again as posted on previous threads as follows:
“You have to realize that pro-deathers are not driven by logic. They are driven by the lust for power, perhaps abortion followers without realizing it, but its leaders and initiators, guilty as hell.
They are no different than the poor man who fantasizes about taking the rich man’s watch without regard to how or why the rich man acquired the watch; while poor materially, they lack no prejudice. They feel totally justified in their position, not because of logic but in some sinister form of perverted self-righteousness not thoroughly arrived at, at having simply arrived. Perhaps this itself feeds the power demon inside them, at just being able to arrive, at joining up: “I’m in the club now and no one will every kick me out, not even me”.
They reject anyone or anything in authority that would tell them how to live including God Himself and it’s generally masked in the facade of women’s rights. Which when you analyze it, is a very parasitical way of thinking. I mean, they kill unborn baby woman too don’t they? How dare they use the issue of abortion to bolster their sense of self-hood. Again, the perverted, twisted and demented logic shows its ugly head from every angle of the looking glass. Ah, but they see in a mirror darkly? No, the light’s off.
So, when they acknowledge the horror of a baby cooking video, or talk about how bad kicking a dead baby in a bag is, or allowing a baby to die in a toilet in an abortion deathatorium despite the pleas of the mother for the baby’s life, they really are acknowledging the horror of abortion since to not do so would be illogical. What they fail to realize is that in doing so, they for a moment remove their masks, and their K-9 fangs show through the sheepskin, scaring even themselves. Does a werewolf know who he is?”
Liz said: “One person even said she made a DONATION TO PLANNED PARENTHOOD in Tiller’s name!”
I had the same reaction as Danielle. Why is that so shocking? It is customary when someone dies to give money to causes supported by the deceased. Lots of people have been giving in Dr. Tiller’s name to Planned Parenthood and Medical Students for Choice.
Only prochoicers would see no problems with giving money to the largest provider of abortions that lies to women, exploits them in the name of ‘choice’ and indoctrinates our youth into lifestyles that cause many of the problems in our world. Not to mention that the founder of said group was a EUGENICIST RACIST that wanted to eliminate the Black race and was most likely an admirer of Hitler himself.
Said group also already gets $$$$$$$$ from the US Government and is in NO NEED of $$$$ at all.
I’d rather give money to a CPC that actually HELPS, supports and loves women throughout their pregnancy and afterwards.
Medical students for death. Some people should never become doctors or nurses!
“I will restate what I wrote the other day. Do not blink. Go on about your pro-life activism business. And don’t let anyone attempt to take away your First Amendment rights.”
Absolutely right, Jill. Just as abolitionists continued the fight against slavery without ceasing even after Harper’s Ferry, so must we continue to fight abortion even after Tiller’s murder.
Please give, give and then give some more to your local crisis pregnancy center!! In His name.
Prochoicer,
I find it highly ironic that people are making donations in the name of a man who was murdered to an organization that promotes killing.
“anonymous at 2:53” was me. Seems like every time I reboot, my ID gets lost.
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 3, 2009 2:50 PM:
“Only prochoicers would see no problems with giving money to the largest provider of abortions that lies to women, exploits them in the name of ‘choice’ and indoctrinates our youth into lifestyles that cause many of the problems in our world. Not to mention that the founder of said group was a EUGENICIST RACIST that wanted to eliminate the Black race and was most likely an admirer of Hitler himself.”
-Well, yes, I would suppose if I wasn’t pro-choice and shared your opinion on abortion providers, I probably wouldn’t donate to PP, NARAL, NNAF, MSC, etc. either.
“I’d rather give money to a CPC that actually HELPS, supports and loves women throughout their pregnancy and afterwards.”
-Then do so. No one is stopping you. No one’s stopping any of us. I gave some money to NNAF the other day. Each of us is finding ways of supporting our beliefs.
Yes, but you are begging the question. We know YOU don’t approve of Planned Parenthood. But why is it shocking that a pro-choice supporter would give money to a pro-choice organization in honor of another pro-choice supporter?
The sense I get at this site is that you view ANYTHING a pro-choicer does as wrong.
“We just found out that Dr. Carhart HAS BREAKFAST EVERY MORNING!!!”
“Oh my gosh, he has breakfast?!?!?!?”
Me: “What’s wrong with having breakfast?”
“How could he possibly have breakfast when he murders babies every day?????”
The above is meant to be satirical, but that’s what this site feels like.
Marcotte’s commentary says nothing new. I can’t bring myself to read the whole thing it’s so full of the usual pro-abort rhetoric. She seems to have no confidence in the medical establishment. Since when does a woman need an abortionist to take care of a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy? When, pray tell, have we ever heard of a doctor refusing to care for a woman with this condition? Never.
“Medical Students for Choice”
I hope there’s a Medical Students for Life group as well!
I’m also not going to stop pointing out the evil of what Tiller was doing — especially not now that people are curious about him and wondering what might drive a man to shoot him.
(Schizophrenia, it turns out, but still.)
I will not stop pointing out that Tiller was deplorable even by abortionist standards. That he did things that ought to appall and disgust even a prochoice citizen. Like the time he left a baby blind, paralyzed, and mentally retarded because he injected formaldehyde into her brain. And the best anybody could say to defend him on THAT count would be that most of the time he injected enough formaldehyde to kill the baby right away — only that one lingered for 8 years — and besides he later switched to digoxin in the heart and that’s much surer and faster. (Not exactly a redeeming quality in my book.)
On the other hand, you can deplore what a person did and still not want them murdered. I was dismayed to learn that Jeffrey Dahmer had been murdered in prison. The man had been tried and convicted and was serving his time. The deplorable nature of his crimes didn’t make it okay to murder him. The same for George Tiller. The deplorable nature of his crimes didn’t make it okay to murder him. And it accomplished nothing, since Carhart and the other butchers will keep the work up anyway. Tiller had been serving mostly as a figurehead and political purchaser in recent years anyway.
Christina:
You may not know this but Jeffrey Dahmer repented of his sins and was even baptized by immersion before he was murdered in prison.
While he many not have been able to escape the physical consequences for his horrible acts of murder, he sure was able to escape the eternal consequences.
None of us is without sin, however, we must continue to speak out against the horror of abortion. How can we not?
If we have breath God can forgive anyone of anything, even Jeffrey Dahmer, even Dr. Tiller, even me. However, a condition of that divine forgiveness is that we must admit and confess wrong, i.e., agree with God that it is wrong, and forsake it.
God is not mocked. We can only partake of the divine nature on His terms and conditions as revealed in His Word.
I found this group Janet.
http://www.uwmedstudents.com/studentorgs/MSFL/
BS”D
We ought to borrow a term the liberal media and the Obama administration uses to describe the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians: the “cycle of violence.” They use this term to promote a false moral equvalence between Hamas terrorists and Israel’s defensive response. But the term is actually better applied here, between the violence of the abortion industry and the violence of a small number of militant anti-abortionists. Those who oppose both forms of violence need to demand peace talks to end this cycle of violence before it escalates and goes nuclear.
Brett Beirt just did i nice piece on the subject of this post. I was high fivin’ the flatscreen… lol
He is about to highlight it again after the commercial break. I am on CST. : )
Thanks Carla!
Hey…. how about this! Anderson Cooper actually interviewed a pro life woman who did not have a late term abortion but instead gave birth to her little girl who died in her arms 12 hours later.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2009/06/03/cnns-cooper-spotlights-woman-who-decided-against-late-term-abortion
For example, one of my college-age children had to read an article on how the world would be different if men could menstruate.
I’m assuming it was the Gloria Steinem one? The humorous essay? What did you find offensive in it? It’s meant to be tongue-in-cheek, but it also is useful in demonstrating that our culture inherently treats things that are exclusively feminine as though they are somehow undesirable, and consequently uses them to justify making certain rights or privileges male-only. Or, on the flip side, that exclusively masculine traits are portrayed as desirable and as an indication that men are better suited to certain rights or privileges than women. Regardless, it’s not like it says anything grossly radical or sexist like, “If men could menstruate they would finally stop being massive idiots” or some other such nonsense.
Anyway it’s ridiculous for people to want pro-lifers to stop calling abortion killing or whatever — basically it neuters the opposition to abortion because it silences the justification for opposing abortion. If you can’t say, “Abortion is wrong because it is the killing of a human being,” then all you’re left with is, “Abortion is wrong,” to which someone just has to respond, “That’s your opinion.” It basically forces the issue to be one of personal opinion rather than legal ethics, and frames the debate in an area most pro-choicers are most comfortable residing in — that being, “You can disagree with me about abortion being okay as long as you agree with me that whether it’s okay or not isn’t too important.”
Roeder was an anti-government criminal with a history of mental illness. So, a crazy guy with no respect for authority.
Blaming pro-life organizations that had been seeking peaceful justice for Dr. Tiller for his death, well, it’s akin to having a 7th grader tell her friend that sometimes she hates her parents, having the friend kill the parents, and then blaming the 7th grader.
Except that in this case, it wasn’t hate speech that the Pro-life leaders were putting out there. It was a call to legal and non-violent action. Peaceful action to save the lives of babies.
Posted by: Prochoicer at June 3, 2009 3:08 PM
“The sense I get at this site is that you view ANYTHING a pro-choicer does as wrong.”
——————————————————
I read somewhere that an abortionists ratted out a competitor to the IRS.
I saw a news article somewhere that said an abortionist committed ‘choice’ on himself.
I saw piece on the network news where an abortionist gave his wife roses for mother’s day.
Do you want some more stunning examples of pro-choicers doing something ‘right’?
yor bro ken
Jerry, the man who killed Tiller is a MENTALLY ILL man. He is NOT associated with anyone in the Pro Life Movement. Pro Lifers do NOT endorse violence (one reason we are against abortion, because its a violent act done to an innocent unborn child).
No, in the end GOD, the author of LIFE, will prevail and there will be justice for all, BORN and UNBORN, disabled, and elderly.
Liz,
The troll above “Jerry” has polluted every thread here using a different name in each one. I guess its not surpring trolls are starting to come here as intimidation is there game. They want us to shut up as they know the pro life side is winning.
And although I agree with you 100% there is no reasoing with someone like him.
And yes there will be justice for all eventually and may it come sooner rather than later.
Posted by: Jerry Johnston at June 3, 2009 6:28 PM
——————————————————
Jerry,
Whatever it is you have been smoking or injecting taking orally or rectally you really need to stop. You have lost touch with reality.
Suggest you go to the library and read some American history books written prior to 1960.
Historical revisionism has taken a toll on your intellect.
Walk slowly, breathe deeply and drink lots of water.
It may take some time but your sanity will return.
Michelle Malkin:
“When a right-wing Christian [ms malkin may be assuming facts not yet in evidence when she identifies Roeder as ‘christian’] vigilante kills, millions of fingers pull the trigger.
When a left-wing Muslim vigilante kills, he kills alone. These are the instantly ossifying narratives in the Sunday shooting death of late-term abortion provider George Tiller of KS versus the Monday shootings of two AR military recruiters….”
From Ann Coulters weekly column:
“Tiller was protected not only by a praetorian guard of elected Democrats, but also by the protective coloration of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America – coincidentally, the same church belonged to by Tiller’s fellow Wichita executioner, the BTK killer.
The official Web page of the ELCA instructs: “A developing life in the womb does not have an absolute right to be born.” As long as we’re deciding who does and doesn’t have an “absolute right to be born,” who’s to say late-term abortionists have an “absolute right” to live?
I wouldn’t kill an abortionist myself, but I wouldn’t want to impose my moral values on others. No one is for shooting abortionists.
But how will criminalizing men [like Roeder] making difficult, often tragic, decisions be an effective means of achieving the goal of reducing the shootings of abortionists?
Following the moral precepts of liberals, I believe the correct position is: If you don’t believe in shooting abortionists, then don’t shoot one.”
——————————————————-
I wish I had I had said that.
yor bro ken
Alexandra, well put!
Joanne @ 6:07,
That was a very touching story that Cooper did. I was pleasantly surprised. He seems to have more respect for the pro-life position than some of the other MSM anchors. Thanks for the link.
Janet,
Anderson has more respect for life than ANY other anchor with the exception of the ones on Fox.
The other “news” networks are nothing but state run propagnada and completely pro abortion. Our side isnt being represented at all. Barely even a mention of the fact that Tiller’s death was condemned by virtually all pro life groups.
Alexandra – no it was not tongue in cheek, nor was it some kind of lark. He had to write an essay on the article and it was discussed in class.
One could put a positive spin on things like this and say “well at least he gets to defend his beliefs and sort them out.”
But seriously, is this sort of thing what young people SHOULD be discussing in university?
It’s beyond ridiculous since everyone KNOWS a man cannot menstruate.
This is how feminist studies have overtaken our universities and men are bailing by the dozens.
I have heard good things about Cooper.
It’s beyond ridiculous since everyone KNOWS a man cannot menstruate.
That’s not the point of the essay. That’s actually basically the exact opposite of the point of the essay.
say what Alexandra?
The point is that this is simply a silly topic for a young man. Why would you pose a stupid hypothetical situation? It’s one thing to pose a hypothetical situation but this is beyond the pale. Apparently few of the men did the assignment.
Why was my post deleted?
As I already stated, angel, you would pose such a hypothetical situation to put up for debate the idea that inherently male traits are seen as desirable or reason for inclusion, while inherently female traits are seen as undesirable or reason for exclusion.
Alexandra, unintentional. It’s back.
Thanks, Jill, I just saw that and was wondering if I’d gone mad!
no that is NOT why the article was mandatory reading. They were not debating male and female traits. This was NOT a feminist studies course. It was an ETHICS course! Even the women objected to the assignment. When you have 50 or 60 articles to read, you don’t want to waste your time reading feminist garbage.
My son does not pay thousands of dollars to go to school to meditate on why he doesn’t have a monthly period and what male traits are desirable over female ones. Good grief. :(
HEather,
Anderson is the only one on the Communist News Network who isn’t completely far left and in Barry’s pocket.
Likewise Joe Scarborough on MSLSD is the only exception to the far left.
Also, the pro late term abortion mentality is rampant here on the internet. One blogger asked people to post their late term abortion stories. One poster asked why her post about regretting her abortion was deleted. The response she got is they werent looking for stories like hers, they only wanted ones that had these abortions and were “grateful” to Tiller for what he did.
I just saw a great T shirt on WND with regard to the hate crimes legislation and I think it fits perfectly for the abortion debate too:
“Truth is Hate to those who Hate the Truth”
love it!
The response she got is they werent looking for stories like hers, they only wanted ones that had these abortions and were “grateful” to Tiller for what he did.
Posted by: Joanne at June 3, 2009 7:31 PM
yeah, abortion simply CAN’T be bad! Can’t have that now.
This is a perfect example of pro”choice” women not being open to what abortion means to many women, when they dismiss a whole group of women whose experiences do not jive with their ideology.
Then again,what do we expect from people who believe a whole group of persons are not entitled to live?
no that is NOT why the article was mandatory reading. They were not debating male and female traits.
Again, angel, debating male and female traits is not the point of the essay. Discussing how society views male and female traits is, as I’ve already stated twice now.
And if, as you say, the point of reading the essay was not to discuss how society views female traits versus male traits, then what was it?
If there had been an essay substituting views on religious tolerance towards Muslims with religions tolerance towards Christians, would you be so taken aback? Personally I would consider it a valid exercise in examining our cultural attitudes towards minority and majority religions, and what counts as persecution for each.
For a good essay on the Tiller killing, go to:
http://www.christorchaos.com
and click on “Reichstag II” on June1.
Angel — you really ought to read the steinem essay called “If Men Could Menstruate.” I am not able to post the link from my blackberry but you can find it easily with google. It is a short and very funny essay, but it makes a serious point.
Basically the idea is that we tend to posit male traits as positive and female traits as negative on a completely arbitrary basis. If men could menstruate and women couldn’t, our culture would view menstruation much more positively and would probably use women’s failure to menstruate as an excuse to look down on them or keep them out of certain activities.
It was a widely read and influential essay when it came out. Can’t see why it would be inappropriate for college reading.
thanks Margaret but I’m not a Steinem fan. Never was, never will be. She’s in the same league a Simone de Beauvoir. I see very little that’s positive in her writing.
I think Gloria’s hypotheses are very wrong.
Perhaps if students could read Edith Stein or Alice von Hildebrand, Kathleen van Shaijik I might be more agreeable. :) But then they don’t share the same ideology at all with those passe feministas! :D
Gloria Steinem is nutty.
My parents think jerry falwell is nutty but they didn’t object when I was assigned to read his book in class. He is an influential figure so it is important for college students to know what he thinks. Same goes for gloria steinem.
Dear Angele, I hope you are doing well, and thanks for the good wishes. I was thinking, Have you ever thought about starting a support group for women who’ve head abortions?
Just curious, what college majors have someone reading Gloria Steinem or Jerry Fawell? What happened to the classics?
Lots of majors, Janet. Usually not in a literature course, which is where the classics would typically be read.
I read writings by Jerry Falwell in an AP English Language high school course (not English literature; that was a separate course) — we studied rhetorical devices and the like.
Not to mention that classics are not the only things students should discuss, whether in rhetorical studies or literary studies. That’s like saying that students should only learn “classic” science or “classic” history — the last 50 years matter very much, in any subject. There’s as much to learn from reading a short essay by Steinem on menstruation as there is from reading A Modest Proposal; and IMO it’s as much a crime for anyone to graduate with a literature degree without having read Luis Borges as it is for them to graduate without having read Dickens, even though Borges died in 1986.
Janet- classics, contemporary literature, and modern work are all essential to giving college students perspective about all aspects of themselves and their fellow man. In one of my classes, I read CS Lewis apologetic work and “The God Delusion”. The level of insightful debate that it provoked was nothing short of inspiring. The Vagina Monologues, for example, is considered crass to some, but at the time that it was published, it was a massive breakthrough for women- an indication that women did not need to hide aspects of their sexuality. Whether you agree with it or not, it has important historical relevance. If one’s beliefs can’t stand up to a challenge, they weren’t very strong to begin with, don’t you agree?
No one in the world is “pro-abortion”. Pro-choice, yes, pro-abortion, no. Smarten up.
Actually, Dave, Prochoicer and other posters on this site have actually stated that they are “pro-abortion”. Prochoicer (on one of the threads recently) commented that there are those who are pro-life and anti-abortion, pro-choice and anti-abortion and pro-choice and pro-abortion and placed him/herself in that category.
Abortionists are Pro abortion, Dave. Especially the ones that pressure women into Eugenicist type abortions (like pressuring them to abort babies that could be born with Downs, or a Cleft Lip or Club Foot for example). You won’t see an abortionist promoting adoption or parenting.
Erin, Alexandra,
Sure it’s good to expand one’s horizon’s. I guess we all have our limits on how far we want to stretch. :)
I won’t discuss VM. It came up a while back on Jill’s and once was enough. You won’t appreciate my saying this, but I think it is an embarrassment to our generation. (Call me a closed-minded prude. I’m OK with that.)
I’ve never heard of “A Modest Proposal” but I googled it and it looks “interesting”. I’m not familiar with “The God Delusion”. I’ll have to check it out.
Thanks for your comments!
Understandable. And Janet, I’m sure you’ve at least heard of the concept of A Modest Proposal- it’s the one where Jonathan Swift (satirically) advocates eating Irish babies to help control the population!
As for the classics, I believe no one should ever be punished by being forced to read Great Expectations. Give me Tale of Two Cities, give me Oliver Twist, but spare the poor students Great Expectations!
ugh, Great Expectations, have to agree on that. BORING! At least I wasn’t forced to watch that horrible movie version….
I LOVED Grapes of Wrath and To Kill a Mockingbird. Both books that everyone should read by Sophomore year of high school. I also read April Morning, The Good Earth (hated), Black Boy, The Bell Jar, Night (Elie Wiesel’s book about living in a Holocaust Death Camp) and A Separate Piece.
Pavone is wrong – one cannot call someone “Hitler” and not expect someone to want to kill him. While I am a pascifist, most people in America are not. Most people don’t like hitler. Most people, given the chance to do so, would kill hitler. When you make statements equating Tiller with Hitler, you have to be stupid to not understand the effect of your words, and the impact they might have on the more unhinged members of your listening, viewing or reading audience. For Pavone to play dumb about that is intellectually dishonest.
Hi RJ,
To be honest, I have thought about it (winced at the thoughts) and decided I’m just not ready for that yet. I randomly show up outside the local clinic here to sidewalk counsel. Every once in a while I do an interview or two and here and there I get asked to speak at an event or take part in a documentary.
I guess, I’m a bit “chicken” still when it comes to giving a full disclosure testimony in my home town. : (
Perhaps some day. I do other kinds of volunteer work (Habitat for Humanity, hospice care, the no kill animal shelter..it keeps me semi-sane. I find that too much born alive “dwelling” can be emotionally unsettling.
Also, I was TOTALLY out of the pro life scene,for a couple of years.. trying to focus on other aspects of my life and family… Then, all of a sudden, I am googling Rowan and POOF.. I find that someone has made a movie. Still trying to digest the thought of my worst nightmares being shown on a full size theatre screen (which TRUST ME is pretty scary) Jill exposed Obama’s voting record regarding their version of the BAIPA..The two events were less than 10 days apart.
Reluctantly, I felt God dragging me back into the PL realm (I actually remember saying to Him… LOOK, you KNOW that if you ask me to go back there… I am going.. but I’m going kicking and screaming… and you BETTER hold me up.” (lol)UUGGHH…..I was terrified..and the next thing ya know, I am off to the movie’s premiere with Jilly, meeting the guy who made the movie..meeting Carla and so many others. This time it’s not as traumatic as it was when I first contacted Jill (4 or 5 days after Rowan’s death.)
This time it feels like friendship and love is all around….even so.. I haven’t felt strongly called to start a support group.. I like having my little escape plan, just in case talking about Rowan publicly ever gets to be too much again.
Gosh what a long explanation.. a simple no would have sufficed!
Soooo… no, not yet. (Why? Ya think I should?) ROFL
Peace,
a
Dave,
Just to clarify my position, I certainly would not wish an abortion on anyone. But I wouldn’t wish a triple bypass on anyone either. I am pro-abortion in the sense that I trust women who conclude that abortion is the best option in their situation. I am pro-choice because I think it should be up to the woman. I would be just as opposed to forcing or coercing a woman into abortion as I would be to depriving a woman of an abortion. So I am pro-abortion and pro-choice.
Some people think abortion is never the right option but they are pro-choice anyway. They do not think they have the right to impose their views on women. They are anti-abortion and pro-choice.
There are also people in the world who think abortion is a good option but they don’t care about the woman’s choice. A classic example would be the Chinese government’s one child policy. China is pro-abortion and anti-choice.
I don’t want to belabor the Gloria Steinem thing but I also read that essay in school and found it quite clever. I am really curious about what the objection to it would be.
Is it just that it is written by a well-known feminist? Is it because the ideas expressed in the essay are objectionable? Or is the idea that a young man shouldn’t have to talk or think about menstruation because it is an intimate female function not generally discussed in polite society? (The latter was kind of the sense I got from Angel’s comment.) Or is the idea that it is not serious object of study for some reason and, if so, why not?
Oh, Janet, A Modest Proposal is the classic example of satire! It was written in like 1729 or something and most people still read it today — as well they should, because it’s an incredibly important work in the history of satire. In it, Swift suggests that a great way for the Irish poor to alleviate their burdens would be to sell their children as food; and he goes to great lengths to “justify” this suggestion — when in reality the whole piece is meant to be absurd and to advocate the very solutions it purports to mock. The serious and pragmatic tone of the essay, combined with the shocking subject matter, combines to inspire an emotional and intellectual rejection of Swift’s suggestion. And the treatment of the poor like commodities inspires empathy with them and an instinctive defense of their humanity — something that was too often lacking in political discourse at that time. It could actually be used, interestingly enough, to satire abortion-debate rhetoric, with a few tweaks.
Of course, at the time it was written, lots of people didn’t see it for the satire it was. I imagine they would have gotten all up in arms about their children being forced to read an essay about selling children for food. Even now there’s still the occasional person who completely misses the point of the essay, which is most emphatically that the poor should NOT sell their children for food.
Which was my point — that’s pretty similar to someone saying, “Everyone knows men can’t menstruate!!” When that is so very absolutely NOT the point of the essay. I don’t know if you’ve ever read the Gloria Steinem essay — it takes about five minutes max to get through, and it’s all over the web — but it’s not like the Vagina Monologues.
“No one in the world is “pro-abortion”. Pro-choice, yes, pro-abortion, no.”
Let’s see, that would make several dictionaries totally inaccurate:
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) – pro·a·bor·tion –adjective: PROCHOICE http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=proabortion&r=66
Proabortion: PROCHOICE http://dictionary.infoplease.com/proabortion
pro-abortion SYLLABICATION: pro-a·bor·tion PRONUNCIATION: pr-bôrshn ADJECTIVE: Favoring or supporting legalized abortion. http://www.bartleby.com/61/27/P0572700.html
Main Entry: pro·abor·tion adjective Date: 1972 : favoring the legalization of abortion http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=proabortion
YLT, the left called Pres. Bush “Hitler” all the time. Should we consider it inevitable that someone will try to kill Pres. Bush and hold all liberals responsible when it happens?
Janet,
“I’m not familiar with “The God Delusion”. I’ll have to check it out.”
No, don’t waste your time with the mindless junk philosophy that Dawkins spews. When it comes to questions of metaphysics, he’s a moron. If you want a really good book defending atheism, I’d recommend “Atheism Explained” by David Ramsey Steele or “Why I became an Atheist” by John Lofton. Those guys are at least trained in philosophy and the ability to think, unlike the new atheists.
About Steinem, for me personally, I’d say that her book “War on Choice” was so bad and full of sloppy thinking that I can’t imagine anything else she has written on the subject of abortion to be even remotely insightful. If the article is short, I suppose I’d read it, but just having read her book there is very good reason to believe that she doesn’t have anything terribly thought-provoking to say.
Bobby, I’ve never read that book — but the essay on menstruation is not about abortion. It’s not deep or anything but it is short: http://www.mum.org/ifmencou.htm In fact, this one section seems somewhat anti-abortion to me:
Male radicals, left-wing politicians, mystics, however, would insist that women are equal, just different, and that any woman could enter their ranks if she were willing to self-inflict a major wound every month (“you MUST give blood for the revolution”), recognize the preeminence of menstrual issues, or subordinate her selfness to all men in their Cycle of Enlightenment.
IMO it seems ironically allegorical — the reality is that, too often, left-leaning people posit that women are equal to men but base this belief on the right of women to be free from inherently feminine traits (ie, pregnancy), thus implicitly accepting the assumption that the feminine is less desirable or “less equal” than the masculine.
The essay is tongue-in-cheek and not a thorough examination of menstruation, nor of the institutions it touches on (academics, religion, military), but the main point of it is that society will embrace inherently male traits, and degrade inherently female traits, as fervently as women allow it to.
Bobby,
The Steinem essay has nothing to do with abortion. It really is worth a read! It is very, very short.
Perhaps if students could read Edith Stein or Alice von Hildebrand, Kathleen van Shaijik I might be more agreeable. :) But then they don’t share the same ideology at all with those passe feministas! :D
Posted by: angel at June 3, 2009 8:40 PM
Yes! These are real “feminists” if we are going to use labels. Intelligent women who are not afraid or intimidated by their femininity. Gloria Steinem is bitter but I have heard that her father left them when she was a young girl and if I am not mistaken, she did not have a close relationship with her mom. Many of these rabidly negative feminists did not have a good man in their lives. What a huge difference a strong, loving dad can make in a girl’s life (and a boy’s life too)!
Right-o. OK PCer and Alexandra, I’ll check it out.
Ehh. While there may have been some humorous antidotes, I don’t see any reason to believe why any of that stuff would be said or happen if men menstruated. Obviously it’s completely hypothetical so there is no way to tell. I don’t know, I can’t see anyone seriously believeing “you have to give blood to take blood” for example. It’s a clever little phrase and I have no doubt that the same people who embrace other little catch phrases without giving them much thought would embrace them, but what thinking person would really argue along those lines to keep women out of the army?
I don’t know. It’s pure speculation, and I would be more interested in reading reasons why it is believed that men are upheld in this society as better than women (not that I don’t agree that that is unfortunately a social outlook).
Oops, that would be “anecdotes” not “antidotes”, lol.
Bobby,
I think it’s very cool that you read the essay!
I think some of the examples Steinem gives are silly, but that’s her point — some of the beliefs in male superiority are silly too. For example, there is a psychological theory that men are more goal directed and better at linear thinking than women because they can aim their urine. I think all of the examples Steinem gives are intended to have parallels in our culture. I am not sure about the “give blood to take blood thing.” It may relate to the argument that women shouldn’t be in the military because people who give birth shouldn’t be permitted to take life even in war.
“Truth is Hate to those who Hate the Truth”
Love it, gonna borrow it.
“For example, there is a psychological theory that men are more goal directed and better at linear thinking than women because they can aim their urine.”
Well, I’m no psychologist, but that sounds like garbage to me. Point taken that there is definitely something wrong with the way society views men and women. Unfortunately I think we might (though not positive) disagree on the solution or the proper view, but at least I think we can hold to the common ground that something needs to change.
Yeah, Bobby, I don’t think it’s any great work of literature, but it is a valuable jumping-off point for discussion when taken in context.
The “give blood to take blood” thing is, I’ve always inferred, a flipping of the oft-repeated line that women are not suited to “harsh conditions” (ie the military) because they menstruate. So the point being made is that in women, this periodic bleeding is seen as a disability, whereas in men it would be seen as a mandatory criteria for inclusion. etc etc etc.
1) As a mother of two sons, please tell me when the accurate aiming of urine begins???
2) I have to quote my husband’s favorite joke: “Never trust anything that bleeds for seven days and doesn’t die.” Seriously, this shows women are WEAK??? Heck no. I give birth… beat that one, guys!
I have had discussions with different people, including military folks, who have never mentioned menstruation as a reason for excluding women. Things discussed have included the fact that most women are not physically capable of carrying the loads that the men are. Men also have an inherent desire to protect women. They have actually attempted to deprogram men to level the playing field in that regard. That is very disturbing.
Does anyone remember Pvt Jessica Lynch? The media did not report how she was also raped (besides being brutally beaten). Why? Because people would object to female soldiers serving in combat or situations where there is imminent danger.
2) I have to quote my husband’s favorite joke: “Never trust anything that bleeds for seven days and doesn’t die.”
Funny, Elisabeth, I’ve always hated that comment.
I imagine that if it were included in Steinem’s essay, it would be flipped to say, “Never trust anything that can’t even make it through seven days of bleeding.”
Eh, Steven has never been politically correct. As we work in the medical field, we tend to have rather dark senses of humor. I just stick my tongue out at him when he says it.
re: by: Lauren at June 4, 2009 8:38 AM
If someone is stupid\crazy enough to say that they want to kill someone or calls them “Hitler” they need to be called out … Right or left. End of story. It’s just intellectual stupidity all around.
http://www.fuel.tv/Elefantti405 “>tracy trouble bdsm library fbkyo http://www.fuel.tv/Fillzork440 “>big tits young amateur voyeur bdsm lpjaxd