Details on pro-abortion terrorist arrested by FBI
UPDATE 2/27, 7:03a: AOL’s Politics Daily has posted an article on this, the 1st MSM site to give the Shulman arrest coverage.
2.25, 3:51p: I received a call last night from an FBI agent in New York saying they had arrested pro-abortion domestic terrorist Theodore Shulman after several years of making threats to pro-life leaders.
Shulman, 49, is being held without bond at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in NYC, a Federal holding facility, for making interstate threats against two as yet unnamed pro-life leaders. Operation Rescue has more, including a voicemail Shulman once left.
While the arrest was made in NY, FBI investigations of Shulman are ongoing in Wichita and Chicago. Shulman has threatened pro-life activists around the country, including Bryan Kemper, Gerard Nadal, Troy Newman, Fr. Frank Pavone, Lila Rose, Ken Scott, Cheryl Sullenger, Robert George, and me.
Shulman’s blog is still live, where you will find a sampling of his threats, starting with the following lovely header. (The quote at the top of this post is also from his blog.) Click to enlarge….
Shulman went by many aliases when commenting on both pro-life and pro-abortion sites. (Note that the afore-linked pro-abort site left his threatening comments as OperationCounterstrike up.)
Other aliases included SoMG [his favorite – short for Spirit of Martin Gardner, a mathematician he admired], DoctorDefense, TheoShul, and ExtremelyProLife. In 2010 Shulman also impersonated an East Coast microbiologist for a time, who contacted me and who I put in touch with the FBI.
In all we gave the FBI over 4,000 comments Shulman posted or tried to post on my site over the last 4 years or so. A sampling…
Shulman’s history is telling. His mother is Alix Kates Shulman, a pro-abort feminist who achieved some level of fame in the 1960s and 70s, during Shulman’s formative years. Here’s Alix’s website. She is most well known for writing the feminist novel, Memoirs of an Ex-Prom Queen.
Alix has spoken of aborting 4 of Shulman’s siblings, “and not one was the result of carelessness.” Theodore has commented on these abortions, saying 2 came before him and 2 after. Shulman has one living sister, Polly, born in 1963.
This isn’t quite over, but at least Shulman is incarcerated.
My moderators and Kelli have been in on the FBI investigation for the entire time and have been a tremendous help compiling information, including IP addresses, and reporting Shulman’s comments, or attempts to comment. As you can see, moderating here isn’t just about conversing! I really appreciate them.
Whew.
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.
Praying a “Hedge Of Protection” around you and all involved, Jill!
I have three words for this guy. Ha, ha, ha.
He probably figured he could just keep getting away with this, and he was wroooooong. Don’t mess with the Feds, buddy.
Please tell me they kicked down his door and yelled, “FBI, freeze!”
Please pray for Ted. He has very, very deep issues that go far beyond anything we can imagine, and I would guess is a poor soul who has, as the prayer of Fatima says, “most need of thy mercy.”
1) Very, very happy that he’s behind bars, at least for now.
2) Definitely praying for his conversion.
3) Definitely praying for Jill and others whom he’s harassed.
Don’t mess with God’s kids!! Our Lord and Savior is protecting you all. Proud to call you and Dr. Gerry Nadal my friends!!
Keep the truth going, I am with you Jill!!!!!! That man does need a lot of prayer!
I completely agree with you Bobby. How terribly sad for him that he lost 4 of his siblings.
What a terrible evil abortion is.
My guess is that he is mentally and spiritually very ill.
I was just thinking about that yesterday. What do pro-aborts say to their child (the one(s) they let live) when the child finds out his/her siblings were aborted, and the child asks “Would you have aborted ME?”
This disturbed individual is in no way typical of pro-choicers .But even if abortion is an evil, it’s nowhere near as great an evil as forcing helpless children to be born into abject poverty, malnutrition, lack of education and opportunity, neglect and abuse.
Oh, Robert. Same ol’ claptrap, eh?
How about instead of killing people (these “helpless children” as you say, who are at their MOST helpless while in the womb), we try to feed the hungry, educate the uneducated, and rescue the abused and neglected? Charity goes a long way. Just a thought.
Schulman: One very scary dude. The man is unbalanced.
Berger: I agree Schulman does not reflect the typical pro-abort–very much like anyone who shoots abortionists is not your average pro-lifer. Sounds like you would be OK with babies being born and placed into adoptive homes.
Robert:
Yes indeed, dismembering helpless children is so much less evil… 0_o
Bobby –
I agree with you. There were times when he was normal and a conversation would actually occur. I was so surprised when I discovered that he was actually quite intelligent. All that hate wasted it though. I do pray for him, and will continue to do so.
Robert –
“it’s nowhere near as great an evil as forcing helpless children to be born into abject poverty, malnutrition, lack of education and opportunity, neglect and abuse.”
How insulting. You really believe that everyone who has an abortion will be so poor that they can’t get on WIC or food stamps, so stupid that they do not use the vast amount of resources to feed their children, so ignorant that they won’t take their children to school and will without a shadow of a doubt neglect and abuse their children. Nice. I’m sure you just turn your back on the fact that most women who have abortions do not and will not fit in your narrow minded view of women just as you turn your back on intellectual thoughts and conversations.
Seriously, if that is your view on women who have abortions you need to look around and realize that just isn’t reality. Not to mention that there are hundreds of thousands of parents looking to adopt, but I’m sure you have a narrow minded view on that subject to.
Robert,
Just curious: would you be all right with the same protocol for children who are already born? It would seem that, if it’s better to kill unborn children for fear of potential [i.e. guessed-at] poverty, abuse, hunger, lack of education, etc., it would be even better to kill the born children who are provably and currently suffering such things, yes?
Bobby,
Yes, I’m with you. I’ve prayed for Ted quite a bit. Tonight, a completely broken man sits in a federal jail for some very serious crimes. I’m so glad that I had the mother I did growing up, and not Ted’s wicked mother. I don’t feel any joy in this. Just relief, and overwhelming sadness for a man with a brilliant scientific mind who lost his way.
Paladin, great point. You beat me to it, and you said it better than I would have.
Robert,
I agree with you that Ted is not typical of all proaborts. He terrorized adults such as Jill, myself, and a host of others, but at least we were capable of working with the proper authorities and had the protection of the law.
In another sense, you are no different, and maybe worse. You advocate terrorizing and brutally killing the most defenseless among us, the child of the womb. To enable such barbarism, you argue against the legal standing of personhood for these tiny human beings.
So while you might be able to assuage yourself legally, Robert, that’s a pretty thin defense for some mighty cowardly behavior on your part.
Get well soon.
I doubt that Ted’s sitting in his cell feeling “broken”. Angry with a martyr’s righteous indignation is more likely. But leaning who his mother was certainly sheds light.
Well said Gerald, well said.
To say that I “advocate” brutally killing fetuses is ludicrous. I don’t advocate it I’m just opposed to the government trying to force women to bear children they are far too poor to provide for or fetuses which would kill or severely harm them if brought to term.
When life begins and whether the fetus is a “Person” or not are utterly irrelelvant red herrings.
“Personhood” is just a convenient word used by anti-choicers to demand that all women
give birth no matter what the adverse cirtcumstances. You cannot attempt to force women to bear children against their will. It is profoundly immoral. And yes,it is infinitely worse for a child to be born into abject poverty than to be aborted. Abortion is tragic, but not nearly as tragic as being born into utter poverty.
You anti-choicers claim that there’s plenty of help available for poor pregnant women to take care of their children, but that’s a blatant lie.If this were true,there would not be so many abortions in America. This country does not even do remotely close to enough to prevent abortion.
But you anti-choicers delude yourselves into thinking that you can stop it by making it illegal. You can’t. Woemn will seek and obtain abortions no matter what.
You cannot escape this fact. And your iopposition to contraceptives is unbelievably foolish.Contraceptives PREVENT abortions, abnd have preventedcountles sone sover the years. One reasn why abortion is so common is that many people are foolish,thoughtless and irresponsible and fail to use them at all.
Abortion is a tragedy,nopt murder.To call it “murder” is ludicrous,because it’s not done for the same makicious reasons as murder.
Furthermore,you anti-choicers refuse to acknowledge the fact that the vast majority of abortions are done early in pregnancies,before a fetus can even feel pain. You always make it sound like torture.It isn’t torture. But the many desperately poor children who live in poor housing,with malnutrition,lack of education and opportunities in life,and neglect and abuse are most certainly tortured.
An abortion is over in minutes. But so many helpless children in America and around the world suffer years of misery. We will never be able to reduce the abortion rate until we reduce poverty in America. And to call the tragically high abortion rate among black womedn in America “genicide” is not only ludicrous,but an utter trivialization of the term.
B;ack women have so many abortions not because of some imaginary racist genocidal plot by evil whites to wipe out blacks, but because of POVERTY.
Gee, Robert, except for the misspelling, Margaret Sanger couldn’t have said it better.
I guess all the college girls getting abortions are poverty stricken. I guess all the suburban women getting abortions are poverty stricken. I guess all the middle class women getting abortions are poverty stricken. I guess all..oh I think some of you get the point.
“Abortion is tragic, but not nearly as tragic as being born into utter poverty.”
Well Robert, you just keep stepping in it. Not so hard when you’re full of it, I suppose.
Meet the new left folks, as embodied in Robert. The Great Society programs of LBJ failed to produce their intended effect. So the brilliant minds on the left (actually just vulgar and deadly caricatures of people like FDR, JFK, and LBJ) have decided that we should just open as many PP clinics as we can to enact Mr. Berger’s final solution.
Nice Robert, except that I was born into real poverty and worked full time while I went to school full time. Lots of African Americans similarly escape poverty. Something else genius, poverty shapes character, fortitude, determination and drive.
I actually have more respect for Shulman. He took on those capable of fighting back.
The whole thing makes me so very sad.
SoMG is unhinged yes, but he is still a human being. I am not making excuses for him. He is where he belongs. But I have been praying for him constantly for 6 years now, and I had hoped for a better ending to his story.
I’ll continue to pray for him. I agree with Gerard, even if he is angry, he is still angry and alone, something he has probably been since the day he was born. Loneliness is a poison even if it is self imposed.
He was a man that thrived on attention, good or bad, and I always felt like he just wanted someone to “mother” him…to tell him he was okay…instead he spent his life trying to shock people into paying attention to him.
I keep picturing this little boy, despartely seeking his mother’s love, knowing that 4 of his siblings were killed, and that he himself was unwanted and considered a burden. When reading his mothers essay “A Marriage Agreement” I actually wept for him.
At least everyone is safe tonight…including him…Jill et al are safe from him and he is safe from himself.
Maybe he’ll get the help he desperately needs. Or maybe he’ll remain angry and bitter. Either way, I’ll keep praying for him, and for all of the people he has harmed.
At least Robert Berger “sort of” responded. It is a little better than the hit and run posting tactic he used when I hung around.
Paladin, you have to find it utterly frustrating to make such a salient point, only to have it patently ignored. It is why I don’t post here anymore: too many stupid pro-choices who refuse to play by the rules of argumentation (you know, actually responding to people’s points and stuff.)
By the way, SoMG totally did this because he couldn’t keep his argument going. Remember when he conceded that a breast feeding mother has an obligation to use her body to sustain her infant just in case the infant could get sustenance in no other way? (I.E. bodily domain is not paramount in all cases.) It was a week later and he was banned for being crazy town.
Nadal,
He won’t respond to you. He uses unfair tactics by ignoring the parts of your argument he cannot honestly address. Consider it an implicit acceptance of his wrongness. If he really thought he were right, wouldn’t he respond to your argument?
I mean, how easy is it to answer the question “If it is okay to kill the preborn to prevent them from growing up poor, is it also okay to kill born babies to prevent them from growing up poor?”
Seems easy enough to answer. Hell, it is a yes/no question for crying out loud!
“Hi I’m Robert Berger and I always say new and exciting things regarding the abortion debate.” NOT!
Pamela, as you know, my 4 year old son when he learned what abortion was asked me if I ever had an abortion. I said no. He asked if I ever wanted to abort HIM. He looked very worried and sad and when I said NO I NEVER would have aborted him because his life was just as valuable as mine a look of blessed relief swept over his little cherub face.
I cannot imagine what Shulman felt growing up knowing his mother who children look to for unconditional love, acceptance and protection, had rejected and destroyed 4 of his siblings. What does that do to a person’s emotional and mental stability? I detest what he did and absolutely think he should stay in prison as he is a danger to others but part of me feels really sorry for him too.
So, Robert, since being killed is better than being in poverty, I guess I should just grab a gun, go to a poor neighborhood and kill everyone in sight, without knowing wheater or not they want to live and depriving them of the chance to ever escape it? According to you that wouldn’t be murder because it’s not done for the same Maybe these people had hopes and dreams, but you, who are so “pro-choice,” would not even let them make the CHOICE of weather or not they want to live. According to you that wouldn’t be murder because it’s not done for the same reasons.
AND that’s assuming theat ALL the women who get abortions are living in poverty which is far from the truth. Many women abort because friends and family members force them into it, or because it will preservve their lifestyle.
Also, when you say that the fact that a fetus is a person is irrelevant to the discussion, that means you don’t believe that a human has a right to life.
It’s so incredibly sad.
Robert,
You make me sad too. What a world we live in, where death is preferred to poverty.
*
After all these years posting here, have you seriously still not gotten your facts straight?
*
Life begins at conception. Fact number 1.
*
The right to life is a right that no government can take away. Fact number 2.
*
Poverty can be overcome. Death cannot. Look at our current president. Fact number 3.
*
It’s not her body. You say that personhood is irrelevant? I say location is irrelevant. Wantedness is irrelevant. The only thing that IS relevant is that there is a human life at stake. Fetus means young one. In this case it means young HUMAN one. The produc of conception is a Human Being. Fact number 4.
*
A woman has a right to her own body. But this is NOT her body. It is a separate human beings body and she has no right to that, no matter where it is located. Fact number 5.
*
The statistics show that women are not having abortions because they live in abject poverty. They have them because they don’t want to or have to, accept responsibility for their own actions. Period. Fact number 5.
*
At least have the dignity to call us what we are. Pro Life. Not anti choice. I have no problem with people making choices. Here’s a thought…perhaps these women could have used their right to choose before they got pregnant. To choose not to have had sex in the first place. You lie… to us, and to yourself when you pretend that the only choice in the equation is whether or not to kill an unborn child.
*
Hundreds of choices are made before even reaching that point. THOSE are the choices you should be focusing on. I am not anti choice. I am anti irresponsibility and anti abortion. To claim otherwise is mean spirited and deceitful. I think you know that.
*
Oliver,
It’s nice to see you again. How is Lauren?
We’re both doing good, MK.
Robert,
Do you honestly ever take time to think about your beliefs? When you see the poor, your instinct isn’t to help lift them up. Your instinct is to wish that they had been torn apart in their mother’s wombs.
And you actually think yourself better than Shulman? Because your way just happens to have legal air cover? Laws change, and may or may not take within their purview things such as decency and humanity (See slavery, Jim Crow, Compulsory sterilization, Nuremberg Laws, Japanese-American internment, etc). Once upon a time, all of the practitioners of those institutions operated within the law. It didn’t make them decent human beings any more than your pathetic and vicious final solution to poverty makes you fit for decent company.
God bless you, Jill, for all you do. You, too, Dr. Nadal. I’m very relieved that this man is behind bars now.
May the Lord keep you safe from all evil. St. Michael, defend us in battle!
Robert,
I think abstinence – which is not as difficult as many seem to portray – prevents way more abortions than contraception. Unlike my housemate, who fathered 3 children (all aborted). It is the inference that women are ‘forced’ to be pregnant that is “ludicrous”. You can choose not to have sex. The idea we are slaves to our sexual drives makes stupid mindless animals of the human race. We are surely smarter than this – or not? I think it “foolish,thoughtless and irresponsible” to have sex without being prepared to wear the potential consequences.
btw, I’m not ‘anti-choice’ and neither is any pro-lifer I’ve known – that term is a lie. I have no problem with you choosing anything in your life, like where you live, who you marry, what colour your car is, what music you listen to, etc.
I just find the one ‘choice’ to end another life of choices repugnant. It is more commonly know as murder and you do advocate it. Even if we granted your definition – ‘tragedy’ – why would anyone deliberately set out to create a tragedy? You just continue to twist yourself in knots as you deny basic human rights to one subset of humans you would be aghast about if it was denied to yourself or someone you love.
And on the basis of your belief that there is no motivation against blacks, please explain these quotes from Margaret Sanger in response to a letter suggesting black leaders put in positions where they only appear to be in power in their organization:
“I note that you doubt it worthwhile to employ a full-time Negro physician. It seems to me from my experience … that, while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors, they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table, which means their ignorance, superstitions and doubts. They do not do this with white people and if we can train the Negro doctor at the clinic, he can go among them with enthusiasm and … knowledge, which … will have far-reaching results among the colored people.”
“The minister’s work is also important and he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” (my emphasis)
That you can ignore such history along with the obviously disproportionate level of abortion mills in black neighbourhoods today is akin to sticking your head in the sand. I can only echo what Gerard wrote – do you care about truth at all?
Thanks Patti and Jennifer.
I owe a great deal of thanks to Jill, Carla, Bethany, Bobby, Chris, Kelli, and the rest of the family here for looking out for me a year ago when I began blogging. Shulman found me pretty quickly and the Stanek gang swooped in to warn me and guide me.
God is so good.
“At least Robert Berger “sort of” responded. It is a little better than the hit and run posting tactic he used when I hung around.”
I noticed that too, Oliver! I was shocked!
Math always has your back, Gerard…always got your back…
I blocked this freak from my blog a while back after it looked like he was ready to take up residence as the daily troll. Wow. But we’re the terrorists, huh?
Woo-hoo! MK is back!
Stick with us, honey.
I must say, those conversations with SOMG were some of the most hilarious, most shocking posts I had read on this blog. Doug was courteous, Robert Berger just rambles, but SOMG possessed something of a sinister air about him that was repulsive, yet at the same time fascinating. And when MK and him were going at it…watch out!
At some point, the off-topic conversations were the most telling, because it revealed a different dimension of someone who claimed to perform abortions.
Wonder what his mama and his sister are thinking/doing right now.
Of course, it’s all different when proaborts want to generalize and lump us all in with Scott Roeder. If it wasn’t for double standard they’d have none at all.
MK, like Suki said, welcome back, you’re a sight for sore eyes. We sure do miss you around here!
Thanks, all, for your expressions of concern and prayers. They’re both very kind and very much appreciated.
Jill, Suki,
Thanks. I’m surprised to see so many familiar faces. I’m thrilled that Gerard has joined the team! I might drop in again every once in a while. I don’t miss the headaches, but I sure do miss you guys.
Headaches? Nonsense.
Looks like a reunion going on here… wait – there’s someone missing….heh
SoMG is one of the few pro-aborts honest enough to admit that he understands that abortion kills a human being but he supports it anyway. I didn’t know he was threatening pro-lifers’ lives, though. Pretty scary stuff.
Berger says: “Abortion is tragic, but not nearly as tragic as being born into utter poverty.”
You mean like Jesus?
Well, we need Hal and Bethany, Doug and John-the-priestly-one, a few others and have another mojito party online.
Remember that?
And then Jill showed up and we had to hide the mess.
Oh, there was Erin who never regretted her choice to abort but sure did have a great time rollicking with us lifers.
Pretty In Pink…let’s see, who else are we missing?
I am sure Father Frank is relieved that this man is behind bars.
Perhaps this man will have time to think….away from bad influences…..pray that he is able to find God and sincerely turn towards him.
Carder, Are you forgetting “Anne” from a few months back?
Carder, Are you forgetting “Anne” from a few months back? Whom I think is actually “Joan”, but I could be wrong.
Hey, who here remembers Texas Red? Right? Remember her? Man…
Lol, the gang’s all here. Brought together by…one of our “choicers” being a terrorist.
It’s weird. So weird.
Bobby, I remember her, she threw a big temper tantrum before she left. She use to call me ”Shi* for brains”, LOL. and Sally, remember her, and Rae…
God bless you all, I pray for the protection of all pro-lifers. I also pray for pro-aborts to see what they are supporting for what it truly is; Murder. I don’t post comments here as often as I’d like… (most of my time is spent with my little girls- 2yr. old and 10 month old) but it is nice to see that I’ve joined very good company! The late Dr. Nathanson, Dr. Nadal, Jill, and all other pro-life leaders are amazing and definitely heroes of mine! May God bless you and protect you always… you are not alone! God is here with you and we are too, fighting for the same life-giving, human rights movement.
God bless you all, I pray for the protection of all pro-lifers. I also pray for pro-aborts to see what they are supporting for what it truly is; Murder. I don’t post comments here as often as I’d like… (most of my time is spent with my little girls- 2 1/2 yr. old and 10 month old) but it is nice to see that I’ve joined very good company! The late Dr. Nathanson, Dr. Nadal, Jill, and all other pro-life leaders are amazing and definitely heroes of mine! May God bless you and protect you always… you are not alone! God is here with you and we are too, fighting for the same life-giving, human rights movement.
Sally too, indeed. She and Texas Red were both angry people, very angry people. I do miss Rae, though…I always enjoyed watching you and Rae interact. It was very cute…
Not to mention the ineffable Marissa, the one who was such a relativist, so attached to the idea that there is no right or wrong, only what society allows, that she proclaimed that laws preventing black people from citizens meant nothing but that at the time they weren’t considered citizens and evidently weren’t ready to be. Then she got mad and said we were really mean to her when we called her a racist. She also called an African cardinal “A Third-World witch doctor.”
In the ranks of pro-abort obtuseness, Marissa was sublime! I wonder if she has been back under a different name.
I miss cranium too — well, not really, but it’s been quite a while since he’s been here. I believe he occasionally hangs around Gerard’s blog now.
Robert, I’ll make you a big sign for your truck that says, “BETTER DEAD THAN POOR. ABORT YOUR CHILDREN!”, and you can come out to my working poor neighborhood and drive around spreading your message.
It’s an honest invite. Please let me know.
Not that it has anything to do with Shulman and his craziness, but hey, I’ll follow your deflection for one comment.
ah I remember Texas Red.
SoMG always creeped me out.
You could search him on the internet and read all of his weird comments. I am so glad the FBI took these threats seriously.
Personally I always enjoyed Oliver comments. They were brilliant and I learned a lot from him.
I miss MK too!
Rae, that’s right.
We’ve had our share of “dynamic” relationships on this here blog.
And then there was that one chick who aborted because she didn’t want to forfeit tenure at her college. No regrets. MK went so far as to call her unhuman.
We never heard from her again.
And then there was Enigma. Another one of MK’s conversation pieces.
I think I might have to print out mk’s 6:56 comment and frame it. :D
Here is an exchange I had with the infamous SoMG when I was trying to get him to see the Holy Spirit and to see things from a Christian perspective.
I know people who have died of CF because their parents refused to avoid having CF babies because of their “Christian” opposition to abortion.In the end, these sorts of Christians lose.
Posted by: SoMG at June 10, 2008 5:45 AM
SoMG, If they had to make a choice between living or saving the lives of their child, Christians parents would gladly offer their own lives to save the lives of their children. The “winning” outcome sometimes means making th eultimate sacrifice of giving your life for a friend.
“Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.”John 15:13 Posted by: truthseeker at June 10, 2008 11:36 PM
As a daily reader and occasional commenter, I am glad to hear the news. About 2 years ago I remember having a back and forth with that guy. He was creepy and scared me at the time.
I’ll keep you all in my prayers for your continued work. I also pray for the pro-aborts and will direct some for his conversion.
And here is one where he showed his dark side:
Every abortion I do, every student I train, and every advance in abortifacient technology I help develop is partly a way of pissing in the faces of those who promote RTL terror.
Posted by: SoMG at August 23, 2008 7:16 AM
I wonder how many women know the reason the “doctor” is providing the service is kill their baby in order to get back at RTL’ers. You are a sick person and I hope just one pro-choice woman who comes to this blog sees you as an example of the type of person it takes to kill their baby. It may be enough to change their heart.
Posted by: truthseeker at August 23, 2008 11:36 AM
And here is some Sally when I was discussing the loss of our son who miscarried at five months
Sally said:
********
Do you really think that the sight of a dead fetus that no one knew, knew no one, had no emotional attachments and never felt life should be something to get all upset about?
And yes, I feel for the departed. I don’t waste my emotions for that which fails to arrive.
Posted by: Sally at February 14, 2008 7:37 PM
********
Sally, the baby did feel life. WoW, so you don’t think baby’s are alive when they are in the womb? How do you convince yourself of that? And it is not only possible, but it is normal to get emotionally attached to a baby in the womb. And you put the blame on the baby for “failing to arrive”, but he/she was already arrived since the point of conception and it wasn’t his fault he was killed as he/she was born. The fault here lies with the the mother’s
decision to walk into that House of Horrors and submit herself to the abortionist and his sacrament of Satan.
Posted by: Truthseeker at February 15, 2008 1:49 AM
And I miss Patricia from Canada:
I think it’s also that abortion is the linch-pin of the entire women’s movement.
Abortion is suppose to mean that women no longer HAVE to bear a child, or child after child. Women no longer HAVE to bear a child from rape.
Women who are stay-at-home mothers no longer HAVE to stay at home saddled with children. Women no longer have to worry about pregnancy from sex.
Instead of DEMANDING that men change THEIR behaviours, women have sacrificed themselves and their bodies and their children for what is suppose to be freedom.
Except it’s not freedom, it is death.
And who is paying the price women who die from botched abortions, women who get STD’s and are infertile because their open reproductive system is more vulnerable, women who can’t find a man to commit to marriage because, why would he, when he has friends with benefits. And of course, unborn females who are being slaughtered by the millions.
So how is it that we are demanding that these Indian women change their men, when our women took the easy road and didn’t demand our men change their behaviours?
Posted by: Patricia at May 9, 2008 1:53 PM
There was an Edyt.
Ah, Sally. :)
There was a JLM and remember Hooves in Maw?? Hilarious!!
Man. Time for a reunion!!
HI MK!!! Miss you too!!
Hi MK B<}
What a walk down memory lane!
Praying for SoMG’s conversion, and Robert Berger’s.
I am so glad this guy is behind bars! I wanted to report him for his comments, but I did not know how to do so. I would read the entries on various blogs, such as this one and Christina’s, and saw the vicious comments he would leave. I have been afraid he would actually do something, or get someone else to do something. I feel very sorry for him, but am so glad that he is behind bars, where he belongs.
Oh and what about Laura who got banishated and came back with the moniker Asitis… she was a hoot sometimes
And DeeL, and Amanda, and Midnite and Alyssa, and Laura and AB Laura of the infamous 5,000+ protestant/catholic post, and Jackie and Young Christian Woman and Sandy (Oh that March for Life was insane!) and Danny w/Erin and Dan who was only 17 when he started here and Leah and Hal and my little sparrow Enigma and Reality and Hieronymus and Philosopher and JKeller and Jess and Samantha and…yeah….good times, good times…*hic*
This is a quote from an article by SoMG’s mom…
*
In her article “For Love and Money: The Politics of Solitude,” published in Poets & Writers Magazine, January/February 1996, Alix says:
http://www.ohioana-authors.org/shulman/highlights.php
*
It was exactly that mentality, me first, that allowed her to first kill 4 of her children and then believe that by fulfilling her own needs she was fulfilling her childrens needs. That would be called Selfishness, Ms. Shulman, with a capital “S”. Are you paying attention to Ted NOW?
*
http://www.ohioana-authors.org/shulman/highlights.php
*
…and produced a sociopath. You must be very proud.
And who could forget CAMERON????
MK,
not a peep though about her abortions on that site. Maybe the fact that she had 4 abortions would have hurt book sales back then?
It might have boosted her sales…
Yeah. I wonder if she talks about them in any of her books.
She mentions her daughter Polly, even has a link to her site, but not one word about her “son”.
I noticed that too.
I may try to locate her books and have a quick go through.
I’ll have to stop over at your blog one of these ol’ days!
Miss you! :)
God bless,
Angel
Cameron and Amanda. The former vicious, the latter smart but petty.
And what about Hisman? Remember he was going to reach through his computer screen and teach Cameron a lesson or two about mistreating the ladies?
I will never forget the thread where SoMG tried to make the case that it is impossible to know how many women died before legal abortion. Yes, okay the absolute exact number, but his point that it could have been huge numbers of otherwise healthy women just suddenly dying and all the hospitals all over the nation covering it up because there were no computers to keep track. As though they didn’t keep records before computers. It was bizarro. Like the the gov’t did keep track or investigate suspicious deaths etc. Like the stats keepers at the CDC just would never notice all those women dying. And the numbers he thought plausible were so high they would have made such deaths about the most common cause of death among women, and no one would have been curious about it. Like I said weird.
Sounds likes Theodore Shulman has his tin foil cap tuned to the same frequency as Jared Lee Loughner.
Robert Berger says: February 25, 2011 at 4:45 pm
“This disturbed individual is in no way typical of pro-choicers .But even if abortion is an evil, it’s nowhere near as great an evil as forcing helpless children to be born into abject poverty, malnutrition, lack of education and opportunity, neglect and abuse.”
==============================================================
I did not know the Fed’s allowed suspected domestic terrorists, who have been arrested and incacerated, access to the internet.
Is ‘Robert Berger’ just another alias for Theodore Shulman or does Berger have his tin foil hat tuned to the same frequency as Loughner and Shulman?
ken said: “Sounds likes Theodore Shulman has his tin foil cap tuned to the same frequency as Jared Lee Loughner.”
What is the frequency, Kenneth?!
Sorry, couldn’t pass up that one.
This guy is a shrewd abuser. He claims to be the first counter-terrorist but in reality is claiming that we are the real terrorists. He’s in a sad state of mind and soul.
THat’s alright John.
I almost included the quote with my previous post.
I thank GOD, literally, I thank GOD, I do not know the frequecy.
My scanner may have picked it up a couple of times, but like unsolicited email I identifed it as ‘junk’ and blocked it.
[It’ in the ‘book’ seach for ‘firey darts’.]
But like Shulman, ‘crazy/evil/’ uses many different aiases and seldom reveals his/her/it’s true identity.
But the ‘bent one’ is a murderer a thief and a liar and though it/he/she is a fairly accomplished impersonator she/it/he cannot keep from manifesting who he/it she really easy.
The personification of evil. Fear and manipulation are his/her/it’s constant companions.
Have any actual photographs of this guy been published ? I wonder if he looks as deranged as his ideas. It would be interesting to put a face to the name.
Noone has mentioned “Reality”…remember her ? (Or was it a “he”? )
I’m sad. Shulman is a deeply disturbed individual who needs help and prayer. As does a culture that can believe that death is better than poverty.
Oh my, an REM fan, ehh John L?
I’m going to host a Divine Mercy Novena for TS on my blog and will start sometime late next week, if anyone is interested.
Gerard,
You can count ts (me) in on the Novena for TS(Ted)
Okay, if you don’t want me to call you folks anti-choice, then please don’t call me and other pro-choicers “pro-aborts”. We’re not pro abortion, but PRO-CHOICE.
We want women to have that choice available to them.We don’t want to force any woman to have an abortion and we don’t LIKE abortion. No pro-choicer wants to increase the number or abortions. anywhere.
If America is to do anything about abortion ,the government must create conditions in society where women are far less likely to seek and obtain them. That is the only way to prevent them.Just making abortion illegal is the wrong way to handle the problem. It won’t stop abortion any more than Prohibition stopped alcohol consumption.
B ut that would require an enormous amount of money, and conservatives don’t want the government to spend that much on something like this.They expect the government to get rid of all sorts of programs to help the poor, and then have the nerve to demand that women not have abortions. This willl only INCREASE abortions.
Trying to stop abortion by making it illegal is like trying to stop a forest fire by pouring gasoline on it and lighting up a lot of cigarettes. A guarantee of catastrophe. Abortion won’t stop, but only become much more dangerous. And what will happen to those children who ARE born under such circumstances? I shudder to think.
Do you think that a desperately poor pregnant woman cares whether her fetus is a “person” or not,or gives a rat’s patoot about when life begins? Of course not. She does not want to go through the awful experience of seeing her child grow up desperately poor, This is why abortions happen.
And if abortion becomes illegal again in America, I guarantee you that a great many children who have already been born will be left without mothers because they will die from botched illegal abortions. Is this good for society? Are you kidding?
What you “Pro-lifers” advocate is a guarantee of catastrophe for America if you ever get your way. It’s a cure far worse than the disease. Remember the coat hangers ……
Robert Berger says: February 25, 2011 at 4:45 pm
“This disturbed individual is in no way typical of pro-choicers .But even if abortion is an evil, it’s nowhere near as great an evil as forcing helpless children to be born into abject poverty, malnutrition, lack of education and opportunity, neglect and abuse.”
Sorry to hear that you think poor people should not exist and be killed on purpose. So what do you think of President Lincoln? Beethoven? President Obama? Dr. Martin Luther King? Oprah? Mother Theresa? Ghandi? Pope John Paul II? and countless others famous and not so famous?
I love the comment about Jesus – after all his parents did not have health insurance, steady work, a pension, no formal education and indeed no roof over their heads. They even had to flee their homeland due to persecution. But all of humankind is valuable. It’s those tough starts and lessons in life that help us to grow, even if it means working hard and having the courage to break family patterns of abuse and neglect.
We are called to help – with education, job skills, parenting skills, food, clothing, time and effort and everything.
I just met this morning with a young woman who saved her oldest son from abortion. We have been visiting each other for more than 6 years. We’ve supplied food, clothing, furniture, rent assistance, transportation, baby sitting, job help… but most of all we offer friendship and hope. We just paired up this family with another family that will supply her newborn son with diapers for a year.
She just read a book: pure womanhood by Christina Everette, and she is grateful we have remained friends and have taken our relationship seriously. We talk all the time…
We are here to help. We are not here to help women end the life of their children. We want everyone to grow and thrive! Including the unborn children!
In regards to the threats – that is so sad and difficult. I pray that all the people he threatened are safe and that he gets the help he needs.
I wonder if the MSM will report this at all, considering he is now jailed. Probably not.
@Scott: :) Now, if only Robert would stand still and reply to the points at hand…
@Oliver: I *do* rather wish more abortion-tolerant people would actually “engage”, rather than lob “incendiary grenades” and run, or troll, or hit the “play” button on their private “recorded list of canned talking points”, or what-have-you. Hope springs eternal…
Robert Berger wrote:
To say that I “advocate” brutally killing fetuses is ludicrous. I don’t advocate it I’m just opposed to the government trying to force women to bear children they are far too poor to provide for or fetuses which would kill or severely harm them if brought to term.
Who’s forcing women to bear children, in those circumstances? Has the federal government outlawed adoption, or mandated artificial insemination? (Actually, I’m somewhat afraid to ask that, given the current Culture-Of-Death(TM) administration we have, but I digress…) We’re only asking that women not be allowed to “kill brutally” the children that are already alive! Surely you see the difference? To illustrate, let me re-write your comment with greater clarity, and without the euphemism-laden “dodge” you used at the end:
“To say that I “advocate” brutally killing fetuses is ludicrous. I don’t advocate it I’m just opposed to the government trying to force women not to kill unborn children brutally, if they so choose.”
When life begins and whether the fetus is a “Person” or not are utterly irrelelvant red herrings.
Really? Whether a person is being murdered, or whether a simple “blob of non-personal tissue” is being excised, is a matter of indifference to you? Pardon me, but: what do you think “murder” means, if not the intentional and unjust killing of another person? You have a very singular sort of worldview if you find “murder vs. garbage disposal” to be a mere irrelevancy…
“Personhood” is just a convenient word used by anti-choicers to demand that all women give birth no matter what the adverse cirtcumstances.
Er… you don’t consider yourself a “person”, you mean? Pro-lifers really do apply the term “person” to more people than just the unborn, you know.
You cannot attempt to force women to bear children against their will.
You might as well say that we cannot attempt to force women to refrain (against their will) from killing their toddlers. Given your earlier comments (about the personhood of the unborn child being “irrelevant”), I see no basis for you to object to that; after all, how unjust is it to force a woman to feed, clothe, and otherwise nurture any of her children, if she feels disinclined to do so? Unless you meant something else, and you’d like to amend your previous remark?
It is profoundly immoral.
I’m very curious: on what basis do you say this? I ask especially since I’m rather in the dark about your moral code at all, and the source for it…
And yes,it is infinitely worse for a child to be born into abject poverty than to be aborted.
(*sigh*) “Infinitely”, eh? But I’ll let the poor mathematics slide, for now. Could you please explain your reasoning behind this, if you have reasoning for it (as opposed to mere personal taste)? I was raised in poverty, and a great many of my friends were raised in poverty… and I can only wonder if you have any real experience of it at all (as opposed to reading about it in socially liberal books)?
Abortion is tragic, but not nearly as tragic as being born into utter poverty.
First: why is abortion “tragic”, in your mind, moreso than, for example, a colonoscopy? Second, what do you mean by “utter”? Third: WHY do you believe this?
You anti-choicers claim that there’s plenty of help available for poor pregnant women to take care of their children, but that’s a blatant lie. If this were true,there would not be so many abortions in America. This country does not even do remotely close to enough to prevent abortion.
Leaving your nonsensical “anti-choicers” epithet aside: this comment of yours simply doesn’t make sense at all. You seem to think that every last abortion (leaving aside the immorality of it, for the moment) is attributable to “a desperate attempt to escape utter, crushing poverty”… and to that, I’d merely invite to you to read some of the statistics about abortion in the USA, Europe, and the like; you may be surprised at the large numbers of abortions performed for other reasons (e.g. not wanting to face angry parents, not wanting education plans to be derailed or delayed, etc.).
But you anti-choicers delude yourselves into thinking that you can stop it by making it illegal. You can’t. Woemn will seek and obtain abortions no matter what. You cannot escape this fact.
Robert, we want to make it illegal because it’s a horrendous crime. We’d want to make it illegal even if we knew that hundreds of thousands of abortions would still be performed in the wake of any new prohibition. Honestly: what separates your opposition to “abortion prohibition” from your opposition to infanticide? Murder and rape laws have failed to stop murders and rapes; should we repeal them? Neither you nor I think so (I assume), correct? Have some sense, man!
And your opposition to contraceptives is unbelievably foolish. Contraceptives PREVENT abortions, and have prevented countless ones over the years. [typos fixed, for clarity]
First: you’ll find that not all members of this board are against contraception. Second, contraceptives have a tendency to encourage more casual sex, since it coats that casual sex with a veneer of “safety” (a phenomenon badly inflamed by the so-called “safe sex” propaganda campaign), and it removes many of the psychological inhibitions against that casual sex (i.e. fear of unintended pregnancy, and fear of contracting an STD); so your claim would be incredibly difficult to prove.
One reasn why abortion is so common is that many people are foolish,thoughtless and irresponsible and fail to use them at all.
Ah. So you feel that contraception, like an anti-abortion law, is ineffective at its stated goal, and should therefore be abolished? :)
Abortion is a tragedy, not murder.
Again: why do you call it tragic? And it’s quite possible for a murder to be “tragic”, in the slang-colloquial sense of “horrid thing, worthy of grief”, yes?
To call it “murder” is ludicrous, because it’s not done for the same makicious reasons as murder.
Oh, come now! Any murder can be “spun” so that it doesn’t sound malicious: “I didn’t kill my wife out of malice; I simply wanted to marry someone else, and she was in the way! Nothing personal…!” (Shades of Michael Schiavo! But I digress, again…) In addition, surely you’ve heard of “second-degree” and “third-degree” murder?
Furthermore,you anti-choicers refuse to acknowledge the fact that the vast majority of abortions are done early in pregnancies, before a fetus can even feel pain.
Whyever would that change the fact that a person is being murdered? If someone were to shoot me in my sleep, would that murder become “non-murder”, simply because I didn’t feel any pain? The fact of pain in many abortions simply makes the already-acknowledged murder more HORRIFYING… as would be the case of any OTHER victim who was tortured before being killed. All sane people would admit that the addition of torture made matters WORSE, but no sane person would say that the torture DEFINED the murder (which was simply the unjust ending of a person’s life… pain, or no pain). Do you understand?
You always make it sound like torture. It isn’t torture.
We don’t always make it sound like torture (which requires pain); but we DO always make it sound barbaric (which it is), since it involves dismemberment, burning with saline, and other barbarisms. I trust that’s now clear.
But the many desperately poor children who live in poor housing,with malnutrition,lack of education and opportunities in life,and neglect and abuse are most certainly tortured.
This is so outlandishly inflamed as to be insane. You’d do well to argue your case with at least some measure of sane proportion; how can we reason with you, if you consider a lost scholarship or a trailer home to be tantamount to being boiled in oil?
An abortion is over in minutes.
And a bullet to the head of a toddler would be over in seconds. I’m not sure how this advances your point (whatever it is).
But so many helpless children in America and around the world suffer years of misery. We will never be able to reduce the abortion rate until we reduce poverty in America.
Forgive me, friend, but I think I can now say with confidence that you haven’t the foggiest notion of what you’re saying, here. Your hysterics-ridden, unrealistic view of “Poverty” (with a deliberate capital “P”) is born of sheer ignorance and ideological bias; no poor person whom I know would fail to denounce your “concern” as utter, murderous rubbish. Speaking as one who was raised in poverty (complete with food stamps, scrimping, etc.), I can personally attest to that.
Besides: your further (arrogant and mind-boggling) assumption that the poor naturally give vent to their grief about their poverty by slaughtering their children is really an idea which has no easy resting-place in my own mind.
And to call the tragically high abortion rate among black womedn in America “genicide” is not only ludicrous,but an utter trivialization of the term.
Words mean things, friend. If abortion is trending toward the elimination of black people, then the term “genocide” is applicable.
Black women have so many abortions not because of some imaginary racist genocidal plot by evil whites to wipe out blacks, but because of POVERTY.
Ah, yes… the “worse than death” fate of poverty. It’s strange that the epidemic of abortion in black communities was nonexistent in past ages (e.g. before the so-called “ineffective laws against abortion” were struck down by Roe v. Wade, Doe v. Bulton, etc.); you’re also showing remarkable ignorance of the views of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. But let that pass, and let us assume that you’re correct about there being no trace of a “master plan to eradicate blacks”; do you not see that it is HAPPENING ANYWAY? If blacks are being eliminated “by sheer coincidence”, how does that make “genocide” any less applicable? If blacks are eliminated from the USA, will you feel better if you can say, “Oops! Well… at least we didn’t do this by DESIGN”?
Actually Robert – that is not is. Many poor women don’t even know that their developing child is actually very nicely growing and developing until they see the ultrasound.
and most middle-income and whites want abortions because they don’t want to disrupt their life-style and want to avoid embarrassment.
I’ve heard all kinds of ‘reasons’ to want an abortion – but none can truly be equal to the action of ending a human life. So – while some people THINK that a baby will not allow them an education, we know that is not true. So while some people think that having a baby is impossible in their situation – that is not true.
And in cases where a mother truly can not truly take care of a child – temporary help or adoption can really help her situation. But we are solution people – we think outside the box and give people hope and real tools to function.
Just yesterday a couple (man not working, woman working) wanted an abortion because they were ‘poor.’ They are able-bodied people, who just decided to use a 1/2 month’s rent to pay for an abortion. And their current rent is due and they have no money.
I offered them employment (I work in a department who is actively looking for people with their skill set), offered to get them food and transportation, and they still went in for their abortion. They did not want to take the avenues given them, they just did not want a baby.
And we have two families that are actively looking for a child to adopt.
So it’s the faulty thinking here – they did not have to raise that child, we could have had them keep their housing and helped in every other way. And I feel sorry for them, because today and for the next 10 days that woman will be sick, and for the rest of their life they will not be able to get this child back.
And if they have any repercussions from the abortion, there is healing and help, but that is the long road to travel. But we pray for them anyway and hope they land on their feet. Please pray for them. Thank you.
Robert, if every single pregnant woman on the face of the earth chose to have an abortion, that would be just fine with you, wouldn’t it? After all, it would be their choice and everything. You don’t like abortion? Why not? If women all choose to have them, what’s wrong with that, in your line of thinking?
I dare you to go to a homeless shelter, find all the moms there, and tell them that they should have killed their children rather than let them be born into poverty. Of course, you’d never do that because I think you’re smart enough to realize you’d probably get beat upside the head. None of this is about real people to you. It’s all some little “intellectual” exercise that doesn’t bother to take anyone’s humanity into account.
On the topic of pro-choicers on this site…how is it that no one has mentioned ProChoiceGal? Were you too busy supporting rape or something? *gigglesnort* :)
Robert,
I commend your tenacity.
“Do you think that a desperately poor pregnant woman cares whether her fetus is a “person” or not,or gives a rat’s patoot about when life begins? Of course not. She does not want to go through the awful experience of seeing her child grow up desperately poor, This is why abortions happen.”
No Robert. The abortions happen because men such as yourself don’t lift a finger to help these women.
Because men such as yourself, lacking in vision and compassion, hold out death as the only viable solution to their existential angst.
Your commentary is utterly bereft of imagination and humanity. And because we have a bumper crop of folks like you, masquerading as “liberal” when all you are is vapid, we have this legalized institution of murder. Way to go, Robert.
Robert,
Giving people the respect and sense of dignity they deserve (outlawing elective abortion does that) is the best way to reduce abortion. You go first.
Okay, if you don’t want me to call you folks anti-choice, then please don’t call me and other pro-choicers “pro-aborts”.
Robert,
I don’t mind “anti-choice” because it’s not offensive. It makes me laugh to hear it because I always think of the old peanut butter commercial that said:
“Choosy moms choose Jiff!” Get it?
If you think being poor is worse than aborting said poor child, then one must conclude that you are pro-abortion in that instance. You can’t really get around it.
Maruader, I think I love you.
Robert says “Of course not. She does not want to go through the awful experience of seeing her child grow up desperately poor.”
Blah blah blah. Robert, your entire argument seems predicated on the idea that adoption does not exist. It does.
Robert Berger says: February 26, 2011 at 3:38 pm
“Okay, if you don’t want me to call you folks anti-choice, then please don’t call me and other pro-choicers “pro-aborts”.”
==============================================================
Bobby Burlger,
OK.
I won’t be so insensitive as to lump all the other ‘dead babies r us’ mob or ‘satans possee’ in with you.
As your numerous redudant and repeititve comments have amply demonstrated, you are ‘pro-death’ and abortion is your method of ‘choice’.
Your default solution to nearly every societal ill is ‘DEATH’.
Your first and last ‘CHOICE’ is ‘DEATH’!
You are ‘pro-death’.
Robert, you might find it interesting that supposedly “pro-poor” politicians do nothing to help pregnant women. For giggles, why don’t you go look at the vote break down over the measure to extend CHIP coverage to include prenatal children.
I’ll wait.
We’re not pro abortion, but PRO-CHOICE.
Wrong, Robert. You are not pro-“choice.” You are anti-life, anti-birth for any impoverished child. Period.
“On the topic of pro-choicers on this site…how is it that no one has mentioned ProChoiceGal? Were you too busy supporting rape or something?”
Ah yes, PCG. Currently on her blog you can enjoy another double standard of the pro abort. She rails against ‘rape apology’ but she herself is engaged in ‘Gosnell apology’.
To Robert Berger and all the pro aborts – First, give up the ’feeling pain’ thing. When has “they felt no pain” ever been an adequate defense for killing another human being?
Second - Explain why women who aren’t poor abort their offspring.
Third – Stop saying that a fetus is using a woman’s body against her will. Until there is a fail safe method of birth control, meaning zero pregnancy, every woman knows she might get pregnant when she has sex. Furthermore, a woman is accepting the risk that her body will do exactly what it was designed to do. The fetus is not there against her will – as a matter of fact, it is there because of her will. Therefore, if a woman does not want a fetus in her uterus, she should choose not to have sex.
Do you think that a desperately poor pregnant woman cares whether her fetus is a “person” or not,or gives a rat’s patoot about when life begins? Of course not. She does not want to go through the awful experience of seeing her child grow up desperately poor, This is why abortions happen.
I think Robert ignored my previous response to this question a few months ago on a different post; I saw a documentary recently in which a crack-addicted prostitute, who’s been on drugs since she was a teenager and is missing her front four teeth, decides not to have an abortion after seeing her baby on an ultrasound. You can watch it for free here:
http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/high_on_crack_street_lost_lives_in_lowell/
An additional point of interest is Christian Bale is up for an Oscar for playing a fictionalized version of another figure in the documentary, a former boxer.
Thanks, Lauren. :D
Janet: Personally, I do think that “anti-choice” is offensive because for more casual observers who don’t get that “choice” = abortion every time for pro-choicers, it makes it sound like we think women are just supposed to get pregnant a million times and raise a million babies – as opposed to, say, choosing not to get pregnant in the first place or choosing to place a baby for adoption.
justlookingon: PCG is defending Gosnell? For real? Even if the abortion and infanticide parts didn’t do it for her, you’d think taking unauthorized pictures of women’s genitalia and showing them to other people would…
Old SoMG,
Motel Hell’s in house chef.
Just keeping the planet beautiful.
Wow, yllas?
Seriously?
Robert: “I don’t advocate it I’m just opposed to the government trying to force women to bear children they are far too poor to provide for or fetuses which would kill or severely harm them if brought to term.”
Robert, I’m going to let you in on something you do not seem aware of: It is a prime duty of government to “force” people to refrain from killing other people. A government that neglects that duty hardly qualifies as a “government” as it is failing to govern.
Government is force. It enFORCEs law. Law is reduced to mere suggestions without force to back it up.
No one forces any mother to bear a child. Birth is the natural, autonomic outcome of pregnancy. I didn’t even take biology in high school and I know that much.
As far as a mother’s life being seriously endangered by a full-term pregnancy: that’s what cesarean section is intended to relieve.
Do you think that a desperately poor pregnant woman cares whether her fetus is a “person” or not,or gives a rat’s patoot about when life begins? Of course not. She does not want to go through the awful experience of seeing her child grow up desperately poor, This is why abortions happen.
No, it is not why abortions happen. Abortions happen because people are selfish, and do not want those children. Not just the mothers, mind you, but, mostly the people around those mothers (see theunchoice.com).
Money does not equal happiness. Love equals happiness. My father was born into poverty. He was the youngest of 14. Every single one of them was loved. There was no want for love in that house. Of her children, my grandmother said, “Every one of them a blessing.” There were even several miscarriages, to which my grandmother said, “God must have needed another angel in Heaven.”
Therefore, it does not matter whether a person is rich or poor. Love is what is needed to survive.
Abortion is not love. Abortion is the blatant disregard for another person’s life. Please do not pretend that it is respectful in any way to abort. Otherwise, you would not see it as a tragedy.
There are many places that help the poor with housing, food, jobs, clothing, baby items, education, referrals for adoption, etc. Those places are known as crisis pregnancy centers, pregnancy care centers, or pregnancy care clinics, otherwise known as CPCs or PCCs. The so-called “pro-choice” movement is vehement in trying to shut down these centers/clinics. Abortion “clinics”/women’s health centers do not give choices. They give abortion, birth control, and that is it. They do sometimes refer for adoption, albeit rarely, and never before trying to goad them into abortion. CPCs help pregnant women who want an alternative. So before saying that you are not for abortion, but for choice, look at your movement. See if they do anything significant to help women who do not want to choose abortion. If you were really for choice, you would help women do more than kill their children.
And please, stop using poverty as an excuse. It is extremely insulting to many, including my family and myself. If it were up to you, I would not exist, and that is the most insulting thing I can think of.
Bobby says: “Oh my, an REM fan, ehh John L?”
No, a Dan Rather fan. At least, a fan of the bizarre stuff that happens to Dan Rather. If you don’t know the story, one day, some crazy person ran up to Dan Rather, attacked him, and started yelling “What is the frequency, Kenneth?!” at him. That’s what inspired the song.
And if a frog had side pockets he’d carry a handgun.
Hello yllas. My bad. I reminisced Sally without mentioning the anti-sally.
Hello TS,
Seems the mystery of who is SoMG, has been solved.
Now I have this image in my head of SoMg being the Planter Peanut dude. Suave, sophisticated, educated, dressed in a tuxedo, carrying a gold headed walking cane, while riding his bicycle(afterall, it’s Manhatten, and quite “green”) to a Richard Wagner opera.
Then he falls off of his bicycle and everybody is shocked, shocked I tell you, to find out that under the tuxedo was nothing more then a NUT.
Pamela: ”What do pro-aborts say to their child (the one(s) they let live) when the child finds out his/her siblings were aborted, and the child asks “Would you have aborted ME?”
The mother of my childhood buddy from when I was four (I’ve known him 55 years) one day said to me that if she had it to do over, she’d abort all three of them.
I was horrified at such a thought! What is the profit in saying such a thing? It is not going to accomplish anything but offend. I wonder if she ever said anything like that to him, to his brother or to their sister?
Robert,
*
I can respect that. I rarely, if ever use the words pro-abort. I get that many of you dislike abortion. That you honestly believe that it is tragic choice. In your eyes, abortion is to unwanted pregnancy what chemo is to a cancer patient. A bad thing being done to eliminate a worse thing.
*
I think you are wrong, of course, but I get it. However, (and even then I don’t use the term pro-abort) there are a number (and it isn’t as small as you think) of people who do not see abortion as a tragedy. 300 of us stood outside a Planned Parenthood clinic at the March for Life 2 years ago, and when the escorts successfully managed to get a woman past us, they did cartwheels. I swear it is true. It’s all the kids talked about on the bus ride home. More than the March itself, more than “Silent No More” speeches, more than the pictures of aborted children…those escorts cemented these teens pro life stance and illuminated for them how evil abortion really is. That’s not the only time I have seen that type of behavior from these escorts either. I’ve heard applause, seen them do the hokey pokey (I wrote about that one, here on Jills a couple of years back)…
*
The point is, that if all pro-choice people saw abortion as you see it, then they would WANT these woman to talk to us. They would want what the women want, whatever that would be. If these women need, or want to talk to the counselors that stand outside the clinics, then these escorts would encourage them to do so.
*
And that brings me to Silent No More…if the pro choice side is really not pro abortion, then they would acknowledge the feelings of women who REGRET their abortions as well as the women who don’t. They would not deny the very real repercussions of abortion, and try to pretend like there are no psychological consequences from having one. But they don’t. They belittle those women who speak out. They belittle us for pointing them out.
*
I think it is naive of you to believe that the majority of pro choice folks view abortion as a tragedy. If they did they would be working to make it rarer. They wouldn’t be trying to close down CPC”s, they’d be trying to build them up. The Truth is, Robert, (and the beauty of Truth is that it remains true whether anyone sees it or not) is that abortion is a business. It’s a money maker. And it is a way for woman (and men) to avoid taking responsibility for, and accepting the consequences of, sexual activity.
*
So I will continue to call you pro choice, but let’s not ever forget what that choice IS. The choice to kill another human being, so that you may live as you wish. THAT’S the tragedy.
Robert,
*
LOL…I think the government must create conditions in society where women are far less likely to seek and obtain them, too…I call it “Making abortion illegal”… ;)
*
Seriously tho, While stopping abortions is the goal, it is also important to understand that making them illegal is a reflection on our country and what it stands for. Prohibition is not a good example, because the OBJECT of drinking is not to kill someone. That is, however, the OBJECT of abortion. The direct INTENT to take anothers life. Prohibition was about controlling citizens behavior, while criminalizing abortion is about protecting members of our society.
*
You would be better to compare making abortion illegal with making drunk DRIVING illegal. Or comparing HAVING sex, to drinking. No one is trying to criminalize having sex. Just as no one should have tried to criminalize drinking. We do however criminalize drunk driving, just as we should criminalize abortion.
*
*
If this didn’t happen BEFORE 1972, why would it happen AFTER? The number of women who died from botched abortions before 1972 was negligible. I forget the exact numbers (tho if you want, I can look them up) but there were something like 72 deaths from botched abortions in 1971 (Pre Roe V Wade)and 74 deaths from botched abortions in 1975 (post Roe v Wade). My point is that the numbers for deaths from botched illegal abortions pre-Roe v Wade was greatly exaggerated. Bernard Nathanson admitted that he and N.A.R.A.L. made the numbers up. Just made them up. Along with the coat hanger myth. Do you know that there is not one shred of evidence that ANYONE, EVER, performed an abortion with a coat hanger?
*
Besides, a moral society should NEVER use “They’ll do it anyway” as a reason to make something legal. If it is wrong, it is wrong, and we should, no MUST, say so. How would that logic work for murder, or rape, or pedophilia. We make laws based on what is morally right, not on whether or not people will continue to behave poorly.
*
You seem like an intelligent man, who truly seeks to do the right thing. I beg you to step outside of yourself for just a few moments and think this one through. What REALLY is best for women? What TRULY is best for society?
*
Forget the government. Why should it “Fix” our moral problems. CPC’s are there to do exactly what you are asking the government to do. Help these woman through difficult times. The Catholic (and other) Churches have been feeding the poor since She began 2,011 years ago. The poor will always be with us. This does not mean we “eliminate” the poor by killing them. It means that we feed them. Aborting children because they will be born into poverty is the same as killing people because they are already in poverty. It is the same mentality that allows us to do abortions.
*
We are a society that prefers to eliminate “CONSEQUENCES” rather than address the BEHAVIORS that led to said consequences. Only when we change our behavior, will we rightly eliminate those consequences. Eliminating the consequences in order to continue the behavior is sociopathic behavior (sorry midnite). Think about that. Please.
*
Robert my friend, think about what you just said. Truth does not care what people “THINK”. or what they “CARE” about. Truth is neutral. It just is. A woman may not CARE about whether her fetus (read young, unborn human being) is a “person” or when life begins…but her “CARING” or lack thereof, has no bearing on what IS. Don’t you see that? We are all allowed to feel or think what we want. We are all allowed to care or not care about what we choose.
*
What we are NOT free to do, is act on those emotions or viewpoints. The fetus (read young, unborn human being) remains a young unborn human being no matter WHAT the mother or you or anyone “cares about”. The OBJECTIVE in this equation is the child. It does not change based on how we feel about it. Born to the navel, born to the neck…wanted, unwanted…cared about, not cared about…the child NEVER changes. You want to make laws, moral laws, based on subjective feelings….we want to protect the rights of OBJECTIVE human beings. Can’t you see that?
*
If two women are pregnant and one desperately wants her child while the other does not, does the child change? No. Of course not. We cannot look at the changeable feelings of societies members to determine right from wrong. It is a beautiful thing that Truth remains constant. It is our moral compass. Or at least it should be.
*
One man wants to force a woman to have sex. Another man wants to woo a woman to have sex. Do we look at the men or the women to determine the morality of this dilemma? Do we base our laws on the subjective FEELINGS of the men? Or do we base our laws on the OBJECTIVE reality…the woman, and her rights?
*
Where would society be if we based our laws on what we “feel”????
THAT WAS HILARIOUS!
!!! Yllas! Nice to see you again.
The stroll down memory lane was nice, but it also reminded me of some unfinished business. When John L was a newbie to this site, I was very impressed with his lucid responses, I purposely gave John a hard-time, hoping to find favor with the morally-confused SoMG. Sorry John, for any negative effects … PEACE!
————————————–
All you folks likely do not ‘see’ this: but you already do help a-LOT in helping to spread our belief. Is it enough? Not my call (thankfully)! [It’s His – THE ONE WHO MAKES ME ONE in Him.]
I am just reminded of St. Francis (on his deathbed), fearing if he had done enough to fill-in and explain what is unexplainable. And he died with @20,000 novices to the Franciscan Order in his lifetime. … he asked, “Is it enough?’ Later they examined his bones and found them riddled with holes – this only occurs if someone starves, Apparently, Francis’ self-mortification habits were rigorous.
“Is it ENOUGH?” Is a question as large as if we had queried about the gaps between Christ’ crucified wounds. What we need to comprehend is that HE IS RISEN!
SoMG always creeped me out. This doesn’t make past interactions any less creepy.
People like him are the male result of a mother who can and does kill her own children, then hands the belief that her actions were a moral good down to her living children. The females become killers themselves, and the men go along with whatever the women say, mostly just “Help! They’re trying to repress me!” or “Help! Pro-Lifers want to kill women!”.
I’m just perplexed at all of the educated people who jump onto this bandwagon. My last exchange was with a (supposed) “bioscience researcher”. When I asked him, “Is an embryonic human a member of the human race? Is it true that the fetal stage is a part of the life cycle of a human being?” he launched into a condescending explanation of how conception happens and basic biology I learned in high school, then told me an embryo embedded in the womb is not a human being or a person yet, when that is obviously not what I asked him at all. When I brought that to his attention, he mentioned something about a fetal human lacking brain activity. I once again pointed out to him that is not what I asked and pressed him to answer the questions, to which he finally said “Sadly, you’ve not grown beyond simple, purile black and white perception of the real world around you. Perhaps you’ll grow up, someday. I feel sorry for prolife people like xalisae, bumbling through the real world with their incomplete understanding.” (to which I pointed out that he was the one who couldn’t or wouldn’t even answer 2 simple yes or no questions about basic biology)
SoMG is insane, but at least he’s honest.
“Sadly, you’ve not grown beyond simple, purile black and white perception of the real world around you.”
Well there’s a black and white statement if I’ve ever heard one! Take that, X! It is black and white that you should never think in black and white.
:) Shame on you, X and Bobby, to use logic in the middle of a pseudo-logical, abortion-tolerant rant by the academically erudite!
Xalisae, I feel for you! There must be a special vocation for talking to brick walls (metaphorically speaking)… and it sometimes feels, when talking to abortion-tolerant folk, as if some of us have been conscripted into the “talk to brick walls” special ops!
MK,
Wonderful stuff! :) Wow… it was a rough way to do it, but I’m glad to see so many old/new “faces” come to the forum! Some of these recent comments (mk, yllas, etc.) have been a feast for the eyes!
Paladin,
Thank you. I read your own comment (3:46) three times! Right back atcha!
And yes, all of us coming together to mourn SoMG…it’s like an Irish Wake!
Bobby,
You can take the Math teacher out of the Philosophy Class, but you can’t take the Philosophy Class out of the Math teacher… ;)
Bwahahaha! Indeed, I do always try and point out nonsense in my math classes as well… especially when I’m the one spewing the nonsense!
Hey it’s a Jillstanek.com reunion! Hehe, welcome back everyone! Ah, some familiar faces and names. To the pro-choicers here too, welcome back, you keep us engaged & on our toes. Ah, who woulda thought, a crazy, raving pro-choice lunatic (read: criminally insane) would bring us all back together :-p ;-)
I like how Bobby and others spoke of how sad this all is – a waste of a life, a waste of intelligence, and that we should pray for him…. and then Jill pops in and calls him a “freak”. Nice.
SoMG and I interacted a lot back in the day. So even though it sounds/seems ridiculous, it feels icky and like a bit of a betrayal to find out that I had friendly conversations (though only online conversations) with someone who’s words (thankfully not actions) were so violent. I can’t help but feel a little naive!
Its a shame that mental illness so often coincides with brilliance, but even more of a shame that he didn’t get help before he got sick enough to jump over that line from disturbed to criminal. Whenever I hear stories like this, I think of the criminal’s family and friends- were they totally blindsided? Or were they enablers? Or too afraid/clueless to intervene?
The important thing to take from this is that it doesn’t matter how much you agree or disagree with someone’s beliefs, when you see anger start to take over the lives of someone you know – when its becoming an obsession, point it out and encourage them to get help. The internet has all sorts of pros and cons – but one of the most frightening cons is that it can not only fan the flames of extreme and unhealthy anger, it can also provide a forum for it.
Bobby,
Well riddle me this oh wise one…
I am having a discussion with Doug on one of my PHILOSOPHY QUESTION posts. I hold that math is objective and external to us. That the understanding and language of math is internal, but that the principles (specifically the Golden Ratio) exists whether we know it or not.
It’s complicated, but what is the “official” teaching on math? Is it a science? Is it objective? Is it external? Does it disappear when we do?
Amanda,
Jill (Stanek) wrote a bit about this particular “criminal’s family”, above; did you catch it?
NO WAY!!!! AMANDA??? OH. MY. GOODNESS! How are you???? What are you doing now???? I often ask Midnite how you are and what you’re up to. Alyssa too! It’s SO good to see you!
But back to your comment…
It helps to remember that Jill had her life threatened by SoMG and we did not. It would only make sense that she would feel more animosity towards him, no?
And you are right. We should step in when we see someone we care about crossing the line…even if it is a “SoMG’…maybe especially when it is a “SoMG”. But many of us tried. I extended the hand of friendship many a time. Bobby and I even thought about going out to see him perform in an Opera he was in. There is only so much you can do…*shrug*
It’s good to see so many faces from the past!
MK, Your comment about the clinic escorts doing cart wheels is priceless. That’s the often hidden face of abortion extremist-zealots. :(
Praying for SoMG.
MK!! :) I thought of you when I popped in here, but I didn’t read through all of the comments…haha!
I’m doing great. Living with the boy and 2 cats just outside of Boston. Full time grad school at MGH and working when I’m not in class – so – not a lot of free time these days, but life is GOOD, and going by awfully fast (seeing the dates on the SoMG comments really drove that home…yikes!)
“Bobby” and I had been talking about this over on FB, and my curiosity finally got the best of me – had to poke over here and read the full article.
How are you?? And the kiddos?
Ciao,
It’s a Bobby, the Bambino.
the zenith of suave graciousness, and patient intelligence.
You know Bobby, maybe us Italians should have sung Joe Dolce’s
“Shut Uppa You Face” to SoMg,instead of deconstructing Das Rheingold.
It’s not soo bad, it’s a nice place, let the baby live, Theodore
.
“I t’ink about-a mama, she used to say:
What’s-a matter you? Hey! Gotta no respect.
What-a you t’ink you do? Why you look-a so sad? It’s-a not so bad, it’s-a nice-a place.
Ah, shaddap-a you face
Mama, she said it all-a da time.
What’s-a matter you? Hey! Gotta no respect.
What-a you t’ink you do? Why you look-a so sad?
It’s-a not so bad, it’s-a nice-a place.
Ah, shaddap-a you face
That’s-a my mama! ”
a valid point. I just hate the word “freak”. Haha… it probably wouldn’t have even jumped out at me if she’d called him an @hole instead. I work with autistic, learning disabled, otherwise not “mainstream” kids – and “freak” is an insult most of them have heard a zillion times. Not a nice way to label a fellow human being, especially if you believe God made all of us.
I just wonder if he had any “real life” friends who were as concerned as Bobby, and apparently you were as well. I’ve told a few of my friends to unplug the interwebz for a week when its clear its starting to cause stress/agitation even when they’re away from it.
(*reading impromptu Italian Ballad, above, then burying face in hands*)
I think the sheer zaniness and creativity has just doubled on this thread, in the last day; why isn’t there a single English word for “morbidly fascinated, utterly impressed, with just the tiniest healthy dash of weirded out”? Because I’d love to apply it to myself, just now… :) If this is what a single thread with this “reunion population” is like, I can only imagine what it was like when y’all were regulars!
Haha, we were a zany bunch, Paladin.
Amanda,
I just wonder if he had any “real life” friends
I asked him once if he had ever loved, or been truly loved by anyone and he gave me a snide response. I pressed the issue and he disappeared. My gut feeling is that no, he had no real friends. I don’t think he understood intimacy.
“It’s complicated, but what is the “official” teaching on math? Is it a science? Is it objective? Is it external? Does it disappear when we do?”
Well MK, I wish I could give you a definitive “math” answer, but the truth is that the answer to your question is relegated to the world of philosophy, just like the foundations and methodology in all the other sciences. Many mathematicians do think that math is objective and “out there” waiting for us to discover it; in other words, that indeed a circle’s circumference would still be 2(pi)r even if life on this planet had never evolved. But again, that is only (i’m pretty sure) a big majority of mathematicians who think this. And actually, the only reason I have any ideas about these kinds of questions is because I’ve studied them on my own. I don’t think the average mathematician has any sort of training in these kinds of questions so, ironically, a mathematician would not be a good person to ask about this, just like a scientist is usually not the best person to ask about philosophy of science.
So though I think most mathematicians would say that math is objective, external, and would still “exist” when we cease to, there isn’t really any better reason to believe a mathematician than anyone else who presents just as good an argument from their side. God love you.
Thanks Bobby…the whole thing goes to whether or not ANYTHING at all can exist only in the mind and still be objective. Obviously, we are discussing Moral Law. He doesn’t believe that love, beauty or justice exist outside of the mind either. I can’t imagine living like that. That means you totally dismiss EVERYTHING except the earth we live on as being real. What a loss. Tragic really.
:P You are *not* going to entice me with a double-bait of math and philosophy. You’re not, you’re not, you’re not… maybe.
As to “Right to Life Terror,” murderers SHOULD be terrorized. The proper ones to terrorize those with murderous intent are the police, prosecutor, judge, jury, prison guards and executioner. The intent is that the would-be murderer will be deterred from committing murder, and if (s)he is not so deterred, to bring the full weight of the law upon such persons.
Unfortunately, in real life it is often the police, prosecutor, judge, jury and punishers who uphold the murderers and persecute those who would fill in the gap.
Actually, Marauder, PCG’s most recent blog post seems to excuse what took place at Gosnell’s clinic d/t women being so “shamed” about seeking abortion, that they go to clinics like Gosnell’s, or that they used his clinic because of the ‘stigmatization’ of abortion. ? Anyway according to PCG, the only ones to blame for what happened at Gosnell’s clinic are pro lifers.
Wow, I just saw this. Makes me so sad.
Feminist/prochoice outrage and condemnation of Shulman’s threats to prolifers? Nonexistent-they’re busily calling prolifers ‘terrorists’ on Twitter, though. As for me calling him a freak, that’s exactly what he is. Leave it to a lib to pat him on the head and call him a poor misguided soul. He knew exactly what he was doing. Some folks are more concerned with the label than the criminal activities, apparently. Sadly, it’s the same kind of enabling that keeps abortion legal. Tolerance is for those with no conviction.
Also, I don’t appreciate being lumped in with people who make fun of autistic children, which I have not done here nor will ever do-but hey, thanks for labeling me, Amanda. Pot, meet kettle.
LOL. Ohhhhhh Jill. I did no such thing. I simply explained to MK why I’m sensitive about the word “freak”. You must have missed the part where I said she had a valid point. Oh well.
I also don’t believe you meant what you wrote about showing compassion to SoMG – seeing as many of your pro life friends here in this post expressed the same feelings about it that I have, without becoming targets of your insults and name calling.
I can see that you’re extremely sensitive about this whole thing, and I certainly sympathize. But regardless, I can see you still can’t handle talking to me without throwing out insults right and left.
It was so nice to check in with the rest of you though!! I only regret that it took SoMG doing something terrible to lead to a “reunion”!
MK, if you’re on facebook, please add me. Its been so nice to keep in touch with Ashley, “Rae” and “Bobby” – etc over the years, and you’re such a part of that too! :)
Since I’ve never heard of you before today, I can’t see when I ‘still’ can’t handle talking to you, but whatever. Enjoy your enabling and ‘extending the hand of friendship’ to folks like Operation Counterstike. After all, that same ‘hand of friendship’ enabled Gosnell to stay in business for 30 years. Labels/word games are all. The actual issues-not so much-to some. Have a nice day. That PC enough for everyone here?
“When John L was a newbie to this site, I was very impressed with his lucid responses, I purposely gave John a hard-time, hoping to find favor with the morally-confused SoMG. Sorry John, for any negative effects … PEACE!”
John M, I can’t say that I recall that. But then, I’m quite a bit different than I was when I originally commented on here. Back then I angrily alienated myself from everybody. Now I just don’t care enough to get that angry.
Whatever you supposedly did in the past is forgiven, and most definitely forgotten.
Paladin,
I’m ashamed to admit that I only vaguely remember you…did you come on close to the time I left? Or have I “seen” you on another blog. I don’t know if you know much about me…I’m 52/mother of six/youngest is 10/grandmother of 4 and have just begun college for the first time. I’m taking my third class right now. I LOVE philosophy. I’m thinking about majoring in it. I had no idea, but when I took the first class I felt like I had “come home”. Math? Not so much, lol…anywho…If you’re bored and looking for someplace to carry on a good philosophical debate, come over and join the conversation between Doug and I (as well as John M) Every once in awhile I put up a post called “NEW PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION” and invite people to talk…Doug is awesome. He is completely on the other side, but plays fair. Of course he makes me nuts, but that’s all part of the fun, no?
How about we all meet up at Metropolitan Correctional Center and have a true reunion–cakes, balloons, drinks–and reminisce with SOMG.
We’ll invite Alex and Polly just to be ultra-inclusive.
It’s funny, but we really only tolerate “bad” things. No one tolerates winning a million dollars or falling in love. We tolerate that which we perceive as bad. Tolerance is gonna kill us all.
Next time someone says that you need to be tolerant, think of it as an admission that what they are asking you to “tolerate”, is bad.
Carder,
Don’t forget the boas!
And peanuts, lots of peanuts.
I can see boas making the rounds there.
Good. Threats and violence on both sides of the debate is immature and unneeded.
Pamela: I’m pro-choice but I would never dream of killing my baby. I want a child quite bad, actually.
Remember to love and pray for this man. He is our enemy, but the Bible says we should love our enemies and pray for those who harm us. We cannot forget that. We have to show people that we can stand up for what is right and follow the Lord with our words and our actions.
MK,
:) I’ll certainly keep you in mind! My time is somewhat at a premium, at the moment (I can usually only comment on blogs on the weekends–teaching keeps me happily hopping, during the week), but thank you for the invite!
As for not remembering me… (*laugh*) ..I never laid any claims to being especially memorable; no worries, on that point! (I’ve commented a bit on Thoughts of a Regular Guy, Creative Minority Report, and Free Republic [excepting my own woefully neglected, dust-collecting blog], but not much beyond that.)
“Tolerance is for those with no conviction.”
Jill, there is a difference between tolerating THINGS and tolerating PEOPLE. People’s concern and compassion for SoMG is not the same mindset that keeps abortion legal. SoMG was wrong, in so many things that he said and did and in so many things he believes. I don’t tolerate that and neither does anyone here – it’s not like anyone is saying he shouldn’t have been arrested. But I more than tolerate SoMG, as a person. I had some wonderful conversations with him and learned some really great things from him. I still think of him and I care about him and I want nothing but happiness for him. Actual happiness – not some of the things he claims, currently, would make him happy.
And I don’t think that it’s fuzzy-warm-feelings-ish to call him a lost soul. Would any soul that wasn’t lost do and say such things?
‘But Hitler seemed like such a nice person.’ Like I said, I’ll leave you to your sugar coated platitudes. I’m not politically correct enough to comment here, and that troubles me not at all. Ciao.
How about instead of killing people (these “helpless children” as you say, who are at their MOST helpless while in the womb), we try to feed the hungry, educate the uneducated, and rescue the abused and neglected? Charity goes a long way. Just a thought.
AMEN!
And this is not politically correct, but I believe the abortion rate in the black community is so not just because of poverty (though it is a factor) but because there is a great deal of sexual irresponsibility going around, involving men as well as women. If this wasn’t so, you wouldn’t see so many men with four or five “baby mommas” and women who don’t even know who the fathers of their babies are. Rap music encourages men to treat women like objects and vice versa.
This is so sad, because things haven’t always been this way. I just don’t know what happened to us.
phillymiss, the federal government, with the cooperation of the states, brought in “Urban Renewal” which mostly meant busting-up the Black communities that had been established. The Blacks were shifted into the public housing projects, pushing the Whites out. The old Black neighborhoods were bulldozed and new government buildings supplanted them.
Black women were paid to generate children and not to know who the father was. When people are paid to do something, even something that is not in their best interest, many will do just that.
Black slavery had weakened the Black family structure. People of many differing ethnics were jerked out of their ancestral regions and mixed together, then sent across the ocean to a place that they did not have any knowledge of, then mixed around and sent to further new lands.
With no sense of who they were, who their parents and relatives were, people were isolated individuals. Despite this, some semblance of family was fairly common in slavery. Then, after the end of that, people further built families, both nuclear and extended. Then along comes Urban Renewal.
This is an oversimplification but this comments is not a place for a full treatise.
Phillymissand Xalisae how are you? Phillymiss I have so much respect for what you said because my heartaches when I see what has happened in the Black community. I heard Star Parker speak and have read her books “Uncle Sam’s Plantation” and “White Ghetto”, she talks about her own conversion experience but also the abandonment of the core Biblical family values of AA families before the welfare state mentality took over. Did you know in the mid 1960s only 20% of Black babies were born to unwed mothers and by the mid 1990s the out of wedlock birth rate was about 70%. This is truly tragic because the single greatest predictor of living in povery is single parenthood, with a child being 9X more likely to live in poverty than a child from a married intact family. This is not putting single moms down or being a hater, I love single moms, my mother-in-law and my sister were single moms (I think that is why I have volunteered so much of my time with my local CPC and pray for single moms like you phillymiss), both of these women who I love dearly went through hell trying to raise their children by themselves many times working 2 or 3 jobs to try to provide for their children. They lived through horrible difficulties and heartbreak that it would take a whole book to tell you about. They had strong faith and got some help from supportive family and church family but is was so hard for them. My mother-in-law, God rest her soul, would tell me and my husband many times how proud she was that my husband was a great husband and father who beat the odds achieving college degrees. our strong Christ-centered marriage and him providing for our family. I am still praying for your son, his girlfriend and their baby and have not forgotten you asking us to pray for them. God bless you.
“You shall not bear hatred for your brother or sister in your heart.
Though you may have to reprove your fellow citizen,
do not incur sin because of him.
Take no revenge and cherish no grudge against any of your people.
You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
I am the LORD.” Lv 19:17-18
Robert: “… even if abortion is an evil, it’s nowhere near as great an evil as forcing helpless children to be born into abject poverty, malnutrition, lack of education and opportunity, neglect and abuse.”
“I’m just opposed to the government trying to force women to bear children they are far too poor to provide for or fetuses which would kill or severely harm them if brought to term….
“You cannot attempt to force women to bear children against their will. It is profoundly immoral. And yes,it is infinitely worse for a child to be born into abject poverty than to be aborted. Abortion is tragic, but not nearly as tragic as being born into utter poverty.”
No one forces any child to be born any more than anyone forces your heart to beat. If the term has any application at all, it is “nature” that forces us to be born, our hearts to beat, and the rest of our natural processes to function. While we can force these processes to stop, we do not force them to operate.
Pro-death solution to poverty: Kill the poor. And who is poorer than a preborn child?
Pro-death solution to hunger: Kill the hungry. Don’t waste resources on feeding them. Kill them.
Pro-death solution to ignorance: Kill the ignorant. Don’t waste money and time on educating them. Kill them.
Pro-death solution to lack of opportunity: Kill them. Don’t spend time and money developing opportunity.
Pro-death solution to people being neglected: Kill them. Don’t give them attention.
Pro-death solution to abuse: Kill the victims of abuse. Don’t try to stop the abuser. After all, the abuser is just exercising choice.
These solutions would make the earth a place empty of people, for most are poor by first world standards. And many in the first world are poor. Most are hungry at one time or another. All start out ignorant. No one has every opportunity in existence open to each. Most are neglected to some degree and one time or another. And who isn’t abused at least sometimes? The pro-death solution covers just about everyone.
“When life begins and whether the fetus is a “Person” or not are utterly irrelelvant red herrings.
“’Personhood’ is just a convenient word used by anti-choicers to demand that all women give birth no matter what the adverse cirtcumstances.”
A person (noun) is a human. A living human body. A human being, whether man, woman, or child. An individual (human). In law, person may be extended to imaginary legal fictions as partnerships, corporations and trusts. These are called artificial persons as distinguished from natural persons.
It will never be that all women will become pregnant, so not nearly all will give birth. Those who do become pregnant won’t stay that way forever. Pro-lifers demand only (in this context) that those who have custody of dependent persons refrain from killing them.