(Prolifer)ations 2-1-11
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN
As always, we welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs! Please email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- Mommy Life shares the thoughts of a father who sees his daughter, Chloe, who has Down Syndrome, as “incorruptible,” and “a soul that cannot be compromised.”
- MN Citizens Concerned for Life points out the flaws in Rev. Kendyl Gibbons’ insistence that abortion is justifiable because miscarriage is common. Is death by natural causes the same as death by drive-by shooting? Intent matters.
- Live Action points out why liberal media like the NY Times, are consistent mouthpieces for the abortion industry:
The media knows that if they frame any issue, they can control how people will think about it. If they write in a way as to assume that the unborn is not worthy of consideration as a human life, they know the public will slowly ignore that fundamental question. Out of sight, out of mind.
When the public is faced with having to answer what an abortion does to an unborn human child, the moral questions that arise are unavoidable. The reality of brutal killing cannot be denied and the public realizes that a civilized society cannot stand for such an uncivil act.
- Lisa Graas reports another attack against pregnancy centers, this time in Washington State. The proposed bill would require PRCs to post in 5 languages that they do not refer for abortions, provide birth control or medical services (even though this is not the case for many centers). These notices must be posted by the door, on websites, and in every brochure and piece of advertising.Secular Pro-Life notes many PRCs actually do offer birth control through Natural Family Planning. The constitutionality of WA’s proposed law is in doubt in light of the recent ruling in favor of pregnancy centers in MD.
- ProLifeBlogs features a tongue-in-cheek post from Creative Minority on the “stealth” technology of pro-lifers. After all, they somehow manage to gather in DC every year by the tens of thousands, and yet, amazingly, no one in the media seems to notice.
- ProLife Wisconsin discusses the effectiveness boycotting WI and national companies which support the abortion industry.
[Image via ahrp.blogspot.com]
Feb.01, 2011 3:30 pm |
Blogs |
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.
Rev Kendyl Gibbons, that has got to be THE STUPIDEST pro-choice argument yet. All old people die… eventually. Yes they do. So lets just go kill Grandpa and Grandma now! The sad fact is that there are some brain-dead and morally blighted pro-choicers who are already salivating over the idea of euthanasia on demand.
“We don’t hesitate to intervene drastically in the normal biological process in the service of achieving or sustaining conception when a child is desired. It’s equally legitimate to intervene when a child is not intended.”
If there is a “stupidest argument,” it’s illogically projecting from what was said – the above comment has to do with conception and gestation, certainly nothing beyond birth – thus Grandpa and Grandma aren’t being included. Regardless of one’s feelings about abortion, the Birth Standard has been with us for thousands of years.
Creating life is not the same thing as destroying life. That should be a great, big “duh.”
Killing someone is not the same as someone dying of natural causes. The result is obviously the same, but the intent is completely different. We lose our human capacity for compassion when we think in such utilitarian ways.
Oh really Doug? This “reverend” is saying because babies die in the womb naturally all the time its okay to make it happen unnaturally. I’m taking that argument that if someone is gonna die anyhow, its okay to make it happen unnaturally, and applying it to Grandma and Grandpa because thats where this lack of respect for human life is headed. Euthanasia is already being practiced in Europe and the idea tossed about here in the US.
The “Birth Standard”? Yeah, how did that work out for abortionist Kermit Gosnell, Doug? Do you stay up on current events at all?
How did the “Birth Standard” work for black people in America? How did it work for Jews in Germany? Some people don’t respect human life. period. Why would you expect people to suddenly respect it once it emerges from a vagina? What a dumb argument.
Sydney, not everybody is 100% protected by being born – killings can and do happen, some legal, most illegal. If Gosnell killed born, living babies then he was not following the birth standard. It was not applied to Africans, going back into history, in the same way as it was to US citizens, but the standard still is massively prevalent the world over, and has been for thousands of years.
I looked for the whole text of what the Reverend said, and only found parts of it. If she is truly saying that the presence of miscarriages justifies willful, elective abortion, then it seems to be that she must be relating it to God or some other presumed external agent to us people.
“I’m taking that argument that if someone is gonna die anyhow, its okay to make it happen unnaturally, and applying it to Grandma and Grandpa because thats where this lack of respect for human life is headed.”
Here it looks like you’re picturing it as a one-way street. Historically, some societies at some times have followed the birth standard to lesser degrees, but if anything it’s been resource shortages that actually put Grandma and Grandpa at risk, rather than a given society’s position on abortion. (The elderly were at times “put out” if the survival of the tribe was threatened.)
For decades now we’ve been having both a decline in fertility and in mortality. If there is an identifiable force behind more danger to (or less societal will to care for) the grandparents, I suggest that it is population pressure itself. If there are not unlimited resources to devote to health care, for example – and there are not – then yes, choices will eventually have to be made.
Likewise with China’s one-child policy. Right or wrong, good or bad (and I certainly see some of the bad of it) it was population pressure that led them to take action.
That post about Down Syndrome was beautiful.
In the wake of the Kermit Gosnell scandal, they’re still worried about “protecting” women from pregnancy centers? I guess their motto is, “Better killed by an abortionist than annoyed by a prolifer.”
How about they let the WOMEN make that choice?
About half of the human race seems to have trouble understanding the difference between death by natural causes and death by unnatural causes. It is absurd to try to justify killing by saying that people die a lot.
The best example of just not understanding this concept was the Terri Schiavo case. Terri was executed by order of the United States government. She wasn’t “allowed to die”, she was put to death by a government which forbid her to be given even a few drops of water on her tongue.
I would like to see undercover video of a woman who is actually pregnant and considering an abortion asking PP for information about fetal development. Catching them lying would not only be revealing, but if the pregnant mother is actually considering abortion, then that would take away the excuse that they always try to use “well, it was fake, so no one was REALLY in danger anyway”. I guess it would be difficult though, to recruit a pregnant mother in crisis to do something like this because we would just be accused of using her. Maybe a pregnant woman who is already pro-life and willing to do this just to expose their lies?
Michelle, Live Action did a video along those lines–although it’s an undercover investigator, not someone actually considering abortion. I don’t know whether or not the actress was pregnant.
http://liveaction.org/rosaacuna
In this slightly different investigation, the actress (Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life) was in late in her pregnancy: http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=e46UZuaGSU