Pro-life news brief 3-5-13
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- A Wisconsin man has been charged with stalking after he allegedly threatened to kill his lover if she didn’t have an abortion.
True Xiong, 46, demanded she undergo the procedure when she learned she was pregnant with his child in July, according to the complaint filed Monday in La Crosse County Circuit Court.She refused, and Xiong continued with his threats to kill her and the child, sometimes calling her two or three times a day. Xiong said he
tampered with her car and rotated her bed, an action in Hmong culture meant to bring bad luck to the woman and her child, according to the complaint.
Xiong, who is married, threatened the woman in person when he could no longer reach her by phone.
- A teacher who was fired by a Christian college after becoming pregnant is suing her former employer:
Teri James, 29, told the news outlet that she did sign a two-page contract with San Diego Christian College that included a provision agreeing not to engage in “sexually immoral behavior including premarital sex.”“I needed a job in this economy and so I never thought that anything would happen,” James explained to “Today.”
But James said she was humiliated after being pulled into her supervisor’s office last fall, where she was asked if she was pregnant and then was let go. After James lost her job, she claims the school offered a position to her now-husband, even though they were aware he’d had sex before getting married, too.
- Planned Parenthood representatives testified against legislation meant to curtail Alaska’s taxpayer-funded abortions.
Alaska’s Supreme Court has ruled to allow taxpayer-funded abortions in “medically necessary” cases, going on to define “medically necessary” so broadly that anything could be considered “medically necessary.” Last year, Medicaid paid for about 1/3 of Alaska’s abortions.
One of PP’s arguments was that limiting taxpayer-funded abortions would be dangerous for women and would “put their health at risk.” They provided no evidence that states which have banned tax-funded abortions are more dangerous places to obtain abortions. Another argument was that the government should stay out of abortion decisions (an odd argument to make when you want the government to pay for abortions).
The testimony by the Planned Parenthood reps is great evidence that PP considers any abortion “medically necessary” if a woman wants one.
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.
If one doesn’t agree with terms of a contract one should not sign it.
What is up with the school offering a job to her fiance, who they knew also had sex? My first reaction is there must be more to the story, but I can’t imagine what additional details could possibly justify such an action.
“If one doesn’t agree with terms of a contract one should not sign it.”
I hear ya, Nicole. But is it the sex-havin or the appearance of sex-havin that the college dislikes? Abortion would have saved her job. And that ain’t right.
It appears that the young woman would have kept her job with an early, clandestine abortion. NOT the message we want to send…the pro-aborts will eat it up.
One thing which the left does that we don’t, is we don’t think strategically. We should be willing to fight for this young woman if it means ensuring that having a baby doesn’t warrant a punishment.
I know that we need to fight unwed mothers, but we shouldn’t lose the forest for the trees. Our ultimate mission needs to be saving babies, and stories like this will make women in similar situations think so.
Plus I wonder if an anti-pregnancy clause is even Constitutional. Not that the Constitution matters under Hussein Obama anymore.
What is up with the school offering a job to her fiance, who they knew also had sex? My first reaction is there must be more to the story, but I can’t imagine what additional details could possibly justify such an action.
Hey, I know how to spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y.
They got married after she became pregnant, so the situation had changed. I don’t understand why they didn’t just get married in the first place-it would’ve saved a lot of trouble. But when you think about it, offering the job to her now-husband is a show of generosity to their family, in my opinion.
There are enough abortions without putting in incentives to abort.
Don’t encourage abortion!
“They got married after she became pregnant, so the situation had changed. I don’t understand why they didn’t just get married in the first place-it would’ve saved a lot of trouble. But when you think about it, offering the job to her now-husband is a show of generosity to their family, in my opinion.”
Nah, if they wanted to be generous they could offer her the job back. But they decided to offer it to the person who won’t be visibly pregnant. I think that sends the wrong message. It’s a private school, they can make all the rules they want and that’s their right, but it’s my right to say they’re jerks.
Nah, if they wanted to be generous they could offer her the job back. But they decided to offer it to the person who won’t be visibly pregnant. I think that sends the wrong message. It’s a private school, they can make all the rules they want and that’s their right, but it’s my right to say they’re jerks.
I don’t see it that way. Contracts MEAN something, and she LIED, and THAT means something, too. I think it was nice of the school to offer one of the family members a means of providing for their family even after one of them had broken the contract previously, and I don’t think it has anything to do with who will or won’t be “visibly pregnant”.
“I don’t see it that way. Contracts MEAN something, and she LIED, and THAT means something, too. I think it was nice of the school to offer one of the family members a means of providing for their family even after one of them had broken the contract previously, and I don’t think it has anything to do with who will or won’t be “visibly pregnant”.”
Well yeah, contracts mean something. I think morality contracts are completely stupid and unenforceable (if she were a dude she could have gotten multiple women pregnant and no one would be the wiser, or if she had gotten an abortion no one would have known), but if they take their morals that seriously I think they would have gotten some good PR by offering her job back and saying something like “we encourage marriage when people make mistakes like this”. What they did seems more like punishing people for not having personal lives good enough for them, rather than actually encouraging “moral behavior”. It’s about appearances. Just my take on it, they can do what they want.
Well yeah, contracts mean something. I think morality contracts are completely stupid and unenforceable (if she were a dude she could have gotten multiple women pregnant and no one would be the wiser, or if she had gotten an abortion no one would have known), but if they take their morals that seriously I think they would have gotten some good PR by offering her job back and saying something like “we encourage marriage when people make mistakes like this”. What they did seems more like punishing people for not having personal lives good enough for them, rather than actually encouraging “moral behavior”. It’s about appearances. Just my take on it, they can do what they want.
I think a good way to get to the bottom of this would be investigating to see if the school had ever terminated a male for violation of the morality contract. I’m just willing to give the benefit of the doubt.
I think morality contracts are stupid, as well. However, that’s why I’d never sign one. Savvy?
Jack,
“Appearances” are pretty important for teachers, especially at a religious-oriented school.
If she were a nurse or a lawyer, it wouldn’t matter much.
“I’m just willing to give the benefit of the doubt.”
You’re a better person than me, then.
““Appearances” are pretty important for teachers, especially at a religious-oriented school.”
I know… and I honestly think that’s dumb. By all appearances I had a great family as a kid and a great marriage lol. I would rather my kids learn from someone who did something stupid and was candid about why it was a bad idea and the consequences than this way of hiding people that make mistakes. I get that other parents would have a different idea on this though.
You’re a better person than me, then.
lol! C’mon, Jack! You know me better than that! ;P
You and I are just inclined to give different people/institutions the benefit of the doubt in different situations. Sometimes those overlap, sometimes they don’t. Honestly, I think the latter is more true than the former. :X
I hate it when Mom and Dad argue. ;)
Lol if that’s us fighting I wonder what you think when her and I disagree about transgenders. O.O