Jivin J’s Life Links 6-17-09
by JivinJ
Jun.17, 2009 1:00 pm |
Blogs |
Commenting Rules
Do's
- “Criticize ideas, not people.”
- Create one original moniker and stick with it.
- Please use a unique name.
- Be civil and considerate.
- Read fully and consider carefully before responding.
Do Not's
- Blasphemy will not be tolerated.
- No swearing or slandering of others.
- No deliberate inflammatory comments.
- Do not violate another’s privacy.
- Do not threaten fellow commenters or anyone else.
- No personal, racial, ethnic or gender-based insults/slurs.
- Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
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.
Oh, my goodness! This woman is seriously needing help. Pray for her. She really needs it. Oh, I am so sad. I am so… at a loss…
I went ahead and did a quick google of Véronique Courjault. I’m just so saddened.
WHY? If she was willing to give birth, why not adopt them out? Or SOMETHING? What was the reason?
This is terrible.
And there’s Dr. Singer. Ugh. Try as I might, I have a hard time showing Christ’s love in reference to that man. How does one LOVE a sinner who WANTS to kill babies?
Oh, it’s just awful!
Here’s a link to a BBC article on this woman.
Personally I believe this woman knew exactly what she was doing. She was pregnant and didn’t want to be. She decided to kill her babies herself. For whatever reason, she decided against abortion. But her logic is an extension of the abortion logic past the womb. Unwanted means the right to kill.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8104195.stm
“Since neither a newborn infant nor a fish is a person, the wrongness of killing such beings is not as wrong as killing a person.”
How absolutely evil. Unbelievable.
And how could that woman’s husband claim to not know she had been pregnant several times? He’s as guilty as she.
Angel,
I agree. She seems to have known precisely what she was doing.
I just… isn’t the usual reason for abortion because the woman doesn’t want to carry the child to term? Why would she carry the children to term and THEN kill them… him.. and him… and her…
It just doesn’t make sense, except within Singer’s claims that a born child is not a person without awareness of self or time. It is infanticide and it is evil.
She was so lost that she believed it was acceptable, for whatever reason, to kill her children. She needs our prayers. She needs God.
Joanne,
To my understanding, he travels quite a bit.
Sometimes my heart can hardly bear what goes on.
Carla,
I agree, and I have not experienced your trauma. My heart goes out to you.
This is truly terrible.
Joanne,
To my understanding, he travels quite a bit.
Posted by: MaryRose at June 17, 2009 2:57 PM
He must travel for at least 5 months at a time, and always when she is pregnant.
I just don’t believe the guy is that clueless.
Joanne,
He might not have been much of a family man, or a strong dad or husband, but it sounds legit to me. I dunno.
In 1999, while still in France, she allegedly shielded her pregnancy from her husband, who was often away on business, and gave birth to a boy whom she “suffocated” and whose body she burnt in the fireplace of her family home.
In 2002 the Courjaults moved to South Korea. There, she confessed to secretly giving birth to a second boy whom she also suffocated. His body was put in one of the two large freezers kept in a separate room in the house in Seoul rented by Jean-Louis Courjault’s company.
The following year, according to her confession, she again gave birth, again to a boy, in her bathtub. She again stopped the baby breathing and put his body in a supermarket plastic bag and placed him in the same freezer, next to his brother.
One investigator said she saw the freezer as a sort of “family tomb”. But the third birth led to an infection which resulted in her having an ablation of her uterus, a procedure one step short of a hysterectomy that leaves the patient sterile.
South Korean investigators used tissue from that operation for one of their two DNA tests which proved the Courjaults were the parents of the babies.
Jean-Louis Corjault raised the alarm to police upon finding the two babies’ bodies in the freezer on July 23.
He had left a family vacation in France to return to Seoul on urgent business and said he came across the corpses while putting away fish given him by his Korean language teacher.
Although questioned by South Korean officers, his obvious shock at the find alleviated suspicions against him and he was allowed to continue his vacation in France.
Later, when South Korean DNA testing showed he and his wife were the parents, the couple made their announcement that they were staying in France.
So from the sounds of it, he was the one who called the cops.
Maybe he had suspicions, but I really think he was pretty clueless, personally.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-410323/Mother-murdered-babies-stored-bodies-freezer.html
There’s the link to the article in its entirety.
Remember Margaret Sanger and her eugenic dreams?
Seems to have backfired. World mean IQ is dropping.
China will probably contribute most to the decline because they will lose the greatest number of intelligent people. Their national average IQ is 100. One of the highest in the world.
Some scientists put together a fun graph:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/IQ/1950-2050/
Hippie,
Honestly, I think it has more to do with BC than abortion for the most part, but I’m sure abortion factors in.
Women with a higher IQ decide they want to wait until they are financially stable to have children. They have less children, sometimes they can’t get pregnant after those years of hormones… etc etc etc.
Fewer children… not less (sorry, my mom was a grammar freak!)
And not all of us with high IQs wait to have kids. Some of us simply achieve our other goals early in life and move on to childrearing.
And I’m sorry, but for an average IQ to be… ahem… average? That’s stunning? Let’s remember that in countries such as China, not everyone is tested or even allowed to pursue certain educational resources. In the United States we educate everybody…
I’d love to know how they even determine those numbers since many people never have their IQ tested.
Elisabeth,
Pardon my mistake. The internet has destroyed my grammar.
No, I wasn’t trying to insult women who have chosen to have many children. I was simply pointing out that our culture considers it ‘smarter’ to wait until you’re nearly out of your childbearing years before you start procreating.
Not to sound arrogant, but I myself am of above-average intelligence, and chose to get pregnant at 21, and again at 23.
I think the point was that the average IQ has dropped, though. Check out the link.
I’m just saying that my theory is that with the advent and circulation of birth control, more women with a higher IQ and the motivation to encourage intellect in their children are choosing to wait longer to get pregnant and are choosing to have fewer children so that they can provide more for each. This isn’t all women who are of above-average intelligence+.
It seems to me though, MaryRose, that if one was actually of above-average intelligence, they would look at the pros and cons of birthing children early and late in life, and act accordingly. To me, it seems that if that were the case, one would naturally choose to have their children earlier in life, considering the lessened health risks to both mother and child, and diminished chance of diseases like down syndrome. I had my first at 21, and would’ve had my second sooner, if biology would’ve been on my side, but 26 turned out to be just as well.
Again, I don’t think those numbers can possibly be accurate for a few reasons:
1) IQ tests as we know them are relatively recent phenomenons
2) Not everyone (probably not even a large percentage of people) gets their IQ tested. Very few homeschoolers get their children’s IQ tested, for example, and yet it is often highly educated parents who choose to homeschool and these children do very well on other standardized tests, so would probably also score highly on IQ tests.
3) We DO test those we suspect to be in need of services for special education, resulting in a higher number of IQ testings for those at the lower end of the scale.
4) Other countries do not educate all of their citizenry the way we do and therefore would have no reason to test the lower IQ population in the way that we do here.
I think these numbers are highly suspect.
ROFLOL… a relatively recent phenomenon (I should reread before I hit post!)
Also, as a side story, when I was in nursing school I had an idiot OB I had to do a day of clinicals with (seriously, this guy had NO brains… proof that the guy with the lowest passing grade in medical school is still called doctor!) informed me (after a classmate told him how many children I have) that only unintelligent women have more than 2 children.
My classmate sucked in her breath HARD when she heard that one and said, “Well, she’s got one of the highest GPAs in nursing school and I’d bet her IQ is higher than yours.”
Elisabeth & Xalisae,
Eh, it was just a theory based on the previous post.
I’m willing to accept it either way, really.
I was just saying that *if* the IQ was dropping, it was likely related to BC more than abortion.
Also, IQ testing, in recent years, has proven to be an utterly inadequate tool in measuring intelligence. To me, a person’s IQ means about as much as their shoe size.
MaryRose, have you seen Idiocracy? It’s a pretty coarse movie, but makes sense, has a message, and I enjoy it. It’s the most frightening comedy ever.