One year anniversary of late-term abortionist George Tiller (the baby killer's) death

george tiller funeral.jpg

Monday, May 31 - Memorial Day, this year - will mark the 1 year anniversary of abortionist George Tiller's murder.

george tiller closeup.jpgPro-aborts have been paying tributes and are planning memorials.

Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has read or will read a Tiller tribute statement on the Senate floor today.

For a donation of $75 the TX Equal Access Fund "will deliver a handmade card, flowers, and a basket of goodies" to your favorite abortion mill on May 31....

The George Tiller Abortion Fund has been established to subsidize late-term abortions.

At the Abortioneers blog Silky Laminaria recalled where s/he was the moment s/he learned Tiller had been killed, closing with a Tiller quote.

tiller quote.png

I'm sorry, and meaning no disrespect for the dead, but what exactly is that supposed to mean? The quote only reminds me of Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey.

NARAL has made a tribute video...

Again, I mean no disrespect for the dead, but a photo of a late-term abortionist dressed as Santa is creepy. And all I can think of when viewing the photos of Tiller and his wife "travel[ing] the world" is that those lovely vacations were paid for by chopping up babies. And this quote from the video is wishful thinking but wrong...

tiller remembered dedication.png

I'm sorry that George Tiller was murdered. Vigilantism is wrong, and in this case it removed the opportunity for Tiller to repent.

But Tiller will not be remembered for anything good.

Tiller will be remembered for drawing and quartering live preborn babies, or delivering them breech up to the head and suctioning their brains before collapsing their skulls and completing their removal from the birth canal dead.

tiller crematorium.jpgTiller will be remembered for building his own crematorium that emanated the stench of burning babies and showered their ashes on pro-life protesters.

Tiller will be remembered for committing illegal underage and viable abortions, only beating the rap with the help of political friends like Kathleen Sebelius.

tiller father and baby.jpgTiller will be remembered for ironically holding memorial services for preborn babies he had just killed, complete with parental photo ops.

Were Tiller an honorable man, assassinated for bravely standing up for the rights of the oppressed, such as Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King, Jr., he might someday have earned his own holiday.

But 11 months ago the U.S. Senate wouldn't even pass a resolution honoring Tiller.

That's because no amount of pro-abort emotionalism or white washing will cover up the fact that George Tiller was a baby killer.

[Top photo via The New York Times]


Comments:

Maybe instead of hating Tiller your time would be better spent PRAYING FOR HIS IMMORTAL SOUL

Posted by: john at May 27, 2010 2:13 PM


I don't understand paying tribute to man whose business was conducted entirely in secret. Who offers words of affection for a hero, then doesn't provide their last name? Where's the pride?

Or is it shame?

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at May 27, 2010 2:20 PM


Well said!! I can't believe how twisted some people are that they would waste their time honoring somebody like that!! Clearly their philosophies are about as ethical as Hitler's were.

Posted by: Karen at May 27, 2010 2:20 PM


Harry Reid is a soulless idiot.

Posted by: Courtnay at May 27, 2010 2:23 PM


How can you pray for someone's soul once they are dead? There is one death and then judgment. Tiller had his time to repent. Let's hope that in that one second after the bullet hit him, he did in fact repent. If not, then he has his punishment given by the Almighty and Just God.

Posted by: Allie at May 27, 2010 2:28 PM


@Allie

Though our prayers are said IN time, their efficacy exists OUTSIDE of time. You can pray for the soul of George Washington if you wanted and God will still answer it.

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at May 27, 2010 2:38 PM


"How can you pray for someone's soul once they are dead?"

Hi Allie,

This question comes up every so often. While not all Christians believe in the practice, Catholics do. The early Church began this practice and there is evidence in scripture. This link is lengthy but informative.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04653a.htm

* * *


"For a donation of $75 the TX Equal Access Fund "will deliver a handmade card, flowers, and a basket of goodies" to your favorite abortion mill on May 31."

What a waste of money. $75.00 would buy food or diapers for a needy family.

* * *

Posted by: Janet at May 27, 2010 2:38 PM


I'd love to know the thoughts running through that father's head as he looks at his dead baby.

Posted by: Peg at May 27, 2010 2:44 PM


Instead of honoring abortion mill workers, I urge all prolifers to make a donation to their local CPC this Memorial Day.

Posted by: phillymiss at May 27, 2010 3:00 PM


Pro-aborts have been paying tributes and are planning memorials.

What of memorials for and paying respect to the women injured, maimed, or killed during supposed "safe and legal" late-term abortions? Abortion activists forget about the dozens of women injured and killed in botched abortions:

Apparent Botched Abortion at George Tiller's Center Comes Days Before Trial
March 12, 2009

Woman Injured by Abortion at George Tiller's Center Taken to Local Hospital
October 29, 2008
Emergency medical personnel arrived at Tiller's abortion center in October to transport an abortion victim for emergency medical care. At the time that was the third emergency transport documented in the last five weeks.

Another Woman Injured by Abortion Taken to Hospital From George Tiller's Center
October 2, 2008

Abortion Practitioner George Tiller May Have Botched Another Abortion
June 2, 2005

Christin Gilbert: "Health" abortion proves fatal
Gilbert was a 19 year-old mentally disabled girl from Texas who was killed in a botched legal abortion done at Tiller's abortion business in Wichita in January 2005.

After the botched abortion, Gilbert was rushed into the Wesley Medical Center ER, followed by Tiller moments later. She eventually died.

Woman Says Late-Term Abortion at George Tiller's Center Nearly Killed Her
September 2004
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sBATtEB5yI
In September, a woman who had an abortion at Tiller's center says it nearly took her life. She said Tiller center abortion practitioner Shelley Sella may have botched an injection she gave the patient.

The injection allegedly caused sepsis, a systemic infection that rapidly spreads throughout the body and can cause rapid death.

The patient also accused Sella of misdiagnosing her pregnancy at 19 weeks, even though previous medical examinations placed her pregnancy at 23 weeks, beyond the legal limit for abortions in Kansas.

A Botched Abortion: "Dolores" Meets George Tiller

A Botched Abortion: "Cathy" Meets George Tiller


For a donation of $75 the TX Equal Access Fund "will deliver a handmade card, flowers, and a basket of goodies" to your favorite abortion mill on May 31.

How about instead they deliver flowers to the patients and families of patients who injured, maimed, or killed during supposed "safe and legal" late-term abortions at George Tiller's clinic? Where's their concern for these women and their families? Are they really placing protecting abortion rights and abortion providers over these women and their families?

Posted by: Rachael C. at May 27, 2010 3:03 PM


Purgatory. His soul could be in purgatory

Posted by: john at May 27, 2010 3:48 PM


"Instead of honoring abortion mill workers, I urge all prolifers to make a donation to their local CPC this Memorial Day."

Posted by: phillymiss at May 27, 2010 3:00 PM

That is a WONDERFUL idea!

Tragically, in the year since George Tiller died, 1.2 million babies have died by abortion in the United States.

Posted by: Janet at May 27, 2010 3:49 PM


"For a donation of $75 the TX Equal Access Fund "will deliver a handmade card, flowers, and a basket of goodies" to your favorite abortion mill on May 31....The George Tiller Abortion Fund has been established to subsidize late-term abortions."

I thought they were not pro-abortion, but rather pro-choice...so what is with all the donations for abortions & goodies for abortionists? Wouldn't that lend credibility that they are for abortion? Including late term abortion? And support those who commit abortion? Don't see them honoring anyone or sending gift baskets to those who offer women choices other than abortion. Just an observation...

Posted by: lifer at May 27, 2010 3:49 PM


I think if more Americans seen pictures of these aborted babies he had memorial services for they would have a better understanding of who George Tiller was. And to think that he will be honored with a tribute is kind of sickening.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 27, 2010 4:09 PM


Your gratitude for his passing is obvious. George Tiller worked within the parameters of the law despite your protestations. While you claim (with dubious and partisan sourcing) that women were injured during the process, you ignore the cases where women would have died if they had given birth. But that's OK in your playbook, isn't it? It's just "God's will" that the woman dies, right? Your smug satisfaction that Tiller was murdered (or was it "justifiable homicide?") is tantamount to your having pulled the trigger of the gun that killed him. Face it, "lifers," you hated Tiller and you, in your heart of hearts, wanted him dead - "moral equivalency" - he "killed" lots of "babies" so his murder was no big deal. Roeder was just your willing executioner. And despite what you say, Roeder is your hero. But nice headline, Jill, a man is murdered but he's still referred to as a killer of babies when in effect they were fetuses (many seriously deformed and a threat to the woman's life) that were terminated according to the law. And that's why the radical anti-choice movement is held in sheer contempt by those who believe in the dignity of woman - as opposed to fetus worship and the woman be damned.

Tiller is a true hero who was murdered by a man whose world view is identical to those who post here. Be proud "lifers." And how ironic that he was murdered while attending a service in his Lutheran church - a church that was proud to preside over his funeral. Goes against your meme that those who support abortion are godless.

Posted by: Pat at May 27, 2010 5:41 PM


What is white is black! What is black is white!

We are seeing the truth being twisted to fit the sin of the flesh and satin is howling like a hyena over the dead babies.

Tiller is reaping what he sowed. Gnashing of his teeth without end.

Tell Tillers family to repent.
Living on the blood money for pleasure!

I pray that the families hearts are not hardened beyond salvation!

To late for Tiller, but not his family.

Just some thoughts.

John

Posted by: John at May 27, 2010 5:50 PM


Pat, if there truly were "cases where women would have died if they had given birth," no doctor or airline would not have let them fly from all across the country to go through a 2-3 day abortion process.

Tiller's late-term abortions were for convenience or eugenics.

Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 27, 2010 6:00 PM


Posted by: Jill Stanek

As far as I know, airlines don't ask for doctor's notes for pregnant women. Besides, it is the 21st century and folks do have automobile transportation. And there are trains that service a huge area of the country. And please - if a woman with complications from a pregnancy is in an area without transportation, do you honestly think that she wouldn't be airlifted out of the area?

Posted by: Pat at May 27, 2010 6:12 PM


Posted by: Jill Stanek at May 27, 2010 6:00 PM

Moving testimonies of parents who needed Tiller's services would seem to indicate otherwise. Are you saying that these folks are liars, Jill? There was a case of a 12 year old, impregnanted by a relative, whose body would have been torn apart by her giving birth. Are you saying that this girl should have died, Jill? Is that what "pro-life" is all about?

Posted by: Pat at May 27, 2010 6:19 PM


Exactly, Jill.

Pat, let's see some stats on how many women were in mortal peril from their pregnancies before Tiller aborted them. From a non-proabort source.

I CANNOT imagine receiving the remains of my own child in an envelope like junk mail. Pat might want to read up on the criteria Tiller used to abort late-term HEALTHY babies, such life threatening reasons as "having a baby would make me sad", "financial hardship" and "emotional distress." If those were life threatening conditions we'd ALL be dead by now. Even when confronted with pictures of Tiller's crematorium and his victims, they defend him. Sometimes I think the natural affection of mothers has been bred out of some women by the feminazi movement. Women deserve better than their children's ashes delivered like second class mail. We tell our children there are no monsters in the world, but there are. Tiller could have had a long and happy career delivering live babies; he abandoned that practice because the money in abortion was better. We know what he 'cared' for, and it wasn't women, or children. Blaming us for his death is just another deflection and a lame attempt to defend the indefensible. Tiller was a babykiller 60,000 times over.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:20 PM


Christina at Real Choice has written a whole series on Tiller and late term abortion, if any of the proaborts have the testicular fortitude to actually read them. Here's a sample:

http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2010/05/late-abortion-retrospective-of-posts.html

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:25 PM


Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:20 PM

Right, those of us uncaring "feminazis" (nice use of a Rush Limbaugh term - he who has had three failed marriages) are just so heartless - so heartless that we care about the mother of children who will be left without a mother if their mother has preclampsia and will die if she doesn't have a late term abortion. And all your talk about Tiller aborting "healthy" "babies" is just more anti-choice agitprop. He was cleared of any wrongdoing by the state of Kansas. But I realize that doesn't fit with your narrative so keep up with the Tiller as "killer" meme. The reality based community thinks otherwise. As Roeder, Eric Rudolph, Paul Hill, and Kopp are your heroes, Tiller is a hero to the those who advocate for women's lives.

Posted by: Pat at May 27, 2010 6:30 PM


Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:25 PM

Right. Some anonymous person who runs an anti-choice blogspot. Now that's credible sourcing. How about some information form the Kansas Department of Health or from the AMA or some real, medical source.

Posted by: Pat at May 27, 2010 6:32 PM


The let's see some stats as to how many women were in danger of dying if they didn't abort, Pat. Put up or shut up.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:35 PM


Tiller himself admitted the 'deadly pregnancy' scenario only comprised 8 percent of his abortion. Your move.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:37 PM


What about the rest of them, Pat? What excuse will you use for the FULL TERM HEALTHY BABIES Tiller aborted? Mommy didn't want to miss college? It was just to hhhhhaaaaaaaaaaard to live up to the responsibility? Is that a deadly condition too?

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:41 PM


Thanks for mentioning the TX Equal Access fund, Stanek. I hadn't seen that link :)

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 27, 2010 6:43 PM


According to Pat's faulty logic, people are guilty of killing Hitler if they are glad Hilter's dead. Ah, faulty logic! The main course in the pro-abortion happy meal! Fetuses aren't babies? Dehumanizing language! Maybe we should reach back in history and resume using the word 'chattel.' Actually, I am sad that Tiller was killed because it robbed him of his chance to repent and begin to repair the damage he's done. If Tiller had died of natural causes, he would not have become the abortionist's martyr.

Posted by: ninek at May 27, 2010 6:43 PM


I've just recently started coming to Jill's site so please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. But my understanding was that he didn't work within the paremeters of the law and this is why he got in trouble. Didn't he continue to perform late term abortions after he was told not to. I think a much better scenario for Tiller would have been serious jail time and his license revoked. Wonder why that didn't happen? The picture of the baby at the memorial service was it red like that because it was burned? How many babies lives and the lives of their moms would have been saved had he really been operating in the perimeters of the law?

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 27, 2010 6:45 PM


"Mommy didn't want to miss college? It was just to hhhhhaaaaaaaaaaard to live up to the responsibility?"

I wonder if people who work in CPCs have that kind of attitude. I pray for the women who are deceived into walking into those fake clinics.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 27, 2010 6:47 PM


Hear Tiller say it himself-only 8 percent of abortions for fetal indications

http://ht.ly/1QO0l

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:51 PM


video series of a review of Tiller's case files done by a doctor

http://ht.ly/1QO0l

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:53 PM


Pat, Christian from RealChoice has done extensive research into abortion related deaths and worked to compile the largest database of such incidents both pre and post Roe.

Tiller's own spokesperson admitted that the vast majority of his late term patients were "teen-agers who have denied to themselves or their families that they were pregnant until it was too late to hide it."


The Kansas City Star


August 26, 1991
Abortions late in pregnancy push public, doctors to moral dilemma

Author: ALAN BAVLEY; Medical Writer

According to his own testimony about 8% of his abortions were peformed because of fetal indication (i.e. euginic abortion)

"We have some experience with late terminations: about 10,000 patients between 24 and 36 weeks and something like 800 fetal anomalies between 26 and 36 weeks in the past 5 years."

From a speech given by George R. Tiller at the National Abortion Federation Annual Meeting on April 2-4, 1995 in New Orleans, LA

As for health of the mother arguments, according to a review of Tiller's files by one Dr. McHugh.

"Highlights: Interviewer asks for Tiller's justifications. "He had mostly social reasons for thinking that the late term abortions were suitable. That the children ... would not thrive. That the woman would have her future re-directed. That they wouldn't get a good education after they had a child. That they would be always guilty in some way about having that child. That they had been abused already and that this -- to have the baby would be another form of abuse. These ... are not psychiatric ideas... These were social ideas. .... There was nothing to back these things up in a substantial way."

Highlights: Interviewer asks for Tiller's justifications. "He had mostly social reasons for thinking that the late term abortions were suitable. That the children ... would not thrive. That the woman would have her future re-directed. That they wouldn't get a good education after they had a child. That they would be always guilty in some way about having that child. That they had been abused already and that this -- to have the baby would be another form of abuse. These ... are not psychiatric ideas... These were social ideas. .... There was nothing to back these things up in a substantial way."

Highlights: Interviewer asks for Tiller's justifications. "He had mostly social reasons for thinking that the late term abortions were suitable. That the children ... would not thrive. That the woman would have her future re-directed. That they wouldn't get a good education after they had a child. That they would be always guilty in some way about having that child. That they had been abused already and that this -- to have the baby would be another form of abuse. These ... are not psychiatric ideas... These were social ideas. .... There was nothing to back these things up in a substantial way."

The interviewer asked if any of the files showed sufficient psychiatric evidence to justify an abortion. Dr. McHugh saw none.


Posted by: Lauren at May 27, 2010 6:55 PM


That should read "Christina from RealChoice." not "Christian" sorry.

Posted by: Lauren at May 27, 2010 6:57 PM


Complaints against Tiller and associates

http://ht.ly/1QO0l

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 6:57 PM


I read that pro-lifers in Tiller's area were disappointed by his untimely death because he was showing signs of converting. He began baptizing these babies and doing memorial-like services for the family. He was beginning to see them as human beings. An abortionist who experiences a conversion is a powerful witness to the world. You have to know the Holy Spirit is working VERY hard to reach them.
http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=30600
It reminds me of the story of a Russian abortionist who performed countless abortions. One night he had a dream and saw a man dressed in black with a white habit. He looked in a field and saw countless children laughing and playing. When they saw him they ran in fear. The doctor asked the saint (St. Thomas Aquinas) why the children were afraid of him. Aquinas told him they were the children he killed in his abortions. The next day, after a horrific abortion, he converted on the spot.

Posted by: Linda at May 27, 2010 7:03 PM


Testimony from another abortion regarding Tiller 'rubber stamping' and okaying late term abortions on healthy babies/mothers

http://ht.ly/1QO0l

Off to cook supper, will let the rest of y'all deal with the trolls.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 7:04 PM


Hi, ProChoiceGal. I'm still hoping and praying that you'll find healing and peace in your life and will realize that people here care about you, even when you insult us.

CPCs are advertised in the phone book and online under "Abortion Alternatives." Anyone who walks into a CPC and finds out it doesn't perform or refer for abortions is free to walk right back out again.

I wasn't even happy when Saddam Hussein died, so no, I'm not happy George Tiller is dead. His killer robbed him of his chance for redemption on his earth - and he needed redemption, because he took human lives. If any of these women were truly in danger of dying, they should have been in a hospital.

Posted by: Marauder at May 27, 2010 7:05 PM


Typo. "this earth"

Posted by: Marauder at May 27, 2010 7:10 PM


Myrtle, you're correct. Tiller did NOT perform this gruesome procedure within the boundaries of the law.

It's also been well-documented that none of these abortions were medically necessary. Nobody's life was actually in danger. We also know that this procedure is reported to be "rare" and yet thousands are performed a year.

Pat, I'm pro life through and through. I don't believe in any kind of killing. I also don't believe in God (....though my friends here are probably tired of hearing me say that....). I don't condone Tiller's murder. What appalls me is that people who claim to be pro "choice" really are for ABORTION. Not "choice." Abortion. Period. You are not even for the right NOT to abort. It's like it makes you ANGRY if a woman decides NOT to abort and then says she's glad she didn't abort (like Pam Tebow).

Anyone who wastes their breath defending Tiller is a nincompoop. There are extremists on both sides of this issue. But anyone who would not only excuse Tiller's practice but actually APPLAUD it possesses a sick mind.

Abortion is unnecessary, in ANY stage. It is gruesome, it is disgusting, it is selfish, and it is the most egregious thing that exists in this world.

Good luck to you, and your defense of "choice." Even us pro-lifers who aren't religious still have logic and reason and, oh yes, SCIENCE on our side.

Posted by: MaryLee at May 27, 2010 7:15 PM


Those of us who actually knew the man and admired him will remember the loving family man, the hero who stood his ground, and the Doctor who gave everything to help his patients.

Doctor Tiller was a man of honor who spent his life helping others every chance he got. He was a man of courage who refused to give in to thugs and extortion. He was a man of conviction who put his life on the line for what he believed and who gave his life to help women.

Those of you who judged him and were so willing to believe the enuendo and the outright lies about him who were so willing to pass along the falsehoods becuase you wanted to believe them are just as guilty of his assasination as the loser who shot him.

Monday we will gather to remember our fallen hero. We will mourn his death but we will also celebrate his legacy and the fact that like him we do not give up the fight. Doctor Tiller was a hero and we lost him but there are more heros and heroines ready to carry on. Like Doctor Tiller they believe that "Trust Women" is more than a slogan, It's a call for justice.

Posted by: bonnie moss-rhodes at May 27, 2010 7:18 PM


RIP

Posted by: Ted at May 27, 2010 7:19 PM


Thank you, Bonnie Moss-Rhodes. ♥♥♥

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 27, 2010 7:21 PM


To those pro-lifers who read Bonnie Moss-Rhodes comments and want to wretch (myself included) remember that the gifts of the Holy Spirit (wisdom, understanding,counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord). These gifts are NOT given to the disobedient. Those living in mortal sin or habitual sin are unable to allow the Holy Spirit to dwell within them. They are blind, deaf, mute and lame. Pray for their souls. Abortion harms not only the women, child, doctor, nurse. It effects everyone. It diminshes us as a community and a nation. For the sake of His sorrowful passion, Have mercy on us and on the whole world.

Posted by: Linda at May 27, 2010 7:31 PM


Going by their logic, all proaborts are personally responsible for the 52 million dead by abortion in the US. Every single one of them.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 7:35 PM


Planned Parenthood study-abortion for 'health' reasons- only 7 percent of abortions


http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2008/09/search-abortions-for-health-reasons.html

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 7:44 PM


Tiller and bogus maternal/fetal indications

http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/weekly/aa102499.htm

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 7:50 PM


♥♥♥ [inject potassium chloride here, here, and here]

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 27, 2010 7:21 PM

Ironic. So many little hearts with cardiac arrest induced by the man they have the audacity to laud as a "hero". Yeah, it takes someone pretty heroic to prey on the most defenseless among us. Whatever happened to "pick on someone your own size"?

Posted by: klynn73 at May 27, 2010 7:52 PM


Klynn-

Abortion really was a 'matter of the heart' to Tiller. The sooner he could stop the beating heart, the better-for him. I feel all 'cared for' as a woman, don't you? What a hero. Incidentally, the common term for potassium chloride is 'feticidal agent'-kind makes you think 'feticide' doesn't it-you know-babykilling? Nite all you prolife warriors. Will check back in a few millenia to see if Pat posted the stats of all those 'in-danger-of-dying' mothers that Tiller 'helped.' Grace still isn't back with the photographic evidence that a fetus is a 'clump of cells,' either. Won't wait up to hear why Tiller was Mr. Wonderful for aborting late term healthy babies, either.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 7:57 PM


To anyone who thinks that a 12 year old (or anyone else) with a high risk, late term pregnancy is more safe to have an abortion than deliver the baby, doesn't understand what a late term abortion looks like. When you are past around 22 weeks, you can no longer have a d and c or d and e. You have to deliver the baby, one way or another. The baby is just too big to be removed piece by piece. So, you have a choice of either delivering a dead baby through an abortion or an alive baby. Either way, the baby must come out. So, the logic that this saves the life of a 12 year old is ridiculous. What this does is cause a 12 year old to deliver a dead child, but either way, she's gotta deliver if the baby is past 22 or 23 weeks. People should actually research abortions at different gestational ages before they make ludicrous statements like an abortion saved her life. She could have delivered the baby and given it given it up for adoption. That would have at least saved one life.

Posted by: Allie at May 27, 2010 7:59 PM


Bonnie Moss-Rhodes
I don't see him as a hero. And I was going to call him a thug but that would have been a little harsh on thugs. He killed babies and the babies suffered in their own mothers wombs before they died. He displayed their little bodies that he killed in a memorial service. Why he was not jailed is a sad reflection on our legal system. And if he was really admired why didn't one of his Friends tell him what he was doing was wrong. And the last I heard Justice does not endorse the killing of the innocent. But please continue to call for Justice just don't be surprised when she shows up.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 27, 2010 8:03 PM


Posted by: Pat at May 27, 2010 6:19 PM

A mother with life-threatening pre-eclampsia does not need a late-term abortion. A responsible OB would deliver the baby early by C-section if necessary. Killing the baby does not improve the mother's outcome.

Also, a 12-year-old who is capable of becoming pregnant is capable of delivering the baby alive - if not vaginally then by c-section. Don't believe me? See the Snopes.com website. The youngest mother on record is a five-year-old (I believe she was from Mexico or S. America). Unfortunately, they never discovered her abuser (she refused to tell and there wasn't enough evidence - this was before DNA testing was discovered) but she did deliver a healthy baby boy via c-section and went on to grow up, get married, and have at least one child with her husband.

So, nice try, but it didn't fly on either count.

Posted by: army_wife at May 27, 2010 8:08 PM


FTA "I'm sorry that George Tiller was murdered. Vigilantism is wrong, and in this case it removed the opportunity for Tiller to repent."

How do you know that he didn't repent? He was in church, if he wasn't praying for forgiveness he should have been. He knew his life was in danger judging by the bullet proof vest he wore to work. If he didn't repent it is his own fault for being poorly prepared for eternity.

Tiller claimed to have slaughtered 60000 babies, if he is spending time in hell, it seems like punishment that fits the crime to me.

Posted by: Nancyu at May 27, 2010 9:00 PM


Bonnie Moss Rhodes,

Are you aware that your "hero" was so concerned about women that he hired unqualified and unlicensed people to "care" for patients. These individuals administered drugs and "supervised" patients. One has to wonder where the licensing and regulation board was as this is absolutely unacceptable under any other circumstances.

Are you aware he was so "concerned" for women he sent aborting women to a local hotel,(good grief where was the health dept!) to labor, "supervised" by someone with no medical training or licensing?

Are you aware that one such patient, Kristen Gilbert, returned to Tiller's clinic in septic shock, collapsed, and it took the staff almost 40 minutes to call 911? Then they put the 911 operator on hold and downplayed the seriousness of the situation, asking only for a hospital transport for a patient being resuscitated! Their main concern was that there be no sirens!
Family pets and school children have displayed better judgment in medical emergencies.

This is your idea of someone who gives his all for his patients?

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 9:07 PM


Thank you Jill Guidry,

If a woman's health or life is truly endangered she need only go to the nearest hospital equipped to handle her needs. There are these things called maternal high risk units with doctors and hospital staff who specialize in high risk maternity care. Any argument that Tiller was needed for high risk pregnancies is absurd.

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 9:11 PM


Hi Myrtle Miller,

You're correct about thugs. Even they usually have standards where children and pregnant women are concerned.

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 9:14 PM


Tiller was NOT a hero. He killed tens of thousands of babies that didn't deserve to die. Several women DIED following abortions at his "clinic", including the girl that Mary mentioned, Christin Gilbert. She had DOWNS SYNDROME and did not understand what was going on and legally could NOT consent to the abortion. Trust women? More like trust women to believe a liar.

And then he burned the bodies of the babies whom were killed, like the Nazis burned the bodies of the Jews that THEY killed during the Holocaust.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at May 27, 2010 9:17 PM


Liz: Oh, my, I got chills reading your post. How utterly evil. This is the only word I can come up with. A disabled women who could not consent legally and burning babies. I should not be stunned but I am.

Posted by: Linda at May 27, 2010 9:32 PM


PCG,
Hi! You must be working on your I Heart Tiller Anniversary blog post right now!! You go girl!!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 27, 2010 9:49 PM


"She had DOWNS SYNDROME and did not understand what was going on and legally could NOT consent to the abortion."

What would you prefer? That she (and by extension, all women with Down Syndrome that become pregnant) instead be forced to give birth, despite being manifestly unfit to have children?

"And then he burned the bodies of the babies whom were killed, like the Nazis burned the bodies of the Jews that THEY killed during the Holocaust."

You're right. Medical waste should be shot into space rather than being incinerated.

Posted by: Marissa at May 27, 2010 9:59 PM


Carla-

Actually I'm done with that one. I'm waiting until the 31st to publish it.

God bless Dr. Tiller. I will always remember him.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 27, 2010 10:02 PM


DNFTT

Do Not Feed The Trolls

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 27, 2010 10:13 PM


Wow. The anger in the "pro-choice" posts on this blog is amazing. Have yet to meet a pro- choice person who wasn't angry. That is in all of my years praying at abortion clinics, talking with friends and family who were pro-choice and going through my own teen pregnancy. On the other spectrum are the pro-life people I have had the privilege to know over the past 20 years, filled with compassion and love. It's true that death breeds death and life breeds life. I choose life.

Posted by: Allie at May 27, 2010 10:15 PM


Carla 10:13PM

...or as a late friend of mine always said: "Mary, you laugh at idiots, you make fun of idiots, and you let idiots make fools of themselves but you never argue with one!

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 10:18 PM


Agreed, Mary. :) Have a great night!!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 27, 2010 10:19 PM


"Wow. The anger in the "pro-choice" posts on this blog is amazing. Have yet to meet a pro- choice person who wasn't angry."

Yeah, why are us pro-choice people so uptight? After all, you're just trying to take something that is currently enjoyed as a constitutional right by women and make it illegal. In fact, we should be grateful that you know better than us what our rights should be.

Posted by: Marissa at May 27, 2010 10:20 PM


you ignore the cases where women would have died if they had given birth.
Posted by: Pat at May 27, 2010 5:41 PM

I remember using that line when I was proabort, but I knew it was a bad argument. If the mother's health is in jeopardy, it makes no sense to pause a procedure, kill the unborn child, and then resume. Or to delay delivery until it's been ascertained that the unborn child has died. If ending the pregnancy is essential, life-saving care required by the mother, you don't delay that care by first performing an elective procedure.

Late term abortions aren't about saving women from death by childbirth. They're about making sure the child she births is dead. Big difference.

Having said that, I in no way condone Dr Tiller's murder. I do not understand how one can be prolife and not value all life, even the life of one who chooses to use his doing things we find reprehensible.

Posted by: Fed Up at May 27, 2010 10:23 PM


Marissa-- say what you may about "constitutional rights" the angry tone is getting old. It really doesn't bring anyone to your cause and makes you difficult to take seriously.

(When I personally was struggling with a teen pregnancy, I received only condemnation about my life being over from "your side" and love and compassion from "the side of life".)

BTW-- the Declaration of Independence declares our (human beings) unalienable right to life.

Posted by: Allie at May 27, 2010 10:29 PM


Marissa,

Please tell me where the Constitution says anything about abortion.

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 10:29 PM


Pat,

If a woman "would have died" giving birth she could have received the specialized care she needed at a hospital equipped for her needs and with hospital and staff trained to care for her.
Whatever was necessary to save her life would be done.
There was no need for Tiller.

BTW, any sources on the women who supposedly would have died if not for Tiller? What were their medical situations? You seem far more accepting of a woman dying under Tiller's watch than we are of women dying at all

Oh and Pat, Roeder had belonged to a militia and being no one here was or has been a member of such a group, Roeder's world view was certainly not identical to ours.

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 10:41 PM


Don't you love it when proaborts bring up their "constitutional rights" yet they're so quick to revile us for our own First Amendment rights to exercise religious freedom? Do you see them showing any respect for a Catholic MD that chooses not to dispense EC? Or for the pharmacist that chooses not to fill scripts for BC or abortifacients? Nope. Their concern about the constitution is rather selective, is it not?

Posted by: Fed Up at May 27, 2010 10:43 PM


Hi FedUp,

I'm still waiting to hear where the Constitution mentions abortion as a right.

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 10:48 PM


Mary,
I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, Tiller's version of a high risk maternity unit was the nearest La Quinta.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 10:49 PM


Jill
Do you understand why he didn't get jail time when Ms.Gilbert died or at the very least have his license revoked?

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 27, 2010 10:55 PM


Fed Up,

They also overlook that any and all constitional rights have been denied if you're murdered before you can enjoy them. All other rights are irrelevant without the right to life.

They also despise freedom of speech, unless it works in their favor (thus all the censorship on rabidly proabort blogs) makes it extra hilarious when they shriieeeeeeeek about how we want to 'silence' women. If it wasn't for double standard, they'd have no standard at all.

Tiller was all about 'trusting women' according to his groupies. If you can't trust a woman not to kill her own child, how can she be trusted with anything else?

Nite yall.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 10:58 PM


Jill,

It makes you wonder where was the nearest Health Dept. and medical licensing and regulation board.
I can't imagine how people hired off the street could be allowed to administer drugs, including narcotics, and "supervise" patients.
Did the hotel staff do the proper cleanup and disinfecting when these patients left? While I entertain no illusions about hotel beds this is an especially repulsive thought.

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 10:59 PM


Mary,

As a midwife I can't tell you how his sending patients to hotels makes my blood boil. And yeah, that is a nasty mental image.

Myrtle,

No, I sure don't. If he hadn't been killed his jail time would have been forthcoming. That would have been a just outcome-a trial by his peers and life in prison. He'll be doing his time elsewhere, in my opinion. Hope he packed his asbestos underwear. Really got to sign out now, thanks all of you for speaking up for the unborn and the women Tiller hurt and killed.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 27, 2010 11:04 PM


Hi Myrtle,

We can understand why his staff didn't lose their licenses, they never had any.

I suspect Tiller's political connections protected him. I can't imagine how else he got away with running a place like he did.

Posted by: Mary at May 27, 2010 11:04 PM


Mary
You think they ever read the information Jill post? It would be kind of callous if they knew that he was responsible for that young womens death and still wanted him to treated like a hero.
Time for me to sign out to. Night.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 27, 2010 11:18 PM


That people would make a virtual cult figure out of someone as vile as Tiller says more about them than it does about those whom they ridicule. In their crazed drive for more and more abortion they will make a hero of someone who will abort up the time of delivery for any reason whatsoever. It also explains why the pro-abortion movement is losing favor with the general public, and why a majority of Americans now call themselves pro life. The pro aborts' worship of Tiller just turns off decent people.

Posted by: Elizabeth at May 28, 2010 12:24 AM


whew! I just spent some amount of time reading a pro abort's blog from beginning to end. Had to come over here to get a logic and sanity fix before I can sleep. Thanks all of you articulate, educated, compassionate men and women who know the truth and aren't afraid to convey it. Here's the truth as I see it. Dr. Tiller knows now, what he wishes he would have known then. The argument is over. There's nothing left to say.

Posted by: aftermidnite at May 28, 2010 1:55 AM


Paul Hill is a hero to the women and children that have been spared Tiller's House of Horrors. To this day that abortuary is shut down. And that monstor has been destroyed. Tiller used his hands to kill several times a day. The people who memorialize Tiller are nothing short of satan worshippers. They enjoy subjecting women to mutilation and shedding the blood of the innocents. It is what they live for. Jesus was the champion for life. He will come again one day and I surmise that Tiller and those who choose to fight on the side of death will reap what they sew. I choose to fight for life not death. I'll be spending my Memorial Day weekend doing volunteer work for a crisis pregnancy center; along with my wife and children.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 28, 2010 1:57 AM


grrrrr.....sorry about the double post.

Posted by: aftermidnite at May 28, 2010 1:59 AM


Meant to say Scott Roeder is the hero who shut down Tiller's House of Horrors. Paul Hill stopped a monster in Pensacola Florida.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 28, 2010 2:05 AM


truthseeker,
No one deserves the death penalty, I don't care who it is. If God had wanted him dead, he would have been dead, but apparently there was something more for him to do, and Roeder may have snuffed out Tiller's life before he had a chance to realize the horror he had done and repent of his evil ways.

Yes, Tiller was a horrible man who did horrible things. However, it's not our place, either, to play God and decide when someone dies.

Also, to lift up Roeder and Hill as heroes is to say that it's okay for a pro-life person to take a life. That vilifies our movement. It's because of Hill and Roeder that we're seen as the terrorists, instead of the abortionists being seen as such. You KNOW that the mainstream media will ALWAYS report a pro-lifer taking the life of a pro-abort, and NEVER when it's the other way around. Therefore, Roeder and Hill are NOT heroes. He's made it justifiable to ridicule and persecute pro-lifers, and made us the ones who the world is told are the enemy, instead of the pro-aborts.

It is NEVER justifiable to kill another person, unless it is self-defense.

Posted by: Amy at May 28, 2010 2:44 AM


It was self defense of the innocent children. And they may not be pro-life heroes but they are heroes to the victims of Tiller's madness. For example, to the ones who Tiller burned inside the womb with saline injections etc. etc.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 28, 2010 3:17 AM


I know, DNFTT-
but seriously, I could not let this one slide by...

****

"And then he burned the bodies of the babies whom were killed, like the Nazis burned the bodies of the Jews that THEY killed during the Holocaust."

You're right. Medical waste should be shot into space rather than being incinerated.
Posted by: Marissa at May 27, 2010 9:59 PM

****

Did anyone else notice Marissa refer to nine million murdered Jews as "medical waste"?


Posted by: Michelle at May 28, 2010 4:05 AM


Michelle: The lack of respect for the dignity of human life is alarming. What I hear in these pro-choice posts is about power. "MY" rights, etc. Power can make people do ugly things.

Posted by: Linda at May 28, 2010 6:27 AM


Scott Roeder is a murderer.
George Tiller was a murderer.

Neither one are heroes.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 7:00 AM


I'll say it again: He was NOT a hero.

I wish Christin's parents had gone to the Emergency Room at the hospital instead of back to that death mill. Christin might have lived had she gotten legitimate medical care from REAL DOCTORS and Nurses.

I have a heart and it breaks thinking of that poor girl going through all that and then dying, not understanding what had happened.

And btw, like Carla, I do NOT consider scott roeder a hero either. Killing is still killing.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at May 28, 2010 7:12 AM


I think we need to pray that the judicial system starts working for women and that individuals like Tiller are held accountable under our legal system. And hopefully families who are losing loved ones to these social deviants will start addressing their losses in criminal and civil court.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 28, 2010 7:18 AM


This woman's heart is for her God, her husband, and her children. This woman would die before killing her child, even if that meant both of us would die. Should that be legally required? No. But this heart will never understand abortion on demand.

The heart of a woman may be deceitful and desperately wicked (the Bible says man, but I think we can understand it to be applicable to both genders). But we are called to imitate and desire the heart of Christ who is in very nature God. Tiller would have done better to try and understand that Heart--the Heart of One Whose Son was sacrificed to save us all, filthy sinners though we are--than to strive to understand the hearts of those who sacrificed their children on the altar of ease or convenience. Abortion may be a heart matter--but if so it indicates a heart condition that needs treatment, not a uterine condition that needs treatment.

Posted by: ycw at May 28, 2010 7:22 AM


"Marissa,

Please tell me where the Constitution says anything about abortion."

Abortion falls under the right to privacy found in the following Supreme Court cases: Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, Lawrence v. Texas, et al. The fact that abortion itself is not explicitly mentioned is irrelevant--the First Amendment does not explicitly protect handing out political pamphlets, yet we know that this activity falls under the right to free speech.

Posted by: Marissa at May 28, 2010 7:38 AM


Marissa, tell me when women are surveyed after abortions and asked if they felt FORCED to do this over 60% report "Yes." Tell me how you rationalize this in your right to privacy playbook?

Posted by: Linda at May 28, 2010 7:43 AM


Marissa,

The handing out of political pamphlets falls under free speech and free press which are specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights, aka the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. Free speech and press is mentioned in the First Amendment.
I showed you where right to speech and press are found so please point out where right to privacy is found.
FYI, the SCOTUS found "justification" for segregation and the imprisonment of Japanese American citizens without due process in the Constitution as well. Interesting how justices can find what they're looking for at the moment, wouldn't you agree Marissa? I'm sure you would agree that SCOTUS rulings have not always been just and not truly based on anything found in the Constitution, except what the justices wanted to "find'.

You called abortion a Constitutional right. Fine, point out where the Constitution says anything about abortion, or for that matter, the right to privacy.

Posted by: Mary at May 28, 2010 8:14 AM


"The handing out of political pamphlets falls under free speech and free press which are specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights, aka the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. Free speech and press is mentioned in the First Amendment."

Yet handing out political pamphlets is not specifically mentioned. Does the First Amendment protect handing out political pamphlets? Of course. That's not in dispute. I'm just drawing an analogy here: you're essentially claiming that unless the Constitution specifically mentions something (abortion; handing out political pamphlets), then it's not a constitutional right, which is nonsense.

"I showed you where right to speech and press are found so please point out where right to privacy is found."

I already cited 3 of the key Supreme Court cases dealing with the right to privacy. Go read the majority opinions in those cases and you'll find where the right to privacy is found in the United States Constitution. I'll give you the one-sentence version: the right to privacy is guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment and the penumbras (emanations) from the First, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments. If that's not good enough for you, too bad: it's been good enough for half a century's worth of Supreme Court justices.

"Interesting how justices can find what they're looking for at the moment, wouldn't you agree Marissa? I'm sure you would agree that SCOTUS rulings have not always been just and not truly based on anything found in the Constitution, except what the justices wanted to "find'."

You don't get to pick and choose which Supreme Court decisions are "just" and which aren't. The law is the law and they are the final interpreters of the law. If you're going to subjectively say that the Supreme Court is wrong or unjust on occasion and therefore its decisions are sometimes invalid then it is impossible to discuss this with you because you can just pick and choose which precedents are acceptable and which are not and argue from that standpoint.

Posted by: Marissa at May 28, 2010 8:35 AM


Let me just say what Roeder did is not the same as what Tiller did. Tiller murdered innocent children; Roeder killed a murderer. If someone had killed Hitler, no one would have a problem with it. That person would be praised as being a hero. The judicial system failed in the case of Tiller, because of corrupt politicians. His clinic is still shut down and innocent children have been spared, not because the system worked, but because he was killed. I understand we have laws for a reason and they must be followed. But, in this case, Tiller was not going to receive justice for what he did, because of his ties to the governor and judges. I understand that Scott Roeder did what he felt he had to to save the lives of children. Can not even be compared to Tiller who did what he did because of money and power. If we knew someone was going to kill one of our children, I think we would do what we could to stop that person. This is self-defense, because the ones you are defending can not defend themselves. I only wish the system had worked and Tiller would not have had to have been stopped this way.

Posted by: Allie at May 28, 2010 8:44 AM


Marissa-- following your logic, you must believe in segregation. Remember the Supreme Court ruled that is was constitutional? If you don't believe in it, then you are picking and choosing which rulings are just.

Posted by: Allie at May 28, 2010 8:53 AM


You can choose to disapprove of a Supreme Court ruling (or something that happens as a result of such ruling) without making the claim that it is unjust or wrong. In Supreme Court cases upholding segregation, the process of law was adhered to and the Justices made a good-faith interpretation of the Constitution.

But then, what does someone who justifies a vigilante murdering a doctor care about the process of law anyway?

Posted by: Marissa at May 28, 2010 9:05 AM


Marissa,

Uh, Marissa, freedom of speech and the press ARE mentioned, thus covering pamphlets, newspapers, radio broadcasting, etc. The right to privacy is not mentioned anywhere.

The due process clause of the 14th Amendment is the principle that the gov't all the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law.
Again, nothing about the right to privacy.

Marissa, penumbras are shadows cast by a solar eclipse. Emanations are steam, odors, or vapor.
This privacy "right" was derived from "emanations" arising from the "penumbra" cast by the 14th Amendment. Put simply, the justices derived the "right" to privacy then abortion from steam and shadows, not from anything actually written. I wonder if that's where they also found the "justification" for segregation and the internment of thousands of American citizens.

For 58 years segregation "good enough" for the justices of the SCOTUS.

Posted by: Mary at May 28, 2010 9:20 AM


Oy Marissa,

Just where do you get that segregation was constitutional? In 1954 it was ruled unconstitutional. So which is it???

Check your history and you will find that SCOTUS justices often made decisions based on little more than personal bias.

Please find a direct quote of me advocating the vigilante murder of Tiller.

Posted by: Mary at May 28, 2010 9:25 AM


So entertaining to watch your verbal tapdance, Marissa, when you're pinned to the wall with your own illogic. Thanks & well done, Mary & Allie, I needed a chuckle this a.m.!

Mods, I've got a post on the QOTD that said it was sent to the blog owner for approval, if you're able to help, thanks.

Posted by: klynn73 at May 28, 2010 9:31 AM


Marissa,

My mistake, you were apparently addressing Allie concerning Tiller.

Posted by: Mary at May 28, 2010 9:31 AM


"Uh, Marissa, freedom of speech and the press ARE mentioned, thus covering pamphlets, newspapers, radio broadcasting, etc. The right to privacy is not mentioned anywhere."

Right, of course. The founders didn't want the government to be able to force private citizens to house soldiers, but they'd be perfectly acceptable with the government peering in through the windows of those same private citizens to make sure they're not committing any illicit sexual act, or determining what medical procedures they can have performed on them. The right to privacy is clearly diffused throughout the entire Constitution--I can only surmise that they didn't specifically include "the right to privacy" or some other similar phrasing because they couldn't have possibly foreseen that there would be so many busybodies who are so concerned with forcing their morals and beliefs on others that they would try and ban safe medical procedures. None of the Constitution's protections mean anything without the right to privacy being recognized as the key underpinning to the entire document.

As for freedom of speech and the press covering those things you mentioned--they only cover them because the Supreme Court has determined that they do. After all, "speech" and the "press" are vague notions, not specific activities--some people would argue that only verbal communications can literally be interpreted as "speech" for the purposes of the first amendment, or that only physical newspapers but not blogs, for example, count as the "press".

Posted by: Marissa at May 28, 2010 9:38 AM


Why do Stanek's moderators allow comments that condone murder? (ie, Allie's comment)

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 9:53 AM


Oh, no, she didn't...you got abortion out of no forced housing of soldiers?!? Please tell me you're kidding, Marissa!

Swing and a miss. In basketball that'd be, "AIRBALL!" You need some lessons on our country's founding, I suggest The American Heritage Education Foundation.

BTW, if you invite troops into your home, you can't shoot them and claim self-defense. Every child ends up in his or her mother's womb by a consensual act (99+% of the time) of mother and father. No, Marissa, our founding fathers did not forsee the godless state of our nation as it exists today.

Posted by: klynn73 at May 28, 2010 9:55 AM


"Why do Stanek's moderators allow comments that condone murder? (ie, Allie's comment)"

Because deep down, people who are so invested in counter-culture movements like this always end up becoming part-time utilitarians--the end justifies the means as long as it's for the cause. Allie only said what most people here are probably thinking, but don't want to say it themselves because, again, it hurts the cause by making them look like raving extremists who are willing to support vigilantism when more peaceful methods fail.

"Oh, no, she didn't...you got abortion out of no forced housing of soldiers?!? Please tell me you're kidding, Marissa!"

I can't take all the credit for this line of thought--after all, the 3rd Amendment was part of the reasoning used to determine that there is, in fact, a right to privacy. But hey, how stupid, huh? Supreme Court Justice klynn73 knows much better than all those other dummies!

Posted by: Marissa at May 28, 2010 10:05 AM


"Allie only said what most people here are probably thinking, but don't want to say it themselves because, again, it hurts the cause by making them look like raving extremists who are willing to support vigilantism when more peaceful methods fail."

Exactly what I thought, Marissa. They will weep their crocodile tears, call themselves "pro-life", and then they will go on will the killing.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 10:08 AM


To all the Tiller fans present -

Make sure you know the full truth before you thoughtlessly worship this man.

TRUTH from someone on the inside who worked for Tiller: http://prolifeaction.org/providers/tivis.php

TRUTH from REAL doctors: http://www.aaplog.org/?page_id=42

The Supreme Court decision is not as cut and dried as you think. Their decisions are based on presented evidence. Using the technology of today, personhood is no longer ambiguous: . . . Whereas in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court declared it could not resolve "the difficult question of when life begins" and admitted "If...personhood [of the unborn] is established...the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the Fourteenth Amendment", Roe [410 US 113 at 156]. (Sourced here as part of a petition: http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/1476/30/)
Abortion is not a guaranteed civil right. Privacy is incorrectly applied to abortion.

Posted by: jim sable at May 28, 2010 10:09 AM


"I can only surmise that they didn't specifically include "the right to privacy" or some other similar phrasing because they couldn't have possibly foreseen that there would be so many busybodies who are so concerned with forcing their morals and beliefs on others that they would try and ban safe medical procedures. None of the Constitution's protections mean anything without the right to privacy being recognized as the key underpinning to the entire document."
Posted by: Marissa at May 28, 2010 9:38 AM

Right. Because all that stuff where the Puritans would run around their towns pulling people out of their homes and to church on Sundays if they weren't sick? Never happened. Certainly no one was ever kicked outta Boston for withholding sex from his wife or anything.

The Founders were perfectly aware of people who couldn't understand the concept of "personal space." That's why places where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy are spelled out in the bill of rights. The government needing warrants for search and seizure for example. To say the Founders had no experience of people who "forced their morals and beliefs on others," to use your words, pretty much indicates you are ignorant of history. If the Founders had wanted us to be allowed to kill other human beings, so long as we did it privately, the government wouldn't be allowed to search your home in the event of a murder.

The right to privacy isn't the underpinning of the Constitution, either, by the way. Human dignity is. The Framers wanted to create a government that protected the rights that belonged to people by nature (those "inalienable" ones that they mentioned in the Declaration), not define what rights people have. Because human beings, innately, are valuable. Because of the kind of thing that they are. Which is the grounding point of the whole pro-life argument.

"Logic! Why don't they teach logic at these schools?"

Posted by: Keli Hu at May 28, 2010 10:15 AM


Marissa,

I'm not certain what housing soldiers in peacetime has do with this discussion but...it is specifically forbidden in the Constitution. The third amendment to be exact.

Also, protecting citizens from gov't intrusion had more to do with protecting people from gov't tyrrany, i.e. unwarranted searches, false imprisonment, gov't soldiers in our homes, than with protection of privacy.

The Constitution does indeed cover the question of free speech and press. These are not blessings from the SCOTUS. You think our Founding Fathers believed that people only talked and never wrote or read? Books and pamphlets had been around for centuries.

If the right to privacy is clearly diffused throughout the Constitution then why did the SCOTUS justices have to search for and "find" it in steam and shadows?

Also, Marissa, may I recommend "google". Its a great research tool, especially for people like us who are not Constituional or legal scholars and need information. No need to "wing it".

Posted by: Mary at May 28, 2010 10:15 AM


Um, Jill? What's up with the URL for this post?

Posted by: Keli Hu at May 28, 2010 10:22 AM


Abortion is mentioned in early US treaties

http://dontbuytheabortionlie.blogspot.com/2010/03/united-states-once-solidly-prolife.html

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 28, 2010 10:23 AM


Questioning the legality of abortion

http://dontbuytheabortionlie.blogspot.com/2010/02/is-abortion-really-legal-part-ii.html

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 28, 2010 10:30 AM


I do not condone murder, which is why I am pro-life. I said you can not compare Roeder to Tiller. Apples to oranges. Roeder killed a murderer outside of the law. Tiller committed thousands of murders inside the law. Crazy world, isn't it? Murdering Jews and other undesirables was also within the law in Germany. It was referred to as The Final Solution. It was perfectly legal at the time under German law. Had someone killed Hitler or any other of his accomplices to stop the murders, would they be then called a murderer and said to be no different than Hitler? I want to find one person who thinks that Hitler's killing would be unjustified. Obviously, he wasn't going to be stopped by using the judicial system.

I am not saying let's all go out and kill abortionists. I am just saying you can't say that what abortionists do and what Roeder did are the same thing, because they are not.

I still pray for a peaceful end to abortion.

Posted by: Allie at May 28, 2010 10:32 AM


The unborn are protected under the Constitution

http://dontbuytheabortionlie.blogspot.com/2010/03/unborn-protected-under-constitution.html

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 28, 2010 10:34 AM


"I remember laughing when we made those slogans up," recalls Bernard Nathanson, M.D., co-founder of pro-abortion group NARAL, reminiscing about the early days of the pro-abortion movement in the late '60s and early '70s.

"We were looking for some sexy, catchy slogans to capture public opinion. They were very cynical slogans then, just as all of these slogans today are very, very cynical."
from http://www.squidoo.com/Bernard-Nathanson

I remember reading this, that among these founding members they actually chuckled and wondered if women would be gullible enough to buy child-murder as a right to privacy. 52 million deaths later, need I say more?

Posted by: klynn73 at May 28, 2010 10:39 AM


Allie,
Prochoice Gal will twist your words to suit her next blog post.

Oh, but just try commenting on your blog right, PCG? You are quite the little moderator yourself.

All of us antis are the "haters" right?

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 10:40 AM


Marissa-- wow reading your posts concerning segregation, it sounds like you are actually justifying it! Because you know you can't follow your own logic and not justify it. Wow! Anything just to keep from actually admitting that sometimes the Supreme Court may have actually made a mistake. You need some serious help.

Posted by: Allie at May 28, 2010 10:41 AM


PCG, will you link back to your source for the 'quotes' you manipulate? Didn't think so.

Posted by: klynn73 at May 28, 2010 10:43 AM


Our constitutional rights are irrelevant if we are denied life before we can enjoy them. No amount of mental gymnastics can change that.

Have a good one yall.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 28, 2010 10:44 AM


Very telling. You support murder, as long as it's from your own side. Not that I'm surprised by this.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 10:48 AM


And who will memorialize the thousands of innocent children this despicable man murdered?

Posted by: Phil Schembri is HisMan at May 28, 2010 10:54 AM


PCG,
You support murder. Very telling.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 10:57 AM


Maybe instead of hating Tiller your time would be better spent PRAYING FOR HIS IMMORTAL SOUL

Posted by: john at May 27, 2010 2:13 PM
______________________

Uh John:

I think it's way too late for that.

"It is appointed once for a man to die and then comes judgment".

Posted by: Phil Schembri is HisMan at May 28, 2010 10:58 AM


Marissa says:

"The fact that abortion itself is not explicitly mentioned is irrelevant--the First Amendment does not explicitly protect handing out political pamphlets, yet we know that this activity falls under the right to free speech."

I have to ask why it is, that in matters constitutional, the lack of explicit mention of abortion is irrelevant, but in matters biblical the lack of explicit use of the word abortion is paramount? (to pro aborts)

Pro choice gal - you are the one who is exposed as a liar. I have first hand experience that you manipulate your comments to support your bias, and then you claim that pro lifers are liars. I guess you never knew how fun (but cowardly) comment moderating could be. Like that Stanek's blog really does allow "respectful" (and even sometimes not-so-respectful) comments from your ilk.....it's really fun to see you so effectively shut down.

Posted by: beforenoon at May 28, 2010 11:35 AM


Tiller killing unborn human beings = bad

Roeder killing Tiller = bad

PCG refusing to link back to the places she quotes from = bad reporting. Is there something here you want to hide from your readers?

Tiller shouldn't be a hero for even the most pro-choice person in the world. Woman after woman went to him for late-term abortions and came out with stories about his sloppy, negligent medical standards.

Marissa = an old-school eugenicist's dream. "Manifestly unfit," huh?

Posted by: Marauder at May 28, 2010 11:37 AM


Marissa @ 7:38 AM makes a great argument against the constitutionality of Obamacare. Isn't it interesting that proaborts were willing to toss privacy out the window when they clamored for passage of that bill?

Posted by: Fed Up at May 28, 2010 12:18 PM


I disagree with Allie. Tiller and Roeder are morally equivalent. Who cares how many people they killed or the degree of "innocence" of their victims? A murderer is a murderer is a murderer. I don't care if you've killed 1 person or 5 or 30 million. And no, no one had the right to kill Hitler. Utilitarianism is dangerous. If we justify it in very tough circumstances (as was the case with Tiller), then we can justify it anytime for any cause. Unfortunately, Tiller's murder has solidified his statue as a martyr for the pro-abortion movement and reinforced the convictions of people who believe those who perform abortions are heroes.

Posted by: Adair at May 28, 2010 12:24 PM


klynn73--- thanks for posting that link on Nathanson. I personally think anyone (pro-life or pro-choice) needs to read his quotes about how he helped legalize abortion in this country. Mind blowing stuff.

Posted by: Allie at May 28, 2010 12:37 PM


PCG,

Shouldn't you be at your counseling appointment?

Geesh. Enough already.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 28, 2010 12:48 PM


Adair-- you are probably the first person I have ever heard of who believes Hitler should have been allowed to live. That's heavy.

The point I am trying to make is murder and killing are not the same thing. To kill in order to defend yourself or another is not murder. Murder is the taking of innocent life. There has to be a line drawn between the two. They are not the same.

I care about the innocence of the victims. A person trying to kill my child and the child are not the same. I wouldn't hesitate for one second to kill someone who was trying to kill my child. But, I would rather die than kill my child. How can you say that they are the same?

Maybe you have never had a family of your own that you had to protect and that is why you hold this view. But, defending your life or another's life is not murder.

Posted by: Allie at May 28, 2010 12:49 PM


Extremism goes both ways.

Those who believe that an abortionist who kills unborn children for a living is a hero is pretty extreme. Pretty much an "extremist" view for a prolife blog, eh Marissa and PCG?

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 12:53 PM


Only on an anti-choice forum would being against murder get someone to imply that you have mental issues. *coughcoughPraxedes* :\

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 1:01 PM


PCG, there is a vast difference between being aginst murdering someone and thinking that person is a hero. You belong in the latter group.

I oppose the death penalty. That doesn't mean that I think that everyone who died on Death Row was a hero. There were a lot of people who were killed who had committed really terrible crimes.

If I were pretending that a man who butchered his family were actually a hero, it would definitely seem I had, at the very least, misplaced priorities.

Posted by: Lauren at May 28, 2010 1:08 PM


Here's a great example that just happened:

www.hcnonline.com/articles/2010/05/27/conroe_courier/news/milam052810b.txt

The man beat and (weirdly) bit his girlfriends 13 month old daughter to death while claiming to perform and exorcism.

He is apparantly mentally handicapped, and was a registered sex offender prior to the incident.

He was just sentenced to death.

Now, I 100% disagree with him being put to death. Life without parole is adequate for any crime outside an act of war, IMO.

However, I definitely do not see this man as a hero. He murdered a toddler.

Do you see the difference between that stance and yours with re: to Tiller?

Posted by: Lauren at May 28, 2010 1:21 PM


During the first "Summer of Mercy" I held signs and prayed in front of Dr. Tillers late term abortion clinic usually during the evenings. A few years later I wrote a poem about the only morning I went to pray,a busload of very pregnant females were going to Tillers office to kill their unborn babies. What would those unborn babies have said if they could speak.

Who Will Remember Me
Cut from my mother's womb
By her own words
There is only pain
Then nothing
I have no heartbeat
There is no first breath
I will not run or jump
I cannot play
Mommy
Did you ever love me?
Did you wonder what I could be
Whether I was a she or he
Will anyone remember me
I wish I could see
Someday climb a tree
I have no hopes or dreams
There is no hugs or kisses
There is no laughter or tears
There is only pain
Then nothing
Who will remember me?

~~~~~~~~~
Praying for an End to Abortion!
~~~~~~~~
What a waste of money. $75.00 would buy food or diapers for a needy family.

Posted by: Janet at May 27, 2010 2:38 PM

Today watching Life on the Rock I learned about Maggies Place

Maggie’s Place is a community that provides houses of hospitality for expectant women who wish to achieve their goals in a dignified and welcoming atmosphere. http://www.maggiesplace.org/content.php?sectionid=3407

If you dont have Sienna as your cell phone provider when your time is up please change it to Sienna. Sienna is,a Catholic cell phone provider, 5% of your monthly plan price goes to your favorite Catholic or Pro-Life charity (PRCs), check it out:
http://www.sienna-group.com/

Posted by: RooForLife at May 28, 2010 2:20 PM


RooForLife, what a touching, poignant poem. "Someday climb a tree" brought back so many memories of sun-filled, barefoot and carefree summers. Every child deserves a chance to experience this world, yes, the ups & even the downs. It strikes me that the will to live is such a driving force in all of us. Truly, if they could speak, they'd say, "Please! Let me live! Just give me the chance that you had!"

Posted by: klynn73 at May 28, 2010 2:48 PM


PCG, Where do you get the idea that I am implying that you have mental issues?

I will make myself a bit clearer so you no longer think I am implying anything:

You have mental issues.

Peace.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 28, 2010 3:45 PM


RooForLife, THANK YOU for the Sienna link. Never heard of them before. I've been exploring other plans, and Sienna looks like a good deal for me. Thanks, too, for sharing the beautiful poem.

Posted by: Fed Up at May 28, 2010 3:49 PM


Oh, I didn't know that you were a doctor, Praxedes. And a doctor who can diagnose an illness just from reading what she has to say about rape apologism? Wow.

Oh wait, you're not a doctor at all, are you? Tsk. You antis are so good at making random crap up :)

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 3:49 PM


rape apologism=random crap

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 3:52 PM


"And a doctor who can diagnose an illness just from reading what she has to say about rape apologism?"

Are you referring to the way you were mindlessly accusing others of "rape apologism" on a previous post?

"You antis are so good at making random crap up"

Yes, anti-lifers are pretty good at that :)

Posted by: Lucy at May 28, 2010 4:00 PM


Most people are not referred to mental health care by doctors but by those who have listened to, worked with or lived with them for a bit.

I've listened long enough and it's a pretty safe bet you could benefit from some mental health care.

Just because someone may have a doctorate degree doesn't mean they don't have mental health issues themselves. Tiller was a great example of one with mental health issues as well.

So no, I am not a doctor, I don't blindly trust all 'doctors' and am also not ashamed to let my parents know what I do and what my future plans are. (:

Posted by: Praxedes at May 28, 2010 4:08 PM


I think you all know that my last post was meant for PCG but just in case she is confused . . . .

Posted by: Praxedes at May 28, 2010 4:17 PM


Praxedes, grow up. It's not funny or smart or cute to use mental illness as an insult. It undermines the experiences of people who have real mental illnesses.

"Most people are not referred to mental health care by doctors but by those who have listened to, worked with or lived with them for a bit."

Well let's see, have you-
1) listened to me? Obviously not.
2) worked with me? Lol, no.
3) Lived with me? Thank GOD you haven't.

Soo, I suggest you shut up. :)

"rape apologism=random crap"

Carla, I'd really like to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you *weren't* trying to say that rape apologism doesn't exist, but considering some of the crap I've seen from you, I'm having a really hard time doing so.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 4:30 PM


Thanks klynn73 & agree wholeheartly!

Thanks and you're welcome Fed Up!

Posted by: RooForLife at May 28, 2010 4:30 PM


I love how all I have to do is call out someone for justifying murder and you all whip out the insults. You people are so mature.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 4:37 PM


Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 4:30 PM

Okay, now you're just not even trying anymore. Carla's post was pretty clear in that she's accusing you of being reductionary and insulting by calling rape apologism "random crap." Seriously, you're grasping at straws at this point. Take a breath before your next post.

Posted by: Keli Hu at May 28, 2010 4:50 PM


Praxedes
That's what I was thinking too. A lot of what he done was so morbid. What I don't understand is why when he was told to stop and didn't why wasn't he immediately jailed and his license revoked immediately? And something else I don't understand is why when he started having memorial services for children he killed while breaking the law why didn't his family seek professional help for him then? This is the way I see it I think Tiller failed women and their unborn. I think the judicial system failed Tiller when he wasn't jailed. I think his family failed him when they didn't have an intervention for him.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 28, 2010 4:50 PM


"Carla's post was pretty clear in that she's accusing you of being reductionary and insulting by calling rape apologism "random crap.""

Maybe it *would* be clear if I had ever called rape apologism random crap,vBUT I never said anything like that. Making up random crap again? :)

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 4:53 PM


You only come here for one reason. You know it and we know it. It is pretty clear. You have accused ALL prolifers of being prorape. You love to say it. You love to blog it. I am not prorape.

Off the top of my head the only people I would think that are prorape are RAPISTS.

But don't listen to what we keep saying over and over, PCG. You go, girl. Keep saying rape apologism until your brain explodes.

Just a reminder- only coming here to incite others
is against the rules of engagement. Keep it up and you will be banned.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 5:06 PM


So ARE you saying that rape apologism doesn't exist?

All I commented here for was to call out Allie for trying to justify murder, and then the rest of you attacked me. Calling people out for their hatred is not "only coming here to incite others". I was actually hoping that some of you would live up to the "pro-life" name and call Allie out for attempting to justify murder, but nope, she's on your side, so that makes murder okay, I suppose.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 5:10 PM


Myrtle,

As in many other cases, money and titles talk. People who have money and titles are unfortunately sometimes held to different standards. Tiller was not qualified to be a life-affirming doctor but he wanted the money and recognition. The money and status are sure doing him a lot of good now. Our judicial system is definitely disfunctional in its own way.

Tiller's family probably never intervened because they probably all had mental issues of sorts as well (how could they not?). Why question Tiller because after all, he IS A 'DOCTOR' you know!

Posted by: Praxedes at May 28, 2010 5:13 PM


I am saying I don't know any. Do you?
Please name some names of real live actual people that you know that are prorape. Or rape apologists. I'm waiting. Real names of commenters here that are prorape would be good too, I think.
In fact, copy their comments and give me some proof that WE are rape apologists. Until then youve got nothing.

Go back and read the thread PCG. I counted two that support Scott Roeder. And more than that who disagree with that position.

And since I already talked to Jill about this thread I think you can head on back to your blog now.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 5:29 PM


What a sick and disgusting man he was! To all you pro-choicers, how is the choice of killing a baby right? And it IS a baby. When someone says they are pregnant, they do not say I am having a fetus, they say they are having a baby! BABYKILLERS! Some day God will show you how truely evil your actions and attitudes were.

Posted by: sara at May 28, 2010 5:29 PM


carla-

Naming their names would be useless. You don't know the people who I know.

Just about every person I've interacted with about my rape, or rape in general, (outside of the pro-choice/feminist community) has said something along the lines of "..jeez, what were you WEARING?" or "why are you upset? it's just sex" or "I think it's a girls responsibility to prevent her own rape by (insert tactic that doesn't work here)" or "It's not really rape if she was asleep or passed out because she said no!". Just about every person I know makes rape jokes, is still friends with a rapist even after knowing what he did.

You read the same comments that I did on that post. Don't pretend that you didn't see the crap coming from antis there. You've read the stories about the girls and women who were told by the authorities that their rapes weren't really rapes because they were wearing tight jeans (http://www.denimdayinla.org/about/why_denim_day_usa) or other stories of the abuse rape survivors have suffered from their schools or from the law enforcement, and if you haven't, you could EASILY find them.

The fact that you deny the existence of rape apologism is very telling.

"Go back and read the thread PCG. I counted two that support Scott Roeder."

Two people who are openly promoting murder. As far as I'm concerned, you are promoting violence by letting that stand. That's the kind of rhetoric that gets doctors killed.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 5:48 PM


""..jeez, what were you WEARING?" or "why are you upset? it's just sex" or "I think it's a girls responsibility to prevent her own rape by (insert tactic that doesn't work here)" or "It's not really rape if she was asleep or passed out because she said no!"


Yeah, none of us said anything remotely like this. All we said is that we will give our daughters all available resources to fight off an attacker, be it a rapist or a mugger.

I'm sorry others have said such things, but we certainly haven't.

Posted by: Lauren at May 28, 2010 6:00 PM


FWIW, I don't think PCG's "rape apologism" is "random crap." I think it's a calculated pursuit of her agenda. I think she views herself as having found the perfect entrapment question for prolifers because no response we give her will be acceptable.

If we say aborting an unborn child conceived by rape is unfortunate but acceptable, then she can rightly point to the hypocrisy of this view and use it to discredit the prolife stance in general.

If prolifers respond that aborting an unborn child conceived by rape is unacceptable because the child is also a victim of the rapist and we do not believe in executing a child for the crime of his/her parent, she can mislabel our response as pro-rapist.

Why nibble on her bait? If she doesn't get what she's looking for here, she'll eventually cast her line elsewhere.

Posted by: Fed Up at May 28, 2010 6:07 PM


btw, I don't know why you tried to bring this back to rape apologism. I was talking about how antis are promoting murder. Why do you want to avoid that subject?

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 6:12 PM


No one is promoting murder. Even the most sympathetic poster here said that she disapproved of what happened.

Posted by: Lauren at May 28, 2010 6:13 PM


oh, and when I said "or "It's not really rape if she was asleep or passed out because she said no!"" I mean to say because she **can't say** no. My bad.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 6:16 PM


Let me say it again, "I do not condone murder. I am pro-life. I love life. I think life is a blessing from God and should be protected." Is that clear enough for you?

What I said was murder and killing are not the same. I would kill ANYONE who tried to murder one of my children. Killing in self defense or other's defense is not murder. That is the point I was trying to make.

I do not think everyone should go out killing abortionists.

Geez PCG, you sure do know how to twist. You need some relaxation exercises or maybe switch to de-caf. Way too much anger. Try getting off of attack mode. Like I said earlier, it doesn't bring anyone to your side. I suggest a bubble bath and a good novel with a happy ending. Peace.

Posted by: Allie at May 28, 2010 6:47 PM


Fed-Up
My sentiments exactly because when I made the suggestion about the mace she pounced on that like a big cat. This is advice I give routinely to anyone who has safety concerns. What's she's doing is playing on their mercy side. It's just a game to her if she really was an advocate for victims she wouldn't be advocating for murder of the unborn. But if she were an advocate for someone besides herself why that just wouldn't be right.
Carla
I hope everytime she tries to make you or anyone feel guilty you remember she is perfectly o.k. with and even advocates for the killing of the unborn.
Pro-Choice Gal
I hope the next time someones heart is moved to give you good advice that they change their mind. I hope you realize one day that the world does not revolve around you and that innocents are being killed daily in our country. I hope that one day you can see that just as rape is wrong so is murder. I also pray that if you refuse the good in you that your own badness stops you.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 28, 2010 6:57 PM


Fed Up,

You've hit the nail on the head. She continues to prove over and over how insane the mentality of her side really is.

It is obvious she has been baiting for a long time. She hurts her cause more than helps it.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 28, 2010 7:06 PM


Myrtle,

I'm going to add your last line to my prayers for PCG.

Jesus loves the little children.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 28, 2010 7:16 PM


What happens if you just ignore PCG? Will she go away? She only hears the sound of her own voice. I think we should all pray that Almighty God will thwart her agenda/end her blogging (hers and every pro aborts) while also praying for her salvation to His Glory. Faithful is He who calls, who will also do it.

Posted by: beforemidnite at May 28, 2010 9:24 PM


I can understand a pacifist having the opinion that they are not The Killer of Tiller was not a "pro-life" hero. So lets say Scott Roeder is a pro-choice heroes who made the choice to sacrifice his own life to save babies lives.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 28, 2010 10:37 PM


I can understand a pacifist having the opinion that The Killer of Tiller was not a "pro-life" hero. So lets say Scott Roeder is a pro-choice heroes who made the choice to sacrifice his own life to save babies lives.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 28, 2010 10:38 PM


"Just about every person I've interacted with about my rape, or rape in general, (outside of the pro-choice/feminist community) has said something along the lines of "..jeez, what were you WEARING?" or "why are you upset? it's just sex" or "I think it's a girls responsibility to prevent her own rape by (insert tactic that doesn't work here)" or "It's not really rape if she was asleep or passed out because she said no!". Just about every person I know makes rape jokes, is still friends with a rapist even after knowing what he did."

I wouldn't call those that have NO IDEA what they are talking about when it comes to surviving a rape-rape apologists. I would call all of them totally freaking IGNORANT and in need of some education on how it is NEVER the victim's fault. EVER.
When I was in 8th grade someone came to speak at my junior high. She talked about the rape statistics from my state. She said the youngest female was 6 months old and the oldest female was in her 90's and wheelchair bound. She asked the questions of my class-Did it happen because these two were dressed provocatively? No. Was it because they were teasing the rapist? No. Anyway, I never forgot that speaker.

You said that most of the people you hang with make rape jokes? Wow. Find some new friends, PCG.

"The fact that you deny the existence of rape apologism is very telling."
Whatevs, PCG. I deny that what you describe as people you hang with saying totally stupid and ignorant things about rape and telling rape jokes is rape apologism. Is that your brand btw? Did you make that up? I have never heard of it until I met you. Hmmmm.

This just reminds me of those that say women who have abortions are sluts, whores, tramps, got what they paid for, deserve any suffering and will burn in hell. Oh, and my personal favorite..we are all mentally ill. Well the ones that struggled afterward at least.

Oh, this is all probably random crap anyway right?
I mean you can read my words and deem them crap and read whatever it is you want to read in it.
It doesn't really matter to me, PCG.

I already told you I counted two that spoke of Roeder in a positive light. I am not avoiding that at all. Roeder is no hero. Tiller is no hero.

We are not what you think we are and I think that really bothers you.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 10:50 PM


apologist: a person who makes a defense in speech or writing of a belief, idea, etc.

If people who blame rape survivors for their own rapes aren't rape apologists, then who is? You obviously don't give a crap about any rape victims if you deny the existence of rape apologism. Do you really think that people who blame rape survivors for being raped aren't rape apologists, or are you just trying as hard as you can to disagree with me? I pray that it's the latter.

"You said that most of the people you hang with make rape jokes? Wow. Find some new friends, PCG."

As if it matters who I hang out with. You are underestimating the amount of rape apologism in our culture. Most of the people I've met in life promote rape in one way or another, because we live in a society that promotes rape. That's just how it is, and that's how it will always be with so many people like you around.

"We are not what you think we are"

You're right. You're a hell of a lot worse than what I thought you were. Thank you for showing that to me, Carla.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 11:05 PM


Like I said I have never even heard the term rape apologism until I read it on your blog. Am I denying that people are stupid and ignorant? No.

Um. Yeah I am wasting my time.

Yes. Blame it all on me, PCG. It's all my fault and I am a lot worse than you could imagine. And yet.....you can't stay away from this blog if you tried.

Gnight, PCG.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 11:11 PM


"Like I said I have never even heard the term rape apologism until I read it on your blog."

...then maybe you should have looked it up?

Let me Google that for you!

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=rape+apologism

See how many links there are out there? Promoting hatred and then defending it by saying "aw, but I just didn't know!" doesn't make it any better.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 28, 2010 11:17 PM


Pictures of burnt babies and aborted babies being memoralized are triggers for me. And reading that women are losing their lifes because of a.holes is also a trigger for me. The fact that you can look at pictures of aborted babies and/or babies that have been burned in their mothers womb and it not bother you is bad the fact that you continue to use rape to justify murder is even worse. And a person who makes excuse for abortion would be called an abortion apologists. And someone who advises you and others as well to carry mace that would be called a friend.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 28, 2010 11:35 PM


Promoting hatred and then defending it

That would be you, my dear.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 28, 2010 11:36 PM


I *did* Google rape apologism and was hard pressed to find any actual definition of it except on very left-leaning pro-abortion feminist blogs. However, one I found said this: The simple answer is that a rape apology is any argument that boils down to the myth that rapists can be provoked into raping by what the victim does or does not do.

I believe that when person rapes, the rapist is the person solely responsible for that rape. Not the victim. Not ever. Is that clear enough for you?

I don't see what this has to do with killing unborn children. If a person becomes pregnant as a result of rape, it is an effect of that rape but is not rape in and of itself. Therefore, someone stating that he or she believes a new life resulting from a rape should be allowed to live is NOT blaming the victim for the rape. That person is simply recognizing that another innocent life is also at stake in the situation, through no fault of the victim. No one takes the rapist's side here.

PCG, it seems you have a very deep and painful issue regarding a past rape. I am sorry for this and I hope you find help and healing. Coming to this blog and accusing pro-lifers of being "rape apologists" really seems misdirected. We are not your rapist. But I know you need to funnel that anger somewhere. I don't see that Carla is promoting rape or promoting hatred of rape victims. We cannot make you better, PCG, though I would really love to be a help to you if I knew how. Your anger won't allow you to see that there are many here who do care about what you've been through. That is something you will need to fight your way through first until you can find healing.

I wish you well.

Posted by: Kel at May 28, 2010 11:52 PM


Dear Allie,

I do understand your position, and maybe I should have clarified that I am very much outside the mainstream in disagreeing with you.

I believe the vast majority would say it would have been moral to kill Hitler to help bring an end to the war, but many do think it would have been wrong to kill him after the war (when he was no longer a threat to anyone), so I have heard others defend his right to life. But I think you were referring to the former, in which case you're right, no one really does defend his right to not be killed.

To people who have not grown up in a Christian pacifist tradition, the ideology of pacifism seems shocking, perverse, and impossible to understand. I still believe it is wrong to kill anyone, but that it what many years of Quaker school brainwashing will do to you :p

Posted by: Adair at May 29, 2010 1:04 AM


"except on very left-leaning pro-abortion feminist blogs"

Yeah, because those left-leaning, pro-choice feminist bloggers are the only ones who give a crap about fighting against rape. Amazing, huh?

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 29, 2010 7:41 AM


PCG 7:41am

Really? Maybe you can explain why such feminists turned a blind eye to the antics of Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy.
Why were they silent when Clinton lapdog James Carville reviled Paula Jones as trailer trash? Low income women aren't worthy of belief?

Why were they silent when Clinton's lapdogs tried to portray Kathleen Willey as some psychotic presidential stalker?

Why did they not support the woman who accused Ted Kennedy's nephew of rape? Did this woman have a prayer against the Kennedy's power and millions? Feminists seemed to have no problem with this incident stemming from a night of carousing with Uncle Ted, who you would think a tad old to be out romping like a college boy.

Yes PCG, tell us how left wing feminists have always stood by their sisters on the issue of sexual assault.

Posted by: Mary at May 29, 2010 8:32 AM


What exactly do you do PCG to fight against rape? Coming on prolife blogs and attacking rape survivors is not proactive and won't prevent one rape.

What groups are you involved with? What groups do you talk to about rape? What groups do you volunteer for and donate to in order that rape decrease?

Do you ask everyone if they are prolife before talking with them and then call them prorape just because they are prolife?

No one here has ever said women (males are raped too but you are never concerned about them) deserve to be raped because of what they were wearing, where they were, whether they were under the influence or any of the other reasons you claim prolifers believe. Your logic is screwy on so many levels and even your own have told you the same. You've chased all rational people from your site but you insist on bringing your ludicrous argument here.

I have numerously asked you politely to stop blaming rape survivors for their own rapes. Maybe you missed my attempts to communticate. Stop blaming me and other rape survivors for being raped. It really is a sick thing for you to continue doing over and over. Do you get off trying to hurt other people, especially rape survivors? JUST STOP ALREADY!

Posted by: Praxedes at May 29, 2010 8:42 AM


I see PCG is back again, trolling.

Those of us who actually knew the man and admired him will remember the loving family man, the hero who stood his ground, and the Doctor who gave everything to help his patients.

Doctor Tiller was a man of honor who spent his life helping others every chance he got. He was a man of courage who refused to give in to thugs and extortion. He was a man of conviction who put his life on the line for what he believed and who gave his life to help women.


No (Dr.) Tiller was a thug who murdered innocent children for convenience and eugenic reasons.
Nothing else matters much.

Posted by: angel at May 29, 2010 8:57 AM


Please prove that you aren't making random crap up (again) and quote where I blamed any rape survivor for hir own rape.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 29, 2010 8:57 AM


PCG,

Please respond to my post of 8:32am. Why did feminists maintain a deafening silence?

Posted by: Mary at May 29, 2010 9:00 AM


WHAT MARY SAID. Feminists do not stand by rape accusers if the man is politically important to them. Juanita Broaddrick credibly accused Bill Clinton of rape. No one could find any holes in her story. Feminists called a press conference to voice their support...for him. That famous photo of Feministing editor Jessica Valenti was of her and Bill Clinton.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 29, 2010 9:29 AM


Also, I'm sick of hearing that Tiller only performed abortions in dire circumstances. It's not true. In 1993, he botched an abortion on a healthy fetus that was so late-term she was in position to be born. The child survived to age 5, but with severe brain damage because of Tiller's injections. She was genetically normal.

http://kylehuwer.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/the-story-of-sarah-brown/

I understand and support a woman who wants to abort a severely deformed baby, but those weren't even the majority of cases. As for "saving the mother's life," if that were true, the woman needs to go to an emergency room, not a clinic in another state.

If you support aborting healthy fetuses a month before they're due, just say so. Don't lie about what he did or claim he "saved women's lives."

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 29, 2010 9:39 AM


You called me a rape apologist and prorape on your site before you even knew I was raped. When I confronted you, you deleted my post. Nice.
But of course this would be my word against your's wouldn't it? Do you remember when you 'mispoke' about your 'spouse'? You are a liar through and through.

Your words: "The more I interact with anti-choicers, the more I am convinced that 100% of them support rape in one way or another."

I am a survivor of two rapes. I am also a proud prolifer (call my anti-choicetokillunbornhumans if you want). Answer this question directly PCG: Am I, Praxedes, prorape or a rape apologist?

Then answer former questions about what you are specifically doing to prevent rape in our country.

http://psychologytoday.psychtests.com/articles/mentalhealth/rapebeh.html

PLEASE get some help.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 29, 2010 9:46 AM


Good morning, Mary and Ashley. Seems to me the feminists have also, for the most part, turned a blind eye to the abortion industry's role in supporting pedophiles and others who abuse young girls.

Posted by: Fed Up at May 29, 2010 9:54 AM


Meanwhile, she's busy on twitter claiming she has *never* called anyone prorape

http://twitter.com/prochoicegal

Do tell us how your attacking other rape victims is advocating against rape, PCghoul. Tell us how calling women here who have been raped liars isn't 'rape apologism.' We already know why-because it takes the focus of your own self-victimization. If you can't be the center of attention, you're not interested. You couldn't give a damn about other rape victims, and you continue to prove it here. Wasn't this a post on Tiller? Spamming other people's blogs when you are not even honest enough to post a link to the convo with the people you are attacking here on your own 'blog'? Hypocrite much?

Don't trip over your cape on the way out the door.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 29, 2010 9:56 AM


The only fitting response to the troll is to rebuke her in the Name of Jesus. She's under the control of a demon. Stop feeding her need for attention and she will slink off to pull her same act elsewhere. Have a nice day yall.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 29, 2010 10:03 AM


Reading fail, Guidry. :/ I never said that I never called people pro-rape. I said " I think a lot of people are pro-rape", and then that I'm not calling all people who don't speak out against rape pro-rape. Apathetic, but not *necessarily* pro-rape.

You didn't answer my question, Praxedes. Please show me where I told you that you were to blame for your own rape.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 29, 2010 10:05 AM


Oh, and if you'd try reading, Guidry, you'd see that Carla was the one who brought the post back to rape apologism by claiming that rape apologism doesn't exist. I was calling out antis on supporting the murder of Dr. Tiller.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 29, 2010 10:07 AM


My bad. :)

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 29, 2010 10:23 AM


Ashley,
Thank you for linking to the story of Sarah Brown.
So grateful she found a loving family to adopt her.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 29, 2010 10:34 AM


Guess who is really pro-rape?

Planned Parenthood.

http://www.childpredators.com/

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 29, 2010 10:40 AM


I in no way support the shooting of anyone. I would have much preferred to see Killer Tiller rot in prison where he belonged for the rest of his days.

However, what's done is done and I Rejoice he is no longer able to kill innocent humans.

Carla, You Good. :) Have a safe, relaxing and joy-filled weekend!

Posted by: Praxedes at May 29, 2010 10:44 AM


PCG 10:05am

Oh, that answers my question. The leftist feminists do not turn a blind eye to sexual abuse and assault, they're just apathetic. Their apathy though does seem highly selective.

Posted by: Mary at May 29, 2010 10:47 AM


In regards to PCG-- she hasn't been able to respond to any of the rational accusations made against her and instead has chosen to be rude, inflammatory, angry and extremely irrational. In my opinion, this will not change. She obviously needs serious help and has deep, deep spiritual issues (probably some serious demonic ones, as someone suggested). She has twisted everything I and others have said. I personally don't see any point in feeding her anger any longer.

PCG-- you don't need to respond to this, but please know that the Christians on this blog are praying for you. There is forgiveness and mercy in Christ. I know it may seem like no one cares about or loves you, but please know that isn't true. Your creator loves you and there is no burden too big for Him to carry. God bless you and please know that Jesus loves you. (Not trying to sound condescending, Jesus really does love you and I wish you the peace that only He can provide.)

Posted by: Allie at May 29, 2010 10:49 AM


"I know it may seem like no one cares about or loves you,"

Absolutely not. There are a lot of people in my life who love me and who I love back. I also know that God is all loving (I'm not an atheist, if that's what you were assuming). Just because I think that the people here who are being rude/hateful don't care about anyone but themselves doesn't mean that I don't think there are a lot of other people in my life who I love and who love me.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 29, 2010 10:55 AM


"except on very left-leaning pro-abortion feminist blogs"

Yeah, because those left-leaning, pro-choice feminist bloggers are the only ones who give a crap about fighting against rape. Amazing, huh?
Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 29, 2010 7:41 AM
******************************

Really? Wow, from a psychological standpoint, you are fascinating.

I'm not surprised you chose one phrase out of my entire post to rant about and ignored the rest. Anger is a really horrible mental filter.

Posted by: Kel at May 29, 2010 10:57 AM


Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 29, 2010 10:55 AM
I also know that God is all loving

Yup. And He loves you too much to leave you the way you are. The true freedom you yearn for can only be found in Him. Cast all your burdens on Him, because He cares for you.

Posted by: klynn73 at May 29, 2010 11:37 AM


Amen, Allie.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 29, 2010 12:22 PM


Wow Ashley 9:29, I had no idea about Juanita Broaddrick! Thanks for bringing this to my attention. How disgusting. I will never defend a rapist, no matter what his political affiliation.

Bill Clinton= woman-hating scum

Posted by: Adair at May 29, 2010 12:58 PM


Hi Adair,

Clinton is a classic sociopath. Nothing he has done or will do with this impending Sestak situation will ever shock or surprise me.
The WH knew just who to get to do their dirty work for them, an accomplished liar.

I just wonder if Obama served Bill his coffee during the luncheon they had to get their stories straight.

Posted by: Mary at May 29, 2010 1:04 PM


"It's not funny or smart or cute to use mental illness as an insult. It undermines the experiences of people who have real mental illnesses."

I've had depression for over half my life, and I didn't think she was trying to be funny or smart or cute. You do have some mental health issues, PCG, and you know that. You said yourself that you never healed from your rape. That doesn't make you a "psycho" or insane or weak or a bad person, but is that a mental health problem? Yes, it's a mental health problem.

Your "friends" are rotten, terrible, despicable human beings. (That doesn't mean they have to be forever, but right now, it sounds like they are.) They're the ones deserving of your venom because they're the ones who have actually claimed that rape victims can bring it upon themselves. But you know that if you tell them how you feel and what you think of them, you'll still have to see them and will have to deal with the fallout. Here, you can decide to take off anytime you want. You don't have to look any of us in the eye or walk past us in the hallway. It feels safer for you to unleash your angry feelings on us than it does to unleash them on the people who inspired and continue to inspire them.

Did you ever read "Sideways Stories from Wayside School" when you were a kid? They're these sort of surreal short stories about the kids in a school that's something like twenty-five feet tall and has one room on each floor. In one story, a kid wishes he were free from school, like the bird outside the window. Later that day, he's in the school basement and sees two men who tell him they can make him free. (Once again, these are meant to be surreal.) However, the men tell him that if he signs the paper that will make him free, he'll no longer be safe. After some thought, the kid decides to sign the paper and be free, even if it means he's not safe anymore.

Right now, you're sticking with safe, and until you sign the paper, so to speak, you're not going to be free. You're angry at your rapist, your friends, your parents. Unless you confront that anger, deal with it, and find the healing and peace needed to go live a happy life, you're not going to be free.

There's nothing wrong with feeling outraged about rape. Everyone should feel outraged about rape, and anger over rape is normal. However, letting rape dominate your life is not healthy. A happy person would not spent time on this site claiming people here believe in things they've never expressed that they believe in. There's nothing you're going to accomplish here. You will, however, accomplish something by finding a therapist, religious leader, counselor, or someone along those lines, and working with that person to heal.

Fortunately, I've never been raped, but I was bullied as a kid, and for many years I was a very angry person. I dwelled in my pain and didn't want to give it up, because I was entitled to it. Well, I may have been entitled to it, but hanging onto it didn't make me happy. I want you to be happy. I don't like seeing people suffer. You didn't deserve anything that happened to you and you deserve to work, heal, and move to a better place in your life.

Posted by: Marauder at May 29, 2010 1:31 PM


Adair
Do you see it as a blessing that you were able to attend a Quaker school? I tend to view pacifists as a little more evolved than most people. Is self defense even an option for them? After I received the baptism of The Holy Spirit I just assumed as a Christian that meant not being able to defend oneself but scripture does not take that stance. In fact Jesus's second set of instructions to the disciples were if you don't have a sword go out and buy one. So as a Christian I think that means we have the right to defend ourselves. Quakers though aren't the only pacifists there are very very intelligent people who for them this is a way of life. I think as humans this should be our goal. But I also realize this is not always possible. Thanks for sharing with us your Quaker schooling. I think your writing reflects their influence. I think with abortionists who refuse to obey the law as pro-lifers we just need to protest until the judicial system gets embarassed.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 29, 2010 2:38 PM


Tiller he Killer injected saline into womens wombs to burn their innocent babies alive. I can think of no existence more intrinsicly evil then his. The people who memorialize his death should play blood curdling baby screams at the memorial.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 29, 2010 4:08 PM


Why did the mods remove my posts chiding Carla for using the word terrorist to describe Scott Roeder; who only killed one person and that person was not innocent.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 29, 2010 4:13 PM


Jill asked me to keep the Roeder is a hero posts to a minimum. So I deleted them. I do not recall calling Scott Roeder a terrorist. I don't believe he is a hero.

You are arguing my opinion.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 29, 2010 4:26 PM


truthseeker
Probably because condoning Tiller's murder would make us like the pro-aborts. And had Tiller gone to jail that would have been a wake up call to other abortionists. Now they view him as a hero and it will be easier for the pro-death camp to continue to use other abortionists just as they done with Tiller. Abortionists are just pawns for the pro-death camp and the more educated there are the better. Evil people like to use educated people they will also use the uneducated but their preference is the educated. Had anyone around Tiller really cared about him an attempt would have been made to get him help. And if we condoned what Scott Roeder did that would make him a tool something that true pro-lifers don't engage in.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 29, 2010 4:45 PM


Praying for the conversion of heart of abortionists around the world. As Nathanson and others have been, they would be most powerful witnesses for life. If more people familiarized themselves with the history of the abortion movement in the U.S. they would understand how harmful it is to society.

Also praying that our political leaders will gain the intestinal fortitude to stand up for life.

Posted by: Janet at May 29, 2010 5:04 PM


Ashley, sounds like the pro-lifers are beginning to rub off on you... I hope so :)

Marauder, I can definitely understand about being bullied and holding on to pain from that. Anyone who minimizes the kind of influence that can have on one's life does not understand just how long-term and all-encompassing it can be, especially for a young person. I've been there too, and I just wanted to express that to you, and I am glad you've been able to put it behind you and move on with your life.

Everyone has probably been through some sort of pain, or isolation, or trauma in their life. They aren't all equal, but they are all different, and it's not right or fair or good to compare pain. And pain is in this world because of sin, because it is a fallen world. And because people are fallen creatures, we end up hurting each other--through rape, through physical abuse, through verbal torment, through libel, through oppression--

but in Jesus there is hope for everyone, no matter what they have been through or how they have lashed out in response. He loves us and forgives us when we dedicate our lives to Him. He died to take the punishment for sin, and rose to prove it vanquished--our sins against God and others, and the sins of others against us.

Abortion, rape, bullying, murder--God forgives. He heals. And sin--both the sins of others against me and my sins against God and others--no longer can hold dominion over my life. Amen!

Posted by: ycw at May 29, 2010 6:41 PM


Keep the Roeder is a hero posts to a minimum huh...lol I guess you think that zero is a good minimum then. Even if they are done in using rational dialogue.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 29, 2010 7:30 PM


Like I said in my previous post. You may disagree with what Scott Roeder did; but Scott Roeder stopped Tiller from his serial killing spree. And it doesn't take a stretch to look at saving babies lives by stopping a monster like Tiller as being heroic. It is what it is. Why are you so afraid of posting the truth.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 29, 2010 7:39 PM


I just came here to see what's been going on.

I want to just SMOOCH Ashley for her post re: Tiller. Even if we disagree on other points, it's really wonderful that we can agree on Tiller.

Posted by: MaryLee at May 29, 2010 9:15 PM


TS @7:39 PM, I disagree that the end justifies the means. We are a nation of laws. Even the most heinous serial killer is entitled to a trial. But Roeder appointed himself judge, jury and executioner. I do not see a shred of heroism in his taking the law into his own hands and smearing prolifers in the process.

Posted by: Fed Up at May 29, 2010 10:14 PM


I understand the need to respect the law FedUp. And I also don't believe in "the ends justify the means". For me the means crosses the line when innocent people get hurt.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 30, 2010 12:34 AM


ycw: Thanks. :D

Posted by: Marauder at May 30, 2010 7:42 AM


I don't understand how anyone can defend an abortion doctor who aborted babies so late-term that they could come out alive and survive despite being completely neglected. That's what happened to baby Sarah. That's why Tiller tried to make sure they were dead first (from an injection to the heart) before they were delivered. (Which, by the way, is completely unnecessary if the woman's health or life is in danger or if the fetus can't survive outside the womb. She has to push the baby out either way, and if the baby truly can't survive, there's no need to kill it first.)

If ProChoiceGal comes back, I want to ask her if she thinks that aborting baby Sarah was okay and why. Remember, we're talking about a healthy mother and a normal baby who was in position to be born. The baby was born alive and survived after being ignored for 24 hours. Was that abortion okay?

I think that one case is enough to make Tiller a villain, not a hero.

And no one talks about how much money he made doing this. You ever think he did this not because he cared about reproductive rights, but because he was one of the only doctors in the country performing a $5,000 procedure? He lived in a gated community and drove a luxury SUV. Where's the usual liberal hatred of the rich?

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 9:00 AM


I agree Ashley. Tiller was a filthy rich filthy villain. Nothing about him can be considered heroic. I pray for his soul because he is a sinner like the rest of us but I do not understand how anyone could possibly put him on a pedestal as a hero.

2 Chronicles 7:14: if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.

I would like to hear a proabort answer why they think Tiller was never held accountable for breaking laws.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 30, 2010 10:20 AM


By the way, before any fellow pro-choicers hit me with this, I don't think women carrying terminally ill fetuses (which Tiller sometimes aborted) should be forced to go the whole nine months. If the baby truly can't survive, induce labor at viability (6 months or so) and let nature take its course. The intent isn't to kill the baby, it's to let the inevitable happen earlier.

Killing them with a heart-attack inducing drug, then incinerating them, is horribly cruel.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 10:52 AM


Bodily autonomy is an absolute, Ashley. If a woman has bodily autonomy in the first trimester of her pregnancy, it only makes sense that she has bodily autonomy in her second and third trimester, as well. By the way, no woman gets to her 37th week of pregnancy and says "Hmm... I think I feel like having an abortion today!". If you're pro-choice because you care about women, then this hatred and judgment is unacceptable (well, it would be unacceptable either way, but it's more unsettling coming from a self proclaimed pro-choicer). Why don't you try listening to the stories of women who have late term abortions instead of judging them for it, Ashley?

Dr. Tiller completely sacrificed his quality of life and eventually his life. No one does this for money, Ashley.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 30, 2010 11:19 AM


By the way, when I said "self proclaimed pro-choicer" I did not mean to imply that you are not pro-choice (can't say that I know your beliefs enough to pass judgment on that). Still, it's a saddening view.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 30, 2010 11:27 AM


If ProChoiceGal comes back, I want to ask her if she thinks that aborting baby Sarah was okay and why.
Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 9:00 AM
You can ask, but I do not think you'll get an answer.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 30, 2010 11:33 AM


"Hmm... I think I feel like having an abortion today!".

Many women don't believe there are other possibilities because the proaborts keep telling them they can't do it without a man, without a college education, without the support of family, without out owning a home and/or vehicle, etc., etc. Proaborts only re-victimize women.

It doesn't help that there was a filthy rich man willing to take advantage of these vulnerable women by not only making them come up with big bucks to kill their own babies but then to have a funeral-type ceremony for the baby he killed. This is the type of gruesome behavior horror flicks are made of! Truth is truly stranger (and more evil) than fiction.

I have read stories from women who worked with and allowed Tiller to abort their child. Appalling that anyone could know how he treated women and still think he is a hero.

I don't expect someone with PCG's mindset to understand victimization of women because she has never done the hard work it takes to deal with her own; she will remain a very easy target until she does so. It is my belief that this one of the huge issues with the nazi antilife feminists in general. They have been so abused and victimized and haven't learned healthier ways to live.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 30, 2010 11:37 AM


ProChoiceGal,

If you think healthy mothers aborting healthy babies who can survive alone with no assistance is okay, you're just as fucked up in the head as people who think using the Pill is murder. You're an extremist, too.

As for bodily autonomy, at this stage of pregnancy, the baby doesn't even need its mother's body. It can survive alone, only requiring nourishment and protection like every other baby. If you're so concerned about your bodily rights, induce labor or get a C-Section. Problem solved! The baby isn't part of your body anymore.

If you support really late abortions (6+ months), you basically support killing fetuses that don't need their mothers' bodies to survive. Which is pretty sick and twisted.

I'm a pro-choicer, but I'm not an extremist. I draw the line at viability. So do many pro-choice women, by the way, including Hillary Clinton and the sponsors of the Freedom of Choice Act.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 11:50 AM


Also, supporting 6+ month abortions for "health of the mother" is almost always disingenuous. If you fall critically ill and your baby is viable, there's no medical reason to choose a three-day abortion procedure (usually in another state) over an emergency delivery/C-section at the closest hospital. You can't argue that Tiller's practice alleviated any stress on sick mothers. The mothers still delivered vaginally at Tiller's clinic--except the babies were dead, not alive.

As for horribly deformed babies who can't survive, I've already said that the woman should have the option to induce labor, deliver early, and let nature take over. If the baby can't survive outside the womb, why go to the extra step of killing it in the womb?

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 11:55 AM


I'm a pro-choicer, but I'm not an extremist. I draw the line at viability. So do many pro-choice women, by the way, including Hillary Clinton and the sponsors of the Freedom of Choice Act.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 11:50 AM

Huh? How does FOCA = viability laws.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 30, 2010 12:15 PM


By the way, before any fellow pro-choicers hit me with this, I don't think women carrying terminally ill fetuses (which Tiller sometimes aborted) should be forced to go the whole nine months. If the baby truly can't survive, induce labor at viability (6 months or so) and let nature take its course. The intent isn't to kill the baby, it's to let the inevitable happen earlier.

Killing them with a heart-attack inducing drug, then incinerating them, is horribly cruel.
Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 10:52 AM

Ashley I understand your sentiments but they are misguided.
Many couples do decide to carry their terminally ill children to term and deliver them. While these children may only live minutes, hours or a few days, nevertheless, all the parents report having had a positive, life changing experience. THey were able to bond with their baby, comfort the child as it died and it also demonstrated to other family members that we are called to love those who are weaker and helpless.

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 12:20 PM


I never finished my train of thought there Ashley! To induce labour early for a child who already has serious defects is tantamount to torture and really is no different than abortion.

Please read some of the stories on www.benotafraid.net

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 12:27 PM


Also, moderator Bethany, has done memorial portraits of several babies who have died under such circumstances.

She can certainly tell you that these parents experienced abundant grace and healing in having their baby go to term.

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 12:31 PM


"Many couples do decide to carry their terminally ill children to term and deliver them."

So deliver the baby at 7 months, not 9. The baby can survive and breathe on its own at this point. The goal isn't to kill the terminally ill baby. The goal is to let the inevitable happen a few months earlier and begin the healing process.

I don't see how anyone could possibly object to this. Even many Catholic priests support it. (I'm Catholic, btw.) The intention is never to kill the child. The outcome is exactly the same: whether at 7 or 9 months, the terminally ill child is delivered and dies a natural death. The only motive for forcing women to go to 9 months is cruelty.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:34 PM


Also, inducing labor is not the same as an abortion. An abortion in the third trimester requires gruesome practices like injecting the baby's heart with heart attack-inducing drugs, or dismembering it. Early labor does not. The baby suffers no more harm than it would at 9 months. If a woman is pregnant with a terminally ill baby, she should be allowed to give birth early to avoid more physical risks and begin healing.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:39 PM


"If a woman has bodily autonomy in the first trimester of her pregnancy, it only makes sense that she has bodily autonomy in her second and third trimester, as well."

Fine, induce labor and rush the child to the NICU. There's no reason that the child needs to die to uphold the woman's bodily domain.

Doctors do this ALL THE TIME. My first son was delivered via c-section at 30 weeks.

Posted by: Lauren at May 30, 2010 12:39 PM


I'm a pro-choicer, but I'm not an extremist. I draw the line at viability. So do many pro-choice women, by the way, including Hillary Clinton and the sponsors of the Freedom of Choice Act.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 11:50 AM
Ashley, that makes no sense. How does FOCA, which rescinds all abortion restriction laws, = viability laws?


Posted by: truthseeker at May 30, 2010 12:15 PM

Posted by: truthseeker at May 30, 2010 12:42 PM


FOCA allows any state to restrict abortion after viability.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:44 PM


So deliver the baby at 7 months, not 9. The baby can survive and breathe on its own at this point. The goal isn't to kill the terminally ill baby. The goal is to let the inevitable happen a few months earlier and begin the healing process.

I don't see how anyone could possibly object to this. Even many Catholic priests support it. (I'm Catholic, btw.) The intention is never to kill the child. The outcome is exactly the same: whether at 7 or 9 months, the terminally ill child is delivered and dies a natural death. The only motive for forcing women to go to 9 months is cruelty.
Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:34 PM

Catholic priests who support this for the intention of killing the baby "earlier" support eugenic abortion.
This practice is not morally licit according to Catholic teaching.
What you really mean is to spare the parents two more months. The child in the womb is actually quite fine since he/she is supported by the mother's body. Inducing labor early is of no benefit to anyone especially the baby who must then deal with immaturity as well as any genetic/physical defects.
An the intention is to kill the child - indirectly.
I would also point out that sometimes unborn children who are given a death sentence by doctors go on to survive. Delivering such a child early might well be the nail in their coffin.
Doctors are not gods and have been known to be.... wrong. :(

You might also check out the following

"The US Bishops' Doctrinal Committee document concerning anencephaly cited above spells it out clearly: "It is clear that before 'viability' it is never permitted to terminate the gestation of an anencephalic child as the means of avoiding psychological or physical risks to the mother. Nor is such termination permitted after 'viability' if early delivery endangers the child's life due to complications of prematurity."

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 12:50 PM


Sorry, still don't agree.

I'm not a fanatic on either side. I'm a realist.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:56 PM


Ashley @ 12:44,

Why should women leave medical decisions to legislators?
There is no definitive opinion on when viability begins.

I would think that healing would be much less traumatic for a woman who was able to look her baby in the eyes or hold her/him than for the woman who aborts just to get the procedure of abortion "over with". There is a measure of closure in waiting for the natural process to occur and there is the hope of a miracle. Doctors are sometimes wrong.

Posted by: Janet at May 30, 2010 12:57 PM


Hi Angel,
Sorry, I didn't read your post before writing mine. We both agree that doctors can be wrong!

Posted by: Janet at May 30, 2010 1:00 PM


Also, inducing labor is not the same as an abortion. An abortion in the third trimester requires gruesome practices like injecting the baby's heart with heart attack-inducing drugs, or dismembering it. Early labor does not. The baby suffers no more harm than it would at 9 months. If a woman is pregnant with a terminally ill baby, she should be allowed to give birth early to avoid more physical risks and begin healing.
Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:39 PM

it depends upon what the intent of the action is Ashley.
If the intent is to make sure a baby dies ("by letting nature take it's course" on an immature baby whose health is already compromised by a defect) then it is no different than abortion whose purpose is always to kill a child.

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 1:00 PM


Sorry, still don't agree.

I'm not a fanatic on either side. I'm a realist.
Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:56 PM

yes of course, because as long as the outcome is a dead fetal anomaly baby, that's being realistic.

Did you even read ANY of the stories on the link?
Please do not be so closed minded.
Why is it with you "prochoicers" the only choice involves the death of the child? :(

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 1:07 PM


@ Janet: it's all cool! ;)

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 1:13 PM


Ashley,
Two close friends of mine carried their terminally ill babies as long as they were able because they knew as soon as they were delivered they would die. They felt their babies moving and growing and kicking and wanted that to last as long as it could.

The healing is ongoing and doesn't START when the baby is delivered. The grieving process starts when you are given a fatal diagnosis. Both families miss their babies so much and it has been close to 9 years ago now.

http://www.benotafraid.net

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 2:42 PM


I also wanted to add that many doctors offer abortion as the ONLY advice after a fatal diagnosis.
Wait....terminate the pregnancy. :P My friends did not know they were going to a proabort dr. until he continued to pressure them about abortion.

Where is the support and caring and referrals to resources like Prenatal Partners for Life??

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 2:58 PM


"of course, because as long as the outcome is a dead fetal anomaly baby, that's being realistic."

A baby with a fatal condition will die, whether you induce labor at 6 months or let labor set in naturally at 9 months. The child dies either way. I don't see how giving birth to the terminally ill child a few months early makes a moral difference. As someone who went to Catholic schools and goes to Catholic church with my very Catholic boyfriend, I'm also not aware of any church restrictions on inducing labor or early C-section. They don't object to "messing with nature" in any other circumstance.

But to get back on topic: late term abortion is sick and wrong. I'm writing a column about how Tiller is not a hero.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 3:04 PM


first off, thank you Carla for actually linking to the website that I offered Ashley.

"As someone who went to Catholic schools and goes to Catholic church with my very Catholic boyfriend, I'm also not aware of any church restrictions on inducing labor or early C-section. They don't object to "messing with nature" in any other circumstance.

Secondly, Ashley, unfortunately many priests and Catholics do not fully understand the Church teachings on a wide range of situations in bioethics. My children do study these situations now in high school, thankfully.
It is our duty as Catholics to try to understand and to learn what our faith teaches us- it's a lifetime process.
The position of the Catholic church on some things like abortion and birth control and in this case, inducing labor appear to be ones that cause more suffering. But instead they recognize the dignity of each person, including unborn children and those who have a fetal anomaly.
What appears to be an easy solution (inducing abortion/early labor) often in the end simply causes more suffering for the parents who now have to deal with guilt.

While it's true that "a baby with a fatal condition will die, whether you induce labor at 6 months or let labor set in naturally at 9 months. The child dies either way." once again, it is the INTENT that is important here.

You cannot "help someone along" to their death.

We have to ask ourselves WHAT is the intent in inducing early labor in such a situation?

I fail to see how this brings about any good for the baby involved. What appears to be it's purpose is to shorten the length of time that the mother and father will have to experience the entire situation of carrying a very ill child and facing it's death.
I by no means am saying that such situations are easy to go through. I can't imagine the pain these parents must face and I have watched video and seen pics on the internet of some couples journeys.

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 4:09 PM


You are welcome angel. :)

Have to share 99 Balloons too.

Love this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th6Njr-qkq0

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 4:21 PM


Ashley, suppose there is a child who is diagnosed with cancer and is given a year to live.

Would you support allowing the parents to put their child through a procedure which they know beforehand will make the child's complications worse and will shorten the life span, making the child die months earlier.

If they are doing it with the intention of making the child die sooner, so that they don't have to suffer as long, would you see any problem with that?

And what is your opinion on aborting babies with spina bifida or Down Syndrome?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 4:40 PM


yes that was really incredible Carla.

Who are we too try to understand the mystery of God and his actions.....

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 4:50 PM


Ashley,

Going to church with your "very Catholic boyfriend" and picking and choosing what works best for you from the Catechism of the Catholic Church does not make you Catholic. It just makes you a hypocrite.

You cannot both support abortion (but only in the cases YOU decide should be OK) and still be Catholic. Call yourself a chicken if you wish but this will never make you one.

You are neither a Catholic nor a realist.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 30, 2010 5:24 PM


Ashley
You have a heart. When you have children of your own you will understand and would probably fight to have the chance to hold your baby in your arms. My son has Downs' and since the age of ten has stopped walking three times. At one point they thought they would have to put a peg in him but the doctor had the wisdom to give it a few more days and see what happened. His body responded to the steroids he's now on plaquenil and is doing fine. Since he was ten he's had leukemia is presently in remission, was diagnosed with Juvenile Dermatomyocitis and Wilson's Disease. When he was diagnosed with the Juvenile Dermatomyocitis I seen how important it is to be around people who can see a little further than a diagnosis. Life is always worth fighting for.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 30, 2010 5:39 PM


When he was diagnosed with the Juvenile Dermatomyocitis I seen how important it is to be around people who can see a little further than a diagnosis. Life is always worth fighting for.
Posted by: myrtle miller at May 30, 2010 5:39 PM

this is why we need doctors with a belief in God and who are humbled before Him.....

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 5:53 PM


In making a fatal diagnosis doctors can be wrong.

I keep thinking of the little girl with anencephaly who lived months longer than expected!!!(Bethany drew her mother a portrait of her precious girl.)

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 5:56 PM


No, I wouldn't support letting a kid with cancer die. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but when the diagnosis is 100% fatal--such as an anencephaly baby--I think you should have a choice to stop pregnancy early without killing the baby. Am I wrong?

And no, I'd never abort a Down's syndrome child or a kid with spina bifida. Spina bifida can be corrected, and kids with Down's syndrome are more like other children than different. I can't support dismembering and incinerating a "special needs" child unless their birth defects are fatal.


Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 6:06 PM


I actually take that back. I DON'T support performing abortions on the terminally ill, just early labor. I heard a story about an anencephaly baby who ended up living 3 months. I think it sounds horrifying and heartbreaking to watch a child with no brain suffer that long in a hospital.

I'm off to a cookout with the Catholic boyfriend :) Feel free to correct me/argue with me.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 6:11 PM


"I think it sounds horrifying and heartbreaking to watch a child with no brain suffer that long in a hospital."

She didn't! She came home with her mother and lived a very happy life.

Here's her mom's blog.


babyfaithhope.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Lauren at May 30, 2010 6:32 PM


I can't support dismembering them at all. In life there is always hope. And incinerating or dismembering any child is barbaric.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 30, 2010 6:38 PM


About the Baby Hope blog..

WOW. She does seem like any other baby.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 6:57 PM


Yeah, she was doing so well that they did an extra MRI to confirm that the anacephaly diagnosis was correct. It was. They don't have any explanation about how she was able to have any sort of interactions. This was partially because they so often abort when this condition is discovered. Even women who bring their child to term often deliver vaginally which results in trauma to the baby and usually death pretty quickly after birth.

In this story the mom decided to have an elective c-section to give her little girl the best chance at life. I don't think anyone was expecting 3 months! It was definitely an amazing story.

Posted by: Lauren at May 30, 2010 7:17 PM


FOCA allows any state to restrict abortion after viability.
Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 30, 2010 12:44 PM

FOCA would strike down ALL existing laws that restrict abortion including the viability laws already in place. So you are saying FOCA is reasonable because it allows for the laws it strikes down to be passed again? It never ceases to amaze me how twisted the liberal mind bend.

Posted by: truthseeker at May 30, 2010 8:22 PM


not only that Lauren, but the mom's life is back to normal.
She could have had an abortion but she didn't.
She had little Hope and cared for her. Hope passed away and Myah went back to finish off her schooling, graduating this spring.

In that time, I'm sure this young woman has grown up in a way that her peers will not have.

It seems that people today are soo afraid to suffer. We don't want to give anything of ourselves to others. We want everything to be perfect and happy.
Life will always be full of suffering. Today's Gospel reading couldn't have said it better:

More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance,
and endurance produces character, and character produces hope,and hope does not disappoint us, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us.

Posted by: angel at May 30, 2010 8:56 PM


angel,
I totally agree with you about suffering. We try hard to avoid it when it is how we overcome. There seems to be so much fear in what "might" happen or "could" happen. Life is hard. God is good.

Pain is inevitable, misery is optional.
-Max Lucado

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 9:11 PM


Ashley,
I would love to read your column about Tiller when you are done. Please link.
I will then compare and contrast to Pro Choice Gal's Tiller is My Hero blogpost. :)


Anyone,
Does anyone know the links to the writings of a few people that did work for Tiller and described the basement where the women labored and Tiller did abortions? I read it once and it made me want to vomit. Just truly horrifying.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 9:31 PM


The words of a former employee of Tillers

I was unemployed and I got a call from Manpower Temporary Services and they said, "Would you mind working in an abortion clinic?" I said, "Oh, no." I belonged to NOW and I was pro-choice so they sent me out to Tiller's clinic. I worked there for about a week getting his computer records going again. He asked, "Would you like to have a permanent job?" and I said "Sure."

So we went back in his office and I sat by his desk as he started explaining in a more formal way what he did there and why he did it. He told me that he was the supporter of women's rights, that he considered himself to be spokesman for women who could not get up and speak for themselves.

He said that he only did late abortions on severely deformed babies or for reasons of a medical crisis—in others words, for a valid reason. Then very quickly he said "And besides that, at this stage, those babies' lungs are so underdeveloped that they couldn't survive outside the mother anyway." I knew in my heart at that point in time that it was wrong, but I said to myself, "He's a doctor. I can trust him."

Trained To Sell Abortions

After I had been there for that period of time, they decided they would train me to answer the phones. I thought they were going to tell me how they want the information sheet filled out and how to keep the phone record and this and that. But what I was handed instead was a packet of information—materials to study—on how to be a high-pressure salesperson over the phone, like telemarketing: how to convince somebody to buy your product.

I started doing all the filing on the medical records. In over 95% of these babies, and it's probably more than that, there was nothing wrong with those babies at all—nothing—and these were third trimester abortions.

There was nothing wrong with those babies at all—nothing—and these were third trimester abortions

I started wanting to go out in the waiting room and tell people to leave. I was very frightened because by that time I knew how wealthy Tiller was. I knew how influential he was. His father had practiced family medicine in Wichita and if you want to talk about entrenched, that man was entrenched. And I felt helpless.

Describing The Procedure

I later asked Alana, "How does this work?" So that's how I found out some more of the details and I will explain it to you as it happens. Day 1, 2, 3.

On day one the women come into Tiller's clinic. He does two groups a week of twelve women, so that's a couple dozen women a week getting a third trimester abortion at that clinic.

They come in. They pay their money in cash and they have a sonogram, first thing and he tells them, "Oh, you're not that far along." He's very happy to take their money. Then the first thing he does to them is he kills that baby, because once that baby is dead, they can't change their mind and get their money back.

He uses the sonogram—a tool for life—to kill the baby. He uses that to guide the needle into the baby's heart and he injects it with digoxin, which is a heart medication and it slows the baby's heart down.

He uses the sonogram—a tool for life—to kill the baby.

The second day, the women come in and they have little group counseling sessions, but they don't do any counseling until after that baby is already dead. On that second day, they get a second pack of laminaria; they got the first one the first day. They are gradually expanding, dilating the cervix. But it's dangerous to put more than just a few laminaria, so you're causing damage to the cervix by doing that. They also start receiving drugs on that second day to stimulate the body to go into labor.

Then on the third day, they come back and he has a room in the basement—that is his labor and delivery room. It is just one big room about 20 feet by 20, or so, maybe a little bit bigger and there's cots lined up with the head of the cot against the wall. You know how sometimes in a hospital room they will have a little curtain you can pull between the two beds in a shared room? Other than that, those women have no privacy. They are in full view of each other and so there's twelve women laboring down there to have these babies and they're so far along, I mean, they are third trimester babies, that they are basically going through just as much, if not more, labor than you would to have a live delivery—Tiller charges them about that much, too.

There was one woman from Southwest Kansas, I wish I knew who she was. Tiller passed this letter around and made all the staff read it, because I guess he thought we were responsible somehow. She had had her third trimester abortion on the advice of her doctor because there was some severe medical problem, but she regretted it and was very, very sorry she had been talked into it. She wrote him a letter and told him it was the most horrible experience of her life.

Although I was not down in the basement for any more than just a few seconds when those women were down there, I got a very vivid description of what actually went on down there from this woman. She said that women were crying and screaming and there was blood everywhere—blood running down their legs and it was just horrible.

. . . women were crying and screaming and there was blood everywhere—blood running down their legs and it was just horrible.

He was so scared. But first let me tell you how tight this man is. He paid me $6.00 an hour and I have a college degree. He is so tight. That woman had paid—and this was back in 1988—$3,000 because it was a complicated procedure. He now charges more than that. He refunded every penny to her, because he was trying to mitigate any damage that might possibly come to him because of her complaint.

On the Fourth day they come back for a check-up and if everything checks out OK they'll go on home. But there are complications that come up every now and then. I didn't know about all of them because he didn't want anyone to know about them if he could help it. I have heard since then that he has had in one week, two or three botches have to go to the hospital. God only knows what happens to those babies that are born alive there.

A Modern Day Jonah

He nets a million dollars a year. (And believe me he spread it around, because I mailed out the checks to the legislators, so I know.) And he is only one doctor at one clinic. He is not the only late term abortionist. There is a lot of money involved in this and that's why he is doing it.

As I said, I did get out of it and I just thank God that I did. I'm a direct descendent of Jonah, I believe. I am one of the most stubborn and obstinate people God has ever had to deal with.

If He had told me why He was sending me in there before I went, I probably would have been scared to death, even though I thought I was pro-choice. I can't say I am glad I was there, but I'm glad that I'm standing here today to give my testimony to you, because if I can inspire you to help save babies' lives, that's what I want to do.

http://www.prolifeactionleague.org

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 30, 2010 9:40 PM


"No one does this for money, Ashley."

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 30, 2010 11:19 AM


Funny that you can state this as fact, PCG and I believe you're probably right.

What Tiller (and the Stalins and Hitlers of our world) did and you plan to do is firstmost about the ultimate power and control.

The money is just a side benefit to such sociopathic narcissistic behavior.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 31, 2010 4:43 AM


Ashley,

I want to read the Tiller column when it's done too.

Here's what I don't get - I'm asking this because I don't get it, not to trip you up or anything. You say, "I can't support dismembering and incinerating a 'special needs' child unless their birth defects are fatal," and I appreciate that. But if that's the case, why do you think people should be allowed to dismember non-special-needs children, as long as they're not old enough to live outside the womb? It's just a matter of X amount of weeks before they CAN live outside the womb. They've already got the DNA that makes them special needs, not special needs, male, female, brown-eyed, whatever.

Posted by: Marauder at May 31, 2010 8:56 AM


I don't know. Can I be a socially liberal pro-lifer?

I'm writing it now.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 31, 2010 9:02 AM


Ashley,
You can be a hard core prolifer and socially liberal on other issues. :)

My two cents.
Praying for you Ashley. That you begin to see that ALL human life has value and worth from the moment of conception and we are to stand and be a voice for the sanctity of life.

I so appreciate you coming here and being honest and respectful and open. It is sooooo refreshing.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 9:28 AM


And what of the women, Ashley? Could you really consider it morally correct to force a woman through a pregnancy?

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 31, 2010 9:55 AM


I never said anything about force. I think it should be legal until viability.

So, you think it was okay to abort a baby so late-term she survived unattended for a couple days? This is a yes or no question.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 31, 2010 10:02 AM


When you asked if you could be a socially liberal anti-choicer, I assumed you were considering supporting forcing all pregnant women through their pregnancies.

I believe I already made it clear that I support abortion in all three trimesters. I understand that many other pro-choicers don't feel the same way.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 31, 2010 10:09 AM


Tiller killed perfectly healthy babies on their due dates!! Only an abortion extremist would cheer on that kind of barbarism.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 11:25 AM


"Dear Allie,

I do understand your position, and maybe I should have clarified that I am very much outside the mainstream in disagreeing with you.

I believe the vast majority would say it would have been moral to kill Hitler to help bring an end to the war, but many do think it would have been wrong to kill him after the war (when he was no longer a threat to anyone), so I have heard others defend his right to life. But I think you were referring to the former, in which case you're right, no one really does defend his right to not be killed.

To people who have not grown up in a Christian pacifist tradition, the ideology of pacifism seems shocking, perverse, and impossible to understand. I still believe it is wrong to kill anyone, but that it what many years of Quaker school brainwashing will do to you :p
Posted by: Adair at May 29, 2010 1:04 AM"

Adair--I also grew up pacifist (raised by a hippie single mom), but not a Christian. I did not get saved until the age of 18, when I was pregnant and alone (but that is a story for a different day). After becoming a Christian, I slowly changed my views on a lot of things, including being a pacifist. We don't need to go back and forth about it; I will just tell you that I do not believe the Bible supports a pacifist view and you obviously do. The Bible says Jesus did not come to bring peace and sadly because we live in a sinful world, pacifism will never work. A father has to defend his family against evil, just as there is a war going on right now with the spiritual world we are unable to see. There is also a war we can see against evil. It is real. There are real people in this real world who want to harm us and others. As Christians we have to do what we can to stop them. Sometimes that means how we vote, how we minister, how we pray, and even in extreme situations, how we physically use our bodies. I wish there were never a reason to do this, but as I said before I would not hesitate for one second to kill someone who was trying to murder one of my children. I honestly can not understand the pacisist belief against defending the innocent. Maybe in a perfect world that will work, but never in this sinful world.

Posted by: Allie at May 31, 2010 11:31 AM


PCG, are you also supportive of infanticide?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 12:40 PM


Ashley
If abortion were o.k. until they were viable what would be the purpose of the womb. The womb is suppose to be a sanctuary for the unborn, a safe place. Not a death chamber. This is what I would suggest next time you hear an argument for abortion usually they'll play on your sympathies just ask yourself who deserves more mercy an adult, that has other alternatives such as a C-Section or adoption, or a baby unable to defend itself in it's mothers' womb. Hope this helps.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 31, 2010 12:45 PM


Ashley, I appreciate your defending babies who are full term in the womb...but I am very confused by the fact that you consider them less worthy of protection before "viability", which is an arbitrary point in time which might change later based on our technology. Years ago, 30 week babies might not have been considered viable if they were born, based on technology- but would that make them less worthy of life?

Can you point to an actual time at which a baby goes from "viable" to "non viable"? How does a doctor determine whether a baby will be able to survive outside the womb? And how is killing a baby who would otherwise be able to live (if left in the womb) not wrong in your eyes? I do not understand how you can see the atrocity of the killing of third trimester babies, but can simultaneously see no problem with killing even more helpless and defenseless babies in the womb.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 12:51 PM


I don't know...because third trimester fetuses are more like babies and first trimester embryos aren't?

I had an abortion at 9 weeks. I did it mostly because I was scared of the father. He's a complete redneck misogynist and racist (he loves calling people niggers, bashing fat girls, etc), and I knew if I had his baby, I would never get away from him. Plus, what if the kid grew up to be just like him? The reality was too scary.

I still never felt like it was a real baby, though. Supposedly mothers start to get a sense that it's a boy or girl, but I never got to that point. I have no idea. I think embryos/fetuses obviously become more like "a baby" the closer they get to birth.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 31, 2010 1:29 PM


Conveniently forgotten by abortion thugs today is Jim Pouillion, shot to death in broad daylight by an proabort zealot. But this, of course, is ok with proabort terrorists. As long as its the unborn or a prolifer dying, they are all for terrorism.

Posted by: Jill Guidry at May 31, 2010 1:57 PM


Ashley, I'm sorry to hear about your abortion. Now I understand why this is such an emotional issue for you.

Let me just point out that your argument does not hold up. "It didn't feel like a real baby to me," isn't much of an argument. And what is a "real baby" anyway? How do you define it?

Are you saying that if a woman "feels" her two-year-old isn't a real baby, then it isn't one? Emotions aren't that much of a guide to reality, especially when science is perfectly able to point out the reality.

Denying reality is no way to deal with your abortion. I hope you can eventually admit the truth.

Posted by: Lori Pieper at May 31, 2010 2:27 PM


I was in denial. Up until two days before the abortion, I was pretty much convinced I wasn't actually pregnant.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 31, 2010 2:41 PM


Ashley, I am sorry you felt like you had to end the life of the fetus growing inside you. I have also lost children, to miscarriage. Their ages ranged between 10 days and 3 weeks. It was early enough that I am not sure even how many children I have lost. I do know for certain about my loss at 3 weeks, because I had a positive pregnancy test.

I am absolutely certain that this child was my child, and that she was a human being with value. I really don't know her gender--I would guess a daughter, but I don't know whether something inspired that guess. I gave her the name Ruby, and I very much wish that each of my children could have become part of my earthly family.

When I finally got pregnant with a daughter I would keep--whom I would later name Hannah--I was so scared. From the time I got the first pregnancy test until the end of the third week I was sure I would lose her. I loved her so much and I was so scared. Even after the 3 week mark I was still sure I would lose her. Eventually God gave me peace, but it wasn't until I held her in my arms that I truly believed she would live.

I expected to recognize her after carrying her for nine months, but I didn't. I didn't know her. I didn't bond with her right away. I don't know whether it was my experiences or my fears or just being a new mom, but it was months before I really fell in love with my little girl all over again (because I had loved her when she was inside me, before I met her).

That didn't make her less of a human being, and it didn't make me a bad mother. The fear I felt of losing her when I first knew about her didn't make her more valuable than any other 15-day-old embryo.

I discovered I was pregnant with my second child, Peter, after a blood test when he was only 11 days old. Because they were going by the date of my last period--which I knew did not lead to an accurate conception date--they told me the numbers were too low. Luckily I was knowledgeable enough to figure out the truth, and they admitted that if my dates were right, the numbers were fine. But I remember what it felt like to hear (after I had told them not to pay attention to the LMP date) that those numbers were too low, knowing that might mean my son was doomed (though I never had any feeling of gender with him). Over the next week, blood tests confirmed that the numbers were rising appropriately. I didn't have the same fear with my son that I did with my daughter. I was on two drugs and a diet that I'd heard might support pregnancy due to a condition I have. I felt hope. But what fear I did feel was made worse by the fact that because of my little girl, I knew what I would be missing if my baby died. I had gestational diabetes with both of my children, and I was in labor off and on for 3 weeks before my son was born, starting more than a month before his due date. He was born on his daddy's birthday only a week and a half early. I fell in love as soon as I held him. It wasn't because he was a better baby or I was a better mother. My bond with my two living children is still different, but I loved them both. And if or when God grants me a third child, God will love them too.

There are all sorts of pro-life people: Some believe in God and some don't; Some have experienced "unplanned pregnancy" and some haven't; some adopt and some do not; some are Catholic and some are not; some vote and some don't; some are pacifist and some believe war can be justified; some are young and some are old and some are in between; some are men and some are women; some are married and some are not; some are celibate and some are not; some have lost children and some have not; some have children and some have none and some have no living children. Some, like Carla, have even had an abortion that they regret. So you could still be pro-life.

I also carry regret. I discovered later that I have a condition which can lead to early miscarriage. Because I don't have a doctor who will put me on drugs before I know I am pregnant, I am currently using a very strict low-carb diet to reduce the chance of that. If I had been doing that--or at least not eating sugar--maybe I would have more living children today. And everyone knows that you aren't supposed to eat too much sugar. So if I had just done the right thing, maybe Ruby would be alive today. I didn't know what I was doing was wrong--I don't know if doing the right thing would have made a difference--I certainly didn't know that candy could kill my baby. I try not to dwell on the past, which I cannot change, but on the present. Even so I'm not perfect. I test often for pregnancy, I try to avoid sugar, but temptation is everywhere. On Sunday there were desserts in my class at church. I had a negative test on Saturday, but I could have a very young baby, or a bad batch of tests. One probably would have been fine, but I had 3. So even knowing the right thing, I do the wrong thing. But God can forgive anything. And he does. We are all evildoers, but His grace is amazing. So I pray my sin hurt no one and I ask God to forgive--and He always forgives.

May God bless you and be with you, Ashley. I hope you are keeping better company now.

Posted by: ycw at May 31, 2010 2:56 PM


Ashley,

Please know that I am thinking of and praying for you. Please look into Rachel's Vineyard. With God's grace and cooperation on your part, you could be a HUGE advocate for women and children.

Jesus loves you so much. And so do we.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 31, 2010 3:01 PM


Ashley, I am sorry for the loss you've gone through. It helps me understand where you are coming from on this issue and why you have gone back and forth on the abortion issue.

That was not just your boyfriend's baby...it was your baby too.

I hope you don't mind me saying this- it could be that your abortion is why you have been hoping to have another baby right now so strongly...the grief of losing a child, whether through miscarriage or abortion, is a real pain and loss...and as much as I wanted another child after my miscarriage, I can only imagine that desire would be tripled if it had been an abortion. I hope that you will be able to heal and find forgiveness and peace.

Carla is an amazing person who will be able to help you if you ever need anyone to talk to who has been there!

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 3:18 PM


YCW, after finding out that I had gestational diabetes with my last pregnancy, I wondered if my sugar eating habits were a cause for my two miscarriages as well. It might have possibly been the reason that my progesterone levels were so low, I don't know?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 3:23 PM


I kind of want to be a liberal pro-life advocate. Not someone's who condemning you to hell and waving my rosary beads at you, but someone who was there.

I would never bully a woman into keeping the baby if she was insistent about not doing it. But trust me, there are plenty of women who have abortions for other people. People don't exactly smile upon single mothers who want to stay in college while raising some deadbeat's child on their own. The fear can be overwhelming.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at May 31, 2010 3:42 PM


Ashley
And no telling how many moms you will be helping just knowing that somebody actually cares what happens to them and their baby.

Posted by: myrtle miller at May 31, 2010 4:11 PM


"People don't exactly smile upon single mothers who want to stay in college while raising some deadbeat's child on their own. The fear can be overwhelming."

Been there Ashley. I was pressured to abort my baby by his abusive father when I was 22. This baby just finished his first year of college. The best day of my life up until that point was the day he was born (there were two more days that tied for best down the road!) and he was the first true love of my life. It wasn't always easy but I have zero regrets.

This beautiful 19 year-old will always be my baby and is one of the most liberal pro-life advocates I've ever met.

Be not afraid.

Posted by: Praxedes at May 31, 2010 4:19 PM


Ashley, hon, I am so, so sorry to hear about your abortion, and I'm sorry you were involved with such a creepy guy you felt like you couldn't get away from, too. A few weeks ago I was scared and stressed out because I was worried about getting my law school grades back (it turned out they were fine), so I can't even imagine how much more scary and stressful it must have been to be in your situation. If I was having a hard time getting to sleep because of something as comparably unimportant as grades...

Maybe I'm wrong, but I suspect that you want to be pro-life, while at the same time thinking that you had no way out of your past situation, so maybe being pro-choice makes more sense. Even if your baby didn't feel human to you, you get that unborn children are human beings. You get that it's wrong to kill people because they have disabilities or are inconvinient. But (I theorize) you still don't see how else you could have gotten out of your situation without having had an abortion, so you're staying pro-choice. And if you do figure out another way you could have dealt with it, with you and the baby both coming out safe and normal, that would be really difficult because of course you can't go back now and fix things.

I know you're Catholic, if not one who believes every single church teaching; seeing as that's me as well, this next part is from that perspective. God still loves you very, very much. God understands that you felt as though you were in an impossible situation. Maybe what God wants now - or, regardless of God, what might help you feel better now - is for you to help other girls and women who feel as though they have no choice but to have an abortion. You had an abortion out of sheer desperation. I don't think you really wanted to have one - you just were afraid that if you didn't you'd be permanently attached to a monster, raising a monstrous child.

Your baby wouldn't have been monstrous. Horrible, rotten people produce great kids all the time, especially if the other parent is a good, kind, loving person. My boyfriend's father is, frankly, not one of my favorite people. He's an alcoholic (recovering...we think...) who divorced my boyfriend's mother when my boyfriend was two. He went on to marry the woman he moved in with immediately afterwards, get a divorce from her, marry her again, get ANOTHER divorce from her, marry yet another woman...and, well, now it's a little hard to tell where he's at. It seems as though things are going well with his current wife and her children, but it seemed like things were going okay with the wife before this one, too. Anyway, he was not a stable or good father for my boyfriend when my boyfriend was a kid.

My boyfriend and I are so happy together that I think God must have made us specifically for each other. He turned out to be a great person, with help from his mother, her parents, his father's mother, and, eventually, his stepfather. He's not perfect. He has some self-esteem issues and sometimes has a hard time expressing his feelings. But even though his dad is someone I would never voluntarily associate with, his dad is someone who managed to contribute something good to the world, even if he didn't have too much to do with it. (Sort of like how even though Gollum from "Lord of the Rings" is terrible, he exists for a reason - to be the one whose actions cause the Ring to finally end up destroyed in Mount Doom.)

I don't say this to make you feel guilty. I say this because I think it would be sad if you spent the rest of your life thinking the world is such a hopeless place that there's nothing women and girls in your past situation can do except have an abortion.

Although I think that people shouldn't kill each other, I also think that God can make something good come from every death. My mom had a miscarriage - her baby was about as old as your baby - a few months before I was conceived. She and my dad had been trying to have a baby for ten years and she was devastated. However, I got to be the phoenix coming out of the ashes, so to speak, because if she hadn't had a miscarriage, I would have never been conceived. I'm my parents' only surviving kid and I think my sibling died for a reason - so that I could be on earth helping other people.

Maybe God is calling you to help other desperate pregnant girls. Maybe God is calling you help other people in bad relationships, before they get pregnant and find themselves in your situation. I've never been in a bad relationship, or pregnant. You can do something I can't do. You can help other people coming from a perspective that a lot of people can't come from. I'm praying for you to be happy.

Posted by: Marauder at May 31, 2010 4:20 PM


(Because Ashley posted again while I was typing my last post)

"I kind of want to be a liberal pro-life advocate."

Well, then, go for it! :D I have faith in you.

Posted by: Marauder at May 31, 2010 4:41 PM


What exactly do you mean by liberal "pro-life" advocate, Ashley? Earlier when you said that and I asked you to remember the women in these situations, you didn't seem like you were planning on dumping your belief that abortion should be legal up until viability.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 31, 2010 4:48 PM


Ashley, we could certainly use more liberal pro-life advocates!

Posted by: Lori Pieper at May 31, 2010 5:40 PM


"Ashley, we could certainly use more liberal pro-life advocates!"

Posted by: Lori Pieper at May 31, 2010 5:40 PM

Definitely! Awesome, Ashley!!

Posted by: Janet at May 31, 2010 6:09 PM


Ashley,
Thank you for sharing that. I am sorry for what you went through. I do indeed know what it is like to abort your own child. I had an abortion at 10 weeks.

There is hope and healing!!!

Please email if you want to talk further.
carla@jillstanek.com

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 7:37 PM


I ended a pregnancy because my son had a condition that made it impossible for him to live for more than a few moments outside of my womb, and while he was in there he was being beaten by my uterus because I had so little amniotic fluid. In addition, due to the lack of amniotic fluid, his legs were unable to grow like they should and when he was born, he had rocker bottom feet and a leg that was twisted backwards, starting at the knee. I didn't get to feel him move and kick more than the occasional shift, because he had no means of movement due to the lack of amniotic fluid. I held him in my arms as he died peacefully, it was in NO WAY torture for him. It makes me sick that someone could even say that. I loved that little boy with my whole heart, and I would have done anything I could to have him here with me today. That wasn't an option, so I could have continued to carry the pregnancy to term, so depressed I could barely take care of the little girl I already had, or I could let him go and begin to heal and move forward. We were able to conceive just a couple weeks after what would have been my due date, and I gave birth to his very healthy baby brother just a little over a year after he died- the little boy who brought hope back in to our lives. My pregnancy with him helped me heal and move forward, a step I never could have taken while still pregnant with the child I knew was going to die. It's been almost 5 years and while I miss him every day, I know that for me and my family, my husband and I made the right choice. We did not murder our son and we did not torture him. To say we did is hurtful beyond all description.

Posted by: Julie at May 31, 2010 7:56 PM


Julie, what would you say about a mother who decided to put her born terminally ill child through a procedure which shortened his/her life span, so that she could move on sooner?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 8:58 PM



Maurader, at 4:23, that was a beautiful post, and I completely agree with you on every part.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 9:04 PM


Julie, I don't know if you're "on my side" or not when it comes to the abortion issue, but nonetheless, your story really touched me. You have my full support. ♥

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at May 31, 2010 9:08 PM


Julie, I am sorry you felt like you had to make such a horrible decision. It sounds like in your case, the pregnancy was also threatening to your son. I think that everyone here agrees that if the pregnancy is harming a post-viable baby, the best course of action is for that baby to be born and receive what medical treatment we are capable of giving. It sounds like you loved your son very much, and had it turned out after his birth that the diagnosis of a fatal defect were incorrect, he would have received medical care.

In the great majority of cases where a fatal defect is present, the womb is not a tortuous to the unborn child. His or her life is sustained, and he or she is not in pain, even if life outside the womb will cause pain. Many times a diagnosis received in the womb of a fatal birth defect turns out to be completely wrong, or sometimes just not nearly as severe as originally thought. As others have stated, in these cases, a premature birth might take a life that could have been saved.

There was a story on this site a while back of a woman whose baby was diagnosed with a treatable birth defect. Doctors tricked her into delivering early so that they could "treat" her son, then left him to die.

If the intent of early delivery is to cause the child's death, or hasten it, we object. There is no good reason to cause a terminally ill unborn child to die sooner, let alone to kill a child whose ailment is not terminal. If the intent of early delivery is to allow medical treatment for a distressed child (or to allow, or part of, medical treatment for a distressed mother), then we see this as a positive, life-affirming choice.

Posted by: ycw at June 1, 2010 4:20 AM


Bethany:
I have been diagnosed with a condition known as PCOS (polycystic ovarian syndrome). My body does not process sugar well—it is correlated with diabetes, prediabetes, and gestational diabetes—and my ovaries sometimes produce cysts in addition to or instead of healthy eggs. My only symptoms are overweight, irregular periods and cystic ovaries (seen by ultrasound), though there are other symptoms listed many places. It is often associated with early miscarriage, but a pill called metformin (a diabetes drug) seems to prevent that, as might progesterone supplements if progesterone is low. Also, because a sugar spike may be the actual cause of the miscarriage, a low-carb diet can help—like the diet you were probably on for gestational diabetes. I eat a lot less carbs than I did on the gestational diabetes diet, actually. I have also found that I lose a lot of weight on a low-carb diet, which is another encouragement to stick with it for me. I would definitely encourage you to consider eating low carb and cutting out sugar if you may get pregnant again and you think you may have sugar issues, especially if you’ve had problems with sugar in the past.

Posted by: ycw at June 1, 2010 4:32 AM


Julie,
I am so sorry for what you have gone through. You love your son and you celebrate his life and his place in your family. God bless you.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 5:16 AM


PCG,
You only support Julie if she is proabortion like you right?? So, let me know if I should delete your comment if she turns out to be prolife. Thanks. Cause it's all about which "side" someone is on.


Also,
on your blog your TILLER IS A HERO post is missing my comments. You don't just want to hear from those who agree with you do you?? That would seem quite biased as well as self-serving.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 6:07 AM


Good morning, Carla!

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 6:24 AM


Julie: I'm so sorry about you son. However, if you're the same person I'm remembering from a different post, you didn't have an abortion - you had an induced early labor. (Is that you or was that someone else?) A baby dying in his loving mother's arms after being born early is different from having an abortion. You're right, you didn't torture him or murder him. You made sure he spent his short time on earth with people who loved him.

Carla: I don't know, PCG said she was touched by Julie's story regardless of what side Julie was on. I think we should take her at her word the way we want her to take us at our word.

Bethany: Thanks. :)

Posted by: Marauder at June 1, 2010 6:44 AM


@Jill. Tiller was not murdered. He was an evil aggressor who was stopped from killing innocent children.

If it had been a room full of born children Scott saved from a serial killer, he would never have seen the inside of a court room.

This was never about giving Tiller room to repent. He had already been given over 30 years to do that at the cost of 60,000 dead. Excuse me for being one who thinks that cost was way to high.

Posted by: R.T.E at June 1, 2010 6:48 AM


Maurauder,
Go read her latest post about Tiller and what she thinks of you and I as prolifers.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 6:48 AM


Good Morning, Bethany!! :)

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 6:50 AM


Nope, Carla, I don't care if Julie is anti-choice. Her story really did touch me, and I think it's horrible that people would call her a murderer for doing what she did. I feel for her, and if she wants it, she has my support.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 8:11 AM


PCG, did you notice my question about whether you support infanticide?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 8:13 AM


PCG,
Who called her a murderer?

Maybe this will turn out to be your next post!! That is the only reason you come here.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 8:42 AM


Julie, after Maurader mentioned that you had posted previously, I wanted to see what you had written so I could have a better understanding of your situation. I may not have fully understood what you went through, and I apologize if my question sounded insensitive.

Whether people see what you did as wrong or not has everything to do with intent. If your intent in inducing labor was to save your life and/or protect your baby with the hopes that he would survive...then this would not be considered abortion at all. If the induction was performed with the intent of making the baby die sooner, then that would make all of the difference.

I am very sorry for the loss of your precious baby boy. I have a dear friend who had two terminally ill babies in a row...one of her babies also had no kidneys, and I remember the deep pain she expressed as she endured the waiting period before giving birth. I know that you will always remember your baby boy. I'm very sorry for your loss.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 9:13 AM


Ashley-- I am so sorry you felt you had no choice in your situation. I am wondering, did anyone at the abortion clinic discuss other options with you? Did they give you any hope other than abortion?

I know in my situation, I did go to an abortion clinic to get a pregnancy test and no one there was caring or concerned. It was run like a business and felt very cold. When I went to a CPC, it was the opposite. These women were filled with compassion and love. It was so obvious to me that abortion doctors do not care about women, but only money.

Please know that there is forgiveness, healing and hope in Christ. But, first you have to acknowledge what really happened and repent.

God bless you on your journey. Praying for you.

Posted by: Allie at June 1, 2010 10:25 AM


Ashley, You definitely can be a liberal pro-life advocate!! I'm so sorry to hear about your abortion and I wanted to offer you this link to Bethesda Healing Ministry located in Columbus, Ohio
https://bethesdahealing.org/
They do long distance support too (not sure where you are located). I know you went to OU (I did too!) Also I'll be on the lookout for your post on why Tiller wasn't a hero.
God Bless!
As far as the original topic of the thread, I wanted to say that being pro-life means that we value all human life, born and unborn. Condoning the murder of Tiller is not being pro-life. What Carla wrote at 7am May 28th sums it up perfectly:
"Scott Roeder is a murderer.
George Tiller was a murderer.
Neither one are heroes."
Exactly!!

Posted by: Laura29 at June 1, 2010 10:32 AM


I just wanted to clarify that not all pro-lifers would agree with this statement,

"As far as the original topic of the thread, I wanted to say that being pro-life means that we value all human life, born and unborn. Condoning the murder of Tiller is not being pro-life. "

The pro-life community I am part of and my own personal views disagree. I value all innocent human life, born and unborn. Taking a life in self defense and the defense of others is not murder and not immoral. The life being taken is not innocent. There are many pro-lifers who believe in this and the death penalty and I am one of them.

So, to be pro-life means you value all innocent human life, but you can be pro-life and believe in the death penalty and killing to defend.

I will say it again, "Tiller and Roeder are not the same." They can not even be compared. To compare someone who murdered 60,00 innocent children to someone who took the life of a murderer is ridiculous.

Posted by: Allie at June 1, 2010 10:45 AM


"Ashley-- I am so sorry you felt you had no choice in your situation. I am wondering, did anyone at the abortion clinic discuss other options with you? Did they give you any hope other than abortion?"

No, the only question they asked me was "Do you feel comfortable with your decision today?" and I said yes.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at June 1, 2010 11:05 AM


Ashley, it is possible to be a pro-life liberal. I'm a pro-life liberal. I don't believe in God, I believe in gay marriage, fight for gay rights....and it wasn't until I did 12 years of research did I find that being pro-life was truly liberal.

I don't believe in pitting the unborn against women. As a feminist, I find abortion-on-demand to be truly anti-feminist. I do know that there are hard cases. I think we should acknowledge these and figure out how we should approach them.

But abortion is used as a form of birth control. Women seek abortions because they are desperate. I those who are pro-choice felt the need to address the REASONS women seek abortion, and fixing those problems. Women have been oppressed for a long time. How can we oppress an entire class of people, in order to assert our independence and liberty? That isn't liberty, that's injustice. We cannot kill another person, at any stage of life, because their existence doesn't suit our plans. We simply cannot do that.

I believe in birth control. I believe in education. I don't believe abortion is a religious issue. I don't believe my rights are diametrically opposed to the rights of my unborn child...I believe they are linked. Abortion advocates are looking at the issue from the wrong side, they are looking at it backwards. Until we respect our unborn children, we are never going to have true liberty, or true equality.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 11:46 AM


You can not be a feminist and pro-forcing women through pregnancies. That's the same as saying you're a feminist who's against women's rights. It's even worse than saying that you're a feminist who's against a woman's right to vote. You make no sense.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 11:48 AM


Allie, I didn't mean to misrepresent your view, but I do disagree with you. I'd like to offer a link to the Priests for Life blog on this issue: http://www.priestsforlife.org/blog/index.php/the-end-never-justifies-the-means

I personally believe that the ends don't justify the means. Additionally, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
"There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it."

I agree that taking a life in self defense is not murder. There is a difference between self defense and defending someone other than yourself. Preserving your own life can have the double effect of taking someone elses, but the intention of killing isn't there. I think it's a slippery slope to say that taking a human life in defense of others is a morally good act. Again, the ends don't justify the means.

Posted by: Laura29 at June 1, 2010 11:54 AM


Really, PCG? You can't be a feminist and be against abortion?

Wow, I guess that'd be news to Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton... http://www.feministsforlife.org/history/index.htm

Posted by: Kel at June 1, 2010 11:57 AM


Pro Choice Gal, you're wrong. The right to kill your child is not the same thing as the right to vote.

You pro-aborts act like we're making all these women pregnant and then forcing them to have children. This isn't The Handmaid's Tale. This is about human rights, on all accounts. You do NOT have the right to kill your child. Period. You have the right to choose to have sex (I support your right to have sex, I was pretty active before my own marriage). You have the right to use birth control (something I also support). But if a child should be conceived, you DO NOT have the right to kill it. Period. That's not a woman's right. That's nobody's right. And IF you choose to have sex and IF you choose not to use birth control--or should that birth control fail--you MUST be aware that a child may come into existence, and you must accept that you do not have the right to kill it and throw it in the incinerator. NOBODY has that right.

The unborn child's right to exist trumps the woman's need to keep her boyfriend/not upset her mom/get a promotion at work.....the truth is, the unborn child is not an enemy. And if you cannot view the unborn with compassion and love, then you cannot view ANYONE with compassion and love. Destroying your child is not a feminist act, it is an act of cruelty, and violence.

To decide that human life is valuable at all stages, that is worth protecting....how is that a violation of women's rights? We will see true equality when we demand that our unborn children be given the right to live. How this goes against my rights is beyond me. There are a lot of things the law tells me not to do. There are a lot of laws that prevent us from killing or harming other people. How is it anti-feminist to extend these laws to the unborn?

Pro-aborts sense of entitlement, and overt hatred of the unborn is sickening.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 12:04 PM


By the way, I'm not keen on banning abortion. It won't go away, any more than banning drugs made drug use disappear. Women will order pills over the Internet, they'll pay off doctors, they'll travel to places where it's legal.

Like drugs, you have to look at the root causes. Obviously women in poverty are under a lot of pressure to abort, for reasons we all know. That's where the liberalism comes in. You help poor women get educations, leave abusive relationships, and find childcare support.

But just speaking from personal experience: there's still a lot of pressure on middle- and upper-class women to abort whenever the circumstances are less than ideal. Everyone sends the message that there are better things to do than have a baby, and being a mom would be "throwing your life away." Upper-class parents are the worst about this. I can tell you there's lots of keeping up with the Joneses, and if you have a teen or twenty-something daughter who gets pregnant out of wedlock, it means you failed. What would the neighbors think?

Another circumstance where women are pressured to abort is when the baby is disabled. Sure, everyone acts like raising a kid with Down's syndrome is just too hard and expensive. But let's just be honest: there's still lots of bigotry directed toward the disabled. How many times did you hear "poor thing" about Trig Palin? (He doesn't look unhappy to me, so why the pity?)

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at June 1, 2010 12:13 PM


Ashely, these are good points.

The thing is, I don't think we should try to ban abortion just yet......Not because I'm pro-choice, but because we haven't really acknowledged 1) what abortion really is and 2) why women seek them out. It's not really going to do any good right now to suddenly ban it. I believe that with education, with honesty, and with real changes that offer women some real choices, then making it illegal will be the next logical step.

My friends who have had abortions have said, "I wouldn't have done it if...." and then they all have different reasons. They wouldn't have done it if they knew they'd be scarred and unable to have children in adulthood; if they felt they had financial stability; if they didn't feel the need to choose between education and their child.

I believe we shouldn't be conceiving these children to begin with...however, if we can say to a pregnant college student "How can we help you have a healthy pregnancy AND still live on campus and get your degree" we'll find less women choosing abortion. It's not a free choice, really, if you feel abortion is your ONLY choice.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 12:21 PM


"How many times did you hear "poor thing" about Trig Palin? (He doesn't look unhappy to me, so why the pity?)"

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at June 1, 2010 12:13 PM

In all honesty, I've never heard anyone say "poor thing" about Trig Palin.

Posted by: Janet at June 1, 2010 12:26 PM


Marylee, why should abortion be a choice at all?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 12:27 PM


Janet, neither have I.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 12:31 PM


BUT I have heard abortion proponents call him some terrible things I wouldn't want to repeat.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 12:34 PM


Bethany, I don't believe abortion should be a choice, ever. I'm unequivocally pro-life. I just feel that before we ban abortion, we need to really establish what it is, and why women seek it out. I should hope that abortion would be UNTHINKABLE. Strategically, I'm thinking ahead......what abortion advocates might pull if we suddenly ban it.

But do know that I am against abortion, through and through. It angers me and saddens me greatly.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 12:36 PM


Let's say a child really wants an ice cream cone. The parent says no. The child asks why. The parent says "Because I said so."

That's how I see a sudden abortion ban. We can't say "You can't have an abortion BECAUSE WE SAY SO."

We have to give a legitimate reason to ban it. The only way to do this is through education, and through establishing resources for pregnant women.

However, abortion advocates are so against women NOT choosing abortion, it seems, that the biggest obstacle will be getting abortion advocates to establish those kinds of resources as well. Abortion advocates are going to have to swallow their pride and admit when they're wrong. The more they argue against science and logic, the crazier they look, and it's really difficult to get anywhere with crazy.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 12:41 PM


MaryLee, but we do give a legitimate reason for banning it.

It's killing innocent human beings who don't deserve to die. That is reason enough.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 12:44 PM


Why should we educate first and save lives second?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 12:46 PM


Bethany, I'm not disagreeing with you. But I'm looking at the political climate, and thinking about how abortion advocates and the media choose to portray this movement, and what a sudden ban will do. It's rather like a chess match.

I would rather have abortion be peacefully banned because we are in agreement, then ban it and have some dangerous outcome from abortion advocates and the media. I believe it would fuel a war.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 12:48 PM


Okay, I'm really not sure why you think it's either/or. I'm not here to fight you. I don't think it's "educate first and save lives second."

Why can't we do both at the same time? Why are you arguing with me? Abortion advocates have money, they have the media, they have resources that non-profit pro-life groups do not have. But the pro-life community has science, technology, and logic that goes far beyond the pro-abort semantics and excuses. If we can change hearts, then that is even better than simply telling women they can't do something. We have to change hearts.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 12:50 PM


I always hear people take pity on disabled people who clearly aren't unhappy.

Anyway, no, banning abortion won't stop it. Women who want one will find some way of getting it: herbal remedies, ordering RU-486 online, bribing doctors. Just like when we banned drugs, no one ever smoked crack again, ever!

Oh wait, no. There was a huge crack epidemic decades after it became illegal, and it's still plenty available if you want it.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at June 1, 2010 12:50 PM


I'd am curious to find out how many women would honestly still have had an abortion, even if it were illegal? I don't expect the proabort fanatics to be honest but would like to hear thoughts from those who have come to grips with their own abortions.

I do think the fact that abortion is legal helps hide some of the guilt most mothers would automatically feel if it were illegal.

Posted by: Praxedes at June 1, 2010 12:53 PM


Praxedes-

I don't expect you to believe me at all, but I'll answer your question.

If I were to accidentally become pregnant now, I would want to go through the pregnancy.

If I were to accidentally become pregnant in a society that outlaws abortion, I would absolutely NOT go through the pregnancy.

Pregnancy has to be a choice for me. I would feel violated being pregnant in a society with a government that owns pregnant women's bodies.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 12:59 PM


MaryLee,I am not trying to be argumentative, but I don't feel that you are thinking about abortion as seriously if you want to wait for abortion to be banned. It's a nice thought (that everyone would just agree to ban it) and I would love to think it could happen, but there is no way that an agreement is going to come about. They are never going to agree to ban abortion...its like if we waited for slave owners to give up their right to own slaves before banning slavery. It wasn't going to happen.

And I don't understand this comparison of abortion to drug use. Drug use directly involves one body, not two (unless a woman is pregnant or nursing while using drugs). Banning abortion is NOT the same as banning drug usage- the two are not comparable by a long shot.
YES, some women will still abort. Some men still rape even though rape is illegal- should it then be made legal? That makes no sense.

The question really is- are babies lives worth being protected right now? If you think we should allow millions more to be killed while we wait for the perfect moment to save them I don't understand that mind frame at all.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:00 PM


If I were to accidentally become pregnant now, I would want to go through the pregnancy.

For what reasons would you want to continue your pregnancy?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:03 PM


I never would have had an abortion if it had been illegal.
I know several post abortive women that would say the same thing.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:05 PM


bethany-

I want to be pregnant. I want to have a child now. I'm not *trying* for a child now because the logical part of me says that now is not the right time, but if I became pregnant, I would welcome that fetus/future child into my life.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 1:06 PM


PCG, the original feminsts were all pro-life. They believed that it would be hypocritical for them to fight against women being treated as disposable property and then turn around and argue that unborn babies were disposable property.

I think it would help you, just as a general suggestion for life, to look into why people believe the things they believe before making up your mind about them. I support gay rights, but I understand that a lot of people with religious oppositions to homosexuality truly believe that homosexuality is a sin, and therefore they want to "save" people from it. Do I personally believe that? No. But I understand that they believe they're doing the right thing. Likewise, I think you have some desire to do good in the world, but by not confronting your anger over your rape and basic science, you have a distorted view of what constitutes "good."

Ashley: Yeah, abortion clinics are terrible when it comes to presenting other options. If you decide to give birth to the baby, they don't make any money. Some of them may truly believe that they're helping women by providing a valuable service, but other ones recognize that abortion can make a lot of money and is probably the least-regulated medical field.

What a horrible way to determine if women really want an abortion or not. For all they knew, you could have said yes to their question because if you came out of the clinic still pregnant, your parents or boyfriend would murder you.

Trig Palin does indeed look like a very happy little guy. I can't remember where I saw it anymore, but there's a video someplace of Todd, holding Trig, talking to a reporter while Trig's giggling away about something. About a year ago, my boyfriend and I went to a going-away-party for some neighbors of his who were moving to a different state. This family had two mentally retarded sons - I'm not sure if they were biological or adopted - who were maybe nineteen and sixteen, and although the older one wasn't thrilled about moving away from his girlfriend, they seemed like pretty happy, well-adjusted guys. They talked to all the neighbors at the party and were looking forward to watching the baseball game on TV that night.

"Everyone sends the message that there are better things to do than have a baby, and being a mom would be "throwing your life away.""

Oh my God, this always makes me so mad. Personal relationships are the most important part of life, period. No one lies on their deathbed surrounded by their loving promotions, awards, and widespread recognition. Your salary is not going to present you with a construction-paper Mother's Day card that says "I love you Mommy" written in barely legible crayon letters. Your children are not going to call you into their bedrooms one day and announce that they have to fire you as their mother because of the economy.

"Upper-class parents are the worst about this. I can tell you there's lots of keeping up with the Joneses, and if you have a teen or twenty-something daughter who gets pregnant out of wedlock, it means you failed. What would the neighbors think?"

This makes me so mad too - especially because a lot of the time, it's not the fact that their daughter had sex out of wedlock that upsets these families, it's that the neighbors KNOW ABOUT IT and know that the daughter wasn't "smart enough" to "take care of the problem." Ugh!

"Another circumstance where women are pressured to abort is when the baby is disabled."

My mom's OB-GYN moved to a different state when my mom was about seven months pregnant with me, and my mom ended up stuck with this other OB-GYN who acted like she couldn't believe that my mom hadn't wanted an amnio. My mom figured the only point of one was to find out if your baby was disabled so you could have an abortion, and she knew that she wasn't getting an abortion under any circumstances. My mom was a thirty-six-year-old woman with degrees in psychology and education who had taught for twelve years, but the new OB-GYN acted like she was being stupid or ridiculous. "Choice"!

Off to try to find my old baby clothes so I can donate them to a crisis pregnancy center...

Posted by: Marauder at June 1, 2010 1:07 PM


So you would suddenly not want to be pregnant, and not want to have a child, based on the fact that you couldn't kill your child? Hmm. Makes so much sense.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:08 PM


bethany-

Nope, I'd still want to be pregnant. However, I wouldn't give up my liberty for any amount of time, even just 9 months. I would feel horribly violated being pregnant in a society with a government that says that women don't own their bodies during pregnancy.

It's sort of like having consensual sex with a person who you know would rape you if you told him to stop. Very violating.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 1:11 PM


"If I were to accidentally become pregnant now, I would want to go through the pregnancy.

If I were to accidentally become pregnant in a society that outlaws abortion, I would absolutely NOT go through the pregnancy."

Does that mean if you got pregnant now, you'd start thinking of baby names and wondering if the baby was a boy or a girl, but if abortion became illegal, say, four months from now, little PGC Jr. would be a goner? That's ridiculous even from a pro-choice perspective. That's letting the government make the choice for you - something you claim to be against.

Posted by: Marauder at June 1, 2010 1:14 PM


Actually, you'd be letting them control your life MORE then PCG, because you would they would be the deciding factor over what you choose to do. They ban abortion, you choose to become an outlaw and have an abortion to spite them even though you WANT the baby. Doesn't make much sense, does it?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:17 PM


I wouldn't be "letting" them control my life more. I'm pro-choice so abortion DOESN'T become legal and I have the CHOICE whether or not to go through a pregnancy. If the government takes away that choice, I'm going to find a way to get out of the violating situation, just like I wouldn't have consensual sex w/ a guy who would rape me if I told him to stop.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 1:20 PM


Having a baby you want to have is comparable to having sex with a rapist? You're delusional.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:23 PM


Nope, being pregnant in a society where abortion is illegal is comparable to having sex with a rapist. For me, anyway.

Ah, and the insults begin. Nice job, Bethany.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 1:24 PM


PCG, that wasn't an insult. I would never say that unless I believed it was truly warranted. I think, as others have brought up, that you truly need to seek help for the trauma you've been through. It has caused you to see the world in a very illogical way.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:27 PM


Insulting someone and then pretending that you insulted them because you like them = a stupid tactic. Sorry.

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 1:30 PM


PCG, I never said I like you.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 1:31 PM


Bethany, I see what you're saying. And philosophically, I agree with you. On a practical level, the times are different from when slavery was banned, and even from when abortion was illegal.

We have more forms of media than ever. And it's on 24/7. More women are going to college, and achieving higher and higher goals. (Side note: THIS is something that I love about the feminist movement....That women said, "I don't want to be an executive assistant, I want to be an executive!" Unfortunately, some have achieved that by believing they have to kill their own children.)

More women are receiving post graduate degrees. A lot of studies show that the more educated and liberal a woman is, the more likely she is to be for abortion rights. Why is this? The abortion advocates have a hypnotic and almost reasonable-sounding sound bytes and straw man arguments. Should we ban abortion completely, in this digital age, I believe there would be a horrible uprising.

We have to know what our opponents believe, and how to counter their arguments. As I've said, we already have technology and science on our side. But we need to change our tactics, too. Perhaps we should stop talking about abortion as if it's a religious issue (it's not). Perhaps we should open the doors to our non "traditional" pro life advocates like PLAGAL (Pro Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians) and pro-choice atheists.

We are making strides.....already people believe there should be restrictions on abortion, and many believe "viability" is a marker for when the unborn's rights should be observed. (Viability is a silly marker, because it's becoming earlier and earlier....It's the same person, from beginning to end, whether it's "viable" or not....but at least this is a step in the right direction.)

We need to be be understanding and compassionate to women undergoing crisis pregnancies. Otherwise, people will never really listen to what we're saying. If we don't follow through, then should we ban abortion, it would most likely quickly be made legal again by a new legislation.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 1:44 PM


Although you don't believe in God, MaryLee many of us do. God is on our side and He will end abortion. He has promised!! :)

Abortion can be argued from a completely scientific view. Agreed.

I do someday pray that abortion be UNTHINKABLE and illegal. We CAN and SHOULD offer women so much better than abortion! There should be a pregnancy care center/maternity home in every city in this country. They offer help and support for FREE.

What can PP offer a scared, young pregnant mom who doesn't want an abortion?? They offer her the door.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 2:10 PM


While it may be true that morality cannot be legislated, behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart, it can restrain the heartless.
-Martin Luther King Jr.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 2:14 PM


"If I were to accidentally become pregnant now, I would want to go through the pregnancy.

If I were to accidentally become pregnant in a society that outlaws abortion, I would absolutely NOT go through the pregnancy."

Do I believe you? Yes.

Does this confirm there's something terribly wrong with you? Yes.

I would not kill my child if abortion were compulsory. I would not kill my child if abortion were illegal. I would not kill my child if abortion were restricted. My kids aren't political statements.

Does this mean that if third-trimester abortions were outlawed, you would wait until then to kill your child? Does this mean that if abortion were allowable for children with disabilities, but not able-bodied babies, you would kill a normal child but if he had Down's Syndrome, he would live? If you love someone then they aren't violating you, even if you have no choice but to care for them.

Posted by: ycw at June 1, 2010 2:22 PM


Carla, I respect everyone who is pro-life and religious. I would never tell you that your beliefs shouldn't inform your views....Indeed, I hope any good Christian/Jew/Hindu/Buddhist would use their beliefs as their guide. To be honest, I'm not completely atheistic--I would most likely be considered "agnostic" since I don't believe atheists have ever proven there ISN'T any God. I think pure atheism is as close-minded as fundamentalism. It's actually fundamentalism in disguise.

However, to gain credence with those who belittle the pro-life movement, thinking it's merely a religious issue, the religious pro-lifers absolutely MUST make room for those who are pro-life and NOT religious. It might be a good idea to let secular pro-lifers take the reins a while. Instead of the usual suspects, it would behoove the pro-life movement to put us up front.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 2:54 PM


What exactly does that look like, MaryLee?

Are secular prolifers not allowed to volunteer at Pregnancy Resource Centers? Write editorials or blogs? March for Life? Give money, time and resources to all and every prolife organization just as everyone else is?

I will link arms with ANYONE who is willing to fight the good fight for the lives of innocent, unborn children and their mothers.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 3:32 PM


Hey, MaryLee, I like a lot of what you say. :)

Posted by: Alexandra at June 1, 2010 3:36 PM


Well, Carla, it goes beyond volunteering, or writing letters or blogs....which they do. The wonderful people at PLAGAL are not allowed to march, and are often the object of ridicule by fellow pro-lifers. I have a priest friend who gets angry when I ask if my pro-life atheist friends can speak at conventions.....NO, he says, because they don't believe in God.

What I'm saying is---it's time for the pro-life community to SEEK OUT those in the community who are not religious, and who are great speakers. Part of this is the fault of the mainstream media (as Nat Hentoff said, the media likes to focus on old white men, or women who wear crucifixes).

I've seen a lot of bigotry within the pro-life community. It goes beyond just protecting the life of the unborn--we have to respect those whose lifestyles and beliefs are different as well. I would hope that religious pro-lifers would welcome secular pro-lifers, because the pro-abortion media and spokespeople would most likely be handed their heads on a plate.

Instead, pro-life atheists and pro-life gays and lesbians are silenced, and even ridiculed, by many of those in the pro-life community. What abortion advocates have in their favor is UNITY. The pro-life community is more diverse than is portrayed, but because of inherent prejudices within the community, "unconvential" pro-life advocates are not only sent to the back, but even silenced.

It would send an amazing message if we had Priests for Life marching next to Atheists for Life and PLAGAL and Jews for Life. Imagine how people might change their views if they saw that the lives of the unborn are so precious that Catholics, atheists, gays, lesbians, Hindus, vegetarians, carnivores are unified to save them.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 3:44 PM


When I say those at PLAGAL arent' allowed to march....Obviously, they have a right to march. But they're told they cannot march with the rest of us. What a horrible, horrible message.

We can't say to those who support abortion: "Don't abort your children, and also, you have to have our values and live the way we tell you to."

We have to make it clear that abortion is an act of violence, destruction, and selfishness. It goes beyond religion, it goes beyond semantics, and it should be unthinkable to anyone.

I am on the birth control pill. Not because I'm all gung-ho about abortion, but because I had some serious problems with my system, and the birth control pill regulates it. I have one daughter and I'm not in a hurry to have another. However, my husband and I welcome the possibility that should I become pregnant, that would be wonderful and exciting. We are also planning on adopting a child in the next couple of years.

Do I not qualify as pro-life, because I'm on the pill? Even though I'm sickened and saddened by abortion, even though I feel it is the worst thing a human can do, even though I feel great sadness for the children who are killed because women are being lied to? No. I am as pro-life as you, even if I am approaching the issue from a different angle.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 3:48 PM


MaryLee, maybe you don't realize this, and so I feel I should tell you.

The birth control pill--like all hormonal contraceptives--works in three main ways. First, it suppresses ovulation. I have no problem with people choosing that. Second, it can stop sperm cells from traveling as well due to changes in the cervical fluids. Again, I have no problem with that. The third way it works--which it seems everyone in the medical community tries to deny--is that it can thin the uterine lining, preventing a newly-conceived human being from implanting and being nourished.

No one ever told me this before I was urged to go on the pill; my church leaders and mentors (Baptist) didn't know it and my "doctor" probably didn't care, and for two visits could not find any info on NFP to give me. So I give this information not to hurt you, but to inform you, because I wish someone had informed me before I used it for a year. I found out on my own after I'd quit.

The proof that the pill doesn't always prevent pregnancy is found in that some women do get pregnant while on the pill. The proof that the pill can prevent the child from implanting if he is conceived can be found by comparing the rate of ectopic pregnancy in pill-users versus those who do not use hormonal birth control. The rate of ectopic pregnancy among users of hormonal birth control is much higher than among those who are not using hormonal contraceptives. Thus, either the pill is causing ectopic pregnancies, or the thinning of the uterine lining means that an embryo is less likely to implant there, whereas the pill does not prevent an embryo from implanting in the wrong place, such as the fallopian tube, if that embryo is conceived despite the use of the pill. The second explanation seems more likely.

Posted by: ycw at June 1, 2010 4:07 PM


Yes, I understand how the pill works. But the chances of a spontaneous abortion on the pill are very, very slim. Not to mention, I spent two weeks a month throwing up and not being able to walk. How can I be a good mother to my child if my system is completely out of whack?

The issue is: Does a woman have the right to go into a clinic and have her unborn child sucked out of her for any reason at all?

The answer is: No, she doesn't.

Life is messy. There are gray areas. There are Hard Cases. But the heart of this issue is about healthy women, healthy babies, and the right to exist. I believe in the right to exist for everyone, whether they're unborn or 87 years old. It is not my decision to kill someone because their existence interferes with my "plans."

So I'm less pro-life because....? Even though I am, through and through, against abortion? And the death penalty? I'm a pescatarian, too. So, I am not part of your group because I'm on the pill?

The pro-life cause is hopeless, with this kind of prejudice. It's absolutely ridiculous. Good luck, then. Good luck fighting this fight and trying to make everyone just. like. you.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 4:12 PM


Please forgive my outburst. However, this is what I've been trying to say. I don't need to be lectured on birth control and how our systems work.

Why can't the pro-life community accept those who are different from them? We are never, ever going to get anywhere if we are so full of pride that we have to make everyone else live the way we tell them to.

I don't care how anyone lives. All I want is for people to stop aborting their children.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 4:17 PM


You know, this is one thing I love about the pro-choice community. All kinds of people are accepted. I'm religious, and atheists pro-choicers accept people like me. Likewise, I haven't met any religious pro-choicers who don't accept atheists as pro-choicers. We have homosexual people, heterosexual people, trans people, people of color, bisexual people, and as long as you believe in the right to choose and are pro-women, you're accepted.

(let the personal insults begin! ;) )

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 4:21 PM


Pro Choice Gal, you may have unity, but you're all still completely off.

Don't let the disunity of the pro-life community fool you into thinking you're right.

However, pro-lifers could learn a thing or two about broadening their spectrum.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 4:24 PM


Also, why are you here, PCG? You remind me of Eris, the Spirit of Strife and Discord. There's obviously something you're looking for. You will never change the minds of pro-lifers, and likewise, we will never change yours. So unless you have something useful to add, then you might want to spend some time on with your own, talking about how anti-feminist and pro-rape you think we are.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 4:26 PM


Watching you bicker amongst yourselves is pretty amusing.

Also, it's interesting. This is what I think about whenever anti-choice people brag about the gallup polls that show that more people identify as "pro-life". How many of those people are *actually* accepted into their movement? The people who make exceptions for rape, incest, fetal deformity, etc? Atheists? LGBTQ? People who use birth control?

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 4:40 PM


Thank you, MaryLee, for expressing your thoughts. Many of the issues with the Pro-Life movement are the very same issues that prevent me from identifying myself as "pro-life."

I have struggled with the issue for so long, after spending most of my adult life as a staunch pro-choicer, and while I can say with certainty that abortion is wrong and should be made illegal, I just cannot bring myself to identify as pro-life. :(

Posted by: len at June 1, 2010 4:40 PM


I'm not afraid of saying I'm pro-life. I'm PROUD to say it.

And PCG, you seriously, seriously need to take a long look at what you want and who you are. Every group has unsavory characters. Hitler was a vegetarian and loved animals. Does that mean I shouldn't be a vegetarian? Even if I disagree with the public tactics of the pro-life movement, I agree with what their fighting for.

I'm certain abolitionists had the same trouble in their own groups, and those who were pro-slavery were just like you pro-aborts.

Len, it's an act of courage to shed the pro-choice label. It's not as sexy, it's not as overtly popular, but it is just and it is right. Abortion is, simply, inexcusable and unjustifiable.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 4:54 PM


Whoops, also, I do know the difference between "their" and "they're."

*ARGH*

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 4:55 PM


I am sorry that you interpreted my sincere desire to educate, based on my own past of being lied to, ignored, and misled, as an attack.

I am sorry that you experience so much trouble in your cycle. I truly am. I did not know that.

I am sorry that you feel the pro-life movement is not welcoming enough. I truly do not feel that is so. I think that this site--where overwhelmingly those who are Christian or atheist, Roman Catholic or non-Roman-Catholic, stand united against the practice of killing children, is rather a testament to the truth that many people want to work together, and are working together, even though some of us disagree about politics, about methods, about lifestyle choices.

I knew I might be opening myself to an attack posting as I did, but I am compelled to mention what I know when I can, even though others might not like it. I sincerely hope that you do not experience a spontaneous abortion on the pill. I am glad that you have been informed. I was not.

I don't think you really want to argue about the pill, and so I won't. I am glad that you are against women having their fetuses sucked out for any reason. I welcome you as an ally in ending that. I welcome Ashley as an ally in ending post-viable abortions.

I have tried to use your own words so as not to offend you. I really was not trying to push you away.

And though you don't worship my God, I pray that He will bless you. And I also pray that someday you will worship Him.

Because if I believe that I am right--and we all believe that we are right--I want others to believe what is right too, and I want others to experience the eternal life that I believe I have been made heiress to.

Posted by: ycw at June 1, 2010 4:58 PM


"And PCG, you seriously, seriously need to take a long look at what you want and who you are. Every group has unsavory characters. Hitler was a vegetarian and loved animals. Does that mean I shouldn't be a vegetarian? Even if I disagree with the public tactics of the pro-life movement, I agree with what their fighting for."

And the point of that was?

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 4:58 PM


My two cents for what it's worth is that if you believe that abortion is the killing of a human being and you believe abortion is immoral and should be illegal, then you are pro-life.

Why does it matter whether you are a member of any group/religion, what your gender or sexual orientation is, where you work, the color of your skin, etc. etc? A prolifer is a prolifer.

I am sorry that some people have felt left out of the prolife movement. When prolifers march should anyone feel they have to bring anything else to the table other than the fact that they know life begins at conception and that life should be protected?

I don't feel the need to proclaim I am a straight, divorced, overweight, Catholic, Caucasian, am affiliated with no political party, German, middle-age, feminist, special needs advocate and parent to feel accepted as equal in the prolife movement.

I totally agree no one should be excluded but I don't think other agendas need to come into play during a march or prolife gathering either. Those battles should be fought elsewhere.

I believe that once our unborn are respected and have the inherant right to life, other humanitarian rights are sure to follow.

Prolifers Unite! Peace.

Posted by: Praxedes at June 1, 2010 5:03 PM


PCG, your pride is astonishing.

The point is, your glee in "watching us bicker" is nauseating. I may criticize the pro-life movement, but I still agree with it.

People may say, "Well, they don't accept gays and lesbians, so they must be wrong." What I'm saying is every single group has people who sully their name. I mention that Hitler is a vegetarian, because I find it fascinating. As he is an example of hatred and violence, it is interesting to note that he loved animals and didn't eat them. Does that mean that he was a good guy? No it doesn't. Does it mean that all vegetarians are like Hitler? No. But pro-aborts will look at any internal criticism in the pro-life community as an excuse to ignore the truth behind the pro-life philosophy. I may say, "We should welcome pro-life atheists and gays and lesbians" and you bounce around going "We do that! We do that! We have unity!" Which means, what, you're RIGHT? No, it means all of you agree that a woman has the right to kill her baby. Even if I disagree with the political or religious philosophies of my pro-life comrades, I still know that they hold the truth, at the core.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Thank you for the kind words, ycw. I believe in the right to life for the unborn, and nothing will shake that. And PCG, I was vehemently pro-choice too, once. I may disagree with the tactics of the pro-life community, but it is the pro-abortion community which is a greater embarrassment and scourge to humankind.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 5:06 PM


Praxedes, that is a very good post.

The members of PLAGAL aren't trying to make everyone march for gay rights. They want to save the babies. Why shouldn't we let them?

Pro-life atheists aren't trying to argue that God doesn't exist. They want to save the babies.

So the idea that "unconventional" pro-lifers have an "agenda" is exactly the problem with the religious pro-life movement. I'm a secular pro-lifer. I don't have an agenda. Yes, I believe in gay marriage, but that's neither here nor there where abortion is concerned. I don't see how my gay best friend's wedding is of any concern to anyone at all.

However, my gay best friend is also pro-life. He wants to keep the children alive. He wants to march for the children. He doesn't have any other agenda. That would be like ....Going to a right to life march and demanding equal pay.

We shouldn't be afraid of those who are different. We should embrace them. There are some really really awesome, funny, brilliant pro-lifers who aren't white, or straight, or Christian. We should respect and listen to them.

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 5:10 PM


MaryLee-- I can't speak for everyone here, but I am thrilled that you are pro-life, whether or not you are on the pill. I don't believe that issue is black and white and has to be a personal decision for each woman and family. Now abortion, on the other hand is black and white; there is no denying that a real human being is being murdered.

Thanks for everything you are adding and the way you stand up for human life and the unborn. God bless you.

Posted by: Allie at June 1, 2010 5:13 PM


The pro-choice movement isn't right because we accept people. We're right because we're the ones who are fighting for liberty. You're wrong because you're the ones trying to force women through pregnancies (thus taking away a person's liberty *just* because she's pregnant). You just happen to be really mean people, too. :)

You really shouldn't jump to conclusions about what I say.

I'm out. Bye bye, antis. ♥

Posted by: ProChoiceGal at June 1, 2010 5:13 PM


Praxedes, MaryLee, agreed! Thanks for your comments. Anyone who is willing to fight for the lives of the unborn, I welcome you!

Posted by: Kel at June 1, 2010 5:16 PM


"What can PP offer a scared, young pregnant mom who doesn't want an abortion?? They offer her the door."

I know the conversation has veered in another direction, but I think the clinic I went to broke the law. Pennsylvania is supposed to have mandatory counseling, and they did nothing besides ask if I was "comfortable." As soon as I said yes, she took my payment.

I'd have to go back and think about the details, but I don't think I waited 24 hours either. I called and got an appointment for the next morning and drove there from Ohio.

Posted by: Ashley Herzog at June 1, 2010 5:43 PM


Hi MaryLee,

Ooops. Sorry for my double post.

Thanks for pointing some of what you see going on in the prolife arena. The more we know, the stronger we become.

I know how being ostrasized can hurt and I think we can all try to be more careful in making sure all prolifers feel welcome in this battle.

I have noticed the continuing strength in the past 5 years. I hope I will live to see the day when abortion is illegal and all life is celebrated!

Hang tough!

Posted by: Praxedes at June 1, 2010 5:47 PM


Ashley,
I am sorry. I wish it didn't happen all the time and one question that I can't seem to get an answer for is HOW are the abortion clinics monitored?? Who makes sure they are giving informed consent, offering ultrasound, 24 hours etc.?? In states that have many prolife laws on the books how do they know clinics are not skirting the law?

Anyway,
interesting conversation!! I must say for myself there are many topics I don't even comment on here. I frankly don't have the energy at times to discuss homosexuality, the pill, sex change operations and I am so done talking about FGM! We are united about one thing The Unborn Have a Right to Life!! Abortion Hurts Women!!

I am so proud of ALL of the different and amazing people here that claim to be prolife not only on this blog but in their neighborhoods, to young pregnant women and to their local government! We do so much more than yap on a blog.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 6:42 PM


PCG, the pro-choice movement is based on lies, obfuscation, demoralization, and will never, ever be right, ever, no matter how much you try to justify it. You're not fighting for liberty, you're fighting for the right to kill. Unborn children are not property. They are people who deserve to live. No matter how many people you accept, you'll always be wrong.

Anyway, yes, apologies for this conversation veering in all kinds of directions!

Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 6:46 PM


"I don't feel the need to proclaim I am a straight, divorced, overweight, Catholic, Caucasian, am affiliated with no political party, German, middle-age, feminist, special needs advocate and parent to feel accepted as equal in the prolife movement.

I totally agree no one should be excluded but I don't think other agendas need to come into play during a march or prolife gathering either. Those battles should be fought elsewhere."

That's because none of the things you describe yourself as being really raise much of an issue in the pro-life movement. GLBT people are a different story with some pro-life groups. For example, although I love this site, Jill referred to lesbians as being pro-abortion a couple of months ago. Well, some are and some aren't. I don't think Jill was trying to say that lesbians can't be pro-life, but sometimes there are assumptions that people on both sides unconsciously make.

If nothing else, GLBT pro-lifers identifying as such detract from the myth that being pro-life is all about "Bible-thumping fundamentalists" who want to "impose their religion on others."

Ashley: I bet they did break the law. I can't think of any circumstance in which "counseling" consists of a single question.

Posted by: Marauder at June 1, 2010 7:54 PM


people are making tillaer out to be a saint at usatoday page

Posted by: chris at June 1, 2010 8:27 PM



Post a comment:




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Please enter the letter "p" in the field below: