Pro-choice women are wimps

faint1.jpgA May 16 article in wwweek.com spotlighted Grayson Dempsey, the "self-proclaimed pro-choice extremist" 2004 founder of Backline, a pro-abortion hotline.

Interestingly, Dempsey is now six months pregnant. Responding to the question, "Has your pregnancy shifted your views?" she said:

My pregnancy has made me so adamantly engaged in the work that I do that it is unbelievable. I can't imagine going through it without the support I have from everybody in my family and in my life, and I can't imagine going through it unless I was committed to being a mom. I threw up every day for three months. I cried for no reason. I'm gaining weight.

I read this "poor me" or "pregnancy is unbearable" lament from pro-abort women a lot, trying to skew a natural condition into something beyond them. Examples from this blog:

faint3.jpg

  • "[I]f I were to ever tell [my fiancee] I couldn't continue a pregnancy, it would be because I COULDN'T do it - emotionally, or physically, or mentally. He wouldn't want me to sacrifice my mental, emotional or physical well-being for a fetus."

  • "I went through a month and a half of pregnancy and I was nauseous from the moment I woke up in the morning to the moment I went to bed at night, I couldn't eat much of anything more than ginger ale and soda crackers, I was constantly exhausted, and cramping like crazy. Would my fetus have lived to gestate fully? Probably. But no one can tell me that I can't get rid of something that is making my body that horribly miserable."

  • "[I[f abortion were outlawed and I becamse pregnant, I would find every way possible to end it. I dislike the condition...."

  • "I loathe the idea of being in such a weakened state."
  • My conclusion? Modern-day feminists have degenerated into frail creatures, the very weaklings that sexists caricature.

    But they're forced to take this position to bolster their claim that abortion is as good as or better an option than pregnancy.

    How ironic.


    Comments:

    ME ME ME ME ME!

    What a great observation! I believe much of their laments are the result of a self fulfilling prophesy. They believe pregnancy is a horrible disease to be avoided at all costs, and try their darndest to make it that way!

    Trust me, I've been through a horrible pregnancy, and it is 100% about your attitude. If I could stay on hospital bedrest for 7 weeks, bleeding and laboring, a woman can survive a normal pregnancy.

    I don't say this to belittle the trials of pregnancy, but only to highlite the fact that a huge part of the "suffering" of pregnancy is due to the way we view our final outcome.

    If we believe the child to be a valuable being, even at the earliest stages, it is much easier to perserver.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 10:50 AM


    "My conclusion? Modern-day feminists have degenerated into frail creatures, the very weaklings that sexists cariciature. How ironic."
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    You're right. Heck! Brain-dead women have children all the time! When women say that the biggest event in their life was the birth of their children, I always have to wonder if they were ever capable of achieving more than a drooling flatliner. Big deal!
    Women who whine about something as trivial and meaningless as pregnancy and delivery ARE worthless and weak. Do they find their other mindless biologigal processes - like digestion or respiration - to be an achivement? They should get out see what REAL LIFE is like.

    Posted by: Laura at May 22, 2007 11:10 AM


    Do you think God in His infinite wisdom intentionally made pregnancy difficult so that at it's end, the birth of a human being, the mother would be internally rewarded with the knowledge that she did it, she faithed it, she endured? How much more would she value that child, having gone through the travails of pregnancy?

    My wife, having had five children, would not trade her kids for anything and they were a gift. Jesus Christ endured the suffering on the cross because He knew the reward set before him. To not understand God's ways is to rob oneself of becoming truly rich.

    Women who want to terminate their children because it's too hard, are not only physically weak of their own choosing but are utterly impoverished in soul and spirit and don't even realize it.

    These self-absorbed women not only steal another's life, they rob themselves of the opportunity to become fully human and fully alive.

    I am not saying that a woman has to have children to live a rewarding life, however, Who do they think allowed them and gave them the privilege of becoming pregnant? Peter Pan?

    Yes, the women's movement has been the biggest lie since Eve bought into satan's lie that she would be like God if she ate the apple. Solomon was right when he said there is nothing new under the sun.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 11:21 AM


    "Do they find their other mindless biological processes - like digestion or respiration - to be an achievement?"

    I, for one, would consider it quite the achievement if my digestion or respiration resulted in the creation of a new human being.

    Posted by: Michelle Potter at May 22, 2007 11:26 AM


    Laura, what a statement. What makes you think these women don't understand "real life?" Although there have been some "pregnancy is hard" type comments, I think most women who don't want children don't want them because they don't want children, not because they don't think they can't handle being pregnant.


    "worthless and weak?" I thought all life was precious.

    Posted by: Hal at May 22, 2007 11:27 AM


    Hal, I think Laura was being satirical.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 12:03 PM


    Laura,

    Your post reveals how you absolutely despise women.

    Bearing children is a gift from God.

    You have been convinced by the women's movement (and I really hate to call it that because it's not about women, it's about power) that being a mother is somehow beneath the dignity of a woman.

    Your only progeny are the cells in your brain that have been washed in the propaganda of the liberal, left-wing, men-haters of our age.

    You deprive yourself of the woman God intended for you to be, you know it, you deny it, you are truly to be pitied.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 12:36 PM


    If I had been determined to have a child, I would have dealt with it. But Jill, you have no right to judge me on how incredibly sick I was while I was pregnant. And NO RIGHT to call me a weak, frail feminist. NO ONE has the right to call me weak. I don't tolerate that, EVER.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 12:36 PM


    Erin, I don't doubt for a second that you were very sick. Hypermesis drives many women to abortion.

    My point was that perspective changes how we feel sickness. If we see the sickness as an indication that things are going well (it is) and that we will deliver a healthy child, dealing with sickness becomes much easier.

    When we are told that our children are the enemy and that pregnancy is a nightmare, it becomes much easier to focus on the nausea.

    What if instead of justification, women found support? I believe it would change the way we view pregnancy and childbirth.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 12:49 PM


    Oh, I'm not upset about that. I'm upset about someone who knows nothing about me or my life calling me weak. It's completely unacceptable to me.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 12:52 PM


    Erin, Where did Jill mention you by name and call you weak? Seems to me you personalized this and it became a subjective claim and not objective.

    Perhaps your abortion had more of an impact on your psyche than you're willing to admit?

    Remember we are made in God's image and hence we are imprinted with His moral map of always doing the right thing. When we sin, the map is short-circuited and we begin to die. No different than a virus in a computer. When we deny that we have done wrong, we call God a liar. The fact is He can't lie and we become victim to a moral Universe. Don't let satan win against you. This is not your destiny. God loves you and wants you to come to Him. He stands at the door of your heart and wants you to open it.

    The only way out of your dilemma of guilt Erin is the love, mercy and forgiveness of Jesus Christ. The first step is to admit that you made a mistake and to ask for forgiveness. He cast no one out who approaches Him humbly and with a contrite attitude. Otherwise, you will forever be beating your head against the proverbial wall, not only here in this temporal life but in the eternal life that is to follow. Please do it while you can for you own sake.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 1:42 PM


    Translating Jill: Buck-up whiners!

    Holy lack of compassion Jill!

    Pregnancy, while natural, is physiologically demanding, permanently changes your body, and letís not even talk about raising the children once theyíre born. No doubt every mother here has employed rhetorical exaggerations of these burdens for the purposes of guilt-tripping their immediate family.

    Finally... itís not about abortion being ďbetterĒ than pregnancy silly moo.... that is a subjective thing which has no moral or legal bearing. Is this really how you want to argue against abortion? ďI like being pregnant?Ē

    By the way... look up ďironicĒ when you get a chance.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 1:43 PM


    "He wouldn't want me to sacrifice my mental, emotional or physical well-being for a fetus."

    so when they like being pregnant it's a baby, when they dislike it, it's a fetus.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 1:47 PM


    "Pro-choice women are wimps"

    "Modern-day feminists have degenerated into frail creatures, the very weaklings that sexists cariciature."

    These are generalizations that directly involve me, and I take great offense to it. This has nothing to do with my abortion- it has to do with the fact that I take great pride in my strength, which my own experiences have imparted on me. Jill generalized that all pro-choicers are weak and frail- as someone who falls under the generalization, I am bound to take it personally. I'm a very strong person and I know that- it's almost the only aspect of myself that I have absolute certainity in.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 1:48 PM


    Yes... I think I saw that in a medical dictionary... Like = baby, dislike = fetus. It also said religion = psychosis.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 1:49 PM


    Cameron,

    Your nacissistic shrill and banter is truly beyond comprehension.

    By your definition of compassion, let's just kill everyone who presents a challenge or hardship to society. You must be a real a--hole.

    My God, let's kill that thing because....[insert lame justification here].

    You're a f--king Nazi. You make me puke.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 1:50 PM


    Why is it that we have to be just like men in order to be equal? I've never understood this. The very definition of female: "of, relating to, or being the sex that bears young or produces eggs "

    We are denying our fundamental right to be women when we deminish who we naturally are.

    Equal 'rights' is one thing. That is something that should be demanded. But I am a woman, which means I bear young. No amount of spin is going to change that scientific fact. But for some reason we are seen as weak if we have to take maternity leave in order to have our kid.

    Men absolutely love the feminist movement. That is why there are so many men involved. We say we have a brain and you need to respect us for it, and then we pose for playboy so all can oogle over us. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,267873,00.html

    Has anyone here actually payed attention to the latest feminine comercials. "every 4 weeks we go through the bloating (girl sitting at desk not able to work) the cramping (girl sitting in bathroom not able to get up) and the mood swings (girl in bedroom not able to get dressed)". oh yea, that shows we are equal and strong doesn't it? Or how about Sally Field's latest commercial on osteoporosis. "My girlfriend has to set aside time everyweek in order to take her medication". What? are we too dimwitted to take a pill everyweek? What is that about?

    Do you really think that they would advertise men not being able to work, get up, get dressed when they are feeling less that fresh? (I couldn't resist that one, sorry) or have jock itch?

    This is what the feminist movement has done. We are seen as weak, feableminded, ditzes who can't even handle what normal life hands us.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 1:52 PM


    "Yes... I think I saw that in a medical dictionary... Like = baby, dislike = fetus"

    Cam, what they do is lie to themselves (using the word fetus) so they'll feel better and not responsible for the abortion.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 1:53 PM


    Gosh hisman... is that what Jesus would say to me?

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 1:53 PM


    "But I am a woman, which means I bear young"

    Apperently suggesting women can do anything other than bear young is "spin."

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 1:56 PM


    Yes, Valerie, because we are still seen as property, still don't have voting rights, and still don't get paid half of what men do for the same jobs.

    Feminism is about equality that acknowledges our differences and respective weaknesses, and one of the important aspects of that is both women and men coming to terms with each other's sexuality and biology. We are a hundred times more equal to men than we used to be- and feminism IS to thank for that.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 1:57 PM


    Cameron -

    Go ahead and read the rest of the post. go on, you can do it. Don't be scared.

    The spin you like to do is reading only one sentence and then making a judgment based on that.

    So, take your time. Read the whole post. It won't hurt you any. I promise.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:00 PM


    "Yes, Valerie, because we are still seen as property, still don't have voting rights, and still don't get paid half of what men do for the same jobs."

    what??????

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:01 PM


    "Men absolutely love the feminist movement."

    LMAO...


    Wake up and listen to your morning radio talk shows when you're on your way to work. Let me know if you here anything regarding feminism, other than disparaging remarks.

    Feminism, like ACLU, affirmative action, and any other number of things which have challenged the WASP male status quo, are popularly the subject of ridicule.

    Alas, I wasnít surprised to note youíre not exactly in touch with reality.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:01 PM


    Hisman "Your nacissistic shrill and banter is truly beyond comprehension.
    * * *
    You must be a real a--hole.
    * * *
    You're a f--king Nazi. You make me puke."


    Now, who asked the question about why everyone was so angered about Hisman's posts?

    Posted by: hal at May 22, 2007 2:01 PM


    Erin, I believe that the pro-choice movement has given a false definition of what strength is when it comees to pregnancy.

    I don't doubt that you are a strong person, but I don't think that abortion enhances strength.

    I think that abortion masquerades as strength in overcoming pregnancy, when the reality is that it weakens us.

    The entire pro-choice ideology has put forth the idea that we must not let a "fetus defeat us" and imposes that ideology on the very nature of pregnancy. Naturally, should abortion not be an option for whatever reason, the woman still holds the opinion of "fetus as bad".

    The pro-choice movement is demeaning to women because it tells us that we can only be "strong" if we forsake what makes us women. How is this power?

    Pregnancy is hard, but the reward is beautiful. Abortion takes away the beauty and leaves only the pain.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:02 PM


    I was being sarcastic.

    The reason none of those statements are true anymore is because of feminism. Feminists were the ones who got us suffrage, the ones who lobbied for labor equality, and the ones who showed that a woman did not have to be a mother to be a good woman.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:03 PM


    Erin, I agree with much of what feminism fights for. I simply do not believe that "pro-choice" is a feminist ideology.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:04 PM


    "We say we have a brain and you need to respect us for it, and then we pose for playboy so all can oogle over us."

    You all need to get your story straight... first the feminists are lesbian, Birkenstock-wearing, man-hating, hairy-legged monsters, now they're posing in Playboy?

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:05 PM


    Erin, those early feminists, the ones who worked for sufferage were all pro-life!

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:05 PM


    Cameron, come on. You know that there is a *huge* issue within feminism about pornogrpahy being either empowering or belittling. Just look at the fall out of the new book "Full Frontal Feminism". There are definitely at least two schools of feminism, and one of them is pretty attractive to men.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:08 PM


    The Pro-Choice movement empowers women because it gives them the CHOICE to have a child. If they want to have a child, wonderful! I hope that it goes wonderfully and they have a fantastic life with their child! But if I am a woman with a career taking every precaution against pregnancy, and do not want children, but concieve anyway, then that pregnancy will jepordize my career. This country needs drastically improved labor laws about maternity leave. Women who go on maternity leave who are extrordinarily promising are fired on a regular basis for that 3 months- sometimes more- of time where they can't work.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:08 PM


    ERIN! Feminists For Life is working for drastically improved labour laws for maternity leave.

    Do you realize that when to MEN went to NOW to petetion them to become pro-abortion (this was before the "choice" rhetoric came into play) their number one argument was that "Men will not accept women as they are. They will not accept women having children. If women wish to enter the workforce, they must do something about bearing children" (rough quote)

    Does this seem pro-women? NO!

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:12 PM


    Women should not have to choose between carrer and children. This is the number one premise of FFL. Abortion has served only to keep women in a place of lower class. We are not accepted "as we are" but only if we kill our children and deny our womanhood.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:14 PM


    "I think that abortion masquerades as strength in overcoming pregnancy, when the reality is that it weakens us."

    Um... speaking of spin. You wouldnít so happen to have an example in which there is a stronger-than-mother-for-having-overcome-pregancy invoked?

    "The entire pro-choice ideology has put forth the idea that we must not let a "fetus defeat us" and imposes that ideology on the very nature of pregnancy."

    Not letting the "fetus defeat us" does not appear at any of the pro-choice web sites. Again, you appear to be talking out of your @ss.

    "Naturally, should abortion not be an option for whatever reason, the woman still holds the opinion of "fetus as bad"."

    Wow... I didnít know you could get in the head of everyone seeking an abortion.

    "The pro-choice movement is demeaning to women because it tells us that we can only be "strong" if we forsake what makes us women. How is this power?"

    Again... example? Good luck with that one.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:15 PM


    "I think that abortion masquerades as strength in overcoming pregnancy, when the reality is that it weakens us."

    Um... speaking of spin. You wouldnít so happen to have an example in which there is a stronger-than-mother-for-having-overcome-pregancy invoked?

    "The entire pro-choice ideology has put forth the idea that we must not let a "fetus defeat us" and imposes that ideology on the very nature of pregnancy."

    Not letting the "fetus defeat us" does not appear at any of the pro-choice web sites. Again, you appear to be talking out of your @ss.

    "Naturally, should abortion not be an option for whatever reason, the woman still holds the opinion of "fetus as bad"."

    Wow... I didnít know you could get in the head of everyone seeking an abortion.

    "The pro-choice movement is demeaning to women because it tells us that we can only be "strong" if we forsake what makes us women. How is this power?"

    Again... example? Good luck with that one.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:15 PM


    Cameron,

    You can't imagine what Jesus will say to you.

    You really think I'm a wimp don't you Cameron? I'd be happy to meet you anywhere, anytime, for a personal one on one.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 2:16 PM


    My problem is that the Pro-Life side doesn't seem to accept women that DON'T WANT CHILDREN. I'm constantly hearing that 'children are a blessing'- I realize, children can be wonderful if you want to parent. I have a just as much a problem with saying women need to have babies to be women as I do with saying they need to not have babies to be a strong woman. This is why extremes frustrate me.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:17 PM


    Cameron, YOU linked to "Mrs. No Fetus Defeat Us"

    http://choice-joyce.blogspot.com/2006/04/let-no-fetus-defeat-us.html

    She just so happens to and publish Pro-Choice Press, Canada's only national pro-choice publication.

    It seems to me that the editer/publisher of the only national pro-choice publication is probably a pretty good spokesperson for the pro-choice view.

    It appears that speaking out my "@ss" is looking t your sources. Interesting.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:20 PM


    "You really think I'm a wimp don't you Cameron?"

    I'm flattered that you care what I think.

    "I'd be happy to meet you anywhere, anytime, for a personal one on one."

    Will you be bringing your daughter? ;-D

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:21 PM


    Cameron -

    YOU are the one that posted the pro-choice website that had "let no fetus defeat us".

    Please stop your ignorance!

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:21 PM


    Oh, for the love of...Cameron and HisMan are taking me back to my high school days. Testosterone really isn't necessary here. Stop it.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:21 PM


    Erin, there are many pro-life individuals who believe in voluntary sterilization if a woman DOES NOT want children. While we do consider every child a blessing, many pro-lifers do not think it morally wrong to reject a blessing. They see a difference between keeping a child from coming into existance and killing one that already exists.

    If this is the only thing keeping you from embracing the pro-life stance I encourage you to look into organizations such as Democrats for life which are supportive of contraception.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:23 PM


    Even at the web site Lauren, there is nothing negative about the fetus e.g. "fetus is bad... fetus underminds us...etc..." per your talking out of @ss.

    in fact, she clearly states her stand regarding the fetus:

    A. Fetuses are not that important.
    B. Fetuses are none of our business.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:27 PM


    My problem with the pro-life stance is that I simply cannot say that I think abortion should be illegal. There are far too many shades of gray. I'm very, very strongly for better education and distribution of birth control and very strongly for reducing the number of abortions. To contradict a common statement Jill makes, I am not pro-abortion- I would be thrilled if it were no longer ever needed. But there is subjectivity in every individual case, and I can't justify making it illegal.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:28 PM


    "If this is the only thing keeping you from embracing the pro-life stance . . . "


    Don't forget Hisman as a reason keeping so many from the pro-life stance.

    You can point out saner alteratives such as Democrats for Life and FFL. Still most pro-lifers here "love his posts" and don't understand why he makes people angry. Right Bethany?

    Here's a classic:

    "Your nacissistic shrill and banter is truly beyond comprehension.
    * * *
    You must be a real a--hole.
    * * *
    You're a f--king Nazi. You make me puke."


    Posted by: hal at May 22, 2007 2:29 PM


    Hal,

    You just can't understand the anger I feel when some one like yourself can be so glib about killing your own children.

    Who defended them? Who spoke up for them? It infuriates me and I can imagine what a Holy God feels.

    You think because I am a Christian I feel no anger. No I feel a lot of anger buddy at such gross injustice. And it's directed at wimps like you and Cameron who have no right to call themselves men.

    You are abominations to your Creator when you support the murder of innocent babies in the most sacred place next to heaven itself, the womb of the mother. To think that you did not even protect your own offspring. It's beastly and animal in nature. That's the truth of what you did Hal. It's cowardly. Face it, own up to it.

    Abortion is an affront to the creative nature of God, it negates God as Creator.

    Abortion denies the power of God to right a wrong, to show forth His glory, it negates God as redeemer.

    Abortion makes that which is good, the birth of human life, into that which is evil, the death of human life, and then calls it good, the very definition of blasphemy.

    Abortion negates the resurrection power of God as it takes flesh that is alive in it's earthly abode (the womb) and kills it, while God takes that flesh which is dead in it's earthly abode (the grave) and desires to make it alive, abortion's desire is to take that which was composed from the chaotic array of elemental molecules into a symphony of life infused with an eternal soul, and turn it back to the entropy of randomness, chaos, nothingness, uselessness, decay, death.

    Abortion is against all that is hopeful, all that requires faith for success; for it's solution; annihilation, it's goal; death, it's dream; breaking God's heart, it's vision, satan's ultimate power.

    Abortion is a counterfeit, for the clawprints of satan are everywhere to be found in its performance; abortion disguises hate as love, bondage as freedom, choice as maturity, sin as righteousness, political correctness as wisdom.
    Abortion pits men against women, mothers against their children, fathers against God.

    Yes, abortion is satan's feeble attempt at killing God himself, for abortion is a metaphor for satan; it is his coat of arms, his family crest, his logo, his brand, it belongs to him......for he laughs at its willing proponents as they craft their own self-destruction, mantled in self-deception.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 2:30 PM


    Oh that's just your opinion HisMan!

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:32 PM


    Hmm. To degrade a human being as "not that important" speaks pretty clearly as a negative attitude.

    If I said I do not believe you life to be of much import, would you consider me to view you in positive terms?

    Her next statement proves my point. She concludes that fetuses have whatever value the mother decides. She has already said that this is "not much". Her views on fetuses are pretty low, which I'm sure carries into her personal life.

    Because I am talking of those in leadership and how their views influence others, Joyce is a clear example.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:32 PM


    Erin -

    yes, old fashion femininism. Not what we have today.

    Let's see...

    Susan B. Anthony went to jail because she tried to vote in an election. Her involvment in the women's movement at that time allowed for all women to vote. She was pro-life.

    Elizabeth Blackwell - 1st woman to receive a medical degree. She was pro-life.

    Frances Willard - 1st woman to become a college president. She was pro-life.

    Victoria Woodhull - 1st woman to be a presidential candidate. She was pro-life.

    Eleanor Kirk - novelist, she endured 10 years of an abusive marriage before her husband deserted her. She was one of the strongest suffragist voices for the unborn.

    Dr. Charlotte Lozier - Her arguments and persistance is what led to women being allowed Bellvue hospital to be open to female medical student. She was pro-life.


    These are the founders of feminism. If it weren't for them we wouldn't be voting. We wouldn't have fair wages. We wouldn't be getting an education. They were all pro-life.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:32 PM


    Erin, I used to agree with you about illegality not being the best solution to abortion. Can I ask you why you believe this is not the best course of action?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:33 PM


    HisMan-

    It's God. If I actually understand the concept of God, if he's really that mad at us, he could do some wicked-smiting. And about us 'going against God's plan'- that's also apparently impossible. If we are offending God, he can send us to hell, or kill our pets, or something. God isn't helpless, from what I understand.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:34 PM


    Erin,

    Testosterone no. Righteous indignation, absolutely, against these creeps who hate women.

    Imposters who pretend to be knights in shining armor but in their free time joyfully play with themselves.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 2:34 PM


    Hisman, if Holy God doesn't like what I did, he can deal with me. Anywhere, anytime, for a personal one on one.

    My "glibness" is part to provoke you (for fun) and part because I am at peace with my/our decision. I have no guilt about it, thousands of people do it every day, and it was the best decision for us at the time. I have two wonderful children that I am an exceptional father to. You can call me a wimp all you want, but I'm happy and well adjusted.

    Posted by: hal at May 22, 2007 2:37 PM


    Lauren- I believe that illegality would prove dangerous(oh, man, I'm going to get reamed for this one, lifers hate that) to women who try to get illegal abortions, and because I honestly do not think that it is criminal. I really don't believe that it is the killing of a baby- I believe that it is the termination of a pregnancy. This is where I split so heavily from lifers. I believe that every individual's case is their individual case, and if they don't want to carry a fetus to term, I have no right to say that they have to.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:39 PM


    Hal,

    Should aborting a 39 week old fetus be illegal?

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:40 PM


    OMG, Hisman, now you have a problem wtih people joyfully playing with themselves?

    Were you really born in 1300?

    Posted by: hal at May 22, 2007 2:40 PM


    Lauren...
    Choice Joyce's stance reflects humanity's throughout the ages...and it is direct oposition to the novel and recent manifestation of this fetus-centrism typified by the prolife camp.

    Society's view of the fetus is, has been, and will be, in no uncertain terms and ostensibly so, "not that important." Nobody calls CSI when there is a misscarriage... nobody has funerals for the misscarried... nobody registers the fetus as a citizen upon conception... etc....

    Choice Joyce does not making destruction of fetus a necesity for the purposes of keeping women strong... per your talking out of @ss.

    You need a different example to support your tenuous spin.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:41 PM


    Lauren...
    Choice Joyce's stance reflects humanity's throughout the ages...and it is direct oposition to the novel and recent manifestation of this fetus-centrism typified by the prolife camp.

    Society's view of the fetus is, has been, and will be, in no uncertain terms and ostensibly so, "not that important." Nobody calls CSI when there is a misscarriage... nobody has funerals for the misscarried... nobody registers the fetus as a citizen upon conception... etc....

    Choice Joyce does not making destruction of fetus a necesity for the purposes of keeping women strong... per your talking out of @ss.

    You need a different example to support your tenuous spin.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:41 PM


    HisMan! You challenged Cameron to a fight! If that isn't testosterone-ridden show-offy boy behavior, I don't know what it.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:42 PM


    Erin,

    are coming over to the pro-life side now?

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:43 PM


    "Imposters who ... in their free time joyfully play with themselves. "

    *gulp

    Guilty as charged!

    ;-D

    But if you'd just hook me up with your daughter HisMan....

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:43 PM


    jasper-

    why always with that same exact question?

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:43 PM


    Jasper,

    so, if I say yes, you'll say, "how about 38 weeks?" then we'll go on and on until your clever arguments make me see that there is no principled way to draw a line after conception. Or, I'll say no, and you'll ask, then why not five minutes after birth? And I'll see the light and repent my evil ways.

    No thanks.

    I think the best practice is to leave the decision to a woman (who I credit with being a moral and intellegent being) and her doctor (same).

    Posted by: Hal at May 22, 2007 2:45 PM


    because if a 39 week old "fetus" (baby) can't be aborted, why should a 1 week old.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:45 PM


    Erin, I believe that better support for pregnant and parenting women must coincide with a ban on abortion. As a country we have become reliant on abortion, and we must do everything possible to help ease the backlash from illegalization.

    I believe that this will greatly help women in our country because it will force employeers to accept women "as is" without the added "benefit" of abortion.

    May I ask you what exactly you believe is removed during an abortion. It's not a tric question, I just would like to see how you feel about what a fetus actually "is".

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:46 PM


    Hal:

    I'm trying to save lives and you're pushing buttons.

    That's sick not well adjusted.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 2:47 PM


    Yes... if an 16 year old can drive... why not a 3 year old?

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:47 PM


    Sorry jasper- my convictions will take a long time and a lot of empirical proof to overturn. I really do enjoy exchanging ideas with you guys...well, everyone except HisMan...and who knows what will happen in time? I may convert- as may you. I don't think anything is carved in stone.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:49 PM


    A 3 year old can't see out the windshield. Next ingnorant question...

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:49 PM


    "I'm trying to save lives and you're pushing buttons."

    LMAO. How many lives have you saved today threatening battery online?

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:49 PM


    I'm trying to save lives too. quality and quantity.

    Many many women believe the quality of their lives, or their life itself, was saved by safe and legal access to abortion.

    Posted by: hal at May 22, 2007 2:50 PM


    Cameron,

    If you were half a man, you'd be willing to say that to my face.

    Whadya say boy?

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 2:50 PM


    and a one week old can't breath.

    Next oblivious comment!

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:50 PM


    A one week old can breath. I saw my daughter breathing when she was one week old. Don't need any proof for that...

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:51 PM


    Lauren- I believe it's a potential life. A fetus. I don't deny that fetii have the potential to become a child- but until they reach viability, they aren't really a valid individual life in my opinion.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 2:52 PM


    "and a one week old can't breath."

    the mother is breathing for him at this point.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:54 PM


    Cameron, I mentioned NARAL's conversion of NOW, but you seem to have missed that part.

    As for "no one cares about fetuses", YOU don't care and you are projecting that onto everyone else. I know one person who was unaffected by a miscarriage. Every other woman I know who has had one has suffered greatly. Women want closure when their children die, and are often heartbroken when they miscarry and are not able to identify the remains.

    Indeed, there are many message boards devoted entirely to women grieving pregnancy loss. Doctors tell women to expect to grieve the loss of a child to miscarriage like they would any other loss.

    It appears that there are quite a few people in the world who view a fetus as a pretty big deal.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:54 PM


    What does viability change? Why does the ability to live connected to tubes change who were essentially "are"?

    In essance what makes us human? It can not simply be our ability to survive. So what then makes us human?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:56 PM


    "Sorry jasper- my convictions will take a long time and a lot of empirical proof to overturn."

    what more proof do you need Erin?

    what exactly are you looking for, what kind of proof?

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 2:58 PM


    I think the best way to demonstrate my "maturity," as opposed to antiquated ideals about male gender role, would be to just ignore you.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 2:58 PM


    Doublespeak Hal:

    What kind of quality of life do your two murdered children have?

    Cameron:

    Is that what you call a good ass whippin', battery? You are a solid wimp.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 2:59 PM


    "A one week old can breath. I saw my daughter breathing when she was one week old. Don't need any proof for that..."

    My Bad... I can never tell what you fetus-centric people mean when it comes to age... after all it's a baby when it's in the womb.

    Anyhow.. the point is that "viability" is the key word here regarding abortion.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 3:00 PM


    Cameron, I toy with that idea from time to time. Then I can't resist jumping back in.

    Of course, he hasn't called me out for a fight yet. Maybe he's afraid of me.

    Posted by: Hal at May 22, 2007 3:00 PM


    Lauren -

    According to Erin the life has to be "valid".

    of course, I have no idea who decides validity.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:02 PM


    Before I get accused of taking words out of text.

    Erin's statment:

    "but until they reach viability, they aren't really a valid individual life in my opinion."

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:03 PM


    Lauren- actually, our ability to survive is largely what I base life on. jasper- I do not have proof that you are right. I don't have proof that I am right either, for that matter, but my personal life experiences have shaped my beliefs to what they are, just as yours have. Neither of us can really prove that abortion is good or bad- we can simply believe what we so chose because that is where our moral compass guides us. The best thing that anyone can do is respect opposing viewpoints- and sometimes friendly debating does change minds. Sometimes it doesn't. Either way, I always enjoy debating here, because I feel that we both gain something from it.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 3:05 PM


    @HisMan: Actually if Cameron were under 18, a good "ass whippin' " would be considered "abuse". Violence solves nothing dude, it just pisses people off more.

    @Valerie: How are you today?

    Posted by: Rae at May 22, 2007 3:08 PM


    "Then I can't resist jumping back in."

    I feel your pain also. Most of the time I just ignore him, and Polly the Parrot (Heather4Life). However, sometimes I can't resist responding just to see what will happen next.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 3:16 PM


    Rae:

    No, a good ass whippin' is what Cameron needs. I'd be happy to oblige.

    How many more unborn children will die because of people like Cameron? Abortion is the ultimate abuse.

    Hal,

    Should I be afraid of you? Why, you gonna abort me too? Sorry, no chance, I can defend myself very adequately thank you. Grew up on the streets of NY my friend and have survived more than you could ever imagine. And if I couldn't defend myself my four sons would be more than happy to protect their father. Of course, that's why I didn't abort them because I was only concerned about MYself and MY quality of life.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 3:18 PM


    Yes, HisMan, you are very selfless. Good for you. We're all very scared of you being a big scary dude from New York who has 'been through more than we could ever imagine'.

    Get off the pedestal. Honestly.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 3:21 PM


    Hal,

    Cameron and you appear to be forming a band of brothers or should I say, stooges?

    That's good. Wimps need each other too. Maybe when your wife leaves you Hal after she realizes what a wimp you were to abort your two children in the womb, you can go cry on Cameron's shoulder.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 3:22 PM


    I think doctors generally make the call when the fetus is viable.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 3:22 PM


    "Lauren- actually, our ability to survive is largely what I base life on"

    how about if one's heart is beating? Is he alive or dead?


    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:23 PM


    "Cameron and you appear to be forming a band of brothers or should I say, stooges?"

    Dang... I miss the paranoid delusional stuff about us actually being the same person.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 3:25 PM


    jasper- this kinda goes with my stance on quality of life too, euthanasia and such. If a child can't survive outside the womb, it is not an independant life form. Brain-dead people have a pulse, and I don't really consider them alive.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 3:26 PM


    Paranoid-delusional implies some fear of you Cameron. And if you look at the posts where I said that, you responded as if you were Hal.

    As I said before and I will say again, I will be glad to meet you anytime, anywhere.

    I warn you NOT to mention my daughter again as I will take that as a personal threat on her safety and will have to deal with you appropriately you wacko.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 3:35 PM


    Erin, We are all only able to survive in our environments. Why is a fetus' ability to survive within the womb valued less than my ability to survive in Texas? Should someone who has adapted to life in Alaska be more highly valued than me?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:36 PM


    "If a child can't survive outside the womb, it is not an independant life form"

    therefore because it can't surivive outside of the womb, the child can be murdered? you said it was a child

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:36 PM


    I second Erin's plea to stop with the whole "meet me by the flagpole at 3:00 attitude."

    Let's have a bit of maturity, please. This is something of a serious topic, wouldn't you agree?

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 3:37 PM


    Erin, premature children require all the life sustaining interventions required of brain dead individuals.

    Viability does not mean ability to survive without intense medical treatment, only the ability to survive outside the womb.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:38 PM


    We're making progress, I think Erin is on the verge of turning pro-life.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:38 PM


    Jasper, you once again think that your word games are going to "convert" someone to the pro-life side, but you are just being ignorant. It going to take a lot more than trying to trick someone as passionate about their beliefs as Erin. I've read posts from her in other forums (or, at least, I think it's her), and she is nowhere near changing sides.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 3:43 PM


    "I warn you NOT to mention my daughter again as I will take that as a personal threat on her safety and will have to deal with you appropriately you wacko."

    Oooooh.. cyber line in the sand.

    What's your daughter's name anyhow? I think it belittle's her to just talk about her as your daughter.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 3:45 PM


    "I've read posts from her in other forums (or, at least, I think it's her), and she is nowhere near changing sides."


    I disagree with you. why? I could be wrong, but Erin felt an emotional connection to her baby. She instintively knew it was the wrong thing to do after it happened.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:47 PM


    Cameron, stop antagonizing HisMan.

    I WILL turn this car around, children!

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 3:47 PM


    leah, I can't speak for Jasper, but I am not playing word games.

    I am trying to get Erin (and everyone pro-choice) to look into exactly what makes humans "persons" and explain their views to me.

    The "pro-choice" elites have done a very good job blurring what is actually done in abortion and to whom it is done. While I don't doubt that Erin has thought out her views, I do question what the deeper meaning behind them might be.

    In a world where informed consent talks about removing a "pregnancy", I think we have a lot of room to explore just what exactly *is* removed.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:48 PM


    oh Leah, where did I leave off with you?.... Do you believe it is a life but OK to abort anyway?

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:49 PM


    "Erin felt an emotional connection to her baby"

    ... that's normal. You don't have to be pro-life to feel an emotional connection to your baby.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 3:49 PM


    "This is something of a serious topic, wouldn't you agree?"

    I think HisMan is actually being serious when he sez he want's to meet by the flag pole, however immature that might seem. As for myself goading him along.... I kind of feel like it shows/exemplifies they're true colors for all to see.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 3:51 PM


    C'mon Cameron.

    Give me some more fuel.

    You have no idea what I know about you.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 3:51 PM


    "that's normal. You don't have to be pro-life to feel an emotional connection to your baby."

    why would you feel an emotional connection Leah?

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:51 PM


    Ohh, Jasper. That made me smile. I like you.

    Yes. I believe it is okay to abort anyway.

    Let the games begin ...

    Competition is in the Darland genes, my friend--you are not going to win this! Competition and stubborness.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 3:52 PM


    I don't know, Jasper. I've never been pregnant. When I am, I'll get back to you, kay?

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 3:53 PM


    Cameron,

    Right on the money you wimp. I have had it with you and am prepared to deal with you.

    Say one more thing about my daughter and you'll find out just what I mean.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 3:54 PM


    I don't feel like classifying feminists movement so generally is a good thing.

    As I've said before, along with many people in this post, FFL is a great organization and defies the stereotype that pro-choice=feminism.

    Many times, it seems pro-abortion stances exploit any feeling of weakness or overwhelmingness to promote the view that killing life is the answer.

    Instead, we should expand the resources and solutions for these feelings so that overcoming the feeling of being overwhelmed for these women is more accessable, available, and viable.

    Posted by: prettyinpink Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:54 PM


    "Competition is in the Darland genes, my friend--you are not going to win this! Competition and stubborness."

    this is not about wining or losing, it's about life or death. Death for the most innocent and helpless among us. I would never compare this to any game.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:55 PM


    Cameron, Hisman

    I think it would be better for you both if you guys took a break and went outside for a bit. I understand that this can become infuriating, but this is not helping.

    I love you both, and do not like what I am seeing.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:55 PM


    Cameron:
    "By the way... look up 'ironic' when you get a chance."

    Jill, don't bother until Cameron I looks up one of Cameron II's big words, "synecdoche" -- and learns that having Cameron II try to get Cameron I off the hook for being stupid is bad form.

    Posted by: rasqual Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:55 PM


    Oh, but I would, because that's what you've been doing--you've been playing mind games with me, trying to trick me. Not going to work.

    And I'm in too good of a mood to let you get to me!

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 3:57 PM


    Leah, I really don't think Jasper is trying to trick you. Do your initial answers to his question make you feel like you're being tricked?

    I believe he's trying to get you to evaluate your beliefs. If they're solid this should reinforce them. Go past the initial "trick instinct" and look into what he's saying.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 3:59 PM


    For Chrissake, I go to take a shower and all blazes breaks loose. Knock it OFF you two. And Leah is right, I'm not remotely near changing sides- but just because I don't intend to change sides doesn't mean I don't honestly appreciate and listen to what you have to say.

    You are correct- I felt an emotional connection to the fetus inside me while I was pregnant. Actually, I even named it before I hit myself with a metaphoric 2x4 and woke myself up. Like all emotions, it was hormone based- and I really honestly don't feel any regret about terminating it. I knew that it was right for me. The ONLY thing that being pregnant changed about me was the fact that I now think that sometime in the future I may want children. I never did before. It jumpstarted my biological clock, heh!

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:01 PM


    Oh, for heaven's sakes.

    Cameron, please stop cyber-ogling HisMan's daugher.

    HisMan, please stop threatening Cameron.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:01 PM


    Better yet, look to what your heart tells you when you are asked the question and then ask "why?". Don't settle for "It's a trick!"

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:02 PM


    Lauren,

    I will deal with this coward in my own way. He thinks he's anonymous on this website. He should think again.

    I have done a lot of searching on my own and I know who he is, by trial and error. His sick comments can be found on other websites. They are mirror images of each other. He's not too smart.

    I can shut him down in a heartbeat so he'd better take my words seriously.

    You see, this is the only things these wimps understand.

    He thinks he can bully Heatehr4Life and who he calls Gestatorof3 and Jill and constantly get away with it.

    If he says one more thing about my daughter, that will be it. It's the line that he crosses and he'll go sreaming home to his mommy, I guarantee it.

    His superiors will end up dealing with him

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 4:03 PM


    Oh, I certainly don't feel like I'm being tricked. I just recognize an attempt.

    I've evaluated and reevaluated my beliefs many times--which is why I am pro-choice now. I used to be pro-life, you see. So I know all the pro-life arguments and I understand them. I don't need them pointed out to me--I get it.

    All I see in Jasper's questions are the questions themselves. I see no deep meaning. Yes. I have looked.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:03 PM


    You guys do realize this is the internet, right? Threatening people over the internet... that's rather ridiculous.

    Posted by: Megan at May 22, 2007 4:03 PM


    Frankly, HisMan, Iíd date Cameron or Hal before you. I like being treated as an equal, with enough brain mass to decide what I do with my own body, thanks. And frankly, your testosterone-ridden calls to one on one combat are laughable. When one resorts to violence, one has failed in all other aspects of debate. Who was it, again, who said to turn the other cheek?

    I would also like to point out that, as a black belt in martial arts, willingness, even enthusiasm to resort to violence is as sure a sign of weakness as there ever was.

    As someone who was quoted in this post (my words were twisted, as I shall explain) I feel the urge to at the very least, clarify the statements.

    If I became pregnant while abortion was outlawed, I would find every possible way to end the condition. I dislike being pregnant, and dislike the weakened state it puts me in. My career and life are quite fast paced, and as I have the (enjoyable) tendency to put myself in dangerous situations to get a story, pregnancy would have an incredible impact upon my life. As journalism, particularly print journalism, is still predominantly male, becoming pregnant could impact my career in other ways.

    Between the fact that pregnancy would leave me unable to cover the stories I choose and could impact how I am seen within my job, I have no desire to become pregnant. As I am using two forms of contraception, know how to use both expertly, and am in a long-term relationship, I see no reason to abstain. If, however, I am one of the unlucky few who has contraception fail them, I will seek an abortion for the reasons mentioned above.

    If circumstances were different, I could carry a pregnancy to term, assuming I havenít inherited any of the persistent family problems doing so. But as of now, I have no desire to. It isnít a flaw in my personality, or some imaginary ďweakness.Ē I just donít want kids. I donít see anything wrong with that, and Iím sorry you do.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:04 PM


    HisMan, that is seriously frightening. It's the internet. Calm down. I know who Cameron is too, by chance, and at this point I'm seriously considering warning the local authorities. Stop.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:05 PM


    Erin,

    He has made threats against my daughter. If you think I take those lightly forget it.

    If he can abort a human being in the womb, why do you thnk he would stop at hurting my daughter or anybody's daughter?

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 4:09 PM


    Erin, I know that coming to see the child you aborted as a person would cause you pain. Because of that I want you to know that you have my support should your begin to see your child as more than a potential person.

    I know that you don't see that happening, but I with an open mind anything is possible. I do believe that you have an open mind.

    Like Leah, I beg you not to think I'm trying to "trick" you. I'm not at all. I just want to talk with you about your views and see perhaps if we can get past some of the walls that seem to have been put up.

    It seems like you talk about your pregnancy and abortion in very removed terms. I can understand why you would. If you're not ready to go past those walls, I don't want to force you to do so.

    On the other side of the wall is pain, but also truth. More than anything there is hope.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:10 PM


    He hasn't made any threats against your daughter. He has actually only shown a typical male interest of the opposite sex. You realize that someday your daughter will date, she will eventually get married, and will not die a virgin?

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:12 PM


    Leah, what were your beliefs when you were pro-life?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:12 PM


    Lauren--

    I am open to anything you want to throw my way. You won't change my mind, but I am interested in discussion.

    What I am not interested in is what was happening yesterday with the word games of unborn child vs. fetus discussion with the same questions being asked over and over again. That was ridiculous, and now that I look back on it--rather laughable!

    I am in much too good of a mood.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:14 PM


    What's got you in such a prancing-through-a-meadow-with-puppies-and-bunnies mood, Leah?

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:19 PM


    Erin, 12:36p, said: "But Jill, you have no right to judge me on how incredibly sick I was while I was pregnant. And NO RIGHT to call me a weak, frail feminist. NO ONE has the right to call me weak. I don't tolerate that, EVER."

    Sorry, Erin, You were weak. You were a wimp. You were utterly selfish. So what if you were nauseous? Honestly. You aborted your baby because you didn't like throwing up? That's not wimpy?

    Erin, 1:48p, said: "These are generalizations that directly involve me, and I take great offense to it. This has nothing to do with my abortion- it has to do with the fact that I take great pride in my strength, which my own experiences have imparted on me. Jill generalized that all pro-choicers are weak and frail- as someone who falls under the generalization, I am bound to take it personally. I'm a very strong person and I know that- it's almost the only aspect of myself that I have absolute certainity in."

    And you show your strength how? By aborting? That's demonstrating strength all right, brute strength against your own helpless child.

    Erin, 2:08p, said: "But if I am a woman with a career taking every precaution against pregnancy, and do not want children, but concieve anyway, then that pregnancy will jepordize my career."

    No, you did not take every precaution. You got horny and had sex and then you didn't like the consequence and aborted your baby. Was it worth it?

    Erin, 2:28p, said: "To contradict a common statement Jill makes, I am not pro-abortion- I would be thrilled if it were no longer ever needed. But there is subjectivity in every individual case, and I can't justify making it illegal."

    Erin, you're pro-abortion. Thrilled if it were no longer needed? Give me a break. You can't justify making it illegal because you need a fall-back plan. You also need to internally defend what you did. And why should it be illegal anyway? What's wrong with it?

    Erin, 2:39p, said: "I honestly do not think that it is criminal. I really don't believe that it is the killing of a baby- I believe that it is the termination of a pregnancy."

    You just said you wished it were illegal. Make up your mind.

    You are so lying to yourself, Erin. Not so much later you posted, "I felt an emotional connection to the fetus inside me while I was pregnant." What was there to emotionally attach to if it was just a pregnancy, whatever that means, and not your baby?

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:22 PM


    My beliefs when I was pro-life are rather vague to me now. I'm not saying this to avoid your question--believe me. It was a while ago, and I am now so deeply pro-choice, that I do not completely know what my beliefs were.

    I do know, however, that I believed--as most pro-lifers do, I imagine--that abortion was murder. I believed that abortion should be allowed only in the most extreme of situations--that a woman should have to go before a judge who would decide whether or not she should be allowed an abortion.

    In short, I believed abortion to be acceptable only in the case of immediate danger to the woman's life, and perhaps other extreme, rare cases--at a judge's discretion.

    I firmly believed in the alternative of adoption and I didn't understand the flaws of such a belief.

    I hope that is sufficient. I could try to go deeper, if you wish, but this is the basis of my thoughts at the time.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:22 PM


    I dislike being pregnant, and dislike the weakened state it puts me in.

    Less, have you been pregnant before?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 4:22 PM


    You pro-aborts may think you are allowed to kill your own babies that live inside you and encourage others to do the same and that without consequence. You fail to realize that this is not a game. Life and death issues are not a game. There are monumental physical and spiritual issues at stake. Posting on this website with the grossly inhumane, profane and sadistic comments against motherhood and unborn babies is intolerable. You all need spankings as you act like spoiled brats, allowed to say anything you want against a Holy God.

    Cameron trivializes life and death. If he thinks he can get away with this by taunting me with threats and insults against my daughter, he's wrong.

    Mention my kids and all the restraints come off. I will die to protect my children, especially my daughter.

    I warn him again not to mention my daughter ever, ever again.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 4:23 PM


    Leah, Thank you for responding.

    It seems to me what has changed is that you now believe that the murder is justified.

    You believe that the fetus is a life, but that the motehr has the right to end that life.

    What do you believe gives the mother that power?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:30 PM


    Erin--

    First of all, I don't think you're weak or a wimp, and I think it's disrespectful for anyone who doesn't know you to make that judgement and I'm shocked that the proprieter of this site would do such a thing. Namecalling. Honestly. If I have ever done so to anyone on this site, please accept my apologies.

    Second of all, I'm not sure why I'm in such a good mood. But no puppies, please. I don't like dogs. :)

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:31 PM


    Wow, I missed a fun one today! Darn work!!

    Posted by: midnite678 at May 22, 2007 4:31 PM


    Jill, I say again, you do not know me personally. You do not know several situations that I have been in in my life. You cannot judge me as a weak person. Especially considering that I know it to be untrue. I had an abortion because it was what was best for me. Was that selfish? Yes. If no one was ever selfish humanity would be a huge mess. I have a right to protect my own self-interest.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:33 PM


    Kittens, maybe, then, Leah? I'm more of a cat person myself!

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:37 PM


    Not at all, Lauren. I do not believe it to be murder, simply.

    Now, I hesitate to use this wording, for it has been openly mocked by Jill and other pro-lifers as pro-choice jargon, but I shall anyway because I find such mocking a rather childish approach to debate (much like name-calling).

    This "fetus" or "unborn child" has life, yes--as all the cells in our body do: skin, blood, etc. But, we do not mourn every time we wipe our hands on a towel and dead skin cells come off.

    I am not trying to dehumanize this potential life (that being the "jargon" I was hesitant to use). I am simply saying that while there is life, it is not life the way it is experienced outside of the womb. This is what is unprovable--when that sort of life begins. Obviously, as soon as there's a cell there's *something* ... but I do not believe that something to be conscious by any means.

    I apologize if this seems disjointed. It's rather late where I am.

    Thank you for the intelligent discussion! I appreciate it!

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:38 PM


    Erin--

    Yes, please, on the kittens! I love cats.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:39 PM


    HisMan:

    Serisouly why are you so angry at Cam? He wasnt "threatening" your daughter...(*Cough*delusions*cough*). He just asked if he could meet her, gyah!....

    Posted by: midnite678 at May 22, 2007 4:40 PM


    Sadly, society is a huge mess.

    Erin, you are right that we do not know the details of your abortion. You say that it was selfish, so it seems you believe that to be the case.

    I don't think that you're a wimp. I do think that you have put shields up to protect yourself. We all do.

    Abortion isn't the end of the story. There is so much that can be taken from such an act. i can understand not wanting to break the barriars down when it seems that you will only be met with anger and judgement.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:40 PM


    You know, this is all slightly ridiculous. You all like to go on and on about how "immature" we are, and yet here's HisMan threatening people over the internet.

    If that's a sign of strength and maturity, you all can keep it.

    The entire time I've been reading, I couldn't do anything but shake my head at your reactions to everything. It's the internet for Pete's sake, people.

    With that said, I bid you adieu. Maybe someday you all will do just what you've advised us "pro-aborts" of and grow up a little.

    Posted by: Heather B. at May 22, 2007 4:41 PM


    In all honesty midnite... I intended to get a rise out of him.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 4:41 PM


    HisMan:

    How old is your daughter anyway? I dont have my daddy fighting my battles for me anymore.

    Posted by: Grace at May 22, 2007 4:44 PM


    Lauren- to be honest, a lot of the reason that I am offended has nothing to do with the matters surrounding my abortion. It has to do with very powerful issues in my past that have made me a strong person. As for putting up walls, that's a way of life for me. PTSD is crazy like that. I have taken a very long time to rebuild myself after a few choice incidents in my past and seeing someone demean all of that the way that Jill has by one decision that she believes to be bad is very, very upsetting.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:45 PM


    Wow, Cam! I think you succeeded!

    For heaven's sake ...

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:45 PM


    Cam:

    I figured you did honey!

    *kiss*

    Posted by: midnite678 at May 22, 2007 4:47 PM


    I have just learned that my dear friend's son was killed in a helicopter crash.

    He was protecting our nation from the onslaught of illegal aliens crossing our border.

    This just goes to show you how fragile our lives are. We all need to be ready to meet our Maker.

    It is a fool who lives his life as if he were going to live forever, without so much as a thought of what might be on the other side and what consequences their actions my bring.

    Please pray for my friends family.

    Cameron, if you make any derogatory comments about this, I'll consider it a personal threat. And I couldn't be more pissed off than right now.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 4:49 PM


    "Wow, Cam! I think you succeeded!"

    Understatement of the day!

    I got a rise out him long before I asked about his daughter... simply by posting here. HisMan, absent any capacity for tolerance and thoughtful debate, follows-up with cyber-bullying... threatening to beat me... threatening to contact "superiors."

    Jill seems to think this kosher though, as opposed to my points and arguments which efficiently destroy the prolife arguments... theses posts must be censored, while cyber-bullying is fine.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 4:51 PM


    Grace:

    "HisMan:

    How old is your daughter anyway? I dont have my daddy fighting my battles for me anymore."


    I'm 36 and if someone was sexually harrassing me, as Cameron likes to do to the pro-life women on this site, my father would defend me. It's what fathers do.

    HisMan -
    I am very sorry to hear of your friends son. He is in my prayers.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:52 PM


    HisMan--

    I am very sorry for your friend and his family. I cannot imagine the pain of such a loss.

    I will pray for them.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 4:52 PM


    That's a shame, HisMan, my sympathies to his family. They will be in my thoughts.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:52 PM


    Leah, scientifically we define the begining of a unique human life as " amphimixis" which occurs with the fusion of the male and female pro-nucuei.

    Amphimixis is literally defined as the "moment of conception"

    Conception is of course defined as "beginning"

    Science defines amphimixis as the beginning of a unique human being.

    Amphimixis destinguishes the formation of the zygote from any other live cell.

    There is no scientific disagreement on this fact.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:55 PM


    "I really honestly don't feel any regret about terminating it"

    Really Erin?

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:55 PM


    Really, jasper. If I had felt any doubt that it was the right decision for me, I would never have done it. I made very, very sure that it was the best option for me. I considered everything else thoroughly. It was what was right for me.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 4:58 PM


    Erin, I understand about triggers. I did EMDR for PTSD, but I know there are certain things that can set me way back.

    Let me know if I hit any triggers, I certainly don't want to.

    Hisman, he is in my prayers.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 4:59 PM


    I am in agreement with cameron here. I read through the post and he didnt "threaten" HisMan's daughter, he asked to meet her. I dont consider that sexual harassment, threats, etc. It's a simple question.

    Posted by: midnite678 at May 22, 2007 5:01 PM


    Okay, Lauren. I won't disagree.

    That does not define, however, the beginning of consciousness--the sort of consciousness that makes human life so unique--the sort of consciousness that differentiates the life of a human being as a while from the life of the human's organs.

    That sort of thing is not provable. It is one of God's mysteries, and will always rest that way.

    That, in my opinion, is what makes human life so beautiful.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 5:01 PM


    Erin, IF some definitive proof came into existance that showed humans from the earliest stages of development to be persons, would you feel the same about your abortion?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:01 PM


    Lauren, I'm sure you'll be fine. Very specific stuff sets me off, and I doubt you're going to creep into my dorm and make gunshot noises :-) So no worries.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 5:04 PM


    Leah, Do you believe that all born humans have this conciousness? Would an anacephalic child for instance have this innate human quality?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:04 PM


    Probably not, Lauren. But then the definition of personhood comes into play and you've got a whole other mess on your hands. I also agree with Leah that personhood isn't really provable- or at least will not be for a very, very long time.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 5:07 PM


    Gunshots! My goodness. No, no worries there. I just didn't want to set off any triggers that might be sexually oriented (as is very possible in a debate about abortion).
    m
    m ,k

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:08 PM


    sorry my son is in my lap and he likes punching keys!

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:08 PM


    I agree that personhood is not necessarally provable at this point, but I believe there are certain permeters that we can agree upon.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:11 PM


    Lauren--

    I could answer you technically, for a start.

    Most anencephalic chilren are born unconscious and never regain consciousness ... so technically no.

    But I know that that isn't what you mean, nor is it what I mean, so I'll give you a real answer.

    I don't know, naturally. It is impossible to know--which is my point. My belief is that they probably do. An anencephalic baby is a human being, after all.

    Being a spiritual person, I do not believe that this consciousness of which I speak rests in the brain, but the soul.

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 5:12 PM


    Sorry, Erin, You were weak. You were a wimp. You were utterly selfish. So what if you were nauseous? Honestly. You aborted your baby because you didn't like throwing up? That's not wimpy?

    Thatís her choice, not yours, and frankly Jill youíre being incredibly judgmental and cruel. Why in the seven hells would ANY post abortion woman want to talk to someone like you? You claim that the pro-choice side had no compassion for women: look what you just wrote. Hypocritical much.

    Less, have you been pregnant before?

    Nope, and goodness willing I never will be.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:16 PM


    THank's Leah, you're right that I was talking about the concept of a soul.

    Actually, you answered it best with "an anacephalic baby is a human being, after all".

    These children do not meet our basic marks of functional personhood. They have no brain activity, no higher mental capacity, no ability to change their surroundings...not much of any "person like" quality.

    Even so, we recognize them as members of our species and they are afforded the rights there of.

    Why?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:18 PM


    Because they've been born. They've been born a human being and once a human has been born they are afforded rights. There is nowhere in law that says "Laws and rights not applicable to those born without a functioning brain."

    I think we agree over this point.

    It's late, but I'm interested in where this is going. I'll stick around for a post or two more ...

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 5:23 PM


    HisMan:

    You need to learn how to take a joke and act your age. And I am sorry about your friend's son. But you're not the only one who has loved ones in Irag defending our freedom (not just Cam's.). They're defending your right to judge him too.

    Posted by: midnite678 at May 22, 2007 5:28 PM


    So birth becomes the measure of who we are?

    It doesn't matter if we have higher brain function, as some have argued, but simply because we are born?

    It seems to me there must be something other than birth that gives us our humanity. To me it seems like saying that a joey in pouch is not a kangaroo, but out of pouch it becomes one.

    Does something occur when we change physical locations that alters our core nature?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:30 PM


    Nice one Less!!

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 5:31 PM


    Less, 5:16p, said: "Thats her choice, not yours, and frankly Jill youre being incredibly judgmental and cruel. Why in the seven hells would ANY post abortion woman want to talk to someone like you? You claim that the pro-choice side had no compassion for women: look what you just wrote. Hypocritical much."

    Excuse me, who's the cruel here? Less, you have an incredibly misplaced sense of compassion, although that is no surprise. You've already said even with complete support, you'd still abort.

    If Erin regretted her abortion, I'd be the first to offer her support. But she doesn't, even after admitting she had bonded with her baby before killing him/her.

    I repeat, who's the cruel one here?

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:37 PM


    All right, Cam and HisMan. I'm deleting all your posts from 5p on that have anything to do with egging each other on. You've both had your say.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:40 PM


    So, Jill, you only offer women any sort of kindness if they agree with your beliefs? What a conditional sort of kindness and caring! Aren't you supposed to love the sinner and hate the sin? Is calling her selfish hating the sin or condemning the sinner?

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:43 PM


    That is my belief, yes. Could I be wrong? Of course, it's very possible. Any one of us could be.

    I do have more to say, but I have to call it a night. I have class early tomorrow morning.

    I'd be glad to continue this discussion at a different time, however.

    Bonne nuit ŗ tous!

    Posted by: Leah at May 22, 2007 5:45 PM


    Cameron:
    "my points and arguments which efficiently destroy the prolife arguments"

    This would be Cameron I with his delusions of grandeur. Or taking the credit for the posts of Cameron II, whose proxy backup he seems to appreciate.

    Posted by: rasqual Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:46 PM


    Less, you've said several times you post here for the thrill of arguing. That's not why I post. I don't enter into debates without the hope of swaying opinion. Pick another target.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:50 PM


    I'll be here, Leah.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 5:51 PM


    Ohhh love the dismiss-rather-than answer responses. very telling.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 5:54 PM


    "All right, Cam and HisMan. I'm deleting all your posts from 5p on that have anything to do with egging each other on. You've both had your say."

    No problem. Already saved it.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 5:56 PM


    So, Jill, you only offer women any sort of kindness if they agree with your beliefs? What a conditional sort of kindness and caring! Aren't you supposed to love the sinner and hate the sin? Is calling her selfish hating the sin or condemning the sinner?

    Less, do you understand the difference between compassion and kindness? We can be kind to someone while telling them the truth, without having compassion on them, when they claim they aren't suffering. Does it make sense to have compassion on someone who's not hurt? Look up the definition of Compassion and tell me how it fits.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 6:00 PM


    HisMan,

    my prayers are with your friends family

    J

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 6:02 PM


    Actually, I may be wrong. Kindness actually doesn't fit either...unless you want us to be condescending to abortive women who have no regrets:

    Definitions of kindness on the Web:

    * the quality of being warmhearted and considerate and humane and sympathetic
    * forgivingness: tendency to be kind and forgiving
    * a kind act
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 6:03 PM


    "Really, jasper. If I had felt any doubt that it was the right decision for me, I would never have done it. I made very, very sure that it was the best option for me. I considered everything else thoroughly. It was what was right for me."

    then there really isn't anything left to be said. you have no doubts. I guess I can't understand why you're at a pro-life blog, because you're not going to be able to convert any of us here. We have the truth on our side.

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 6:09 PM


    Hisman: Do you think God in His infinite wisdom intentionally made pregnancy difficult so that at it's end, the birth of a human being, the mother would be internally rewarded with the knowledge that she did it, she faithed it, she endured? How much more would she value that child, having gone through the travails of pregnancy?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Wow! You have the Puritan "suffering is good for the soul" ethic DOWN.
    I don't have time to bother with it. Self-indulgence soaks up all of my free time.
    Speaking of women and suffering, life got a whole lot better for a lot of women starting about two hours ago:

    FDA approves Wyeth's Lybrel contraceptive pill

    By Jennifer Corbett
    Last Update: 5:25 PM ET May 22, 2007


    WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first birth-control pill that is also designed to eliminate women's monthly periods, an agency spokeswoman said Tuesday.
    The pill, Wyeth's (WYE : wyeth com
    News , chart , profile , more
    Last: 58.42+0.01+0.02%

    6:40pm 05/22/2007

    Delayed quote dataAdd to portfolio
    Analyst
    Create alertInsider
    Discuss
    Financials
    Sponsored by:

    WYE58.42, +0.01, +0.0%) Lybrel, contains low-dose hormones and should be taken every day. Traditional birth-control pills contain 21 "active" pills with hormones and 7 placebo pills. Women using traditional birth-control pills typically get a period a few days after taking the last active pill in a given month.
    Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. (BRL) markets two birth-control regimens that limits periods to four a year. All birth-control pills are designed to prevent pregnancy by stopping women from ovulating or releasing an egg. Other birth-control pills, such as Bayer Healthcare's (BAY) Yaz, can shorten monthly periods.
    Wyeth, Madison, N.J. applied for FDA approval of Lybrel in 2005, but the approval had been delayed partly until the company resolved problems with a manufacturing plant in Guayama, Puerto Rico, where Lybrel is made. Earlier this month, Wyeth said the FDA notified the company that the problems found by the agency at the Guayama plant had been corrected.
    The FDA had also sought additional analyses of studies conducted to evaluate Lybrel's safety and effectiveness and more data about the product's "stability."
    -Contact: 201-938-5400

    Posted by: Laura at May 22, 2007 6:10 PM


    "We can be kind to someone while telling them the truth, without having compassion on them, when they claim they aren't suffering."

    Oh... so calling someone a selfish baby killer is kind and truthful?

    "Does it make sense to have compassion on someone who's not hurt?"

    Like someone who aborted because the burden of pregnancy was too physiologically demanding on them?


    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 6:13 PM


    Laura, Yikes! I wouldn't feel comfortable with never having my period. I'd imagine there would be quite a bit of spotting involved. Also, what happens when you miss a pill?

    Of course, I'll never be on birth control again so it doesn't really apply to me anyways.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 6:14 PM


    His Man, I am so sorry! You will be in my prayers!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 6:15 PM


    Jill, you've nailed the "women are pathetic, weak creatures who can't cope" theme in abortion advocacy. Don't show her an ultrasound! She can't cope! Don't refer her to an adoption agency! She can't cope!

    As Rachel McNair said, how do abortion-supporting feminists reconcile their stand that women are fit to shoulder the burdens of the Presidency or of being Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but they're little fainting dainties who can't cope with the stresses of an ordinary pregnancy?

    If women are strong and capable, they're capable of handling pregnancy. If they're poor little pitiful creatures and we oughtn't to worry their pretty little heads, they need to get out the corsets and be honest about their Byronic hystronics.

    Posted by: Christina at May 22, 2007 6:17 PM


    "Self-indulgence soaks up all of my free time."

    LOL..

    Dito

    Posted by: cameron at May 22, 2007 6:18 PM


    jasper- I'm not trying to convert you. I strongly respect your belief system. The reason that I am on a pro-life blog is because I feel that everyone has things to learn from other people- that even without changing your beliefs to accomodate the other person, we can gain respect for each other and each other's views. I participate in debates like these on both pro-life and pro-choice sites because ideally, I know that there is a way for people to resolve their differences. I know that understanding the beliefs of others, while peacefully disagreeing, is the way that humans will hopefully, in time, live together peacefully.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 6:19 PM


    Christina -

    very well put.

    Midnite -

    I'm just curious about something. Let's say you were at work and some guy said some very inappropriate sexual comments to you. Then the next day, he just imply's the subject of the comments but isn't as forward as the first day so the people around don't know what is really going on. Does this mean that he was not sexually harrassing her on the 2nd day because he was just implying? or are both days considered harrassment?

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 6:26 PM


    Less, you've said several times you post here for the thrill of arguing. That's not why I post. I don't enter into debates without the hope of swaying opinion. Pick another target.

    No answer, then? Dismissing the question is not an acceptable answer, Jill.

    Kindness: noun:

    1. The state of quality of being kind: kindness to animals
    2. A kind act, favor: his many kindness to me
    3. Kind behavior: I will never forget your kindness
    4. friendly feeling; liking

    As kindness is the adverbial form of kind, I also looked up that.

    kind
    Ėadjective, -er, -est.

    1. of a good or benevolent nature or disposition, as a person: a kind and loving person
    2. having, showing, or proceeding from beneolvence: kind words
    3. indulgent, considerate, or helpful; human (often fol. by to): to be kind to animals
    4. mild; gentle; clement: kind weather

    Look particularly at the bolded phrase in the first definition, and the entire second definition. Would what Jill said to Erin qualify at all as kind?

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 6:30 PM


    Okay, how about these feminists that say that having an abortion empowers women? That sounds like such a crock!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 6:32 PM


    What thing did Jill say to Erin that was unkind? I wasn't here all day and there's a lot of posts. I may have missed it.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 6:33 PM


    Let me note something: I am not angry at Jill for being unkind. I'm angry at Jill for being judgemental. Basing a person's entire character on one act that you believe to be wrong is not appropriate in my opinion. I don't care if Jill is kind to me- I care that she does not judge me.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 6:36 PM


    I love the sign that asks 'Why must women have surgery to be = to men?

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 6:36 PM


    You can point out saner alteratives such as Democrats for Life and FFL. Still most pro-lifers here "love his posts" and don't understand why he makes people angry. Right Bethany?

    Why was this question directed at me?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 6:36 PM


    Sorry, Erin, You were weak. You were a wimp. You were utterly selfish. So what if you were nauseous? Honestly. You aborted your baby because you didn't like throwing up? That's not wimpy?

    That would be what Jill said that was so unkind.

    I think that Hal meant Heather on that one. She couldn't understand why HisMan is disliked.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 6:44 PM


    Less, "I loathe the thought of being pregnant, and I WOULD have an abortion." "Incest is okay too." Do you feel that you always say kind things?

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 6:45 PM


    Have I ever directly insulted someone, Heather? I would have an abortion: how is that unkind? How is voicing my personal beliefs particularly unkind, Heather, using the above definitions?

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 6:47 PM


    I would have an abortion: how is that unkind?
    That's kind of a funny question to ask a pro-lifer.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 6:51 PM


    I like reading His Mans posts. Once again, I am allowed to like what I like.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 6:52 PM


    I am pro choice. I choose to like His Man's posts. They are excellent!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 6:54 PM


    Less, you bashed me yesterday for voicing my personal beliefs. I think Bill Cliton is unattractive. I think Amanda looks evil.Just because I said these things, doesn't make them facts! This is called our freedom of expression.Whatever happened to our freedom of speech? You tried to make so much more out of it. You went on to say that I said that Amanda was ugly. I said no such thing!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:00 PM


    There! There you go Heather! I am pro-choice because even though I think that HisMan is a very predjudiced person and makes unjustified threats of physical violence towards Cameron, I support your right to agree with his posts and praise them if you so choose!

    You understand a little about how different views can get along? I don't like HisMan, but I would never threaten his right to post his beliefs here or anyone elses right to agree with him. Once people start telling me I HAVE to agree with what he says though, I have a problem. Or maybe I do agree with what he says- if that's the case, I shouldn't agree because I'm being forced to agree under the threat of being thrown out of the group, I should agree because that's what my mind has decided is the most logical point of view.

    It might seem kind of absurd, but think about it.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 7:02 PM


    Speaking of being unkind, Cameron takes the cake!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:05 PM


    Cameron, your new name is Geek Boy. Paybacks from Gestator of 3.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:08 PM


    Cameron...while attempting to do the moderation duty and delete your duplicate post, I must have deleted the other by mistake. I'm sorry.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 7:09 PM


    Try to keep up Polly... dropped Gestator of 3 some time ago.

    Here... have a cracker!

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 7:10 PM


    Erin, I have no bone to pick with you this PM, but I can't stand Geek Boy.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:11 PM


    I like Polly. It's cool.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:13 PM


    Well, as long as you don't threaten him with physical violence, you can laugh at him all you want. He's adept at pushing buttons. It's a talent, really ;-)

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 7:15 PM


    Morally bankrupt? Huh? You have US confused with you Geek!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:15 PM


    Erin, I wouldn't threaten anyone. Especially not an internet troll like him.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:17 PM


    I know you wouldn't Heather, you're a doll.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 7:22 PM


    Erin, You seem really intelligent. Why do you find his silly posts helpful? How do they benefit the CHOICE side? He prattles on about a lot of nothing.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:22 PM


    Erin, I must tell you that before I even saw your posts, he was acting like a total jerk. Name calling and all. By no means is he an innocent victim! Even pro choice Hal didn't want anything to do with him.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 7:27 PM


    Heather-

    I don't find Cameron's posts helpful. I know Cameron from another online community and he is intelligent- he's just not really on here for the same reasons I am. I don't come on sites like these to convert or to be converted, I come to share opinions in hopes of starting to reconcile people who thought that they could never agree on anything, and in hopes that I will show that A) Pro-choicers are not all absolutely unaccepting of pro-lifers and their ideals, no matter what, and B) That we can understand and respect each other without agreeing with each other's opinions. Cameron has different goals than mine, focused mainly on provocation(which I have actually been guilty of on occasions when I'm a little on the PMS side), but I wouldn't ever deny anyone the right to say what they want short of being blatantly inflamatory.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 7:29 PM


    Oh- and thank you for the compliment! As a 20 year old I feel a little out of my league here sometimes.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 7:31 PM


    Oh come ON! Enough! Knock it off!

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 7:34 PM


    Oh- and thank you for the compliment! As a 20 year old I feel a little out of my league here sometimes.

    Dont worry, Erin...most of us here are pretty young too...I'm 26. :) We all have lots to learn too!

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 7:38 PM


    I feel as tho pregnancy is one of the hardest things a woman could ever go through. I had such bad nausia that I lost weight until six months into my pregnancy and went into preterm labour (thankfully it was stopped with medical intervention). I am pro-choice, I feel as tho every person, whether man or woman, should have a choice about what to do with their bodies and their life. What I am having a problem with is grasping the linkage between woman complaining about the hardships of childrearing and being pro-choice.

    Posted by: Lindsey at May 22, 2007 7:43 PM



    Wimp:
    a person who lacks confidence, is irresolute and wishy-washy

    irresolute:
    uncertain how to act or proceed; "the committee was timid and mediocre and irresolute"

    confidence:
    assurance: freedom from doubt; belief in yourself and your abilities

    Wishy washy:
    weak in willpower, courage or vitality


    Selfish:
    concerned chiefly or only with yourself and your advantage to the exclusion of others;

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 7:58 PM


    "I know that there is a way for people to resolve their differences."

    not when killing the unborn is involved. one side is right and the other is wrong. the side who is against the killing is right. The are absolute rights and wrongs in this world Erin, you'll learn it sooner or later....

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 8:06 PM


    That is one thing I'll never agree with, jasper- absolutes. I may be a bit postmodern in my thinking, but people's sense of morality varies because morality isn't absolute. This is why both fanatical Christians and fanatical Muslims are equally dangerous- they both believe without any shadow of a doubt that they are right and the other side is wrong and they will never, ever consider that they believe just as strongly. Beliefs are something that should be respected. I believe this because of 5 years of abuse for my religious beliefs. It's sad to me when people completely cut themselves off from any other opinion, or from even respecting that opinion. I never said that you wouldn't be able to convert me- I do wish you didn't feel like you had to in order to make me a good person.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:14 PM


    This is why both fanatical Christians and fanatical Muslims are equally dangerous- they both believe without any shadow of a doubt that they are right and the other side is wrong and they will never, ever consider that they believe just as strongly.

    Do you think that it is absolutely wrong to be that way, Erin?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 22, 2007 8:16 PM


    Erin, We have all made mistakes. We all fall short. I know you probably don't want to hear my "mumbo jumbo" but you can be forgiven. You say you don't regret your decision to abort. I'm not too sure you mean that. It's called reading in between the lines.Just because you've had an abortion, doesn't mean that you have to remain pro choice. I can't change the way you think, but it's worth a try. Think about it.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 8:18 PM


    "This is why both fanatical Christians and fanatical Muslims are equally dangerous"

    Really? as an atheist, would you rather live in Pakistan or the United States?

    "Beliefs are something that should be respected."

    Erin, I have to confess. I believe that murdering people you don't like is OK. thank-you for respecting my beliefs.


    "I believe this because of 5 years of abuse for my religious beliefs.":

    what?

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 8:23 PM


    Heh...I know the whole, if there is no absolute truth, then there is absolute truth, because if there weren't any absolute truth, then it wouldn't be absolutely true that there isn't absolute truth. It's a bit circular, I agree. I do think that it is wrong that things are that way. Some people may not, and I will respect that. For example, three years ago, I was on a date at the opera seeing Madame Butterfly. It got out late, and my boyfriend Kurt and I had parked about a half-mile away to avoid the hefty parking costs. On returning to our car, we were mugged, I was shot in the leg, and he was shot in the chest and died soon after. To me, do I think that that was absolutely wrong? Yes. But something tells me that that man, although he may have had a few screws loose, did not believe that what he was doing was wrong, or at least that he believed that he was doing it for some reason that would justify his actions. For every individual, then, perhaps there is universal truth- but it isn't the same for everyone.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:23 PM


    Erin, You deserve to be set free from bondage. To me your posts DO show regret. I'm sorry if I'm wrong. You could be a great voice for the pro life side. This is my opinion.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 8:24 PM


    jasper- I am not an atheist, I am a pagan. I was kicked out of my house for a month when my parents found out. My best friend honestly believes that I am going to hell. I still love her, but it hurts to know that someone who loves me as much as I love her believes that even though she thinks I am a fantastic person, I am going to hell. I grew up in Georgia- paganism doesn't get much respect there. Nor, for that, much respect anywhere.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:26 PM


    Erin, why does your friend think you are going to hell?

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 8:29 PM


    I do not accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior.

    So, I'm going to burn in hell for eternity. :-(

    Makes me kind of sad, but hey, what can I do?

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:31 PM


    Nice definitions Bethany, any point to them?

    Not meaning to step in for Bethany, but there are some extremeists who are Erin. Quaker extremeists, for example, or Amish extremeists. You're not going to see them blowing up buildings or killing in the name of God.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 8:31 PM


    "Makes me kind of sad, but hey, what can I do?"

    accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior.


    Your problem is with Jesus, not your friend. Jesus said, the only to heaven is through me.

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 8:34 PM


    Of course, Less, I'm not attempting to speak for them. I'm referring to the rather frightening Christian extremists, like the ones in the film "Jesus Camp". Those children are going to grow up to blow up things, I know it.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:34 PM


    Whoa, medication set in a leeeettle early. That should say: Not meanint to step in for Erin, but some extremists just aren't particularly bothersom.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 8:36 PM


    I could screw up anything, Erin, I mean:

    accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior.


    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 8:36 PM


    I have no problems with Jesus. Jesus was brilliant. My problem is that I don't believe in the concept of divinity. I don't believe in hell- it simply makes me kind of sad to think that many more fundamentalist Christians believe I'm going somewhere to be tortured eternally, even though I think I'm a pretty nice woman.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:37 PM


    "Jesus Camp" --- another film which mocks believers. The film was made by....guess who??? Nancy Pelosi's daughter.

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 8:38 PM


    Erin, you seem to be nice! What do you believe in? What does a pagan believe happens when they die? I am being serious, because I haven't a clue.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 8:41 PM


    "Ohhh love the dismiss-rather-than answer responses. very telling."

    You should know Cameron as you never aswered this question I posed directly to you last night.
    Care to answer now???


    Cameron,
    Are you suggesting that a janitor mopped himself into a corner and died of starvation? A hairdresser scissored herself into a hemmorhage? Please. I think it is safe to say the analogy is murder. But if you don't want acknowledge them.....

    Why didn't you respond to the statistics below. Nothing to say? As Valerie pointed out, the pro-life movement does not endorse murder and has spoken against any violence. Anyone involved in a crime against an abortionist has been arrested.

    The point here is the pro-choice movement obviously covers up and advocates for violence and murder. You are pro-choice. Your side has done nothing to stand against this violence.
    PLease respond!!!! Don't ignore and divert my question. What about these statistics?????

    Also, 520 murders and 360 fatal botched abortions by pro abortionists, including;

    145 pregnant women
    360 abortion clients
    71 other women
    110 born children
    164 wanted preborn children, and
    30 men (including two pro-life activists,
    two abortionists, and a sheriffís deputy)
    Deadly pro-abortion violence has been reported at least since 1965 and is escalating rapidly, with an incredible 269 homicides and other killings committed in just the last six years (since 2000). 2005 was the bloodiest year, with pro-abortionists murdering 77 people, including 28 pregnant women (and their 28 wanted preborn babies), two baby boys, one little boy and five little girls, four men and two women, and seven other wanted preborn babies. The pro-abortionists almost matched this bloody slaughter in 2002, with 58 deaths, and in 2003, with 53 deaths. In fact, pro-abortionists have averaged more murders per year since 1967 (thatís 39 years in a row) than so-called ďpro-lifersĒ have in the history of the entire conflict over abortion!

    Posted by: Sandy at May 21, 2007 08:22 PM


    Posted by: Sandy at May 22, 2007 8:43 PM


    Great post Sandy!!!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 8:45 PM


    I didn't find it mocking, jasper. I find it frightening. I would never mock someone for their belief system, and I don't approve of it when others do it. I respect that you believe that Jesus Christ was divine and died for your sins. I wish that religions could all agree to disagree on certain matters. If I do not believe that Jesus is my personal savior, it will not affect you- just as you not believing that the forces of nature are beautiful and powerful will not affect me.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:46 PM


    Thanks Heather!

    Posted by: Sandy at May 22, 2007 8:48 PM


    Goodnite all. Very tired.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 22, 2007 8:48 PM


    Good-Night Heather.

    "I do not believe that Jesus is my personal savior"


    Erin, what devil drew you away from Christ?

    please read when you get a chance-->
    http://www.amazinggrace.com/Accept%20God's%20Salvation/dogoodpeople.htm

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 8:53 PM


    Heather: I can't speak for all pagans, because it's an unorganized religion that allows you to personalize your system of beliefs. Also, my choice in religion stems from me being unsatisfied by my religion(Lutheranism) at a young age and trying to find something to fit what my beliefs had come to be. I've always felt that my beliefs should be shaped by my experiences, not the other way around. But essentially, I don't believe in a god or gods- I believe that nature is in itself the greatest power men are faced with and that it should be treated with great respect. Not worshipped, but treated with great respect. The four elements symbolically come into play as a the center for my belief in how all things come in opposites- creating the balance that I find so important in everything. As for a concept of an afterlife...I think that that's the end. Our good acts and bad acts will live on in the memories of those who were affected by us during our lives, and though to you it won't matter whether you leave a good legacy or a bad one, I believe that it is everyone's responsibility to honor each other and strive to improve the world out of respect for where we came from- nature.

    That's always complicated to explain, if you've got any more specific questions, I'd be glad to answer them!

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:54 PM


    jasper- I have a problem with a god who will send innately good people to hell. I simply do. I can't accept or understand it. Plus the concept of a god just doens't make empirical sense to me. I'm all for Jesus. He was a great man with wonderful ideas.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 8:58 PM


    Erin, you can't believe Jesus was just a "good man":

    He was either a total fraud or He is our Load and Savoir. There are no in-betweens.

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 9:02 PM


    I'm sorry you feel that way about him, then. I think you can have good ideas about how to treat your fellow man without being the son of god. I think he did. I do believe Jesus was just a good man. So obviously, I can.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 9:04 PM


    please read why heaven is not possible by just being good:

    http://www.amazinggrace.com/Accept%20God's%20Salvation/dogoodpeople.htm

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 9:05 PM


    jasper- see, I just can't agree with that. If that's your belief system, and it works for you, then I'm thrilled that you have a faith that fulfills you. It simply isn't a faith that fits me.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 9:11 PM


    So, if you believe Jesus was a good. Why did he say "No one can get to Father except threw me" and "I'm am the Messiah, son of the Living God":

    As I said, you're problem is with Jesus.


    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 9:11 PM


    I believe Jesus had very good ideas about how humans should treat each other. Maybe he was a little nuts, a little eccentric. He still tried to teach a lesson of compassion and love, and I will always respect that.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 9:13 PM


    Erin -

    "I believe that nature is in itself the greatest power men are faced with and that it should be treated with great respect. Not worshipped, but treated with great respect."

    I agree with you 100% on this. (Of course, I put God in there as well.) But I'm surprised that you believe this. This belief is the strongest reason why I am pro-life. How is someone respecting nature when they don't respect how their bodies function? How do you respect nature when you are willing to destroy what she has helped to create?

    This is why I feel that we are destroying ourselves as a species because we no longer respect the power of nature. We are always trying to manipulate and control nature. But it doesn't work that way. SHE controls us. We have no power over the rain, the rising of the sun, or wind. And we never will. But for some reason we think we have power over how are bodies function, but in reality we don't.

    We put junk and waste in our bodies with what we eat and have the audicity to be surprised when we become obese. We use chemicals to control pests and insects and then get surprised when we get cancer. We take medication like it is candy and then can't figure out why our livers and kidney are failing.

    Nature always wins in the end. IMO respecting Nature means respecting how she created the world and us. We can't go messing with it just for our convenience. Like the new BC that stops our periods. Remember when the depo shot first came out. No periods for three months. Women went nuts! Oops, caused bone loss. So sorry, here have some more pills.....

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 9:14 PM


    Erin,

    Are you just rebelling against Mom and Dad? what turned you against Jesus. Did you just wake up one day and say, ah, I don't believe in Christ?

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 9:15 PM


    "Erin, 12:36p, said: "But Jill, you have no right to judge me on how incredibly sick I was while I was pregnant. And NO RIGHT to call me a weak, frail feminist. NO ONE has the right to call me weak. I don't tolerate that, EVER."

    Sorry, Erin, You were weak. You were a wimp. You were utterly selfish. So what if you were nauseous? Honestly. You aborted your baby because you didn't like throwing up? That's not wimpy?

    Erin, 1:48p, said: "These are generalizations that directly involve me, and I take great offense to it. This has nothing to do with my abortion- it has to do with the fact that I take great pride in my strength, which my own experiences have imparted on me. Jill generalized that all pro-choicers are weak and frail- as someone who falls under the generalization, I am bound to take it personally. I'm a very strong person and I know that- it's almost the only aspect of myself that I have absolute certainity in."

    And you show your strength how? By aborting? That's demonstrating strength all right, brute strength against your own helpless child.

    Erin, 2:08p, said: "But if I am a woman with a career taking every precaution against pregnancy, and do not want children, but concieve anyway, then that pregnancy will jepordize my career."

    No, you did not take every precaution. You got horny and had sex and then you didn't like the consequence and aborted your baby. Was it worth it?

    Erin, 2:28p, said: "To contradict a common statement Jill makes, I am not pro-abortion- I would be thrilled if it were no longer ever needed. But there is subjectivity in every individual case, and I can't justify making it illegal."

    Erin, you're pro-abortion. Thrilled if it were no longer needed? Give me a break. You can't justify making it illegal because you need a fall-back plan. You also need to internally defend what you did. And why should it be illegal anyway? What's wrong with it?

    Erin, 2:39p, said: "I honestly do not think that it is criminal. I really don't believe that it is the killing of a baby- I believe that it is the termination of a pregnancy."

    You just said you wished it were illegal. Make up your mind.

    You are so lying to yourself, Erin. Not so much later you posted, "I felt an emotional connection to the fetus inside me while I was pregnant." What was there to emotionally attach to if it was just a pregnancy, whatever that means, and not your baby?

    Posted by: Jill Stanek at May 22, 2007 04:22 PM"

    Ok, I'm making this one-time only post here just to put out a bit of commentary on what I've seen, and how it disturbs me that human beings can talk to each other like this.

    Now, I may be somewhat biased because I'm Erin's boyfriend and was the father of the child. I am pro-choice, and I let Erin make this decision on her own. I did not pressure her, nor did I force her into it. I gave my opinion on what I thought would be the best solution, and let her make the ultimate call.

    Jill, what you wrote to Erin was extremely judgemental and not at all presented in an educated and mature manner. It was like listening to a high schooler rant. Maybe radical college right wing, and that's being very gracious. Presenting yourself in such a manner is not only bad for your image, it puts you on par with ignorami like the KKK, or neo-Nazis. So far, from what I've read here, most of these people have been presenting themselves in an intelligent fashion, and you're presenting yourself like our dear friends, Mr. Phelps and Mr. Faldwell. It's this radicalism that drives the wedge between us as human beings, making us choose one side or the other. Personally, I think it'd be better if you all just tried to get along.

    Jill, instead of trying to attack people and judge them based off of something they've done that you don't agree with, why not instead sit down and have an intelligent discussion with them? Right now, what you're doing is the equivalent of having an argument with a three-year old who just says "No, you're wrong" over and over like a broken record, or an overly-biased parrot.

    Now, before I get called a coward, a baby-killer, and a hypocrite, I just want to say one thing in my own defense. I'm just an educated man with an appreciation and respect for the working class who is making a statement about what I've seen here today. I normally do not engage in these types of internet discussions, but after watching Erin on this website for hours on end, it piqued my curiosity and I decided to take a look. I believe that many of the people posting here are extremely intelligent and have a very noble agenda that they've put their faith in. That's great, and while I may not agree, more power to you guys. I do think, though, that some of the people on here are acting rather immature, and I couldn't help but to comment on it. I will not name anyone, with the two exceptions I mentioned earlier, so don't assume I'm making personal attacks. Keep fighting what everyone here believes is the good fight, but do it like the grown men and women that you are.

    Posted by: Dan at May 22, 2007 9:17 PM


    There are actually tons of natural supplements in nature that have been used since ancient times to induce miscarriages. And I try to be very natural, but when I have a migraine, dang it, I'm going to take the happy-pain-go-away medicine. When I got shot in the leg, I was not going to sit there and let it ferment. I was going into surgery. Natural medicine is great up until a point. And either way, a quarter of all pregnancies end in miscarriage. Birth rates are enormous- a few abortions arent going to cause a critical drop in the human population.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 9:19 PM



    This is part of the "Pro-Choice Homicides" list from Sandy's everpresent Human Life International website. What do ANY of these crimes have to do with the pro-life movement?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    ANDERSON: In November 1999, Pasadena pediatrician Kevin Paul Anderson strangled his business partner, neonatologist Dr. Deepti Gupta, a mother of two young children who was expecting her third. They were involved in an extramarital affair, and she was carrying his baby. Anderson was arrested by the police when a passerby noticed him pushing Gupta's Mercedes off a 450-foot cliff in the San Gabriel Mountains, after dousing her with gasoline, to make it appear that she had been killed in an accident. He confessed to Gupta's murder. In December 2000, Anderson was convicted of second-degree murder by a Pasadena jury (California).

    ARD: Joseph "Jody" Ard's 17-year-old girlfriend Madeline Coffee was 8Ĺ months pregnant with his child. In 1995, he shot her in the head, and then alleged that he was trying to wrestle the gun away from her to prevent her from committing suicide. In 1996, a Lexington County jury found Ard guilty of the murder of his girlfriend, and he was sentenced to death (South Carolina).

    BAIRD: On September 6, 1985, Arthur P. Baird strangled to death his pregnant wife Nadine in their mobile home near Darlington, Indiana. He then held her body and watched television for several hours. The next day, he traveled to the home of his parents, Arthur and Kathryn Baird, where he fed the chickens and received a haircut from his mother. Then he stabbed both his parents to death in their home, loaded up his belongings, and left the premises. On March 13, 1987, a jury found Baird guilty of three counts of murder and one count of feticide. He received a 60-year sentence for killing his wife and eight years for killing the preborn child his wife was carrying. Baird confessed to the killings (Indiana).

    BAKER: In November 2005, Jared Eugene Baker shot 19-year-old Olivia Marie Talbot to death in her home. Olivia was six and a half months pregnant, and her baby ó already named Lane Junior ó was due on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2006. Baker was charged with first-degree murder (Alberta).

    BALDWIN: Michael Paul Baldwin, 21, had a 15-year-old girlfriend, Amanda Lynn Hanson, who was four months pregnant, and he was not happy about it at all. So he lured Amanda Lynn into a secluded area, and killed her by jamming a branch an inch in diameter down her throat with such force that her tongue was nearly torn loose. Several of her teeth were also broken out. Baldwin then jammed sticks into her other body orifices, one 10 inches inside her body. After he strangled her, Baldwin beat her and crushed her skull with a 30-pound rock. Baldwin was charged with first-degree murder, rape, and several other felonies. He confessed and, in November 2002, he pleaded guilty to first-degree murder. Sheriff John Anderson called the killing "the most vicious I've seen in my 30 years in law enforcement" (Colorado).

    BATEMAN: Dennis Bateman needed money, so he decided to target the most helpless person he could find ó 21-year-old Brandy Waryasz, a gas station attendant who was seven months pregnant. On April 16, 2005, he stole a pint of brandy from the gas station, and was caught doing so on a videotape. Three hours later, he assaulted and strangled Brandy, and then stole the gas station's cash register with about $350 in it, as well as some liquor. Brandy had already named her viable unborn son Dane Anthony Hall, but he died on the floor of the gas station that day as well. Unfortunately for him, Bateman left the black nylon strap that he had used to strangle Brandy around her neck, and prosecutors matched his DNA to the DNA on the strap (Massachusetts).

    BEAMON: Donte Griffin had affairs going on with at least two women. He had fathered a child with Tamikia L. Beamon, and Antoinette Vanlandingham was six months pregnant with his child. Beamon went Antoinette's home and shot her. Beamon fled the scene, and Griffin returned about an hour later. He immediately called police. Beamon was scheduled to go to trial on June 20, 2005, but, on May 27, she pled guilty to two counts of first-degree reckless homicide. On July 15, Milwaukee County Circuit Judge David Hansher sentenced her to fifty years in prison (Wisconsin).

    BOLER: DeShone Boler was married, but was committing adultery with Emily Garrison, who was pregnant with his child. His wife, Crystal Michele, was understandably unhappy with this cheating, so she decided to take action. She went to Garrison's home, beat her up with a gun, bit her severely on the shoulder, stabbed her in the neck with a knife, and finally shot her five times (Texas).

    BRADY: Una Brady was just days from delivering a healthy baby. She had been married to Shane Brady for two years. On March 4, 2005, the couple began to argue. Then, in front of Una's two teenaged daughters from a previous marriage, Shane Brady shot his wife in the face and chest, then turned the gun on himself. Fairfield police Sergeant John, a 22-year veteran of the force, said "It's one of the worst [murders] I ever heard of. It doesn't get much worse than shooting a pregnant woman" (California).

    BREWER: John George Brewer and Rita Kathleen Brier had been living together for some time, but Rita, who was pregnant, wanted to end the relationship because Brewer was too dependent upon her. Brewer describes what happened on November 11, 1987: "I started screaming and yelling, you know, "Why think about if you were dead? I'll kill you." I proceeded to beat her, strangle her, pound her, throw her, bash her head against the wall, tried to break her arm so she couldn't claw my eyes out." Brewer bludgeoned Rita with his fists, bit her, slammed her arms against the sharp corners of furniture, and tried to gouge her eyes out with his thumbs. Finally, he strangled her with a gray necktie. She was 22 weeks pregnant at the time. Then he had sexual intercourse with her dead body, got dressed, walked to a nearby bowling alley, and called police. Brewer asked for the death sentence because he said he deserved to die. His wish was granted. Brewer pled guilty to first-degree murder, and a jury sentenced him to death in August 1988. On March 3, 1993, he was executed (Arizona).

    BROWN, ERIC: On January 22, 1999, the 26th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, pro-abortionist Eric Laquinne Brown of Pontotoc, Mississippi strangled to death his pregnant ex-girlfriend Shorlonda Moore and left the bodies of Moore and her preborn child in a burned-out car in Memphis, Tennessee. In November 1999, Brown received a life sentence for the murder of Moore and a concurrent 20-year manslaughter sentence for the killing of her preborn child after pleading guilty to the charges (Tennessee).

    BROWN, KASHARD: Kashard Omar Brown had a long history of abusing his pregnant girlfriend, Rebekah Hanson. He repeatedly held a shotgun to her head, beat her, and even beat Rebekah's mother, Ann Mayne. Rebekah had been to emergency rooms many times after Brown beat her. Rebekah was about to leave Brown because of his continued violence, but he would not allow this to happen. In September 2001, he threatened Rebekah with the shotgun held against her head again, only this time he pulled the trigger. On September 13, 2002, a jury convicted Brown of first-degree murder. Rebekah's mother said that "My daughter can hold up her head now and she can be proud. She had dreams until this cockroach came along" (Nevada).

    BULL: John Bull married his wife Sandra at Niagara Falls on February 17, 1998. On March 2, they argued, and Bull strangled Sandra to death in their Amherst home. Then, he returned to the American side of Niagara Falls on March 10, 1998. In full view of horrified tourists, he put on swim goggles, climbed over a guard rail, and was swept over the Falls. His body was never found (New York).

    BUNYARD: Jerry and Elaine Bunyard had been married for three years, and Elaine was ecstatic that she was about a week away from delivering their first child, a little girl, in 1979. But Jerry Bunyard wasn't as excited. He was carrying on an adulterous affair with a Tracy woman and thought his wife would "take him for everything he had" if he divorced her, a witness said. So Bunyard approached a biker-type boyhood friend, Earlin Popham, and offered him $1,000 to kill his wife. When Elaine Bunyard was alone in the kitchen, Popham broke an iron skillet on her skull. He then shot her in the head with a shotgun and tried to make the crime look like both a robbery and a suicide (California).

    BUTTRAM: Michael Willard Buttram met "exotic dancer" Tara Cantrell at a bachelor party and began dating her. They had been going out for about a year when she started seeing her former boyfriend, Jason Talley, and became pregnant by him. A jealous Buttram began to follow Tara and Talley, and eventually went to Tara's home and shot her and her mother Mildred multiple times. In 2003, a jury found Buttram guilty of two counts of murder and sentenced him to life in prison (Georgia).

    CALAC: On February 15, 2004, Andre F. Calac shot his pregnant girlfriend, Marlene J. Magee, in the head. He was charged with murder (California).

    CHASE: Richard Trenton Chase was an unusual child, to say the very least. He enjoyed capturing, torturing and killing animals, particularly cats. He could have grown up and made a lot of money doing exactly the same thing to preborn children as an abortionist, but he decided to take a different career path. In 1977, he shot and killed 51-year-old Ambrose Griffin "just to see what it was like." The following year, he killed Teresa Wallin, who was three months pregnant. Then he dragged her body into a bedroom and carved off her left nipple, stabbed her repeatedly, cut out both of her kidneys and sliced her pancreas in two. Then he retrieved a yogurt container from the trash and used it to drink her blood. The same day, he stole a four-month-old puppy, shot it in the head, and drank its blood. Two days after this, he raped and sodomized Evelyon Miroth, then shot and killed her. Then he murdered Daniel Meredith and Evelyon's six-year-old son Jason. Finally, he went to the crib of little 22-month-old David Ferreira and crushed his head. Chase took the body of baby David with him, cut off the little boy's head, and ate some of his organs. Two psychiatrists examined Chase, and he confessed to all of his crimes. The psychiatrists both declared him sane and fit to stand trial. He became known as the "Vampire Killer of Sacramento," and a jury found him guilty of six counts of first-degree murder. Chase was sentenced to death for his crimes, but he ended his violent life by committing suicide on Death Row. In 1992, a movie on his life was released. It was appropriately entitled Unspeakable (California).

    CICCONE: On October 23, 2003, Albert A. Ciccone and his pregnant wife Kathleen began to argue on the way back from a marriage counseling session. They both got out of the car and scuffled near the road. Kathleen then walked away, headed toward a friend's home in the sparsely-populated area. When she had walked about 200 yards, Ciccone gunned his turbocharged car and accelerated to a speed of about 40 to 50 miles an hour, then ran down his pregnant wife on the rural road Northeast of Tipanuk. The impact, witnessed by a teenager, threw Kathleen's body an estimated 50 feet through the air. She died instantly. Ciccone was arrested and soon confessed to the murder. He was charged with two counts of first-degree murder (Idaho).

    COPPERSMITH: Ryan Coppersmith had had enough of his domestic troubles, so he decided to kill his entire family, including his pregnant wife Angela Marie and their two children, a ten-year-old son and a five-year old daughter. On January 25, 2004, he began by cutting the telephone line to the house so nobody could call for help, and opened the natural gas line, filling the house with gas. Finally, he strangled his pregnant wife Angela Marie to death, then killed himself (Georgia).

    CLINARD: Christopher Clinard's girlfriend, Tia Vinson, was just two weeks away from delivering a healthy baby, but she wanted to end their relationship. According to Lieutenant Williams Watkins of the Springfield Police Department, "He became angry and upset because he told her that if he couldn't have her, no one else could, that he wasn't going to see another man raise his child." So, on February 20, 2005, Clinard repeatedly stabbed Tia until she and her preborn baby died. Clinard was charged with criminal homicide the next day. In May 2005, a Robertson County grand jury indicted him on two counts of first-degree murder (Tennessee).

    DUROUSSEAU: In late 2002, Paul Durousseau raped and strangled eighteen-year-old Nicole L. Williams and nineteen-year-old Nikia Shanell Kilpatrick. In early 2003, he raped and strangled a pregnant woman, twenty-year-old Shawanda Denise McCalister. He had also raped and murdered at least four other women. Durousseau was charged with seven counts of first-degree murder (Florida).

    EDWARDS: In April 2002, Mark Edwards stole some illegal drugs from the Bobish family, which then demanded payment. In order to avoid payment, Edwards went to the Bobish house and shot and killed 50-year-old Larry A. Bobish, Sr., 42-year-old Joanna M. Bobish, and 17-year-old Krystal Bobish, who was 28 weeks pregnant at the time. He also attempted to murder fourteen-year-old Bobish, Jr., who suffered a bullet lodged in his skull. Edwards was sentenced to death for the murders. In May 2004, Edwards was also found guilty of second-degree murder in the death of Krystal's preborn child, who was 28 weeks old and was sentenced to life in prison on top of the death sentence he had already received (Pennsylvania).

    FLETCHER: Lawyer Michael Fletcher was having an affair with Warren District Judge Susan Chrzanowski. Fletcher's wife Leann was pregnant, and he saw her pregnancy as a threat to his adultery. So, on August 16, 1999, he shot his pregnant wife to death and tried to make it look like a suicide. Fletcher was charged with first-degree murder. After a trial that was broadcast nationwide by Court TV, a jury found him guilty of second-degree murder in the killing of his wife (Michigan).

    FLIPPEN: On December 18, 2004, Earl L. Flippen, a member of the violent Aryan Brotherhood White supremacist group, had an argument with his pregnant former girlfriend, Deborah Rhoudes, then shot her to death. When Otero County sheriff's deputies arrived at the house, Flippen shot and killed Deputy Robert W. Hedman, Jr., who was standing at the back door of the house. He was then arrested by Deputy Hedman's partner, Deputy Billy Anders, who handcuffed him, placed him on the ground, and then shot him execution-style (New Mexico).

    FLOYD: On October 7, 2004, William Floyd Jr. threatened his pregnant girlfriend, Destiny Davis. Destiny went to the home of Shantelle Vickers, Floyd's ex-girlfriend. Floyd arrived at Vickers' home and began firing a handgun into the house, hitting Destiny and two others inside. Destiny died soon afterwards (Nebraska).

    FREY: Drifter Marshall Wayne Frey was dating Adrienne Anne Smiddy, who was near-term pregnant. One day in June 2005, she decided to break off their relationship. In response, Frey took her to a secluded area in South Nashville and beat her to death with a large rock, then left her body in a shallow grave. He later confessed to murdering her and led detectives to her body. A medical examiner determined that she had been about eight months pregnant. On September 28, 2005, Frey was charged with criminal homicide in Adrienne's death (Tennessee).

    GOINS: Even by pro-abortion standards, this case is grisly in the extreme, and perfectly illustrates the vile and murderous nature of anti-life thinking. 22-year-old Glenn Isaac Goins confessed to murdering 24-year-old Amanda Wood of Johnson City, who was at least four months pregnant, in January 2004, after police told him they had found her body in the basement of his mother's house. An investigator testified that Goins said "I did it. I killed her." Goins said he had seen Amanda, watched her a couple of times, and wondered what it would be like to kill her. Goins testified that he said "And I said "I'm going to kill you." She said "Please don't" or something like that, and I smacked her in the face and told her to shut up. She was sitting on the bed, and I took a towel and started choking her with the towel. I kept on choking her until she died." Goins then told how he stuffed Amanda's body in a sleeping bag and moved her to the basement, and then tried to clean up the scene. Goins then wrapped her body in plastic and duct tape. He said "I never felt bad about what I have done. Whenever I let her in my car, I knew I was going to kill her and nothing would stop me." Goins was charged with first-degree murder in Amanda's death. But hers was not the only murder he confessed to. On January 12, 2004, Goins was indicted in Louisville, Kentucky, on charges of murder, first-degree rape and first-degree robbery in the 1999 slaying of country singer Melissa Januskevicius, 20, of Stevens Point. He was also charged in two other cases of the murder of women. When questioned about one of his murders, Goins admitted that he "liked killing people." According to police investigators, at no time did Goins show a scrap of remorse for any of his murders (Tennessee).

    GRANDE: 16-year-old Brenda Paz was four months pregnant and was being sheltered by the Federal Witness Protection Program for her cooperation in investigating members of the notorious Salva Maratrucha (MS-13) street gang. She decided to leave the Program, believing she was safe. But, in July 2003, two MS-13 gang members, Oscar Grande and Ismael Cisneros, who both knew Brenda was pregnant, stabbed her 13 times, slit her throat, and dumped her body along the shores of the Shenandoah River in Virginia. In May 2005, a jury found Grande and Cisneros each guilty of capital murder. On September 9, 2003, U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee sentenced them to life in prison (Virginia).

    GREEN: On January 3, 2004, Lawrence Green savagely beat his pregnant girlfriend, 21-year-old Rashawn Peterson. He kicked her twice in the abdomen and then beat her with a broomstick and his fists at their home, causing her to go into premature labor at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. Medical examiner Dr. Michael Graham said that the beating resulted in bleeding behind the placenta, resulting in the baby's premature birth. He ruled the death a homicide. Rashawn named her dead baby "Rosie" (Missouri).

    GREIST: On May 10, 1978, Richard L. Greist, Jr. went berserk and fatally stabbed and strangled his pregnant wife Janice. Then he attacked his six-year-old daughter, Beth Ann, who lost an eye during the savage attack, and beat his 71-year-old grandmother, Anna Gresko. Then he took the time to cut an 8-month-old male preborn child from Janice's body. After being institutionalized for 12 years, Greist married Patricia Louise Griffin in May 1990. She said that she was not bothered by her husband's past and that she was looking forward to a good marriage. She committed suicide a year later (Pennsylvania).

    HACKING: On July 19, 2004, Mark Hacking reported to authorities that his wife Lori was missing after failing to return from a morning jog. She was five weeks pregnant. Nearly three months later, Lori's badly decomposed body was found in a local landfill. She had been shot in the head. Mark Hacking confessed to his brothers that he had shot her and dumped her body into a trash container. On August 2, 2004, Mark Hacking was arrested and charged with aggravated murder. On April 15, 2005, Hacking admitted to Third District Judge Denise Lindberg that he had murdered his wife (Utah).

    HAMILTON: In November 1981, 27-year-old Michael Hamilton gunned down his pregnant wife Gwendolyn with a shotgun on a rural road near Fresno. Her preborn child was killed in the assault as well. Then he tried to collect on her $100,000 life insurance policy. In 1982, he was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death (California).

    HARBIN: Frank Harbin Jr. and Kimberly J. Krebs were expecting a baby, and she was four months along. On November 11, 1999, Harbin went to Kimberly's Shepherdsville trailer home and stabbed her with a large butcher knife more than twenty times. She bled to death on the floor. Harbin was arrested the next day after a high-speed chase that ended when he crashed his car into a police cruiser (Kentucky).

    HELSEL: In 2006, 20-year-old Jaclyn Nicole Helsel of Titusville was six months pregnant and wanted to abort her preborn child, but did not ever get around to having an abortion. So she waited until he was born, watched him struggle and die, and then wrapped his sad little body in a towel and put him under the bathroom sink. She was charged with aggravated manslaughter in the death of her little newborn boy. The State of Florida had passed a Safe Haven Law in 2000, which allows parents to leave unwanted newborn babies at hospitals or fire stations anonymously. There was a fire station less than two miles away from Helsel's apartment, but apparently it was just too much trouble for her or her boyfriend to drive that short distance so that their little son could live. Police official Warren Van Vuren said "She also could have dialed 911. There were about three dozen other options than the one she chose. She just didn't want the child" (Florida).

    HENRIQUEZ: Christopher Henriquez held up a bank, and was afraid that his wife Carmen would inform on him. So he decided to eliminate her as a witness permanently. On August 12, 1996, Henriquez strangled Carmen to death, and then bludgeoned his three-year-old daughter Zuri to death with a claw hammer. Carmen was just four weeks away from delivering a healthy baby. In 2000, Henriquez was found guilty of two counts of first-degree murder and was sentenced to death. He now resides at San Quentin Prison (California).

    HICKS: In November 2004, Daruis T. Hicks and his girlfriend, Shawndre Fulton, visited a park in Northern Virginia. Shawndre was eight months pregnant with Hick's child. Hicks shot her in the back seven or eight times. In December 2005, a jury found Hicks guilty of first-degree murder. During his trial, Hicks came up with perhaps the lamest excuse ever heard by a Virginia jury. He said that he "... was teasing Shawndre with the gun, it went off accidentally and continued to fire. [Shawndre] somehow stayed in front of where the gun was." Ray Morrough, the Fairfax County deputy commonwealth's attorney, said that "I told the jury I've been doing this a while and I've never seen a good murder, but this is worse than most, and I meant that from the bottom of my heart, that it is worse than most" (Virginia).

    HORNE: Deborah Horne was awaiting the birth of her preborn child, whom she knew to be a baby girl. Deborah was, in fact, already overdue to give birth. In August 1982, her estranged husband Terrance savagely attacked Deborah, stabbing her in the neck, arms and abdomen. She lost so much blood that doctors could not save the life of her child, which suffocated before doctors could save her through an emergency Caesarian section. Deborah survived, and Terrance was convicted of assault and battery with intent to kill and manslaughter (South Carolina).

    HUBBARD: On July 13, 1999, Ernest Hubbard got into an argument with his pregnant wife Trijuana over an affair she was having. He took their three young children out to the family car, then returned to their home in Glendale Heights and doused himself and Trijuana with gasoline and ignited it. Both husband and wife were severely burned in the resulting fire. However, Trijuana and her preborn child died after lingering in the hospital for eleven days, but Ernest Hubbard recovered. On November 15, 2002, a jury convicted Hubbard of first-degree murder. Hubbard was sentenced to life in prison because the state proved that he acted in an "exceptionally heinous or brutal" manner. Laura Pollastrini of the Illinois State District Attorney's office said that "I think you can call setting someone on fire pretty heinous" (Illinois).

    HURD: Lorie Renee Hurd gave birth to full-term twin baby girls in the bathroom of her home. Then she stuffed them into a plastic bag, cinched it closed, and abandoned her dying babies. Hurd had had several previous abortions, and just did not want to be a mother this time either, so she performed a "fourth trimester abortion" on her babies (California).

    IDELFONSO: On January 5, 2004, Antonio Dejesus Idelfonso and Eliseo Marcelino-Quintero were driving their pickup truck past a woman walking on the road when she fell down next to them. They stopped to see if they had hit her. 32-year-old Tracy Owen, who was so heavily pregnant she might have even been in labor at the time, was lying on the road, crying for help. Idelfonso told police that he responded, "Here's your help," and shot her five times in the upper body. One of the bullets struck her preborn child. Metro police detective Robert Swisher said "In my 22 years on the job, I have never seen anyone executed, and I mean executed, because someone thought they had hit the person with a vehicle. It sickens me." Both men were charged with murder (Tennessee).

    JACKSON: On November 26, 2005, Sarah Marie Fay was found unconscious on the floor of a Fern Acres subdivision house, with severe head and bodily injuries. On December 1, 2005, Marwann Timothy Saad Jackson, also known as Judah Jackson, was arraigned in Hilo District Court and was charged with second-degree murder, second-degree murder by omission, kidnapping, first-degree sexual assault, second-degree robbery murder, sexual assault, kidnapping, robbery (for stealing Sarah Marie's car), and violation of a long-term protective order. Police declared Sarah Marie legally dead, but she was kept alive at the Queen's Medical Center in order to preserve the life of her preborn child. The little boy, Josiah Darcy Fay, was born healthy on December 11, 2005, and Sarah Marie was taken off life support and died (Hawaii).

    JAMES: On July 20, 2004, Cody James was riding in a pickup truck with his girlfriend, 16-year-Rebecca Lynn Johnson, and three other people. James and Rebecca started to argue, then James shot her once in the chest and killed her. Rebecca was five to ten weeks pregnant. On April 1, 2005, James was charged with first-degree murder and first-degree manslaughter in the death of an unborn quick child. James pleaded guilty to second-degree murder, first-degree manslaughter, and three counts of assault with intent to kill. On January 17, 2006, James was sentenced to life in prison (Oklahoma).

    JOHNSON: In May 2003, Robert Johnson used two guns to kill his pregnant girlfriend, 22-year-old Tamnika Powell. He told investigators that he fired the guns because he thought there was an intruder in their home. Their full-term baby boy was delivered by Cesarian section, but died a day later. On September 24, 2003, a Marion County jury convicted Johnson on two counts of first-degree murder (Indiana).

    JONES: Shawne Mims and Jennifer Penning decided to steal some drugs from Maurice D. "Riz" Jones, Harold "Mikey" Murray IV, and Ernest Reginald "Dinero" Morris at gunpoint. It was the last mistake they would ever make. Jones, Murray and Morris took their revenge in the most extreme way by murdering Mims and Penning, who was six months pregnant. They shot Penning two times in the face, and shot Mims twice in the chest with two guns, including an AK-47-style assault rifle (Pennsylvania).

    JURADO: Teresa Holloway was six months pregnant and happily awaiting the birth of her baby. Teresa learned of a plot by Robert Jurado, Jr., his girlfriend Anna Humiston and Denise Shigemura to murder a drug dealer. She made the fatal error of confronting Humiston about the plot. In order to silence Teresa, on May 15, 1991, Jurado strangled her and beat her to death while Humiston held her down. Then they dumped her body in a culvert, where it was found two days later. Jurado was convicted of first-degree murder, and a jury sentenced him to death. Humiston and Shigemura were both sentenced to 25 years to life in state prison for first-degree murder and for conspiracy to commit murder (California).

    KEEBLE: Sundance Medicinehorn Keeble was living with his 20-year-old sister and his 21-year-old girlfriend, who was four to five months pregnant. On November 21, 2003, Keeble deliberately stabbed his girlfriend in the stomach and savagely beat his own sister. He punched her in the mouth so hard she lost several teeth, and his girlfriend's preborn baby died as a result of his attack, although the girlfriend survived. Keeble was charged with fetal homicide, three counts of aggravated assault and simple assault. Brown County prosecutor Mark McNeary said "This was a heinous act. The defendant intentionally stabbed the woman in the stomach, causing the death of the unborn child" (South Dakota).

    KING: On September 29, 2005, Levi King murdered 70-year-old Orlie McCool and his 47-year-old daughter-in-law, Dawn McCool, using guns he had stolen from his father. The next day, he murdered Brian Conrad, his wife, Michell, and her 14-year-old son, Zach Doan, in their home. Michell was six months pregnant with Brian's first child. King also shot Michell's ten-year-old daughter, who survived and called police. King had stolen Orlie McCool's 2005 pickup truck and used it to drive to the Texas Panhandle. King then tried to escape to Mexico, but was arrested by Border Patrol agents the same day he had killed most of the members of the Conrad family. On March 23, 2006, a Gray County, Texas grand jury indicted King on three counts of capital murder. This was shortly after he pleaded not guilty to two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of Orlie McCool and Dawn McCool (Texas).

    KNIGHT: Richard Andrew Knight was a freeloader who was sponging off Hans Mullings and his pregnant girlfriend, 24-year-old Odessia Stephens. Finally, Hans and Odessia had had enough of Knight, and asked him to move out. Knight got furiously angry, and waited until Hans had left the house. Then, on June 28, 2000, he stabbed Odessia and Hanessia to death. He assaulted them with such force that he broke the handles on two knives (Florida).

    LARIO-MUNOZ: When Leoncio Garcia-Lopez arrived home at his Grand Rapids home on October 14, 2005, he found his pregnant wife Sylvia Sanchez dead on the floor and Edwin Lario-Munoz in the house. The two men battled with knives, and both were wounded and transported to a nearby hospital. Sylvia had been stabbed twice and strangled. Lario-Munoz changed his stories to police several times, and finally said to a detective that "When I saw her die, I was the only one there and I didn't want them to pin that [expletive] on me." He was charged with murder, intentional death of a fetus, and assault with intent to murder (Michigan).

    LEACH: On January 18, 2004, Dan Leach murdered his 19-year-old girlfriend, Ashley Nicole Wilson, who was pregnant with his child. He strangled her and hung her body in her apartment. Her mother discovered her body, and the medical examiner ruled her death a suicide. Leach left a letter written by Ashley near her body, which said that she was despondent because she was pregnant and the father did not want to help raise the child. This was intended to make people think she had killed herself. After seeing Mel Gibson's film "The Passion of the Christ" on March 7, 2004, Leach felt severe remorse for his murder, and confessed to it. He said that he killed Ashley because she was pregnant with his child and he did not want to be involved with her anymore or care for their child. Leach said "And so, after watching that movie, I was very emotional, and so I thought about the things I had done." Leach was charged with murder after his confession (Texas).

    LESLEY: On November 15, 1999, James Patrick Lesley Jr. and Ricardo Blonner broke into an apartment looking for drugs and money, and murdered nineteen-year-old Danielle Nicole Scott, who was just two weeks away from delivering a healthy baby. After Blonner cut her throat, doctors managed to deliver her baby, Kasiah Scott, who is comatose and lives on life support. On November 13, 2002, a jury convicted Lesley of first-degree murder in the slaying, and, two days later, recommended a sentence of life in prison for him. Lesley and Blonner both admitted that they were drug dealers. Blonner was also charged with first-degree murder in the case (Oklahoma).

    LETOUR: Michael Letour's live-in girlfriend, Jenny McMechan, was 36 weeks pregnant with his preborn child. She was just two weeks away from delivering a healthy baby boy. On New Year's Eve of 2001, Latour brutally shot her in the head and neck as she stood outside a friend's home in Plainfield (Connecticut).

    LINGLE: On January 19, 1999, Harold R. Lingle and two of his friends drove to the home of 36-year-old Erin Vanderhoef, who was just days away from giving birth. Lingle drove Erin to a nearby grocery store to buy donuts with food stamps. While they were gone, Lingle's friends strangled Erin's children, eight-year old Darlene, ten-year old Chris, and eleven-year-old Jimmy. When Lingle brought Erin back to her home, the three strangled her with an electrical cord as well, and her full-term preborn baby died as a result. One of Lingle's friends kicked Erin in the head so hard that he had a limp for several days. This was the worst mass murder in the history of Springfield, Missouri. Lingle was convicted on five counts of first-degree murder (Missouri).

    LIPINSKI: On August 10, 2004, John E. Lipinski pushed his pregnant girlfriend, Melissa Salvidar, out of a moving car. Her head was crushed under the wheels of the car. Lipinski picked her up and drove her to Sacred Heart Medical Center, where he gave three different versions of what had happened. Doctors restarted her heart in order to save her baby, but she died the next day. Since she was seven months pregnant, doctors attempted to save her baby. They succeeded, but the baby, who was brain dead, died 52 days later after being removed from life support equipment. On June 24, 2005, Lipinski was charged with two counts of second-degree murder (Washington State).

    LOSINGER: In 2001, Daniel Losinger murdered Vicki Soto, who was 8Ĺ months pregnant. He slashed her throat and then, in an act of unbelievable savagery, cut off both of her legs. Her husband found her mangled body in their North Platte basement apartment. He was sentenced to seventy years to life in prison for second-degree murder. In October 2004, the Nebraska Supreme Court rejected Losinger's plea for a lesser sentence, ruling that the vicious nature of his crime justified the long sentence. The passage of Nebraska's unborn victims law was passed a year after Soto's death (Nebraska).

    LOZA: On January 16, 1991, gang member Jose Loza used a .25 caliber pistol to murder his pregnant girlfriend's mother, 46-year-old Georgia Davis, his girlfriend's brother, 25-year-old Gary Mullins, and his girlfriend's sister, 20-year-old Cheryl Senteno, before finally killing 17-year-old Jerri Jackson, who was 6 months pregnant at the time. He silence his pistol with one of the young girls' fuzzy slippers and shot each of the victims in the head at close range. Roger Knabel, the lead detective in the case, said "The worst part was the young lady who was pregnant. When we were checking the body everybody assumed she was dead. I shined my light in her eyes and she screamed right in my face. ... She lived 15 days, just long enough to deliver her baby." Loza confessed to police and told them the order in which he shot the victims. He said "I done it, and I'm taking the whole responsibility for it." On March 3, 1991, Loza was indicted on four counts of aggravated murder and was sentenced to death on November 12, 1991 (Ohio).

    LUSTER: On January 28, 2003, Aaron Luster and his girlfriend, Christine Karcher, who was seven months pregnant, began arguing in his car as they drove down a road near the Pittsburgh International Airport. Luster attempted to strangle Christine, then pushed her out of the moving vehicle. She fell to the pavement, and was immediately struck by a following car. When police officers arrived at the scene, they found Christine's mangled body. During Luster's trial, jurors heard Christine's frantic cell phone call for help just nine minutes before she died. Luster's voice, encouraging her to jump from the moving car, was clearly audible. On March 26, 2004, a jury found Luster guilty of two counts of murder, one for Christine and one for her viable preborn baby (Pennsylvania).

    MACDONALD: In 1970, Special Forces officer Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald called the Fayetteville, North Carolina police department to report that his pregnant wife, Colette, and two young daughters, five-year-old Kimberly and two-year-old Kristen, had been murdered by a marauding gang of hippies shouting "Kill the pigs, acid is groovy." Kimberly's head had been smashed in and she had numerous stab wounds in her neck. Kristen had been stabbed numerous times in the chest and back. Colette's face and head had been cruelly battered. In 1979, a jury found MacDonald guilty of three counts of first-degree murder (North Carolina).

    MACGUIRE: Roger MacGuire shot his ex-wife, Susan MacGuire, to death in January 2001. He was angry about her pregnancy by her fiance and deliberately aimed at her unborn child. He was tried and convicted of two counts of murder (Utah).

    MANSON: Nobody more perfectly typifies the narcissistic, selfish, "anything goes" anti-life mentality better than homosexual Charles Manson of "Helter Skelter" fame. To people like this, people are mere commodities, to be used and discarded as they see fit. In 1969, the racist Manson plotted to start a race war by carrying out a spectacular series of murders against famous people. First, he ordered members of his "family" to kill music teacher Gary Hinman. They imprisoned him in his house, then stabbed him to death and used his own blood to write "POLITICAL PIGGY" on his living room walls. Voytek Frykowski was the next to die. They crushed his skull with 13 heavy blows, and savagely puncturing the rest of his body with 51 stab wounds, in addition to shooting him twice. Next, Susan Atkins approached Sharon Tate, who was heavily pregnant. Atkins said "Sharon was the last to die. [She said] "Please don't kill me. Please don't kill me. I don't want to die. I want to live. I want to have my baby. I want to have my baby." [I said] "Look, bitch, I don't care about you. I don't care if you're going to have a baby. You had better be ready. You're going to die and I don't feel anything about it." ... In a few minutes I killed her." Sharon was found with 16 stab wounds all over her body. Atkins had wanted to cut ther near-term preborn child from Sharon's body, but she said that "there wasn't time." The gang also murdered Abigail Folger by stabbing her many times and dumping her body on the front lawn. They also shot and stabbed Jay Sebring seven times. The Manson "family" concluded their night's deadly activities by scrawling the word "PIG" on the front door of the Polanski-Tate home in the blood of the victims. Last to die were Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. One of the Manson gang tied Leno's hands tightly behind his back with a leather thong, and stuck a carving fork in his stomach. They stabbed him at least 26 times. One of the gang carved the word "WAR" on his abdomen. They also strangled and stabbed Rosemary at least 41 times. Finally, the Manson gang wrote various slogans on the walls of the house in the victim's blood (California).

    MCGUIRE: On February 11, 1989, Dennis McGuire kidnapped, raped, sodomized and murdered pregnant 22-year-old Joy Stewart in a wooded area. McGuire was cleaning gutters on her house and she had just met him that day. The next day, hikers found Joy's blood-saturated body near a creek. While in jail for an unrelated kidnapping charge, McGuire tried to blame his own brother-in-law, Jerry Richardson, for the crime, but McGuire knew significant facts that were not disclosed to the public. McGuire was sentenced to death for the murder. In December 1997, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld his sentence (Ohio).

    MCGRORY: Michael G. McGrory and Matthew Eshbach had committed many acts of armed robbery, and operated an armed robbery "ring." In November 2002, McGrory and Eshbach went to the home of Kerry Schadler, 21, and his 20-year-old wife, Katherine, who was 20 weeks pregnant, in order to threaten them, because they knew about the robbery gang. McGrory and Eshbach tied up the Schadlers and forced them at knifepoint into McGrory's vehicle. After driving some distance, McGrory pulled Kerry Schadler out of the car and squeezed his neck until "his body went limp," Carroll said. Returning to the car, McGrory began to look for a place to unload the body. He stopped the car, put his arm around Katherine Schadler and started to strangle her; Eshbach finished murdering her. Then they dumped the bodies in Tow Path Park in East Coventry Township (Pennsylvania).

    MCKENZIE: On January 30, 2005, Lonnie McKenzie, Jr., attacked his pregnant wife in a fit of jealousy. He stabbed her in the back and the chest with an eight-inch steak knife, nearly killing her. She lost a large amount of blood and a kidney and suffered a collapsed lung. She also lost her 14-week-old preborn child. In November 2005, Lonnie McKenzie pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter and attempted murder. On December 15, 2005, Summit County Common Pleas Judge Brenda Burnham Unruh sentenced him to eight years in prison (Ohio).

    MELCHER: Zachariah Melcher's wife Christian was eight months pregnant with their second child. Their little son Zach Jaiden was eleven months old. On April 16, 2005, Melcher strangled his heavily pregnant wife and then suffocated his little boy. He then stuffed their bodies into a plastic container in their apartment's laundry room. He told police that he sprayed the bodies with deodorizers to "buy himself time." Then he drained Christian's bank account and went to spend it all in a Louisville crack house. A week later, police arrested Melcher, who boasted that he murdered his pregnant wife and 11-month old son "faster than you can open a can of Coke" (Kentucky).

    MENDES: On July 29, 1986, John Gomes Mendes strangled his pregnant 18-year-old wife Susan while their 10-month-old son was in the apartment. He convincingly staged a scene making it look as if someone else had killed Susan. He then spent all of her $150,000 inheritance money on his cocaine habit. Shortly before he murdered her, Susan told Mendes "My father worked too long and too hard for you to be doing all his hard-earned money up your nose." He was not arrested until 1999, after the Plymouth County district attorney's office began to review dozens of unsolved murder cases. Mendes was apparently relaxing more than a decade after his wife's murder. He had remarried and had told at least two people that he had killed Susan. In January 2005, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld Mendes' first-degree murder conviction (Massachusetts).

    MORRIS: On December 21, 2002, Edward Morris surprised his family with a trip to the Tillamook State Forest near the Oregon coast. He was with his seven months pregnant wife, Renee, and their three young children, ten-year-old Bryant, eight-year-old Alexis, and four-year-old Jonathan. At a pullout on Route 6, he shot his wife and two sons, then drove to a deserted wooded area and stabbed his daughter more than a dozen times. He then fled in the family minivan. Hunters found the bodies of the slaughtered family in the snow. Morris left the area and attempted to change his appearance by shaving his head and growing a mustache, but was identified and arrested on January 4, 2003. Morris was charged with seven counts of aggravated murder, because, in Oregon, the murder of a child under fourteen years of age counts twice. On September 20, 2004, Morris pled guilty to seven counts of aggravated murder and was subsequently sentenced to serve four consecutive life terms in prison (Oregon).

    MOSS: In December 2004, Bobby Joe Moss savagely beat his girlfriend, 17-year-old Michelle Harlan, who was eight months pregnant. Then he shot her three times in the back with a handgun. She was still alive even after this murderous assault, so Moss threw her into the trunk of his car and drove her to Carter Lake, where he dumped her into the water. Moss was sentenced to 65 to 100 years in prison. Judge J. Patrick Mullen said to Moss, "Shooting Michelle Harlan three times in the back is cold enough. To throw her in the back of the car while she's asking for help shows you were only thinking of yourself" (Nebraska).

    MOUKALLED: Jihad Hassan Moukalled wrote a suicide note expressing remorse over his gambling debts, then killed his pregnant wife and three young children, and wound up the bloody night by committing suicide. For two years, Moukalled had made weekly trips to Las Vegas and Atlantic City, gambling and losing large amounts of money. He had amassed over half a million dollars in debt (Pennsylvania).

    MYERS, CALVIN: On December 3, 1994, Calvin Shane Myers, his pregnant ex-girlfriend, Irene Christensen, and another man, Steven Paul Howard, were driving toward Park City shortly after midnight in heavy snow. They came upon an unplowed road, and the three got out and walked toward Rockport Reservoir State Park. Myers and Christensen embraced, and then Myers stabbed her at least 12 times with a rusty 4Ĺ-inch hunting blade. The two men then left the area, leaving Christensen in a snowbank. Her frozen body was found by a snowmobiler two weeks later. Myers confessed to the crime and was charged with two counts of murder. In February 1996, pled guilty to one count of capital murder (Utah).

    MYERS, TIFANY: On January 20, 2000, Tifany Ann Myers, who was baby-sitting for 21-month-old Joel Vasquez, shook him and slammed him to the floor, causing his death, when he would not stop crying. Myers was charged with first-degree murder. She filed a notice of diminished responsibility, alleging that an abortion she had had just two days before the incident exacerbated her preexisting depression. As a result, her mental state was "greatly compromised" (Iowa).

    NIELSON: Tabitha Bonaparte was ten weeks pregnant, but that certainly didn't stop her twin brother, Larry Ray Nielson, from stabbing her repeatedly in the chest and murdering her inside her Oaktree Mobile Home Park home. Marlene Starkey, Tabitha's mother, said "He tore her to pieces. He just kept stabbing her. She didn't have a chance." Starkey also said that, each time Nielson plunged the 18-inch long carving knife into his twin sister's chest, he cursed her. Police charged Nielson with first-degree murder in the brutal slaying. On July 7, 2005, a judge found him guilty of first-degree murder (Virginia).

    NIEVES: After mailing suicide notes to both of her ex-husbands, Sandi Dawn Nieves told her four young daughters that they were going to sleep in the kitchen in a kind of "slumber party." She bedded the girls down comfortably. Then Nieves, who had just had an abortion, set fires at several points throughout the house to make sure that her little daughters could not escape. All of them burned to death in the fire (California).

    NOAH: On December 9, 2005, John David Noah and his pregnant girlfriend, Shalonda Bendler, were in what appeared to be a fatal traffic accident. The Oklahoma State Highway Patrol initially believed that Shalonda died in the crash, but a medical examiner found that she had instead died of several stab wounds in the neck before the accident. Noah himself put on a convincing act, having suffered several broken bones himself in the wreck. On December 12, 2005, the McCurtain County Sheriff's Office filed first-degree murder and manslaughter charges against Noah (Oklahoma).

    NORIEGA: James Manuel Noriega's girlfriend, Kathleen Martinez, was just four weeks away from giving birth. In 2001, Noriega strangled Kathleen with a pair of black stretch pants, then smothered his two-year-old daughter, Savanna Zamora. He dumped their bodies in the tub of the motel room and then scrubbed the entire room with bleach to remove fingerprints. In 2005, a jury found Noriega guilty of two counts of first-degree murder (California).

    NOWELL: In June 2002, Willie Nowell and Jermaine Bellamy locked 475-pound aspiring rapper Kelvis Smith and his pregnant girlfriend, Michelle Gill, in a closet in Smith's home. Then Nowell and Bellamy shot Michelle six times, execution-style, and then shot Smith twice in the head ó once under each eye. Miraculously, Smith survived, but was rendered unable to speak because of the severity of his injuries, but he identified his assailants in court using sign language. A jury convicted Nowell of all counts, and he was sentenced to death (Florida).

    OBREMSKI: On February 3, 1969, Russell Obremski shot LaVerna Mae Lowe four times and left her partially clad body to be discovered by her eight-year-old daughter Becky. LaVerna was eight months pregnant. Then he kidnapped and killed Betty Ann Ritchie by holding a gun against her temple and shooting her. Then he threw her body down an embankment and went to buy some beer. Her nude body was found the next day, 34 miles Southwest of Medford. Obremski had been sentenced to prison for twenty years for various previous offenses, including statutory rape, larceny, vagrancy, and escape. He served only 14 months, and was released just five months before he murdered LaVerna Mae and Betty Ann. During his trial, he attempted to escape from his cell, destroyed the furniture in his cell, threatened to stick a pencil in the eye of one of his defense lawyers, and tried to hit the other with a chair. In June 1969, a jury found Obremski guilty of two counts of first-degree murder, and he was sentenced to life in prison (Oregon).

    O'BRIEN: On January 15, 1993, Terrance O'Brien and his pregnant sister Noreen O'Brien were at the West End Post Office on Brighton Avenue in Trenton, New Jersey. Noreen was about three months pregnant. Terrance went to a pharmacy across the street, bought two serrated steak knives, and then, using both knives, stabbed his pregnant sister 33 times in front of horrified witnesses at the post office. He was intent on ending his sister's relationship with an illegal immigrant from Mexico. She lingered for a short time, and then died. When police later informed O'Brien that his sister had died, he said "I'm happy. I'm in a good mood because that's what I wanted. I wanted to kill her." In 1996 and 2000, O'Brien was convicted of murder and received a life sentence in prison (New Jersey).

    PATTISON: In February 2001, Hanalei Dante Pattison got hold of an assault rifle and shot his pregnant sister, 32-year-old Carrie Pattison-Adrick, in her grandparents' home. Then, as his sister, Sally Kato, attempted to call police, he murdered his grandmother, 75-year-old Sally Kato, and his grandfather, 82-year old Yoshio Kato. In March 2005, a Clark County District Court jury found Pattison guilty of three counts of first-degree murder (Nevada).

    PERRY: Jake Perry and his girlfriend, Patricia Smith, were expecting a child. In November 2002, Perry grabbed Patricia by her hair, slapped her, punched her and jabbed her in the stomach, head, arms and legs. He threw her into a box of plates, and both her legs began to bleed from cuts she received. Perry finally agreed to take her to the hospital to treat her injuries, but first he demonstrated his touching concern for her safety by forcing her to drive him to his mother's house, where he stole an amplifier. Then he had her drive him across town so he could sell it and buy crack cocaine. Smith miscarried, and the next day Perry was charged with the reckless homicide of an unborn child, among many other charges (Wisconsin).

    PINKSTON: On December 18, 2003, James "Herc" Pinkston beat up his pregnant girlfriend Toni Koonce at his apartment. Five days after the beating, doctors at Magee Women's Hospital in Pittsburgh performed emergency surgery on Toni, because the embryonic membranes had ruptured and the leaking fluid could have resulted in a fatal infection which might have killed her. Her preborn baby died during the surgery. Pinkston was charged with criminal homicide for the attack (Pennsyvania).

    RAPOZA: In 2002, Eddie Rapoza, his eight-months pregnant wife, Raye, and their four-year old daughter Tehani were driving near Moss Beach. Rapoza drove the family Dodge Caravan off a 150-foot cliff in a triple-murder/suicide attempt. Raye and her preborn child were killed in the plunge, and the little girl was disconnected from life support a few days later. Rapoza confessed to deliberately driving the minivan off the cliff and was charged with three counts of first-degree murder (California).

    REYNOLDS: On March 12, 2005, Tony Lee Reynolds was released from prison for a 2003 burglary. He didn't waste any time going back to his old ways. He broke into a woman's house later in the day and raped her. Then he went on a burglary spree, breaking into at least two other homes. Just three weeks later, on March 31, he broke into the Fairmount Boulevard home of Estela Perez, who was the mother of two small children, and who was five months pregnant with a baby girl she had already named Michelle. Nobody was home at the time, but she returned to her home and surprised him. Reynolds stabbed her repeatedly in the chest, stomach and legs, and finally slashed her throat, killing her (California).

    RINICK: Billy Rinick of South Philadelphia was an aspiring mobster. He wanted to sell Adam Finelli an $85,000 row house. But he decided to keep both the row house and the money, so he shot Finelli five times in the back of the head on October 31, 2001. He had taken Deborah Merlino, the wife of jailed local mobster Joey "Skinny Joey" Merlino to Maryland for an abortion. She was pregnant by a New York football player. Rinick said that "She was cheating on her husband with a guy from New York, a football player. She had gotten pregnant. ... She didn't want South Philadelphia to know." Deborah Merlino agreed to be a prosecution witness in Rinick's trial. On October 29, 2003, a jury took three hours to find Rinick guilty of first-degree murder, reckless endangerment and theft by deception. Rinick had previously in 2003 been sentenced to 30 years in federal prison for cocaine trafficking (Pennsylvania).

    RIVERA: Lawrence Rivera of Barstow, California, killed his pregnant girlfriend, Kristina Garcia, in May 2002. Rivera had a previous manslaughter conviction on his record, and was also implicated but never charged in the manslaughter death of his live-in girlfriend's daughter in Germany in 1998. His former wife testified that "if I didn't get an abortion that he would pull it out of my stomach." Rivera is still at large (California).

    ROGERS: On December 19, 2003, Emmanual Rogers, Sheldon Roberts and Brandon Shaw, members of a Dallas street gang, decided to retaliate for a shooting that had taken place during a robbery the previous day. So they traveled to an apartment where Virginia Ramirez, who was nine weeks pregnant, was living. She had two visitors at the time, Heath Laury and Jessica Thompson. The three gang members then shot all three people in the apartment, and, of course, Virginia's preborn baby was killed as well. A jury convicted Rogers of two counts of capital murder. A medical examiner said that Virginia's preborn child had been alive when she was murdered. Rogers was sentenced to two life terms in prison. On May 19, 2005, a jury convicted Roberts and Shaw of two counts of capital murder, and they also were sentenced to two life terms in prison (Texas).

    RUDY: In November 2005, Shaun Rudy murdered his wife Christine, who was six months pregnant. Then he chopped up her body, tried to burn some of it, and dumped the pieces in the Chippewa River near Jim Falls. Soon after, some of Christine's remains were found in a wooded area of Clark County near where her husband last reported seeing her. On March 28, 2006, Chippewa County Sheriff's deputies found most Christine's decomposed body near the Chippewa River. In April 2006, Shaun Rudy was charged with murder, first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree intentional homicide of an unborn child and mutilation of a corpse in the deaths of Christine and her preborn child (Wisconsin).

    SALCEDO: Hector Salcedo shot his girlfriend, Maria Reyes, who was six months pregnant, in the chest. He then drove her from their home to Central Carolina Hospital, where doctors performed an emergency Caesarian section and delivered their baby. But the baby was too premature and died a few days later. Salcedo told police that he had found Maria shot in their driveway, but that he was just a neighbor and an acquaintance. But the police soon determined that she had been shot inside the house and began looking for Salcedo, who had disappeared. Salcedo was charged with first-degree murder in the death of his baby, and with attempted first-degree murder for his assault on Maria (North Carolina).

    SCHAEFER: Gerard John Schaefer was a troubled child, to say the very least. He was a peeping Tom and a transvestite, and enjoyed killing and torturing animals. His behavior quickly became more and more bizarre. From killing small animals, he graduated to shooting and beheading cattle and having sex with their carcasses. In 1970, Schaefer raped, tortured, murdered and cannibalized two little girls, nine-year-old Peggy Rahn and eight-year-old Wendy Stevenson. In 1972, he abducted, raped, tortured, skinned alive and murdered 17-year-old Susan Place and 16-year-old Georgia, then buried their bodies. He also raped and murdered 14-year-olds Mary Alice Briscolina and Elsie Lina Farmer. At some point, the thrill of killing only one young girl at a time wore off. He said "Doing doubles is far more difficult than doing singles, but on the other hand it also puts one in a position to have twice as much fun. There can be some lively discussions about which of the victims will get to be killed first. When you have a pair of teenaged bimbolinas bound hand and foot and ready for a session with the skinning knife, neither one of the little devils wants to be the one to go first. And they don't mind telling you quickly why their best friend should be the one to die." Schaefer told others about how he was admired by fellow inmate Ted Bundy. Schaefer said that "Bundy was always 100% respectful of me. I treated him as a supplicant, while others were hanging on his every word." Bundy said that he had been influenced by Schaefer to murder two girls on a single day in 1974. Bundy and Schaefer discussed at length the more delicate elements of planning a murder, such as "the maggot problem" and how to effectively clean upholstery after their dying victims involuntarily urinated in their cars. Schaefer also wrote lurid short stories about his murders, with names like "Murder Demon," "Blonde on a Stick" and "Flies in Her Eyes." In 1991, Schaefer wrote that "I am the top serial killer and I can prove it. I am such an expert hangman that I can hang them so quickly that they wouldn't even pee on the rope. ... I never at any time required more than two strokes to behead a woman. Never. I was absolutely skilled at it. ... One whore drowned in her own vomit while watching me disembowel her girlfriend. I'm not sure that counts as a valid kill. Did the pregnant ones count as two kills? It can get confusing." On December 3, 1995, the murderous saga of Gerard John Schaefer finally came to an end when fellow inmate Vincent Rivera slashed him to death in his cell. Rivera cut his throat and stabbed him 41 more times in the head and neck (Florida).

    SEGREST: Geremy Segrest got drunk one night in January 2005, and decided to take out his simmering frustrations on his wife Ashley Renee Korhoren, who was six months pregnant. First he punched her in the face and struck her with a lamp. She fled into a bathroom, and he kicked down the door and stabbed her in the stomach and chest. She delivered a baby in emergency surgery, but the baby, who she named Graham, died just three hours later. A medical examiner found that the baby had died from a stab wound in the back and premature delivery. In April 2005, a Wharton County grand jury indicted Segrest for capital murder, felony murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (Texas).

    SELEPAK: Patrick Alan Selepak and Samantha Jean Bachynski befriended Scott Berels and his pregnant wife Melissa. On February 16, 2006, Bachynski and Selepak went to the Berels' home and got down to their deadly business. They tortured Scott for a while, beating him with a rifle butt and injecting him with bleach, before finally strangling him. Then they turned their attention to Melissa. She begged for her life and that of her 10-week-old unborn baby. "I'm pregnant, I'm pregnant," she shouted, but the murderers took no mercy on her, and strangled her as well. After they murdered the Berels, Selepak and Bachynski went to a bar and befriended 53-year-old Winfield Frederick Johnson, who invited them to stay in his home. When Johnson finally realized he was unintentionally harboring two fugitive murderers, he tried to leave, but Selepak and Bachynski shot him twice in the back, strangled him and covered his body in duct tape and plastic, as they had done to the Berelses. Finally, police arrested Selepak and Bachynski in a motel parking lot in the pickup truck they had stolen from Johnson, whose body was in the back of the truck. Selepak and Bachynski were arraigned in district court in Mount Clemens on February 24, 2006, and both were charged with three counts of first-degree murder (Michigan).

    SMITH: Julie Smith was a nurse whose 13-year-old daughter was pregnant, and she did not like the situation one bit. So she used her nursing skills to induce premature labor in the little girl, and, when her infant grandchild was born, she refused to use those same nursing skills, and just watched her struggle to live for half an hour. Then the baby died, and Smith buried the baby in a shallow grave. She was charged with murder (Arkansas).

    SOLTYS: Nikolay Soltys murdered his pregnant wife Lyubov by stabbing her repeatedly and slashing her throat, then slaughtered his elderly aunt and uncle Galina Kukharskaya and Petr Kukharskiy. He then killed their grandchildren, ten-year-old Dimitriy Kukharskiy and nine-year-old Tatiana Kukharskaya. Finally, he returned home and sexually assaulted and murdered his three-year-old son Sergey. He battered the little boy to death and stuffed his body into a box. Soltys confessed to the crimes and was charged with seven counts of first-degree murder (California).

    STANO: In the early 1970s, Gerald Eugene Stano, who had a very troubled childhood, moved to New Jersey and began to date a mentally handicapped girl, whom he impregnated. He had no trouble paying for an abortion for her. He soon became addicted to drugs and alcohol and was fired from several more jobs for theft. He was married in 1975, but the marriage only lasted six months because he beat his wife frequently. In December 1973, Stano picked up 17-year-old hitchhiker Cathy Lee Scharf of Port Orange, Florida. He stabbed her to death and dumped her body in a remote area of Broward County. In July 1975, he murdered 16-year-old Linda Hamilton, and in January 1976, he killed 24-year-old Nancy Heard. Later in 1976, he murdered Ramona Ecker and Ramona Neal. In February 1980, Stano stabbed 20-year-old Mary Carol Maher to death and dumped her body in an abandoned area near the Daytona Beach Airport. On February 25, he hired a prostitute, Toni Van Haddocks, and murdered her by stabbing her repeatedly in the head. He also confessed to the murders of 24-year-old Susan Bickrest, 23-year-old Mary Muldoon, 19-year-old Janine Ligotino, 17-year-old Ann Arceneaux, 17-year-old Barbara Ann Baur, 34-year-old Bonnie Hughes, 18-year-old Diana Valleck, 21-year-old Emily Branch, 17-year-old Christina Goodson, 23-year-old Phoebe Winston, 18-year-old Joan Foster, 12-year-old Susan Basile, 35-year-old Sandra DuBose, 17-year-old Dorothy Williams, and an unidentified woman whose body was found in Altamonte Springs, Florida in 1974. In all, he confessed to 41 murders of women, some of them pregnant, but was tied with certainty to eighteen of the murders. He was sentenced to death and died in the electric chair at Florida State Prison on March 23, 1998 (Florida).

    STUART: On October 23, 1989, Boston furrier Charles Stuart made a panic call to police, saying that a Black man had attacked himself and his wife Carol as they left a hospital birthing class at a inner-city hospital, carjacked them, drove them

    Posted by: Laura at May 22, 2007 9:21 PM


    Jasper- I could not accept certain aspects of religion. It did not make sense to me. I can't point out the exact thing that made me notice it, but some aspects included: The harsh bible belt environment, my church telling me that anyone who didn't believe in Jesus, including people like Ghandi and Buddha, were going to burn in hell. I just can't understand that and rectify it with my personal understanding of humanity.

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 9:24 PM


    Gah, be nice, baby. Thank you for defending me though. I love you!

    Posted by: Erin at May 22, 2007 9:28 PM


    This is part of the "Pro-Choice Homicides" list from Sandy's everpresent Human Life International website. What do ANY of these crimes have to do with the pro-life movement?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I meant "pro-choice movement." (It doesn't matter. None of these crimes have anything to do with abortion...)

    Posted by: Laura at May 22, 2007 9:29 PM


    "Presenting yourself in such a manner is not only bad for your image, it puts you on par with ignorami like the KKK, or neo-Nazis."

    Just a side-note, I was not trying to compare anyone here to the KKK or the Neo-Nazi's. I apologize for my usage of words, and I hope I didn't offend anyone too badly. Sorry!

    Posted by: Dan at May 22, 2007 9:37 PM


    Dan,

    This is not a feel-good, anything goes blog. We are here to state the truth about abortion. Abortion is a grave evil which destoys a life.

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 9:40 PM


    "There are actually tons of natural supplements in nature that have been used since ancient times to induce miscarriages"

    Yes, and most of them cause adverse affects. Some women have ended up having severe menstrual cycles for months or years afterward. Some women have ended up with liver failure and kidney damage. Just because it is a natural supplement doesn't mean it is safe taken in the doses necessary to cause miscarriage. Plus, if the miscarriage doesn't happen (many cause break through bleeding so you think the miscarriage happened when it didn't) that medication goes into the placenta and into the baby.

    "when I have a migraine, dang it, I'm going to take the happy-pain-go-away medicine."

    Being natural doesn't mean you can't take the chemicals. It just means that you have to realize you are messing with Mother Nature and may have to pay consequences. I have AD/HD and take adderall. I don't think you can get anything more unnatural! I know that I will have liver problems and possibly other difficulties because I have to take it everyday, no exceptions. My body is probably addicted to it now. But I want to be able to function and care of my children, so I am willing to accept that consequence. But with the migrain and the AD/HD we are taking meds to help with something that is unnatural. As humans, we take on more stress than what we were designed for. Some of the air we breath is not very good. These are factors in migrains and with difficult periods (access stress being the big one!)

    "When I got shot in the leg, I was not going to sit there and let it ferment. I was going into surgery. Natural medicine is great up until a point. "

    Surgery is not unnatural. It has been done for centurys. Animals have even been known to perform their own form of surgeries. When an animals leg is caught in a trap, they will chew their leg off in order to survive. This is a form of surgery. The bullet was unnatural (like the trap) and had to be removed or it would cause unnatural problems in your system. The medications are just a plus! ;-)

    "And either way, a quarter of all pregnancies end in miscarriage."

    huge difference between surgical/medicated abortion and miscarriage (natural abortion). Nature selected the natural abortion. We selected the surgical/medicated one. We are telling Nature we are gods and can control creation. (yes, dramatic affects used.)


    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 9:41 PM


    Dan, you sound like a wonderful man, and Erin obviously made a wonderful choice in picking you. :)

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 9:42 PM


    "Gah, be nice, baby. Thank you for defending me though. I love you!"

    AAAWWWWWW!!!

    ;-)

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 9:51 PM


    It's been a good conversation today.

    Gotta go to sleep.

    Talk to ya'll tomorrow!

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 22, 2007 9:52 PM


    Laura,

    What is your point in listing all these homicides? I'm afraid I'm jumping into this discussion a little late and I obviously missed something. Thanks.

    Posted by: Mary at May 22, 2007 10:01 PM


    From Mary:
    Laura,

    What is your point in listing all these homicides? I'm afraid I'm jumping into this discussion a little late and I obviously missed something. Thanks.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Sandy is forever touting a list of supposed pro-choice acts of violence. I looked it up and can't figure out what 99.9% of these incidents have to do with abortion, much less the pro-choice movement.

    Posted by: Laura at May 22, 2007 10:14 PM


    Erin, I am thinking how to say this without seeming argumentative, because on the internet, especially in emotionally charged discussions about beliefs and values, anything can seem rude or condescending unless you kindly extend me the benefit of the doubt.

    You said:
    "For example, three years ago, I was on a date at the opera seeing Madame Butterfly. It got out late, and my boyfriend Kurt and I had parked about a half-mile away to avoid the hefty parking costs. On returning to our car, we were mugged, I was shot in the leg, and he was shot in the chest and died soon after. To me, do I think that that was absolutely wrong? Yes. But something tells me that that man, although he may have had a few screws loose, did not believe that what he was doing was wrong, or at least that he believed that he was doing it for some reason that would justify his actions. For every individual, then, perhaps there is universal truth- but it isn't the same for everyone."

    This is an amazingly good analogy for the current discussion, because you are 100% correct. It is quite likely that the person who shot you believed he was justified in some way. Perhaps he thought he was owed something by society, or that he had no other choices but to survive this way, or even that your life was not valuable to him. The human mind is incredibly good at rationalizing, and the fact is that people just don't do things that they don't think are justifiable -- even things they believe are wrong. And that is exactly why a just society does not base its laws on how each individual feels he should act. Rather we forbid that which hurts another. Just societies always forbid that one person should murder another, regardless of whether the individual considers the murder a good idea.

    (Murder meaning not self-defense, so for the sake of argument I am meaning pregnancies that do not endanger the mother.)

    The exception for abortion hinges on a belief -- a belief that you yourself called unprovable -- that the unborn is not a person. If this belief is unprovable, then our competing view is just as valid as yours. It's just as possible that abortion kills a person as that it doesn't.

    Posted by: Michelle Potter at May 22, 2007 10:46 PM


    Laura,

    Your research abilities are quite remarkable.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 11:50 PM


    I just received this e-mail from a friend. I thought I'd post it as a warning to us all:

    "A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two Owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many
    German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our Attitude toward fanaticism.

    "Very few people were true Nazis "he said," but many enjoyed the Return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration
    Camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."

    We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims
    just want to live in peace.

    Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.

    It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who ystematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire
    continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.
    It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims. The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" the "silent majority" is cowed and extraneous.

    Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

    China's huge population, it was peaceful as well, but ChineseCommunists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

    The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel and bayonet.

    And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?

    History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all 0ur powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of oints: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

    Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and
    find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

    Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and
    many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

    As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life."

    Posted by: HisMan at May 23, 2007 12:07 AM


    @HisMan: I hate to admit it, but that is a good point, and you're right, the peace-loving Muslims (true Muslims) need to speak up against the fanatics. It's unfortunate that they are too afraid to do so and I wish they didn't have to be afraid.

    Posted by: Rae at May 23, 2007 12:13 AM


    Rae,

    I didn't write this, I received it from a friend and thought I'd post it to clarify that I don't hate Muslims. As I have stated before, I have Muslim relatives and I love them.

    However, there is a faction of people who call themselves Muslim who are bent on destroying us; Me, you, pro-lifers, pro-choicers, etc. We would be wise not to put our heads in the sand and ignore it.

    This very site is a miracle of debate that is the result of the sacrifice of many brave people over the years. Freedom is not free...it is maintained with constant vigilance. Pearl Harbor and 9-11 are testaments to that.

    We should always oppose evil in all its forms. I know that pro-choicers, as much as I disagree with them, think they are doing the right thing, however, when someone threatens or insults me by using my daughter, the hairs on the back of my neck go up and war is declared.

    I let Cameron use me horribly today. He pushed my buttons by involving my daughter who, by the way, is a minor. It won't happen again, however, if he ever threatens my daughter with any kind of sexual innuendo again or disrespect, my head will not be stuck in the sand but I will immediately be on the phone to authorities. I'm not playing games anymore with him. I have had it.

    Posted by: HisMan at May 23, 2007 12:31 AM


    HisMan- that is actually an interesting article, and while points of it do perturb me, I agree that the peaceful Islamic community should be talking much louder than they currently are. I am sorry that Cameron pushed your buttons today- it was inappropriate. I encourage you to understand that that is not the only goal of all pro-choicers. And once again I express my sympathies for the loss of your friend.

    Posted by: Erin at May 23, 2007 12:51 AM


    @ HisMan,
    I will agree that Cameron was out of line. I may not be old enough to have children, but my father is an OB/GYN and the way he is around my 16 year old sister is pretty much the way you are about your daughter. At the same time though, keep in mind that he is a 22 year old kid. He's not a real threat. Yes, keep an eye on him if you want to, but seriously? He's just trying to get your goat and you're taking the bait like a muskellunge who's being tempted with a piece of bloody porterhouse steak.

    I do, though, sympathize with you about your friend and your friend's family. I went to military school and many of the seniors who graduated before me went to Iraq and a few of them lost their lives in this "war on terrorism." Please accept my condolences, on that end.

    Posted by: Dan at May 23, 2007 1:27 AM


    "Jesus Camp" --- another film which mocks believers. The film was made by....guess who??? Nancy Pelosi's daughter.

    Posted by: jasper at May 22, 2007 08:38 PM
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Not even close.
    Heidi Ewing made "Jesus Camp."
    Alexanda Pelosi did an HBO documentary called "Friends of God."
    Common feature? Both featured Ted Haggard bloviating about the virtues of Christian family values (like meth and gay hookers) and the depravity of homosexuality.

    Posted by: Laura at May 23, 2007 3:58 AM


    Dan, 9:17p: I appreciate your coming to Erin's defense, and I'm not surprised. By so doing you defend yourself.

    But your advocacy of peace, love and kumbaya fall flat considering you condoned the killing of your own self-professed "child."

    Furthermore, your portrayal of pro-lifers as KKK/Nazi-esque zealots also falls flat. The pro-life position is the exact opposite of a radical, prejudiced ideology that promotes death or banishment of an unfavored class of people. You, my friend, are actually that man, as Nathan told David.

    As much as you and Erin - and only pro-aborts, btw - promote compromise, there will be no compromise. Get that through your head. The same blood runs through pro-life veins as that of slavery abolishionists. There can be no compromise on the protection of innocent human life. How utterly ridiculous.

    Dan, you said: "I may be somewhat biased because I'm Erin's boyfriend and was the father of the child. I am pro-choice, and I let Erin make this decision on her own. I did not pressure her, nor did I force her into it. I gave my opinion on what I thought would be the best solution, and let her make the ultimate call."

    You are more a wimp than Erin, Dan. You stood by and let her kill your baby, likely with a sense of relief. And you placed the entire onus on her so could walk away guilt-free. How well the "pro-choice" position works out for men.

    I'm curious, though. What opinion did you give Erin?

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:13 AM


    Every so often you hear this from right-to-lifers--the "pregnancy isn't so bad" argument.

    Labor and delivery constitute a major medical/surgical trauma.

    In 2003, twenty-eight percent of births in the USA ended in Ceasarian section, which is a major abdominal surgery.

    Jill Stanek thinks you're "frail" if you want to avoid this risk.

    Jill, I'm glad you're not a nurse anymore. You sound dangerous.

    Posted by: SoMG at May 23, 2007 5:19 AM


    Laura,

    Likewise, I have no idea what your list has to do with the pro-life movement, if that was your point. Again, forgive me if I'm a little lost here!

    SOMG,

    And its been found that many of those C-sections are done by choice, not necessity. There was a time when C-sections were very rare, if a hospital had a 5% C-section rate that was cause for a major investigation. Isn't it interesting how all the Hollywood stars "need" C sections.
    I think its unacceptable that unnecessary sections are being done, but who asked me?

    Posted by: Mary at May 23, 2007 6:15 AM


    SOMG, I know over a dozen people, personally (as in, not on the internet- there's more that way) who chose to have a scheduled c-section, not because they had to, but because they preferred the idea of having it scheduled and happening quickly.

    Doctors apparently love c-sections also because they don't have to stand by like they would for a full term natural delivery. My own doctor told me he preferred these methods for this reason. He likes being able to schedule the exact time in advance. That's why my doctor wanted to have me induced instead of waiting two more weeks, with each of my babies, and twice I was told I might need a c-section, and I told them no, I could do it myself.

    That's another thing that causes women to need c-sections...unnecessary inductions.

    I didn't know about this when I was pregnant the last three times or I would have never induced. I am darned lucky that I did not have to have a c-section because of my error in trusting what the doctor said about safety instead of researching it for myself.

    C-sections are WAY overdone from what I have found through researching the topic, many times it is completely unnecessary, and it is a major surgery, where normal delivery is natural and can be much safer.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 7:10 AM


    SOMG, stop please. That's just silly and pointless.
    I deleted your comments.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 7:28 AM


    Smog, you're glad Jill isn't a nurse anymore? I'm sure she still has a license. LOL. Now that's funny!~ You have said before that you work in a hospital. If so, that is extremely frightening! I wish I knew which one it was. I FEAR for ANY of your patients!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 23, 2007 8:07 AM


    Yes, Heather, you're right. I've kept my license current. Didn't want to waste my time responding to Smoggy. But to set the record straight....

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 8:37 AM


    Dan -

    "At the same time though, keep in mind that he is a 22 year old kid. He's not a real threat."

    Really? Do you want me to make a list of people who believed this until it was too late? Do you have any idea how many women end up being stalked and murdered because of this attitude? Having someone stalking you is terrifying, I know. It takes everything away from you. It takes your freedom, your personality, your thought process'. It takes your life! Cameron fits the mold, Dan. I think what all of you forget is that this is not the only post the Cameron has mentioned HisMan's daughter. And some of you didn't read comments that were deleted.

    I think the people who protect Cameron need to wake up. I applaud HisMan for protecting his daughter. He's a good father.


    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 8:55 AM


    Erin and Dan,

    You sound like very reasonable and intelligent people.

    Although I disagree with the abortion, you two would be excellent to have on the pro-life side.

    All I ask is that you keep an open mind.

    I know it is difficult to admit that something you did was wrong but, note that God would forgive anything and toss it into the sea of forgetfulness. He is the God of redemption and second chances. Even though your baby was not allowed to live, he or she is experiencing the joys of heaven now and will forever. You can meet that baby someday if you choose to....now that would be glorius.

    Thanks for your comments regarding yesterday's tussle with Cameron. He remains warned. If he's 22, he's old enough to know better and will extract a price if he crosses the line with regards to my daughter ever again. There are very strict laws regarding the sexual solicitation of minors on the internet. He would be very wise to stay on topic.

    With regards to my friends losing his son yesterday, his e-mail to me said, "Robert is with Jesus, we will meet him some day, praise the Lord". And he meant it. Jill can attest to that, I forwarded her the e-mail. To be able to say that and mean it takes faith. These are the types of people I hang with. They love the Lord deeply but realize, "Though He slay me I will trust Him".

    Posted by: HisMan at May 23, 2007 8:59 AM


    About Cameron being a 22 year old "kid".

    Since when is 22 a child? Our society has apparantly stretched childhood throughout ones 20's. This is ridiculous. At 22 my husband is a father and provides for his family. We our buying our first house, bought our car without payments, and are expecting our second child.

    Every couple we know around our age own their homes and are financially stable. Most are married. They aren't living with their parents or going out to wild parties.

    Why is it that we are held accountable as adults, yet someone like Cameron is written off as just some kid? He should be held to the same standards as the rest of us.

    At 22 you are an adult. Goodness, at 18 you are an adult in the eyes of the law. A threat from a 22 yaer old should be taken with all the seriousness we would the threat of a 40 year old.

    Acting like Cameron is a 7 year old boy is both dishonest and a bit frightening.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 9:21 AM


    I totally agree, Lauren.

    At 22 my husband is a father and provides for his family. We our buying our first house, bought our car without payments, and are expecting our second child.Every couple we know around our age own their homes and are financially stable. Most are married. They aren't living with their parents or going out to wild parties.

    Exactly! At 18, my husband and I were married and buying a house...and at 22 we had almost completely paid for our home, and had two children.

    Just because Cameron is obviously immature, doesn't mean he's not an adult.


    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 9:32 AM


    Laura,
    Good job cherry picking stories that have nothing to do with pro-choice violence.
    Which again, just proves you are so willing to ignore and obviously condone documented cases that do involve pro-choice violence.

    Posted by: Sandy at May 23, 2007 11:18 AM


    Ooo, I just realized that I that second painting is a Vermeer. He's one of my favorite artists.

    Posted by: Erin at May 23, 2007 11:29 AM


    "Dan, 9:17p: I appreciate your coming to Erin's defense, and I'm not surprised. By so doing you defend yourself.

    But your advocacy of peace, love and kumbaya fall flat considering you condoned the killing of your own self-professed "child."

    Furthermore, your portrayal of pro-lifers as KKK/Nazi-esque zealots also falls flat. The pro-life position is the exact opposite of a radical, prejudiced ideology that promotes death or banishment of an unfavored class of people.

    As much as you and Erin - and only pro-aborts, btw - promote compromise, there will be no compromise. Get that through your head. The same blood runs through pro-life veins as that of slavery abolishionists. There can be no compromise on the protection of innocent human life. How utterly ridiculous.

    You are more a wimp than Erin, Dan. You stood by and let her kill your baby, likely with a sense of relief. And you placed the entire onus on her so could walk away guilt-free. How well the "pro-choice" position works out for men.

    I'm curious, though. What opinion did you give Erin?"

    Jill,

    First off, let's get one thing straight. I am NOT a wimp. I highly doubt that you have been through the same experiences that I have. I doubt you fought with boot and fist for a cause you believed in, and have been persecuted for it. You say that pro-choice is easy for the men? How sorely mislead and misguided and naive you are, Jill! It seems that your narrow world views and your ignorance are only surpassed by your stupidity. You compare pro-lifers to slavery abolishionests. That is noble of you, and may even work to get you some sympathy, but at the same time, our world stands idly by and watches the genocides that have happened all over Africa without even truly lifting a finger to stop it. Oh, how the modern descend!

    Furthermore, you say "But your advocacy of peace, love and kumbaya fall flat considering you condoned the killing of your own self-professed "child." I advocate compromise and mature settling disagreements when it comes to these discussions. My true personal beliefs is not one that you would understand. I believe in both a peaceful and a violent solution towards everything. They are both applicable in many situations, but not here on a pro-life forum over the internet.

    As for my opinion on what should be done with the embryo/fetus/child/whatever you believe it to be, I said that Erin should do what she knew to be best for her. If she'd kept it and carried it to term, I would've cared for it or agreed for adoption. If she'd decided to terminate the pregnancy, I would've supported her decision.

    I'm not a fence-walker here, Jill. I just merely believe in trying to work things out with peace before using my fist. Remember, "United we stand, divided we fall"

    Dan

    Posted by: Dan at May 23, 2007 11:33 AM


    I would like to point out three things.

    First: HisMan, cowardly hiding behind a nick, threatened/challenged physical assault prior to me ever having invoked his daughter.

    Second: while I definitely goaded him on, there is no excuse for his actions, which amount to internet bullying. His behavior, as opposed to asking one's father about their daughter as a course of disrespect, raises the only legitimate legal concerns.

    Finally: HisMan's daughter is age consent.

    You people need HisMan know that he is an abomination to prolife supporters, and his behavior is unacceptable, rather than letting him justify it by the relatively benign antics of another. Having mostly gotten away with it thus far, his hostility has been approved by you all, and this is how people really get hurt... because others turn a blind eye to it.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 11:35 AM


    You say that pro-choice is easy for the men?

    What makes the pro-choice stance difficult for men?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 11:38 AM


    "What makes the pro-choice stance difficult for men?"

    I'm not saying it's difficult for me, but some might find it difficult to stand by their girlfriends/wife's decision to abort because they believe it the woman's right to make that decision, while at the same time wishing she would make a different choice and have a baby. That would be a difficult time for a pro-choice man.

    It might also be difficult if their pro-choice convictions clashed with the religious doctrine of their faith. They must be brave to buck the orthodoxy of their church, their community, to do what they believe is right. I imagine that's a tough one for some men.

    Pro-life is such much simpler: "Abortion is always wrong and I have no concern about the consequences of banning it."

    Posted by: Hal at May 23, 2007 11:58 AM


    @ Valerie,

    I was not protecting Cameron, nor am I condoning his comments in any way, shape, or form. I do understand the dangers of stalkers; I've had a few. I may not have read all of his comments, and I may not know the full story, but based on what I read between him and HisMan, it seems that he's just goading HisMan to get a rise out of him, like a school yard bully. HisMan is right to protect his daughter; I would be protective of mine, too, provided I ever have a family and settle down. However, the comments that HisMan made do cross the line from protectious warnings of caution to dire threats. If Cameron chooses to continue his crusade of annoyance and harassment, he will get caught and he will have to lie in the bed he's made. But, no one needs to be threatened in these debates. Trust me, I'm usually the first one to strike first and ask questions later, but a threat of physical violence is not the answer here.

    My recommendation is that you keep an eye on Cameron, and if he keeps up with the harassment, report it. But don't threaten him. That only gives him legal leverage against you, HisMan.

    That's my only advice. Sorry if I sound a bit callous; I really don't mean to.

    Posted by: Dan at May 23, 2007 12:11 PM


    Laura,
    Good job cherry picking stories that have nothing to do with pro-choice violence.
    Which again, just proves you are so willing to ignore and obviously condone documented cases that do involve pro-choice violence.


    Posted by: Sandy at May 23, 2007 11:18 AM
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    HILARIOUS! Sandy, all of those pointless stories came from the "Human Life International" website YOU ALWAYS SITE as examples of pro-choice violence. They came from the site YOU tout as "documentation." The premise of your whole pro-choice violence argument is BS! YOU cherry-picked those stories, NOT ME!

    Posted by: Laura at May 23, 2007 12:32 PM


    Pro-life is such much simpler: "Abortion is always wrong and I have no concern about the consequences of banning it."

    You mean like the consequence of millions of babies not having to die unjustly, for instance?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 1:00 PM


    HILARIOUS! Sandy, all of those pointless stories came from the "Human Life International" website YOU ALWAYS SITE as examples of pro-choice violence. They came from the site YOU tout as "documentation." The premise of your whole pro-choice violence argument is BS! YOU cherry-picked those stories, NOT ME!

    Laura, why do you have to be so rude? Can you not state your opinion without being so spiteful?
    I think your comments would be received a lot better if you'd try it.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 1:08 PM


    Dan, 11:34a, said: "First off, let's get one thing straight. I am NOT a wimp.... I believe in both a peaceful and a violent solution towards everything.... As for my opinion on what should be done with the embryo/fetus/child/whatever you believe it to be, I said that Erin should do what she knew to be best for her.... I'm not a fence-walker here, Jill. I just merely believe in trying to work things out with peace before using my fist."

    Read what you wrote and tell me again you're not a wimp, Dan.

    Dan, you crumpled at one of the most crucial times of your life. I'm sorry to say you will never forget what you allowed. You became Pontius Pilate. It was a defining moment in your life, a marker, and you know in your heart you blew it. There is forgiveness, of course. I'm not condemning you to hell. I'm just giving you the facts.

    And you and Erin? Get back to me in a year. You'll likely be long over by then. Most couples break up - some stats say 90% - following abortion. You'll never look at each other the same again.

    As for your blathering about advocating peace before force, you're such a liar, Dan. Sorry, I'm not known for mincing.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 1:14 PM


    I'm not saying it's difficult for me, but some might find it difficult to stand by their girlfriends/wife's decision to abort because they believe it the woman's right to make that decision, while at the same time wishing she would make a different choice and have a baby. That would be a difficult time for a pro-choice man.

    Why would a pro-choice man would wish his girlfriend/wife/SO would keep the unborn child?
    Why would that make him sad? What would be difficult about it?
    You guys stress so often the importance of the idea that a fetus is a non-person, and that you feel relief after abortion. Why would a pro-choice man have difficulty accepting his S/O's decision?


    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 1:15 PM


    I just merely believe in trying to work things out with peace before using my fist.

    How is killing your unborn child a peaceful solution? How is that not using your fist? I really do not understand that, Dan.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 1:18 PM


    Goodness, at 18 you are an adult in the eyes of the law. A threat from a 22 yaer old should be taken with all the seriousness we would the threat of a 40 year old.

    You mean like the threats of force HisMan used against Hal and Cameron? Seems you guys are doing a pretty good job of ignoring those.

    At 18, my husband and I were married and buying a house...and at 22 we had almost completely paid for our home, and had two children.

    So if youíre not married and pregnant at 18 youíre immature?

    Sorry, I'm not known for mincing.

    No, Jill, youíre known for your kindness towards others. *insert dripping sarcasm here* You never did answer my question about that, by the way: would your consider yourself kind towards these women? All you've done to Erin and Dan is insult them constantly: is that kind?

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 1:36 PM


    Dan

    "If Cameron chooses to continue his crusade of annoyance and harassment, he will get caught and he will have to lie in the bed he's made. "

    You sound just like that cop I spoke to before the man who was stalking me put me in the hospital.

    " and if he keeps up with the harassment, report it."

    Tell me, why do we have to put up with being harrassed? We have to wait for a certain level of harrassment before we can report it? By then, it's usually too late.

    He's already made innappropriate comments to women on here. Those have been deleted. We found out one night that he doesn't like to keep his pants on and he wanted someone on here to join him in going pantless.

    Cameron admits that he does this to HisMan on purpose. He doesn't like HisMan's belief's or how HisMan presents himself. Instead of being polite and ignore HisMan he does things to set him off. He has already found out that HisMan's weekness is his love for his kids. So he uses that at every possible moment that he can to pick a fight. What kind of person uses someone else's children just for entertainment value? He's a disgusting individual who stops at nothing to invoke specific emotions out of people. He gets his rocks off by purposly saying things to hurt people. This is not someone to be trusted.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 1:39 PM



    "Why would a pro-choice man have difficulty accepting his S/O's decision?"

    Bethany, I'm not speaking for myself, so I might get this wrong. But, a pro-choice man might want a child, and might even believe that abortion is morally wrong. but still believe a woman has the right to make the choice for herself. Like Rudy, for example, if his wife got pregnant and wanted an abortion, his "pro-choice" views might be difficult to live up to.

    You can believe abortion is "wrong" and still be pro-choice. (or at least some people state such views)

    Posted by: Hal at May 23, 2007 1:42 PM


    "You mean like the threats of force HisMan used against Hal and Cameron? Seems you guys are doing a pretty good job of ignoring those."

    Just to clear things up, I'm unaware of HisMan ever threatening force against me.

    Posted by: Hal at May 23, 2007 1:45 PM


    Way to see it for what it is Valerie!

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 1:46 PM


    Amen Valerie!

    Posted by: SH at May 23, 2007 1:48 PM


    My fiance is a pro-choice man. He believes abortion to be morally wrong, and would certainly want to keep whatever child was concieved: whether that would be to remain with us or adopted out. More importantly, however, he reocognizes that it is my body, and my choice as to what happens, and understands my reasons for wanting to abort.

    I would be, without a doubt, an incredibly difficult choice for him. But he would allow me to make it, as I would be the one carrying the child for nine months.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 1:49 PM


    Val,

    "Tell me, why do we have to put up with being harrassed? We have to wait for a certain level of harrassment before we can report it? By then, it's usually too late."

    You mean like the level where they make physical threats?

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 1:53 PM


    So good of him to chose your happiness for 9 months over his child's lifetime of... well...life! And I ask how long have you been together?

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 1:56 PM


    And I'm curious, why does your fiance think abortion is morally wrong?

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 1:59 PM


    "At 18, my husband and I were married and buying a house...and at 22 we had almost completely paid for our home, and had two children."

    So if youíre not married and pregnant at 18 youíre immature?

    Not sure how you got that out of what I said, Less. It's obvious by reading Cameron's posts he's extremely immature. It doesn't matter if he's married or not. Marriage isn't the issue, I was just making the statement that not all 18 year olds are "partying" through life, as Valerie also stated. (or I think it was Valerie).

    And certainly, we are old enough by 18 to be held accountable for our actions.

    Less, Cameron says stupid, childish things, HOPING to get Hisman to say something like what he has said, so I seriously doubt that Cameron is not feeling threatened at all. If he is, it's silly , cause all Hisman has threatened to do is report what he does to the cops, or to ban him from this site. Doesn't seem physically threatening to me.

    And if you want to bring up something that was said 2-3 months ago in the heat of an argument, then you'll also have to concede that Cameron has made some pretty bad choices in language here as well in the very recent past. (You know, like the "faux" cyber creep, where not only did he post totally inappropriate things to me (like what bra size do I wear? Why can't he find a full body picture of me on my site? etc), he also came to my blog and I saw in the stats that he had actually been searching my blog all day long. If I didn't know who the actual Cameron is, I probably would have felt very threatened by this. I found through the stat counter exactly where he lives. He doesn't live too far away. He posted a few things like, "Why'd you run away, Sugar?" on my blog, and if that's not inappropriate, I don't know what is. ) Anyway, said that to say, Cameron , whether in jest or not, has acted MUCH more threatening than Hisman would even try to be.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:02 PM


    Over a year. We're engaged, that should say something. He believes that abortion is morally wrong for many of the same reasons that the pro-life croud on this board does.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 2:02 PM


    so he thinks it's murder?

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 2:06 PM


    Over a year. We're engaged, that should say something. He believes that abortion is morally wrong for many of the same reasons that the pro-life croud on this board does.

    And you wouldn't even consider his feelings on his own child before aborting?
    I sincerely do hope that you don't get pregnant. I realize you do too. If he truly feels that abortion is morally wrong, if you did have an abortion, it would change your relationship forever. I know you most likely think it's not true, but I can assure you, it would change the way he looked at you. And it sounds like you have a great guy, but a very confused guy who is trying to make you happy by doing what you want instead of what he knows is right. Sounds like you hold the reins in the relationship. Is that really fair to tell your fiance, who would love to help you bring up the child that you two create in love one day, that you will kill your baby because you "don't like" the idea of being pregnant? If that kind of thing would not make your relationship suffer, then your fiance really doesn't have strong convictions one way or the other, whether he keeps them to himself or not.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:10 PM


    ...all Hisman has threatened to do is report what he does to the cops, or to ban him from this site.

    Untrue. HisMan has threatened Cameron physically several times as well.

    Cameron posted on your blog, but he also appologized right after posting, I happen to remember. I don't always agree with Cameron's actions, but I tend to believe that more often than not, they are the outpouring of an intense frustration that none of you seem to actually listen to most of anything that any of the pro-choice posters on this blog say. Instead, you're more likely to critisize our religious choices, twist our words, or pull a Jill and call names: but when we do any of those, you're more than willing to delete posts or ban us.

    Frustrations will do interesting things to people.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 2:11 PM


    Cameron posted on your blog, but he also appologized right after posting, I happen to remember. I don't always agree with Cameron's actions, but I tend to believe that more often than not, they are the outpouring of an intense frustration that none of you seem to actually listen to most of anything that any of the pro-choice posters on this blog say.

    If posting out of frustration makes it okay, then you ought to allow Hisman to post his statements out of frustration, Less. It's not fair to say it's okay for one and not the other. Do you not see frustration in Hisman's posts?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:13 PM


    Instead, you're more likely to critisize our religious choices, twist our words, or pull a Jill and call names: but when we do any of those, you're more than willing to delete posts or ban us.

    Less, the only time people are deleted or banned is when it becomes vulgar or they violate rules which they were warned against. And did you not notice that Jill not only deleted CAmeron's posts yesterday and today, she posted Hisman's as well?
    After 5 last night, all conversation between the two of them was deleted. They both broke the rules. They both were deleted. How is that unfair?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:16 PM


    less still wondering if your fiance disagrees with abortion because he thinks it's murder, or why exactly?

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 2:20 PM


    less still wondering if your fiance disagrees with abortion because he thinks it's murder, or why exactly?

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 2:20 PM


    Frankly, I donít think heís ever considered the idea of abortion before. Heís a pretty sheltered guy, and I highly doubt that heíd ever thought about it. He doesnít believe its murder, but he does believe that, as I have a good support system in him, it would be a responsibility to carry the child to term.

    He and I have already discussed what would happen in the event of pregnancy. I have considered his feelings, and am aware that should the worst happen, I donít know how my fiance would react. He might break up with me; Iím aware of that. I am the more dominant one in the relationship: my personality is more aggressive and more forceful than his is, but I know that if he felt particularly strongly on an issue he would tell me. Thus far, he hasnít.

    He wouldnít ďlove to bring up a child.Ē He would tolerate it. At this point, heís even less sure of wanting to have children than I am. He knows how I feel about pregnancy and abortion, and he has before we even started dating. Iíve always felt the same way about those two issues, and every man I date knows about it. I wouldnít want him to waste his time with me if he was trying to change me, or wouldnít accept me and all of my views. Itís his choice to stay with me, if he fundamentally disagrees with what I believe.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 2:24 PM


    He doesnít believe its murder, but he does believe that, as I have a good support system in him, it would be a responsibility to carry the child to term.

    Well, if he doesn't believe it's murder, then there's no reason for him to be morally against it, is there?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:27 PM


    Frustration at what, Bethany, that not everyone is Christian? Frustration that we point out his hatred?

    HisMan has previously threatened physical violence, and has already judged several posters on this form hell-worthy. Why were those posts not deleted?

    I think his being morally against abortion rests with the fact that he believes responsibility ought to be taken if you have sex. I disagree completely, but we both know how the other feels, we donít really discuss it much. We donít see the point, to be honest.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 2:31 PM


    my point exactly!

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 2:32 PM


    Bethany, you want everything to be black and white don't you? You can be against abortion and not believe it is "murder."

    Apparently, some beleive abortion raises the risk of breast cancer, so maybe someone's against it for that reason alone.

    Posted by: Hal at May 23, 2007 2:32 PM


    "And you and Erin? Get back to me in a year. You'll likely be long over by then. Most couples break up - some stats say 90% - following abortion. You'll never look at each other the same again."

    Jill...You are WAY out of line here. I thought you were better than this...well, no, not really.

    You don't know these people. You don't know anything about them, save for what they post here. How dare you try to tell them what kind of person they are? What the hell are you doing?

    Posted by: Stephanie at May 23, 2007 2:32 PM


    I think Jill is using statistics, what people actually say about their relationships, not just what Jill thinks.

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 2:37 PM


    If Jill was using statistics, she'd have cited them. What she's seeing before her is simply incongruous with her worldview, so she bashes it.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 2:40 PM


    good point Less. I see the biggest problem at this site being the inability to thoughtfully consider anything "incongruous" with their worldview.
    A few examples of what they can't understand:

    You can be a good person, but pro-choice
    You can be against abortion, but pro-choice
    You can have had an abortion and not regret it
    You can believe in god but support choice
    You can understand abortion "stop a beating heart" but don't want it banned by the government.
    Some abortions are performed by qualified, caring and talented doctors who are NOT doing it for the money.
    Some people find sex outside of marriage a positive, fulfilling and life-affirming experience.

    Posted by: Hal at May 23, 2007 2:46 PM


    Bethany, you want everything to be black and white don't you? You can be against abortion and not believe it is "murder."
    Apparently, some beleive abortion raises the risk of breast cancer, so maybe someone's against it for that reason alone.

    Oh come on, Hal.

    Do you really think that is plausible?


    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:48 PM


    Does this work in other scenarios with human life involved?

    You can be a good person, but condone murder

    You can be against murder, but pro-choice to murder

    You can have murdered someone and not regret it

    You can believe in god but support the choice to murder someone

    You can understand murder "stop a beating heart" but don't want it banned by the government.

    Some murders are performed by qualified, caring and talented doctors who are NOT doing it for the money.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:51 PM


    I posted before I was finished...

    And yes, some of those work, but do they actually make murder okay?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 2:52 PM


    That, unfortunately, highlights the most basic confliction in our views about abortion: we don't believe that it is murder. As the definition of murder supports us...well. I find it interesting that you're talking about lack of understanding and simotaniously claiming that abortion is murder.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 2:55 PM


    Yes, Less, I get that you don't believe that it's murder. I think it's been drilled into my head about a million times by now. I'm not forgetting it anytime soon. You can relax.

    My point is that if it's not murder, there's nothing wrong with it.

    There's nothing morally wrong with abortion if it does not murder unborn children.

    It's ridiculous for people to state that they're morally opposed to abortion while simultaneously stating that they are supportive of women choosing to do that thing that they find morally wrong. It's a moral conflict....it makes absolutely no sense.

    If it's not murder, then what's wrong with it?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 3:06 PM


    "It's ridiculous for people to state that they're morally opposed to abortion while simultaneously stating that they are supportive of women choosing to do that thing that they find morally wrong."

    Millions of people do say that. Ridiculous as you find it to be.

    Maybe they view it as the lessor of two evils. It is better to allow some women to choose an immoral act than to ban it altogether and face the consequences of illegal abortions.

    Some people are against the use of alcohol, but don't support prohibition.

    Posted by: hal at May 23, 2007 3:15 PM


    Bethany, there are plenty of other reasons why someone can be opposed to abortion without it being murder:

    - the proposed breast cancer link
    - the idea that women should have as many children as possible
    - the idea that sex is a contract to pregnancy
    - the idea that medical procedures such as abortion are against natural progress

    None of those rest upon the idea that abortion is murder, and all of those could result in a person believing that abortion is morally undesirable.

    It's a moral conflict....it makes absolutely no sense.

    So what about the idea that thereís a loving God, and yet all sorts of suffering happens? Or the idea that murder is wrong, but its okay when preformed by the state, as in the death penalty or wars? Are those not also moral conflicts?

    People have moral conflicts in their worldviews constantly. It isnít uncommon at all.

    And it isnít that I donít believe abortion to be murder. It isnít murder. Period. Need me to post the definition again?

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 3:19 PM


    Cameron -

    "You mean like the level where they make physical threats?"

    You are a creepy person. If you made comments about my daughter I would not even blink an eye before attempting to protect her. If that means physical violence happens, so be it. You knew what you were doing. You know he loves his daughter and you used it against him to get what you want. That is the lowest thing a man can do. There are many things that people say on here that I take offense to. some things that upset me greatly. I don't respond. That is what mature people do. They don't constently pick at that person for their own personal enjoyment like you do.

    Less -

    "Cameron posted on your blog, but he also appologized right after posting, I happen to remember. "

    What? oh, okay. So if the man that stalked me had appologize then I had no reason to be afraid? Give me a *&&** break. Read Bethany's post about exactly what he did. He doesn't live that far from her. And then he comes back on here and starts his same BS. That is not someone who is sorry.

    "but I tend to believe that more often than not, they are the outpouring of an intense frustration that none of you seem to actually listen to most of anything that any of the pro-choice posters on this blog say. "

    You don't listen to a thing I say. I don't go off on tagents just because "I'm ignored". How childish! I don't use someone's children just to get a rise out of them. If you ever have children, you may understand just how frightening his statement can be.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 3:30 PM


    So Less, do they perform a violent "procedure" on a child to stop it's heart from beating? Or do they just take the baby out of the mother and see if it will live?

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 3:31 PM


    "Dan, you crumpled at one of the most crucial times of your life. I'm sorry to say you will never forget what you allowed. You became Pontius Pilate. It was a defining moment in your life, a marker, and you know in your heart you blew it. There is forgiveness, of course. I'm not condemning you to hell. I'm just giving you the facts.

    And you and Erin? Get back to me in a year. You'll likely be long over by then. Most couples break up - some stats say 90% - following abortion. You'll never look at each other the same again.

    As for your blathering about advocating peace before force, you're such a liar, Dan. Sorry, I'm not known for mincing."

    Ah, we meet again over the vast ocean of the internet, Jill. Now, while I'd much rather use a violent approach here and prove how wrong you really are in your assumption that I'm a liar, I'll just list some facts and let your feeble little mind try to wrap itself around them so you can make a sound, educated decision.

    Jill, I didn't crumple at all. When Erin and I got the news, we were both scared about what to do. We talked immediately about abortion, then backed off and talked of carrying the pregnancy to term and putting it up for adoption. We went through all of our options. We looked at what would be the best decision for both of us, and what would ultimately be the best for Erin, and she made the final call. I don't think that's crumpling at all.

    Second, take your statistics and forcibly insert them into your anal cavity. Erin and I are seperating, yes, but because she's going back to school in Georgia and we both decided that a long-distance relationship is not in our best interests. Personally, I believe that the experience we had with her being pregnant and the following abortion made us stronger and closer as a couple, and has renewed my faith in love. So, why don't you quit with the personal attacks? Are you really that low that you need to attack someone's relationship?

    Another thought that comes to mind. Aren't you a Christian? Do you think that Jesus Christ would find your actions and comments to be Christian? Is not the golden rule "Treat others the way you would like to be treated?" I say unto thee, Jill, judge not lest ye be judged. Understand that I am not making an attack on your faith or your beliefs. I'm not Christian, nor do I believe in Jesus Christ being the son of God. I believe that Jesus was a revolutionary man with ideas way ahead of his time who did martyr himself for the cause that he believed in, but I do not think he's the son of God. However, I do know my Bible, and I do know that in accordance to the way you've been treating Erin, myself, and some of the other people here, you are not being a very good Christian. So, in the words of the immortal William Wallace, "I hae brocht ye to the ring, now see gif ye can dance."

    On a side note; Stephanie and Less, you girls are LEGEND! Thank you for your support and your defense. I appreciate it whole-heartedly.

    Posted by: Dan at May 23, 2007 3:38 PM


    Just want to remind Dan that Jesus had some violent reactions to sinful behavior. Jesus does not tell us to talk sweet all of the time. He fought for what was right and wants us to also.
    This deepend love that you and Erin have, not in your best interest? I find it interesting that you refer to "it" as a pregnancy and never as a baby or child.

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 3:44 PM


    You don't listen to a thing I say. I don't go off on tagents just because "I'm ignored".

    Of course I listen to what you say. I engage in debate, I donít dismiss posts with insults, and I donít ridicule your life choices or force you into doing something because I believe it is right. Nothing that youíve said, however, has been particularly convincing. I listen to you, Iím just not convinced by you.

    murēder
    1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
    2. slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
    3. A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.

    Is abortion unlawful? No? Is it committed with malice? Nope. Is it a flock of crows, perchance? Nope. Is it particularly difficult or hazardous? No, not really: even if you want to use that definition, itís a slang term.

    As to Dan, pshaw. Iíve been the victim of Jillís relationship bashing more than once: itís a pretty common MO Ďround here. Kudos to you, sir, for not giving in or getting angry. :)

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 3:50 PM


    "I just merely believe in trying to work things out with peace before using my fist.

    How is killing your unborn child a peaceful solution? How is that not using your fist? I really do not understand that, Dan."

    I worked out every solution in my head and applied it to my situation. Erin did the same. We didn't go straight out and get it done. We had to sit and think hard on what we're going to do. I'm sorry that you don't agree with our decision, and it is your right to disagree, but I truly do not believe it's violent. My father, who is an OB/GYN, has taught me much about the fetal development, and I do know that when the abortion took place [6 weeks], the embryo was still technically just a cell cluster in an amniotic sack. While we don't know when a fetus gains conscious thought, I personally don't believe that at that stage of development anything has thought, so in essence, it wasn't a truly living thing. If that offends you, sorry, that's just my personal belief.

    Posted by: Dan at May 23, 2007 3:52 PM


    "This deepend love that you and Erin have, not in your best interest? I find it interesting that you refer to "it" as a pregnancy and never as a baby or child."

    We love each other, but the seperation is something we aren't mature enough for. We're both freshmen in college, going on sophomore, and while we love each other and have seen a lot of what life has to offer, this is a big world we live in and I want her to be able to see more of it. I've been many places and I've seen many people; she hasn't. She needs to be able to live life to the fullest, and while I won't hold her back, I'll always love her and remain her friend.

    That was completely off topic, but I hope it answered your question.

    Posted by: Dan at May 23, 2007 3:58 PM


    1. The unlawful killing of one human by another,

    The problem is that killing is lawful in our country, So before Roe v. Wade than abortion was murder but not that is it lawful it suddenly is not? Murder has nothing to do with lawful. If you are ending the life of someone, it is murder.

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 3:59 PM


    If you are ending the life of someone, it is murder.

    Not according to the dictionary, dear. If youíre going to debate, learn the meanings of the words youíre using, mkay? It generally helps your argument.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:03 PM


    kill-
    Ėverb (used with object) 1. to deprive of life in any manner; cause the death of; slay.

    murder-
    the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

    I guess even when I look in the Webster dictionary if I deprive the life of an unborn child it is to kill. If I kill that is murder. Hmmm.

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 4:15 PM


    Bethany,

    exagerations (all day???) and missrepresentations about my antics aside.... I had a little respect for you up till you left out the part...where I aknowledged that what I was doing could indeed make someone uncomfortable, and I APOLOGIZED.

    Alas... humulity and apology apparently aren't christian virtues any more.

    Val,

    "And then he comes back on here and starts his same BS."

    I have not asked anyone to take off their pants again... per Jill's allowing me to continue posting (thank you Jill). Thanks for showing us your true color by lying.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 4:16 PM


    kill-
    Ėverb (used with object) 1. to deprive of life in any manner; cause the death of; slay.
    murder-
    the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
    I guess even when I look in the Webster dictionary if I deprive the life of an unborn child it is to kill. If I kill that is murder. Hmmm.

    Unlawfully killing, with malice aforethought. For abortion to be murder, it would have to be illegal, and the woman would have to be cackling with glee at ending the life of her spawn. As abortion is not illegal, and was completely legal until the 1880s, it is not currently murder; as no woman does it maliciously it never was.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:20 PM


    Less -

    "I listen to you, Iím just not convinced by you."

    What does this have to do with what I said? Nothing. I said that it was childish that Cameron cannot handle it when someone isn't, to use your words now, convinced by him.

    Also, since abortion is "murdering" a baby, this means you must look up the verb form of murder.

    1. To kill (another human) unlawfully.
    2. To kill brutally or inhumanly.
    3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.
    4. To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language.
    5. Slang To defeat decisively; trounce.


    To Kill brutally or inhumanly is a good one. I think everyone who sees an actual abortion being performed could say that ripping a baby to pieces fits that description.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:21 PM


    Dan,

    At six weeks it's a lot more than a clump of cells, hands, legs, etc are formed. Sorry your Dad gave you the wrong information.


    Dan: "I'm not Christian, nor do I believe in Jesus Christ being the son of God"

    I see now Erin, this is the devil who drove you away from your family and Christ.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:22 PM


    Less -

    It was once legal to watch Gladiators fight to the death.

    It was once legal to have Christians fed to the lions.

    It was once legal to nail someone to a cross and let them hang for days to die.

    It was once legal for a man to 'own' his wife.

    It was once legal to own humans as personal property and call them slaves.

    It was once legal to have parlor tricks play out during a court case to make sure the outcome.

    It was once legal to hang someone accused of being a witch.

    It was once legal to have children start working at the age of 5.

    It was once legal for a factory owner to work his employees as many hours and for as long as he wanted.

    I'm so glad that when something is legal it means it is right. Arent' you?

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:24 PM


    Cameron -

    "I have not asked anyone to take off their pants again... per Jill's allowing me to continue posting (thank you Jill). Thanks for showing us your true color by lying. "

    I said the same BS. Not the same "asking everyone to take off their pants" BS. If you remember you were attacking HisMan's daughter before Jill banned you. So, tell me exactly where I lied.

    You were banned for more than just what you did to Bethany. Which was the last straw by the way.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:28 PM


    Oh, yeah right jasper. Dan's been amazing to me all year and I was pagan well before I was with him.

    Valerie-

    It was once illegal for a woman to speak back to a man.

    It was once illegal for a black man and a white woman to get married.

    It was once illegal to have views different than that of your government.

    It was once illegal to write articles or books that went against the church teachings.

    I'm so glad that when something is illegal, it means that it is wrong.

    Posted by: Erin at May 23, 2007 4:29 PM


    I've seen an abortion, Valerie: I didn't consider it particularly brutal.

    I'm not saying that legal always equals right, I'm saying that abortion, legally, is not murder. I don't think that laws prohibiting gay marriage are right. But I wouldn't dispute that right now, that's the law.

    jasper, it is completely inappropriate to refer to Dan as a "devil." How do you know that she didn't change his religious beliefs: or perhaps they were attracted to each other based upon those shared beliefs? You assume too much.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:30 PM


    Erin -

    My point, which was obviously missed, is that if something is legal it doesn't make it right. It was once illegal to drink alcohol. It is now becoming illegal in many places to smoke in public.

    Laws do not make morality. Morality is supposed to assist in the law making.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:33 PM


    Bolded type = quotes from Less:

    Frankly, HisMan, IÔŅĹd date Cameron or Hal before you. I like being treated as an equal, with enough brain mass to decide what I do with my own body, thanks. And frankly, your testosterone-ridden calls to one on one combat are laughable. When one resorts to violence, one has failed in all other aspects of debate. Who was it, again, who said to turn the other cheek?

    I've noticed that the presence of testosterone accompanies the characteristic of a man to stay with and protect his mate and children. Some women don't want the protection, but I notice from observation that it's a lot more difficult to do the work of raising a family singly.

    I would also like to point out that, as a black belt in martial arts, willingness, even enthusiasm to resort to violence is as sure a sign of weakness as there ever was.

    Ummmmm, what's the study of martial arts for? The decision to physically defend oneself most often results in some harm to the other person. Most martial arts ethics weigh against initiating violence in the absence of a threat. But the perception of threat is individual, and there is preemptive self defense.


    If I became pregnant while abortion was outlawed, I would find every possible way to end the condition. I dislike being pregnant, and dislike the weakened state it puts me in.

    There are some dangers and commitments that are just too much for ya, Less. I was still able to get up a good kick while pregnant. It's not so bad. And my kids are are all in martial arts too. They will surpass me, and it's a good thing to see.

    My career and life are quite fast paced, and as I have the (enjoyable) tendency to put myself in dangerous situations to get a story, pregnancy would have an incredible impact upon my life. As journalism, particularly print journalism, is still predominantly male, becoming pregnant could impact my career in other ways.

    Kids are lightening fast. They could speed you up and make you more able to multi-task. Just a comment- that it's not a surprise the lbrl media is male oriented and a woman would feel a need to kill her kid before birth in order to stay in the game. My career and interests don't require that, fortunately.

    Between the fact that pregnancy would leave me unable to cover the stories I choose and could impact how I am seen within my job, I have no desire to become pregnant. As I am using two forms of contraception, know how to use both expertly, and am in a long-term relationship, I see no reason to abstain. If, however, I am one of the unlucky few who has contraception fail them, I will seek an abortion for the reasons mentioned above.

    This is an example of the trouble with artificial contraception. The cultural entrenchment has led people to think that pounding themselves with exogenous hormones is natural, and that pregnancy (a function for which the female body was designed) is an error.

    If circumstances were different, I could carry a pregnancy to term, assuming I havenÔŅĹt inherited any of the persistent family problems doing so. But as of now, I have no desire to. It isnÔŅĹt a flaw in my personality, or some imaginary ÔŅĹweakness.ÔŅĹ I just donÔŅĹt want kids. I donÔŅĹt see anything wrong with that, and IÔŅĹm sorry you do.

    You wouldn't have to think about killing your kids prior to birth if you didn't feel socially obligated to provide the type-of-sex-that-causes-pregnancy. It's a defective social system which leaves women feeling obligated to supply that particular amenity to males, while utterly denying the natural outcome, which is pregnancy.

    Addressing the testosterone laden men -- don't let these odd women squeeze it out of you. Though fewer of us ladies neeeeeeed the protection and the commitment, we still PREFER it, and frankly, I think a guy who doesn't display this kind of character is a poor candidate for passing on his genome.

    The liberals continue to clean themselves from the gene pool........

    Posted by: KB at May 23, 2007 4:37 PM


    Less -

    "But I wouldn't dispute that right now, that's the law."

    But disputing is how all the laws that Erin and I mentioned were changed. This is how injustice is corrected. You have to stand for what you believe and dispute it if you think it is wrong. Which, is why we all, pro-life and pro-choice, are here.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:37 PM


    ďI said the same BS. Not the same "asking everyone to take off their pants" BS. If you remember you were attacking HisMan's daughter before Jill banned you. So, tell me exactly where I lied.Ē
    I have never attacked his manís daughter, as she hasnít been here. Again... nice lie.
    ďYou were banned for more than just what you did to Bethany. Which was the last straw by the way. ď
    Yes, you got that right. Itís called good debate.
    You can continue making accusations, or maybe you could actually support this ďattackĒ BS with an example.

    Good luck tool.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 4:38 PM


    ďI said the same BS. Not the same "asking everyone to take off their pants" BS. If you remember you were attacking HisMan's daughter before Jill banned you. So, tell me exactly where I lied.Ē
    I have never attacked his manís daughter, as she hasnít been here. Again... nice lie.
    ďYou were banned for more than just what you did to Bethany. Which was the last straw by the way. ď
    Yes, you got that right. Itís called good debate.
    You can continue making accusations, or maybe you could actually support this ďattackĒ BS with an example.

    Good luck tool.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 4:38 PM


    Less, I know it has gotten waypast the post you adressed to me, but I'll answer anyways.

    I don't sdupport Hisman's threats or Camerons inuendo. I was just pointing out that at 22 Cameron is an adult, not a child.

    Bethany was not saying that you have to be married at 18 to be an adult, nor was I. We were simply saying that at 18 you have the full capacity to *be* an adult, and thus should be held to the standards of an adult.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:42 PM


    Val, you're such a tool.

    "I said the same BS. Not the same "asking everyone to take off their pants" BS. If you remember you were attacking HisMan's daughter before Jill banned you. So, tell me exactly where I lied."

    I have never attacked his man?s daughter, as she hasn?t been here. Again... nice lie. I suggest you try you condenscending dictionary referencing on your own thoughtless ramblings here and look up "attack"

    "You were banned for more than just what you did to Bethany. Which was the last straw by the way."

    Yes, you got that right. It?s called good debate.

    You can continue to make an @ss of yourself..with baseless accusations and rhetorical hyperbole, or maybe you could...omg... you know... actually...SUPPORT SOMETHING YOU SAY with an example. Seriously... it sounds like it's everywhere here... can't be too hard to find my "attacks"

    Good luck doorknob

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 4:43 PM


    ooops... what's wrong with this site?

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 4:45 PM


    Val, you're such a tool? Who is this geek/wack job calling a tool? He sounds so stupid, it's funny.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 23, 2007 4:47 PM


    I notice from observation that it's a lot more difficult to do the work of raising a family singly.

    I have no desire to have a family, so that oneís solved.

    But the perception of threat is individual, and there is preemptive self defense.

    Yup, and threatening someone over the internet isnít preemptive self defense. Its pathetic.

    I was still able to get up a good kick while pregnant.

    Iím not concerned with my ability to continue my martial arts training while pregnant: Iím much more concerned with the impact on my career, frankly.

    My career and interests don't require that, fortunately.

    My career doesnít require me to be childfree, but I will do better if I remain as such. As I have ever desire to remain childfree for the reason that I donít have any particular desire to have kids anyway, itís a good fit.

    pounding themselves with exogenous hormones is natural

    I have to be on birth control for medical reasons not relating to my desire to remain childfree.

    women feeling obligated to supply that particular amenity to males, while utterly denying the natural outcome, which is pregnancy.

    I frankly enjoy sex quite a bit. Iím sexually open and I love my orgasms. I just have no desire to have kids or be pregnant. If thatís denying the natural outcome, Iím fine with that. Sex has purposes other than procreation, and I donít think taking out that one unfortunate consequence is going to impact my desire for sex at all.

    we still PREFER it

    I find it sad that you prefer a man to protect you.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:48 PM


    Dan, Your dad would tell you (if he has any acedemic honesty) that a fetus is indeed "alive". No amount of twisting can change this. Sorry. You can "believe" it not to be true, but it doesn't make it so.

    As for the "clump of cells" arguement at 6 weeks the following are developed:


    Integumentary System:

    Formation of:
    Nail Beds
    Hair Follicles
    Sweat Glands

    Skeletal System:
    Formation of:
    Somites
    axial and appendecular cartilages

    Muscular system:

    Formation of:
    somites
    axial musculature

    Nervous system:

    Formation of:
    Neural tube
    CNS, PNS organisztion
    Growth of cerebrum

    Special Sense organs:
    Formation of:
    Eyes
    Ears
    Taste Buds
    Olfactory epitlelium

    Endocrine System

    Formation of:
    Tyhumus
    thyroid
    pituitary gland
    adrenal gland

    Cardiovascular System
    Heartbeat
    Formation of:
    Basic Heart Structure
    Major blood vessles
    Lymph nodes and sucts
    Blood formation in liver

    Respiratory System:

    Formation of:
    Trachea
    Lungs
    Extensive bronchial branching into mediastinum
    Diaphragm

    Digestive System:
    Formation of:
    Intestinal Track
    Liver
    Pancreas
    Yolk Sac
    Intestinal subdivisions
    intro villi
    salavary glands

    Urinary System:
    Allantois
    Formation of:
    Kidneys(metanephros)

    Reproductive System:
    Formation of:
    Mammary Glands

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 4:54 PM


    Less, you displayed extensive lbrl print media experience by editing out the most salient points in order to avoid addressing them.

    I understand that the point of debate is not to convert the debate opponent, but to use them as an educational tool to convey viewpoints and information to the audience.

    So, good people, read my post, read Less's answer, and remember that the bulk of print and television media is just like that.

    Save your money and allow lbrl media sales to continue the downward spiral.

    Off to work!

    KB

    Posted by: KB at May 23, 2007 5:05 PM


    Cameron -

    "I have never attacked his manís daughter, as she hasnít been here. Again... nice lie. "

    She was here on this post: http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/the_new_undergr.html#comments

    And you can see what Bethany had to say about the above link:
    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/prochoice_toler.html#comments

    Also, convient that you ask for proof when you know that the comments you made have been deleted. But, just for you, the definition of Harass:

    1. To irritate or torment persistently.
    2. To wear out; exhaust.
    3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.


    Notice #3. Repeated attacks. Which you admitted to:

    Most of the time I just ignore him, and Polly the Parrot (Heather4Life). However, sometimes I can't resist responding just to see what will happen next.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 03:16 PM

    As for myself goading him along.... I kind of feel like it shows/exemplifies they're true colors for all to see.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 03:51 PM

    In all honesty midnite... I intended to get a rise out of him.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 04:41 PM

    while I definitely goaded him on....
    His behavior, as opposed to asking one's father about their daughter as a course of disrespect, raises the only legitimate legal concerns.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 11:35 AM


    You admit the repeated attacks for the purpose of getting a rise out of him.

    And... another bit just for you:

    Will you be bringing your daughter? ;-D

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 02:21 PM

    But if you'd just hook me up with your daughter HisMan....

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 02:43 PM

    What's your daughter's name anyhow? I think it belittle's her to just talk about her as your daughter.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 22, 2007 03:45 PM

    Finally: HisMan's daughter is age consent.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 11:35 AM


    And these are just the ones that didn't get deleted.


    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 5:08 PM


    KB, are you having selective vowel deficiency for the word liberal, or is that just how you type? Or maybe its a secret code for those who seriously believe that the liberal media is ruining the world...

    Anyway. I addressed the points that seemed important. If there's something else you'd like me to address, point me to it. Otherwise, I think I got the main points of the posts.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 5:08 PM


    KB, this is for you and your post above:

    http://www.rockcentral.co.uk/quiz/content/files/images/applause.png

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 5:09 PM


    "Frankly, HisMan, I'd date Cameron or Hal before you. I like being treated as an equal, with enough brain mass to decide what I do with my own body, thanks."

    Thanks Less, if I were single (and younger) I'd be honored to date you anytime.


    Posted by: Hal at May 23, 2007 5:11 PM


    Hehe, if I were older and single we'd make a delightful couple. :P

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 5:15 PM


    that's the trouble, it's not your body, it's a child in your body, if it was your body, and the doctor sucked out the brains, than I think you might have issue with that!!

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 5:16 PM


    Dan: "Jill, I didn't crumple at all. When Erin and I got the news, we were both scared about what to do. We talked immediately about abortion, then backed off and talked of carrying the pregnancy to term and putting it up for adoption. We went through all of our options. We looked at what would be the best decision for both of us"

    ah, what was the best for us, never thinking about their child, it was only about them. so they outright murdered their child. It's quite sad, these young children having sex but can't deal with the consequences or the responsibity.

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 5:25 PM


    yep!!

    Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 23, 2007 5:30 PM


    Jasper,I'd like to point out again that they're not children. They are adults. As adults, they should be held culpable for their actions.

    I know it was not your intent, but so often society uses age as justification for actions. At 18, youth is no longer a valid excuse.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 5:35 PM


    Yes, I agree Lauren..they are adults (I meant children in the sense of their maturity level)

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 5:41 PM


    "It's quite sad, these young children having sex but can't deal with the consequences or the responsibity."

    not sad at all. They *did* deal with the consequences, you just don't approve of how they did it.

    And, I agree with lauren, Dan and Erin are certainly not "young children," maybe young adults.

    Posted by: hal at May 23, 2007 5:44 PM


    "It's quite sad, these young children having sex but can't deal with the consequences or the responsibity."

    not sad at all. They *did* deal with the consequences, you just don't approve of how they did it.

    And, I agree with lauren, Dan and Erin are certainly not "young children," maybe young adults.

    Posted by: hal at May 23, 2007 5:46 PM


    Less, if you went out with Cameron, you would be the only "brain mass" in that relationship!

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 23, 2007 5:47 PM


    I agree with Hal: they dealt with the consequences, just not in a way that you approve of.

    Heather, I'd be content so long as the guy was pro-choice. I would never date a guy who wasn't!

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 5:48 PM


    Nice try Val, but you canít seem to find anything that holds a candle to... say... maybe this:

    "Your nacissistic shrill and banter is truly beyond comprehension. By your definition of compassion, let's just kill everyone who presents a challenge or hardship to society. You must be a real a--hole. My God, let's kill that thing because....[insert lame justification here].You're a f--king Nazi. You make me puke. Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 01:50 PM"

    or maybe this...

    "You really think I'm a wimp don't you Cameron? I'd be happy to meet you anywhere, anytime, for a personal one on one. Posted by: HisMan at May 22, 2007 02:16 PM"

    All this before I even started ďgoadingĒ him.

    Come Val, nothing I said holds a candle to this... you really have to find something else.


    "She [HisManís Daughter] was here on this post:"

    But the nick sez HisMan. And where on the post did I attack her... assuming that it really was her and not just HisMan (which I did assume)?

    Again.. youíve no evidence of me attacking HisManís Daughter, and no evidence that it was really even HisManís daughter. Seriously... all said to her directly was "sup sugar"... OMG... ATTACK ATTACK... Sorry! I guess I should have called her @#$%'n NAZI.

    You are sooooo stupid Val! Sorry. Have to tell you that. Anyone so obliviously attempting to justify threats and such derserves to be called that.

    "And you can see what Bethany had to say about the above link:"

    Again.. Bethanyís biased comments regarding what happened on that SAME THREAD doesnít prove anything.

    "But, just for you, the definition of Harass:"

    Back-peddling from "attack"... ???

    "Notice #3. Repeated attacks. Which you admitted to:"

    Guess not... just while it was convenient to missrepresent?

    Nothing you can say, or that I did here justifies what HisMan has done.

    HisMan, unlike myself, has broken the law, and has resorted to threatening intimidation to silence those he disagrees with.

    You should really try to save some face Val and just stop trying to justify what heís done by tenuously exaggerating what Iíve done, because it doesnít hold a candle any way you look at it. Frankly, and Iíve never seen so much blind hatred, animosity, and ugliness since I came here and watch you all insult me every day, then have hissy fits and scream bloody murder (or "attack) when you get insulted back. You all are bunch of babies.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 5:52 PM


    "not sad at all. They *did* deal with the consequences, you just don't approve of how they did it."

    not sad at all? what don't you ask Erin if she wasn't sad.

    yea, they delt with it allright, the same way fanatical muslims deal with rape victims.

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 5:55 PM


    Erin said she has no regrets. I don't know of she was sad that day, but the situation is not sad.

    Posted by: hal at May 23, 2007 5:58 PM


    Cameron, I havn't been here since the beginning. Perhaps in the beginning you were a shining example of curteus discussion.

    From the point I've been coming here, however, you have done quite a bit to instigate fights. You now what you're doing. Don't pretend that you aren't coming on here to get a reaction. I don't think this could get much more obvious.

    The saddest part in all of this is that you *do* make valid arguements on occasion. Following up with "you idiot" makes it very hard for me to take you seriously.

    I agree that Hisman was out of line. I don't think anyone here believes differently. The thing is, we all know that you were *trying* to get a raise out of him. You admitted to this. It's hard for us to see you as a victim when you were so obviously pushing Hisman to his breaking point.

    Again, I ask that if you truly wish to engage in debate you stop the personal attacks. You know what you're doing. It isn't asking much for you to stop saying that someone is "sooooooooooo stupid" or making inflaming remarks about someone's child. You know what you were doing by saying "sup sugar" and it wasn't innocent. You wanted to provoe a response, you succeeded. Congratulations.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 6:03 PM


    "Erin said she has no regrets. I don't know of she was sad that day, but the situation is not sad."

    oh yea, she must feel proud!

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 6:50 PM


    - the idea that women should have as many children as possible

    Less, can you explain to me what kind of person that thinks that women should have "as many children as possible" does not think life in the womb is sacred?

    The same type of question could be applied to all of the other scenarios.

    So what about the idea that thereís a loving God, and yet all sorts of suffering happens? Or the idea that murder is wrong, but its okay when preformed by the state, as in the death penalty or wars? Are those not also moral conflicts?

    Less, you hate being controlled, correct? Would you rather God be a God who controlled everyone, or who gave people the ability to choose to do right or wrong, or to accept His grace, of their own free will?

    If God controlled all of the bad things that happened in this world, he would also be controlling you. You would have no choice but to obey what He said, regardless of how you may feel, you'd always do it by "instinct", because you'd basically be a robot.

    As for murder being wrong, I have always made it clear that killing of innocents is wrong. The legal killing of a guilty person, after they've had their trial, proven guilty, who has killed another human being in cold blood is not murder, it's justice. It is not justice to kill an innocent person who did nothing to deserve it.

    And it isnít that I donít believe abortion to be murder. It isnít murder. Period. Need me to post the definition again?

    No, I'm quite aware of what the definition of murder is. And I believe it fits. But just for you, maybe a definition of "slavery" would fit better.

    "The most extreme, coercive, abusive, and inhumane form of legalized inequality; people are treated as property."
    http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072500506/student_view0/chapter14/key_terms.html

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 7:24 PM


    Cameron -

    You asked for it. I was trying to be nice.

    Attacks/Harassment on HisMan and his daughter April 17:

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/the_new_undergr.html#comments

    Hey Daughter of His Man!!! Sup Sugar??

    If you're a satanist, you are technically a christian, because satan is a biblical figure necesitating God and Jesus and what not.

    ohhh what happened to Jesus' bo (His Man)??

    For a second there, I thought Jesus' bo was transgender... then His Daughter... whew!!

    His Dauther, Have you asked your father if your a an in-vitro left over... adopted for the purposes of being a pro-life poster baby?

    OMG.. that's got to be Jesus' bo... as opposed to in-vitro left-over.

    BTW.. if she's really that drop dead, she's hearing "sup sugar"

    Seeing how I love to kill pre-babies... I'd probably have offered to do it for her.

    Great... that means neither of them why she menstruates... how to calculate ovulation... etc... But I'll bet they can suck the plaque off each other's teeth just the same.

    I personally think that maybe they're slipping you a micky at communion.

    But what if your daughter went ahead and had it aborted??? What of your precious in-vitro left-over??
    ___________________

    Now here is just a sampling of the things you have said to us, all of these are BEFORE the above post. After I put the kids to bed, I can always go past April 17 if you like.

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/post_23.html#comments

    Jill would probably smear the blood on her face like war paint and charge the clinic ululating.

    You all be running out into the street with the pre-baby corpse and shoving it in the windows of cars passing by... Looky what abortion does... looky at the dead pre-baby... we're so rightous.

    The counselors were like a macabre version of paparazzi, waiting for a bloody version of the beaver shot.

    What do you do Beth? Shoplift then go home and self-flegullate or something??

    You must support NAMBLA Beth... pictures of children and such. They're exposing the autrocities of having an adult only sex world

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/can_a_woman_be.html#comments

    Perhaps if the abortion doctor met them at the closest church... seeing how all the zealots are at the clinic???

    I was whipping myself the other night for impure thoughts (killing abortion doctors), and I though... oh my god... I'm turning into my mother.

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/babies_aborted.html#comments

    This live birth stuff must really erk the pro-bloody-fetus-porn industry (Jill's trade), because it's such a waste to leave them laying on shelves to die when you could be throwing the bloody lil' bodies at cars and patients leaving clinics. I feel their pain!

    but I like doing HisBlood. I think I'll continue being a poser just to see how many "hell yas" i get from newbies here. It's a fine little litmus test don't you think!! After all, what are scared of.

    Keep up the shenanigans and let your true colors shine. HisBlood is proud

    I asked you a question coward.

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/and_you_thought.html#comments

    Let's analyze Jill's asinine conclusion...

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/the_harder_trut.html#comments

    Your capacity for responding is bordering on breathlessly inane... as oposed to your ussual inane.

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/may_need_a_new.html#comments

    My bad... but not all my bad. Try to provide more appropriate links in the future.

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/the_happysad_qu.html#comments

    I have a name for that, itís simple minded.

    Your pious judgement is wrong every time, all the time, under every circumstance. Seriously... how do you sleep with so much hate??

    How's this for truth His Man....Jesus was not buried.

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/paradox.html#comments

    Translation: i'm ignorant when it comes to the nuances of feminism and abortion.

    http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/04/post_24.html#comments

    Translation: women can only be trophy wives or diseased infected whores.

    _____________________

    And then you act surprised when people get angry. Gee... go figure....


    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 7:24 PM


    \My father, who is an OB/GYN, has taught me much about the fetal development, and I do know that when the abortion took place [6 weeks], the embryo was still technically just a cell cluster in an amniotic sack.

    Dan, I dont know why your father chose to mislead you about this. I posted to Erin in this thread with one of many pictures that I have of my baby Blessing, who died at 6 weeks in the womb. I took the picture myself. I have more if you'd like to see them...some very close up. Please go look at it and explain to me how that is simply a "cell cluster"? Do you realize you are insulting every woman who has lost a child in early pregnancy when you call them such terms which are not even true? You are basically telling them their child "didn't matter", regardless of whether it's indirect implication, this is what you're saying ,and this is the message that comes across to those of us who actually grieve our losses.

    You realize, by the way, that by that definition, you could describe every human on the planet. We basically are ALL just "cell clusters".

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 7:32 PM


    You go, Valerie!

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 7:34 PM


    Valerie, do you want me to dig up all the insulting things you guys have said, particularly HisMan? I have an entire post, and I'm sure I could go through these last few blog entries and get a few more: it's already two pages, I bet I could add another.

    Posted by: HumanAbstract Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 7:37 PM


    exagerations (all day???) and missrepresentations about my antics aside.... I had a little respect for you up till you left out the part...where I aknowledged that what I was doing could indeed make someone uncomfortable, and I APOLOGIZED.

    Cameron, perhaps I would have taken your apology as honest if it had actually been sincere. You enjoyed every moment of what you did, and you reveled in the thought that you imagined I was "cowering in fear" or something ridiculous like that. The only thing that made you apologize was your realization that you "may have" stepped over a boundary where I could have pursued legal action if I had wanted to. That is the only reason that I can see that you apologized. That is why I could not accept your apology. Sorry.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 7:41 PM


    BTW, Cameron, I'm not even angry with you about it. It didn't bother me. I know you were just being a jerk, but there are people out there who have much worse intentions, and since you are on the computer, people can only see the words on the screen and their imagination does the rest. You need to make better choices next time.

    P.S. Can you just let me know where I 'misrepresented' you?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 7:44 PM


    Jasper, my friend, you and I need to get a few things straight.

    "ah, what was the best for us, never thinking about their child, it was only about them. so they outright murdered their child. It's quite sad, these young children having sex but can't deal with the consequences or the responsibity."

    Thank to everyone who is supporting Erin and I. I appreciate the fact that you, and the doctors and counsellors we talked to, have treated us as adults and have acknowledged that we made some very adult decisions. Jasper, I am sorry that you don't agree with our decisions, but that is the way life works. We all have things we don't agree with in life, and, assuming that you're an adult, have probably seen your fair share of them. I may only be 20, but I've seen horrible things in my life and have done things that I'm not proud of. However, I stand firm by my decision and I support Erin in the decision she made, which I know was not an easy one to make.

    As for me being the wolf that lured the lamb away from her flock, she was pagan long before I met her. I've taken my first communion and I've been confirmed in the lutheran church, but I've lost my faith and learned to think outside the lines of what I was force-fed as a child. Even as a child and later as a teenager, I didn't believe in Jesus Christ as humanity's savior, nor did I believe him to be a heavenly being. I guess it's safe to say that I've never really believed in either Jesus or God. So, in this case, I've never been a part of the flock that I supposedly led Erin away from. I do not mock or say that your faith and beliefs are false and unfounded, I'm just saying that I don't share them.

    Now, I did call my father to confirm what I posted today about the development of a fetus along with the information that someone else posted about fetal development. He did prove me wrong, and I apologize and therefore retract my previous statement. However, I still do not believe that a 6-week old fetus is consciously living.

    Posted by: Dan at May 23, 2007 7:46 PM


    Lauren,

    "Cameron, I havn't been here since the beginning. Perhaps in the beginning you were a shining example of curteus discussion."

    This is an internet forum dedicated to a specific ideological agenda, and doing so completely divorced from reality, proportionality, and reason. People like me come here to gawk.

    So, no... no shining example, but I havenít threatened anyone... and I apologize when I go to far making fun of you all, or when having fun at otherís expense goes to far.

    My initial posts on each thread are usually a critical analysis of Jillís blog entry, in which I often ridicule her for lying, implying erroneously, or ulterior motives, and I do so by supply evidence or a coherent course of logic. A couple of times Iíve been off base and wrong though and I apologized to her, but mostly right on the mark... which, not so much recently, usually resulted in my post getting deleted, particularly if I pointed out gross embarrassing errors with Jillís blog entry.

    With other people, I will point out when they say something stupid. Which, given the ubiquitous foolishness here, not surprisingly results in numerous personal insults directed at me. Few people here actually try to support their notions or advance their arguments, they simply find personal fault with those who criticize their baseless notions and flawed logic. They do this by assuming (e.g. that otherís who agree with me are actual me posing as others) or hyperbole (e.g. suggesting that my greeting, "sup sugar," is sexual harassment).
    Here are some other examples of my not so shining behavior, and the disproportionate responses they elicited.

    When I pop in, April 10, I painted an all too realistic picture of what Jill would do with a fetus if she got a hold of it...

    "What's most disgusting about this, is imagining what would have happened if the "counselors" had actually gotten a hold of the fetus and started parading it around like a trophy. Who's really ugly now? Jill would probably smear the blood on her face like war paint and charge the clinic ululating. Posted by: Cameron at April 10, 2007 03:53 PM"

    Response...

    "Cameron, you are vile, wicked. I cannot imagine the darkened mind that would think what up, never mind actually type it. Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 10, 2007 04:19 PM"

    I asked if that was maybe too close to home.

    Response

    "Cameron, I've held one of those aborted babies until he died. Just SHUT UP. Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 10, 2007 04:25 PM"

    My response was:

    "Explain to me what the *&$% they were trying to do?? I really don't think a "proper burial" was at the top of their minds, and you don't either, hence the "shut up""

    Beth pipes in here also ... though by ridiculously turning the tables:

    "Cameron, you're a hyopcrite. If this were a pro-'choice' story about pro-life women 'waving fetuses' as you so eloquently described in your sick fantasy, you'd have no problem with it."

    After this, and I think some places before this, where the comments were too good, Jill deletes most of my posts regardless of content.

    In the April 12 Polish abortion thread... MK threatens to have me banned for humorously deconstructing an argument. MK declares that I am rude, however when I ask him why he thinks that, he cannot seem to elaborate on what particular thing that I said was rude.

    Basically, someone sez something stupid here, and I make fun of them.

    MK and I have a few confrontations, but it mostly remains tit for tat friendly ribbing... like any other similarly polarized exchange.

    Jill pops in a few days later and responds to my erroneous accusations (which I conceded were wrong) with...

    "Cameron, if you were a man, I'd swear you have small penis complex. I was there, silly girl. The link was to a written transcipt I gave orally. Posted by: Jill Stanek at April 13, 2007 03:39 PM"

    I think I really got under HisManís skin back on April 13 when many of us got engaged in a lengthy and surprisingly civil debate about the bible. I argued that Jesus was not in fact buried. Oddly enough, that particular thread stays relatively polite with only a few maturity and intelligence digs getting flung about by pretty much everyone. But I think this blaspheme was festering in HisManís mind, and he starts loosing all cool with me after this.

    Things really get ugly with HisMan when Jill leaves on vacation and letís her lilí clique here post for her. HisManís first submission is nothing more than bible verse cut ní past, but heís feed back junky and hovering on the thread, stirring it up. He wanted attention and he got it, despite my trying to direct others to what I thought was actually a worthy discussionóValís post preceeding HisManís. This is when hisman looses his cool again.

    I criticized his blog entry for lack of substance, and deservingly so, and received this response.

    "Cameron,Since you vaccillate between being a rather intelligent pro-deather and a juvenile, my guess would be that you still masturbate regularly? Can't get girls? What is it? Are you just ugly? Zits maybe? Or, don't tell me, I know, it's your lame personality. Posted by: His Man at April 19, 2007 10:17 PM"

    Again.. there's bears no resemblance to civil debate or even the level of conduct I engage in... actually talking about what's said as opposed to people in general. I just ignored him and didnít insult him back... instead, I tried to make my point by posting cut-n-paste scriptures from about 50 different religions without ever having any discussion about it.

    Next: Then we get to HisManís daughter. Ssomewhat belatedly, after numerous posts and not seeming to have anything else to deride me about, HisMan goes back to an earlier post and decides to perceive my tongue in cheek greeting of his daughter (Sup sugar) as some sort of threat.

    "You're lucky this is cyberspace because if you ever disrespected her in my presence by saying "Sup Sugar?", well, I think you can imagine....what any self-repsecting dad would do."

    Other glowing comments include....

    "Camsgottheruns and SMOG are are back. Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 01:03 PM"

    "Cameron is a living fart. The site just stinks up when he's on it. When you have a minute go back and look at his posts. He's a blaspehmous wimp. Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 01:44 PM"

    Then, when other people ask HisMan why the insults, he responds...

    "Sorry, the Bible is the Sword of the Spirit. I choose to wield it. Posted by: His Man at April 23, 2007 02:04 PM"

    I could go on an on... the point is that nobody here, particularly those making false accusations in order to facilitate they're own unwholesome behavior, are any sort of "shining example" of curteousness.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 8:26 PM


    Dan, Erin,

    Your child would've been so wonderful, you never would've regreted having him/her. Yea, it may have been a lttle tough at your age going to school and raising a child, but 10, 15, 20 years down the road you would've looked back been proud of the fact you didn't terminate his life. All of the memories, taking him to school, etc. There is hope:

    Convert to pro-life and spread the word to other students that abortion is never a solution.

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 8:26 PM


    "P.S. Can you just let me know where I 'misrepresented' you?"

    You said I spent all day on your blog.

    I don't know how much time I spent there, but it certainly wasn't all day... probably took me 20-40 minutes to read everything and check out the site. Then come back again later and apologized for the post I left on your blog. Then came back again the next day to see how you handled it.

    What I did was not illegal, but it was not nice either, and after seeing your face, and reading about your family, I felt bad about it because you really didn't deserve it. I did visualize you.. but not cowering in a corner. I visualized you annoyed and complaining about me to your husband, and him telling you to just get off the fricken computer. My response to you was disproportionate, not unlike HisMan's response to me, and, at least immediately after, your response to me was not to make a big deal about it. Which I totaly respected given that everyone here is all about conflating and inflating any personal flaw such to dismiss arguments illigitimately. This place is ussually one accusation after the other... but you seemed to refrain some... at least till now... where you've jumped on the put-cam-on-the-defense-bandwagon rather than actually addressing the genuine problem here... threatening people.

    Posted by: Cameron at May 23, 2007 8:45 PM


    "Your child would've been so wonderful, you never would've regreted having him/her."

    How do you know that? Trying to make them feel bad? For all we know, Erin might have had a miscarriage the next month. Or, they might have given the child up for adoption. (Hwho knows, they might have regretted that).

    The have the next 15 years to have children if they want.

    I could have just as easily said "you made the right decision and will never regret it,"

    however, I don't know, you don't know. We all do the best we can with what we're faced with. Having been in a similar situation as these two, I have nothing but respect for them and wish them the best.

    Posted by: hal at May 23, 2007 9:10 PM


    "How do you know that? Trying to make them feel bad?"

    why should they feel bad, they have no regrets, they're not sad, like you said Hal.

    "I could have just as easily said "you made the right decision and will never regret it,"

    no you couldn't have Hal, because abortion is not something you can look back at and be proud of, but having a child is.

    "We all do the best we can with what we're faced with"

    Abortion is not anybody's best

    "however, I don't know, you don't know"

    I can almost say with certainty that once they had the child, they would not regret their own child.

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 9:32 PM


    "Having been in a similar situation as these two, I have nothing but respect for them and wish them the best."

    do have any regrets Hal?

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 9:37 PM


    Jasper, none.

    Not once, not ever. Nope.


    Posted by: hal at May 23, 2007 9:42 PM


    "Jasper, none.

    Not once, not ever. Nope."

    You know Hal, when somebody says "No, No, No, No" like you did to my question. That means Yes.

    Posted by: jasper at May 23, 2007 9:48 PM


    You said I spent all day on your blog.
    I don't know how much time I spent there, but it certainly wasn't all day... probably took me 20-40 minutes to read everything and check out the site.

    I didn't mean literally...I just meant that I saw that you had been to so many pages, I assumed it had been all day. Agreed.

    Then come back again later and apologized for the post I left on your blog. Then came back again the next day to see how you handled it.
    What I did was not illegal, but it was not nice either, and after seeing your face, and reading about your family, I felt bad about it because you really didn't deserve it. I did visualize you.. but not cowering in a corner. I visualized you annoyed and complaining about me to your husband, and him telling you to just get off the fricken computer. My response to you was disproportionate, not unlike HisMan's response to me, and, at least immediately after, your response to me was not to make a big deal about it.

    Cameron, I appreciate your sincere words. I wish that this particular part of Cameron would be a part of the board more often. Since you were so nice as to apologize so openly and sincerely, I will not bring it up again.

    Which I totaly respected given that everyone here is all about conflating and inflating any personal flaw such to dismiss arguments illigitimately. This place is ussually one accusation after the other... but you seemed to refrain some... at least till now... where you've jumped on the put-cam-on-the-defense-bandwagon rather than actually addressing the genuine problem here... threatening people.

    Cameron, aren't you constantly putting us on the defense? Especially Jill. There are times that you post very intelligently and do not act immature...and these times are the times that Rasqual refers to as Cameron II. I wish Cameron II would stay, and we could have much nicer, less insulting remarks flying back and forth. However, most of the time, you have to fling insults carelessly, and randomly, instead of trying to engage in a sincere debate. It makes it appear that the only reason you are here is to try to get people angry with you.

    If this is what you're trying to do, you're getting what you want.

    I don't understand why you would try to get people mad at you, then complain when they respond in the same manner as you did.

    Anyway, thanks again for your sincerity in this post above. And I hope I'll see more of the sincere Cameron...because I really hate being at odds with anyone, pro-choice or life.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 23, 2007 9:50 PM


    Less -

    "Valerie, do you want me to dig up all the insulting things you guys have said, particularly HisMan? I have an entire post, and I'm sure I could go through these last few blog entries and get a few more: it's already two pages, I bet I could add another. "


    1st of all, Less, Cameron asked me to do this.

    "Come Val, nothing I said holds a candle to this... you really have to find something else. "

    "Seriously... all said to her directly was "sup sugar"
    (this statement has been proven to be a lie)

    "You are sooooo stupid Val! Sorry. Have to tell you that. Anyone so obliviously attempting to justify threats and such derserves to be called that. "


    I even started my post telling him I didn't want to do it, but he asked me to.

    Also, Less, I would like for you to notice that I posted approx. 30 seperate insults/harassing statements from Cameron from April 10 - April 17. And I'm sure I missed some. 30 seperate inappropriate statements in just 7 days. Not to mention the 9 comments that I found just on this post alone. I am not posting anything anyone else has said, only Cameron. If you feel it necessary to attempt to lump us ALL into your quotes in an attempt to "save" Cameron, feel free. Cameron attempts to pull off innocence, which we all know isn't true. I'll give you an example of his BS....

    Quote from Cameron today:

    "In the April 12 Polish abortion thread... MK threatens to have me banned for humorously deconstructing an argument. MK declares that I am rude, however when I ask him why he thinks that, he cannot seem to elaborate on what particular thing that I said was rude. "

    1st of all, on that day, Cameron was posting as HisBlood and Chuck. So, he was playing 3 different people. When Jill asked him to stop, his response: "Oh... but I like doing HisBlood. I think I'll continue being a poser just to see how many "hell yas" i get from newbies here. It's a fine little litmus test don't you think!! After all, what are scared of. I'll stop with the posers as soon as you stop censoring. "

    Jill was censoring his BS. Not his comments that 'proved us wrong'. But his BS. Why do you think he had to harass us as HisBlood and Chuck? Because he was stirring up trouble.

    Now, for what he said that MK wanted to ban him for:

    "That's what we call selective hearing. You're not listening for the unwholesome aspects within your own camp, but they're there. I'll be sure to let you know the next time I do hear it. In all fareness thogh, it's ussually infered by comments such as "using abortion as contraceptive," rather than overt. But occasionally the mysogeny comes out of its dark lil' corner of their mind and they'll let loose with the vulgar rhetoric. "

    That comment was in response to Heather4life questioning him when he called post-abortive women whores:

    "The pre-babies in jars reminds me of a technique I use in Sunday school with my students. I show them pictures of such fetuses in jars and explain to them what happened. Many of the children start crying, and it is then that we all hold hands and console each other by asking baby Jesus' forgiveness for the cruel and murderous whores who've commited such bloody crimes against the lord."

    he posted that one as Hisblood.

    Let's continue:

    "There are reasonable conclusions, but youíre like Pro-lifeís worst friend. Keep up the shenanigans and let your true colors shine. HisBlood is proud

    ;-D "

    "O goody! What are you going to lie about now Jill????

    Let me guess... stem cells are turning their pre-heads towards presumed mothers upon disection??"

    And then he asks MK why she said "I am about this far from taking a vote and having you banned from this site.You are rude, ignorant and arrogant.Now for you faults...But the worst is that you're not even funny or clever. Just a jerk.Don't you have homework or something?" Her response (which included more than just Cameron because of the nastiness on that day, maybe that is why Cameron is confused and doesn't seem to remember that she did answer his question.)

    "You use vulgar language, Blaspheme our God, make fun of our religion, call us names, attack Jills posts (not because you have anything to say, but precisely because you don't) and are generally ungracious."

    And then...since MK didn't give him a specific example he says:

    "I figured as much!

    Can't even elaborate on the "rude" statement. Probably forgot you said it though. Or you don't have pre-made form response ... such "baby killer" "pre-baby" ..

    Sorry if I transcended the ussually back-slapping fest y'all have here. "


    Do you really want me to continue? I can prove more of his lies if you would like?

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 10:17 PM


    I can't help it. His lying is just too much...

    Let's go back to April 10.

    He says:

    "I asked if that was maybe too close to home. "

    No...what you really said was:

    "Oh.. Come on Jill... you're just mad because you know it's true. You all be running out into the street with the pre-baby corpse and shoving it in the windows of cars passing by... Looky what abortion does... looky at the dead pre-baby... we're so rightous. "

    And then :

    "Beth pipes in here also ... though by ridiculously turning the tables: "

    Now Cameron...why dont' you tell them what you said BEFORE Bethany "pipes in".

    "So what's the pearl here??? Bringing-up such a gruesome story in the first place so you could put it in peoples' faces and try to make some sort of self-righteous point at the expense of an unfortunate couple in IL?? Nice!

    I really like how everyone started out speculating how pro-choicers might defend such a thing, as though making it political capital isn't just a bit unconscionable to begin with. The counselors were like a macabre version of paparazzi, waiting for a bloody version of the beaver shot.

    You should really think about this stuff a little better. You look like a 5 year old screaming how mature and old enough you are as you cry and grudgingly stomp-off to bed."

    hmm...Bethany's response makes a bit more sense now doesn't it?

    oh...And Bethany had more on that post then what you copied and pasted...

    "The reason Jill posts these gruesome stories (at least you have the ability to admit it's gruesome), is to expose these people for what they're doing, to raise awareness so that people can know what is happening behind the label of "PRO CHOICE". "

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 10:36 PM


    And for some more lies:

    Cameron said today:
    "I criticized his blog entry for lack of substance, and deservingly so, and received this response. "

    Now...let's be honest with everyone...

    What you said was:

    "Lazy and vacuous."

    "Don't even get him started Less... he's a feed-back junky!"

    "For those of you not interested in helping His Man get his cyber rocks off...

    Val's got a great blog post today... right before this one. Good discussion fodder. "

    And then from today's post:

    "Next: Then we get to HisManís daughter. Ssomewhat belatedly, after numerous posts and not seeming to have anything else to deride me about, HisMan goes back to an earlier post and decides to perceive my tongue in cheek greeting of his daughter (Sup sugar) as some sort of threat.

    "You're lucky this is cyberspace because if you ever disrespected her in my presence by saying "Sup Sugar?", well, I think you can imagine....what any self-repsecting dad would do."


    um.. Cameron...when did Hisman post that? oh, yea... Posted by: His Man at April 17, 2007 11:07 PM

    I noticed you left that out. But what did you say before that?

    "For a second there, I thought Jesus' bo was transgender... then His Daughter... whew!!

    His Dauther,

    Have you asked your father if your a an in-vitro left over... adopted for the purposes of being a pro-life poster baby? Seriously... your pa's got some zeal, and you should consider...

    Posted by: Cameron at April 17, 2007 10:45 PM"

    ""Cameron, just stop."

    OMG.. that's got to be Jesus' bo... as opposed to in-vitro left-over.

    Posted by: Cameron at April 17, 2007 10:57 PM"

    "If women slut around, they diserve to be strapped to a table and forced to give birth... then take the kid away from them and give it someone that actually apreciates life.

    Hell ya!

    Posted by: Cameron at April 17, 2007 11:05 PM"


    You made comments at 10:45, 10:57 and 11:05. HisMan comment was at 11:07.

    Would like to explain to me how: "Ssomewhat belatedly, after numerous posts and not seeming to have anything else to deride me about, HisMan goes back to an earlier post"


    I am beginning to believe that telling the truth is something that you don't understand....

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 23, 2007 11:05 PM


    Thank you, Valerie, for clarifying what I was responding to. Without that extra information it doesn't make much sense.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 7:22 AM


    Ha, I had to laugh. "Cameron is just a 22 year old kid?" Try a 22 year old MAN with a lot of growing up to do. I know 13 year olds that demonstrate more maturity.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 24, 2007 7:41 AM


    Dan, Do you believe that a born anacephalic (no or little brain mass) is a "person"? What I mean is, should a living anacephalic neo-nate be afforded the same protective rights afforded to a "normal" neo-nate?

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 7:42 AM


    Woke up thinking about Dan and Erin. Such a tragedy, particularly now that you've shared you're splitting up after your abortion, making my prediction come true much faster than anticipated. I know, I know. It's not because of the abortion. The abortion has drawn you closer.

    Your story has really impacted me, since I pseudo-know you via cyberspace. I guess I'm more distraught than either of you, but that's what makes me pro-life and you pro-abortion.

    Dan, did your ob/gyn dad commit the abortion? Just curious.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 10:02 AM


    Jill- Dan's dad did not perform the abortion. I had it done by a very sweet lady doctor at the Planned Parenthood near our college.

    Posted by: Erin at May 24, 2007 10:51 AM


    Jasper...

    "convert to pro-life and spread the word to other students that abortion is never a solution."

    This puts me in mind of trying to brainwash someone.

    "You know Hal, when somebody says "No, No, No, No" like you did to my question. That means Yes."

    This sounds like rapist mentality. Remember kids, NO means NO.

    Posted by: Stephanie at May 24, 2007 10:55 AM


    "I had it done by a very sweet lady doctor at the Planned Parenthood near our college."

    deception, deception, deception

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 10:55 AM


    To add, Of all the women I know who have had abortions, only 1 of them stayed with the man. They have other children and they are married. Everone else broke up.

    Posted by: Heather4life at May 24, 2007 10:57 AM


    "This sounds like rapist mentality. Remember kids, NO means NO."


    yes, that probably is not correct, maybe Hal doesnt have any regrets of murdering his children..

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 10:59 AM


    Jill, your sarcasm not withstanding, do me a favor and get down off your high horse and join the rest of us lowly peons back here in reality. You're not some righteous crusader for this jihad against abortion. You're just an average woman who has an opinion.

    By the way, I am curious. Were you not loved enough as a child, and that makes you lash out and try to belittle people to build your self-esteem? Is it just that Jill needs a hug? Just curious.

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 11:46 AM


    Correct my dear friend, except we don't call it "murder."

    Don't mind if you do though. It makes you sound like some kind of fanatic, and thus it's easier to discount your views....

    Posted by: Hal at May 24, 2007 11:48 AM


    "yes, that probably is not correct, maybe Hal doesnt have any regrets of murdering his children.."

    What is not correct, Jasper?

    Posted by: Stephanie at May 24, 2007 12:02 PM


    Dan, the only part of my previous post that I wrote with any sense of sarcasm was, "I know, I know. It's not because of the abortion. The abortion has drawn you closer."

    Other than that, my lament was real, and my question re: your dad was serious.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 12:08 PM


    @ Lauren,

    "Dan, Do you believe that a born anacephalic (no or little brain mass) is a "person"? What I mean is, should a living anacephalic neo-nate be afforded the same protective rights afforded to a "normal" neo-nate?"

    That's actually a very interesting question. Let me do some research on it, and I'll get back to you!

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 12:10 PM


    Jill,

    Please excuse me for not trusting your so called "real" lament. You've already shown me your malicious side, so now if you try to be nice, you're not going to get trust.

    As for my father, no, he didn't perform the abortion. He's an obstetrician/gynecologist, on the National Board of Osteopathic Medicine, and is regarded as one of the best doctors in his field in the Chicago and Chicagoland area. I believe he is pro-life, but he does advocate abortion under certain circumstances [IE Rape, etc]

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 12:22 PM


    Dan, understood. I've honestly just grown very sad. I honestly woke up thinking about you and Erin this morning.

    You've been so forthcoming with your abortion and future plans, it's hard to keep picking at.

    There's plenty I could keep hammering you on, but your scenario has just borne out as so tragic to me, I would consider myself mean to keep at it. I feel sorry for you now. Can't explain emotions.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 12:30 PM


    Dan, re: "feeling sorry"...

    I see your email addresses. I know where you go to school. I know you and Erin are both very bright, and I've said you're forthright. You seem like good kids, pardon my matriarchy.

    You simply played house and weren't mature enough to handle reality. I visualize your lost baby. I visualize what could have been... what should have been the road you and Erin chose... and it would have been hard but so superior to the road you chose. I feel sorry for you for that.

    I know your future. I know you'll never get over this. I know it will haunt you forever, unless you come to grips and seek forgiveness. I feel sorry for you for that.

    In the not too distant future, you and Erin won't be speaking any more. The thought of one another will raise an indescribable feeling you won't want to foster. So you'll slowly stop communicating. And your somewhat broken lives lives will go on apart. I feel sorry for you for that.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 12:39 PM


    "That's actually a very interesting question. Let me do some research on it, and I'll get back to you!"

    Dan, you should've done your research on unborn children before you allowed your son to slaughtered and sucked through a tube.

    "You're not some righteous crusader for this jihad against abortion. You're just an average woman who has an opinion."

    Dan, do you have any idea about Jill's story? I would suggest you get your facts straight. Jill is party responsibe for getting legislation passed to protect the unborn and babies born alive who were aborted.

    http://www.nrlc.org/Federal/Born_Alive_Infants/BAIPAsigned.html


    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 12:46 PM


    Jasper, you aren't adding anything to the argument. Shut up already.

    Posted by: Stephanie at May 24, 2007 12:49 PM


    We don't know whether our fetus was a boy or a girl, jasper.

    Posted by: Erin at May 24, 2007 12:53 PM


    Jill: "I know your future. I know you'll never get over this. I know it will haunt you forever, unless you come to grips and seek forgiveness. I feel sorry for you for that."

    Jill, you don't know that. You don't know any of that. This kind of statement is what first provoked me to leave comments on this site. You guys think that abortion haunts people forever. It may for some, but not for all. I know that it doesn't. Not just me, but others I know who have gone through it. I don't know dozens, but I know some, and everyone woman I know who had an abortion, every one, is fine with her decision. I'm not saying every women in American is like that, but my sample is as valid as Heather's.

    Posted by: Hal at May 24, 2007 1:01 PM


    From freerepublic:
    " Women who have had abortions suffer an increased risk of anxiety, depression, and suicide. A study published in a recent edition of the Journal of Anxiety Disorders found that women who aborted their unintended pregnancies were 30 percent more likely to subsequently report all the symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder than those women who had carried their unintended pregnancies to term.

    A study of a state-funded medical insurance program in California published in the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry in 2002 showed that the rate of mental health claims for women who aborted was 17 percent higher than those who had carried their children to term.

    And, according to a 1996 article in the British Medical Journal and a 2002 article in the Southern Medical Journal, the risk of death from suicide is two to six times higher for women who have had abortions when compared, again, with women who have given birth."


    Also, this study below was done by a pro-choice athiest, professor David M. Fergusson:

    Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health

    * David M. Fergusson11Christchurch Health and Development Study, Christchurch, New Zealand,
    * L. John Horwood11Christchurch Health and Development Study, Christchurch, New Zealand, and
    * Elizabeth M. Ridder11Christchurch Health and Development Study, Christchurch, New Zealand

    *
    1Christchurch Health and Development Study, Christchurch, New Zealand


    Abstract

    Background: The extent to which abortion has harmful consequences for mental health remains controversial. We aimed to examine the linkages between having an abortion and mental health outcomes over the interval from age 15Ė25 years.

    Methods: Data were gathered as part of the Christchurch Health and Development Study, a 25-year longitudinal study of a birth cohort of New Zealand children. Information was obtained on: a) the history of pregnancy/abortion for female participants over the interval from 15Ė25 years; b) measures of DSM-IV mental disorders and suicidal behaviour over the intervals 15Ė18, 18Ė21 and 21Ė25 years; and c) childhood, family and related confounding factors.

    Results: Forty-one percent of women had become pregnant on at least one occasion prior to age 25, with 14.6% having an abortion. Those having an abortion had elevated rates of subsequent mental health problems including depression, anxiety, suicidal behaviours and substance use disorders. This association persisted after adjustment for confounding factors.

    Conclusions: The findings suggest that abortion in young women may be associated with increased risks of mental health problems.

    ***************

    There are many other studies which show a link between a woman's mental health after abortion.

    I do not know the effects of abortion on men, but I would like to see some studies done not only on the maternal reactions to abortion, but the paternal reactions as well.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 1:26 PM


    "elevated rates of subsequent mental health problems" does not mean Erin and Dan will "never get over this" or be haunted forever.

    How much are the rates elevated? From what to what? from 1% to 2% is a significant elevation, but would still mean 98% are fine.

    Posted by: hal at May 24, 2007 1:32 PM


    I don't know, Hal, that's just the abstract. I will try to figure out how to read the entire thing so I can find that information for you.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 1:35 PM


    "Jasper, you aren't adding anything to the argument. Shut up already."

    No Stephanie, we don't have to "shut up" here for speaking the Truth. Go over to leftist blogs who ban people right away for saying Abortion is wrong.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 1:35 PM


    Hal, okay I found it. Here is a link to the entire study:
    http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:IfdGmFuO38AJ:www.prolife.org.uk/pdfs/Abortion_in_young_women_NZ.pdf&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

    And here is one of the sections (this is a screenshot), which tells of the percentages of increase in mental problems:

    http://www.preciousinfants.com/abortionstudy.jpg

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 1:46 PM


    Thanks Bethany. I won't dismiss it out of hand, the increase appears significant in some areas, but it sure doesn't support Jill's attack on Dan and Erin.

    Even so, the study uses a small sample, and I'm not sure how they dealt with the question of causation vs. correlation. the women who decided to have abortion might have done so becuase of more difficult circumstances then the women who had the babies. Thus, they might already been at higher risk, and the conditions were not "caused by abortion." those particular women, might have had the same (or worse) problems without the abortions.

    I'll try to dig into the research when I have more time.

    Posted by: Hal at May 24, 2007 1:52 PM


    I believe they went through all of that...they were very, very thorough. Plea time. If I didn't have to leave to go into town in just a minute, I'd copy and paste the most relevant info now to save you time. I might just do that tomorrow or tonight. :)

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 2:05 PM


    Dan/Hal, as for my "malicious" (Dan) "attack," (Hal), let's get one thing straight. Who is actually the malicious attacker here, the one(s) aborting or the one(s) speaking against the one(s) who aborting? Get real.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 2:07 PM


    Oops...don't know how I made that typo. I meant to say, please do look into it when you have time.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 2:07 PM


    What? Are they the same person?

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 2:09 PM


    Ok, after checking it, I think i must have interpreted your slash mark. Sorry about that.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 2:10 PM


    *misinterpreted

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 2:11 PM


    Erin, 12:53p, said: "We don't know whether our fetus was a boy or a girl, jasper."

    Erin, your care to use scientific terminology to prop your ideology/obfuscate what you aborted has verged over the edge of ridiculousness.

    To be consistent you should have said, "We don't know whether our fetus was male or female, jasper." "Boy" and "girl" indicate personhood, Erin, humanity.

    It's very hard for you pro-aborts to cover all your tracks, isn't it?

    And get back to me when you're carrying a wanted baby and tell me whether you're calling him/her a fetus.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 2:22 PM


    Bethany-

    Mental health problems don't intimidate me. I don't think there's any room in there for any new issues.

    Posted by: Erin at May 24, 2007 2:53 PM


    Hal -

    "the women who decided to have abortion might have done so becuase of more difficult circumstances then the women who had the babies. Thus, they might already been at higher risk, and the conditions were not "caused by abortion." those particular women, might have had the same (or worse) problems without the abortions. "


    You may not know this, but this is how pro-choice has always covered the "there are no harmful after effects to abortion". Do you have any idea how many studies have been dismissed because of this attitude? When will it be good enough? when the scientist have the women monitored 24/7 for their entire life?

    Project Rachel
    Silent No More
    afterabortion.com
    Rachel's vinyard ministries
    Safe Haven ministries
    Healing Hearts
    Inner Healing
    Sisters of life

    This is just a sampling of organizations that have been started, most of the nationwide, because of emotional problems after abortion. Do you really think that each and every one of them (including the ones I don't have time to list) was started for only a few women? Almost every Catholic Church/Hospital has ministries for this. Do you really think all this is for woman had problems before their abortion therfore we must dismiss them?

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 2:59 PM


    Ok Jill, for a second I thought you were actually being nice up until I read your last couple of posts regarding Erin and I. Suffice it to say that you keep making these assumptions about Erin and I without knowing who we truly are. I know that Erin doesn't feel comfortable with me talking about my past on this forum, so if you want to get an understanding of who I am, just email me and I wouldn't mind talking to you.

    I would like to ask, though. Have you ever heard the saying, "Don't assume. It makes an ass of yoU and me?" When you assume that we'll stop talking, and that our actions will haunt us, you're making an uneducated image in your head of who we are.

    I am haunted by memories of my past. Blood has stained my hands and my conscience, and I will always seek atonement for my actions. However, in regards to this abortion, I do not regret it happening when it did. Were Erin and I in a different situation [IE Out of college, financially stable, ready to start a family, etc], I might have chosen differently, especially since I have a very low sperm count and Erin getting pregnant was somewhat of a miracle in my eyes. But, given that we are both in school, financially unstable, and not mature enough to handle this burden, I stand firm in my belief that we did the right thing.

    I think you are a good person, Jill. A bit radical and maybe a little misguided, but at heart, you seem to have good intention. Maybe someday you'll drop you facade of cruelty and start reaching out in a different manner when it comes to something you disagree with. Until then, though, I can only pity you.

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 3:12 PM


    Jill- I ask my neighbors if their cats and dogs are boys or girls. It doesn't indicate personhood. It indicates gender.

    Posted by: Erin at May 24, 2007 3:16 PM


    Jasper,

    Do me a favor, man. Please, please, PLEASE just let it die. I get it. You're Christian and don't like me because I'm not. Fine. Whatever.

    Reading your comments is like talking to a myna bird that was raised Southern Baptist.

    Yeesh

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 3:21 PM


    "Do me a favor, man. Please, please, PLEASE just let it die. I get it. You're Christian and don't like me because I'm not. Fine. Whatever."

    I didn't say that at all Dan. We're just trying to get yourself and Erin to see the truth. If you want lies, there are plenty of leftist blogs you can go to that think abortion is just swell.

    Posted by: jasper Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 4:10 PM


    "And get back to me when you're carrying a wanted baby and tell me whether you're calling him/her a fetus."

    @Jill: I have a friend who's due in June and she calls her baby a "fetus". She says it creeps her out to think of it as a "baby". Said baby/fetus is also very much wanted and her birth will be very much welcome.

    Posted by: Rae at May 24, 2007 4:12 PM


    No Jasper, what I wan is for you to open your eyes and realize that truth is all relative. You believe in what you say is the truth. I believe in what I say is the truth. We're going to butt heads over it unless we just agree to disagree, capiche?

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 4:18 PM


    Dan, Erin it seems like you have both been through quite a bit in your lives. I notice that Dan talks about seeking atonement. Do you think that atonment is something that a human can earn through his own acts? If so, do you think you will find it?

    I don't know what you have done, but I know that we have all done *something*. I know that if I lived in my past, I probably wouldn't be living. If you would like to talk feel free to email me.

    My email is pope7446@gmail.com

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 4:18 PM


    Dan, here's the thing: I hate falsehood. I hate lying. I hate cover-ups.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 4:25 PM


    Thanks but no thanks, Lauren. I prefer to let sleeping dogs lie, and I don't like talking to people that I haven't met face to face. Thanks for the offer though.

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 4:44 PM


    Think what you will, Jill. Think what you will

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 4:48 PM


    Read the entire thing here.

    The full length version of this article was originally published in the peer-reviewed journal "Social Science and Medicine" Vol. 38 No. 9, pp. 1193-1200, 1994.

    Tables are not presented here. For the full article, please see the Pioneer Publishing Order Form in our resources section.

    The Effects of Pregnancy Loss on Women's Health

    Philip G. Ney MA, MD, FRCP(C), FRANZCP, Clinical Professor, Department of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of B.C.

    Tak Fung PhD, Biostatistician, Academic Computing Service, University of Calgary

    Adele Rose Wickett, BSN, Research Assistant

    Carol Beaman-Dodd, BA, Research Assistant

    Correspondence and reprint requests to:

    Dr. Philip G. Ney, PO Box 27103, 750 Goldstream Avenue, Victoria, BC, V9B 5S4

    Phone (250) 642-1848 / Fax (250) 642-1841

    Abstract

    A survey of women patients in the practices of family physicians in Victoria, B.C. was undertaken to determine the factors associated with pregnancy losses and their effect on women's health. Questionnaires returned by 1428 women with 2961 pregnancies showed that a higher number of losses, particularly abortions, correlates both with poor health and the need to obtain professional help in dealing with the loss(es). Partner support appears to be one of the most important factors in maintaining a pregnancy.

    KEY WORDS: Maternal Health, Mental Health, Abortion, Mother-Fetus Relationship, Pregnant Women.

    Introduction

    We have known for a long time that loss affects humans as well as animals. When pets lose their keepers or animals lose their mates they "pine away". Emde, Polak, and Spitz (1) found that "anaclitic depression" occurs in children when they lose contact with their parents. Bowlby (2) described mourning in infants when they lost their parents. Depression correlates with poor health in adults. Sudden death of many kinds occurs in people who lose hope after the death of a loved one (3). For this reason, Emmanuel Lewis and others (4,5) have emphasized the importance of mourning stillborn infants.

    The present study was conducted with the objective of determining the effect of all types of pregnancy loss on women's general health.

    Literature Review

    Several researchers have documented maternal reactions to perinatal death as similar to symptoms of grief over any death (6 -19). Kowalski noted that, "perinatal death encompasses each type of loss": loss of a significant person, loss of some aspect of the self, loss of external objects, loss of a stage of life (as defined by Peretz, 1970) (20,21), loss of a dream inherent in the parents' desire to have children (as studied by Schneiderman, 1979) (22), and loss of creation (23,24). Yet because the infant who dies through miscarriage, stillbirth, induced abortion, or as a newborn has not been seen and known, the death is often not considered worthy of recognition and mourning (9,12-14,19,24-31). Such ignorance of the significance of the loss on the part of society, friends, family and possibly even the mother herself, impedes the mother's bereavement process. This in turn may lead to her development of pathological, chronic, or inappropriate grief responses (7,17,24,27,29,31-35).

    Acute or pathological grief threaten the mother's physical and psychological health. Dr. Erich Lindemann (36) catalogued the following symptoms of pathological grief:

    (1) overactivity without a sense of loss;

    (2) acquisition of the symptoms of the illness of the deceased;

    (3) development of psychosomatic diseases such as ulcerative colitis, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis;

    (4) irritability and social withdrawal;

    (5) furious hostility;

    (6) mannerisms resembling schizophrenia, due to repressed hostility;

    (7) lost patterns of social interaction, involving inhibition of decision-making and initiative;

    (8) activities detrimental to own social and economic existence;

    (9) agitated depression, including insomnia, tension, agitation, low self-esteem, self-accusation, and even suicidal tendencies.

    Research has confirmed the presence of symptoms typical of both acute and prolonged grief in women who have suffered pregnancy loss (6,7,24,27,29,31,37). Kennel also noted a preoccupation with the dead infant, the inability to function in a daily routine, and the loss of appetite (6). Other researchers have recorded feelings of guilt and a sense of failure (27,29). The acute grief phase generally lasts from six to twelve months (38,39) and possibly even as long as two years (28).

    Pregnancy loss strains all of a woman's important relationships. Her anger and need to focus blame alienate her from the medical staff serving her, her friends, her family, and her partner. In particular, differences between her partner's and her own grieving behaviours can produce extreme conflict and stress in their relationship (7,9,13,14,18,24,27,29,31,38). Any other children in the family will have special needs at such a time, to which their mother, distracted and physically exhausted by her ordeal, may not be able to attend (29,31,40).

    Pregnancies within five to six months after pregnancy loss, and later births, may exacerbate parents' trauma, causing inappropriate grief (25,27). Phipps found that neither parent showed much pleasure in there being another pregnancy and less emotional attachment in subsequent pregnancies (41). Forrest, Standish and Baum reported that mothers were unresponsive to their newborns (14). Mandell and Wolfe described the "replacement child syndrome" in which parents hold unrealistic expectations for the next child (42). As a result of evidence that both pregnancy and pregnancy loss leave an impact on not only the women, but entire families, hospitals have initiated family-centred caregiving programs, equipping medial staff, counsellors and friends to support bereaved couples and their families (24,31,43-46). The supportive presence of their partners promotes the health of pregnant women or women suffering pregnancy loss (24).

    The key elements in facilitating the recovery of the mother and any partner or family member involved are:

    (1) the bereaved's recognition of both the life and then the death of the infant (27,29,34);

    (2) an ongoing, informed, and sympathetic social support network for the bereaved (27,29,34,48-50).

    Both medical workers and researchers have stressed the importance of the mother's (or couple's) actually seeing and holding the dead infant (5,17,47,51). Naming, baptizing, holding a funeral service, visiting the gravesite, and keeping mementos benefit the bereaved by acknowledging the individual for whom they mourn, and by drawing together a caring community (18,24,27,29,52-54). Single women, both teen-aged and adult, frequently have less social support for their pregnancy and thus face greater hardship upon pregnancy loss. Although pregnancy as a single woman is no longer taboo, it is not the norm, so the grieving mother lacks the aid of a partner and possibly even family and a larger social network (29).

    The options of seeing the baby, holding a funeral service, keeping mementos (e.g., lock of hair, footprint, photo, etc.) available to some parents suffering later natural pregnancy losses, are not available to those experiencing a loss through induced abortion. Benfield and co-workers found that intensity of maternal grief was not correlated with positive feelings about being pregnant (55). Although parents may not express regret over choosing to abort due to fetal abnormality, they still feel a sense of failure and frequently grieve intensely for a period of time longer than the typical duration of grief. This may be due to conflict over the decision to end a wanted pregnancy (34) or from the deliberate decision to terminate the life of an unborn child. Borg and Lasker learned that even when parents maintained that selective abortion was appropriate, they still felt "ambivalence", "terrible guilt", and grief, and were generally "shocked and overwhelmed" by the experience (29). That decision is all the more poignant and painful because frequently by the time selective abortion is deemed necessary, the baby has already started to kick. Adler and Kushnick reported classic grief symptoms on the part of parents dealing with the midtrimester termination of pregnancy because of fetal abnormalities (16).

    There is evidence of guilt, regret, and psychological disturbance in cases of the termination of unwanted pregnancies as well. Freeman, in a follow-up investigation four months after the abortion, reported that of his 106 patients, 39 percent were ambivalent, 14 percent showed symptoms of anxiety, and 13 percent showed symptoms of depression (56). Ashton recorded that 5 percent suffered severe psychiatric sequelae for up to eight weeks following the abortion, while 10 percent sought help from their doctor for emotional problems (57). The Lane Committee report stated that 20 percent of women experience short term regret and self-reproach after abortion (58). Other studies confirm the common occurrence of distress soon after termination of pregnancy (59,60). Donnai, Charles and Harris observed that terminations later in the pregnancy disturb abortive women more than do earlier ones (61). Figa-Talamanca reported that teens are more vulnerable to suffer distress after an abortion than adults (62). Belsey, Greer, Lai, Lewis and Beard determined that conflicted or negative attitudes towards pregnancy termination or the pregnancy itself lead to problems after abortion (63). Additional research has revealed that guilt detected before an abortion will recur afterwards (60,63,64). The Lane Committee found that most women were uninformed and lacking in helpful counsel prior to termination (58). Dunlop produced a list of factors related to distress following abortion (65), which Shusterman augmented (66). Broome summarized with her statement that "in general terms the ambivalent woman who lacks social support or has previously had psychological difficulties is more likely to be at risk" (67).

    Growing evidence indicates that any phenomenon which may intervene in the early attachment of the mother to the child may be an important contributor to the pathogenesis of child abuse. The establishment of the mother-infant bond is a delicate business and can be easily influenced by subtle changes in the mother or infant. Any stress, the death of a close friend, an earlier abortion or loss of previous children may delay preparation for the infant and retard bond formation (68). Though longer and more intense mourning was seen in mothers for whom pregnancy was a positive experience, the mothers grieved whether an infant lived one hour or twelve days, whether he weighed 3,000 grams or a non-viable 580 grams and whether the pregnancy was planned or unplanned (69). There is a significant association between a previous induced abortion and depression during pregnancy (70). The mother's wanting or not wanting the child during the pregnancy does not seem to have an effect on bond formation or rates of child abuse and neglect (71). The shakeup in pregnancy can be seen as an alarm reaction, readying the circuits and preparing the mother for new attachments (72).

    Method

    In this study, conducted in conjunction with the College of Family Physicians, a request was made of the family physicians of British Columbia, Canada to hand out questionnaires to the first thirty women of child bearing age or older who walked into their practice on a particular week. Each questionnaire began with assurances of confidentiality and proper treatment regardless of the subject's participation, together with an explanation of how to respond to the questions.

    The questionnaire consisted of seven visual analog scales asking questions about health. There was also a grid in which subjects indicated the outcome of up to nine pregnancies, the presence of a supportive partner and questions regarding age, number of living children, marital status, and total number of pregnancies. While the patients waited to see their doctors, the receptionists gave them questionnaires with brief instructions.

    To validate the patients' estimate of their own health, we checked a sub-sample. Without seeing the patients' answers both her own doctor and a researcher made independent estimates of each patient's physical and emotional health. The researcher's estimate was based on a perusal of the patient's chart. Each estimate was rated on a 9-point scale. Correlations were used to estimate the amount of agreement. In 84% of the cases, the researcher's estimate was within 2 points of the patient's. The doctor made a rating within 1 point of the patient's in 44% of the cases. While any scale rating of health will necessarily be subjective, these data indicate that there is a reasonable correlation between the patient's estimate of health and the estimate of an outside observer.

    Results

    Of the 238 family physicians to whom requests were sent, 69 physicians provided useful questionnaires. These doctors appeared to be representative and without any dominant bias or style of practice. Of the 1428 women in this sample, 1167 women had 2961 pregnancies. Figure 1 shows the distribution of responses on the visual analog scale in answer to the question, "My present health is ..." , together with responses to the questions, "My family life is...", "I enjoy being a parent...", and "My partner is supportive...". Each of these shows a similar distribution, roughly a reversed J-shaped curve.

    Using demographic data from Statistics Canada, it appears this sample is representative of the general population of women (Table 1). There is a slight preponderance of married people in our sample, but there were more teenage pregnancies than the national average.

    Table 2 indicates there is a correlation between the age of the patient and the outcome of her first pregnancy. Approximately 27% of pregnant women 14 to 19 years have abortions. Of these, 22% have a second abortion. If aborted pregnancies are not included in the calculation, it appears that the 14 to 19 year old group has as many full term, normal birthweight pregnancies as older mothers. That is, 77.2% of the unaborted teenage mothers in our sample gave birth to full-term, normal birthweight babies, as compared to 78.0%, 75.8%. and 73.8% of the unaborted mothers in the older age groups. The miscarriage rate in young women is 12.5% for first pregnancies, and climbs steadily after age 25.

    Table 3 shows that the woman's present health is negatively affected by miscarriages, abortions, and low birthweight babies. In response to the question, "My present health is ...", it appears that age is not a significant factor but the number of abortions and the support of the family is (Table 4). Table 5 indicates that there is a progressive impact on the mother's present health by an increasing numbers of losses.

    Table 6 indicates a more negative effect on the mother's present health by the abortions of the second and third pregnancy. That may be partly due to immediacy and ability to recall the more remote effect or a natural tendency of people to heal. Table 7 indicates that there is a greater correlation between negative health effects and the loss of the latest pregnancy than with previous pregnancies. Approximately 50% of the women who lose a pregnancy indicate their health is affected by that loss. Twenty-five percent estimate their health is adversely affected a great deal by their most recent pregnancy loss.

    Table 8 indicates that a woman's health is affected by a previous loss through abortion to a greater extent than through a miscarriage. Table 9 shows that more than 20% of the women feel from moderately to a great deal that they need professional help to resolve a loss, particularly in the most recent pregnancy.

    When a multiple regression analysis is performed on the 44 factors we considered relating to "My present health ...", the most important factors are quality of family life, previous pregnancy loss and whether the partner is supportive (Table 10). Lack of partner support was a significant contributor to higher rates of abortion and miscarriage. In the first pregnancy, if a partner is present and not supportive, the miscarriage rate is more than double and the abortion rate four times greater than if he is present and supportive (Table 11). If the partner is absent the abortion rate is six times greater. The most important factors, determined by logistic regression, of those considered as affecting the mother's decision to abort her first pregnancy were the lack of partner support (Table 12).

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 6:41 PM


    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11072583&dopt=Citation

    Emotional distress among couples involved in first-trimester induced abortions

    OBJECTIVE: To establish the prevalence of clinically significant psychological distress in women and men involved in first-trimester abortions and to identify related risk factors. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A downtown Montreal public abortion clinic and the Montreal metropolitan area. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited 197 women and 113 men involved in first-trimester abortions and compared them with control groups composed of 728 women and 630 men 15 to 35 years old who had taken part in a previous public health survey (Enquete Sante Quebec 1987). One hundred twenty-seven women and 69 men completed the follow-up questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Level of distress as measured by the Ilfeld Psychological Symptom Index. RESULTS: Before the abortion, 56.9% of women and 39.6% of men were much more distressed than their respective controls. Three weeks after the abortion, 41.7% of women and 30.9% of men were still highly distressed. Predictors of distress for women were fear of negative effects on the relationship, unsatisfactory relationships, relationships of less than 1 year, ambivalence about the decision to abort, not having a previous child, and suicidal ideation (this association was weaker than in controls). Predictors for men were fear of negative effects on the relationship, relationships of less than 1 year, preoccupation with the abortion and anxiety about its accompanying pain, negative perceptions of their own health, suicidal gestures in the past, and suicidal ideation in the past year (only the association with suicidal gestures was marginally stronger than in controls). CONCLUSION: Being involved in a first-trimester abortion can be highly distressing for both women and men.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 6:58 PM


    Anniversary reactions and due date responses following abortion.

    Department of Psychiatry, Medical College of Ohio, Toledo.

    Of 83 women who responded to surveys exploring postabortion coping, 30 women reported anniversary reactions associated with the abortion or due date. Women in the anniversary reaction group more often reported ambivalence about the decision to abort (p less than 0.007). This group also acknowledged fewer suicidal thoughts and attempts, but expressed more concern about verbally abusing their children (p less than 0.04). Strong trends toward dependency and somatoform disorders were present among anniversary group members (p less than 0.06). The authors recommend that physicians be alert to the possibility of hidden anniversary reactions of both physical and emotional nature during patient evaluation.

    PMID: 2486394 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2486394&dopt=Abstract

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 6:59 PM


    ď. . . (In this seven-year Finnish study,) the mean annual suicide rate (for the general population) was 11.3 per 100,000. The suicide rate associated with birth was significantly lower (5.9) and the rates associated with miscarriage (18.1) and induced abortion (34.7) were significantly higher than in the population . . . CONCLUSIONS: The increased risk of suicide after an induced abortion indicates either common risk factors for both or harmful effects of induced abortion on mental health.Ē
    Gissler M, Hemminki E, Lonnqvist J. (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES), Helsinki, Finland): Suicides After Pregnancy in Finland, 1987?94: Register Linkage Study. British Medical Journal 313(7070):1431?4, 1996.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 7:03 PM


    By the way, I don't lie, nor do I cover the truth or bear falsehoods or false witness. I'm being straight with you.

    Posted by: Dan at May 24, 2007 7:05 PM


    Bethany-

    Like I said, I'm A) not distressed about my abortion, and B) I fought with depression for 4 years in high school, I have social anxiety, and I have Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. There is no more room in my brain for mental issues.

    Posted by: Erin at May 24, 2007 7:28 PM


    Erin, the studies were posted for Hal.

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 7:37 PM


    May I ask though...what caused your PSTD? I know it was something before the abortion, I'm curious though. I'm very sorry...

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 7:38 PM


    Bethany, actually, I think I posted it earlier on this thread...I'll see if I can copy-paste it...

    Yup, here it is.

    "three years ago, I was on a date at the opera seeing Madame Butterfly. It got out late, and my boyfriend Kurt and I had parked about a half-mile away to avoid the hefty parking costs. On returning to our car, we were mugged, I was shot in the leg, and he was shot in the chest and died soon after."

    Posted by: Erin at May 24, 2007 7:58 PM


    "I fought with depression for 4 years in high school, I have social anxiety"

    Erin, there some helpful medications that can help you with this, it's quite common.

    Posted by: jasper at May 24, 2007 8:02 PM


    WOW that is absolutely terrible! It's no wonder you have suffered from that. :(

    Posted by: Bethany at May 24, 2007 8:02 PM


    Jasper, I was on one for the depression and just recently got off of it, and I still take beta-blockers to prevent anxiety attacks.

    Bethany- it has made me a stronger person with a better understanding of the world. It was terrible and it still gives me a hard time sometimes, but I know that I have a comprehension of the world that very few do. I am fortunate in that.

    Posted by: Erin at May 24, 2007 8:07 PM


    Erin -

    I did forget to comment on that story. I'm very sorry you had to go through that. Since you said you were dealing with it, I'm assuming you've been talking to someone, a therapist etc?

    I can't remember how long you have been blogging here, but many of us have dealt with depression in many different ways. We've talked many times about it on here. There have been times when some of us vent it off on here, and I have been surprised how quickly the people I thought I couldn't stand ended up being very sympathetic. I guess what I'm trying to say is - sometimes talking to a stranger is easier than talking to someone you know. Many of us will be/are here for you if you ever need it.

    okay - End of the sick sweetness stuff...on with the debate!!!

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 8:10 PM


    Dan, I wasn't calling you a liar. I was thinking of Erin's "fetus-boy-or-girl" comment, and that you called your baby a "child" yesterday. You both get it in a deep place but deny it.

    But our degenerating conversation has weighed on me today. I confess I'm at a loss how to properly discuss this with you. Whether you believe it or not, I'm not in this to win debates, I'm in it to win converts. This is where I am in a quandary. I see I'm certainly not accomplishing that goal with you. I may even be aiding in hardening your heart to the pro-life message. That I want no part of.

    But from a pro-life perspective, it seems to me the first order of business is that you comprehend and acknowledge the magnitude of what you and Erin did. Perhaps that's not the first order of business. What are your insights?

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 24, 2007 8:14 PM


    Well Jill, unfortunately, you've picked a Scotsman and an Irishwoman to try and convert. We're Celtic, and stubborn ones at that.

    I can't speak for Erin, but I can tell you what I think. While I do think what you're trying to do is noble, I don't think pro-life is necessarily right, nor do I even think about entertaining the thought of converting. I'm very set in my ways, and unless someone can present to me an argument that is extremely moving, I'm not budging, and there is nothing you can really do.

    Do not take the previous statement as an invitation to send me pictures, movies, propoganda, etc. I get enough of that from Chicago Nazis, and they have yet to recruit me. Being the son of a doctor, I've seen childbirth, and he has taken me in to see cadavers and shown me parts of the human body that I never knew existed. Like I stated before, I've seen many things in my day, and there is nothing that can phase me. So please don't send me a flood of media that I'm not going to pay attention to.

    That being said, if you'd like an insight on what I stand for, I can give you that.

    I believe in the equality of all men. I do not believe in a superior race. I do not judge based on heritage, sexual preference, religion, or the color of one's skin. I defend those who are weaker than I am to the best of my ability. I do my best to lead when others will follow. I believe that a woman is as every bit equal as a man, and should have the same rights and priveleges as a man does. I believe that a woman has a choice to do what she wants with her body, and no law made by a mortal man can dictate her right to that. But, above all else, I believe in unity and brotherhood.

    Posted by: Dan at May 25, 2007 1:19 AM


    Dan, you say that "I believe that a woman is as every bit equal as a man, and shouldhave the same rights and priveleges as a man does".

    Doesn't this extend into parenthood? A man does not have to kill his children in order to further his carrer. A man does not have to kill his children in order to be seen as loyal to a company. A man is not expected to limit his family in order to better serve his employer. A man is not seen as selfish if he has a child.

    How is that equality? Men LIED to women about abortion in order to further their own agenda. (see Bernard Nathanson) Women have been spreading those lies for the past 30 years. It's time we stand up and question why our country believes that 12 weeks unpaid maternity leave is acceptable, and why mothers are constantly engaged in some "mommy battle".

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 25, 2007 2:48 AM


    Dan, 1:19a, said: "Do not take the previous statement as an invitation to send me pictures, movies, propoganda, etc. I get enough of that from Chicago Nazis, and they have yet to recruit me."

    Haha... I'm one of those Chicago Nazis... :)

    You said, "I believe in the equality of all men.... I defend those who are weaker than I am to the best of my ability.... I believe that a woman has a choice to do what she wants with her body... But, above all else, I believe in unity and brotherhood."

    Dan, how does your pro-abortion position fit? I'm thinking based on past posts you're going to say preborns aren't human, at least early preborns.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 25, 2007 7:27 AM


    How was Pirates of the Caribbean?

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 25, 2007 7:27 AM


    Dan -

    "I believe that a woman has a choice to do what she wants with her body, and no law made by a mortal man can dictate her right to that. "

    So then you believe that prostitution should be legal? Do you believe that the government shouldn't control how much clothing is removed at strip clubs? You think that escourt service should include sex? How about if a women wanted to go out in public and masterbate on a park bench? That is her body. She can do what she wants.

    You see, there are laws that prohibit what a woman can do to their bodies. And the reason is is because these things hurt women. Prostitution hurts self esteem not to mention what 'johns' can do to them. Laws limit the clothing that can be removed at strip clubs to protect them from drunk horney men. She can't do her thing on the park bench because most people do not want to be exposed to something like that.

    Abortion hurts women. Maybe not all. I want you to really think about this: There was a national woman's magazine, I can't remember which one, that put out word that they wanted women to sign a petition to let the Govt know that they had abortions and didn't regret it. They put ads on the internet, in the news and in the magazine. They also said that if you wanted to remain annoynamous they would just release your first name. They only got 5,000 signatures. Planned Parenthood alone did 264,943 abortions in 2005. But they only got 5,000 signatures. Even with campaigns in California and New York. That is very telling.

    Posted by: Valerie Author Profile Page at May 25, 2007 8:53 AM


    Jill,

    Pirates was good, but the ending was sub-par.

    I'm from Chicago as well. Are you a real Nazi, or were you just joking? I really don't like Nazis, and if you're truly one of them, then I'm going to discontinue my talking with you.

    As for my abortion stance, yes, I do believe that early pre-borns are still not truly living human beings. That's more of an opinion that an actual fact, I guess, but seeing as how we don't know what conscious thought begins, I don't think that starts until later on in the pregnancy.

    Posted by: Dan at May 25, 2007 11:53 AM


    Dan, I think Jill was kidding about being a Nazi.


    As for "early pre-borns are still not truly living human beings. That's more of an opinion that an actual fact, I guess, but seeing as how we don't know what conscious thought begins, I don't think that starts until later on in the pregnancy."

    They *are* truly living human beings. Scientifically. There is no debate. The debate hinges on "personhood" and if you belive that these human beings should be legally considered "persons" and afforded the rights there of.

    Again, I ask you to consider anacephalic infants. They are considered "persons" legally, yet are incapable of "conscious thought".

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 25, 2007 1:20 PM


    I know you were asking Dan, but I'll give you my $0.02

    So then you believe that prostitution should be legal?

    yes

    Do you believe that the government shouldn't control how much clothing is removed at strip clubs?

    yes

    You think that escourt service should include sex?

    yes

    How about if a women wanted to go out in public and masterbate on a park bench? That is her body. She can do what she wants.

    No. cause of the children.

    Posted by: Hal at May 25, 2007 2:12 PM


    woah woah woah Hal.

    You say " How about if a women wanted to go out in public and masterbate on a park bench? That is her body. She can do what she wants.

    No. cause of the children"

    Either you're joking and don't really care if the "children" witness this, or you are saying that a woman's right to do whatever she wants with her body is limited by...harmful affects on children.

    Posted by: Lauren Author Profile Page at May 25, 2007 2:29 PM


    live, born children between the ages of two and 17 should not, hopefully, run into a woman masturbating on a park bench. It wouldn't be the end of the world, and maybe you could convince me otherwise, but that's my gut reaction.

    I would prefer all sexual and nude behavior take place in private or if in public, at a place (like a strip club) where only adults who know what they're in for are present.


    Posted by: hal at May 25, 2007 4:51 PM


    Dan, I thought you were calling pro-life activists (i.e., who show graphic signs) Nazis. For that I plead proudly guilty.

    As for your assertion on when life begins, you're right, it isn't based on fact. Science and medicine agree human life begins at conception. You can even see it these days under the microscope.

    Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at May 25, 2007 5:45 PM


    No Jill, I don't believe that pro-life activists are Nazis. I'm talking about the actual, racist, prejudiced, fascist Nazis, like neo-nazis/the KKK. Sorry for the confusion.

    Posted by: Dan at May 26, 2007 1:02 PM


    Whoa, that was just a little heated. Are all of your posts so vehemently debated?

    I just thought I would throw in my story.

    I had an abortion. I knew it was wrong. I was young, foolish and selfish. I was also REALLY sick. I couldn't keep down a tablespoon of water. I repented, the Lord forgave me.

    Now, I have been blessed with three children (two and one being formed inside). I hate the first three months of pregnancy. I get sick from sunup to sundown, I lose weight, if I am not really careful, I can become severely dehydrated and would need hospitalization. It has not gotten easier with subsequent pregnancies, infact now I have to raise other children WHILE being horribly ill. It is hard. But I plan on having many more children. As many as the Lord provides.

    People need to stop whining about how hard pregnancy is. It's just ridiculous. I can think of lots of worse things than being sick for three months! I am glad I don't live in a third world country where I am chased by militia, and starving, and possibly pregnant!!

    Sheesh, I'm with you Jill. Pregnancy sickness is really NOT something to justify abortion.

    Mrs. Meg Logan

    Posted by: Mrs. Meg Logan at June 13, 2007 10:02 AM


    Hi

    Looks good! Very useful, good stuff. Good resources here. Thanks much!

    G'night





    Posted by: govokinolij at July 13, 2007 12:46 AM