RH Reality Unchecked

The folks at RH (i.e., Reproductive Health) Reality Check need to stop wasting Ted Turner's money by hiring morons. Yesterday one of its finest, Scott Swenson, posted this:

Jill firestorm.jpg

Spare the respect, Scott. It's not mutual and you'll soon be taking it back, although maybe not since your Pulitzer Prize nominee, Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune emailed me yesterday, "He not only misunderstood what I wrote in the first place, but he misunderstood my confirmation to him." So Swenson's denseness apparently knows no bounds. To his credit, Zorn attempted to correct Swenson's gross misrepresentation of my comment....

That comment was to acknowledge to Zorn in an email that I - like Zorn and a thousand other bloggers, journalists, and authors - made "a mistake" when interpreting "Held in Health & Human Services" to mean then-chairman Obama held the Born Alive bill in his State Senate Health & Human Services Committee in 2003 without allowing it . Silly us.

We were wrong that the bill was "held" in committee. In fact Born Alive was actually amended to contain the identical language of the federal BAIPA and then voted down in committee with Obama as chairman leading the way.

On that note, Zorn also deserves kudos for his blustery 4,000 word blog attempt to obscure Obama's 40-word record on Born Alive: That he took a pro-abortion position to the left of even NARAL when voting against identical legislation overwhelmingly passed on the federal level and then misrepresented his vote for 4 years until National Right to Life caught him last week.

And now I must take a bow. *bow*

I have officially attracted the long knives of the Left, even garnering my very own post by the liberal Media Matters. I had to smile at fond memories of starting liberal hair on fire through the years when reading through some quotes of mine MM pulled.

Andrew Sullivan also took a stab at me ("Obama's nemesis"? Cool.), as did Politico's Ben Smith.

Amanda Marcotte even devoted a section of her podcast to me the other day!

aborted baby parts 2.jpgRecall I cursed Amanda earlier this year "to henceforth think of the blood of abortion every time you see or wear the color red."

Yesterday one of Amanda's comments to Swenson's post indicated the curse is working. About me she wrote: "Her main mistake is being a misogynist ghoul... particularly her endless fascination with the bloody remains of later term abortions."

In reality, Amanda is now being endlessly tortured by the "bloody remains of later term abortions."

That photo is so sad. Makes me all the more determined.

I want to pause and extend heartfelt thanks to many of you and many blog friends for mopping up after me in the comments section here, on Left blogs, and your own blogs.

This allows me to remain focused on exposing Obama as pro-abortion on steroids to the point he supports letting little preemie babies die cold and alone in hospital soiled utility rooms because saving them would "burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion," as we have now have him saying on audiotape.


Comments:

RH "alternate" reality check's writers couldn't debate their way out of a argument with a 3 year old. (Ok they could, but they would cheat and tell lies to the poor child..)

They keep circling the wagon on this story, avoiding the bottom line that Obama allowed infanticide to go unchecked and is simply a hard hearted man - two daughters or not.

Finally, I guess I really irritated Scott - in this same story, he compared me to a dog with a bone. WOOF!

Visit prolifewitness.com

Posted by: Ruben at August 22, 2008 5:44 AM


Must-reading from Pat Buchanan (my second-favorite RTL; my first-favorite is Bob Dornan):

http://townhall.com/columnists/PatrickJBuchanan/2008/08/22/and_none_dare_call_it_treason

Posted by: SoMG at August 22, 2008 5:54 AM


The left is so predictable. When they are confronted with evidence against them, they almost always attack the person exposing it and not the evidence itself. It was obvious when this started that they were going after Jill Stanek. Also, what they do is come up with a different explanation each day about their wrongdoing until one sticks. Obama all along said that he didn't vote for the Illinois bill because it didn't protect Roe v. Wade. When that was exposed to be wrong, his surrogates then said that there was a companion bill he didn't like so he didn't vote for the Born Alive bill. That didn't work so yesterday they said there was already a bill on the books covering this. Now they're desperate because Obama and his followers are saying that of course he doesn't believe in infanticide. Anyone who accuses him of that is the one that is wrong in this issue. I wonder what their response will be today. I'm sure they are shaking in their boots because there really is no way out of this one. I hope some group or McCain (I don't think so) will bring this up in an ad, because the mainstream press won't touch it.

Posted by: Monte Harms at August 22, 2008 6:28 AM


I'm confused...as I often am...what "mistake" are we talking about? What does Zorn say that Jill admitted?

Someone spell this out in kindergarten terms...please?

Posted by: mk at August 22, 2008 6:32 AM


Sorry MK. I am busy right now. Busy crying over the picture of the baby.

Jill,
You are doing great!! Keep it up!!

Posted by: Carla at August 22, 2008 7:01 AM


mk @ 6:32 AM

mk - the mistake that Jill admitted: she was wrong about the bill being "held" (as in "held-up" in committee) when in fact the bill was actually amended and voted upon with the identical language of the federal BAIPA (save changes for the state vs Fed).

Many people have been believing the lie that Obama's been spinning.

The basic truth is - if there really was nothing wrong with his defense of induced labor abortion then why did he lie about it?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at August 22, 2008 7:20 AM


Let us all pray for Jill. This issue may be the defining moment in exposing Obama. Let us keep up contacting friendly outlets to get the story out.

Posted by: Maria at August 22, 2008 7:31 AM


Sounds like the bottom line is some confusion about which of several BAIPAs Obama voted against and which he thought were threats to Roe/Wade.

Posted by: SoMG at August 22, 2008 7:32 AM


Jill "anti-choice nut" Stanek, keep up the good work!

I love this one, from Marcotte's post!:
The idea that hospitals have the right to expose infants is a blatant lie. I looked up Illinois' murder statutes, and unsurprisingly, it's illegal to kill a person or cause their death through negligent behavior, full stop. There is no loophole for infants. A law protecting newborns from infanticide is redundant. So what's going on?

yeah, well we asked that one FIRST AMANDA! You proaborts didn't really seem to care, as long as the woman getting the abortion ended up with a dead baby....and if that meant infanticide, so BE IT!

and there's this "choice" gem:
"But BAIPA isn't really about protecting infants; it is anti-abortion rights legislation crafted by the hard right. BAIPA targets the abortion procedure known as dilation and extraction, which anti-choicers have so successfully re-branded as "partial birth abortion."....During the operation, the fetus' skull is capsized inside of the woman, after which labor is induced and she delivers the fetus. It is a wrenching process, but one that allows a woman or couple to grieve and bring closure to a pregnancy by holding the intact fetus.

Yup, you got that right - it IS a wrenching process, especially for the baby who has it's skull crushed, and brains sucked out. Sweet. I can't think of a more painful way to die, can you Amanda M?

As this is Jill's blog, I won't go but I think I'm made my point.
IMO, Amanda should rename her blog - it's nothing about reality, especially reality of women's lives.

Posted by: Patricia at August 22, 2008 7:36 AM


My favorite from Marcotte's blog/podcast: Stanek is a pretty much perpetual liar. Throughout her defense of this bill, she swears up and down that it's not intended to ban abortion, just born infants. Except that Stanek is a rabid anti-choicer on every level..."

I chuckled at this because of the sloppy logic. Marcotte says the bill is anti-abortion because... Jill is anti-abortion.

Riiiiiiight.

Who knew Jill was the author of the bill?

And then I started feeling sad for pro-aborts because it seems the days of the intellectual, pro-choice editorial have waned. Read enough from RH Reality Check and you soon learn the authors aren't about being logical or factual. It's more important being witty.

Look. I can be witty too...

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at August 22, 2008 7:41 AM


Ya gotta love it when the proaborts are so desperate that they don't even coordinate their stories... there are so many different explanations being offered that you'd think one of them would fly...... but so far, no such luck.

Maybe it's time those dying babies caught a break?

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at August 22, 2008 7:42 AM


It appears to me that the Radical Left is in a rabid frenzy over the exposure of Obama's votes. When Obama, himself, contrary to his many statements, voted to amend the 2003 bill to be identical to the federal bill and then voted against the identical bill, it's sad, but not surprising, that some would try to turn it around against Jill and continue a strategy of trying to confuse people. Truth is still truth.

On a side note, Obama (and Alan Colmes last night)keep repeating the statement that there was already a law in place in Illinois to protect the babies, but in a letter
in July 2000, Illinois Attorney General Jim Ryan told us
he found no violation of Illinois. FYI

Posted by: Karen Hayes at August 22, 2008 7:46 AM


touche, Cranky Catholic!
You are VERY cranky this morning!
It might be bearable if they were at least witty, but they aren't even THAT!

Posted by: Patricia at August 22, 2008 7:57 AM


Re: Patricia:

Marcotte has this fanatical idea that after a women subjects herself to a late-term abortion, she cradles the corpse of her dead child whose head is completely imploded (not capsized - having been overturned).

Do women do this? Would an abortionist really collapse her child's head, remove him from the birth canal and say, "All done. Now you can hold him."?

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at August 22, 2008 7:57 AM


She also makes it sound like all these children were hopeless and going to die anyway.

I don't know what planet she or Eric Zorn are from, but where I live, Down Syndrome is NOT a death sentence.

Posted by: mk at August 22, 2008 8:09 AM


I don't know what planet she or Eric Zorn are from, but where I live, Down Syndrome is NOT a death sentence.

That is bothering me, too. One article I read spent like two sentences talking about how these fetal abnormalities would prevent the babies from surviving even at full-term, and then, with no explanation whatsoever, identified the one in question as having Down Syndrome. That's just sloppy and stupid.

Posted by: Alexandra at August 22, 2008 8:26 AM


Keep up the fight, Jill! I have been following your posts closely and applaud your bravery. You do have a crazed "tiger by the tail" but the Creator of all beings (including tigers) is your protection and your strength.
"They will collapse and they will fall
but we shall rise and stand for good"

Posted by: Darlajune at August 22, 2008 8:49 AM


Cranky, 7:41a: Witty and funny as usual!

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 22, 2008 8:51 AM


Re: Patricia:

Marcotte has this fanatical idea that after a women subjects herself to a late-term abortion, she cradles the corpse of her dead child whose head is completely imploded (not capsized - having been overturned).

Do women do this? Would an abortionist really collapse her child's head, remove him from the birth canal and say, "All done. Now you can hold him."?

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at August 22, 2008 7:57 AM

Yes I read that and thought, "Really?"

Well, that's why I'm sooo appreciative of your editing skills - you have such a way with pictures!
These people don't live in the real world. They have a whole set of verbage (what the he11 is a "capsized" head anyway?) to help them get past what they are promoting and the type of life they are living. Everything is relative and subjective. Sad.

Posted by: Patricia at August 22, 2008 8:51 AM


Alexandra,

Exactly! The truth is babies are aborted for cleft palette, dwarfism, down syndrome...and many of these are only suspected. They often turn out not to be true. (Not that that makes any difference to us) and babies end up being aborted that have absolutely NOTHING wrong with them.

BTW, I have not forgotten you. I have one last camping trip (With the girl scouts) and then I PROMISE, I will continue our discourse...I miss them terribly.

I keep sitting down to answer the circumcision question and realize it's more complicated than I thought...

Anywho, you are still VERY much on my mind, in my heart and in my prayers...:)

Posted by: mk at August 22, 2008 8:55 AM


Smile for the camera, Scott!!

Posted by: carder at August 22, 2008 8:58 AM


I posted the wrong URL in my last post. Here's the right one.

Posted by: Darlajune at August 22, 2008 9:00 AM


Jill,

thank you again....

you may want to add Chris A's clarifiction to the post which further explains the gross misreprensentation....:

she was wrong about the bill being "held" (as in "held-up" in committee) when in fact the bill was actually amended and voted upon with the identical language of the federal BAIPA

Posted by: Jasper at August 22, 2008 9:01 AM


Cranky Catholic @ 7:41 AM LOL!!!


Posted by: Chris Arsenault at August 22, 2008 9:14 AM


Cranky thats great!

Posted by: Jasper at August 22, 2008 9:20 AM


Amazing detective work, as always, super sleuth!

And Cranky C - fantastic graphic.

I'd sure like to see some more focus on mama BO's role
in this family's ghoulish obsession.

Posted by: lesforlife at August 22, 2008 9:21 AM


Jill, don't be discouraged by the attacks. They are what every prophet inherits but you have the prayers of my family. God bles...

Posted by: Amy Proctor at August 22, 2008 9:29 AM


Has anyone else noted that NOWHERE on Obama's website (www.barackobama.com) do you find him giving a position or saying ANYTHING about abortion.

I searched through the issues section of his site where his stand on major issues are given, but in none of these did I find any mention of the words ABORTION, REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, RIGHT TO CHOOSE or FAMILY PLANNING.

Has it always been that way on his site or did he recently take down his position on abortion due to the recent exposure in the mainstream media and blogs that he actually has supported INFANTICIDE by refusing to support the much needed law sepcificly criminalizing it in Illinois?

It may be that he wants NOTHING ABOUT ABORTION on his site just to keep people from thinking about it at all. The whole out of sight, out of mine mentality.

Posted by: Ezek13:19 at August 22, 2008 9:31 AM


Karen Hayes at August 22, 2008 7:46 AM

Karen - do have that letter available - or have a link to it?

Thanks!

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at August 22, 2008 9:32 AM


I have wondered about this supposed "law" that was already in place in Illinois that made it unnecessary for the Illinois version of the BAIPA to be made into law.

If those at Christ Hospital (where Jill worked and discovered infanticide being done there) had broken an already existing law by killing babies after they were born alive, then WHY DIDN'T ANYONE PRACTICING INFANTICIDE AT THAT HOSPITAL GET TRIED FOR MURDER IN COURT????

Posted by: Ezek13:19 at August 22, 2008 9:43 AM


Jill,

You have my full support. I am praying for you. You are a very courageous and tenacious person and I admire you for that.

Posted by: Carrie at August 22, 2008 9:45 AM


Don't worry about it, mk. I had a problem with my stitches so I had to go back, and the doctor prescribed a different pain med, which wasn't any better, but it did result in me spending more time drugged while I gave it the old college try.

Unfortunately, since I'm mostly lounging around even when not drugged, I kept thinking of more things to ask but I didn't want to overwhelm you!

Posted by: Alexandra at August 22, 2008 9:47 AM


Hmmm.... I think each time Scott Swenson misrepresents Jill I will dedicate a 40 Days For Life day to him. Maybe I will hold a poster that says, "Brought to you courtesy of Scott Swenson". Kind of like a reverse of PP's "Pledge a Protester". :)

Posted by: Carrie at August 22, 2008 9:50 AM


"I have wondered about this supposed "law" that was already in place in Illinois that made it unnecessary for the Illinois version of the BAIPA to be made into law."

Zeke, Jill looked into that law and consulted with laywers a long time ago. ....They told her that law would not prevent what was happening, thus the need for BAIPA.

Posted by: Jasper at August 22, 2008 10:03 AM


Great idea, Carrie @ 9:50.

Let's continue to pray for all those fighting to protect and promote the dignity of human life, and for those women and men who are struggling now with with abortion decisions past and present. If each of us spends one hour per day in prayer, think of how many prayers we could offer up to heaven. Lord, have mercy on us all.

Posted by: Janet at August 22, 2008 10:12 AM


Zeke,9:31 Obama's pro-choice position is set forth under "issues" subcategory "women". Not surprising you didn't see it, as I'm sure it would never occur to you that abortion might be considered a woman's issue.

Posted by: PPC at August 22, 2008 10:14 AM


I have officially attracted the long knives of the Left, even garnering my very own post by the liberal Media Matters. I had to smile at fond memories of starting liberal hair on fire through the years when reading through some quotes of mine MM pulled.

Congratulations, Jill!! You always know you're doing something right when this type of thing happens.

We are so proud of you!!

Keep going and we'll keep praying!!!!

Posted by: Bethany at August 22, 2008 10:24 AM


Thanks Janet.

Posted by: Carrie at August 22, 2008 10:28 AM


Janet,

I think we need to lift Jill up in prayer as I am sure that the Left will continue to come after her. It will probably get worse before it gets better.

Posted by: Carrie at August 22, 2008 10:31 AM


A libel suit against Scott and or the RH blog might be a good idea.

Posted by: TonyM at August 22, 2008 10:39 AM


Carrie, @ 10:31,
Janet, I think we need to lift Jill up in prayer as I am sure that the Left will continue to come after her. It will probably get worse before it gets better.

Of course! That's a given!


Posted by: Janet at August 22, 2008 10:40 AM


Nick, it is the perfect storm- Jill's insatiable need for adulation and publicity meets Sean Hannity's insatiable need for hate rants against Obama.

Posted by: PPC at August 22, 2008 10:40 AM


The mindless OBAMA-BOT PPC patheticly wimpered:

"Obama's pro-choice position is set forth under "issues" subcategory "women". Not surprising you didn't see it, as I'm sure it would never occur to you that abortion might be considered a woman's issue."

WHAT "WOMEN" SECTION????

Its not listed here anywhere!
http://www.barackobama.com/issues

Maybe you can provide a link where this alleged WOMEN section is that Obama has on his main website or some other site of his run by his campaign. Its not in the ISSUES section. The categories listed in his ISSUES section include the following:

Civil Rights
Defense
Disabilities
Economy
Education
Energy & Environment
Ethics
Faith
Family
Fiscal
Foreign Policy
Healthcare
Homeland Security
Immigration
Iraq
Poverty
Rural
Service
Seniors & Social Security
Technology
Urban Policy
Veterans

There is currently no WOMEN section to check out.

Posted by: Ezek13:19 at August 22, 2008 10:56 AM


Ezek,

It's there now. I just clicked on it.

Posted by: Michael at August 22, 2008 11:00 AM


Ezek,

I see what you mean. It's not listed in the page. However, if you go to the menu items along the top and hover over issues, women does appear at the end of the list. Strange that it's not on the regular page.

Alright, peace now, PPC and E, at least on the existence of women's issues on Obama's website. You were both right. :)

Posted by: Michael at August 22, 2008 11:04 AM


Michael said:

"It's there now. I just clicked on it."

On the ISSUES page? I don't see the word WOMEN or even WOM appearing in that section except for the word "women" being used twice in the short description there under the DEFENSE section.

If it really is there then give me the exact LINK TO IT Michael. If you can't provide the link then you're lying about it or you have some other side besides barackobama.com in mind.

Posted by: Ezek13:19 at August 22, 2008 11:09 AM


In analyzing and meditating on Jill's post today, I have invented a new acronym for the MSM. My goal was to capture and express what they do and who they are in as few lettes as possible. I've got to confess, it wasn't difficult, however, it is so right on the money, so easy to remember, so market friendly, I must claim ownership of it amd copyright it. Here it is:

L.I.E.S

It stands for Left In Extreme Spin. It is representative of what a liberal media is willing to do at every level when they realize that their annointed one is in danger of being exposed as one who lies and therefore, be disqualified, i.e., not elected, as one ready and fit to lead the Free World.

So, the LIES lies to expose their LIAR or Leftist In Altered Reality, aka, Barack Obama (another acronym or should I say acrimony I now copyright). Ah, the LIES of a LIAR, aka the Chigago Tribune, Washigton Post, Time, Newsday, Huffington Post, MSNBC, CNN, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

So, the LIES conspires not by exposing the LIAR, as is their sacred duty confirmed by the shedding of blood in wars past, the LIES add to the pile of lies by attacking the revealer of truth, necessitating more LIES. The downward spiral of LIES begins, while we reminisce the tale of one Dan Rather, the poster boy for the LIES.

And nothing exposes LIES more than the convoluted fury and unrighteous indignation they express at the display of post abortion results: a mutilated and dismembered baby in all it's gory and sanguine horror. After all, LIES recognizes and uses the power of the visual, but demonizes its use when the visual of an abortion exposes abortion for what it really is. Could this be evidence of the LIES' use of selective memory and obfuscation (let's not forget the Clinton saga)? Time has told and will tell.

So, in Christian humility I refrain from posting pixelated visuals of aborted babiies. Rather, I post a literal version of an abortion and here it is:

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, 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.

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.

Copyright 2007, 2008 by HisMan

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 11:12 AM


Michael said:

"I see what you mean. It's not listed in the page. However, if you go to the menu items along the top and hover over issues, women does appear at the end of the list. Strange that it's not on the regular page."

Ohhhhhh I see now! He's doing his best to HIDE his position on abortion to make it appear as if he isn't really hiding it by not including it on the ISSUES page.

Wonder how many people will read the WOMEN section under the issues drop down list ner the top of the site rather than going right to the ISSUES page itself where it isn't included?

Posted by: Ezek13:19 at August 22, 2008 11:22 AM


All pro-lifers on this site:

Please pray Psalm 91 over Jill.

It brought my AF pilot son home safely from numerous combat flights over Iraq, it has delivered me numerous times from all kinds of trouble and it will deliver Jill from the LIES of a LIAR.

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 11:37 AM


Jill, thank you for not being afraid to stand up for life. Your intentions will be included in my (almost always daily) rosaries. On this feast of the Queenship of Our Blessed Mother may Her intercession for you bring grace to you and the cause for life. +JMJ+ John

Posted by: john at August 22, 2008 11:41 AM


Zeke, funny how I, and apparently others, easily found what you claim is "hidden".

Posted by: PPC at August 22, 2008 11:52 AM


Being a LIES makes one DIZZY.

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 11:53 AM


I'll be honest- that 4k word thing at the Chicago Tribune Zorn thing left me a bit dizzy. Can you say convoluted? From my best parsing, here is what I took away from it:

Obama would have voted for the Fed BAIPA - /literally/ - in other words he NEVER meant to imply that he'd vote for the BAIPA that was passed in the Capitol while in Illinois. Only if he were in the US Senate would he vote for BAIPA.

On the other hand, if the Illinois BAIPA was so toothless that it had no more real effect than a proclamation of Michael Phelpps recognition day, then he'd be happy to vote for it.

Great- so he doesn;t want to compel doctors to keep equipment on stand-by for miracle babies (too expensive) and he worries about insurance costs if there were to be malpractice claims.

Lets all give him a round of applause for being willing to pass a pointless bill, though!

And thanks for misleading people (like me) who once thought that he might be moderate enough to vote for. :(

Posted by: Ockraz at August 22, 2008 12:17 PM


I read a story yesterday which dubbed you (Jill) "Obama's Swift Boat." You know something's going right when the other side is watching you closely. You're in my thoughts and prayers.

Posted by: JustMarian at August 22, 2008 12:23 PM


Ok, I've added Chris' sentence of clarification.

And thanks to all for prayers and words of encouragement! The pro-abort assault was anticipated. If it hadn't have come, I would've been disappointed. It just assures us that the exposure of Obama's Born Alive vote and misrepresentation is hurting him. I'm doing well; am focused.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 22, 2008 12:25 PM


PS: I wish that there were a closer link between Rev. Wright and BAIPA. Hannity would play it every day for a month!

Did everyone else notice that Colmes (and Pro-Choicers I know personally too) never really said anything other than 'Stop calling him a baby killer! You're just attacking him with more conservative slime!' The Obama supporters have claimed that McCain 'flip-flopped' on torture because he didn't want the CIA to be compelled to use only the same techniques allowed in the military field manual. (Some argue that if the enemy know what techniques can be used then they can prepare and train to resist them. Therefore, the CIA wants to be able to use interrogation methods not on the list which aren't torture, but which need to be kept secret.) Anyway- the next time a pro-Obama fellow brings this up with me, I'll just use Colmes technique and say, "Stop saying my candidate is a sadist who yearns to torture people! Don't slime McCain!"

I wonder how well that'll work.

Posted by: Ockraz at August 22, 2008 12:29 PM


Is McCain's misrepresentations about Cindy talking to Mother Theresa hurting his campaign.

Posted by: Hal at August 22, 2008 12:42 PM


"Is McCain's misrepresentations about Cindy talking to Mother Theresa hurting his campaign."

Considering that it isnt a moral issue that is important to a large amount of Americans...no I dont think.

I dont think forgeting how many investment homes he owns does either.

Posted by: Oliver at August 22, 2008 12:51 PM


Obama is pro-choice and anti-abortion. He will work to reduce the number of abortions. That is a lot better than what McCain will do which is probably nothing. It's a matter of preventing un-wanted pregnancies in the first place. We should take off the faith glasses and really look at the issues.

Posted by: Joe at August 22, 2008 12:51 PM


I agree with Joe.

Oliver, I agree aboutthe homes, although it does make him look very old and out of touch. However, I do think people will be troubled by McCain lying about the circumstances of his adoption. Why would he lie about something like that?

Posted by: Hal at August 22, 2008 12:58 PM


Joe,

Obama is pro-Obama. That is all, and to think he or anyone else in politics is anything but pro-themselves is really wearing "faith glasses."

The issue is what the politician wants to represent for the purpose of garnishing money and votes.

He currently supports any form of abortion, which is essentially something that the large amount of even mildly pro-life supporters do not want to see. He understands this and this Im sure a large part of why he is obscuring the issues. He wants to placate the far left and the middle as well. Unfortunately he got caught.


Hey other pro-lifers out there...I find it really funny that Obama won the nomination. I wasnt even going to vote because I was so dispassionate about Mccain, but now that they have the Devil running opposite him, he looks like a hero. I registered just the other day and looks like I will be voting after all. Funny how that worked out.

Posted by: Oliver at August 22, 2008 12:58 PM


Pretty amazing stuff that Jill's brave 9 yr + marathon mission to expose the horrors and enormity of abortion have stymied the Democratic Presidential nominee. Devines intervention? The power of chutzpah? And many others who have faithfully fought the good fight through this blog deserve kudos too. Well done!

An Admirer!

Posted by: AnnE at August 22, 2008 1:00 PM


Oliver,

Your spelling and grammar are atrocious. You'll probably vote for Mickey Mouse.

Posted by: Ben at August 22, 2008 1:01 PM


Ben,

Typos and spelling have never been linked to intelligence. However, the various test scores that have qualified me for MENSA have been.

Posted by: Oliver at August 22, 2008 1:06 PM


The Devil? sure. And what would you have said about Clinton, or Edwards?

Posted by: Hal at August 22, 2008 1:14 PM


Oliver,

I see that on top of you shortfalls in the field of literacy, you also live in a fantasy land.

By the way genius, what's the membership fee for that MENSA membership card? Heck, I'll bet they pay you...

Posted by: Ben at August 22, 2008 1:18 PM


Ben,

Yes you got me. I live in fantasy land. Nice one. Oh and yes MENSA pays me...for some reason. I get it! I guess. Thanks for contributing to the discussion!!!

Hal,

I did not like Clinton, dont get me wrong, but I honestly did not really care too much about her. I rooted for her against Obama the whole way. My wife actually in a sense helped to campaign for her to oppose Obama. I didnt go that far personally, but I didnt protest it either.

Posted by: Oliver at August 22, 2008 1:23 PM


Ben,

No more personal attacks. Point out the shortcomings in Oliver's arguments.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at August 22, 2008 1:25 PM


Bobby,

What shortcomings? :)

Posted by: Oliver at August 22, 2008 1:27 PM


I used to think Clinton was the devil until I saw Obama in action...The man is a master!

Posted by: mk at August 22, 2008 1:27 PM


Oliver,

You're ok in my book.

And Obama can't be the devil, because he's black.

Posted by: Ben at August 22, 2008 1:27 PM


Oliver,

I think Bobby meant the 'shortcomings' from Ben's point of view...instead of personal attacks...

Posted by: Jasper at August 22, 2008 1:31 PM


I mean, don't you think the devil could come up with a better disguise than a black dude whose name rhymes with Osama?

Posted by: Ben at August 22, 2008 1:32 PM


"I think Bobby meant the 'shortcomings' from Ben's point of view"

Yes, exactly.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at August 22, 2008 1:33 PM


I was joking. Everyone has shortcomings. Debating is what allows you to find them in yourself and fix them.

Posted by: Oliver at August 22, 2008 1:33 PM


Oliver,

congratulations on your new baby girl :)

Posted by: Jasper at August 22, 2008 1:37 PM


I used to think Clinton was the devil until I saw Obama in action...The man is a master!

Oh my, I was only joking too!

Posted by: mk at August 22, 2008 1:43 PM


Ben,

The DEVIL can appear in many shapes and forms. He can appear as a slick, smooth talking politician, a woman or a snake. Basically he can take the form of anyone or anything.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at August 22, 2008 1:43 PM


LizFromNebraska,

Exactly my point: Why take the form of a black man with a middle eastern sounding name? Not exactly the best form when it comes to winning over the masses.

Posted by: Ben at August 22, 2008 1:45 PM


Regarding Obama's website, I did find his position on abortion, but not his position on infanticide. Oversight?

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at August 22, 2008 1:46 PM


She also makes it sound like all these children were hopeless and going to die anyway.

I don't know what planet she or Eric Zorn are from, but where I live, Down Syndrome is NOT a death sentence.

Posted by: mk at August 22, 2008 8:09 AM
.....................................

MK, if Down is not often accompanied by a 'death sentence', why all the research and treatments to save those afflicted? Perhaps if fewer were aborted, the pain and suffering of many would be more visible to you. Perhaps a visit to a nursing home for the profoundly disabled would open your eyes to the seriousness of Down and all of it's implications.

Posted by: Sally at August 22, 2008 1:54 PM


LOL Faux News, the hate-Obama network, has declined to run McCain's new ad linking Obama to a bombing that took place in DC in 1968, when Obama was 6 years old and living in Hawaii.

Too bad Faux's discretion doesn't extend to Jill's and Sean Hannity's "infanticide" smear.

In other Obama smear news, hatemonger Jerome Corsi cancelled his Sunday appearance on an extremist White Separatist/Neo-Nazi radio show.

Posted by: PPC at August 22, 2008 2:20 PM


Regarding Obama's website, I did find his position on abortion, but not his position on infanticide. Oversight?
Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at August 22, 2008 1:46 PM

I know, nothing about Unicorns either!

Posted by: Hal at August 22, 2008 2:26 PM


I don't know what planet she or Eric Zorn are from, but where I live, Down Syndrome is NOT a death sentence.

Posted by: mk at August 22, 2008 8:09 AM
.....................................

MK, if Down is not often accompanied by a 'death sentence', why all the research and treatments to save those afflicted? Perhaps if fewer were aborted, the pain and suffering of many would be more visible to you. Perhaps a visit to a nursing home for the profoundly disabled would open your eyes to the seriousness of Down and all of it's implications.
Posted by: Sally at August 22, 2008 1:54 PM
*******************************************

Sally, as we've discussed this issue before, I'm wondering if this is something that's more of a personal nature to you. Do you have a child or loved one with DS? Feel free not to answer, I was just wondering.
Being profoundly disabled is NOT the same as a death sentence. Anyone who claims that it IS has not been around those who are. But if we're talking about "death sentences" here, EVERYONE will die from something. Does that make our lives of any less value?

We research cures for cancer, too. Does that mean it would be better if we'd have known beforehand about this affliction so we could have aborted these people before their births?

As I've said before, I have worked with DS children, autistic children, physically and mentally disabled children. I cannot look at them and say that I felt they were suffering so greatly that they should not have lived.
How arrogant it would be to even suggest that *I* think it's better that a person's life was ended.

Posted by: Kel at August 22, 2008 2:34 PM


Jill, I'm glad you're hanging in there. Be encouraged. If you weren't doing something RIGHT, you wouldn't be so greatly under attack.

I'm praying for you.

Posted by: Kel at August 22, 2008 2:37 PM


"Regarding Obama's website, I did find his position on abortion, but not his position on infanticide."

It's OK Doyle, he's made it pretty clear where he stands on infanticide. How about the deabte the other night? he wouldn't even say newborns have rights. He is so entrenched with PP.

Posted by: Jasper at August 22, 2008 2:37 PM


Hisman,

You always make my heart soar!

L.I.E.S - HA!

Posted by: lesforlife at August 22, 2008 2:53 PM


PPC-
I do not believe that McCain is shopping around any ad of the sort. Maybe a 527, but not McCain

Posted by: Ockraz at August 22, 2008 3:11 PM


Joe-

so you don't believe either candidate?
McCain on SCOTUS
Obama on FOCA
???

Posted by: Anonymous at August 22, 2008 3:15 PM


Kel,

If one googles "Dixie Lawrence" a wealth of information will be found on nutritional treatment for children with DS that can actually minimize the symptons.
Dixie researched extensively when she realized her DS daughter wasn't born retarded, she became retarded.
DS children need certain supplements beginning as early as possible to better enable more normal development. Its like the PKU that all newborn children are tested for. Undiagnosed and untreated nutritionally it results in severe retardation. Diagnosed and treated nutritionally, it results in normal development.
It has frustrated me no end that parents of DS children will either not look into this or will listen to some doctor who tells them its BS.
What harm can there be in checking into it?

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 3:36 PM


I finally got to the Rh Reality site (was having trouble earlier) and I find it hard to read. I'm looking at Amanda Marcotte's August 18th piece called "Obsessive Sheriffs And Obsessive Anti-Choicers" is that the correct place?

Posted by: Andy at August 22, 2008 3:38 PM


Anon,
McCain's view on the supreme court is blatant patisan politics. Obama at least told the truth on that question. On foca, the choice is between a woman, her family, her doctor, and god.

Posted by: Joe at August 22, 2008 3:46 PM


Andy, Yes, you are on the right page, and guess who the Obsessive anti-choicer is.

Posted by: PPC at August 22, 2008 3:48 PM


wheeeeeeeeeewwww, looks like the pro-aborts have their panties in a wad!!! That must mean you're doing something right, Jill .... KEEP IT UP!!!!

We're praying for you!

Last night I was watching the Born Alive screaming match on Hannity & Colmes, and I wondered, can you even IMAGINE what Obama must think when he sees Jill's face plastered on every news show pulling his skeletons out of the closet and exposing them for all to see? I imagine it's something like, "That @*%! nurse AGAIN!!! She won't go away, she's HAUNTING ME!!!!"

hahahaha, Jill you are my hero! :)

Posted by: Anonymous at August 22, 2008 3:53 PM


Anon:

It's not Jill that's haunting Obama, it's the truth that's haunting Obama.

Joe:

You wrote this: " McCain's view on the supreme court is blatant patisan politics. Obama at least told the truth on that question. On foca, the choice is between a woman, her family, her doctor, and god.

Posted by: Joe at August 22, 2008 3:46 PM"

I think God has already spoken pretty clearly on the issue of abortion or perhaps you haven't even heard of the Ten Commandments and the Bible yet? You know, the parts where they talk about not murdering and how God asks us to choose life, and Jesus' rather stern admonitions not to hurt children, etc....

Also, if you believe in God and believe every single conception is an expression of His will, how can you even imagine that He would condone a termination of that will?

Or, are you trying to tell me that God didn't know that the woman who now wants to murder her baby and seeks the approval of a family mamber, a doctor, or liar-for-hiar preacher/minister wasn't married, or didn't want to get pregnant, or that she already had too many children, ad infinitum.

Gee Joe, do you know what omniscience is. I think God knows just about everything there is to know past, present, and future. It's called an eternal persepctive. He even knows who's gonna sin by murdering a baby He concieved and yes Joe, even that you, would deny Him by supporting abortion.

And Joe, doctors are not God. The have no right to determine who lives and who dies. Sorry Joe, I see no doctors hanging from a cross except the One Great Physician, Jesus Christ, and He says, choose life, over, and over, and over again.

So Joe, a closer analysis of your post results in an F. That's an F for failure. Failure to present any logic or evidence of rational thought.

So go sit in your pro-abort corner and write this 500 times:

god is not God, God is God, and He's not beholding to any man or any woman.....

until it sinks into your thick skull.

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 4:55 PM


Lesforlife:

Blessings my fellow warrior for life.

Les, if you were around in Joshua's time, you would have been of the dudes that would have reported back and said, "let's go take on those giants".

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 5:04 PM


Gee Joe, do you know what omniscience is. I think God knows just about everything there is to know past, present, and future. It's called an eternal persepctive. He even knows who's gonna sin by murdering a baby He concieved and yes Joe, even that you, would deny Him by supporting abortion."

This is where you fall flat my friend. If God already "knows" who is going to sin by aborting the baby, what the heck are we supposed to do about it?

Posted by: Hal at August 22, 2008 5:07 PM


Sally, as we've discussed this issue before, I'm wondering if this is something that's more of a personal nature to you. Do you have a child or loved one with DS? Feel free not to answer, I was just wondering.
Being profoundly disabled is NOT the same as a death sentence. Anyone who claims that it IS has not been around those who are. But if we're talking about "death sentences" here, EVERYONE will die from something. Does that make our lives of any less value?

We research cures for cancer, too. Does that mean it would be better if we'd have known beforehand about this affliction so we could have aborted these people before their births?

As I've said before, I have worked with DS children, autistic children, physically and mentally disabled children. I cannot look at them and say that I felt they were suffering so greatly that they should not have lived.
How arrogant it would be to even suggest that *I* think it's better that a person's life was ended.


Posted by: Kel at August 22, 2008 2:34 PM
................................

Having an incurable illness that will eventualy kill you is a death sentence. Many many Down's are born with a death sentence. Such as heart deformities so severe that the only experience of their short lives will be the pain of multiple surgeries before the inevitable death.
What is arrogant is believing that how you feel justifies interference in the lives and decisions of others. As we have discussed, there are very serious considerations in chosing to knowingly bring a child into the world with little chance of enjoying any kind of life that anyone would wish upon another. Pretending that these decisions are made flippantly does service to nothing and no one.
I have no one in my family with Down's. As I mentioned before, it is something I studied during my last pregnancy.

Posted by: Sally at August 22, 2008 5:19 PM


Are you getting it Hal? Please tell me you're getting it....that's why they're called SINS - actions contrary to His will.

WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO MURDER BABIES HAL. NOT BABIES JUST CONCIEVED, IN THE OVEN, OUT OF THE OVEN AND BREATHING, ETC., ETC., ETC.

Gee Hal, God knows just about everything bad that's gonna happen and even all the sins that were going to be committed. He even knew the children you aborted before thay were concieved Hal. But, imagine this, their father, decided to change that plan and by doing so committed a grace sin, forgiveable, but grave. No worry, the Redeemer and King can even correct the failings of a human being, if that human being just decides to cooperate.

Gee, let me see, I think that's why Jesus died on the cross, Hal.

And this is the real sad part Hal. When your wife and two daugheters find Christ and go to heaven and you don't, well, you'll be abel to think about that forever.......alone.

Ya know Hal, if I was falling flat, I would just take Obama's advice and just have my tire pressure checked. Sorry Hal, the truth is I am more than a conqueror as well as a member of a royal priesthood and holy nation. How? Listen closley......by the Blood of the Lamb.

C'mon Hal, you're not listening to the chosen one or, I should say you're not listeing to the Chosen One.

Yes Hal, capital letters and punctuation mean things.

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 5:27 PM



Gee Joe, do you know what omniscience is. I think God knows just about everything there is to know past, present, and future. It's called an eternal persepctive.

Posted by: Hal at August 22, 2008 5:07 PM

Choke on my soup!

Did Hal just say, "I think God knows just about everything..."

I thought Hal was atheist. Now suddenly he thinks God knows everything. I have been out of town. I guess I missed his conversion.

Posted by: hippie at August 22, 2008 5:44 PM


Hippie:

Hal was actually quoting me.

But, I always have hope.

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 5:59 PM


Kel,

If one googles "Dixie Lawrence" a wealth of information will be found on nutritional treatment for children with DS that can actually minimize the symptons.
Dixie researched extensively when she realized her DS daughter wasn't born retarded, she became retarded.
DS children need certain supplements beginning as early as possible to better enable more normal development. Its like the PKU that all newborn children are tested for. Undiagnosed and untreated nutritionally it results in severe retardation. Diagnosed and treated nutritionally, it results in normal development.
It has frustrated me no end that parents of DS children will either not look into this or will listen to some doctor who tells them its BS.
What harm can there be in checking into it?

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 3:36 PM
..........................................

I'm convinced that sound nutrition is necessary for fetal development as well as a child's. It could only be more so in children with additional physical burdens. It seems only logical.

Posted by: Sally at August 22, 2008 6:13 PM


Sally,

This is more than sound nutrition. DS children need this special blend of amino acids, vitamins, and antioxidants that their bodies otherwise do not process nutrients adequately. It is thought that this is the reason they become retarded and have flaccid muscles and stunted growth. Like PKU, it is thought that DS may be a treatable metabolic disorder and not an inevitable fate.
Dixie Lawrence made this discovery after extensive research on her own. In fact this theory and nutritional formula was first devised by a Dr.Turkel in the 1940s or 50s. Of course the man was branded a quack by doctors ready to toss DS children in the junkheap.
Please google and see for yourself. Its fascinating. Believe me if it was my child or grandchild, they would be on it.

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 6:54 PM


Kel,

Its interesting to note that I read of a person with Aspberger's(sp?)who resents any suggestion that a "cure" should be found. She said she is very happy with her life just the way she is, thank you very much.

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 6:59 PM


Sally,

This is more than sound nutrition. DS children need this special blend of amino acids, vitamins, and antioxidants that their bodies otherwise do not process nutrients adequately. It is thought that this is the reason they become retarded and have flaccid muscles and stunted growth. Like PKU, it is thought that DS may be a treatable metabolic disorder and not an inevitable fate.
Dixie Lawrence made this discovery after extensive research on her own. In fact this theory and nutritional formula was first devised by a Dr.Turkel in the 1940s or 50s. Of course the man was branded a quack by doctors ready to toss DS children in the junkheap.
Please google and see for yourself. Its fascinating. Believe me if it was my child or grandchild, they would be on it.

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 6:54 PM
.................................

Actually I have read a bit of the research. Makes complete sense that a syndrome would increase dietary needs of specicfic nutrients. Syndromes cause increased stress upon the organs at risk from the syndrome. That those organs would need extra nutritional support only makes sense. It's a bloody shame that some medical professionals would dismiss the brain as something other than an organ. From what I have read, there has been significant evidence to support this.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if such treatments could be employed to prevent the more deadly health issues of Down's during gestation?

Posted by: Sally at August 22, 2008 7:38 PM


Mary- I live with Asbergers and while it has made lots of things difficult for me, I think it also gives me a unique perspective that many people don't have. I wouldn't utilize a 'cure' if there was one. But I'm also on the very high-functioning end of Asbergers.

Oliver! You're in MENSA! Are you located in the South, by any chance? Where do you attend chapter meetings? I haven't been to a meeting in, like, a year. I ought to pick back up.

Posted by: Erin at August 22, 2008 7:41 PM


Sally,

Metabolic problems can cause syndromes and addressing these problems can prevent the syndromes, or decrease their severity. That's the whole point of the treatment.
PKU is the result of a metabolic deficiency, however a proper diet can prevent its devastating consequences. Its theorized that DS may also be a metabolic disorder that can have its most devastating results(retardation, muscle flaccidity) minimized with proper supplementation.
I think it would be wonderful if this was general knowledge and children were started on treatment at birth.

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 8:33 PM


Erin,

How very interesting. Thank you for your perspective.

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 8:35 PM


Wow Erin....neat. We knew you were smart, now why can't you understand that abortion is wrong. Life begins at conception, it's simple science.

Posted by: Jasper at August 22, 2008 8:48 PM


Many of the Asperger's patients I've seen have been amazingly good at something- one was a great writer, another a good actress.

David Byrne has Aspergers-and really, could you see him doing ANYTHING else??

Posted by: prettyinpink at August 22, 2008 8:49 PM


Erin:

Please tell me what "living with Asperger's" means if you would be so kind. Thanks.

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 9:28 PM


Having an incurable illness that will eventualy kill you is a death sentence. Many many Down's are born with a death sentence. Such as heart deformities so severe that the only experience of their short lives will be the pain of multiple surgeries before the inevitable death.
What is arrogant is believing that how you feel justifies interference in the lives and decisions of others. As we have discussed, there are very serious considerations in chosing to knowingly bring a child into the world with little chance of enjoying any kind of life that anyone would wish upon another. Pretending that these decisions are made flippantly does service to nothing and no one.
I have no one in my family with Down's. As I mentioned before, it is something I studied during my last pregnancy.
Posted by: Sally at August 22, 2008 5:19 PM
*********************************************

Sally, believe it or not, I wasn't treating this issue flippantly. I'm simply trying to get the point across that what we perceive as "quality of life" may not always be the truth of the matter.

I find it absolutely amazing, however, that pro-choicers suddenly become interested in the feelings of newborns (i.e. having to have so many painful surgeries) but they really could care less if an unborn child, moments before, possibly feels any pain at all. What about the incredibly short life of a baby who is dismembered in utero, or of one who is delivered alive and left to die without any breathing assistance?

Posted by: Kel at August 22, 2008 9:44 PM


Erin,

"Oliver! You're in MENSA! Are you located in the South, by any chance? Where do you attend chapter meetings? I haven't been to a meeting in, like, a year. I ought to pick back up."

I havent joined as of yet. I qualify based on my LSAT and GMAT scores but I have to have them notorized. Honestly I dont see much benefit in joining MENSA so I have had a hard time motivating myself to actually go through the mess.

Ive been thinking about just coming in for an old fashioned IQ test considering I usually do very well on MENSA's practice tests and "mental workouts."

Is it worth it?

Posted by: Oliver at August 22, 2008 9:44 PM


PIP,

The diagnosis and education of autistic people has come so far just in my lifetime. The "spectrum" of autism is a fairly new discovery and I suspect many children and adults who were thought to be "difficult", "eccentric", "slow" or socially challenged were in fact at some level of autism. Only the more severe cases were accurately diagnosed and usually institutionalized and assumed to be retarded.
I suspect that Rosemary Kennedy may well have been autistic, apparently she was not in fact retarded as the public has been led to believe, or at least she wasn't until old Joe Kennedy had her brain scrambled resulting in lifelong institutionalization.
One can only wonder how many children and adults shared her tragic fate.

Posted by: Mary at August 22, 2008 10:06 PM


Oliver, it's definitely worth it if you feel you have the time to commit to it. I mean, it doesn't NEED a time commitment, but if you actually want to get much out of your membership, it's best to attend at least a few chapter meetings a year. I know that every single chapter meeting I have been to has been fantastically enlightening- and it's also, in my opinion, a GREAT place to get different perspectives from intelligent people about their views. I've met conservative and liberals in relatively equal numbers, and it's really just a fun place to go. It's kinda like a country club for people with high IQs.

HisMan- Aspergers is a high-functioning branch of autism, so a lot of the qualities that autistic people have, I do as well. I tend to excell in areas of objective learning, like science and math, and have a very strong ability in solving puzzles and the like. The hardest areas involve my abilities to communicate and rather stunted social skills. I have grown up loving being by myself, and I have a limited ability to express emotions. It doesn't mean that I don't have them, or anything, but I can't communicate them effectively. Living with Aspergers has meant, for me, an opportunity to work in those areas where most people simply naturally adapt. I feel it gives me a more objective approach to everything- because I have no real primary internal source for social interaction or communication, it allows me to actually study and investigate which methods may work best before actually applying them.

Posted by: Erin at August 22, 2008 10:12 PM


Erin:

Thanks for that, very, very much. Better to get it right from a person livig it, then a google search. I'm not sure I completely understand, but, I'm trying.

Would you consider the "Rain Man" as someone in a "high-functioning branch of autism" also or, is that different? What about Beethoven, etc. Sounds like "rare air" to me.

Since this conditon, "....gives me a more objective approach to everything- because I have no real primary internal source for social interaction or communication, it allows me to actually study and investigate which methods may work best before actually applying them", does that mean you can run through things in your head like a Power Point presentation in segments or is it more like a movie, a continum of events?

What has your IQ been tested at?

Seems like you are demonstrating that you are God's gift to the world as we all are and, living proof that we can overcome challenges for the glory of God.

And, that no baby, not even one with pre-diagnosed challenges, is deserving of being denied the right to life.

Good job.

Posted by: HisMan at August 22, 2008 11:43 PM


Great job, Jill - you amaze me.

Posted by: Deborah at August 23, 2008 12:22 AM


Sally, believe it or not, I wasn't treating this issue flippantly. I'm simply trying to get the point across that what we perceive as "quality of life" may not always be the truth of the matter.

I find it absolutely amazing, however, that pro-choicers suddenly become interested in the feelings of newborns (i.e. having to have so many painful surgeries) but they really could care less if an unborn child, moments before, possibly feels any pain at all. What about the incredibly short life of a baby who is dismembered in utero, or of one who is delivered alive and left to die without any breathing assistance?

Posted by: Kel at August 22, 2008 9:44 PM
..........................

Moments before exactly what? Do you imagine that you feel pain before you can and/or do feel pain? Suddenly become interested Kel? How old are you? And how willing are you to swallow whatever is regurgitated down your throat?
I suppose I became interested in fetal anomolies and fetal demise as well as the effects upon the families involved about 1962 when I attended the funeral of the last child my mother delivered.
When are you going to start taking reality seriously?

Posted by: Sally at August 23, 2008 1:05 AM


Moments before exactly what?

Umm.... birth.

Sally,
While fetal anomalies are a tragic reality, they do not justify abortion on demand. Doctors are trained to care for women with these diagnoses. Frequently the diagnosis turns out to be wrong! I doubt you would be in favor of terminating a pregnancy "just in case". That would be tragic as well.

Posted by: Janet at August 23, 2008 6:01 AM


Both Kel AND Janet's points are well made and important.
Abortion supporters generally apply inconsistent logic. The interest in pain of a newborn as compared to the so-called lack of pain an unborn baby might experience, is only one of many such examples of this kind of thinking.

Posted by: Patricia at August 23, 2008 7:43 AM


HisMan

The diagnosis and education of autistic people has made such tremendous strides. At one time mothers were held responsible for their child's autism, poor nurturing was blamed, as mothers were also held responsible for a child's mental illness.
I find Erin's account of her own autism fascinating and thank her for sharing it with us.
Better technology is opening up the brain to more precise exploration and its interesting to see that people, for various reasons, do indeed have different brain wiring and perceive and function in their own way because of it.

Posted by: Mary at August 23, 2008 7:55 AM


Lol, no, HisMan, Rain Man is severely autistic. He has areas of high function, but he cannot process the basic areas of survival on his own. As for Beethoven, well, you never know. He lived in the time before these kind of diagnoses, so that will probably remain a mystery.

As for running things in my head, a powerpoint presentation is actually a pretty good comparison. The only closer thing I can think of is a sales pitch. The ways in which I interact have to be 'sold' to me. I look at pros and cons from my perception and decide whether I approve of it.

My IQ generally tests between 145-155, usually it holds at 153. But I've never really considered IQ tests to measure intelligence. I think a person's capacity is much better measured by how they live than how they score.

Posted by: Erin at August 23, 2008 10:16 AM


Erin @ 10:12 PM, 10:16 AM,

HisMan- Aspergers is a high-functioning branch of autism, so a lot of the qualities that autistic people have, I do as well. I tend to excell in areas of objective learning, like science and math, and have a very strong ability in solving puzzles and the like. The hardest areas involve my abilities to communicate and rather stunted social skills. I have grown up loving being by myself, and I have a limited ability to express emotions. It doesn't mean that I don't have them, or anything, but I can't communicate them effectively. Living with Aspergers has meant, for me, an opportunity to work in those areas where most people simply naturally adapt. I feel it gives me a more objective approach to everything- because I have no real primary internal source for social interaction or communication, it allows me to actually study and investigate which methods may work best before actually applying them.

As for running things in my head, a powerpoint presentation is actually a pretty good comparison. The only closer thing I can think of is a sales pitch. The ways in which I interact have to be 'sold' to me. I look at pros and cons from my perception and decide whether I approve of it.

Your perspective on Asperger's is fascinating. Thank you for sharing!


Posted by: Janet at August 23, 2008 12:49 PM


Moments before exactly what? Do you imagine that you feel pain before you can and/or do feel pain? Suddenly become interested Kel? How old are you? And how willing are you to swallow whatever is regurgitated down your throat?...
When are you going to start taking reality seriously?
Posted by: Sally at August 23, 2008 1:05 AM
*****************************************

Moments before birth, Sally, as I believe I was comparing "newborns" to "the unborn."
How *old* am I?? Well, let's see...I'm old enough to form my own opinions about life in the midst of great opposition from those who surround me. I'm old enough to have lived through a lot of my own pain, as well, and seen those close to me suffering.
But thanks for being so patronizing. ;)


Patricia said:
Both Kel AND Janet's points are well made and important.
Abortion supporters generally apply inconsistent logic. The interest in pain of a newborn as compared to the so-called lack of pain an unborn baby might experience, is only one of many such examples of this kind of thinking.
Posted by: Patricia at August 23, 2008 7:43 AM
*****************************************

THANK YOU, Patricia. That's it exactly.

Posted by: Kel at August 23, 2008 1:02 PM


Patricia, thanks from me too.

Posted by: Janet at August 23, 2008 4:17 PM


I've never really considered IQ tests to measure intelligence. I think a person's capacity is much better measured by how they live than how they score.

Erin, well said. How happy are we, to the extent that we can make ourselves happy?

Posted by: Doug at August 24, 2008 9:29 PM


Sally wrote: Having an incurable illness that will eventualy kill you is a death sentence.

This made me LOL... I have an incurable illness called LIFE... to have it certainly sentences me to death.

Posted by: Anonymous at September 19, 2008 11:45 AM