Jivin J's Life Links 5-31-10

web grab.jpgby JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

  • Australian authorities are continuing to investigate the infection of a growing number of women (22 right now) who were infected with Hepatitis-C after getting abortions at an abortion clinic in Melbourne.

  • Marie Stopes International is partnering with China to kill more Chinese unborn children...
  • MSI has opened 5 outlets in China's eastern province of Jiangsu. Here the selective abortion of girls has led to a gender imbalance of up to 131 boys for every 100 girls.

  • At Salon, Mary Elizabeth Williams (pictured below left), a pro-choicer who accepts the reality that human life begins at conception, writes about her feelings on ultrasound legislation:
  • Forcing a woman to look at her fetus in order to manipulate her sympathies is, make no mistake, an insulting interception of a private procedure, one that anyone who cares about reproductive freedom should be outraged over....

    mary beth.jpg

    But the tactic, despicable as it is, does raise an uncomfortable issue. Abortion is a deeply personal enterprise riddled with conflicting emotions, one few women take lightly. Among those of us who are pro-choice, I've long considered my own simple belief that life starts at conception a verboten topic. And I've been disappointed when I've heard friends taking the convenient semantic dodge of referring to an abortion as a decision regarding "a clump of cells" and then calling a planned pregnancy at the same stage "the baby...."

    The fight over ultrasounds starkly shows exactly what anti-choice forces have glommed onto, and what unnerves some of us on the other side so deeply: that having a choice and seeing that choice are two different things. Because, uncomfortable as it may be for many of us to acknowledge, a human heartbeat is a powerful thing.

    What a truly backwards way of thinking. Williams recognizes (or at least claims to recognize) that the unborn are living human beings and understands abortion is a procedure which kills these living human beings. Yet instead of being outraged over the ongoing slaughter of these human beings, she's outraged over laws which show women images of the child who is about to be killed. It's almost like her starting point of thinking is "Abortion must remain legal" and questions like "what is the unborn" and "are the unborn valuable human beings" don't matter because "abortion must remain legal."

    [Williams photo via beliefnet.com]


    "Forcing a woman to look at her fetus in order to manipulate her sympathies is, make no mistake, an insulting interception of a private procedure, one that anyone who cares about reproductive freedom should be outraged over...."

    'An insulting interception of a private procedure,' is how reality orientation is being treated by a woman who accepts the human identity and status of the murder victim.

    In this post, Williams shows that she is the most wretched of all pro-choicers. Accepting the baby's humanity, she is bitterly resentful that a mother should be shown the identity of the intended murder victim before final consent to the killing.

    Now that's malevolence.

    Posted by: Gerard Nadal at May 31, 2010 1:30 PM

    I just hope the new laws on ultrasound are not overturned by a judge.

    And, it's impossible for me to really understand how "pro choice" people think and justify their beliefs.

    Posted by: Joanne at May 31, 2010 2:23 PM

    a woman I knew had an abortion in her early 20's. The baby was an "it" and nothing to be regarded. Years later she married and was consumed with baby fever (trying to get pregnant before she was even married and in fact slept with her husband on their first date and immediately proclaimed she was "pregnant!" She was not.) when she finally conceived the child was "the baby" and when they found out she was having a girl it was "her" "the baby girl" "our little girl" "my daughter" and the like. She had ultrasounds early in her pregnancy and posted them on myspace and showed EVERYONE her baby!How do you juggle those contradictions in your heart? She did by becoming a very bitter, angry woman who lashed out at anyone who was pro-life, myself included. What a mental and emotional wreck she was.

    Posted by: Sydney M. at May 31, 2010 3:00 PM

    Not only is the article disturbing, but so are the letters commenting on the article. Again, the term "anti-choice" is obviously becoming popular, though they don't want to say what the CHOICE is. I am not anti-choice, I am against abortion. The term is completely nonsensical.

    But what I hear, again and again, by pro-aborts, is not that they are for CHOICE, but abortion. Period. They do not want women being informed about what abortion is, they just want women to keep having them. How is this "choice," someone please explain that to me.

    And the ultrasound is an amazing tool. Obviously, it makes pro-aborts look more and more insane. Essentially, what they keep saying is, "Yes, it's a baby, I know it's a baby, but I want to kill it anyway." The temper tantrums they hold if anyone should question this so-called "right" to abortion are not held up by logic, reason, and science. All pro-aborts have are excuses.

    Posted by: MaryLee at May 31, 2010 3:48 PM

    One might argue that requiring ultrasounds will protect women from unscrupulous abortion "doctors" who would claim a woman is in her second trimester instead of the first to garner a higher fee, or stating that a woman is not as far along in her pregnancy as she truly is to avoid so-called "viablility" restrictions.

    "Among those of us who are pro-choice, I've long considered my own simple belief that life starts at conception a verboten topic.

    Pro-choicers need to find the courage to get off the abortion-fence.

    Posted by: Janet at May 31, 2010 5:33 PM

    Wow, some of the comments over at the Salon article are so cold-hearted. One of them likened a fetus to a brine shrimp!

    I was able to kid myself about being pro-choice over 2 decades ago. I'd never seen an ultrasound image and didn't know much about human development. But, the biological facts are undeniable. On one hand, modern technology is an amazing asset in our efforts to educate people about the murderous procedure that is abortion. On the other hand, people are still trying to cling to their dehumanizing language and non-logic in an attempt to defend their position. I am confident that life will triumph, but I pray it happens sooner rather than later. Every day that passes, our most precious resource is destroyed: the very future of the human race. A species that turns on its own young is a species that is suffering from a disease. This world needs a lot of healing.

    Posted by: Ninek at May 31, 2010 5:59 PM

    It's almost like her starting point of thinking is "Abortion must remain legal"...
    No "almost," Jivin' J-- you got it exactly right!

    Posted by: Kelsey at May 31, 2010 6:19 PM

    I think the pro-life movement should start defining the phrases "reproductive freedom" and "reproductive rights" ourselves. Abortion is the "right" to NOT reproduce.

    I'm always at a little bit of a loss when it comes to pro-choices who admit fetuses are human beings - are they refreshingly honest, moving closer towards the pro-life side, or just really, really creepy?

    Posted by: Marauder at May 31, 2010 7:11 PM

    Because, uncomfortable as it may be for many of us to acknowledge, a human heartbeat is a powerful thing. - Mary Elizabeth Williams

    Yes - a human heartbeat is a powerful thing Mary Elizabeth. You should try having one sometime.

    The only principle (if one could even call it that) it appears you follow is that might makes right. However, when one acknowledges the humanity of another, and still rejects mercy, then the result is a kind of sociopathic-psychotic perversion, which eventually yields the stuff of nightmares in reality.

    Without a profound sense of mercy towards innocent life, there is no basis for expecting you to protect the lives of any other human being.

    That way lies madness.

    Posted by: Chris Arsenault at May 31, 2010 8:29 PM

    I say that we ought not to OFFER the ultrasound to the woman. She should be made to draw the arrows pointing to the body parts, and label them, then write an essay spelling out exactly what this particular baby did to deserve to die and exactly how the killing will be carried out. The woman is, after all, signing a death warrant when she signs the consent form for the abortion. And she ought to take full responsibility for what she's doing.

    When a judge pronounces a death sentence on a convicted criminal, he has to look that person right in the face and tell that person that he is condemning him to die, and by what means. And I'm getting sick of being mamby-pamby about it. If you want your baby dead, at least have the guts to square up to what your doing, call it what it is, and sign your name to it. And if you're not sure enough that you want that baby to die to follow through, then why are you signing the death warrant?

    Posted by: christina at May 31, 2010 8:37 PM

    I dunno, folks, sounds to me like she is questioning her own pro-choice foundations. She needs prayer that God will expand her "simple belief that life starts at conception" to include protection of that life.

    LORD, I ask that you soften her heart and reveal completely what is happening to both mom and baby in an abortion!

    Posted by: Peg at May 31, 2010 8:46 PM

    A woman is not forced to view the ultrasound. The abortionist by law is made to offer a woman a view of the ultrasound. She can refuse and sign the form that states she was given the opportunity to view it.

    Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at May 31, 2010 8:55 PM

    I wonder if that person who likened pre-born babies to "brine shrimp" has ever looked at early photos of a developing baby either. He claims the pictures we carry are all "near-term" babies and that most abortions are earlier.

    Here's an ultrasound photo found online at 11 weeks: http://pregnancy.about.com/od/pregnancyphotos/ig/Ultrasound-Photo-Gallery/11-Week-Ultrasound.htm (This means there's still 29 weeks of pregnancy left, hardly "near term").

    Posted by: Mother In Texas at May 31, 2010 9:05 PM

    Hi Jill

    I just couldn't help notice that you used the enemy's favorite self-descriptor "pro-choicer" here. In the name of honesty and accuracy, you might consider calling them what they truly are: anti-human-rights extremists.

    Their primary objective is to assure no legislation exists that would hamper their ability to deny others of their most fundamental, and inalienable human right: the Right to Life.

    I suggest, "Mary Elizabeth Williams (pictured below left), an anti-human rights extremist who accepts the reality that human life ..."

    Posted by: Ted at May 31, 2010 9:38 PM

    Why isn't the choice made in favor of the baby? We can prove humanity with the ultrasound, but still execute the child with no due process. The baby is a life separate from the mother, but its choice is never considered. Who would choose to be ripped apart by a vacuum, or cut apart limb from limb by a scalpel? No one ever considers what choice the baby would make. So sad.

    Posted by: Sheila Warner at May 31, 2010 9:50 PM

    Comparing unborn children to shrimp seems to be nothing new for pro-abortionists. After I posted pictures of my baby who died through miscarriage, three separate abortion proponents compared my baby to food:


    Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at June 1, 2010 7:18 AM

    You know, I can understand how, years ago, people could justify abortion in their minds. I did.

    But the more advanced technology became, the more difficult it became for me to justify abortion. The more I studied biology, anthropology, and sociology, the more I realized that abortion is not a "right," it's an act of desperation. Pro-aborts do not question WHY women seek out abortion; they feel it should not be questioned, ever.

    The commenters on Salon seem to believe they're highly informed, but they remind completely in the dark. Most of those who claim to be for "choice" either dehumanize what we know is human, or refuse to acknowledge that the unborn child is its own person. They use terms like "potential life" or "potential person." But we don't magically become people in the womb....we ARE people, period. It's not a matter of opinion, or religion. It's just logic.

    There are some who cannot tell the difference between a human life/human cell and a human being. A sperm is not a person. A piece of your liver is not a person. Once the egg has been fertilized, then it's a person.

    Pro-aborts also use functionalism--arbitrary markers to define "person." A person, to them, is one who meets certain criteria. Breathing, thinking, feeling, they say. But there are people who are already born who don't match their description. Are these not people? People on respirators, people in comas.....it's very frightening to think that if they can dehumanize a person in the womb, then they can dehumanize anyone, if it suits their purpose.

    They also use the word "choice" as "license." Even those who say they understand that it's a person, with its own DNA, with a head and arms and legs and a heartbeat, but then say, "I must come down on the side of CHOICE," because a woman must "be able to make decisions about her own body."

    But we are not talking about HER body, we are talking about someone else's body. We have a right to control our bodies, yes. But we do not have a right to kill someone else because their mere existence is an inconvenience to us.

    Those who know me know that I have a fighting and independent spirit. I do not like to be told what I can and cannot do. However, when it comes to the unborn, it is not to do with ME, it is to do with someone ELSE. I am not giving up my rights if I allow my unborn child to live.

    It's really a sense of entitlement that fuels the pro-abortion movement. You don't need God, you don't need to be a Republican, you don't need to be a white man to be pro-life. You just need to have an understanding of biology, of human rights, and intellectual honesty.

    Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 10:19 AM

    I am so sorry that some people are so sick and cruel, Bethany. Having been through it (miscarriage) four times now, it's difficult to fathom how someone could mock a mother in our situation(s).

    (I haven't been able to go to another doctor to find out the cause of my miscarriages, either. My regular doctor was only able to rule out blood-clotting issues)

    Posted by: Pamela at June 1, 2010 10:38 AM

    Totally agree, MaryLee (I made a rhyme!). That's why (as I've commented before) I don't like the term 'Mother-to-be' when referring to an expectant mother. If you're THINKING about becoming pregnant you're a 'mother-to-be', if you're pregnant, you're ALREADY a MOTHER whose child is not yet born.

    Posted by: Pamela at June 1, 2010 10:47 AM


    Have you tried contacting the Pope Paul VI institute?


    Posted by: RSD at June 1, 2010 11:39 AM

    Exactly, Pamela. Unfortunately, our language hasn't caught up with science. We say "Mommy to be" or "I'm a soon-to-be mother," but we obviously know that we are carrying a baby. When I was pregnant, I quickly realized this was my baby, someone who had her own rights, her own health, her own habits (at 19 weeks, the doctor checked her fingers and toes on the ultrasound, and she was sucking her thumb and had her legs crossed).....Abortion seems like the most unbelievable evil thing we could ever do. The fact that people not only believe it should be legal, but actually think it's not a big deal really makes me feel sick.

    Posted by: MaryLee at June 1, 2010 11:53 AM

    Bethany, I am stunned by those images. So, let me get this straight: you posted the images on your blog, then they took the photos off your blog, manipulated them, and then sent them back to you? Then they say that if one is pro-life one 'gets what one deserves'? What?

    "Gallows humor" is a real phenomena; sometimes vets let off steam making jokes, and I'm sure even doctors and nurses do. BUT, pro-choice people who are just going about their lives think they can be this cruel because we make them feel bad about killing children? Huh? Even back when I was unfortunately pro-choice, that level of cruelty wouldn't have entered my mind in a million years.

    Posted by: ninek at June 1, 2010 12:26 PM

    Going back to Bethany's post 2 years ago got me thinking about the decent pro-choice commenters Dan, Rae, and Jesse. Has anyone kept in contact with them? Any idea how they're doing or what they're doing these days?

    Posted by: Rachael C. at June 1, 2010 1:01 PM

    Going back to Bethany's post 2 years ago got me thinking about the decent pro-choice commenters Dan, Rae, and Jesse. Has anyone kept in contact with them? Any idea how they're doing or what they're doing these days?

    I'm still in contact with Rae and Dan! They're doing well. Working hard, studying hard, having fun, etc. Haven't heard from Jess in a while but last I knew she was happy and healthy.

    I hope that I was one of the 'decent' pro-choice commenters back in the day, too. :)

    Posted by: Alexandra at June 1, 2010 1:39 PM

    Well has anyone heard from Xalisae recently? She isn't pro-choice but I miss her input on here.

    Posted by: Sydney M. at June 1, 2010 1:41 PM


    I'm sorry they did that to you. That's cruel. They yammer on and on about "reproductive freedom" and "privacy", and "defending women" yet can't even leave a grieving mother alone just because she's public about her grief.

    So much for being pro-woman.

    P.S. I was glad to see some pro-choicers who did not share that brand of so-called "humor".

    Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 1, 2010 1:47 PM

    Of course, Alexandra :) Thanks for updating us and how are you?

    Posted by: Rachael C. at June 1, 2010 2:33 PM

    Yes Sydney M. I have been wondering if anyone has heard from Xalisae recently. I have been praying for her and wondering how she and her family are doing. If any of you do have contact with her just let her know we are concerned, miss her and wish her well. God bless.

    Posted by: Prolifer L at June 1, 2010 2:46 PM

    Ha Rachel, I'm well, thanks. Busier than I ever thought possible, but I guess that's not really a complaint in this economy! I'm around a little more lately since I have a semi-regular office for the next six months (a rarity in my industry). How've you been?

    Posted by: Alexandra at June 1, 2010 3:32 PM

    definitely contact the Pope Paul institute, Pamela. They can help with a lot of issues, not just miscarriages. They're located right in my home state.

    Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 1, 2010 3:50 PM

    Been having a rough time of it lately.

    Posted by: Rachael C. at June 3, 2010 7:46 AM