(Prolifer)ations 10-27-07

pro-lifeblogbuzz3.jpgLast night marked my final speaking engagement for the fall, with the exception of one locally in December.

My blog's subtitle is Pro-Life Pulse, but it's hard to keep a finger on the pulse when you're running. I feel a bit out of the loop.

So I particularly looked forward to perusing the blogs of fellow pro-lifers for a long overdue (Prolifer)ations. So much great information, I can only get through 1/3 of my list of favorite bloggers....

  • It was a baby aborted for being imperfect according to some human standards who got me involved in the pro-life movement. So I was glad to see the link on the After Abortion blog to a "one-day retreat of healing from someone--and for someones--who have suffered the loss of a child from abortion due to poor prenatal prognosis" in NY November 24.

  • Matthew Eppinette at Americans United for Life lists all the bloggers who participated in the FRC Washington Briefing and thanks FRC's Jared Bridges, Joe Carter, and Charmaine Yoest for being so hospitable. I'd like to thank AUL for donating $10k to finance what Matt called "New Media Row." (I like that term!)

  • In July I posted three entertaining short videos produced by seminarians at the Institute for Priestly Formation in Omaha on NFP vs. contraception. Elizabeth Andrew has posted #4 and I found #5. Very witty:

  • (Btw, don't you miss the "Ask an abortion doc" videos?)

  • La Shawn Barber links to a NYT op ed discussing a new book co-authored by Bill Cosby, Come On, People: On the Path From Victims to Victors. Best lines from the column and book:

    come%20on.jpg

    A word to the wise ain't necessary. It's the stupid ones who need the advice. ~ Cosby

    You can't land a plane in Rome saying, "Whassup?" to the control tower. You can't be a doctor telling your nurse, "Dat tumor be nasty." ~ book

    Speaking about the epidemic of fatherlessness in black families.... [t]he most important step toward ending the tragic cycles of violence and poverty among African-Americans also happens to be the heaviest lift - reconnecting black fathers to their children. ~ column

  • Judie Brown links to an LA Times article about the NC state medical board appealing a court decision that allows doctors to administer lethal injections for death penalty inmates. Notes Judie, "This same medical board will not object to the removal of feeding tubes from patients who are ill but not dying." I'd add the same board inexplicably supports abortion.

  • Speaking of the death penalty, our northern blogging friends at Big Blue Wave link to an October 26 Associated Press article:

    montgomery.jpg

    Kansas City, MO - A jury on Friday decided that a woman convicted of killing an expectant mother and cutting her baby from her womb should receive the death penalty....

    Lisa Montgomery [pictured right]... 39, was convicted Monday of kidnapping and killing Bobbie Jo Stinnett on Dec. 16, 2004....

    BBW says the punishment meted was "so wrong," Gotta disagree with my friends on this one.

  • BBW also links to wacky blogger bastard.logic, who blames the Partial Birth Abortion ban on the death last month of 22-year-old and 13-weeks pregnant Laura Smith at the Cape & Island Center for Women's Health in MA. bastard.logic should rename itself incredibly.stupid.logic. After admitting Smith had a suction abortion, incredibly.stupid leaps to D&E abortions and then to PBA abortions and proclaims, aha! Another example of the pro-aborts' best and brightest.

  • Mark Crutcher has two great posts. From the first, "If saving women is really the goal...":

    [O]ne of [the abortion lobby's] favorites is the old line that since women are going to have abortions regardless of what the law says, we have to protect them against dangerous back-alley abortions....

    What I'm wondering about is this. If the motivation for legalized abortion really is to save the lives of women, why aren't the people who make that argument also calling for the repeal of laws against rape? After all, it is not uncommon for a woman to be killed by a rapist so she can't identify him to the authorities. Legalizing rape would save those women by taking away the rapists' motivation for killing them.

    And not only is this title brilliant, "On the trail of Rodham and Gomorrah," so is the piece, which should be read in its entirety:

    In the first few years of legalized abortion, studies were taken to determine the cost of an abortion. The findings were that, generally speaking, the price was between $300 and $350. Interestingly, those figures have changed little since then. That begs the question: with no competition and a seemingly reliable demand, why have they been unable to raise prices in almost 35 years?...

    Since day one, the abortion industry has pushed this idea that when a woman does not want to be pregnant she will crawl through hell on broken glass to get an abortion....

    [But] the evidence does not support this. The financial publication, Economic Inquiry, Vol. XXVI, April 1988, produced a study about the relationship between abortion cost and abortion rates and found... as the cost of abortion goes up, the demand for abortion goes down. This finding has been confirmed by other independent studies....

    The obvious solution to the abortion industry's current financial dilemma would be for them to raise prices to meet their increased costs and simply make more money off fewer killings. But as fiscally reasonable as that may sound, the abortion lobby knows it is not a viable option. They have long understood that, in order to maintain abortion's legality, they need the political and cultural inertia created by a high abortion rate. This has put them in a kind of "Catch 22" situation. They need higher abortion prices to solve their financial problems, but the lowered abortion rate produced by these higher prices would threaten their political survivability.

    That is why the abortion industry has not raised prices for almost 35 years. The problem they now face is that the cost of doing business has risen dramatically during that time....

    hillary.jpg

    In order to survive, the abortion industry has to find a way to raise their prices without lowering the abortion rate.

    Enter Hillary Clinton.

    Planned Parenthood's current expansion is their way of betting that Slick Hilly is going to be the next president. They are also counting on her to install a system of socialized medicine that will include elective abortion....

  • Culture Campaign has a good post, "Breast cancer organizations promoting only selective awareness," for "[f]ailing to disclose 2 major risk factors: abortion and hormonal contraception."...


  • Comments:

    OMG, Hillary looks disgusting in that picture. What a hateful woman. I despise her.

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 3:12 AM


    Mark Crutcher has two great posts. From the first, "If saving women is really the goal...":

    [O]ne of [the abortion lobby's] favorites is the old line that since women are going to have abortions regardless of what the law says, we have to protect them against dangerous back-alley abortions....
    What I'm wondering about is this. If the motivation for legalized abortion really is to save the lives of women, why aren't the people who make that argument also calling for the repeal of laws against rape? After all, it is not uncommon for a woman to be killed by a rapist so she can't identify him to the authorities. Legalizing rape would save those women by taking away the rapists' motivation for killing them.


    What asinine, misogynistic garbage. Is there any low-down,nonsensical anti-choice argument you people will not resort to? I don't care if Crutcher's comments were written in sarcasm; they are still disgusting.

    Women do not CHOOSE to be raped, but, honestly, I'm not surprised YOUR side would suggest making rape legal since you're really all about punishing women anyway.

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 3:30 AM


    Its sad that this murderer [Lisa Montgomery] won't be surely, swiftly, painfully and publicly executed tomorrow evening, but will have a lawyer fight for appeals that will delay justice from being carried out for years.

    Its not a justice system. Its just a system.

    Posted by: Zeke13:19 at October 27, 2007 3:42 AM


    Bill Cosby: Speaking about the epidemic of fatherlessness in black families.... [t]he most important step toward ending the tragic cycles of violence and poverty among African-Americans also happens to be the heaviest lift - reconnecting black fathers to their children.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    GREAT MOMENTS IN HYPOCRITE HISORY!:

    Six years ago, Bill Cosby gave a scathing, self-righteous speech at the Urban League Conferance about fatherless children, single-parent homes and illegitamacy destroying the African American community. Behind him, Jesse Jackson and Julian Bond stood, applauding and nodding in agreement.

    Why is this priceless?

    ALL THREE - Cosby, Jackson and Bond - fathered illegitimate children while married.

    Gee, thank you Captain Role Model! (I'll see if I can find the picture...)

    Posted by: Laura at October 27, 2007 3:42 AM


    OMG, Hillary looks disgusting in that picture. What a hateful woman. I despise her.

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 3:12 AM
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Why is that? Envy?

    Posted by: Laura at October 27, 2007 3:44 AM


    OMG, Hillary looks disgusting in that picture. What a hateful woman. I despise her.

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 3:12 AM


    And here we have a very good example of the pot calling the kettle black.

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 3:52 AM


    And here we have a very good example of the pot calling the kettle black.

    Oh my gosh Heather, I had no idea that Hillary knew you. What did you do to make her despise you?

    Esther,

    Why does that upset you? The logic is spot on.
    If you want to lower deaths from back alley abortions by making those abortions legal, why not lower deaths from rape by making rape legal?

    Nothing to do with choice, and everything to do with lowering women's deaths.

    And why do you think we want to punish women? Don't you think that's a little over the top?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 4:26 AM


    Esther,

    Why does that upset you? The logic is spot on.
    If you want to lower deaths from back alley abortions by making those abortions legal, why not lower deaths from rape by making rape legal?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 4:26 AM

    So only WOMEN get raped? Let's make raping children and disabled senior citizens legal. Great idea! We'll save lots of lives -- not.

    Myths About Rape

    Most rapists kill their victim. One percent or less of all rapes end in murder.
    Every woman in every part of society is a potential rape victim. Rapistsí targets range from infants to disabled senior citizens.

    The biggest myth is that rape really does not happen that often. It does! Few cases are ever reported. For every rape that is reported, ten go unreported. The FBI estimates that there is a rape every 60 seconds in the United States.

    Posted by: Anonymous at October 27, 2007 5:03 AM


    Good morning Doug,

    Are you an early riser or a vampire that just hasn't gone to bed yet?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:13 AM


    Doug,

    Call me crazy, but when we say "women" I think we mean all females. And I know plenty of female senior citizens that would be a little put off by the fact that you no longer consider them women because they are older.

    And we are not seriously making an argument for legalizing rape. Just pointing out how weak that particular argument from the pro choice side is...I think you need some coffee. Or another Bloody Mary.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:15 AM


    And here we have a very good example of the pot calling the kettle black.

    MK: Oh my gosh Heather, I had no idea that Hillary knew you. What did you do to make her despise you?


    So, according to MK, Heather's remarks about Hillary weren't hateful?

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 5:15 AM


    Esther,

    Was that anonymous you and not Doug? If so, sorry, but you are posting with the same IP address. How do you know Doug?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:22 AM


    So, according to MK, Heather's remarks about Hillary weren't hateful?

    Well, they certainly weren't kind. But I cut Heather a little slack as she is so often "personally" attacked here. Laura and others tend to really get mean when it comes to her. I know they have seriously hurt her feelings on more than one occasion.

    I give her credit for "holding back" as much as she does. But yes, I'll agree, her statement was far from the Christian standard.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:26 AM


    Doug,

    Call me crazy, but when we say "women" I think we mean all females. And I know plenty of female senior citizens that would be a little put off by the fact that you no longer consider them women because they are older.

    And we are not seriously making an argument for legaliizing rape. Just pointing out howweak that particular argument from the pro choice side is...I think you need some coffee. Or another Bloody Mary.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:15 AM


    That was my post. Sorry for the confusion.

    I doubt Crutcher was talking about children in his remarks because he specifically said women -- not females. I am just pointing out how absurd and hateful Crutcher's logic is.

    In essence, Crutcher is equating rapists and women who have abortions, which is another disgusting aspect of his comments.

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 5:31 AM


    Esther,

    In essence, Crutcher is equating rapists and women who have abortions, which is another disgusting aspect of his comments.

    I don't think that's what he was doing. I think he was equating abortion and rape, (not women that have abortions and men who rape) and pointing out that the argument to save lives by legalizing something evil can be carried over to other "evil" acts.

    Even if he was comparing "persons", I think it would be abortionists to rapists, and not women who have abortions to rapists...I think we all view women as the victims when it comes to abortion. We see them as duped, and misguided, confused, or deluded, desperate and scared...I don't think anyone here sees them as malicious.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:37 AM


    Esther,

    Was that anonymous you and not Doug? If so, sorry, but you are posting with the same IP address. How do you know Doug?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:22 AM


    How is it possible that Doug and I have the same IP address? I only know him from his postings.

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 5:40 AM


    Laura and others tend to really get mean when it comes to her. I know they have seriously hurt her feelings on more than one occasion.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Heather gives as good as she gets.
    The first time I came to this board she let me have it both barrels, and the way she treats Hal - a really decent human being - gives me carte blanche to treat her as I please.

    Sure, I could take the high road, but we both know THAT'S not gonna happen...

    Posted by: Laura at October 27, 2007 5:44 AM


    Esther,

    I don't know...I was curious as to who was up this early and clicked on the comment above by anonymous. Then clicked on the IP address, and then clicked on all posts from that IP address and Dougs name came up...weird, huh?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:45 AM


    MK: Even if he was comparing "persons", I think it would be abortionists to rapists, and not women who have abortions to rapists...

    I disagree.

    MK: I think we all view women as the victims when it comes to abortion. We see them as duped, and misguided, confused, or deluded, desperate and scared...I don't think anyone here sees them as malicious.


    Well, that's simply untrue. People have stated on this blog that they would like to see women who have abortions and the people who help them procure their abortions imprisioned.

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 5:48 AM


    Laura,

    Sure, I could take the high road, but we both know THAT'S not gonna happen...

    LOL.

    But you know as well as I do that you are much better at wielding the sarcasm sword, and that puts you at the advantage.

    It's like you carry a cannon, and Heather has a slingshot.

    We both know that you test people to see if they can handle your wicked sense of humor and if you deem them as weak, you show no mercy.

    I love you girl, but your tongue is sharp. And not everyone can take it.

    Sometimes taking the "high" road is an indication of strength. Something we both know you have an abundance of.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:50 AM


    Esther,

    Well, that's simply untrue. People have stated on this blog that they would like to see women who have abortions and the people who help them procure their abortions imprisioned.

    You're right and I'm sorry. But they are few and far between. I think the general consensus on the pro-life side is that the women are victims, tho.

    There is always someone who will disagree.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:52 AM


    Esther,

    And if you prove me wrong, I'll gladly eat crow and change my statement to "I believe that women are victims in the abortion world..."

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:54 AM


    Esther,

    I don't know...I was curious as to who was up this early and clicked on the comment above by anonymous. Then clicked on the IP address, and then clicked on all posts from that IP address and Dougs name came up...weird, huh?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:45 AM


    Yes! It seems weird to me. I just asked my daughter about it, and her response was, "That's impossible!"

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 6:07 AM


    the Institute for Priestly Formation

    Ha! I love the way that sounds.

    Mornin' MK - I was up late and now I'm back at work. Really easy duty on this job, just listening to some vacuum pumps run. Literally won't have to lift a finger for ten hours (other than tapping a few keys on this keyboard yuck yuck yuck) and then I do have about 15 minutes worth of work in the last two hours. Whew.... I better rest up.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 6:23 AM


    On the same IP address deal, it may be that Esther has America Online. If so, that'd explain it - I've seen all AOL users show as the same IP address before.

    For this post, I opened Internet Explorer, so I think I should show a different address here.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 6:28 AM


    Esther, how are you doing this morning? Fine, thank you, and you?....

    Uck uck uck uck uck. (Popeye laugh)

    Reminds me of the Ian Hunter album from 1979, You're Never Alone With a Schizophrenic.

    Awesome album IMO, and the residence of "Cleveland Rocks" which much later on became the theme song for "The Drew Carey Show." I remember the Rolling Stone review, now so long ago....

    Hunter, despite a preference for fast ones rather than ballads here, somehow always manages to sound like a venerable rock & roll King Lear, raging passionately against the elements. Or like Hamlet, sitting in the graveyard, holding his own freshly unearthed skull (instead of Yorick's) in his hands, gazing into its eyeless sockets and prophesying autumnal doom.


    Estherug/Dougesther

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 6:42 AM


    Esther,

    Well, that's simply untrue. People have stated on this blog that they would like to see women who have abortions and the people who help them procure their abortions imprisioned.

    You're right and I'm sorry. But they are few and far between. I think the general consensus on the pro-life side is that the women are victims, tho.

    There is always someone who will disagree.


    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:52 AM


    I think it's rather demeaning to women to portray them as mindless, helpless lumps of clay who have to have their reproductive decisions decided for them by the "compassionate" Christians who think THEY know better. Christians who would rather these helpless, easily influenced and manipulated creatures have their abortions illegally under unsafe conditions.

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 6:43 AM


    On the same IP address deal, it may be that Esther has America Online. If so, that'd explain it - I've seen all AOL users show as the same IP address before.

    For this post, I opened Internet Explorer, so I think I should show a different address here.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 6:28 AM


    And I am using AOL. So that's the story, huh? I'm also from the Cleveland area. Coincidence?

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 6:54 AM


    I think it's rather demeaning to women to portray them as mindless, helpless lumps of clay who have to have their reproductive decisions decided for them by the "compassionate" Christians who think THEY know better. Christians who would rather these helpless, easily influenced and manipulated creatures have their abortions illegally under unsafe conditions.

    So we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't.

    If we perceive you as malicious criminals who deserve the full punishment of the law, we are hypocrites, uncompassionate and arrogant.

    But if we undertstand that you are trapped, and alone, and scared and grasping at any solution, we are condescending and righteous.

    I give up.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 6:58 AM


    MK: So we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. If we perceive you as malicious criminals who deserve the full punishment of the law, we are hypocrites, uncompassionate and arrogant.

    Esther: Yep.


    MK: But if we undertstand that you are trapped, and alone, and scared and grasping at any solution, we are condescending and righteous.


    Yep.

    The damning starts at the moment you decide YOU know what's best for ME.

    Posted by: Anonymous at October 27, 2007 7:10 AM


    Aren't you heading to Aurora today, MK?

    Posted by: carder at October 27, 2007 8:18 AM


    "Last night marked my final speaking engagement for the fall, with the exception of one locally in December."

    What do your talks typically consist of, Jill?

    BTW, I revisited the prospect of you speaking at a local CPC with the director. She said thank you, she was familiar with you, and would take it up for consideration.

    One more rah-rah from the stands...

    Posted by: carder at October 27, 2007 8:24 AM


    And I am using AOL. So that's the story, huh? I'm also from the Cleveland area. Coincidence?

    Esther, yeah, but the internet has made the world "small." I was born in IN but at six months moved to Ohio (with the aid of my family). We lived in Painesville and Claridon (my dad built a bomb shelter there - those were the days in the 1960s when people were scared of the Russians and "the bomb"), not all the far from Cleveland. Then down by Dayton and later Youngstown, and finally the little town of Minerva, east of Canton. I have a brother in Cleveland Heights.

    I've been to some websites and got messages like, "Your IP address has downloaded 3,449,850 megabytes in the last 24 hours, and no more downloads are allowed." And I've yet to download anything.

    AOL acts like one big "proxy server" - connecting to other servers and dealing with them, just as with Jill's site.

    Doug (one of the horde)

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 8:27 AM


    So we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't.

    If we perceive you as malicious criminals who deserve the full punishment of the law, we are hypocrites, uncompassionate and arrogant.

    But if we understand that you are trapped, and alone, and scared and grasping at any solution, we are condescending and righteous.

    Well yeah, MK, to some extent, because those are not the only two deals. Women are obviously not "criminals" in this respect, and by no means are all scared, grasping, etc.

    Women don't necessarily think that abortion is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but most that have abortions are just doing what they think is best, the same way that we all go through life.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 8:32 AM


    Esther 6:43am

    Mindless, helpless lumps of clay? That's often how feminist leaders have wanted us portrayed when it has served their purpose.

    That digusting farce called the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill hearings and all the ballyhoo and handwringing over sexual harassment and what victims women were. "When did women become so damned helpless"? That question was posed by my elderly mother while she was having a fit of laughter. "They think this is something new"?
    Feminists argued that women could be put in combat positions in the military but couldn't stand up to the office fanny patter.

    Oh, then there's Crisis Pregnancy Centers. If anything turns women into helpless, mindless, snivelling wrecks, its walking into a CPC. Somehow women become completely incapable of saying they are not interested and simply walking out.

    Posted by: Mary at October 27, 2007 8:55 AM


    I would just like to add, my mother pointed out that women, herself included, stood up to sexual harassers for years. That was why she couldn't quite comprehend this sudden helplessness.

    Posted by: Mary at October 27, 2007 9:29 AM


    @Esther & Doug,

    gotta admit though MK's flustering had me going too. You say you do not like any imposition/opposition to 'me' .... but the 'me' is two folks for a pregnant lady. She (rightly with justice) gives voice to that 'other-one'. You know that one you do not even acknowledge!

    As far as emotive 'feelings' go, MK's assessment seems pretty close-to-home for ladies DURING pregnancy. Outside of this time, she might indeed be a feminist 'superwoman - combat boots and all.

    As far as the criminality is concerned, I really think it is for 'healing' not 'condemnation'. As such maybe a 'truth & reconciliation commission' like in South Africa would help heal.

    Posted by: John McDonell at October 27, 2007 10:11 AM


    Why is that? Envy?

    Posted by: Laura at October 27, 2007 3:44 AM
    LOL!

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 11:38 AM


    As far as I'm concerned, a lot of women who have abortions aren't the "helpless little victims" they make themselves out to be. I have shared many stories here. They are all true. I swear all them on my children's lives. I WISH they weren't true, but they are. America allows 4000 murders per day.

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 12:07 PM


    Doug, I was in Cleveland Heights yesterday. Small world!

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 12:42 PM


    Doug, where do you live? We might be neighbors.

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 12:49 PM



    We might be neighbors.

    Heather - Minerva, east of Canton.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 1:16 PM


    Doug, Canton/Akron is about a 40 minute drive from here. Let's go out for that steak! LOL!

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 1:19 PM


    You say you do not like any imposition/opposition to 'me' .... but the 'me' is two folks for a pregnant lady. She (rightly with justice) gives voice to that 'other-one'. You know that one you do not even acknowledge!

    John - no, not "any impostion." Unless one wants to be a total hermit, outside society, then one is gonna have some "impositions." Yet without a good enough recognized reason, for third-parties to want their will enforced on people is gonna get a lot of opposition.

    We acknowledge the unborn, such as they are. We may not impute all that you do to the unborn, however.
    ......

    As far as emotive 'feelings' go, MK's assessment seems pretty close-to-home for ladies DURING pregnancy. Outside of this time, she might indeed be a feminist 'superwoman - combat boots and all.

    For some ladies, John, but not nearly for all.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 1:24 PM


    Canton/Akron is about a 40 minute drive from here. Let's go out for that steak! LOL!

    Heather, cool - sometime when I'm hope, and I'll buy. Just a couple weeks ago we worked near Youngstown - my job takes me all over.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 1:27 PM


    I love those clips! So true, so true!

    MK, PL Laura, Rosie and Joe - it was great meeting you this morning!

    Posted by: Kristen at October 27, 2007 2:15 PM


    Laura, you blasted me when you came on board here too. Don't be so quick to paint yourself into the victim corner. I wasn't aware that you and Hal were buddies. Perhaps you just like him, because he agrees with everything you say. Also, not only did you bash me, but you have insulted many. Women from "Silent No More" are "nuts." Terri Schiavo is "a breathing pot roast"...I wonder what the Schiavo family would think if they saw that. Women who give birth to children have "welfare brats." Abortions are "crotch goop." Where are you being funny and/or even decent? I will never humor your stupidity. I just don't think it's a good idea. Some people can convert. I just don't see this in your future. jasper is right. You are of the devil.

    Posted by: heather at October 27, 2007 2:34 PM


    Esther,

    The damning starts at the moment you decide YOU know what's best for ME.

    But I don't claim to know what's best for you. I have no doubt that you believe becoming "unpregnant" would be best for you.

    I am speaking for what is best for the "innocent" party. As in the one that did not enjoy a roll in the hay, and yet will be ripped apart from limb to limb.

    The fact that I empathize with the panic a woman must feel does not mean that I think I have the solution to her problems.

    Other than suggesting she keep her skirts down until she is ready to act like a big girl and take responsibility for her actions, I have nothing at all to say.

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 3:31 PM


    Doug,

    Unfortunately, the alternative to believing that a woman is panicked, afraid and feeling backed into a corner, is believing she is a heartless, cold, compassionless, shrew.

    Since I don't wish to view them that way, I am going to take a rare trip to the land of denial, and believe that they are feeling, human beings who are reacting like a cornered rat.

    To coldly, and calculatedly plot and plan the vicious destruction of such a precious being, as opposed to being driven to it by uncontrolled emotions and sheer terror, is unfathomable to me.

    I'll even go with the notion, that these intense feelings have been driven so deep that they don't register in the conscious mind. But I simply cannot face the fact that there are women (and if you are correct, many, many of them) that are that completely depraved and devoid of human warmth.

    Nope. Just visitin' denial on this one...


    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 3:41 PM


    ug,

    Unfortunately, the alternative to believing that a woman is panicked, afraid and feeling backed into a corner, is believing she is a heartless, cold, compassionless, shrew.

    Since I don't wish to view them that way, I am going to take a rare trip to the land of denial, and believe that they are feeling, human beings who are reacting like a cornered rat.

    To coldly, and calculatedly plot and plan the vicious destruction of such a precious being, as opposed to being driven to it by uncontrolled emotions and sheer terror, is unfathomable to me.

    I'll even go with the notion, that these intense feelings have been driven so deep that they don't register in the conscious mind. But I simply cannot face the fact that there are women (and if you are correct, many, many of them) that are that completely depraved and devoid of human warmth.

    Nope. Just visitin' denial on this one...

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 3:41 PM

    Of course a good number of women abort because they are DESPERATE NOT to be pregnant. Unless you have some kind of magic wand capable of changing every woman's situation, a certain percentage of women (of every moral character)is going to want to abort at certain times in their lives. That won't change if legal abortion is banned.

    See, I feel people who want to ban abortion are devoid of a certain amount of empathy. I'm reading many posts on this blog seemingly written by heartless, cold, compassionless pro-lifers pretending to care about the "poor, desperate women who have abortions."

    These heartless pro-lifers would rather these desperate women have to seek IILLEGAL, UNSAFE abortions.

    Oh, the pro-lifers PRIDE themselves on THEIR superior morality and human insight, that's for sure. After all, THEY care about the BABIES! Certianly, THEY'RE the compassionate ones!

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 4:50 PM



    Unfortunately, the alternative to believing that a woman is panicked, afraid and feeling backed into a corner, is believing she is a heartless, cold, compassionless, shrew.

    Nope, MK, there's a lot more than just those two.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 5:02 PM


    Really Doug,

    And what would "those" be?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:37 PM


    Esther,

    When those "other" pro-lifers come on, then talk to them.

    But you said yourself that we are damned if we show compassion to the women.

    And damned if we don't.

    Sounds like you are the one that is being prideful, superior and bull headed.

    You won't even meet halfway, and believe that it is possible to care about both. And to want to find a solution that helps and gives dignity to the womens needs, but doesn't entail killing her child.

    You are the one who ONLY has compassion for one party. Not us.

    I get so tired of being accused of not caring about the women. First it's not true and second I have never once, not once, heard compassion for the unborn child from someone pro-choice.

    So, now who is really the compassionate one here, and who is the heartless one?

    It's not like we're saying Kill the mother, save the baby. Which is exactly what you say. Kill the baby, save the mother.

    Why can't we save them both?

    Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:41 PM


    MK: When those "other" pro-lifers come on, then talk to them. But you said yourself that we are damned if we show compassion to the women. And damned if we don't. Sounds like you are the one that is being prideful, superior and bull headed.


    Esther: Unlike you, I don't pretend to understand the motivations behind why each and every woman has an abortion, nor do I claim to KNOW how women REALLY feel after they abort. You're the one making claims of being all-knowing here.

    YOU'RE claiming banning abortion is the BEST solution to the problem of unwanted pregnancies and abortion. Nope, YOU are the one with the superiority complex.

    MK: You won't even meet halfway, and believe that it is possible to care about both. And to want to find a solution that helps and gives dignity to the womens needs, but doesn't entail killing her child.


    Esther: YOU don't want to meet halfway. Halfway is allwoing women to make their OWN reproductive choices, not forcing them to conform to YOUR notion of what they SHOULD do.

    MK: You are the one who ONLY has compassion for one party. Not us. I get so tired of being accused of not caring about the women. First it's not true and second I have never once, not once, heard compassion for the unborn child from someone pro-choice.

    Esther: I get so tired of the moral superiorty displayed by Christian pro-lifers too. Here you are claiming you're morally superior AGAIN because YOUR side is the only side that TRULY cares. What bunk! And it's not true that pro-choicers don't have compassion for fetuses. Most pro-choicers are opposed to elective abortion after viability. Personally, I wouldn't care if the cut-off were at 12 weeks gestation.

    MK: So, now who is really the compassionate one here, and who is the heartless one? It's not like we're saying Kill the mother, save the baby. Which is exactly what you say. Kill the baby, save the mother. Why can't we save them both?

    YOu can't save them both by banning elective abortion because you can't right every WRONG situation. Pro-lifers would be better served and would serve women BETTER by helping women at risk of unintended pregnancy and abortion financially, emotionally, medically, etc., rather than FORCING them to seek illegal, unsafe abortions. Women will abort regardless of the legal status of abortion.

    Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 6:12 PM


    what would "those" be?

    MK, women who simply know they are making their best choice. They're not "heartless" nor "panicked" - they have an unwanted pregnancy and the right thing for them to do is to end it.

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 7:32 PM


    A long time ago this analogy cropped-up: five people are riding in a car. The right-front tire blows. The car plunges over the guardrail and all 5 are killed at the bottom of a ravine. It turns out that the front-tire blew because it was shot-out.

    The defense is: 'I didn't kill nobody! Just shot a tire, I did!' .... STRONG not. Seems that we're-only-stopping-a-pregnancy has a similar rational.

    Posted by: John McDonell at October 27, 2007 8:49 PM


    John, 5 deaths were caused, and in an abortion 1 death is caused.

    Posted by: Doug at October 27, 2007 10:10 PM


    Esther,

    YOU'RE claiming banning abortion is the BEST solution to the problem of unwanted pregnancies and abortion. Nope, YOU are the one with the superiority complex.

    I'm not claiming any such thing. I'm certainly not claiming that banning abortion is the "solution" to anything, except saving the lives of millions of children.

    The only solution to unwanted pregnancies I have ever promoted, is to stop having sex until you are willing to accept responsibility for the results.

    So now who is claiming to know what someone else thinks?

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 6:21 AM


    Esther,

    YOu can't save them both by banning elective abortion because you can't right every WRONG situation. Pro-lifers would be better served and would serve women BETTER by helping women at risk of unintended pregnancy and abortion financially, emotionally, medically, etc., rather than FORCING them to seek illegal, unsafe abortions. Women will abort regardless of the legal status of abortion.

    Honey, I don't own a gun. And I am certainly not violent. So I fail to see how I could/would possibly "Force" anyone to have an illegal abortion. Just like I didn't "force" them to get pregnant.

    Are women such complete idiots that you don't believe they make any choices for themselves. Do you honestly think that they only do things because they are "forced".

    They chose to have sex. They choose to have abortions. If abortion is illegal, they will choose to have illegal abortions.

    Rape is illegal. Am I "forcing" men to rape women illegally?

    Heroin is illegal. Am I "forcing" people to use heroin illegally?

    You are too funny.

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 6:25 AM


    Esther,

    I get so tired of the moral superiorty displayed by Christian pro-lifers too.

    Perhaps that is your conscience speaking. You remember your conscience, don't you?

    Do you feel morally superior when you say that child abuse is wrong? Do you feel qualified to tell grown adults that they shouldn't beat their children?

    The nerve! How dare you act so superiorly smug! Why can't they beat their children? Because YOU say so? Where is your compassion? All you care about is the kids that are getting beaten! You don't care at all about the parents who have anger issues. And now they have to beat their kids in the basement because YOU have made child abuse illegal! You have FORCED them to do "basement beatings!"

    Do you feel morally superior when you say that people can't drive drunk? How dare you force them to drive drunk illegally. You are so arrogant. What makes you think you know better than they do how they should drive? All you care about is the people that they might kill. You don't care at all about the drunks feelings. They didn't choose to get drunk. They only chose to drink. And when they found themselves innebriated, without their consent, they still had to get home! Sure they could have called a cab, but it was their choice.

    If they wanted to call a cab fine. I'm not against that. But if they wanted to drive themselves home, then that was their choice. It's not like I'm pro child abuse or pro drunk driving. I'm just Pro choice.

    sheesh! Get off your morally superior high horse and leave child abusers and drunk drivers alone!

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 6:37 AM


    I think people should have to have six drinks before they take their driving test.

    That way, if they pass, you know they're good drivers.

    Posted by: Homer Simpson at October 28, 2007 6:53 AM


    If I had six drinks , I'd be in the bathroom puking and unable to remember my name let alone take a driver's test!

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 7:00 AM


    "If I had six drinks , I'd be in the bathroom puking and unable to remember my name let alone take a driver's test!"

    You need to practice more.

    Posted by: Homrah Schlimpson at October 28, 2007 8:18 AM


    No thanks. I can puke very well now, but thank you.

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 8:34 AM


    I tried it, and it didn't work out - failed the driving test. Told the examiner I'd had six drinks, and he gave me a dirty look.

    I asked him if I could take the test again. He said you can take it three times, but if you fail on the third one you have to wait sixth months.

    Well, I thought I just needed to repeat everything, so I asked him, "There's a tavern right around the corner, can I come back in two hours?"

    Then the guy gets really mad....

    Posted by: Hom Sipsizzinuh at October 28, 2007 9:19 AM


    MK, You GOOOOOOOOOOOO GIRL!:}

    Posted by: heather at October 28, 2007 9:56 AM


    MK 6:37am

    A great post! But why stop there. Since there is this issue of moral superiority, we should also remind the state it has no business forcing morality on any of us either. I want to get rid of all legislatures, police and all law enforcement agencies, courts, prisons, parole officers, and anyone else associated with forcing morality on the rest of us. Talk about displays of moral superiority.
    After all, has the existence of any of these state agencies ever stopped those determined to commit crimes?

    Posted by: Mary at October 28, 2007 10:55 AM


    Mary and Heather,

    *bows*

    Thank you, thank you veddy much...

    Seriously tho, you try to be patient, you try to be gentle, and then you get blasted by someone who doesn't know you, know what you believe..

    Maybe I'm wrong here, but it seems to me that I go waaaaaayyyy out of my way (as do many others on here) NOT to point fingers, not to condemn, not to act superior...so to get accused of trying to force my morality on someone is ludicrous.


    What bunk! And it's not true that pro-choicers don't have compassion for fetuses. Most pro-choicers are opposed to elective abortion after viability. Personally, I wouldn't care if the cut-off were at 12 weeks gestation.


    That's compassion? She doesn't even give the child dignity. She refers to it as an inanimate object. Personally, I wouldn't care? Obviously, she's right about that...she wouldn't care. She doesn't care.

    How big of her to allow the cutoff at 12 weeks. What about all those women who want to abort at 13 weeks? How dare she force her "cutoff" date on them!

    Can you see it? Well rape is okay. I mean I have compassion for the body getting raped and all. But it's not like it's a person. It's just an anatomically correct body. And I wouldn't care at all if you cut off the age that you could rape it at say, 60?

    I don't really know this Esther person. And I realize that everybody has a story. So I'm sure I'm reacting too strongly. But she just got my dang dander up...

    Came out of left field and startin' accusing us of being heartless and having no compassion...

    Crazy talk! PP gets paid to do abortions. Women get let off the hook when they get an abortion. Men get to shirk their responsibility when the girl gets an abortion.

    Just what exactly am I getting, standing out in the rain, snow, freezing cold, blazing hot, 52 weeks a year praying that these girls don't do something that will suck their souls out of them?

    I'll tell you what I get. The satisfaction of knowing that out of COMPASSION I am showing them that someone cares about them.

    I'm not getting paid. I'm not getting awards. I'm not even getting thanked (not that I want to)... it is precisely because of our compassion and love for these women and their children that we are fighting tooth and nail!

    And so help me, if one more person says we need to be doing more to help women in these situations I'm gonna call out the lemmings.

    Our church just raised upwards of $18,000 dollars this weekend for the women's centers. What has Esther done?


    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 5:05 PM


    And of course,
    Esther is nowhere to be found...I need a blood pressure pill. Pass me the asparagus, please.

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 5:06 PM


    *passes MK the asparagus*

    Posted by: Rae at October 28, 2007 5:22 PM


    Rae,

    Hooray! Sorry you had to hear that rant...you know better than anyone that I rarely lose my temper...but for heavens sake!

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 5:46 PM


    Are you still at mom's house?

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 5:47 PM


    @MK: Jah, I went to the lab for a wee bit and got done sooner than I planned, so I knew I'd be bored so I went back home. :)

    Posted by: Rae at October 28, 2007 6:10 PM


    And it's okay to lose your temper. Everybody does. No worries.

    Posted by: Rae at October 28, 2007 6:16 PM


    Mk, you wrote: "I'm not claiming any such thing. I'm certainly not claiming that banning abortion is the "solution" to anything, except saving the lives of millions of children."

    Except now we know that laws against abortion do not prevent abortions and therefore do not save the lives of any fetuses. They just make abortions dangerous for the women who have them.

    See for instance http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS014067360761575X/fulltext

    Posted by: SoMG at October 28, 2007 6:24 PM


    Oh please SoMG,

    You're going to try to tell me that if abortion were illegal, women would be having 4000 of them a day?

    "If you want to inspire confidence, give plenty of statistics. It does not matter that they should be accurate, or even intelligible, as long as there is enough of them. " Lewis Carroll

    Posted by: mk at October 28, 2007 7:28 PM


    Just what exactly am I getting, standing out in the rain, snow, freezing cold, blazing hot, 52 weeks a year praying that these girls don't do something that will suck their souls out of them?

    MK, you probably have the wrong premise, but here's hoping you get a nice rum drink.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 29, 2007 1:50 AM


    Doug,

    With all due respect, I don't drink in order to further my ability to live in denial. While a warm rum drink would be nice, it wouldn't be enough to block the truth that these girls souls, are indeed, being damaged.

    I don't know how to give you the ability to see what is right in front of you. I've never met anyone quite so able to blind themselves to truth. I mean, I have seen people in denial, but you almost make it an artform.

    The girl that goes into the clinic, is not the same girl that comes out. She is changed for ever, and I don't mean physically. You might not see it, and she might not see it, but it is truth nonetheless. Deny it all you want. Wishing something, is not the same as the reality of a thing.

    Erin may think she is okay. But something died in her that day, and I don't mean her child. It isn't affecting her now, but it will. It will color every relationship she has from this point on. It will eat away at her, silently, like an unknown cancer. And cancer can only be cured if it's caught in time. Like other cancers, cancer of the soul can be very tricky to diagnose. Many times there are no overt symptoms. Just vague feelings of unwellness. But slowly, and steadily, it is doing it's damage.

    You can't tell that a person has cancer just by looking at them. They can appear perfectly healthy. But it's there. Lurking. And cancer of the soul is the worst kind.

    So while you are enabling her and all the rest with your defense of their choice, just remember that you are also "contributing" to their spiritual demise, no less than you can enable an alcoholic by denying that there is a problem. You can clean up their vomit, call them out of work, and swear up and down that you don't believe they have a problem, but in the end, their liver will fail and you will be at least partly responsible.

    I understand that you believe that I have the wrong premise. But again, what you believe and what the truth is, is two very different things.

    We'll never agree on this, I know, but I at least, know which side of the "battle" I am on. I am fighting for Erin's soul. You are fighting for her right to become stone.


    Posted by: mk at October 29, 2007 6:08 AM


    MK, thank you for that KICK ARSE Post!! How true it is. It eats their souls like a cancer.

    Posted by: heather at October 29, 2007 7:13 AM



    MK, I know you deeply about all this, and I was just being light-hearted and kidding about the rum drink.

    The truth is right in front of us, but it's not that "these girls" are as you say. Some do suffer and regret having abortions, sure. Yet most do not, are "the same people" after having abortions as they were before, and I think you are just plain wrong about Erin.
    ......

    I understand that you believe that I have the wrong premise. But again, what you believe and what the truth is, is two very different things.

    I am looking at reality. You are pretending it's the same for all women or "these girls," and that's not true.
    ......

    We'll never agree on this, I know, but I at least, know which side of the "battle" I am on. I am fighting for Erin's soul. You are fighting for her right to become stone.

    Okay, your opinion. I will go with the people who are actually involved.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 29, 2007 10:56 AM


    @Doug,

    I know you like out-of-the-ordinary psychological stuff. Some people may tend to think MK overreacting, I don't! True story: Dan (a senior in high school) was hard from toe to the top of his head. He was a champion wrestler and had a mannerism and aire about him that would intimidate anyone.

    At the end of a weekend to explore his faith, Dan said, "I've really changed!" 'Sure, sure' I thought to myself. About 2 months later this fellow calls me by name. Dan had to tell me it was him. He had not just worn new clothes and sported a new hairstyle, but his manner and even the creases in his face were gone. The new Dan was a mellow Dan ... marvelous!

    After that experience I started to live-the-moment and very few things are now ... the-same-old. Our very beings can be transformed.

    Posted by: John McDonell at October 29, 2007 1:51 PM


    Whoa, whoa, what? I have no cancer of the soul. I'm happier than I've ever been, I'm pretty sure. I don't need anyone to 'fight for my soul'. I'm a mature woman and can take care of my soul myself. It's really, rather insulting that you can take such a superior attitude to me. I'm not some little child that needs you to watch after me or pray for me. I cast my own stone and I'm quite happy. You just cant IMAGINE that though, can you?

    Posted by: Erin at October 29, 2007 2:32 PM


    even the creases in his face were gone.

    John, sweeet - amazing stuff once again.


    After that experience I started to live-the-moment and very few things are now ... the-same-old. Our very beings can be transformed.

    I hear you (and I still have to try lying on the floor, etc., as you described).

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 29, 2007 3:10 PM


    I'm a mature woman and can take care of my soul myself.

    No, actually, Erin, you can't. Only Jesus can.

    It's really, rather insulting that you can take such a superior attitude to me.

    We are not superior to you. We just recognized that we need Jesus to save our souls and you haven't come to this realization yet. And the longer you persist is soul-numbing and soul-killing activities, the harder your heart becomes and the harder it is to accept salvation.

    Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2007 3:15 PM


    *snort* Soul-numbing and soul-killing? I have had an abortion. I like to go out on the weekends to have a couple drinks with my friends. I work my butt off as a waitress. Surely, my life is a sin-filled one! Thank goodness I don't believe in God.

    Posted by: Erin at October 29, 2007 3:23 PM


    It is sin-filled with original sin. No matter if you do nothing but feed the homeless till you die, you're still damned by your original sin. Everyone needs Jesus.

    The actual sin added by killing your baby and not repenting for it doesn't help.

    Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2007 4:27 PM


    Erin,
    How many weeks along were you when you terminated?

    And how many months ago was this?

    Posted by: carder at October 29, 2007 8:20 PM


    Almost 6 months, carder. And I'm happier than I've ever been. I was about 5 weeks along. It wasn't a baby. It was a fetus.

    Posted by: Erin at October 29, 2007 8:30 PM


    Erin --

    I think the fact that you spend so much time defending abortion on this blog indicates that the act has changed you. It seems like you are constantly trying to justify your actions.

    If it was such a minor thing, why do you spend so much time on it instead of just going on your way?

    Posted by: LB at October 29, 2007 9:49 PM


    I spend time on this blog because I enjoy debate. It's nothing new. I was fiercely pro-choice before my abortion, and I remain so afterwards. Nothing has changed except my level of experience with my cause. I was just as much of a flaming liberal before I aborted. I'm an example that you can have an abortion and not feel bad about it. I don't intend to let you guys forget it.

    Posted by: Erin at October 29, 2007 10:12 PM


    Erin,

    Even if I am wrong and you are 100% right, why would the fact that I am praying for you and for your life to get or remain goo,d bother you?

    If there is no God then I am simply wasting my time. But not yours. I didn't ask you to join me in prayer. And I certainly didn't mean to insult you. Why would I pray for somebody unless I cared about them and their well being. I pray for everyone on this site.

    So if praying for you because I care about you is an insult, I'm sorry. But I sincerely have only your best interests at heart.

    It's not like I was wishing you eternally damned. I'm praying for your health of mind, body and spirit...this is a bad thing?

    Posted by: mk at October 29, 2007 10:18 PM


    I guess it puzzles me that as a liberal and pro-choice advocate that you became pregnant in the first place. PP offers 'so much help' to avoid pregnancy and it didn't work out for you. Unless you were simply careless.
    Carelessness (callousness) is really what it takes to be so proud of your actions.
    MK -- I am praying too

    I really wonder at 'debating' with the pro-choicers --- to have a change of heart, you have to have a heart to begin with.... Trolls need to be feed, I guess.

    Posted by: LB at October 29, 2007 10:27 PM


    LB- some people don't like debating, some do. I do, you don't. Doesn't mean that you have the right to pass judgment on me. There's lifers that like to debate. You condemn them too?

    MK- I know you didn't mean to be condescending, I think part of my taking offense was that I didn't even realize that I was being talked about, and the rest was how you were talking about how my soul is now apparently dying and stuff. I don't really care if people pray for me. I do care if they assume that I am obviously miserable and suffering, even though they can't see it. It's all on the INSIDE. It drives me nuts that you guys can't believe that I honestly am happy with my decision and my life.

    But then, I guess I can't understand a vast amount of what you guys think either.

    Posted by: Erin at October 29, 2007 10:41 PM


    Erin,

    I honestly don't even know why you're name came up.
    I really worked up a head of steam after Esthers posts and as you can see, she hasn't even been back.

    You know we've talked before about the "poster child" thing and I guess I just abused the privilege.

    I'm sorry. You and I have a "real" relationship and it would upset me a lot if I thought that I had permanently damaged it by speaking before thinking.

    Thanks for being so understanding. And thanks for realizing that my prayers come from a "good place" and are filled with genuine love, not arrogance.

    Posted by: mk at October 30, 2007 6:10 AM


    MaryKay, you are a sweetheart.

    Doug

    Posted by: Doug at October 30, 2007 1:08 PM