UPDATE, 2/8, 6:55a: Here's more of an obit at NewsObserver.com.
2/3, 6:53p: If it's true these things happen in 3s, here's the final death in an abortion trilogy. First, abortionist George Tiller, then abortionist Eugene Glick, and now abortion chain owner Susan Hill.
Hill died on February 1. I don't know her birthday beyond the year, 1948, making her either 61 or 62. This video says Hill had lung cancer, and this article states she died of breast cancer. If it was breast cancer, she doesn't appear to have birthed any live children, which would have protected her against it. If Hill had an abortion or hormonal contraceptive history, which also would have increased her risk, they are unknown....
Hill was president of the National Women's Health Foundation, which collected donations to fund abortions of poor pregnant mothers.
Hill also headed the National Women's Health Organization, "a pioneering group of [abortion] clinics," according to the Southern History Oral Program. At 1 point Hill/NWHO owned 11 mills but were down to 4 at the time of her death, including the last mill in MS located in Jackson.
Two weeks after the Roe v. Wade decision Hill and a partner opened the 1st mill in FL, the EPOC mill in Orlando. This is the infamous mill now owned by James Pendergraft, where baby Rowan was aborted alive in 2005 and allowed to die (the death the movie 22 Weeks was based upon).
Hill, a social worker by trade, is said to have been responsible for the deaths of 400,000 children aborted at her mills.
Hill was also a part of the infamous NOW vs. Scheidler lawsuit.
Here is a video bio of Hill, made in 2007 when she received the Nancy Susan Reynolds Award...
In June 2009 Hill was Rachel Maddow's guest to memorialize Tiller...
A June 1, 2009, Salon story about Tiller, included this:
Susan Hill, President of NWHF, who knew Dr. Tiller for over 2 decades and referred girls and women to his clinic, said in a phone interview, "We always sent the really tragic cases to Tiller." Those included women diagnosed with cancer who needed abortions to qualify for chemotherapy, women who learned late in their pregnancies that their wanted babies had fatal illnesses, and rape victims so young they didn't realize they were pregnant for months. "We sent him 11-year-olds, 12-year-olds who were way too far along for anybody [else] to see," said Hill. "11-year-olds don't tell anybody. Sometimes they don't even know they've had a period."
About Susan's soul, we know she was presented the Gospel. This comes from Flip Benham of OSA:
Susan Hill died yesterday morning, Monday, February 1, 2010. We had run into each other on several occasions over the years - at abortion mills or debating on TV. We all liked, her even though her opinion of us was less than shared.
She had many opportunities to hear and be challenged by the Gospel of Christ, but never appeared much interested. She truly believed that killing children was the right thing to do, and that a woman's right to choose always eclipsed a child's right to live.
We went to visit her at her home in Raleigh, NC, a few years ago desiring to share Jesus with her. We passed out hundreds of flyers to the folks in her neighborhood and passer's by.
Susan [on far right in photo above] is alive right now and very conscious of her whereabouts and her sinful and wicked ways. Now, however, there is no time to repent. That time has passed her by.
There is only the fearful judgment of Almighty God who will bring justice to bear on those who have slaughtered His children. She will never be able to say that she was not warned. The Hound of Heaven sought after her heart on so many different occasions. But then, maybe she did cry out to Jesus for forgiveness? I certainly hope so....
[HT: Mary Q.; top photo of Hill via Operation Save America]
Another terrible, tragic, wasted life.
And 400,000 dead children. What an absolute tragedy.
I wish I knew what we can do to get everyone to reject this awful mentality once and for all.Posted by: Joe at February 3, 2010 7:10 PM
I can only hope that in her final moments, with the weight of eternity pressing in on her, Hill had insight into what she had done and asked God's forgiveness.
If not, her soul stands sore-charged before God for what she has done, and as Jill says, with the time to repent having passed her by.
What a tragedy that a social worker of all people lacked vision, lacked hope, lacked faith in the women she thought death would serve. Death seems to be the last refuge for those among us with no vision and no soul. Is it that Hill really lacked vision for these women, or that she looked down on them from the start and just sought to profit from their hardships?
God be merciful to her.Posted by: Gerard Nadal at February 3, 2010 7:20 PM
you have to wonder how many of those young 11 or 12 year old girls now suffer after their abortions?Posted by: LizFromNebraska at February 3, 2010 7:23 PM
Posted by: Mary
at February 3, 2010 7:40 PM
She looks like she could have been pregnant in that photo.
"If it was breast cancer, she doesn't appear to have birthed any live children, which would have protected her against it."
Excuse me. My mother had breast cancer AFTER she birthed two children. Giving birth decreases your chance of breast cancer, it does not remove your chance of breast cancer.Posted by: anon at February 3, 2010 7:49 PM
And I am sure that Tiller reported the pedophile rapists of the little girls to the proper authorities.
I wondered the same thing.
God bless, Flip Benham!!
He baptized Miss Norma Mc Corvey who BTW never aborted,
despite her being used by the baby killers to enshrine a
so called "right" to abortion on demand.
Hey Anon....my mom had four children and was diagnosed with breast cancer when I was 10. However, she was on the pill in the 60's and took it for years (there is a 10 year space between my two older brothers and my sister and I). My mom also had an IUD in the 60's as a newlywed. She didn't know it worked by causing an abortion.
My mom also nursed my sister and I. But even though that lessened her risk, being on the pill raised it right back up. I have so much breast cancer in my family and I myself was on the pill for a few years I shudder to think...oh well. Its all in God's hands now.
Susan Hill def. looks pregnant in that photo. What a sad waste of a life. She knows the truth now though.Posted by: Sydney M. at February 3, 2010 8:27 PM
The truth is, whether one murders 400,000 of God's children or lives a moral life harming no one, unless an individual accepts Jesus Christ as their Savior and asks forgiveness for their sins, they will be spending eternity separated from God.
While we tend to think that abortionists like Susan Hill get a worse fate than others, it is a simple line. Reject Christ, accept Hell.Posted by: Cristy S. at February 3, 2010 8:28 PM
Welcome to the conversation.
Please pick a monicker to use as the blog rules do not permit "anonymous".
Thanks.Posted by: carder at February 3, 2010 8:28 PM
Actually, there's.a fourth -- Ruth Proskauer Smith, one of the founders of NARAL, died in late January at age 102Posted by: Henrietta G. Tavish at February 3, 2010 8:31 PM
I was told as a teenager that I was supposed to have been aborted illegally. My uncle had paid for the abortion for my mom (yes, I've wondered why over the years) but my sister who was 11 years old at that time told my mom that abortion was illegal. My mom did not go through with it and I have my own two, wonderful children today. My daughter works with children and wants to make that her career. I am so thankful that my life was spared from illegal abortions.Posted by: Kim at February 3, 2010 8:40 PM
When I read of people like this dying, I often pause to reflect for a few moments on my own Judgment Day, and whether I'm currently engaged in His service so as not to be ashamed on that Day.
Strengthen us, O God, to do thy will with excellence and passion.Posted by: Ed at February 3, 2010 8:43 PM
Abortionists like Tiller, Glick and Susan Hill DO get a worse fate. Anyone that rejects Christ will receive hell. That is when people are judged to see if their name is written in the book of life. Anyone not found was cast into the lake of fire. But the dead were also judged out of the bookS.The books (plural) is different than the book of life which only records salvation. The books (plural) are the records of all evil deeds that a person does in their lifetime. Someone whose sins were not forgiven was then given a degree of suffering in hell based on their evil deeds. So someone who lived a "good" life yet rejected Christ would suffer less than say, Hitler.
Tiller, Glick, and Hill, if they never repented and asked Christ to save them will have far more suffering in hell than the average unsaved person. The average unsaved person has not killed thousands of babies. These three have. Revelation 20:11-15Posted by: Sydney M. at February 3, 2010 8:57 PM
BTW, that Erwin Chemerinsky is a professor of law at DUKE UNIVERSITY and he thinks that the Constitution guarantees abortion to women? How can he be a professor and be so ignorant of what the Constitution says? Obama thinks the Constitution guarantees abortion rights too. What a bunch of IDIOTS! Or daresay, they KNOW the Constitution guarantees no such thing but figure if they repeat it long enough and often enough people will start to believe it.Posted by: Sydney M. at February 3, 2010 9:02 PM
As an atheist, I can't really say I'm sad to see this woman go. At least it wasn't a pro-lifer that killed her.Posted by: Nate Sheets at February 3, 2010 9:26 PM
Kim: Oh WOW. Was your uncle alive when you found this out? If I knew that someone had paid for me to be aborted, I'd have a hard time being around them, to put it mildly...
I noticed that in the 1970s-era picture, one of the signs says "Free Abortion On Demand." Is that "liberate abortion on demand" or "give us abortion on demand for free"? Because if it's the latter, that's the stupidest thing I've heard this week. If any medical procedure was going to be free, about ten billion things would be a higher priority than abortion. Besides, what, doctors should just work for free? Give me a break. I think I'll make a sign for "free money on demand."Posted by: Marauder at February 3, 2010 9:30 PM
Let's be mindful of the words we choose to describe acts of evil. Tragic would describe a family killed in a car accident, a child falling into a swimming pool, or a fatal illness.
Being complicit in the deaths of 400,000 preborn children is not tragic ...
it's wicked.Posted by: Cranky Catholic at February 3, 2010 9:44 PM
Posted by: Christina at February 3, 2010 9:58 PM
Posted by: Christina at February 3, 2010 10:02 PM
That was definitely "free abortion on demand". I remember it well.
Another was "stop child abuse, support abortion reform".
Then there was the statue of liberty with a tear in her eye and a dejected looking woman asking "Born free?"Posted by: Mary at February 3, 2010 10:03 PM
I'm going to stand with Donne on this one:
"Every [wo]man's death diminishes me."
Cancer is horrific. I don't agree with what she did- it's sad that she was so bigoted- but cancer is a miserable way to die.
So much death. :(Posted by: Vannah at February 3, 2010 10:05 PM
Posted by: Mary
at February 3, 2010 10:19 PM
I would suspect she had breast cancer that spread to the lung. That's the course this disease can take.
And may God have mercy.Posted by: Jennifer at February 3, 2010 10:27 PM
'anon' is none other than @insaneartgurl on twitter. She's too big a coward to use her real name here, or there, even though she has no problem cawing about how she commented here to her proabort pals on twitter. If you're on Twitter, send her some prolife love. LOL. I recommend some hip waders and a profanity filter when reading her 'replies.'Posted by: Jill Guidry at February 3, 2010 10:54 PM
As a Catholic Christian I am called to pray for the repose of Ms Hill's soul and I do. Not a one of us is her judge -
I pray that you will all pray for me at the hour and time of my death, for I too, have sinned.
God Bless -
Posted by: Lee at February 3, 2010 11:05 PM
I'm with Lee. I pray for grace for all of us who have sinned. Love is the greatest commandment of all. How often should we turn the other cheek? Seventy times seven. This was Jesus' direction to us in no uncertain terms. We forgive Flip Benham for being gay though we don't understand that life ourselves. No one benefits when we close our hearts. The love of God and the gift of Jesus are unconditional. Our love must be unconditional too even when we see what we judge as wrong. we can voice our opinions, but most important is to love our enemies and forgive. This does not mean to condone, it means to pray for grace & understanding and refrain from casting stones. Jesus would not do that. Every sheep is worth finding & bringing home into the shining light of God. God help us all.Posted by: lucy at February 4, 2010 12:05 AM
Twelve year old girls having abortions! That's tragic. They should have babies instead.
Posted by: ExtremelyProLife at February 3, 2010 7:56 PM
The trolls are so cute this time of year.
A 12 year old can't be expected to raise a baby. She shouldn't KILL the baby, but can have family support to raise the baby or an open or closed adoption so that the baby doesn't have to die.Posted by: xalisae at February 4, 2010 12:09 AM
Hill was a 2007 recipient of the Nancy Susan Reynolds Award.
"The Nancy Susan Reynolds Awards recognize the uncommon leadership of North Carolinians whose vision, determination, resourcefulness and strength of character have caused them to succeed when other individuals might have failed. What is remarkable is how each recipient - usually with limited resources and in spite of the odds - has accomplished extraordinary good in his or her community. "
If anyone got vertigo reading that, you're not alone.Posted by: Gerard Nadal at February 4, 2010 2:29 AM
She was a social worker?!? Wow. It takes some serious cognitive dissonance to help some children in need one day and kill others on the next.Posted by: Kelsey at February 4, 2010 7:06 AM
My mom had 7 kids and one miscarriage, nursed all of her children for at least a year after birth and never used hormonal birth control yet she still had breast cancer. Twice. To infer that if Susan Hill had had children and breast fed them would have saved her from breast cancer is a little disingenuous don't you think? I'm no fan or supporter of abortion but these broad sweeping statements make us no better than the Pro-abortion side with there sweeping generalizations...Posted by: sam at February 4, 2010 8:20 AM
My grandmother and mother both had breast cancer (both survived), both had several children, neither used hormonal birth control or had abortions, though my mom took hormone pills after her hysterectomy. I think my grandma actually blamed her cancer on having nursed her youngest child!
I'm not sure how appropriate it is to mention Susan Hill's lack of childbearing in connection with her cancer death, but it's certainly important to get the word out there to women that childbearing and breast feeding are protective in regards to breast cancer.
Anyway, I'm praying for Susan Hill's soul. Imagine her dying and then meeting the souls of all the children she killed.Posted by: nissa_amas_katoj at February 4, 2010 8:36 AM
God have mercy on her.
Another cause of breast cancer is hormone replacement therapy, which was heavily promoted, with great success, in the 1990s for perimenopausal women up until the early 2000's. This woman would have been in that cohort.Posted by: Row1 at February 4, 2010 8:51 AM
As C.S. Lewis said in The Problem of Pain, "The doors of hell are locked on the inside."
Oh, by the way, I've chatted with @insaneartgurl on Twitter a number of times and despite what Jill Guidry said, if you speak to @insaneartgurl respectfully/politely, she will respond in kind. It's as simple as do unto others as you would have them do unto you. She may be prochoice but she's also a mother. Not all prochoicers are wicked, they're just deceived. :)Posted by: Bekah Ferguson at February 4, 2010 8:54 AM
To those who say they will pray for Susan Hill, pray away, but it will do no good. Once you die your chance at repentance is past.
You say you too, have sinned. Haven't we all? Romans says "There is none righteous, NO NOT ONE."(Romans 3:10) The Bible also says "For ALL have SINNED and come SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD." (Romans 3:23)
Not a one of us is sinless. But if you wait until you die to take care of that sin it will be too late. You will awake in torment and flames and you will know the truth that Jesus, and JESUS ALONE is needed for salvation but you will find no redemption at that point. I sincerely hope Ms. Hill accepted God's gift of forgiveness before she died. We don't know. We truly don't know the state of her soul. But our prayers will not save Ms. Hill now. Each of us is given free will concerning our souls. If she chose to reject God's Son there is no hope now.
Good works do not save you. If you reject Christ and live a WICKED life like Ms. Hill your torment will be far worse (See Revelation 20) and if you accept Christ and live a life of good works you will receive a much greater reward in heaven. So good works are important to the Christian life but they are not the way to heaven. They don't EARN you salvation. "For by grace are ye saved, through faith and that not of yourselves. It is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:8,9) (Romans 3:28--justified without good deeds)
To anyone reading this and searching for peace in their lives I say, remember the thief on the cross. He lived a wicked life stealing from others. He was executed for his crimes. He had no chance to live a "good life" and do good works and yet he believed Jesus and put his faith in the Son of God and Jesus said "Today thou shalt be with me in Paradise." Jesus is waiting in a moment to put His loving arms around you and take away all your burdens. He is waiting to grant you eternal life. The moment you stop struggling and allow Him to rescue you, He will pull your feet up out of the miry clay. I know because He did that for me.Posted by: Sydney M at February 4, 2010 8:57 AM
Sydney M., don't make the mistake of thinking people like Erwin Chemerinsky are idiots. Chemerinsky is wrong on the place of abortion in the Constitution, but he's a smart guy. In fact, conservative talk show host and constitutional lawyer Hugh Hewitt has him on his show regularly in the "Smart Guys" segment alongside conservative law professor John Eastman.
Chemerinsky was brought on in the NOW v. Scheidler case ("Scheidler" being my father, Joe Scheidler) in the suit's third trip to the Supreme Court, after lead counsel Fay Clayton earned an 8-1 defeat in the 2003 decision in favor of the pro-life defendants. Chemerinsky was handed an 8-0 defeat.
I was there for oral arguments that day, and I was frankly disappointed. Chemerinsky seemed to be phoning it in. Arguing for the pro-life side was an inspired Allen Unterreiner, a real champion. But even the lawyers on our side felt it a privilege to be facing an opponent like Chemerinsky, whose book on Constitutional Law is a standard text, broadly admired by conservatives and liberals alike.
Let's not underestimate our enemies. You can be very, very wrong, but still very, very smart. And smart people are much more dangerous than stupid ones.
She is of course a woman of the lie. Some of the deepest and dangerous lies are lies that women tell themselves. It is not a baby. God will not forgive me for this horrific abortion I once had. The baby is better off.Posted by: xppc at February 4, 2010 9:19 AM
If it was breast cancer, she doesn't appear to have birthed any live children, which would have protected her against it.
That's a pretty strong claim. Having children young decreases your risk of breast cancer, it doesn't necessarily PROTECT you from it. It's like if an overweight woman died of breast cancer and you said, "She doesn't appear to have exercised much, which would have protected her against it." You have no idea what, if anything, would have protected her - just guesses about what would plausibly have reduced her risk.
I say this as the daughter of someone who suffered from liver cancer and who never in my life drank more than one full beer in a sitting. I have put up with MORE than my share of conclusion-jumping jerks who whispered behind closed doors about how maybe my mom should have drank a bit less, or something. You have no idea what would or would not have protected someone. You have an idea what MIGHT have but you are in no position to say that ANYTHING "would have protected her" against it.
I know quite a few mothers with breast cancer.Posted by: Alexandra at February 4, 2010 9:27 AM
Eric--I know Erwin Chereminsky is not an idiot. I know he knows exactly how to spin things to his liking.Posted by: Sydney M at February 4, 2010 9:42 AM
I'm so sorry about your mother's condition. :(
Did she beat it? I certainly hope so. Cancer is something that affects my family, too. Everyone in my family on my mother's side has died of cancer except for one person. My grandmother died in 2004 of colon cancer and it's hard to watch people suffer.
I hope that everything is alright, though.Posted by: Vannah at February 4, 2010 9:42 AM
Do you really think that those "400,000 abortions" wouldn't have happened if Susan Hill had been "pro-life"(really anti-choice)?
Of course they would have. Abortions happen,period. They always have and always will.
It's also ridiculous to blame Margaret Sanger for abortions. In her day,it was very common for women to try to abort themselves. Many had very large families and could not support their children. If the anti-choice movement gets its way, it will just turn back the clock to the bad old days, and a bad situation will only become far worse.
Vannah, my mom was very lucky and she is 100% healthy now! She had extensive surgery to remove most of her liver, and the recovery from that took nearly a year, but the cancer hadn't spread anywhere else and they were able to get it all out. It didn't really hit me how dangerous it all was until I heard that the wife of a professional acquaintance was at the same hospital as my mom, at the same time, for roughly the same procedure - and she died a few days after my mom was allowed to go home. That really upset me. It seems so arbitrary.
I'm sorry about your relatives. Seeing my mom in that kind of pain, and facing the very real possibility of losing her, was one of the hardest things I've ever gone through in my life. It's something I don't think you can understand until you've gone through it, and I'm sorry you understand it.Posted by: Alexandra at February 4, 2010 10:02 AM
Spare me the lecture, Bekah. You have openly stated that you support abortion if the mother's health is in question. If you want to pander to the proaborts and stroke their egos (as you frequently do) have at it-quit passing judgment on those of us who WON'T. And kindly stop telling the rest of us how to do battle. If you're not committed enough to call sin sin, let those of us who are do it for you.Posted by: Jill Guidry at February 4, 2010 10:18 AM
as a Catholic Christian, also, I am with Lee. I pray for her soul, however, I believe God may have a hard time being merciful with someone who was indirectly or directly involved with as many as 400,000 abortions. HE is merciful, though.Posted by: LizFromNebraska at February 4, 2010 10:35 AM
The RH obit is still in Google's cache, here:
I also saved a copy of it here, on my (slow) server, but you'll have to use Opera or IE to view it, since FireFox, Chrome & Safari don't handle this type of file:
Always fallacies from you.
Whether abortion crimes are committed is beside the point. The only question is whether or not killing human beings in the first nine months of life and taking away our entire human lifespans is a crime.
Murder, rape and armed robbery crimes have occurred throughout history. Do you think that is an argument for "legalizing" them?
You can, with efficient law enforcement, suppress abortion crime a very high percentage of the time and since it is a crime which destroys human beings, this is something which has to be done.Posted by: Joe at February 4, 2010 11:44 AM
God hates abortion as it is a heinous sin and iniquity. Also, to believe that abortion is a potentially right thing to do traps one soul from ever hearing from God.
If I regard wickedness in my heart, The Lord will not hear;"
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; A broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise."
Then I acknowledged my sin to you and did not cover up my iniquity. I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the LORD "— and you forgave the guilt of my sin..."
LizfromNebraska...God never has trouble being merciful. Its what He does. Afterall, that God could show ANY of us mercy is incredible isn't it? I've never had an abortion but I've done terrible things...I've lied, I've stabbed people in the back, I've coveted, I've thought lascivious thoughts, I've cursed, I've hated people with blood curdling rage, I've been impatient, I've been uncompassionate, I've disrespected my parents, I've lost my temper and used my tongue to hurt others...I could go on and on. That God forgave ME in all my human imperfection and selfishness is a MIRACLE!
St. Paul was a murderer. He tore children from their parent's arms and wives from their husbands and threw them into prison where they were tortured and killed. Yet Christ sought him and forgave him. St. Paul bowed his will to God's and received sanctification. It was nothing HE (st. Paul) did that warranted such grace. Its not a game "Will God show mercy or won't He? Maybe if we pray harder!" God will always show mercy...it is up to us to accept it. God will never force Himself on anybody. God believes in CHOICE...the spiritual kind. You can accept His gift of eternal life or you can choose to reject it. We can know if we're going to heaven. The Bible says we can. We don't have to try to be good and just hope and wonder.
God is always willing to show mercy should we choose to receive it. Once we are dead the offer is off the table so to speak. There comes a point when God will no longer offer mercy but judgement that we deserve. That point is the final rejection of His Son Jesus Christ...and at death, that final rejection is irreversible. No where in the Bible will you find any verse telling us to pray for the dead. It isn't there because it isn't of God. Better that we pray for the abortionists still living, and the clinic workers like Abby Johnson who may still be won and pried away from the industry of death.Posted by: Sydney M at February 4, 2010 12:03 PM
I'm right there with you in the sin column. Thank our Lord that He loves us so much.
Having said that, the Lord requires an obedient life which we don't hear preached much these days. It's not that we don't continue to sin, (if we say we have no sin the truth is not in us) however, God knows that we are engaged in the battle against sin. The Christian walk is not easy, however, there is no other way to Heaven.
26Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
28so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.
2 Peter 2:4
For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment;
26For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
27but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES.
I'm so glad that your mother is doing well, Alexandra. She must be so brave to go through that. I can't imagine.Posted by: Vannah at February 4, 2010 2:09 PM
The irony in your trollish comment is truly striking. Had your mother aborted you, we wouldn't have you telling us what we can and cannot believe and do. The difference is that we would have lamented your murder, while you would have rejoiced at ours (and at Jesus' murder, apparently--wow...). No sane standard could consider your comment as anything other thank blithering, hateful nonsense.Posted by: Paladin at February 4, 2010 3:32 PM
You are all so messed up. You *just don't get it.* Mills? Mercy on her soul? In your book ALL of us are sinners. May each of you awaken to the reality that *is.* Your dream of Jesus is but your ego in disguise. "...a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation of peculiar people who are called forth..."? I think not. You are the same people that enslaved African-Americans and laud folks like Beck and Hannity.Posted by: RealityCheck at February 4, 2010 3:42 PM
(*sigh*) "Oh, when the trolls... come flocking in... oh, when the trolls... come... flock-ing in..."
And it isn't even a full moon!Posted by: Paladin at February 4, 2010 4:02 PM
I am not surprised at all that this woman was a social worker. Most social workers are prochoice, as are the professional organizations. Prolife social workers such as myself are exceptions.Posted by: Phillymiss at February 4, 2010 4:23 PM
Yes we are all sinners, however, why do you think Jesus Christ died for all of us?
The difference is that those of us that accept that message and understand the Gospel of life DO NOT believe that abortion is ever the right thing to do.
I pray that God will open your eyes to His truth.
And yes we will all recieve a Reality Check when we either rejoice or cower at the return of Jesus Christ who first came as a gentle lamb but will return as an avenging lion.Posted by: Phil Schembri is HisMan at February 4, 2010 4:52 PM
So disingenuous. "If it was breast cancer, she doesn't appear to have birthed any live children, which would have protected her against it."
No. NOT having a child is one risk factor. But to say that having children "protects" one from breast cancer is completely false. They aren't two sides of the same coin.
Good heavens. What an insult to all the moms - like my cousin - who have died from breast cancer and all the other moms - like my colleague - who are fighting it.
Make your case, but don't lie or distort the truth so that, to the uninformed, it doesn't look like a lie.Posted by: MSEH at February 4, 2010 5:32 PM
Comparing abortion to murder is ludicrous. It's not murder at all. Murder is only murder if it's the intentional and malicious killing of a BORN person.
Even more ludicrous is calling the use of contraceptive pills "murder". How can a pill which prevents a pregnancy from happening be a murder? This is sheer insanity. There isn't even a developed fetus.
Abortion is not done out of malice. And furthermore, unlike murder, it's absolutely impossible to enforce laws against abortion. Yes, not all murders are prosecuted, but a heck of a lot more of them can be prosecuted than abortions.
How many abortions were prosecuted before Roe v Wade? Only an infinitely tiny fraction of all of those which happened. It won't be any different if the US makes abortion illegal again.
And what will the government do anyway to try to
enforce the law? Will it appoint thousands of government anti-abortion agents to scour every corner of America 24/7 to try to find abortionists performing abortions? Are you kidding? Is this a realistic thing to do?
And furthermore, it would only be a massive invasion of our privacy, and many innocent people would be wrongfully accused of crimes.
Let's face it; making abortion illegal is the wrong way to handle this terrible problem.
The only thing that can be done is to prevent as many unwanted pregnancies as possible and to provide more help to poor pregnant women. You anti-choicers are barking up the wrong tree.
I believe a woman has the right to do whatever she choses to do with her body. You seem like a heartless bitch. I have no idea who you ever are, nor do I care. If you are against abortion, don't have one. Period.Posted by: Merrianne at February 4, 2010 5:43 PM
Merriane, you sound like a walking bumper sticker. Try to dig a little deeper.
"I believe a woman has the right to do whatever she choses to do with her body."
The unborn child is not a part of her body. We aren't debating getting a hair cut here. The issue is if the woman has the right to do whatever she choses to someone else's body.
" If you are against abortion, don't have one. Period."
Do you apply this logic to other parts of your life or do you speak out against injustice where you see it? To put it another way, would you yell "don't like rape, don't rape someone!"? I doubt it. We can, and do, speak against injustice done to others.Posted by: Lauren at February 4, 2010 5:56 PM
Oh, hi Jill! Hi Bekah! Yeah, see I do actually use my internet handle when posting to blogs...you should know Jill, you're so good at censoring my comments. :)
And thank you for the kind words Bekah...I miss our discussions! I've just been feeling so overwhelmed with school and kids lately, but that's neither here nor there.
And for the record: Unlike poor Anon, my mother, thank goodness, has NOT had breast cancer. However, my great-grandmother and her mother both died from breast cancer. Grammy had 3 kids, no abortions, no birth control. Her mom had I think a total of 20 pregnancies (there were a couple miscarriages and a couple stillbirths...16 kids survived to at least mid-childhood, but no one is 100% sure how many pregnancies she had), no abortions, no birth control. To the best of my knowledge, they both nursed all their kids. So, yeah. Women can crank kids out and still get breast cancer.Posted by: InsaneArtGurl at February 4, 2010 5:59 PM
Insanegirl, no one is saying that nursing or childbirth will protect a woman with 100% certainty.
What those acts will do, however, is dramatically reduce the risk of breast cancer. That is the point that Jill was making. They have a protective affect. This is an established medical fact.Posted by: Lauren at February 4, 2010 6:05 PM
Well, Lauren, I guess you told me. Perhaps I am a walking bumper sticker. So what? It's almost like you are happy this woman died when your whole argument is pro-life. Hiporcites.Posted by: Merrienne at February 4, 2010 6:19 PM
Cute Lauren, what you did with my name there :)
I was directed by a friend that I was being discussed here. I came to correct Jill Guidry's rather wild assumption, and since I saw other people with tales of family members getting breast cancer despite multiple pregnancies and no hormonal BC, I thought I'd throw my family history into the fray.Posted by: InsaneArtGurl at February 4, 2010 6:20 PM
I didn't actually mean to do anything with your name. I just glanced at it and saw "insane" and "girl" and my mind missed the "art"
Merrienne, I guess you have no response to my substantive points? Oh, and I have done nothing at all to indicate that I am in any way happy that this woman died. I know it's easier to throw around baseless claims than actually respond to an argument, but you could at least try.Posted by: Lauren at February 4, 2010 6:33 PM
I am also so sorry to hear about your mother. My thoughts and best wishes are with you and her. How devastating.
I remember encountering a woman with severe cirrohsis and jumping to the conclusion the woman was an alcohol and drug abuser. Why just look at her and you see the ravishes of hard living. She was neither a drug or alcohol abuser, but rather a victim of the ravishes of Hepatitis C. What a lesson in humility and making assumptions.
Though there was no personal connection, I was incensed when people assumed the late actess Farah Fawcett's anal cancer was caused by a sexually transmitted virus. You know this.... how folks? I'm sure similar assumptions are made about women with cervical cancer.
Cancer doesn't follow any rhyme or reason and jumping to conclusions is totally foolhardy as well as devastating to both victim and their families.Posted by: Mary at February 4, 2010 8:39 PM
Glad you womaned up enough to at least use your twitter pseudonym. I blocked you from commenting on my blog because of your filthy mouth. Anyone here can also view your trash talk at http://twitter/com/insaneartgurl . By the way, you were squawking to Jill Stanek about there being no link between abortion and breast cancer- then you bailed with the promised links to your purported 'peer reviewed, scholary studies. You never answered Jill. Mighty dishonest of you. For someone who claims not to troll prolife blogs you certainly managed to try commenting on mine yet again. Just one lie after another, eh? Pot, meet kettle. Again. I suggest you take your post-abortion guilt and aim it at ther person responisble-yourself. I guess hypocrisy is a way of life for you, eh?
I know others told me to not waste my time with Robert Berger, but this is for anyone else reading and wondering...
Robert--do a little research, would ya? As a WOMAN who took the pill, I DID. Guess what I found out? It works primarily by inhibiting ovulation (pregnancy prevention) but ALSO WORKS BY THINNING THE LINING OF THE UTERUS. That prevents the conceived baby from implanting. That is abortion. That is murder.
The pill is also VERY dangerous to women. If you did a little research you would be very surprised to see all the women who have died or been injured from taking the pill. It is so deadly to a woman's system, I cannot for the life of me understand why feminists would push this on their sisters! I would never put those synthetic hormones into my body again. A woman's body is designed to ovulate every month and have a rich, lush uterine lining. The pill actively undermines a woman's natural body chemistry and biological function. I can't think of any pill a man is pressured to take that would make his penis limp and interfere with sperm production, yet that is exactly what sexist men like you want to do to women. So you can use us for your sexual pleasure and not be bothered with our silly biology. I really don't understand why all you child-hating, woman-hating men don't just go have vasectomies then! NO abortion...wallah! problem solved. Instead you want to shove poison down our female throats and then masquerade as some champion of women. You are the classic example of a male chauvinist pig!Posted by: Sydney M. at February 4, 2010 9:14 PM
Hi Robert Berger,
Just whose legs, feet, arms, hands and head are those all chopped up after an abortion? The womans???
You are barking up the wrong tree if you think that abortion is NOT murder. I had my child murdered by abortion. I paid for it and now I have to live with it. My daughter DIED in an abortion clinic and I left her tiny body there. I left her there.
There I fed the troll.Posted by: carla at February 4, 2010 9:59 PM
Thank you, Mary - what kind words! To be honest I still to this day feel the need to clarify that my mother's cancer was not caused by excessive drinking, when the topic comes up - and that urge makes me so angry at myself, because it's NO ONE'S BUSINESS and I hate when I perpetuate the assumptions by reflexively denying them. I feel like even acknowledging that kind of stupidity validates it. I usually am able to stop myself from mentioning it, unless someone outright asks - but then I have to deal with unspoken assumptions, which is frustrating. Someone once asked me if I shouldn't be more careful about that beer I was drinking, what with alcoholism running in my family! What an assumption.
I was equally troubled by the speculation/gossip surrounding Farrah Fawcett. Health - particularly cancer - is far more complicated than a simple "do this and you'll be okay" formula. You can decrease risk but there's no road to simply "protecting yourself."Posted by: Alexandra at February 5, 2010 8:39 AM
Sydney M,It's not pro-choicers like me who are anti-woman and hate them. It's people like you who want to force women to give birth no matter what the adverse circumstances. And if you REALLY loved children, you wouldn't want them to be born into abject poverty,hunger,malnourishment,disease,lack of education and opportunity and to be surrounded by drugs,violence,and crime,abuse and neglect.
Abortions isn't slavery. The real slavery is forced childbearing, and being born into poverty.
Yes, you say that some of these children might succeed in life anyway. And they might also win the lottery.
Your self-righteous and whining hypocrisy makes me sick.
Jill Guidry: You said: "If you want to pander to the proaborts and stroke their egos (as you frequently do) have at it-quit passing judgment on those of us who WON'T."
You keep telling me to stop passing judgment and in the same breath, you pass judgment on all prochoicers as if they were on entity instead of individual persons with unique life experiences. Why is it okay for you to harshly judge them and yet it's not okay for me to politely point out your rudeness? Jesus told us to speak the truth in LOVE. I've yet to see you demonstrate any love or compassion for the lost.
You also said: "Spare me the lecture, Bekah. You have openly stated that you support abortion if the mother's health is in question."
This is misleading. If there is cancer of the mother in the first trimester, we can NOT save the baby. It's a tragedy, but when two people are drowning and you can only rescue one of them, then you rescue who you can - you don't just let them both drown. Some women will choose to risk their lives and hold off chemo until the baby is viable and I support that, but I also support the woman who chooses chemo right away. My aunt recently died of cancer just one day after diagnosis! It was a fast growing cancer which wasn't caught in time. Some cancers spread rapidly. And anyway, it's not an abortion I would support in 1st trimester anyway. The baby would die from the chemo. Health crises in 2nd to 3rd trimester are different and I do *not* support abortion in this case either. Why? Because the baby can be delivered live through induction or c-section if necessary. These situations are rare anyway.
I agree with you, Jill Guidry, that abortion-on-demand is murder, I also agree with you that the embryo and fetus is a human being, a person.
But so is the woman.Posted by: Bekah Ferguson at February 5, 2010 9:51 AM
"If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.
"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails."
The Apostle Paul - 1 Corinthians 13:1-8Posted by: Bekah Ferguson at February 5, 2010 10:02 AM
Robert Berger, they're not pro-lifers like me who are anti-women and hate them. They're people like you who want to force abortions no matter what God has said. And if you REALLY loved children, you wouldn't want them to be born into abject poverty, hunger, malnourishment, disease, lack of education, and an environment of drugs, violence, crime, abuse, and neglect. Quite the contrary, you would CARE for the children.
God has the authority to end human life, and He does end human life. The wages of sin is death. Stop blaming God. You are the problem. Every one of us by nature (Adam's fallen nature) has rejected God and chosen death. Some of us, however, seek death more ardently than the rest.
Why do you advocate death? Repent, and live! "As I live!" declares the Lord GOD, "I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die...?" (Ezek. 33:11)Posted by: Jon at February 5, 2010 10:28 AM
I have never said proaborts aren't women, or people. "I agree with you, but..." really says it all. Proabort sympathizer. Feed their victim feminism because they threw you a few compiments. You have fallen right into their trap. Judge not. There were folks who sympathized with the NAZIs too, not because they necessarily agreed, but because they were more concerned with the opinions of others. Apathy and sympathizing does more damage to the prolife movement than the proaborts do. Like I said, keep patting their hands. Meanwhile they are laughing behind your back. NO COMPROMISE. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Women deserve better than abortion. So do unborn children. Enough said. I'm not going to use another's blog to get into a protracted flame war with someone who has already decided they have all the answers. Have a nice day.Posted by: Jill Guidry at February 5, 2010 12:19 PM
Robert, if the circumstances of the child are that bad, and their mothers truly cannot take care of them, adoption is another option.
I personally volunteer to adopt any child whose mother is unable to care for him or her and does not want to keep him or her past birth. So don't give me any nonsense about there not being people willing to adopt.
Robert Berger, Jesus Christ died for you, and even though you grieve His heart by advocating the murder of the children that He loves, He is still willing to accept you and love you and make you clean, to give you peace and hope. He is, in fact, yearning for you to turn from your sin and believe in Him, because He loves you more than any mere human being loves any other, with a love that is pure and holy and utterly unselfish.
If someone hacks off someone else's limbs and lets them bleed to death, but doesn't hate them, just thought they had to do it, is it still murder? After all, it wasn't "malicious." Well, except to the dead person.
Saying that it's only murder if it's a BORN person is like saying it's only murder to kill a WHITE person or an ATHEIST person or a HEALTHY person. It's small-minded, mean-spirited, bigoted, and wrong to categorize people and use that to take away their rights--let alone their lives.Posted by: ycw at February 5, 2010 12:40 PM
Bekah, those are great verses and great thoughts. Have you read the passage about the moneychangers lately? Just curious...
Read "Get thee hence" lately?
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do"?
I feel that if I allow someone to push a practice that is evil, murderous, selfish, self-serving, Satanic, destructive, morally reprehensible, psychologically damaging, spiritually depriving, and intellectually depraved, then I am as guilty as they are. I refuse to be silent and I refuse to not use any available and legal word, phrase, medium, insult, characterization, attack, or statement to effect a stop to this.
No, some of them are NOT decent people who are deserving of respect. They support the needless, senseless slaughter of God-given human life and fully deserve everything that gets thrown at them. We have a duty to stop them by all legal means necessary. If they get their feelings hurt along the way, so be it. I would love to see God bless this country mightily again as He once did. Not going to happen while we allow this fetal holocaust to continue.
And to those who support the choice to murder, and do so under the guise of "christianity", we must stop their message and show it for what it is without regard to their "feelings".
Either abortion is murder, or it is not. If it is murder, don't you think it is about time we let the FULL impact of that word hit us?
I can love the sinner, and hate the sin. I simply love the innocent baby more.Posted by: D.R. at February 5, 2010 1:31 PM
Robert, instead of eliminating the poor, why can't we help lift them out of their situation?
And as I said before, not all women who have abortions are poor.Posted by: Phillymiss at February 5, 2010 2:37 PM
Robert Berger-- You said if I loved children I wouldn't want them born into abject poverty..whats the solution you propose, to KILL THEM?
I love children. I am a mom. I don't want children WHO ARE JUST AS PRECIOUS AND IRREPLACEABLE AS MY SON TO BE MURDERED. I don't want women like me to feel grief and regret the rest of their lives.
I have friends who have had abortions. They are SO HURT, SO ANGRY that people in their lives, people just like YOU would have rather taken them to the abortion clinic than to spend time and effort HELPING them so that they could have their babies.
I am not a hypocrite Robert. I have had an unplanned pregnancy. I know what its like to be poor and pregnant. Do you? Oh wait, (gonna totally pull the feminist card, tee hee) you're a MAN so you don't know what its like to be POOR and PREGNANT. When you grow a uterus than you can pontificate about your almighty important man thoughts. Stop using my gender as your masturbation toys. Stop killing our children. You are sexist. Your whole dialogue confirms that you hate women.
WOW. No wonder NOW takes that tone. It is fun to throw in my gender card every once in a while!
Let me re-capsulate that for you Robert. i am a woman. Therefore how can you accuse me of hating women? I don't hate my own gender, thanks. Time to come up with another (lame) argument in support of sexist abortion!Posted by: Sydney M at February 5, 2010 3:29 PM
Here's another idea Robert Berger. Why don't we find every man who makes lets say, under 40K a year and surgically implant a device that would block sperm production?
Walluh! No babies born into poverty because every baby being born would have a dad that could support her/him. And no women being targeted for surgery that produces emotional/physical scars.
But men like you would never go for that right? Its all about using women as you like. You don't REALLY care about sparing women from physical or emotional harm.
You and Margaret Sanger would have gotten along great, Robert. you both hate(d) poor people.Posted by: Sydney M at February 5, 2010 3:34 PM
If there is cancer of the mother in the first trimester, we can NOT save the baby.
(??) That's an awfully sweeping statement, don't you think? What if the cancer is non-uterine, or chronic (i.e. slow-growing)?
It's a tragedy, but when two people are drowning and you can only rescue one of them, then you rescue who you can - you don't just let them both drown.
Right. But there's a big difference between "letting someone die a natural death" and "targeting them for extermination" (or committing willful neglect which results in unnecessary death).
Perhaps we can cut to the chase: are there any circumstances in which you do support (direct and procured) abortion? Incest, rape, "gross fetal abnormality", etc.?
And anyway, it's not an abortion I would support in 1st trimester anyway. The baby would die from the chemo.
You're sure of that, are you? And you're sure that chemo is always the best way to go, in that situation? For that matter, there are many types of chemo...
I agree with you, Jill Guidry, that abortion-on-demand is murder, I also agree with you that the embryo and fetus is a human being, a person.
Then you agree that we may never choose to target that human being for death, no matter what the provocation?
But so is the woman.
You'll need to unpack that, a bit. Of course, the woman is a person, also; and I'd readily agree that we can't rip her limb-from-limb (or burn her to death, or suck her brains out with a high-powered vacuum, etc.) either. Could you explain your point behind that sentence?Posted by: Paladin at February 5, 2010 3:53 PM
Sorry, I'm not a Christian, and I've never believed that Christ died for me or any one else, or that he was the son of God. If you believe that, that's fine with me. I've always admired Jesus as a great religious teacher, but I've never believed in Christian dogma about him. I'm a non-observant secular Jew, but not an atheist.
What you say about the pill being dangerous to women is ridiculous.Countless women have been taking them for many years with absolutely no ill effects. And there are potential helath risks with many different pills people take, including those on this website. In fanct, many can be far more dangerous than birth control pills.
And it still defies all logic to call a birth control pill a means of murder, when there isn't even a fetus yet. This is as ridiculous as saying that thinking about killing some one actually constitutes murder.
Remember the movie Minority Report with Tom Cruise about the future, where there cops are able to arrest people for crimes they're planning to commit?
Basically,many anti-choicers are puritanical prudes who can't stand the idea of any one having sex for anything but procreation. What a bunch of busybodies!
One reason that so many abortions occur is that
many people are thoughtless and irresponsible and
don't use contraceptives. It's not contraceptives which are responsible for abortions, but the failure to use them many times.
The Catholic church has it all wrong;their opposition to contraception is unbelievably wrong-headed.
And saying that you shouldn't use them because they don't always work is ridiculous. Seat belts don't always save people's lives, but it's stupid not to use them because of this fact.
Yeah, way to argue the FACTS Robert Berger. I am such a busy body. I am a 29 year old housewife. I believe sex is for a husband and wife because all sorts of problems (disease, abortion, emotional heartache) result from sex outside of marriage, whether it be affairs or teenage sex or whatever.
But if people want to fornicate, I am not losing any sleep over it.
The pill IS harmful to women...
Its not ridiculous Robert. Its called science. Synthetic hormones are not healthy for women.
Hi Alexandra, 8:39am
You are very welcome. Please keep us updated on your mother. I know I speak for everyone on this blog when I express our deep concern for her and you.Posted by: Mary at February 5, 2010 5:15 PM
"Basically,many anti-choicers are puritanical prudes who can't stand the idea of any one having sex for anything but procreation. What a bunch of busybodies!"
Not true. That's such an old sterotype. Not busy-bodies, either. We are called to love one another. I'm sure you don't disagree with that. You are admirably concerned for the poor. If a woman is living on the street, hungry, etc... shouldn't she be advised to abstain at her fertile time to avoid getting pregnant so she doesn't have to consider abortion? You'd rather we be quiet about it?Posted by: Janet at February 5, 2010 5:38 PM
"Sorry, I'm not a Christian, and I've never believed that Christ died for me or any one else, or that he was the son of God. If you believe that, that's fine with me. I've always admired Jesus as a great religious teacher, but I've never believed in Christian dogma about him. I'm a non-observant secular Jew, but not an atheist."
Interesting to hear that you admire Jesus as a great religious teacher. He admonished people all the time against hurting others. Did he ever teach it was OK to sacrifice their child for one's own personal gain?Posted by: Janet at February 5, 2010 5:47 PM
Hey mods, I have a comment pending approval which proves the point that hormonal contraceptives hurt women!Posted by: Sydney M. at February 5, 2010 5:49 PM
"Did he ever teach it was OK to sacrifice their child for one's own personal gain?"
That should be:
Did He (Jesus) ever teach it was OK for a husband and wife to sacrifice their own child for their own personal gain?
We don't know what Jesus would have said about abortion. There are zero references to abortion by him in the New Testament.
And women don't have abortions for their own "personal gain".Any one who thinks they do is deluding himself.
"We don't know what Jesus would have said about abortion. There are zero references to abortion by him in the New Testament. "
I believe he did, but, I'm sorry, I don't have the sources handy. Not to be snarky, but if we made an educated guess based on what Jesus taught, what do you think he'd say? Would he approve of us killing those who are made in his likeness?
"And women don't have abortions for their own "personal gain". Any one who thinks they do is deluding himself."
I disagree. They abort because they feel abortion will take away a perceived problem, therefore "improving" their perception of their life. A woman who is poor aborts thinking it will reduce her poverty. A teen aborts her child so she can finish high school. A woman having a difficult pregnancy can avoid further self-sacrifice by aborting.
Did Jesus say we would never suffer in our lives? No. He asks us to take care of each other. If you want to aegue what is and isn't in the bible, No where does he advocate a doctor destroying a life.Posted by: Janet at February 5, 2010 7:09 PM
Robert Berger said, "Sorry, I'm not a Christian, and I've never believed that Christ died for me or any one else, or that he was the son of God. If you believe that, that's fine with me."
I do believe that the Messiah (Christ) is the Son of God and that He died for His people. He also arose again, and He is Lord over everyone, you included.
You later said, "We don't know what Jesus would have said about abortion. There are zero references to abortion by him in the New Testament."
I believe that Jesus is God, and that's fine with you, you said. Jesus Christ is anti-abortion, having made the human species like God in some ways (see Genesis 9). As God, Jesus made the human species like Himself. As a man, He is still truly like God, and is the representative--and ultimate representation--of every restored human being.
Your disbelief is not fine with me. Also, my belief is not fine with you. You lie.Posted by: Jon at February 5, 2010 8:13 PM
For more information on Jesus Christ's anti-abortion stance, see Naaman's excellent comment of February 4 in the thread just before this one ("Mixed message: Progressive Evangelical let down but not surprised by Obama").Posted by: Jon at February 5, 2010 8:33 PM
Robert, you clearly do not know your biology and refuse to be educated.Posted by: ycw at February 6, 2010 8:13 AM
Bekah: What you said is disturbing.
“If there is cancer of the mother in the first trimester, we can NOT save the baby.” Can you be sure of that? NO!… Miracles happen every day.
“And anyway, it's not an abortion I would support in 1st trimester anyway. The baby would die from the chemo.” So you would support burning/killing the baby with chemo in the 1st trimester? What part of that is different from supporting abortion at all? Perhaps dismembering the baby would be less painful than slowly burning it to death? And no; I don’t support either.
God has plenty to say about abortion in the Bible. Do a search on 'innocent blood' and 'child sacrifice.'Posted by: Jill Guidry at February 6, 2010 11:48 AM
Still waiting to see if my comment will be posted that specifically addresses Robert Berger's disbelief that the pill causes harm to women.
Mods, can you help?Posted by: Sydney M. at February 6, 2010 3:29 PM
Sydney, is this it?
Yeah, way to argue the FACTS Robert Berger. I am such a busy body. I am a 29 year old housewife. I believe sex is for a husband and wife because all sorts of problems (disease, abortion, emotional heartache) result from sex outside of marriage, whether it be affairs or teenage sex or whatever.
But if people want to fornicate, I am not losing any sleep over it.
The pill IS harmful to women...
Its not ridiculous Robert. Its called science. Synthetic hormones are not healthy for women.
Posted by: Sydney M. at February 5, 2010 4:27 PM
Yes! Thanks Rachael!!!!!
Robert...do a little research before you spout off RIDICULOUS statements that medicine has found to BE INCORRECT. I had to do the research since, as a woman, I am the one who had to ingest that poison. You can stand there and spout off that the pill is all good and well, but it means nothing really, since you will never have to swallow that toxic pill in order to undermine your fertility. It is WOMEN who are told to go on BC pills...women who are blamed when an unwanted pregnancy occurs, women who have to spread their legs and allow surgical instruments to rip out their children from their wombs.Posted by: Sydney M at February 6, 2010 8:55 PM
Amen, Sydney. I don't know how some women can be so self-hating that they actually think the pill and abortion are good things.Posted by: ycw at February 6, 2010 10:03 PM
Robert is the typical man that all women should avoid!!! The only men who love and support abortion are indeed men who WANT TO USE WOMEN FOR THEIR OWN SEXUAL GRATIFICATION AND WALK AWAY WITHOUT ANY OBLIGATIONS!! It's really just that simple! Men like Robert Berger love women who want to keep abortion legal! Ladies, it gets them out of child support payments and marriage obligations. It also keeps things easier in their lives not to be saddled with a child!....Don't want to carry any baggage into that next relationship!Posted by: Heather at February 7, 2010 3:41 PM
Actress Suzanne Summers was on the Joy Behar show and spoke of her own battle with breast cancer. Suzanne had an abortion, but told Joy that she believed there was a link between her long term use of oral contraceptives and her breast cancer. Post abortive mothers Gloria Steinem and Linda Ellerby also battled breast cancer. I personally know of 2 women who aborted in their 20's and died in their 40's -both from breast cancer! There is a link and it's obvious!!!!Posted by: Heather at February 7, 2010 8:14 PM
You said: "Perhaps we can cut to the chase: are there any circumstances in which you do support (direct and procured) abortion? Incest, rape, "gross fetal abnormality", etc.?"
I do not support abortion for any of those reasons, no. It would be murder.
You said: "You're sure of that, are you? And you're sure that chemo is always the best way to go, in that situation? For that matter, there are many types of chemo..."
I never said that chemo is always the best way to go. I didn't want to write a book-length post. I was speaking specifically of a fast-growing cancer in the first trimester in which the woman has decided that chemo is the treatment she wants. I personally feel that alternative medicine is the better way to go if possible, but that is irrelevant. Slow-growing cancers that won't affect the pregnancy are irrelevant to this discussion.
You said: "You'll need to unpack that, a bit. Of course, the woman is a person, also . . . Could you explain your point behind that sentence?"
My point was simply that women come from many different walks of life. The way I view a promiscuous prochoicer is much different than the way I view a rape victim. Name-calling and hatred does not save babies. But contrary to what Jill Guidry said, I do not show respect to every prochoicer I come across, only the ones that honestly misguided. There's a difference between the woman who cares about children who grow up in abusive families and the woman who just doesn't want to take responsibility for choosing to have sex. The way I interact with a prochoicer depends entirely on that individual person. As I said previously, the prochoice movement is not one entity - it is made up of as many unique people as the prolife movement. I am not of the "warrior class" personality type and perhaps Jill and I are able to reach different people based on our methods and personalities.Posted by: Bekah Ferguson at February 8, 2010 7:57 AM
After reading these wonderful 'Christian' comments
I recognize you as the same 'christians' in front of my clinic with your hateful rhetoric and loathsome actions. The EVIL and SATAN reside in your hearts and soul and you make a mockery of the message of love,peace, and forgiveness that Jesus spread during his also short life.
Rest assured, Susan is in the loving embrace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. May God have mercy on your souls.
Which Jesus are you talking about Diane? The Jesus that loved the little children? The one that was once carried for nine months by a young, most likely in her teens mother?
Jesus weeps when abortion happens. He does not embrace abortion.Posted by: LizFromNebraska at February 8, 2010 10:05 AM
Jesus is alive!!!! Love wins.
I am not sure I have ever been in front of your clinic, Diane. Give me the address and I'll see what I can do.Posted by: carla at February 8, 2010 10:12 AM
If Susan Hill repented of her participation in the shedding of innocent blood through abortion, I have no doubt she is in the loving embrace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.Posted by: carla at February 8, 2010 10:14 AM
Diane..since you say you are a Christian please read Proverbs...it talks a lot about the bloodthirsty.
Proverbs 28:17 "A man that doeth violence to the blood of any person shall flee to the pit: let no man stay him."
The Bible isn't here to condemn you Diane but to prick your conscience so that you will accept the love and forgiveness of Christ and experience rejuvenation in your life.Posted by: Sydney M at February 8, 2010 10:24 AM
I love you too, Sydney!!Posted by: carla at February 8, 2010 10:49 AM