Pro-aborts use kids they didn't kill as props at marches

UPDATE, 1/25, 9:40p: This comment and photo come from reader xalisae:

Here, I figured since one of her kids was holding a sign for abortion, we should get the other one in the picture. Now the gang's all here!

i was a choice, too, abortion.jpg______________

DCish, March for Life, abortion, toddler 1.jpg

1/24, 3:28p: Blogger Kriston Capps wrote on DCist January 23:

Evidently the right-to-life or anti-choice movement is made up of cute young people and cranky-looking old men. Oh, and toddlers....

Kriston was referring to 20 photos she posted, although as an aside I only spotted one subject in all of them who might possibly qualify as a "cranky-looking old m[a]n." Kriston, yet another lemming.

But what really got my attention were the photos of toddlers carrying pro-abort signs, which is honestly disgusting....

It makes total sense for children to be a component of pro-life marches. But it is grotesque for those marching to protect preborn child killing to brandish postborn children holding signs promoting preborn child killing...

DCish, March for Life, abortion, toddle 2.jpg

Then there was this one, with the caption, "Abortion rights marchers Norman Luce, left, and Roxanne Strohmeier stop to visit 18-month-old Cyrus Zardkoohi-Shaw and his mother Allissa Shaw, the associate vice president of Planned Parenthood in Mar Monte, during a march in Los Altos on Jan. 22...."

Los Altos, Planned Parenthood, Allissa Shaw, abortion, pro-choice, pro-abortion, pro-life.JPG

What fakes, all. The smiling man and photo-taking woman would have been just as happy to see little Cyrus dead. Meanwhile his mom makes her living off of killing babies. (Yes, her mill aborts.)

Ugh ugh ugh

[Top 2 photos by meeshypants at DCish; bottom photo via MercuryNews.com]


Comments:

So for Newsweek, there aren't enough young people, so we're out of touch. For Capps, there are too MANY "cute young people" so we shouldn't be taken seriously. Apparently someone didn't get the memo about what the official pro-abortion narrative was supposed to be.

Posted by: Kelsey at January 24, 2010 3:34 PM


I just think it's wrong to use young children for a political cause period, one because it's unethical to use children to further a political cause and two, because they're too young to understand the issue and what's going on.

Posted by: Rachael C. at January 24, 2010 3:45 PM


To clarify, it just seems wrong to use our children as political pawns when they're too young to understand the issue or choose their own beliefs.

Posted by: Rachael C. at January 24, 2010 3:50 PM


your complete ignorance of the idea of choice is absolutely infuriating. choice means respecting and rejoicing in the facts that people who want children should be able to have them, and people who dont want children should not be forced to have them. its sickening that you would even suggest that someone who has a child would be happy to see their child dead just because they support another womans decision to terminate a pregnancy. its indicative of your black and white thinking, and your complete lack of compassion and understanding. i feel really sad for the children who are unfortunate enough to have to grow up in your completely binary world.

i feel disgusted when i see children manipulated into supporting your message. children who you refuse to even teach about the realities of life and sex. children who you put at risk of having unintended pregnancies with your abstinence only sex education.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 3:54 PM


The act of making a child hold a sign "I was a choice" is especially appalling. It erroneously asserts that his parents had the right to determine whether he lived or died. What a gross belittlement of this boy's right to life.

Posted by: Tim at January 24, 2010 3:59 PM


the planned parenthood at which this woman works also provides primary health care to men women and children who otherwise would not be able to afford it. men women and children whose lives you fight against with your negative appraisal of the socialized healthcare which would provide all people in our country with a better life and more opportunities. this woman is a hero.

you say you are for children, but you dont offer any solution for how to make sure they are born healthy (no prenatal care at your crisis pregnancy centers) or that they stay healthy (no post natal care or social support programs either). i think all you are for is misguided religious ideology.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 4:00 PM


An anonymous coward posted "i feel disgusted when i see children manipulated into supporting your message. children who you refuse to even teach about the realities of life and sex. children who you put at risk of having unintended pregnancies with your abstinence only sex education."

Check out http://www.chastity.com and fix your bigotry, OK?

Anonymous coward also said "the planned parenthood at which this woman works also provides primary health care to men women and children who otherwise would not be able to afford it"

Hidden video at Planned Parenthood exposes incredible lies http://bit.ly/8EwnIk

Abortion is not a complex issue. If it is not wrong for big, strong people to kill little, weak people just because they do not want them to live, then what could possibly be wrong? - Peter Kreeft

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 4:06 PM


"you dont offer any solution for how to make sure they are born healthy (no prenatal care at your crisis pregnancy centers) or that they stay healthy (no post natal care or social support programs either)."

That simply isn't true. Prenatal care is provided at many pregnancy centers. Where it isn't and the patient can't afford prenatal care, the center will guide her through the process of signing up for the pregnancy Medicaid program. While waiting for the Medicaid funding to come through, they will usually refer her to a local ob/gyn who partners with them to provide care at a reduced cost or for free. And no social support programs?!?!? Clearly you have never set foot in a pregnancy center and are just swallowing whatever NARAL feeds you.

Posted by: Kelsey at January 24, 2010 4:07 PM


The world according to L:

1.) 3-year-old girls (we are discussing the pictures after all) are at risk of "unintended pregnancies" and therefor require sex-education.

2.) Women "forced to have" children is a wrong while forcing a child to be torn apart and killed is a right.

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at January 24, 2010 4:08 PM


Oh, and this: "i think all you are for is misguided religious ideology."
SecularProLife.org :-)

Posted by: Kelsey at January 24, 2010 4:10 PM


I'm with Jill and Tim...if I didn't have more tact, I'd let that parent know just how f***ing sick they were to make their child hold that sign.

**Yes, I'd use that language**
***I'd be OK with it IF the child had been shown an image of abortion and explained that a living (albeit small) human being inside their mother was killed in abortion.***

Posted by: Pro-life atheist at January 24, 2010 4:11 PM


Pro-choice? Some choices are just plain WRONG, such as murder, which is deliberate, pre-meditated killing. Abortion is the pre-meditated, deliberate killing of preborn children.

Such wrong choices need to be exposed for what they are:
http://www.unmaskingchoice.com
http://www.abortionno.org
http://abort73.org

Long story short: Abortion kills children. http://bit.ly/62biBD

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 4:16 PM


l: "choice means respecting and rejoicing in the facts that people who want children should be able to have them, and people who dont want children should not be forced to have them."

What you fail to grasp is that those people already HAVE a child once fertilization takes place.

"I was a choice." Sweet. I guess "If my parents didn't want me I would have been burned or dismembered to death." wouldn't have fit on the sign.

Posted by: bmmg39 at January 24, 2010 4:37 PM


Jill, i was wondering if you have read this
article, talking about how the MARCH had a strong PRESENCE! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/23/AR2010012302400.html

Posted by: Jay at January 24, 2010 4:45 PM


Posted by: Jay at January 24, 2010 4:45 PM
-----

Jay - interesting article at the WaPo. Curious about this though:

Erin Matson, action vice president for the National Organization for Women, said that the current political climate is "terrifically hostile" to abortion rights and that her group hopes to organize a national march similar to a huge rally for NOW's side of the issue in 2004.

Resurrected article or did the writer mean 2014? That seems very odd and a long way out.

All in all though, not really a bad article. Thanks for the link.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 24, 2010 5:26 PM


Oh yes, but bringing your 5-year-old with you to protest at an abortion clinic, where he sees bloody posters and hears people screaming about "killing babies," is totally appropriate. And props to the parents who allowed their children to be arrested for trespassing at Terri Schiavo's hospice.

Amen to this:

"choice means respecting and rejoicing in the facts that people who want children should be able to have them, and people who dont want children should not be forced to have them."

It was pro-choice feminists who decried the sterilization of poor women against their will. It is pro-choice feminists who believe that fertility treatments should not be denied to poor women who want babies. On the flip side, it was religious and social conservatives who ran "maternity homes" in the 40s and 50s, where teenage girls had their babies snatched from them against their will, often when they were drugged. In fact, Christian CPCs still do that. Google the article "Shotgun Adoption."

Posted by: Ashley at January 24, 2010 5:29 PM


Tim,

I agree. The little child saying, "I was a choice." implies that his life has no more value than the arbitrary, fickle, selfish will of his brain-dead mother with the seared conscience.

Despicable.

Posted by: Ed at January 24, 2010 5:32 PM


Ashley said: "Amen to this: "choice means respecting and rejoicing in the facts that people who want children should be able to have them, and people who dont want children should not be forced to have them."

Rephrase "people who dont want children should not be forced to have them."

to mean "people who dont want children should be allowed to kill them.:

Because that's what it is, no matter how you try to hide it behind the language of "choice."

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 5:32 PM


Ashley said: "Amen to this: "choice means respecting and rejoicing in the facts that people who want children should be able to have them, and people who dont want children should not be forced to have them."

Rephrase "people who dont want children should not be forced to have them."

to mean "people who dont want children should be allowed to kill them."

Because that's what it is, no matter how you try to hide it behind the language of "choice."

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 5:33 PM


"I Was a Choice"

"Aren't I Lucky? My Mother Didn't Kill Me Before I Came Out Of Her Tummy Like She Did My Brother And Sister."

Posted by: Ed at January 24, 2010 5:39 PM


Cyrus might well have just held a sign that said "I won the lottery" since he is so lucky his parents chose to let him live. Also noteworthy, is how few children are ever at their events - except when they are targeting other people's children.

Posted by: Kyleen Wright at January 24, 2010 5:39 PM


Hey L:

Your logic is twisted and typical of the PP propaganda. You are so blinded you can no longer see the truth.

Abortion is murder and will alway be no matter how you want to couch it in flowery, politically correct terms.

Yes, there is a God in heaven that we all will answer to. This is our shared inexorable destiny.

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at January 24, 2010 5:40 PM


I think that is pretty sick what they are doing. I wonder what these kids will think when they grow up and the signs there parents made them hold. They may say something like this: I was a CHOICE? Did you think about aborted me? Poor kids! Just very sad, the one in the orange coat in the baby carriage got me, just sick.

Posted by: Pati Adams at January 24, 2010 5:46 PM


Pati Adams,

I was thinking the same thing. Plus, the woman is teaching her son that her FUTURE GRANDCHILD is also a CHOICE.

Posted by: Janet at January 24, 2010 5:58 PM


@Jay: I think one of the reasons that young people especially are starting to get so fired up over abortion is that the high school-college-young adult crowd of today knows, in an explicit way, that we could have been aborted. We have grown up in an environment that is specifically missing millions of our cohorts because they have been aborted. It's impossible not to realize, in a deeply personal way, that had my mother been someone else, had her situation been different, had she talked to the wrong person, etc., that it could just as easily have been me.

That kind of awareness is very motivating.

Posted by: Keli Hu at January 24, 2010 6:15 PM


It's impossible not to realize, in a deeply personal way, that had my mother been someone else, had her situation been different, had she talked to the wrong person, etc., that it could just as easily have been me.

That kind of awareness is very motivating.
Posted by: Keli Hu at January 24, 2010 6:15 PM

why is that "motivating?" I don't get it. You could have been lost via miscarriage as well. Or never conceived at all if your parents had not met.

Posted by: Hal at January 24, 2010 6:21 PM


Keli,

Have you visited the website survivors.la? The group calls themselves Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust.

Pretty cool.

Posted by: Ed at January 24, 2010 6:24 PM


why is that "motivating?" I don't get it. You could have been lost via miscarriage as well. Or never conceived at all if your parents had not met.

Posted by: Hal at January 24, 2010 6:21 PM
-------

Hal - what you are suggesting has nothing to do with the central focus of the discussion - choice.

Kind of surprised you're missing that.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 24, 2010 6:30 PM


The "I was a choice" pic disgusted me too. Abortion and euthanasia are both part of the same culture of death mindset. Surviving the womb doesn't guarantee that children won't be subject to termination after birth. That photo makes me think of Baby Isaiah and his parents. How much has the proabort promotion of a culture of death affected medical providers and government officials to view human life as disposable? And if disposable, at whose choice?

Posted by: Fed Up at January 24, 2010 6:31 PM


I literally dropped my phone when I saw the photo of the small guy in the stroller with the sign, "I was a choice." God help that child. Can you imagine how his mother treats him? "See, honey, you were a choice I made that day! Just after deciding which shirt I was going to wear and what I was going to eat for breakfast! I decided I wouldn't kill you!! Isn't that great!? Aren't you lucky to have me for a mommy?! I really wanted YOU! Your big brothers and sisters weren't so lucky!!"

Posted by: MamaMT at January 24, 2010 6:38 PM


why is that "motivating?" I don't get it. You could have been lost via miscarriage as well. Or never conceived at all if your parents had not met.
Posted by: Hal at January 24, 2010 6:21 PM

As Chris Arsenault pointed out, it's supposed to be about choice, right? As in, my parents could have chosen to kill me. I have no say in the matter--how could I? And even if someone had spoken up for me, what guarantee is there that they would have succeeded? How many women tomorrow will go to an abortion clinic, and have a sidewalk counselor beg them not to kill their child, but will go inside and abort that child anyway?

The two situations you cited are beyond anyone's control. But to look at yourself in the mirror and realize that your own mother could have killed you if she'd wanted to is a wholly other experience. "Choice" starts sounding very sinister at that point.

If you are an American older than 38, you may not feel this in quite the same way. Me, I was born in 1984. I was lucky. But of all the kids aborted that year, I bet some of them would have been my friends. Or enemies, to be fair. Nobody gets along with everyone in the world. But, either way, it's a certainty that at least one person is missing from my life because of abortion. How could this not be motivating?

Posted by: Keli Hu at January 24, 2010 6:47 PM


Oh God, that is DISGUSTING. Look at that woman with her baby that she kept, meanwhile she's thin as a model, with amazing hair and clothing because she's convincing other women to murder their own babies.

That's gross. Could those women honestly, after having and raising those children, honestly, in their right minds, tell other women to abort their own?

I am utterly disgusted.

Please visit http://www.abort73.com and buy a tshirt. I just did and I'm on a pro-life rampage.

How can a child be a choice? I mean, it was a choice for the two people to get together, but to say they can choose to murder or not? Please, that's the same thing terrorists do! They have a choice to murder one person, or many.

I don't understand how a sane person that's not brainwashed or on drugs or something can say that being "PRO-CHOICE" is okay. I just don't understand. Okay, so what if they CHOOSE to keep their child, but a criminal chooses to run them over a few years down the road? Well they'd better not get upset, because after all, the criminal is just making a choice... the same choice a lot of people are making these days when they choose to have an abortion.

And to use little kids as their advertising campaign? That's just gross. They don't even have the knowledge to know what their doing. Just like some middle-eastern terrorists will put children in front of them because they know the Americans won't shoot at children or women.

Just gross, weak, disgusting, and COWARDLY.

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 6:47 PM


@ "L" who said "children who you put at risk of having unintended pregnancies with your abstinence only sex education."

Okay, I'm going to use simple terms and be very vague in responding to that.

DUHH--

How can abstinence put people MORE at risk for unintended pregnancies than just permitting a free-for-all? DUH?

And that's beside the point. The point is their choice to keep or abort that child they created BY CHOICE. At least have the child, and give it to another family that will love it as their own.

I'm only 20 and I know these things. Please. When will the world grow up?

I'm really upset about all this right now, I can't believe people are so naiive, yet pretend to know so much. This world is seriously backwards when good is called "bad" and bad is called "good".

Okay, well I'm also really excited right now because I volunteered to be a graphic designer for a pro-life group near me. VERY motivated right now.

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 6:56 PM


i know we are never going to agree, but the fact that you cant even consider what im saying about healthcare and sex education speaks to your depraved indifference to humanity. the fact that you try to use god to defend your views is even more ridiculous, given the fact that not everyone in our country believes in god, the existence of a god can not be proven, and freedom of religion (or lack of religion) is a legally protected right.

let me also reiterate, its not always a choice for two people to have intercourse and just because you would be fine carrying a child that was the product of rape doesnt mean its ok for you to force that burden on another woman.

Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

In 1995, 354,670 women were the victims of a rape or sexual assault. (NationalCrime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.)

Over the last two years, more than 787,000 women were the victim of a rape or sexual assault. (National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.Department of Justice, 1996.)

The FBI estimates that 72 of every 100,000 females in the United States wereraped last year. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Statistics, 1996.)

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 6:57 PM


teaching people that abstinence is the only way to protect them from pregnancy leaves them unprepared when they invariable do decide to have intercourse.

yes, actual abstinence prevents pregnancy, but abstinence only sex education just increases pregnancy rates.

are you really so blind that you think that people dont have sex, just because someone tells them its a sin? these children think that god forgives them for all of their sins, have sex anyway, get pregnant, are shocked.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 7:01 PM


The anonymous coward "l" claimed: "Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice"

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
"From 1973 through 2005, more than 45 million legal abortions occurred."

Former Abortionist Bernard Nathanson Exposes Lies of American Pro-Abortion Movement
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08072904.html
"Nathanson's conversion to the pro-life movement was sparked by the advent of the ultrasound machine in the early 1970s. He related how his heart was moved to realize that a fetus is in fact a human being after he watched an unborn baby recoil from a vacuum abortion device before being sucked from its mother's womb...Pro-abortion advocates "refuse to see what most people are now conceding, that the fetus is a human being and we have no business massacring it in large numbers," concluded Dr. Nathanson."

"L" also used the phrase " your depraved indifference to humanity"

That's pretty hypocritical, coming from someone who does not seem to consider unborn children to be human beings.

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 7:08 PM


So, this beast hands her child a sign saying it was a choice.

My three were not choices.

They were gifts, blessings, and our saslvation; as are all children.

The worst was the baby holding the sign to "Keep Abortion Safe and Legal".

I note that the cowards left off the other half of the sign:

"So Mom can kill my siblings."

Posted by: Gerard Nadal at January 24, 2010 7:10 PM


I like the "I was a choice" t-shirt. Very cute. Adorable.

A lot better than telling a child they were a "mistake." That bothers me a lot more.

Posted by: Hal at January 24, 2010 7:10 PM


The anonymous, cowardly "L" blustered: "are you really so blind that you think that people dont have sex, just because someone tells them its a sin"

Are you really so bigoted that you think human beings are just like other animals, who have no CHOICES when it comes to deciding whether or not they will have sexual intercourse?

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 7:11 PM


Are you really so bigoted that you think human beings are just like other animals, who have no CHOICES when it comes to deciding whether or not they will have sexual intercourse?
Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 7:11 PM

I'm not sure that was what "L" was saying. Yes we have the choice whether or not to have sex, and we also have the choice to terminate a pregnancy if we wish.

Posted by: Hal at January 24, 2010 7:15 PM


Um, as far as I know, abstinence TEACHES them what happens when they're NOT abstinent, so they ARE prepared. Besides, if you knew anything about Pro-Life organizations and supporters, we are MORE than WILLING to offer love and support to someone.

WE are the ones that will HELP them become prepared and excited. Opposed to the freakout-and-run actions that pro-choice people tend to take.

UHOH!!! PREGNANT? DON"T KNOW WHAT TO DO? KILL IT!

Opposed to the more level-headed response of a pro-life person, of "Pregant? Let me help you and your child."

Besides, I don't think anyone has any experience or know-how about children until they've had one. Please. Be reasonable. Or at least logical.

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 7:21 PM


Here, I figured since one of her kids was holding a sign for abortion, we should get the other one in the picture:

Now the gang's all here!

Posted by: xalisae at January 24, 2010 7:23 PM


Hal helpfully offered: "we also have the choice to terminate a pregnancy if we wish"

Would you please try to be more precise and stop hiding behind obfuscatory language? Why not just say "we also have the choice to deliberately kill an unborn child if we wish"? Your lame attempt at legitimizing a destructive act of profound violence is pathetic.

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 7:24 PM


l, are you willing to submit to execution by live dismemberment as punishment for a crime committed by your father? I suspect you'd find it a "depraved indifference to humanity" to personally undergo the very penalty you're willing to impose on another.

Posted by: Fed Up at January 24, 2010 7:24 PM


xalisae: "A picture is worth a thousand words."

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 7:26 PM



"Pro-aborts use kids they didn't kill as props at marches"

The only other alternative was formaldehyde.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 24, 2010 7:29 PM


At least can you have any ounce of respect and capitalize God's name?

Also... if you want to start getting into the dirty details, back up your knowledgeable sentence of "but abstinence only sex education just increases pregnancy rates", because please, we'd all like to learn something, too.

Show me the facts. Show me the facts. From a neutral standpoint, don't forget.

Also, "are you really so blind that you think that people dont have sex, just because someone tells them its a sin? these children think that god forgives them for all of their sins, have sex anyway, get pregnant, are shocked."

DUH since when did I try to say THAT? NO... I SAID it's a CHOICE to do it, didn't I? People are NOT animals that they just ravenously do things without thinking. OOOH NO. Because if they were like animals, they wouldn't murder their own children by their own free will. They'd probably eat their children like protective ducks do, because they don't have the brains to make choices. Maybe that's the reason? Hm...

God does forgive His people when He knows that person is willing to change, they knew they did something wrong, and they've learned from it. We all do some things wrong in life. I'm sure even my sarcasm above is wrong. But right now this is an issue of preserving/denying the right to life. However that's beside the point. We all makes mistakes, we all sin, we all learn from it, we all are given a second chance. YOU, by your PRO-CHOICE stance are NOT giving even an innocent CHILD a second chance at LIFE. And by the way, Forgiveness is given when it's asked for.

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 7:31 PM


To all the commenters: Do a simple thought experiment. Did any of you CHOOSE to be born?

Anyone answering in the affirmative, you have a logical case for arguing that being born should be a CHOICE. Everyone else, just accept that your use of the word "choice" is illogical and suspect, because it's an attempt to legitimize something that shouldn't even be under debate if there is such a thing as an inalienable right to life. All other human rights proceed from this right.

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 7:31 PM


@xalisae:

I HATE MURDERING!!! I HATE IT I HATE IT I HATE IT. GAHHHJKGFDJHFGKLSAHDSKJNDS

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 7:35 PM


Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 6:57 PM
------

How does it follow that the child should be executed for the crime of her father?

Rape is wrong, but adding abortion as a solution only victimizes the mother with complicity.

There are actually other cultures where the mother has the child to show something great can come out of such horror.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 24, 2010 7:39 PM


Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 7:35 PM
-------

alyssa - are you okay?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 24, 2010 7:41 PM


Those children, if told what they were actually saying out there, would never support their fellow children being murdered. No child would ever agree with it.
This is abuse, those children are being abused by their parents. Used as pawns.
They should be taken away from those "parents".

Posted by: Michigan at January 24, 2010 7:42 PM


Haha, yes, I'm okay.. thanks for asking. Just imagine me getting up from my Mac and doing a couple screaming circles around my room. I have to sit here and be thankful that I have an amazing life, while millions of innocent children are being deprived of that right thanks to their parents' selfish choices. It's selfish, it's just so grossly selfish.

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 7:45 PM


If you've bought a pack of lies, (that a fetus isn't a baby, that abortion is a humanitarian thing for women, lack of abortion is a cruelty for women, etc.) then you can't see the irony or craziness in having young children at a pro-abortion demonstration. These people probably think they're demonstrating for a better world for their children. That's how deceived they are.

Posted by: Ceecee at January 24, 2010 7:47 PM


@Michigan;

Hey have you heard of Crossroads Pregnancy Center in Auburn Hills, MI?

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 7:49 PM


People should leave their children home when protesting something this heated. I'm not against children assisting in bettering society (obviously), but abortion is an issue where everyone is screaming. The environment, no matter what, is a battle zone and children have no part in that.

However, I have to agree that the poster with the "I Was a Choice" writing is disturbing. People are people, not property or choices.

The Taos Pueblos have a saying: We are in one nest. I wish that people would stop arguing over this and simply take care of one another. One nest. That's all that we have. We can't play all-powerful with each other, just appreciate each other.

Posted by: Vannah at January 24, 2010 7:53 PM


if you will notice, im not capitalizing anything i type, including my name.

here are the facts, alyssa, about abstinence only sex ed:

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_sexEd2006.html#30a

i know you will be irrationally irritated that they are posted on the guttmacher institute website, but if you look at the citations you will see that they are scientific studies published in peer reviewed journals. you do know what that means, i hope.

like it or not, people do things without thinking all of the time. we are animals. and people who have the tools to think rationally about their choices make better decisions for themselves and their families. and, as you will see if you actually consider the data im presenting you with, instead of dismissing it as you casually dismiss anything that doesnt jive with your small-minded view of the world, have fewer unintended pregnancies.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 7:55 PM


Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 7:45 PM
------

Yes, it's very selfish, primarily because raising children is self-sacrificial. Without that sacrifice there are no generations - effectively no country to carry on.

People fail to realize 37 million taxpayers are missing. (Yes, I know the abortion totals are near 52 million, but the peak has been sliding). Abortion's demographics have a huge impact on our country and the mental health of the population.

Don't let the insanity of the abortion-choicers get to you. The imagery is very rough some times, but it needs to be shown as the truth.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 24, 2010 7:55 PM


Okay so now your'e calling me an animal. And yourself, and ALL of us. I'm sorry, I was going to post something else logical, but since you're obviously an animal, too I don't think that animals can comprehend what I was going to respond, so therefore, I don't agree with you or your shallow reasonings, and therefore case closed. Grrrrrrr....

Goodnight,
Goodbye...

Happy Hounding. WOOF!

(now since I've found I'm an animal I no longer see the need to even consider anyone PRO-CHOICE, since animals don't MAKE choices. WHOOP! There goes the toilet paper, too, since animals don't need that either!)

Okay, well there's no getting through the skull of an animal, so see ya later! Have a great life, at least you HAVE a life, unlike millions of other children you're denying LIFE to.

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 8:00 PM


you dont want to do anything good for anyone with peoples taxes anyway. this website constantly decries social welfare and healthcare programs. its a silly argument to make. if everyone was forced to have twice as many children, then we would have twice as much tax revenue. are you lobbying for that?

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:01 PM


Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 7:55 PM
---------

l -do you have a willingness to believe what is authentic scientificly presented material?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 24, 2010 8:01 PM


I sure wouldn't be lobbying for "L"'s silliness. I'd lobby for the rights and lives of citizens. Whether it's a right to keep and bear arms, the right to life,

And if you're pro-choice... then what are you doing even THINKING bringing health care up, since that's totally NOT giving any choice to individuals?

Give me credit for caring about your future when I should be doing my HTML homework. :)

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 8:04 PM


"depraved indifference to humanity" Oh. I thought we were animals?

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 8:05 PM


animals with consciousness (ie human beings) are capable of choice. i agree that i am an animal, as are you, as are all people and beings on this planet. you are pretty silly to think that i will somehow be offended by that.

seriously though, go to the link if you were being honest about wanting to learn something. dont even look at the research that came out of the guttmacher institute, if you think that it is not neutral, just look at the public health data from the journals.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:05 PM


"animals with consciousness"... so um... my cat is unconscious? Last I checked she was blinking and breathing.

Hm...

And no YOU'RE silly to think I'm trying to offend you! If your'e convicted, fine, offended, fine, that's not for me to care about right now. I can tell you don't care about murdering innocent children. After all, that's the debate here.

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 8:07 PM


The degree of degradation is stunning. Now even using kids to manipulate ... horrible.

Posted by: Abortion Support at January 24, 2010 8:08 PM


humans are animals. we are a SPECIES. you probably need a definition for that so here you go:

–noun
1. a class of individuals having some common characteristics or qualities; distinct sort or kind.
2. Biology. the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:09 PM


people in comas blink and breathe on their own even though they are unconscious. consciousness is an awareness of oneself and ones situation.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:11 PM


Whatever. Like I said, animals, which I choose (yes CHOOSE and since you're PRO-CHOICE, you should respect my CHOICE) NOT to be referred to as an animal, but since you enjoy being called an animal, I'm going to slam the kennel on this one and say "Leave it!"

So good night, you've actually given me an even stronger backbone for WHY I take the stand I do. Great job for making me an even stronger person, I appreciate the effort! :)

I believe what I do for a reason, and now I see what I could become if I -woof- didn't believe -meow- the way I do! Thanks -ribbit- Again! :D


Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 8:13 PM


i do care about murdering innocent children. i do not consider a fetus or a zygote to be a child.

YOU dont care about protecting children who already exist and are conscious or about giving them the intellectual tools to protect themselves.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:14 PM


L helpfully pointed out "consciousness is an awareness of oneself and ones situation"

So does this mean it's OK to kill people if they're not conscious? Hmm. I better not have you for a roommate, because I like to take naps. :D

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 8:19 PM


its pretty sad that misusing words and dismissing peer reviewed scientific research makes you feel like a better person. i hope this isnt something you are passing on to your children.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:19 PM


do you think its okay to kill animals that lack consciousness? if you are a vegan who doesnt believe in the death penalty, doesnt kill bugs, etc., then i could have at least some respect for your principled stance, despite disagreeing with it.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:23 PM


L: Did you CHOOSE to be born?

If not, then being born isn't a choice, at least not the child's. And since we all were children once, we didn't really have a choice in the matter. What you are saying, then, quite simply, is that the choice of whether anyone should live is a choice that is up to the parents, regardless of what stage of life a child is at. Nice going. At least Peter Singer is honest about this, arguing that up to a certain age, parents should be allowed to kill their children.

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 24, 2010 8:30 PM


What goes around, comes around.

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at January 24, 2010 8:42 PM


OOOH that is SO GOOD! :D

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 8:45 PM


true, no one chooses whether or not to be born. the choice is up to the mother. and if my mother wasnt ready to have children when i was conceived, i truly wouldnt know the difference. my mother practiced safe sex before and after she was married and had my siblings and i when my father and her were financially stable. they had the education and resources to avoid unintended pregnancies, and my mother was lucky to not have been the victim of sexual assault. unfortunately not everyone is that lucky.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 9:00 PM


Hate to interrupt your babbling l but
GO VIKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 24, 2010 9:07 PM


Cranky Catholic--LOVE IT! EXCELLENT and SO TRUE.

Kinda along the lines of what Keli Hu was saying, my generation is gearing up and the Nancy Pelosi's of the world who killed 1/3 of us better watch out! You've taught my generation that granting life to others is a choice so you just wait when you're old and in the way. Planned Grandparenthood euthanasia clinics...here we come!

X--you hit the nail on the head! Very good pic and the words are true.

Alyssa--you state it so well. Excellent posts.

My son wore the "former embryo" and "abortion is mean" t-shirts as a baby and young toddler. He got a LOT of attention and a lot of positive comments. I guarantee it got some people to think. It makes you think of WHAT is being chosen in an abortion. Its all very fine and well to keep going on and on about choice, but the choice is to have the baby or...or what? Have the baby sucked out and killed. THATS THE CHOICE.

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 24, 2010 9:11 PM


l:

What species of embryo/fetus were YOU when your own mother was pregnant?

What is that on the ultrasound screen that has a torso, a head, two arms and two legs? Is that a dog? Cat? Rabbit? Horse? Fish? Hmm, the person getting the ultrasound is a HUMAN.

We don't have FETUS showers, we have BABY showers.


*excited for the birth of her 4th niece at the end of April or early May*

Yes, my sister in law is having a HUMAN CHILD.


And the local Walks for life I have been to are peaceful and prayerful. My 10 year old niece went to her 1st local Walk for Life last year. My sister said they'd try to make it this year. My brother in law may not be able to go due to his back injury.


We don't use graphic signs at our local walk for life and the only really loud people are the 5 or so pro abortion protesters that are heckling us, all several thousand of us.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 24, 2010 9:14 PM


It's impossible not to realize, in a deeply personal way, that had my mother been someone else, had her situation been different, had she talked to the wrong person, etc., that it could just as easily have been me.

That kind of awareness is very motivating.

I have never really found that line of thought moving, personally speaking. I don't really see much emotional sway in "what if" scenarios. What if I hadn't been conceived; what if that guy had hit me instead of my mom on the ski slopes when I was 7, and killed me rather than breaking her leg in two places; what if my dad had left Newark airport on September 11 rather than September 10; what if I had been four inches further left when that car hit me last summer, its tire rolling right past my head? It's scary in the moment and shortly after the fact, but ultimately, I'm either dead or alive.

"What if?" I'd be dead. It'll happen someday anyway. I don't mean that to sound bleak - I'm a pretty optimistic, upbeat person, I swear. I get that abortion is different than miscarriage or never having been conceived; but from a "what effect would this have on my life" perspective I find the argument as unmotivational as "what if I'd never been conceived." Sure, I'm happy to be alive. Sure, I'd rather not die; I like my life and I love the people in it. But I will die. I haven't yet. That's...the end of it, emotionally.

I recently turned 27, if it matters.

Posted by: Alexandra at January 24, 2010 9:18 PM


Alexandra,

Happy (Slightly Late) Birthday! :)

Did you party? Partai, New York, partai!

Posted by: Vannah at January 24, 2010 9:25 PM


lol Vannah not really, I was working a ton at that point. It actually wasn't TOO recent. I just can't believe I'm 27 so I keep saying it was recent. ;)

That is like SOLIDLY late-twenties. Unacceptable.

Posted by: Alexandra at January 24, 2010 9:30 PM


Hey Liz, I tweeted your "We don't have FETUS showers, we have BABY showers." quote. LOVED that! :D

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 9:36 PM


Happy late birthday Alexandra.

An old neighbor of mine (he was friends with my brother when they were younger) was born on the 1st anniversary of R vs W. I wonder what his view on abortion is.


My birthday is tomorrow. Off on a shopping spree and then dinner out to Ruby Tuesday w/ my parents and possibly two of my nieces.

(Oh, and there's nothing worse than having R vs W anniversary right before your birthday. About eleven or twelve years ago, there was an article ON MY BIRTHDAY in the local paper about abortion. It really upset me.)

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 24, 2010 9:45 PM


Late twenties is young! You can't call yourself old until eighty, I say.

-Vannah, Hypocrite Who Obsesses Over Her Age

^.^

Posted by: Vannah at January 24, 2010 9:53 PM


And thanks for tweeting what I said. Sent you a follow request (I think you'll figure out its me)

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 24, 2010 9:53 PM


Liz

Happy Birthday, Liz! Yay, January! I hope that everything goes splendidly. :)

Tomorrow will be great- I get to register to sponsor a child! That way something good somewhere in the world happens on your bifdai instead of abortion. :)

Posted by: Vannah at January 24, 2010 9:55 PM


tweet tweet! I requested to follow you back! :)

Posted by: alyssa at January 24, 2010 10:15 PM


Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:01 PM


"if everyone was forced to have twice as many children, then we would have twice as much tax revenue. are you lobbying for that?"

--------------------------------------------------
It should be noted that not every person who recognizes the humanity of the pre-natal human is a conservative socially or fiscally.

Some of the liberal pro-life folk who post here do believe it is acceptable to use the force of the government to steal other peoples money and re-distribute it as the majority see fit.

Most conservatives have objections to the goverment stealing other peoples money and spending it ways that are not constitutionally authorized.

We disagree in principle to the confiscation and we object to where it is spent and we object to the ineffcient and wasteful way it is spent.

We believe it is more responsilbe for us to control and direct to whom and to what our voluntary charitable contributions are given.

Liberals like spending other peoples money. Conservatives choose to follow their own conscience in how their money is spent.

It is called liberty.

Now to deal with your faulty premise:

"if everyone was forced to have twice as many children, then we would have twice as much tax revenue. are you lobbying for that?"

First let us remove 'forced', because no one I know of is advocating a government mandated minimum family size. If anything, the progressive/liberal/humanists are moving the other way, a government mandated maximum family size.

Second, If there were less of a tax burden on individuals then they might 'choose' to have more children, because they like children and with more of their hard earned money remaining in their posession it would make large families easier to support.

Third, If people had less of a tax burden they could save or invest or consume and all of those would be beneficial to the economy.

Fourth, If there were more people paying into the system and the system was only concerned with providing that which the constitution authorizes then everyones tax burden would be less.

I have a simple motto: 'More money and less taxes for everyone.'

One kind of produces the other.

I should add that as any entity grows it reaches a point of optimum efficiency and when it grows beyond a certain size it becomes more inefficient until it reaches the point of deminishing return and becomes wasteful at some point may even cause it's own demise.

There is a lesson to be learned from biology:

Multiplication by division.

Instead of reaching an unstable or unsustainable size the entity divides into two or more parts and starts over.

That is how the body of Christ grows in the earth.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 24, 2010 10:17 PM


Vannah, you will be glad to know there's an organization (one of the members of it was interviewed on EWTN during the March for Life) that is drilling wells in Darfur. :)

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 24, 2010 10:47 PM


l.: "if you are a vegan who doesnt believe in the death penalty, doesnt kill bugs, etc., then i could have at least some respect for your principled stance, despite disagreeing with it."

Yo. Right here.

Posted by: bmmg39 at January 24, 2010 11:44 PM


Hey Alexandra, we're about the same age, you're only about 6 months older than I am :)

Posted by: Rachael C. at January 25, 2010 12:05 AM


Wells for water?

Yay! :D

Thank you for letting me know!

Woo hoo!

I still haven't sent those letters (I've decided to write a story instead- I feel more in my element than giving a presentation) or finished those shirts (ugh...), but fortunately the world is full of people who get off their lazy butts and do good. I have a good feeling now. Yessss!

Posted by: Vannah at January 25, 2010 12:56 AM


'l' - I have at least a couple of reasons for doubting that link. First of all, this link
http://www.abstinence.net/library/index.php?entryid=3100
and the wild discrepancy between one of the similar findings between the two
(ie. "Only one-third of adults surveyed support abstinence-only education, while half oppose the abstinence-only approach." compared to "79 percent of parents want young people taught that sex should be reserved for marriage or for an adult relationship leading to marriage.") make me wonder about the reliability of either. Except for the fact that Guttmacher are motivated by MONEY and Abstinence Clearinghouse not so much. So I am left comparing what their findings are with my own personal experience.

So, given the fact that I was an unplanned pregnancy and was taught abstinence as the best way as a teenager and that now as a 42 year old (is that "unacceptable", Alexandra?!? ;-) ) virgin I don't have to worry about STDs or my past, and also given the fact that you routinely overlook the HUMANITY of the unborn (ie. biological REALITY) means I can pretty much disregard everything you've written as obfuscation, biased and outright evil. You're one sick puppy to be able to stare into the eyes of truth and ignore it. You've obviously been involved in abortion at some stage, otherwise you would not have such an investment in twisting things so much to where up is down and down is up. But I hope you WAKE UP real soon and get the healing and light you need.

Posted by: Mark at January 25, 2010 2:58 AM


"I just can't believe I'm 27 so I keep saying it was recent. ;) That is like SOLIDLY late-twenties. Unacceptable. "

Right Alexandra... try 29!

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at January 25, 2010 6:19 AM


Vannah,
Please go to http://www.Iamwholelife.com

There is a video about the wells in Darfur and tons of other info too. Sign the pledge. :)

Jason Jones is the man on a mission.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 25, 2010 6:46 AM


its pretty sad that misusing words and dismissing peer reviewed scientific research makes you feel like a better person. i hope this isnt something you are passing on to your children.

Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:19 PM
------

l - I have two questions for you:

1) Could you explain to us why it's okay for you to present what you consider to be scientifically accurate, peer reviewed research material (via Guttmacher Institute) and expect us to accept it, while at the same time you overwhelmingly reject the humanity of the unborn:

i do care about murdering innocent children. i do not consider a fetus or a zygote to be a child. - Posted by: l at January 24, 2010 8:14 PM

when there is considerable valid evidence to the contrary:

"Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zygtos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being." [Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]

"Although human life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed. ... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity." (O'Rahilly, Ronan and Müller, Fabiola. Human Embryology and Teratology, 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29).

"the term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. It is synonymous with the terms fecundation, impregnation and fertilization ... The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life." (J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Freidman. Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers, pages 17 and 23.)

"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus." (Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146.

"every time a sperm cell and ovum unite, a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition." (E.L. Potter, M.D., and J.M. Craig, M.D. Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant (3rd Edition). Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975, page vii.)

"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life." [Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]

And on a related note;

2) Could you please explain how the presence of the offspring/child ('fetus' in Latin) can be both the observational basis used by medical doctors to declare a pregnancy (which is required by law in all states) and yet not be something you consider essential to your own conclusions that this child doesn't exist?

Thanks.


Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 25, 2010 7:18 AM


@Alexandra: Well, obviously not everyone is going to react the same way. I think that's one reason out of many that "our generation" is largely pro-life and very energized. There are, of course, others. :)

Posted by: Keli Hu at January 25, 2010 7:24 AM


I think this is truly pathetic and sad.
Children holding signs that basically say that they are here today because their parents "chose" them and "wanted" them

that is the only reason - they were "wanted"

so these children are survivors of their parents contraceptive mentality, their parents selfishness and the abortion culture...

so depraved, it defies words.... :(

Posted by: angel at January 25, 2010 7:32 AM


lol Bobby, it's not actually all bad. I am a waaaaay cooler person now than I was in my early 20's, so I figure as long as I keep becoming more and more awesome with time, bring 30 on, right? ;)

Posted by: Alexandra at January 25, 2010 7:55 AM


Happy Belated Birthday to you Alexandra!! :)
Late twenties-early thirties is cool!

I will be mid forties this year. Bring it.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 25, 2010 8:02 AM


Carla: mid forties ain't so bad either, now that I look back on it! ;)

Posted by: angel at January 25, 2010 8:12 AM


The argument by "l" about 300,000 or more rapes per year could lead us to conclude, if we were to follow abortionist "logic" (and I don't necessarily recommend doing this), that since we cannot stop all these illegal "back-alley" rapes, we must legalize rape, so that it can be safe for men and they will not end up in the hospital emergency room when women fight back and injure them. In addition, why should we be controlling what a man does with his body?

Obviously, this is absurd, but the reason for this is that the same "logic" that the abortionist movement has applied to abortion crime, we are applying to rape crime.

Forget about what is "chosen" and whether or not it is a crime and focus only on the "choice" and the "back alleys" and the conclusion, based on the impeccable "logic" of the opponents of unborn human rights, logically follows.

Posted by: Joe at January 25, 2010 8:30 AM


Jay, 4:45p: Thanks! Posting, giving you the HT!

Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at January 25, 2010 9:11 AM


Thank you angel!! I am enjoying my forties!

Joe,
I guess I have given up on "l" but was wondering what the world the number of rapes had to do with abortion when less than 1% of abortions are done because of rape......??!!
Anyway, I admire those who continue commenting with l. I'm tired. :)

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 25, 2010 9:11 AM


Joe: the problem is not so much the logic of the proaborts arguments
they KNOW their arguments don't hold water

the problem is with their hearts :(

Posted by: angel at January 25, 2010 9:41 AM


If her mother truly understood, her sign would read "I was a gift!"

Posted by: jaktx at January 25, 2010 10:30 AM


Thanks for the link, Carla!

Posted by: Vannah at January 25, 2010 11:35 AM


jaktx, so true! My son was a gift. I mean afterall, I am CHOOSING to be pregnant right now and sadly this month I am not. Didn't somebody tell God that motherhead is a choice and I have made my choice? The NERVE!

Posted by: Sydney M at January 25, 2010 12:00 PM


Happy belated birthdays to Alexandra and Xalisae and Liz!

Posted by: Janet at January 25, 2010 1:03 PM


These signs are as low as low can get! What do you expect from people who support and continue to justify murder? These women are very sick. They need God. They need to get out of denial. Their abortions have hurt them deeply. This is how they cope. Denial, promotion, justification, excuses, defending abortion on demand, etc. I've met MANY of them. I have also met MANY WHO REGRET THEIR ABORTIONS! I hope these women will come on over to our side one day!

Posted by: Heather at January 25, 2010 1:20 PM


X: Very powerful statement on baby Malachi's photo...hmm... maybe we should add that when we do "Truth Tours"?

I would also add these under abortion pics:

"I was inconvenient"

"I was a mistake"

"My mom didn't want me"

"I'm just a blob of tissue...with fingers and toes"

**I remember being called a 'disgusting human being' for holding up one of these sigens...***

Posted by: RSD at January 25, 2010 1:56 PM


I think putting the two pictures side-by-side would be most effective, RSD. If the living child was nothing more than a "choice", than the dead baby was, as well. So let's show both sides of this disgusting coin, shall we?

Posted by: xalisae at January 25, 2010 2:16 PM


"I hope these women will come on over to our side one day!

Posted by: Heather at January 25, 2010 1:20 PM
------------------------------------------

Not without a lot of prayer and sacrifice....on our part, as well Heather.

Posted by: RSD at January 25, 2010 3:18 PM


X: I agree...

Posted by: RSD at January 25, 2010 3:21 PM


We human beings are, indeed, animals. We're not vegetables or minerals. That leaves only animals.

Of course, unborn children are just unborn human animals, and could use our protection, just the same.

Posted by: bmmg39 at January 25, 2010 3:24 PM


bmmg39: Dunno about that. Some days I feel like a vegetable. :D

Posted by: Victor Panlilio at January 25, 2010 8:17 PM


I like the "I was a choice" t-shirt. Very cute. Adorable.

A lot better than telling a child they were a "mistake." That bothers me a lot more.
Posted by: Hal at January 24, 2010 7:10 PM

except that the flip side of choice IS mistake. :(

So sooner or later a child will think "what IF I wasn't wanted?"
"What would have happened to me? Would I have been aborted?"


Posted by: angel at January 26, 2010 6:18 AM


I like the "I was a choice" t-shirt. Very cute. Adorable.

A lot better than telling a child they were a "mistake." That bothers me a lot more.
Posted by: Hal at January 24, 2010 7:10 PM

Who would do such a terrible thing, Hal? Would you have, if abortion hadn't been an option? Would you also call a black person by a racial slur?

I have told my daughter she was a happy accident. It's the truth!

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 7:52 AM


I actually got into a discussion about that very thing, X, with my mother-in-law last night. She doesn't want me to ever tell my son he was unplanned because that will hurt his feelings. I said that she is equating being "unplanned" with being "unwanted".

My son was a surprise. I wasn't planning on a baby at that time. But NEVER did I not love and want my son! When I first found out I was pregnant at 13 days the doctors thought the pregnancy might be tubal. They were all set to give me methotrexate to abort but I refused and wanted to find out for sure if the baby was in my tubes. I was so upset thinking I might lose my 13 day old baby. I had only known he existed for a few hours but already I loved him ferociously. Thank God the pregnancy turned out normal and today my son is healthy.

I want my son to know he was unplanned so he will understand how STUPID it is that I could have legally killed him for interrupting my life without my consent. I want him to grow up to be a defender of life, especially of the children he might someday father. My son was definitely a "happy accident" and my husband often smiles at our son and turns to me with deep emotion on his face and says "I'm so glad our birth control failed! Thankyou for our little guy!" Children are a GIFT not a "choice".

Posted by: Sydney M at January 26, 2010 8:30 AM


So sooner or later a child will think "what IF I wasn't wanted?"
"What would have happened to me? Would I have been aborted?"

Posted by: angel at January 26, 2010 6:18 AM

I know that if my mother didn't want another child (I was her last) I would have been aborted. I'm not troubled by that at all, and doubt other children would be either.

Posted by: Hal at January 26, 2010 11:13 AM


Oh yes, I'm sure an idea like that wouldn't psychologically harm anyone ever in the least.

"My mommy would've killed me under slightly different circumstances."

There's a bond of real love right there, people.

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 12:36 PM


Hal, how can you not see how damaging this is? That does not project the feeling of "I will love you, no matter what." to me. That, to me, sounds like someone having kids so they can get the full relationship experience with their partner, or so they can have (have, as in own, like an object) what everyone else on their block has, or just because they feel that it's just something they're supposed to do at a certain point in their lives.

Someone who has children for themselves and not the child's sake ("We aborted this child so we can wait until we are ready to have children..."), loves themselves and not the child.

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 1:54 PM


I know that if my mother didn't want another child (I was her last) I would have been aborted. I'm not troubled by that at all, and doubt other children would be either.
Posted by: Hal at January 26, 2010 11:13 AM

however, your 4 children wouldn't exist Hal and what you said is like saying that your life now really has no meaning?

Is THAT really what you believe?

That a world without you would be no different?

now multiply that by 50 million lives?
Would those 50 millions lives lost make no difference?

Your rational doesn't make sense.

Posted by: angel at January 27, 2010 5:36 AM


Hal wrote:

I know that if my mother didn't want another child (I was her last) I would have been aborted. I'm not troubled by that at all, and doubt other children would be either.

Hal... seriously, think about this for a moment. Abortion ends the life of an already-existing child; it doesn't simply "prevent" a life, any more than a mother slitting her toddler's throat simply "prevents" a life. The life was already in progress, Hal; how can someone who seems so educated be so completely oblivious to that fact? Your attempts to draw moral equivalence between sexual abstinence and direct murder of your unborn child is bizarre.

Are you seriously saying that "the only bad thing about a murder is the loss of [future] potential?" Some of us find abortion to be evil because it ends the life of a non-repeatable, unique person who has intrinsic value that we can't possibly understand completely; it's a total and irrevocable violation of an existing person. We don't limit our laments to "darn... he/she might have gone on to a good college, someday!"

Posted by: Paladin at January 27, 2010 8:06 AM


Hal, you're also saying you're fine with your daughters not being here. Abortion doesn't just end a human life, it cuts the branch off a family tree.

Posted by: Jill Stanek Author Profile Page at January 27, 2010 9:40 AM


Hal says "I know that if my mother didn't want another child (I was her last) I would have been aborted. I'm not troubled by that at all, and doubt other children would be either."

I know several people with aborted siblings who are very troubled by the fact that their parents would choose to kill their siblings. Hell, my own mother in law has issues with her own mother to this day because her mother tried to throw herself down a flight of stairs when she found out she was pregnant.

Just because you don't care about the abortion of your family doesn't mean your daughters wont.

Posted by: Lauren at January 27, 2010 9:48 AM


RSD, how true. A whole new generation of pro-aborts in the making. Without God, they will never see the error of their ways! WE as PRO-LIFERS see the insanity of what pro deathers do. I've talked to some women who still claim that their abortions were "A good choice at the time." "I couldn't have that baby." "I do feel bad, but I just couldn't have seen myself being tied to that guy for the rest of my life." "I had other things that were more important." ETC. However, these women and their behaivor indicates that they feel anything but okay with their abortions. Drugging, drinking, promiscuity, seeing shrinks, having it all yet expressing feelings of emptiness and unexplained sorrow, night terrors. Post Abortion Syndrome is real, and many women don't have a clue as to what's the matter with them.

Posted by: Heather at January 27, 2010 11:40 AM


Ashley posted: "It was pro-choice feminists who decried the sterilization of poor women against their will. It is pro-choice feminists who believe that fertility treatments should not be denied to poor women who want babies. On the flip side, it was religious and social conservatives who ran "maternity homes" in the 40s and 50s, where teenage girls had their babies snatched from them against their will, often when they were drugged. In fact, Christian CPCs still do that."

Can't find any citations of "pro-choice" feminists objecting to forced sterilization, but the American Life League vociferously fought against UNFPA and USAID practices of implanting Norplant in unsuspecting third world women, as well as other equally egregious programs and any forced sterilization/contraception.

In the 40's and 50's, maternity homes were the ONLY recourse for just about any pregnant teen. The stigma was so bad no one was willing to have their teen's pregnancy acknowledged. Adoption was the only real choice, and yes, churches were often the backers of such charities. So? Where else were these women to go? What is so evil about providing them a place to stay? Yes, everyone was encouraged to adopt - by their families as much as by anyone else. You'd have to have lived in the era to understand. I don't advocate nor defend any forced adoption, but, although many moms were no doubt reluctant and sad about adoption, I doubt many were actually forced at that time, as they knew what stigma and hardship they and their children would face as single moms.

However, now, women are forced by families and boyfriends to abort - a much more devastating situation. Unfortunately, coercion will always exist when it comes to pregnancies.

The fact that these homes all closed is the biggest reason there are few housing choices for moms who want to parent.

It's patently false that Christian CPC's "snatch" babies from drugged moms. Christian CPC's are NOT adoption agencies and do not push adoption. They do counseling which includes courses wherein moms can realistically look at how parenting AND adoption will affect their lives before making their own choice.

Posted by: Lynne at January 31, 2010 6:57 AM


Jill, can I use your quote that says Abortion doesn't just end a human life, it cuts the branch off a family tree.? I'd love to post that on facebook.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 31, 2010 2:13 PM