Carla meets Sarah Palin

Palin.jpgModerator Carla met Sarah Palin at a Mall of America book signing in MN on December 7 and shared the experience on her blog:

I shook Sarah's hand as I got to her and asked if she would sign my shirt. She did! She signed my book and I handed her a precious feet pin and told her it was in memory of Tad (her baby lost to miscarriage). She got teary eyed and said, "That is just so precious! Thank you! God bless you! Todd, isn't that precious?" He nodded. I told her that I loved her and she said she loved me too. I shook Todd's hand and told him it was so nice to meet him....

photo(8).jpg

I was interviewed by Star Tribune and someone else videotaped me yapping about Sarah Palin. Many folks took pictures of my signed shirt. I guess she is not supposed to do that. I submit that she can pretty much do whatever she wants. Her book. Her gig. Her people.

The shirt Carla wore, signed by Sarah, was designed by moderator Bethany. Contact Bethany for information on ordering your own Sarah Palin tee.

See the video interview with Carla below:


Comments:

My precious Carla!

Merry Christmas to you all at JillStanek.com. You're all courageous missionaries! I read but don't interact much. I was surprised to check in today after lunch and see this post - I'm privileged to be married to Carla.

Posted by: Pat S at December 23, 2009 1:12 PM


Hi Pat!! :) Thank you.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 3:13 PM


Too bad she doesn't repent and join the pro-life fight. She said in her book that "good people can disagree on abortion." Really? Can good people disagree on salvery or killing Jews? I don't think so.

Also of note in her book was when she was being interviewed for US Senate by Murkowski and he asked her what her number one issue was. I was hoping she would say "abortion" but she didn't. She said "energy." Unbelievable, huh? She probably would have said the same thing running for office in Nazi Germany.

My husband didn't go with me, but I waited in line to meet her in Colo Spgs and gave her my ProlifeProfiles.com/Palin business card and begged her to deal with these issues so I can vote for her. I doubt she will.

Posted by: Connie at December 23, 2009 3:28 PM


Connie, I'm just glad that she is pro-life and is willing to act on the issue. Her position may not exactly match most of our own (including mine) but it is certainly 10,000% better than Obama, most RINOs, and many so-called-conservative republicans (such as Meg Whitman here in CA). Our hope is in appointing pro-constitution and pro-life judges to the Supreme Court to reverse Roe vs. Wade!

Posted by: segamon at December 23, 2009 4:02 PM


I've been waiting for this post! :) Oh, I wish so much I'd gotten to go to this. And how cool is it that she signed your shirt?!

Connie: What I got out of "good people can disagree on abortion" was that sometimes people can be truly trying to do what they think the right this is, but they get it wrong. For some reason they think abortion is "right" and they're for it because they want to do the right thing. I think of them as kind of like the abortion version of Melanie in "Gone With the Wind". Obviously a very kind woman who wanted to be a good person and have compassion and help others, but she still didn't see the problem with slavery.

Posted by: Marauder at December 23, 2009 4:23 PM


Sarah Palin is a typical so-called pro-life politician who is actually pro-choice in many respects. God's position is, "Thou shalt not murder." Sarah Palin's position is, "Thou shalt not murder unless ..."

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 4:44 PM


Carla, congratulations again! I love the video of you, and you look great in the shirt!

Sarah Palin is not only pro-life in her words, but in her actions. Thank God for her!

I can only imagine how many babies with down's syndrome have been saved as a result of her story being public, and seeing what a blessing Trig is and how a very successful woman with a career can have children and be happy!

How many women who have had miscarriages have been helped by her story about losing Tad - she considered all of her unborn babies persons and wrote about them as such. What other politician has written about miscarriage experiences in this way? How many people have chosen not to have abortions after reading her experience? I am sure there are many more than we can even realize.

It is sad to me that some people want to pick her apart and try to demonize her. Some ARTL people seem to be experts on misrepresenting facts about pro-lifers (including Jill Stanek).

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 4:46 PM


Yea! Go Carla! ..right on . exactly, she is what we need. An honest person in office, someone we can identify with.

Good point Bethany.

Posted by: Jasper at December 23, 2009 5:19 PM


Bethany, what facts has ARTL misrepresented about Sarah Palin?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 5:28 PM


Too bad Jeremy Paul Olsen was a vegan.

Todd and Sarah would probably have enjoyed a good steak.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at December 23, 2009 5:40 PM


Jasper, Sarah Palin gave serious thought to aborting Trig. To a strong pro-lifer, that would be unthinkable.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 5:41 PM


hot video of Carla! whoohoo!
just keep pushing Palin to do what she should do - be prolife!

Posted by: angel at December 23, 2009 5:45 PM


Connie and Scott,

You know why we have people like Sarah Palin running for political office?

Because the only 'perfect' candidate is NOT seeking elective office. HE has paid HIS dues and HE is not willling to be crucified again.

You have to learn to work with the hand you are dealt.

I admire your principled postions.

You should try running for elective office.

Let us know where to send the campaign contributions.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at December 23, 2009 5:50 PM


"Jasper, Sarah Palin gave serious thought to aborting Trig. To a strong pro-lifer, that would be unthinkable."

Scott,

From the interview I saw, she said it was a 'brief passing thought'.

Posted by: Jasper at December 23, 2009 5:51 PM


And there you have it, one very classic example of a misrepresentation by Scott Evans. (Scott 5:41)

Jasper's response at 5:51 is right on the money.

Great post, Kbhvac!

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 5:55 PM


It was a passing thought. She was the only who knew about the pregnancy. She could have had it "taken care of" and no one would have known. I don't condemn her for that thought any more than I would condemn a woman who changed her mind while walking into an abortion clinic.
She chose LIFE!

Read page 172 of Going Rogue.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 6:19 PM


When the many truths about Sarah Palin come out, her worshippers will be devastated. For an appetizer go to the Mudflats, Immoral Minority, Bree Palin and Palingates(abortiongate) websites.

Sarah can refuse to talk to the press and have bloggers thrown out of her book signings by the police, but the truth will come out, and it will not be pleasant for her.

Posted by: Bystander at December 23, 2009 6:23 PM


Sarah Palin's words:
"For a split second it hit me. That is, did I really want another child? I'm out of town. No one knows I'm pregnant. No one would ever have to know. What I thought was, 'Gee, now of all times? Ya', I'm no spring chicken.' I understood why a woman would consider it an easier path to perhaps, if you will, do away with the problem."

To a strong pro-lifer, abortion would be unthinkable. The above statement shows it wasn't unthinkable to Sarah Palin. Only she knows if it was a 'split second' or not, but naturally she would say it was after the fact.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 6:27 PM


To a strong pro-lifer, abortion would be unthinkable. The above statement shows it wasn't unthinkable to Sarah Palin. Only she knows if it was a 'split second' or not, but naturally she would say it was after the fact.

Scott, I find this interesting. Do you think that someone who, desperate and scared, briefly considers stealing something that no one would ever even realize had been stolen, is not opposed to theft? If he has that momentary urge, is he therefore not anti-theft? Do urges - even cowardly urges that go against what we believe - determine who a person is at their core, or are they understandable in situations of desperation or despair?

Posted by: Alexandra at December 23, 2009 6:33 PM


Besides, it's not me you have to answer to for supporting an abortion regulator like Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 6:34 PM


Alexandra, shame on you for comparing killing an unborn baby to stealing.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 6:37 PM


On the other hand, Sarah won a prestigious award, her lie about death panels won the "Lie of the Year" award from Politifact. She followed the announcement by repeating the lie. Who says she is a loser and a quitter? LOL

Posted by: Bystander at December 23, 2009 6:44 PM


Wow. Fleeting Thought Police.

Bystander,
It is a good thing then that I am not a Palin worshiper. LOL

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 7:21 PM


Scott, you're a fraud and a Pharisee.

Posted by: Bethany at December 23, 2009 7:56 PM


Oh puleassssssssssssssse Connie. You really haven't got a clue.

I know Sarah Palin and her pastor and she's got more pro-life blood in her than all uf us combined.

Please don't be dumbed down and learn when to hold your tongue. Just becasue a very small line in her book doesn't match what you think she should have said is not reason for such an awful comment.

Remember we are to be as gentle as doves and wise as serpents. Is there any way you could possibly learn to read between the ines before you diss and eat one of our own?

Posted by: Phil Schembri is Hisman at December 23, 2009 7:56 PM


Gee, Carla, you wear a shirt with her image to her book signing, and have her sign the shirt, but you are not a Sarah Palin worshipper? Coulda fooled me.

What do you make of her story about the "wild ride" where she went into labor with a premature DS child in TX, did not seek any medical help at a world class neonatal ICU 5 minutes away, and spent 10 hours flying back to AK, bypassing NICU units in Seattle and Anchorage to give birth at a facility in a small town not equipped to handle high risk deliveries? Do you consider that pro-life? If the story were true,(which I don't believe) it could only be described as reckless endangerment of the baby, at best. Her only excuse is she didn't want him born in TX!

Do you buy the story? Doesn't it make her judgment seem suspect to you? Give it a shot.

Posted by: Bystander at December 23, 2009 8:37 PM


Hisman, I don't think that Scott or Connie (and those like them) are one of our own. I think they are fakes. After years of hearing their "arguments", I'm beginning to think they are pro-abortionists whose ploy is to attempt to destroy the pro-life movement from within by pretending to be "purists". Or it's possible they're really so self righteous that they believe what they say, but I don't know.

I think that is why they seem to focus almost soley on pro-lifers to attack instead of actually focusing on the enemy or doing anything to actually try to stop abortion. In fact they have done many things to try to thwart pro-life efforts.

I haven't seen any indication that they truly care about the unborn- only that they hate pro-lifers who won't accept everything they say.

Posted by: Bethany at December 23, 2009 8:42 PM



Gee, Carla, you wear a shirt with her image to her book signing, and have her sign the shirt, but you are not a Sarah Palin worshipper? Coulda fooled me.

My husband is wearing a Jimi Hendrix shirt right now. I guess he must worship Jimi Hendrix.

Oh and I have a Snoopy shirt- wonder if that means I am following the religious cult of Snoopy?

Posted by: Bethany at December 23, 2009 8:44 PM


Palin is not above being tempted.

And neither are you, Scott.

Posted by: carder at December 23, 2009 8:44 PM


And yet, Bethany, you have not answered this question that I asked earlier: "Bethany, what facts has ARTL misrepresented about Sarah Palin?"

Until you answer that question, I care not what you say to me because you have zero credibility. You're simply a Sarah Palin cheerleader with no rhyme nor reason as to why.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 8:51 PM


Carder, a strong pro-lifer could be tempted by other things, but they could never be tempted to kill their unborn child. Carder, could you be tempted to kill your unborn child?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 8:57 PM


Scott, you already misrepresented her today once in this conversation. That was easily shown.

Posted by: Bethany at December 23, 2009 8:57 PM


This lurker finds it very surprising that some thoughtful people can have such a difficulty in determining the difference between a temptation and a sin.

Even Jesus was tempted in the desert, and here, some expect Sarah Palin to be more perfect than Jesus.

Posted by: KathyM at December 23, 2009 9:06 PM


Bethany, which part of "zero credibility" don't you understand? ARTL has leveled some heavy duty criticisms at Sarah Palin and you haven't refuted one of them. You may has well get a Palin t-shirt and a couple of pom-poms and dance around cheering for your abortion-regulating heroine.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:07 PM


KathyM, Satan tempted Jesus. Jesus didn't think for a second of doing anything Satan tempted Him with. You really should study your Bible more.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:09 PM


By the way, KathyM, could you be tempted to kill your unborn child?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:11 PM


Suffice it to say, Scott, that I can swell up with pride and pompously announce that I would NEVER be tempted.

I think it was Peter who promised Jesus he would NEVER betray Him.

It took a rooster to set him straight.

Posted by: carder at December 23, 2009 9:13 PM


Carder, you could actually be tempted to kill your unborn child or are you being coy in a pathetic display of loyalty to the abortion-regulator, Sarah Palin?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:20 PM


Bethany, apparently you need assistance so I'm here to help. I'm going to post an ARTL fact about Sarah Palin so you can give it your best shot at showing it's a misrepresentation:

Here goes:

- appointed in 2009 a Planned Parenthood board member to the Alaska Supreme Court

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:26 PM


Could someone define pro-life for me? If pro-life means you considered killing your son before AND after you found he had down syndrome, you think the morning after abortion pill should be legal and you appoint Planned Parenthood board members to the Supreme Court, then I guess I'm not pro-life. Oskar Schindler was never tempted to kill a Jew, Harriet Tubman was never tempted to kill a slave, and Jill Stanek was never tempted to kill a baby in her hospital. Enough said.

Bethany, put your money where your mouth is. ARTL offers a $100 reward for any error pointed out to them on their Palin profile. I'll double that if you can find one and point it out here on this thread. It's wrong for you to spread lies about an organization without evidence.

ProlifeProfiles.com/Palin

Posted by: Connie at December 23, 2009 9:33 PM


I was prolife 4 years ago. Found out I was pregnant and would have a baby at 40 years old. In total debt and a very tough spot in my marriage. I had a fleeting thought too. BUT remembered that I had already had an abortion that I regretted and KNEW I would never go there again.
What Sarah wrote totally resonated with me.

What's your point, Scott?

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 9:35 PM


Carla wrote: "It was a passing thought. She was the only who knew about the pregnancy. She could have had it "taken care of" and no one would have known. I don't condemn her for that thought any more than I would condemn a woman who changed her mind while walking into an abortion clinic.
She chose LIFE!"

Carla, don't you see? Read your last three words and especially the second one. A "choice" wouldn't even exist for a strong pro-lifer. Saying, "She chose LIFE!" is a pro-choice statement!

Carla, could you ever even think about killing your unborn child? Would you ever think of your own child as being a "choice?"

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:36 PM


Marauder said, "Connie: What I got out of "good people can disagree on abortion" was that sometimes people can be truly trying to do what they think the right this is, but they get it wrong."

Like Hitler right? Any Holocaust research will tell you that Hitler thought he was doing good. Your point is irrelevant. Would Sarah Palin ever say good people can disagree on slavery or killing Jews? Never! Then why can good people disagree on killing little babies?

Posted by: Connie at December 23, 2009 9:40 PM


Carla, I made my point at 9:36 while you were writing your post at 8:35.

My point is, it's not only that Sarah Palin thought about aborting Trig, she goes on to say she understands how girls and women feel who want to abort their children. I find it interesting how people who say they are pro-life think differently of the unborn than they do the born.

You said you had a fleeting thought of having another abortion but neither you nor Sarah Palin would even give a fleeting thought to killing one of your born children. So you tell me, Carla, what's the difference?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:44 PM


The "Choose Life" meme, as I recall, is from the pro-life camp.

I have a confession to make, Sott. I would be tempted to kill my unborn child. We live on one income, we live beneath the poverty level, and I'm surrounded by a barrage of propaganda on how children are a burden, not a blessing.

Now, would I go through with it? No.

But, you see, I'm a lousy pro-lifer. I don't donate enough money to the cause. I'm not praying every waking hour in front of abortion facilities. I'm not adopting every kid on the planet. I suck.

So put me out of my misery, o righteous one, and deliver me up to my just punishment.

Pick my poison.

Posted by: carder at December 23, 2009 9:45 PM


See my post above yours Scott.


Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 9:46 PM


Carla, it wasn't just a passing thought. She first toyed with murdering Trig because he might hurt her political career. Then she toyed with murdering Trig once she found he had down syndrome. No pro-life leader would ever do this. Contemplating murdering your children disqualifies you from being a pro-life leader. Why is it that Oskar Schindler was never tempted with killing a Jew because it was legal and no one would have to know? Because he was a true leader.

The fact that Sarah Palin did not murder Trig is nothing to celebrate. It should be expected that parents don't murder they kids. If that is to be celebrated, then why is ARTL attacked here? They're much better than Palin. They didn't murder their kids, they would never appoint a Planned Parenthood board member to the Supreme Court, they're against killing babies with chemical weapons like the morning after pill and the their number one issue is abortion, not energy.

Posted by: Connie at December 23, 2009 9:48 PM


Phil Schembri is Hisman said, "Is there any way you could possibly learn to read between the ines before you diss and eat one of our own?"

I've read her book and I'm beginning to think that people here know very little about Sarah Palin. Click on my name and read Sarah Palin's profile and let me know what you think. There's no errors in the profile or people here would be cashing in. It's devastating if you're prolife.

Posted by: Connie at December 23, 2009 9:54 PM


Well, carder, if you would be tempted to kill your unborn child then you are no more pro-life than Sarah Palin is. You are both pro-choice. Congratulations.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 9:56 PM


Carder,
I must be pro-choice too. Scott says so.

Sigh.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 9:57 PM


Thank you Judge Evans.

What's my sentence?

Posted by: carder at December 23, 2009 9:59 PM


I don't say so, carla, you say so yourself.

carder, your sentence is a lifetime of ignorance unless you decide not to be confused by the facts some day. After your lifetime, it won't be Judge Evans you'll have to worry about.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 10:02 PM


Bethany said, "Hisman, I don't think that Scott or Connie (and those like them) are one of our own. I think they are fakes."

My number one issue is abortion.
Sarah Palin's number one issue is energy.

I'm against the morning after pill.
Sarah Palin is for it.

I'm against appointing Planned Parenthood Board Members to the Supreme Court.
Sarah Palin is for it.

I'm for Personhood.
Sarah Palin is against Personhood, statewide or federal.

I would never contemplate killing an innocent baby, born or unborn.
Sarah Plain did, twice.

If I'm not on your side, you've got serious problems.

Jill Stanek and her moderators, including you, are very hypocritical. George W. Bush would not support an all out abortion ban and campaigned against it, yet he's the hero and ARTL is really an undercover pro-choice group. Wow.

Posted by: Connie at December 23, 2009 10:04 PM


Part of the underbelly of human nature is the notion of "Kill or be killed." That's what abortion is- the key is to stand up in this notion that arises from desperation and do the right thing. I don't see how what Sarah Palin did is wrong then. The pro-life movement is about getting rid of the idea that it's "kill or be killed" and replacing it with equal rights.

Posted by: Vannah at December 23, 2009 10:05 PM


Well, your honor, be sure to give us the heads up when you run for POTUS.

Posted by: carder at December 23, 2009 10:14 PM


Hi, Carder.

I didn't know that about you. You're a very brave person and I think that, if you're a bad pro-lifer, I'll join you in the sinking boat of Not Good Enough.

Never donated money? Neither have I. I also have no interest in ever being a parent, have never gone out in front of a clinic, and count Darfur as my top issue. I actually stumbled across this website when doing research for an unrelated issue and I stick around because I think that people have a lot to say and need a way of saying it without guns and I've learned a lot about other lives. Not because I was protesting abortion.

So you're not alone.

Posted by: Vannah at December 23, 2009 10:15 PM


Why would I do that, carder? No one here would vote for me. Apparently I'm "too pro-life" for the Jill Stanek crowd.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 10:20 PM


To a strong pro-lifer, abortion would be unthinkable. The above statement shows it wasn't unthinkable to Sarah Palin. Only she knows if it was a 'split second' or not, but naturally she would say it was after the fact.
Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 6:27 PM

I haven't read all the comments on here but I think Sarah is simply being honest - abortion IS the great temptation for women today.
It doesn't mean she isn't prolife, it simply means she was tempted to do the wrong thing - to possibly consider killing her unborn baby.
She's a human being.
Are you a human being, Scott? Have you EVER been tempted in your life to do the wrong thing? EVER?

No one is perfect and Sarah was stating how she could see a woman in a difficult situation might consider, even for a moment, abortion. Some women have to work through these things, others do not.

Posted by: angel at December 23, 2009 10:20 PM


Beam yourself up Scottie!

I believe everbody is a little bit queer, but you and I...... and I am beginning to wonder about you.

My GOD man/woman!

Your becoming as leagalistic as any fundamentalist puritanical jihadist.

Word search 'fiery darts' and get back to us on just what that passage is talking about.

If not being able to shoot down every incoming 'thought' beore it reaches your consciousness is as bad as actually seriously considering and acting on the thought then how are we supposed to take every thought captive in Christ?

Your passion, though admirable, is overiding your reason and your spirit.

Tap the brakes, take deep breaths, take long leasurely walks and drink lots of water.

The kingdom of GOD is not shaken and the body of Christ is not beyond hope.

And just so you know, Sarah Palin would not be my first choice for President. She still needs some 'seasoning' which only time can bring.

B.O. is the best living example of what can go wrong when you elect someone who was not yet 'ready' for prime time.

B.O.'s liberalism and humanism aside, he is incompetent at best.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at December 23, 2009 10:21 PM


Angel, would you ever consider killing your unborn child?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 10:21 PM


Not every thought, kbhvac, but the thought of killing an unborn child. Please stop obfuscating. It's unbecoming of a good debate.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 10:24 PM


Heb 4:15-16

15 For we do not have a High Priest Who is unable to understand and sympathize and have a shared feeling with our weaknesses and infirmities and liability to the assaults of temptation, but One Who has been tempted in every respect as we are, yet without sinning.

16 Let us then fearlessly and confidently and boldly draw near to the throne of grace (the throne of God's unmerited favor to us sinners), that we may receive mercy [for our failures] and find grace to help in good time for every need [appropriate help and well-timed help, coming just when we need it]. AMP

So Scottie,

Has Jesus passed your 'purity' test?

Have "'YOU'" passed your 'purity' test?

How can anyone be seriously tempted, without considering the temptation? And if considering the temptation is the same as acting on the impulse, then Jesus was not without 'sin' according to your 'LAW'.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at December 23, 2009 10:28 PM


Scottie,

Heb 4:15-16

15 For we do not have a High Priest Who is unable to understand and sympathize and have a shared feeling with our weaknesses and infirmities and liability to the assaults of temptation,

but One Who has been tempted in every respect as we are, yet without sinning.

16 Let us then fearlessly and confidently and boldly draw near to the throne of grace (the throne of God's unmerited favor to us sinners), that we may receive mercy [for our failures] and find grace to help in good time for every need [appropriate help and well-timed help, coming just when we need it]. AMP

So Scottie,

Has Jesus passed your 'purity' test?

Have "'YOU'" passed your 'purity' test?

How can anyone be seriously tempted, without considering the temptation? And if considering the temptation is the same as acting on the impulse, then Jesus was not without 'sin' according to your 'LAW'.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at December 23, 2009 10:32 PM


I have donated money, Vannah, but not every last penny in my possession. I'm not prolife enough, you see.

And I am hypocritical, in more ways than one. My family reminds me of that regularly.

I'm guilty as charged. I simply pick myself up, dust off a little, and try to do better the next time.

As angel eloquently put it, I'm human. I'm bound to fail.

And so is Sarah Palin.

*cock crows three times*

Posted by: carder at December 23, 2009 10:38 PM


Carder,

We Baddies ought to talk more often. :)

Posted by: Vannah at December 23, 2009 10:40 PM


So, kbhvac, you're actually saying that Jesus thought, "Hmm.. well now, maybe I should take Satan up on that?" Not hardly. He heard Satan's offer and immediately came back with, "It is written..." Every time. You must know that having someone offer up a temptation and actually thinking about acting on the temptation can be two different things, right? A strong pro-lifer after unexpectedly hearing they are pregnant would instantly know they were going to have a baby 9 months later. They wouldn't say, "Hey, no one knows me here. I could get rid of this problem and no one would ever know."

If someone tempted you with a million dollars to kill your 5-yr-old child, would you consider it for even a millisecond? Of course not!

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 10:49 PM


angel said, "No one is perfect and Sarah..."

Sarah isn't perfect, as a matter of fact, she's not even close. ProlifeProfiles.com/Palin has a laundry list of devastating things about her and I could share many more from reading her book. No one is talking about perfection here. We're just looking for a Tier 1 pro-lifer, not a Tier 4 pro-lifer like Palin.

Everything starts with an education. We can't have the blind leading the blind. I'm sure most people here would be shocked to find out that RomneyCare is way worse when it comes to abortion than ObamaCare, but it's true.

Posted by: Connie at December 23, 2009 10:50 PM


Why would I do that, carder? No one here would vote for me. Apparently I'm "too pro-life" for the Jill Stanek crowd.

Nope. I am not convinced you're pro-life at all.
You're a fraud and a pharisee.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 10:57 PM


Ken 10:28, excellent!

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 10:59 PM


Bethany, you have as much evidence that I'm a fraud and a pharisee as you have evidence to refute ARTL's information on Sarah Palin. You are irrelevant and an embarrassment to Jill Stanek's blog.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 11:04 PM


So, kbhvac, you're actually saying that Jesus thought, "Hmm.. well now, maybe I should take Satan up on that?" Not hardly. He heard Satan's offer and immediately came back with, "It is written..." Every time. You must know that having someone offer up a temptation and actually thinking about acting on the temptation can be two different things, right?

I think Ken's well aware of the difference of being offered a temptation and being tempted. I think he's also well aware that the Bible clearly states that Jesus was TEMPTED.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 11:06 PM


Dude, you don't even like this blog. You come here to be prolifer than thou.

What is this embarassment of which you speak?

Posted by: carder at December 23, 2009 11:06 PM


Scott,

If I might say what I think that the others are arguing:

It's not a matter of, "Get a million dollars for killing a kid." Abortion is not a fun thing. Abortion is a symptom, much like armed robbery, street violence, or vadalism. But abortion is particularly heinous because it involves children and it's horrifically violent. No one is saying that it's simple a la "Give ya a million bucks, lady..."

Think of it in this senario:

If you are on a sinking boat with another person and you get off of the boat and can swim to safety, but in order to do so you will have to leave your companion behind (he's tangled in something, let's say) to drown, would you keep swimming because the instinct to survive is powerful, or would you fight that initial thought, turn around, and free your friend? In a heartbeat, your initial thought is, "Stay alive." After that, you are left with either the ability to swim back and free your friend, thus endangering your own life (in the case of most abortions, it's not your physical body) or move on.

Sarah Palin, in this instance, chose to swim back. But it's human to be torn when faced with difficult circumstances.

Jesus was tempted differently- the temptations of Jesus are, I think, to signify the more common temptations that everyone faces (not everyone will face the type of temptation, the "Save Yourself" type of temptation), and, frankly, if Jesus defied the temptations without a flicker of an eyelash, that would be why Jesus is Jesus.

Posted by: Vannah at December 23, 2009 11:09 PM


Sorry, that should be *vandalism.* Watching movies right now. Mystery Science Theater 3000.

*Alright...*

:)

Posted by: Vannah at December 23, 2009 11:11 PM


carder, your sentence is a lifetime of ignorance unless you decide not to be confused by the facts some day.

Do you think that temptation is a matter of ignorance? It seems to me that temptation is a matter of emotion, whereas ignorance is related to knowledge/reason. Ignorance does not cause temptation; ignorance merely leaves you with only your emotions to guide you once you're tempted.

Someone who has a fleeting thought of doing the wrong, "easy" thing, but who uses their rational intellect to overcome those initial emotions, is not an ignorant person.

Posted by: Alexandra at December 23, 2009 11:11 PM


Scott, I have no desire to debate you about Sarah Palin. You're a pharisee like I said. It's pointless to try to debate a pharisee. Your questions are not sincere. They are intended to entrap, just as it was when the Pharisees tried to entrap people with insincere questions. Oh by the way, they always had their "facts straight", but did they manipulate those facts to try to make Jesus look bad? Yep. (Jesus is a friend to sinners and winebibbers! Gasp!)

If I had any feeling whatsoever that you were sincere, I'd go for it, but seeing as i've read through Bob Enyart's book and watched his seminars on DVD, and think I correctly understand your whole mindset by now, I know it is pointless. You know everything, and you're better than everyone else. Just ask you.


Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 11:12 PM


Hi, Alexandra. How are you? :)

Posted by: Vannah at December 23, 2009 11:13 PM


Yes, bethany, Jesus was tempted, but He didn't consider for even a millisecond turning the stones to bread, throwing Himself down from the pinnacle of the temple, or falling down and worshipping Satan.

The difference is, Sarah Palin was tempted with abortion and she, as a professed pro-lifer, actually contemplated killing her unborn child. How pro-life is that?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 11:15 PM


How do you know the inner workings of Jesus mind when he was being tempted, Scott? Enlighten me.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 11:17 PM


Carla, you look pretty happy in those pics :) Nice job on camera. Looks like your Christmas present came early this year.

Merry Christmas, everyone.

Posted by: Fed Up at December 23, 2009 11:29 PM


Yawn. All anyone has to do to see what I'm talking about is to go to the Prolifeprofiles website Connie linked to and they can easily see for themselves. I don't need to convince you, scott. I'm not interested in whether I have credibility with YOU.

Good night everyone...I'm off to bed!

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 23, 2009 11:34 PM


Bethany, it would be impossible for me to enlighten you.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 11:34 PM


Vannah wrote: "Scott,

If I might say what I think that the others are arguing:

It's not a matter of, "Get a million dollars for killing a kid." Abortion is not a fun thing. Abortion is a symptom, much like armed robbery, street violence, or vadalism. But abortion is particularly heinous because it involves children and it's horrifically violent. No one is saying that it's simple a la "Give ya a million bucks, lady..."

Vannah, please try to keep up. That scenario wasn't about abortion, per se. It was about being tempted and considering whether to follow through with the temptation or not.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 11:42 PM


Alexandra wrote: "Do you think that temptation is a matter of ignorance?"

No, and that's not what I was referring to. The ignorance I was referring to was carder's willful ignorance of the facts concerning Sarah Palin presented by ARTL.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 11:47 PM


Carder wrote: "Dude, you don't even like this blog. You come here to be prolifer than thou.

What is this embarassment of which you speak?"

The embarrassment of Bethany presenting assertions about ARTL's facts about Sarah Palin and Bethany's inability and unwillingness to back up her assertions.

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 23, 2009 11:51 PM


Scott, contemplating on whether or not to follow through with temptation and actually following through with it are two different things. Contemplation is a part of temptation- they frequently go together. No human is able to separate the two at every single temptation that he or she comes to. If you, in every aspect of life, walk across potential wrongdoing and walk away without a second thought then you're certainly better than the rest of us, but everyone else contemplates and does his or her best to turn back (well, most people).

Posted by: Vannah at December 24, 2009 12:22 AM


Vannah, I never argued no human is able to separate the two at every single temptation that he or she comes to. If I have, please point it out. My temptation argument is SPECIFICALLY concerning killing one's unborn child.

A true, strong pro-life person would never consider killing their unborn child... not for a millisecond. Do you agree or disagree with that statement, Vannah?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 24, 2009 12:29 AM


Connie, a tricky Pharisee is the only kind to be, no? ;)

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 24, 2009 1:02 AM


FYI Scott,
God is both pro-life and pro-choice. Did you know that?

Posted by: truthseeker at December 24, 2009 4:14 AM


I'm good, Vannah! Buzzing around preparing my last little random acts of holiday kindness before I take a train home. How are you?

Posted by: Alexandra at December 24, 2009 7:04 AM


Merry Christmas Vannah and Alexandra!!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 24, 2009 7:17 AM


Merry Christmas everyone!

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 24, 2009 7:33 AM


"Father, if Thou art willing, remove this cup from Me, yet not My will, but Thine be done!" (Luke 22:42, NASB)

"...One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." (Hebrews 4:15, NASB)

Would some of His more than a "split second" temptations pass the muster of some of these commentators?

Posted by: Carl at December 24, 2009 8:40 AM


Merry Christmas!

Posted by: Janet at December 24, 2009 9:52 AM


Did Carla love Sarah Palin enough to ask her, as a loving neighbor, to stop promoting homosexuality and advocating that we keep abortion legal?

Posted by: Jamie Schofield at December 24, 2009 10:28 AM


Alexandra,

I have to wrap my sister's gift, but I'm having a hard time figuring out what to say to make it more special.

So are you spending Christmas in New York? Exciting! :)

Carla and Bethany,

Merry Christmas to you, too! :)

Posted by: Vannah at December 24, 2009 11:16 AM


Scott,

I couldn't say that I agree with that statement because even good people contemplate unspeakable things, particularly when under extraordinary pressure. The only thing that truly separates a good person in that sense from a bad person is that good people know when to say that they were wrong and when to confess that they learned a new truth from it all.

If people try to fight the good fight and stumble themselves, contemplating not getting up for only a moment, then push themselves to be stronger, I can't see how anyone could possibly condemn them.

Posted by: Vannah at December 24, 2009 11:24 AM


Scott,

How about just dropping the assertion that considering killing your own child is the equivalent of killing your own child in regards to Sarah Palin and just stick with the nomination of a former PP board member to the Alaska Supreme Court.

Assuming that charge is true, then it was a willfull considered action that demands a satisfactory explanation to any thinking pro-life person who is considering furhtering Sarah Palin's political ambitions.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at December 24, 2009 11:35 AM


Merry Christmas, Jamie!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 24, 2009 12:31 PM


Well, Sarah does have that ability to bring people together. LOL Nothing like the far right extremists at each other's throats, over whether Sarah is extreme enough to suit them.

I would say that Sarah making rape victims pay for their own rape kits to help catch the rapist, and forcing rape victims at gunpoint to have the rapist's child should be extreme enough for you.

And I am glad to hear that "Scott", presumably a male, would never consider having an abortion. That is good because it could hurt a lot. LOL

Posted by: Bystander at December 24, 2009 1:44 PM


Bystander? Number one, your talking points are all debunked, and number two, it's Christmas Eve. I don't know if you have any religious beliefs, but whether you do or not, why are you wasting time insulting people while most people are working on dinner, or wrapping presents, or spending time with family and friends, or at least looking at websites they genuinely enjoy? Go have fun somewhere. I am - I just stuck my head in here for a second to see what was happening. If you don't have any Christian beliefs and this is just another day for you, go watch a movie or call a friend or go outside. If you're at work, go hang out on a website that's fun for you. I mean it. The fact that you're here on Christmas Eve just makes me feel sort of sad for you, and I don't mean to be condescending. It makes me genuinely sad that this is what you're doing on Christmas Eve.

Everyone else, be nice to each other.

Posted by: Marauder at December 24, 2009 2:01 PM


Well Marauder, I appreciate your concern and don't be "sad" for me. Making fun of Sarah Palin has become a Christmas tradition for my family and friends. Like the Jelly of the Month Club, Sarah is the gift that keeps on giving.

Posted by: Bystander at December 24, 2009 3:16 PM


Ken, hope you are having a great Christmas eve! :)

I'm just going to quickly copy and paste the links I gave in response to Polly, who had posted about the same argument about Sarah Palin nominating the Planned Parenthood board member a couple of weeks ago...These had helped me understand her decision better.

Polly,

http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/03/governor-palin-fills-supreme-court.html

http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/03/governor-palins-judicial-appointments.html

And Sarah's facebook page explaining the decision:

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=55469398434

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 24, 2009 4:42 PM


Sarah Palin's a Christian, right? Then, why's she tweeting about celebrating the pagan holiday of the Winter Solstice? "AKs Winter Solstice=today begins season of lighter/brightr days."

Posted by: Amazed at December 24, 2009 6:47 PM


Amazed, do you have a link? What were her exact words? That was a bit vague, and a fairly serious accusation.

Posted by: Jamie Schofield at December 24, 2009 6:48 PM


Jamie, it was a tweet that she put out yesterday.

Posted by: Amazed at December 24, 2009 7:04 PM


Amazed, again, do you have a link. or the exact text of it?

Posted by: Jamie Schofield at December 24, 2009 7:20 PM


Ummmm, the quotes indicate that that was the exact text. The entire tweet was: "AKs Winter Solstice=today begins season of lighter/brightr days.May it b in Washngton,too=more light so r govt's actions can lift up America"

Posted by: Amazed at December 24, 2009 7:37 PM


Thanks, Carla and Bethany! Merry Christmas to you guys, too. :) And happy holidays to everyone here.

Vannah, I was in NYC until about 3:30 today - took a quick train out to my parents' house in a small town just outside Manhattan. Christmas in the city is REALLY fun, but a lot of that is the lead-up to it - the store windows, the cider vendors, the way that your commute suddenly becomes a hike through snowdrifts, etc. The tourists, even, as long as I'm not in a rush to get anywhere. There is really nothing like the holiday season in NYC, IMO. But for the actual day, we usually just lounge around inside, and sometimes see a movie in the afternoon (my dad often has to work in the afternoon, and I sometimes do as well - but not this year), so I don't really care where we do that. ;)

My younger sister only just left Boston at 8:00pm, so she probably won't even get here until it's already technically Christmas! I think she did it on purpose to get out of decorating the tree.

Aside from her, we're all just chilling here listening to a David Sedaris audiobook together, doing little mindless tasks. I'm clicking around online, Mom is dozing, older sister is stretching (she's a dancer), Dad is doing some paperwork. It's a good night. :)

Posted by: Alexandra at December 24, 2009 7:40 PM


By the way, Carla, you said, "I guess she is not supposed to do that. I submit that she can pretty much do whatever she wants. Her book. Her gig. Her people."

Let me explain just a bit. Actually, it's not her time or her option to do anything. Her publisher has paid (and will continue to pay) her millions to help write this book and then to go on this tour.

The publishers also pay for the rental of the building and the police to provide security. So, just like any employer, they establish the guidelines as to how she can spend that time.

From what I've read, it seems that they usually set out the rules that she can sign just two books per person, no personalization (she's only allowed the length of time it takes to sign her signature, not to say who it's to). And, they usually say that she can't sign other items (because, of course, they want people to buy the book, not just bring in other stuff for her to sign -- besides that, it takes longer to sign something lumpy than it does the title page of a book).

Posted by: Amazed at December 24, 2009 7:47 PM


By the way Amazed, I have a book and tshirt signed by Sarah Palin!!! The words I wrote are from my blog Fourby40. My blog. My words. My gig.

Merry Christmas!!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 24, 2009 8:53 PM


Merry Christmas, Carla!

Posted by: Amazed at December 24, 2009 9:21 PM


That's so cool, Alexandra. :)

Jealousy! :O

Our own Christmas is off to a good start here in Tamalewood. We went to visit my aunt and uncle and their daughter (who is now nineteen months old). We opened a few of the gifts- I got a new bag, my sister got a (desperately needed) coat, my little cousin got just about everything under the sun (Penguin Bowling, Green Eggs and Ham, A Judge Grows in the Bronx, a Teddy, gloves and a hat...). We cook enchiladas (vegetarian!) and posole, discuss episodes of Mystery Science Theater 3000, and try like mad avoid the meltdowns that come with getting family together. ^.^

Do you watch Mystery Science Theater 3000? I've become hopelessly addicted to it. :)

Anyways, I hope that you have a wonderful Christmas and New Year. :)

Posted by: Vannah at December 24, 2009 11:46 PM


What a great Christmas present! My post to bethany gets deleted and I'm compelled to look up fraud and Pharisee in the pro-life dictionary and what do you know, multiple definitions;

bethany, Stanek, National RTL, Focus on the Family, Jay Sekulow, George W Bush, John McCain, U.S. Supreme Court...

Good luck with your love affair with politicians and the fund raising pro-life industry. Child killing continues and you all just keep talking about how smart you all are.

Posted by: theonlything2fear at December 25, 2009 1:07 AM


Child killing continues and you all just keep talking about how smart you all are.

I thought that is what you came here for- to talk about how smart you are.

Good luck attacking other pro-lifers instead of focusing on the actual enemy, when the child killing continues.

Merry Christmas!

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 25, 2009 7:45 AM



The way you fight for the pro-life cause is to put Sarah Palin in the White House for eight years so that she can appoint judges including those that are on the Supreme Court who are interpretationists of the Constitution and NOT activists.

Then, Roe vs. Wade gets challenged and gets reversed, thereby throwing the issue to the states short of any Legislative action or a Constitutional Convention to determine when an American's right to life begins.

By overturning Roe vs. Wade, you immediately give power to the states to determine how to regulate or end abortion.

Then the next step in the fight for life will be fought within the individual states.

People must also be convinced of what abortion actually is via education and ultrasounds, etc. Most women will not get an abortion once they realize clearly that it is murder.

Also, Sarah Palin never said she thought about abortion. She said she thought about how a woman or girl felt about thinking about having an abortion. She was NEVER going to have an abortion, but that she understood the pressure.

Posted by: Sapwolf at December 25, 2009 10:58 PM


Vannah, I LOVE MST3K!!! Joel did it best though. I miss him. :(

aaaaand:

""Hmm.. well now, maybe I should take Satan up on that?" Not hardly. He heard Satan's offer and immediately came back with, "It is written..."

Yeah...because you were totally there, right? And there's no way there could've been an actual pause there, because back then they had grammatical devices like ellipses and stuff. Certainly.

Posted by: xalisae at December 26, 2009 1:36 AM


Also, for Christmas I want Bystander and Scott to hash it out in an arena, gladiator-style. 2 Birds + 1 Stone = WIN.

Posted by: xalisae at December 26, 2009 1:39 AM


All of you people are absolutely and utterly ignorant about what matters in this country. Abortion is an issue that does not have a perceptible effect in the scope of the majority's lives; there is no reason that it should be debated as frequently as it is. Why not stop wasting your time on abortion, an issue that will not be changed without a federal court decision, and fight about something that actually matters, like healthcare or the economy? And I know that all of you will rail at me about "HOW COULD KILLING BABIES NOT MATTER???" News flash: if it can't even breathe on its own, it's not a baby. Try to get that fact through your heads (even though I know it's futile).

Posted by: Austin at December 26, 2009 9:36 AM


Austin- your brilliant logic has stunned and silenced us all. LOL


Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 26, 2009 9:38 AM


Also, I find it amusing that you attempted to start a debate about abortion to try to convince us to stop debating about abortion.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 26, 2009 9:41 AM


Xalisae,

I know. Joel was so cool. I like Mike, too. I thought that he was very playful. Joel was more like a breath of deadpan air in a very campy show. I love Joel's episodes. :)

Do you celebrate Christmas, X?

Posted by: Vannah at December 26, 2009 12:43 PM


"News flash: if it can't even breathe on its own, it's not a baby. Try to get that fact through your heads (even though I know it's futile)." -Austin 9:36

Tell me, Austin, if you lost the function of your lungs, even temporarily, would you cease to be a person? If a baby is born with the umbilical wrapped around his/her neck, cutting off breath, should the doctor be required to unwrap it? If an individual requires respiratory assistance, does that person lose some of their humanity? Or their personhood? If your mother were to go on a respirator, should she also have her voting rights restricted?

Breath is only argued as a condition for personhood in regards to the unborn. Get another definition because independent breath is illogical and, quite frankly, unintelligent.

Posted by: MaryRose at December 26, 2009 5:45 PM


Our family celebrates by gathering together after giving gifts to the youngest among us, feasting, and just having a good 'ol time for about a week or so while my brother is out visiting from the marine base in CA. Nothing super religious, but I did read the Hanukkah story to my daughter, my youngest sister told her the story of Jesus' birth, and my husband told her the history of the tradition of Santa Claus.

Posted by: xalisae at December 26, 2009 10:56 PM


Austin,

Sorry buddy, but you don't get to show up here and hold yourself out as the Mount Olympus of both moral norms and biological realities. I'm a biologist, so perhaps you can direct me to the source of your wisdom and erudition in these matters.

Here's a newsflash for you:

If it's breathing, it's a live baby.

If it isn't breathing, it's a dead baby.

Breath does not characterize the ontological reality or identity of the being in question, only its status: Living or Dead.

As for you admonition for us to focus on something that actually matters, like healthcare, here's another news flash Austin:

Those 'safe and legal' abortions are a major part of the healthcare industry. They kill over three thousand humans per day, inflict long term sequelae on the mothers such as inability to conceive or carry in the future, emotional/relational trauma, increased risk of breast cancer, etc.

Before popping off like an ignoramus, get familiar with the ENTIRE body of medical and scientific literature, not just what suits you.

That's your assignment.

Class dismissed.

Posted by: Gerard Nadal at December 27, 2009 12:52 AM


I just need to mention that the president does not "appoint" people to the Supreme Court. After the president nominates them, they must be confirmed by a majority vote in the Senate. So, getting new judges in will take a lot more effort -- you will need to get pro-life people in the Senate as well as in the president's office.

Besides that, the Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life. Only one right now is truly "old" (John Paul Stevens is 89). Four are in their seventies, but the judges tend to stay on the bench for a very long time. So, that's not necessarily an age where they will be sure to retire in the next 8-10 years (if Palin were to be elected in 2010 and served two terms, then she'd be out of office nine years from now).

Posted by: Amazed at December 27, 2009 6:28 AM


For all you 'fleeting moment' advocates out there, if someone said they would give you a million dollars if you would allow them to kill your 5-yr-old daughter, would you consider it for even a fleeting moment?

Posted by: Scott Evans at December 27, 2009 9:39 AM


She never said that she actually "considered" aborting him. She said that it was a fleeting thought, like an epiphany, finally understanding the pressure that might cause another girl to desire to abort.

She was able to learn to understand the thought process that might deceive a woman into doing such a thing. It's called empathy. Putting yourself in the place of another. She never said SHE was ever considering aborting, but that she finally was able to understand how another woman would get to that point.

By the way, page 178 clearly contradicts the accusation that Sarah "seriously considered" aborting trig after she found out he had Down's Syndrome. Here's what her words actually say:

"I read that almost 90 percent of Down syndrome babies are aborted---so wasn't that a message that this is not only a less-than-ideal circumstance but that it is virtually impossible to deal with? Now, just a couple of hours into this new world, I could not get my arms or heart around it. That fleeting thought descended on me again, not a consideration so much as a sudden understanding of why people would grasp at a quick "solution", a way to make the "problem" just go away. But again, I had to hold onto that seed of faith". (emphasis mine)

Having the ability to learn to empathize with people who do things you oppose is NOT the same as "seriously considering" killing your child.

If you do not have an understanding of why someone does something, it makes it much more difficult to help others in the same situation to do the right thing.

She was showing that she understands why women have this temptation- but still holds to the fact that a child should never, ever be aborted for any reason. I think that the empathetic approach is MUCH MORE likely to save unborn lives than the holier than thou and unfeeling approach of some.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 27, 2009 12:22 PM


Scott, do you think that in God's eyes, stealing is less of a sin than murder?

Do you think that if you do not murder, but if you steal, you could go to Heaven, on your own?

Is being prideful a lesser crime than murder in God's eyes?

Is lying a lesser crime than murder in God's eyes?

Have you ever, even for a fleeting moment, considered stealing anything, for any reason?

Have you ever, even for a fleeting moment, considered lying, for any reason?

Have you ever, even for a fleeting moment, looked down on someone because they weren't as good as you perceive yourself to be?

If you have done any of these things, you are no better than the person who considers murdering someone, who lusts after another person besides their spoouse, who considers raping, who considers aborting their baby, etc.

You are no better. Your sins are no less filthy in God's eyes, Scott.

Scott, tell me...are you the person who says, "I have done all of these things, God. Look at me, how much I have done for you in my life, I'm much better than so and so over there." when you pray....

Or are you so and so, who prays, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner."?

I'd prefer to be the latter.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 27, 2009 12:32 PM


Interesting comments. Especially the one about the Supreme court appointment of a Planned Parenthood advocate. Interesting in that someone doesn't want to present all of the information because it wouldn't be convenient. There were three appointees presented to the governor by a skewed congress. She had to pick who she considered the lesser of evils. How often have we also had to be presented with the same decision at the voters boothe? Some of you should try running for something so that you too could be presented for such scrutiny. Such whining does not suit serious conversation, nor does it promote anyone from wanting to engage you.

Posted by: Alan of Alaska at December 27, 2009 9:05 PM


Scott, You are a man and you have no clue. Give it a rest. This is a discussion between the women of this country. Sarah Palin will lead.

Posted by: Clueless at December 27, 2009 9:48 PM


I see from the comments here that it has been firmly established by some that Sarah Palin is not Jesus, Lord and Savior of the world. All I can say is - (I never thought she was) & thank God for His mercy and grace He has shown us with His unmerited favor. Just like Sarah, I too have been tempted to sin, not only that - I have actually committed sins. God came and died on a cross to redeem despicable sinners like Sarah Palin and myself - and He calls us His children. It is true, no one will be answering to Scott Evans - we will answer to God - thank the Lord for the free forgiveness offered in Jesus Christ through his holy wounds and His blood shed on the cross. Otherwise, we would all be condemned. Is Sarah Palin perfect - that's been established as no. Is anyone perfect? No, we all fall short of God's standards - thank the Lord for the cross of Christ - for without Christ crucified for the forgiveness of sins, we would all be doomed.

This judgment of Sarah Palin by some here for her fleeting thought/temptation (I have read the book too) is ridiculous. If anything, after reading Going Rogue, I became convinced that Sarah Palin truly is pro-life, and not just posing as some politicians do.

I too think it highly possible that some posting here (with the initials Scott Evans and Connie) are frauds with the opposite agenda than the one they seemingly support.

Lord, have mercy on us sinners.

Posted by: SarahsNotJesus at December 27, 2009 10:19 PM


Sarah Palin didn’t need to tell us of her imperfections, which could (obviously) be used against her. Her openness is evidence of several things: Honesty, humility, and that she chooses life. She’s not perfect, but she does not kill babies; she is not the enemy.

Posted by: Bill589 at December 27, 2009 10:31 PM


I'm not concerned in the least about the way she worded her comment. People approach her all the time and she doesn't have any idea who they are, what they are, what they believe, or what their agenda may really be. To "go to the mat" in that situation, on such a controversial subject, would be ridiculous. What I "know is this: make her President and there's no doubt she would nominate judges who would reverse Roe; give her a congress that will pass pro-life legislation and send it to her desk and there's no doubt she would sign it. That's as simple as it is. Sit back and whine about her not saying what "you" want to hear regarding life or other issues, and you'll just guarantee nothing ever changes.

Posted by: Ldub at December 27, 2009 10:46 PM


Bethany, all sin is hurtful to God, but not all sins are equal.

"He who delivers me unto you has the greater sin."-John 19:11

Not all sins are crimes. Being prideful doesn't merit the death penalty. Murder does.

Posted by: MBallentine at December 27, 2009 11:17 PM


STOP being a one issue voter. Get a freakin grip.
Energy is at the top of the list so DRILL BABY DRILL. And Foreign affairs are at the top and Sarah will be great at both which are her main issues. She's pro life I'm pro life and no one can force morality on a free people even if not to commit murder. Capice? We could start with outlawing late term abortion except in extenuating circumstances. But PLEASE people stop being a one issue voter. That's a sure way to lose to another term of obama's cesspool. Get a grip.

Posted by: Silly you at December 28, 2009 2:23 AM


50% of weekly Catholic goers voted for the politician whose position against sanctity of life is more extreme than NARAL yet some are pissing over one woman's momentary thought.


I used to blindly support abortion without conscience then partial birth abortion awoke my conscience however I will not crucify any woman for just having the thought.

Honestly, I am more disgusted by the Catholic Church voting for abortion while preaching how it protects the sanctity of life..

Further, why won't Pope Benedict ex-communication Nancy Pelosi or the Kennedy family?

FOr so long as the devout Catholics Pelosi and Kennedys continue to empower abortion then I cannot help but to look upon the Catholic Church as a fraudulent religion along the lines of Scientology.

Posted by: syn at December 28, 2009 7:18 AM


Bethany, all sin is hurtful to God, but not all sins are equal."He who delivers me unto you has the greater sin."-John 19:11
Not all sins are crimes. Being prideful doesn't merit the death penalty. Murder does.

Sarah Palin has never murdered anyone.

The abominations in the Bible:

A proud look is #1.
A lying tongue is #2
Then #3 is hands that are quick to shed innocent blood.

Why do you think that pride and lying are listed right there with shedding innocent blood?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 28, 2009 7:56 AM


Not all sins are crimes. Being prideful doesn't merit the death penalty. Murder does.

Oh yeah, and last time I checked, fleeting thoughts don't merit the death penalty either.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 28, 2009 7:58 AM


By the way, Mballentine, just for clarificiation, I never was talking about our laws.

I was talking about the way God perceives our sin- ANY sin. Totally different topic.

In other words, are we any less lost if we are perfect in every way all of our lives, yet we tell one lie?

No, any sin is enough to separate us from God. And we have all sinned. THAT is what I am talking about.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 28, 2009 8:02 AM


Mballentine, just one more thought since you brought up the law. In the Old Testament law, people were given the death penalty for stealing, for adultery, kidnapping, even lying...etc. Not just murder. Sometimes God showed mercy on different individuals who committed these crimes, but these were the laws for a reason. What do you think that reason might be?

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 28, 2009 8:39 AM


Bethany, sorry to respond so late. Son had a water pipe break. God did have mercy on David for His murder. God is God He has the authority to do that. But He does not give that authority to earthly governments. That's a short answer. Hope that helps.

Sarah Palin told Katie Couric that states should have the right to decide the abortion issue. Do you think states should have the right to violate God's command, "Do not murder"?

Posted by: MBallentine at December 28, 2009 3:49 PM


But that wasn't really my point, Mballentine.

I was saying that it used to be (in old testament times) that stealing, lying, and various other non - murder crimes were punished with a death sentence as well. In other words, those sins (in the contexts they were described in the Bible) were just as horrific and evil in God's eyes as murder.

The reason for this point to respond to Scott's reply to Alexandra's Dec 23 post at 6:23, where he had said, "Shame on you for comparing stealing to murder".... he had totally missed her point, but I thought I'd go ahead and debate what he said anyway.

Sorry your son's water pipes broke- that is always a mess and so aggravating to fix. We had the same problem a few weeks ago when the pipes froze.

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 28, 2009 8:11 PM


Murder, adultery, Giving false testimony (in murder cases that involve perjury) were capitol crimes which I believe should be applicable today. It's a tough issue to debate in this kind of forum.)

But nonetheless, I would really like you to google Sarah Palin/Joe Biden/Katie Couric. You have a good heart. I'd like your take on Sarah's position on abortion being left up to individual states. I can't imagine her saying that about slavery.

Godly people need to raise each other up to His standard. It seems we lower that standard for certain politicians, certainfriends, or certain family members. (I'm certainly guilty of that. And, I'm thankful, when someone, rightly rebukes me.)

I think we are, in many instances, failing in our obligation to 'love our neighbor'. The kindest thing we could tell Sarah is this: States don't have the right to abort innocent babies.

Your thoughts? (PS- worst of the water problems are over-thanks)

Posted by: MBallentine at December 28, 2009 10:41 PM


To Alan of Alaska who stated..."Interesting in that someone doesn't want to present all of the information because it wouldn't be convenient."

WWJD?

Whether it was 2,3, or 10 candidates given up by a so called "skewed congress", when none of the candidates is qualified you leave the seat empty. You don't pick the lesser of the evils and claim you "had no choice". Real leaders don't act and talk this way. The tail wagging the Palin.

WWJD? Hint, the answer is in that old book collecting dust on your shelf while you read worthless books by politicians...

Posted by: godisnowhere at December 29, 2009 12:30 AM


to truthseeker who stated..."FYI Scott,
God is both pro-life and pro-choice. Did you know that?"

And therefore you also believe God to be truth and liar? Good and evil?

Posted by: godisnowhere at December 29, 2009 12:40 AM


If you have had an abortion, and you have since realized how awful it is, and said you made a wrong choice, why would you consider it again?! Unless you are pro-choice. How anyone can consider abortion again after delivering 3 children is beyond me. Would have thought the pain, rememberance, of the first time would be enough of a lesson.

Posted by: Tina-mobile:// at December 29, 2009 4:33 PM


MBallentine, I personally do not know which route is the best way to go. I just know that I will continue fighting to protect the unborn in whatever way I can, as long as I can. I support personhood efforts and I also support efforts to overturn roe.

I truly believe Sarah Palin's heart is for the unborn, and for protecting them. Her actions and her words are a loud testimony to that fact.

If you feel that the path she believes will save lives is not the correct one, pray that God will open her eyes and help her see the right one. I believe she is absolutely sincere as a pro-lifer and truly cares for unborn life. She may be mistaken in some areas, or ignorant about some things (like the birth control pill, for instance). I was just as ignorant about the pill a few years ago, even though I would have never taken it had I understood what it was capable of and I was just as pro-life as I am now... I think that God can show her and she can change her mind on those things, but I have no doubt that she is 100 percent pro-life, and that she is my sister in Christ. No, not perfect...but none of us are. But what I am thankful for is that she doesn't pretend to be perfect. She admits where she has failed, and where she has allowed life to teach her lessons.


Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 29, 2009 4:55 PM


Tina,

I'm so glad a paragon of virtue like yourself is able to come here and cast such righteous judgment against an ardent supporter of unborn life for humbly admitting to having had a fleeting temptation to do something wrong when she was having problems years ago.

I know we really needed to hear how much better you are than others here.

(By the way, Carla is one of the most pro-life people I know, or that you will likely ever come across).

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 29, 2009 5:01 PM


Hi Tina,
The hopelessness and loneliness I felt led me to a fleeting thought. And immediately I thought NO! NO! NO! Because you see, I had already been there, done that. Thank God my horrifying abortion experience has led me here!! A voice for the unborn!!

Hi Bethany! :)

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 29, 2009 5:47 PM


Hi Carla! :)

Posted by: bethany Author Profile Page at December 29, 2009 5:52 PM


I, at first had no idea Tina was talking about lil ol me!! :)

Wow. I am the only one who has ever had an irrational thought, huh??

The difference is that I did not entertain that irrational thought nor let my hopeless feelings dictate what to do. Like I did in 1990 when I had an abortion.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at December 29, 2009 8:52 PM