"For too long, the stem cell debate has been distorted by those who advocate exclusively for research in which human embryos are destroyed. They insist that any attempt to find ways to advance stem-cell science without harming nascent life - and, thereby, to serve both science and ethics at once - is misguided."
~ Georgia state Sen. David Shafer, as quoted in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, March 19
Also, a new document available on pdf, "75 new reasons to reconsider the alleged need for stem cell research that destroys human embryos," lists advances in adult stem cell research and other alternatives to embryonic stem cell research between June 2006 and February 2007.
[Hat tip: Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity]
Study Margaret Sanger. She was into the Eugenics movement. The tampering with genes for selfish purposes.
The only thing worse than abortion is abortion as a scientific project.
cold, so cold.
I keep picturing Michael J. Fox, being told there is good news and bad news. "Well Michael, we killed 42 children to do it, but by gum, we've cured your Parkinson's. However, we're not sure what to do with that 8 pound tumor growin' in yer head..."
Consequences. I keep sayin' it and I'll keep sayin' it. Consequences.
MKPosted by: MK at March 24, 2007 5:47 AM
MK, the whole COUNTRY was obsessed with Eugenics a little before the World wars up to world war 2. Many thought Hitler had the right idea until he actually started to kill people instead of forced sterilization (which was enforced here for years, many wernt even told they were being sterilized)Posted by: Dan at March 24, 2007 10:37 AM
take a look at this powerpoint I found on it via google
pretty scary stuff, but you cant blame it on Sanger, she was basically one of millions who supported the eugenics movement in the country.Posted by: Dan at March 24, 2007 10:43 AM
She may have been one of many, but she is the one who managed to initiate a billion dollar enterprise (planned parenthood) that has taken the lives of countless babies. She may have lived a long time ago and in a different era, but her mentality and her agenda have been spread through latter generations. Her son or nephew or someone now sits on the Planned Parenthood board.
Just because Ms. Sanger is dead does not mean that her ideas are.
Eugenics is pretty much dead in America, yes, there are still the few who believe in it, I would assume. There are always some people involved in one movement or another. She had advocated birth control, however, she did NOT advocate abortion as we now see it. She thought it posed too high a risk to the mother, which it did at the time, however she did think that it was acceptable under some circumstances.
She, like many today, thought the "cure" to abortion relied on birth control in that once used efficiently and properly, unwanted pregnancies would be reduced to a point where abortion was a rare procedure.Posted by: Dan at March 24, 2007 11:48 AM
the objective of eugenics was to eliminate people - we propose that people share rather than hoard resources.
The eugenics of her day said white(race) = life ::: coloured folk = dead .... we do not call it 'eugenics' these days ... but population-control comes close. So what you have is a death because a person is too young: adults = life (they have more/better rights) ::: babies/preborn = dead. Instead of WW II, we have a demographic reversal that sees more seniors/retired folks + many fewer workers ((including farmers to grow their food)).
Abortion as a surgical technique ... requiring non-existent transfusion then, because the procedure had to be done late-term and the abortionist was doing the surgery blind. [Even X-rays and sonar-grams were not invented yet!] This surgical-technique is now so simple that abortion is just another method of birth control. So Sanger's ideas to ... and PP seem very similar even today.Posted by: John McDonell at March 24, 2007 2:59 PM
You seem like a very bright person. Don't lower yourself to calling PP nothing more than an abortion mill. They offer sooo many more services than that. If I remember correctly from Amanda they only do abortions on one day out of the week while they are open six (in many places).
I'm trying to work up to courage to go to the gyno and I'll probably be going their because it's much cheaper than going somewhere else.Posted by: Danielle at March 24, 2007 3:16 PM
No, Eugenics meant SMART, law-obeying white folk = race perfection = better society = better life.
colored people wernt the only ones affected by Eugenics, there were many whites sterilized who were criminal or were, considered "imbeciles". Eugenics was an attempt to make society perfect.
babies NEVER equal dead, thats just a tad bit illegal.
not all unborn are aborted, to say so is ridiculous. the population is still rising, just not as quickly (I believe, I need to do more research on that one). There is no argument over whether an unborn person is living or not, they are composed of cells, which are living, which makes it "alive". we have more old folk and fwer workers because of the baby boomer generation. the pyramid that social security was based on has slowly been flipping upside down. People are having children later in life, if at all.
Abortion as a method of birth control is sad, personally I think thats a sad reason to get it done, but once again its the woman's choice to either give birth or to get an abortion.
From what I've read (which really isn't much) she believed that abortion was justifiable in some cases though overall she was against it, believing that contraception was a better method.wikipedia references her autobiography with this quote:
"To each group we explained what contraception was; that abortion was the wrong way—no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun."
Posted by: Dan
at March 24, 2007 3:40 PM
Neither she nor Planned Parenthood (which was under a different name at the time) advocated abortion or tried to legalize abortion, during her lifetime anyway. She tended to only reference abortion when it was in context of birth control (i.e. saying that birth control was better because it prevented conception and the mother didnt have to take the risk of the medical procedure)
it really is difficult to 'talk' ... I used to work in a mine-underground .... loved the job ... The way to access where we worked was a quasi-elevator we call 'the cage'. It's as if I'm on surface (safe) and you are very much on 'the cage' and wish to go-down.
please try to understand: I very much affirm that all living human beings are persons - some of these are dependent beings, but this does not make them any less human, only younger. The humanity of a growing (even if dependent) child is not to be subject to be discarded by anyone.
Now this may or may not sound frivolous to you ... but Margaret Sanger had very little trouble having sex with a number of men. She wrote constantly about this. [It may have been safer then, but now we have many times more types of STD's like AIDS to worry about; and we might frown on such behaviour.]
All activity (even sexual activity) has consequences ... doing-it or abstaining from it has consequences also. Like going to a gym for a workout has defined merit or a person will not bother doing it. Many pleasurable activities like sex or eating have their own set of consequences.
Too often these consequences also engage a heart so these become an ultimate goal. TRUE STORY: I once could tell non-stop for 3 hours 'dirty' jokes. Things said that were not 'dirty' were never funny. 'BS, on that!' I finally said. And it took me close to 5 years to recover any sense of innocence .... hell, I could talk to & delight in kids again! I hope you can avoid much of the macho-stupidity that has mental consequences ... like 'stud' attached.
Following Margaret Sanger's ideas tends to lead a man to view a woman as a sex-object (and any children as her-responsibility). Her 'choice' in fact is often a response to-knowing how you feel ... my child (now an 'it') is kill-able, Please, think about it!Posted by: John McDonell at March 24, 2007 5:25 PM
all things have consequences, that is true. Never argued that fact, there are many physical benefits to sex, as well as detrimental ones. There is always bad to balance out the good and vice versa. At least, in most cases.
Sanger was pretty much against abortion, as I had said. So she had sex with multiple men, that is done now almost without issue. Am I saying its good? No, but its up to the woman to make her own decisions, just as it is up to the man to make his own.
as for viewing women as sex objects based on sanger's views, do you have evidence to that? because last I knew she just enjoyed sex and wanted women to have the right to have sex without having to get pregnant.
Also, I do NOT view women as sex objects, in any sense of the word, and I honestly wish that guys who do would wake up somehow. Its ridiculous to view them that way, or anyone for that matter. I cannot say this in absolute certainty since I havent been in the position, but if I got a girl pregnant I most likely wouldnt want her to get an abortion, and I would certainly do my best to support her and the child. However, it is up to her whether she gives birth or has an abortion, not me.Posted by: Dan at March 24, 2007 8:19 PM
her problem >>> the child
try: her child >>> my child and even better >>> OUR precious CHILD!!!Posted by: John McDonell at March 24, 2007 9:59 PM
it affects her health and well being, not yours. Should fathers have a say? certainly. should they make the decision? absolutely notPosted by: Dan at March 24, 2007 11:08 PM
Eugenics is pretty much dead in America, yes, there are still the few who believe in it, I would assume.
The focus of this paper will be on intelligence. Here's the argument, in a nutshell:
1. Human intelligence is largely hereditary.
2. Civilization depends totally upon innate intelligence. Without innate intelligence, civilization would never have been created. When intelligence declines, so does civilization.
3. The higher the level of civilization, the better off the population. Civilization is not an either-or proposition. Rather, it's a matter of degree, and each degree, up or down, affects the well-being of every citizen.
4. At the present time, we are evolving to become less intelligent with each new generation. Why is this happening? Simple: the least-intelligent people are having the most children.
5. Unless we halt or reverse this trend, our civilization will invariably decline. Any decline in civilization produces a commensurate increase in the collective "misery quotient."
Logic and scientific evidence stand behind each statement listed above.
The Case for Eugenics in a Nutshell
by Marian Van Court
This article appeared in the Winter 2004 issue of The Occidental Quarterly
Sounds alive and well to me...
MKPosted by: MK at March 25, 2007 6:21 AM
"it affects her health and well being, not yours. Should fathers have a say? certainly. should they make the decision? absolutely not"
in a detached way this statement may be true, Dan. But love is about becoming one ... that is why I said 'our'. Many years ago people from our country were floored by a Guatemalan teen (@17) when he spoke to the assembled group. He said ... 'we think ...' . At the time he was surrounded by his fellow villagers who did not even flinch by these references. [For him and for many this so-called autonomy is much closer to isolation. I know firsthand that the word 'independent'(isolation) should be 'interdependent'(belonging).]Posted by: John McDonell at March 25, 2007 7:22 AM
* "The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood
* "I have met thousands and thousands of pro-choice men and women. I have never met anyone who is pro-abortion. Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. -Hillary Rodham Clinton
* "...such laws are unnecessary for stable and supportive families, and they are ineffective and cruel for unstable, troubled families." -American Civil Liberties Union on Parental Notification laws
* Population control is too important to be stopped by some right wing pro-life types. Take the new influx of Hispanic immigrants. Their lack of respect for democracy and social order is frightening. I hope I can do something to stem that tide; I'd set up a clinic in Mexico for free if I could..." Abortionist Edward Allred quoted in the San Diego Union, a millionaire 12 times over from the abortion industry
*The pro-life movement is having a negative impact on abortion. Sometimes women change their mind on the operating table and then we lose money! We have to run a cost-effective termination service. We have abortion on request now. It's what I believe and what I practice. A woman has a right to abort - whether it's to go on a skiing holiday or whether the foetus is disabled. Doctor John Parsons in an interview from Kings College Hospital, London. The Universe, March 1997
* "The abortion question is not just about women's rights, but about life on the planet - environmental catastrophe awaits the world if the population continues to grow at its present rate." - Molly Yard, President, National Organization for Women 1989
* "Not one [so-called] pro-life organization in the U.S. supports contraception to reduce abortion. It's the pro-choice movement that's actually working to reduce abortion." - Cristina Page, author How the Pro-Choice Movement Saved America
* "The real fear for Bushs conservative base is not that embryos are killed. The real fear is what would happen if the research pans out. If a cure to any disease is found by using stem cells, it undercuts the contention from anti-abortionists that life begins at conception." -Kirk Caraway, Nevada Appeal
* "We know that its killing, but the state permits killing under certain circumstances" -Dr. Neville Sender, abortionist
MK, I want to know where you got that sanger quote, just out of curiosity, because everything Ive found says she didnt really approve of it accept in certain circumstances.
and I did say there are still SOME who follow it. I acknowledged that but for the large part Eugenics has little support in comparison to population.
love is about making decisions together, thats true. The same should go for abortion, thus why the father should have at least some say (assuming it wasnt rape). But ultimately the risks are the woman's. I'm not saying there should be no discussion. There certainly should be a discussion between the two parents, but the decision ultimately does lay with the woman.Posted by: Dan at March 25, 2007 12:21 PM
Dan, it's from the book, Women and the New Race, chapter 5, "The Wickedness of Creating Large Families". You can see it for yourself here:
"it affects her health and well being, not yours. Should fathers have a say? certainly. should they make the decision? absolutely not"
My boyfriend agrees very much with this statement. We've talked about what we would do numerous times if I was to get pregnant (and we would speak about it more if I actually was).
While he wants me to talk to him about it, so that he can help and support me, he agrees that the final decision is up to me. He knows how much a pregnancy would affect my life and he would never try to force me to go threw one if I wasn't ready.
"The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)Posted by: MK at March 25, 2007 1:57 PM
honest, we're not ganging up on you (at least I hope you don't feel alienated!)
got to thinking - how to explain to a person who seems locked-in to this concept ... cause you repeat it over and over. So I came up with this: do not yet know just how it will pan out but it's a first ... therefore, a wee bit 'rough': let's think about 9/11 ... this event was about airplanes and skyscrapers ... seems to be the argument of pro-choicers .... no, no silly - then its a 'World trade Center and Pentagon event ... no, then a New York city and Washington event ... no, then an American event ... no, a human event for all peoples of this planet ... is it religious? is it philosophical ... military or is it ????
Answer::: it is all these and more ... one thing that very much galls many Canadians is that many Americans seem to isolate this as an American-only event. [Like Honolulu is 'closer' to this than Montreal or Toronto ... yeah right!]
This penchant for exclusivity ... the why-me/poor-me syndrome ... goes back to the prologue of the American constitution. It says ...'all men are created equal' ... except many Americans who believe: 'we live in the best country = we are superior beings' ... eg. baseball/basketball. So when a 9/11 happens it becomes 'owned-by-us'. And we have the right to do anything, even kill our own kids ... sorry, this is a pro-choice right, correct?.
All are not created equal, they are created unique (just like everything in our universe). All humans do have a mighty strange power of becoming one. Just look at our own words ... 'United' states. Are we not one? If you are distressed by height on top of a skyscraper, would your response be to throw the panicked person over the ledge ... or to bring in 'medical' people to do the deed?
We have a-helluva strange response to pregnancy ... sorry not mine! Its 'hers', not ours ... not others. Hey, has the child no input ... he/she is the one being wasted (versus the mother/parents being inconvenienced)?Posted by: John McDonell at March 25, 2007 1:57 PM
What does it matter what someone who died over 40 years ago has to say? That's like judging all Germans based on the thoughts of Hitler and the Nazi party.
Many people in her time period were for eugenics. You're going to put blame on PP for an idea that was prevalent in that time?
It's like me saying that Christians still want to convert the remaining Native Americans to Christianity to save them from a savage life style... Wait... Never mind, bad example...Posted by: Danielle at March 25, 2007 2:08 PM
It is true that she didn't approve of abortion, but not from the infant's point of view. In her generation, abortion was dangerous and more often than not harmed the mother (baby be damned).
I feel pretty sure, from reading her writings, that if she were alive today and knew that you could suck a baby out of a mother's womb with litter ramifications (Physical, not moral) she'd be all for it. The woman was sick. She wanted to fool around and didn't want to suffer the consequences. She complained of the poor not being fed and instead of setting up a soup kitchen set up butcher shops.
Sorry, I just can't get my head around her "heroic" and "noble" cause.
As the Eugenics argument...
what do you think embryonic stem cell research is?
It's the manipulation of genes at the expense of life.
Eliminate the unwanted and keep the cream.
Don't kid yourself that when embryonic stem cell research becomes commonplace, it won't be used (and commonly used, I might add) to create a "super race"...
Like we're gonna stop at eliminating cystic fibrosis? I don't think so. But time will prove us right. The question is, will it be too late?
Start with Rwanda...
Posted by: MK
at March 25, 2007 3:03 PM
Our Lady of Kibeho: Apparitions in Rwanda PDF Print E-mail
By Roy Abraham Varghese
Saturday, 03 June 2006
The Marian apparitions of Kibeho in Rwanda, perhaps the poorest country in Africa (one known also as the "Switzerland of Africa" for its many mountains), were witnessed by seven principal visionaries. The apparitions share many common features with the great apocalyptic visions of the past. As in the nineteenth-century French apparitions and at Fatima and Akita, the Virgin announced impending bloodshed on a horrific scale. Moreover, as in Medjugorje, the apparitions themselves took place in the very region that would shortly become synonymous around the world with genocide and systematic butchery. The warnings issued at Rwanda were not only prophetic but unmistakably accurate and, because they were not heeded, the fate of the nation seemed sealed; the Virgin finally even urged the visionaries to flee their homeland before the onset of the wars ahead.
The apparitions began on November 28, 1981, when Alphonsine Mumureke, a sixteen-year-old student in a Catholic convent, heard a voice calling out "my daughter" to her as she was helping in the dining room. She left the room and saw a beautiful lady in white in the corridor. When Alphonsine asked her who she was, the lady replied, "I am the Mother of the Word," speaking in Kinyarwanda, the language of the Rwandans. The Virgin asked her which of the religions she liked, to which Alphonsine replied, "I love God and His Mother who have given us Their Son who has saved us." The Virgin commended her and said that she wished that some of her friends would have more faith since some did not believe enough. She then asked Alphonsine to join a lay evangelization group called the Legion of Mary and said that she wanted to be loved and trusted as a Mother so that she could lead people to her Son Jesus (the Legion of Mary is one of the largest lay Christian organizations in the world; one of the pioneers of the Legion from Ireland, Edel Quinn, had devoted her life to the work of the Legion in the neighboring country of Kenya). The Virgin then gracefully arose until she was out of sight. As she departed, Alphonsine dropped to the ground and was unconscious for about fifteen minutes.
The other children had heard Alphonsine engaged in conversation and were curious to find out what had happened. When Alphonsine narrated her experience, both her friends and the nuns were skeptical and scornful. Alphonsine witnessed another apparition of the Virgin on the next day, in which she was told that the Virgin liked her children to see her as a mother. Again she lost consciousness at the end of the apparition, and again she told the others what had happened but was met with the same ridicule. The apparitions continued through December. Most of the girls continued to mock Alphonsine, even throwing Rosaries at her during the apparitions, but some prayed that others could also share the experience so that they could find out if Alphonsine was being truthful.
On January 12, 1982, these prayers were answered, and Anathalie Mukamazimpaka, a sixteen-year-old girl who was already a member of the Legion of Mary, witnessed an apparition of the Virgin. The messages she received focused on prayer, humility, and self-sacrifice. Once Anathalie started witnessing the apparitions, most of the community accepted Alphonsine's veracity. The continuing apparitions were now beginning to transform the spiritual life of the students. On March 22, yet another student, twenty-two-year-old Marie-Clare Mukanganga, reported seeing the Virgin as well. She had been one of the most ardent scoffers and now begged forgiveness for her disbelief. She said that the Virgin wanted everyone to meditate on the Passion of Jesus and the sorrow of His mother and asked them to pray the Rosary and the beads of the Seven Sorrows to receive the grace of repentance.
By now news of the apparitions had spread around Rwanda and visitors were coming to Kibeho from all over the country. To accommodate the hundreds of onlookers, special platforms were constructed for the visionaries in the convent yard and the crowds could now see them as they entered the state of ecstasy, which often lasted three or four hours. The girls would sing songs or pray the Rosary until the coming of the Virgin at a preset time.
Four others also began seeing Jesus and Mary. Stephanie Mukamurenzi, a fourteen-year-old girl, saw her beginning on May 25, 1982, and received messages about repentance, conversion, and mortification. On June 2, Agnes Kamagaju, twenty-two years old, first saw the Virgin; within months she was also seeing Jesus. Jesus called everyone to conversion and prayer and specially asked the youth to keep their bodies holy. The last of these seemed to be a warning about AIDS and the path of destruction it would cut through Rwanda. On July 2, a fifteen-year-old illiterate pagan boy named Segatashya (who later received the Christian name Emmanuel) saw and heard a handsome thirty-year-old man—Jesus—who taught him the Lord's Prayer and other basic Christian prayers and doctrine. Through Emmanuel, Jesus asked for prayer, repentance and reparation because the end of the world was rapidly approaching. He also spoke about the failure of many priests to remain faithful to their vows. On September 15, Mary appeared to Vestine Salina, a twenty-four-year-old Moslem woman. Vestine was asked to play the role of a shepherd leading people to God and Heaven. The Virgin asked the people for daily recitation of the Rosary and remembrance of her Seven Sorrows on the Rosary beads.
Huge crowds watched the seven visionaries as they went into ecstasies that lasted several hours. During the ecstasies, the visionaries were not affected when observers pricked them with knives or burnt them with candles or shone bright lights into their eyes; they were also "frozen" so that their arms and legs could hardly be moved. Sometimes during the apparitions the assembled multitudes also witnessed various supernatural phenomena such as miracles of the sun (including the dancing of the sun and multicolored displays like at Fatima), stars turning into crosses at night, and heavy rains that came when the visionaries asked the Virgin to bless the crowds (cures were reported from the water collected from the rain). After warning observers that this would happen, the visionaries went into comatose states for extended periods in which they were taken to Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell. They were also shown a vision of the savage future awaiting Rwanda: rivers of blood, burning trees, and countless rows of corpses, many of them headless. This glimpse of the future, given in an eight-hour-long apparition on August 15, 1982, had such a terrifying effect on the visionaries that it shook even the onlookers. The visionaries were told that there would be a "river of blood" if Rwanda did not come back to God.
The apparitions went on for various spans of time for each visionary: Marie-Clare up to September 15, 1982; Stephanie to December 15, 1982; Emmanuel to July 3, 1983; Agnes to September 25, 1983; Anathalie to December 3, 1983; Vestine to December 24, 1983, and Alphonsine all the way through November 28, 1989. Bishop Jean Baptiste Gahamanyi of the diocese of Butare, to which Kibeho belonged, had appointed investigative commissions of doctors, psychiatrists, and theologians in March 1982. Public devotions at the site of the apparitions were permitted by the bishop on August 15, 1988.
The Rwandan civil war began in 1991 and took a toll of over one million lives. The visionary Marie-Clare was one of the slain. Alphonsine's entire family was killed although she herself escaped. The other visionaries are believed to be in refugee camps, although there is speculation that Emmanuel may have been killed as well. Bishop Gahamanyi is one of the hundreds of clergy who were killed in the civil war. Thousands of dead bodies were thrown into rivers that turned putrid. Thousands of other corpses, many of them decapitated, were left unburied.
Description of the Virgin
Alphonsine: She "was not really white like we see her in pictures. I could not determine the color of her skin, but she was of an incomparable beauty."
To Marie-Clare: "I am concerned not only for Rwanda or for the whole of Africa. I am concerned with, and turning to, the whole world. The world is on the edge of catastrophe."
"I have come to prepare the way for my Son for your good, and you do not want to understand. The time remaining is short and you are absent-minded. You are distracted by the goods of this world which are passing. I have seen many of my children getting lost and I have come to show them the true way."
To Alphonsine: "I love a child who plays with me because this is a beautiful manifestation of trust and love. Feel like children with me because I, too, love to pet you. No one should be afraid of their Mother. I am your Mother. You should not be afraid of me but you should love me."
At the last apparition: "I love you, I love you, I love you very much. Never forget the love I have for you in coming among you. These messages will do good not only now but also in the future."
To Anathalie: "Wake up, stand up. Wash yourself and look up attentively. We must dedicate ourselves to prayer. We must develop in us the virtues of charity, availability and humility."
To Stephanie: "Repent, pray, change your life."
To Vestine: "The walk to Heaven is through a narrow road. It is not easy to get through. The road to Satan is wide. You will go fast, you will run because there are no obstacles."
To Emmanuel: "There isn't much time left in preparing for the Last Judgment. We must change our lives, renounce sin. Pray and prepare for our own death and for the end of the world. We must prepare while there is still time. Those who do well will go to Heaven. If they do evil, they will condemn themselves with no hope of appeal. Do not lose time in doing good and praying. There is not much time and Jesus will come."
Jesus to Agnes: "The youth should not use their bodies as an instrument of pleasure. They are using all means to love and be loved and they forget that the true love comes from God. Instead of being at the service of God, they are at the service of money. They must make of their body an instrument destined to the glory of God and not an object of pleasure at the service of men. They should pray to Mary to show them the right way to God."
Jesus to Emmanuel: "I am Jesus before whom all humanity stands."
"I am neither white nor black; I am simply Lord."
"The priests and religious do not take enough care of those who are ill physically and morally. If they have promised freely the vow of chastity, they must observe it faithfully."
"How can someone say he loves Jesus, adores Him, and live outside His Blessed Mother's Immaculate Heart? My Mother is the Mother of the world."
"The world will come to an end. Prepare while there is still time. When I return on earth, the soul will find the body it had before, and then man will bring his own dossier. Do not lose time in doing good. There is not much time left."
"Too many people treat their neighbors dishonestly. The world is full of hatred. You will know my Second Coming is at hand when you see the outbreak of religious, ethnic, or racial wars. Then, know that I am on the way."
The call of Our Lady of Kibeho is one with the overall Marian Message of prayer, penance and the Rosary, for the purposes of both present conversion and the mitigation of future events which threaten world peace and security. May Our Lady of Kibeho intercede on our behalf for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Posted by: MK
at March 25, 2007 3:08 PM
The above article is excerpted from the text God Sent, Crossroad, 2000, by Roy Abraham Varghese. Roy Varghese is a prolific author in the areas of religion, science and Mariology.
this was in answer to Alyssa on a different post.
Don't know how it ended up here.
You're forgetting me, MK!!
I'm a Catholic badass though.
Alyssa, you're young. There's time.
Prepare to meet your match:)
I was once a cheeky young thing too.
Look at me now.
A cheeky old thing.
With chin hair.
But, I've come full circle home to where I started.
The allies were fun, but this is much more fulfilling. I don't just like my faith. I LOVE my faith. It is so incredibly deep.
Last week after mass, I told the priest that I believed that should change the words before communion from "Happy are we who are called to His supper", to "Delirious are we who are called to His supper"
I'm tellin' you girl, once you get past all the stuff college has stuffed into your brain and start over, you'll learn things that'll curl your hair.
Rebel without a cause? Try this. We are in a spiritual battle. HUGE spiritual battle. Quite possibly the final spiritual battle. We need soldiers girl. Trained, armed, brave and ready soldiers. It might get ugly.
You need to start with reading up on the saints, Eucharistic Miracles and the incorruptibles" Good stuff. Puts you in the right frame of mind for the supernatural warfare that's goin' on. From there, move on to Fatima (not the stories you heard as a kid), Akita Japan, the Rwandan apparitions, and Medjugorge.
Then get back to me. I'll point you to the next step.
I almost envy you. The first time is always the best.
But you all might find it interesting too.
MK Ive never heard about any of the things you were talking to Alyssa about and am interested in reading about them too. Im not Catholic, tho; Im Methodist for seven generations and Church of England before that...Posted by: SamanthaT at March 25, 2007 4:31 PM
how's about: Happy are we who are called to His supper", to "Happy are we who are called to Your supper." Is He not there? Try addressing Jesus Himself rather than talking about Him.
You got me John.
Now let's eat.
which one interests you most...let's start there.
We'll take it one at a time, because quite frankly, you could read on each one of them for years and not be done. But we can whet your appetite and you can go from there.
So what's it gonna be? Saints? Bi-locution? Stigmata? Incorruptibles? Apparitions? Eucharistic Miracles?
I'm so excited, I wish we could start right now!
When I said that to the priest he told me that this is one of the things the bishops are working on with the mass changes. They want to change "happy" to "blessed".
You might enjoy this...
Oooh Im really interested in apparitions and stigmata (I think--thats the thing where people get the same wounds as Jesus, right?)Thank you!Posted by: SamanthaT at March 25, 2007 6:08 PM
Danielle, 3/25, 12:42p, said, "While he [boyfriend] wants me to talk to him about it, so that he can help and support me, he agrees that the final decision is up to me. He knows how much a pregnancy would affect my life and he would never try to force me to go threw one if I wasn't ready."
So he's fine having sex with you, but if you become pregnant, he has said to your face he is willing to let you kill his child?Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 25, 2007 6:55 PM
Let's start with the stigmata.
Here's a link and then get back to me.
I'll answer any questions and send you further if you want. The internet is only gonna give bits and pieces, so be prepared to buy a book if you really want the nuts and bolts.
You can probably type any one of these saints into the Catholic search engine to get more info on each saint.
Padre Pio is the most recent saint to receive this gift. He is the most incredible, unbeleiveable saint and he lived in our century. He died in 1968 and was canonized (made a saint) in 2002. He was able to bi-locate (be in two places at once), had the stigmats (which caused him great embarassment), could read a person's soul (knew what your sins were just by looking at you), and would go into ecstasies (mystical states) during the consecration(the ritual where the bread and wine is turned into the true body and blood of Jesus, called transubstantiation). He was unable to leave his monastery without becoming mysteriously ill, sometimes having a fever so high that it had to be taken with a horse thermometer.
When a man was going back to his hometown he told Padre Pio that he would write to him and Padre Pio replied "Don't bother, just tell your guardian angel anything you want to say, and he'll tell mine. I'll get the message."
He was often heard in his cell conversing with his angel.
He was also constantly attacked by the devil. The other monks would gather around his locked cell and hear fighting and pounding inside, only to find Padre Pio the next morning, bruised and beaten. He said the devil had been to visit him again.
You can see a picture of him here:http://www.marypages.com/Pio.htm
Most pictures of him show his hands bandaged. They were after all, constantly bleeding.
He was also given specific souls (by God) that he spiritually adopted and prayed for. Often these souls had no idea.
He is AMAZING...
Posted by: MK
at March 25, 2007 7:09 PM
I would not be killing a "child." I would be ending a pregnancy.
And here's the thing, I suffer from severe depression. Before I went on meds I was extremely suicidal. I go off meds for a pregnancy guess what, I'm suicidal again and this time not just risking my own life but a fetus as well.
So would you rather me kill myself and a fetus just so that I don't get an abortion? Does that make it better?Posted by: Danielle at March 25, 2007 7:23 PM
I'd rather you didn't have sex. Ironically, being on meds for the rest of your life means you might have to adopt. Except that's becoming more and more difficult because the babies are being aborted. Life's funny huh?
I sympathize with you. My son is on meds for bi-polar. Off meds, he's not pretty!
But sometimes you have to make sacrifices. You could abstain, practice NFP, go off your meds and have a strong support group...
But killing the baby because you couldn't take control of your passions? Just seems kind of self serving.
MKPosted by: MK at March 25, 2007 7:29 PM
You're joking. It's hard to adopt because they're aren't enough children in the system? Tell that to the 300,000 kids up for adoption in the US alone.
And thanks for the lecture, mom, but there's nothing selfish about having sex. I take care of my "passions" very well, thanks. What is it with people and still trying to criminalize sex? I have sex with my boyfriend because I love him.
NFP? Yeah, that's the reason that my grandma has 10 siblings.
Thanks. I know where pro-life hearts really are. Save the fetus! Don't give a crap about the living human being. If I get pregnant, I'll kill myself just for you MK.Posted by: Danielle at March 25, 2007 7:35 PM
Your grandmother had 10 siblings because her parents were using the rythymn method, not NFP.
And I do care about you, which is why I wouldn't want you do anything else that could possibly add to your depression.
"Men use love to get sex; women use sex to get love"
I don't want to criminalize sex. I just want it to be done when people are ready and willing to accept the consequences for it. You're right there isn't anything selfish about having sex. Under the right circumstances. The fact that you have already decided that you would kill yourself if you got pregnant tells me that you don't love yourself very much. Someone who would threaten suicide to punish someone else does not sound like a very stable person. An unstable person should probably be working on their mental health rather than playing russian roulette with their significant other. You say you love him, but does he love you? If he did, he would put you first and want what was best for you. Knowing that you would kill yourself if you got pregnant, I should think that he would be doing everything possible to ensure that you don't get pregnant. Even if that means abstaining. I know that's what I would do if I loved somebody.
MKPosted by: MK at March 25, 2007 7:55 PM
Say a young woman suffers from severe depression and is on meds. If she goes off her meds she will become suicidal. Does this sound like a healthy course: To date a young man who knows all this but still has sex with her, stating he would be willing to kill their child if she became pregnant? And does she really think her depression would be any better off if she aborts rather than goes off her meds?Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 25, 2007 8:09 PM
"Knowing that you would kill yourself if you got pregnant, I should think that he would be doing everything possible to ensure that you don't get pregnant. Even if that means abstaining."
Yes, and that's the reason that we aren't having sex right now. Because I'm scared of getting pregnant and he completely understands that.
Shut the f*** up. You know nothing about my boyfriend or what he has done for me. He's the only one in my life who ever gave to s*** about me. He's the one who holds my hand threw every panic attack and every suicidal moment. If that isn't commitment. I don't know what is.
Want to know what my mom did when I told her I was on meds for depression. She laughed in my face and called me a liar. You know who picked up the pieces yet again of my shattered self-esteem. My boyfriend.
You know who stood up for me when my mom slapped me because I told her I wanted to go away to college to get away from her, my boyfriend.
And you know who's there even when I've told him a million times to just go, that life would be easier for him. My boyfriend.Posted by: Danielle at March 25, 2007 8:40 PM
Oh, Jill, and another thing. The person who took me to get help and go on the meds was my boyfriend. If it wasn't for him, I'd still be the empty shell I was two years ago before I met him.Posted by: Danielle at March 25, 2007 8:41 PM
So...medicated people arent allowed to have sex now? What about that whole thing where Paul said that partners should satisfy each other's sexual needs?Posted by: SamanthaT at March 25, 2007 8:43 PM
That's not what we said.
If you are on meds and feel like you would commit suicide by getting off of them, then perhaps you should hold off until things are more stable.
It's a journey. I don't know what's down the road for Danielle. But for now, if getting pregnant would send her over the edge, then she should abstain.
Your boyfriend sounds amazing! Of course, I wish you were married, but it's understandable under the circumstances. I think it is extremely mature of you guys to hold off on sex until and when...
Keep this guy. And don't be so hard on yourself.
I like ya. He likes ya. Ya must be likable. Your mom really did a number on you, huh?
Don't let her keep doin' one. By holding in that anger towards her your sort of still giving her power over you, you know.
I heard a story once. A guy went to his priest and told him his lifes story. Sick mother, no job, blah, blah, blah.
The priest tells him to go home and pray x prayer and y prayer and come back in a week.
Next week the guy tells the priest nothins' changed. Priest says go back and pray A prayer and B prayer, come back in a week.
Next week, nothin. The guy is getting worse and worse. So the priest says, okay, let's pray together, maybe I can figure out what you're doing wrong. So he has them both close their eyes and they pray prayer A. Priest thinks, hm, nothing wrong there. Let's try prayer B. Same thing.
Priest decides he's gonna open his eyes, maybe he can see something the guy is doing wrong.
They pray prayer C. The priest notices the guys hands are clenched, clenched, so tight the knuckles are white...
Priest says: Look, your saying all the right words, but your holding onto everything. The Lord can't fix your problems unless you give them to him. Open your hands man, LET GO...
You see my point.
Let go. Find peace. It wasn't you. It was your mom. You were fine. She was sick. Don't repeat her mistakes. If your boyfriend likes (loves) you, and I like you, you must be likeable. And trust me, I don't like everybody. So from now on, like yourself. Why? well, like Jill says, CUZ I SAID SO! :)
Don't know why that posted twice. Sorry.
I wish we were married too, but that's a whole other story. lol Me I'd love to be married by the time I'm 20 (I'm' 19 right now), but he wants to wait until we're out of college and both have jobs. Right now I'm hoping for a ring in Disney this summer, but don't tell him or he'll say one more day!
It's joke between us. Every time I mention anything to do with marriage he says one more day until he proposes and any time he says anything about motorcycles I say one more day till he can ride.
I definitely know that he's a keeper. I'm lucky to have him in my life. But sometimes I still feel very guilty for dragging him through the things that I do.Posted by: Danielle at March 25, 2007 9:44 PM
Ok. So I was in church this morning, and the preacher told a funny joke. He's not my preacher bc Im at school, but it was still funny:
These three ministers are leaving a funeral. They say to each other, "What would you want people to say about you at your funeral?"
The first preacher says, "I think I would want people to say that I was a good husband and father, and that I served my church well."
The second preacher says, "I think I would want people to say that I preached with conviction and that they could really see God working thru me."
The third preacher thought a minute. He said, "Well, I guess the only thing I really want anybody to say at my funeral is, 'Look! He's moving!'"Posted by: SamanthaT at March 25, 2007 10:07 PM
Danielle I have a personal question--are your meds working? I had a real problem with finding meds that worked for me--altho I have ADHD + PTSD--and my psych did a test called an rEEG that measures your brainwaves. They send the results to some pros who can basically tell by the wave patterns what meds will work best, and it has been amazing what a difference it has made. Just something you might check into if they are having you bouncing around trying different things, because I know how frustrating it can be not to find the right pills. *hugs for you!*Posted by: SamanthaT at March 25, 2007 10:12 PM
Actually, the first pill (Lexapro) they put me on worked really well. I got a little worse when I first went on it, but then leveled off. After about six months, I started to get worse again so they upped the dosage. I'm now taking 20mg and so far so good. I'm really lucky that things have worked out so well with the meds. I've met sooo many people who have had a really hard time finding the right pills or mix of them (some of which are other girls on SAWRTC).
The main thing with me was not wanting to get help. I thought that I deserved everything that was happening to me and that it was just normal. I mean, I've lived that way for as long as I can remember. I never remember a time before I went on meds that I was happy for more than a day at a time, even a day was a long time.
It's like I started my life all over again. I've found out so many things about myself in the past year and a half since I went on meds it's amazing. I never realized how much I stayed away from things until now looking back.
That's not saying that it's a miracle and I'm healed. I still have a loooong way to go. But I'm doing a lot better than ever before. ^_^Posted by: Danielle at March 26, 2007 12:12 AM
Danielle, 3/25, 8:40p and 9:44p: Your boyfriend has apparently helped you make good decisions. But he is not perfect. Neither of you understand how much worse off your depression will be if you become pregnant, whether or not you stay on meds, and particularly if you decide to abort, which I guarantee would be catastrophic to your psyche.
Can you honstly say sex has not complicated matters? Women have sex for love. Men have sex for sex. Can you honestly say you're not having sex to feel loved and/or to keep him?
Do you think he would stay with you if you told him you wanted to stop having sex until you got married?Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 26, 2007 11:42 AM
If my boyfriend was only in our relationship for the sex he would definitely go else where. No man would put up with my issues just so that he could occasionally get some. And if I was trying to keep him around by having sex with him, I'd be doing it more often.
If you had actually paid attention to my post instead of just trying to make my boyfriend out to be a big hornball, then you would have noticed that I said we aren't having sex now because I'm scared of getting pregnant. I also have a very low sex drive because of my depression medication and tend to want to simply be held more than have sex. Also there are plenty of other sexual activities that we can do instead of having sex.
And even if I told him that I wanted to stop having sex until we're married, it's not just him that enjoys sex. I enjoy having sex as well. Shocking? I know. Don't bust your brain over it.
And what if I didn't even want to get married? What if I choose to have a relationship like my uncle? Should I never have sex with my partner because I'm not married? Ridiculous. Marriage changes nothing, it's in the mind and hearts of people where marriage is created. The ceremony does nothing.
Since you know nothing about mine and my boyfriends relationship, I find it extremely laughable that you're trying to judge him. He is a wonderful human being who has been through a lot in the time that I've been with him.
If he was just in it for the sex, he would not be with me now. Because quite frankly, we don't have sex very often, once a month is a lot.
How about you get off your moral high horse, Jill.Posted by: Danielle at March 26, 2007 3:11 PM
Danielle, I read what you write, and you say different things at different times as is apparently convenient for the moment.Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 26, 2007 7:15 PM
I do not. And what the hell is it with you and barely being able to make a response to anyone?Posted by: Danielle at March 26, 2007 7:27 PM
So Jill, where exactly have I been making stuff up? And how exactly would you know enough about my life to know that I'm lying (as you claim) are you stalking me now?Posted by: Danielle at March 26, 2007 7:34 PM
I know you're angry with Jill. I think you perceive her as making judgments, but honestly, when she asks questions, she's just trying to understand the finer points.
Just try to express yourself so that we can see it from your side. Otherwise you get defensive and it comes across as anger. Then nobody can possibly see your side. Does that make sense?
I think you and Jill got off on the wrong foot somewhere. Maybe if you both start over and try to communicate with a fresh perspective, you could make this work.
I know that you're capable of expressing yourself without "attitude" because you've done a beautiful job of it with me.
Allow me to introduce you...
Danielle, this is my BF Jill. This is her site and she is here to help shed some lite on some very touchy subjects. It's not always easy to hear, but it's meant with love.
Jill, this is my new friend Danielle. She's had a hard time of it so far, and is trying to get her life on track. I guess the word gentle comes to mind...
I'm just confused as to how I've been saying "different things at different times as is apparently convenient for the moment."
Granted I did make a mistake when I said I have been on depression meds for two years, I cleared that up in another post. I've been with my boyfriend for two years and on meds for a little over a year.
I don't have much respect for Jill because of her making assumptions about my boyfriend who she has never spoken with and also with her asking me numerous times "Where my abortion pride is."
She asked me no questions in her last statment all she did WAS cast judgment by in essence calling me two faced.Posted by: Danielle at March 26, 2007 8:18 PM
Can you honestly say sex has not complicated matters? Women have sex for love. Men have sex for sex. Can you honestly say you're not having sex to feel loved and/or to keep him?
Do you think he would stay with you if you told him you wanted to stop having sex until you got married?
Those seem like legitimate questions. Without being defensive you could say "Yeah, I think he would stay with me, and here are the reasons. And no, I keep him because he has shown that he cares about me, not my body, but me even with all my faults (and they are many) and I've watched him make decisions based on my best interests time and time again.
If Jill is making assumptions, I think it's because sooooooo many times relationships are based on the sexual aspects. Many young women sleep with men before they really get to know them and the relationships end in disaster.
1/2 of all marriages end in divorce and Jill and I believe it's in part because sex was the main focus. We have learned through the years, that having sex sans marriage can actually postpone the period where you get to know your partner on a deeper level...you know, important things, like does he clip his toenails regularly?, Is he a cat person or a dog person?, vanilla or chocolate, pro-life or pro-choice, does he want children?, will he still love you if you get fat and most important...does baldness run in his family.
So we really aren't trying to be judgmental. Just trying to see if your relationship is based on love or lust.
Yours sounds pretty good, although I always advocate holding off on sex til after your married. Don't want to be accused of condoning pre-marital sex. But I also realize that I didn't raise you or your boyfriend and your code of ethics is not my code of ethics.
I think Jill is coming from the same place, but you assume she is judging you, just as you say she is making assumptions about you.
MKPosted by: MK at March 27, 2007 5:55 AM
Danielle, 3/26, 7:27p, said: "I do not. And what the hell is it with you and barely being able to make a response to anyone?"
Danielle, 3/26, 7:34p, said: "So Jill, where exactly have I been making stuff up? And how exactly would you know enough about my life to know that I'm lying (as you claim) are you stalking me now?"
Danielle, which do you think I am doing, barely acknowledging you or stalking you?
I didn't say you you have "been making stuff up." You may not even realize your thoughts shift with the blog post or conversational turn. Here's an example:
3/25, 9:44p: "I wish we were married too, but that's a whole other story. lol Me I'd love to be married by the time I'm 20 (I'm' 19 right now), but he wants to wait until we're out of college and both have jobs. Right now I'm hoping for a ring in Disney this summer, but don't tell him or he'll say one more day!"
3/26, 3:11p: "And what if I didn't even want to get married? What if I choose to have a relationship like my uncle? Should I never have sex with my partner because I'm not married? Ridiculous. Marriage changes nothing, it's in the mind and hearts of people where marriage is created. The ceremony does nothing."Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 27, 2007 7:44 AM
Yes, I want to get married (but definitely not through a Christian ceremony). I simply asked the question of what if I didn't?
And marriage won't really change our relationship, it's just something I've dreamed about since I was a little girl. I want to get married in Disney world and ride in Cinderella's carriage. :-P
I know that marriage won't change our relationship if we are indeed in it for the long run. Marriage IS in the heart. If your heart is in the wrong place marriage is meaningless. The ceremony of marriage to me is just a way to express your love, not a way to commit to it. The commitment must already have been made BEFORE the wedding.Posted by: Danielle at March 27, 2007 8:15 AM
Remember the saying..Why buy the cow when the milk is free? I too had to learn this one.Most men aren't going to marry you when you give them the sex first.Posted by: momof3 at March 27, 2007 10:05 AM
PS-Also remember that men love the chase.They generally want what doesn't come easy.Posted by: momof3 at March 27, 2007 10:18 AM
Okay, let's try this again. I'm not sure why I'm still trying to defend relationship to you, but I guess I don't like people saying bad things about the man who saved my life.
We have been together for two years now. In that time, I have put my boyfriend through hell, not intentionally but it's still happened.
While in your eyes we're "living in sin" I don't believe in God or sin, therefore your moral beliefs do not influence me in anyway. So stop trying to be religion into. Neither me or my boyfriend are religious. And if we get married it will be a non-Christian ceremony.
Granted two years might now seem like a lot in the eyes of (married) adults, but remember that you guys have had a lot more years under your belt. I'm only 19 and have only known my boyfriend for 3 years. Our two years together have brought us closer together than many other couples I've met.
Our relationship is not based on sex. It is actually a very small part of it. We've had sex yes, but it's far from the focus of our relationship. Right now, our focus is me getting better, helping him cope with the death of his father this past summer, supporting each other through the stresses of the days, planning for our vacation to Disney, and just having fun together.
He's teaching me German for when we go study abroad next summer. And I help him with his RA duties here at college.
It's a give and take relationship. We both support each other. We've had our rough times, especially before I went on meds. Adam almost left me then, but said that he couldn't bring himself to because of how much he cared about me.
Since then I've told him that he can leave to make life easier for him. This man has lost hours of sleep staying up with me on the phone (before we were at the same college) after I had a bad day. And now, since their's been some issues with my roommate, I practically live with him. At night is when I'm at my worst. I'm worn down and crabby. I don't know many other men who would wake up at 3am in the morning and sit and hold a crying woman (and this still happens because of stress here at school. I'm still learning to manage it. I'm happy all day, but at night I tend to crash. Like I said, my depression isn't healed).
Adam is a pretty popular guy with plenty of girls who would be willing to have sex with him, so if our relationship was just about the sex as you and Jill claim then he would not be around anymore.
We have talked about marriage (which is the point when I think most stereotypes say that men will run), he doesn't want to get married until we're out of college while I would love to get married now. My comment earlier for thoughts on that. But I respect his with to not get married now and don't pressure him about it, while he respects mine by considering a long engagement.
I think that the stereotype that you wrote above ends with the man leaving once he's gotten what he wants. And Adam still hasn't. I trust this man more than anyone else in my life and I know that I can. He's proven himself to me over and over again with his compassion and support. If you can't understand then I feel sorry for you. If you only see the part of our relationship dealing with the fact that we've had sex, I pity you. Because their is so much love and support between us... I wish everyone the love that I have found.Posted by: Danielle at March 27, 2007 2:41 PM
It's funny when I'm told that my boyfriend will leave me after getting what he wants.
Since he wants long term commitment and a family, looks like he's not.
It's so funny that blatantly misogynist people could degrade the desires of a man as well.
I'm convinced it's because these people believe in the "common sense" ethic when understanding gender differences and psychology. I hate it when people say, "Men love the chase", or "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free". Forget how degrading or sexist these analogies and phrases are. Look to see that your "common sense" approach to this field is anything but, and is proven wrong pretty much on a daily basis.
Danielle, I'm with you. Women who have pre-marital sex who are in monogamous, long term relationships. Doesn't look so impossible to me.Posted by: Jen at March 27, 2007 4:45 PM
I do not see why, Jill, you continue to allow your supporters to attack people who simply comment on your blog. I've been reading your blog for a while now and I'm very disappointed in the turn you have allowed your readers to take. You have no problem letting them attack pro-choicers, but when pro-choice commenters ask you a simple question, you delete their comments. It has made me question how much respect you actually have for other people, and has made me not want to read you anymore. I'm sorry, you're just not very pro-life.Posted by: Mary at March 27, 2007 5:30 PM
Mary, let me get this straight. You accuse me of deleting pro-abort comments, which makes me "not very pro-life"?Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 27, 2007 7:31 PM
Don't feel too bad. Mary accused me of not being pro-life because I bring God into it.
I thought being pro-life meant being on the same side.
It is neither respectful nor pro-life of you. You do not respect other humans, so why should anyone believe you are actually pro-life?
And MK, I never accused you of not being pro-life. I said that if you are not pro-life for your own reasons, reasons that you have come to on your own separate from what the Church has told you, then you're not pro-life. If you can't say that you're pro-life on your own without the Church's influence, can you really say you're pro-life? If you don't like that, maybe you should examine yourself and see, do you really believe what you claim to believe? Because I am pro-life for one reason and one reason only: Killing a human being is wrong. The end. No pro-choice supporter can defend themselves against that. I don't have to say anything about God or sex. It is not about God or sex, which is what the pro-life movement likes to focus on. This is about simple human rights. We are guaranteed a right to LIFE. That's that. I respect all other people. This includes respecting those who differ with me. Jill, I am asking you why you allow your readers to harrass and attack the pro-choice supporters who come onto this board while you simply delete comments from pro-choicers who ask you a simple question. It shows that you do not actually respect people, and has made it very clear to me that you are not pro-life in the least.Posted by: Mary at March 27, 2007 9:41 PM