Tag Archives: African-American

Pro-life “Dad’s Princess” billboards called “weird” and racist

prolife-800x430

Anti-abortion billboards targeting predominantly African American communities in Atlanta have many questioning the motivations of Prolife Across America, the organization that erected them….

Atlantans aren’t the only ones up in arms about the posters, which are being called racist. The same signs have been placed in Memphis and African American residents are criticizing them for their messaging, telling Raycom News Network that it pits black men against black women.

“To use black men like me to facilitate the erasure of black women like my wife and others from the conversation about their own bodies is not only propaganda, it’s pathetic and repulsive.” Memphis Pastor Earle Fisher told Raycom.

~ Article entitled, “Anti-abortion group targets black neighborhoods with weird ‘dad’s princess’ billboards,” Raw Story, June 5

Sunday Word: The abolitionist history behind “Go Tell It on the Mountain”

The abolitionist story behind treasured Christmas hymns, Wk 1 of 4…

“Go Tell It on the Mountain”

John Wesley Work, Jr., an African-American professor at Fisk University in Nashville, first published the lyrics and music to this slave spiritual in 1907.

Writes Ace Collins in his book, Stories Behind the Best-Loved Songs of Christmas:

The song had come from the fields of the South, born from the inspiration of a slave’s Christmas, and it was unique in that, in the hundreds of Negro spirituals the work family saved from extinction, few had been written about Christmas. Most, as would seem only natural, centered on earthly pain and suffering, and the joy and happiness that only heaven seemed to offer.

Yet here, standing against the backdrop of such haunting spirituals as, “Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child,” was “Go Tell It on the Mountain,” a triumphant piece that embraced the wonder of lowly shepherds touched by God at the very first Christmas.

Chorus and verse 3...

Go, tell it on the mountain
Over the hills and everywhere
Go, tell it on the mountain
That Jesus Christ is born.

Down in a lowly manger
Our humble Christ was born;
And God sent us salvation
That blessed Christmas morn.

“Go Tell It on the Mountain” was also an anthem of the 1960s Civil Rights movement. Peter, Paul, and Mary adapted the words to refer to the Israelites’ exodus from slavery. The Pro-Life movement could clearly adapt the words today…

Also read the abolitionist history behind “O Holy Night” and “I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day.”

Why in the world do Black women’s groups see abortion as the answer to violence?

1920In The American Prospect, Cherisse Scott, founder of SisterReach, an African-American “reproductive justice” group centered in Memphis, laments the passage in Tennessee of Amendment 1 this past month.

Amendment 1 undoes a 2000 Tennessee Supreme Court decision that blocked any pro-life laws from being passed in the state. Scott writes:

The results will be particularly devastating for poor families.  As it is, these families struggle to have their voices heard by state lawmakers, who stigmatize and shame them for facing very hard choices….

Now, more than ever, we must be intentional about fighting the policies that fail those women and girls who are victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, rape, incest, age-discordant relationships….

SisterReach staff and members spent day after day calling attention to the unique concerns of black and poor communities…. Though the outcome of the vote on Amendment 1 wasn’t what we worked for, I congratulate those voters and advocates in Tennessee who engaged with us and began to believe, for the first time, that their votes and voices are important.

hqdefaultI don’t understand this misplaced fixation on abortion as the solution for violence imposed on women and girls of color. Why doesn’t SisterReach expend its energy stopping the source of woes – violence? Abortion is just another form of it.

As an abortion advocate, SisterReach is actually helping silence black voices through extermination. New abortion statistics released by the CDC only last week reveal the annihilation. Reported The Daily Caller:

The race of the victims is disproportionately skewed as well. Non-Hispanic black women had the highest rate of abortion — for every 1,000 black women between the ages of 15 and 44 years, 29.7 had abortions in 2011. Non-Hispanic black women accounted for 36.2% of all abortions that year; non-Hispanic white women accounted for 37.2%.

That’s a serious skew – the 2013, the Census Bureau reported that in the U.S. at large, 62.6% of people in the country were non-Hispanic white alone, while 13.2% were black or African American alone.

It gets worse, at least in New York City. Reported CNSNews.com:

In New York City, 77.56% of the abortions in 2011 were performed on Black and Hispanic babies, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Abortion is destroying the black race, rendering its population stagnant for decades. Blacks comprised 12.1% of the U.S. population in 1990, 12.3.% in 2000 and 13.2% in 2013.

Meanwhile, the Hispanic population jumped from 9% in 1990 to 12.5% in 2000 to 17.1% in 2013.

Abortion is such a tragedy, and I haven’t even discussed the high incidence of breast cancer and preterm births among black women, just to name two disproportionally high health consequences of abortion in their community.

African-American women are needlessly walking right into the eugenic trap. When will they wake up?

War on Women, Extreme Edition: prison for miscarriage?

10406672_831509336871205_6394487492385379703_n

Following the devastating Democrat rout last week, commentators on both sides of the political spectrum have proclaimed the “war on women” battle cry dead.

While abortion enthusiasts may now be forced to retire that exact terminology, and while they may also be forced to temper their hysterical push for free contraceptives (also because the new Republican “let’s offer them over-the-counter” counter-offensive terrifies Planned Parenthood), rest assured they will repackage the message.

In fact, they already have.

The abortion lobby has pushed a version of this forever, but they revealed their next PR campaign in a New York Times op ed on November 8.

Their previous version was that mothers procuring back alley abortions will be thrown in prison should abortion be made illegal.

Clarke Forsythe of Americans United for Life handily refuted that when liberal Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn tried to corner me in 2006.

Basically, Forsythe responded that there are no known cases of aborting mothers being prosecuted before Roe v Wade legalized abortion nationwide in 1973, and the law has always considered women second victims in abortion. Prosecuting them would circumvent the real goal of nabbing the perpetrators, i.e., the abortionists.

The new and improved meme is that pro-life laws will be used to send miscarrying mothers to prison. See graphic above, referenced below…

This argument has also been out for awhile, but abortion proponents are ratcheting it up as a major offensive now that former claims are felling on deaf ears.

In the NYT, Lynn Paltrow and Jeanne Flavin of the pro-abortion and misnomered group National Advocates for Pregnant Women, used skewed reports to make their case.

If the examples Paltrow and Flavin gave sound too incredible to be true, they are. Here’s just one:

In Louisiana, a woman who went to the hospital for unexplained vaginal bleeding was locked up for over a year on charges of second-degree murder before medical records revealed she had suffered a miscarriage at 11 to 15 weeks of pregnancy.

The real story? In a 2013 report Paltrow and Flavin went into greater detail, still being coy and adding some dramatic flair. But what really happened nevertheless becomes clear:

In Louisiana, Michelle Marie Greenup, a twenty-six-year-old African American woman, went to a hospital complaining of bleeding and stomach pain. Doctors suspected that she had recently given birth and contacted law enforcement authorities. After repeated police interrogations, Greenup “confessed” that the baby was born alive and it died because she had failed to provide it with proper care.

Greenup was charged with second-degree murder and incarcerated. Eventually counsel for Greenup obtained her medical records, which revealed that the fetus could not have been older than between 11 to 15 weeks and that prior to the miscarriage Greenup had been given Depo-Provera, a contraceptive injection that may cause a miscarriage if administered to a woman who is already pregnant.

Greenup was finally released, but only after she agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor violation of a public health law that regulates disposal of human remains. There is no indication that the human remains law was intended to apply to pregnant women confronted with a miscarriage

So Greenup gave birth at home and confessed to authorities that her baby died due to her neglect, after which she dumped his or her dead body.

There was a there there. Paltrow and Flavin’s colorful rendition is not plausible. I’m confident this holds true for the rest of their examples in the NYT.

Paltrow and Flavin also took issue with mothers being prosecuted for intentionally harming their babies prenatally.

But why not? If mothers are prosecuted for harming their children post-birth, they should be held just as liable pre-birth.

If courts are able to determine whether mothers are negligent or violent toward born children, courts can certainly make the same determination regarding harm inflicted on preborn children.

Mothers should be held responsible for drugging their preborn babies, just as they are for postborn babies. Or plying preborns with alcohol.  The route of administration is simply different.

Throwing in the kitchen sink, Paltrow and Flavin complained pro-life laws are forcing pregnant mothers to undergo caesarian sections against their will.

But there are indeed extreme cases when higher authorities should step in when mothers refuse surgery that would save the lives of their children.

As a labor and delivery RN, I witnessed several examples, for instance a psychiatric patient who tried to refuse a c-section to save her baby’s life. She was eventually overruled, rightfully so.

Lesbians sue sperm bank over accidentally mixed-race baby

mom and baby

by Carder

On August 21, 2012, Jennifer gave birth to Payton, a beautiful, obviously mixed-race baby girl.

Jennifer bonded with Payton easily and she and Amanda love her very much. Even so, Jennifer lives each day with fears, anxieties, and uncertainty about her future and Payton’s future….

Though compelled to repress her individuality amongst family members, Payton’s differences are irrepressible, and Jennifer does not want Payton to feel stigmatized or unrecognized due simply to the circumstances of her birth.

~ Excerpt from a lawsuit in which a white lesbian couple is suing the sperm donor bank for mistakenly giving them the sperm of an African-American male, as quoted by The Chicago Tribune, October 1

Journal of Public Health publishes study linking autism to vaccines made with aborted fetal cells

study linking autism to vaccines made with aborted fetal cells

I’ve written previously (here and here) about the possible connection between autism and vaccines made with aborted fetal cells.

Now, the September issue of the prestigious Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology has published a study conducted by scientists at Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute that shows an spike in autism in country after country where vaccines using fetal cells from aborted babies have been introduced.

The implicated vaccines are MMR (measles/mumps/rubella), Varicella (chickenpox), and Hepatitis A.

Using data from the U.S. government, United Kingdom, Denmark, and Western Australia, researchers found a spike in autism around the world after vaccines using animal cells were replaced by vaccines using aborted fetal cells:

Autistic disorder birth year change points were identified as 1980.9, 1988.4 and 1996 for the US, 1987 for the UK, 1990.4 for Western Australia, and 1987.5 for Denmark. Change points in these countries corresponded to introduction of or increased doses of human fetal cell line-manufactured vaccines….

This pattern was repeated in the US, UK, Western Australia and Denmark. Thus, rising autistic disorder prevalence is directly related to vaccines manufactured utilizing human fetal cells. Increased paternal age and DSM revisions were not related to rising autistic disorder prevalence.

Lead researcher Dr. Theresa Deisher noted something more alarming, “Not only are the human fetal contaminated vaccines associated with autistic disorder throughout the world, but also with epidemic childhood leukemia and lymphomas.”

Right to Life of Michigan goes into great detail explaining the origin of the aborted fetal cell vaccine lines. The implicated manufacturers are Barr Labs, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Sanofi Pasteur.

The RTL Michigan website lists other vaccines using aborted fetal cells and some alternatives. Unfortunately, there are currently no approved alternatives to the MMR, Varicella or Hepatitis A vaccines.

CDC and FDA implicated in cover-up

The bombshells don’t stop. From Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute’s press release announcing the publication:

Their study comes on the heels of recent breaking news that the CDC deliberately withheld evidence of the significant increase in autism among African-American boys who were vaccinated prior to 36 months of age.

So it should come as no surprise that the FDA has known for decades about the dangers of insertional mutagenesis by using the human fetal cell lines and yet, they chose to ignore it. Instead of conducting safety studies they regulated the amount of human DNA that could be present in a vaccine to no greater than 10ng.

Unfortunately, Dr. Deisher’s team discovered that the fetal DNA levels ranged anywhere from 142ng – 2000ng per dose, way beyond the so-called “safe” level.

“There are a large number of publications about the presence of HERV (human endogenous retrovirus – the only re-activatable endogenous retrovirus) and its association with childhood lymphoma,” noted Dr Deisher. “The MMR II and chickenpox vaccines and indeed all vaccines that were propagated or manufactured using the fetal cell line WI-38 are contaminated with this retrovirus. And both parents and physicians have a right to know this!”

Certainly these discoveries by SCPI should generate an immediate investigation by FDA officials, if not an outright ban on the use of aborted fetal cell lines as substrates for vaccine production. There are numerous other non-human FDA-approved cell lines that can and should be used.

New York Times touches off race war inside abortion movement

reproductive justice abortion-pro-choice-ireland-3 (1)If you didn’t know what was going on inside pro-abortion world, the Huffington Post piece Planned Parenthood Executive VP Dawn Laguens posted on July 30 in response to the July 28 New York Times article, “Advocates shun ‘pro-choice’ to expand message,” would seem out of left field.

As I explained in a blog last week, the NYT article simply elaborated on a decision Planned Parenthood made 18 months ago to abandon the term “pro-choice” as antiquated.

This is where Laguens seemed to go off on a tangent:

I was sorry to see that the Times had not included those voices and missed the rich history of women of color fighting not just for “choice,” but for full reproductive justice….

We at Planned Parenthood recognize that organizations and leaders of color made this shift decades before we began to doubt the capacity of the “pro-choice” label to fully represent the dreams of our movement. They led the way, and we respect and honor their vision and leadership. There’s a rich context that needs to be told and shared, by Planned Parenthood and others. We should have done more to ensure that the New York Times was hearing from organizations and leaders of color who have provided a reproductive justice framework for decades and led the way in the discussion about the limitations of a “pro-choice” movement. It wasn’t our intention to contribute to the exclusion of the history and the work of reproductive justice activists and organizations.

The first item of interest (underlined) is Planned Parenthood helped shape the article – and likely pimped the story, I would bet. Planned Parenthood has NYT’s ear, no surprise.

But what does race have anything to do with dropping “pro-choice” from the pro-abortion lexicon?
 

Racial tensions simmering for years


I first became aware there were racial divisions within the pro-abortion community during the Take Root 14 conference this past February, when there was pushback after NARAL co-opted the potent civil rights phrase “I Am a Man!” to oppose personhood amendments and promote abortion…

NARAL co-opts "I Am a Man" to promote abortion

Women of Color were incensed…

which resulted in mea culpas and apologies…

As it turns out racial tensions have been brewing for years. Women of Color have resented being used to push abortion while their array other concerns were all but ignored until the abortion industry needed them.
 

Planned Parenthood co-opted broader language


reprojusticeWOC believe that decades ago they conceived the concept of “reproductive justice,” which encompasses much more than abortion. Planned Parenthood, et al, are only suddenly championing the idea because abortion can no longer be sold on its own. From furiousandbrave.com, March 2013:

Reproductive justice (RJ) is a framework that arose in the late 1980s to expand the reproductive rights movements’ primary focus on “choice.” Before that time, mainstream reproductive rights and health movements comprised of mostly white-middle class women who often skirted issues that directly affected women of color despite women of color’s participation in these movements. RJ was formed in order to add an intersectional analysis to reproductive rights where advocates recognized how race, class, gender, sexuality, and nationality impact the control, regulation, and stigmatization of female fertility….

[M]any white feminists fail to recognize how perceived racial inferiority and structural inequality contributes to reproductive health disparities of women of color.

With Planned Parenthood deciding to distance itself and move beyond the “pro-choice” label, many white feminists and reproductive rights and health advocates are beginning to recognize how polarizing and inaccessible “choice” is for many communities of women.  They are beginning to embrace the reproductive justice framework.  However, while the adopting reproductive justice framework, many still struggle with inclusion.

 Reproductive justice based on crimes against WOC

 
Reproductive justice - abortion, forced sterilization

The concept of “reproductive justice” for black women is rooted in unimaginable wrongs committed against them, from rape and impregnation by white slave owners, to forced separation of families, to forced sterilization.

I read the following in a Salon article a few months back, and it really impacted. me. Even if I disagree with the course of action, I understand it more:

[T]hroughout slavery and into the 20th century, self-abortion through herbal remedies, hangers, hatpins and pencils were a way out of slavery and poverty. Our ancestors fought hard to refuse to carry the children of their master rapists and rear another generation of slaves, even when it meant that “barren” women were deemed worthless chattel and sold between plantations.

From generation to generation, stories and recipes were passed down to ensure that women weren’t forced to carry pregnancies they never desired or weren’t able to carry healthily. For as many powerful women that raised children in the worst conditions imaginable, so there were those who refused.

Margaret Garner

 
I recall a horrific story about an escaped slave mother in the autobiography of Levi Coffin, (beginning on page 557) a relative of mine (after whom my grandson Levi is named), who was the president of the Underground Railroad:Margaret_Garner story, as part of post on reproductive justice and abortion and pro-choice

Perhaps no case that came under my notice, while engaged in aiding fugitive slaves, attracted more attention and aroused deeper interest and sympathy than the case of Margaret Garner, the slave mother, who killed her child rather than see it taken back to slavery. This happened in the latter part of January, 1856….

The husband of Margaret fired several shots, and wounded one of the officers, but was soon overpowered and dragged out of the house. At this moment, Margaret Garner, seeing that their hopes of freedom were vain seized a butcher knife that lay on the table, and with one stroke cut the throat of her little daughter, whom she probably loved the best. She then attempted to take the life of the other [three] children and to kill herself, but she was overpowered and hampered before she could complete her desperate work….

The murdered child was almost white, a little girl of rare beauty….

But in spite of touching appeals, of eloquent pleadings, the Commissioner remanded the fugitives back to slavery….

It was reported that on her way down the river she sprang from the boat into the water with her babe in her arms; that when she rose she was seized by some of the boat hands and rescued, but that her child was drowned.

For WOC, killing one’s born and preborn children were historically acts of desperation. The pro-life movement yearns for WOC to be lifted from desperate states. The abortion industry exploits and profits from their desperate states.

Against the volatile backdrop of racial conflicts within the pro-abortion movement, of which I have only scratched the surface in this post, we return to the NYT article, wherein two grave errors were made that only twisted the knife in the backs of WOC.

The author, Jackie Calmes, claimed the expansion of the pro-abortion scope was a recent development, dating only as far back as 2010, which simply isn’t true. She also gave no credit to WOC:

The broadened message from women’s groups coincided with – and, they say, was hastened by – Republicans’ actions after taking control of the House and some state legislatures in the 2010 elections.

Worse, all seven women quoted in the article, whose names Planned Parenthood admitted supplying, were white.
 

“Coming irrelevance” of white-dominated abortion groups


A July 31 colorlines.com post is not only written to Calmes but also sends a scathing shot across the bow to white-powered abortion groups like Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and EMILY’s List:

Your article had a really major, glaring, gaping hole. It completely ignored, erased and denied the role women of color in this big shift.

It’s true that you never outright said that the movement was only white women, and neither did any of your interviewees. But the thing is, when you don’t mention race in a topic like this, when you don’t quote even one woman of color (in an article that quotes seven white women), that’s what you’re doing….

You may not be the only one to blame for the absence. It’s possible that of the seven white women from big, majority-white organizations that you interviewed, none of them mentioned the role of women of color and race-based tensions in the pushback against the term. Unfortunately if that is the case, as a woman of color involved in this movement going on 10 years, it’s sadly not surprising….

You might sense that I’m a little bit angry, Ms. Calmes. And in reality, this isn’t about you. Your article is just one more piece of reporting that highlights what has been going on for decades and what may really be the downfall of the reproductive rights movement – the constant erasure and co-optation of the work of women of color.

The fact that white-led organizations are now taking the credit for moving us away from pro-choice, when that charge has been led by women of color for decades, is just salt on an already long-standing open wound. The fact that your article didn’t even mention the movement for reproductive justice is evidence of the coming irrelevance of these players….

The thing is, there’s a lot at stake here. This isn’t just about your article, or even the media. Part of the reason you quoted the people you did is about the way access to resources is shaped by racism in the non-profit arena. The groups with the most funding are not the groups that represent women of color. The organizations with the best media teams, the most access to reporters like you, they are also not the groups with real connections to the women on the ground who are facing the biggest hurdles to creating the families they want to create.

The tide is turning, and there is a groundswell of people already organizing behind a broader framework. Call it reproductive justice, or just call it common sense, but no matter how much these groups try to claim they were responsible for this shift – those of us involved know it just isn’t true. While the majority of resources may remain with these groups, their serious lack of diversity in leadership, both in terms of race and age, is setting them up for a future where the majority young and of color population isn’t going to have any interest in their movement.

(Pictured L to R: Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood; Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY's List; Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL)

(Pictured L to R: Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood; Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY’s List; Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL)

Now you know why Dawn Laguens wrote her HuffPo piece. Planned Parenthood is rightfully panicking. The group inexplicably blew it.

“This is a fight about abortion rights groups both taking over the reproductive justice framework and making it only about abortion and birth control,” abortion advocate and author Robin Marty explained to me.

“The big battle is over whether those who held the pro-choice mantle are coming in and overtaking RJ to make it fit their needs, or whether they can understand that they are more than welcome to enter the framework, but it is not theirs, they do not own it, and to be a part of it means accepting the entirety of the work as their mission, far beyond just the abortion/birth control side of it,” Marty concluded.

I cannot possibly identify with the history of African-American women. I can only say the “pro-choice” movement is founded on racism and eugenics. There is a reason, according to Planned Parenthood’s research arm, Guttmacher Institute, “the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women” – and it’s not due to lack of availability of contraceptives, which are handed out like candy.

Statistics black abortion

WOC are rightfully suspicious of the abortion lobby. Abortion is not their friend. Abortion is their enemy.

UPDATE 8/5, 5p: The pro-abortion race war has opened up into an “Open Letter to Planned Parenthood” by SisterSong’s Monica Simpson, followed by a response from Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards.

[Top photo via xojane.uk; second photo via Women of Color and the Reproductive Rights Movement; graphic via furiousandbrave.com; painting by Thomas Satterwhite Noble, 1867, The Modern Medea, based on Margaret Garner’s story; bottom graphic via toomanyaborted.com]

Pro-life blog buzz 6-17-14

pro-lifeby Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.

  • Abstinence Clearinghouse says Facebook has decided to contribute to the gender identification confusion by providing users with a myriad of choices – far beyond simply “male” or “female” – with which to identify:

    In February 2014, Facebook made the startling announcement that they would provide 58 gender choices for their users to choose from. The typical identities such as male or female, heterosexual, gay or lesbian can be found on the list. But there are numerous other obscure options such as “Pangender” and “Two-Spirit.” When this “buffet-style approach” to gender becomes available to Facebook users, it places biology as secondary and allows users to describe themselves by however they “feel like” at the time.

gates

  • Bound4Life, Live Action, and Down on the Pharm all react to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s recent announcement that they will not fund abortion. Is this a true change of mind and heart or a deception, and will they suffer blowback from the abortion industry? Bound4Life writes:

    This is huge news as the Gates have always been not just “pro-choice” in their philanthropic endeavors, but radical abortion activists. According to Breitbart, “The Gates Foundation has together awarded the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Planned Parenthood of Western Washington, and other Planned Parenthood affiliates approximately $71 million in grants from prior to 2009 and through 2013.

  • Live Action says even though people like Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane would like to turn sex-selective abortion into a joke, the public isn’t laughing:

    Although Planned Parenthood may take a blase attitude to all of this, most Americans do not. Polls show that an overwhelming majority of the public is opposed to gendercide, with a significant portion also concerned about fetal suffering. You can add your voice to that number by signing Live Action’s petition calling for Planned Parenthood to be stripped of the half a billion in federal funding that it receives. Girls already face plenty of challenges; a federally subsidized death shouldn’t be one of them.

  • Euthanasia Prevention Coalition says the best way to prevent elder abuse (which is on the rise) is to say no to legalized assisted suicide in New Jersey.
  • The Leading Edge has 10 pressing questions for New Zealand’s Green Party about their “rushed and badly crafted” proposed abortion policy:

    It seems that the Greens have had to do a spot of damage control since Friday’s announcement that the introduction of a new extreme abortion law in New Zealand is going to be one of their key priorities for the upcoming general election.

Ds

  • Clinic Quotes posts a reader’s amazing testimony of aborting a child with Down syndrome (to spare the entire family the burden of caring for the child) only to end up in preterm labor during her subsequent pregnancy, in which she gave birth to a child with special needs. The reader says she has learned something important since the birth of her son:

    But what I have learned in the 5 years since he was born amazes me more. I have learned that I do have the strength to raise this child. That yes, the drs. appts. and therapies which at the beginning seemed all encompassing, fade into the past as he grows older. I have seen my daughter grow beautifully into a compassionate and loving person. The experience of having a brother with special needs has exposed her to something that I always said I would teach my children. That different isn’t bad… that what makes a person beautiful isn’t what you can see with your eyes.

  • Coming Home has some strong words for President Obama regarding the deaths of children in school shootings:

    WHY are these shootings taking place, and WHY now? We have tighter restrictions on gun purchase and ownership than in any time in America. There is a seeming proportionality between restrictions and violence, but even that cannot explain the motives….

    Obama is too myopically focused on the gun to see the coarsening to life that he himself has championed his whole adult life. He fails to see the 57 million babies torn apart in abortion….

    He fails to see an African American community decimated by 15 million missing members from abortion…. But blaming Obama is as myopic as the president’s vision.

    We have brought all of this upon ourselves. We live in a constitutional republic: limited powers to government with elected officials. We have been too narcissistic and hedonistic to care about the destruction wrought by these men and women who come from us, and are a reflection of us. We have lived lives, as a people, that are out of control and have raised children in a coarsened and calloused environment of our own making….

    The only difference between the victims of Columbine, Sandy Hook, the other school shootings, and the 57 million butchered babies is that these children in school were wanted children.

[Photos via brogzinho.wordpress.com and mdbeau.blogspot.com]