If only she had aborted
Associated Press, today:
Orosi, CA – The first newborn was discovered swaddled in a blanket on an outdoor bench, an umbilical cord still hanging from his tiny body. Then, at neat 11-month intervals, two more abandoned babies were found in parked pickup trucks in the same neighborhood.
This week, DNA tests established all three babies were almost certainly born to the same mother.
Now, in a heartbreaking mystery that has transfixed this central California farm community of 7,300, investigators are trying to find the mother and figure out what drove her to such desperate lengths….
All three newborns were found within a two-block radius. The first two – a boy and a girl – survived and are now wards of the state. The third baby was found dead of exposure on the cold night of Dec. 3….
On Monday, sheriff’s officials announced the DNA results. The first two babies probably had the same father, but Angelita [name given to baby who died] was fathered by a different man….
“This little community is a family. We know pretty much everyone else’s business and they know ours,” said Eugene Etheridge, principal of Orosi High School. “It’s concerning that this could happen again when the most precious thing we have is our children.”
Several thoughts.
~ “[T]he most precious thing we have is our children”? Really? Only when born.
~ Had this mother gone to an abortion mill when in labor, there would have been no problem.
~ I wonder how the community would react to finding abandoned aborted babies on park benches or parked pick-up trucks.
~ Some CA hospitals do this same thing. What’s the prob?
~ Interesting photo, right, of a sticker being posted in the area.
[Photos courtesy of AP]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Alyssa,
I also have another point to raise…
Many of you pro-lifers have expressed the following opinion that abortion, no matter what, is evil.
ie…someone has said that when faced with taking away a woman’s bodily autonomy and having an abortion, the abortion would be the lesser of the two evils. To which most of you replied, “there is no such thing as a lesser of two evils, as in evil is evil is evil”.
Maybe I better explain: Let’s use the ectopic pregnancy as an example. If we choose to save the mother’s life, we are choosing a good thing. There will be unfortunate consequences to the baby, but we did not choose these. Rather, we looked at the situation and chose the thing that offered the most good. Not the thing that offered the less evil.
Evil can be a consequence, true. But we never choose the evil…we just accept that it is an unfortunate consequence.
This may sound like semantics to you, and I can understand why, but we believe that there is a difference between choosing the option that offers the most good (choosing something positive) and the thing that offers the less evil (choosing something negative). The results might be the same, but the intent is different.
In the case of abortion we are faced with two choices. Take away the woman’s autonomy. Kill a child. Both negatives. But look at them this way.
Suspending a woman’s right to autonomy thereby choosing to allow the child to live (choosing a positive)
Affirming a woman’s right to choose by aborting her child. (another positive)
Of these two positives we believe that suspending the woman’s right to autonomy will bring about the most good. Choosing to affirm her right to autonomy will bring about a grave evil and must therefore not be chosen.
In this scenario, we have not chosen an evil (taking away a womans rights) but chosen a good (bringing a baby to term), with an undesirable consequence.(suspending a woman’s right to autonomy).
You may continue to view this as choosing the lesser of two evils, but at least now you know what I mean by we “never choose evil.
Does that help?
I put your answer here because I thought it was a great question and the post you put it on is about to be dropped.
mk
Does anyone remember the Amy Grossberg case? I read the book and the story about her and her ex-boyfriend Brian Peterson.It’s titled ‘Always in our Hearts.’ This poor child was thrown into a freezing cold dumpster just minutes after his birth.There was another girl in my city.Perhaps you’ve heard the name Jessica Coleman. She appeared on Oprah to tell her story of infanticide.Amy did 2 and 1/2 years in prison.Jessica is currently serving 6 years.In both cases these girls received support from the pro-choicers.What it all boils down to is lack of respect for human life.Neither girl received enough prison time.Why is the penalty for an adult killing an adult generally life or the death penalty,but when it’s an infant[the worst killing of all]women are only receiving a few years here and there?
In CA, as in most states, newborns can be taken to various places, such as hospitals and firestations, and left without any questioning within 72 hours of birth. I think that given the fact that the woman conceived three babies in three years, each conception two months after the previous birth, this is not simply a case of a woman who is dumping off unwanted children. She delivered in the absence of a medical professional, and it would seem that anyone who had just suffered thru having to deliver at home and then give up her child would wait a little longer than two months to get pregnant again or be more careful. Especially when no one has come forward and said that they know of a woman whose pregnancy mysteriously ended on three recent occasions, I believe more investigation is necessary before making too many assumptions.
Samantha,
Don’t want you to miss the post I put on the $500 site…It’s gonna get dropped soon…
MK
Since 1972 an entire generation has grown up thinking that life is expendable. They have been told that they are more important than anybody else, that they have more rights than anybody else, and that human beings are possessions.
How can we be surprised when stuff like this happens? How can we be surprised by anything that happens. Once you disregard the sanctity of human life, every other evil pales in comparison.
I wonder what virtues this generation does believe in. What have we taught them? What have we left them with. How are they supposed to discern when they are constantly told that “everything” is acceptable, and if you don’t accept it then you are being intolerant? How can we blame them? Our generation is the one that told them human life was irrelevant. So how can we point our fingers at them and say they are “bad”…what else do they know. From the time they could talk, these ideas have been hammered into their heads over and over by the media, music, their parents, their schools, their government…
So why are we surprised?
mk
MK,
I am part of the generation of which you speak, the generation that supposedly puts human life in the category of possessions, the generation that believes the individual is more important than anyone else.
You ask what virtues we believe in. While I cannot speak for all of my generation, I can certainly speak for myself.
I believe in tolerance: it is not my place to force my ideals down anyone
Hey, I’d like one of those stickers.
The woman in this story needs a psychiatric evaluation and a nice long prison term.While in prison she should receive a mandatory tubal ligation.
Less –
I have never known a life without Rowe V Wade. So, I beleive I am part of this generation that MK is talking about. What you have said scares me.
When does tolerance end? Can we continue to be tolerant of the pediphile who repeatedly hurts children? or is this none of your business because it doesn’t affect you personally? Pediphiles will tell you that having sex with a child is there basic right. In your definition we should be defending the basic rights of the North American Man/boy Love Association (NAMBLA).
Why are basic rights more important than human Life? Would it be okay for me to murder you for your food because I am hungry? Food is a basic right.
Or are you only tolerant when it comes to abortion? And you can force the rest of your ideals down people’s throats? You can’t say you are tolerant of abortion but then be intolerant of phediphilia and murderers.
Valerie,
Thank you.
Less,
I wasn’t attacking your generation, and I have already posted on a number of occasions that I do not think you are monsters. My children belong to your generation and I adore them.
My point was that I feel that MY generation deserves the brunt of guilt for creating a generation that believes, as you have said, that an individuals right to autonomy is more important that a human life.
You also say that you believe in tolerance. I do not believe in tolerating behavior that creates a society that is sick. I believe it is a sickness that allows us to close our eyes and turn our backs on anything that interferes with our personal space or doesn’t directly affect us negatively.
This is selfishness. Being self-absorbed. Be so focused on oneself that the needs of others are never as important than the needs of I. Even when you say women should have the right to make decisions about their own body, you are really saying that you should have the right to make decisions about your own body.
Thank you for allowing me the right to speak my mind. But do you realize that by legalizing abortion you are forcing your beliefs on me. I have to live in a place where people kill their own children and there is nothing I can do about it.
You say a persons rights must not be infringed upon, and I say without the first and most basic of rights, the right to live, all other rights are useless.
So, I am sorry. Sorry that this is what we have taught you. That you are number 1 and everyone else comes second. I don’t know quite how that message got to you, but I strongly suspect it began the day we said, “go ahead, kill your children…if it feels good do it…don’t worry, be happy.”
Somehow, girls like Valerie have managed not to be affected. And maybe my view is skewed because I am immersed in the pro-life cause, but it seems to me that Amanda is the exception and not the norm.
And it makes some days feel very dark…
Hope comes hard to me at these times…
But hope is all that is left…
MK
“In your definition we should be defending the basic rights of the North American Man/boy Love Association (NAMBLA).”
NAMBLA, National Association of Marlon Brando Look Alikes. South Park FTW!!! ^_^
Kyle: Dude, you have sex with children.
Stan: Yeah, you know we believe in equality for everybody and tolerance and all that gay stuff. But dude, F— you.
Kyle: Seriously.
Danielle –
;-) I’ve stopped watching South Park. (Too little time nowadays). Do I even want to know what happened?
Marlon Brando? LMAO
It was a really good episode…I’m loving the new season. The lice episode was AMAZING.
I haven’t seen any of the new season. :( Me and the bf own the first 8. Since we don’t have much free time and rarely watch tv, its a good way to see all of them.
It’s probably on the internet somewhere…my boyfriend knows all the sites…he’s way more internet savvy than I am.
MK,
Frankly, I don
I was reading on another site that Norma McCorvey[Roe] has written a letter to the Kansas House of Resolution to help put abortionist George Tiller out of business.
Less –
If you would like to help out people in school, then check out the new proposed legislation ‘Elizabeth Cady Stanton Pregnant and Parenting Student Services Act of 2007.’ It was introduced by Senators Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., and Ben Nelson, D-Neb. It was introduced March 19.
As for comparing abortion to pediphilia and murder: Why is it that only women who want abortion can be the only people on the face of this planet who can say “its my body and I can do what I want”? Why is it murder only if the person is ‘born’? Are you saying that if someone had killed my baby when I was 7 months pregnant that it would not be murder? The object that is violating the woman’s autonomy has a seperate blood type, seperate DNA structure and has a heartbeat. Not to mention that the majority of the time that ‘violation’ was permitted to be placed there by the mother. (please note: I said majority, rape and incest are excluded)
Valerie the right to bodily autonomy is the right to control what one does with her body so long as it does not affect another person’s rights. A fetus is not considered a person by definition of the law. However, your assertion that bodily autonomy applies only to women who want abortions is incorrect. A woman who does not want to have sex but is forced to has her right violated and her ability to control what happens to and in her body is taken from her; therefore, rape is a crime because it is one person’s infringing on the rights of another person.
Samantha –
I clearly put at the end of the post that rape and incest are not apart of this. So, I’m not sure your point.
I asked a specific question. If someone artificailly ended my pregnancy at 7 months you are saying that it is not murder?
oh yea – The supreme court once ruled that the black people did not have the same rights as white people. AT another time it was law that you could own a black person because they were not human, they were animals. hmm… Good thing people stood up for them to give them their rights. That is what I am doing for the unborn. The law is wrong now as it was wrong then.
Thats right, at that time the law stated they were not a person. If people decided to just listen to what the “law” said and not what their moral convictions said, slavery of black people would still be an issue today.
The difference between the law regarding slavery and the laws regarding abortion is simple. African American slaves are already born: fetii are not.
Less –
So then according to you if my pregnancy had been termintated by someone at 7 months without my permission you would not consider it muder.
My son was born at 7 months and survived, so the fetus would be viable.
“Why is it that only women who want abortion can be the only people on the face of this planet who can say “its my body and I can do what I want”?…The object that is violating the woman’s autonomy has a seperate blood type, seperate DNA structure and has a heartbeat. Not to mention that the majority of the time that ‘violation’ was permitted to be placed there by the mother. (please note: I said majority, rape and incest are excluded)”
“Samantha –
I clearly put at the end of the post that rape and incest are not apart of this. So, I’m not sure your point.”
No, Valerie, you said that the only women who exercise their right to bodily autonomy are pregnant women who want abortions. Your disclaimer was about raped women’s not consenting to being pregnant. It did not reference the fact that rape and incest is a violation of bodily autonomy. I find it interesting that when you make an argument that I clearly rebutted, you say that my example is null and void…
No, Samantha, I asked why Pro-choicers beleive the only person who has a right is the woman wanting an abortion. That is why it is posed as a question to Less asking why the pediphile and murderer do not have the same ‘it’s my body’ rights.
Considering the word rape means: “unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female ” I figured it was assumed that it is a violation of the womans body. But I guess I shouldn’t make assumptions based on the definitions of words.
You can’t just read the lines you want and then dismiss the others.
By the way. Once again, I’m asking questions over and over and over, with no one answering them. Interesting.
South Park!
“My unborn bebe”
My favorite one so far is the one where Butters is termed “bi-curious” and is sent to gay camp.