Pro-abort prof to develop balanced abortion curriculum?
Oh, please.
Pro-abort, pro-gay Drury University professor Teresa Hornsby has been handed a grant by the Wabash Center for Teaching and Learning in Theology and Religion to develop a “historic” college teaching program on abortion “that takes into consideration many different viewpoints.”
Hornsby is an expert on the pro-abort viewpoint, that’s for sure.
She sits on the board of the Abortion Conversation Project, where they “envision a world in which abortion is affirmed as a moral decision without stigma.”…
In 2005 Hornsby was the faculty contact for the talk, “Why abortion rights should be preserved.”
In 2007 Hornsby authored the book, Sex Texts from the Bible, about which a reviewer wrote:
The Bible sends no message, or mixed messages, about divorce, adultery, masturbation, abortion, celibacy, sexual abstinence, homosexual relations and even sex with slaves, says Hornsby, who could be described as a moderate-to-liberal Bible scholar….
Abortion? The issue that makes or breaks political elections in dozens of countries? There is no specific word for abortion in the Bible, Hornsby says.
It is equally difficult, she maintains, to determine any clearcut message from the Bible about the touchy subject of birth control….
[T]he first book of Samuel… describes an intimate, loving and sometimes physical relationship between two men, Jonathan and David, the latter of whom became the King of Israel.
Hornsby is listed in the Lesbian and Gay Archives and Libraries Life for the United States as the holder of the Tennessee Lesbian Archive.
When at Vanderbilt Hornsby headed the Department of Religion’s Office of Gay, Bisexual and Lesbian Concerns.
Hornsby did say she wants to “invite insiders from both sides of the issue” to her workshops when she develops her curriculum, the one from our side being an official from the local crisis pregnancy care center.
She has got to be kidding. That will be her pro-life apologist? I mean, let’s at least feign fairness, Professor. Email me. I’ll give you a name or 2.
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.
I love how being a pro-abort makes you neutral, but being pro-life makes you biased.
I’m confused about why you seem to be offended by her involvement in gay and lesbian issues.
“”envision a world in which abortion is affirmed as a moral decision without stigma.””
What does that mean?
“””envision a world in which abortion is affirmed as a moral decision without stigma.””
What does that mean? ”
hehe…
I love how being a pro-abort makes you neutral, but being pro-life makes you biased.
Posted by: Jacqueline at February 25, 2008 5:51 PM
I think it’s that she’s a legitimate scholar who seems to admit her own bias towards choice and seeks out understanding of other viewpoints that makes her more neutral.
She has got to be kidding. That will be her pro-life apologist? I mean, let’s at least feign fairness, Professor. Email me. I’ll give you a name or 2.
………………………………..
What kind of bozos are running cpcs that you wouldn’t consider a cpc official to be competent of providing adequate representation of the anti-choice view point? You seem to think that they are expert enough to ‘guide’ women’s decisions about gestation and parenthood.
Does anyone here agree with what Paul Hill did?
I think I’m unbiased for the most part, seeing as many people I love and respect are pro-life, I’m not so quick to think anything radical.
I’m confused about why you seem to be offended by her involvement in gay and lesbian issues.
Posted by: Hieronymous at February 25, 2008 5:54 PM
I see no offense. Jill posted her credentials. Why would you take that as offensive? Wouldn’t this woman want to get recognized for her work and accolades in her area of interest? If these were not mentioned, you would accuse Jill of being homo-phobic for not disclosing these items.
Hornsby is an absolute false prohet of Baal and needs to be called out for what she is.
Her lifestyle is an utter admission of her rebellion towards a Holy God. It is very sad and tragic that an apparently intelligent person would act so ignorantly of the clear commands of Scripture. And she too will pass on to oblivion.
God cannot be pleased as she attemtps to get people to buy into her perversion.
I’d like to debate her biblically. I’d eat her lunch.
The funding arm of this so-called “Wabash Center” should be called into account by its contributors. I’ll bet you anything they’d lose half their mailing list if they knew of this garbage.
This is evident where the utter blasphemy of God is going in our society. Calling evil good and good evil.
I’d like to debate her biblically. I’d eat her lunch.
Posted by: HisMan at February 25, 2008 7:33 PM
Now, now, stealing other people’s food isn’t nice.
I see no offense. Jill posted her credentials. Why would you take that as offensive? Wouldn’t this woman want to get recognized for her work and accolades in her area of interest? If these were not mentioned, you would accuse Jill of being homo-phobic for not disclosing these items.
Posted by: Sandy at February 25, 2008 7:26 PM
Do you actually believe yourself when you write disingenuous stuff like that?
Hisman please read my post.
I think it’s that she’s a legitimate scholar who seems to admit her own bias towards choice and seeks out understanding of other viewpoints that makes her more neutral.
She’s more than biased- she’s an activist.
And so am I- I am not quite on her level but I will have my doctorate in 3 years. I am a member of several pro-life organizations. By my admitting my bias towards life, am I considered neutral? Would I get this grant?
H:
Why do you think I am being disingenuous?
H:
Why do you think I am being disingenuous?
Posted by: Sandy at February 25, 2008 9:02 PM
Because I’d prefer that to thinking that you’re either a deliberate liar or just stupid? Pardon me for being blunt, but you asked.
I’d like to debate her biblically. I’d eat her lunch.
Posted by: HisMan at February 25, 2008 7:33 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE!
LOL FF
Now, now, stealing other people’s food isn’t nice.
You’re my favorite, Hieronymous. XOXOXO
…well, you may tie with MK
FF,
Could you give me that link to Jim Bob Duggar’s posts on the white supremicist blog? I would really like to see these for myself.
Thanks.
Leah,
Some time ago you and I discussed the poetry of a woman who was writing from the perspective of a black slave. Wasn’t there an actual freed slave who also wrote poetry? I think that’s where I was and remain a little confused, or was this always just a woman writing from the perspective of a slave?
Thank you for any help you can give me on this.
I wonder how those silly pro-aborts think they’re EVER going to get the stigma taken off of murdering your unborn child. Sheesh, it’s been 35 years, you would have thought they could come up with SOMETHING.
FF,
Could you give me that link to Jim Bob Duggar’s posts on the white supremicist blog? I would really like to see these for myself.
Thanks.
Posted by: Mary at February 25, 2008 9:43 PM
I don’t think he posts there. People there talk about him and his family.
“”envision a world in which abortion is affirmed as a moral decision without stigma.””
PIP: What does that mean?
“Where there won’t be whining about it”?
“Now, now, stealing other people’s food isn’t nice.”
Leah: You’re my favorite, Hieronymous. XOXOXO
...well, you may tie with MK
Whew… a guy takes a few hours off… he loses ground….
; )
Having an activist pro-abort lesbian develop this “curriculum” is like having the Grand Wizard of the KKK teach Black History.
Doug: Je t’aime aussi ! Don’t worry. You did come up with “very lucky guy” for my personal poll yesterday.
Mary: I’m not quite sure… Let me get back to you on that.
I’m going to bed.
lol Doug, but the issue here is “why is there a stigma?” You guys admit yourself that abortion isn’t a good thing, that it is a horrible choice, that you think women should be able to make. Why shouldn’t it be treated like it is- something that’s really a horrible thing?
If she wants abortion to be the new black, she’s heading down the wrong road.
PIP, I think the “stigma” is vastly less than it used to be, re decades like the 1940’s and 1950’s.
To the degree that there is current stigma, it comes from people who don’t like abortion, to the extent that they make a relatively big deal about it.
I don’t say that abortion is a “horrible” choice. Personally, I’d say that pregnancy prevention is preferable, on several scores, but once an unwanted pregnancy is fact, it’s too late for any such consideration, and in a case like Erin’s, for example, it may well be that abortion is the best thing. No, everything is not “perfect” but in no way does “horrible” necessarily apply.
So, here is a bible interpreter who uses the bible for adding authority for abortion.
This confirms the absolute truth, of the agnostic Doug, that all religions have a God vision that is always looking out for something to kill in that God’s name.
Why should she use the bible to make abortion confirm her personal interpretations of the bible?
What difference does it make to logic and reasoning, when she is making up a invention of her own mind, a personal version of God, from a book that has NO words on abortion in the first place, according to her study of the bible.
She is making it all up, and her personal need for using a silent,know nothing god, to allow her to murder human beings is a offence against logical reasoning.
.
A honest killer, such as Doug, is a better killer then a scapegoating killer, such as this women.
Responses to various posts and questions:
1. The fact that Hornsby is a homosexual proponent is germane. The homosexual and abortion lobbies work in tandem and have the same goal: illicit sex without consequences. Lately, whenever I research someone such as Hornsby, there seems to be a homosexual connection.
2. That Hornsby is an abortion activist did not come out in the article. I had to find it.
3. People who work in CPCs are equipped to discuss the issue with mothers in crisis. Some may be equipped to discuss it academically. But a serious scholar developing serious and fair college curriculum should search out pro-life scholars, not just grab the nearest pro-lifer.
4. Mike, 11:39p, said: “Having an activist pro-abort lesbian develop this ‘curriculum’ is like having the Grand Wizard of the KKK teach Black History.” Great analogy, Mike.
5. PiP, great question. What in the world does “envision a world in which abortion is affirmed as a moral decision without stigma.” mean?
Just curious..
What do the prochoicers see when they see that mangled, dead baby in the sidebar? Do they see cells? A blob of tissue? Medical waste?
Perhaps they can’t bring themselves to look.
The homosexual and abortion lobbies work in tandem and have the same goal: illicit sex without consequences.
LOL. I love how the idea of people having sex on their own terms just horrifies you.
What do the prochoicers see when they see that mangled, dead baby in the sidebar? Do they see cells? A blob of tissue? Medical waste?
The same thing you see: a stillborn.
reality,
LOL. I love how the idea of people having sex on their own terms just horrifies you.
Does this mean that doing “things” on your own terms makes something morally okay? Using that logic, Jack the Ripper was an upstanding guy.
You see a still born? So you think these pictures are fake? Tell me, what do you think a child aborted at 24 weeks would look like? How about 15 weeks? How about 11? And why in heavens name would we need to fake these pictures? That would imply that the real thing looked different!
honestly, you have chose a misnomer.
I find it interesting how those who actually come from a religious tradition and have studied a religious text and related commentaries extensively differ so much with professors such as Hornsby. If someone wants to know what the bible really teaches and means why would they read Hornsby’s book? Why not ask a rabbi?
Anyway here are some good articles by those whose agenda is nurturing families not the promotion of abortion and homosexuality:
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/homosexuality-and-judaism.htm
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/why-do-religious-people-have-so-many-kids.htm
Anonymous, 9:51PM
Thank you. That’s what I thought. A big difference between posting yourself and other people posting about you.
The same thing you see: a stillborn.
Posted by: reality at February 26, 2008 7:10 AM
When I see that picture, I can’t honestly say that I know if he or she is alive or not. I also cannot be sure of the baby’s age. I certainly cannot assert much about the medical condition.
However, I can say that I immediately feel a desire to wrap the that child up and comfort him and wipe his face. This isn’t a medical assesment, just a gut instinct.
I guess it is from spending time with children and youth. You just develop this reaction that you want to help and comfort a hurting child.
Reality,
You are not seeing the same thing that I see. Thanks for trying.
Leah,
Comment allez-vous. Jill ne sera pas tres heureuse si je ne parle pas anglais.
There was a poetess named Phillis Wheatley who was a former slave. That’s who I was thinking of.
Mary,
I looked up Wheatley because I didn’t know she was freed. Anyway she was so popular as a poet in the US and England that she was freed. Great story of amazing accomplishments.
She was freed at age 19. Another competent teen.
Doug 12:31am
I can’t agree with you that stigma was any worse in the past or less today. I can tell you for a fact that while the local abortionist is tolerated by the medical community, I know of a few who sent him a pregnant mistress or two to be discreetly taken care of, they are still looked down on by the medical community as a whole. As I stated in a previous post, our local abortionist would not even acknowledge to the local newpaper that he performs abortions. Its not like the entire city hasn’t known for over 30 years. Why won’t he proudly proclaim what he does?
I well remember when people had no problem being called “proabortion”. Abortion was called abortion, not “choice”. Now its an insult to be called pro-abortion. Why? I also remember when they became “pro-choice”. Gee we don’t like abortion, we only support the choice of having one. It was to make abortion more palatable to the public.
I remember a news magazine was whining about the “abortion backlash”, which was of course, according to this magazine, plotted and engineered by the Catholic Church. The magazine could offer no proof to its claim but why let facts get in the way of bigotry and scapegoating.
Good Lord, Jill, that picture of the aborted baby on the side bar makes me feel like I’m going to throw up. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be there – pictures like that did make a difference to me in my conversion from the “dark side”. I guess I just can’t understand how someone can look at that and still support a “right to choose”. I mean, have people completely taken leave of their senses?
S.
Hippie, 8:25am
Especially when you consider that there was certainly no effort to educate slaves, so they were self taught, often at great personal risk.
When I look at someone like Hornsby, I wonder how many children she has. I think in contrast to the rabbi with five kids. Will his kids be sitting in her class? If she isn’t interested in indoctrinating her own kids why then the interest in teaching other people’s kids? I am not saying this because she is a woman. I think there are men who share Hornsby’s views. I think as parents we need to think about the motives of these “teachers” who reinterpret what we have taught our children and help our children choose colleges that hire professors whose views we share.
LOL. I love how the idea of people having sex on their own terms just horrifies you.
Posted by: reality at February 26, 2008 7:09 AM
How long did it take you to figure that out?
Ever since Moses brought down the tablets, followers have struggled with obeying the commandment that all sex be inside a marriage.
No sex outside of marriage is ever good. Only sex between a man and a woman in a committed marriage and open to possibility of life is good. All the other variations are wrong.
Thousands of years of interpretation and commentarty and we are right where we started when Moses came down the mountain.
Especially when you consider that there was certainly no effort to educate slaves, so they were self taught, often at great personal risk.
Posted by: Mary at February 26, 2008 9:00 AM
Wheatley was a bit of an exception, her owners encouraged her and she knew Latin as well. Sometimes we forget that slavery was commonplace and some slave owners evolved in their understanding of slaves as human beings when they got to know them as people. Many abolitionists started as slave holders and grew in their appreciation of the inherent rights of their slaves which is why they opposed slavery, helped their slaves to freedom and worked to change the laws. People can change when they see the truth and in humilty admit they have been wrong and seek to right those wrongs.
No sex outside of marriage is ever good.
Posted by: Anonymous at February 26, 2008 9:10 AM
Huh, my experience was different :-)
Oh wait, I think your “good” must mean something else than my “good”….
Responses to various posts and questions:
1. The fact that Hornsby is a homosexual proponent is germane. The homosexual and abortion lobbies work in tandem and have the same goal: illicit sex without consequences. Lately, whenever I research someone such as Hornsby, there seems to be a homosexual connection.
Posted by: Jill Stanek at February 26, 2008 5:46 AM
ROFL!!! And there’s the crux of the matter. There’s a quote that I’ve seen attributed to HL Mencken about a “Puritan is someone who is deathly afraid that someone, somewhere, is having fun.” It seems to apply to “pro-lifers” just as well.
Good Lord, Jill, that picture of the aborted baby on the side bar makes me feel like I’m going to throw up. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be there – pictures like that did make a difference to me in my conversion from the “dark side”. I guess I just can’t understand how someone can look at that and still support a “right to choose”. I mean, have people completely taken leave of their senses?
S.
Posted by: Anonymous at February 26, 2008 8:56 AM
Anon,
Totally agree.
Mary,
Great question. I would love an answer from someone.
Good weekend question maybe for all of the PCers.
What do aborted babies look like at 15 weeks? 20 weeks? 25 weeks? 30 weeks?
It is such a ridiculous argument to say that is a stillborn baby. I mean PCers support the killing of these babies, but they don’t want to see the reality of the outcome I guess.
You support it. Own it.
Because I’d prefer that to thinking that you’re either a deliberate liar or just stupid? Pardon me for being blunt, but you asked.
Posted by: Hieronymous at February 25, 2008 9:15 PM
I guess I could say the same about you H.
Hippie,
Thank you. That’s very interesting. That certainly would be an exceptional situation.
I understand that freed black men and women helped settle the West, the women opened businesses, the men mostly worked the ranches, farms, etc. The black women were, for the most part, more literate than their white counterparts. They had taught themselves to read with the Bible.
Yes Sandy, I agree. Own it.
As for the baby being “stillborn” – what do pro-choicers think happens when a baby is stillborn? Why would a stillborn baby be mangled like that?
Furthermore, what interest could pro-life people possibly have in faking a photo – in portraying “stillborn” babie as “aborted”? None -they have nothing to gain, and indeed a great deal to lose, in speaking for these voiceless victims. They don’t get paid for their efforts, nor do they get a lot of positive notoriety for their work.
Now, think, what interest$ do abortion proponents and providers have to gain from claiming that abortion DOES not look like that photo? Well, abortion providers have a great deal to gain from that. If people start seeing abortion for what it really is, of course, the majority of them will turn against it, leaving the abortion providers up $h!t creek, so to speak. Of course, the pro-abortionists have a vested interest in trying to make people believe that photos of mangled, aborted babies are actually photos of stillborn babies. If they don’t do so, they will be out of business!
Think!
S.
Mary,
I’ve never heard of Phillis before, very interesting woman. I found this poem on Wikipedia. They say it’s one of the few written about her own experience. Most were about other people.
On Being Brought From Africa To America
‘Twas mercy brought me from my pagan land,
Taught my beknighted soul to understand
That there’s a God, that there’s a Savior too:
Once I redemption neither sought nor knew.
Some view our sable race with scornful eye,
“Their color is a diabolic dye.”
Remember Christians; Negroes, black as Cain,
May be refin’d, and join th’ angelic train.
—-Phillis Wheatley
Responses to various posts and questions:
1. The fact that Hornsby is a homosexual proponent is germane. The homosexual and abortion lobbies work in tandem and have the same goal: illicit sex without consequences. Lately, whenever I research someone such as Hornsby, there seems to be a homosexual connection.
Posted by: Jill Stanek at February 26, 2008 5:46 AM
I have to agree with Jill. Even worse is the denigration of motherhood.
“Good Lord, Jill, that picture of the aborted baby on the side bar makes me feel like I’m going to throw up.”
I posted that as QoTD. Those pictures are disturbing, but it’s important to see what abortion actually is and does, the barbaric nature of it, the evil that it is. It must be seen, not hidden.
I know Jasper – I agree with you….
S.
Thank you Jasper for posting it. The precious baby is difficult to look at but I can’t seem to turn away from the horrific truth of what abortion is and what abortion does.
I’d like to have a pc’er post a photo of what they think an aborted baby looks like. Every single one of them that has been posted, pc’ers deny is actually an aborted baby.
I wonder how those silly pro-aborts think they’re EVER going to get the stigma taken off of murdering your unborn child. Sheesh, it’s been 35 years, you would have thought they could come up with SOMETHING.
Posted by: Elizabeth at February 25, 2008 9:46 PM
*******************
Since the term ‘proabort’ is a dishonest deliberate insult, since being pro choice is not being a ‘pro abort’ and since no one is murdering children … youd think that antichoicers would be able to come up with something besides insults, misinformation, lies, sensationalism, melodramatics and hysteria … but they cant. After 35 years you’d think antichoicers could come up with SOMETHING at least resembling the truth. But they cant.
And yllwass shows up to vomit in front of everyone yet again ….
The homosexual and abortion lobbies work in tandem and have the same goal: illicit sex without consequences.
******************************
Its this kind of puritanical punative idiocy that makes so many antichoice arguments just flat out laughably stupid. Trying to pretend that only married people ‘should’ have sex and that only people who are ready and willing to have children ‘should’ have sex and everyone else ‘should’ be celibate is absurd. Whimpering about ‘sex without consequences’ is imbecilic. Just what ‘consequences’ are SUPPOSED to be attached to being sexually active? If ‘you’ want to live your life with those attitudes then by all means go right ahead. But to expect the laws of the US to reflect those archaic attitudes and expect everyone else in the nation to get into line and march to your tune is demented and delusional. Its also imbecilic to try to assume that only “illicit” sex can result in an unwanted pregnancy.
From Jasper’s QoTD:
In a prepared statement, Diane Luby, president and chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood, said her organization will continue its commitment to strengthen the community fabric of Worcester.
“We will continue to work collaboratively with a broad coalition of schools, organizations, parents, clergy and policymakers to encourage and promote strong families in the heart of the commonwealth”, Ms. Luby said.
That’s not the PP I know.
No sex outside of marriage is ever good. Only sex between a man and a woman in a committed marriage and open to possibility of life is good. All the other variations are wrong.
************
Bullsh*t
After 35 years you’d think antichoicers could come up with SOMETHING at least resembling the truth. But they cant.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 1:11 PM
Did you not see the picture of the twisted mangled aborted baby above? Or is that too much truth for you to handle??
And yllwass shows up to vomit in front of everyone yet again ….
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 1:14 PM
pot…meet kettle.
TR,
I realize that pro-abort is offensive, which is why I try not to use it anymore. What do you think about “pro-abortion-choicer”? Is that acceptable?
idiocy stupid imbecilic demented imbecilic
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 1:25 PM
TR,
You really should try to expand your vocabulary a bit. Your insults are getting so….I don’t know….predictable?
Sandy,
It amuses me! I just picture TR pounding away on the keyboard, red-faced, smoke coming out of nostrils and ears, wearing a 10-gallon hat. It’s sad but kindof funny!
“No sex outside of marriage is ever good. Only sex between a man and a woman in a committed marriage and open to possibility of life is good. All the other variations are wrong”
Okay, you live that way if you like. Others who believe differently will behave differently.
Department of Religion’s Office of Gay, Bisexual and Lesbian Concerns
hee-hee-hee-hee! That’s hysterical!
Would that office be located in a closet, or out of one?
Sandy,
It amuses me! I just picture TR pounding away on the keyboard, red-faced, smoke coming out of nostrils and ears, wearing a 10-gallon hat. It’s sad but kindof funny!
Posted by: JLM at February 26, 2008 1:37 PM
JLM,
Thanks for the good humor! Toooo funny. I’ve always thought maybe the cowboy boots were a little to tight and pinched in the toes which could make anyone a little ornry. (Especially when your stomping your feet up and down)
lol Sandy!
or the chaps too tight???
I’d love to see an interview with this “woman” once the genetic marker is found for homosexuality and prenatal tests result in the mass abortion of fetuses who may grow up to be gay. That will be quite a dilemma for “her” dontcha think?
Did you not see the picture of the twisted mangled aborted baby above? Or is that too much truth for you to handle??
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 1:27 PM
*****************************
You could start out by proving that the picture is ‘the product of abortion’, tell us all where the picture came from, when it was taken, and where it was taken. If you cant do that then you dont have any room to talk about ‘the truth’. You dont know if its ‘the truth’ or not and its obvious you dont care.
When I look at someone like Hornsby, I wonder how many children she has. I think in contrast to the rabbi with five kids. Will his kids be sitting in her class? If she isn’t interested in indoctrinating her own kids why then the interest in teaching other people’s kids? I am not saying this because she is a woman. I think there are men who share Hornsby’s views. I think as parents we need to think about the motives of these “teachers” who reinterpret what we have taught our children and help our children choose colleges that hire professors whose views we share.
Posted by: Anonymous at February 26, 2008 9:03 AM
*******************************
And what about the fundamentalist teacher who tries to ‘indoctrinate’ children with their biases? Do you have a problem with that? Of course not! If you APPROVE of the attempted indoctrination then thats just find and dandy. Im amused that youre so neurotic and paranoid about COLLEGE age children being ‘protected’ from attitudes YOU dont approve of.
What is with the Texasoxymoron?
This one attribute of yllas and vomit is again pointing out Texasredneck’s reduced mental capacity.
Do you suffer from GERD Texasredneck?
Just for grins and a chuckle, Texasoxymoron, what are you trying to say with this attempt to return my correct definition of you as a oxymoron, from not be a friendly person, from the state that is defined as “friend” in its orginal Caddo language, and adding a “W” to my moniker?
Care to explain your word spelling of my moniker with a “W” included in it?
PajamaMama 2:16PM
Not so far fetched. Who ever thought females would be aborted on such a massive scale for no other reason than being females? I cannot for a minute believe feminists ever anticipated this.
It is such a ridiculous argument to say that is a stillborn baby. I mean PCers support the killing of these babies, but they don’t want to see the reality of the outcome I guess.
You support it. Own it.
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 9:25 AM
*********************
No one is supporting ‘killing babies’. And your only argument seems to be ‘you have to agree with me!’
You could start out by proving that the picture is ‘the product of abortion’, tell us all where the picture came from, when it was taken, and where it was taken. If you cant do that then you dont have any room to talk about ‘the truth’. You dont know if its ‘the truth’ or not and its obvious you dont care.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 2:22 PM
The question has been posed TR, but I will go on and ask you directly.
Let’s jest settle on this once and fer all, what do you ponder an aborted baby done look like? Now don’t you go run and hide on me naw. I’m beggin ya to come on back with an answer.
You hear??
You could start out by proving that the picture is ‘the product of abortion’, tell us all where the picture came from, when it was taken, and where it was taken. If you cant do that then you dont have any room to talk about ‘the truth’. You dont know if its ‘the truth’ or not and its obvious you dont care.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 2:22 PM
The question has been posed TR, but I will go on and ask you directly.
Let’s jest settle on this once and fer all, what do you ponder an aborted baby done look like? Now don’t you go run and hide on me naw. I’m beggin ya to come on back with an answer.
You hear??
You could start out by proving that the picture is ‘the product of abortion’, tell us all where the picture came from, when it was taken, and where it was taken. If you cant do that then you dont have any room to talk about ‘the truth’. You dont know if its ‘the truth’ or not and its obvious you dont care.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 2:22 PM
The question has been already been posed TR, but I will go on and ask you directly.
Let’s jest settle on this once and fer all. Jest what do you ponder an aborted baby done look like? Now don’t you go run and hide on me naw. I’m beggin ya to come on back with an answer.
Ya hear??
It is such a ridiculous argument to say that is a stillborn baby. I mean PCers support the killing of these babies, but they don’t want to see the reality of the outcome I guess.
You support it. Own it.
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 9:25 AM
*********************
No one is supporting ‘killing babies’. And your only argument seems to be ‘you have to agree with me!’
And yllwass shows up to vomit in front of everyone yet again ….
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 1:14 PM
pot…meet kettle.
Posted by: JLM at February 26, 2008 1:28 PM
******************************
So you want to try to pretend my posts are *no different* from yllowass’? I dont expect honesty and integrity from antichoicers – youve given one more good reason not to.
Now, think, what interest$ do abortion proponents and providers have to gain from claiming that abortion DOES not look like that photo? Well, abortion providers have a great deal to gain from that. If people start seeing abortion for what it really is, of course, the majority of them will turn against it, leaving the abortion providers up $h!t creek, so to speak. Of course, the pro-abortionists have a vested interest in trying to make people believe that photos of mangled, aborted babies are actually photos of stillborn babies. If they don’t do so, they will be out of business!
Think!
S.
*************************
I CAN think. Thats why I realize your argument is so pathetically stupid. Over 90% of abortions are performed in the first trimester with more than 60% performed by 8 weeks. Whimpering that a picture of what is apparently about a 7 month fetus is “the truth” about abortion is absurd. Trying to pretend that dishonest pictures will ‘end’ abortion just shows that either you cant deal with the truth or you cant tell the truth.
TR,
I realize that pro-abort is offensive, which is why I try not to use it anymore. What do you think about “pro-abortion-choicer”? Is that acceptable?
Posted by: Janet at February 26, 2008 1:29 PM
*******************************
I’m pro choice. I honestly dont care which decision a woman makes as long as SHE is happy with her decision. I can explain why I am not against abortion. I can also accept very readily that its not the right decision for everyone. What is the best decision for one woman can be the worst one for someone else. I support the woman who is pregnant making the choice that is best for her. I am pro choice.
So you want to try to pretend my posts are *no different* from yllowass’? I dont expect honesty and integrity from antichoicers – youve given one more good reason not to.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 3:30 PM
Of course you don’t. You obviously wouldn’t know honesty if it slapped upside the hide.
I call it like I see it, TR. I see the same things in yllas’ posts that I see in yours. Great points, too much anger & name-calling.
idiocy stupid imbecilic demented imbecilic
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 1:25 PM
TR,
You really should try to expand your vocabulary a bit. Your insults are getting so….I don’t know….predictable?
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 1:33 PM
**********************
My vocabulary is just fine. I use the right words in the context of the sentence. What is ‘predictable’ is the idiocy and dishonesty of a typical antichoice argument. Its hardly my fault that you cant come up with an intelligent argument to support your position or an intelligent insult. Your comment about ‘cactus’ just made you look juvenile and stupid.
Sandy,
It amuses me! I just picture TR pounding away on the keyboard, red-faced, smoke coming out of nostrils and ears, wearing a 10-gallon hat. It’s sad but kindof funny!
Posted by: JLM at February 26, 2008 1:37 PM
************************
You prove my point. You have to lie. You dont have what it takes to deal with the truth so you have to fabricate – have to invent – have to make up fantasies that you CAN deal with. And lying about other people comes as readily to you as drawing breath.
JLM,
Thanks for the good humor! Toooo funny. I’ve always thought maybe the cowboy boots were a little to tight and pinched in the toes which could make anyone a little ornry. (Especially when your stomping your feet up and down)
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 1:50 PM
********************
As I pointed out, you have to hide behind your lies.
Not so far fetched. Who ever thought females would be aborted on such a massive scale for no other reason than being females? I cannot for a minute believe feminists ever anticipated this.
Posted by: Mary at February 26, 2008 2:59 PM
*************************
And what ‘massive scale’ is this happening on in the United States?
TR,
You done brought that little diddy on all by yourself. Apparently the cacti prickles are still pain’n ya?
JLM,
Thanks for the good humor! Toooo funny. I’ve always thought maybe the cowboy boots were a little to tight and pinched in the toes which could make anyone a little ornry. (Especially when your stomping your feet up and down)
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 1:50 PM
********************
As I pointed out, you have to hide behind your lies.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 3:48 PM
What lies are you talking about? We are just speculating as to why you get so riled up and start name calling.
The question has been posed TR, but I will go on and ask you directly.
Let’s jest settle on this once and fer all, what do you ponder an aborted baby done look like? Now don’t you go run and hide on me naw. I’m beggin ya to come on back with an answer.
You hear??
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 3:27 PM
***********************************
Thank you for again looking like an idiot, Sandy. You have a flair for it. No doubt its a result of a great deal of experience. Babies arent aborted and a typical abortion performed by RU486 or suction curettage is going to look like menstrual flow. An aborted fetus later in gestation – that would be between 3% and 4% is going to look like a fetus. As I said before, if Jill wants to say the picture she posted IS ‘the product of abortion’ then all she has to do is say where she got the picture, when it was taken, where it was taken, where the abortion was performed, and provide proof that it IS a picture of an aborted fetus and not a picture of a late term miscarriage or still birth. If she cant do that then all she can offer is “Well this might represent what a fetus aborted late in gestation might look like”. And thats not ‘the truth’ about anything.
“I CAN think. Thats why I realize your argument is so pathetically stupid. Over 90% of abortions are performed in the first trimester with more than 60% performed by 8 weeks. Whimpering that a picture of what is apparently about a 7 month fetus is “the truth” about abortion is absurd. Trying to pretend that dishonest pictures will ‘end’ abortion just shows that either you cant deal with the truth or you cant tell the truth.”
Ignoring the insults….
What about the remaining 10%? 10% of 40 million is still 4 million. 4 million deaths that look like that picture, caused by intentional killing by doctors and women, is OK with you?
You are entitled to your opinion, but I don’t want that blood on my hands.
Have a nice day.
S.
Of course you don’t. You obviously wouldn’t know honesty if it slapped upside the hide.
I call it like I see it, TR. I see the same things in yllas’ posts that I see in yours. Great points, too much anger & name-calling.
Posted by: JLM at February 26, 2008 3:44 PM
************************
You know as much about honesty as my cat knows about riding a unicycle. You see what you invent – you invent what youre comfortable with.
TR, 3:49PM
Its happening on a massive scale in Asia. Also, around 1982 the late Dr. Robert Mendelsohn was interviewed for a nursing journal on the subject of sexism in the medical profession. Imagine.
Anyway, Dr. Mendelsohn claimed that 4 out of 5 of the fetuses aborted for being the “wrong” sex in the United States were female. Keep in mind that unlike today, this was not an era when ultrasound was routinely done and parents very seldom knew the gender of their unborn children.
Doctors had to be willing to perform amniocentesis, not routinely done on “young” mothers, to determine gender. Apparently cooperative doctors were found and people were willing to pay extra.
I know an OB who was asked to perform this “service”. The woman told him if the baby was female she planned to “get rid of it”. The OB refused, telling her she would have to find another physician, he’d have no part of it. She went ahead and had the baby, a girl.
Nowadays when knowledge of gender is almost routine, one can only guess on what number of abortions selectively abort a child of either gender.
TR,
You done brought that little diddy on all by yourself. Apparently the cacti prickles are still pain’n ya?
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 3:51 PM
*****************
Im not responsible for you looking like an idiot. You manage that entirely on your own. You cant deal with what IS said so instead you hide behind idiocy. Your choice.
What lies are you talking about? We are just speculating as to why you get so riled up and start name calling.
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 3:53 PM
******************************
Youre lying. Its as simple as that. You need to fantasize that I have to be ‘riled’. You have to make up lies to make yourself feel better. You have to fabricate because you arent able to deal with reality. You lack the capacity to even comprehend why so many of your arguments are quite simply stupid.
What about the remaining 10%? 10% of 40 million is still 4 million. 4 million deaths that look like that picture, caused by intentional killing by doctors and women, is OK with you?
******************
No, that picture is not representative of ‘the remaining 10%’. Thats one more lie. That picture is obviously of a third trimester fetus. You apparently cant even prove it IS the result of an abortion. And if it WAS then you cant tell WHY the abortion was performed. Thats the point – you dont have any problem at all telling lies and believing lies.
Can someone post the source of the picture?
thanks
S.
OK, deRsaxeT, whatever you say!
“That picture is obviously of a third trimester fetus.”
Are 100 intentional killings like this OK with you? 50? 10? 1?
If, in fact, this baby’s death is the result of an abortion, even this one is wrong.
Have a nice day.
S.
Its happening on a massive scale in Asia. Also, around 1982 the late Dr. Robert Mendelsohn was interviewed for a nursing journal on the subject of sexism in the medical profession. Imagine.
Anyway, Dr. Mendelsohn claimed that 4 out of 5 of the fetuses aborted for being the “wrong” sex in the United States were female. Keep in mind that unlike today, this was not an era when ultrasound was routinely done and parents very seldom knew the gender of their unborn children.
Doctors had to be willing to perform amniocentesis, not routinely done on “young” mothers, to determine gender. Apparently cooperative doctors were found and people were willing to pay extra.
I know an OB who was asked to perform this “service”. The woman told him if the baby was female she planned to “get rid of it”. The OB refused, telling her she would have to find another physician, he’d have no part of it. She went ahead and had the baby, a girl.
Nowadays when knowledge of gender is almost routine, one can only guess on what number of abortions selectively abort a child of either gender.
Posted by: Mary at February 26, 2008 4:00 PM
******************
What do Asian abortions have to do with American feminists? In those countries infanticide was relatively common place. Please dont try to pretend that abortion is *suddenly* an outrageous thing int hat context. And saying ‘4 out of 5’ doesnt mean a thing if you dont know HOW MANY abortions in the US are BECAUSE of gender. Just HOW MANY abortions in the US are because of gender in the first place? Youre the one who made the assertion about ‘massive scale’. Just what ‘massive scale’ are we talking about in the USA? And sure you *know* an OB who etc etc etc
Babies arent aborted and a typical abortion performed by RU486 or suction curettage is going to look like menstrual flow.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 3:56 PM
So babies arent’ aborted, but they are aborted.
Hummmmmmm…….
“That picture is obviously of a third trimester fetus.”
Are 100 intentional killings like this OK with you? 50? 10? 1?
If, in fact, this baby’s death is the result of an abortion, even this one is wrong.
Have a nice day.
S.
**************************************
Just what do you KNOW about this picture? IF it IS a third trimester abortion, what do you know about the reasons why it was performed? But the fact is you dont care. You dont care about the facts. You just say its wrong because youve decided its wrong and nothing could make you see it any other way. But pretending that picture is ‘representative’ of abortion or ‘the truth about’ abortion is being dishonest.
Babies arent aborted and a typical abortion performed by RU486 or suction curettage is going to look like menstrual flow.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 26, 2008 3:56 PM
So babies arent’ aborted, but they are aborted.
Hummmmmmm…….
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 4:12 PM
***********************
As I said before, you have looking like an idiot down to an art form.
Just what do you KNOW about this picture?
Let’s get some clarification about it…. I’ve asked, let’s see what Jill says.
If it is a third trimester abortion, which I imagine it is, I don’t care for what reason(s) it was performed. There is no reason that justifies it. The only possible justification would be to save the life of the mother, and in that event, at that stage of pregnancy, labor could have been induced and the baby could have been born alive. There was no conceivable need to kill that child. Selective killing of disabled fetuses is as wrong as selective killing of disabled children or adutls. To me, that is not a reason or justification.
S.
TR,
You asked me about the deliberate aborting of females and I told you. When I said massive scale, it was in reference to both Asia and the US. In Asia they do occur on a massive scale. I would consider sex selection abortions that abort 4 females for every five abortions a tad unbalanced and definitely favoring males. If you have no problem with this blatant and vile sexism, whether it occurs here or in Asia, and you consider the disposal of Asian females less relevant the the disposal of American ones, so be it.
I was referring to an article written in 1982 when I mentioned 4 out of 5. Sex selection abortion was already a fact 25+ years ago.
I said that with knowledge of the baby’s gender far more prevalent today than it was 25 years ago, one can only speculate on sex selection abortions that may very well occur today as well.
Am I sure I knew such an OB? If I didn’t TR I would never say I did.
TR:
Just trying to clarify your post. You are the one who said; and I quote:
“Babies arent aborted and a typical abortion performed by RU486 or suction curettage is going to look like menstrual flow.”
So what is being aborted??
BTW, your statements are lies. I have read testimonies from women who used this drug and found a perfectly formed little human beings in the toilet.
Suction currettage? Please. Why do they have to re assemble babies after this procedure to make sure they sucked everything out?
Its happening on a massive scale in Asia. Also, around 1982 the late Dr. Robert Mendelsohn was interviewed for a nursing journal on the subject of sexism in the medical profession. Imagine.
Anyway, Dr. Mendelsohn claimed that 4 out of 5 of the fetuses aborted for being the “wrong” sex in the United States were female. Keep in mind that unlike today, this was not an era when ultrasound was routinely done and parents very seldom knew the gender of their unborn children.
Doctors had to be willing to perform amniocentesis, not routinely done on “young” mothers, to determine gender. Apparently cooperative doctors were found and people were willing to pay extra.
I know an OB who was asked to perform this “service”. The woman told him if the baby was female she planned to “get rid of it”. The OB refused, telling her she would have to find another physician, he’d have no part of it. She went ahead and had the baby, a girl.
Nowadays when knowledge of gender is almost routine, one can only guess on what number of abortions selectively abort a child of either gender.
Posted by: Mary at February 26, 2008 4:00 PM
Mary,
I read a very interesting article on gender abortion in India. It was called the “Lost Generation” So many females are being aborted that it has created huge social problems. Women are being raped at higher rates as the ratio of men to women is so unbalanced. There are not enough women available to marry.
The article profiled one family where I believe the woman had 15 abortions. They were shunned by their village for not being able to produce a male.
I do wish we can get off of the “homosexual agenda” thing though, seriously. You can believe it is a “choice” if you want to, or that it is “a sin.” But if the pro-life movement keeps labeling homosexuals as synonymous with abortion, how will we ever convince them that abortion is wrong?
You simultaneously accuse her of choosing to be gay AND pro-abortion but they are NOT synonymous, they are NOT the same thing. Most of them have a bias against the pro-life side because many pro-lifers align themselves with the same religious right that condemns them.
Don’t you think it’s odd when we say, “I don’t understand you at all, and I think the life you live is disgusting, so why on earth won’t you listen to me?”
Uh…maybe if we accept them for who they are and come at the conversation from their angle they would be more willing to look at the pro-life arguments with more sincerity.
Sandy 4:35PM
How tragic. Isn’t it ironic how abortion has only perpetuated the second choice, second class status of women instead of liberating them and bettering their lives? Why do anything to eliminate the inequality and injustice when its so much easier to abort the victims?
“I do wish we can get off of the “homosexual agenda” thing though, seriously. You can believe it is a “choice” if you want to, or that it is “a sin.” But if the pro-life movement keeps labeling homosexuals as synonymous with abortion, how will we ever convince them that abortion is wrong?
You simultaneously accuse her of choosing to be gay AND pro-abortion but they are NOT synonymous, they are NOT the same thing. Most of them have a bias against the pro-life side because many pro-lifers align themselves with the same religious right that condemns them.
Don’t you think it’s odd when we say, “I don’t understand you at all, and I think the life you live is disgusting, so why on earth won’t you listen to me?”
Uh…maybe if we accept them for who they are and come at the conversation from their angle they would be more willing to look at the pro-life arguments with more sincerity.”
RAmen PiP!
So what is being aborted??
BTW, your statements are lies. I have read testimonies from women who used this drug and found a perfectly formed little human beings in the toilet.
Suction currettage? Please. Why do they have to re assemble babies after this procedure to make sure they sucked everything out?
Posted by: Sandy at February 26, 2008 4:29 PM
**********************
What is aborted is an embryo or a fetus – mindless insensate nonviable oblivious tissue and cell structure.
And no, there is no ‘perfectly formed human being’ with a RU486 abortion – its an embryo and its so tiny in most cases you wouldnt even be able to see it unless you made a concerted effort to find it and even then it would be difficult.
And no, they dont have to ‘reassemble’ anything.
Again, youre proving to me that youre very stupid.
Sandy 4:35PM
How tragic. Isn’t it ironic how abortion has only perpetuated the second choice, second class status of women instead of liberating them and bettering their lives? Why do anything to eliminate the inequality and injustice when its so much easier to abort the victims?
Posted by: Mary at February 26, 2008 5:01 PM
******************
Oh yeah – letting women do what they know is best is SO belittling … having someone like YOU tell them what they OUGHT to be doing and how they SHOULD be feeling is SO much better! Its not even POSSIBLE for a woman to think for herself – YOU need to TELL her what she ‘should’ think. It isnt even POSSIBLE for a woman simply to not WANT to be pregnant. EVERY woman really WANTS to continue every pregnancy – its just her ‘second class citizen status’ that PREVENTS her from doing so. And you wonder why I point out that youre full of scat.
Its happening on a massive scale in Asia. Also, around 1982 the late Dr. Robert Mendelsohn was interviewed for a nursing journal on the subject of sexism in the medical profession. Imagine.
Anyway, Dr. Mendelsohn claimed that 4 out of 5 of the fetuses aborted for being the “wrong” sex in the United States were female. Keep in mind that unlike today, this was not an era when ultrasound was routinely done and parents very seldom knew the gender of their unborn children.
Doctors had to be willing to perform amniocentesis, not routinely done on “young” mothers, to determine gender. Apparently cooperative doctors were found and people were willing to pay extra.
I know an OB who was asked to perform this “service”. The woman told him if the baby was female she planned to “get rid of it”. The OB refused, telling her she would have to find another physician, he’d have no part of it. She went ahead and had the baby, a girl.
Nowadays when knowledge of gender is almost routine, one can only guess on what number of abortions selectively abort a child of either gender.
Posted by: Mary at February 26, 2008 4:00 PM
**************************
YOU were the one talking about ‘feminists’. Just what do American feminists have to do with abortion in Asia? Dr Mendelsohn CLAIMED 4 out of 5 … and that means what? How many gender related abortions WERE performed? 4 out of 5 doesnt ‘mean’ a thing without that information. And yeah you can GUESS and you can ASSUME and you can FABRICATE and you can INVENT. But thats all youre doing.
If it is a third trimester abortion, which I imagine it is, I don’t care for what reason(s) it was performed.
*************
Thats the point – you dont care. Its all about YOU – YOU know – YOU are sure – YOU are certain – and youre not going to let something like reality get in your way.
What is aborted is an embryo or a fetus – mindless insensate nonviable oblivious tissue and cell structure.
And no, there is no ‘perfectly formed human being’ with a RU486 abortion – its an embryo and its so tiny in most cases you wouldnt even be able to see it unless you made a concerted effort to find it and even then it would be difficult.
And no, they dont have to ‘reassemble’ anything.
Again, youre proving to me that youre very stupid.
Posted by: TexasRed at February 27, 2008 12:34 PM
Enter Twilight Zone music……do do do do do do
So again the stories I read from the women who took the drug were lying. And again, the abortion workers who testified that their jobs were to make sure all of the baby parts have been removed are lying.
TR,
Its sounds like a nerve or two has been struck with you. Sandy wrote an excellent post concerning sex selection abortion in India and its dire consequences. Women remain in a second choice second class status as Sandy so well pointed out. If you take the time to read it its pretty straight forward and not at all difficult to get the message that the status of Indian women has definitely not improved by abortion.
I thought abortion was supposed to liberate and elevate women, not keep them in their “place”. Why should societies where women have long been thought of as second class change when they can more easily dispose of females in the first place? I remember reading of one Indian doctor who supported sex selection abortion of females by stating that this way a woman does not have to give birth to “many undesirable females” before finally having the much coveted male child.
My reference to feminists concerns their struggle to legalize abortion. I don’t believe for one minute they anticipated sex selection abortions. That’s my opinion from observing the battle to legalize abortion. I recall hearing all the “good” abortion would do and never a word as to how it may result in sex selection abortions that disposed mainly of females. A classic case of be very careful what you wish for…you just might get it.
No TR, Dr. Mendolsohn also backed up his claim when challenged. Whatever the number of sex selection abortions performed when Dr. Mendelsohn was interviewed, the fact remains it was mainly females being disposed of. Rant and rave all you want TR and hurtle whatever accusations you want. It won’t change facts you obviously find very unpleasant.
“Thats the point – you dont care. Its all about YOU – YOU know – YOU are sure – YOU are certain – and youre not going to let something like reality get in your way.”
Can you give one good reason why a society which outlaws and does not condone murder of born persons should allow abortion and killing of viable third trimester fetuses?
yllas: This confirms the absolute truth, of the agnostic Doug, that all religions have a God vision that is always looking out for something to kill in that God’s name.
No, yllas, and good grief – what a horrible mish-mash of illogic, falsehoods, and rank silliness from you.
There is logic, yes, but as for “absolute truth,” I’m not the one guilty of pretenses there – it’d be you if anybody.
“All religions…. looking out for something to kill..” – those words came from your mind. I’ve made points about the biblical god and what we can deduce about hypothetical all-knowing and all-powerful entities but you’re the one going with the crazy stuff.
Saying that “not every preegnancy is wanted” is not the same thing as saying none are, or that a given person or given religion will “look for something to kill.” You can do better than that.
Anyway….