CNN gets info from liberal blogs
In the article below, CNN posted a still graphic from the BornAliveTruth.org ad with the web address clearly notable, so I’m pretty sure CNN knew the link to get information.
If it had gone to the BAT site, it would have found that I, as BAT’s executive director, have a direct connection to Obama and the Born Alive issue.
Instead CNN got its info on me from the liberal blogs. As the Discriminations blogger wrote:
Either because of sloppiness or bias, CNN neglected to mention that Stanek is the former nurse [who testified] before Congress [which] …. passed, with virtually no dissent (it passed the Senate 98-0), even from committed pro-choice legislators, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. It was an identical Illinois version of that act that Obama blocked, claiming that it would have tended to undermine Roe v. Wade.
But I suppose you could say, if you’re CNN, that Stanek “has made controversial statements in the past.” And she continues to make them.
Click to enlarge…
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.
Jill, still waiting for your response on Sarah Palin refusing to allow the AK legislature to consider the born alive bill in a special session in the past few months, based on political expediency, because she didn’t want to imperil the pipeline bill. Would responding to this question be a “contoversial statement”?
Hadn’t heard that, LTL. Source, please.
Is there anything in that highlighted sentence which is inaccurate?
Hal,
It may be the truth, but not the whole truth. I believe Jill’s point, is that CNN could have easily gone to the source for the facts of their story, but chose not to. WHY?
Jill, I just had a friend bring this up to me and I was wondering if you had time, if you could explain it. He was talking about Gianna, and how he didn’t think her story was valid, and I told him it was and showed him that page with the medical record. He asked how you can post those types of records without it being a HIPPA violation?
Palin’s refusal to allow the born alive bill to be brought up in the special session because it might imperil the pipeline bill, as well as her other actions on abortion, are best summarized in “Family Matters: On Palin’s Watch Alaska Liberalized its Abortion Laws”. Newsweek.com Katie Paul 9/6/08.
Her refusal to allow the born alive bill in the special session is in that article, as well as articles in Palintology.com 4/28/08 Homernews.com 9/9/08 “Nations image of Palin Differs from Alaskans.” and the Peninsulaclarion.com 9/8/08 “What Alaskans know about Palin: for better or worse.”
Since the next step in the game is for you to denounce all those publications as “liberal media” the same story appears in a Lifesite news article of 4/24/08. Or google “Palin abortion Alaska” and take your pick of the first 200 hits.
Also the history of the born alive bill is on line on the Alaska legislature website.
Erin, I don’t think HIPPA regulates the press/blogosphere, it regulates medical providers and insurance companies. If the patient consented to her records being disclosed (or if she disclosed them herself) I don’t see a problem.
Janet, I don’t see the “missing facts” as particlarly interesting. What they did post is accurate and informative. If CNN did print the history of Jill’s grudge against Obama for not supporting her pet bill, it might have made her look biased.
How do you know the information in the article came from liberal blogs? My guess is they get their “information” from Media Matters.
Hal @ 11:42,
Janet, I don’t see the “missing facts” as particlarly interesting. What they did post is accurate and informative. If CNN did print the history of Jill’s grudge against Obama for not supporting her pet bill, it might have made her look biased.
Just looking for “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help us, God”.
Hal,
It’s not a grudge it is a mission. I believe Jill is right to make sure that Obama is on the public record supporting Infanticide. This is an important fact that needs to be brought up.
I can see why you want to push this fact under the rug. You took an active role in aborting your own children, so infanticide might not seem so bad.
The vast majority of people think killing delivered infants is wrong — Obama disagreed publicly.
Jill, I wonder if Mancow Muller would be interested in interviewing Gianna Jessen on his radio show?
One. Last. Time. Opposing the bill does not mean he doesn’t think “killing delivered infants is wrong.”
And yes, it’s a grudge. –noun
1. a feeling of ill will or resentment: to hold a grudge against a former opponent.
LTL,
I called your bluff and searched “Palin Abortion Alaska” in Google and actually found nothing supporting your ideas.
I did find an article on newsweek that you should probably read that pretty much explains what you are upset about, and guess what! I am actually going to link it.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/157541
It explains what I pointed out to you earlier that Palin did not want to jeapordize the pipeline bill with partisan politics. Her goal was and is, should she fail in the VP bid, to address this issues separately. I find that interesting too because this article is clearly biased in that it claimed that she slashed funding to Covenant House to not help pregnant teens. Covenant House has a program that helps teens, but it is not even the sole purpose of the charity. She slashed funds to the main Charity, not to the program helping pregnant teens. Besides, she actually raised the funds from the previous year. However, even with that bias, the article pretty clearly points out how she is a supporter of pro-life activities, unlike Obama.
Why did Obama oppose the bill? He claimed that it would hurt Roe unlike the federal bill. This is a problem because the bill was identical to the federal bill in that it specifically protected “abortion rights.” Why did he oppose it then? Probably because he sees even the tiniest of a possible insult to the sensibilities of a mother having an abortion as worse than allowing a possibly viable infant to starve to death.
Do you see the difference?
By the way, mods, if youre listening, please delete LTL’s posts everytime he brings this subject up until he replies to my post. LTL does not engage is coversation, but just spams this kind of crap. When he is called on it, he does not respond. Im tired of it and Im sure everyone else is too.
Hal —
No you are wrong he is on record opposing even the consideration of this measure. He stalled hearings, and finally voted against a bill that was supported by nearly everyone else.
I would say that making such efforts and taking such a ‘lonely stand’ shows that his interest was in maintaining conditions where infanticide can take place. He was ensuring continued acts of infanticide by his actions.
Belittling others who tried to stop Infanticide as having a ‘grudge’ shows your real colors as a stalwart cheerleader FOR Infanticide and abortion.
Then again are just doing your job — cashing the PP check for your work on this board.
“By the way, mods, if youre listening, please delete LTL’s posts everytime he brings this subject up until he replies to my post.”
That’s going to be the standard? Because you say so???? who the hell are you to make up rules???? Can I ask the Mods to delete all your posts until you start making some sense?
Hal: “One. Last. Time. Opposing the bill does not mean he doesn’t think “killing delivered infants is wrong.””
I know reasoning is hard for you, considering you refuse to use any when called out, but let me walk you through this again.
Obama did not oppose the bill because it would hurt Roe, this has been demonstrated through the example of the federal bill.
He opposed the bill for some other reason.
The bill protected infants born alive. He did not support it and even specifically argued against it.
By not helping to stop this bill, he allowed it to be possible to let infants starve to death if they were born alive after an abortion. He removed an obstacle to the fatal neglect of infants. Neglecting an infant to the point of fatality is considered infanticide. Removing an obstacle is to assist. He assisted infanticide. Its pretty clear logic really. But why are you bothered by it? Its your child right? You can kill it if it hurts your feelings about your abortion right? Its your choice isnt it?
Oliver, thanks for researching.
Hal, why did CNN portray me,the exec. dir. of BAT, as someone “who has made controversial statements in the past expressing her opposition to abortion rights” rather than the nurse who testified before Obama about an abortion survivor she held until he died?
Was not that set-up to cast a shadow on the endeavor as something likewise simply controversial on the topic of abortion, rather than based on a personal experience with Obama on the issue?
In fact, I find the story line of a classic showdown much more intriguing than CNN’s casual dismissal of me.
No one likes to be casually dismissed.
Hal: “That’s going to be the standard? Because you say so???? who the hell are you to make up rules???? Can I ask the Mods to delete all your posts until you start making some sense?”
I think its safe to delete someones post who is spamming and refusing to respond to any points dont you?
By the way, I make sense everytime I post buddy. If it makes you feel better, I probably scored higher than your Obama on his law school entrance exam. Considering he wont make that info public we will never know…
Not higher than I did, I would bet you $1.00
I probably scored higher than your Obama on his law school entrance exam.
Your desire to boast about how intelligent you think you are is getting a tad old, Oliver.
To be perfectly honest, Jill, I think they were reporting pretty ‘fairly’. They are obviously trying not to take a stance.
Also, the article isn’t directly about the founders of the website, it’s about the website itself.
LL:”Your desire to boast about how intelligent you think you are is getting a tad old, Oliver.”
I think its fair in response to Hal telling me that I dont make sense.
By the way is this LTL with a typo? What do you have to say now that I called you out on your lies about Palin, again?
LTL, Hal,
This can’t be very enjoyable for you, day in and day out, trolling in this site.
Who do you do it for? Do you get paid?
Arlen, I don’t think you know the real meaning of ‘troll’. LTL and Hal do not troll. They simply bring opposing viewpoints to the table.
Erin, I will say that Hal isn’t a troll. LTL though, never actually responds to anything and just makes inflamatory statements. I think that’s the definition of “troll”.
Oliver, I was a bit over the line saying you didn’t make sense. I was trying to point out that someone’s subjective objection to a post does not translate into a basis to have those posts deleted. If you could do that to LTL, then someone like me could do that to you.
Your posts do “make sense,” in that I understand what you are saying. I just don’t agree with you.
CNN is not a news organization.
They are a Liberal Propagandsa Machine and I think we all need to find a way to sue them out of business like in lible and slander lawsuits.
Jill, I say you have your attorney write them a terse warning letter advising them that every word thay say about you must be factual or suject to litigation.
There is no subjectivity to the statement that LTL is not responding to anyone and is just respaming the same ideas. I have already called him on the Palin opposes Born Alive legislation crap, and he has not responded. I made an even more pointed comment just now, and if he refuses to respond, he is clearly showing that he is here to spam, not to engage in coversation, which is what I suppose this forum is for. It makes sense to delete his posts if he just says the same stuff over and over without responding. Although it does seem it is possible that LL is LTL and is responding to SOME points anyways.
Jill:
I’ve launched my new pro-life blog:
http://www.Ixoye.name
HisMan, there is nothing false about Jill in that article.
Arlen, I don’t get paid, but that would be nice. I do enjoy it. It’s an interesting mix of finding on occasion some common ground, learning a bit more about the pro-life movement, finding some in this movement I can respect, and shaking my head in dismay and fear reading the comments of some others.
I’ve said before, I can understand and even respect the basic pro-life premise. I have no objection to people trying to convince others not to have abortions. We differ on whether abortions should be banned. That’s a legitimate dispute. I see both sides, I oome down on the pro-choice side of that.
When some go off on “related” topics of gay rights, birth control, creationism, Obama, etc., we have more spirited disagreements.
“I probably scored higher than your Obama on his law school entrance exam.”
“Not higher than I did, I would bet you $1.00”
Yeah well, I bet if I were to take it today, I could get a lower score than both your scores COMBINED! Take that.
Hal: “One. Last. Time. Opposing the bill does not mean he doesn’t think “killing delivered infants is wrong.”
Hal, this would only be true if Obama had a valid reason for voting against the bill.
For instance, if there was something included in the bill that would have had a negative effect larger than the positive effect of saving infants. But no such thing existed. He changed his reasoning multiple times as each of his reasons was proven invalid.
In fact he said he would have voted for the bill if it had been identical to the federal one, but it virtually was.
There was no reason for Obama not to support the bill concerning infanticide. Therefore we must assume that he supports infanticide.
If you would argue that he doesn’t need a reason to kill the bill without being accused of infanticide, all kinds of silly things could be derived from that. You could say “I don’t support slavery, I just voted to uphold it.” Or “I’m a democrat, I just vote republican.”
There’s just no way around it. Obama supports infanticide. Actions speak louder than words.
Erin:
A half truth is a whole lie.
LOL Bobby
Not higher than I did, I would bet you $1.00
Posted by: Hal at September 17, 2008 12:33 PM
I find it hard to believe…… :-D
But if you say so, it must be true!
“One. Last. Time. Opposing the bill does not mean he doesn’t think “killing delivered infants is wrong.”
I see…
Hal,
If a little boy is choking on a piece of steak and I just sit there and watch him choke to death.
what does that make me?
“In fact he said he would have voted for the bill if it had been identical to the federal one, but it virtually was.”
So, he made a mistake? Like saying you don’t support the Bridge to Nowhere when you did. Or saying your teleprompter wasn’t working, when it was.
Yeah well, I bet if I were to take it today, I could get a lower score than both your scores COMBINED! Take that.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 17, 2008 1:06 PM
I dunno Bobby – you’d probably be good at the logic and math section (subjects, you’d think most lawyer-wannabe’s would excel at).
Hal,
It’s hard to call it a mistake when it happens four times. Plus, the born alive bill very much black and white. To kill babies or not to kill babies; hence it passing unanimously on the federal level. The bridge to nowhere seems to have fooled a lot of people, including Obama.
Hal,
If a little boy is choking on a piece of steak and I just sit there and watch him choke to death.
what does that make me?
Posted by: Jasper at September 17, 2008 1:25 PM
Good question.
Hi Bethany!
Did you get my e-mail the other day? I wanted to follow-up with you and have some exciting news!
Let’s put it another way.
There’s a vote before the city council to install a traffic light at a notorius intersection where numerous people have been killed in accidents. In fact, I personally know some of these people.
As a member of the city council I vote against installing traffic lights that would drastically reduce the number of fatalities four times.
Shortly thereafter, 50 kids are killed in a school bus when they are broad sided by a 100 ton concrete truck.
Now I may not be for people getting T-boned at intersections but because I was put in a position of authority and repsonsiblity to protect the citizens of my community and my vote resulted in them not being protected. I should be held accountable for that vote.
Even more so, if I lied about how I voted I should be removed for office for gross malfeasance.
mal·fea·sance /mæl?fiz?ns/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[mal-fee-zuhns] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun Law. the performance by a public official of an act that is legally unjustified, harmful, or contrary to law; wrongdoing (used esp. of an act in violation of a public trust). Compare misfeasance (def. 2), nonfeasance.
In conclusion, Barack should be removed from the Democratic ticket for gross malfeasance.
Obama is the greatest candidate of our generation. I doubt he’ll be removed from the ticket.
Hal —
Thankfully I’m not part of your generation.
I suppose he beat out Charlie Manson as the Best Community Organizer of that generation too!
Keep drinking the Kool Aid (oh, wait that refers to Jim Jones — another community organizer) Anyway, keep believing in Hope to Change….
Hi Bethany!
Did you get my e-mail the other day? I wanted to follow-up with you and have some exciting news!
I didn’t get it! Please send again!!!
Hal, why did CNN portray me,the exec. dir. of BAT, as someone “who has made controversial statements in the past expressing her opposition to abortion rights” rather than the nurse who testified before Obama about an abortion survivor she held until he died?
……………………………….
Perhaps because your ‘testimony’ had absolutely nothing to do with medical intervention for preemies and everything to do with outlawing later term abortions for any reason.
You have made it very clear that you know very well that there was nothing that could be done to prolong the death of the baby in your testimony. Your issue is clearly based on your non professional and emotional opinion that the abortion should never have been allowed in the first place.
Having been a nurse most certainly does not make you an expert in obstetrics or pediatrics. Therefore you having been a nurse is redundant to your anti-abortion opinions. CNN noting that you were a nurse would have been implying some sort of expertise on the subject matter of which you do not posess. Your opinions are purely civilian. But you bank on the illusion that you know what you are talking about to emotionally sway the uninformed to your opinions.
I love that you set up your little 527. It exposes the irrationality of your opinions to a wider group of rational voters.
Go ahead and delete my post. You’ve proven time and again how much you despise the truth.
Peace Out.
Wait a minute, Sandy, I did a double check through my emails and your email is there!…I’m going to go read it now. (I’ve been missing lots of emails lately- I’m so scatterbrained).
Hal said, “Obama is the greatest candidate of our generation.”
Well, he certainly hasn’t been canned-to-date.
Jasper-
it may make you a bad person, but it is a perfectly legal action. Look at all the people who witness stabbings and murders and don’t say a thing because there is a code of silence. There doesn’t even necessarily need to be a threat in order to want to keep the silence, it can be as simple as believing the authorities are wrong, the person “had it coming,” or simple denial.
HisMan-
if that vote or lying to people about it was illegal Republicans would be all over him trying to start an investigation or arrest him, so malfeance doesn’t fit the bill sort of speak.
Why on Earth do you object to CNN making note of your background? You should be glad they didn’t actually quote any of your controversial statements.
Judging by Sally’s little snit. The ads must be getting under some skin.
Great work, Jill!
jill stanek, will you post my tribute video. I want more people to know that I rescue animals and I am with you. I don’t want to be associated with people who call themselves animal lovers, but who are willing to kill babies. I’m really really frustrated. I’m about to turn my animal account into a republican animal account. Ugh. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7YeNTI_dBU I’ll do anything to promote your story, because my hearts mission is so similar to yours, but mine is for animals. God bless you, Jill.
Jill:
Hal, why did CNN portray me,the exec. dir. of BAT, as someone “who has made controversial statements in the past expressing her opposition to abortion rights” rather than the nurse who testified before Obama about an abortion survivor she held until he died?
Probably because your little hospital tale triggered an investigation, which found no evidence to support your claims.
Your controversial statements, however, are online for all to see.
Her “little hospital tale” triggered an investigation into baracks voting record and it was enough to convince me that Obama is the last person I’ll vote for.
It is ok though because CNN has very very low rating. I stick with FOX News
Yeah, reality, I stopped reading your little opinon piece when it stated that the IL BAIPA didn’t include the neutrality clause of the federal bill. We all know that this is, in fact, a lie. But please, keep spinning your wheels and plugging your ears.
Her “little hospital tale” triggered an investigation into baracks voting record and it was enough to convince me that Obama is the last person I’ll vote for.
Posted by: JamieNov81 at September 17, 2008 2:24 PM
Yeah, you were really leaning Obama before that.
Oliver @ 2:28 was me. Sorry.
One. Last. Time. Opposing the bill does not mean he doesn’t think “killing delivered infants is wrong.”
And yes, it’s a grudge. –noun
1. a feeling of ill will or resentment: to hold a grudge against a former opponent.
Posted by: Hal at September 17, 2008 12:09 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hal, Once again you seem to have missed the point with this one.
If BHO was truly concerned about the BORN alive infants who were left to die he could have done something. He was the chairman of the committee that dealt with this issue. He is the man that says he is going to set aside party differences, and to reach across party lines, to achieve common good for all US citizens.
Now I am sure that you will agree that these baby’s were in fact being left to die in hospitals. And you are aware of the letter Jill has posted on this site which states with clarity that in the hospital’s action which she witnessed violated no laws.
Now given all of this where was BHO when nearly the entire population will agree that letting a baby die in the hospital is wrong. Why couldn’t he reach across party lines and make this happen?
This is something that he needs to answer for.
No I wasn’t leaning on Obama, but Jill’s story reminded me of when I held an animal as it died and I saw the same emotion in Jill’s story of holding the baby and I actually though you know her passion for life is like my passion for rescuing animals. I investigated the votes so I would have the proof to back up my Obama rants and I found more than I needed. All I had to do was type Jill Stanek in google search and I found it here. I searched forever and jill had the direct link. I love this site
“it may make you a bad person, but it is a perfectly legal action.”
Dan, do you want that person to be President of the U.S.?
“Now I am sure that you will agree that these baby’s were in fact being left to die in hospitals.”
I will not agree with that. the vast majority of abortions do not result in live births. Is there evidence of live births after abortion being left to die in more than one or two cases ever? Would these babies have lived otherwise? The baby Jill held couldn’t be saved, even by a trained nurse. Apparently he or she was so unlikely to live that Jill didn’t even try to give it medical aid. This is false outrage over a non-existant issue.
And now, because I’m not being paid to post here, I must go. see you all tomorrow perhaps.
Jill, Hal, Oliver, et.al.
LTL has posted the same remarks about Sarah Palin and the Alaska legislature on 5-10 threads this past week or two. I wouldn’t waste my time to go back and recount. Hal, you must have been away most of the past two weeks to not have noticed.
I asked her for her source several times – yesterday again. She cited the same one to me that Oliver found today and I posted the link. It makes no sense whatsoever and I told her so. She’s obviously not interested in dialogue.
if there have been abortionists charged and convicted with killing the live babies which have been the results of abortion, I’d say so, Hal.
say so = that there is evidence of babies surviving abortion
… who has made controversial statements in the past expressing her opposition of abortion rights.
The Discriminations blogger failed to make much of the little phrase “abortion rights.” The bias is in the assumption that abortion as a right is not controversial, but Jill Stanek’s anti-infanticide stance is. Rights are thought to be absolute, written in stone. Something controversial, however, is obviously an opinion of only some and probably not very many. It only gets attention because it’s radical. And it’s divisive, and therefore bad.
Everybody has bias. It’s impossible to be completely neutral. I understand that there is a difference between reporting and analysis, but I don’t know much about journalism.
xalisae @ 2:55 PM
Gianna looks like very objective evidence to me!
Jasper-
that would be dependent on a multitude of factors.
I would still vote Ted Kennedy for senate despite the controversy that ended his presidential bid. He’s done a lot of good for the state. Good person? Maybe, maybe not. I dont know him personally nor did I witness the incident, but based on his overall record I would certainly vote for him.
What happened to LTL? Did he quickly slither away rather than face the truth against his weak assaults with no basis in fact?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/apr/080424.html#3
By her own heroic actions Sarah speaks for the innocent. The rest are cowards with no standing. Go Joan!
Obviously Jill Janet and Oliver want to hide Palin’s record on the AK born alive bill, and have deleted my responses. How about thwarting them by doing your own research and thinking?
Sarah Palin’s private email hacked, family photos raided. That’s the angry, unhinged left for ya..
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/17/sarah-palins-private-e-mail-hacked-family-photos-raided/
Sally,
You have made it very clear that you know very well that there was nothing that could be done to prolong the death of the baby in your testimony.
Sarcasm alert. “Prolonging the death of a baby” is not the correct characterization of what happened to the baby Jill testified about. Jill fought for the baby’s right to receive care when born alive after an abortion attempt. They deserve the same right to live as any other premature baby.
Can you see into the future? Gianna’s “sentence” was “death by abortion, but she prevailed against all odds.
Jasper @ 3:11,
Sarah Palin’s private email hacked, family photos raided. That’s the angry, unhinged left for ya..
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/17/sarah-palins-private-e-mail-hacked-family-photos-raided/
I hope the authorities do everything in their power to prosecute the offenders to the full extent of the law.
From Michelle Malkin at the above mentioned link:
There is a time to be tolerant and there is a time to draw lines. If you don’t draw those lines, bullies will be emboldened. The smug Gawker smear machine is all about pushing those boundaries with the expectation that no one will push back. They project their own cynicism, recklessness with facts, intellectual laziness, and bad faith on everyone else.
But outside of Manhattan and Los Angeles, not all of us think blogging is a for-profit enterprise founded solely to tear people down with gossip, rumor-mongering, and damaging lies disguised as “satire.” Funny how some of the loudest voices decrying the lack of civility in the blogosphere are the biggest promoters of the bottom-feeders and debasers at Gawker.
I see the satirical stories as most damaging and would like to see some type of indication at the top of the story that it is indeed satire, and not factual. It’s often hard to tell. Are there any rules regarding this?
Obviously Jill Janet and Oliver want to hide Palin’s record on the AK born alive bill, and have deleted my responses. How about thwarting them by doing your own research and thinking?
Posted by: LTL at September 17, 2008 3:11 PM
Oh, please.
LTL,
“Obviously Jill Janet and Oliver want to hide Palin’s record on the AK born alive bill, and have deleted my responses.”
I am pretty sure nothing you have posted has been deleted. I could be mistaken, but the moderators are supposed to unpublish comments, not outright delete them, and I can’t find any of your comments in spam, pending, or unpublished. So unless another moderator can confirm that they deleted your posts, I’m not sure what you’re referring to here.
KC @ 3:08,
What happened to LTL? Did he quickly slither away rather than face the truth against his weak assaults with no basis in fact?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/apr/080424.html#3
By her own heroic actions Sarah speaks for the innocent. The rest are cowards with no standing. Go Joan!
THANK YOU, KC! Leave it to Lifesite News to get the story right!
LTL, ARE YOU READING THIS?
“Obviously Jill Janet and Oliver want to hide Palin’s record on the AK born alive bill, and have deleted my responses. How about thwarting them by doing your own research and thinking?”
I marked it as spam. Three times we have requested you to provided links to where Palin rejected Born alive, I haven’t seen any.
Your issue is clearly based on your non professional and emotional opinion that the abortion should never have been allowed in the first place. posted by Sally
It doesn’t really matter on what level one is opposed to abortion be it emotional, professional – as a nurse, a Catholic and aethist or whatever. Abortion is a human problem and it concerns us all. There are many reasons to oppose abortion.
Jasper, the references are on my post at 11:37. Obviously you, Jill, Janet and Oliver refuse to read or acknowledge them, and I cannot force you to do so. However, to refuse to read them and then claim they “don’t exist” and to delete subsequent posts on the subject is childish.
Others may have an open mind, and wish to learn about Palin’s record on born alive, and many other issues. I have given them the tools to do so. The facts are a matter of public record.
LTL: i see no “links” on your 11:37 post. I see some websites listed.
Find the webpages and link to them or post the url’s please.
If CNN is going to talk about how you’ve made “controversial statements” just out of the blue like that, then they should also tell us about how Ted Kennedy drove his car off a bridge which resulted in a girl drowning every time they mention his name.
OK, LTL. I looked up the website you directed to. And, imagine that, not only does it have nothing to do with born alive – rather it deals with partial-birth abortion – but also, you have COMPLETELY misrepresented what actually happened. How do you sleep at night, LTL?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/apr/08042408.html
JUNEAU, Alaska, April 24, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – After refusing to introduce two abortion restricting bills to a special session on a natural gas pipeline on Wednesday because of fears that the bills would not likely succeed, Governor Sarah Palin expressed her willingness to bring the legislation to separate sessions.
House Bill 301 would forbid partial birth abortions, while House Bill 364 would require parental consent for women under 17 seeking abortion.
Senate President Lyda Green called on Palin to incorporate the two bills into the pipeline special session after the bills failed to pass the House.
Palin argued that Green should have used her position to support the two bills before they died at the end of the regular legislative session on April 13.
“Senate President Green did not exhaust every possible option during the regular session to move the legislation,” said Palin.
“As you are aware, I fully support these bills.”
“Alaskans know I am pro-life and have never wavered in my belief in the sanctity of every human life. These issues are so important they shouldn’t be diluted with oil and gas deliberations,” added Palin.
Palin asked Senate leaders to examine how best to advance legislation similar to the two failed bills and suggested the possibility of a separate session for abortion restricting legislation, provided Green could “show a path to success.”
Palin expressed disagreement with the Alaska Supreme Court when it overturned a 1997 parental consent law in 2007.
“She feels parental consent is reasonable because it is required in nearly every aspect of a child’s life. It’s a parent’s right and responsibility to be involved in their child’s life,” spokeswoman Sharon Leighow told the Juneau Empire.
Leighow added that Palin supported a constitutional amendment requiring parental consent for abortions.
On Friday, Palin gave birth one month earlier than expected to a child with Down Syndrome.
“We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives. We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed,” Palin stated.
John,
Thank you. I just read the links and was about to post the same information. I would not have been as thorough nor as well written as you in my response. Great job.
LTL,
You really should look for another line of work.
LTL,
What species of embyro/fetus was Gianna Jessen when she was assaulted/asalted in her mothers uterus?
You could just ask her; she has a publised web site.
lbkdn
LTL – apparently you have no idea there are differences between partial birth abortion (PBA) (aka D&X) and induced labor abortion. I did read the LifeSite article and what I read wasn’t even close to what you were suggesting.
Apparently you have such an open mind, something fell out.
John:
Libs get confused when you post the facts.
Please proceed slowly or you could induce Obfuscation and Denial Syndrome, (ODS) or odius.
The symptoms are word twisting, finger pointing, semantic creativity, as in the resulting “pro-choice” mantra repeated over and over again by baby hating Liberal gurus (i. e., those Liberals that hate babies Dan) which really means pro-murder-of-innocent-children-in-the-womb-at-your-discretion-rights.
janean garofalo said pro-lifers should be thrown in jail
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/09/16/janeane-garofolo-great-jail-all-republicans
This ought to interest you guys:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/uk_news/7621751.stm
Apparently you have such an open mind, something fell out.
hehehehhe, good one Chris. :)
Janeane Garbagelo actually said that all conservative Republicans should be thrown in jail, and that includes pro-lifers.
She also refers to Republicans as the “unrestrained id”. Is she insane? It’s the liberals who champion the id while downplaying abilities of the superego. The left tells us that we have no control over our own actions, so we need abortion to save us from our selves, and we need a huge federal government to hold on to our money for us.
I’m having a VERY big problem. I just found out that my aunt took my 13 year old cousin to planned parenthood without her parent’s consent, and at this point we are almost 100% certain it was for an abortion. What are parental consent/notification laws like in California? Could my aunt be prosecuted for possibly intentionally misrepresenting herself as my cousin’s mother? Our whole family is staunchly pro-life (apparently with the exception being my aunt). I’m beside myself
i can’t believe my aunt would cover for my cousin’s sexual abuse at the hands of adult men. i feel like I’m going to be sick.
X-
I think the parental notification laws in CA were struck down, but I’m not entirely sure.
Oh X, I’m so sorry…
X, you don’t know that it has anything to do with sexual abuse. It is most likely that she was impregnated by a kid her age, completely voluntarily.
looks to be the case. i can’t believe this. i remember babysitting her when she was as old as my daughter is now. i think i might pray for her and her poor baby tonight. i’m in tears.
Yea, required parental notification was overturned in early August of ’97.
http://www.ppacca.org/site/pp.asp?c=kuJYJeO4F&b=139490
x: My heart goes out to you. I am praying for your cousin and aunt, and for you as well. I wish I could give you the answer you need. If you don’t get a response here, you might contact a pro-life group in CA.
no, erin. we talked to her family. she was recently arrested for public intox…drugged w/ecstacy by a few 20 year olds. if you think this doesn’t happen all the time, you’re full of it with a capital “sh”. I hope you choke on it.
X,
I too am very sorry for your cousin and what this means to your family.
X, I understand that you’re upset, but that doesn’t mean you have to say nasty things to me.
If your cousin is going around with 20 year olds, there is no reason assume she isn’t asserting herself in other ways. Stuff like that can happen, but what happens more often is a couple youngsters start making out and one thing leads to another. I’m sorry that you’re upset, but that doesn’t mean I’m not glad that your cousin found someone in the family who would help her and support her in a way that the PL members of your family wouldn’t have been able to.
in what fing universe is being abused by grown men “asserting yourself”? get bent.
Because the fact that your 13 year old cousin was out drinking to begin with says a lot. She’d sure have been a GREAT Mom. I’m sure the father would have been a class act Dad too.
Erin,
With all due respect, xalisae is very upset, she’s looking for support right now, not a lecture. Thanks.
ditto to you, “seriously?” @ 8:49.
Erin, with all due respect, shut the hell up.
Gotcha, Janet.
I’m not real good with cues sometimes. I’ll step off.
she was acting out because she is a CHILD and her parents were recently divorced. These MEN TOOK ADVANTAGE OF HER.
Around 50% of kids out there have divorced parents, and the majority of them manage to get through it without wanting to go out drinking with older boys at the age of 13, or at least have parents who can control them. Where were her super wonderful pro life parents while she was out getting tanked?
x, Dan,
In the November election, Propostion 4 will be up for another vote in CA.
Proposition 4 would amend the California constitution to prohibit abortion for unemancipated minors until 48 hours after a physician notifies the minor’s parent or legal guardian. State voters have twice rejected similar measures.
http://www.ppacca.org/site/pp.asp?c=kuJYJeO4F&b=139413
Too bad you’re a coward who hides behind a fake name, “seriously?”. Otherwise when something happened to cause you pain, we could pour salt in your wounds just like you’re doing to xalisae.
i never said her parents were great. they’re human, just like everyone else, and my uncle was doing the best he could with a house being foreclosed on and an alcoholic wife. what he needed was real help. not a sister who was more concerned with being a friend to kids than a responsible adult and respectful of him.
X,
I am so sorry. I am praying for you and your cousin. She needs you now.
I would call a local Pregnancy Care Center. They have a ton of resources for you and for your cousin.
Whose Policies led to the credit crisis?
Democrats practically run the real-estate market. Harold Raines, Obama’s senoir financial advisor made 90 million dollars off the tax payers back:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/16/whose-policies-led-to-the-credit-crisis/
Big Government: Barack Obama and Democrats blame the historic financial turmoil on the market. But if it’s dysfunctional, Democrats during the Clinton years are a prime reason for it.
Read More: Business & Regulation
Obama in a statement yesterday blamed the shocking new round of subprime-related bankruptcies on the free-market system, and specifically the “trickle-down” economics of the Bush administration, which he tried to gig opponent John McCain for wanting to extend.
But it was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street’s most revered institutions.
Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or face stiff government penalties.
The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but “predatory.”
Yes, the market was fueled by greed and overleveraging in the secondary market for subprimes, vis-a-vis mortgaged-backed securities traded on Wall Street. But the seed was planted in the ’90s by Clinton and his social engineers. They were the political catalyst behind this slow-motion financial train wreck.
And it was the Clinton administration that mismanaged the quasi-governmental agencies that over the decades have come to manage the real estate market in America.
As soon as Clinton crony Franklin Delano Raines (Obama advisor) took the helm in 1999 at Fannie Mae, for example, he used it as his personal piggy bank, looting it for a total of almost $100 million in compensation by the time he left in early 2005 under an ethical cloud.
Other Clinton cronies, including Janet Reno aide Jamie Gorelick, padded their pockets to the tune of another $75 million.
Raines was accused of overstating earnings and shifting losses so he and other senior executives could earn big bonuses.
In the end, Fannie had to pay a record $400 million civil fine for SEC and other violations, while also agreeing as part of a settlement to make changes in its accounting procedures and ways of managing risk.
But it was too little, too late. Raines had reportedly steered Fannie Mae business to subprime giant Countrywide Financial, which was saved from bankruptcy by Bank of America.
At the same time, the Clinton administration was pushing Fannie and her brother Freddie Mac to buy more mortgages from low-income households.
The Clinton-era corruption, combined with unprecedented catering to affordable-housing lobbyists, resulted in today’s nationalization of both Fannie and Freddie, a move that is expected to cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.
And the worst is far from over. By the time it is, we’ll all be paying for Clinton’s social experiment, one that Obama hopes to trump with a whole new round of meddling in the housing and jobs markets. In fact, the social experiment Obama has planned could dwarf both the Great Society and New Deal in size and scope.
thank you all for your kind words and prayers. after that, some crying, and much cuddling with my daughter, I’m feeling a bit better. i’ll pass that info you gave on to my uncle and cousin, carla. thanks so much…there’s not much we can do now,but at least venting helped.
X,
sorry about your little cousin, I’m so sorry…
X,
I’m soo so sorry. Is there any way you can contact your cousin to find out the whole story? I will pray for everyone involved as it sounds like there are some major issues going on besides this as well. Feel free to message me on facebook if you need a friend. I’m here. :hugs:
xalisae,
I’ll pray for your cousin. :(
There are people in California trying to pass a parental notification law for abortion.
Sorry to hear about your family problems X.
The men that raped,drugged, and sexually abused your family member are criminals. It has nothing to do with the family having “problems”.
They should be arrested, convicted, and then be registered as sex offenders.
7. Q: Who is required by law to report the crime of “Unlawful sexual intercourse”? Top of page
A: Many professionals including medical staff, teachers, administrators, coaches, doctors etc… are mandated by law to report reasonable knowledge or suspicion of “Unlawful sexual intercourse” or any types of sexual or physical abuse. These laws are called “Mandatory Reporting Laws.” Under the California Child Abuse and Neglect reporting act, many professionals must, by law, report suspected abuses and violations to law enforcement, or risk criminal prosecution for failure to report. These professionals include, but are not limited to, school teachers, public employees, medical or hospital staff, mental health professionals, clergy, and many more…(the list is substantial.)The purpose of these laws are to protect children from abuse and neglect. “Partial clip of the law” California Penal code 11165.1 As used in this article, “sexual abuse” means sexual assault or sexual exploitation as defined by the following: (a) “Sexual assault” means conduct in violation of one or more of the following sections:
Section 261 (rape), subdivision (d) of
Section 261.5 (statutory rape)
Section 264.1 (rape in concert)
Section 285 (incest)
Section 286 (sodomy), subdivision (a) or (b), or paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of
Section 288 (lewd or lascivious acts upon a child)
Section 288a (oral copulation)
Section 289 (sexual penetration), or
Section 647.6 (child molestation).
Professionals Required to Report Citation: Penal Code §§ 11166; 11165.7
Teachers, teacher’s assistants, administrative officers, certificated pupil personnel employees of any public or private school
Administrators and employees of public or private day camps, youth centers, youth recreation programs, or youth organizations
Employees of childcare institutions, including, but not limited to, foster parents, group home personnel, and personnel of residential care facilities
Social workers, probation officers, or parole officers
Any person who is an administrator or a counselor in a child abuse prevention program in any public or private school
District attorney investigators, peace officers, firefighters, except for volunteer firefighters
Physicians, surgeons, psychiatrists, psychologists, dentists, licensed nurses, dental hygienists, optometrists, marriage counselors, family and child counselors, clinical social workers
Emergency medical technicians I or II or paramedics
State or county public health employees
Coroners or medical examiners
Commercial film and photographic print processors
Child visitation monitors
Animal control officers or humane society officers
Clergy members, which includes priests, ministers, rabbis, religious practitioners, or similar functionary of a church, temple, or recognized denomination or organization
Any custodian of records of a clergy member
Employees or volunteers of Court Appointed Special Advocate programs
Reporting by Other Persons Citation: Penal Code § 11166 Any other person who reasonably suspects that a child is a victim of abuse or neglect may report. Privileged Communications Citation: Penal Code § 11166 Only the clergy-penitent privilege is permitted. Complete Section – California Penal Code Section 11164-11174.3
Best of luck X.
X —
I am so sorry for your cousin and the crisis you are experiencing. Please be there for that young girl, letting her know that you can be a shoulder to cry on and a resource for her during the difficult time. Get the story from her side. If she has been abused by anyone, you should work with her, and her parents, to get good counseling for her.
Also, your aunt needs to be confronted. She has overstepped her role and if she misrepresented herself and transported the girl to the clinic –she could be guilty of a crime — fraud, kidnapping – spring to mind. She should not be allowed to influence any other children in the family because she obviously doesn’t respect children or parents.
To the pro-abort ghouls on this site — your responsed to X’s story shows your real colors. Blaming a child and mocking the incident — get real and try to grow a heart.
We haven’t seen the full effects of the Clinton presidency yet.
In the hindsight of historical perspective, Clinton will go down as the worst president in history.
His weakness emboldened the terrorists to attack our country and his economic policies have now killed our country. And he and Hillary made over 130 million dollars since he has left office. It’s diaboloical and all under the cover of a morally bankrupt Democratic Party and Media.
X:
What did Mr. Clinton teach young girls? Have sex, don’t call it sex, then get a twisted adult to take the child to an abortion clinic funded by the taxpayers. Obama…..more of the same.
Our society is so messed up, I get absolutely sick.
Come quickly Lord Jesus.
Sarcasm alert. “Prolonging the death of a baby” is not the correct characterization of what happened to the baby Jill testified about. Jill fought for the baby’s right to receive care when born alive after an abortion attempt. They deserve the same right to live as any other premature baby.
Can you see into the future? Gianna’s “sentence” was “death by abortion, but she prevailed against all odds.
Posted by: Janet at September 17, 2008 3:12 PM
………………………
Only in PL fantasy land can every premature infant be artificially kept alive. There was nothing to be done for ‘Jill’s baby’ and she knows it. Pretending to be concerned over babies capable of thriving, being denied health care is total bull. Her insessent whine about ‘born alive’ has nothing to do with premature health care and everything about her unprofessional opinions about abortion.
If anything, Giana is a case in point why born alive legislation is redundant. A completely unecessay waste of time and tax payer’s money unless you believe it to be a foot in the door to legal interference between a woman and her doctor. Why can’t you PL be honest. Drop the pretense of concern for preemies and admit that your agenda is to hinder the health care of pregnant women. This is clearly what all this infanticide hysteria is all about.
It doesn’t really matter on what level one is opposed to abortion be it emotional, professional – as a nurse, a Catholic and aethist or whatever. Abortion is a human problem and it concerns us all. There are many reasons to oppose abortion.
Posted by: Patricia at September 17, 2008 4:02 PM
…………………………
So, tell Jill she shouldn’t get her knickers in a twist for not being described as a nurse by CNN. She seems to think that it matters that they didn’t credit her with some kind of special knowledge over the topic of abortion. Obviously her ego is bruised.
I just popped in to give you all a reality check. You can go back to your tilting at windmills and mumbling amongst yourselves.
Sally, no one needs your “reality checks”, so you needn’t “pop in” anymore.
The “reality” here is your overwhelming need for something positive and uplifting in your life, which will make you tolerable, at best.
xalisae, I just read about your cousin, and I’m so very sorry that this happened. :( She and your family are in my prayers.
——————————
Our society is so messed up, I get absolutely sick.
Come quickly Lord Jesus.
Posted by: HisMan at September 17, 2008 10:53 PM
***************************
Amen.
Jill – what are you complaining about? You got the name of your 527 organization out there and you got a nice PR shot. Are you looking for them to just post an entire press release from your organization? I’m sure that if they did that for NARAL you’d be steamed. So why should they do that for you. The point is not to have a controlled interview with you, but rather to put your 527 organization into an objective context by naming funders and ect.
If you didn’t like that you should have put up a stink about them giving you any press at all.
Yes, I really think that “Mancow” is a suitable venue for your issue. This is the same host that insulted Chicago radio legend Steve Dahl’s wife so greatly that he was sued and Dahl was paid 6 figures. That there is a man of character!
x,
I will pray for you, your cousin, and her aborted unborn baby tonight.
May God bless you and keep you.
X —
I’m so sorry for everything. It sounds like there’s a lot to be upset about in this situation. I wish there was something I could say to make it better, but please know that I’ll keep you in my thoughts.
This whole situation is horrible, but it seems like maybe the one good thing in all of it is that your cousin has at least one person — perhaps more — who loves her and is going to get her through all of this; you clearly care about her and have her best interests at heart. You’re a good person, and a strong person, and I’d want someone like you on my side helping me out if I had been through even half of what your cousin has.
xalisae @ 8:35 PM
I’m so sorry to hear of this. As much as you can, be there for her – what’s needed most at such times is love.
I’m in complete agreement with Alexandra @ 5:32 – you have an opportunity to make a huge difference.
Your cousin, her family, you and your family are in our prayers.
As Carla suggested, at some point she’ll need to have a love-affirming talk with someone capable in these matters, but how to go about suggesting to her and her parents may take time and patience.
If you’d like, I can put you in contact with a PRC that can provide some initial steps and perhaps establish contacts for additional support. Let me know through email at chris@jillstanek.com
Good Morning X,
I hope you slept well last night.
I received a call yesterday from a friend who didn’t know what to do about her cousin who had gotten into drugs, a bad crowd and said she had a miscarriage at a Planned Parenthood. The main thing I was concerned with was that she was ALL ALONE in a state with no relatives close by. I urged Someone to step into her life and walk with her. Abortion recovery, drug abuse, sexual abuse can all be worked through when we walk together. I hope and pray you can be an advocate and friend for your young cousin. She needs you.
I echo the other thoughts that this aunt needs to be taken to task for what she has done in the name of “helping.”
God bless you!
LTL: “Jasper, the references are on my post at 11:37. Obviously you, Jill, Janet and Oliver refuse to read or acknowledge them, and I cannot force you to do so. However, to refuse to read them and then claim they “don’t exist” and to delete subsequent posts on the subject is childish.
Others may have an open mind, and wish to learn about Palin’s record on born alive, and many other issues. I have given them the tools to do so. The facts are a matter of public record.”
Bulls***.
Ive called you on it multiple times in fact LTL. I called your bluff and read your “sources” that you refused to post and pointed out that you are wrong. In fact Palin as it turns out has made many strides towards the pro-life cause. The time she opposed the Born Alive bill was to avoid muddying the pipeline with partisan politics. She specifically pointed out that she wants the issue addressed separatly and not just slammed on the end of another bill.
You refuse to respond to my points, therefore your posts are spam. Makes sense to me.
X,
I read this this morning and didn’t have time to respond. When I got back I saw that Carla, Chris, Oliver and Alexandra all said exactly what I wanted to say.
Your cousin has been through one crisis, but still faces another. You couldn’t be there for the first, but you can and must be there now. If she thought she was in trouble before, she has no idea what “trouble” is. She has such a long road ahead of her. It might be days, it might be years, but at some point she is going to have to face what she has done, and that’s when she will need you.
She also needs to know that while you are adamantly prolife, that does NOT influence your love for her.
As for the aunt…never mind. This blog is not meant for what I’m thinking…
God Bless.
Only in PL fantasy land can every premature infant be artificially kept alive. There was nothing to be done for ‘Jill’s baby’ and she knows it. Pretending to be concerned over babies capable of thriving, being denied health care is total bull. Her insessent whine about ‘born alive’ has nothing to do with premature health care and everything about her unprofessional opinions about abortion.
If anything, Giana is a case in point why born alive legislation is redundant. A completely unecessay waste of time and tax payer’s money unless you believe it to be a foot in the door to legal interference between a woman and her doctor. Why can’t you PL be honest. Drop the pretense of concern for preemies and admit that your agenda is to hinder the health care of pregnant women. This is clearly what all this infanticide hysteria is all about.
Posted by: Sally at September 18, 2008 12:07 AM
NOPE. That is not what it’s all about.
The intent is to force an abortionist to act with the bare minimal professional conduct and either offer help or seek help for a premature, aborted baby, whose chance of survival may well be largely undetermined. Gianna is proof that this IS the right thing to do.
It’s about recognizing what proaborts have clained all along, that a baby isn’t a person until it gets birthed – then it has rights. We are making sure that for now at least, those rights are respected, even if it means that eventually the child will die because it’s too premature.
It’s about trying to salvage a little of what’s left of our humanity in a truly barbaric age.
If that bothers you Sally you are the one looking at the world askew – hence the tilted windmills in your world.
FYI: the word is “incessant”
X, I’m very sorry about your cousin.
I too had a cousin who, years ago, at the age of 13 got pregnant. The father was 23 years old. Her family insisted that the two marry, which they did. The marriage did not last (no surprise there!!). I remember being furious with my parents for attending the wedding. I was 16 at the time and implored them not to go. IMO, her parents should have reported this man to the authorities.
My cousin eventually remarried in her 30’s and has a very good life now.
Sally,
Doctors frequently quote “impossible to survive/walk/think/breathe/etc” and frequently proven wrong. This is why when someone who is probably going to die still receives medical care. You never see a doctor tell a cancer patient “eh, you only have like a 1% chance of surviving, I am not going to treat you.” They do their best, and although most of the time the diagnosis ends up accurate, there are times where “miracles” occur, whether or not you believe they are divine of course. Anyways, why do we not extend those identical rights to an infant born alive? Certainly most of the time they will die no matter what, but that logic hasnt been used before for doctors in regards to their patients, why is it suddenly okay with a born alive premature baby?
Think about it like this. When a mother gives birth to a premature child, a NICU doctor is on hand in addition to the normal doctor. The NICU doctor’s job is to save the infant’s life, while the OBGYN is concerned with the mother. This changes when the child is aborted for one reason and one reason only. The mother wants the child to die, specificially so she does not have to “deal” with either adoption or caring for a child. The motives are evident.
Oliver,
You and Lauren are quite a pair!! I am so glad you both are here! :)
Aw, thanks Carla!
Xalisae, I am SO SORRY! I just read above what happened. I agree with others…you need to confront the aunt. Those people who raped your cousin deserve to be in jail!
Erin!
If your cousin is going around with 20 year olds, there is no reason assume she isn’t asserting herself in other ways. Stuff like that can happen, but what happens more often is a couple youngsters start making out and one thing leads to another. I’m sorry that you’re upset, but that doesn’t mean I’m not glad that your cousin found someone in the family who would help her and support her in a way that the PL members of your family wouldn’t have been able to.
How in the world could you possibly have been so insensitive? This is a THIRTEEN YEAR OLD GIRL. What is wrong with you? Do you really think that a 13 year old girl is old enough to consent and “assert herself” with 20 year old men?
Even if a 13 year old says “yes”, it is RAPE if a man has sex with her. It is not ‘one thing leads to another’, it is a fully grown man TAKING ADVANTAGE of a young child!
I can’t believe you would justify that and then say you’re glad she got the “help” by those who were protecting the sexual predators who raped her! That’s SICK!
You’re a good person, and a strong person, and I’d want someone like you on my side helping me out if I had been through even half of what your cousin has.
Amen, Alexandra!
OK, I think what I said is being misunderstood. I was not referring to sex with 20-year olds being OK. My point is that the only person who knows the entire story is this girl. I was referring that if this girl is doing things like possibly taking drugs and getting drunk, she may be having sex with boys HER AGE. If she had sex with a boy HER OWN AGE, which happens just as often if not more often than date-rape scenarios, there is nothing statutory about it. If the 20 year olds had sex with her, yes, it’s a crime. The only thing I’m trying to guard against is jumping to conclusions.
Erin,
An apology would be nice.
The age of consent in California is 18. I understand that it makes no difference to you if two 13 year olds engage in sex. Since they are THE SAME AGE. You have made that abundantly clear.
The point was….X was crying out for support. You offered none.
Oh, except for praising the aunt.
Look, I DO apologize if I came off as cold. I will not apologize for anything I particularly said because it needed to be said. It doesn’t seem like X really knows the entire story, heck, it doesn’t seem like the girls’ PARENTS know the entire story. Jumping off half-cocked on accusations like sexual abuse and rape and such are not laughing matters.
Erin,
Your experience has left you blinded and with a twisted sense of right and wrong. Even if it is two thirteen year olds it needs to be adressed and stopped, not supported with feelings of their right to assert themselves about their irresponsible sex and drug use.
Erin, Xalisae confirmed that she was not making assumptions when she posted this:
no, erin. we talked to her family. she was recently arrested for public intox…drugged w/ecstacy by a few 20 year olds..
Look, I DO apologize if I came off as cold. I will not apologize for anything I particularly said because it needed to be said.
What part “needed” to be said, Erin? Praising the aunt for protecting those who would take advantage of a 13 year old?
Sheesh.
Let’s talk about the facts of what really happened here instead of your made up scenarios and warnings about jumping off half cocked.
1) Twenty year old man.
2) Thirteen year old girl
3) Drugs involved.
Thirteen year olds CAN take ecstasy willingly. I’ve gotten drunk with my best friend and his 14-year old brother before. And the 14 year old was the one supplying the alcohol. 13 year olds are not just children nowadays. Especially if they have a troubled home life, they know where to go to find things that will get them attention.
X is looking at things emotionally. I’m just trying to portray them logically. Emotional people get hostile, usually, when I do that. But they need to see it from a calculated view.
X is looking at things emotionally. I’m just trying to portray them logically. Emotional people get hostile, usually, when I do that. But they need to see it from a calculated view.
Posted by: Erin at September 18, 2008 10:29 AM
What you are saying right now makes you come off as cold and you already apologized once. Why do you continue with your “logical” comments? I think x is smart enough to see things logically all by herself. Anyone would be annoyed at your response. “They don’t “need”to see it from any other view.
I’m just trying to portray them logically. Emotional people get hostile, usually, when I do that. But they need to see it from a calculated view.
Erin,
Logicaly a thirteen year old needs help if they are taking ecstasy wether they take it willingly or not because they do not have the capacity to see the big picture and how it effects their future lives. That is why they are not allowed to drive or vote or have credit cards etc.. etc..
If you truly had a logical, calculated view then you would not be so adamant in your position that a thirteen year old can calculate the effects of sex and drugs on her life. Anybody who looks at it logically would calculate that such a thirteen year old is in an abusive situation. Are you really trying to say that a thirteen year old girl is capable of asserting herself and making calculated judgements about decisions to do drugs and have sex with older men?
Erin,
Any twenty year old man that does drugs with and has sex with a thirteen year old girl deserves to be locked up or shot. Your supposed logic that a thirteen year old girl can make her own calculated decisions about sex and drugs is a predators dream.
Erin: ” 13 year olds are not just children nowadays. Especially if they have a troubled home life, they know where to go to find things that will get them attention. ”
If anything 13 year olds are more of children nowadays. A hundred years ago 13 year olds were adults and acted accordingly. In our current society, 13 year olds are immature, much worse than they were even 20 years ago. If you are going to claim that you do not get emotional and you use cold logic, you really should avoid making appeals to non-facts as well.
Besides you are confusing doing an action with willfully doing an action.
Does a 5 year old have the capacity to make choices about their life? Should we feed them chocolate and candy and pizza because they are “willfully” asking for it? The same principle applies. a 13 year old may claim they want drugs/sex/etc but the question is “do they willfully want these things? Are they qualified to willfully decide these things?” I dont personally know the answer to that question, but you certainly cannot outrightly assume that they do because they “choose” to do so.
Guys,
First of all, I am very sorry for what X and her family had to go through, a 20-year old man drugging and having sex with a 13-year old girl is disgusting, and he should be shot.
Secondly, stop misrepresenting Erin. She is NOT advocating statutory rape, nor is she saying that 13-year olds are mature enough to make decisions about sex and drugs. She was just saying that WE do not have the entire story to be jumping to conclusions. We cannot get it directly out of the horse’s mouth, the cousin’s.
And she is right…13-year-olds (7th to 8th grade?) these days are not as naive as we think they are. They know about sex and drugs and know how to get both if they want it. During sex ed in middle school I found out a lot of my classmates were already having sex, drinking alcohol, and smoking (cigarettes or weed, I have no idea). And that was in a mostly Asian, well-off, upper-middle class neighborhood!
But just because Erin said something factual doesn’t mean she supports it. I’m sure she is against this happening and wants to stop it like we all do. But please don’t try to make her out like a monster by misrepresenting her views because she is not.
Xalisae, I’m sorry to be late on this, but you have my sympathy. Your cousin, you family, and you are all in my prayers.
Come, Lord Jesus.
Erin: the fact that 13 years olds are not naive and can figure out where to get drugs etc does not lessen the trauma to the family.
she may have went to the one family member she thought would help her “deal” with “it”
In my experience, most teens are terrified to tell their parents they are pregnant. They will tell total strangers but not their parents. Anybody but parents.
And I would think the idea of having a baby would be a pretty darn terrifying concept to deal with for a 13 year old girl.
Your family will be in my prayers, X! God bless you.
“LTL,
You really should look for another line of work.”
LTL should look for A line of work.
And, yeah, CNN’s “highlighted” statement is just one more example of the MSM’s unequal coverage of this issue. Abortion is a controversial topic, and so any opinion someone might reveal can be considered controversial, and yet they reserve that word for pro-life people exclusively. Sarah Palin is said to have “controversial” views on abortion; Joe Biden’s views are said to be “moderate.” And the phrase “abortion rights” (as has been pointed out) frames the issue in terms the pro-choice side would use. It’s not the “choice” issue or the “reproductive freedom” issue or the “abortion rights” issue. It’s the abortion issue, and the debate should start from that neutral corner.
X,
sorry for a late reply…I will include your family in our prayers…and lift up your intentions.
Don’t mind the pro-aborts’ comments…they’ll get what’s coming to them in the end.
i’m planning on visiting my uncle and cousins when i go to see my husband on his leave next month. i want to get a teddybear and book for her…does anyone know a good title for healing after an abortion? thanks again, all.
X,
I’ll Hold You in Heaven by Jack Hayford
Bethany might have some ideas too. There are so many books but I am trying to think of what is appropriate for a 13 year old girl.
I hope your spirit feels lifted after reading some of the comments by those that do care about you and your cousin. I will continue to pray. You can always email any of the mods too. I do want to say that I am glad you shared, as hard as that must have been for you.
X: thank goodness that your husband will be home safe and sound! This is one great blessing for you at any rate!
I saw a picture in our newspapers up here about one of our Canadian soldiers who died two weeks ago. The picture was taken in March of his girlfriend and him kissing goodbye and she had tears streaming down her face. He’s dead now. I just lost it – I was at work and had to go to the staff room to compose myself. I felt so badly for the young girlfriend and family.
So make sure you give that guy of yours a big hug!! :-)
Thanks, guys. I am feeling somewhat better today, and have moved more into a “what to do next” mindset rather than dwelling negatively in “what has been done”. I’ll prepare, and see what my aunt and cousin have to say, and continue doing what is right (my aunt currently isn’t answering my phone calls because i’m the one who tipped my uncle off to what happened in the first place). even though she might not understand the gravity of her situation right now, she will, and i’ll be here when she’s ready. my aunt’s life is screwed-up enough, and she’s the last person anyone should be getting help or advice from
X, You and you cousin and her family are in my prayers. God bless.
Sally, some babies do survive. But even if they do not, don’t you think that they at least deserve some palliative care and not be left in a waste can?
Xalisae, Carla has suggested the best book possible- I’ll hold you in Heaven is the most caring, compassionate book you’ll ever find for a woman who has experienced an abortion (or a miscarriage too). You can get it every inexpensively on Amazon.com, or I can actually send you a copy from the CPC if you’d like.
Also, your aunt needs to be confronted. She has overstepped her role and if she misrepresented herself and transported the girl to the clinic –she could be guilty of a crime — fraud, kidnapping – spring to mind. She should not be allowed to influence any other children in the family because she obviously doesn’t respect children or parents.
To the pro-abort ghouls on this site — your responsed to X’s story shows your real colors. Blaming a child and mocking the incident — get real and try to grow a heart.
Posted by: LB at September 17, 2008 10:52 PM
Oh BS. By X’s own post – dad is overwhelmed (financially and otherwise) to the point he can’t parent a 13 y o . Mom is an alcoholic – so the 13 y o has NO support system. And PL dad would have forced the 13 y o to gestate a rape resultant pregnancy without reporting the rape. Sounds like the aunt is the only one in the family with some sense – kudos to her.
Some sense! Why didn’t the aunt kill the 13-year-old, too? As Phylosopher said, the girl has no support system. Why not kill the whole family? Why not kill every last human being and rid the earth of its vermin? Save the planet!
Do you have a problem? Kill it!
But don’t kill the rapist. Don’t let the government bring him to justice and perhaps execute him, rewarding him according to the severity of his crime. Rapists have feelings too. Rapists are victims of their heredity, upbringing, and environment. They can’t help it.
And rapists do have feelings. And they can’t help their propensity to sin. And perhaps they can’t even resist their urge to violate women and children. The government must still do its job and punish them. The church should also do its job, where it can, and offer them the Lord’s salvation, a place in heaven. Remember the repentant criminal who went to Paradise the same day that he was justly crucified.
According to the Sermon on the Mount, we are all murderers and adulterers. We all sin in thought and word. The civil government must punish the evil-doers and thus work to prevent the degree of violence that occurred on the earth before the Flood.
Justice for the unborn!
Shucks, I shouldn’t have made that last comment. In my previous four comments, I was being ironic in my first two and the first paragraph of the third. I was no longer being ironic in the fourth comment. I do mean it. Justice for the unborn!
Xalisae, I’m sorry about this tragedy in your family. I don’t know whether crass Phylosopher accurately presented the details; he certainly lacked sense and sensibility. I like to remember that King David, the man after God’s own heart, committed both murder and adultery. He suffered terrible consequences–and so did his children because of him–but he was forgiven. Bristol Palin needs to get the same forgiveness, as do your aunt and cousin. As Bobby says, God love them! God love us all! His will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
X, I’m sorry too – and I understand how you feel.
I hope your cousin gets the best support from her family that she can.