New Stanek WND column: “Killing Girls”
UPDATE, 3/12, 9:30p: LifeSiteNews.com has more insights on Killing Girls:
“Killing Girls has also been my most difficult film to produce, mainly because it was next to impossible to find finance,” said Ireland-born producer and director David Kinsella. “Everybody was telling me that I could not show this or that! … I was being suffocated by all the negative criticism towards our film. So I decided to make a film straight from my heart and soul and forget all the negative reactions.
“At times I felt totally helpless during the filming, the screaming from the hospital are tattooed on my soul, the sound of a baby crying during the abortion,” he said. “I was totally shocked.”…
Anna Sirota, script writer and narrator of Killing Girls, said she too was shocked “not just because this was so painful and cruel, but also because I could not understand how easy it is to give and to take lives, how mechanical the whole abortion process looks.”
Sirota has given birth to one daughter and had four abortions.
“The project started to become an obsession. Maybe I was trying ‘to excuse’ away my sins… I still have no answers,” she said.
_______________
A documentary about late-term abortions in Russia, 7 years in the making, has just been released. [JLS note: I have been watching for this film for a year.]
Killing Girls has already been nominated for best documentary film in 3 European film festivals and through the wonders of technology is available to download online for $14.99, which I did last weekend. (DVD is also available for $22.99.) Here’s the trailer:
The primary setting of Killing Girls is the Center for Family Planning and Reproduction in St Petersburg, a large, old hospital where babies are delivered on one floor and aborted on the next. Mothers recover together….
Late-term abortions are common in Russia. In a country where the film tells us 80% of women abort an average of two to 10 times, older girls tell younger girls to wait until after 20 weeks to abort because, they say, it is better for the female body to have an induced abortion than surgical abortion. The girls worry about becoming sterile. Very messed up. This despite the fact abortions are free up to 12 weeks.
Killing Girls tracks the labor-induction abortions of several teens. The name of the movie is a play on words, because as Irish director David Kinsella wrote me, “All the girls I filmed gave birth to girls.” By “gave birth” Kinsella meant aborting by labor induction, except one who changed her mind and went on to deliver a full-term girl….
Because these were labor-induction abortions, I asked Kinsella if any babies survived….
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.
This is what Obama wants for America.
This kind of stuff terrifies me no end. I can never watch it.
Dittos Bobby. My blood pressure went up just watching the trailer.
I wonder what they do with all of the babies after they have been aborted. How can these people work in such a place day in and day out.
How very very sad.
I must have been sleeping because I never knew just how bad the abortion rate was in Russia with all the focus on China.
I’m so saddend by this though, these women most likely have No CLUE because in Russia women are to been seen and not heard for the most part. I’ll bet those women don’t get to see their baby before it is aborted or even after they’ve aborted. Couldn’t imagine having an elder woman in my family tell me to wait the pregnancy out until after 20 weeks so I can abort and save my fertility. With all those infertile couples caused from abortion don’t you think there would be many couples willing to adopt a child?!
I don’t think any pro-choicer could argue after viewing it that abortion is a right to be celebrated with no lingering after-effects, not just on the mother but on an entire culture.
Pro-choicers don’t argue that there are never any after-effects. No one could argue that childbirth has no lingering after-effects, either. Pregnancy, birth, abortion: all of them can have after-effects. Most things in life have after-effects. It doesn’t mean they should be illegal, though, because illegal abortion has even worse after-effects.
The best pro-choicers might argue after viewing “Killing Girls” abortion is a necessary evil, which is not very winning.
Abortion is absolutely necessary, and not evil at all.
Abortion in Russia is prevalent, the film tells us, because the topic of sex is taboo, resulting in grand scale ignorance among youth on how pregnancy happens, and because women don’t like hormonal contraceptives and men don’t like condoms. Abortion is a primary means of contraception.
Which is why all pro-lifers should support the work of Planned Parenthood. Contraception and sexual education prevent abortion.
To Reality:
“Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal.” -Martin Luther King, Jr.
Abortion is not necessary. It takes one life and harms another. You are sadly mistaken.
After-effects from pregnancy? Oh yeah, they will be walking in the door after school.
“Abortion is a primary means of contraception. Which is why all pro-lifers should support the work of Planned Parenthood. ”
Not utilitarians. You need to come up with a non-utilitarian argument if you wish to convince us of anything.
I completely applaud you for your work, but I will not watch the film “Killing Girls” for two reasons:
First, as you pointed out, no actual abortions are shown. This removes the most powerful argument against abortions. Its like not
showing the airplanes flying into World Trade Centers.
Second, the title of the movie itself, implies that only girls are being aborted or worth making a movie about. What?? That sounds
like something only a feminist would do.
David, just to clarify, “Killing Girls” has 2 meanings. On the surface it refers to young Russian girls killing their babies. But (and not mentioned in the movie) it so happened that all babies aborted the day of filming were girls.
I would like you to think about what happens when abortion is illegal. Forty-odd years ago, abortion was illegal in this country. That did not stop abortions from being carried out. No. Plenty of abortions were performed. There were two kinds of abortions being performed in the United States during that sad time.
1) Women from wealthy families were able to have a qualified M.D. perform in-hospital abortions for a couple of thousand dollars. Greedy M.D.’s had a profitable side line.
2) Poor women either tried to perform their own, causing immense suffering for themselves and their families. Or, had to find some “quack” who took them to a cheap hotel and frequently left them there to bleed.
If you think that is a good idea and that either of those kinds of abortions should come back, then you had better think again.
So tired of hearing about how poor people need abortions and contraception to be happy in life…
Ana, what do you think happened to all those “quack” doctors once abortion became legal?
They became legal abortionists.
When abortion was illegal and a “quack” killed or maimed a girl, they were charged with a crime.
Now we have Tiller, who killed Christina Gilbert and was given a free pass.
Make abortion illegal and arrest the abortionists. There are already so many services available to women that go unused because they aren’t mentioned.
For example, there’s a local maternity home who has a highschool on campus. I talked to the director the other day and she told me that they would take ANY woman who was at the abortion clinic planning to abort.
We can support women facing unplanned pregnancies, we don’t have to have a legal killing service.
If you think that is a good idea and that either of those kinds of abortions should come back, then you had better think again.
Posted by: Ana at March 11, 2009 3:20 PM
******************************************
No, Ana, what we want is for life to be respected as human life, not to be thrown out as garbage. Abortion is not a proper solution, so we do not support any “kind of abortion” nor do we think they should come back. The number of abortions, since abortion became legal, has skyrocketed. Heavily skewed statistics were given to tug at heartstrings in support of legalized abortion, but the fact remains that there were few (in comparison) illegal abortions that took place here before Roe v. Wade. The legality of abortion has INCREASED the number of abortions.
Ana, I think that you’re confused. Pro-life doesn’t mean we are pro-backalley abortion. It means that we’re against abortion. We see women who were absolutely maimed or even killed, and we all know what happened to the children, and we feel awful. That is why we oppose abortion- because of what it did to women and children in the past and what it does to children today. You act as though we cheer when we read of slaughtered women and children from the 1930s.
Fifteen years before abortion was legal in America, around 85% of illegal abortions were done by “reputable physicians in good standing in their local medical associations. In 1960, Planned Parenthood stated that “90% of all illegal abortions are presently done by physicians.” The vast majority of abortions were not done in back alleys, but in the back offices of license physicians.
Were these doctors “butchers” as prochoice advocates claim? The majority of physicians performing abortions after legalization were the same ones doing it before legalization. Neither their training nor their equipment improved when abortion was decriminalized. Either they were not butchers before legalization or they continued to be butchers after legalization. It cannot be argued both ways.
Research confirms that the actual number of abortion deaths in the twenty five years prior to 1973 averaged 250 a year, with a high of 388 in 1948.
If abortion became illegal, abortions would be done with medical equipment, not clothes hangers.
Clothes hangers make effective propaganda at prochoice rallies.
“Abortion: For Survival” a video produced by the Fund for the Feminist Majority.
Hank K.Atrash,M.D., Theodore Cheek, M.D., and Carol Hogue, Ph.D, “Legal Abortion Mortality and General Anesthesia,” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (Feb 1988):420
Ana:
It’s people like you and your generalized statements and convoluted and relativistic morality that just want to make me puke. They represent the thinking of a beast.
Murder is NEVER justified. Got it?
The US had led the world into murdering 1,000,000,000, that’s One Freaking Billion children. And you call that a good thing? I call that blaspheme.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
Romans 1:18,19
What a curse there is upon Russia & upon America! Anyone who aborts their infant has to actively’suppress the knowlege of the truth in unrighteousness’ to kill their innocent little ones. We all have a God-given conscience that tells us right from wrong, even the young teen mothers know “You shall not murder”. We spoke to a mom who came to Orlando Women’s Center abortuary to labor-and-deliver her live baby into the toilet this morning. Chloe said: “Yes, I know it’s murder. I’m okay with that.I don’t care. Nothing you can say will make me change my mind.”
Legalized murder. That is the truth. God forgive us for tolerating the shedding of innocent blood! God help us!
Ana,
Forty years ago was forty years ago. Women today hold advanced educational degrees and have careers that can afford them a life of independance as single moms. Birth control is very accessible. It is constantly advertised all the time on television for crying out loud. Birth control can be given by injection, patch or ring so women don’t even have to think about taking a pill everyday. You can buy condoms at any corner gas station.
Women can decide to have a child out of wedlock without the social stigma it once had. With so many infertile couples, there are people waiting in line to adopt not just one baby but two or three.
The illegal abortion death rates prior to roe v wade have been debunked. Go to the Real Choice blog and you will see how many women died from abortions performed by medial doctors.
I don’t think that I could actually watch this movie. It would make me cry. I saw one movie from some medical footage that had me sobbing, but nothing ever made me cry as I cried when I read an article in MSN about the Ms. Magazine article that featured a woman who killed her baby simply due to the fact that he had a disability. That article made me a very dedicated anti-abortion activist.
Seeing this movie would just make me sob even more and but all people ought to consider this.
Patte:
BINGO!!!!
I agree with you, Jill, to make a film & leave out the BABIES, who are the victims of abortion, is unconscionable. I will not support or endorse the film because of that evil decision. He let that baby die & refuses to expose the unfruitful deed of darkness. I consider this depraved indifference.
I pray that the director releases ALL of the birth footage. I pray that he includes every single bit of it and that everyone watches that poor little baby who was born alive and the love and care she was actively denied. What a hellish nightmare.
Carla, thanks, that’s what I was talking about as well. I appreciate you posting the source. :)
Ana,
I forgot to add that forty years ago we didn’t have the medical technology to know what is growing inside a woman’s body. We all know about fetal development and what is growing inside a woman’s body is not just a clump of tissue.
Also, being pro-choice does that make you ok with women who abort for any reason? Minor birth defects? Wrong sex? Too many in the womb?
Ana: you might want to check out RealChoice at http://realchoice.blogspot.com/
This blogger has absolutely no trouble demonstrating that legalization of abortion hasn’t saved women’s lives. The quality of doctor (and I use the term loosely) who does abortions has not improved since legalization.
Well put, Sandy.
I forgot to add that forty years ago we didn’t have the medical technology to know what is growing inside a woman’s body. We all know about fetal development and what is growing inside a woman’s body is not just a clump of tissue.
I’m sure abortionist new, though, since it was they would pulled out little arms and legs.
Too many in the womb?
The further disgusting irony here is that there are only ever too many in the womb when people inject themselves with hormones or create 6 babies in a petri dish and then put them into the womb….
Just a few moments ago I was reading where someone had written “President Abortion”… and I don’t know if it was a typo, but it sure fits Barack……. “President Barack Abortion”.
abortion isn’t necessary. It is taking of an innocent child’s life. That child did NOTHING to deserve the horrible death. Well, except be conceived at the wrong time.
Thanks Lauren. I am trying to get more savvy with the sources. :)
Good God. The suffering of the women in the video made me blanche. How can anyone woman go through this? My heart goes out to women who feel that they have no recourse except abortion.
It doesn’t look like the easy, safe, rare procedure that it’s made out to be does it?
Hell on earth.
Heartbreaking.
And perhaps more atrocities to come — perhaps in America.
Posted by: Sandy at March 11, 2009 2:38 PM
——-
Saw other material on this – even the “doctors” that work there are pretty sick of the whole thing. I wonder if it’s a case of mistaken expectations – the girls thinking abortions are needed, and the “doctors” thinking they’re provided needed services, but no one having a real heart to heart about what’s happening.
Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at March 11, 2009 4:08 PM
Jill said that after Monday’s ESCR signing.
President Barack Hussein Abortion.
Finally got the courage up to watch the trailer. May God forgive us.
What a heartbreaking, disgusting tragedy. So many would love to see our beloved country take this same course. Oh, Lord, save us from this evil.
Posted by: David T. at March 11, 2009 3:14 PM
David – The number of girls being aborted worldwide is moving up considerably as more ultrasound technology comes on-line. China, India and other countries are performing sex-selection abortions at astounding numbers.
Obviously this not something the pro-choice feminists care to discuss. It reveals the ugly hypocrisy of their position.
I’m with Patte. Show the babies, or you’re only giving 1/2 the story. Let the world see just who is being murdered. Those poor children.
A poignant moment was when the nurse/assistant states matter of factly…”this is legalized murder.” Let us not forget that indeed it is murder. The advancement in technologies, plus decades of pro-life activism have combined to educate the unwilling and unknowing to become aware of the reality that this is no blob of tissue. This is an actual living human being that is being destroyed. If one does not find that troubling, it is time for them to think again.
I read that the director thought the images of the babies would be to graphic.
These are induced labor abortions, so it’s not like we’re talking about children without arms or legs, just very small babies.
It would be dramatic, and heartbreaking, but it is certainly something that needs to be shown. If seeing these children offends our senses, perhaps it should serve as a warning that we shouldn’t be killing them in the first place.
How horrible for those girls.
I read that there is a lack of sex ed in Russia and abortion is their principle form of birth control.
Jill: “…older girls tell younger girls to wait until after 20 weeks to abort because, they say, it is better for the female body to have an induced abortion than surgical abortion”.
Jill, is it true in Russia that induced is better for women than surgical? Also does the film say what percentage of abortions are performed after 12 weeks?
Killing Girls is a great title, BUT this is not a pro-life film—at best it is ambivalent.
If killing girls is the main theme, then one MUST show the girls who are killed.
The film producer gives the most lame excuse that women will shy away from graphic photos. It is the mothers who see the babies aborted. And by the way, why did the producer just stand by while the baby born alive struggled
for life?
Magazines, newspapers, tv and movies show some of the most violent acts against human beings and yet we are not supposed to show photos of aborted babies??? Get real.
Asitis, neither method of abortion is “better.” But the longer one waits to abort, the more dangerous it becomes. I can only imagine the astounding number of these girls who are going to get breast cancer.
No, the film did not give percentages.
The title is great BUT not showing the babies because women don’t like horror is lame.
So much of common entertainment in movies and tv is saturated with graphic horror. Even popular magazines, newspapers and school textbooks display photos evidencing horror. Even driver training films show horrific accident scenes to teenagers.
Unless the babies are shown it is not a pro-life movie.
Asitis, neither method of abortion is “better.” But the longer one waits to abort, the more dangerous it becomes. I can only imagine the astounding number of these girls who are going to get breast cancer.
Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 11, 2009 5:16 PM
Jill, I was referring specifically to Russia. Is there something about the way they do surgical abortions that makes it better to wait longer for an induced abortion? Or is this just an “old girls'” tale? Does the film say anthing about this?????
Oh, have they actually shown that in Russia abortion causes breast cancer?
The attitude of Russian doctors is also quite different from their western counterparts who seem to believe that abortion is merely a walk in the park.
“Dilyara Latypova is a gynecologist in the Russian republic of Tatarstan. With more than 25 years of experience, she’s seen some progress in family planning since the days of the Soviet Union, when such topics were largely taboo.”
The relative ease of getting an abortion, in fact, has blinded many women to the numerous health risks associated with the process, especially for those who turn to it more than once. “The complications include bleeding and inflammation in the short term,” says Lyubov Yerofeyeva, the director of the Russian Family Planning Association, an NGO that works to improve sex education in Russia. “In the long term, the most severe complication could be infertility.”
“Today, modern techniques make the experience less traumatic and dangerous, but Natalia Vartapetova, the director of a Russian NGO called the Institute of Family Health says complications following abortions are still widespread.”
“Unfortunately, still, the consequences of abortion are among the key causes of maternal mortality in Russia,” she says. “One of the problems, perhaps, is infection control — infection and sepsis afterward — or other complications, like hemorrhage. Infertility, as well — we know about one-third of infertility is due to previous abortions.”
“Doctors like Latypova in Tatarstan are also quick to remind women of the enormous emotional cost that abortion can inflict. While the topic of abortion does not spark the kind of fierce moral debate seen in countries like the United States, Latypova says terminating a pregnancy can be a devastating experience.”
“You can’t compare the emotional state of a woman who undergoes an abortion with anything else. As both a doctor and a mother, I can say that it’s a huge psychological trauma. There are very few women who can just breezily say, ‘oh, I had an abortion.’ I think there’s no abortion that doesn’t leave its mark on a woman.”
Jill, I posted this on my facebook. People are looking at what I post,and I am amazed at how much more thinking is going on with people who I thought could not think.
It is a horrifying prediction of exactly where the USA is headed with FOCA. I’m very sure that the strong and unremitting sexual messages that we are subjected to on a daily basis, along with the rejection of God, have led to this disaster. May God have mercy on us!
brad I would think rather that Russia would start educating and using birth control and would be headed toward the US or better yet, a more progressive nation.
Asitis:
Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Chemotherapy, Cancer Scientific Center, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia
2004
Conclusion: Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer in women in Russia and is the leading cause of oncological deaths in Russia.
Breast cancer is a major contributor to oncological morbidity and mortality in Russian women….
Incidence… 38.3/100,000…. This index has increased annually by 3.25% during the last decade….
I would say that healthcare, information on abstinence and contraceptives- that would be a truly progressive nation. A nation which desires progression ought to elminate abortion both in a legal sense and an illegal sense. The ownership of another is not exactly progressive. Though, I’m happy that you care very deeply for these women, Asitis. I read a lot from pro-choice supporters on why the dangers of abortion are overrated. This is good news that you feel that something must be done to try and stop this. Abortion in a clinic, backalley, or whatever they call this horrendous place in Russia ought to go.
thanks jill. I misread your comment to mean that breast cancer would increase as a result of these abortions. I didn’t realize you simply meant beast cancer is high in Russia
Even if the producers DID show the babies that were aborted, the film would not be shown here. The feminists would go ballistic, theater owners and financers would refuse to show it, and Planned Parenthood and other abortion organizations would have it pulled from theaters the first day.
Why? Because NONE of these groups want the TRUTH shown. The truth hurts and God forbid people really see what this “safe and legal procedure” is all about. We just wouldn’t want to upset anyone with the truth now, would we?
Not showing the babies diminishes its impact. I don’t know that I wish to see children massacred, though I understand your point in that this needs to be out regardless of the attempted censorship that will be tossed at it. It’s hard to see suffering. Though sometimes it’s necessary. Furthermore, no clinic member or feminist is going to care about seeing deceased children. If you are going to survive then you ought not to belong to one of those women who are poor. Oh, and if you want to be one of those exceptions who gets your rights acknowledged then you better be one of those good babies who will be disability-free, wealthy, Anglo, and perfectly fine with your rights and value being diminished after you’re born, too.
I mean, these are, after all, the offspring of women who can’t just smile for the cameras and tell what awesome stories that they came by from their totally awesome abortionists.
Poor women and poor babies.
Sorry, I meant to say that not showing the babies does not diminish its impact.
Would the world have believed the people who exposed the killing of the Jews by Nazi’s if they didn’t have photos?
Like Fr. Frank Pavone says, “America will not REJECT abortion until America SEES abortion”.
There is a mission field of post abortive women and men around the world!!!
Here am I Lord. Send me.
My oldest daughter adopted two toddlers from Russia, a boy and a girl.She originally wanted two girls but was told that it was hard to get girls in Russian. Now maybe I know why, they abort them. I thank God for the woman who for whatever reason saw fit to give birth to my granddaughter even though she abandoned her at the hospital. What a blessing she and John are to us.
it’s not surprising breast cancer rates are so high in Russia, given the astronomical abortion rates.
It will be interesting to see if the breast cancer rate continues increasing as the effect of abortions takes about 8 to 10 years to be seen in cancer cases.
asitis,
Abortion is birth control in Russia.
Yes, let’s send condoms and pills and all kinds of “safe sex” care packages to Russia!!
Our nation is such a glowing example of how well that is working.
Just like we send condoms by the 1000s to African countries who are more in need of actual medicines and food, right Carla?
In at least one African Nation, they have reduced the rate of HIV infections, not with condoms, but with the common sense method of: Abstience Be FaithFul Condoms as a last resort.
The solution for Russia is not more pills and condoms. And its certainly NOT PP’s skewed sex education, either.
Ms. Maria, that’s a beautiful story. My teacher is adopting, too. What is the little girl’s name?
Her name if Finley (American) but her Russian name was Anna. I would love for her birth mother to know that she is very loved and we thank her for the gift of life. I pray she is safe and well. Why she did not abort we may never know but Finley is a special gift as is her brother John adopted from another part of Russia.
actually carla our nation is NOT a glowing example of how well birth control works. But others are. Americans who do not want pregnancy ( or not yet anyway) need to use it and use it better.
I’ve never heard Finley before. It’s really pretty.
brad I would think rather that Russia would start educating and using birth control and would be headed toward the US or better yet, a more progressive nation.
Posted by: asitis at March 11, 2009 5:51 PM
Again we have a person who has no knowledge of the nation of Russia.
Putin is giving away vacations, cars, even refrigerators,housing, to encourage Ruskizans to “have babies.”
Why would the government encourage less citizens by passing out non-citizen products, literature,propaganda, when their stated policies are to increase citizens?
What they did during the great leap toward socialism/communism/humanism was abort their citizens until they have taken the spirit to reproduce out of their culture.
But, like the socialist in the USA, they want citizens to reduce carbon use,while giving billions to carbon producers; auto manufacturers.
BBC;jan.15.2009
Mr Medvedev’s presence at a church service for Orthodox Christmas featured prominently in television coverage. Then he was back on TV again – hosting a reception in the Kremlin for the winners of the “Parental glory” awards.
He was giving state honours to parents who have seven or more children. It was the first ceremony of its kind, and followed 2008, which was declared “year of the family” in Russia.
The proud parents had come from right across the country. One couple wore the traditional clothing of the native people of Siberia; the next father wore a cardigan with the word “Extreme” emblazoned on the front.
‘Hero mothers’
Russia’s 24-hour news channel even found a gap in the gas row to carry the ceremony live.
“With your attitude to child-rearing you set an example to the whole of society, and continue the special traditions of parental service which have been developing for centuries in our country,” President Medvedev told the participants.
For the last couple of decades those traditions have been disappearing. The Soviet system did its best to promote them, even rewarding the “hero mothers” who had big families. The collapse of that system ushered in a less heroic age.
“Beginning from 1992, mortality in Russia has consistently exceeded fertility: the loss of population has amounted to approximately 12 million individuals,” the United Nations said in April.
The UN did add that the loss had been partially compensated for by 5.5 million due to migration, but warned that if current trends continued, the Russian population could be as low as 100 million by the middle of this century. For comparison, Russia’s state statistics service said the population in 2008 was 142 million.
So while Mr Putin’s words and actions on the gas crisis are of vital importance to Russia’s present and immediate future, Mr Medvedev’s gentle attempts to address his country’s drastic decline in population are of vital importance in the longer term.
Notice, the “Orwellian twist” where the communist were promoting “hero mothers” during their reign of family terror since 1917 and before.
Which leads to contemporay common citizen knowing their leaders are still lying, and will never admit the fact that they were “giddy with success” in destroying the family and its origins in “having babies”.
They hated themselves first, then each other, and finally have come to the end of the road of their civilization.
Or for clarity;
It’s as if the killum old and in the womb propagandist ASitis, suddenly was “commanded” to preach for large families and less to no population control.
No one would believe her, and definetly not herself.
Ans so the killing goes on, and ASitis is still holding on to her own, while preaching that old time tune of the culture of death.
Anybodu but hers, and her own.
My oldest daughter adopted two toddlers from Russia, a boy and a girl.She originally wanted two girls but was told that it was hard to get girls in Russian. Now maybe I know why, they abort them. I thank God for the woman who for whatever reason saw fit to give birth to my granddaughter even though she abandoned her at the hospital. What a blessing she and John are to us.
Posted by: Maria at March 11, 2009 8:05 PM
Because of her babuska, most likely. The mother thought of the spirit/religion of her great- grandma/grandma.
No matter how hard they tried to destroy the family/religion and the culture which preceded the humanist, it never totally died.
yllas: Again we have a person who has no knowledge of the nation of Russia.
Putin is giving away vacations, cars, even refrigerators,housing, to encourage Ruskizans to “have babies.”
Hmmm. Kind of at odds with free abortions up to 12 weeks, wouldn’t you say yllas?
And regardless of what the government wants, if women don’t want to be pregnant they will get an abortion. You might prefer that those women not be pregnant in the first place. That’s going to require some changes.
And regardless of what the government wants, if women don’t want to be pregnant they will get an abortion. You might prefer that those women not be pregnant in the first place. That’s going to require some changes.
Posted by: asitis at March 11, 2009 10:16 PM
It’s your ignorance of the culture of present day and past Russia is my point.
They will not recover from their national suicide because they agree with your values towards sexual matters.
And this “regardlss of government attitude” must include our governemnt also? Such as your want to encourage your personal hypocritical quest for more of that old time culture of death?
Or, how about China, and that regardless of government attitude towards abortion?
Next, you’ll preach individualism and liberty was, and is rampant in socialist cultures.
Fact is, the culture of Russia was propagandized to abort for hundreds of reasons until the’ve found themself “giddy with success”.
Why. I bet you can give at least a dozen reasons why others should kill themselves and abort their own Asitis, but not for yourself.
The state is responsible for the upbringing of children. A. Kollontai.
But even if housework disappears, you may argue, there are still the children to look after. But here too, the workers’ state will come to replace the family, society will gradually take upon itself all the tasks that before the revolution fell to the individual parents. Even before the revolution, the instruction of the child had ceased to be the duty of the parents. Once the children had attained school age the parents could breathe more freely, for they were no longer responsible for the intellectual development of their offspring. But there were still plenty of obligations to fulfil. There was still the matter of feeding the children, buying them shoes and clothes and seeing that they developed into skilled and honest workers able, when the time came, to earn their own living and feed and support their parents in old age. Few workers’ families however, were able to fulfil these obligations. Their low wages did not enable them to give the children enough to eat, while lack of free time prevented them from devoting the necessary attention to the education of the rising generation. The family is supposed to bring up the children, but in reality proletarian children grow up on the streets.
Nothing there you disagree with commrade ASitis, is there?
Unless your a genius of unrecognized proportions, your a simple mind puppet who was owned before you were born by even A. Kollontai.
Another words, you have not thought, one thought which wasn’t put in your head on how to come to the best choice.
Just as it was predicted you would turn out.
A. Kollontai,1920.
The workers’ state needs new relations between the sexes, just as the narrow and exclusive affection of the mother for her own children must expand until it extends to all the children of the great, proletarian family, the indissoluble marriage based on the servitude of women is replaced by a free union of two equal members of the workers’ state who are united by love and mutual respect. In place of the individual and egoistic family, a great universal family of workers will develop, in which all the workers, men and women, will above all be comrades. This is what relations between men and women, in the communist society will be like. These new relations will ensure for humanity all the joys of a love unknown in the commercial society of a love that is free and based on the true social equality of the partners.
Communist society wants bright healthy children and strong, happy young people, free in their feelings and affections. In the name of equality, liberty and the comradely love of the new marriage we call upon the working and peasant men and women, to apply themselves courageously and with faith to the work of rebuilding human society, in order to render it more perfect, more just and more capable of ensuring the individual the happiness which he or she deserves. The red flag of the social revolution which flies above Russia and is now being hoisted aloft in other countries of the world proclaim the approach of the heaven on earth to which humanity has been aspiring for centuries.
Nothing in that writing you disagree with Asitis?
Yet, less then a century later, the Russian culture is dead and dying off.
To a certain extent,Asitis, your exhibiting that typical apparatchik thinking at this moment; concentrate,concentrate, until you have buried yourself into the intricacies of abortion matters.
Free abortions, 12 weeks, free abortions, 12 weeks, health, health, must compute, must compute.
Gogol thought of you in Dead Souls, as a woodpecker, pecking away at your desk in the ministry of abortion propaganda.
Now, don’t get confused, since Gogol never wrote about abortion propagandist, he wrote about party hacks of the ancient regime.
I posted this back in April, 2007 and am re-posting here today as it is relevant to this thread:
“Since abortion makes no sense to any rationally thinking person, there has to be other reasons for pro-aborts’ “death grip” on this so-called “death right” .
It is no secret to me what abortion truly is and why I think it is used as a means to hold political power. I state it again as posted on previous threads as follows:
“You have to realize that pro-deathers are not driven by logic. They are driven by the lust for power, perhaps abortion followers without realizing it, but its leaders and initiators, guilty as hell.
They are no different than the poor man who fantasizes about taking the rich man’s watch without regard to how or why the rich man acquired the watch; while poor materially, they lack no prejudice. They feel totally justified in their position, not because of logic but in some sinister form of perverted self-righteousness not thoroughly arrived at, at having simply arrived. Perhaps this itself feeds the power demon inside them, at just being able to arrive, at joining up: “I’m in the club now and no one will every kick me out, not even me”.
They reject anyone or anything in authority that would tell them how to live including God Himself and it’s generally masked in the facade of women’s rights. Which when you analyze it, is a very parasitical way of thinking. I mean, they kill unborn baby woman too don’t they? How dare they use the issue of abortion to bolster their sense of self-hood. Again, the perverted, twisted and demented logic shows its ugly head from every angle of the looking glass. Ah, but they see in a mirror darkly? No, the light’s off.
So, when they acknowledge the horror of a baby cooking video, or talk about how bad kicking a dead baby in a bag is, or allowing a baby to die in a toilet in an abortion deathatorium despite the pleas of the mother for the baby’s life, they really are acknowledging the horror of abortion since to not do so would be illogical. What they fail to realize is that in doing so, they for a moment remove their masks, and their K-9 fangs show through the sheepskin, scaring even themselves. Does a werewolf know who he is?
So, I ask myself, if we disparage ourselves of the silliness and really take a deep look, what is abortion? Here’s what I, HisMan, think it is:
Abortion is an affront to the creative nature of God, it negates God as Creator.
Abortion denies the power of God to right a wrong, to show forth His glory, it negates God as redeemer.
Abortion makes that which is good, the birth of human life, into that which is evil, the death of human life, and then calls it good, the very definition of blasphemy.
Abortion negates the resurrection power of God as it takes flesh that is alive in it’s earthly abode (the womb) and kills it, while God takes that flesh which is dead in it’s earthly abode (the grave) and desires to make it alive.
Abortion’s desire is to take that which was composed from the chaotic array of elemental molecules into a symphony of life infused with an eternal soul, and turn it back to the entropy of randomness, chaos, nothingness, uselessness, decay, death.
Abortion is against all that is hopeful, all that requires faith for success; for it’s solution; annihilation, it’s goal; death, it’s dream; breaking God’s heart, it’s vision, satan’s ultimate power. Abortion is a counterfeit, for the clawprints of satan are everywhere to be found in its performance.
Abortion disguises hate as love, bondage as freedom, choice as maturity, sin as righteousness, political correctness as wisdom.
Abortion pits men against women, mothers against their children, fathers against God.
Yes, Abortion is satan’s feeble attempt at killing God himself, for Abortion is a metaphor for satan; it is his coat of arms, his family crest, his logo, his brand, it belongs to him……for he laughs at its willing proponents as they craft their own self-destruction, mantled in self-deception.””
Asitis is owned.
A. Kollontai,1920
In the era of private property and the bourgeois-capitalist economic system, marriage and the family are grounded in (a) material and financial considerations, (b) economic dependence of the female sex on the family breadwinner – the husband – rather than the social collective, and (c) the need to care for the rising generation. Capitalism maintains a system of individual economies: the family has a role to play in performing economic tasks and functions within the national capitalist economy. Thus under capitalism the family does not merge with or dissolve into the national economy but continues to exist as an independent economic unit, concerned with production in the case of the peasant family and consumption in the case of the urban family. The individual economy which springs from private property is the basis of the bourgeois family.
The communist economy does away with the family. In the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat there is a transition to the single production plan and collective social consumption, and the family loses its significance as an economic unit. The external economic functions of the family disappear, and consumption ceases to be organised on an individual family basis, a network of social kitchens and canteens is established. and the making, mending and washing of clothes and other aspects of housework ‘are integrated into the national economy. In the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat the family economic unit should be recognised as being, from the point of view of the national economy. not only useless but harmful. The family economic unit involves (a) the uneconomic expenditure of products and fuel on the part of small domestic economies, and (b) unproductive labour, especially by women. in the home – and is therefore in conflict with the interest of the workers’ republic in a single economic plan and the expedient use of the labour force (including women).
Clarity; The communist/socialist/humanist economy “DOES AWAY WITH THE FAMILY”.
And Obama believes every word of Kollontai, as does the culture of death propagandist, Asitis.
Principle; There are no bad children, only bad parents.
Followed by Asitis whispering in a child’s ear to remember her “bad parents” and not make that mistake again;abort that mistake.
Maria at March 11, 2009 8:05 PM
Maria, very nice story..
yllas,
They will not recover from their national suicide because they agree with your values towards sexual matters…
…Fact is, the culture of Russia was propagandized to abort for hundreds of reasons until the’ve found themself “giddy with success”.
Very similar to what is going on in the black community.
They will not recover from their national suicide because they agree with your values towards sexual matters.
Posted by: yllas at March 11, 2009 10:40 PM
Hmmm. And which values would those be yllas? That women be informed and responsible? Sorry, but I’m not seeing evidence that they agree on that… yet.
I don’t think that Asitis would like communism to spread through the community. At least I hope not. He/She (sorry, I’m not sure if you’re male or female) seems to be concerned with getting the situation to end. Perhaps the fundamental thing here is that you disagree with how this ought to end. I think that communism needs to go- it’s a terrible theory, which, granted, seems glorious on paper, but cannot sustain itselfl in the real world. Why don’t we all encourage abstinence but also teach about birth control and safety, but, again, let people know that if they aren’t at all prepared to handle potential pregnancy (because birth control isn’t perfect, even when used properly), STDs, and the emotional repurcussions (Spelling? I’m not a very good speller) then they ought to remain abstinent. Also, I think that, no matter how much education that people have, they will remain reckless until our culture does something about all of that glorification of “it” in the media. Do you have any idea how many television shows, movies, songs, and advertisements make it sound as though nothing could ever go wrong and your life will be better for it.
Pansy Moss, when you say those things about abortion in African American circles…it makes me very sad. I wish that people wouldn’t pressure minorities into abortion. It happens a lot in the Hispanic community, too. Sad day.
Asitis,
I know that your whole premise for heading this country in the right sexual direction is EDUCATION, BC, CONDOMS and SAFE SEX. OH, and don’t forget education!
I am wondering how you propose to make sure every single person who lacks self control, in the heat of the moment protects themselves in your sure fire asitis way.
Condom Cops? Pill Police? Aren’t you trampling on the rallying cry of your PC people? MY BODY, MY CHOICE!! KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OF MY OVARIES!! STAY OUT OF MY BEDROOM!!
You, at least are consistent at being inconsistent.
I would like to hear your plan to save us from ourselves, though. I hope it involves education.
Thanks Vannah. I don’t know (nor do I care) if yllas actually thinks I am all for communism. I think he was just using this as a chance to jump on his soapbox. Best to just ignore him when he gets like that.
As for me, I’m a she!
Absolutely, LizfromNebraska!!
When people really need food and clean drinking water let’s send them contraception!! We know best of course.
I am wondering how do you propose to make sure every single person who lacks self control, in the heat of the moment makes sure to protect themselves in your sure fire asitis way.
You, at least are consistent at being inconsistent.
I would like to hear your plan to save us from ourselves, though. I hope it involves education.
Posted by: Carla at March 12, 2009 7:20 AM
Well, obviously you can’t make sure of this Carla. There will always be people who act irresponsibly no matter what they know and what they have available to them. The thing is though, to … wait for it…. make sure people are educated and have what they need to act responsibly. This is not happening (in spades!) in Russia.
You got a better plan Carla?
And how, exactly do you see that I am being “consistent at being inconsistent” carla?
That is not happening in Russia but is happening here? That is what I hear you saying. We have safe sex education and all the BC anyone could ever want or need and yet……there are those slackers you speak of. They just aren’t listening, so we need to do MORE OF THE SAME!!!
Abstinence.
They just aren’t listening, so we need to do MORE OF THE SAME!!!
Posted by: Carla at March 12, 2009 7:29 AM
No, we need to do it better. There are places in this country where comprehensive sex ed is not taught. The message is not to people that if they engage in sex and do not want to be pregnant they need to act responsibly. We need to look to other countries and see how they do it better. Because we are not great at it…. yet.
Abstinence.
Posted by: Carla at March 12, 2009 7:30 AM
Palin.
More of the same but BETTER!! Got it.
I adore you asitis. Truly. :)
http://www.abstinenceclearinghouse.net
I adore Palin too!! :)
More of the same but BETTER!! Got it.
I adore you asitis. Truly. :)
Posted by: Carla at March 12, 2009 7:35 AM
Exactly Carla. We need to do it better. Other countries do:
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_teens.html
and how much sex ed and contraceptive devices and back-up abortion will be enough?
I wouldn’t say I adore Sarah Palin. But I do give her daughter applause for speaking out about reality. And I do feel for her – I read yesterday that she and Levi have split up.
and how much sex ed and contraceptive devices and back-up abortion will be enough?
Posted by: angel at March 12, 2009 7:43 AM
“back-up abortion”? You mean Emerganecy Contraception?????
How much will be enough to what? Make abortion totally non-existent? Well, no amount will ever do that. How much will be enough to significantly reduce it? Well, look to other countries for that answer. It’s not simply a question of the quantity of sex education Angel, it’s the quality. And it’s society’s attitude toward sex that makes a difference in other countries as well.
and how much sex ed and contraceptive devices and back-up abortion will be enough?
Posted by: angel at March 12, 2009 7:43 AM
Is this “22 weeks” angel?
Never mind. I think that’s Angele…..
The extremely high abortion rate in Russia goes back all the way to the old USSR, and is largely the fault of the pathetically inept Soviet government.
In cities, housing was terribly cramped and inadequate; therefore married couples could not have larger families, and abortion was extremely common. There was little or no provacy.
If the Soviet government had provided better housing for families many of those abortions could have been prevented.
In the central asian republics of the former USSR which are now independent countries, and are primarily inhabited by muslims who speak languages very similar to Turkish, large families are common, but so is abject poverty and misery.
When that megalomaniac idiot Nicolae Ceausescu was in power in Romanis, he made abortion illegal, as well as contraceptives.
The result? An abortion rate that was still very high, as well as many poor,unwanted children born to parents who could not take care of them.
They were placed in horrible orphanages as infants, where they got little or no holding or affection, stunting their mental development and intelligence. They suffered from abuse,neglect, malnutrition and Romania is still feeling the devastating effects of Ceausescu’s folly.
Do we want something like this to happen in America? it definitely will if abortion becomes illegal again.
But fortunately we now have a president with the intelligence and foresight to prevent something like this, and who has a grasp on reality.
Yet conservatives persist in demonizing him and spreading all manner of lies about him.
Vannah, did you ever read my explanation of why many of us are against “the pill” and other hormonal forms of birth control? If not, let me know so that I can repost it.
So…Robert…how come you come here, spout off and never engage anyone in discussion? I have been reading your words for years it seems.
Russia needs better housing??!!
I am so grateful to the friends I have that adopted orphans from Russia and Romania. Including the babies that were shown on the news rocking in their cribs. They are alive and well today in the US of A! Those poor, unwanted better off aborted babies are now healthy and happy and thriving.
“spreading all manner of lies about [obama].”
Show me ONE lie we’ve spread.
Uh, no, sorry, I haven’t read it. If you repost it I’ll gladly read it though. I am not against abstinence. I think that abstinence is best. Absolutely. It spares all people. Some individuals, however, who are married or have some sort of abhorrence to abstinence (again, partly human nature and partly a popular culture that is obsessed) because they think that it is controlling women- whatever. Women ought to be free of a society that tells them that they are good for physical pleasure.
So I agree with Asitis and all of those who support abstinence. I think of contraceptives as life enhancers, and for women who need them to save their lives, I think that they ought to have plenty of abstinence and comprehensive education. They go hand in hand. I must point out, however, that abortion is NOT BIRTH CONTROL. It is the taking of another’s rights.
Mr. Berger, regardless of whether abortion is legal or not, it happens. There is no such thing as a safe abortion and, I say this with respect but conviction, that whether or not you kill them, they were still here. They were still here even though they lack names, legality, and affection. You say that they will be unwanted, but killing them does not change that. Killing them only kills them and takes away their connections to the world that they live in. If everyone cared for one another, then this would be the equivalent of having billions of parents who do care rather than two that do not care. But we shall not achieve true freedom until all people are legally entitled to it. Making abortion illegal is not hurting women; depriving them of education and support in the forms of healthcare and general recognition of their humanity kills them. No human, though, is a second-class citizen.
asitis does not support abstinence.
Reposting for Vannah:
Vannah, some others have touched on this, allow me to explain why I disagree that the pill should be publicly funded–or encouraged–or legal:
The pill works by three methods. The first is to prevent ovulation. I do not object to the legality of a woman choosing not to ovulate, were this the only thing a drug did. Secondly, it can cause changes in the cervical mucous which may prevent the sperm from reaching the egg. Again, I do not have an objection to this being legal. Thirdly, the pill works by thinning the lining of the uterus, making it difficult for the blastocyst (human baby) to implant. In this way it can be responsible for the death of a baby, which I do not find acceptable. The fact that this happens is statistically shown by studies that show a higher percent of pregnancies on the pill are ectopic. If the pill never prevented implantation where it was supposed to occur–the uterus–one would expect the percentage of pill pregnancies which were ectopic to be the same as the percentage of normal pregnancies which were ectopic. In reality, a much greater percentage of pregnancies in women using the pill are ectopic. The best explanation is that the pill makes uterine (normal) pregnancies less likely if breakthrough implantation and fertilization occur. The only other explanation is that the pill somehow causes ectopic pregnancies–a possibility for which I cannot think of a mechanism, and which would be undesirable as well.
All hormonal birth control works in this way, with some being worse than others. Many IUDs work solely by inflaming the uterus so that an embryo does not implant (though some also use hormones). Therefore, I find these methods of contraception completely unacceptable.
I do not object the the condom, spermicide, sponge, cervical cap, diaphragm, or other barrier methods being available. I do not object to the “male pill” being available. I don’t think Christians should be preventing pregnancy in most situations, but that is a separate issue which, of course, I do not advocate being enforced by law.
I hope this answers your questions.
(Feel free to use whatever sources you trust to corroborate the facts.)
HisMan & yllas, as a curtesy, please try to shorten your posts & keep in mind there are those of us who are viewing the site from a mobile device. Trying to scroll through your long posts not only tires out my poor fingers, but also gives me a headache. So please try to reduce the length of your posts.
asitis does not support abstinence.
Posted by: Carla at March 12, 2009 12:09 PM
Oh but I do! I do not support abstinence-only education though. And I don’t think everyone who isn’t married has to abstain. And I don’t think married woman who don’t want to get pregnant have to abstain…….
And I don’t think homosexuals have to abstain….
Hmmm. And which values would those be yllas? That women be informed and responsible? Sorry, but I’m not seeing evidence that they agree on that… yet.
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 6:03 AM
Which is exactly what the great communist Kollontai wrote about. Informed and responsible are exactly what she demanded of women.
I know your lazy and a propagandist who has no interest in knowing where your coming from, since it lessens your worth to be tool and parrot of those which came before you.
But, once again, is there anything which you disagree with Kollontai with in matters of her wisdom on women and this informed and to be “called upon for their actions”(responsible)?
It’s nothing to be ashamed of, being a fellow traveler of a system which is the subject of this article.
My post, in the matters of how Russsia became to be what it is today, is to explain that “your values” are the causes of the destruction of a once great culture.
And that “your values” are based on the values(informed and consent) of the great writer, A. Kollontai.
Oh but I do! I do not support abstinence-only education though. And I don’t think everyone who isn’t married has to abstain. And I don’t think married woman who don’t want to get pregnant have to abstain…….
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 12:46 PM
And I don’t think homosexuals have to abstain….
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 12:46 PM
you do NOT support abstinence.
Abstinence means abstaining from sexual intercourse and saving yourself for the one you marry.
Therefore Carla is correct.
BTW:how much sex ed and contraceptive devices and back-up abortion will be enough?
No lies spred about Obama ? Are you joking? Obama has been the victim of the most massive and vicious smear campaign in world history ! All through the election and after, nothing but the most blatant lies and distoritions and half-truths have been spread about him all over the internet and in newspapers, magazines and books about him by conservatives with an ax to grind.
And so many gullible people have fallen for all these countless lies about him like yokels gawking over the fraudulent wares of a snake oil salesman.
Supposedly, Obama is a socialist,Marxist and communist. He wasn;t born in America. His middle name Hussein proves he’s a muslim and all kinds of other bad things about him.
He’s a baby-killer, supports infanticide,wants to increase abortions, and wants everybody to be sexually promiscuous and cause plenty of unwanted pregnancies so there will be more abortions for Planned Parenthood to profit from.
He’s a friend of terrorists such as William Ayers. He’s not a patriot. He hates the military and our troops. He wants to encourage Arab terrorists and make America weak and vulnerable.
He’s going to tax us out of existence and take all our liberty away. And so on.
What a load of you know what !!!
There is not one shred of truth to any of these stories.
And why do anti-choice people like you support republican presidents who have done everything they can to reduce or eliminate aid to the poor, while calling for the government to make aborrtion illegal.
And yes, if the Soviet government had provided better housing and safe contraception for its people, there would not have been nearly as many abortions there. And what that idiot Ceausescu did was absolutely devastating to Romania.
I stand by what I said.
We can’t afford to turn America into another Romania or Brazil where abortion is illegal but rampant.
Abstinence is a nice idea right asitis??
Except there just isn’t enough self control to go around. After all, we HAVE to have sex or we simply keel over and die for lack of it. All of the teenagers know that you have to act on every sexual impulse, ya know??!!
Abstinence is hardly a money maker for Planned Parenthood.
Mr. Berger, I don’t like the lies that were spread about Barack Obama, but he did not have any more lies spread about him than any other candidate. George W. Bush had lies spread about him. Sarah Palin had lies spread about her. Hillary Clinton had lies spread about her. It is not as though “anti-choice lies” put him if office. If you like Barack Obama, then that is fine. I like that he is helping the environment, signed the Fair Pay Act, and has shut down Guantanamo. But I dislike his policies on rights of the preborn. You act as though we wake up in the morning thinking about him, wander throughout the halls of school or business offices or wherever thinking about him, and go to bed to dream about him. We have lives, you know. It is not Barack Obama, it is where he stands on human rights regarding the preborn.
Hi Robert,
In regards to your last sentence about Brazil and Romania…
That harmful acts against the innocent will take place regardless of law is a poor argument for having no law.
There are laws against burglary, rape and armed robbery, yet every one of these continues to happen in our society. That these things still happen should not convince us to make them legal. Laws should discourage bad things from happening not conform to them simply because they happen.
In one survey of women who had abortions, 72 percent said they would definitely not have sought an abortion if doing so were illegal.
Making abortion illegal would not stop all abortions but would encourage women to pursue available alternatives.
David C. Reardon, Aborted Women: Silent No More(Westchester, Ill: Crossway Books, 1987), 333.
you do NOT support abstinence.
Abstinence means abstaining from sexual intercourse and saving yourself for the one you marry.
Therefore Carla is correct.
BTW:how much sex ed and contraceptive devices and back-up abortion will be enough?
Posted by: angel at March 12, 2009 1:55 PM
Really Angel? Is “abstinence” that specific? What term do you use when someone decides not to have sex until they are more mature or meet the “right person, but not necessary wait for marriage? What term do you use then when a couple is married but doesn’t want to get pregnant and doesn’t believe in birth control? What do you call a homsexual who believes his sexual attraction is wrong so he doesn’t have sex?
And as for your question about “how much…..”, did you see this Angel:
“back-up abortion”? You mean Emerganecy Contraception?????
How much will be enough to what? Make abortion totally non-existent? Well, no amount will ever do that. How much will be enough to significantly reduce it? Well, look to other countries for that answer. It’s not simply a question of the quantity of sex education Angel, it’s the quality. And it’s society’s attitude toward sex that makes a difference in other countries as well.
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 7:52 AM
Abstinence is a nice idea right asitis??
Except there just isn’t enough self control to go around. After all, we HAVE to have sex or we simply keel over and die for lack of it. All of the teenagers know that you have to act on every sexual impulse, ya know??!!
Abstinence is hardly a money maker for Planned Parenthood.
Posted by: Carla at March 12, 2009 2:46 PM
A nice idea carla? Well, yes if you are referring to not having sex before you are ready or for the right reasons.
But when you say abstinence do YOU specifically mean abstaining from sex until marriage? That what Angel says it means.
I agree with Angel. Abstinence until marriage.
In marriage there are times of course that you are abstaining….the last month of pregnancy, for six weeks after delivery. :)
Also,
I think angel means that abortion is used when birth control fails. Back up abortion.
I am wondering if you are looking for other words like chastity? Chaste?
So “abstinence” means abstinence until marriage. Or periodic abstinence within a marriage?
it’s chastity we are looking for: being chaste until one is married and therefore in the best situation to raise a child, should one come along.
Chastity is more than just abstaining from sex, it is being pure in mind and body: being interiorly pure and manifesting this purity in the body.
However, abstinence education is a means to help attain the above. Abstinence has a negative connotation as in self-denial which is not a popular concept these days. However, we all have to deny ourselves something. We see no problem with abstaining from fatty foods or the use of plastic bags.
It means both to me, asitis. Abstinence before marriage is what I will be teaching my children. My husband and I have abstained at times in our marriage.
Are you purposely being obtuse?? :P
Thanks angel. I agree.
No, I am not purposely being obtuse Carla. i am just trying to get your lingo down. I hear a lot of abstinence until marriage so it did not occur to me that abstinence used on its own meant the same thing.
BTW people oppose abstinence-only education not just because of its ineffectiveness but also because it is discriminatory.
BTW people oppose abstinence-only education not just because of its ineffectiveness but also because it is discriminatory.
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 4:41 PM
prove this claim
prove what exactly angel?
asitis: one more time and that’s it. As Oliver states you never back up your claims.
Reread your post @4:41pm and decide what it is that you are claiming are the (two) flaws of abstinence education.
Then back up your claims. Otherwise it becomes mere opinion and should be stated as such.
angel, for the record I do back up my claims. I merely asked in order to not waste my time on something you weren’t contesting.
Well as for discriminating: abstinence-only teaches sex I’d only right within marriage. Inasmuch, it excludes same sex and other unmarried couples.
Now as for ineffectiveness, I’m sure you’ve seen the stats, but I’ll give some to you anyway once I’m back at my laptop .
“angel, for the record I do back up my claims. I merely asked in order to not waste my time on something you weren’t contesting.”
How plain must one be?
There are plenty of stats to show that abstinence works. One need only look at the experience of Uganda which reduced HIV transmission rates from 18% to 5%.
I didn’t know if you were refuting the effectiveness or the discriminating or both. Wanted to know exactly what to address.
How about some U.S. data? You show me yours. I’ll show you mine. (Even though we’re not married)
Quit wasting everyones time on asitis…he/she can’t back up anything and likes to argue endlessly for the sake of argument.
We have to have acts of physical pleasure or we die? I suppose that that depends on the individual in question. However, it is also a physical need- even more of a physical need than other things which I’d rather not mention- to grow inside of your mother’s womb until you’re nine months old. But I’m just saying…
No amount of abstinence encouragement will eliminate mistakes, but it can tell people why they ought to respect one another more. And, yes, if they refuse abstinence, the best way to spare their life and their child’s life is to know what birth control (I did read your posting, by the way, YCW, thank you and I’ll look into it further) is and how to use it.
Oh, regarding the comments on needing to show the victims of abortion, it isn’t always necessary:
A few weeks ago my friend showed read a copy of Jane Roe’s book in front of the class for our “third-quarter debate paloozas” and another girl in our class who identified herself as pro-choice, found me the next day and said:
“I can’t stop thinking about abortion now. I mean, I used to think that they were just clumps of skin or something…but if she’s talking about seeing their arms and legs, then they really are people. And, I don’t know, this is just really bothering me what she read.”
She looked up the matter further (and, well, I gave her a lot of articles but said that she ought to look into the pro-choice side as well so that she was unbiased) and now, because of what she read, she is pro-life. Woot woot! So what you guys are doing writing and talking and soothing- it does make a difference in lives.
Won by Love by Norma McCorvey?? I have read that book so many times!!
That is very exciting, Vannah!!
Yeah, that one. The section that Emmi read was so sad. I asked my friend Cheryl how she feels about it and she said that she’s passionately pro-life, too (I’m no longer alone in this town).
I’ve never read Won by Love, though. Is it about the trial, abortion, what? It sounds interesting.
Asitis, Sara, etc:
Another good way to reduce STDs would be to make homosexual sex illegal, on the grounds that it is a public health risk. Disease spreads much more easily when sexual acts that aren’t reprodutive are performed, because the vagina is designed for that activity and thus is less susceptible to injury and infectious agents. In fact, if people had sex with only one other person, STDs would die out completely. Shall we make sex outside of marriage illegal to prevent STDs?
Better yet, why don’t you make every kind of sex except lesbian sex illegal. That way you’ll do away with abortion as well!
Norma McCorvey is the Roe of Roe V Wade. Her book about coming out of the abortion biz is called Won by Love. It is a must read!! :)
How about some U.S. data? You show me yours. I’ll show you mine. (Even though we’re not married)
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 5:39 PM
thanks, but no (creepy). You made the claim. Back it up.
I’ll see if I can find it when I visit Albuquerque tomorrow! The passage that Emmi read was so gut-wrenching. I wanted to cry but I think that people would have stared and…besides, it’s very easy to make me cry, so I sat in silence. What did you think when you had first read it?
Jill, you wrote in one paragraph, “The omission (in the movie) is the baby in the room.”
The omission is the “admission” (that abortion is wrong)!
Searing article, thanks.
Vannah,
When I first read Won By Love, it made me sick to my stomach. Norma doesn’t leave anything out about selling abortions in the clinic she worked in. But how she became a warrior for life is amazing!! :)
I’ll try reading it. Especially since her story in real life has a very happy ending. I think that that is what anti-abortion activists need to hear- that there is hope- to get back into the swing of things campaigning for human rights. I’m off to bed soon. Good night and God bless you all!
Better yet, why don’t you make every kind of sex except lesbian sex illegal. That way you’ll do away with abortion as well!
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 8:08 PM
More homophobia from ASitis.
Still won’t kiss a women out of fear and narcissism, Asitis.
A better, less bigoted statement would have stated, “make every kind of sex………illegal”.
Alas poor yllas. Still trying in vain to label me a homophobe. Why do you want so desperately for me to be a bad person yllas?
Alas poor yllas. Still trying in vain to label me a homophobe. Why do you want so desperately for me to be a bad person yllas?
Posted by: asitis at March 13, 2009 6:40 AM
Your not a bad person, just a homophobe who denied sexual relations with the same sex while stranded on a island. Even a kiss.
Same as Hal did.
Your sexual prejudice reveals itself again.
The question is a Rorschach test. It reveals yourself to you, and you get to deny the test.
Your denial of being a person who has homophobic tendencies is quite common in liberals.
BTW,
There is a answer to the question, which actually leaves you unable to be homophobic, but not one liberal has ever answered in such a manner.
And never will.
“My sexual prejudice reveals itself”. Huh? Because I am not attracted to the same sex? Because I do not believe, as you and Bobby do, that I am selfish if don’t let someone use my body for sex that I do not want.
Yllas, yllas. Still trying in vain.
BTW people oppose abstinence-only education not just because of its ineffectiveness but also because it is discriminatory.
Posted by: asitis at March 12, 2009 4:41 PM
since no proof was posted,
rewritten: BTW, in my opinion, people oppose abstinence-only education not just because of its ineffectiveness but also because it is discriminatory
My sexual prejudice reveals itself”. Huh? Because I am not attracted to the same sex? Because I do not believe, as you and Bobby do, that I am selfish if don’t let someone use my body for sex that I do not want.
Yllas, yllas. Still trying in vain.
Posted by: asitis at March 13, 2009 7:20 AM
I’m not writing about sexual matters where your will is not free. But, because you have free will to have sexual relations with the same sex, and continue to deny those relations, it simply reveals your prejudice toward homosexuals, even kissing you.
That is learned behaviour, based on prejudice.
And to write that your not attracted to same sex women, is blatantly exposing your fear of sexual attraction of the same sex.
Your world has narrowed Asitis. Your mind is closed and unable to be free and unhampered by your literally naming homosexual women, all homosexual women, sexually unattractive to you.
You have formed a adverse judgment beforehand without knowledge or examination(definition of prejudice;houghtonmifflin) of sexual relations with the same sex.
Have you ever kissed another women and found it unattractive Asitis?
If not, your prejudice.
“I’m not writing about sexual matters where your will is not free”.
Ummmm… yes, you were. When I told you that I would not have sex with her because I am not atttracted to the same sex. You tried to tell me I was selfish. Bobby explained this reasoning with his football analogy. I maintain that it is NOT selfish to not allow someone to use your body for sex that you do not want.
“But, because you have free will to have sexual relations with the same sex, and continue to deny those relations, it simply reveals your prejudice toward homosexuals, even kissing you”.
No it doesn’t yllas. That’s nonsense. Just because I am free to, doesn’t mean I want to. I am sexually attracted to men. I know this with certainty. I do not have any such attraction for women. If I did, I would have chosen women.I have no issue with homosexuality. There is no prejudice holding me back. I simply have no such desire.
Why is this so hard for you to understand? Or do you just not want to understand because you’d like it better if you could call me a homophobe?
I bet ana you had adortion. That’s why you defend it.
who’s “ana”?
I’m still wondering about “adortion” myself…
Too funny Elisaeth! I”m thinking it’s a cocktail of some sort!