(Prolifer)ations 11-23-09
by intern Andy M.
Spotlighting important information gleaned from other pro-life blogs…
The document lays out the groups’ arguments against anti-life, anti-family, and anti-religious public policy as contravening “foundational principles of justice and the common good,” in defense of which the group says they are “compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act.”
… the [school board’s] policy [to allow students to leave school for medical procedures without parental knowledge] didn’t make it. It lost, 3 to 2. Parents, who had “flooded” the meeting “clapped and cheered” at the result.
… Some will justify it because the mother has freedom not to be burdened. But so does the child. And in denying that the child has the same freedom she claims to have, she destroys the meaning and foundation of her own.
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.
Regarding Palin, what positive actions has she taken for the pro-life movement? What has she done with her authority as governor to save the unborn?
Other than advocating keeping abortion legal, appointing a Planned Parenthood executive to her state’s supreme court happily and without regret (publicly calling her an “outstanding” judge and saying she has “wisdom and character), and throwing out her state’s democratically-voted decision to block gay-couple benefits by enacting a pro-gay agenda against the will of the people?
Other than simply not killing her own children, which is the most common pro-life praise I hear about her… what actions has she taken to save the unborn?
Most of those attacks on Palin are incredibly weak, such as “using pro-choice terminology.” They don’t even take into consideration that she might have been “speaking to the middle,” so to speak, even if her true beliefs are more to the right. Prolifeprofiles really should have a little more faith in people.
They’re simply being comprehensive, Scott. Covering every detail. Naturally some points will be stronger than others. Nothing wrong with that.
But openly advocating keeping abortion legal is by all means the most devastating charge. Is that what we should have faith in? What reason has she given us to have faith in her, regarding pro-life issues, pro-evolution issues, her promoting of the gay agenda, and certainly how she has propped up blatant pro-aborts like McCain and Bush as being pro-life champions, lying to promote them for her political gain. Is this why we should have faith in her?
I ask again, in all sincerity: What has she actually done, actually accomplished (or tried to accomplish) to protect the unborn? Other than talking the talk, and not killing her own children? What has she actually done?
I didn’t know that Sarah Palin supported gay rights. Are you sure? I always thought that she opposed things like gay marriage.
Has Father Pavone signed the “Manhattan Declaration”?
Does anyone know why she appointed a Planned Barrenhood board member to the Supreme court? What was the excuse?
This may sound like heresy, but I advocate keeping abortion legal (so to speak) – as a first step towards ultimate criminalisation of abortion. Take New Zealand as an example. In New Zealand, abortion is illegal unless the mother’s mental or physical health, or life is in serious danger. Over 98% of abortions in NZ are done under the “mental health” exception – and we’ve even had a High Court judge declaring that a large number of these are likely unlawful. It is clear that NZ has abortion on demand. However there is general agreement amongst the pro-life groups here that we must advocate for our abortion law to be applied as it was intended, and as it was written. If this were the case, instead of a greater than 1/5 abortion rate, with 18,000 every year, we would have well under 500 each year. Once we achieve this, we can press on further for the cause of the unborn.
Basically, the people who hate on Sarah Palin are “purists” while many of us are “incrementalists”.
Andy, I totally agree. To paraphrase Stephanie Gray of the Center for Bioethical Reform, before we make abortion illegal, we must make it unthinkable. This needs to be more about a cultural change than a legal change, for unless the culture wakes up to what is happening, illegal abortions will be extremely prevalent. But if people understand the true nature of abortion, demand will decrease and the law will naturally follow.
that’s right, outlawing abortion will not make it go away.
Ironic- the far right is fact checking Palin, rather than uncritically accepting everything she says. Much as I would like to see if their $100 check would clear, the ARTL summary of Palin’s record on abortion is substantially correct.
As for fact checking, I invite every woman who has ever borne a child to read the latest account of Sarah’s “wild ride” in which she claims to have made a speech and then flown for 10 hours back to AK without any medical attention, after she experienced contractions and her water broke, while carrying a special need DS child, and after two miscarriages. She then drove past another neonatal ICU in Anchorage, to give birth is a small clinic in Wasilla, not equipped to handle special needs infants. Her only excuse is that she didn’t want Trig born in Texas.
If you believe her story (I do not) she is one of the most utterly reckless mothers in history.
substantially correct, but substantially lacking. Palin has done far more good than bad.
I am the most utterly reckless mother in history. My child died during my abortion.
Vannah, yes, I’m afraid so. The people of Alaska democratically voted against homosexual unions by a huge margin of 2 to 1, but Palin forced the state to overturn that and institute that pro-gay agenda against the will of the people. Not only was it immoral in and of itself, but she did it after the citizens of Alaska voted against it, to begin with. She sided with the activist liberal courts in her state. You can find this documented at WorldNetDaily.com , the most trusted online conservative source of news and where Jill Stanek is a columnist, and also it is documented with sources at Wikipedia if you search for “Alaska Ballot Measure 2.”
Andy, you say I am substantially lacking, but I asked you a simple and direct question, asking for substance, and you have provided absolutely nothing. I asked what she has done. What has she done? You can’t come up with a single thing, other than to make the vague and vacuous claim that she has done “more good than bad?”
And, Andy, I exhort you to repent of your confessedly pro-abortion stance. I appreciate that you at least are honest that your position and your goals are impure. However, the Bible says that we should never do evil so that good may come of it, and that is exactly what you are advocating here. Rather, we should do right and trust God. Taking an intentionally impure attitude and strategy does not honor God or show faith, and it is not a principled stand.
Dear Carla,
You’re not reckless, Carla. You’re a very good person and you work so hard to make the world better for women and children and all of your children should be very proud (plus, you have the funniest itty bitty blog posts around- loved the poem). Albeit, you face stiff competition from Tim for the title of Monarch of the Mini Posts.
Lots of Love,
Potato (Vannah)
Hi Jamie,
I wasn’t saying that you were substantially lacking, rather that the ARTL report on Palin’s record was substantially lacking, i.e. ignoring the good.
My position is not a straight-forward one, however it is anything but pro-abortion. Neither my position nor my goals are impure. I am dead set against abortion – in incredibly rare cases a judgement call may need to be made if a number of doctors concur that if the baby continues growing the mother will die, however the outcome should by no means be by default that the baby is killed.
I am not advocating evil; I did not pass a law which allows abortion on demand. What I am saying is that I don’t believe that now is the correct time to call for the complete overhaul of the law, as such an approach would likely not achieve anything. I’m sorry for this apparent disagreement, however as I said before, this is an example of one person who believes in all or nothing – a purist (yourself), and someone who believes that small steps of improvement are an acceptable method – incrementalst, like myself. I would not say that either of these is necessarily wrong, however I am clearly incrementalist.
What good has Palin done? I’m not too up to speed with her, however I know she’s one of the most pro-life politicians – with a real chance at effecting change. What a politician publically advocates, and what they genuinely believe about an issue may be two very different things. However politics is a complex game in which you must not always show your whole hand lest your plan be comprimised.
Here’s what Wiki briefly says about her pro-life stance,
Palin opposes embryonic stem cell research, and abortion, calling herself “as pro-life as any candidate can be.” She has referred to abortion as an “atrocity,” but opposes sanctions against women who obtain an abortion. She supports laws requiring parental consent for minors seeking an abortion.
Vannah!!
I know, babe.
I am a new creation in Christ. What I did before I knew Him was done out of my own selfishness and sin.
I wrote that to maybe help BS to shut his/her yapper. :P
It worked.
Hee hee! :P
Celebrate with a nice churro! ^.^