Jivin J’s Life Links 10-19-10
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- The Daily Princetonian has an article on a recent conference on abortion at Princeton entitled, “Open Hearts, Open Minds and Fair Minded Words.”
- Both the New York Times and the Boston Globe have obits for former National Right to Life Committee president Mildred Jefferson who died on Friday at the age of 84.
- The CA Catholic notes that an abortion mill run by abortionist Feliciano Rios is still open as Rios awaits firearm charges. Apparently, he had a couple of semi-automatic guns in his office. That’s a no-no for a felon:
In January, the state attorney general filed a criminal complaint against Rios charging him with 3 counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm and 2 counts of being a felon in possession of ammunition. If convicted, Rios’ probation could be revoked and he could be sentenced to prison.
In light of Rios’ criminal history, the medical board is now seeking to have Rios’ license to practice medicine revoked, alleging in part, “he has been convicted of crimes substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a physician and surgeon.”
[Photo via LifeNews]
a recent conference on abortion at Princeton entitled, “Open Hearts, Open Minds and Fair Minded Words.”
Wow. I just read the article about the conference. Most of the attendees quoted have very little open mindedness and almost no open heartedness toward pre-born humans.
I noticed that, too, Ninek. They’re all pro-aborts. At least Singer–as frightening as he is–knows there is no difference between a blastocyst and a newborn. Open minds? WHERE?!
Maybe all of the open hearts and open minds were protesting outside?? :)
I’ve decided to use pre-born instead of unborn. “Pre-born” has a strong implication toward birth, whereas “unborn” contains the possibility of never being born.
I was pre-born in my mother’s womb, but my unborn child met an untimely end. If the pro-abortion advocates want to keep playing with words to twist and degrade, then I will play with words to clarify and heal.
I hear you Ninek. I will try to remember this too.
Carla used it in a comment on the quote of the day earlier. Go Carla!
Despite the trolls, I find my fellow pro-lifers on this blog to be a constant source of inspiration and encouragement.
Here we have the liberal humanist intelegentsia proudly parading around with the severed heads of their victims implaled on pikes.
“But Singer argued that a fetus, even when it becomes a newborn, lacks the same moral status of an adult.”
In Singer’s lifeboat it is the strongest men first.
Women, children and the infirm, you are on your on.
A lot of people lack moral status, but we let them drive and vote.
I had never heard of Dr. Mildred Jefferson, and that was definitely my loss. How I wish I could have known her, or at least known about her, during her life!
Quoting her:
“With the obstetrician and mother becoming the worst enemy of the child and the pediatrician becoming the assassin for the family,” Dr. Jefferson continued to testify, “the state must be enabled to protect the life of the child, born and unborn.”
Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, “gave my profession an almost unlimited license to kill,” Dr. Jefferson testified before Congress in 1981.
Dr. Jefferson, a surgeon, was speaking in support of a bill, sponsored by Senator Jesse Helms, Republican of North Carolina, and Representative Henry J. Hyde, Republican of Illinois, that sought to declare that human life “shall be deemed to exist from conception.” Had it passed, it would have allowed states to prosecute abortion as murder.
“With the obstetrician and mother becoming the worst enemy of the child and the pediatrician becoming the assassin for the family,” Dr. Jefferson continued to testify, “the state must be enabled to protect the life of the child, born and unborn.”
In a 2003 profile in The American Feminist, a pro-life magazine, Dr. Jefferson said, “I am at once a physician, a citizen and a woman, and I am not willing to stand aside and allow this concept of expendable human lives to turn this great land of ours into just another exclusive reservation where only the perfect, the privileged and the planned have the right to live.”
How wonderful it would have been if someone, somewhere, who was in a position to affect public policy, had really listened to her and thus had learned from her! She was a wise woman indeed, and will be greatly missed. I pray her tribe will increase, that many more will arise to carry on the great work she was engaged in throughout her life and medical career.
Meh — same old same old, in other words, THE USUAL SUSPECTS. It doesn’t seem like there were any prolifers there at all. Peter Singer says that it’s acceptable for people to have sexual relations with animals, so it’s very hard to take him seriously.
I found out to my dismay that Frances Kissling, former head of Catholics for A Free Choice, is now a “visiting scholar” at my alma mater. Hope she doesn’t visit for long. Anyway, tell my my learned Catholic friends, by her actions, hasn’t Ms. Kissling been excommunicated?
Yes, Kissling has excommunicated herself. One doesn’t require a letter from Il Papa to be excommunicated.
The reason I use “unborn” instead of “preborn” is that I feel like the latter makes the child’s status contingent on it being born. To me, it sort of accidentally plays into the “magic personhood-granting birth” ethic of the pro-aborts by linking the child’s humanity to its eventual birth. That implied expectation of birth bothers me.
On the other hand, the word “unborn” carries the affirmation that unborn children are children, even the ones who are never going to be born.
Jill and I have talked about using the words preborn and unborn too. I am going with preborn. :)
I don’t personally think the terms “preborn” or “unborn” make any difference to a prochoicer. To them, the magical line that determines personhood, is being born. So anything that comes before birth is only “potential.” Preborn/unborn, it means the same thing to them.
Which reminds me, this is actually a great way of turning words around on the prochoicer. Next time they claim that birth is what makes us turn into human beings/persons, ask them if a stillborn fetus is a person. If they say yes, you can then point out that therefore every single aborted fetus is/was a person, because the very act of extracting a fetus from the womb is BIRTH. Whether the fetus is born alive or dead, is inconsequential: he/she has been born.
But, on the otherhand, if they see this coming, they might try claiming that a stillborn fetus is not a person. In which case, have them explain why the live born fetus is a person but not the one who died, since both were born from the mother’s womb.
Now here’s an interesting “talking point” about Peter Singer himself:
“Mr. Singer, heralded in a recent interview with the New Yorker as the ‘greatest living philosopher,’ has a mother who suffers from Alzheimer’s disease. She is, by his definition, no longer a ‘person.’ Yet he has, at great personal expense, hired round-the-clock health care workers to care for her. In a rather astounding fit of self-examination, Singer conceded in the same interview, that ‘I think this has made me see how the issues of someone with these kinds of problems are really very difficult. Perhaps it is more difficult that I thought before, because it is different when it is your mother.’
“Dr. Peter Berkowitz, a professor at George Mason University Law School . . . says of Singer’s revelation, ‘Although he strenuously denies that from the ethical point of view we ought to treat friends and family differently, Singer’s actions seem to proclaim that what is right and what is rigorous applies only to other people’s mothers. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more stunning rebuke to the well-heeled and well-ensconced academic discipline of practical ethics than that its most controversial and influential star, at the peak of his discipline, after an Oxford education, after twenty-five years as a university professor, and after the publication of thousands of pages laying down clear-cut rules on life-and-death issues, should reveal, only as the result of a reporter’s prodding, and only in the battle with his own elderly mother’s suffering, that he has just begun to appreciate that the moral life is complex.’ ”
Source: “Singer’s Sanctimonious Song,” Federalist Digest, 18 January 2000.
Wow, that is amazing, Bekah. It’s too bad the article is from 2000. I was really hoping that this was just happening and that Singer might repent of his wicked ways… of course he still can…
It proves his hypocrisy, at least.
singer’s mother has since passed away. Singer has gone on record as saying that he acted unethically. he refuses to discredit his theory, only states that he acted immorally.
Nice cop-out. :P
“singer’s mother has since passed away. Singer has gone on record as saying that he acted unethically. he refuses to discredit his theory, only states that he acted immorally.”
Good. Grief.
That man is so sick.
Actually, I take back calling him a man. Men don’t act like that.
About ‘preborn’ or ‘unborn’ children: (I myself prefer ‘preborn’ or ‘nascent’ children)
Think about our schizophrenic US laws about preborn children:
A man who kills a pregnant woman is charged with double murder. (a la’ Scott, Laci, and Connor Peterson)
Yet a “doctor” can commit abortion and not be charged with breaking any law! (not even violating the Hippocratic Oath)
The dichotomy and hypocrisy are ludicrous. It is almost unbelievable that highly-educated, intelligent people can actually propound such hypocrisy without batting an eye.
I say “almost” because, unfortunately, we’ve witnessed this very thing at the highest levels of academia and government for more than four decades. :(
Claire,
We are schizophrenic from state to state in our country! Every state varies. Double murder in one state is one murder in another for the death of a pregnant woman.