More lies from Jill Stanek. We shouldn’t be surprised. It’s what she’s good at.
And for the record, this page is not a democracy. Jill stans [sic] to the left.
~ “Jill Stanek needs to shut up” Facebook page, May 31
WARNING: Vulgar language alert
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
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.
you must be doing something right, chica! Keep up the good work! <3
Jill,
You seem to have stumbled upon a nest of debutantes. What pleasant little ladies they are, and full of erudition, wit, and wisdom too!
Congratulations Jill! LL <3
Hahahahaha!
Okay, I’m clueless. What is this symbol/ending: <3 ?????
nest of debutantes
:) That’s interesting! I didn’t know that “debutante” was the French word for “troll”…
I think that means “kiss”.
Amirite Angel?
Dr Nadal- <3 on Facebook makes a heart.
Oh Jill, how does it feel to be inducted into the “Anti-Choice Women Haters Hall of Fame”? Speech! Speech! Where are you going to put your Golden Coathanger Award? In your office, or would it look better on the mantle?
;)
Reading the comments on FB, I am having a hard time remembering their assertion that pro-choice people are more loving and more educated than hateful knuckle-dragging pro-life people.
Love it!
Good. They’re doing many people a favor. The more they talk the more they discredit themselves. The irony of that page is astounding. Blasting Jill for being foul and hating women in the exact same sentence they use extremely vulgar and anti-women language to say it!
Soon you will take over the world!! Your agenda is advancing!!
Muwhahahahahahahahahahahhahaa
I would like to see a TRAVELING Golden Coat Hanger Award!
Share the love. Share the joy.
Rent a bus, plaster the US flag all over it, and have an unannounced bus tour to abortion facilities all over this great land.
And make them chase you.
Sound familiar?
Way to go, Jill! It’s an honor to be hated by evil people! :)
Oh, lol. What a page! Well, congrats, Jill. You know you’ve really made it when you have Facebook hate pages about you.
Taylor,
“pro-choice” people who, whether they realize it or not, advocate abortion which is evil.
Maybe the people themselves aren’t evil but they are advocating something that’s evil.
And besides, they are certainly childish to make a hate page about a blogger. Haha. If they’re so pro-choice, why can’t they respect Jill’s choice to blog about what she wants?
Spell check is free
Because Jill is advoating for the reversal of women’s rights. I’m pro-choice, and I totally respect women’s rights to adopt, raise their baby, or abort. To remove those rights is to oppress women, and that’s why we don’t respect Jill stanek (among many other reasons, including the aforementioned (but deleted by mods) approval of domestic terrorism)
No self-respecting woman would think she needs abortion to be un-oppressed. Mitchell do you understand that?
No, Stacy…apparently he doesn’t, because as we all know (sarcasm) “Abortion fixes everything!”
Besides, he “totally respects women’s rights”…to kill their children.
Mitchell, I’m a liberal pro-lifer. I’m not religious. I do not want to “reverse” my rights. I do not want to oppress myself. I am an educated woman. My rights are not diametrically opposed to my unborn baby’s…..they are INTRINSICALLY LINKED. Pregnancy is not a flaw. Our babies are not PART OF OUR BODIES–and babies are not punishments, or parasites, or internal organs. First and foremost, we have no right to kill anyone. The idea of killing your baby should make all people sick; it is not equality. We are not equal, if we achieve that “liberty” by killing someone else. The question is…WHAT IS IT THAT WOMEN ARE ABORTING? Their children. My studies in biology and philosophy bring only one conclusion—these are persons, with their own bodily autonomy. If my choices result in the existence of a baby, then the answer is to love that baby, not kill it, even if it infringes on my so-called “plans” or “dreams”…..how can killing my child make me liberated? How is that fair? How can we demand ANYTHING if we believe “equality” means “the right to have my child dismembered and incinerated.”
Look, if the unborn weren’t human beings, then abortion wouldn’t be wrong. It wouldn’t be a “tough choice.” It is NOT a choice. It is an injustice….not ONLY to the babies, but to women as well. I will NOT kill my child to compete in a man’s world. I honor my ability to carry children, and I respect my body and my baby’s body. There is nothing good about abortion. NOTHING.
Mary Lee,
Thank you! That was beautifully put. :)
I know plenty of women that respect themselves very much that believe that removing their right to abortion removes their body autonomy. I agree with them. Our culture should celebrate and revere a woman’s ability to be pregnant and give birth, but should not force a woman to go through a pregnancy if she does not want that for herself.
It’s about respecting women enough to let them make their own decisions regarding their own bodies.
We see yet another example of “choice”…a brainy lot, fair minded, balanced, and ever so honest. Oh, and did I mention classy? Reading some of those Facebook comments reminded me of some of my co-workers–if they could not be vulgar just about every sentence would be missing a word or two.
What was said before about Jill stanek being the vulgar one needs to be said again:
Jill stanek advocates for domestic terrorism
Jill stanek has spoken out against gay American’s equal rights
Jill stanek raked a woman over the coals because of a story in which she describes THE DEATH OF HER BABY.
Jill stanek, something is very very wrong with you, and your followers (your “stans” Aka “stalker fans”) should be ashamed to take you seriously
But Ella, we are not talking about their own bodies…..We cannot claim “bodily autonomy” while destroying the body of another—especially the body of our child.
This is a horrific “choice.” Pro “choice” people seem to think that pro-lifers see women as incubators; we are called “forced-birthers.” That’s ridiculous. We make choices all the time. But some choices–though we have the ABILITY to choose them–are not RIGHT. Ever. I have the ability to do drugs, the ability to sell my body as a prostitute, the ability to smack someone in the face. That does not give me the RIGHT to do any of these things. You are confusing liberty with license. You are confusing ABILITY with RIGHT. There are some things we ought never to do….You would think that killing our babies would be the first thing that springs to anyone’s mind. 1% of abortions are performed on women who were raped. I was raped. I did not become pregnant. But I hate that people who support abortion use rape as an argument. When I did become pregnant (years later, unplanned, and in a crisis), I realized that this baby was my BABY, my CHILD, with her own right to exist. I had no right to kill her then, just as I have no right to kill her now that she is ten. She is not worth more now, at ten years, than she was at 10 weeks in utero. She will not be more valuable at 35 than she was at 15. She will, however, ALWAYS be the same person. She didn’t magically become a person–she always WAS a person, and it is our duty, as women, to respect all life, and respect our bodies enough to know that abortion is a violation of everything good and just in the world.
Ella:
Go back and re-read Mary Lee. In fact, re-read it as many times as it takes for it to sink in.
Michelle,
Thanks!! <3
Pamela (not the same as the usual Pamela who comments here), it’s interesting you call Mikki’s child “her baby.”
Did you notice Mikki didn’t call her baby by that term? She called it a “fetus” that was going to die anyway. She devalued the life of her own child in her writing.
Re: Pamela
“Jill stanek raked a woman over the coals because of a story in which she describes THE DEATH OF HER BABY.”
Jill Stanek, et al, pointed out glaring inconsistencies in a story in which a woman used THE DEATH OF HER BABY to push the polictical agenda of abortion on demand.
How vulgar is that?
Who cares what she called her baby? “fetus” is a perfectly acceptable medical term, and “baby” means the same thing. How dare you tell a grieving mother how to refer to her child.
She told a story about the death of her child (because it was her own personal experience and she has the right to experience it and understand it in any way she wants), and explained that it’s dangerous to deny women access to abortion. I don’t see anything vulgar about that in the slightest.
Pamela, any doctor worth their salt will try to save BOTH the baby and the mother. There are times the baby dies, and that’s tragic. However, Mikki’s story is wrought with medical inconsistencies and a lot of obfuscation. Not to mention—she is using a “hard case”–which exists and which pro-lifers must acknowledge–to argue that elective abortions on healthy mothers and healthy babies is a right. There are going to be hard cases. There are going to be tough calls. But 99% of abortions are performed on healthy mothers and healthy babies. To use a hard case in order to justify a woman who gets an abortion because she just “isn’t ready” to have a baby is deceitful and rather diabolical.
and vulgar.
“You seem to have stumbled upon a nest of debutantes. What pleasant little ladies they are, and full of erudition, wit, and wisdom too!”
Yeah! All 96 of them :D
So Mitchell @ 11:31 – what’s your personal benefit in terms of killing children and seeing anywhere from 20-40% of women suffer from abortion?
Well Pamela, Mikki is using the DEATH OF HER BABY to advocate for the DEATHS OF OTHER WOMEN’S BABIES. Thats pretty vulgar, imo.
Btw, congrats Jill! I echo the sentiment that you know you’ve arrived when you’ve got a facebook pages devoted to hatin on you! I am really jealous but I aspire to tick so many pro-aborts off that I have one of my own some day. ;-)
Oh!!!!
YAY MARY LEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mary lee- let women live their own lives…not every woman believes that pregnancy is a beautiful sacred thing, and that difference in viewpoint should be respected
Wow, I guess when one has no logical, reasonable arguments, one resorts to sarcasm and name-calling and ad hominem attacks. Color me surprised.
Abortion kills more females than war, famine or disease. Now who is the women haters again? Congrats, Jill. You have arrived as the princess of pro-life causes now, being an asset to humanity. Shout for joy! Pray for those who are enemies of life and worship their g d of convenience. Most women abort their little ones because of a lack of support and believe they have no choice. CPC is always there to help before, during and after conception. They are there for mother and child. Pro-aborts are a sad, dying breed. There is hope, Silent No More offers truth and healing as does Rachel’s Vineyard. Many men are becoming aware of their roles as well and are getting much needed help.
Pamela, it’s either a baby or it’s not. Let women lead their own lives? Gladly. I am pro-birth control and pro-gay marriage. I am not pro-abortion because it kills a little person who has the right to live. Pick on someone your own size. Instead of supporting the killing of babies, maybe you should try picking up a biology book and stop using slogans and sound bites and excuses as “arguments” for something that is simply inexcusable. Women need abortion to be equal? Give me a break. I’m equal because I’m equal. Killing your child doesn’t give you liberty–it makes you an OPPRESSOR.
LOL THE PRINCESS OF PRO-LIFE CAUSES
Because of a Facebook group with less than 100 people in it?!
Yes , pleas do a bus tour like Sarah palin, our other princess idiot. I would love to see the reception you’d be getting
Pamela – since abortion is about women’s empowerment and rights – what about all those female fetuses aborted? Statistically 50 % of all abortions … What about their rights? See Gianna Jessen – her own story, in her own words – a woman who survived abortion. Since I am sure that every woman’s opinion matters, and she has real-world experience here, I am sure that you would want to hear her story.
Pamela, why are you here? If you are so unwilling to engage in a dialogue, and have no actual arguments except for being rude, then go to a pro-abortion website and talk about how evil we are. You’re only making pro-lifers look sympathetic, which is something I’m sure makes you very angry.
GEEZ, I am SO thankful I don’t know any of these trashy talkers! Oooh, we’re sposed to be so scared because they know some curse words! We don’t NEED to hate-filled curses.
We have truth on our side.
Keep it up Jill!! We got your back!!!
I LOVE IT!!!!
Pamela – FYI – since you are Jill-bashing – Jill is an international speaker and gets a huge reception where she goes. Before you take on and dismiss something, please do a little research. Just because only a few are on a facebook page does not dismiss the truth of the teller or the importance of a message. If you have heard of Jesus – he only started with 12, and one betrayed him. so initial numbers mean nothing – the message and the intent, though are everything.
Abortion means that one group of people have superpower over another group of people. Not an even playing field at all. And since harm and death are involved, I would hope that humans would want to protect all other humans. That is what is meant by humanity and humane treatment. Just a thought.
Why am I here?! You all say infuriating things about the oppression of women, why would I stay silent?
Yes, why are you here? Did you even read what I said? I’m a liberal non-religious pro birth control, pro sex, pro-gay marriage pro-lifer. Oppression of women? Give me a break! I don’t need some elective surgery to make me equal to men. Killing our children doesn’t make us equal. If you’re so angry about this so-called “oppression of women,” then start your own website or something. You’re only making yourself look bad. And frankly, quite unhinged. Which is good for our cause, actually. ……So, come to think of it, keep it up, Pamela. We appreciate you making us look reasonable and logical.
I can’t imagine anything more oppressive than being sucked out of your first home (your mother’s womb) and thrown in the garbage.
‘Pamela’…you need to call yourself something else. Use your last inital or whatever, but I have always been ‘Pamela’ here.
Yeah, I bet the anti-choice movement is really grateful for any assistance in helping them look reasonable and logical, they need all the help they can get in that department
Then Pamela, with all due respect, start arguing your case with FACTS. You typically resorted to the “pro choice” playbook by resorting to ad hominem attacks. This is such predictable behavior.
Whyyyyy would I have to change my name just because you were here first?
Pamela [not “our” Pamela],
No one is asking you to remain silent. We asked only why you choose to continue breaking your silence here. What do you expect to accomplish by emitting sarcasm-laden, scorn-dripping rants at this particular site, where it will only make you look non-credible, foolish, and boorish?
If you want to debate the issues, and even if you want to take Jill (or someone else) to task, fine: put away your flame-thrower (and other troll-tools) and debate. Discuss reasonably. Bite your tongue and clamp down your temper, and be an adult in the “room”, using logic and restraint, rather than tantrum-esque rants. If you simply arrive to “vent your rage” at the targets of your wrath, what possible good will it do? You’ll be stressed, we’ll be annoyed, and nothing productive is done.
What say you? Are you willing to converse, using actual conversation (i.e. not simply tossing incendiary grenades in all directions)?
As for changing your name: surely you can see the confusion that could result from identically-named people? And why especially should “our” Pamela be forced to change *her* name to accommodate a new-comer whose current express purpose is to vent and insult? No sane person would consider the request that you change your name (even to the point of adding a pseudonymous last initial) to be anything other than reasonable and fair; have some sense, here.
Pamela: “Who cares what she called her baby? “fetus” is a perfectly acceptable medical term, and “baby” means the same thing.”
Yippee!! I’m just thrilled that a pro-abort finally admitted that a fetus is a baby! It’s not terminating a pregnancy or a fetus — it’s killing a baby! (Whew!) Glad we finally got that on record.
Of course a fetus is a baby, it doesn’t change the fact that women should have the right to abort
There are some usual posters on your site that are noticeably absent from commenting with support for you on this story…Truth is they are not supporters but fakes and phony’s…They are full of hot air and when the attention is not on them…Poof they are gone…
Pamela – facts are important – not sentiment.
What is in a human mother’s womb? A human child – not a cat, dog, pig or cow. Human. Living. distinct, although within. Human DNA. Distinct blood type. Even possibly distinct sex (male). Unique DNA.
If a woman was not carrying a human child – have at it with abortion! But since any pregnant woman is carrying a human child – one can not kill that living human. Now raising that child is another matter. If a woman does not want the responsibility to raise that youngster – she can enlist help – from family, friends, church, community or have that responsibility go to another couple she has chosen for that task. She can even go through an open-adoption if she chooses. That is where the choice comes in. But her ‘choice’ to kill another human is not ok. If she can not kill the child after birth, that same child was living before birth.
legal and honorable/good are not always the same, no matter how much we wish it. abortion ends the life of another human, purposefully.
Pamela 1,
No chance of getting the two of you mixed up!! :)
Pretty stark contrast actually.
(*grumble*) That troll nest must be around here somewhere… good grief, look at them all!
Pamela – a woman has a right to end the life of her unborn child because…? Use real terms here – remember you challenged people to use logic! ;)
Pamela and Pamela,
In order not to confuse the Prolife Pamela with the Prochoice Pamela, perhaps we can make a slight adjustment.
Prolife Pamela posts a picture with her name, which helps with positive ID. Plus, she’s been part of the gang for quite some time.
Prochoice Pamela, I for one would like for you to stay on board and debate your little heart out with us, so would you be gracious enough to include something with your moniker? Or, if you’re so inclined, perhaps change the name altogether?
We like to get our Pamelas straight.
I am not used to seeing internet slang on this site, so it took me a bit to place it.
“Stan” up there is not a typo or a mistake. “Stan” is net-slang for “fan.” I have no idea how it got to be that way, but it is. “To the left” comes from the phrase “haters to the left” which means “go away” or “you aren’t welcome here.” So, translated out of net-slang, that last sentence reads “Jill fans are unwelcome.” Essentially, they’re declaring that anyone who posts anything they don’t like will have their posts deleted.
Lucy,
Name them.
Pamela, you admit that these are babies but still believe in killing them? Babies are disposable and worthless unless his or her mommy says so? What a hateful, violent, and oppressive idea. No wonder our world is such a mess.
Pamela,
We actually have another MaryLee here as well, so please try and pick a third name, one that is not used. Perhaps you could go back to Tony or another one of your old names that no one else uses.
Pamela, or whatever your name is, you are acting like a child.
Mods, I didn’t write those last few posts.
I’m talking about Mary Lee who posted something in response to you in this very thread at 2011/06/01 at 1:28 pm. We simply would like people to use one name, and a name that is distinct from everyone else here. So you can feel free to use something like ‘Pamela the Wise’ or ‘PC MaryLee’ or whatever. It is just a common courtesy we ask of all posters which shouldn’t hinder discussion but enhance it.
Real cute. Typing in different monikers to make it look like more people share your warped viewpoints? Okay, Mary Lee, Pamela, Tony etc…
Who has a sad life again? I don’t go to pro-abort websites and froth at the mouth as I pound furiously on my keyboard. Why are you even here? Want to have a dialogue? great. Want to act like a loser spouting off and using 30 different monikers??? We won’t waste our time.
Unborn women have a right to be born. Thats the starting point for “women’s rights”
Prolife MaryLee,
No worries. :)
Carry on.
Create one original moniker and stick with it.
One of the rules of commenting here, Marylee/Pamela/Tony.
Prochoice Pamela,
I like your name, too.
But my head is spinning with all these clones.
Please, for the sake of my sanity, could you distinguish your beautiful name?
Pretty please?
Alice,
Thanks for the explanation.
I thougth it was a typo when Mikki meant to type “Jill stands to the left.”
I see what you’re saying now.
How are pro-lifers racist? We are trying to end the black genocide of abortion in black wombs. We are the ones trying to help these moms get the things and help they need in order to have their babies. PP would just rather see them dead. I want to see every black baby born. It is the pro-abortion side that wants to see them suctioned out and thrown into biohazard bags.
I have gay friends. I am not homophobe but I do not condone homosexuality. It is not outdated to believe that. But you will find pro-lifers here who are pro-gay rights. Being against homosexual behavior isn’t actually a prerequisite for being pro-life.
you make no sense PC Mary Lee
The irrational anger and tangible hate over at that FB page is really eye opening!
All this from the cultured, liberated, educated, “ladies of the left”.
Next, they’re sure to hiss, spit and claw….. :)
I had a bad tempered cat like this once, course she’d been fixed. :)
Could you please stop using my name to post your ignorant and ridiculous tantrums? Either pick your own name or leave the board. You add nothing to this discussion.
fake Mary Lee; “I just think that more often than not, pro-lifers are racist and homophobic, and their outdated world view means that they’re making incredibly unrealistic assumptions about other people’s lives”
U should really spend a moment and reread ur posts before u press “add comment”. U do what u accuse others of doing.
As I’ve often said, slamming others doesn’t substitute for a descent point or for logic. It just shows you got nothin better to say on behalf of pro-choice. Very typical here.
Thanks for pointing that out, Carder. I had forgotten that I posted my picture WITH my name.
So everyone DOES know who’s who ;) (whom?)
I think my favorite sockpuppet was “tommy”
Do you remember that one? It was right after as it is got banned and “tommy” came in to say “I’m a pro-lifer, but I’ve always liked as it is. She has a lot of good points!”
Of course “tommy” was “as it is”
Hilarious.
I always thought a stan was named after the Eminem song…, well, ”Stan.” Now that I think about it, it sounds a little odd- maybe it’s an acronym or something. I think I just thought of the song because I listen to a ton of Eminem and when I hear “Stan” I think of his song. Does it really mean fan? Huh. So out of the loop. I don’t even know what a meme is and my sister recently explained to me what BAMF stands for.
Anyway, people who make pages on Facebook just to hate someone really need to get a life. And this is putting it mildly.
Pamela troll, everyone knows it’s you because I know how to form coherent sentences and use proper punctuatuon. Go back to school. You have nothing worthwhile to say and are only here to harass us. There’s nothing funny about abortion; you are just proving what a fool you are.
Looks like “Pamela” has used about 6 or more monikers on this site in the past few months and is also using a web anonymizer.
Yeah, that’s a web troll.
Kel, what are some of her other names? Has she ever actually debated the issues, or is she just screwing around?
Pro-choice Pamela/MaryLee- your rage and anger are so evident in your comments and even in your prank posts. It doesn’t make me want to listen to what you have to say or think you may have a point. What it does is make me feel really really sad for you. I know you don’t give a crap about my pity. But your level of rage and hurt does just that.
Carla,
Should we impose a two-week ban the imposter who goes by several names?
Pro-life MaryLee: There’s no mistaking you. Your light shines in the darkness!
God Bless.
Nope.
Banned.
Period.
Once again, social media helps the pro-life cause. Pro-aborts, please continue your tactics. The evil of your tone reflects the evil of abortion.
Hi Lauren. “She” has gone by “Lauren,” “Arthur,” “Tony,” “Pamela,” “MaryLee” and others. No, she has not debated issues but has typically hurled insults. And now “she” is randomly picking IPs so “she” can continue commenting.
Obviously, this is someone who is a troll. Do legitimate commenters continually switch monikers and IPs?
you have to admit Jill, it is pretty funny…an entire FB page!
MaryBeth says:
June 1, 2011 at 3:03 pm
Once again, social media helps the pro-life cause. Pro-aborts, please continue your tactics. The evil of your tone reflects the evil of abortion.
VERY good point, MaryBeth! Pretty name too, BTW ;)
My IP address changes because I use an IP hider so that I can watch baseball. (MLB has really stupid blackout policies!)
I just think that more often than not, pro-lifers are racist and homophobic, and their outdated world view means that they’re making incredibly unrealistic assumptions about other people’s lives”
Really? i hate when people say “some of our best friends are . . .” but one of my dearest friends was a gay Puerto Rican man. He moved away and we lost touch, which saddens me.
As for the racist part — being a person of color myself, I kinda of like brown and black folks (and white folks are okay, too)!
I like the champions of women over there using the “c” word like it’s going out of style. I think I’ll pass on the version of feminism that thinks a good way to demean people is with a word that vilely objectifies a female body part, that thinks men can handle the lifelong responsibility of parenthood/financial support as a foreseeable consequence of sex but women couldn’t possibly be expected to accept the same responsibility, and that thinks I need access to artificial hormones to suppress my fertility and surgery to kill my offspring in order to have a fighting chance at equality. Lame.
Thanks Pamela! We have nothing to fear with the truth on our side!
CT said, “…(this) version of feminism … thinks men can handle the lifelong responsibility of parenthood/financial support as a foreseeable consequence of sex but women couldn’t possibly be expected to accept the same responsibility”
This certainly summarizes the double standard of this brand of feminism and highlights the absurdity of the claim that abortion makes men and women equal.
I wouldn’t say Jill hates women, I would say she just doesn’t think they are as important as unborn fetuses.
Jill Stanek “approves of domestic terrorism”? What could be more domestic and more terrorist than abortion?!
“I can’t imagine anything more oppressive than being sucked out of your first home (your mother’s womb) and thrown in the garbage.” ninek, you rock!
And pro-life (the real) Mary Lee: words are useless to express my awe!
My IP address changes because I use an IP hider so that I can watch baseball. (MLB has really stupid blackout policies!)
Lauren, if you have a problem with the moderation of the comments here, please email the moderators privately and we’d be happy to discuss this. Thanks.
Alice PA, thank YOU! I just checked out your blog; very nice!
I was blessed enough to be able to visit the site of The Visitation. Elizabeth lived in a small valley, but when she became pregnant late in life, her neighbors thought the child couldn’t be her own husband’s. Unable to weather the constant gossip, Elizabeth hiked up the hill where there was a spring of water and made herself a temporary home there while she was pregnant. When the Blessed Mother arrived, she, also pregnant, hiked up that hill. It’s a lovely place with the Magnificat displayed on ceramic tiles in different languages around the church. So, when the Gospel tells us how Elizabeth’s neighbor’s came around and celebrated the birth of John the Baptizer, it wasn’t just oh-isn’t-it-nice. They REALLY turned their attitudes around. Perhaps we can hope that people today turn their attitudes around about other women’s pregnancies.
When I was younger, the rationale for abortion was ‘women are so desperate’ and now its become ‘that non-human creature isn’t a person and has no right to invade and use my body’. It went from ‘a woman should be able to have an abortion’ to ‘that woman SHOULD have an abortion.’ It’s truly horrific.
Even if all pro-choicers were the sweetest, nicest people in the world, and if all pro-lifers were obnoxious and rude, I’d still be pro-life. Because life is more important than being likable.
Thank you Alice PA!
Ninek…..brilliant. The pro-abort mindset seems to believe abortion should be a rite of passage. They WILL NOT look at the issue. They will not ask WHY. It’s destructive and myopic.
Thank you, ninek. And thanks extra for the beautiful information about Elizabeth! I become more and more fond of these two women every day! Also, great final paragraph! Amen!
“pro choice” aka pro murder people are only for being “open minded” and “tolerant” when you agree with THEIR point of view. Your freedom of speech does not apply if you do not agree with their pro death agenda.
Oh and phyllymiss, you may want to look up the history of the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger. Do some research. She was a major racist and the entire purpose of the organization was to eradicate blacks and other minorities who she claimed were “human weeds”.
http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm
http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html
I wouldn’t say Jill hates women, I would say she just doesn’t think they are as important as unborn fetuses.
Sure, Biggz. That’s why so many of us here are women, and so many of the pro-choicers I talk to over the course of my day are men. We just hate being equal, and men only want what’s best for us. Not that we want what’s best for (our) children and men just want to use us for sex. Oh no. 9_9
Congratulations Jill Stanek …
“Not that we want what’s best for (our) children and men just want to use us for sex. Oh no.”
What’s best for YOUR children. Not the developing child inside my body, okay? If you’re the arbiter of what’s “best” for everybody, what else would you like to police? Should eating deli meat while pregnant be considered a felony? Or smoking pre-pregnancy–should we just sterilize smokers, since the habit’s one of the biggest risk factors for poor birth outcomes? How far would you extend that fetal protection?
How far would you extend that fetal protection?
Just far enough to make sure they aren’t willfully killed by design at their parent’s behest.
Care to show me precisely how having your child torn from your womb and killed would be best for him/her? Typically, dying is seen as a rather bad career move by most.
What’s best for YOUR children. Not the developing child inside my body, okay?
No, that is distinctly not okay. If I saw my neighbor abusing his kids, the fact that they’re not my kids would not lessen my responsibility to call the police. And if I had reason to believe that the children were in immediate and life-threatening danger, I would arguably have a responsibility to intervene. So, no. The fact that a child in danger doesn’t happen to be my child doesn’t mean I can suddenly have this breezy, “Oh, well, as long as it’s your freely made choice!” attitude.
As for the rest of your post, second-hand smoke is also dangerous to born children, but that does not mean parents who smoke automatically have their children taken away. Your examples are all very over-the-top and exaggerated.
Hey, at least Megan admitted the fetus is a developing child! A fetus is a developing child inside his mother’s body and a toddler is a developing child outside of his mother’s body… but maybe Megan finally gets it… its still a CHILD even if he/she is still developing (which they do well into their late teens/early 20’s btw)
“Fetus” is simply Latin for “baby” or “little one” you are simply using another language. So it makes no sense to say “It is not a baby it is a fetus” as you are saying “It is not a baby, it is a little one”. That would be like saying, “It is not a house, it is a casa” aka “It is not a house, it is a family abode.”
Er… would it be too much to ask for the various Megans to distinguish their names from each other, somehow? Unless we’re dealing with one person with multiple-personality disorder, I’ve seen posts from (what certainly seemed to be) a pro-life Megan (e.g. May 30, 2011 at 12:38 pm, on the “Human life begins with personhood?” thread), and posts from a stridently abortion-tolerant Megan (e.g. June 1, 2011 at 11:05 pm, this thread)… and it’s not exactly conducive to smooth reading/conversation…
Megan @ 11:05 said : What’s best for YOUR children. Not the developing child inside my body, okay?
If you’re going to abort that developing child, then it looks like your child needs protection from a severely abusive parent.
Megan said: What’s best for YOUR children. Not the developing child inside my body, okay?
Like others pointed out, you actually acknowledged pre-born human being is a developing child. One would believe based on those words that you recognize said being is another life. Therefore, if said being is recognized as another life, and it’s murder to take another life, doesn’t it stand to reason that abortion is murder?
Of course, if you consider a developing human being isn’t alive, then you wouldn’t see abortion as murder…but then, that begs the question…if said being is developing but alive, then why would it develop into a fully developed human being if it’s not alive to do so?
Megan: Should eating deli meat while pregnant be considered a felony?
Actually if a woman warms up those deli meats (I think in the microwave it’s for 30 seconds to 1 minute, but it might be longer than that, I don’t remember; I’m not pregnant right now, but when I was pregnant I knew the answer) it’s considered all right to eat. From what I understand cooking the meat gets rid of the nitrates. So, no, I don’t consider it felony. I’d consider it a mistake not to cook it since docs always warn pregnant women about deli meats.
Megan said: Or smoking pre-pregnancy–should we just sterilize smokers, since the habit’s one of the biggest risk factors for poor birth outcomes?
Since I’m against sterlization I’d say no, don’t sterlize smokers. However, smoking IS proven unhealthy and dangerous for people (Surgeon General warnings are right there on the boxes). Plus docs warn against smoking, too. Usually people agree on that (even some smokers agree it’s unhealthy and try to quit–I know a few of them).
The problem with smoking is how addictive it is. You can get addicted by just one cigarette (that happened to a friend of mine). I’ve never smoked because I’m highly, highly allergic to it and plus I didn’t want to be a slave to it and I figured if I started I would get addicted. So I didn’t ever smoke.
But it certainly wouldn’t be a bad thing for people to quit smoking. And it could even help the environment. I do know it’s hard for some people to quit, though. (Watched friends of mine quit and go back to it several times).
Megan said: How far would you extend that fetal protection?
Many mothers go a great distance for fetal protection. I did my best to eat well, and to eat enough. I walked around (and I walked through the mall when it was too hot outside). I tried harder to be healthy than I ever had in my life when I was pregnant.
Michele Cook,
Er, it would be better if you got the commenters here straight before lobbing your not-so-friendly fire. phillymiss is pro-life.
MIT,
My thoughts on the personhood of fetuses are irrelevant because I don’t believe another human being’s body can be used as a means to an end.
” I don’t believe another human being’s body can be used as a means to an end.” But it’s OK to kill another human being’s body as a means to an end? That’s hypocritical.
@Hans
I apologize, phillymiss was obviously quoting someone else. I was reading the comments backwards and it was about 1 am in the morning yesterday. I was quite tired.
As for the whole “it’s my body” argument, and the use of said body, using cigarettes or other harmful products (meats or whatever) the whole “it’s my body” argument is completely hippocritical as it is used as the reason for legalized murder aka abortion, however drug use is illegal, as is prostitution, both of which would involve an adult deciding what to do with their own body, however harmful to their own personal body. The gov’t feels free to decide that grown adults cannot do those (not that I am saying anyone should) however they are free to say “it is my body” when it is not, and slaughter another’s body growing inside of them.
While one person may not believe in using another person’s body as a means to an end, there is ample precedent for believing that the female body may be compelled to be used to nourish and keep alive a body already growing within it.
We draft young men, forcing them to go through ordeals in combat. Forcing the female to carry and give birth may be seen as similar in that she is forced to suffer for the sake of her offspring.
Megan says:
June 2, 2011 at 4:08 pm
MIT,
My thoughts on the personhood of fetuses are irrelevant because I don’t believe another human being’s body can be used as a means to an end.
So, what? You want us to have “test tube” babies in order to continue the human race? That way nobody’s “body would be used as a means to an end.”
Strange definition of the word “use,” AlicePA. A woman’s body never has “use” for a fetus, unless you want to twist things around and argue that abortion is “using” the fetus’ body to end a pregnancy. And that would be strange logic indeed.
I don’t believe in criminalizing drug use, reinstating the draft, or criminalizing prostitution. But hey, if you want to look to current law to justify your argument, I could also look to abortion and say, “Hey, totally legal.”
MIT: No, I would just have all pregnancies be absolutely voluntary on the part of the mother.
Megan, you have either misunderstood or misrepresented my comparison. In my first sentence I quoted YOU. YOUR point was that the unborn child has no right to use his or her mother’s body as a means to an end (that end, by the way, is to remain alive in order to grow and develop until he or she is physically ready to live outside the womb). I simply compared the unborn child’s “means to an end” to killing another human being as a means to an end. For example, a woman may have her unborn child killed because she thinks it will ruin her educational or career plans or a relationship. The desired “end” is to not have to interrupt her life or any of her current plans, or to save a relationship, or to avoid embarrassment (or various other “ends”). The “means” to those ends is, she thinks, to kill her unborn child. And you think that’s acceptable. That is, you think it’s OK to kill another human being as a means to an end. THAT was MY point.
You should read and think more carefully. But I guess if you did that, it would be a lot harder, if not impossible, to remain pro-abortion.
No, I would just have all pregnancies be absolutely voluntary on the part of the mother.
Sexual activity during one’s fertile time is almost always a voluntary act. If you have sex, you consent to the fact that sexual reproduction may occur, or at the VERY least, you should understand that it is possible.
This should be common sense, but in today’s world where people view contraception as a fail-safe, that’s usually not the case.
I think that woman who use abortion for birth control should instead be fighting for the right to have a hysterectomy when they want to have one done.
“Sexual activity during one’s fertile time is almost always a voluntary act.”
Ah yes, except when it isn’t (and consider that rapes are vastly underreported), and then you trot out ‘ole Rebecca Kiessling and her histrionics to justify further denying rape survivors control over their bodies.
“In today’s world where people view contraception as a fail-safe”
This paints a very simplified picture. There are lots of reasons why people don’t use contraception consistently and correctly. First there’s lack of knowledge, but there are other, more complex factors involved. Like being generally ambivalent about getting pregnant–most late teen moms I know didn’t have anything to strive for beyond the immediate of having a kid, so they were halfhearted in protecting themselves. And then there is the issue of coercion–women who have difficulty negotiating consistent contraceptive use with their partners. And then yes, on top of that, there are the plain old risk takers who think they’re immune to any consequence.
But in our “modern world,” even with all its risks, having sex doesn’t mean a woman signs a pregnancy contract–it just means she might find herself at a tricky crossroads.
You know you guys can report that group to Facebook for hate speech, based on the vulgarities and attacks made towards Jill. Maybe if Facebook got enough complaints, they’d take it down. The link to report the page is on the left-hand side.
Paladin: (*grumble*) That troll nest must be around here somewhere… good grief, look at them all!
Dude, Jill had an enormous bridge built.
Do legitimate commenters continually switch monikers and IPs?
Kel, totally agree on switching names, but IP addresses can change all the time, as with using wireless aircards to get online. I’ve got one from Verizon, and I’m always getting different locations listed, perhaps dozens in a single day, at times.
Mrs. Arnott: I think that woman who use abortion for birth control should instead be fighting for the right to have a hysterectomy when they want to have one done.
No doubt, but for women under a certain age, it’s really, really tough to get doctors to agree to do it – I’m assuming part of it is that she could later change her mind and sue the doctor, our litigious society being what it is, and malpractice laws that could use some revamping, IMO.
Megan,
Pregnancy is a reality of sexual activity. If a woman is consenting to have sexual intercourse she’s going to have to face the fact that she could still have a “surprise” (or as some people term it, “unplanned”) pregnancy. They happen. Trying to live a “no consequences” life just plain ain’t reality. But just because someone isn’t willing to face the reality doesn’t mean that a pre-born human being needs to die.
Actually, Doug, we can look them up and determine whether or not they’re wireless or using a web anonymizing tool/site. But thanks, everyone, for your unsolicited input. :D
Ah yes, except when it isn’t (and consider that rapes are vastly underreported), and then you trot out ‘ole Rebecca Kiessling and her histrionics to justify further denying rape survivors control over their bodies.
Megan, do you have statistics showing rapes are vastly underreported?
“Rebecca Kiessling and her histrionics.” Hmm. That sounds so pro-woman…
Here you go, Kel: http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/reporting-rates
I don’t think you get what being “anti-woman” means. Not supporting the worldview of one woman who a) actively tries to restrict the control other women have over their bodies b) shows no real demonstrable concern for, you know, rape survivors, is hardly “anti-woman.”
MIT: So my good friends, both 20, who just got married should abstain until they’re financially stable enough to support a family? Hmm.
Doug says:
June 3, 2011 at 5:42 pm
Mrs. Arnott: I think that woman who use abortion for birth control should instead be fighting for the right to have a hysterectomy when they want to have one done.
No doubt, but for women under a certain age, it’s really, really tough to get doctors to agree to do it – I’m assuming part of it is that she could later change her mind and sue the doctor, our litigious society being what it is, and malpractice laws that could use some revamping, IMO.
(Denise) A hysterectomy? Why would she have to remove her womb? She can have a tubal ligation.
In response to Megan @ 6:39 p.m.:
What I said is that when choosing to engage in sexual intercourse people should not ignore the fact that pregnancy can and does happen. The pre-born human being should not have to die just because people don’t want to face that reality. Nowhere in my comment did I say married couples HAVE to obstain from sexual intercourse although there are times when a woman is most fertile that if they’re avoiding pregnancy abstaining from sexual intercourse would be something they could do to naturally prevent said pregnancy, but I never said married couples had to abstain from it completely. In fact, your friends could learn Natural Family Planning (NFP) and learn when they are most feritle and not-as-fertile and make informed decisions about their family that way. There are several methods available, 3 of the ones I know of are: Sympo-Thermal (that’s the method my husband and I have used, both to achieve and avoid pregnancy), Creighton and Billings. I’d be happy to provide information and contacts for NFP teachers/consultants for your friends if they are so interested. I can also provide a website that has pamphlets on Natural Family Planning and the like, if you or your friends are interested.
“(Denise)”?” A hysterectomy? Why would she have to remove her womb? She can have a tubal ligation.”
either or. tho I was told by my doctor that it’s not 100% effective either, but could increase your chance’s of an ectopic pregnancy.
the age should go hand in hand with the legal consenting age of sex(which should go hand in hand with the legal age to get married because I’m a mean mom lol) and an agreement could or should be signed.
Actually, Doug, we can look them up and determine whether or not they’re wireless or using a web anonymizing tool/site.
Kel, cool – I guess there are known proxy server addresses, etc. My point about differing wireless IP’s is that there’s no way you would know if it’s just one person or several on the same network.
Hi Doug,
Yeah, we have several people here who use wireless networks, and there’s no issue with that.
Megan, Rebecca Kiessling (as far as I know) is not just a woman who is pro-life. She is a woman whose life could very easily have ended because of “choice.” She is the child of a rapist (father) and rape victim (her mother). You don’t think slamming her is anti-woman? You didn’t go against her worldview, Megan. You made reference to her as if she were a show pony. You claimed her life story is merely “histrionics.” You objectified her. And you don’t get it.
Re: the rape statistics – I found the study they reference. If this study is defining “unreported rapes” as those not reported to the police, somehow the Bureau of Justice was able to obtain accurate information on the average number of rape victims per year, despite that. So, we HAVE the numbers, whether they were reported to police or not. If we know that there are an avg. of 109k-150k rapes or attempted sexual assaults per year, then how does alter the facts behind my statement- that most women who are sexually active knowingly and willingly engage in sexual intercourse?
honestly a woman has no problem removing a baby from their body why would they mind having their reproductive organs removed?