(Prolifer)ations 6-14-11
by Kelli
As always, we welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- The Anti-Abortion Gang discusses the “happy, guilt-free” abortion story of Jessica DelBalzo, who, instead of leaving her admittedly “deteriorat[ing]” relationship with her children’s father, decided to stay and risk the pregnancy she had already decided to abort.
- Big Blue Wave shares a powerful Daily Mail article about now 19-year-old gang rape victim Elizabeth Cameron, who believes having her daughter, Phoebe, was “more important than what happened.”
- Americans United for Life reveals a dangerous new trend of skirting international pro-life laws via websites selling RU-486 to women without physical exams. If the goal of such sites is to curb “unsafe abortions,” this certainly seems counterproductive.
- David Daleiden at Live Action expresses disappointment in pro-life political candidates’ use of vague, abstract terms when referring to abortion.
- Stacy at Accepting Abundance shares some thoughts on being open to life after age 40.
- Bryan Kemper posts the text of pro-life speaker and attorney Rebecca Kiessling’s response to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, who last week referred to Kiessling (and other children conceived in rape) as “the rapist’s child.”
- Moral Outcry posts a blog by Kinsey Thurlow, encouraging Christians to become even more proactive in caring for orphans and widows.
- At Coming Home Dr. Gerard Nadal presents his concerns regarding the upcoming pro-life film, “The Gates of Hell.”
Jun.14, 2011 3:00 pm |
Blogs |
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.
I wish Rebecca Kiessling would take contact with Rachel Maddow’s producers, instead of just posting a column on a website. One of the redeeming qualities about Maddow is that she does take on guests with wildly opposing views, and since Rebecca’s tour was specifically mentioned on the show she should have a chance to defend herself.
I would enjoy watching Rachel tear her apart on national television. Rachel is about the only TV media person covering the underhanded actions by republican law makers all across the country and the unlawful intimidation going on in Kansas right now.
Sorry Biggz, but Rachel would never tear apart an abortion survivor like Rebecca. Unlike you, Rachel is an empathetic and fair person.
Yes she is but her views are very clear on this subject and by “tear apart” I mean intellectually lay into her.
Yes, it would be interesting because she would be forced to face the “victim” head-on; I mean the pro-choice position means that you (general you) thinks that Rebecca shouldn’t have been born. I don’t doubt that Rachel wouldn’t have the intellectual courage to do that – say “I support a position that means you shouldn’t have been born because I believe that your mother’s health and freedom was more important.” It would be refreshing.
Another reason I would want to see it is because taken out of context, the “Conceived in Rape Tour” sounded like something Republican law makers had come up with, instead of being the brain child of an actual individual with a specific life experience.
Wow, how self-centered of Ms. Kiessling to twist the prochoice position into a personal attack. I’d like to prevent rape. Does that mean that I wish Rebecca Kiessling were dead? Only if you’re a histrionic trying to spin a career out of your mother’s personal tragedy. And what faulty logic! Who even knows what would have happened if abotion had been legal in the early 70’s–maybe her mother would’ve gotten inside the clinic and changed her mind. It’s not much of an argument.
You know what I would like to see, Kristina? I’d like Ms. Kiessling to use her platform to speak out against the horrors of rape and the advocate for swift justice for all survivors. And then I’d like her to sit down with a scared young victim of incest, look her in the eye, and tell the girl that she has to relinquish control of her body for nine more months because maybe, just maybe, another Rebecca will be born.
You seem to be under the impression that all Pro-choice people think that all pregnancies conceived in rape should be aborted. That is simply not true. We believe in choice and that decision is up to the rape victim. We support her decision one way or the other. Can anti-choice people say the same thing?
We are not Pro-abortion. We are Pro-choice, or Pro-freedom of choice if you wish. We don’t want increased abortion numbers we want reproductive freedom for all women.
We care about women and children just as much as you do. I am married with a daughter. We just disagree about one issue, does a fetus have rights that supersede the rights of the mother to terminate her pregnancy. That is it. On most other subjects we all agree.
A developing child and his or her mother have an equal right to exist. One does not trump the other. Abortion fans clearly do not care about children because you do believe that children should be murdered for convenience, fear, or any other reason that will make an abortionist $$.
YOU ARE PRO-ABORTION. OWN IT, COWARDS.
I’m pro-woman, pro-choice, pro-equal rights. If that makes me pro-abortion so be it. I’m not anti-abortion so I guess that makes me pro-abortion. Again, so be it.
You are anti-abortion, therefore you are anti-choice. From what I read here you haven’t convinced me that you are pro-life, just anti-choice.
I’d like to see a deep, independant study undertaken by anthropologists and psychologists into why society legalised freedom from slavery, legalised womens’ equal political rights, legalised womens’ equal employment rights (well we’ve barely scratched the surface there to be honest) and legalised womens’ right to choose. There must be a common link underlying all these advances. It may also indicate why equal marriage rights will soon occur.
You see Kristina, comments like the one Ninek just made are not to be listened to. He is just trying to start a fight by insulting people. This is not how a rational debate is done. What do you expect from a tea party birther… They just want to fight.
Wrong on 3 counts, Biggz. I’m female, registered Democrat, and the only tea party I attended actually included hot tea and cookies.
You see, I say that both mother and child have an equal right to exist, and you come off with oh no, that’s unreasonable. In your case I agree: your mother might be more valuable than you are, lol!!
You are cowards, abortion fans, one and all. You pick on the smallest. You advocate for murder for tiny humans that can’t get away and can’t fight back. Go ahead, make fun of me, at least I can defend myself.
“You pick on the smallest.”
Aaaand you’re completely delusional. Pick on? I won’t even unpack this latest ridiculous claim except to say that, once again, you forgot to write a part for adult women in your little victims vs. villains script. Not even one of your favorite scared fool or selfish harlot tropes makes an appearance. So much concern for women…
goodness – no concern for women? Of course there is concern for women – we want the best fort hem. we want them to succeed. we want them to live good, honest and as God-fearing a life as possible (I know that won’t make any sense to those who are not of the Judeo-Christian tradition).
Just last week, we helped a family of three avoid eviction, avoid the turning off of their water, and arrange for the oldest to have a job with a good-hearted entrepreneur. we want this family to succeed. So much for your take on that we do not care about women.
We want all involved to live and thrive – but with abortion one definitely dies and the other is affected. My girlfriend who has no natural children because of her abortion experience is still grieving her abortion after over 20 years.
We want everyone whole, functioning and doing as well as can be expected. We encourage women to get a degree, we help with transportation, rent payments, food, clothing furniture, medical care and more. Mostly we offer our hearts – and stand by them – even when they are in the hospital, when they bury their children, when they have their appointments, when they need someone to talk to, and even when they just need a friendly face.
Faced with this – as a matter of course for many in the pro-life movement, who is delusional now? The ones who keep saying pro-lifers only care about the baby, not the woman? Or those who keep saying that abortion has no effect on anyone? Or that people should support PP otherwise many women would continue to die?
Abortion kills a pre-born human. Pro-Lifers care about ALL concerned – including MOM and baby. Abortion is not neutral, and never will be, despite you thinking so.
Love them both. help them both. Love big. Think big. Welcome all into the human family. Help all. nuf said.
Mothers are also victimized when they are coerced, sold, pushed, or forced into abortion. Post abortive mothers are not villains. Unless they become “staunch” advocates for abortion, I’d like to say emotionally, because it’s hard to have sympathy in that case. Still they are in need of healing, even the ones who make us mad.
Megan, since you focus here instead of elsewhere, constantly arguing for the destruction of tiny children’s lives, yes, I say you are picking on them. You don’t volunteer at a CPC do you? Why don’t so-called pro-choicers? Why not split your time between escorting at PP and helping at a CPC? NONE of you do. So, I repeat: you do pick on the smallest.
Probably because CPC’s aren’t pro-choice ninek.
“Post abortive mothers are not villains. Unless they become “staunch” advocates for abortion” – villians? And maybe pro-choice post-abortive women see post-abortive mothers who are “staunch” advocates against abortion as villians?
“Picking on”? Strawman.
“pro-choice” = “pro-murder” (imprecisely but accurately speaking)
Megan said at 7:13 p.m., “And then I’d like [Rebecca Kiessling] to sit down with a scared young victim of incest, look her in the eye, and tell the girl that she has to relinquish control of her body for nine more months because maybe, just maybe, another Rebecca will be born.”
But Rebecca’s not pro-murder, Megan. You might like her to say so, but I envision her saying something more along the lines of this (if there is already enough of a trust relationship) (context is everything): “I’m here for you. Take good care of yourself for the baby’s sake.” And there would be much more to say, but I’m neither a woman nor a good counsellor. One thing I do know, though: killing the child isn’t an option. How evil to even suggest it! Talk about taking advantage of a vulnerable girl! (and such utter disregard for her even more vulnerable child)
And then I’d like her to sit down with a scared young victim of incest, look her in the eye, and tell the girl that she has to relinquish control of her body for nine more months because maybe, just maybe, another Rebecca will be born.
Instead, why not tell her about how having her baby ripped to pieces within her and then suctioned out of her will be the ticket to healing from the trauma of her abuse (sarcasm)
Hey Megan,
Abort any more babies lately, or are you vying for “Miss Congeniality”? Whence all this vitriol?
You might be spittin’ in the wind Gerard, I think they’ve all gone to bed.
<i>You seem to be under the impression that all Pro-choice people think that all pregnancies conceived in rape should be aborted</i>
I’m well aware that pro-choice people don’t promote abortion, it’s just in this particular case Rebecca’s mom chose to terminate the pregnancy.
Wow, how self-centered of Ms. Kiessling to twist the prochoice position into a personal attack.
It is a personal attack. Rebecca Kiessling’s mother wanted to abort her and was only prevented from doing so by laws in her state. If you had your way, Rebecca would not be alive today. There is no way at all in which that is not personal. Of course it’s a personal attack. It’s always been a personal attack.
Pro-life quiz of the day:
Which quote does not go with the other two?
A. “Wow, how self-centered of Ms. Kiessling to twist the prochoice position into a personal attack.” ~Megan
B. “This isn’t personal. It’s strictly business, Tom.” ~ Michael Corleone (The Godfather)
C. “The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships.” ~Mother Theresa ofCalcutta
I read that “Happy Abortion” piece, and I’m nauseous.
If I were one of her kids and knew what she’d done to my little brother or sister, without a twinge of remorse, I’d sleep with a knife under my pillow. Never mind the fact that her “deteriorating relationship” with her children’s father didn’t stop her having sex with him. She sounds like a psychopath and a narcissist.
Yes, me too, Clarice. That “Happy Abortion” story is frightening and it made me sick. Abortion makes me sick—I cannot fathom how some women believe this to be a “right,” especially now that we know what it actually is, what it does to a little baby human? How can anyone ever support this?
By the by, did anyone go to RHRealityCheck (LOL at the name…..LOLOLOLOL) and read the comments? Alarmist and fear-mongering, that’s what pro-aborts are. These women, they claim that “Forced birth is rape” and then continue to talk about rape and the misogynist world they live in. Hypocrites, angry, ugly words, without logic, or compassion, just rage rage rage. It is amazing to me that anyone actually functions on the day-to-day with that mindset. They have no idea what the pro-life movement is about, and they refuse to listen. They hide behind smokescreens and slogans, it’s just outrageous. And as a rape survivor, I am absolutely SICK TO DEATH of them comparing pregnancy to rape. That is beyond horrifying.
“By the by, did anyone go to RHRealityCheck (LOL at the name…..LOLOLOLOL) and read the comments?”
—
I posted there for a while until I was banned even though I insulted no one. But you’re correct. They insult you, call you a troll, call you a misogynist, assert that you’re a rapist or a rape enabler, that you’re a woman hater and that any woman who opposes abortion is a traitor to women, among other things. It’s really sad.
“I’d like to see a deep, independant study undertaken by anthropologists and psychologists into why society legalised freedom from slavery, legalised womens’ equal political rights, legalised womens’ equal employment rights (well we’ve barely scratched the surface there to be honest) and legalised womens’ right to choose.”
—
So you want a study on nothing? First of all, not only do you not compare making slavery legal to making abortion legal (since the two contain more similarities than does making abortion legal and slavery illegal), but you ignore the fact that one of those instances was forced by the courts, while the others were shaped by public opinion. Second of all, you don’t need an anthropologist or psychologist. All you need is a sociologist, and there are numerous papers written on abortion which absolutely show that abortion laws are far from what the public would like them to be, but also papers which show that the younger are generally less approving than their elders on the
Here’s one such paper for you to read on the latter:
http://www.michelepolak.com/200fall10/Weekly_Schedule_files/Strickler.pdf
With the exception of the period from 1982 to 1985, where older people are more opposed to abortion than younger people in Model 1, age is significant only in the full model, and is consistently positive in its association with abortion approval, indicating that after controlling for other factors, older people are more approving of abortion than younger people.
CPC’s are not pro-abortion that’s true. A vegetarian restuarant is not pro-meat. However, many a carnivore has eaten with their vegetarian friends. It’s not that different. If you truly are pro-choice, you would have no problem at all with CPC’s because it’s the same as a vegetarian establishment. Vegetarian restaurants don’t ban meat lovers, they simply don’t serve them meat nor have a list on their door of all the other restaurants you might rather dine in.
Some of you say, “I would support a rape victim if she wanted to carry her child.” But you spend your actual free time advocating abortion and what you call “abortion rights.” Where you spend your time demonstrates what you do believe. (By the fruits of your labor, I can see.).
So-called pro-choicers have been fighting CPC’s which shows they have no interest in “live and let live.” There is only one choice they approve of. You can put on a chicken suit and tell me you’re poultry but that doesn’t make it so.
You can’t be pro-woman and want to kill some of them. Trolls, you are intellectually dishonest.
No ninek, I don’t volunteer at “crisis” pregnancy centers because using the term “crisis” renders clients vulnerable and helpless. It’s just another deceptive tactic to steer women away from abortion, just like “clinics” that masquerade as health care facilities without any medical professionals on staff. As I mentioned before on here, I’m gearing up to do research for an organization that helps young mothers in need by offering parenting classes, a visiting nurse program, and food/clothes drives. The great thing is that it’s neutral on the position of abortion (like any good feminist women’s center). That’s right–no lies, obfuscation, or scare tactics. If a young woman gets pregnant and is ambivalent, she will have resources she can rely on, but it will be her decision 100% of the way.
Megan said, “Using the term ‘crisis’ renders clients vulnerable and helpless. It’s just another deceptive tactic to steer women away from abortion.”
You’ve got to be kidding, Megan! Do you mean to say that these pregnancies are planned? What happened to the supposed common ground that pro-lifers and pro-aborts can work on? What do you want to call CPC’s then? Accidental pregnancy centres? If there’s no crisis, then why should we pay any attention to these expectant mothers? Then according to you, they’re just like “gays,” who supposedly only want to be left alone.