Betty Ford’s pro-abortion legacy
While I empathize with the loss Betty Ford’s family and friends must be feeling at her death, I do not lament the passing of any unrepentant leader of the pro-abortion movement, bluntly speaking. The world is a safer place for children with one less person facilitating their murders.
Betty Ford was an unapologetic abortion activist. In her roles as First Lady and world dignitary, Betty Ford was, thus, partially responsible for untold thousands, perhaps millions, of their deaths. Watch with revulsion 2:15-2:45 on this Fox News video…
Of course, Ford’s vision that legalizing abortion would “bring it out of the backwoods and into the hospitals where it belonged” proved unsound. All the Supreme Court did in 1973 was take abortion from the back alley into the front alley.
As I said, Ford was a pro-abortion activist…
From that Los Angeles Times piece:
Former First Lady Betty Ford and several other Republicans announced today that they have formed a new political action committee to support GOP candidates who oppose President Bush’s anti-abortion stance.
The committee, calling itself Pro-Choice America, said it has “only one purpose – to support courageous pro-choice Republicans who face anti-choice opponents.”…
[T]he PAC will concentrate only on races in which a Republican who favor abortion rights is opposed by another Republican or a Democrat who is opposed to abortion.
Two other influential pro-abortion activists, Bill and Hillary Clinton, released a sadly ironic joint statement of condolence upon learning of Ford’s death:
As a staunch advocate for women’s and equal rights, Betty paved the way for generations of women to follow.
No, Ford helped make it impossible for generations of women to follow because she promoted killing them.
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 just had to get your postmortem shot in at Betty Ford, didn’t you? Is the concept of showing a little respect for the dead completely lost on this site? What do you possibly stand to gain from attacking a woman who, in death, is no longer capable of defending herself? And even if you have a problem with her record of support for abortion rights, you could at least acknowledge her great service for those with substance abuse problems.
Attack?
Every other piece I’ve read since her death has been a summary of Betty Ford’s “contributions” to the world. I understood this post as a reminder of the negative effects of one of her larger “contributions”.
“abortion from the back alley into the front alley”
Are you kidding me? Pro-lifers take away funding for abortion clinics, you bomb them, you protest them if the building is too expensive or nice, you stalk the doctors and harrass them at home, and every once in a while a deranged pro-lifer goes and kills an abortion doctor.
And you wonder, or even have the audacity to mock, the fact that some women still receive unsafe abortions?!?
We would be able to safely integrate all abortion into women’s reproductive care in SAFE, STERILE, comfortable environments where it belongs if pro-lifers didn’t create an anti-woman environment where they pretend to care if a woman is receiving an unsafe abortion, but in reality, it’s all BECAUSE of you. You horrible people.
Lrning, how would you feel if Ronald Reagan’s body wasn’t even cold yet before I started espousing why he was such a vile person (which I truly believe, but would never say so close to his death)
We would be able to safely integrate all abortion into women’s reproductive care in SAFE, STERILE, comfortable environments where it belongs if pro-lifers didn’t create an anti-woman environment where they pretend to care if a woman is receiving an unsafe abortion, but in reality, it’s all BECAUSE of you. You horrible people.
Jane, are you seriously blaming the Gosnells of the world on the fact that pro-lifers exist?
Lrning, how would you feel if Ronald Reagan’s body wasn’t even cold yet before I started espousing why he was such a vile person (which I truly believe, but would never say so close to his death)
You just espoused how “horrible” we pro-lifers are – and we’re still alive. Hmm.
I blame bad doctors for being bad doctors, that’s on them 100%. I blame the pro-lifers for creating a culture in which most great doctors shy away from performing abortions out of fear for their safety and the safety of their families. I blame pro-lifers for refusing funding to family planning clinics, forcing them to operate on shoestring budgets.
And yes, Kel, I believe that all you living breathing pro-lifers do horrible things that creates an anti-woman culture. What’s your point?
“And yes, Kel, I believe that all you living breathing pro-lifers do horrible things that creates an anti-woman culture.”
at least we don’t think murdering pre-born women should be legal, unlike you.
Ford was a lousy President, an embarassment for republicans.
Good comeback, jasper
I blame the pro-lifers for creating a culture in which most great doctors shy away from performing abortions out of fear for their safety and the safety of their families.
You think that’s the only reason why they shy away from it? Interesting.
I blame pro-lifers for refusing funding to family planning clinics, forcing them to operate on shoestring budgets.
Pro-choicers don’t fund pregnancy resource centers (most of which actually DO operate on shoestring budgets), so I don’t really see your point here. And you obviously haven’t heard of Planned Parenthood, who currently receives hundreds of millions of dollars per year of taxpayer (and that includes pro-lifers’) money.
And yes, Kel, I believe that all you living breathing pro-lifers do horrible things that creates an anti-woman culture. What’s your point?
My point is that you seem to have zero problem insulting living people, so let’s dispense with the feigned outrage over your perceived insult to the dead. As if you had any respect for the dead who don’t meet your criteria, anyway.
You know what’s anti-woman? Telling women they “need” abortion in order to be free and equal. What a sickening lie.
Jane – there are many doctors who no longer perform abortions simply because they came to the conclusion (perhaps their sense of humanity?) that what they were doing is completely wrong. Our PRC medical director is a former abortionist who walked away from Planned Parenthood and is now adamantly pro-life.
Jane – while you’re outraged about respecting the dead, how about the untold millions of children killed – any outrage about them being horribly disrespected?
Or does that cut a little too close to home?
Jane, how about a little outrage over the fact that abortion orgs like NARAL and PP are constantly fighting all state health and safety regulations for abortion clinics? You know, like having to have hospital admitting privileges for emergencies and corridors wide enough for gurneys, like all other outpatient clinics? They claim it’s “too expensive.” Well boo-hoo. If you haven’t enough money to protect your patients, don’t open. That they don’t get federal funds is no excuse. Besides, those clinics that provide a fuller range of family planning services have always gotten federal funds over the years, while abortion organizations have always looked the other way or fought against the regs, even when there is money. And the abortion-only clinics rake in the money. Problem is, they don’t want to spend their profits on their patients’ safety. Pro-lifers have always fought FOR those regs. I think it’s clear who really cares about women’s safety.
Betty Ford represents the old school Republicans that I grew up with. These were educated people whose mainline Protestantism wasn’t worn on their sleeves (no “bible thumpers” there). Many of them were Episcopalians (as was Betty Ford) - a church that supports a woman’s right to choose whether to give birth or not. They quietly supported Planned Parenthood in the days pre Roe as they believed that birth control was essential to a better quality of life for women and their families – a belief not held by many of today’s pro-lifers who would seek to ban contraception. This is why I supported the late Senator John Chaffee who was a lifelong Republican. His son, an “independent,” is our governor and while Linc presides over our state, no anti-choice legislation will be signed – although as none ever makes it of legislative committee, it shouldn’t be a problem as RI, despite its number of Catholics, is still very pro-choice.
As someone who grew up in the pre-Roe years, I remember the absolute horror of knowing that if I became pregnant, I would be forced to seek out an *unsafe illegal abortion or give birth to a child I didn’t want. I remember how wonderful it was to finally have safe and effective contraception. Betty Ford advocated for women’s reproductive freedom and for that, those of us who are pro-choice, are grateful. It’s ironic that there is such a fear of Sharia, in the US, when the criminalization of abortion and birth control represent something as bad.
*Yes, there are the Gosnell situations. But that is a small percentage of abortion outcomes. There is abuse and neglect in all areas of health care provision.
“Is the concept of showing a little respect for the dead completely lost on this site?”
They are still spitting (metaphorically speaking) on the graves of all the murdered abortion doctors and staff.
Jane, take your comments to ‘Abortion Clinic Days’ or some other blog; they probably need the traffic. While I appreciate that you are making a case for pro life, I have to do a rolleyes at most all your statements.
“Our PRC medical director is a former abortionist who walked away from Planned Parenthood and is now adamantly pro-life”
Who is that?
Jill, your comment: “While I empathize with the loss Betty Ford’s family and friends must be feeling at her death, I do not lament the passing of any unrepentant leader of the pro-abortion movement, bluntly speaking. The world is a safer place for children with one less person facilitating their murders” is very poignant.
One of the abortion clinic workers in Orlando has a RIP memorial sticker on her car for a loved one. I have often wondered how those who support & perpetrate the wholesale slaughter of the murder of innocent children can expect others to sympathize with them when they lose people in their life to natural death. Don’t they recognize the hypocrisy?
Lifesong are you saying you only grieve for the “death of pre-born babies” and not already living human beings? Especially not living human beings that disagree with your cause?
Because that’s what it sounds like and I wouldn’t at all be surprised, to be honest. Love them and love them until they’re born and they disappoint you with such crazy ideas as liberalism, feminism, not raising children in a two parent household, atheism, agnosticism, etc etc? That’s the impression I’ve gotten from the Jill Stanek blog so far at least.
this is a blog about abortion, duh! she’s only reiterating betty ford’s public comments. I pray she had change of heart. You never know, we all get old and see things clearer from the other end of the spectrum.
“Lifesong are you saying you only grieve for the “death of pre-born babies” and not already living human beings? Especially not living human beings that disagree with your cause?”
Most of the comments about Dr. Tiller’s death had the caveat relating to his death being just one death compared to the many whom he “murdered.” While pro-lifers do provide some assistance to the post born, they do seem to be, as noted elsewhere, a fetus worshiping cult. They put fetuses and post born, legally defined ”persons” on the same level which means that for a woman, the rights of the fetus supersede hers. She thus becomes a breeding maching with no say over what she can do with her body. It’s the absolute denigration of women but they will say that abortion denigrates women. I (and many others) beg to differ. Thankfully, I live in an area of the country where women’s reproductive rights are not under attack.
@Joan:
“Is the concept of showing a little respect for the dead completely lost on this site? What do you possibly stand to gain from attacking a woman who, in death, is no longer capable of defending herself?”
Oh, the irony.
“Is the concept of showing a little respect for the dead completely lost on THIS site?” You mean, the site that draws attention to the 53 million deaths of “unwanted” unborn Americans since 1973? The site that respects the lives of the unborn whose lives are disrespected to the point of death by the likes of Betty Ford?
And to follow your comment up with indignation at Jill for “attacking” a woman who is not capable of “defending herself”??? Do you hear yourself? Ms. Stanek’s “attack”, if you want to call it that, is verbal. Jill is using WORDS…she is sharing the historical truth of this woman’s record, something Ford was apparently proud of. You are upset about a verbal attack, yet ignore the physical attack of tiny, unborn humans in the womb with chemicals, suction machines, curettes, & forceps? These little ones are totally unable to defend themselves verbally or physically from being dismembered & killed. They can’t speak for themselves. They can’t defend themselves. They can’t fight & they can’t escape.
Oh, I forgot…only born humans count.
Lifesong are you saying you only grieve for the “death of pre-born babies” and not already living human beings? Especially not living human beings that disagree with your cause?
Preborn children ARE already living human beings.
It’s pretty illogical that anyone who cares for human beings at their most fragile is somehow indifferent to born human beings – but keep on beating that straw man. You know pro-lifers (and *gasp* Christians!!) support and/or started organizations like Feed the Children, World Vision, Compassion International, Samaritan’s Purse, various homeless shelters, pregnancy resource centers, the Salvation Army, Catholic Charities, Operation Blessing, and the American Red Cross.
@Jane: Considering that there were a number of people who did begin criticizing Reagan the instant he died, then I don’t need to imagine anything. Nor, I would venture to say, does anyone else here. They all remember. I assumed that people who didn’t like what he stood for while he was alive were hardly going to change their views because he had died, and I ignored it.
People will always say things you don’t like. Welcome to free speech. We hope you enjoy your stay.
“People will always say things you don’t like. Welcome to free speech. We hope you enjoy your stay.”
Don’t try to twist this into a free speech issue. No one is questioning the right to say appalling things about someone who isn’t even buried yet. This is strictly a matter of good taste, and more importantly, respect. Most people, regardless of their politics, show some deference to the recently passed. I don’t expect anyone to change their views about a person or their beliefs because they’ve died, but I do expect anyone with any sense of propriety to, at the very least, withhold their personal misgivings about that person until a reasonable length of time has lapsed.
This is strictly a matter of good taste, and more importantly, respect.
LOLOLOL! You have the audacity to say this after your jokes about Trig Palin and your denigration of disabled people?!
I’m stunned. Seriously. Unbelievable.
And yes, Kel, I believe that all you living breathing pro-lifers do horrible things that creates an anti-woman culture. What’s your point?
So Jane, you’d prefer that we pro-lifers weren’t living and breathing? That’s only logical. Your answer to “unwanted” people is to kill them.
That is the attitude that makes your spirit so impoverished and pitiable, Jane. May God show you His mercy and truth.
Kel- women NEED abortion to be safe and legal.
Chris- that’s her own personal journey and doesn’t apply to the whole medical community.
No, it doesn’t cut too close to home, because I don’t subscribe to the idea that fetuses have more, or equal, rights than their mothers. (yeah I said “mother” and it’s not inconsistent or shocking)
A lot of pro-abortion, pro-death, pro-baby killing people on here. Take the sugar coating off of the word “pro-choice” and that is what you have. Interesting that they blame the pro-lifers for lousy doctors in the abortion industry. Funny how it’s all the fault of those who defend and protect life. Try looking in the mirror. Go out to the Rockford Illinois abortuary and look at the vile filth that doctor has displayed in his windows. He blasts vile and loud music at the prayerful sidewalk pro-lifers. He even ran in to a pro-lifer with his car. Nice guy that Doctor is. Every now and then there’s a pro-lifer who kills a baby killer. That is never justifiable but how many children did that doctor kill? There have been almost 50million babies murdered in the womb since Roe v Wade. How’s that for a record on the pro-abort side?
Betty Ford was rabidly pro-(abortion)choice. She needs to be remembered for this atrocity. I have to laugh at those who are appalled by the so called lack of decorum and respect for this woman. When have the pro-death camps ever shown any kind of respect and decorum? Never. So she was an alcoholic, drug abuser who cleaned up her act. Good for her. A lot of people do that. She started the Betty Ford clinic. That’s great but she used her notoriety to promote the killing of the unborn. You pro-aborts and gay rights activists are always calling for “celebrating diversity” and “coexisting.” Try walking the talk for once and let someone else enjoy the free speech you are always shrieking about. How about growing up!
Jane says:
Lrning, how would you feel if Ronald Reagan’s body wasn’t even cold yet before I started espousing why he was such a vile person (which I truly believe, but would never say so close to his death)
I wouldn’t have felt anything. I’m not a big fan of Reagan.
But I’ve read the post twice now and I still fail to see where Jill espoused that Betty Ford was a “vile” person. She’s described as:
* unrepentant leader of the pro-abortion movement
* person facilitating murders
* unapologetic abortion activist
* First Lady and world dignitary
* pro-abortion activist
Not “vile”. Not “horrible” even.
The “anti-women” label put on pro-lifers makes me laugh. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a pro-choicer explain how fighting to save the lives of unborn girls is “anti-women” and how fighting to ensure that they are able to legally be killed is not.
joan says:
No one is questioning the right to say appalling things about someone who isn’t even buried yet.
Can you please quote where “appalling things” were said about Betty Ford?
Ah yes. Propiety! One must have propriety!!! LOL
Especially when reading about women who are forcibly aborted in China and Joan comments that they get what they deserve because they know the law!!
Cassie says:
Every now and then there’s a pro-lifer who kills a baby killer.
Anyone who purposefully kills another person should not be described as pro-life, in my opinion. In fact, those are the people that strike me as anti-abortion, but definitely not pro-life. I know those terms get used interchangeably. But using the term “pro-life” to describe a murderer has always struck me as an incongruous label.
@Lrning : Why not take what I wrote out of context? I also said it was never justifiable. You pro-deathers are always screaming unfair. Post what I wrote in the fullness of the text. Pro-choice to describe choosing death over life has always struck me as an incongruous label
Most people, regardless of their politics, show some deference to the recently passed.
No, they don’t. As I pointed out, your “how would you feel…” is fairly laughable considering that not only did the exact situation you described happen, but it happened all over the place. It was normal. I even expected it before he died, so entrenched is the hatred of Reagan. And now you’re all upset because of one article that doesn’t praise everything Betty Ford did. An article which is, reading it over, mostly straightforward and hardly written in a mean tone. Given the standard you put forward (criticism of Reagan shortly after his death), Jill’s way ahead of the game.
Furthermore, considering how little feeling you have for the 50 million dead children whose murders you routinely defend as a good thing, any demands from you for consideration for someone who likewise did not give any deference to their deaths rings so hollow that it would crumble to dust if you touched it. Maybe there are people who have standing to criticize this article. You are not one of them.
Cassie says:
@Lrning : Why not take what I wrote out of context? I also said it was never justifiable. You pro-deathers are always screaming unfair. Post what I wrote in the fullness of the text. Pro-choice to describe choosing death over life has always struck me as an incongruous label.
What?
I didn’t imply that you said it was justifiable. I was simply pointing out that I don’t think the term “pro-life” fits a murderer.
And I’m pro-life, not pro-death or pro-choice.
I don’t understand, really, why you pro-aborts keep coming here just to tell Jill and the rest of us that you don’t like what she has/we have to say.
I don’t go on pro-abort blogs because I KNOW what they’re like, I KNOW what they have to say and I don’t care to read it.
That’s like continuing to go to a restaurant even though you know you hate the food.
Why bother?
I Guess misery really DOES love company.
@Lrnig, excuse me for not being psychic. If you have to get picky about apples and oranges then all I have to say is those who kill baby killers most likely consider themselves pro-life. I think you paid a lot of money for the word “incongruous” and just wanted to use it. What ever. I’ll try to read your mind the next time you post. Sheesh.
Wow.
No need to read my mind. I usually take pains to say exactly what I mean. Which I did. And if you go back and re-read it I think you’ll find it wasn’t an attack.
But I do apologize for quoting you in my comment. I should have just posted about my opinion of using the word “pro-life” to describe those that kill abortionists without quoting your use of it, since you’re hardly the only one that does it.
It is important that we learn from the examples of people who go on to eternity before us, both the good and the bad.
Betty Ford’s hands are covered with the blood of innocent children.
If she could communicate with us right now, she would be screaming at us, imploring us not to make the same mistakes she did. She would yell, “Repent! Repent! Don’t kill your babies in the womb! Don’t come to this horrific place!”
She would be in total agreement with, even adamantly supporting those of us critical of her contribution to prenatal child-killing.
Truth is truth.
It’s too late for Betty Ford. If you’re reading this, it’s not too late for you.
Repent while you still can. Call upon the Lord Jesus Christ to save you from your sin.
It’s the best decision you could ever make.
Eternity is longer than time.
(I should qualify my statment. I was not with Betty Ford when she died and I don’t know for a fact that she did not repent of her sin before she passed. Let’s just say that if she did not repent, you can be certain she is filled with indescribable pain, regret, remorse and hopelessness. If she did cry out to Jesus in her dying breath, well thank God. Her life was wasted, but at least she made it into Heaven.)
Ed says:
If she could communicate with us right now, she would be screaming at us…Don’t come to this horrific place!”
Ugh. I hope you aren’t insinuating that Betty Ford is in hell. God is perfectly merciful as well as perfectly just and we have no idea what transpired between Betty Ford and God before she died.
(Edit: posted before I saw your edit.)
“Can you please quote where “appalling things” were said about Betty Ford?”
Saying that “I do not lament the passing” of someone who has just died? Here’s a little thought experiment for you: imagine that you just lost a loved one and some person, for whatever reason, said that they don’t lament that person’s passing. I’m sure you’d find that pretty appalling. At the very least, it shows a callous disregard for the feelings of the bereaved. At worst, it’s an implicit personal attack on someone who can no longer defend themselves. Obviously none of us here were personally close to Betty Ford, but so what? She was somebody’s mother, wife, daughter, aunt, friend, and so on. What if one of those people happened to come upon this blog?
“And now you’re all upset because of one article that doesn’t praise everything Betty Ford did.”
I’m upset because this article is a gross display of disrespect and contempt for someone who hasn’t even been dead for a whole week yet. I wouldn’t expect an article praising Betty Ford on a site that is literally obsessed with abortion, for obvious reasons, but I would expect people who are supposedly so sensitive towards human death to not explicitly engage in this kind of sniping following the passing of a 93-year-old woman.
“Given the standard you put forward (criticism of Reagan shortly after his death), Jill’s way ahead of the game.”
First off, that’s not my standard. I didn’t bring up the death of Ronald Reagan once. Secondly, if the amount of disrespect shown towards Reagan immediately following his passing was as bad as you claim it is, then that’s a pretty low standard to meet, isn’t it? Hardly something to be proud of.
“Maybe there are people who have standing to criticize this article. You are not one of them.”
Oh, okay, only qualified people who have the “standing” can recognize and point out disreputable behavior when they see it, according to you. Nice to know.
Joan, I disagree w/ you on the standard of respect. I do not lament the passing of everyone who dies (though I certainly pray for all souls). Some people do horrible things during life. I see no reason that when a person dies, we have to say only glowing things about them. You need to be respectful in tone (and I think Jill was), but the whole, everyone gets to be a saint for a couple months until it’s proper to speak about the entirety of his/her legacy is nonsense.
la·ment
[luh-ment]
1. to feel or express sorrow or regret for: to lament his absence.
2. to mourn for or over.
I don’t lament the passing of millions of people, because I never knew them. However, I can empathize with the lamentations of those that did know them. Kind of like how Jill expresses it: “While I empathize with the loss Betty Ford’s family and friends must be feeling at her death”
And no, I wouldn’t find it “appalling” if someone I didn’t know and who didn’t know my dead loved one expressed that they didn’t lament the passing of my loved one. Even if my loved one was a public figure.
“gross display of disrespect and contempt”? Really? I think you need to re-read the post. You seem to be confusing disagreement with the actions of Betty Ford with contempt for the person. Your argument that this article shows contempt for Betty Ford is really unfounded. It seems based on your reading into what is written instead of just reading what was actually written. Jill has no respect for (and perhaps even contempt for) the pro-abortion legacy of Betty Ford. I don’t think any of Betty Ford’s family or friends would be surprised at that.
First off, that’s not my standard. I didn’t bring up the death of Ronald Reagan once.
Ah. So you didn’t. I’ll give you that point, but I am not sorry for calling you a hypocrite. If you’re going to proudly support something that unjustly kills over 3000 human beings a day, in the USA alone, then any comments about respect for the dead from you are always going to be ridiculous.
And yes, Kel, I believe that all you living breathing pro-lifers do horrible things that creates an anti-woman culture. What’s your point?
Do you mean prolife social workers like myself and Jacqueline who work with disadvantaged women every day? The people here, including myself, who have adopted children, both male and female, or taken in foster children? The prolifers who open their wallets, homes, and hearts to young women with unplanned pregnancies who CHOOSE to have their children? All this is anti-women?
Really?
Ah yes, phillymiss, and those of us who volunteer our time in CPCs helping women and children.
We’re HORRIBLE people…HORRIBLE I tell you! ;)
“The prolifers who open their wallets, homes, and hearts to young women with unplanned pregnancies who CHOOSE to have their children? All this is anti-women?”
As that demonstrates a concern for women, that’s a very laudable thing. What isn’t laudable is for you folks to try to bring us back to the days when women didn’t have a choice. Again, I applaud you for what you do to help. But when you try to restrict what I can do with my body, that’s where the line is drawn.
CC, that “my body” argument is tired, tired, tired. And lame. You choose to have sex with your body, knowing full well you may become pregnant with a new human being. The new human being has HER OWN BODY and that’s where you have no “right”. The body you kill and destroy is not your own!
Yes, a pregnant woman is obligated to carry and give life to the child. That’s the profound reality of being a woman. There is no such thing as a “right” to kill an unborn child. Period.
CC, your typical inflammatory, vomitous, anti-religious comment has been removed.
Yadda yadda blah blah blah and all that. We get it. How dare we be pro-life AND religious. If you don’t like reading it, you can stop coming here.
Ed, how dare you actually repeat the words of the Bible here or claim Jesus was who He said He was. And on a PRO-LIFE blog, no less! You should be sooooo ashaaaamed.
*eyeroll*
“The new human being has HER OWN BODY and that’s where you have no “right”. The body you kill and destroy is not your own!”
It’s inside my body and like anything else inside my body, it’s mine and you have no right to it.
“CC, your typical inflammatory, vomitous, anti-religious comment has been removed.”
So how his pointing out that Betty Ford’s Episcopal church doesn’t consider abortion a sin “vomitious?” How is pointing out that the constant Christian commentary from pro-lifers like Ed underscore the Christian nature of the pro-life movement - one that certainly doesn’t do much to attract Jews who are, for the most part, pro-choice?
“Yes, a pregnant woman is obligated to carry and give life to the child”
Mabye according to those who want to control women - but not according to the law of the USA. But I get it. That’s the same argument used by those who say that a woman who has sex should do so without contraception and is, therefore, obligated to get pregnant – and, as you say, bear a child. Talk about punishment. And that’s why my enligthened area of the country, as well as Canada and much of western Europe, is pro-choice. And while we remain pro-choice, those women whom you hold captive to breeding can travel here for reproductive freedom – or are you going to stop every woman at your state’s borders to ascertain if they are pregnant and if so, stop them from leaving the state?
But thanks, Jen, for the incisive comment about womens’ obligation to mandatorily produce a child. I screen printed it for use on pro-choice websites. Beyond being ludicrous, it’s funny.
Thank you, Jill, for posting this. I thought the same things when I heard the news.
Seriously, do you folks actually know anybody who is a member of a pro-choice religious group and if so, do you tell them that they are apostates?
CC, do you deliberately ignore those in the pro-life movement who are not religious? You don’t have to believe in God to believe that everyone has a right to life.
CC says:
But when you try to restrict what I can do with my body, that’s where the line is drawn.
You’re restricted by law from using your body in innumerable ways.
Those of us that are pro-life would like to see that those restrictions include intentionally killing your unborn child.
CC says:
It’s inside my body and like anything else inside my body, it’s mine and you have no right to it.
I’m not actually sure that’s true. If you swallow my wedding ring I still retain ownership of it. If you shove an illegal substance into a body cavity or ingest it the police can still confiscate it.
But we’re not fighting for the rights to something you have inside your body. We are fighting to prevent you from killing the life of another human, which happens to temporarily reside in your body.
How is pointing out that the constant Christian commentary from pro-lifers like Ed underscore the Christian nature of the pro-life movement – one that certainly doesn’t do much to attract Jews who are, for the most part, pro-choice?
Uh… if they’re pro-CHOICE, CC, they’re not going to be “attracted” in the first place, regardless of whatever other commentary is going on.
And interestingly, the pro-life atheists on this site don’t seem to be too turned off or threatened by Christian commentary. And you don’t see them vomiting hate all over the place when someone posts a religious comment, either. That’s just people like you who do that.
CC,
“womens’ obligation to mandatorily produce a child”
Pro-lifers usually believe that, as rational beings with free will, women who do not want the consequences of an act will not participate in that act. Women are so highly esteemed by us that we believe that they can exercise great self-control in abstaining from sex if they do not desire the consequences of sex. Furthermore, if a woman makes a foolish decision and becomes pregnant because of it, we believe that she can handle it with maturity and fortitude. Women ought to be in control of their bodies. They are not obliged to have sex. No one ought to control another’s body.
Exactly RCJC. The underpinnings of the pro-choice view treats women like nitwits who can’t be forced to accept the responsibility of their decisions in the same way men are forced to.
The documentary, Maafa 21, captures mainline Protestant Republicanism very well. I was so horrified to listen to Nixon’s audio tapes documenting the government’s strategy to attack black children (only he called them something less flattering). Then there was Nelson Rockefeller. Powerful people seeking to exterminate undesirable people through abortion. Betty Ford was in that group but may she rest in peace.
It is nice that, since the 1970’s, Republicans for the most part abandoned their war against the unborn. They have been pretty ineffective in protecting the unborn, but seem to be getting better. Now if we could only convince the Democrats to do likewise …
Betty Ford, rest in peace. I do not lament her any more than I lamented Osama bin Laden and if that strikes some people as insensitive, I blame my abortion experience for making me into a horrible person.
Kel- women NEED abortion to be safe and legal.
Jane on July 12, 2011 at 2:01 pm
Yeah right, Jane, like these, these, these, and these supposed “safe and legal” abortions.
CT,
And rcjc. Sex has a lot of outcomes pregnancy is merely one of them. You seem to be transfixed on consequences, as if you are glad they exist to catch people who have misbehaved….
Pro-lifers love consequences claiming that when people do things they compromise certain rights and claiming the responsible thing to do is accept the consequences of your action. I feverently disagree.
Let’s say you sleep with a married man and catch the clap. I don’t think it’s irresponsible to treat it and not live with the consequences do you? If a drunk driver wraps his car around a pole if ge demands medical attention should we deny him and tell him to live w the consequences?
Btw ct I am fine w you making women take responsibility just like men. At most men have to send checks once a month they never have to change a diaper if they don’t want. And those are only the men w whom the women have some sort of relationship. One night stands whom the women have no way of contacting get off Scott free , so I’m ok w holding women to those standards
“The new human being has HER OWN BODY and that’s where you have no “right”. The body you kill and destroy is not your own!”
It’s inside my body and like anything else inside my body, it’s mine and you have no right to it.”
“But thanks, Jen, for the incisive comment about womens’ obligation to mandatorily produce a child. I screen printed it for use on pro-choice websites. Beyond being ludicrous, it’s funny.”
CC, I never said women are mandated to “produce a child.” I said women have no “right” to kill an unborn child. I said women are obligated to allow the child in their womb to live and be born because that child is a separate human being, not an extension of mom’s body. The child doesn’t belong to mom’s body, and is not an invader of mom’s uterus. Baby didn’t crawl up there all by herself. Mom chose to have sex and nature did what nature is supposed to do.
I never said women are breeders. I simply acknowledge what you refuse to: that the baby is a person, separate from mom, with her own body and her own life. Again, it’s not YOUR body you’re killing. It’s sick and twisted that you find it funny.
Shannon,
You “feverently” disagree with accepting the consequences of your actions? Really? So your drunk driver shouldn’t have to go to jail? How do people grow up into mature adults in your world of no consequences?
Just sift through some of the pro death rhetoric in these comments and it becomes abundantly clear why they’re losing the battle, and will lose the war.
You can’t fool and confuse people of good will with smoke screens and euphemisms forever.
Thank you Jill Stanek for calling a spade a spade. Betty Ford has already been judged, though I am not privy to the state of her judgment, I could only be very uneasy how terrible it must have been, for the Judge’s only question woud be: “How faithful have you been to Me?”
I remember an article in “Good Housekeeping” from when Betty Ford was First Lady. It was called “Betty Ford Talks About Homemaking.” This was during a period in which “women’s libbers” tended to deride women who did not work at paid jobs outside the home. Betty Ford was a full-time homemaker and she said in the article that she believed homemaking could provide a good deal of fulfillment.
Jill Stanek, you should at least credit Betty Ford for her recognition that full-time homemaking is a legitimate calling.
Has Westboro Baptist Church now mainstreamed the idea that when a person dies the appropriate response is to publish all kinds of hateful stuff for their families to read? Betty Ford had four children, seven grandchildren, and a number of great-grandchildren. Bad enough they’re going to have the ‘God Hates America’ brigade at the funeral. I certainly hope none of them sees any of this.
Printing the truth is not hateful. Betty Ford chose to support abortion and I’m sure her family knows this. I’m also sure they realize many people oppose abortion.
Food for thought: What you stand for in life is often talked about at your death.
She was doing as most Episcopalians do and practicing one of the Episcopal sacraments of their faith, abortion. Because of abortion the Episcopalian have aborted themselves into a minority.
Joan and Jane don’t know it yet, but they will one day soon be pro life. They just haven’t had the dream yet when they see the faces and little feet of all they have aborted or have been ok with being aborted.
CC, no one is mandating that women produce a child because the child is already produced, don’t you get that? You already made the decision and suffered the consequences. The pregnant women who abort are doing the ‘forcing’ by forcing the child to be aborted.
To everyone here that talks about women’s rights, why should anyone have the right to killl their child. Theres no reason to punish an unborn child for your actions. Heres the question you have to ask, does a baby deserve to die for someone else’s mistake?
Shannon you said you disagree with accepting consequences, well if you dont accpet them someone else will suffer for it. So your belief is to let someone else suffer the consequences of your actions? As long as you pro-choice women are happy thats all that matters, am I wrong?
Shannon,
“Let’s say you sleep with a married man and catch the clap. I don’t think it’s irresponsible to treat it and not live with the consequences do you? If a drunk driver wraps his car around a pole if ge demands medical attention should we deny him and tell him to live w the consequences?”
Of course the drunk driver should get treatment! No one has to die so that some of the consequences of his action, his injuries, are treated. Again for the woman who slept with the married man. Another person does not have to die for her to get rid of the “clap.”
”At most men have to send checks once a month they never have to change a diaper if they don’t want. And those are only the men w whom the women have some sort of relationship. One night stands whom the women have no way of contacting get off Scott free , so I’m ok w holding women to those standards”
So it is ok if women have no standards? (I hope I am not misinterpereting that last statement) At MOST men have to send a check? And if a pregnant woman does not want to change a diaper she can leave her child in a safe haven in ANY emergency room, no questions asked. (In my state anyway.)Or, if she wants a relationship with her child, she can have an open adoption.
“Sex has a lot of outcomes pregnancy is merely one of them. You seem to be transfixed on consequences, as if you are glad they exist to catch people who have misbehaved….”
Thank you for not saying that I am “transfixed on consequences.” Why would anyone be happy that another person was punished for misbehaving? I don’t think that pregnancy is a negative consequence. I suppose you could say that I think it could be a good thing that people who misbehave can get a child to help them grow past their “misbehavior.” Yes, sex has a lot of outcomes. Many are good. For example, sex strengthens relationships that are already strong by causing certain bonding hormones to be released. (It is harder to bond with each successive partner.) Then again, there are STDs.
Denise Noe says:
Jill Stanek, you should at least credit Betty Ford for her recognition that full-time homemaking is a legitimate calling.
If Jill had been writing comprehensively about all facets of Betty Ford’s life, that would be true. Since the article was focused on abortion, not so much.
The Day of Judgment
“When the time comes as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I’ve often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God and a terror will rip through your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there will be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, ‘Spare him because he loved us,’ and God will look at you and say not, ‘Did you succeed?’ but ‘Did you try?’” – U.S. Congressman Henry Hyde (Jan. 23, 2010)
RCJC beat me to most of this (busy day yesterday). No idea if Shannon is still reading or if she will respond but….
Sex has a lot of outcomes pregnancy is merely one of them. You seem to be transfixed on consequences, as if you are glad they exist to catch people who have misbehaved….
Absolutely not glad, though some people certainly make good situations out of their poor decisions.
Let’s say you sleep with a married man and catch the clap. I don’t think it’s irresponsible to treat it and not live with the consequences do you? If a drunk driver wraps his car around a pole if ge demands medical attention should we deny him and tell him to live w the consequences?
As was stated – no one dies to cure the clap or treat injuries.
Btw ct I am fine w you making women take responsibility just like men. At most men have to send checks once a month they never have to change a diaper if they don’t want. And those are only the men w whom the women have some sort of relationship. One night stands whom the women have no way of contacting get off Scott free , so I’m ok w holding women to those standards
If she didn’t bother to find out his name then yes, he gets off “Scott free” in terms of support payments. There is no question that women bear a larger share of the consequences of sex in terms of pregnancy (and abortion and STDs) which is why it would behoove them to take the decision more seriously. But even if someone makes a foolish decision, pregnancy is temporary. Women never have to change a diaper or hold the baby or deal with sleepless nights either. You have adoption which can be arranged pre-birth with all attendant options or you can leave the baby at a hospital under safe haven laws. But right now, under our laws, if a man has sex, then, assuming he can be identified, is forced to take a DNA test and will be forced to take financial responsibility for that child forever. I think that’s appropriate. But women shouldn’t be the only ones who have the choice to escape all the responsibilities of parenthood while men are treated like they should have known better.