Buggy writer of abortion tale partially blames Jill Stanek for having to move
This apartment is making me crazy. My bug phobia… I thought I was managing okay… I’m not…. This place needs 15 exterminators, a fire, & a possibly to be nuked from orbit….
I am not sleeping much or well and I am afraid to go in my kitchen and I really really need everything to go right so I can get out of here before I have the breakdown that I feel clawing around in my head right now.
And because of the Stanek sh** I really can’t leave the apartment much or at least not as much as I would & I can’t go out with the boys because I don’t want them to get caught in any kind of crossfire or whatever. And I know that sounds hyperbolic, but I got all these threatening emails & comments for a while and even though I don’t think anyone knows exactly where we live she posted my pic and I don’t want to risk it. Aaagh, I just have to be hysterical for a little while I think & then I can put my mask back on and go back to pretending to be okay….
We are definitely headed out of Memphis post haste (courtesy of my aunt), but first we have to find someplace to stay. Funnily enough I probably would have liked Memphis more if I hadn’t had the Stanek s*** happen.
~ Blogger Mikki Kendall, July 5, writing about her need to exit not only her bug-infested apartment but the entire City of Memphis, partially due to the controversy surrounding her claim that abortion saved her life
[Illustration of Kendall above and Kendall photo posted on this blog came via a blog Kendall posts on and Kendall’s Facebook page]
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.
She wouldn’t have so much anxiety and guilt had she written a true article. She is so bogus it’s sad. She seems like she is trapt in her own head, trying to figure how to get out of the tangled web of lies she has spun.
First, she just sounds paranoid, I don’t think there’s a real threat, since she addmitted herself noone knows where she lives.
Second, she published a highly contraversial and biased article and by doing that she must have known she’ll get some attention (maybe the attention she expected is of a different kind though).
Thirdly, Jill didn’t hack her personal computer and stole a private photo! If she’s publishing her photo somewhere on internet, that simply becomes a common knowledge for everyone to access, so even if Jill didn’t use it, anyone interested could have just googled it.
And really, everyone forgot that story a while ago (like she admitted herself, she recieved the comments and emails “for a while” and not anymore I understand), and noone would bother trying to find her and talk to her now, looks like another attempt to get attention to me, that’s all.
And for the record, I’d love to meet the pro-lifers who are stupid and arrogant enough to send threatening emails to other people (even if those people are anti-life), and give them a “good hiding”. It doesn’t do any good ever and doesn’t achieve anything, only puts a bad name on the whole pro-life community.
“I really can’t leave the apartment much or at least not as much as I would & I can’t go out with the boys…”
Does she not have employment or education responsibilities as a reason to leave the apartment? Who pays for her apartment? Like many pro-choice people I’ve met, sounds as if she has enablers keeping her forever a child.
Do the theatrics with this woman ever end? Concerning her being recognized in Memphis, she is giving herself too much credit. As mush as I’ve seen her picture and read about her, I wouldn’t know the woman if I fell over her. Threatening e-mails and comments? Ask Jill about the proper authorities to report this to.
For future reference Mikki, if you don’t want the world to involve itself in your business, then don’t put it on the internet for millions to read.
Oh, and anytime you want to release the documentation of your “abortion” experience, and give the doctors and hospital staff permission to discuss your case, you will have a rapt audience here at Jill’s blog, especially those of us who work in the medical area.
This is very, very sad. This woman needs some genuine help and love and post-abortive counselling.
Somehow, I doubt that she received any actual “threats.” She probably got a number of sternly worded reprimands and scoldings — that’s the same thing as a threat in pro-abort world. They keep telling themselves that all pro-lifers are gun-wielding, bomb-throwing extremists, so they scare themselves if we look at them with a crossly.
But if anyone really did give a genuine threat to this emotionally challenged, post-abortive sufferer…. Don’t do that again. That’s not how we roll. The pro-life movement brings love and healing to post-abortive women — even if they don’t yet understand their own pain.
Sounds to me like this woman is trying to create a situation where none exists just to bring attention to herself. Maybe she thinks she’s more important than she really is.
Two words come to mind when I see this womans name mentioned: attention seeker. Im still confused by her article. So many unanswered questions that throw up red flags, but she doesn’t see it that way. She sees pro lifers ‘attacking’ her. We just want the truth about what really happened instead of words that feed into the pro ‘choice’ agenda and hype.
I agree with Mary. If you don’t want the world knocking on your private front door about such a private matter, don’t invite the world to your house. Writing about what she did was an open invite for opinions and she knew exactly what she was getting herself into. We all do when we write about anything that has to do with abortion.
When you put something up for all the world to see, the possibility that the world may decide to care enough to come see it an accepted potential outcome. If you don’t want people to know it, don’t write it down and post it in a public place (if you’re really serious about not letting people know it, don’t write it down at all, actually).
To be honest, I’m surprised she hasn’t just f-locked her LJ already.
Edit: Ohmigosh, I internet-know one of the commenters on her journal. That’s…kind of weird.
Did anybody stop to think that some deranged persons may have indeed threatened her? Some of the prolife reaction to her story reminds of proabortion zealots who ridicule, misrepresent, and dismiss women who have suffered from their abortions. Even if her story did have some holes in it, that’s no excuse to try to harass or intimidate her. Honestly, some of the posts here are rather mean-spirited.
Hi phillymiss,
Perhaps she has been harassed and threatened. If that’s the case, report it. The same happened to Jill so maybe she could advise Mikki on how to do so. No one here has excused harassment and threats. When you put info on the internet for people to see and read, you have to know that deranged and mentally unstable people can also see and read it. Something we should all remember.
Basic common sense says if you don’t want people commenting on your business, then don’t put your business out there for millions to read.
Sorry, but I see nothing mean spirited in any of these posts.
…and she just receive more attention by being ‘quote of the day’ again. Just sayin’………..
If there have been any threats against her, I condemn them. They would certainly not be an expression of Christian love. I’m skeptical she has received any threats, though. Narcissists are notorious for thinking any disagreement or criticism is a threat.
I hope that Mikki has reported any and all threats she has received to the local authorities so that they can be investigated.
I think she gives way too much credit to most people’s memories, though. I saw her picture on Jill’s post but there’s no way I would recognize her on the street unless I sat and studied her picture for hours on end.
All she did was write an article using questionable facts to support a highly controversial topic. Who could have expected that all the feedback wouldn’t be praise an adulation?
This woman needs help badly. She has insulated herself with the very people who will prevent her from ever getting the help she needs. Pray for her.
Any chance we can let this one go, guys? I mean, there have been two blog posts about her, countless comments, and it’s been beaten and argued to death. I think it’s cruel to keep going on about it. And who knows, she might have gotten threats, it wouldn’t be the first time that has happened. I say, leave it be.
I’m sure she didn’t get any threats. This is the Pro-Life movement. It would never harm anyone.
Also, I think she waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay overestimates the amount of people who read Jill’s blog. I mean, no offense, Jill, but I can’t imagine that 95% of Memphis reads Jill’s blog with such zeal that they memorize all the pictures of the people who appear in order to hunt them down and lynch them in the streets. Methinks she’s a tad paranoid.
I think a better quote of the day is the one about pro-choicers who can’t argue against sex-selective abortion because they are “strangled by the word ‘choice.'” That’s in the blog entry just posted on “Jivin J’s life links” here. It’s a much better subject for a quote.
That being said, I agree with the others: don’t send unpleasant emails to abortion advocates. We have plenty of forums to comment on.
Yeah, totally, volunteer, the pro-life movement has a lonnnng history of non-violence. Just ask Dr David Gunn, Dr John Britton, James Barrett, Shannon Lowney, Lee Ann Nichols, Robert Sanderson, Dr Barnett Slepian, and Dr George Tiller- all killed by “pro-lifers.”
Or, because the examples I gave are actually now dead, you could ask any of the hundreds of people that survived clinic bombings, stalking, threats, attempted murder, and various assaults.
You think you are part of a peaceful movement? Your movement threatens people, scares families at home, and intrudes people’s sense of safety. Call a spade a spade- the prolife movement is violent and hateful, and you’re ignorant if you think otherwise.
Jane,
Please directly quote a legitimate PL leader who has advocated violence or applauded any of these deaths.
The world is full of deranged people ready to strike for reasons only they know or understand.
The extremists of a movement don’t define it, Jane. An educated woman such as yourself knows that, I’m sure. True pro-lifers don’t agree with or participate in violence, and condemn acts of violence toward pro-choicers.
Would you blame moderate Muslims for the violence caused by extremist Muslims? Would you blame MLK Jr for violent acts committed by extremists of the civil rights movements? There are crazies and kooks belonging to every group, and the reasonable members condemn it.
ninek, I like that quote, too! I think I’ll use that when it’s my turn for QOD tomorrow. :D
You might say you condemn it, but you use propaganda language such as “pro-aborts” and “baby killers” and “murder” and people like Jill stanek advocate for posting abortion providers addresses, and says that she doesn’t see anything wrong with protesting the homes of people involved in abortion. Do you not see the direct connection between that kind of language and that encouragement of harassment, and the violence perpetuated by the pro-life movement?
Operation Rescue all but encourages violence, and people who are riled up and scared by their inflammatory rhetoric go out and harm people. It’s a movement of violence and threat.
If you felt like searching other threads for my comments, you would see that I dislike that kind of language, and have stated so. I don’t think that the link to violence is so strong as you suggest, but I think it is harmful and counterproductive. Some pro-lifers agree with me, some don’t.
You realize that millions of Americans are involved in the movement, and the amount of violence committed in anti-abortion activities is a tiny percentage of pro-life activities. Extremist activity Jane, pretty much by definition.
For the record, I really don’t like Operation Rescue, Randall Terry, and people of that ilk.
Any chance we can let this one go, guys?
For the record, I really don’t like Operation Rescue, Randall Terry, and people of that ilk.
WORD!!!
@Jane – It’s a movement of violence and threat.
Jane, if we’re so violent, I wonder why you’re here. Its relatively easy to find someone on the internet, if you know what you’re doing. Aren’t you afraid for your safety?
Jane must be quite brave.
To risk her own safety just to keep commenting among those she considers violent and threatening.
I used to call abortion advocates, extremists. Now I pray on the public sidewalk in front of abortion centers. Yet today, two members of Northland Family Planning (the “good women get abortions” people) came outside to tell me that they knew my name, had my license plate number and knew where I live. I asked if they were planning to send me a Christmas card. A lady stopped by to talk to me and they took pictures of her license plate, too. I yelled at them to leave this lady alone at which point the lady realized what was going on and got very irate with the picture taker. Honestly, the gamesmanship that goes on. Abortion advocates, don’t lecture me about pro-life threats. Your side is very sophisticated with bullying tactics.
Jane, the only reason you feel free at this pro-life site to accuse pro-lifers of being violent is because you know in actuality we’re exactly the opposite – peace-loving – and won’t come after you. Have you considered taking your claims of violence to Islamic extremist sites?
Wow, what a great argument there, Jill. You just had to throw islamic extremists into an argument that had….literally nothing to do with Islam in the slightest.
I do not fear you people because I am not involved in abortion providing. I fear for the people you deem unworthy of personal safety, space, or privacy. They’re the ones you target.
Jane, I was making a correlative point, which I’m sorry you did not understand.
It’s not “correlative,” it’s a “straw man.”
A quick search of the term “‘operation rescue’ site:www.Jillstanek.com” brought up 2,610 mentions of operation rescue on your site alone. If your movement really condemned the violent extremist rhetoric of randal terry and operation rescue, you would stop using their propaganda as a source.
I fear for the people you deem unworthy of personal safety, space, or privacy. They’re the ones you target.
Okay Jane, you win. Not are all prolifers are violent, all Italians are in the mafia, all blacks are criminals, all Mexicans are lazy, all Asians are lousy drivers, all white people are racist, and so on . . .
I fear for the people you deem unworthy of personal safety, space, or privacy. They’re the ones you target.
A prolifer could have written that to you, Jane.
Jane, how can you accuse Jill of making a strawman argument when that’s all you have done on this thread. It’s a rare pro-lifer who is a terrorist, but you continually lump us all together into some single-minded monolithic group of hate. Can you actually have a conversation about this, or will you continue to mischaracterize the movement?
Those that use violent rhetoric encourage violence, pure and simple.
And it’s not a strawman argument for me to respond with accounts of violence when someone says the pro-life movement is peaceful
Jane,
Sometimes I wonder how some people on the pro-abortion-as-a-choice side define violence. I have had my picture taken by escorts at an abortion clinic who believe that I am a terrorist. I pray quietly with a group of other people. That is all we have ever done. We have been accused of wanting to kill the abortionist. (Partly because one of the men in our group (as a male, part of a minority in our group) had a beard and looked like a Muslim, which he was not.)
violent extremist rhetoric
Can you provide an example and explain, carefully, how it meets the criteria?
Please study this like and provide a critique.
http://tree-in-the-sea.blogspot.com/2008/05/pro-abortion-violence.html
Thank you.
Anyone can throw the “violent” claim around. It proves nothing to claim something.
http://tree-in-the-sea.blogspot.com/2008/05/pro-abortion-violence.html
“The numbers below are a comparison of the list of documented pro-abortion violence and a comparison to alleged “pro-life” violence.
Deadly and extreme crimes against persons (murder,
manslaughter, infanticide, attempted murder,
kidnapping, torture and rape):
VERIFIABLE CRIMES BY PRO- ABORTION ADVOCATES: 121
ALLEGED CRIMES BY “PRO- LIFE” ADVOCATES: 26″
Do you think you are facilitating a good conversation with your lumping together of all pro lifers into a violent group?
Human behavior within any movement exists on a spectrum, Jane. I suppose I would exist on one extreme end of the movement, because I decry all forms of killing and violence. Heck, I’m even a vegetarian and anti death penalty. On the other end of the spectrum from me are those rare people who approve of violence to further anti-abortion ends. The vast, vast majority of pro lifers lie somewhere in the middle. I would wager that most of them lie closer to my end than the other. If you can’t understand that, I simply don’t know what else to say to you.
Believe what you will, but you aren’t furthering your understanding or doing yourself any favors by thinking that pro life= murders and violence.
What’s “propaganda” about the term “pro-abort”? Pro means “for” and abort is short for abortion, therefore FOR ABORTION, which you ARE,Jane. If you’re not AGAINST something, you’re FOR it.
I am praying for your (obvious) mental “confusion”.
Pamela, they dislike being referred to that way. I prefer to call people by the names they gives themselves, otherwise it just devolves into this huge argument over names. Not very productive.
Pamela, stop telling people you’re praying for them… it’s condescending. It’s ESPECIALLY rude when you’re not praying for the obvious well-being of someone, but instead using prayer as a way to insult someone by implying “mental confusion”. Jane seems pretty mentally sound to me. Just because you disagree with her doesn’t make her “mentally confused”.
All I’ve seen out of many commenters (but Pamela specifically) on this site is a lot of name-calling and rudeness when someone disagrees. JackBorsch and a few others seem capable of keeping the arguments to facts and beliefs instead of inflammatory statements. Do you guys really want to “convert” people to your side? Because you’re not doing a good job of it. I’d be much more willing to see the pro-life side if you didn’t always stoop so low when someone presented a differing opinion.
Oh, look. Someone’s taking a leaf out of antitheistangie’s playbook and is about to use the (albeit rather mild) publicity to start begging for change-I mean, “accepting donations to my blog”. I’d really appreciate it if Jill didn’t feed this kind of thing.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m the kind of chick who can definitely appreciate a good vendetta, but you’re only hurting yourself if you’re helping her. Which you are.
And, for the record, I believe in God and I consider myself Christian but that is about the 10th time someone on this site has said they are praying for me and other pro-choice commenters AS AN INSULT. Since when do good Christians use prayer to bully and insult?
I know you’re all going to tell me that she didn’t actually MEAN it is an insult and if I’m seeing it that way then something must be wrong with me or blah blah blah but let’s face facts… it’s rude and disrespectful to the idea of prayer to say you’re praying for someone when you really mean it as a veiled attack.
“All I’ve seen out of many commenters (but Pamela specifically) on this site is a lot of name-calling and rudeness when someone disagrees”
Welcome to The Internets. You must be new here. If so, though, how’d you figure out what trolling is? Or, “How does a polar bear know what apples is?”, if you will.
“I believe in God and I consider myself Christian but that is about the 10th time someone on this site has said they are praying for me and other pro-choice commenters AS AN INSULT.”
I know I’ve been gone from this whole “Christianity” thing for awhile now, so the rules might’ve changed since last I was here….but….How exactly does one square “Thou shalt not kill.” with abortion, which is the very act of killing another living human being? (and that’s just for starters. I can think of a few other instances which list all kinds of horrible things that will happen to people who do bad things to children.)
xalisae, I’m not trolling. I don’t know why you automatically think that when people disagree with you it’s trolling AND I don’t know why you think it’s such an insult. Really it’s kind of a laugh that you can’t ACTUALLY respond to either of my comments and instead you just stoop to calling me a troll.
We have different ideas about God, clearly, but I know plenty of Christians that are pro-choice, as well. Are you ready to write all of us off as non-believers and heathens? Again, you’re not doing a very good job of bringing people over to your side with that attitude.
Good points, X!
For myself, I will say this to abortion advocates: I do not wish to convert you to the pro-life movement. I do wish to see abortion end, worldwide.
Abortion advocates do not wish to convert us to being pro-abortion. They want to have their way whether we like it or not.
You can call us haters, but it doesn’t make it true. It only makes true the fact that you call us haters.
And I ask the same thing of so-called Christians: We are charged with growing the body of Christ, not destroying the innocent because ‘it’s just not the right time for them.’ There is no Biblical or Traditional basis for concluding that Jesus, Mary, and all the Apostles were pro-abortion. Any Christian who is pro-abortion is extremely hard of heart. The flame of life burns within the developing child, and you would snuff it out.
Perhaps you’d like to look Jesus in the eye and tell him how naughty he was for overturning the tables of the moneychangers outside the temple. Perhaps you’d like to tell him that he wasn’t ‘winning any converts’ at that moment. The Jesus-as-wimp is just a modern straw man, which reflects not the real Jesus, but the non-judgemental Jesus that abortion advocates merely wish could exist.
Hey derrr,
If you come on here with a fighting attitude and a dissenting opinion, you aren’t going to get too far. If you said something like “pamela, I disagree with your attitude because of a, b, and c”, you are probably going to have a better discussion than the way you are coming across now. I disagree with people all the time on here, and generally people keep it fairly polite if I am. You are coming across pretty aggressively.
“I don’t know why you automatically think that when people disagree with you it’s trolling”
“Again, you’re not doing a very good job of bringing people over to your side with that attitude.”
By definition: “A concern troll visits sites of an opposing ideology and offers advice on how they could “improve” things.”
You are a troll. Live it. Love it.
And frankly, yes, I am ready to write all of you off as non-believers and heathens. When you read a book, and it says, “In order to be a member of _blank_, you have to _blank_.”, and you say “I want to be a member of _blank_, but I can’t _blank_.” no matter how hard you SAY you are a member, you’re not a member. You’re just not.
And once again, quite frankly, I don’t want someone who thinks it’s ok to pay to have their child killed at a certain stage of life on my side. This is not a popularity contest, and I’m fine by myself. I’ll tell you why I object to your philosophy, I’ll fight tooth and nail to get laws changed, but if you want to ignore me and are dead-set (no pun intended) on disagreeing, I know you are going to disagree and disregard everything I say, no matter what that is.
Xalisae, really?
How do you expect to change laws if you don’t change minds and hearts? With the country so divided, and so many abortions being performed, don’t you think that kinder and calmer words are going to convince people to vote or choose better? I usually don’t mention it because I realize people are entitled to their opinions, but I think sometimes that people do more harm than good.
I’ve talked to enough of these people to know that nothing I say is going to change them.
I firmly believe that if enough scientific evidence is allowed to be heard that the humanity of the pre-born is indisputable, normal people will have no recourse but to do their part to outlaw the practice of abortion. Hardliners that support abortion even though they know the gestating human beings are in fact human beings (which actually makes up most of the pro-abortion voices) don’t care, nor will they through the efforts of myself or anyone like me. The only thing they care about is #1, and no baby, not even their own, will get in their way. They have to have a personal wake-up call before those attitudes change, and no one can make that change for them externally.
Jane’s accusation about violent language by pro-lifers is one we need to keep exposing for what it really is: pro-aborts (those who favor abortion) depend on euphemisms like “choice”, “family planning”, “reproductive rights”, etc, because they’d prefer to use the word abortion as little as possible.
Pro-lifers who call abortion baby killing are merely stating truthfully what abortion really is and what it really does. It’s not violent rhetoric — it’s merely telling the truth. Those who profit from baby-killing are, in fact, murderers. Again, not violent rhetoric, just calling a spade a spade.
Those who genuinely believe in the sanctity of LIFE, however, will never use violence to accomplish their goal of ending abortion because it contradicts the LIFE principle. Violence will never end violence. Hatred will never defeat hatred. It may be tempting to hate those who hate the child in the womb, but it will never end the scourge of abortion. We have to keep telling the truth, AND we have to insist that violence is not the answer.
Amen, Jen!!
Xalisae,
I do realize that nothing short of… I don’t even know what could change hard-core pro-choice minds. I am more thinking of those more casual people who are pro-choice surfing around who come across things like:
“And frankly, yes, I am ready to write all of you off as non-believers and heathens.”
I’m pretty sure that would turn a lot of people off. A lot of the “pro-choice” people I know in real life are of the “I don’t like abortion, but it’s not my body” persuasion, and rational arguments and kindness have won a few over. I’m still working on the rest. When they see and hear stuff like that, it makes it that much harder to talk to them about it.
It’s the same thing when people talk to me about Christianity. If someone starts a conversation by telling me I am going to hell or that I am a heathen that’s usually the end of the conversation. The people I will actually discuss stuff with don’t treat me like that, or I them. And they actually get me thinking that Christianity has some validity. The others just tick me off, frankly. I think it would be the same principle for the more “on-the-fence” pro-choicers. Name calling will harden them further, kinder words and arguments might change some minds.
Sorry for the long post, and I do get your point. I just think a different approach would be better sometimes.
X you said this
And frankly, yes, I am ready to write all of you off as non-believers and heathens. When you read a book, and it says, “In order to be a member of _blank_, you have to _blank_.”, and you say “I want to be a member of _blank_, but I can’t _blank_.” no matter how hard you SAY you are a member, you’re not a member.
You really don’t get to do this, sorry. I too am a pro-choice Christian, i believe in God, you don’t get to monopolize god, you don’t get to say other people don’t please in God, you don’t get to tell people they aren’t Christians, its redic that you would even try. People have their own relationships with God which is frankly none of your business
Shannon, there simply cannot be any such thing as a follower of Christ who believes it is morally permissible to kill the child in the womb. There is no such creature as a Christian who supports abortion. No one can say he loves Christ and also believe it is right to kill an innocent child. Christ Himself began His humanity as a child in the womb.
To be “Christian and Pro-Choice” is the worst kind of dissonance and lie. The kind that only Satan can mastermind.
Why do folks who are not minding their own business keep coming here to tell us to mind ours?
Show me where, in the bible, it says that abortion is wrong.
“Love thy neighbor” and all that apparently doesn’t apply to pro-choice neighbors. Shall we all bust out our bibles and point out where YOU fall short?
Here, I’ll help:
The Bible never specifically mentions abortion. This is significant, because herbal abortifacients–most notably pennyroyal and silphium–were in common use at the time that the New Testament was written. Jesus, Paul, and the other major figures of the New Testament were surrounded by cultures that practiced abortion, but no specific condemnation of the practice can be found in the Bible.
Likewise, Exodus 21 draws a clear demarcation between the killing of a person and the killing of a fetus. Exodus 21:12, for example, reads:
But Exodus 21:22 reads:
In other words: Killing a person outside of the womb warrants the death penalty or exile, but killing a fetus is punishable only by a fine–and that’s in a circumstance where the killing of a fetus takes place against the woman’s will. Exodus describes no penalty of any kind for women who choose to terminate their own pregnancies, nor does any other passage in the Bible.
But the Bible certainly suggests that human life begins prior to birth. While Rebekah is pregnant with the twins Esau and Jacob, for example, Genesis 25:22 states that “the children struggled together within her.” Likewise, when Elizabeth (pregnant with John the Baptist) meets the Virgin Mary, “the child leaped in her womb” (Luke 1:41). One of the most frequently cited passages in the abortion debate is Psalm 139:13, which addresses God with the statement that “you knit me together in my mother’s womb.”
So the Bible’s position on abortion, like its position on so many other issues, can be described as extremely ambiguous. It treats the death of a fetus as a non-homicide and makes no attempt to punish women who have abortions, nor does it mention the widely-practiced abortion that was contemporaneous to the period during which the relevant texts were written. On the other hand, it does not suggest or imply that personhood begins at the moment of birth. This is why the Judeo-Christian tradition has long struggled with the question of abortion. A theological approach to abortion, if it is to be found at all, cannot explicitly be found in the text of the Bible.
This leads me to believe that being pro-choice or anti-choice is a personal issue, not a Bible issue. You can still be a good Christian and be pro-choice, folks. The Bible tells me so.
Once again, “Thou shalt not kill.” That says abortion is wrong. That does. Abortion is killing another living human being in utero, and the Bible specifically states you won’t kill others. That’s pretty freaking obvious.
“Killing a person outside of the womb warrants the death penalty or exile, but killing a fetus is punishable only by a fine–and that’s in a circumstance where the killing of a fetus takes place against the woman’s will. Exodus describes no penalty of any kind for women who choose to terminate their own pregnancies, nor does any other passage in the Bible”
It’s not Old Testament times anymore. There’s a lot of things that were acceptable or unacceptable (eating Kosher comes to mind) that just aren’t so anymore, and now that we know a lot more about the nature of gestating human beings and what/who exactly they are. At a certain point, one must use the evidence given to them OUTSIDE of biblical reference and apply that information within biblical context.
And I’m sorry, Jack, but most of my experience talking to pro-abortionists is with people whose mothers had abortions and have been told that it was ok to kill their sibling from a very young age, or actually had abortions themselves and are happy about how “liberated” and “free” they are and how they know they killed a living human being that was their biological child, but that their child should never have had any rights. They admit these things. I just don’t give a flip about these guys anymore.
You know, it’s kinda funny. The only reason Mikki keeps “getting attention”, as it were, is because you keep giving it to her. You are the one stalking her personal livejournals, just waiting for your labors to bear fruit. You are the one combing through past entries looking for good “dirt” that suits your purpose.
She’s not crowing about her “victory”, nor is she encouraging others to stalk her. Yes, there are crazies, but to shake your head and cluck because someone unbalanced is causing her problems, regardless of whether or not it’s a “legitimate” prolifer, this website is encouraging them. Feeding that imbalance with a rather creepy level of stalking.
Did you already give her that 15 minutes of fame? Why are you still pushing this? Do you enjoy reveling in the misery of others? In the situation that you most assuredly helped to cause? I doubt we can blame it all on the regulars of this website, but Jill Stanek, you should be ashamed. You’ve declared yourself the victor of this “battle”, and yet you are the one pouring salt into the wounds of a woman being driven from her home. Which, of course, if you had any real care to present the real situation, you would know that she was already miserable, and looking for a good reason to leave… a few death threats just gave her the impetus she needed to go.
Seriously, I ask you, and all of those here, what exactly what the purpose of this post? What about the greater good of the pro-life movement would this serve? And to be trite, Would Jesus condone this behavior? Would He really advocate you publicly continuing to flog someone who isn’t even talking about your issue anymore?
You keep hanging the bullseye over her head. You need to ask yourself why. Why would you bother, if not to gloat?
I think you’ve lost sight of the very things you claim to be concerned about. I just want to know that one thing. How, exactly, does this do anything but make you and your acolytes look like anything other than crowing, gloating fools, proud of your own involvement in the attempted destruction of another human being?
I don’t think she’s being paranoid. She doesn’t post details of where she lives, but at least one of her friends used to tweet the name of the apartment complex they both live in. I don’t know her specific apartment number, but there are only two places with anything like that name in town & it would be really easy for me to drive over and hang around the complex long enough to find out if I had the right one. If I were her I’d move and get new friends.
Hillary,
When one keeps one’s personal info off the internet, when one does not give one’s personal information to millions of strangers, then one does not have comments and opinions made by strangers about one’s personal life and circumstances.
Strangers make personal comments about someone’s life with or without the internet. I don’t agree with Mikki’s politics, but I also don’t agree with blaming her for being harassed. Like it or not she’s not a criminal, but the people harassing her are & we should not condone their actions.
The bible is very clear on life: Choose life that you may have in abundance. It is only abortion advocates who believe that abortion is some kind of popular norm. It’s merely a lie, but they lean on it like a crutch.
All other world religions have a creed. But only pro-choice so-called Christians believe in a religion they think is rubber and can bend to their own will. In fact there is a religion who’s core dogma is ‘do what you will that is the whole of the law’ and it is satanic. Anyone who calls themselves a Christian but supports abortion is like a person slapping a name tag on at a conference. You can write any name you like on your label, but its just a lie on your label. You are not a Christian and you know it. Christianity is not some religion you can make up as you go along. Citing a few phrases here and there does not make it so. Anyone who has read the whole Bible knows how valuable is lineage, family, love, and life.
Mary,
When one keeps one’s personal info off the internet, when one does not give one’s personal information to millions of strangers, then one does not have comments and opinions made by strangers about one’s personal life and circumstances.
This isn’t about what personal information she has shared (or not.) She knew what she was getting into when she posted that article in the first place. To the point she’d even vowed not to read comments. This isn’t unusual behavior for this discussion. This isn’t even something new. Comments about her personal life don’t bother her. Threats to her well being (and that of her family) do.
I’ll ask again. What exactly was this whole thing supposed to accomplish? To further harass someone? To gloat? To point and laugh?
I guess I’m missing the one that’s supposed to be the most Christian response.
Hillary,
I have already pointed out that no one here advocates threats and if she and her family are threatened, she can contact the authorities.
Would you invite total strangers into your home? You have to accept you are taking some serious risks when you inform millions of total strangers, not all of them mentally stable, about your life.
Let’s say your next door neighbor leaves on vacation and assumes its safe to leave her home unlocked. Big surprise, someone robs her of everything. While you would be sympathetic wouldn’t you also ask why she was foolish enough to leave her home open while she was gone, in other words setting herself up?
Speak On, Ninek! Speak On!!!
Thank you Mama3!
Back in the first century, people got rid of their children by “exposure” that is waiting until they were born and leaving them outside in the cold. Abortion advocates think they can re-write history to ‘normalize’ abortion, but it’s not true. Taking toxic herbal concoctions was too risky for the mother, too often fatal. Abortion is a 20th century phenomenon. Before that it actually WAS rare.
The Bible is full of condemnation of infaticide: Pharoah’s widwives disobeyed his order to kill hebrew children, Pharoah’s daughter was moved by mercy to save and raise Moses, Herod’s slaughter of the innocents is firmly condemned, and Jesus believed so fervently in the value of life that not only did he heal but he raised from the dead more than one person (the most famous of which was Lazarus). The wise men wisely sidestepped Herod and returned home by another route rather than endanger the life of Christ.
If you say you are a Buddhist, but don’t believe in the 4 Noble truths and don’t believe in the 8-Fold Path, and don’t believe in reincarnation…guess what? You’re not a Buddhist.
Exodus 21:22
Ohhh… let’s quote the verse immediately after for context, shall we?
“If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.”
Read here for a fuller explanation of why you are wrong. http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5700
“Yasa [to go or come out, as in birthing a living thing] is used 1,061 times in the Hebrew Bible. It is never translated ‘miscarriage’ in any other case….. Yasa doesn’t mean miscarriage in the sense we think of that word. Instead, the combination of yeled with yasa suggests a living child coming forth from the womb. Nowhere else is this word ever translated ‘miscarriage.'”
Shannon: “People have their own relationships with God which is frankly none of your business”
Akin to the rhetorical question of old, “Am I my brothers’ keeper?”
Everyone a Cain! That’s the ticket. ;-)
Needless to say, advocating for a right to kill the unborn goes outside the confines of one’s relation to deity, and enters a messy world where the unborn die and their killers profit.
Ninek et al.: Whether pro-choice folk can be Christians seems to me of a kind with wondering whether slave owners in the South could have been. To me, it seems that yes, they can be authentic Christians — albeit gravely morally confused ones who come frighteningly within range of the “better a millstone around the neck in the sea than to cause someone else to sin” thing.
Pro-choice folk recognizing a right to life for folks they deem expendable would be as dramatic a change as slaveholders recognizing a right to freedom for those they deemed property.
I wouldn’t trust either, in a recalcitrant state of moral confusion, with any moral leadership whatsoever.
I was fascinated with the whole Civil War era so I have read many of the arguments for and against slavery that quote the Bible. In Biblical times, slavery was accepted and its existence taken for granted, but the abuse of slaves was not acceptable. It is difficult to translate the experience of those people into 18th and 19th century society. Early Christians were taught to treat their slaves as brothers, since we are all brothers in Christ, but socially there wasn’t a condemnation of slavery itself.
Pro-choice folk recognizing a right to life for folks they deem expendable would be as dramatic a change as slaveholders recognizing a right to freedom for those they deemed property.
I agree. It is a challenge to turn this society we live in back to a pro-life model, but it can be done. It will be done.
Oh, and since the abortion advocates can freely admit that abortion isn’t mentioned in the Bible, perhaps they can freely admit that their attempts at re-writing history are a lie. If women were having abortions left and right from 5k BC through the first century AD, I guarantee you that the Bible would certainly contain mutliple references to it.
To whomever commented that someone praying for you is insulting and condescending: I’m praying for you, too. ;)
To be honest, I didn’t even remember the article until I clicked on the link and read back over the post. Also, I remember I was a little confused about that post and going through the comments it doesn’t even look like I commented on it.
For the record, I don’t agree with threatening someone’s life.
Mary, you’re STILL missing the point of my questions. Not that she is dealing with consequences of her own actions, but the fact that posting here is just continuing to ADD to those consequences, and for what purpose? To use your example:
Let’s say your next door neighbor leaves on vacation and assumes its safe to leave her home unlocked. Big surprise, someone robs her of everything. While you would be sympathetic wouldn’t you also ask why she was foolish enough to leave her home open while she was gone, in other words setting herself up?
What responsibility to you have, as the neighbor, if you stand outside of her door with a sign? One that reads “My neighbor left her door unlocked! Look at how foolish she is!”
And after it’s burgled, you continue to make new signs, each saying “Look, my neighbor was burgled for her foolishness, and look, her door is still open!”
This isn’t a good thing. You’re deflecting, saying “this is all your fault.” I suppose you figure women who are raped “deserve it” because they were wearing short skirts, eh?
I’m done arguing with the wall. I don’t expect a real answer. I don’t expect anyone to admit that there is absolutely no positive benefit to this post for the pro-life movement whatsoever. It is nothing but gloating, and it reflects poorly on every one of you.
“I’m done arguing with the wall. I don’t expect a real answer. I don’t expect anyone to admit that there is absolutely no positive benefit to this post for the pro-life movement whatsoever. It is nothing but gloating, and it reflects poorly on every one of you.”
I agree that this post is mean spirited and basically useless. I don’t think that many will agree with me, but there ya go.