Lila Rose mystifies Jezebel
But the most controversial information I’ve gotten out of Rose so far is that she’s a “one glass of wine” kind of girl who loves yoga and U2 and does her rosary on the elliptical every morning.
She’s also the type of girl whose idols are martyrs: Jesus Christ (“It’s hard to beat him. You can’t.”), his mother (“The most amazing woman of all time!”) and Joan of Arc come up repeatedly during our conversation, which is the first in-person interview she’s granted to a non-televised, left-leaning outlet.
~ Katie J.M. Baker, mystified during her interview with pro-life activist Lila Rose (pictured above right), via Jezebel, August 8
[Photo via UK Telegraph]
Aug.15, 2012 6:00 am |
MSM anti-life bias |
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.
Ugh. Hated the article They made her out to be some giggly silly girl and an extreme freak. I don’t blame her if she doesn’t do another interview like this again. Of course, the comments at the bottom of the article are hateful. It seems like it’s not an interview, but a hit piece with a few quotes from her thrown in. If she does a print article again, she should require it to be in a strict Q and A format.
“And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.”
I thought it a fair article, though it tells me a lot more about the interviewer than about Lila. The “backpedal” remark, among others, suggests a bad thinker though. Based on words alone, Lila was just moving from a special case (dying) to a generalization (anything). I think the writer’s obvious incapacity to comprehend a lack of fear (of death or anything else) led her to project a wee bit there.
Lack of fear. Right? A LOT of people don’t understand that.
Lila Rose is a nice person who actually cares about others?!? The SHOCK!!! The HORROR AND CATASTROPHE!!!!!1!11!eleventy-one! That can’t possibly be true! It must be that she’s just too bubble-headed to know what she’s talking about! Because if it were true, it might mean the pro-life movement wasn’t going to go away! That they really care about unborn lives! AND THAT IS INCONCEIVABLE!
…Honestly, this is the feeling I see lurking between the lines of that article. As if the Jezebel reporter didn’t expect to find actual human beings who are strongly committed to their cause. Apparently, from her point-of-view, that’s weird. Which is actually kind of sad, when you think about it.
That article was infuriating! The way they speak about her trying “to reel in large audiences” and how she “struck gold” in New Jersey–you know, PP doesn’t usually do this stuff, she just stumbled on the needle in the haystack, right? And her “sticky-sweet” voice? OK, Lila dear, please don’t give any more of your precious time to these people. Our Lord gave the apostles instructions to “shake the dust off their feet”, and he frequently refrained from doing miracles “because of their lack of faith”. Leave them behind. The article didn’t hurt you in the eyes of your supporters, but it didn’t win any new supporters from the Jezebel crowd. So it was basically a waste of valuable breathes.
I defy anyone to produce a quote, a sound bite, or a video clip where Lila Rose ever claimed that she was/is an objective, non-biased journalist.
[See definiton of ‘activist’.]
Hidden cameras and deception used to draw out murderers, thieves and liars. I am shocked…. shocked! [See ‘Casablanca’ for context.]
Professional journalists and law enforcement personel do it all the time.
This was not ‘entrapment’ in any sense of the word.
Tho it is illegal in California to record someone without their knowledge/consent, I doubt too many people get exercised about it unless they are recorded doing something they believe is wrong.
[The best example I have seen is Bill Clinton walking away from Ron Brown’s memorial service laughing and smiling…until he spots the camera. In one pace, Bill goes from frivolity to biting his quivering lower lip and a long sad face because BILL felt he had been caught doing something HE believed was wrong.]
These employees and representatives of pp that Lila Rose captured on camera were at work in a pp facility marketing pp’s goods and services, which include ‘safe and legal’ taxpayer funded elective abortions on demand for any and all reasons.
Finally, I doubt there is single person who has ever lived that has faced his/her death absent fear. [I include Jesus. ‘Fear was present in the garden of Gethsemane.]
Courage is not absence of fear. It is selfless action in spite of it.
While she definitely comes across as a bumbling teenager, and Jez accents her weaknesses (lying?), Jez also plays into her strengths: courageous, convicted, and carrying weight among youth. If anything, Jez shows her own irrelevance by admitting she’s focused on how pretty she is before trying to get into the substance, but never really getting there.
There’s a difference between “accentuating weaknesses” and casting unsubstantiated aspersions.
What? A sane pro-life activist? A sweet person who cares about babies and women and listens to the bands Humans listen to and such?
Preposterous! ;)
LibertyBelle–and pretty to boot! Can’t have that!
What’s wrong with having martyrs as heroes? MLK and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, anyone?
Phillymiss, that’s what struck me, too, actually. The journalist just couldn’t wrap her mind around the whole “martyr” thing. I would wager that’s because a) she probably doesn’t believe in life after death and b) she doesn’t know the God of love who gave Himself for us.
Christianity is totally radical when you think about it. Giving your very life for another person runs against human nature and instinct. But as Lila says, I’d hope I’d have the courage to give my life if the opportunity arose.
They don’t get that through Christ, there’s no fear in death, and the grave has lost its sting. Amen and glory hallelujah!
Also, I LOVE Dietrich Bonhoeffer. One of my favorite heroes – him and ole William Wilberforce. If only we could be used for abortion as he was used for slavery…. What a legacy that man left. :)
Parenthood is actually a form of martyrdom – and it’s understandable why the idea is so alien to the author of the article. Accepting (like Mary) God’s will in a having child, a parent sacrifices their life for the well-being of the child. While many think having a child is the end of their life, it really is a new beginning. A new life, if we accept it. And if you’re thinking this looks a lot like the gospel – yes, it does. God always points back to Christ on the cross, in what’s sacrificed will bring us a joy beyond comprehension.
I’m reminded of a night during a series on sex in our church’s youth group. Most of the kids are not church members, but come from surrounding areas (urban).
Present were four folks not usually present on such nights, with their stories to tell. One is a virgin at 30. She’s an impressive young lady — always has been. She and her fiance are keeping things pure.
The whole “staying a virgin” thing registered a huge “does not compute” with most of the youth. Their incredulous questions, however, indicated how very, very little they’d actually thought through the matters their questions were concerned with. They were living with assumptions spoon-fed them by the culture — no independent thinking whatsoever. Of course, youth imagine that thoughts involving doing whatever they want constitute some kind of radical, original thinking (which is darned funny).
At any rate, the incredulity thing is definitely “the world’s” response to Christians living out their faith. Gina nailed it with her first comment above.
That article left me with a terrible thought. I really hope no one takes the reporting of Lila’s willingness to die to save others as an invitation. :(
Let’s give Katie J.M. Baker credit: She wrote a reasonably fair and sensitive account of Lila and her work, given that Jezebel hates and detests everything that Miss Rose stands for. If Ms. Baker is mystified by Lila Rose, it seems that she is honestly mystified.
That whole “willing to give up my life to save another” — where could that have come from? I suppose there is nothing like that in the tradition of Ms. Baker and Jezebel‘s readers.
For my part, I am glad that Jezebel and Planned Parenthood think that Lila Rose and Live Action are insignificant and unworthy of concern. May they keep on thinking that.
The lack of fear is one of the defining traits of sociopathy. So is the willingness to lie and manipulate others in order to achieve one’s goals.
I’d say she’s angling to get a head start on building a base of support for an anticipated run for elected office in the future, although like so many borderline-sociopath conservative grassroots heroes her ambition is tempered by a dull mind and poor communication skills. Maybe she should start her political career in Alaska.
So what you’re admitting, FINALLY, joan is that you’re a sociopath?
Well done. Admitting to the problem is your first step towards healing.
Yep, cuz it’s not sociopathic at all to slaughter your own children.
The most complex and intelligent animals exhibit cooperative behavior. The passing on of one’s own DNA is what most so called Darwinists should agree is an admirable survival trait. However, abortionists think that the most admirable trait is complete self-absorbtion to the detriment of one’s cooperative relationships with other members of one’s species. Abortion advocates also frequently exhibit severe negative bias against procreation of other members of their own species (“pop out babies” or “brood mare” or “baby machine” or “crotch dropping” just to name a few commonly seen phrases coming from their typing fingers). Members of a species that are filled with self-loathing, loathing of one’s children, and loathing of another’s children are certifiably ILL. Being ILL is not an optimal survival trait, nor one that would deem the ill member as being “fittest.”
In summary, abortion advocates are NOT the “fittest,” proven so by their self-imposed cutting off from their community of their own DNA. Keep it up, because we’ll just breed the sickness out of our culture over time.
Mods, my 4:31 comment is ‘awaiting moderation’ but I don’t know why since I didn’t include any links. I think it’s a good one and don’t want to double up. I hope you’ll approve it for posting.
@Courtnay-
BAZINGA! ;)
I mean, seriously.
Isn’t there some other place she can solicit attention?
One last comment:
Obama had little experience but “Obama girl” was lauded for having a “crush” on him.
Sarah Palin had little experience, but 4 years later the haters are still knocking her good looks. Lila Rose is young and gaining experience, and see, the haters can’t get over their own disappointed sense of narcissism. Girls, just because another woman is attractive, it does not diminish YOU. Grow a little genuine self esteem, please.
“In summary, abortion advocates are NOT the “fittest,” proven so by their self-imposed cutting off from their community of their own DNA. Keep it up, because we’ll just breed the sickness out of our culture over time.”
I have two children. Remind me how many you have again? I don’t think you’ve thought this “outbreeding” thing through very well.
I have two children.
Two living children?
Not all prolifers are completely uncritical of Lila Rose.
http://www.fem2pt0.com/2012/04/16/why-lila-rose-doesnt-speak-for-pro-life-feminists/
An “anticipated” future run for office? Anticipated by whom? I don’t think Lila’s interested in getting elected to any political office. Does anyone think that, but for paranoid pro-aborts?
The lack of fear is one of the defining traits of sociopathy.
Agreed but you forgot to add that it can also be the result of a strong faith in God, joan.
I’ve dealt with anxiety issues my whole life and have used nicotine, alcohol and caffeine to try to fight off these fears. The more I put into prayer and my faith life, the less I fear.
“There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment, and so one who fears is not yet perfect in love.” ~1 John 4:18
“If anyone wishes to come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it.” ~Luke 9:23-24
“No, in all these things we conquer overwhelmingly through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor present things, nor future things, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” ~Romans 8: 37-39
Start asking Jesus to help you to Be not Afraid, joan.
“In summary, abortion advocates are NOT the “fittest,” proven so by their self-imposed cutting off from their community of their own DNA.”
So how do you account for the fact that many who are pro-choice have reproduced or will reproduce? How do you account for the fact that many daughters of those who are “pro-life,” are pro-choice. Many of us who fought for reproductive rights, back in the 60’s and 70’s, grew up in staunch pro-life, religious households. Some of these women grew up in homes where their mothers were unable, for financial or health reasons, to care for large families and this was instrumental, for these pro-choice women, in forming their worldview. So much for the pure, “pro-life” bloodlines that you’re trying to breed. (Talk about eugenics!)
Lila’s affection for martyrdom gives her something in common with Islamic jihadist types. No?
“I have two children. Remind me how many you have again? I don’t think you’ve thought this “outbreeding” thing through very well.”
Joan, once again, here you go showing that wonderful anti-life compassion? You’re a real sweetheart Joan.
CC, there are many, many prolife women that are NOT advocating that women be broodmares. The bottom line for the prolife side is to respect life. Plain and simple. Just because a woman got pregnant doesn’t mean murder is the answer. We’re also trying to teach young girls and women to have some self respect, that if they want to have a career or school life and put off having children, well, then don’t have sex. It’s the only action to ensure 100% non-pregnancy. But hey, I can recall many women of your generation forcing abortion onto the women of my generation because they felt they didn’t have the chance to abort their “mistake” and it “ruined their life” and so they convince the young girl she’ll ruin her life if she has this “mistake”… only for the girl to realize her only “mistake” was the abortion itself. In which case, women of your generation tell her to get over it. No compassion, no understanding because you’re too self absorbed to see beyond your own pity pool of regret for getting pregnant and not seeing the good that child was in your own life because you’re too dang focused on your own selfish “missed moments in life.”
As for the question to how many kids i have…. three times more than you Joan and they’re all pretty pro-life because they’ve witnessed first hand how ugly, hateful and selfish pro-aborts are. They’ve seen the truth through pictures of what abortion does to a baby. And they want NOTHING to do with it. They’re not pro-life just because of me… they’re prolife because they know the truth of abortion. Do your kids know the truth or just selective euphemisms
Joan….you very eloquently and calmly explained a lot of prochoice opinions. I applaud you. It saddens me to hear so many people who want to believe were “breeding ourselves out” and who just assume all women who have abortions have them for selfish reasons or slutshaming.
Ignorance of this worlds reality will trip up,the antichoicers every time. They seem to have this utopian view that all this NEVER happened in the good old days before Roe v. wade. In 1957, the CDC reports 1.2 MILLION illegal abortions were performed in the US. Abortion has been around since ancient Egypt and Greece, when women packed their uteruses with herbs and seaweeds to abort.
But they have this illusion that if you take away birth control, take away legal abortion and tell everyone to be chaste and worship their god, we’ll go back to “the good old days”
So…if abortion has existed since ancient times, when exactly WERE those “good old days?” SO tired of this “hell in a HANDBASKET” mentality of the antichoice group. You think abortion, premarital sex, gays and lesbians, STDS and promiscuity among men and women is NEW??? Sorry but you are living in a cloistered fantasy world. And pushing your gods down people’s throats isn’t going to change it. Keep abortion safe and legal until medical technology comes up with a 100 percent effective, safe, affordable, reversible form of birth control. India is very close now with the polymer vas deferens implant. .25 in materials and put in with a single injection. Flushes out with a water injection if the man decides to procreate with a woman. Instead of trying to deny reality, why not look at being SOLUTIONISTS instead of prochoice bashers and prostelytizers???
Hi folks,
This article had me curious and wondering in a whole new direction. I would very much appreciate any feedback. A few years back, I took-a-shot and asked folks to name their heroes. The PC’ers usually had none, while those in the PL usually could name quite a few.
Western science/medicine is also hero-based by folks called researchers. I like watching the tv show called ‘Repo Games’. The host asks 5 trivia questions, and he will pay-off-the-car in total IF 3 of those trivia answers are correctly answered. His trivia questions are most-interesting too. He seems to have hero-based (including science ie..geography) ones, + many questions based on fictional tv-characters.
[I usually miss the non-hero ones, and do quite well on the hero-based ones.] Am I onto something??????????????
Kathi. Sigh. Please print this out:
As a prolife woman, I;
don’t want to take away your birth control
I don’t want to control how many men OR women you have sex with
I don’t want to make you worship God
I NEVER use the word slutshaming; as a former slut, I could care less.
THIS AND ONLY THIS IS WHAT I CARE ABOUT:
THE UNBORN MUST BE PROTECTED. THEY ARE HUMAN. THEY ARE ONE OF ME AND ONE OF YOU. ABORTION IS MURDER.
That’s it. It’s so simple. You really need to get to know us; we;re actually good folk AND we’re better looking.:)
Going out on a limb here: I think Lila knew exactly what she was getting into, decided to take the opportunity to witness to the Jezebel writer, and let the chips fall where they may.
That alone is worthy of a “You’re pretty awesome.”
And it kind of worked; the Jezebel writer had some stereotypes challenged, which is a start.
CC: “Lila’s affection for martyrdom gives her something in common with Islamic jihadist types. No?”
And with any soldier who’s willing to die for their country.
Any military in your family, CC?
Prochoicers have their martyrs of sorts: George Tiller, for one. And any of the other slain abortionists.
Then there are all the women that died due to illegal abortion that they defend.
Kathi: Ignorance of this worlds reality will trip up,the antichoicers every time. They seem to have this utopian view that all this NEVER happened in the good old days before Roe v. wade. In 1957, the CDC reports 1.2 MILLION illegal abortions were performed in the US. Abortion has been around since ancient Egypt and Greece, when women packed their uteruses with herbs and seaweeds to abort.
Murder is also as old as dirt; except, unlike abortion, we still have laws against murder.
By the way, original sin or evil acts are not fictional concepts made up by Christian theologians; they express a fundamental truth about our human nature and the human condition.
@John McDonell: Obviously that’s a question that would take some more balanced research than just randomly grabbing people and asking them. However, it is an interesting thought, and I’m personally inclined to think you are on to something. Have you thought about putting together any sort of more formal survey on it?
“Lila’s affection for martyrdom gives her something in common with Islamic jihadist types. No?”
Only if you’re an ignoramus who thinks that Christian martyrdom is the same as Islamic jihadist martyrdom, since the Christian variety means DYING for the cause and the Islamic jihadist variety means KILLING for the cause.
Hi Alice,
This may seem very strange, but answering does gravitate a person towards a line-of-thought/reasoning. A survey is a device-of-popularity/opinion IMO and does not answer a-valid-objective reality. A counter holds surveys in high esteem because reality is basically a subjective set of experiences that dismisses any ‘objective’ reality as mental fabrications. I am at wits end just trying to formulate this division in my own mind. Attempting to get-it-out-there would accomplish what.
LibertyBelle–and pretty to boot! Can’t have that!
Combine pretty and crazy and crazy always wins in the end. I would rather hang with an ugly pro-choice woman than a pretty anti-choice one. Don’t understand your comment, what does appearance have to do with anything?? Are you that shallow?
I hear you Courtney. Do proaborts really think we sit around obsessing over their sex lives? Most of us have more important things to worry about.
Jake: The Babe Theory of Political Movements has a venerable pedigree in the blogosphere, if not in academe. A search for “protest babes” yields a trove of data for analysis.
This is my kind of protest babe.
Notably, the side who asks “are you that shallow” generally has activist babes that are, well…
Rasqual. Have fun with your “protest babe”. Maybe she will choose abortion in order to keep her looking like a “babe” for you, since, you know, you value that kind of thing. Prolife everybody!!
“You think abortion, premarital sex, gays and lesbians, STDS and promiscuity among men and women is NEW??? Sorry but you are living in a cloistered fantasy world.”
Um no, I know history. People have always murdered their unborn and born children. Men having sex with other men was not only accepted, but the norm for the large majority of human history, along with men having sex with children, women, animals, or anything else that was around. And–shocker!–they got diseases doing it. Nearly every pre-monotheistic society was absoutely obsessed with promiscuity…it completely dominated their cultures.
So you are correct…killing one’s offspring and screwing whoever/whatever you want is indeed very old. Ironic that you think you are being progressive, but you really just want to take us back to barbaric, primative times. I prefer civilization.
“Lila’s affection for martyrdom gives her something in common with Islamic jihadist types. No?”
Hahaha. In other words, support fetus-killing OR THE TERRORISTS WIN.
Gettin’ kind of touchy, eh Jake? ;-)
“…choose abortion to keep her looking like a babe for you…”
Right, because I can’t hardly stand to look at Angelina Jolie or Jessica Alba these days. Give me a break.
Jake, that you think becoming a mother automatically causes one to lose any babe-like qualities is quite telling on your part. Why do mothers disgust you so?
Hey Kathi! Glad to see you back! You never answered my question about you being a nurse, and whether or not you have a FINANCIAL horse in this race as well as just the emotional one you have from killing your own child in an abortion. Do you work in the abortion industry? If you already answered, I’m sorry to press, but I haven’t seen it if you have.
And also, I would like to remind you that I’m not religious, and I definitely have no interest in your sex life. I really do not give one single flying fig what you do with your genitals, how often, with whoever else you like…AS LONG AS YOU ARE NOT KILLING ANYONE ELSE BECAUSE OF THAT. Until we get a form of contraception that is 100% effective and easily reversed, laws against abortion will be needed, because people are inevitably going to want to kill their child to facilitate their sex lives, and that kind of thing should never be legal. As long as you are rubbing your junk together with other people in configurations that are known to cause reproduction, there’s the chance there that you’re going to produce another human being. Our society is civil enough that we shouldn’t accept killing that newly-created child as a legitimate course of action.
X, once again, you crack me up.
Rubbing your junk together, indeed.
Kathi says: They seem to have this utopian view that all this NEVER happened in the good old days before Roe v. wade.
Nice straw man.
“Christian variety means DYING for the cause and the Islamic jihadist variety means KILLING for the cause.”
Like Scott Roeder and his soul brothers who murder (and attempt to murder) abortion providers?
They seem to believe whatever they want about history and biology! I’ve never met a less scientific and more subjective group of folks than abortion advocates. Ya gotta admire the third reichian: why not look at being SOLUTIONISTS instead of prochoice bashers and prostelytizers?
Yes, kids, there’s nothing more solutioney than bashing and dismembering a pair of female twins over 20 weeks into gestation because they’re girls. Riiiiiiight… What do abortion advocates think Tiller and his peers are/were doing? Handing the fetus’ politely written eviction notices and waiting patiently while they gently exited the womb?
Abortion is the opposite of civilization.
”Nearly every pre-monotheistic society was absoutelyobsessed with promiscuity…it completely dominated their cultures.”
Which cultures might these be? Do you include Buddhism and Hinduism? The monotheistic Semites, as shown by their bible, were pretty sexed up. Funny, while, according to your history, the Greeks, Persians, and Romans were obsessed with sex, they managed to create strong cultures, philosophical systems, and empires. And how do you account for ongoing libertine behavior in monotheistic Europe by both secular and religious figures like those Renaissance popes who had mistresses and children. And how do you account for the pedophilia scandal (obsession with sex with children) that continues to afflict the Catholic Church?
Before you make ludicrous statements about history (which you don’t “know”), you really need to learn something about it.
Jake, the point was that pro-aborts seem to think that pro-lifers are all crochety old ladies with rosaries. Nope, as rasqual pointed out, we’ve got some babes. :) And I totally take offense at your degrading comments about women who give birth. I plan on bearing my husband’s children and still being a total babe. Ever heard of eating right and excercising? Yeah, even childbirth can’t stop that. And guess what else? My husband will still think I’m hot even if I do keep a bit of baby weight because motherhood is beautiful and I will have born his children conceived in love. :)
Hey Kathi. Alright. Here we go again. I’m pro-life because I don’t want to see babies lose their lives and women regret their decisions. No one has said that this is new. And the only people I hear using the word “slutshaming” is YOU and your pro-abortion cohorts. NO ON HERE IS SHAMING SLUTS!!! Good grief get your facts straight!! :) If anything, there’s a lot of grace and forgiveness here. And please get over yourself and your sex life – I couldn’t care less what the heck you do it with or what goes on behind your bedroom doors (or wherever else…). I’m not trying to take away your birth control – please, by all means, pump as many artificial hormones into your body as you want. I’m a libertarian so I’m not trying to legislate your use of drugs or whatever. I just don’t want to see babies killed, get it?
And anyway, I know history. There weren’t really good old days. I’m not living in a utopia. But am I so evil for seeing a social injustice and wanting to see it changed? Am I so evil for trying to make this messed up world a little better?
And no, I don’t want you to worship my God (though all pro-lifers are not religious – say it with me: NOT ALL PROLIFERS ARE RELIGIOUS) but if ever you’d want to try it out, it’s really not so bad. There’s peace, and forgiveness and grace. But you can go on with your belief system, you can take as many bc pills as your heart desires, you can get it on with whoever you want to get it on with, whenever, wherever you want, and that’s fine with me. Just don’t go screaming about how people need to kill babies, mkay?
Also, we DO try to offer solutions – we just don’t agree that killing your young is a viable solution for an unplanned pregnancy.
Why do people so often get into the “our girls are purtier than your girls” crap here? Thinking it’s “shallow” to hold a political beauty contest does not mean you are ugly. It means you think it sucks to comment on someone’s appearance unless they are putting themselves out there to be judged on those merits.
Comments in this discussion are worth reading: https://www.jillstanek.com/2011/06/2011-twenty-hottest-conservative-women-in-the-new-media/
And if abortion is “murder,” then those women who have abortions are murderers. So if you get your way and we live in a dystopian world where abortion is criminalized, what sentences would you propose for any woman caught “murdering” her “baby?” Or should she get the death sentence?
But good luck with the zygotes as full fledged “persons” who have the same rights as those who are already born. If it didn’t make it in Mississippi, it won’t make it anywhere!
“women regret their decisions”
News flash – not all women regret their abortions inasmuch as you want that to be true. Some folks regret having botox. Does that mean we should criminalize it?
I am at wits end just trying to formulate this division in my own mind. Attempting to get-it-out-there would accomplish what.
Just to see. Is this a valid hypothesis? If so, to what degree? It’s an interesting thought and it would be worth it, in my opinion, to pursue it more to find out the answer just for it’s own sake. Not all research has to be a cog in some grand master scheme, after all. :D You’re right that the questions would have to be very particularly phrased, to avoid throwing the results. Getting a good sample is the main problem I forsee, but even so, I think it could be something fun to look into.
”Our society is civil enough that we shouldn’t accept killing that newly-created child as a legitimate course of action”
Too bad that not all “society” (legal, scientific, and religious) agrees with you. It all boils down to votes and courts.
CC my gosh. The point of that comment was because Kathi or whoever said that we think cultures didn’t have sex. WE KNOW THEY HAD SEX. Even Jews, even Greeks, we KNOW it’s been around for years. It’s called human nature. We get it.
Heh. Someone pulled CC’s string this morning, that’s for sure. ;-)
LibertyBelle: “My husband will still think I’m hot even if I do keep a bit of baby weight because motherhood is beautiful and I will have born his children conceived in love.”
Shush. It’s getting uncomfortably warm in here. :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1ZOgQiLAsc
An attractive young woman, Brittany Trilford, spoke at Rio+20 environmental conference a couplemonths ago, and got a lot of media attention. You can bet the sexism was not as prominent when we liberals portrayed her, vs. Lila. Solely based on politics. Where was the talk about Brittany’s giggliness? Her hair? We attack Sara Palin’s daughters on their looks, but not Obama’s. McCain’s daughter confounds us, since she is supposedly conservative, but is edgy, smokes the weed and favors same-sex marriage. We are very frustrated that we cannot pigeon-hole her.
Let’s face it: if political analysis depends on people’s looks, you are not doing very well.
We liberals act enlightened, but it is all an act. We are as sexist as anyone. It is the marxist influence. We strive to turn everything into a Hegelian dialectic, then sharpen divisions between people based on these differences, so we can build resentment and anger, then motivate people based on this hate, and so destabilize society, and eventually usher in the marxist revolution that we know is inevitable. The ‘synthesis’ to resolve the dialectic. Until then, don’t expect us to act any differently.
LILA ROSE MYSTIFIES JEZEBEL.
I think SANITY mystifies Jezebel… ;)
And if abortion is “murder,” then those women who have abortions are murderers. So if you get your way and we live in a dystopian world where abortion is criminalized, what sentences would you propose for any woman caught “murdering” her “baby?” Or should she get the death sentence?
Depends. Did it happen in a doctor’s office under the table where there was very little risk of physical harm to her? Then the doctor is a hitman and she paid him to kill her child. Charge accordingly. Did it happen on some quack’s kitchen table or behind a dumpster somewhere no sane person would have a surgical procedure? She needs counseling because she’s obviously suicidal in addition to homicidal, and the person who did it needs to be prosecuted for murder. Did she do it herself with a knitting needle? Again, counseling. Was it early in pregnancy and she ordered some abortion pills online knowing she’d probably be fine? She should do some time. Was she being coerced or forced into doing it by someone else? Prosecute THEM, and get her away from the human excrement.
Context has a lot to do with it when you’re talking about ANY homicide case. You should know that, CC!
Too bad that not all “society” (legal, scientific, and religious) agrees with you. It all boils down to votes and courts.
That’s why I said we “SHOULDN’T” accept killing. We do currently, and I’m working to change it so that more people DO agree with me. We’re all working to change the scientific community’s obsession with cow-towing to philosophy. We’re working to change the legality based on new medical scientific advancements that weren’t considered initially when the (BAD) judicial decision was made. And…religiously is irrelevant, but you knew that already. ;P
CC – Newsflash: botox doesn’t kill innocent people
X, you don’t fit CC’s stereotype of pro-lifers (but who does, considering it’s a strawman from her imagination?) so she’s not going to listen to you. :P
“And…religiously is irrelevant, but you knew that already. ;P”
One day we will say/see that the religious opposition to abortion is absolutely vital. Society’s values generally come from their religion and therefore from God. If they don’t come from God they come from the human mind. Either there is a transcendent being that values creation and the human being, in particular, or there isn’t a transcendent being who values creation and the human being in particular. Without values, religious values – the God value, laws and scientific knowledge are meaningless. WIthout faith, and God, CC is absolutely right – “It all boils down to votes and courts” or in other words, it all boils down to might is right, the power of the majority to assert its will over the rest of the populace. (And as we know today, the majority can even influence the courts by exerting its force externally or internally.) Unfortunately, since we live in Democracy, the truth and power of CC’s idea is easy to observe and feel and is persuasive to unbeliever. Therefore, unless we regain our ability to have spiritual vision, to pierce through the veil of our earthly existence and see the values that undergird our creaturely life, we will not have laws that reflect these spiritual values based on the belief in transcendent God who loves human beings, and wants them to be with him for eternity.
Well, that was rather longwinded….
Well, I disagree. I believe there is a natural Truth, which exists whether or not there is “God”, and one can find that independently of religion. Religion might facilitate finding that, but it is not essential.
interesting… just a few questions…. can you explain what this natural Truth is, does it have any other attributes, or is it completely substantively Truth? How is it found/learned/discovered? Are all humans born with the ability to discern this natural Truth? Does this Truth end-up being equivalent to God? If not, how would you differentiate God from this natural Truth?
xalisae, I surmise that this natural Truth touched your heart, or kissed your soul, revealing your utter vulnerability and your baby’s vulnerability, exposing the precariousness and preciousness of life, when you were pregnant. I bet it was a beautiful feeling….
CC: “It all boils down to votes and courts.”
Well then. Merely because theists like me believe there’s more to life than making the personal the political, and more to human relations and social contracts than merely the will to power, does not mean that we’re unwilling to try to kick your ass in the courts and with votes as much as any scrapping progressive. We’ll try to be honest about it, but there are honest and honorable ways of, politically speaking, kicking someone’s teeth out. ;-)
Tyler, I don’t know if this enlightens the discussion about Truth or not, but I’ve seen a couple of interesting examples of primates on documentaries. In one, monkeys were given a food reward for completing identical tasks (such as pulling a lever) within sight of each other. One monkey would get a grape as a reward, the other a piece of cucumber. The cucumber monkey watched the grape monkey and guess what? He stopped working. He preferred grapes to cucumber and NATURALLY couldn’t see the point in continuing with his efforts. He seemed to understand it wasn’t fair that his buddy got a tastier treat for the same task.
In another, a very smart Orangutan was deliberately given a task that was above her mental ability, to see how she’d react. When she failed, she bowed her head and raised her hand to cover part of her face, a classic gesture of shame if I ever saw one. Recently, I was at an event where a little boy made a mistake in his recital. He did EXACTLY the SAME gesture: bowed head, hand to the face.
Nobody told the orangutan that she was a shameful ape, nobody scolded her. But she reacted in way that demonstrated that SHE wanted to do it right and was DISAPPOINTED in herself. What does this have to do with truth?
Abortion advocates think that women who feel bad after an abortion do so because pro-lifers SHAME them into it. No matter how much anecdotal evidence we give them to the contrary, they often refuse to believe it. Animals, if intelligent enough, can understand and feel frustration, disappointment, shame, and more. There is a natural Truth to what they expect from themselves and the world around them. Amazingly, there is no Patriarchy to bully them.
It may well be that religion RINGS TRUE to us because it coincides with many of our natural inclinations. Maybe we have a natural tendency to monogamy and modesty (people are jealous and hurt when their partners cheat or even just flirt). Maybe everything we do and say isn’t the result of a conspiracy or the desire of one group to control another.
The thing that must frighten abortion advocates very deeply, to which they can’t bear to give voice, is that we just might really care about small, vulnerable humans. There’s a possibility that we are NOT waging a war on women. Gasp! We might not CARE what they do in the bedroom. Gasp! We might not all be religious. Gasp! And those of us who are religious might (hope you’re sitting) might have a love of science and an appreciation for truth.
Basically, if the enemies of life cannot be persuaded, they must be defeated. It’s not optional to leave the unborn at the mercy of activists who deem them rubbish. If it comes to a fight — consistent with both the pro-life ethic and free exercise of Constitutional rights as citizens with a franchise — yes, there’ll be a fight. The believe that pro-lifers are milquetoast grannies fumbling with useless beads is a woefully naive caricature deemed valuable propaganda by some, but is believed a fact by such propagandists at their peril.
Alexandra, I remember that thread you pointed out. We did good!
Here’s an interesting talk somewhat related: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtzIcz7MOkc&feature=player_embedded
I think SANITY mystifies Jezebel…
I think you are so right, Pamela!
Ninek,
you put it better than I ever could. I was going to say, “I love the natural order. I love science, biology, and knowledge of the world around me. The clues to Truth are written everywhere around us. They are easy to see when one studies the intricacies of life itself.”
But your explanation was far and away better than mine.
Dick Keyes, in his superb book Beyond Identity (an antidote to, rather than merely another of, the self-help genre), distinguished shame from guilt quite well — though they interact.
Hmm. Here’s PDF where he treats it as well.
”If it comes to a fight — consistent with both the pro-life ethic and free exercise of Constitutional rights as citizens with a franchise — yes, there’ll be a fight”
Votes, Courts, and money – which we are raising. Meanwhile, the wealthy Catholic Church, the Praetorian Guard of the anti-choice movement, is selling properties and other assets to pay for the “sins of the fathers.” You are obviously mobilizing – as are we.
Oh, and Rasqual. You asked me if I had any family members in the military. Not presently but one of my elderly cousins is a retired vice-admiral who hobnobbed with the Kennedy’s.
Hi Tyler, Alice, X and anyone interested,
Alice figured these ideas worth pursuing via a good questionaire, knowing how much I hate sociological perspective, I somehow doubt I would bother. Interesting observation though, later.
Tyler, like most folk you got bogged-down in thee often overlapping terms. I too reflected on the philosophic necessity of God … to give value. Here’s what I came up with: There are four aspects to human life. It might help to draw three interlocking circles (like the Olympic games ‘rings’) in the general shape of a triangle. Around this triangular draw a larger ring encompassing all three.
The 4 aspects of human life are: physical, intellectual, emotional, and faith. [This is ‘simple’ faith like: You-will-continue-to-read-this.; etc.] Each in turn, has a ‘goal or end-point’: for ‘physical’ , it is ‘purpose’; for ‘intellectual’, it is ‘understanding’; for ’emotions’, it is ‘meaning’ and for ‘faith’, it is ‘significance’. For many people, these words are interchangeable. They ARE that way only to an amount. (This is why they interlock.)
I now think the word reserved to God-alone is ‘significance’, not ‘meaning’, although it too has powerful religious connotations. ‘Meaning’ is just NOT a must!(as X noted) I do hope this helps to clarify!
How can the perspective of PC and that of PL live in harmony, or is there a natural-Truth? As the discussion on heroes goes: the ‘objective’ truth[natural-Truths] are found in ‘heroes’ – religious and secular (like science researchers).
Thanks for everyone else’s answers, sincerely.., however, in humility here, I was only hoping to hear xalisae’s answer to the questions that I posed to her.
ninek, I appreciated your answer (and I agree with many of the implications that you think natural Truth implies), but the response to it by any die hard abortionist/atheist is: So what? So what that monkeys and orangutans have intelligence or feel shame – what makes intelligence or shame more intrinsically valuable than a woman’s right to kill her child?
John, interesting ideas, but at the moment I don’t see how they relate.
So back to xalisae, xalisae your personal love of nature is not sufficient to make an universal rule that is applicable to every expectant Mother. If you were to make the concept of “Love” an absolute good then you would have a foundation upon which to make a universal rule that would say abortion is wrong in every situation. Do you feel that we can discern absolute values from nature? If so, how do these absolute values differ from God?
CC, pro-choicers have one major problem that you continually fail to acknowledge: conscience. You will never be able to run fast enough, or ‘win’ enough. Even if we all were to become pro-choice (for that is what is needed now that it is legally recognized) pro-choicers would still have to justify the killing of their offspring in their own mind because of their conscience. You may be able to change public opinion, but you can’t change who people fundamentally are.
So back to xalisae, xalisae your personal love of nature is not sufficient to make an universal rule that is applicable to every expectant Mother. If you were to make the concept of “Love” an absolute good then you would have a foundation upon which to make a universal rule that would say abortion is wrong in every situation. Do you feel that we can discern absolute values from nature? If so, how do these absolute values differ from God?
My love of nature isn’t the REASON to make the rule. My love of nature is how I was able to see that the rule existed in the first place. It exists regardless of whether or not our current societal laws recognize it. It is the biological obligation of those who have exercised the ability to perpetuate the species to their offspring, because they are intelligent enough to understand that they do have such an obligation. If you can grasp that you should treat others as you would want to be treated in their place, with consideration, you are obligated to do it. People capable of ignoring this obligation and wronging or harming others-particularly those who they have a familial biological obligation to through perpetuating their species-are evil. They ignore the natural order and deny Truth. I don’t even think “Love” has to be a factor. A horrible parent who hates their child and treats them poorly yet still does not kill/abort that child is still less evil than a parent who executes their child in an abortion. They violate the natural order and familial obligations to their own offspring.
intersting… would you consider your worldview/view of the natural world to be more deistic than atheistic?
I suspect that you believe this ‘biological obligation’ to the preborn exists independent of the person’s ability to comprehend this obligation. For example, do you support abortion when the Mother is mentally challenged or when the Mother is temporarily mentally incapicated? If a pregnant mother is made unconscious as the result of anesthetic gas (or some other cause) is an abortion still wrong? If it is wrong, it must be because killing a human being is wrong independent of any biological obligation. But then we must ask why is killing a human being would be wrong when a biological obligation does not exist.
Additionally, the dedicated moral relativist could ask why you value the concept of “biological responsibility” more than a woman’s right to kill? What makes the biological obligation an imperative that binds all human beings in all times and in all circumstances? Indeed, they could ask, in a godless world, how can any human being said to have an obligation to another human being? ‘Obligation’ is really a moral term, so how is it derived from nature? Haven’t you simply personified (or deified) nature?
“Like Scott Roeder and his soul brothers who murder (and attempt to murder) abortion providers?”
Could someone tell me which religion (or lack thereof) inoculates a person against mental illness?
Basically just because someone claims a particular religious tradition doesn’t necessarily mean that he embodies 100% of its ideals, nor does it render those coming from a particular tradition immune to insanity.
Wasn’t there a website listing the abortion doctors who had been randomly murdered by criminals who didn’t know who they were? It showed that an abortion doctor was more likely to be killed by a street criminal or robber than a freak idealogical madman.
xalisae, (seems I omitted the addressee) intersting… would you consider your worldview/view of the natural world to be more deistic than atheistic?
I suspect that you believe this ‘biological obligation’ to the preborn exists independent of the person’s ability to comprehend this obligation. For example, do you support abortion when the Mother is mentally challenged or when the Mother is temporarily mentally incapicated? If a pregnant mother is made unconscious as the result of anesthetic gas (or some other cause) is an abortion still wrong? If it is wrong, it must be because killing a human being is wrong independent of any biological obligation. But then we must ask how and why is killing a human being wrong when a biological obligation does not exist.
Additionally, the dedicated moral relativist could ask why you value the concept of “biological responsibility” more than a woman’s right to kill? What makes the biological obligation an imperative that binds all human beings in all times and in all circumstances? Indeed, they could ask, in a godless world, how can any human being said to have an obligation to another human being? ‘Obligation’ is really a moral term, so how is it derived from nature? Haven’t you simply personified (or deified) nature?