Pro-life news brief 3-12-13
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- In an attempt to further abortion worldwide, the United States and the European Union joined forces at the UN Commission on the Status of Women to ask for the deletion of “a reaffirmation that every human being has the inherent right to life, liberty and security of persons.”
- Authorities in Minnesota have charged a man with two counts of murder for killing his wife and his unborn child:
The Dakota County attorney’s office charged Roger Earl Holland, 36, with two counts of second-degree intentional murder – one count in his wife’s death and one in her unborn child’s death. Bail was set at $1 million, or $750,000 with conditions….Holland called 911 last Thursday to report finding his wife, Margorie Ann Holland, in cardiac arrest at the foot of a staircase in their Apple Valley apartment, prosecutor James Backstrom said in a news release. Margorie Holland, who was nearly four months pregnant, and her unborn child died at a hospital later that morning.
- NARAL Wisconsin stopped Care Net of Dane County from getting a city loan to build low-income housing:
City staff had recommended extending two low-interest loans totaling $550,000 to Care Net, which operates a crisis pregnancy center and residential home for pregnant single mothers on MacArthur Road. The group is proposing to build a 36-unit apartment building and daycare on land it owns next to its center….Megin McDonell [pictured left], a board member with NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin, and Ald. Lisa Subeck, the former executive director of NARAL, told the committee that Care Net, an anti-abortion, faith-based group, misleads women about the risks of abortion and does not offer “all-options” counseling, as it advertises.
- The Beaumont Enterprise has more on a previously reported story regarding a fetal surgery where doctors used a laser to cut off blood flow to a mass which was pushing against the child’s lungs and heart:
The surgery, known as fetal laser ablation for bronchopulmonary sequestration (BPS), has only been performed one other time in the United States, at the St. Louis Fetal Care Institute in 2011. During the procedure, doctors insert a needle into the mother’s belly and into the womb. Then, the needle is advanced into the baby’s chest, then into the BPS where a laser fiber is introduced through the needle and targeted at the abnormal blood vessel going to the BPS. The laser fires and blocks the blood flow, causing the mass to stop growing. The goal of the operation is to reverse the process by which the BPS is causing heart failure in the fetus. After the surgery, the BPS steals less blood flow from the fetus, and the heart and lungs start growing more normally as the BPS shrinks in size.
Mar.12, 2013 1:00 pm |
Blogs |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
”the United States and theEuropean Union joined forces at theUN Commission on the Status of Women to ask for the deletion of “a reaffirmation that every human being has the inherent right to life, liberty and security of persons.”
That about says it all.
Tweeted all those Wisconsin pro-abort fools about how proud they should be of themselves that they helped deny a loan for low-income mothers in crisis to have a place to live. Let’s see what they say! ^_^
Wow. This women are so dedicated to killing children that they actually fought against low-income housing and childcare for poor women simply because it was supported by people who don’t favor killing children? This is one of the most breathtakingly evil acts I have come across in a long time.
Not offering “all-options” counseling? As if it is a bad thing to not help women kill their sons and daughters. As the abortionist Aleck Bourne said, “I have never known a woman who, after her baby was born, was not overjoyed that I had not killed it.”
You’ve got to be kidding me!
NARAL Wisconsin, you are just plain evil.
Who is it that doesn’t care for born people?
Where are all our trolls?? Defend NARAL WI! C’mon! This should be good!
1. They didn’t intend to meet the repayment time and interest terms.
2. Other organisations which aren’t agenda driven can apply to undertake the same type of project.
3. On another thread some of you want to prevent chldren being adopted.
“1. They didn’t intend to meet the repayment time and interest terms.”
Those concerns were secondary, the real issue was that people didn’t like Care Net. That’s pretty clearly expressed.
“2. Other organisations which aren’t agenda driven can apply to undertake the same type of project.”
What would you consider “no agenda”? Certainly not NARAL, I hope?
“3. On another thread some of you want to prevent chldren being adopted.”
Lmfao. :D
1. what you say is true Jack but it still indicates they’re thinking that they are ‘special’ and needn’t operate within the same parameters as others.
2. no, not NARAL :-)
3. the comments on the two threads show that many here want discriminartion to take place in some cases but not others.
If you are truly pro-choice, why would you oppose building housing for women who have made the choice to give birth? NARAL members DO NOT TRUST WOMEN! Reality’s attempts to defend denying poor women housing are Pathetic.
Tell me again what side doesn’t care for children after they are born? Megin McDonell and Lisa Subeck are leaders in the War on Women.
“NARAL members DO NOT TRUST WOMEN!” – no, NARAL members do not trust groups which lie to women and restrict their choices.
“Reality’s attempts to defend denying poor women housing are Pathetic.” – I don’t defend denying poor women housing. I defend denying biased and dishonest groups from becoming the conduit whilst using government resources.
Sad to say but the best thing for this CareNet is to have faith and pursue plans other than govt funding. The borrower is slave to the master.
I say this as a consistent donor to a crisis pregnancy center.
“what you say is true Jack but it still indicates they’re thinking that they are ‘special’ and needn’t operate within the same parameters as others.”
Hm, so do you think if everything was on the up and up financially that this group would have been able to get the loan? I’m thinking not.
“no, not NARAL”
Who then? If there is a group that wants to provide low income housing to pregnant women or mothers do you think they should have no stated opinion on abortion, or what?
” no, NARAL members do not trust groups which lie to women and restrict their choices.”
But Care Net is everything that pro-choicers say that pro-lifers should be doing! They are trying to provide every opportunity for a person to carry their baby to term. I don’t see how they are restricting, at all. A woman can walk out of a CPC and go get her abortion, they are just trying to provide her with other options.
” I don’t defend denying poor women housing. I defend denying biased and dishonest groups from becoming the conduit whilst using government resources.”
Who do you think should be allowed to build low-income housing?
“I’m thinking not.” – again, I agree Jack. I was simply pointing out another example of such groups feeling entitled to not need to meet the same criteria as other applicants. “oh, but we are…”. It’s indicative of their inherent bias.
“Who then” – dunno. Not about to spend half a day googling “community groups in Dane county”.
“do you think they should have no stated opinion on abortion” – yes.
“But Care Net is everything that pro-choicers say that pro-lifers should be doing” – not exactly. Pro-choicers don’t say that groups like Care Net should be biased and misleading.
“Who do you think should be allowed to build low-income housing?” – community housing cooperatives might be a good start.
Reality, since you and NARAL care so very much about women, when do you plan to secure a loan to build housing to help economically disadvantaged women who choose to keep their babies?
I think hell will freeze over before you lift a finger to actually help women.
And I would say NARAL is a dishonest and untrustworthy group. They are certainly anti-information and anti-science.
You’d get outraged if I did so Kelly Z because you’d squawk that I would be building a pro-choice enclave with a captive audience for propaganda or something.
You have zero knowledge of how I have done and do support women, and others.
“They are certainly anti-information and anti-science” – ROFLMBO
Is this comment also going to sit indefinitely awaiting moderation for no fathomable reason?
apparently not
so why has my response to Jack’s last comment been stuck for two and a half hours?
I hope any of the ladies here planning to attend CPAC will adhere to the dress code as prescribed by Adrienne Royer
You’d get outraged if I did so Kelly Z because you’d squawk that I would be building a pro-choice enclave with a captive audience for propaganda or something.
You have zero knowledge of how I have done and do support women, and others.
“They are certainly anti-information and anti-science” – ROFLMBO
Reality,
Is this the comment you are asking about??
Let’s go over this again. If you cannot find your comment please email a mod. Pick a mod, any mod.
We are not on here 24/7 blogsitting. But I do, however enjoy it when you puff up your chest and DEMAND to know what happened to your comment as if some vast right wing conspiracy has singled you out AGAIN for your beliefs!!
Thanks for the laughs. :)
She demanded, though, Carla. Try not to bring up the vast right-wing conspiracy again, though. They’re on to us.
“I don’t think our public money should go to an organization that relies on deception to advance their agenda,” McDonell (of NARAL/WI)said.
Indeed! Which is why we need to defund Planned Parenthood!!
BE PROUD NARAL!!! You prevented 36 families in need from receiving affordable housing!! Rock on!!
True enough Courtnay. True enough.
If our supposed lack of effort to “care about people after they’re born!” make us such bad people, what does NARAL’s active thwarting of measures to provide for born people say about them?
P.S.
Only one pro-abort bothered to try and respond to me on twitter. Her ultimate argument? A .gif of cats. No, I’m not kidding:
https://twitter.com/radioclashed/status/311612224491892736
“again, I agree Jack. I was simply pointing out another example of such groups feeling entitled to not need to meet the same criteria as other applicants. “oh, but we are…”. It’s indicative of their inherent bias.”
Well, lol, I would like to meet the people who belong to a group that don’t feel entitled and don’t have any inherent bias. That’s just human nature, we all think our causes are the most specialist ever and we are predisposed to deny contrary evidence.
““do you think they should have no stated opinion on abortion” – yes.”
Well I suppose that’s consistent of you. What if it was a group of people from an anti-abortion church, that made a secular organization for community work but the employees all still were very anti-abortion and conservative. Would that really be any different from a group that is upfront with their anti-abortion leanings?
I know that’s far-fetched, I’m just trying to make the point that everyone is going to have bias. If we stopped every group that’s biased toward certain viewpoints from doing charity work then we would have a problem.
“not exactly. Pro-choicers don’t say that groups like Care Net should be biased and misleading.”
“Biased” there’s that word again. Pro-choicers are biased, so are pro-lifers. That’s life. As long as Care Net is upfront with the fact that they provide all options except for abortion services and referrals I am not seeing an issue. You guys seriously can’t expect pro-lifers to magically be pro-choice. Pro-lifers are simply going to always be against abortion. If pro-choicers and pro-lifers genuinely want to work for good and find common ground, projects like low-income housing are a good place for them to start. Everyone agrees that women who choose to keep their babies need assistance.
“community housing cooperatives might be a good start.”
But see, for whatever reason groups like that aren’t meeting the need. And since pro-choicers are telling pro-lifers that we don’t care about born people, I seriously don’t understand how you can’t see the hypocrisy of shutting down an anti-abortion group for stepping up to meet a need of born people.
“Is this the comment you are asking about??” – no Carla its not. I was talking about my 9:43pm response to Jack. I don’t understand how that wouldn’t be obvious given that my later comments, including the one you cite, appeared immediately upon posting. There is also my question “Is this comment also going to sit indefinitely awaiting moderation for no fathomable reason?”
“Let’s go over this again. If you cannot find your comment please email a mod.” – ok.
”But I do, however enjoy it when you puff up your chest and DEMAND to know what happened to your comment as if some vast right wing conspiracy has singled you out AGAIN for your beliefs!!” – you wish. I think this says more about you than me. I didn’t have any great issue with my comment being held for moderation until I found it strange that my later comments all appeared whilst my 9:43pm comment still wasn’t up. I didn’t want Jack to think I wasn’t responding to him. Can you demonstrate on what basis you claim that I think ‘some vast right wing conspiracy has singled you out AGAIN for your beliefs!!’?
“Thanks for the laughs.” – laughing at your own jokes again?
Let’s go over this again Courtnay – he.
Jack,I still think my comment about “oh, but we are…” applies more to organistions such as Care Net more than many others.
“What if it was a group of people from an anti-abortion church, that made a secular organization for community work but the employees all still were very anti-abortion and conservative.” – it wouldn’t – probably couldn’t – be a truly secular organisation.
“Biased” there’s that word again. Pro-choicers are biased, so are pro-lifers” – hence my comment to Kelly Z.
Hello again Reality.
Keep Calm
Email a Mod
Hello again Carla.
“Keep calm” – that’s funny coming from you.
“Email a mod” – I have, it was a pleasant experience.
If pro-choicers and pro-lifers genuinely want to work for good and find common ground, projects like low-income housing are a good place for them to start.
This. Again, if you were truly pro-choice, you would have zero problem with housing for mothers and the babies they choose to keep. Pro-choicers claim over and over that they trust that women are perfectly capable of making the right choice for themselves. Anyone who opposes a project like this is neither pro-life nor pro-choice but obviously pro-abortion.
The gif of cats is the best thing they got going for them.
So you’d support a coven of satan worshippers applying to undertake such a project?
“The gif of cats is the best thing they got going for them.” – pro-choicers are more sophisticated than that Praxedes!
http://babyanimalzoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/fennec-fox-baby.jpg
Better than the same tired old alleged images of defenstrated fetuses.
“applies more to organistions such as Care Net more than many others.”
Oh I know you do.
“– it wouldn’t – probably couldn’t – be a truly secular organisation.”
Well, that’s kinda like you’re arguing that unless people share specific viewpoints (pro-choice and liberal), they aren’t capable of running/organizing a secular organization. I’m pro-life and non-religious, would an organization I started automatically be suspected of not actually being secular, since I don’t agree with the pro-choice stuff?
“hence my comment to Kelly Z.” which was “outraged if I did so Kelly Z because you’d squawk that I would be building a pro-choice enclave with a captive audience for propaganda or something.”
If a pro-choice organization decided to build some low-income housing, sure I’d support them. I don’t have to agree with their rhetoric to see that they are doing a good thing in that instance.
“So you’d support a coven of satan worshippers applying to undertake such a project?”
Don’t see why I wouldn’t. If someone else thought their religion meant that they couldn’t do charity work I would tell them they are being overly-biased.
I think a lot of people would have issues with a satan-worshipping group wanting to start an orphanage.
What if nambla wanted to open a pre-school?
Or a condom manufacturer offering to run abstinence programs.
If I was a printer I might relish winning a contract to print religious instruction materials.
Get my point? :-)
Are you seriously comparing nambla to pro-lifers? Argh Reality, that hurts. :(
But seriously, you think we are incredibly biased compared to the other side. Noted. That’s not typical at all lol.
“I think a lot of people would have issues with a satan-worshipping group wanting to start an orphanage.
What if nambla wanted to open a pre-school?
Or a condom manufacturer offering to run abstinence programs.
If I was a printer I might relish winning a contract to print religious instruction materials.
Get my point? :-)”
I get it. Truly there is a shady motive for pro-lifers – be careful … They will promote life-affirming decisions and attitudes! Ha ha.
“Are you seriously comparing nambla to pro-lifers?” – not at all Jack. Just giving very clear examples of where groups with agendas need to be vetted before undertaking certain activities.
“But seriously, you think we are incredibly biased compared to the other side” – not this either. I don’t think that clearly pro-choice groups should be permitted to run things like pregnant teens hostels.
“Truly there is a shady motive for pro-lifers” – groups of various hues can have ‘shady motives’ in certain situations. I might let nambla run a car wash but certainly not a pre-school.
“They will promote life-affirming decisions and attitudes” – not as well as others :-)
“not at all Jack. Just giving very clear examples of where groups with agendas need to be vetted before undertaking certain activities.”
I’m just overly sensitive to groups who constantly try to normalize abuse I suffered, I just hate it when people use them as examples. They’re scum.
“not this either. I don’t think that clearly pro-choice groups should be permitted to run things like pregnant teens hostels.”
So you basically think that unless a group is (supposedly) neutral on a somewhat related issue (like abortion for women’s low income housing), they shouldn’t be allowed to do any charity work regarding that issue? Well, at least you’re consistent. Considering how much help is needed I don’t know if we should be quite so picky.
” I might let nambla run a car wash but certainly not a pre-school.”
Your examples represent a conflict of interest or self-serving motives. They illustrate no point whatsoever in terms of pro-lifers helping to provide affordable housing to moms in need.
It’s a shame Jack but I think ‘pickyness’ is required. In many cases.
“a 36-unit apartment building and daycare on land it owns next to its center.”
“your clients are going to know about the housing and will be on the list.”
“Care Net representatives acknowledged the possibility that revenue from the apartment building could eventually flow back to Care Net.”
So that’d be a “conflict of interest or self-serving motives.”
pro-choicers are more sophisticated than that Praxedes!
That baby animal link you posted is an obvious fake Reality!
“Care Net representatives acknowledged the possibility that revenue from the apartment building could eventually flow back to Care Net.”
Oh heavens! Care Net could possibly use funds gathered in the course of their charity work to…pay off their loan?! Gracious!!! We certainly can’t have that!
As someone who’s known a Satanist personally at one point in my life, I don’t think your idea of what a Satanist is is very far off from most of the Christians here (and rather incorrect-the worst you could expect from the Satanist I knew was him borrowing your xbox and not returning it), which I find absolutely hilarious, Reality. You’re such a narrow-minded prude.
Reality opposes charitable measures of Pro-Lifers to help women in crisis meet their basic needs. He really needs to start defending us to all those pro-legal abortionists who give us crap because we don’t do enough. “But guys, they can’t help women and their children like you’re constantly urging them to do. They’re…biased!”
Because, X, it has never been about helping women for the abortion defenders.
It’s been about abortion, the most important endgame and piece of political posturing ever.
Killing the unborn=liberation. OWN IT.
Yes Reality I said
KEEP CALM
And that is funny coming from me because……………
“That baby animal link you posted is an obvious fake Reality”
http://babyanimalzoo.com/?s=fennec
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fennec_fox
Like I said….
“Oh heavens! Care Net could possibly use funds gathered in the course of their charity work to…pay off their loan?!” – bzzt, wrong. Read the sentence again.
“Care Net representatives acknowledged the possibility that revenue from the apartment building could eventually flow back to Care Net.”
“And that is funny coming from me because……………” – you demonstrate a tendency for making outrageous and sometimes almost hysterical statements.
‘Advocate, promote and celebrate the killing of babies’
‘CHEER and CELEBRATE when women abort!’
The fact that I would encourage you to parade the streets carrying signs with such statements on them says it all, doesn’t it.
Sigh. The same tired old alleged images of defenstrated foxes. . . . . . . .
You think the fox in the photo has been defenestrated?
Do you not know what defenestrated means or do you have an ocular issue?
Like I said…..