Pro-life blog buzz 7-30-13
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- 40 Days for Life looks back at the history of the infamous, now-closed Bryan/College Station Planned Parenthood abortion clinic. It was the site of the very first 40 Days campaign, and was also the place where former PP employee Abby Johnson experienced a pro-life conversion.
- Americans United for Life shares the latest media poll numbers which show that “a plurality of Americans prefer reducing the limit on late-term abortions from 24 weeks to 20 weeks” and that women are more supportive of greater restrictions than men.
- At Live Action, Nancy Flanders reports on Tuesday Cain (pictured left, with her supportive pro-choice father), the young teen who is proudly taking credit for creating a vulgar sign seen during the Texas Capitol protests which read, “Jesus isn’t a d***, so keep him out of my vagina”:
Now that she has made sure to receive the credit for creating the sign, Tuesday plans on creating T-shirts to express her feelings. And while Tuesday says she knows a post-abortive woman who is now pro-life, it doesn’t change her stance. She says that this woman, likely with post-abortion syndrome, is one of the reasons she will continue to fight for abortion rights.And if witnessing someone’s pain and regret at killing her own children isn’t enough to instill a sense of wrong when it comes to abortion, perhaps an education will. Tuesday is fourteen and she wants to be a science teacher. It is my hope that in learning about science, Tuesday will soon see that even females in the womb deserve rights, no matter the religion of their parents.
- Fletcher Armstrong writes a stinging rebuke of church leadership’s excuses for refusing to address the abortion with their congregations. Many pastors have become social activities directors instead of getting involved in abolishing this “great injustice.” But this is nothing new:
But has the [church’s] response been anything more than ineffective half-measures, at best? Is that a surprise? Not if we look at how the Body of Christ responded to genocide against Jewish people and countless other crimes against humanity. To our eternal shame, the church has often been more concerned with saving face than saving lives….The church often seems preoccupied with other matters during times of great injustice.
- Clinic Quotes highlights a statement from Drea Olmstead (pictured right), an Oregon OB/GYN who believes parents should know about their minor daughter’s abortion because “it is highly unlikely that a teenage girl will seek appropriate treatment for complications arising from secret abortion, thus endangering her health.”
- Big Blue Wave finds it strange that – thanks to a gag order on the case – a New Zealand abortionist who has been fined, suspended for six months, prohibited from prescribing the misoprostol abortion drug for 3 years, and convicted of professional misconduct will not be publicly named. How does this protect the health and safety of women? After suspension, can we expect this abortionist to continue working without having to disclose past disciplinary actions?
- Expectant father Jason writes honestly in his blog about how he reacted with worry when he found out his wife was pregnant with their “surprise” third child, and how he soon discovered that “the next big thing might be the small thing in front of you”:
I probably should have felt thrilled about bringing new life into this world from the first moment I learned the news. But the truth is, I wasn’t.I suspect that is often the case any time our story changes in a way we didn’t anticipate, even if that change is mostly a good one. Our stories are bursting with opportunities for adventure. I’m slowly learning that the biggest among them might be hidden within the circumstances clothed in uncertainty.
[Photos via xojane.com, whallc.com]
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.
These pro-choice, er… pro-abortion supporters don’t comprehend that no-one is keeping anything from these women’s vaginas. It is the aftermath of that occurance, that we from the pro-life perspective fight for. So again, to make my point very clear to the pro-abortion crowd: women can partake as much as they desire but with one caveat: take responsibility for “putting up” and honor yourselves and your existence by defending the sanctity of unborn life. Afterall, as pro-abortionists, you were once in the womb!
The image of a father supporting his daughter’s quest to abort babies (read, his unborn grandchildren) is just abhorrent to me.
Seeing this pic made my jaw drop. First of all I thought they were a couple not father and daughter . What kinda morons are they? We live in a world gone mad.
Anyone else think this father has a creepy incestuous vibe to him? What father wants to think about anything inside his daughter’s vagina? EWWWW.
Sydney I thought the same thing….its beyond abnormal and disgusting!!! If anything he ought to be ashamed of her!
Creepy?
https://www.jillstanek.com/2013/06/pro-life-video-of-the-day-daddy-who-win-their-daughters-heart/
Sydney and Heather ~ So true. Father’s support for her sign makes him essentially holding a sign saying “Yeah, only d**** belong in my daughter’s vagina!”
What else do you think belongs there LifeJoy?
Oh, Reality … Is it really beyond the realm of imagination that some dads would not encourage anything at all going near their daughter’s vagina? Crazy conservative dads.
Sure, but you’re the one who derided him for supposedly saying only d**** belong in a vagina so I just wondered what you thought belongs there instead.
This conversation is really creepy.
I know Jack. Dad’s who want to ‘win their daughters heart’ rather than just be supportive and folk who imply who knows what belong in certain places. Freaky.
The only thing that makes this creepy is that a father would proudly stand by his daughter with this vulgar sign! Period!!
Its just creepy beyond words. I thought they were a couple which would have been a slight improvement….but her dad? I think I just threw up in my mouth a little!
Not to mention her pc friend who became pro life….what’s that saying? Kill more babies leave more women wounded.
I’m with Thomas R. This dad doesn’t want grand kids. But I’ll take it a step further: does this guy regret his daughter’s existence? Gotta wonder…
Reality: nothing belongs in the vagina of a 14yo girl. Period.
Beyond that, the sign shows a remarkable disregard for men. Presumably, Jesus was anatomically complete, so does she see the men around her only as their reproductive parts? Hopefully no man with the opportunity is *just* a D–. Lets say she has a boyfriend. He isn’t a D–, so does that mean he doesn’t belong in there at some point? Strictly speaking, that sign suggests that only sex toys belong there.
Congrats, Reality. I thought you’d reached a new low defending carriers of human waste at the Texas capitol. But today, you’ve sunk to a new low, even for you. Your mama must be so proud.
Back at you Rachel. Your assessment that this sign suggests that sex toys are a welcome foreign object is spot on. Hard-core feminists despise men and most likely envision a utopia of a nation of Amazonians. The only problem is that their pro-abortion stance will soon make them an extinct species and then what?
“This dad doesn’t want grand kids.” – that’s a baseless claim.
“But I’ll take it a step further: does this guy regret his daughter’s existence?” – it doesn’t appear to be so. He’s a supportive father.
“nothing belongs in the vagina of a 14yo girl. Period.” – the sign didn’t say that anything has been, needs to be or should be. It simply says that a penis is the only thing that would belong in her vagina – which kinda throws your ‘sex-toy’ theory out the window.
Are you not able to discern that the sign is indicative of the fact that religion should be kept away from womens bodies?
“But today, you’ve sunk to a new low, even for you.” – oh yes, how do you figure that? Who was it that wrote that daughter-dating-daddies were trying to ‘win their daughters hearts’ and of Tuesday Cain’s ‘supportive pro-choice father’? Wasn’t me. Nor was it me that suggested that objects other than a penis belong in anyone’s vagina.
Well, it’s pretty obvious the sign is meant facetiously to suggest keeping religion away from lady parts, but the message doesn’t change the fact that it’s still rather creepy.
The daddy-daughter “dating” isn’t meant to be creepy, either, but it still creeped me the hell out.
I’ve gotta get out of this thread.
L.I.B. there’s a trap door at the bottom of that scraped barrel. So the low could get ever lower.
Wonder if they brought their bottles of urine and crap with them to throw at the Jesus freaks….sheesh creepy fudges….no cursing so you can read between the lines on that one.
Yeah, Reality, if an adult woman chose to hold a sign saying the same thing, I might think it’s kinda dumb but not creepy. The fact that a fourteen-year-old is holding it, though, and that her father is encouraging it, that’s just creepy to me.
I don’t think it’s fair to accuse him of acting “incestuous” though. That’s a serious accusation. He might be an idiot, and it’s rather creepy he’s cool with his fourteen-year-old daughter talking about d**ks in her vagina, but I think we need to be careful about what we say about people imho.
“Is it really beyond the realm of imagination that some dads would not encourage anything at all going near their daughter’s vagina? Crazy conservative dads. ”
I missed this earlier, hey now that’s not fair. I tend liberal on a lot of issues and when my daughter is fourteen I would not be enthused about any dude being near her vagina (or any other girl, for that matter). Same for my son, when he’s fourteen people can stay off his genitals. I don’t think that’s a liberal versus conservative thing, most involved dads wouldn’t be cool with people getting near their kids at that age.
Everything I’ve seen indicates he is supporting her Jack, not encouraging her.
And I’d say his focus is more on what should be kept away from her woman bits rather than what might, um, enter them at some stage.
Okay, so say when my daughter is a young teen, thirteen or fourteen, she decides to protest some noble cause, say she goes to an anti-rape protest (obviously I don’t think pro-choice is a noble cause, but bear with me). I would be fine with that, and encourage her. I wouldn’t allow her to carry blatantly sexual or suggestive signage at that age. I would let her carry a sign that says “No means No”, but I wouldn’t let her carry a sign saying “You need my consent to f**k me” or something of that nature. It’s just… creepy to let your child carry sexually suggestive signs when they can’t even legally have sex. It’s inappropriate in my opinion. Obviously she’s not my kid and he can parent how he wants, but I still think it’s creepy. Just like I think talking about “winning your daughter’s heart” is rather creepy (though I think the idea is noble I think that language is rather creepy, might be a personal problem of mine because of my experiences though).
Do people not realize that fetuses don’t grow in the vagina, or something, btw? I’m firmly convinced that pro-choice protesters focus on that type of language because they insist on painting pro-lifers as anti-sex people trying to control sexuality, because they refuse to admit that the vast majority of pro-lifers are pro-life because they care about the babies.
Like I said if she were an adult it might be dumb, but not creepy. If my daughter wants to carry sexually suggestive signage at a protest when she’s an adult, I might tell her I think it’s dumb and that I don’t agree, but a grown woman can make those decisions. Minors aren’t adults, though, and I think parents who allow their young daughters and sons to carry signs like that are being creepy and making a mistake. Just my opinion on the matter. And I’m seriously having trouble with this dad being so cavalier with this when his daughter’s only fourteen. Fourteen-year-olds aren’t ready for sex at all, and if her dad thinks that she is I think that’s sad.
“pro-lifers as anti-sex people trying to control sexuality, because they refuse to admit that the vast majority of pro-lifers are pro-life because they care about the babies.” – in too many cases the ‘control sexuality’ bit plays a part.
“Fourteen-year-olds aren’t ready for sex at all, and if her dad thinks that she is I think that’s sad.” – there is nothing which indicates that that is the case.
Is it worse than a huge placard of a shredded fetus being waved in front of young children, or actually being waved by fourteen year olds?
“in too many cases the ‘control sexuality’ bit plays a part.”
Yeah, for some people they do focus on that. It’s exaggerated though by pro-choicers. There are plenty of pro-lifers who really don’t care what consenting adults do when they get freaky, as long as no one is killing babies or passing on diseases by not informing their partners.
““Fourteen-year-olds aren’t ready for sex at all, and if her dad thinks that she is I think that’s sad.” – there is nothing which indicates that that is the case.”
I think that letting your child carry sexually suggestive signage is tacitly approving of them having sex. That’s my opinion on it.
” Is it worse than a huge placard of a shredded fetus being waved in front of young children, or actually being waved by fourteen year olds?”
You should know by now I don’t agree with graphic photos being used around children, or held by children. I actually only think graphic photos are appropriate in very limited situations, none of them involve them being shown to children, except if it’s at home and the parents are showing them as education.
Before other pro-lifers jump on me NO I’m not saying your constitutional right to wave the graphic photos around should be taken away. I just disagree with it.
To be clear, if I let my kids go to a pro-life protest (which I wouldn’t, I am of the opinion that abortion protesting in general is really emotionally charged and dangerous for minors, I wouldn’t want my children to get hurt), I would let them carry a “Choose life for your baby” sign or something like that, I wouldn’t let them carry a “Sex is great, just don’t kill the baby!” sign or a graphic photo. Some things are not okay for kids to be involved in.