Pro-life blog buzz 12-9-14
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
- Suzy B agrees with pro-choice forces on a lawsuit against the alleged discrimination against pregnant employees in the workplace:
Both pro-life and pro-choice groups have filed amicus briefs on behalf of Peggy Young. The Women’s Law Project and Legal Momentum argued that the previous ruling in favor of UPS was incorrect on the basis of “misconceiving gender stereotypes in pregnancy discrimination.” Americans United for Life has filed an amicus brief, which the Susan B. Anthony List, among other pro-life groups have signed on to, coming from a different approach, standing up for the unborn and women. The brief argues that in creating the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Congress was trying to “protect women from economic pressure to abort their children because of pregnancy discrimination.” - Wesley J. Smith notes how swiftly the culture is accepting the policies of Jack Kevorkian, which were rejected in the 1990’s. People tend to respond to emotion as opposed to “facts and analysis,” as was seen in the case of Brittany Maynard, a woman with terminal brain cancer.
- Right to Life of Michigan shares an excerpt of an article by Ed Rivet on why death is not a treatment for disease. In the full story, Ed writes:
Suicide in response to terminal illness is by far the exception, not the rule. It is often a fear-based request and driven by underlying treatable depression. In 2012, the voters of Massachusetts also rejected legalized assisted-suicide. The widow of Sen. Edward “Teddy” Kennedy (pictured left, at bottom), after he died of the same cancer Brittany [Maynard] (pictured top left) had, spoke out strongly against the ballot measure. Vicki Kennedy said that the proposal “turns his [Teddy’s] vision of health care for all on its head by asking us to endorse patient suicide — not patient care — as our public policy for dealing with pain and the financial burdens of care at the end of life. We’re better than that.” - Secular Pro-Life examines the apparent connection between being pro-abortion and being an atheist.
- At The Vine, Breeanne Howe highlights some of the past week’s biggest pro-life headlines, such as the scandalous government-backed study of premature newborns in which their parents were not informed of the potential risks of blindness and neurological damage.
- Pro Life Blogs features an article from Where the Rubber Meets the Road on the increasing acceptance of the idea of infanticide for newborns with terminal illness or disabilities.
- ProWomanProLife gives a thumbs up review of The Birth of the Pill by Jonathan Eric, who writes in his book the following:
The cardinal tenet of the Contraceptive Regime is that The Pill safely sterilizes the sexual act. As a result of this belief, we accept the idea that we can have sex with anyone we want, without regard for potential consequences.We think we can have sex with a person who would be a disaster to parent with. And when the inevitable pregnancy actually occurs, we act surprised every time. Women are then faced with the choice of becoming a single mother, having an abortion or placing the baby for adoption. None of these choices is particularly good for the child, nor in the end, for the woman.
- Saynsumthn’s Blog says an “abortion abolitionist” recently showed abortion victim images at a children’s holiday parade in Tampa:
Being attacked for showing babies that have been horrifically aborted is not new. There is much debate among pro-lifers on this tactic. Yet, today, many groups within the pro-life movement advocate the use of these images in public venues.The wisdom of using such images intentionally where there are children around is an entirely different matter. Some believe that exposing children to the horrors of abortion at an early age cements their opposition to child killing for the rest of their lives. Others think that doing such a thing without parental permission is harmful.
What do you think? Do you believe this abolitionist was out of line in her activism at this children’s parade or do you support her?
[Photos via laprensanews.blogspot.com, salon.com, and startribune.com]
If abortion is no big deal, then why would parents object so vehemently to public display of abortion victim pictures?
Why do abortion rights advocates steal the signs or try to destroy them or block the view of them?
I’m not an Abolitionist but I understand why they do what they do. However, similar tactics by Operation Rescue generated sympathy for the baby killers and not for their victims.
I try to avoid any tactic that generates sympathy for abortionists but I don’t criticize tactics by other advocates for prenatal children – even the display of abortion victim pictures at “children’s” events.
2 likes
Adoption is good for children.
3 likes