GOP’s Abortion Barbie causes a meltdown – of more than just the GOP
I was leaving the One Voice worship service at the Renaissance Hotel in D.C. Wednesday night, on my way to meet fellow pro-lifers at the Dubliner Pub (dichotomous activities, I know, at least for a Protestant :), when Casey Mattox of Alliance Defending Freedom stopped me in the hall.
“They’re pulling the 20-week ban,” said Casey, “and substituting ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion‘.”
Casey started walking again, but I remained frozen, with my mouth agape, watching Casey until he entered disappeared around a corner.
I knew Rep. Renee Ellmers had tried to slow progress of the Pain Capable Child Protection Act.
But it was beyond the scope of my imagination to think GOP House leadership could be so traitorous, weak, and stupid as to pull a publicly supported landmark pro-life bill they’d publicly promised to sign the following day – during the largest public annual pro-life gathering in the world, and literally in their own backyard.
My shock turned to anger, and at all involved – Ellmers for fomenting a pro-abortion talking point the other side had never even thought of, and House leadership for their “deflated balls,” as Sarah Palin aptly put it, when it came to the pro-abortion cabal, but balls of steel when it came to such a brazen and senseless betrayal of their base.
I learned House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (pictured right) had broken the news to bill co-sponsor Trent Franks earlier in the evening at an inopportunely timed pro-life reception at which McCarthy was scheduled to speak.
Leaving a tearful Franks and pro-life leaders in his wake, McCarthy departed without giving that speech. What could he say?
This led to a tweet that was a bit out of character for me (two Guinnesses helped, I’m sure) but conveying the emotion I felt at the moment, which frankly hasn’t dissipated…
.@GOPLeader was supposed to speak at #prolife event tonite and bailed. #fu
— Jill Stanek (@JillStanek) January 22, 2015
Yesterday morning I woke up crying, and I pretty much haven’t stopped. The emotion of holding the 21-week-old abortion survivor at Christ Hospital has returned. Maybe I’m experiencing PTSD, dunno. I haven’t been this upset about it in years.
The 20-week ban was so close. It needed to get to Barack Obama’s desk. If he blocked it, well, been there, done that with the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.
But for our own side to abandon these babies, especially when they had the power not to, well, it makes me want to punch somebody.
Well, not really. I had the chance to do that yesterday and passed on it.
As I said, I woke up crying. And an idea I had broached with friends at the Dubliner the night before (that’s us brainstorming, right) to protest Ellmers’ office took hold.
More than that, for the first time since I joined the pro-life movement 15 years ago, I felt I was in the midst of an unjust moment in time for which I was willing to commit civil disobedience during the protest – in honor of that baby.
So Reverend Pat Mahoney and I started organizing our protest. And when a reporter oddly but coincidentally asked if I was prepared to be arrested, I said yes.
This piqued the media’s interest. Calls started coming in. “You’re willing to be arrested?” I was asked by MSNBC, CBS, etc.
The prospect also terrified Ellmers’ staffers, I’m told. (By the time of our protest Ellmers had gutlessly left town.)
So when we, together with a group from Students for Life of America, showed up at Ellmers’ office at the appointed time of 3 p.m., news cameras were waiting, and three of Ellmers’ staff stood outside her locked door – to preclude a sit-in – with a bucket of iced refreshments.
So after pro-life spokespersons, including me, made their statements, and Ellmers’ people responded with, “We’re here to listen, we want to hear you,” blah blah blah…
… I was ready for my sit-in but had nowhere to sit but in what was fast becoming an empty hall, which seemed pretty lame.
There were seven capitol policemen ready to arrest me, but their boss told me that would only happen if I broke a window or punched somebody. Otherwise, no.
So unable to civilly but disobediently take a stand for the little 21-weeker who was being cast aside by Republicans, along with thousands of his friends in the name of political cowardice, I glumly left to crash at my daughter’s house, drained from the emotional roller coaster of the past 24 hours, which had started on such a high note and ended with PTSD.
Today I woke up crying again.
This all reminds me of the time the Born Alive Infants Protection Act failed in Illinois for the first time. I was naive and so taken by surprise I began sobbing uncontrollably and had to be led to a bathroom by my friend Fran Eaton to compose myself.
But the first, second, third, and fourth fails of BAIPA were for a reason. Had BAIPA passed without a hitch, the pro-infanticide proclivity of then no-name state Sen. Barack Obama would never have been known. This has served more than one good purpose, I think, for instance to further educate the American public on the barbarism of abortion.
Is it a coincidence that it was only in 2009 that more Americans first told Gallup they were pro-life than pro-choice? And have polled our way five of nine times since? I don’t think so.
So I’ll return to the battle in faith that this setback, too, will somehow work for good.
_______________
[Photo of Dubliner via Brandi Swindell; photo of reporters via Andy Moore; photo of crowd via Kristina Hernandez of Students for Life of America; credit for “GOP’s Abortion Barbie”: Erick Erickson]
Some good commentaries to read on this catastrophe:
“Why everyone should be terrified of the GOP’s abortion bill debacle”
“Renee Ellmers says she won’t flip-flop on bill protecting viable infants from late-term abortion”
Planned Parenthood VP’s tweet supporting Republicans’ cave
“Why does @RepReneeEllmers want to protect rapists and abortionists?”
“The pro-life movement must stop being whores of the Republican Party”
Wow. They are such cowards. Ellmers skipped town and sent her poor hired hands out to meet the villagers and their pitch forks? WHAT COWARDS. I wonder how the pro-lifers who voted for her feel.
I love love love that you hashtagged #fu. I love that. You’re so real, Jill. And passionate. And I admire that.
I guess AHA can be happy now. The ban that was so beneath them has been shelved.
9 likes
I am truly sickened by this betrayal. It plays right into the hands of the pro-aborts by making this about “punishing” women with a baby (quoting our president). So if the baby was conceived through “bad” behavior (sex) on the part of the women, she must bear the child. But if the child was conceived through no fault of the woman (rape or incest) she can have it killed. There should be no exception for rape or incest – this is about the BABY. A 20 week fetus feels the same pain regardless of his or her conception. This takes the focus off of child completely. I cannot believe this.
FYI – My father, a life-long democrat and faithful Catholic, told me for years that the Republicans are just stringing pro-lifers along to get their votes. I finally believe him.
11 likes
So let me get this straight – just want confirmation.
The house put together a bill that essentially says that almost every abortion that happens is a-okay, except for a small percentage, which they want to ban.
Some of the house GOP women say that of that small number, there is an even smaller percentage – a tiny component of that that which is problematic to them, so they’d like language switched.
The bill, either way, was going to get vetoed, and even if it didn’t, was going to cause court battles – and the pro-life goal, as I understand it, was to try to test the language with the courts to change the bar on viability and exceptions.
So rather than just take the language out of the bill and pass it to test it out, they fall on their sword and do nothing?
And this gal is the bad guy?
Is there a less coordinated, less logical movement than the pro-life movement these days?
Just let me know if anything factual I said was wrong – could the bill language simply not get changed? Did somebody lose their pen or something?
2 likes
I’ve felt whipsawed today: the Ellmers of Congress on one side, my all-or-nothing pro-life allies on the other. “We can’t seem harsh,” say the Ellmers. “It was a bad bill that had exceptions and wouldn’t have saved anyone anyway,” say the pro-lifers who fought against the bill.
Well, I supported the bill, and I feel socked in the gut. I don’t blame Boehner, because I didn’t expect much from him. I blame the GOP women in Congress who backed out. These are women who took money from pro-lifers in order to unseat pro-abortion Democrats. This is what we get.
Thank you, Jill, for your account of the day. I don’t feel quite so alone. There’s work to be done, and like you, I believe this will somehow work for good.
12 likes
“They’re pulling the 20-week ban,” said Casey, “and substituting ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion‘.”
Jill, I am sincerely sorry for your PTSD…
Does anybody know What is the anti-funding bill that they were replacing it with? If it means defunding Planned Parenthood of government monies then imo it would save a lot more babies than the pain capable legislation could save.
4 likes
I hate news like this….so horrible!
2 likes
These poor children…I felt there protection all the march and back. I believe it gives us all a touch of PTSD…. however in our next life all of these pro aborts will have much much more than PTSD! All we can do is keep trying as best as we can to get our message across that abortion is MURDER!
2 likes
sorry for typos…their protection all the way as well as the Lords protection. Despite many obstacles… including being pulled over for speeding and let off with a warning I made it. The cop even was helpful and gave me directions!
2 likes
God bless you, Jill. I know how personal this is for you and I hate that the GOP is so stupid and inept and that they need to be led by the hand every step of the way. But we will demand that this bill be reintroduced. If the language needs to be adjusted to avoid a potential backlash, fine. That’s pragmatism. But at the same, if the GOP wasn’t stupid they would have known this beforehand and the adjustments would have been made as required.
Really the only reason I’m commenting here after so many years is that I can feel the anguish in your words. God will give us Justice and Mercy even if mankind never will. May the Blood of the Lamb wash over your wounds and heal them. Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us all.
9 likes
Ex-GOP – that “small percentage” still equates to approximately 10,000 abortions per year. Are you okay with the deliberate killing of 10,000 innocent human beings per year in this country?
10 likes
truthseeker, the anti-funding bill is to enact a permanent Hyde Amendment so the Hyde Amendment does not have to be attached to a bill and passed every year.
Small consolation, but at least they passed a pro-life bill yesterday instead of nixing the whole thing.
5 likes
Thanks MoJo. Maybe you could help me further. Could making the Hyde amendment permanent law set the stage for using the Hyde amendment to defund Planned Parenthood? Also, why was Obama willing to drop the ‘Affordable Care Act’ rather than place hyde-like language (The stupak Amendment) into the Obamacare legislation?
0 likes
So lame that the leadership bailed on this small step (tho still about 10,000 children a year) towards ending elective abortions.
But don’t despise the “small” beginning. Like a small child, it can grow & grow!
5 likes
Jill, but you must rejoice in the fact that the bill went so far! We just have to keep trying and not give up. The devil wants us to stop trying and to give in to despair. Rome was not built in a day. Keep pressing on, and never give up the good fight!
3 likes
Hi all: How can we find out who was on that committee and how each voted? I want to send a letter (small step I know) to each of them and the Republican leadership to let them know exactly how much damage they did to their party. They “sucker-punched” everyone who voted for them in the mid-term election.
3 likes
I agree Julie….. This year the march was just huge. Many of the people were young. As I’ve said before I’m now 45 and I doubt abortion will ever be turned back… we have had the legalization for so long. We have to turn back 42 years of this mindset. Also think about all of the other people who couldn’t make the march all across the world. I should specify…. I doubt abortion will be turned back in my lifetime given I live into old age. I hate to be cynical but its sad that so many of the nuts want abortion on demand. They are going to go back to their demands that we must keep abortion legal. We won’t go back to the back alley days and we we I I I me me me waaaaaa! All we can do is keep trudging on. Any young woman I meet I put it into their heads that abortion is what I fight for.
3 likes
Also MK and I agree that pro abort parents today are creating a sociopathic mindset in their children today. Allow me to take 2 famous women Kathy Najimy and Whoopi Goldberg who are both post abortive without apology. Both have said they wish to keep abortion legal for their daughters. Well a former friend of mine who had aborted years ago used to justify her abortion by saying ” Well my mom had one.” I had finally had a huge fight with her…..not necessarily about abortion but I finally brought it up. I explained that she was a cold blooded killer and a sociopath who has never ever felt an ounce of regret. She shot back ID DO IT AGAIN…. my attitude is don’t fuss with me because now I WILL let you have it. I did so including ” Sad that men who murder have to sit in prison and you’ve gotten to become a nurse get married enjoy your living children etc.” it’s not fair and not all women feel bad. Her mom doesn’t feel bad either. Get out of my life and good riddance!!!!!
4 likes
[…] Do TheyThink I Am? SpeakingSchedule Bio Blog GA_googleFillSlot("Ad_Row_Wide"); « Previous Entry · Home […]
0 likes
JoAnna –
I’ve posted multiple times they should have lowered it a lot less than 20 weeks – if you’re going to go to the courts anyway, just do it.
My point is, the GOP is already saying they are fine with 99% of abortions in this bill – but then they draw a line on just a small percentage of that, and pull it completely?
I’ve taken static for years about voting for Democrats. Well – look what your GOP has delivered!
2 likes
Group of us were talking about this at lunch yesterday. Made the remark that the dumbest reason to end up in hell is sticking up for someone else’s sin. With abortion/no-living-baby-birth-control my thought is;
I did not have the sex/NOT having an affair,
did not make any money i.e. not the pimp/abortion worker/pharmacy industry/etc.,
still stuck-up for them and
wondering where my bud is while sitting in the flames of hell.
They, at the last moment, repent and end up in Heaven. Dumber than Dumb on my part if that is what is happening.
As for rape and incest victims, imagine how they feel when they realize that 57 million and counting abortions and everything else are USING them as an excuse! Not to mention that the most of the rapists are still out there. Does PP report this? Not that I have heard.
Prays for Jill and everyone in these trying times.
4 likes
You referred to “The pro-life movement must stop being whores of the Republican Party”.
Name calling. Take the w and e (we) out of that name and what are you left with? HOR, the House of Representatives. Vote them out of office. Every last one of them!
1 likes
For what it’s worth, the only reason Ellmers got elected in the first place is because she was running against this wingnut. Then in 2014, the Democrats ran an American Idol contestant against her.
0 likes
Take heart. How many times did William Wilberforce’s legislation against the transatlantic slave trade get halted and subject to political interference? So many, many times! Perseverance payed off in the end. Romans 5 says “. . .we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.” And Lady, you’ve got a lot of character!
7 likes
Hi Meghan,
Excellent point.
Did slavery end overnight in the US? How many years of setbacks, disappointments, stagnation, and political battles won and lost before slavery ended?
Did Dr. Martin Luther King Jr throw his hands up in despair and walk away from the battle for civil rights when civil rights legislation wasn’t passed overnight?
Perseverance is what won these battles.
5 likes
“told me for years that the Republicans are just stringing pro-lifers along to get their votes.”
Some of them, yes. And they need to be weeded out.
“look what your GOP has delivered!”
Look at what your party has delivered: herestheblood.com
6 likes
Prax –
No party delivered abortion to the US – but now that it is here, both parties allow it.
2 likes
Welcome Jimmy Ashby. We hope you’ll stay and dialogue with us. However, please read the rules above. If you disagree, that is fine. You’re welcome to express your opposing viewpoints but please express them in a constructive manner. Your comment on the other thread was just fine so it stays. The one here was out of line and not in accordance with our rules so it goes. Thank you for your future cooperation.
1 likes
I have always viewed Republicans who support legalized abortion as RINOs and not real Republicans.
I think I may have previously mentioned on here that, in regards to abortion, I believe the only person worse than the person who openly states s/he supports legal abortion is the person who says s/he opposes legal abortion but secretly pushes it behind the scenes.
The fact remains that your party openly pushes/supports abortion, Ex-GOP.
The RINOs need to go, and your party needs to get with the program.
6 likes
Ex-GOP – the GOP does not say they are “fine” with 99% of abortions in this bill, so please stop making false statements (unless you can provide a quote from the bill in question that says, “The GOP are fine with 99% of abortion.”)
I’m having a hard time seeing the logic in your comments. If we try to ban abortion from conception onwards, that kind of bill has *no hope* of passing. The dehumanizing legacy of Roe is still in full force. There are many Republicans (who should indeed call themselves RINOs) who have no problem with first trimester abortions and WOULD vote against such a bill (but these same legislators do oppose abortion after 20 weeks, for various reasons — viability, capability to feel pain, etc). So we try to save as many as we can with the legislation that has the best chance of passing. After it does pass, we work to educate the public and our legislators about the humanity of the unborn in hopes that we will eventually outlaw all abortion. But I think working to save 10,000 babies a year is a worthy goal, since sadly it’s not going to be possible to save 1 million a year as things stand. That’s simply reality at this point. And of course the people “on the ground” will work to save as many babies as possible through offering tangible support to mothers in crisis pregnancies. It’s not “either we pass legislation or we work to save babies,” it’s “we pass legislation AND we work to save babies.”
This is called the incremental approach, and you can read mor about that here: http://gerardnadal.com/2011/05/23/outlawing-abortion-making-the-case-for-an-incremental-approach/f
4 likes
thank you Syd!!! That was cruel….Jill I’m so sorry you are crying. The blood..is on the hands of unrepentant murderers. They shall pay pay pay for..what they have done! Our nation is in huge trouble and Jill you are the best! Nice to see you Mary and all. Sydney you are a wonderful moderator! All pro lifers rock!! I wish the day would come that we didn’t have to defend abortion. It needs to be a criminal offense. I give my free time as do many standing in front of abortion clinics and I take horrid abuse. yeah like that’s fun. But it’s necessary and I shall keep fighting. We shall keep fighting this evil. Satan’s favorite sin.
4 likes
Also giving a big clap for those who work at pregnancy crisis centers. Those who pray to end abortion and those who protest against at abortion..clinics. Many are called but few are chosen.
5 likes
Prax –
Used to be straight ticket GOP.
I don’t like that the Dems support abortion – but it’s clear that the GOP isn’t much different on the issue – so I vote on different issues.
1 likes
Joanna –
A couple of points –
The bill says: “A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the
abortion shall not be performed or attempted, if the probable
post-fertilization age, as determined under paragraph (1), of
the unborn child is 20 weeks or greater.”
– So essentially, any vote is still in favor of abortion up to 20 weeks.
– On the rest of your statements – that would be news to me – I thought the GOP was in favor of banning abortion outright – so you are of the opinion that if there was a bill to ban abortion outright, one of the most conservative House of Rep groups in the history of this country would not support it?
– I’m okay with small steps – but what is the step after 20 weeks? Is there a plan? That’s to my point of this not being a well thought out movement it appears. Every 40 years or so, are they just going to drop it another 2 weeks? So, we’ll be down to a ban in several hundred years?
1 likes
I really appreciate you Jill. Thank you so much for fighting so hard and caring so much. It is an honor and a privilege to fight alongside you.
This battle isn’t over, like several of the great comments above pointed out. I’ve cried with you Jill, and now I share your rage. We need to keep hammering the truth with a vengeance. We need to identify these cowards and traitors and make sure they know there will be hell to pay for their treachery.
Keep praying Jill. Keep pressing in and getting those inspired thoughts and those Heavenly downloads. And keep raising your voice. May your boldness increase even more Sister as you continue to confront the darkness of our generation. Specifically, the horrific evil of abortion, and the detestable, weak and cowardly hearts of those who refuse to oppose abortion with the appropriate righteous indignation and spiritual violence that you do.
Fight on Sister.
6 likes
I can’t give thumbs but @ ED….you said it!!!
4 likes
Welcome Jimmy Ashby. We hope you’ll stay and dialogue with us.
Jimmy Ashby = James Ashby = Jake, who was already banned for perpetual trolling and cyberstalking a rape victim (among other things).
2 likes
[…] I was disappointed that, to my knowledge, no conservative political cartoonist picked up on the 20-week abortion ban scandal in the GOP-controlled House. […]
2 likes
Does anybody from the pro-life movement have an explanation as to why the Obama administration was willing to let Obamacare fail to become law rather than insert the Stupak amendment? Why would putting “Hyde-like” language into Obamacare have been such a crushing blow to the abortion industry?
1 likes
truth –
I can comment on your second question – but your first – I hadn’t seen that – can you provide background or an article that Obama wouldn’t have signed the bill if the Stupak amendment was in there?
1 likes
Hmmm…I guess Navi because I’m new at moderating I didn’t know he was Jake. Funny how people like to come trolling…and keep on even after they’re banned. Kinda pathetic.
2 likes
Ex-RINO, many Democrarts (pro-choice representatives) of the House were holding up the passage of the ACA if the Stupak amendment was not withdrawn. That is when Obama brought Stupak into the oval office and got Stupak to agree to vote against his own amendment.
3 likes
Two things:
– You said the Obama administration was willing to let it fail rather than become law – now you are saying that house members. Please clarify which ones you want to stick with.
– The Stupak amendment passed November 7, 2009 by the house 240-194. Stupak voted for it.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll884.xml
1 likes
Ex-RINO,
For someone who calls themselves pro-life you sure have a poor memory of this. It has nothing to do with picking one to stick with.
1) Nobody can say 100% that Obama would not have signed the ACA with the Stupak amendment in it because he was not forced to make that decision. Let’s just agree that the ‘pro-choice’ Democrats were willing to hold out and not vote for the ACA unless the Stupak amendment was withdrawn.
2) Yes the Stupak amendment passed the House the first go around. But the Senate made changes so it had to get voted on in the House a second time before it could go to the president’s desk for signing and it was stripped from the ACA.
But the purpose of my post was not to knit pick with you or anybody else about the Stupak betrayal or Obama lobbying the Democrats against the Stupak amendment. What I wanted to ask is is if anybody knows why the Stupak amendment (Hyde like language) in the ACA would have negatively impacted the abortion industry?
5 likes
The Hyde amendment is current law. Because of the Hyde amendment government can not pay for health plans that cover abortion. Even without the Stupak amendment why wouldn;t Hyde prevent the federal government subsidize health plans that cover abortion for private citizens?
2 likes
“They’re pulling the 20-week ban,” said Casey, “and substituting ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion‘.”
Did they ever vote on the bill to make Hyde permanent law?
4 likes
Never mind…I see they did pass it.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/22/house-abortion-bill/22148205/
When are they going to bring it up for vote in the Senate?
2 likes
truth –
If that was not your purpose, then I would recommend you use accurate and truthful information next time.
The answer you’re looking for is out there – easy to find. Good luck!
1 likes
I am genuinely interested in efforts to stop government funding of abortion. I would like to see the GOP pass a law that cuts through the shell games and deceit that allow Planned Parenthood to get millions in Title X funding each year. That would really make my day and restore my faith that the GOP is not just business as usual and they are serious about making a positive difference in the culture-for-life while they control congress.
3 likes
What I wanted to ask is is if anybody knows why the Stupak amendment (Hyde like language) in the ACA would have negatively impacted the abortion industry?
The ACA itself would inherently negatively impact the “abortion industry,” if such a thing existed, because it increases access to effective contraception and therefore decreases the need for abortion. Pro-life claims that PP would “benefit” from the ACA are and always have been arrant nonsense.
2 likes
LisaC,
Try and get your mind off contraception for a minute if you can. Reread the question. The question was about why the Stupak amendment would have negatively impacted the abotion industry and the Stupak amendment had nothing to do with contraception.
1 likes
So do we think that Ellmers has cold, dead eyes now?
4 likes
Try and get your mind off contraception for a minute if you can.
Sorry, I shouldn’t have left you to piece things together on your own. The ACA hurt the “abortion industry.” The Stupak Amendment was intended to to help the ACA pass. Therefore, the Stupak Amendment would have hurt the “abortion industry.” However, the fact that reproductive health organizations supported the ACA in the first place shows the fundamental flaw of constructing pro-life discussion around a framework of what benefits the “abortion industry.”
3 likes
“the fundamental flaw of constructing pro-life discussion around a framework of what benefits the “abortion industry.”
LisaC,
Are you able to comprehend that it would hurt the abortion industry if we were to withhold government funding from any business that commits abortion?
2 likes
“the fact that reproductive health organizations supported the ACA in the first place”
I thought it was hypocritical for pro-aborts to support the ACA. I see them chanting for people to stay out their vaginas and to “keep your rosaries off our ovaries” but they want government overseeing their health care plans. Oh well, I guess you shouldn’t expect logic or any kind of common sense from baby killers….
3 likes
Trying to figure out who’s who can be difficult. I think I trust the dead, zombie eyes before the charming, snake eyes.
I admit that I am often easily confused though (I accept it!) and have relied on luck more than anything to get through trials.
Thinking of and praying for you and other prolifers, Jill. I think there are many of us dealing with PTSD because of abortion and the other terrible issues surrounding it.
2 likes
Ex-Gop, Democrats have sold out en masse. At least there are Republicans who genuinely care passionately about this issue. The Democratic Party is not the answer to this national lesion on society — just the opposite.
There should be ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion‘ and an early limit on abortion (like 0 weeks old).
2 likes
The blood..is on the hands of unrepentant murderers.
ITA with you, Heather.
And not only the murderers themselves, but all who support (in any way) and fund their abortuaries.
2 likes
I see them chanting for people to stay out their vaginas and to “keep your rosaries off our ovaries” but they want government overseeing their health care plans.
A strong statement, truthseeker — and absolutely true!
Oh well, I guess you shouldn’t expect logic or any kind of common sense from baby killers….
Indeed. :(
2 likes
[…] think it was my friend Jill Stanek who pointed out recently in a blog post on her website that holding an abortion survivor may be causing her to […]
0 likes
[…] last week’s unconscionable retreat by House Republicans from pressing forward with a federal Pain-Capable ban, to date 10 states […]
1 likes
A couple of points –
The bill says: “A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the
abortion shall not be performed or attempted, if the probable
post-fertilization age, as determined under paragraph (1), of
the unborn child is 20 weeks or greater.”
– So essentially, any vote is still in favor of abortion up to 20 weeks.
That’s not true. To draw an analogy, suppose I tell you that you can’t have what you want unless you ask nicely. Now, it doesn’t necessarily follow that you can have whatever you want as long as you ask nicely. For example, the answer is always going to be “no” if you ask me to help you smuggle drugs or bombs past airport security regardless of how nicely you ask. It does, however, follow that you can’t have what you want if you don’t ask nicely. Likewise, a vote on a bill that says “no abortions unless the woman was raped or under 20 weeks” is not a vote in favour of early abortions. It does, however, say that abortion is not allowed if the woman wasn’t raped and she is more than 20 weeks pregnant. A vote against it is a vote in favour of late-term abortion.
– On the rest of your statements – that would be news to me – I thought the GOP was in favor of banning abortion outright – so you are of the opinion that if there was a bill to ban abortion outright, one of the most conservative House of Rep groups in the history of this country would not support it?
I discussed that in another thread. What do you think of my answer?
– I’m okay with small steps – but what is the step after 20 weeks? Is there a plan? That’s to my point of this not being a well thought out movement it appears. Every 40 years or so, are they just going to drop it another 2 weeks? So, we’ll be down to a ban in several hundred years?
Your math is a bit off, seeing as the limit is about 40 weeks now (reducing it to 20 would be much more than two weeks). As for what’s next, what about putting an end to dismemberment abortion (dilation and evacuation) as they’re likely to do in Kansas? That would effectively ban abortion from 13-20 weeks. Coupled with legislation like the Pain Capable Child Protection Act, abortion would be limited to the first 12 weeks.
2 likes
Navi –
Thanks for the link back to the other thread – I had unsubscribed so hadn’t seen your post.
A few quick thoughts:
– I still think this appears less of a incremental plan and more like a settled compromise. At best, it gets through the courts and they affirm abortion up to 20 weeks, and make an exception for a percent or two of abortions – but strengthen the history of decisions up to 20 weeks.
– The court has four votes in the bag – so it would just be Kennedy that would swing on it – and he’s a wild card in general. Goes all the way and wins, and there’s finally something that makes more than a tiny change in the numbers (though I don’t think it would be a significant change) – go and lose, and you fire up the pro-life base more and bring the discussion to the forefront of the nation (it simply isn’t anymore – even though it is more than 5 years ago, it is still pretty far down the list of top issues people vote on)
-More and more, I just don’t feel bad about not voting for conservatives – at best, they are passing up swinging for the fences to try for a bunt single. At worst, they’re finding token legislation to try to keep a base of voters without really doing anything. People can mock me – I don’t really care – GOP tried hard to save a very small percentage, and they failed to even come to consensus on that. I feel you answered the question on the supremes not being conservative in the other thread – but I’ll ask this – if the House voted on a ban for abortion, total ban, no exceptions – does it pass?
0 likes
[…] news broke that H.R. 36 would be shelved, supporters of the pro-life issue were outraged. Wrote long time pro-life activist Jill Stanek, ”…it was beyond the scope of my imagination […]
0 likes
[…] news broke that H.R. 36 would be shelved, supporters of the pro-life issue were outraged. Wrote long time pro-life activist Jill Stanek, ”…it was beyond the scope of my imagination to think […]
0 likes
[…] was pretty angry that day, and, if anything, I’m angrier today. I’m not alone in wanting the political scalp of […]
0 likes
I still think this appears less of a incremental plan and more like a settled compromise. At best, it gets through the courts and they affirm abortion up to 20 weeks, and make an exception for a percent or two of abortions – but strengthen the history of decisions up to 20 weeks.
The same criticism was made of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban (which, unlike this one, did not directly prevent any abortions at all). But that clearly wasn’t a settled compromise seeing as we’re here discussing yet another new abortion law (and pro-life groups are already experimenting with a ban on dismemberment abortions which will eventually make its way to the national level). Virtually everyone on all sides (except AHA whackos) sees the 20-week ban as a step toward ending legal abortion, not a compromise. A good analogy I have heard is that the strategy to end abortion is like the famous “island hopping” campaign of World War II. Rather than capturing all of Japan at once, the goal was to capture one island at a time (all the while moving toward the mainland). This bill is like a single island – not worth much on its own, but still an important and necessary victory. It’s also worth noting that the Supreme Court originally ruled 5-4 to strike down a state-level version of the ban on partial-birth abortion, but upheld the federal one following a change in the judiciary. I also notice that you routinely dismiss 20-week abortions as “only a percent or two”. But that translates to over 10000 people killed every year – more than three times the number killed by the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The court has four votes in the bag – so it would just be Kennedy that would swing on it – and he’s a wild card in general. Goes all the way and wins, and there’s finally something that makes more than a tiny change in the numbers (though I don’t think it would be a significant change) – go and lose, and you fire up the pro-life base more and bring the discussion to the forefront of the nation (it simply isn’t anymore – even though it is more than 5 years ago, it is still pretty far down the list of top issues people vote on)
Indeed, getting people thinking about the issue is essential. But that doesn’t mean everything that gets the pro-life movement in the news is a good thing. We saw that with Todd Akin’s gaffe about pregnancy and rape. Which brings us back to the issues I rose in the other thread about whether it’s a better strategy to put the other side on the defence by framing the debate on the area where they’re the weakest, or to open ourselves up to attack on rape, criminal punishment (including the death penalty) for women who have abortions, birth control, and IVF – things that derail total abortion bans even in states like Mississippi and South Dakota. Going after late-term abortion would accomplish the goal of “fir[ing] up the pro-life base more and bring[ing] the discussion to the forefront of the nation” without the baggage attached to a total abortion ban.
The 2015 political environment is not one where voters stand outside a courthouse for three hours watching political leaders exchange the best arguments for and against abortion Lincoln-Douglas style before making an informed decision on how to vote. It’s one where soundbites like “legitimate rape”, “freedom fries”, “I love Big Bird”, “You didn’t build that”, and (most importantly) “my flag pin is bigger than your flag pin” carry more weight than whatever the speaker was trying to say. It’s also a very visual one. A video of a police officer choking an unarmed man to death or a medical diagram depicting an abortionist about to stab an unborn baby in the head with surgical scissors can have a profound effect (recall that the partial-birth abortion debate resulted in a significant, permanent shift toward the pro-life opinion).
More and more, I just don’t feel bad about not voting for conservatives – at best, they are passing up swinging for the fences to try for a bunt single. At worst, they’re finding token legislation to try to keep a base of voters without really doing anything. People can mock me – I don’t really care – GOP tried hard to save a very small percentage, and they failed to even come to consensus on that.
I don’t know why anyone would mock you on the latter point. Pro-lifers have spent the last two weeks condemning the GOP as useless and dysfunctional at best, if not downright treacherous. Here’s a sample of articles from this site and others:
https://www.jillstanek.com/2015/01/gops-abortion-barbie-meltdown/
https://www.jillstanek.com/2015/02/weeks-today-gop-house-leaders-bailed-20week-abortion-banout-ellmers/
http://www.redstate.com/2015/01/22/the-pro-life-movement-must-stop-being-whores-of-the-republican-party/
http://thefederalist.com/2015/01/22/if-the-gop-cant-pass-a-late-term-abortion-ban-what-can-it-do/
Efforts are already underway to defeat Rep. Ellmers and other members of congress that sabotaged the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (and nobody is safe – even high-ranking Republicans like Eric Cantor can lose primaries).
I feel you answered the question on the supremes not being conservative in the other thread – but I’ll ask this – if the House voted on a ban for abortion, total ban, no exceptions – does it pass?
I wouldn’t count on the House to pass anything at this point. There’s no way it would pass the Senate – there are not enough reliable pro-life votes there.
1 likes
[…] nurse and pro-life blogger Jill Stanek, who once held a late term abortion survivor in her arms and who organized that protest at […]
0 likes
[…] I was with SFLA the first time its students visited Ellmers’ office on January 22. The student group has been particularly keen to speak with Ellmers, since one of her reasons for opposing a vote on the 20-week ban is that it might turn off young people. According to National Journal: […]
1 likes