After getting my kids off to college this weekend, I actually sat back and read the newspaper! Thumbing through the New York Times, I came across an article about a new medical test that would help couples identify the sex of their unborn baby much earlier in the pregnancy. Today, you have to wait until about 15 weeks or so to get a definitive answer.
This is a great scientific advancement so, of course, the pro-life groups are up in arms and expressing grave concern. That’s because they think that women will start aborting fetuses because they wanted a boy instead of a girl or they already had three girls and were hoping to mix it up a bit. And, of course, if the male has anything to say about it, he would abort that silly little girl over the next Derek Jeter.
Let’s all acknowledge that in certain cultures boys are preferred over girls and the practice of sex selection abortions is rather common in some of those cultures. And, to be honest, while the idea of aborting a fetus because of its sex feels rather strange to me, I still have to support the woman on this one. As I have always said, up until the point of viability the women should be able to abort no matter what the reason, no matter how uncomfortable it might be for others. That’s because, if you start carving out exceptions such as sex selection, then you’re on a slippery slope and our lawmakers would soon be looking at other exceptions.
Of course, those who were raised in other cultures wind up coming to the United States so it is quite possible that a woman, for example, from India might want an abortion here in the U.S. because she knows she’s having a girl. This new test will allow her to identify the sex much earlier which would allow her to have an abortion earlier in her pregnancy. And, if you are going to have an abortion, earlier is always better than later, no?
So, yes, this new test might “encourage” a woman, particularly one from the East, to have an abortion for purposes of sex selection. But let’s be real about this.
The fact is that when a woman goes into an abortion facility, after signing the paperwork, getting some medical tests, etc. she is then seen by a counselor. The counselor discusses with her the abortion process, she reviews her other options, she talk about birth control and, well, sometimes they just plain talk. But in the vast majority of reputable abortion clinics, the counselor does not ask why the woman is having the abortion. There is no reason to know. It would not change the abortion process. That issue is left to the woman and anyone else she wishes to have involved in the decision. Sure, a woman might just voluntarily offer why she was having the abortion but that question is not on the counselor’s “must ask” list.
So, in the future if a woman takes this new test and it indicates she is having a girl and she decides she does not want a girl, she may abort. Personally, I think that would be a rare circumstance, i.e., to abort just because of the sex. Even if you prefer a boy, when you learn that it’s a girl you perspective can change rather rapidly. But if she wants to abort for that reason, no one is gonna know unless she decides to voluntarily talk about it.
Meanwhile, however, pro-life legislators have already indicated that they will be introducing measures prohibiting sex selection abortions. I say go for it boys. I think it’s a waste of time but if that’s where you want to spend your resources, go knock yourself out. That’s because the reality is that, if you pass a bill prohibiting sex selection abortions, a woman will simply go to the clinic and, in the very unlikely event that she is asked why she is having an abortion, she’ll just make up another reason.
Duh…….


August 25, 2011 at 12:07 pm
From the Pro-choice Propaganda Training Manual, Volume 2, Page 13, number 42.
“When pro-lifer points out the fact that you are diverting simply continue to divert by asking how many children they have raised. They will eventually realize that you are not interested in the facts.”
LikeLike
August 25, 2011 at 3:03 pm
So, voice, you should be able to tell us from your personal experience whether it’s more important to tend to living children or somebody else’s fetus.
LikeLike
August 25, 2011 at 7:29 pm
V, you could tell Chuckles that somebody else’s fetus is a living child and it’s a child that age that we are now killing, but don’t waste your breath.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 6:12 am
Sorry. Voice, but I missed where this “training manual” is. What exactly is it???
Meanwhile, unless i missed it also, I await your asking me the one question about abortion/abortion providers that I will answer for you. Did I miss it???
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 9:26 am
yes, scroll up.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 6:17 am
Voice: Please do me a favor and re post your simple question on the main “comment” section on the home page so we can start a seperate conversation. It should be interesting! Thanks…
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:37 am
Where does one find that manual?
Is that the real name of it?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:56 am
No, that was a sarcastic post. It doesn’t exist. At least not in writing. It’s in their heads.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:02 am
It sounded like a Pro Life Propaganda stunt; I thought so.
Tx.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:15 pm
You are smarter than most on here then. Some of the others thought it was real…and they are supposed to be educated pro-choicers. Hilarious!
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:12 pm
the only one that i noted that obviously thought it was real was nun ya.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 3:32 am
I thought it was real too.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 9:33 am
Rogelio, saying that the manual stated that they say they “aren’t interested in the facts” was a dead give-away. I was just enjoying voice’s play by play of what obviously goes on in the heads of some pro-choicers. BTW…I thought you “forgave” me” for calling you out on your lie, yet you have still been on my case for several comments after that. What gives Rogelio?
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 6:17 pm
Can’t believe what Rog says, NY. He has trouble with truth.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:47 am
From the Pro Life Anti Abortion Terrorist Manual:
1) Murder innocent doctors and their associates so they will not practice medicine. So far we have murdered a bunch, so keep up the good work! God likes our murderous ways. Look at how much Infanticide there is in the bible! God likes infanticide and murder.
2) This murder will terrorize other doctors.
3) Create as many CPC Mills as you can to deceive and terrorize women with as many lies that you can think of.
4) Get rid of Birth Control as some are abortifacients, so we have more unwanted pregnancies, so we can pass legislation to force women to incubate the zygotes.
5) Create more Catholic Mills. If the priests end up being pedophiles, as was endemic, just cover it up and move them around. It serves a greater good.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:49 am
Most importantly,
From the Pro Life Anti Abortion Terrorist Manual:
6) Do not take care of any impoverished or starving children that need help. We need to focus on the fertilized egg cell, and the several cell blastosphere. These cells are much more important than dying children.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:16 am
No Arnold….you know full well that no such manual exists. If it did it would say, ” Have great pity on the pro-choice people because they have no idea that they believe their own lies and propaganda to the point that they will excuse killing innocent children and even in some cases do the killing themselves. They are deceived.”
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:28 am
Why do you not speak of the anti abortion proganda manuals?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:30 am
Voice,
Figures, more Pro Life lying propaganda.
Just use the truth, isn’t that enough? Why do you need to lie also?
Why don’t you answer some questions?
You seem to dodge most of them. Evasiveness is the first sign of your personal incredulity.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 1:36 pm
Instead of using a puppet to put on her hand and let it talk for her, she’s using the spectre of a prolife manual….Personally, I like the puppet idea better…a big white sock with a face drawn on it.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 3:34 am
Of course you’d like that better. Doesn’t hurt as much.
LikeLike
August 25, 2011 at 8:01 pm
The so-called “pro-lifer’s” focus on death, death, death, death. Never stories about how they cashed in their IRA to keep an orphanage going for another six months or how at age 70 they adopted three kids or how they paid the entire medical bill for a cleft palate baby in the projects… They always have to be heroes fighting against death death death death death death. Real children, real families don’t count.
LikeLike
August 25, 2011 at 8:18 pm
Most people don’t run around tooting their own horn Responsible, do you? I and others here on this blog, since it’s anonymous, have mentioned some of what we do, but then we are told it’s not enough. What’s your answer to that?
LikeLike
August 25, 2011 at 9:40 pm
Really? NunYa, you insinuate that people don’t brag (or toot their own horn, as you so indelicately wrote). I’d beg to differ. Prolifers boast about their conquests (are you NOT paying attention to the posts?), they upload photos of their “saves” on the internet (like hunters who mount the heads of wild beasts in their homes/dens) and, when they are feeling defensive, insecure or particularly randy, they babble on and on to clinic escorts about how wonderfully saintly they are. Just look at the posts from these dear hearts who have “literally saved thousands” to get a feel for their desperation to be recognized. So many have led what they view as selfless lives. Now that their children are grown, now that they are no longer capable of reproducing, now that they’re feeling useless, they create a persona of selflessness akin to Mother Theresa. Only these folks are mean, nasty, judgmental. They use the legal system like big bad bullies.
In the end, regardless of lawsuit settlements, these folks know that they are wrong. Like one protester tearfully said to one of my students, “i know I say things I shouldn’t. I know I’m not a good Christian.”
My thought? No Shit, Sister!!!!!
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 8:30 am
Kate, I did not insinuate, I was direct in my comment. And if I were you, I’d never throw around the word judgmental, especially while participating yourself.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Well you’re not me, are you?
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:51 pm
Look, toots, I’m not the one touting all this religious crap about the ten commandments, jesus, mary and joseph and such. I’m just pointing out to all those who are tethered to their faith that they fail to see their own hypocrisy or, more likely, see it and project it on others, like you do.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 3:36 am
You’re supposed to capitalize those five words, Kate.
LikeLike
August 25, 2011 at 10:39 pm
>>>Most people don’t run around tooting their own horn Responsible, do you? <<<
dunkle asked chuckles to share what his corporal acts of mercy have been, and charles told us about them. he poured his heart out and expressed his hopes for the children he helped, told of his fears and concerns of how maybe he could have done a better job.
and those works were quite admirable and they were also acts that lifers would do well to do.
then dunkle proceeded to belittle him and accuse him of bragging when he was the one who asked to begin with.
LikeLike
August 25, 2011 at 11:55 pm
I didn’t see that post I don’t think, but it just makes my point as to why I stay anonymous, and why I chose Nunya. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 12:33 am
this has been some time back.
but it seems that just because someone disagrees with me on the topic of abortion, it doesn’t mean that they don’t have valid points.
chuckles has a set list of values that he asks about.
what he is really doing is trying to get lifers to think about what we actually do in order to walk the talk.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 4:49 am
“dunkle asked chuckles to share what his corporal acts of mercy have been . . . then dunkle proceeded to belittle him and accuse him of bragging when he was the one who asked to begin with.”
No, not my style. Accusing him of bragging is my style, but the rest ain’t.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:50 am
Anti Abortionists are like Harry Potter’s Death Eaters.
A lot of the Catholic priests are homosexual pedophiles.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 5:15 pm
Karl and his ilk are like Harry Potter’s Death Eaters.
A lot of guys named Karl are homosexual pedophiles.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 6:15 am
So, is the hurricane coming anyone’s way??? Up here in D.C. we are hunkering down…..Be safe everyone
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 4:19 pm
I’m heading for the AWC where everyone will cooperate to pull apart fifteen young people. Everyone himself or herself, though, will be quite safe, thank you.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 7:00 pm
In the four hours that the freak show will be pretending to “rescue unborn humans” outside the Allentown Women’s Clinic, across America there will be born:
•Eight hundred children who for most of their life will barely, if at all, know their biological father
•533 children whose parents never intended for them to exist
•400 to not graduate high school
•400 to have a life without health insurance
•400 to live in a family with an alcoholic parent
•320 to live in poverty
•228 to be left alone at home unsupervised between the ages of five and fourteen
178 to come home after school to an empty house
•160 to have mothers weren’t “elated about their condition.”
•160 to a families that pay more than half of their income for rent- two and a half times the national average
•160 to be the baby of a child
•160 to experience lifelong depression
•137( of extremely low birth weight) to be at highest risk for school failure and for a felony conviction by age 24
•109 (girl babies) to sexual abuse beginning at about age two and continuing until about age 14
•80 to become a pregnant teenager
• 80 to live in a household with no parent present
•54 (boy babies) will to suffer sexual abuse
•48 to run away from home. Almost half will be running away because of intolerable family conditions
•35 to receive state custody to protect him from his own parents
•11 to go to jail
•4 to die within the first year of life
•2 to die from a gunshot wound
None of these children will be helped by the self-proclaimed “pro-lifers.”
Instead, the self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” will say, “So, you think the way to solve their problems is to kill them?” They cannot bring themselves to say, “What can I do to help them?”
Merely insisting a fetus be carried to term is not helping it in the least.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 8:48 pm
and 15 or twenty will die at the clinic….. a dozen or so will help them die assuring their spot in hell. And none of those things you listed will stop that. The people on the sidewalk may stop one or two. At least they are trying to do something for humanity. You on the other hand seem to spend a lot of time on the internet complaining about what others are not doing. Instead of making all of those lists why don’t you go out and fix something on the list and let the people outside the clinic try to help someone there?
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 10:08 pm
“and 15 or twenty will die at the clinic…” 15 or 20 will die? At “THE Clinici”? Are you saying you are planning on killing people? Is this a threat or a taunt? Do you know that regardless of your foolish sense of anonymity, your ISP is identifiable? So, who is being killed? And how do you enter into this killing equation? Who are your cohorts? What are their names, the SSAN, their addresses, their political or religious affiliation?
And what assures a spot in what you call hell? Have you been there? Do you have evidence? Or this more of the prolife fear mongering that you and your ilk seem to excel at when there are conversations about life and some foolish notion about eternity?
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 10:24 pm
“So, who is being killed?”
Have you really dismissed the babies to the point that they do not exist? The 15-20 that will die at the clinic are the babies! Have you forgotten them so quickly that they do not enter your mind? The helpers are you and the others who escort and work in the clinic.
“And how do you enter into this killing equation?”
Not at all. I have nothing to do with killing.
Cohorts? I have no idea what you are referring to.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:06 am
Voice
You do not sound educated enough to understand the word ‘cohorts’.
Hard to support your position when you don’t know the basics, not even science, just vocabulary.
Yes, I agree, the murderous Pro Lifers will go to hell for their heinous crimes as will those that have supported the Pro Life Murderers.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:21 am
I know what the word “cohort” means. It is Kate’s accusation that I have cohorts that is the mystery. But, I am sure you knew that. You, like the others who kill babies are simply diverting attention away from baby killing to the pro-lifers. That tactic is getting boring.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:36 am
Voice,
1) You did not respond to what happens to the Pro Life terrorists.
Evasive. You lose all your credibility.
2) Please explain to me how I am killing babies . . . or is that misinformation and pro life propaganda as well?
I am not an escort and I do not work at a doctor’s office that performs abortion.
Why would you make that false claim?
Again, Pro Life lies.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:13 pm
You are obviously pro-abortion, on here arguing for your so-called “right” to kill your baby. You are as guilty as those who do the actual abortion.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 4:13 am
To get back to Chuck here, this is his third idiotic reason for keeping murder legal: lots of bad things happen in this world so I can help kill as many young people as I want.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:52 am
Responsible:
Anti Abortionists do not care about children . . . They care about cells. That is why they want to get rid of birth control.
This is objectively documented by their daily manner of terrorism and routine.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 5:17 pm
Go away, Karl.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 6:15 pm
What they care about most, Karl, is themselves. Why would anybody limit their “protection” of what they call an “unborn human” to its life as a fetus? Why do they focus on the one segment of a life span for which they can do absolutely nothing short of taking on the surrogate pregancy? Not too many people in the US are aware of this weirdness.
When a senior citizen teabagger holds up a sign that says “Tell the Government to keep its hands off my Medicare,” most of America realizes they’re looking at someone who is at the least misinformed.
When somebody says, “I’m pro-life,” most Americans should look at the discrepancy between what they say and what they do.
The big question is, “Why do they focus on abortion rather than on caring for human life?” And there’s a big answer.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 1:28 pm
The big answer is that many of us do, and you just ignore that.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 7:43 am
So true Responsible. So how is life without, God, morality, personal responsibility and boundaries working for us? At least we have total freedom. There’s that.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 9:16 am
Pat,
You began this article about sex selection. The NY Times has a piece about a twin pregnancy being reduced to singleton. Takes the selection choice to a new direction, doesn’t.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 2:15 pm
Crazy world this one we live in, but I guess this is what is supposed to happen right? It is evolution, only the fit, the intelligent will survive.
What if we start taking people out because their are a burden, would that be shocking?
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 2:22 pm
Pol Pot took out the intelligent ones. Hitler the Jewish ones. Ancient Rome took out the Christian ones. I guess it’s a crap shoot when you live in a society where one part thinks they are superior over the other part.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Well, voice, the self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” WANT to be superior, in that they need to be heroes. The best we “pro-choicers” can do is nurture the children they won’t and can’t care for. Are you a Big Brother or Big Sister?
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 6:41 pm
Your examples of mass killings were the political and intentional programs of specific regimes, not a crap shoot. Abortion is neither the outcome of a particular regime nor a crap shoot.
However, I’d suggest that standing on corners or in alleys dressed like clowns in vinyl aprons or toting religious tchotchkes while trying to flag down strangers to share the gospel of “Saving Babies” is a crap shoot.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 8:41 pm
“I’d suggest that standing on corners or in alleys dressed like clowns in vinyl aprons or toting religious tchotchkes while trying to flag down strangers to share the gospel of “Saving Babies” is a crap shoot.”
WHAT are you talking about Kate? That is the most random display of nonsense that I have ever read. So tell me….do you plan to go stand out in the hurricane at the clinic to “help” the women kill their children?
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 9:05 pm
What are you projecting dear one? Or are you simply unclear about what happens outside the clinics in Allentown PA? And how does a hurricane factor into this discussion? Talk about nonsense…. bless your heart.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 9:24 pm
Are you unclear on the expression “religious tchotchkes”? Is that what you call random display on nonsense? Is it nonsense because you don’t comprehend what religious tchotchkes are or because you are totally uninformed about the idiosyncratic features of the Cirque du Absurde in Allentown?
In this part of the Eastern seaboard, some of us understand the cultural term tchotchkes. Do you have a problem relating tchotchkes with religion? Or do you have an issue with vinyl aprons, clowns, crap shoots, gospels? Just what is the issue?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 4:18 am
Good to see we have another able able to keep Kate going, don’t let that young lady relax. Pat, what the heck are tchotchkes?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 9:03 am
Yes Kate, that is the way that the pro-choice propaganda manual states you should do it. When someone points out your faulty logic and the fact that you are helping kill babies you immediately point at them and accuse them of all sorts of things. You talk about their religion, their clothing, their weight, their everything.You accuse them of plotting some sort of crime. You do whatever it takes to avert the attention off of you and your baby killing. Why is it that you will talk about everything except the dead babies and the fact that you are guilty of helping kill them? You can’t run from the truth forever.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:16 am
“Pat, what the heck are tchotchkes?”
Kate is implying that the literature and help that the sidewalk counselors offer to the women are useless trinkets. She may also be referring to rosary beads. But it is a mystery because she tends to pick apart just about everything she can as a diversion from the real issue.
It is amazing how someone who claims to stand for “choice” shows such hatred and disrespect for people who are attempting to show women an alternative choice to killing their child. Apparently the only choice for her as a “pro-choicer” is abortion.
“Homicide is homicide, no matter how small the victim.”
~ Archbishop Charles Chaput,
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:10 am
Kate is a voice of reason and sensibility.
Voice is handicapped in the mental capacity department as far as I can tell.
Voice, you have to bring your education up a few notches to make any sense with the powerful messages from this crowd that defends the rights of women.
All you do voice is embarrass yourself and the entire Anti Abortion cause, and you harm it by saying things that are just plain dumb.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:11 am
Voice,
where is this manual?
We have found Anti Abortion manuals and CPC manuals filled with lies and deception.
Where is the manual you speak of?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:13 am
Voice,
Is Chaput another Catholic Pedophile?
There are so many Catholic Pedophiles.
I am not familiar with him/her.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:41 am
I love reading the Pro Life whimper and whine being Hammered hard by the superior intelligence of the Pro Choice community.
Hammered Hard! Again!
The powerless terrorist voice of ProLife is pathetic.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:10 pm
The Feather is back! These folks blow away when the air circulates. Then they return.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:15 pm
Hammered Again!!!
You gotta Love It!
Every time they write, the Hammering is hard and severe.
They have no response, except for their whiny whimper!
The Powerful words of reason in the Pro Choice movement decimates the terrorists of the anti abortion movement!
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:58 am
Why do prolifers always use the most irrelevant metaphors?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:38 am
Pro Lifers are just clueless mindless zombies. Don’t hold your breath for an intelligent answer. You will asphyxiate.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Ashley and Yenna are just clueless mindless zombies. Don’t hold your breath for an intelligent comment. You will asphyxiate.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Just Hammered another Pro Life illiterate!
The funny thing is they Hammer themselves by their own stupidity!
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 7:53 am
Wow, all of them? Every single last one of them? And you’ve met them all,interviewed them, and therefore come to your rational, logical, unbiased, EDUCATED determination? Super.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 6:32 pm
I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say that we, as a nation, already take care of those with whom we deem a burden. We warehouse them in nursing homes or VA hospitals or mental institutions and let them die by erasing their humanity and by neglecting their physical and emotional needs.
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 8:33 pm
>>>I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say that we, as a nation, already take care of those with whom we deem a burden.<<<
in florida, the governor ran as a pro-life candidate, and the gabachos elected him.
but his value for life stops at the delivery room doors.
once in office, he proceeded to make cuts to the budget that have had a catastrophic effect on the seniors.
seniors are already on limited incomes as it is,and now he has directly made cuts for their health care benefits!
where is his compassion?
where is his humanity?
WHERE IS HIS GOD?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 9:42 am
Kate, Warehouse them, kind of a cold statement. My brother Francis is in a nursing home. Holy Family Manor to be exact. His health has improved since being there and as far as I can see his needs are met. I visit him often and I have seen this for myself. There are many volunteers there also and every time there has been a medical need for him it has been met. I also have a nephew in Emeritus. He has Parkinson’s and he also has improved since they regulate his meds. It is a beautiful place, well if you can call a nursing home beautiful. We have wonderful conversations on the porch rocking away. I am so grateful that I am still able to see the grass from this side and not under the ground. As long as God permits I will forage ahead looking at the world thru rose colored glasses. Wishing you the same. I still love those babies and all of the families I have talked to over these many years. Also loved talking to your students from Muhlenberg. Kathleen Rose
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:00 am
Is abortion ever OK?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:12 pm
No, and neither are your posts.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:19 pm
The question is to you Kathleen.
Dunkle is irrelevant.
Is abortion ever OK?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 1:28 pm
Kathleen, while I’m glad that you are satisfied with the care that your family is receiving, not everyone receives quality care. And rather than draw from my own anecdotes from Illinois and Pennsylvania, I’ll offer a few tidbits from governing bodies about nursing homes (although I’d bet that VA and mental institutions have similar problems).
According to a disturbing 1986 Institute of Medicine report about the quality of nursing home care, it claimed that continued efforts were needed to reduce the number of residents who receive emergent care, develop pressure ulcers, sustain falls, or experience pain while in the care of a nursing home facility. In 2004, there is still much to be done to improve the quality of care. So, here are few facts:
#In the U.S., there are 16,000 nursing homes, with approx. 1.4 million residents. Staff-to-resident ratios are frequently
#One of four nursing homes every year is cited for causing death or serious injury to a resident.
# In abuse cases, the primary abusers are aides and orderlies.
#National Citizens’ Coalition for Nursing Home Reform found that “as least a third of nursing home residents in the U.S. may suffer from malnutrition or dehydration; lack of adequately trained personnel and high staff turnover are largely to blame”
#The GAO gave a report, based on interviews and records in Georgia, Illinois and Pennsylvania, found that more than 30% of nursing homes have been cited by state inspectors for violations that “harmed residents or placed them in immediate jeopardy.”
#Resident to resident violence occurs resulting in fracture, dislocation, bruise or hematoma, laceration, and reddened areas.
#In 2004, 110 million nursing home residents had an emergency department (ED) visit. Among nursing home residents with an ED visit, 40 percent had a potentially preventable ED visit. Conditions that may lead to potentially preventable visits to an ED among nursing home residents include fever, chest pain, heart disease (mainly heart failure), mental status changes, gastrointestinal bleeding, urinary tract infections, metabolic disturbances, pneumonia, diseases of the skin, and injuries due to falls (the most common and potentially preventable).
LikeLike
August 26, 2011 at 6:35 pm
I tried to place my parents in a senior living facility with a polar bear on an ice floe in the inner courtyard, to care for them the way the Eskimos used to care for their elderly. I couldn’t find one.
The curse of being human is, you usually die very very slowly.
Darwin’s use of the word “fit” is better expressed as “fitted.” The ones most fitted to their environment survive, not the ones who are fastest in the race or the healthiest Nazis.
There are at least seven measures of intelligence. Nobody is superior in all of them, but we all do well when we are able to rely on others to supply our defects.
Self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” deny this support to the children who were once their “unborn humans.” The closer the responsibility get to them, the less sacred human life becomes…..
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 4:24 am
“There are at least seven measures of intelligence.” — which one do I display, Chuckles, when I recognize your absurd reasons for supporting legal child murder?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:57 am
What about an infant transfusion syndrome, where one twin’s placenta is parasitizing all the nutrients and Oxygen from it’s twin’s placenta to it’s own.
In this situation should selective reduction be allowed so at least one twin can survive?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Hey, maybe you’re not so dumb (just spell its right). I’ll send this to somebody smart and come back here with the answer.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:20 pm
Did you answer the question or just evade again wasting everyone’s time?
No wonder everyone thinks you are irrelevant.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:31 pm
I refuse to answer your questions because they are meant to divert attention away from the fact that pro-choicers argue for the right to kill babies.
Why don’t you answer this question? Why do you think it is acceptable to kill a baby?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 1:43 pm
Ashley,
You may want to ask “voice” to define baby. My guess is that the answer will be a fertized egg=baby. That’s what we’re dealing with here–folks who think an egg is a chicken, an acorn is a tree, a silkworm is a dress and a fertized egg is a fully formed human baby.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Yeah, and some people even think great-grandmothers are people!
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 5:20 pm
My mistake — Some people even think grandmothers are people.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 2:43 pm
I didn’t answer the question, Ash, but somebody smart did:
“Double effect here. Can’t intentionally kill one or both of the twins. Try your best to separate the placentae and to guarantee the safety of one or both twins. If that action, even foreseeably, has the unintended effect of the death of one of the twins, it’s licit (Basic rule: we can not intend what we nonetheless foresee). But your motives must be pure.
So, no, selective reduction isn’t allowed. What a gruesome term.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 2:46 pm
And I’ll add this. Sure I thought you were another adolescent illiterate, Ash, but you proved me wrong; you asked an excellent question and you were able to express yourself clearly.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:20 am
NunYa asks, “Most people don’t run around tooting their own horn Responsible, do you? I and others here on this blog, since it’s anonymous, have mentioned some of what we do, but then we are told it’s not enough. What’s your answer to that?”
Nunya, if you could only stand outside yourselves and take a look. The self-proclaimed “pro-lifer’s” approach to dealing with the needs of children is sad. If a parent focused on a child’s needs the way a self-proclaimed “pro-lifer” does, he or she would fret over a kid for nine months at some time in its life and then walk away. Parents, however, have a different attitude toward human life than do self-proclaimed “pro-lifers.”
They know they’re in it for the long run, and they plan and act accordingly. They give up certain things that they liked or loved, because they know those things will get in the way. They surrender hopes and plans and dreams because now there is someone who needs more attention. And they accept responsibility, present or absent, awake or asleep, even alive or dead, for what happens to and what shapes their child.
They don’t think about how terrible it would be if their child were dead; they focus on the needs of the living child, not only those of the present but those of the future as well. Like self-proclaimed “pro-lifers,” they want their child to live, yes; but unlike those people, they want their child to live well, to learn that it’s safe to express his feelings, to trust her instincts about any situation, to know that they can always find someone to help them with a problem. They want their child to have a good grasp on the basic tools of life, and they look ahead, they plan ahead, they sacrifice—and sometimes it doesn’t work. But at least they tried.
Your focus is on death, and you only try to suck other people into your fantasy trip: “It’s a baby! It’s a girl! It’s going to be tortured! You’re going to be a murderer!” You cannot choose wisely when faced with the prospect of a fetus being aborted or a child being born to be sexually abused until the authorities seize it. You follow your instinct and say, “So, you think the solution to this problem is ABORTION?” when a normal person would think, “What can I do to protect the born child?”
You have a choice: you can either care for a child or else hate abortion. You choose to hate abortion. You cannot do the one thing that would make you truly pro-life: raise the next child. You say you might, Deanna says she might, voice refuses to even commit one way or another, and it is all so sad. That is why I say the self-proclaimed pro-lifers do not do enough: they won’t do what they want every pregnant woman to do: raise the next child. As soon as you raise the child you don’t want to, you will win.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 9:48 pm
Well hallelujah and pass the pancakes, I have a short name to type, finally!
Chuck, you say I can’t look outside of myself, and I know I stand for all pro-lifers in your statement, so I’ll say that I feel the same way about you/pro-choicers. You have all pro-lifers neatly wrapped up in a package, which isn’t logical or based in reality. I, for instance, don’t focus on death, nor do I “want” women to raise an unwanted child, I want them to prevent that unwanted child. I am for education and personal responsibility. What you don’t seem willing to admit is that abortion IS a multi-billion dollar business, NOT “health care”. You know it as well as any pro-lifer. While the unborn child, which science has proven is a growing human, just as a fertilized egg is a growing chicken, is my top priority, for you to tell me, a total stranger to you, that I believe this or that, or do/don’t do this or that is proof that you and most of the people here don’t want true discussion, and aren’t open to being wrong. You don’t know ME, just as I don’t know you. I don’t have the “choice” to either raise the next child or hate abortion. I have the choice to do what I do in society in MANY areas, that you don’t know about. Back in the day, before abortion and free sex, people monitored themselves, chose when/if to have a child, and we weren’t faced with “millions” of unwanted children. Of course there were exceptions to this rule, but society as a whole wasn’t faced with what we are faced with today. I don’t know why you all won’t admit that many, many abortions are happening due to the irresponsibility of women. Of course I understand the issue of a woman’s rights, and I could have legitimate discussions on this issue, but your post, as with most here, lump all pro-lifers into one mold, and try to make believing in God and the unborn something to be ridiculed. Your only goal seems to be to defame anyone who believes differently than you on this issue. (Yes, I know a large segment of “my” side does the same.) I have explained that I have made a conscious choice, after trying to adopt and having the girl change her mind, to help as many children as I can. I’ve also explained that I have worked with these children and women for years by choice. Why do you and other pro-choicers here ignore that and keep spouting your anti-pro-lifer propaganda? If you are secure in your stand, why do you need to ignore it?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:08 pm
“What can be known about God is clear to them because he has made it clear to them. From the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly observed in what he made. As a result, people have no excuse. They knew God but did not praise and thank him for being God. Instead, their thoughts were pointless, and their misguided minds were plunged into darkness. While claiming to be wise, they became fools………And because they thought it was worthless to acknowledge God, God allowed their own immoral minds to control them. So they do these indecent things. Their lives are filled with all kinds of sexual sins, wickedness, and greed. They are mean. They are filled with envy, murder, quarreling, deceit, and viciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, haughty, arrogant, and boastful. They think up new ways to be cruel……….don’t show love to their own families or mercy to others. Although they know God’s judgment that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do these things but also approve of others who do them.” Romans 1
“Do you have contempt for God, who is very kind to you, puts up with you, and deals patiently with you? Don’t you realize that it is God’s kindness that is trying to lead you to him and change the way you think and act? Since you are stubborn and don’t want to change the way you think and act, you are adding to the anger that God will have against you on that day when God vents his anger. At that time God will reveal that his decisions are fair. He will pay all people back for what they have done. He will give everlasting life to those who search for glory, honor, and immortality by persisting in doing what is good. But he will bring anger and fury on those who, in selfish pride, refuse to believe the truth and who follow what is wrong. There will be suffering and distress for every person who does evil.” Romans 2
In God’s mercy because he does not wish that any perish he is giving time for people to turn from their sin. This scripture makes it clear that deep down you really know that God exists. You just choose to ignore that knowledge. In his kindness he is trying to get your attention. Even though you refuse to acknowledge Him.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Which God of what religion are you referring to? There are a lot of religions out there with different Gods. It is helpful if you tell us which cult you belong to.
Tx!
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:10 pm
His name is Yahweh, Adoni, The Great I AM.
Jehovah — The Lord our Sovereign
El-Elyon — The Lord Most High
El-Olam — The Everlasting God
El-Shaddai — The God Who is Sufficient for the Needs of His People
Jehovah-Elohim — The Eternal Creator
Jehovah-Jireh — The Lord our Provider
Jehovah-Nissi — The Lord our Banner
Jehovah-Ropheka — The Lord our Healer
Jehovah-Shalom — The Lord our Peace
Jehovah-Tsidkenu — The Lord our Righteousness
Jehovah-Mekaddishkem — The Lord our Sanctifier
Jehovah-Sabaoth — The Lord of Hosts
Jehovah-Shammah — The Lord is Present
Jehovah-Rohi — The Lord our Shepherd
Jehovah-Hoseenu — The Lord our Maker
Jehovah-Eloheenu — The Lord our God
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 4:16 pm
Jesus Christ!
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Yes! He is God also!
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 2:22 pm
Voice seems to be suffering from hyperemesis. Despite her nauseating string of questions followed by presumptious answers, I’ll offer two of her queries and then respond.
VOICE: Which is worse Kate? “Shaming” someone or killing someone?
KATE: Definitely shaming someone because you automatically position yourself as superior then attack her when she is under stress from an unwanted pregnancy and unwanted invasion of her privacy–a double pain you intentionally inflict. The fetus, in the meantime, has no feeling, no sense of entitlement, no cognition, no pain.
VOICE: A baby will die tomorrow at your hand, with your “goodness” on stage for all to see. That is what you are after anyway isn’t it Kate? To be seen? You must be aching to be on t.v. thus the fake documentaries and videos on You Tube.
KATE: I view documentary work as creative renderings of actuality. What is posted on the Bullywatch channel on You Tube are actually clips from observations of real behavior. What you are seeing is the actuality of protesters’ own behavior. As for my aching to be on television, a baby dying at my hands, my goodness and fake documentaries, I’d say there’s some real issues you’re dealing with and anger seems to be fueling all of it. You might want to see someone about those issues.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 2:54 pm
“The fetus, in the meantime, has no feeling, no sense of entitlement, no cognition, no pain.” That’s not what somebody told me, Kate! She said that great-grandmothers have no feeling, no sense of entitlement, no cognition, no pain.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 5:21 pm
I mean grandmothers.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:05 pm
“Definitely shaming someone because you automatically position yourself as superior then attack her when she is under stress from an unwanted pregnancy and unwanted invasion of her privacy–a double pain you intentionally inflict. The fetus, in the meantime, has no feeling, no sense of entitlement, no cognition, no pain.”
Is that how you justify murder? By fooling yourself into thinking that it doesn’t matter because they supposedly can’t feel pain, have no sense of entitlement, or no cognition? And you think you aren’t superior? Your comments reek with superiority.
What would you do if you found out that you were wrong and that they could feel pain and did have cognition? Would you then change your stand? I doubt it because this has nothing to do with why you help kill. You probably do it as a defense mechanism for your own abortion (s). Psychologists would tell you that women who scream and dance about in front of abortion clinics about their rights to kill are simply trying to convince themselves. They are trying to drown out there own conscience. The more women you help to kill their babies, the more you justify your own abortion (s). Certainly there is nothing wrong with it since ALL of these women are doing it, right? You will never be able to kill enough to extinguish the knowledge of what you did to your own child (ren). The phrase, “Methinks the lady doth protest too much”, comes to mind. You are a classic textbook case as are most pro-abortion extremists. I feel sorry for you. Healing and forgiveness are what you need, not more screaming or lashing out at pro-lifers. It’s something for you to think about.
“When something happens that we find difficult to accept, then we will make up a logical reason why it has happened.The target of rationalization is usually something that we have done, such as being unkind to another person. It may also be used when something happens independent of us which causes us discomfort, such as when a friend is unkind to us.We rationalize to ourselves. We also find it very important to rationalize to other people, even those we do not know. When a person does something of which the moral super ego disapproves, then the ego seeks to defend itself by adding reasons that make the action acceptable to the super ego. Thus we are able to do something that is outside our values and get away with it without feeling too guilty.” The psychological definition of rationalization.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:31 pm
You can stop with the psychobabble right now because it’s a waste of time. Plus, you’re not qualified. Licensed professionals don’t violate HIIPA laws, don’t invade people’s privacy. But, wait, that’s what you and your band of merry mongers do all the time: invade people’s privacy and pretend to be sidewalk counselors. If it’s the illusion you must maintain to make yourself feel better about shaming, humiliating, stigmatizing and, yes, terrorizing women, then by all means do as you must.
As for calling abortion murder, I don’t agree. That’s your word. It’s part of your vocabulary of violence:
maim
wound
hurt
fight
violate
destroy
slaughter
murder
kill
road kill
rip apart
destruct
attack
break
suck out
crush
lash out
punch
provoke
anger
hatred
plotting
bloodshed
Sound familiar?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:45 pm
“Vocabulary of violence”
I may have the vocabulary but you have the act of violence. Abortion is a very violent action against a human being. Some of those words you listed describe it precisely. Good job! You are learning well!
Oh and can you tell me please which HIIPA law was violated. I seem to have lost my list but can’t recall one that says it is wrong to define rationalization to someone who is obviously rationalizing.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 9:04 pm
From my perspective, your acts of violence, your acts that are terrifying the crap out of a young woman, happen when you stand outside an abortion clinic, a loud, large and looming strange presence with odd signs, absurd shouting, angry voices, being tell-assertive rather than listening with compassion. You act out of violence toward women. You don’t give a flying fig about the women. That would take so much more care and concern. It’s so much easier to violate women with your actions and to do so in the name of your rights to free speech and your rights to religion, in the name of saving some microscopic product of conception that you call a baby. Can you, for one moment, stand back and listen to your ranting and raving from a client’s perspective? All I see and hear is you and the members of your group demanding your rights like selfish children while totally trampling the rights of women. It’s despicable. And it’s absolutely unethical. You ALL should be ashamed. But, sadly you’re not. You’re proud as peacocks, belligerent and resolute in your rightful place to terrorize women.
And, about us, you pretend to worry about judgment day, standing before God and all the other myths of fear and damnation you foist on your enemies. Do you even see what’s wrong with this picture?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 10:52 pm
“From my perspective”
That’s the whole problem. Your perspective is warped because you have never stopped to listen for half a second to what sidewalk counselors try to say to the women. They offer help, support and true choices. You on the other hand walk them down the path to death and misery. If you would care to stop long enough to actually have a conversation sans the raunchy attitude you might learn that things are much different than you think. But you need to be angry at anyone who stands for the unborn…it helps you justify what you do.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:40 pm
Look who’s calling the kettle black. You falsely claim that I have never stopped to listen to what you tell women. You talk about TRUE choices as if there are false choices. Then you claim that women walk down a path to death and misery.
Well, sugar, sweetie, honey, sweetheart, you’re the one who doesn’t listen. You have ONE choice for women and that is to carry the pregnancy to term. PERIOD. If women tell you to leave them alone or no thank you, you volley back with ugliness. You do not listen. That’s some choice isn’t it. Bullying women who disagree with you.
Your idea of choices are wrapped up in your heroic efforts at throwing resources at women to get them to keep their pregnancy. I personally don’t give a rat’s patoot if women want to keep their pregnancy or not. Nor do I care if you and your cronies are footing the bill. But you don’t listen to that. You only hear what you want to hear. You only hear and see your enemies as obstacles, that anything they may do or say falls on blind eyes and deaf ears. So believe what you want. Create more lies. It’s something I’ve come to expect from most of you.
I’m not angry at anyone who stands for the unborn. I’m livid with anyone who humiliates women, who believes that they are superior to women who go into clinics, who attempt to “rescue” a woman with sugar-coated words then when she ignores your offers, they rip her apart with their nastiness and hateful “mommy please” crap. I see this kind of behavior as reprehensible. Offer help? Go ahed. But treat women like you do? It’s shameful.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 8:56 am
How would you have any idea how I treat women?
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 6:29 pm
“Create more lies. It’s something I’ve come to expect from most of you.” Ah, “most”! You were thinking of me when you wrote that. Right, Kate?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:03 pm
“And it’s absolutely unethical”
No, killing is absolutely unethical. The way women are treated in clinics is unethical.
Doing what is necessary to try to stop it is honorable.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 5:31 am
But don’t be too hard on ole Kates, v. When I met her all she talked was psychobabble, and considering her degrees and what she taught that was understandable. But look now how she’s coming around: “You can stop with the psychobabble right now . . .”
We taught her what psychobabble was and now she can use the word herself. That’s a sign of growth and who knows where it will lead. (Her cohort, Chuck, still talks the stuff; I think he’s the real lost cause.)
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:44 pm
Thus, major philosophical differences. What more is there to be said. You and your ilk all seem to be in the same camp as John Dunkle. Force, lies, violence, whatever it takes. that’s what you all believe and you when you do it, it is honorable. That’s exactly what the terrorists believe. All for the honor to your supreme being. Domestic terrorists at abortion clinics
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 3:48 am
a bump on the road to recovery
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:06 pm
whaddya do to her dumbkle? euthanize yer own g.mother?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 4:15 pm
I beg your pardon!
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 8:15 pm
Vera,
He is John Dunkle.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 5:32 am
I think dumbkle’s cute.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Tchotchke (pronounced /’tʃɒtʃkɨ/ choch-kee) are small toys, gewgaws, knickknacks, baubles, lagniappes, trinkets, or kitsch. The term has a connotation of worthlessness or disposability, as well as tackiness,[1][2] and has long been used by Jewish-Americans and in the regional speech of New York City.
The word may also refer to swag, in the sense of the logo pens, key fobs, and other promotional freebies dispensed at trade shows, conventions, and similar large events. Also, stores that sell cheap souvenirs in tourist areas like Times Square, Venice Beach, and Waikiki Beach in Hawaii are sometimes called “tchotchke shops.”
Leo Rosten, author of The Joys of Yiddish, gives an alternate sense of tchotchke as meaning a desirable young girl, a “pretty young thing.” Less flatteringly, the term could be construed as a more dismissive synonym for “bimbo.” These usages are not common outside of Jewish circles. The term (in the form צאצקע, tzatzke, [ˈtsäts.qʕ], with a tsade instead of teth-shin) is sometimes used in modern Hebrew as a slang word equivalent to slut.
Where you referring to the image of Our Lady that I bring to AWC? There are two ways to look at this, a pretty young thing or slut. Which is it?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Voice,
Is Chaput another Catholic Pedophile?
There are so many Catholic Pedophiles.
I am not familiar with him/her.
Another disgruntled Catholic, look around you. They are everywhere.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 3:38 pm
Who said it and what their background is is not the point. The point is that
“Homicide is homicide, no matter how small the victim.”
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 4:23 pm
It is necessary that the fetus be seen as a victim; otherwise, you cannot be seen to be acting heroically.
Try “rescue” a substance-abusing teen; it’s a lot, lot harder. Try to portray him to the public– especially the public he’s robbed to support his habit– as an object worthy of rescue, and they will heap scorn on you.
But call a fetus a “person” or a “victim,” and you’ve won half the PR battle to get the public to recognize you as a hero.
“The hero pays the price society specifies.” –Ernest Becker, “Denial of Death,” explaining why some people are willing to risk or accept death, when it is natural to fear it.
Your choice is to care for a child or hate abortion, voice, and you have chosen the easier path. Just like Jesus did when the soldiers came to arrest him, and he pushed Peter toward them, saying, “Here’s your man!” and bugged out to Alexandria and retirement….
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 5:28 pm
People on this blog, Chuck, put up with your absurdities and your silliness because they figure, “So what if I have no idea what the heck he’s talking about and so what if he’s a kook. He’s pro-death ain’t he? That’s all that counts.”
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 8:46 pm
You crack me up, Charles. Seriously, the PR spin is spot on. That’s what makes the prolife industry so powerful. They’re no different than any other propaganda machine that spins falsehoods. Tell a lie often enough it begins to feel like the truth. Abuse people often enough and it seems not only normal, but also the right thing to do. Use the Bible or invoke the name of Jesus, is just okey dokey. It doesn’t take much to read what the prolifers on this blog (and elsewhere) write to justify their behaviors. They have swallowed the crispy cracker and sipped the Kool Aid.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:10 pm
To Kate and Chuck, I have to say this blog is the first place I have heard anyone refer to being a hero in this issue. It has never occured to me, nor have I ever heard another pro-lifer even allude to the need to be a hero. Kate, however it is said by the pro-life individuals, in a good way or bad, (I admit there is bad) the message is the same: we believe in the sanctity of HUMAN life, in each and every stage of development. It is a human life at each and every stage of development. We believe it is wrong to end human life, whether cognitive or not. Abortion ends human life. What part of any of that is a lie? It may be handled wisely or poorly or tragically by either side, but it is still the truth, proven by science and reality. As far as anything at all about God, neither of us can prove or disprove his existence. I look at the intricacies of the world around me, such as the human eye, and I see no other choice but to believe in Him. I don’t believe because I need to believe, I believe because a lifetime of seeking answers to the universe leave me no choice but to believe. History is on my side. Most civilizations have believed in a creator or divine being. Some of the greatest minds in human history believed in Jehovah God. I am amazed that you are so certain, 100% sure, that he doesn’t exist. So I find no “lies” that you keep mentioning. Also, being new to the blog, I have researched many of the facts mentioned here that were called lies by you guys, from independent sources, since I do want truth in my life, and I have so far found nothing mentioned to be a lie, including Malachi, which you failed to disprove. All you did was quote others, as I did. I really am sorry that so many pro-lifers out there, as well as so many Christians, behave in a way that drive people away rather than draw them in. I have given you both tit for tat, because I felt you were the bullies of the playground, and now Kate, you say you have something called Bully Watch. I find it amazing that you are guilty of the exact same behavior you accuse others of. If pro-lifers and/or Christians out there are behaving badly, that’s a shame, it really is. But I believe you both know, Kate with your Bully Watch, and Chuck with your Aborticintrism, that believing in God and the sanctity of human life isn’t a cult, syndrome or psychosis. And I also believe that you both know that this whole thing is about people believing babies are being killed, not about being a hero, or refusing to adopt dozens of babies, which seems to be your only argument, and is a lame one, because the children languishing in the system aren’t there because of abortion, or due to “insisting” woan have babies, or a violation of women’s rights. They are there because ALL women can’t be trusted, (men too) and because ALL women (men too) aren’t respectable. Men and women everywhere have shirked their responsibility, their duty, their common decency toward their children, usually due to self-centeredness and irresponsibility. Your answer to that, like all liberals, and I don’t mean that as a slur, is to turn them into victims, and strip them of what little self respect they may have, giving them the easy way out, complete with excuses. What they, and all humans need, are boundaries, responsibilities, a conscious and a sense of shame when they slack off, and a sense of pride when they don’t. Society used to handle these things very well by our public approval or disapproval. That was stripped away little by little as morality declined. Now, anything goes, and it’s not your fault.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 5:43 am
See what I mean? Into my newsletter. Pat, NY will pull you into heaven in her wake because you are the reason I am able to read this. How do I know NY is a her? No man could write like that.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:05 am
For all your sanctimonious blustering, I must say that I have never read such misanthropy couched in tedious, saccharin eloquence. That takes some serious skills.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 8:00 am
Kate does this a lot: she uses words like sanctimonious, misanthropy, couched, tedious, saccharin to disguise that she’s simply responding as do the adolescent illiterates on here: “you’re really stupid!” Yeah, usually she does that, but occasionally she says something intelligent. Let’s keep working on her.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 8:57 am
Kate, sad that an educated person such as yourself can’t pick up on the tone of a writer’s voice.
“Another example of mistaken misanthropy is Jean-Paul Sartre’s quote “Hell is other people.” On the face of it, this looks deeply misanthropic, but actually Sartre was making an observation about the tendency of human beings to lack self-knowledge. We tend to project our worst fears, and our most deeply disliked personal characteristics, onto other people, rather than look inside and face them within ourselves. Thus, when we look at other people we often see the worst of what is in our own personality.”
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:24 am
So, what are you saying? that you were writing about the things you find disgusting in yourself? Are you saying that your worst fears, and your most deeply disliked personal characteristics, are what you are projecting on those lazy, irresponsible people because they’re like you? Because these women are lazy and shirking their responsibilities like you? Well, that’s quite a brave admission.
You also claim that society used to “handle these things very well by our public approval or diapproval” but that is simply your opinion. Society has always used Scarlett Letter tactics to condemn mostly women (like you do in your rhetoric) and has forever lamented that lost “way we were” when, in fact, it’s just nostalgia.
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 7:41 am
Christians have been bullying people since the inception of all the different cults of Christianity.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 9:27 pm
Is it a homocide if you kill a fly?
Is it a homocide if you kill a mosquito?
Is it a homocide if you kill an ant?
Or is this “no matter how small” talk from plagiarists using Dr. Seuss?
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 11:27 pm
None of those are human. An unborn baby is human no matter how small.
To kill it is homicide.
Homicide is defined as “a killing of one human being by another.”
An unborn baby is a human being. Homicide is the killing of it. Abortion is homicide.
You encourage it. Pro-lifers try to stop it.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 5:52 am
In spite of her background, I know for a fact that Kate is smart. That makes it so much worse when she has to write stupidities like this: “Is it a homocide if you kill a fly?”
“What else are you gonna say, though” is the only excuse. And it’s another reason, to go along with the fact that she knows they are mostly girls she is helping to kill, why she’s The Angry One.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:23 am
So, tell me what Ted Bundy needed in order to grow up not to kill three to five dozen women, voice. There’s a lot more that your “unborn baby” faces besides abortion.
And tell me what you’ve done to re-direct the next Ted Bundy.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 5:52 pm
It is impossible to shame this guy,
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:30 am
But those are God’s creations, right. Are you saying humans have more value than other creations?
“An unborn baby is a human being. Homicide is the killing of it. Abortion is homicide”
And if God kills the unborn, is it still homocide? Is God a murderer?
Do you really believe God meddles in the minutia? Didn’t God give humans cognitive and physical capabilities to determine their own free will? And you want to go against that which God created, to defy one of God’s own to interfere with what she was given by God? Phew! That’s a pretty uppity point of view, I’d say.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:48 pm
“And if God kills the unborn, is it still homocide? Is God a murderer?
Were we talking about God? Which god are you referring to? I was under the impression that you didn’t believe in a god.
I thought we were talking about this “An unborn baby is a human being. Homicide is the killing of it. Abortion is homicide.”
Are you trying to divert again by taking the attention off the fact that you encourage homicide by turning it into a religious issue? I quoted a religious person however the quote in itself was not religion based. Let’s keep religion out of it.
Let’s talk about this: “An unborn baby is a human being. Homicide is the killing of it. Abortion is homicide.” You encourage homicide. This makes you homicidal.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 8:25 pm
What’s this “we” stuff? As in “we were talking about….” There is no “we” here until you answer my question. See, this is how things go in a reciprocal discussion. You say something about abortion as homicide and I ask for additional clarification regarding your thought process. But NOooo. You respond with a value-loaded question “Are you trying to divert again by taking the attention off the fact that you encourage homicide by turning it into a religious issue?” This is as loaded a question as this one: “How long has it been since you had your last abortion that you regret?”
Until you answer my question, this exchange between you and I goes no further. For clarification, that means there is no “We” here.
So, how about it? If God kills the unborn, is it still homocide? Is God a murderer?
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:04 am
Even though Chuck’s reasons for supporting legal baby killing are absurd, they are annoying because you other killers’ helpers pick them up. This is his #3 — everybody dies so we can kill them first.
So I have to make a request that I don’t want to make. Chuck, will you leave this blog, forget about aborticentrism, and spend the rest of your life trying to amend the rifts in your relationships with father and son? You’ll be so much happier.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 9:04 am
Why are you under the impression that I believe in a god? Why would I get into a discussion about religion with you if I don’t have a religion? It’s a diversion so I refuse to talk religion with you. Back to the original point, “An unborn baby is a human being. Homicide is the killing of it. Abortion is homicide.” What is your answer to this remark sans the insects and Dr. Seuss?
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 6:38 pm
“Until you answer my question, this exchange between you and I goes no further.” Dang Kates — “between you and me”! People get fired for less!
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 7:39 am
And Pedophilia is pedophilia. Even if a Catholic priest does it, and it is covered up by the Catholic Church, and it is endemic in Catholic culture.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 5:24 pm
Kathleen,
Are you another Catholic Pedophile?
There are so many Catholic Pedophiles.
I am not familiar with you.
Another disgruntled Catholic, look around you. We are everywhere.
LikeLike
August 27, 2011 at 8:02 pm
John,
Thanks
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 5:57 am
Aw,forget it. You deserve it.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 8:09 am
Message to Voice: Where is that “pro-choice manual that you referred to?”
Second message to Voice (or Nunya): in the spirit of having an honest dialogue, go to the home page and see where it says “comments”. We have about 1,294 comments so far. Go there and ask one very simple question about abortion and/or the provision of abortion services. Don’t mess it up with a lot of stuff. Ask ONE question…..Then I and/or Kate would be happy to answer it. You may have asked it somewhere in this thread but I can’t find it.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:04 am
Pat, are there 1,294 among several articles, or do you mean this article alone? I ask because I’m showing only about 330 on this article.
Also, I have asked several questions, and only one of them has been answered, by Chuck, I think. When I ask pointed questions of you guys, all the way back to my first posts here, I get no answers. I even mentioned a few comments back on this article that no one answers these questions, but ignore them, and there was not ONE comment on it, unless I am not showing all the comments for some reason.
No offense intended, but if you don’t read our posts that are too long in your opinion, you are probably missing some things.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:54 pm
There is no such thing as a pro-choice manual. At least none that I am aware of. That was a sarcastic post. Although I do think the manual is in the heads of most who claim to be pro-choice because they all say the exact same things over and over again and refuse to answer the most basic questions. It’s as if they are programmed to answer certain ways to certain comments.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:09 am
NY, Pat’s talking about the top post. It’s named “Comments.” And, Pat, may I answer that question too? And, v, love it: “I do think the manual is in the heads of most who claim to be pro-choice because they all say the exact same things over and over again . . .”
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 8:58 am
It is my understanding that the overwhelming majority of the prolife activists believe life begins at conception – in the sense that a fertilized egg is the moral equivalent of the woman. As such, they personally feel a moral obligation to save the zygote/embryo/fetus from abortion regardless of the ethics of their tactics and regardless of the accuracy of their information. Their tactics included violent words, yelling and screaming, grotesque images that are misleading and that are intended to shame women. They use inaccurate images, compare dog abuse with abortion, connect abortion to breast cancer and post abortion stress syndrome (both of which have been debunked by distinguished medical institutions), compare abortion clinics to the Auschwitz Nazi extermination camp, and lie or exaggerate the risks of abortion.
The activists, with seemingly noble intentions, create a volatile atmosphere, asserting their rights to free speech and to exercise of their religion, their rights to get close to clinic patients to talk to them and their rights to hand out their literature. They turn every neighborhood where they picket into a spectacle with their penchant for invading women’s privacy and using violent words to humiliate and stigmatize women. Yet, they fail to see how their very presence, as strangers to women at clinics, and their harsh words are a form of violence.
But when they feel slighted or wronged, they complain that life isn’t fair. As one can read on this blog and elsewhere, they are fighting a unidirectional war against abortion providers and their affiliates. No one is fighting them, no one is making widespread laws that target anti-abortion activists, no one is filing lawsuits against them, or no one is imagining conspiracies. They can dish out all their ugliness with impunity like any school yard bully. But when they encounter resistance, they first whine as if they’ve been wronged, file frivolous and nuisance lawsuits, protest either in person or through letter-writing campaigns against doctors and clinic directors. For example, three protesters claimed that there was a conspiracy to block their constitutional and civil rights with the use of tarps, human scrums and nonverbal vocal noises. While they asked for damages for the deprivation of *their* rights and *their* emotional distress, I doubt that they ever consider the emotional distress that they caused the staff, volunteers and the patients.
No one on either side on the abortion controversy would argue against the right to speak freely or the right to exercise one’s religion. However, it seems to me that most of the prolife advocates have crossed the line when they
• Invade women’s privacy outside a health care clinic
• Use their religion to harass and shame women
• Refute established medical and scientific knowledge
• Force grotesque images in women’s faces
Regardless of one’s position on abortion, no one should ever subject a woman to public humiliation for her personal health care choices.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:16 am
Kate, I absolutely admit that these things happen, I am glad that you are finally admitting that this is done because we know/think/believe a baby is going to it’s death. If you could really put yourself into the shoes of someone who REALLY believes that, you will understand that any “tactic” is justifiable when a child is being escorted to it’s death. I do believe though, in the way of Jesus. He did everything with loving correction and pointed reminders of the consequences of our actions, with the goal of restoration, not punishment. You all need to know that the bible says that hell was created for satan and his minions, NOT humans. God never intended for us to go there, but he is the ultimate advocate of free choice, and he won’t force us to choose Jesus. I wish all Christians behaved as Christ did. But the fact that they don’t is the whole reason God had to send his son to make the ultimate sacrifice for us, because he loves us just that much, and realized we’d NEVER make it on our own as far as living up to God’s standards, which are the very things we wish out of life, ourselves and others. Don’t forget though, that all of humanity behaves badly and in selfishness the majority of the time. You have done the very same things on this blog that you’ve accused others of doing. Such is the HUMAN condition. Thus is the reason we all need a Savior, But granted, Christians have chosen the way of the Savior, and we should behave accordingly. But for the life of me, I can’t think of an alternative of the behavior you describe on the sidewalks when THAT baby is about to be executed.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:48 am
Deanna said something quite similar when referencing the CPCs–that lying to save an unborn was OK.
Well two wrongs don’t make one right. I believe the protesters’ behavior is despicable. Period.
All of the religiosity is a waste of time if you can’t behave according to your own tenets of your faith, if you behave badly because you want to symbolically annihilate the woman in your crude and shameless effort to save the unborn, and if you judge others. It didn’t take long to lose what little shred of faith I had in organized religion after watching for several years the people outside abortion clinics in Allentown and elsewhere. Religion turns them into hateful and nasty hypocrites who try every means to get their way. Religion has deluded them into believing in themselves, into worshipping themselves and their cohorts and into using all the outer religious trappings to make it all appear holy when it’s not.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 4:27 pm
I understand why you find it despicable. It’s because you focus on the woman and her rights, and you don’t acknowledge the humanity and right to life of the unborn. Can’t you understand that they behave that way because they equally value the unborn and it’s rights? Have you never behaved badly toward them in defense of the women? You are driven to do what you do in defense of women, and you think it’s justified. Why isn’t it justified in defense of unborn women? They unborn don’t have a “choice” as the born woman walking into that clinic does. I said I have no idea what to do but scream, but years ago we stood on the sidelines and offered help, real help. We were rarely taken up on it. I do have an idea though. A movie about Martin Luther King was on today, and I realized that it would be awesome to stage peaceful sit in’s as the black community did then. If hundreds of pro-lifers surrounded the clinics in peaceful sit-in’s, or quietly praying scripture in unison, that would be something. Anything.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 7:08 pm
NunYa: I understand why you find it despicable. It’s because you focus on the woman and her rights, and you don’t acknowledge the humanity and right to life of the unborn. Can’t you understand that they behave that way because they equally value the unborn and it’s rights?
RESPONSE: How can you even begin to imagine that what you wrote is logical? they value women and the unborn equally?
You were complaining earlier that no one responds to your questions, that they don’t read the postings. Well, dear heart, neither do you. I am going to hopefully say this once and once only. I believe that women’s rights trump the rights of ANY fetus, ANY time. While I recognize the humanity of the fetus, which I’ve said numerous times, if a woman values her fetus and wants to keep it, fine. If she doesn’t value it and doesn’t want to keep it, that’s fine too. As for the protesters equally valuing women and the unborn, I don’t buy it for one minute. If you value women, you demonstrate that value by treating women with dignity, compassion and love not with nastiness and lies, snippy little digs and smirky comments.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:21 am
“I believe that women’s rights trump the rights of ANY fetus, ANY time.”
We’ve heard you say this before, Kate, and we understand what it means: I, Kate Ranieri, believe that my rights trump the rights of ANY scumbag ANY time.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 10:28 am
Kate, I’m feeling snippy, but I’m going to be nice about this and I’m letting you know I’m being nice, since you can’t seem to discern the difference. I know it’s partly my fault for our little tit for tat party, but let’s lay down the gloves and answer each other honestly.
You misunderstand my post completely. I didn’t say they value the woman and unborn equally, I said they value the unborn equally as much as you value the women, although I believe that most pro-lifers do value the women equally or there would be many more in jail for crimes against the women. Can’t you understand for just a moment that watching a woman go into the clinic to kill what WE value and know is a human life drives people to behave badly?
I didn’t “complain” that “no one” reads the posts. I said that Pat doesn’t read the long posts, by his own admission, and therefore may be missing the fact that I’ve asked several questions that you all ignore. Just as you ignored the TWO questions I asked in the post that you are responding to here.
I do read the posts, just as I’ve said here before. Apparently you read them but are so filled with bitterness, judgment and bias toward ALL pro-lifers that your objectivity is completely gone, to the point that you totally misread the comments. Or you do it on purpose.
I haven’t evaded/refused to answer any question put to me that I’ve seen, and I wasn’t “complaining”. (You are very bad about reading into comments what you want them to be) Pat asked me to ASK a question, and I told him I have asked several that you all have not answered. Voice asked you a direct question above, you ignored it, asked her your own question about religion, then refused to speak with her again until she answered YOUR question, I know you know you are doing that, and it’s why I think of you as a bully, and a reason I wonder if any of you other than Pat really wants real discussion.
No need to “say it one more time”. I have heard you say it, and I know it is what the pro-choice community believes. I didn’t ask you what you believe, I asked you if you could understand for a moment what others believe.
You stated: “If you value women, you demonstrate that value by treating women with dignity, compassion and love not with nastiness and lies, snippy little digs and smirky comments.” If that’s what you really believe, then I’d say that you don’t live what you believe any more than the pro-lifers/Christians you have called out for the very same things, judging by how you have handled women and men on this site in just the short time I’ve been here. Remember, I started posting and stopped lurking because of YOU, and the way you treated Deanna. Deanna is a woman. You treated her with no dignity, compassion or love, and did treat her with nastiness, lies, snippy little digs and smirky comments. Are you going to say it’s because she does/stands for things you find unacceptable, even despicable? That your behavior is justified because of what you believe and how you see others being treated? Just to stop something before it begins, we are talking about YOU and YOUR values, not DEANNA’S. If SHE wants to discuss her beliefs with me, she can. We are talking about YOUR declaration of how you believe a TRUE valuer of women treats women, so please don’t respond by throwing it back on her comments to you.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 1:24 pm
this b nunya bidness
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 10:22 am
It is only a baby if it’s YOUR pregnancy, NunYa. You can’t speak for any other pregnant woman. In your line of work you must have run across the women who said of their newborn, “He’s angry at me,” or of their two-year-old, “He hates me,” or of their three-year-old, “Shithead.” It’s not what you think about her pregnancy, it’s what she thinks about it that matters.
And what are you going to do about it?
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 5:17 pm
Actually, it’s a HUMAN life that begins at conception. That isn’t what I “believe,” it’s science. There is no debate about that anymore. No, I encountered women, who were sheltered at our crises center from abusive men, who wanted to protect their children at all costs. There are bad parents out there for sure, just like there are criminals, liars and thieves. But you sell women way short in your assessment that they will raise serial killers just because they don’t want the child. Most people fall in love with their child, and the ones that don’t, and are headed to being bad parents, will anyway. Many of them aren’t seeking abortions, but rather getting pregnant on purpose with their latest boyfriend. I saw it over and over. But I honestly never saw a woman who didn’t love her child, even if she was a sub-par parent, usually due to her circumstances. We tried to help them improve their circumstances. We would do the same for women facing unwanted pregnancies, but also educate them in the hope that they would prevent pregnancy rather end it. If every woman who has an unwanted pregnancy would do such a horrific job, how can you “trust” these same women to make a decision to end that child’s life? And most of all, how can you and Kate say “Trust Women! Respect Women!” with a straight face?
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 6:22 pm
NunYa,
Two things:
NunYa: “Atually it’s HUMAN life that begins at conception.
RESPONSE: Well no kidding. Aren’t you the bright one! Gosh, perhaps we should add that to our body of knowledge about reproduction.And perhaps send a press release to the Institute of Medicine, the Mayo Clinic, the CDC, the Guttmacher Institute, the AMA and such. I’m sure they’d really appreciate your insight. Because it’s entirely likely that no other HUMAN would know what you just offered.
NunYa: “If every woman who has an unwanted pregnancy would do such a horrific job, how can you “trust” these same women to make a decision to end that child’s life? And most of all, how can you and Kate say “Trust Women! Respect Women!” with a straight face?”
RESPONSE: That’s a pretty amazingly ego-centered statement you’ve made about not trusting women. If I or other prochoice-minded people don’t trust women, should they trust you or the protesters? How utterly preposterous.
Sam Daley-Harris has something that might resonate with you and your buddies. He wrote: “When I help, I am aware of my strength and of others’ weaknesses. . . Fixing is a form of judgment. It implies something is broken and creates a distance, a disconnection. We can only serve that which we are profoundly connected to”
And your rhetoric strikes me as someone who is disconnected, who is judgmental and who fails to communicate anything but your own obsessions, aggresivity, and ambitions.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 1:44 pm
Kate, I mentioned the obvious, that it’s human life, in response to this:
RESPONSIBLE Right to Life/chuck/charles/aborticentrism Says:
It is only a baby if it’s YOUR pregnancy, NunYa. You can’t speak for any other pregnant woman.
But you know that.
I was also pointing out the obvious that anyone who believes women will do a horrific parenting job automatically,just because they didn’t want the child, does not trust or respect women. I stand by that statement. I am not the one saying they will raise serial killers. I never said I didn’t trust women, or that you should trust pro-lifers.
But you know that too.
I never said I tried to “fix” anyone. I said we at the crisis center tried to help abused women better their circumstances. You find that egocentric, obsessive, aggressive and ambitious? But I thought the mantra of you guys throughout this blog was to HELP women, HELP already born children?
Kate, are you insecure in your pro-abort stance? Is that why you seem to need to read into everything said by a pro-lifer?
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:29 pm
Reject false gods. Embrace truth.
FSM
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 10:32 am
NunYa, I trust the judgment of all women much more easily than I trust the judgment of all mothers. The aborticentrism site has a page which lists the common reasons that women get pregnant. Not many of them imply good nurture.
Groucho Marx once said that a man could experience what a woman goes through in labor if he grasped his upper lip and peeled it back to the top of his head.
If I had to go through that sort of pain to produce a baby, you can bet that no matter what he turned out to be, I would think the same thing Louise Bundy probably thought– “He was so much trouble, he must be worth something!” and of course I would tell everyone that, yes, I love my child.
The self-proclaimed “pro-lifer’s” real job is to understand what it takes to make a baby into a real human being, rather than let it develop into an inhuman being. But they can’t do it. You can’t do it. voice doesn’t do it. Not only does Dunkle not do it, he won’t even open his eyes to the reality of feral children. All of you take the easy way out and simply express your hatred of death as it is represented in abortion. Why?
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 2:29 pm
I don’t believe you really want an answer to your question, because I’ve seen it answered here by others, and by myself. I help in ways you do not know. Deanna helped by adopting children. Nothing is enough. We have all mentioned the many organizations out there, most of them Christian organizations, helping children and whole families both at home and abroad. Every church and denomination I know sends teams of people with supplies and money overseas to build hospitals and schools, and feed the hungry. I personally wrote the curriculum for and taught a parenting program for our local CPC, which never lied to clients, by the way.Every town I know has Big Brother/Big Sister organizations, Head Start Programs, crisis centers, homeless shelters, usually all started and run by Christians.They educate as well as provide basic needs. Is your answer to that again going to be what it has been every time:
“The self-proclaimed “pro-lifer’s” real job is to understand what it takes to make a baby into a real human being, rather than let it develop into an inhuman being. But they can’t do it. You can’t do it. voice doesn’t do it. Not only does Dunkle not do it, he won’t even open his eyes to the reality of feral children. All of you take the easy way out and simply express your hatred of death as it is represented in abortion. Why?”
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:45 pm
In my home town, along the Adriatic, we say
Tra il dire e il fare c’ e’ di mezzo il mare—between saying and doing, there is an ocean of difference.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 10:04 am
A gold mine, as I said before, a gold mine. Better yet, a farm. Every statement is food for the pro-life appetite. Whenever I get bored, I just go to the next topic and feed. Let’s start with the start:
After repeating the obvious — we prolifers believe life begins at conception (“conception”?, Kate, the beginning?) — she writes: “As such, they personally feel a moral obligation to save the zygote/embryo/fetus from abortion regardless of the ethics of their tactics and regardless of the accuracy of their information.”
The tactics she deplores include calling out prolife messages over the deathscorts’ attempts to drown us out, showing pictures of what happens inside the little Auschwitz, reading prolife messages to the deathscorts during the quiet intervals, and so on. And I know why she does that. If she can continue to convince us that these pitiful gestures really do make us effective prolifers, we will never become effective. We will never break the diabolical laws that protect the killers and condemn the innocent. We will simply keep repeating to ourselves and others that nauseating mantra: “We must first convert hearts and minds blah, blah, blah.” We will simply keep making ourselves feel good in spite of the overwhelming evidence of our failure: of every five hundred babies we try to keep from getting pulled apart, we save, maybe, one.
Now, back to the trough.
LikeLike
August 28, 2011 at 9:20 am
NunYa says: “To Kate and Chuck, I have to say this blog is the first place I have heard anyone refer to being a hero in this issue. It has never occured to me, nor have I ever heard another pro-lifer even allude to the need to be a hero.”
NunYa, why do you choose the easier option of hating abortion rather than nurturing the next child? Humans everywhere seek to find meaning behind actions that appear irrational– and the self-proclaimed “pro-lifer” focus on life up to the delivery room door and no further appears to be irrational.
But if you’ve read Freud’s monograph, The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, you know that every behavior, no matter how incongruous, has a motive. Freud admits that he, the up-and-coming pioneer in his field, tussled with his niece so that he could fondle her and make it look accidental. So, one has the impulse to find the underlying rationale for the self-proclaimed “pro-lifer’s” cognitive dissonance: Why this passion for the fetus unmatched with even a tenth of the same passion for the real human?
Ernest Becker, who did not deal with the issue of anti-abortion, is one who explored why people would be willing to die, when it is obvious none of us wants to. He determined that we all want to transcend Death. Some do it through religion or philosophy, and others try to be immortal in the memory of the human race by becoming a hero. “The hero pays the price society specifies,” he wrote. Caesar and Napoleon, conquerors and rulers; Albert Schweitzer, Father Damien, Mother Teresa, caregivers; James Dean, Jimmy Stewart, entertainers; and so on.
So, it follows that if a person can create a field of endeavor which he can sell to the public as an heroic enterprise, he can become a hero. If he picks the right victim and the right villain, he can become a hero without expending very much effort. Which is why self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” don’t have to pay any attention to real children if they don’t want to.
And of course, they can’t afford to recognize they have an underlying compulsion to be a hero. Why?
But you read about all of this at the aborticentrism website.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:21 pm
You know Chuck, I answered this above, and now I’m calling your insistence that pro-lifers don’t do anything about “real” children, as opposed to the fake children growing in wombs, an outright fabrication meant to make yourself feel better. Either that or you are the most blind, uneducated person on the planet to deny the truth. Do you think all the organizations, from the local level to the international, don’t really exist? It’s like when a child keeps saying “did too” when you tell them they didn’t do their chores. Just pointless words spoken out of childishness. What the heck is wrong with you? As for the “hero” theory, Christianity is now based on trying to be a hero? Really? Have you ever studied the history of Christianity? I’m tired of hearing it. Come up with something new and valid. I’m not trying to be mean, truly I’m not. It’s just the most ridiculous argument I’ve ever heard, based on my knowledge of my actual surroundings, not the fictional one you push. It’s ridiculous anyway, but to try to justify abortion based on it makes no sense at all. Is Child Care International based on trying to be a hero? Or does it exist at all? What about Feed the Children? Really Chuck, I don’t get you at all. I did read your site, and I think it’s a case of you trying to coin a word and start a movement. Sounds like delusions of hero-dom to me. No wonder there are few pro-lifers around here. You guys refuse to deal with facts and logic, you only deal in your own fantasies.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:25 pm
If what you say about other self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” is true, then why is THIS true about yourself, NunYa: You are not raising the child you want(ed) someone else to bear. And that’s not a fantasy.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:36 pm
Because as is usually the case, the girl backed out and is raising him herself. Like I said, women CAN and DO rise to the occasion if not escorted into an irrevocable “choice” during an emotionally charged time in her life. (And by the way, your comment makes no sense, I just answered your question)
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:37 pm
And Chuck, way to ignore my ENTIRE comment, including each and every point I made.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:50 pm
No, NunYa, you want 1.2 million more babies to be born. Her decision leaves you with 1.199999 miliion more. You are not raising the next child you want(ed) born.
What all those other organizations and all those other people do is not about you. After you adopt the child you don’t want to raise, I will start with them.
By the way, I once dealt with a woman who was very reluctantly raising her imprisoned sister’s six-year-old. it was a really ugly situation for the child. I think you could have done better than she. But you were busy, I suppose.
LikeLike
August 30, 2011 at 9:59 pm
No Chuck, as I’ve said several times, which you’ve ignored, NO ONE IS ASKING. I’ll fly to your town, and you and Kate can “escort” every woman past me first, and I’ll do everything in my power in a NICE, loving, Christlike way, to get her to let me adopt her child. Not one of them will take me up on it. Your argument is lame and pointless, since all these millions of children you keep bringing up will never exist, and pro-lifers won’t get the chance to prove whether they will adopt or not because we don’t get the chance. You have ZERO facts, just an unproven theory. The only way you can prove your aborticentrism theory is for abortion to become illegal, leading to millions of unwanted babies born, and then the pro-lifers will have to refuse to adopt those babies. Until that happens, you’re are just snapping at air. As for the small scale, for every woman you can bring to me with a “story” about how she begged every pro-lifer she knew to adopt her child and they wouldn’t, I can introduce you to actual families raising babies they’ve adopted who were scheduled for abortion and given a chance at life. But in both instances, it’s a “tiny minority.”
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 6:26 am
Just to clarify again, folks. If Nunya, Voice and/or John has ONE question for us pro-choicers, go to the Home Page of this world famous blog and you will see “Comments”. At this point, there are about 1,200 comments. Go into that and then in the available box, post your question. All of us keep throwing things around, it gets very confusing and I feel like we often are not talking to each other. Why not spend some time deriving the facts? So, to the pro-life gang, ask your question and PLEASE try to keep it short! Here’s your opportunity to stick it to us 🙂
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Pat, I have asked questions here over and over and they remain ignored to this very moment. Plus, I thought this was the point of your blog, to solicit discussion? That’s what this is, and I see no reason to carry it to yet another place to become even more confusing. But I will give you this. Once each question I have answered just in this article is answered, I’ll think about going on the other page. Otherwise it’s a waste of time. At least here there is dialog. And no, I won’t be the one to go back and dig them out. How frustrating do you think it is to ask questions, have them ignored or answered with more questions (a classic diversion) and then be asked to ask questions? And Chuck is just annoying. That’s a freebie.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 10:15 am
NunYa says, “It’s HUMAN life that starts at conception.”
Well, actually, no. It’s a POTENTIAL human life that starts at conception. The fetus, if properly nurtured, stands a very good chance of becoming an infant. The infant, if properly nurtured, stands a very good chance of becoming a human being.
The infant is protected from birth by society’s recognition that it has certain rights. As a result of that recognition, the more advanced societies offer support for its nurture, including medical, nutritional, educational and protective services. When the parent is sufficiently competent to take advantage of those services and when the parent is sufficiently endowed with human talents for nurture, the infant is likely to receive the support and nurture it needs to become a “happy” adult– happy in that he or she will be able to exercise vital talents in a setting affording them scope.
So, to fret obsessively over somebody else’s fetus without fretting over the entire span of needed nurture is bizarre. It’s like watching a child marvel over a two-week-old puppy while ignoring the parent starving in the kennel.
And why would the self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” choose the easier task of hating abortion rather than the harder task of sacrificing their substance to see the fetus they rescued is well-raised? The only answer is, they’re not doing it for the resultant child or the mother, they’re just doing it for themselves.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 10:36 am
Explain the following: “they’re just doing it for themselves.” Don’t understand that statement.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 12:18 pm
They seek reassurance that they can transcend their own death. We all do (cf Ernest Becker, Denial of Death). We deal with it in our separate ways. Some of us get our reassurance in religion, some in philosophy, some in agnosticism.
We all have to, otherwise our awareness of our inevitable and irreversible death, our loss of everything we’ve known and loved, our descent into oblivion and the total erasure of all evidence– that we ever lived, thought, laughed, loved, cried, shared– would paralyze us.
Some of us can’t deal with it. Although we try to be strong in our faith, we can’t believe strongly enough in what our spiritual leaders offer. We need proof in the here and now, through our own senses, that we will transcend Death, that even though gone our words and deeds will last forever. We know we can do this by becoming heroes.
For the self-proclaimed “pro-lifer,” it is just a matter of selling himself to society as a hero for the unborn, and he has provided himself the proof he cannot get through faith that he will transcend his own Death. By being a self-proclaimed “pro-lifer” the person he helps is himself.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:32 pm
How many pro-lifers have you interviewed to come to your conclusions?
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 4:56 pm
Check the sources at the aborticentrism website to see how extensively I have studied the situation. It takes more than interviewing to understand many phenomena.
What do you think about Gianna Beretta Molla choosing to risk death rather than stay alive to care for the child that died two years after she did? In my opinion, she is deservedly the patron saint of aborticentrists.
LikeLike
August 30, 2011 at 10:11 pm
Let me practice the technique you guys use here; I’ll answer your question with my own. Mine will not be evasive though, as yours are, because you’ll know my opinion by my question. Here it is:
What would you think of a mother who ran into a burning building to save her 1 day old infant, and died in the process of saving it? Oh, I’ve just realized this is a two-parter:
If she could predict the future, and saw that that child would die at age two, what would you advise her to do as you both stare at the growing fire?
LikeLike
August 30, 2011 at 10:15 pm
And by the way, she couldn’t have stayed alive to raise it, because if she lived it would have meant she aborted it. That was her choice: abort it or die herself of a tumor. Of course a good mother isn’t going to kill her child to save herself.
LikeLike
August 31, 2011 at 11:59 pm
You don’t need to interview the subjects of your study? LOL.
LikeLike
August 31, 2011 at 5:17 am
“We deal with [our own deaths] it in our separate ways. Some of us get our reassurance in religion, some in philosophy, some in agnosticism.”
And some, like yourself, Chuck, try to get that reassurance by obsessing on Mom and Dad, those who have hurt you deeply. So you invent this fake palliative, aborticentrism, Obviously, that is a religion that is not working for you.
May I suggest that for relief you try the religion of one of us who is not fixated on his own demise; in my case that would be Catholicism.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 11:54 am
“The fetus, if properly nurtured, stands a very good chance of becoming an infant. The infant, if properly nurtured, stands a very good chance of becoming a human being.” = The fetus, if properly nurtured, stands a very good chance of becoming a puppy. The puppy, if properly nurtured, stands a very good chance of becoming a canine. See how silly that is? Don’t matter, he’ll repeat it.
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 12:21 pm
He will now tell us again what he knows about the nurture of feral children. ( Keep it brief.)
LikeLike
August 29, 2011 at 6:48 pm
I know that when Pat started these discussions, you were a feral child, Chuck. Months and months later and you’re still feral.
LikeLike
August 31, 2011 at 9:33 am
Okay, I’ll bite. What the heck do the few known cases of feral children have to do with abortion?
LikeLike
August 31, 2011 at 7:26 pm
Lord Goodness, NY, don’t get him started.
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 6:02 am
NunYa, I think your heart would be tortured if you knew the condition of even one feral child. Feral children are forever deprived of normal human function, and it is almost entirely due to lack of human nurture. I’d suggest you do a little research on it.
Feral children are what you risk when you refuse to care for the child you wanted born. And therein lies the grave of the so-called “pro-life” movement.
LikeLike
August 31, 2011 at 5:03 pm
To NunYa about the burning baby scenario: Let’s stick with reality. I could dream up an even more fantastic scenario which would be just as pointless.
As for inviting you to challenge pregnant women to let you raise their baby if they promise not to have an abortion: Why do you have to be a visible hero? You could do what my sister did and simply go through the adoption process. No whistles and bells for her, just 22 years of interesting responsibilities. Why does it have to revolve around you, rather than around the needs of a real child? It is with some bashful pride that I point out aborticentrism posits this self-centeredness.
LikeLike
August 31, 2011 at 11:54 pm
You know I was making a point, I don’t really intend to fly there and you wouldn’t march the women past me if I did. You are determined to force every statement into your aborticentrism point of view, even if you have to twist meanings and ignore facts, aren’t you? As for the burning baby scenario, it was also to make a point that a one day old baby would be just as important to save as the unborn one in Molla’s womb. I am explaining it in vain though, because, just like Kate, you are a reasonably intelligent person, (although that opinion of you is starting to falter) so I have to conclude that you do these things on purpose just to defame and blow smoke,
LikeLike
August 31, 2011 at 5:06 pm
NunYa, it must be exasperating for you. You come on here to ask questions, and then you get asked them. And you don’t like those, so you answer by asking more. I’m sorry I’m a pain in the butt, but I think you can handle it anyway. Good luck!
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 12:12 am
Actually I came on here because I wanted to gain insight into the “other side.” I started posting because of Kate’s crap.You are not only a pain in the butt and astronomically annoying, you are dishonest. You know that I haven’t avoided a single question, you know that I answered ONE question with a question to make a point that that’s ALL you guys do, and you know therefore that your observation that I “don’t like those, so you answer by asking more” is an outright lie. Why do you and Kate (and I assume other pro-choicers?) do that if you are so sure of what you believe? It’s all still here, all we have to do is look back. I am asking seriously, why do you do it? I don’t need to do it to uphold what I believe. I am secure in what I believe and can discuss it all day long without needing to twist your words and ignore your questions. I certainly don’t talk to you as if you are a billion pro-choicers operating from one brain. Alhough…no, I’m being nice. I really would like an answer.
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 5:20 am
Powerful as usual, NY. They have to lie, though, becausue they cannot bear to realize that under their watch, and with their help, more innocent people have been killed than under the watches of Stalin and Mao combined. Can anybody face the fact that he is worse than Hitler? I can’t, and that’s why I have to lie too. I have to tell myself that this is not happening with my help.
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 6:04 am
NunYa, your response is typical of a patient whose doctor says, “You have cancer,” and whose response is, “I don’t want to hear about it!”
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 12:15 pm
I know you are, but what am I?!
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 2:03 pm
?????
Translator please . . .
LikeLike
June 4, 2013 at 1:36 am
Howdy! I could have sworn I’ve been to this site before but after looking at many of the articles I realized it’s new to me. Nonetheless, I’m definitely delighted I came across it and I’ll be book-marking it and checking back often!
LikeLike
June 4, 2013 at 3:58 pm
That’s very cook rbs. Thanks for the kind words. Hope you’ll comment on other posts….
LikeLike