McCain Turns Hard Right, Goes All-In With “Pro-Life” Sarah Palin as Veep


Senator John McCain is going all-in with "pro-life" social conservatives by selecting first-term Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate. Palin will be the first woman Republican nominated to the national ticket. With this choice, McCain is signaling that he is preparing for ideological battle, appealing to the far-right social conservative base that he called "agents of intolerance" when he ran against George Bush in 2000. RH Reality Check readers may recall that I wrote about this possibility June 4, 2008.

In her remarks Palin thanked McCain and noted the historical moment of her selection came 88 years, almost to the day, after women first gained the right to vote. In a clear indication of why she was selected, to reach out to women, she acknowledged the achievements of Geraldine Ferraro who was the first woman nominated to a major party ticket in 1984 by Walter Mondale, "and of course Sen. Hillary Clinton who showed such determination and grace in her Presidential campaign. It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest glass ceiling in America, but it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all."

Sen. Hillary Clinton said today, "We should all be proud of Gov. Sarah
Palin’s historic nomination and I congratulate her and Sen. McCain.
While their policies would take American in the wrong direction, Gov.
Palin will add an important new voice to the debate."

That, in a nutshell, is the gambit, the Hail Mary, the roll of the dice that McCain is making, that women will be more interested in electing a woman based on biology, than policy.

Sarah Palin could not possibly be further away in terms of policy than the two women she saluted, Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton.

Neither McCain nor Palin once mentioned the words "pro-life" or even made an oblique reference to social conservative values. They want to introduce her only as a woman, working mom, reformer, striving to underscore the ticket’s claim to a maverick mantle, even as they double-down with the extreme far-right wing of the GOP to motivate the base.

They hope to attract women who don’t know her, and perhaps even some who don’t yet believe that women’s reproductive health is genuinely threatened by policies reducing access to contraception currently proposed by the Bush Administration, and by the promise to overturn Roe v. Wade that McCain has underscored with Palin’s selection.

Conservative icon Pat Buchanan called Palin’s selection, "the biggest political gamble, just about, in American political history. This will energize the base." Palin was a supporter of Pat Buchanan when he ran for President, declaring the Culture War in his 1992 convention speech.

Former Republican Congressman and host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough said, "If John McCain’s campaign thinks he can get Hillary Clinton voters by choosing Palin it is condescending and insulting to women and it is a terrible political faux pas."

Former McCain adviser Mike Murphy said, "They know they are in a real fight here so there was a calculation that they need a real shock value here."

NBC Political Director Chuck Todd said McCain runs the risk of this looking like a gimmick. "John McCain only met her twice, he doesn’t know her. This goes against everything we know about John McCain, he like to surround himself with people that he is comfortable with and that are loyal to him and all of the sudden this is a political calculation and it is gimmicky," Chuck Todd said.

If there was any doubt about the stakes in this election for Americans interested in preserving the value of choice, and a Supreme Court that respects the differences of belief and faith and resists the push from the far-right to prohibit safe, legal abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade, there should be none now.

Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood of America said, “According to an article in the Alaska Journal
(3/16/08), when Palin was running for lieutenant governor in 2002, she
sent an e-mail to the Alaska Right to Life board saying she was as
“pro-life as any candidate can be.” She is also on the record stating
that she is opposed to abortion even in the case of rape or incest."

McCain flirted with returning to his centrist roots by considering pro-choice running mates like Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman. His selection of Palin confirms the hard right turn he took in the primary, and puts a woman’s right to make her own reproductive health decisions in jeopardy.

With this decision John McCain can reliably lock-up the approximately ten percent of voters who want to see Roe v. Wade overturned, but does nothing to reach out to Americans who may differ on the question of abortion, but prefer to implement comprehensive sexuality education and the prevention of unintended pregnancies. Those sorts of centrist views can now be found no where in the GOP ticket or party platform, moving the party even further to the right than the Bush administration.

How this choice appeals to independents, which is what any objective analysis suggests is most important in this tightly contested election, is a question.

Palin is opposed to gay marriage but sympathetic to concerns about discrimination because of her own gay and lesbian friends. She just doesn’t believe those friends should be allowed the same rights associated with marriage as she and her husband enjoy. She is pro-gun, common in the West, and a member of Feminists for Life, making her a hero for far-right social conservatives.

Palin is under investigation as to whether she abused her power in firing Public Safety
Commissioner Walt Monegan. The legislative council approved $100,000 for the investigation that will find out whether Palin was
angry at Monegan for not firing an Alaska State Trooper who went
through a messy divorce with Palin’s sister.

 

This post will be updated throughout the day as news comes in.

 

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • http://www.cpcwatch.org invalid-0

    I’m completely surprised at the number of “Hillary lost and didn’t get VP so I’m voting for McCain” people out there. In my opinion (and that’s the opinion of an unaffiliated leftist, you understand), those people need to grow up and realize what they’re doing. No, I don’t think Obama will heal all our reproductive health woes, but McCain will just create more. And his pick for veep (a woman) is a clear attempt to pander to those former Hillary supporters who are more or less in bad spirits following the loss of a candidate they were extremely passionate about. Of course the media might be heightening the numbers of those Hillary-turned-McCain supporters, but I know they’re out there. Palin is DANGEROUS, just like McCain. The possession of “female parts” does not automatically make one a champion of women’s lib… I mean, look at Ann Coulter, Phyllis Schaffly, Jill Stanek…

  • marysia

    Now, personally, my politics run off the leftist end of the US political spectrum, and I have known since before he announced that I’d vote for Obama…but there are a couple of things about Sarah Palin that may clue in exactly what school of prolife she may belong to. 

    She apparently is pro-contraception, when some prolifers with large families virulently oppose contraception not just for themselves but others.  And while she was in office, Palin’s prolife beliefs were put to a heavy test–she birthed a child she knew to have Down syndrome.  So…she may have some inklings about reproductive justice that it’d be unwise to simply dismiss. 

     

  • scott-swenson

    We are researching her positions in detail now and will have something more on our Election 2008 page soon. She may have a more nuanced view on reproductive health than those on the far right, and if so, she should speak up now to stop HHS from making contraception and other health services more difficult to access. The bottom line is with this pick, McCain also sends a signal that he is bought and sold by the far-right, so really no question about what kind of justices he would support. He really had a chance at a more comfortable pick of Ridge or Lieberman, but like Mondale in 1984 realized he needed something to draw some attention by selecting a woman that would appeal to the base of their respective party.


    Be the change you seek,

    Scott Swenson, Editor

  • sayna

    I just found out from NARAL that she opposes abortion in cases of rape and incest, a position that many "moderate" pro-lifers find too extreme. Her page at OnTheIssues says very little except on this issue that she calls herself pro-life and opposes gay marriage.

  • sayna

    Some of the strongest anti-feminists and most misogynist people I have ever seen are women. It is entirely possible to be an anti-woman woman. They are either self-loathing or see themselves as “exceptional” and able to do things that other women can’t do. Often, they are both.

    Seeing the number of Clinton-turned-McCain voters troubles me as well. I just don’t understand how anyone could do a total 180 on their political beliefs out of spite. If people are that willing to pick a candidate’s gender over political views, I would not be surprised if they ignored Palin’s views just because she is female. “Oh, that John McCain’s not a misogynist! He picked a woman as vice-president! How progressive!” …Ugh. Almost as if she’s a token “I don’t hate women,I swear!” pick to make himself look good.

  • invalid-0

    McCain ‘n’ Palin Ticket!!!!!!!!

    Mrs. Palin is from the boonies and is too greatly immersed in small town mentality to become a heartbeat from the presidency. It appears to me that she is out of touch with the concerns of the larger populated areas of this great nation.

    Oil interests, rather than the interest of the people, appear to be motivation for making her a candidate. Her husband is an executive with BP. This, IMO, presents a conflict of interest and lends to greater empowerment of the oil barons who are constantly dragging us into the ground. That leads me to believe her election would be a great danger to the health of the nation as a whole. The oil barons have had control for too long a time. We need leaders who are interested in the health & welfare of the entire nation and not just those who impoverish the rest of us to advance their own interests.

    Mr. & Mrs. Palin may be union members but that is not, necessarily, a great asset. I’ve known many unions, through the years, which have been company owned. I wonder what her policy would be with the regard to RIGHT TO WORK??? We already know she is against a WOMAN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE!!!

    Her experience as a mayor & governor of the largest state, with the smallest population, is no great credential (IMNSVHO). It would be bad enough, should McCain attain the presidency. The GREATEST danger would be in the event of his demise! Her experience in matters of GREATEST import (economy & international realtions) leave too much to be desired, should she be catapulted into the highest office in the land.

    Just my initial thoughts while listening to her speak.

    “Jack”-:)

  • http://www.cpcwatch.org invalid-0

    Yeah, we were wondering if McCain was planning on calling Palin a c*nt as well or if those choice words are reserved for his wife ;)

  • http://www.cpcwatch.org invalid-0

    True, true, she did birth a child known to have Downs, and of course a woman’s decision to do so should be supported regardless. Unfortunately, she as well as the anti-choice camp has made her a champion of refusing late-term abortion, almost to say “See, if this busy woman can do it, all women can.” While I of course support Palin’s personal decision, and would have if she’d had an abortion as well, the way she and others have used it against the case for late-term abortion rights is significantly troubling.

  • invalid-0

    I recently saw (today)a interview on C-span that was taped on 2-28-08 and when Sarah Palin was asked about her family there she replied that she had 4 children with no mention about her pregnancy or reference to a new addition.
    If she is pro life then why would she not mention this when specifically asked. I wonder about this.

  • scott-swenson

    She is very clearly anti-choice and a member of Feminists for Life. I can’t imagine why she wouldn’t discuss it on C-Span, or even why they wouldn’t want to talk about it today at her announcement, other than they want women to believe that she isn’t anti-choice.


    Be the change you seek,

    Scott Swenson, Editor

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    Sir, there has been plenty of oil you have personally used today, including your very own carbon imprint left on pangaea by having the audacity to use your first amendment rights. I mean, how dare you? Write about the evil yet fictitious interests of oil barons who do not even exist while hurting the environment so. Repent by buying some carbon credits…

    Timothy+

  • invalid-0

    Sarah Palin will deny legal and safe abortion rights even in the case of rape and incest. This is the most extreme possible anti-abortion position, one shared by fewer than 10 percent of voters. I think McCain already had those voters. Maybe he needed her to make sure they go out and vote for him, so that must be the plus. But how many people in the middle does he lose along the way? I agree with the commentators you quoted in the piece, this is a huge risk politically for McCain. It is dangerous for women. But most important of all, let’s be very clear — this woman would be one heart beat away from the Presidency in a very complex world, and the only reason she was selected was to shore up the far-right base. No American hero, no American patriot would make this selection for Vice President. This is decision made of blind ambition, tactical advantage, and with absolutely no regard for the future of our nation. McCain has undercut whatever credibility the he retained with this choice, and it is frightening to me as an American citizen, a woman, and an independent, that he has made this choice. It says far more about him, as I’m sure she is a lovely woman, perhaps even a good Governor, but she is a tool of McCain’s blind ambition. He should be ashamed.

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    To moan that your adversary ought to moderate his position regarding abortion is to capitulate ideologically that he is right. Either women should have the right to choose or women should not. If women should have the right to choose, then it is up to the women having the abortions to decide how many abortions there will be, and in what way they will be done, regardless of any consideration of preventive contraception that would hope to limit the total amount of abortions. I, for one, am very well pleased that the republican’s platform on abortion is uncompromising. You sound like: safe, rare, and legal. That makes you out to say that there is something wrong with abortion. Why would you want to take that moral decision away from women by appealing for a centrist’s position for all? Anyway, you should realize that considering Mrs. Clinton was probably the one who put the expression safe, rare, and legal into her husband’s ears in the first place, that those many women who are centrists will be voting for McCain because of Palin. This is true because a person’s moderate position yields to the definitive, especially when disgruntled. And especially when the liberal base has given up on its definitive ideals, anyway.

    Timothy+

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    Yet you would vote for a PRESIDENT who is similarly inexperienced. Considering ideology, I WILL GO WITH THE WOMAN! Gee, I am supposed to be against women…

    God bless
    Timothy+

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    Oh, and I forgot. Why should HE be ashamed? Are you implying that MRS. PALIN cannot make up her own mind?

    Timothy+

  • invalid-0

    Please Timothy, I beg of you to make sure that people keep comparing Barack Obama’s experience with Sarah Palin’s. That is a comparison I pray everyone makes. She said, “I haven’t thought much about Iraq policy” and Obama said, while still in the State Senate in Illinois, that we should not go to war, it was a distraction from the real war on terror and we would get bogged down in an expensive (blood and money) war. So please, compare the former State Senator’s judgment on the world stage, with the former Mayor of Wissila, Mrs. Palin.

  • invalid-0

    McCain should be ashamed, knowing as much as he does about the state of the world, that he has put someone with absolutely no world view, by her own admission, one heart beat away from being the leader of the free world. It is frightening that he would put his ambition ahead of national security. That seems like McCain First, Country Last.

  • invalid-0

    Dude, you are seriously circular in your “logic” — you want to take away legal rights to a woman’s right to choose and then turn around and say “it’s up to women to choose.” You are seriously confused. As for “safe, legal and rare” that just means that we should work together to improve health care for pregnant women, not legislate it. Women are not only concerned about abortion, but being able to make their own health care decisions, from the choice to use contraception or not, to when to have children or not. That Gov. Palin would deny abortion even in cases of rape or incest is shocking.

  • http://www.cpcwatch.org invalid-0

    Feminists for Life? Amazing she even got the Eagle Forum’s endorsement with the “feminist” title, even if it’s “feminists for life”…

  • http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/1416598065/db73f06059531-20?ref=nosim invalid-0

    From the boonies? Are you serious? What about whatsisname, the former governor of Arkansas? What was his experience in “matters of GREATEST import (economy & international realtions)”? How many Americans are “from the boonies”?!

    She’s shown how she handles conflicts of interest with the oil industry:

    Palin has strongly promoted oil resource development in Alaska, but also helped pass a tax increase on oil company profits. Palin has announced plans to create a new sub-cabinet group of advisors to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Alaska.

    Shortly after taking office, Palin rescinded 35 appointments made by Murkowski in the last hours of his administration, including that of his former chief of staff James “Jim” Clark to the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority. Clark later pleaded guilty to conspiring with a defunct oil-field-services company to channel money into Frank Murkowski’s re-election campaign.

    In March 2007, Palin presented the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) as the new legal vehicle for building a natural gas pipeline from the state’s North Slope. This negated a deal by the previous governor to grant the contract to a coalition including BP (her husband’s seasonal employer). Only one legislator, Representative Ralph Samuels, voted against the measure, and in June Palin signed it into law. On January 5, 2008, Palin announced that a Canadian company, TransCanada Corp., was the sole AGIA-compliant applicant. In August 2008, Palin signed a bill into law giving the state of Alaska authority to award TransCanada Pipelines a license to build and operate the $26-billion-dollar pipeline to ship natural gas from the North Slope to the Lower 48, through Canada.

    from Wikipedia

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    To understand the second sentence of my response one would have to necessarily realize that its understanding is contingent on understanding the first sentence of my response, which is directly written to Scott who has a propensity to plea for conservatives to moderate their political positions to the center to join the newly formed homogeneous cultural peace party. Are you, as a gesture towards moving to such a political moderation towards the center, saying that if Mrs. Palin agreed that it was right to allow for abortions to occur in cases of rape and incest you would vote for McCain? It might be too much of moderation for you, though. I mean considering those particular reasons for abortion only amount to approximately 2% of all abortions and you would giving up the other 98%.

    Timothy+

  • lynda-waddington

    That she did not make the pregnancy public until she was roughly 7 months along.

  • invalid-0

    to add “personally uncompromising PRO-LIFE woman, SARAH PALIN”
    you live in world of denial, of your own little making, like so many other right-wingers, don’t you?
    fictitious interests of oil barons? um…have you watched ANY news source lately? even your right wing MSM reports about oil companies making record profits while the price of gas increases.
    let me guess, you don’t believe in global warming, huh? and that’d be a-okay, if it wasn’t for the fact that people who want to play ostrich are screwing future generations.
    and this invalid style of “arguing”, the whole fundie way of looking at others (never themselves), this “judge not, lest thee be judged” doesn’t really work in the grown up world, timothy. there’s a HUGE difference in what an individual does, and what an oil corporation does.
    omg, i just realized that this is futile. you’re one of the few who come to this site as some sick masochism. you’re not here to get the other side’s perspective, nor are you here to educate yourself about reproductive health outside of abortion – your just here to make yourself feel superior in your beliefs. funny that you have no idea that you rarely make sense, and that you miss the point of this website entirely.
    GO WOMEN=GO OBAMA/BIDEN ’08!

  • invalid-0

    but, in regards to, personally uncompromising ANTI-CHOICE woman, SARAH PALIN – mccain should be ASHAMED for showing his complete lack of respect for women, for believing that they will vote blindly for any one who is of their gender, for calling his wife a c*nt, for making jokes about rape, for voting against equal pay for equal work, for voting against insurance companies who pay for viagra having to also pay for birth control. he has shown zero respect for women, and his pick for v.p. is nothing more than his thinking women aren’t smart enough to vote issues, that they only vote vagina. THOSE ARE JUST A FEW of the MANY reasons he ought to be ashamed.

  • invalid-0

    i’ve come to realize that you are one of those people who equate “big” words with intelligence. no pro-choice person is saying that a moderate view of abortion is tantemount to abortion being wrong. what we’re saying is, anti-choice is bad enough, but anti-choice that includes women who have been raped or the victim of incest is just beyond the pale.
    or, in your lingo:
    no pro-choice member of the human race is expressing that a temperate outlook of a woman’s right to the termination of preganancy for whatsoever reason she may have is equivalent to said termination of pregnancy for whatsoever reason she may have being inappropriate. what we’re saying is, having standards which are fully against the stance that a woman may terminate a pregnancy for whatsoever reasons she may have are deficient as they stand, but opposition to a woman having said rights to terminate said pregnancy for whatsoever said reasons she may or may not have and including within that said opposition those very same women who have incurred the dark realities of intra-familial family forced sexual intercourse and/or forced sexual intercourse outside of familial relations is purely, and without any doubts unconscionable.
    and in the simplest words possible, in relation to my education and intelligence:
    if you want to attempt an open discussion on reproductive health, you might try something new. you keep trying those old tactics of non-sensical arguments, and circular “logic”, all of which pro-choicers have heard soooo many times. if i only had a dollar for every ridiculous “argument” i’ve heard, i’d be a very financially comfortable woman right now.

  • http://didntaskme.blogspot.com/ invalid-0

    In my blog post on Palin,

    http://didntaskme.blogspot.com/2008/08/mccains-ultimate-pandering-to-women.html

    I quoted my friend Tanya Melich, who wrote in her Women’s Media Center Commentary, “John McCain may think he can seduce American voters by having Sarah Palin by his side, but when the majority of Americans learn the Republican platform does not bring health care to Americans, will not protect woman to make their own reproductive choices, does not bring legal protection for equal pay for equal work, Sarah Palin, the McCain Trojan filly, will not fool American women.”

    The trick of course will be to educate American voters, who appear uneducatable, on these facts.

  • mellankelly1

    I mean considering those particular reasons for abortion only amount to approximately 2% of all abortions and you would giving up the other 98%.

    10,000-to 15,000 abortions each year occur due to rape/incest… it is absolutely disgusting how you attempt to minimize these situations.  Nobody should ever (under any circumstances) force a victim of rape to carry a pregnancy that resulted from the crime to term… that is pure evil.  I could never, in good conscience, vote for someone who lacks a basic human emotion such as empathy.  That woman is disgusting.

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    Yes. That is simply the fact of the matter. That 1% to 1.5% are the aggregate or total amount of abortions that occur from rape/incest. No emotional minimization implied. Just numbers.

    Timothy+

  • invalid-0

    That’s great. But that’s not to what I am responding. I am responding to comments like this, when Scott your reproductive help editor says: “but does nothing to reach out to Americans who may differ on the question of abortion, but prefer to implement comprehensive sexuality education and the prevention of unintended pregnancies.” This is a proposition that Americans moderate their political views to the center when it concerns abortion. Conversely, such an appeal weakens pro-choice ideals because it offer’s from the pro-choice side to the pro-life side a lessening of the total amount of abortions that occur as a means to the sought after central position. However, pro-choice ideals necessitate that it is up to women to decide how many abortions there will be, if any. Pro-choice ideals are not to be bargained with. The reality that they are just indicates that the pro-life side’s decision not to compromise its ideals is winning ideologically over the pro-choice side because y’all seem to be moderating. This is my only point here. Anyway, you may want to limit the use of the ad hominem because it lessens the effectiveness of the sought after validity of your argument. Sorry to beg the question for you. Also, I cannot apologize for being didactic.

    Anyway, good day,

    Timothy+

  • scott-swenson

    Timothy, I’m responding here to a couple of your comments above. In no way am I suggesting that you or other far-right extremists change your views – I respect your right to hold those views no matter how much I may disagree with them. What I argue consistently is that the vast majority of Americans are more in line with centrist and mainstream views that include reality-based and comprehensive sex ed, access to contraception and other preventive health care, reproductive health care seen as something more than just one procedure, and the right for individuals to make their own health care decisions. If any of those ideas appeal to you and you would like to join us and work together to improve sexual and reproductive health, that would be great. But I understand why some people believe what they do and I respect it. Unfortunately you and others don’t have similar respect for pro-choice people. You believe that over turning one Supreme Court decision will make everything better, when all the evidence of life before Roe, and in other countries that ban abortion, clearly indicate that it won’t be. And to be clear, while I am very proud to work at this site, I do not pretend to speak for everyone here, for pro-choice people. I advocate what I believe, and the joy of building this diverse online community is hearing from others in the sexual and reproductive health community. Please do not put your patriarchal/hierarchical world view on me. I’m one person in a much larger community working to create a world where health care decisions are made by the people impacted, the health care professionals they choose, and the people close to them they choose to involve. I trust individuals to speak for themselves and make the choices best for them in their life journey. That’s the world we’re moving toward, thank God.


    Be the change you seek,

    Scott Swenson, Editor

  • invalid-0

    Joe Conason at Salon nailed it: McCain’s Palin pick is the epitome of tokenism. http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/08/30/palin/?source=newsletter

  • invalid-0

    I liked this part of the Conason piece the best:

    Looking back on the Ferraro nomination, another well-known conservative wrote: “I believe that someday we are going to have a woman president, possibly during my life, and I’ve often thought the best way to pave the way for this was to first nominate and elect a woman as vice-president. But I think Mondale made a serious mistake when he picked Geraldine Ferraro as his running mate. In my view, he guessed wrong in deciding to take a congresswoman that almost nobody had ever heard of and try to put her in line for the presidency … I don’t know who among the Democrats might have been a better choice, but it was obvious Mondale picked Geraldine Ferraro simply because he believed there was a ‘gender gap’ where I was concerned and she was a woman.”

    Those are the words of Ronald Reagan in his 1991 memoir, “An American Life,” pouring scorn on the nomination of a woman who had served six years in Congress working on foreign policy issues. In retrospect, he had a point. Only this Palin gambit could make the Ferraro mistake look responsible and wise.

  • http://www.treehugger.com invalid-0

    I think it is time to form a women’s swift boat group headed by Hilary to show how much this woman really cares about women’s issues.

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,

    I do not think I am misunderstanding you. You seek a centrist position, which will ultimately compromise a woman’s right to freely choose. I believe it to be a contradictory position when considering the history of the social movement of choice in our country. Thank you for saying that you “do not pretend to speak for everyone here, for pro-choice people.“ I am wondering, though, do you see my point? Do you see how advocating for a centrist position ultimately compromises a woman’s right to freely choose because it says that something is actually wrong with abortion? Also, why would you say to me that you “respect your right to hold those views no matter how much I may disagree with them” while also saying “please do not put your patriarchal/hierarchical world view on me”? Now I appreciate that you have taken the high road with me, but how do you expect me to dialogue with you if I cannot put my views out there, even on you? You are trying to compromise. I, you see, cannot. I feel we are actually talking about human life. I am sincerely venturing a gander that that is more important than reproductive rights. If we are really discussing limiting the amount of abortions that occur by prescribing contraception to women then we are both actually saying that there is something wrong with abortion. But how can you say that something is wrong with abortion and maintain a pro-choice position? More importantly, how can you think something is wrong with abortion and not be pro-life.

    Timothy+

  • scott-swenson

    Timothy,

    You assume, wrongly, that a centrist position holds that something is wrong with abortion. To me a centrist position holds that there is nothing wrong with women and families making the best choice for their particular circumstance. Abortion could be a very moral choice, and it is, for many people. Ninety percent of abortions take place VERY EARLY, and the less than 1.4 percent, according to the CDC, of late-term abortions that you love to pretend are what every abortion is, are done for medical reasons, for the mother or the fetus. Women do not make these decisions lightly, and suggesting otherwise as you do in every comment is callous. I get that you don’t agree with that position and the difference between us is I’m not suggesting that you should. I’m suggesting that in a pluralistic democracy, the starting point should be keeping government out of private medical decisions, or imposing any one belief on all people. Can government play a role in helping to improve evidence-based sex ed, access to contraception and reproductive health care services so that that there are fewer unintended pregnancies? Yes. Does that mean that by making those services available government is forcing people to use them? Not in the US, and the pro-choice community has been vocal opposing countries, like China, where government has imposed those views, because that is taking choice away in another way. And we’ve devoted extensive coverage on this site to the problems with sex selective abortion in India, where because girls are devalued, this takes place at alarming rates. But back to America, where the fight not to end up like China and India is now front and center, because if we overturn Roe, and remove a woman’s right to choose, all we’ve done is made women and doctors criminals, subjected women to back-alley illegal abortions that will hurt them an their families.

    As for my comments about patriarchy, you may advocate for your beliefs in those outdated, arcane, and soon to fade systems, but your earlier comments suggested somehow that I speak or lead others here. I’m one person, a person of faith that believes every child should be wanted, respected and heard. I try to walk the walk and if others walk with me, great, if they take a different path, I wish them well and God speed. I do not need you or anyone else to tell me about my relationship with God, how to live in accord with my beliefs, or to judge or stigmatize (throw stones) me for who I am or the politics I have. Please, express yourself and what you believe, just keep your ideas confined to your life and stop assuming that you know what is right for everyone else. You do not walk in my shoes, or anyone’s but your own, and that is what my comments were directed at. We can argue and disagree without assuming that the other must adopt our world view. You want to live in a patriarchal system and there are women who will submit to you in that way, and follow your lead. Bless and keep you all, that is your journey, not mine. God did not set your path above mine, or mine above yours, but put all paths here for us to learn, and ultimately, gave us free will to choose. I simply believe we are better off talking about rights, respect, responsibility that encourages wiser choices on all paths, than suggest that everyone must follow the same path.


    Be the change you seek,

    Scott Swenson, Editor

  • invalid-0

    YOU people need to remember that a Life is a Life, regardless of how it was started, I am a product of Rape and I am very glad to be alive! MY Mother was a real woman and she made the choice to GIVE LIFE, which is a very brave thing to do, she didnt think of herself 1st only me…

    LIFE is the Choice, and it takes a very brave woman/mother to forget herself and give it regardless of how she may feel about the crime… WOMEN need to realize that once they are impregnated they are NOW MOTHERS and that Child is theirs and they can sacrifice right from the start and give up things for their CHILD!!!!

    LIFE aren’t you glad your Mother chose to give it to you?

    There is always ADOPTION IF the Mother can not raise the child, BUT murder, Killing an innocent child/baby in not the answer! Thanks Mom for giving me LIFE!!!

  • heather-corinna

    Anonymous: I am glad your mother felt able to make the choice she wanted to make, and I agree with you — continuing a pregnancy from a rape is usually an exceptionally difficult thing to do.  If that is what she wanted to do, I think it’s critically important she had that option. I also think it’s critically important that if she made a choice, she was able to do just that, rather than to be forced into something she didn’t want to do, which clearly would not have carried as much meaning as you ascribe to her choice.

     

    But I wonder if you realize that plenty of women who have chosen to terminate pregnancies are women who have very much made that choice based on what they considered best for their families, their exsiting children and any potential child? The idea that women who choose to terminate are only thinking of themselves just doesn’t bear out with what so many women who have say about their choices, how they make those choices, and how they feel in making them.  It dismisses those women’s lives and their own truths and realities.

     

    I know I’ve had women in counseling who never spoke about themselves at all in discussing their situations, but rather, about bringing a child into an abusive relationship, or having their existing children have to go without the care and resources they needed if they remained pregnant and had another child, or who just weren’t okay with brining a child into the world who may very well have serious genetic anomolies due to having their father and grandfather be the same person.  Around half of women who terminate pregnancies are already mothers: they realize they are mothers and they they might be again.  For plenty of them, that is exactly why they choose to terminate.  Some also choose to terminate over choosing adoption because they’re aware of some of the realities of adoption and do not want to risk giving a child a life in foster care.

     

    I wonder if you recognize that some of those very women read words like yours, and if you consider how your words might make them feel.  I’d very much hope that people were supportive of your mother and her reproductive choices, and I’d hope the same for all women, no matter what reproductive choices we make.

  • invalid-0

    Unless you have lived in Alaska for awhile it’s almost impossible to understand the degree of cultural isolation and utter self absorption of small town rural Alaska.. Alaska is not like any place anywhere in the ‘lower 48′ because, due to geography and climate, the degree of isolation found in rural Alaska is impossible to achieve unless you’ve spent your life living out in the woods in some cabin sans electricity and coming into town once a year.

    Jack is not off and, speaking as someone who actually lived and worked in Alaska for over a decade I am appalled by McCain’s choice. The thought of this woman a heartbeat away from the Presidency should disturb any reasonable person whatever their political persuasion. I assure you that she is from the boonies and will be an unmitigated disaster for the GOP. She will make Katherine Harris look principled.

  • invalid-0

    Heather, YES I am aware of what I am saying… I don’t intend to hurt Mothers/women, I just want them to think about ADOPTION too, Killing an innocent baby is never the answer, I have family members who have had an abortion and for the rest of their lives (2 of them) wish they had not, my one aunt actually tried to kill herself after choosing abortion, the pain of knowing she killed her baby does not go away… she is in her 50’s now.

    The act of rape is very violent and like my mom said and the doctor said getting PG during Rape is a miracle in itself, there are chemical reactions going off in the body that actually make it very hard to get PG during Rape.

    LETS just think about the BABY too, it is a person and like myself, am Glad I was given LIFE, very thankful in fact, if my mother never does anything else nice/good for me – giving me Life would be and has been more than enough… the Baby does not need to be the next victim of a crime, PLEASE I am just saying please give LIFE – it is highly recommended by me a child who could have been destroyed by Abortion… IF you can not raise the baby give it up for ADOPTION PLEASE and THANK YOU very much.

  • invalid-0

    “YOU people need to remember that a Life is a Life”

    You people need to remember that we don’t want to be like your mothers

  • invalid-0
  • invalid-0

    When I was sixteen I did not know anything about abortion. I went to the local library (I was living in the Netherlands at the time), and grabbed all the books I could find about abortion. I thought there must be some really damned good arguments FOR abortion ,seeing there were so many people jumping up and down over abortion “rights”. I kept searching and searching for a good, valid reason to kill a fetus. I am able to say in all humility that I could not find one. Now if you look at the arguments of the anti abortion side then if you actually look and listen with an open mind you will see that they speak the Truth . They do not have to SHOUT it they can whisper it and it will still be the truth.
    Abortion is probably the very very worst traumatic thing that can ever happen in a woman’s life.

  • invalid-0

    Scott:

    >less than 1.4 percent, according to the CDC, of late-term abortions that you love to pretend are what every abortion is, are done for medical reasons, for the mother or the fetus.

    You are claiming that I have held a position that I have not. That is quite shameful, indeed. I defy you to cite for us all where I ever said or even intimated that all abortions are late-term abortions. If you mean that I have clearly held the position that human life is obliviously human life at all stages of its development, and a mother ending a life that is inside her is obliviously a cessation of that life regardless of its developmental age, than I agree that I do not see the distinction between hour one and 9 months of its life. Human life necessarily has to be human life or it would never be human at all. Why does an 8 month old person have more rights that a one hour old person? That is a very strange concept…indeed.

    > Women do not make these decisions lightly, and suggesting otherwise as you do in every comment is callous.

    It has never come up: that women do not make these decisions lightly. Again, I have never intimated such a thing. The very fact that you claim that women do not make these decisions lightly, however, is an implicit proof that they may feel that they are doing something wrong.

    >the starting point should be keeping government out of private medical decisions, or imposing any one belief on all people.

    It can be just as easily said that the role of government is to protect its people. The Due Process Clause, I believe, will soon indicate this, rather than the risible penumbra that is now found in it to protect privacy, as indicated by the federal government’s involvement in Roe v. Wade. You have just indicated an ironic position. You are free to look all this up, but please do not say that I misunderstand you or you do not understand me until you do. I say this sincerely and not sarcastically.

    > Does that mean that by making those services available government is forcing people to use them?

    Yes. I am glad that you tried to address the contradiction. Sex education is practically in every public school in America. In Massachusetts, it was just federally ruled that parents have no right to ask that their children be removed from a class that is teaching alternate marriage via role-playing by using the students in the class. These are just two examples. You may say that you are for choice, but both examples clearly illustrate that a parent’s constitutional right to raise their child they way they see fit is being denied. Private agendas have infiltrated the public schools by the tickling our government’s ears into their validity and are being coerced into the hearing for our children at their schools by that same government. These issues belong at home with the parents or you will never be able to prove that you are for choice. You cannot force people into being tolerant of others by denying their rights to raise their children the way they see fit. You keep telling me that I am the one putting my views on you. I wish you were a liberal so I would not have to keep addressing your fallacies. Again… just concepts… not emotive reasoning.

    > I do not need you or anyone else to tell me about my relationship with God, how to live in accord with my beliefs, or to judge or stigmatize (throw stones) me for who I am or the politics I have

    What is your deal? I have never told you anything about God, nor have I ever mentioned Him, until now. I have never judged your intentions. Have we not been discussing objective issues? As far as throwing stones, I have not. I have been your most benign adversary, as far as ad hominem attacks go. Moreover, I have continually warned against the invalid nature of such attacks on this very forum. I will, however, let you entertain the suggestion that you have not acted similarly.

    In closing, I agree that we should keep this on the issues. And just because I say that a woman SHOULD NEVER HAVE AN ABORTION, does not mean that I desire a society ruled by men. I have continually suggested the transcendence of women is good for all: look at Governor Palin, for example. I hope that you can see that. It is an objective truth, but we have problems with that idea on this site too. So what do you want me to do? If you are right and I am right than neither of us is right. Do you see that? If a woman thinks she is right, why can’t I say that she is wrong? According to your very system, I have every right to do so. Otherwise, nobody has any right to say that a child molester is doing anything wrong. I hope you get this. But it doesn’t matter if you don’t. I would prefer to convince women that they are wrong to take their children’s lives. We can get every one of those babies adopted. Why end their lives? It really is not that complicated. And I say all of this not so that I can control women. RIDICULOUS. Rather, SO THAT A BABY MIGHT LIVE. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH women’s RIGHTS! IT IS PROTECTING ANOTHER’S SOON TO BE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FROM WOMEN. GET IT? If that is extreme, you’re right. Truth usually IS perceived in the absolute and not in the subjective. Anyway, I will continue to de-spin, as their can be only one truth.

    Sincerely,

    Timothy+

  • http://www.cpcwatch.org invalid-0

    …that the kid is her daughter’s. Of course it’s kind of a crazy internet rumor, but when you read up on the facts it gets a bit crazy.

    http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223

  • heather-corinna

    Thing is, plenty of birth mothers and women who chose to parent have also suffered from depression and being suicidal: that’s by no means exclusive to women who chose abortion, and sound studies done on this have never found substantially differing rates of either amoung women who abort than among those who don’t.  I’m not discounting or denying your family members experience, mind, just like I’d not expect you to deny mine with the women in my family who were not allowed any choice but parenting or adoption and suffered from their situations, I’m simply saying that depression or guilt are not exclusive to choosing abortion, nor a sound reason to deny women choices many want and plenty have have felt best about.

     

    In my reply to you, I made clear that many women DO think about their potential child and DO consider adoption.  And even in doing both of those things, plenty still consider abortion their best choice for them AND a child.  Abortion is also not a crime on most areas, including in the United States.

     

    There is more than one life to discuss with reproductive choices, and women tend to be acutely aware of this, particularly when pregnant.  To insist — despite the reality of actual women — that women choosing abortion do not or have not thought about more than themselves, have not thought about their children, and/or have not considered all their options is patronizing at best: it is dismissing the reality of many women.  Most women do consider what you are asking they consider and many still feel abortion is the best choice they can make for everyone, including that potential child (whom they often do not consider a baby).

     

    So, those women have heard the kinds of things you are saying.  They have considered what you are pleading with them to consider.  yet, they have come to a different conclusion than you have about what is best for them and their families.  That given and known, I am not sure I understand the point of this kind of comment, or why you seem to insist women have not thought about things which women have thought about.  Can you see why I don’t understand your motivation?

     

    Just FYI?  According to the CDC, the pregnancy rate through rape is around 5% (and that would include victims who were on BC methods at the time), which is not that low for a single incident of intercourse (which rape is not, and I hate to use that word regarding rape, but from a fertility perspective, that’s what it is) where a typical rate of pregnancy is usually estimated at around 8% (which does not include those using BC). Other recent studies have found that the rates of pregnancy for rape and consensual sex are nearly identical (particularly taking into account the substantial differential birth control methods create). Chemically, when there is fear and violence, we’re certainly going to see things like increases of adrenaline, but we can also see those in consensual nonviolent sex, as well.

  • invalid-0

    Heather, I went the CRIME of rape, not that abortion is a crime, legally. The 2nd victim of RAPE – the crime-is the unborn child, who is aborted.

    < > That potential Child IS a child, I did not turn into anything else in my mothers womb, I AM am a LIFE, I am a Child… HOW can people be so blind, Thank you that my mother was not blind, and saw me for what I was and am.

    I am not good with numbers so throwing out numbers from the CDC is fine and well, but for me 5% or 8% or less than 1%. It is still a CHILD – ME, a CHILD, plain and simple. Please see just that, okay, Yes I feel very sad that people would hurt others and rape them or chose incest, IT is very sad I agree, and the trauma was horrible on my Mom, but she said she did not want to add to her trauma by killing me… thats all I know.

    My Grandpa thought it was the worse choice in the world and he was going to have nothing to do with me, but NOW we are best buds and he can’t image that I would have never been born… THINGS CAN turn out good thru bad… I am proof, and I believe, God forbid, IF my daughter would ever be PG for these reasons, I would want her to have the child and then CHOOSE what to do raise the child or put it up for adoption… KILLING me and BABIES like me is never the answer, I bet if you got to ask the Child if they wanted to live or die, they would chose LIFE…I hope you understand the babies are humans and you would not kill it after it was born – right? So why kill us before we are born??

    CAn we agree Adoptions is better for all, Please and thank you.

  • invalid-0

    Heather, I *meant* the CRIME of rape, not that abortion is a crime, legally. The 2nd victim of RAPE – the crime-is the unborn child, who is aborted.

  • heather-corinna

    I cannot agree that adoption is "better for all" because of so very many women who have not felt it was better for them and plenty of children who do not feel that adoption or a life in foster care was better for them, either.  I cannot pretend that people have not had the experiences they have had, or dismiss what they have stated and expressed to be best for them and those they had to make choices for.  Even if I dismiss all of the experiences of others, and work from the personal standpoint of someone who likely will be an adoptive parent in time (so one might say it’s serve my self-interest more to do so) I can’t agree with that.

     

    The other thing I cannot agree with is not differentiating between an infant who has been born and a blastocyst, embryo or fetus who has not.  I simply do not share your opinion on that issue.  I am fully aware that just like every other living cell in my body, an existing embryo or fetus is human.  But I do not ascribe the same status to a living being independent and separate from women’s bodies and that which is part of an existing woman’s body.

     

    And the kind of statements you are making are not at all new to me, so if the point of a conversation would be to try to get me to think differently based on these kinds of statements — rather than, say, changes or new information in science or biology — it’s simply not going to happen.   And when it comes to the HHS policies,none of this is an issue of how you or I think or what our personal opinions are: it’s about what is being legislated for all women BASED on the personal opinions of someone BESIDES those women.

  • invalid-0

    Heather, I looked up your Scarletteen.com and I see why you say what you say now, do you work for this place, is your income at stake? Wow, this is very sad, you would beat this drum for $$ reasons…

    I thought I was talking to a women not a corporation,,, a woman that can think for herself, I wish I would have seen your tag of Scarleteen.com before I poured my heart and life out in responses to you… my fault not yours.

    Well I feel very let down and sad for you.

  • heather-corinna

    Scarleteen is my own organization (and very much not a corproration, legally or otherwise), which I founded and still run: I work for myself, think for myself, and I live by leaner means than most.  I currently work three different jobs including Scarleteen to make my ends meet.  Some years, I have continued my work there despite not being paid at all.

     

    All the same, the way I think on these issues has been the way I have thought on these issues for most of my life (and has nothing to do with money: if I was after money, I’d be working for the abstinence-only camp, since that’s where the big bucks are the last eight years), including when my job was being an early child educator, rather than a sexuality educator or a worker for a FWHC.  You can feel let down and sad for me if you like, but it’s a bit wasted, since I’m certainly not let down and sad myself.

     

    And my credentials and my running Scarleteen has not been kept anything close to secret: in fact, it’s been listed visibly next to my name throughout the whole of our exchange, which I’d presumed, since we were each apparently responding to reading the others words, you’d have read.

     

    How exactly would having the opinions I do, saying the things I have, financially benefit me?  After all, without lots of people to educate, I might be out of work as an educator period, wouldn’t I?  Shouldn’t I be concerned about making sure — for my own sake — there are as many births as possible? Or is an attempt at character assasination the only place you feel able to go if we can’t agree?

  • invalid-0

    Heather,
    Nope, you got me wrong, sorry If I hurt your feelings.

    Sorry you think I assigned your character or dissed your business.

    I am sure you are a wonderful person. I just was caught off guard, when I viewed your Website…and it let me down… thats all.

    Take good care of yourself.

    Signed –
    Product of Rape and glad to be alive

  • mellankelly1

    I am a product of Rape and I am very glad to be alive

    I’m glad you’re alive too… I also experienced a rape related pregnancy that I terminated immediately.  I am a "real" woman too (not sure what you meant… what, exactly is a "fake" woman?) who made the equally brave and moral choice to terminate that pregnancy.  Because of this choice I became a mother to three beautiful children (who are all as glad as you appear to be alive!)

    LIFE aren’t you glad your Mother chose to give it to you?

    Please, prove to me how if I had not been born to the "Smiths" I would not have been born to the "Jones".  Please prove to me that had I not terminated my pregnancy (and been tied to a man who raped me) I would have given life to my beautiful children.  Terminating a pregnancy is most certainly not murder.  I respect your personal beliefs regarding life… I find it rather sad that you do not show the same respect toward those who have differing beliefs.

  • mellankelly1

    I don’t intend to hurt Mothers/women

    Then I think you shouldn’t make statements like "BUT murder, Killing an innocent child/baby in not the answer!".  First, because abortion is not murder and second because abortion does not kill an "innocent" child/baby.  How is it that you completely disregard the woman who became pregnant as a result of rape?  You cannot compare your situation to the lives of other woman… every woman is different, every woman’s experience with abortion is different… and from the victims of violent crime that I’ve spoken with over the past ten years, every woman’s experience with rape is different.  If you truly don’t intend to hurt women, you simply must cease with your gross over-generalizations and minimization of a crime as violent as rape (and a resulting pregnancy.)

    I have family members who have had an abortion and for the rest of their lives (2 of them) wish they had not,

    First, I am going to explain to you that I terminated my pregnancy thirteen years ago and have never, ever felt anything even remotely close to "regret" for one second.  I felt relief… I felt ready to change my life for the better – which is, in fact, what I did (one need not gestate a rape related pregnancy in order to experience a positive life change.)  Further, I would be remiss not to share with you he fact that many women have regretted their choice to: give birth and raise a child, give birth and give a child up for adoption & terminate their pregnancy.  The one thing that all of these women have in common:  They did not feel that the choice was theirs.   Even the women who have regretted their choices (whatever that choice may have been) believe that every other woman should have the right to decide for themselves the course of their own pregnancy (whatever that choice may be).

  • mellankelly1

    CAn we agree Adoptions is better for all, Please and thank you.

    NO… adoption is not an alternative to abortion.  Adoption is an alternative to giving birth to and raising your child yourself.  Adoption is only an option when a woman has decided to gestate a pregnancy.  Abortion is an alternative to gestation.ra

  • mellankelly1

    I kept searching and searching for a good, valid reason to kill a fetus.

    Might I ask why any other person should care what it is that you would consider a "good, valid reason" to terminate a pregnancy?  How many unwanted pregnancies have you terminated?  I’ve terminated one… your post was not only insensitive and ignorant, it was inaccurate.  Your personal opinions about abortion are relevant only to you… I could not care less what you think a "good, valid reason" to terminate a pregnancy constitutes… I trust women enough and I believe women are intelligent enough to decide for themselves under what circumstances they will or will not continue their own pregnancies..

  • invalid-0

    Sorry for your rape… I never want to min. that. You did not desrve that and I am sorry a person would do that to another.

    What I meant was only women can carry a baby to full term, and do with there bodies what it was made to do, carry a baby in their womb and give them life.

    I am just sorry that you thought you had to kill your child, and that was your only choice. I just really feel for you. It just breaks my heart.

    I feel like where did these generations go wrong that we think that killing our child, or me, become a “good” choice.

    It can seem like a great and good idea at the time, but after the child is born – your view point may change, once you look into the eyes of your child. Adoption is still better than killing your child. YOU are never going to convince me that it is not… I am PRO-LIFE for a very good reason.

  • invalid-0

    Mellankelly, You say you could not care less what I think a good valid reason would be and then you go on to call me insensitive and ignorant…..
    Should I care about what you think is a good reason?
    You see that is just the point.
    As for being called inaccurate, well how inaccurate can a person be who calls themself pro-child, pro-family, pro-choice-to-kill….
    You are mother of … how many?

  • invalid-0

    Of course people should make statements like “But murder, killing a innocent child/baby is not the answer!”
    Yes,abortion is murder. (The abortionist is the prime murderer because he/she knows a human life is being ended.)
    And, Yes, abortion DOES kill an innocent baby/child. Are you some kind of religious nutter who is going to tell us that this unborn baby is guilty of the crime of his father or something?!?
    As for the second part about not feeling any guilt after having “terminated” a pregnancy. A long time ago at primary school a young boy threw a rock (hand grenade) over a fench hitting another child on the head. No guilt or remorse was ever felt. Does this boy have the makings of a psychopath or is he just like you?

  • mellankelly1

    You say you could not care less what I think a good valid reason would be and then you go on to call me insensitive and ignorant…..Should I care about what you think is a good reason?
    You see that is just the point

    And you’ve just agreed with me and reiterated my point.  Merci beau-coup!  

     As for being called inaccurate, well how inaccurate can a person be who calls themself pro-child, pro-family, pro-choice-to-kill….You are mother of … how many?

    Now you’re being silly… I’ve given birth to three children and there are still three children running around my house.  Actually, on most days you will find three to six of the li’l buggers running around here.  But in all honesty, it is completely irrelevant how many children one has…  I’d be interested to know, do you believe that one has less of an opinion or more of an opinion if they have children?

  • mellankelly1

    What I meant was only women can carry a baby to full term, and do with there bodies what it was made to do, carry a baby in their womb and give them life.

    Some women die "doing with their bodies what it was made to do…"  I believe that only a pregnant woman can decide the course of her own pregnancy since it will be her, and not any other person, who will be suffering any and all consequences of the childbirth/labor process.

    I am just sorry that you thought you had to kill your child,

    No, I swear to you… my children are all alive (at last count!)  I gave birth to three beautiful, healthy children and I will forever be grateful that I was able to terminate my very much unwanted pregnancy safely (and legally) so that I could be the mother I am to my wonderful children! 

     

    Adoption is not an alternative to abortion… adoption is an alternative to raising your child yourself.  Only when a pregnant woman has decided to gestate her pregnancy is adoption an option.

  • invalid-0

    No, I don’t agree with you at all. You seem to have an infinite number of “wise” or “intelligent” reasons or cop-out excuses to kill an unborn baby. I don’t have any reason (bar an ectopic pregnancy, which is a strictly defined and acute medical condition).
    Who is being silly? My question to you was: “The mother of how many?” Would it not be accurate and correct to state that you were the MOTHER of the unborn being that you “terminated”? If so, would that not make you biologically the mother of four?
    As for your question… Opinions can change over the years, truths and facts don’t, although you might see them in a different light. Last time I counted I had twelve living children. When I had only two children , I used to say my friend with seven must be mad, now I realize that was not the case. Apart from feelings or opinions about the number of children the fact that I became pro-life has always remained intact.

  • invalid-0

    It’s time for Republicans to put up or shut up. John McCain has picked one of the most selfish and hateful social conservatives to become .5-heartbeat away from commander-in-chief, even if he were to last a full 2-terms. A win would mean theocrats would have a solid grip on the GOP top-down, but a loss would result in so much fingerpointing the party would fracture for good as the balance between pork and puritanism would lose its fulcrum.

    It is up to US to assure this possibility becomes reality. We must get Obama elected to break the true axis-of-evil and not worry about what happened to Hillary: can you say “Senate Majority Leader?” Yes we can!

  • invalid-0

    I love how the Timothy the gasbag’s arguments ALL boil down to ALL CAPS at the end as if somehow in their poorly worded, hateful screeds we missed that they just want women to sit down shut up and be incubators.
    I guess the truth makes people like him so angry they have to resport to the internet version of yelling.

  • invalid-0

    Greetings,
    Yes, the irascible power of passion actually takes its very name from truth. This is true not because all movements of that power are one of anger, but all its movements terminate in anger. Moreover, of all of these movements, so being constant, angry passions are the most patent. From this consideration, then, that anger is caused by contrary passions, it includes in itself contrariety; consequently it does not have an opposite outside of itself. Take for example mixed colors, there’s no contrariety, except that of the simple colors from which they come. Anger includes several passions, not as a genus includes several species, but rather according to cause and EFFECT. It is your presumed truth that makes me sad and the TRUTH that you’re violating that makes me MAD. No need to sit down and incubate or something like that.
    Timothy+

  • mellankelly1

     I don’t have any reason (bar an ectopic pregnancy, which is a strictly defined and acute medical condition).

    Then you should never, ever terminate a pregnancy for any reason other than ectopic pregnancy.  I have certain instances where I believe it would be a good idea to terminate a pregnancy that are different than your reasons.  Other women have other reasons for deciding to terminate their pregnancies.  I don’t believe that your reason or my reasons or any other women’s reasons for terminating a pregnancy are any more (or less) relevant… what is important to note is that each woman has a right to decide under which circumstances they would continue with any pregnancy they may have.

    Would it not be accurate and correct to state that you were the MOTHER of the unborn being that you "terminated"?

    It would be inaccurate and incorrect to say that I was a mother to anything (or anyone) other than my three children.  I guess I’m confused as to why it would matter how many children I have (as that was your question) which is why I asked this question:   But in all honesty, it is completely irrelevant how many children one has…  I’d be interested to know, do you believe that one has less of an opinion or more of an opinion if they have children?

    I know pro choice women who have many children, few children and no children at all… I’m certain that those against abortion fit into many different categories also which is why I do not believe how many children one has is a relevant question to ask in regards to this issue.

  • mellankelly1

    Of course people should make statements like "But murder, killing a innocent child/baby is not the answer!"

    Certainly, people can (and do) make statements such as those… if their intent is to come off as ignorant, unsympathetic, judgemental and/or holier-than-thou they are perfectly free to make such outlandish statements.  Really, it’s only their opinion and clearly every person is entitled to her/his own opinion, right? 

    Yes,abortion is murder

    No, it’s not.

    Yes, abortion DOES kill an innocent baby/child

    No, it does not.

    Are you some kind of religious nutter who is going to tell us that this unborn baby is guilty of the crime of his father or something?!?

    It it was found guilty by a jury of it’s peers, who am I to say it’s not?

    A long time ago at primary school a young boy threw a rock (hand grenade) over a fench hitting another child on the head.

    Wow.  And people say I’m random.

  • invalid-0

    What can be sadder than a mother who aborts her unborn baby and then actually denies that she is its mother?
    I suppose the father wasn’t the father either?
    Maybe the pregnancy wasn’t a pregnancy and the abortion wasn’t an abortion…
    Life must be so easy if you live in fantasyland!

  • mellankelly1

    Ha!  I knew you would have nothing to say as a response to the points that I made… however, I was amost positive that you’d come back with God stuff.  But alas, you did not.

    I suppose the father wasn’t the father either?

    The "father" was a rapist.  And yes, he was a father as he had a child at the time that he raped me. 

    Maybe the pregnancy wasn’t a pregnancy and the abortion wasn’t an abortion…

    Crazy much?

    Life must be so easy if you live in fantasyland!

    From the photo’s it looks quite pleasant… I’m not sure if it’d be easy to live there but it would probably be really super fun!

  • invalid-0

    …for the rest of US to consume: filling but not very nutritious. You don’t want the unborn to live as much as you NEED the unwanted to arrive by the millions, growing into the cannon-fodder John McCain needs in his 100-year war against Islam. Palin’s on board because she said our occupation of Iraq is “God’s work,” so in putting her on the ticket, he assures the fundies the Crusade will continue. The economic conservatives won’t stand against the opportunity to become richer than the exceeding wealth they alone enjoy from a military-industrial complex on Christian steroids, so their bankroll is at full-throttle to make this work.

    Those who “protect” the unborn are foxes in the hen-house, because a fox never discloses true intent until it’s too late. Kick out the foxes and Fox News by voting straight Democrat this year. Be sure to be current in your voter registration and don’t hesitate to use absentee ballots which for many is the closest they’ll get to a paper trail.

    Oh, McCain’s being optimistic. The last Crusade was over 200 years, Knights Templar atrocities notwithstanding. Failure to defeat him would be un-American because China’s ready to take over the whole shebang once the rest of the world beats each other senseless and then we’ll all go back to 1-child/family. Defeat the McCain, the Manchurian candidate.