Log in

Ryan loses favor with pro-life group
Upset by what it sees as U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan’s abandoning his pro-life position, Democrats For Life of America removed the congressman from its national advisory board.

“DFLA gave Congressman Ryan ample opportunities to prove he’s committed to protecting life, but he has turned his back on the community at every turn,” said Kristen Day, the Washington, D.C.-based pro-life organization’s executive director.

Ryan of Niles, D-17th, insists he’s still a strong pro-life advocate, but grew frustrated with Democrats For Life of America and other pro-life groups that refuse to accept contraceptives as an option to avoid unwanted pregnancies.

“We’re working in Congress with groups that agree with preventative options while [the DFLA] is getting left behind,” Ryan said. “I can’t figure out for the life of me how to stop pregnancies without contraception. Don’t be mad at me for wanting to solve the problem.”

I don't know exactly what went on here, but I've been a fan of Tim Ryan for a while now, and I find this distressing. If there's no room for him in the pro-life movement, there's no room for the likes of us either.
09 June 2009 @ 10:17 pm
Former SBC officer says Tiller murder answer to prayer

"This man, George Tiller, was far greater in his atrocities than Adolf Hitler," Drake said. "So I am happy. I am glad that he is dead."

But: Drake said he agreed that it was wrong for Tiller's killer to take the law into his own hands

Oh. Okay then.
09 June 2009 @ 05:31 pm
If you don't have anything in your journal or profile relating to pro-life interests, one of the mods will have to contact you before your membership is approved. If you have locked your messaging and commenting so that the mod cannot contact you, you will not be approved.

Rules have been updated to indicate such.
22 April 2009 @ 12:43 am
I just started a new communityfor moms in school. Join community.livejournal.com/momsinschool/ if you are looking for advice/support along the way!
30 January 2009 @ 10:11 am
Article here.

Why are we not allowed to have frank, honest discussions about pregnancy in this country? Neither the pro-life nor the pro-choice crowd would dare to criticize this woman - one because she has autonomous control over her own body, and the other because she decided not to terminate any of the embryos.

But what about the initial decision to undergo fertility treatments at all, when she already had six children? Where is the discussion about the implications of fertility treatments on the health of the woman and the health of the children in the case of multiple births? Where is the honest discussion about the medically responsible decision to tell this woman that, no, it is not a good idea to undergo fertility treatments except in the most extreme conditions, and those conditions are not met by someone who already has six children.

Why are we so selfish when it comes to having 'our own' children? Believe it or not, I see this as the flip side of the coin that tells us it is okay to terminate an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy. The highest ethical priority is given to the desires of the parent, not to the health or well-being of the child.
18 January 2009 @ 02:19 pm
Stop pulling shit like this.

Seriously not helping.

19 July 2008 @ 09:48 am

We live in a misogynistic society. This is not our children’s fault so much as our own. When we flaunt abortion as the panacea for our inability to recognize motherhood as an important contribution to society and to acknowledge that mothers may have ambitions in life other than motherhood – ambitions that are not per se incompatible with motherhood but that are made so by a myopic outlook on motherhood and ambition – we effectively reinforce prejudices against mothers, children and families. This is the heart of my position against abortion.

I am not “anti-choice.” I only firmly believe that choice in matters of pregnancy has effectively reduced the range of options available to women in society. And this occurred principally when we made childbearing a personal choice for which women alone are held accountable.

Read the rest of the post; it's a good one.

Don't worry, she got cautioned for it.
09 July 2008 @ 07:08 pm
"Abortion debate ignores impact on child poverty."

I think there are a few bad assumptions in this article.  First, the author assumes that if abortion were made illegal, there would be no change in the number of unplanned pregnancies, and that all unplanned pregnancies would be carried to term. More likely most people would be more careful about their birth control methods (not to suggest that most women who get abortions use it as their only line of defense against unplanned pregnancies--but the fact of the matter is that half of women who get abortions weren't using birth control at the time they got pregnant), and so the number of unplanned pregnancies would decrease. Also more likely that at least some of the women who had unplanned pregnancies would seek out illegal abortions. The number of additional children born each year if abortion became illegal would be much fewer than the author suggests. The second bad (and repulsively classist) assumption is that children are better off dead than poor.

But the reminder of the connection between abortion and poverty, and the work that pro-lifers need to do not to shame women into keeping their babies, but to help make sure that they have the emotional and financial resources to take care of a child, is an important one.