Follow Save the 1
Saturday, January 17, 2015
You Want Us To Compromise Our Pro-Life Values MORE?!!! By Rebecca Kiessling
Pro-life leaders, pundits and bloggers are up in arms now
because Republican Congresswoman Renee Ellmers -- NC, (along with at least five
other female Republicans,) is protesting the terms of the rape exception within
the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act – H.R.
36, also known as the 20-week abortion ban.
As written, the late-term abortion in the case of rape or incest is
permitted “if the rape is reported any
time prior to the abortion to an appropriate law enforcement agency.” To be clear, given the plain language of the
legislation, there’s no time frame as to
when the rape must be reported, the
bill doesn’t require that the rape victim actually report the rape herself, and
there’s no requirement that the reporting must be done in person. Accordingly, an abortion clinic employee
could “report the rape” (wink-wink) by telephone, just seconds before the
late-term abortion takes place.
This overly-permissive language certainly opens the door for
late-term abortions on demand, for any reason, which is why closet pro-choicers
always want a rape exception – to open the door. Women will be told to lie, just like Jane Roe
(Norma McCorvey) of Roe v Wade was
told by her lawyers to lie in order to obtain an abortion. In addition, there is absolutely no sense of
due process involved in this death penalty decree for children conceived in
rape. Can you imagine if Congress
introduced a bill stating that a rapist could be put to death -- just with the
requirement that a rape be “reported”?!
But according to
the U.S. Supreme Court, rapists don’t deserve the death penalty, and even for
child molesters, it’s “cruel and unusual punishment.” Yet, the Congressional GOP will summarily
issue the death penalty to the innocent child.
Never mind that children conceived in rape feel pain too, we can just go
ahead and suffer for all they care. And
such exceptions are also violative of the 14th Amendment’s Equal
Protection clause.
BIO:
Rebecca Kiessling is an international
pro-life speaker, writer and lawyer, having been conceived in rape and
nearly aborted at two back-alley abortions, but legally protected by
no-exceptions Michigan law. She’s the
founder and president of Save The 1 and
co-founder of Hope After Rape
Conception
This overly-permissive language certainly opens the door for
late-term abortions on demand, for any reason, which is why closet pro-choicers
always want a rape exception – to open the door. Women will be told to lie, just like Jane Roe
(Norma McCorvey) of Roe v Wade was
told by her lawyers to lie in order to obtain an abortion. In addition, there is absolutely no sense of
due process involved in this death penalty decree for children conceived in
rape. Can you imagine if Congress
introduced a bill stating that a rapist could be put to death -- just with the
requirement that a rape be “reported”?!
But according to
the U.S. Supreme Court, rapists don’t deserve the death penalty, and even for
child molesters, it’s “cruel and unusual punishment.” Yet, the Congressional GOP will summarily
issue the death penalty to the innocent child.
Never mind that children conceived in rape feel pain too, we can just go
ahead and suffer for all they care. And
such exceptions are also violative of the 14th Amendment’s Equal
Protection clause.
But Ellmers and the other female lawmakers want the liberal reporting
requirement to be completely removed. She
stated that “the bill will cost the party support among millennials” and
she said in an interview, “I have urged leadership to reconsider bringing it up
next week . . . . We got into trouble last year, and I think we
need to be careful again; we need to be smart about how we’re moving forward. .
. . The first vote we take, or the
second vote, or the fifth vote, shouldn’t be on an issue where we know that
millennials—social issues just aren’t as important [to them].” The liberal press is all over this -- saying the bill is so extreme that even pro-life Republicans can't support it.
As a result, some pro-life bloggers have called her a “pro-choice
mole,” or “a
lying waste of oxygen,” and “sniveling liar,” but has she really broken any
campaign promises, and how did she even get elected as a pro-life legislator? Well, she was pro-life with exceptions when
she ran, so this really shouldn’t be a big shocker, and it shouldn’t come as a
surprise to the groups who endorsed Ellmers that she’s now advocating according
to her prior values.
On Susan B. Anthony List’s website, their
endorsement of rape-exception Ellmers for Congress includes the following
statement: “A new women’s movement which
affirms its original pro-life roots is making its way to the House of
Representatives, and Ellmers is one of its brightest new stars.” But original pro-life roots would not have
included a rape exception. I’m very
pro-woman, but I’d much rather see a 100% pro-life male endorsed than a
rape-exception female! Other big names
in pro-life circles helped get Ellmers elected as well: Wikipedia gives credit to
Erick Erickson’s RedState blog, as well as Sarah Palin’s endorsement for
helping to get the “previously obscure” Ellmers elected to Congress in 2010.
In the article in which Erick Erickson calls Ellmers a liar,
he says, “Just as the GOP has decided to stand firm on a piece of legislation
supported by +60% of the nation, she’s scared people won’t like her.” Stand firm?
The bill was introduced with a rape exception! How is that standing firm? And it was done because Congressional Republican
leadership were scared people wouldn’t like them!
But Erickson is the same guy who endorsed
rape-exception candidate Karen Handel in a bid for U.S. Senate in the 2014
primary when there were viable 100% pro-life candidates. If Handel had won, she’d surely be standing
with Ellmers, and I guess Erickson would now be calling her a liar too, just
for standing by her declared values.
Erickson is also the guy who accused
Georgia Right to Life of “moral vacancy” for refusing to compromise on the
rape exception in the last go-round with the 20-week ban, and in fact, Erickson
went on to get GRTL kicked out of National Right to Life for refusing to
compromise, replacing them with his own newly-formed Georgia Life Alliance.
Right now, the other five Republican women are not being
named, but once those names are released, it’ll be very interesting to see
which pro-life groups and leaders endorsed them, and what their prior positions
were on the rape exception before gaining the honor of those endorsements. If we want to have better legislators – ones
who really are champions for defending human life, then pro-life leaders need to stop lavishing
undeserving candidates with pro-life endorsements. That means no rape exceptions!
One has to wonder -- how can pro-life leaders who endorsed
them, and who’ve also compromised on the rape exception themselves, now be so
upset? After all, this bill was
introduced with a rape exception already in it, set on a “fast track” with no
hearing, no debate, and allegedly no amendments to be allowed, yet there was
scarcely any public objection to this rape exception from pro-life leaders and
organizations. Instead of objecting to
the exceptions, big pro-life organizations like National Right to Life
Conference, Susan B. Anthony List and Priests for Life instantly began
promoting the bill as is. There was no
campaign from the pro-life movement at-large to contact Congressmen to get the
rape exception out, only no-compromise organizations like Save The 1,
Personhood Alliance and its affiliates, and American Life League. Children conceived in rape were summarily
yanked off the 20-week rescue bus and thrown under it, while pro-life leaders
tried to hide the bodies – not even informing their supporters that there’s a
rape exception in the bill. Are we that
negligible? And the grass-roots can’t be
trusted with the truth? How could they
give in so quickly and how can they now be so upset that a group of
rape-exception Republican women want the impotent reporting requirement
removed?
It reminds me of the
old story where a guy asks a woman, “Will you get in bed with me for $1
million?” And she says “Yes!” Then he
asks, “Will you get in bed with me for $50?”
Now she’s indignant: “No
way! What, do you think I’m some kind of
whore?!” The man replies, “We’ve already
established that. Now I’m just
negotiating terms.” When pro-life
leaders get in bed with rape-exception candidates by endorsing them and
colluding with them, and when they instantly accept, enthusiastically endorse
and aggressively promote a fast-tracked rape exception bill, they’ve already
compromised their values. So why should
they be upset when these legislators begin negotiating terms?
BIO:
Rebecca Kiessling is an international
pro-life speaker, writer and lawyer, having been conceived in rape and
nearly aborted at two back-alley abortions, but legally protected by
no-exceptions Michigan law. She’s the
founder and president of Save The 1 and
co-founder of Hope After Rape
Conception
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
Right on Rebecca! Thanks
Post a Comment
Comment rules:
Please do not criticize or berate others you can disagree with their comments and views but please be an adult about things and don't resort to cursing, insulting, and name calling.
Please do not post any private information about yourself or others (i.e. email addresses, phone numbers, etc.)
Please be respectful, civil, and considerate.
The following is NOT allowed under any circumstances and will result in your comments being deleted and not published, and could result in you being banned from any further commenting.
No Blasphemy in any way shape or form this is a Christian owned blog.
No swearing, slandering, or threatening of any kind.
No insults of any religion, gender, race, will be allowed.
Any threats will be immediately reported to authorities.