Follow Save the 1
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Will My Silence Save Babies? ~By Mary Rathke
With the recent debate in the New Mexico HB 390 Late-term Abortion Ban a fellow conceived in rape woman I know, was asked to be silent. She was told that her silence would save 95% of the babies that are killed in late term abortions. These politicians must assume that a woman who is desperate enough to receive a late term abortion will not lie about being raped to receive a way out of her current situation. Will my silence about being conceived in rape and being worthy of life really save 95% or will the “wink, wink-just say you were raped” approach of the abortion backers make that number 90%, 80% or even 50%? We don’t really know do we? Except we do know Norma McCorvey admitted she lied about being raped and that was why she needed an abortion. Many feel this was “an important point in the fact pattern of the Roe v. Wade case.”
Pictured here, I spoke out at a press conference in Lansing, MI December 2013 and the bill in question was passed without a rape exception. Once we who were conceived in rape spoke out, those asking for the exception immediately stopped insisting there should be an exception. Why? Because they couldn’t say our lives didn’t matter!
Save the 1, a pro-life speaker group of the “exceptions and hard cases” have been told by pro-life strategists not to keep silent but rather to speak out. If we speak out every time a pro-life bill has a rape exception, the pro-life community will finally understand that pro-life bills should not have exceptions put in them, in the first place. Even if the bill is killed initially, because in the long run the realization will come that the bills need to be presented without exceptions. I wish everyone would understand that we don’t need exceptions to pass pro-life bills, Michigan never has. When we as a pro-life community say, “Some life is not valuable,” we value none.
There are many parallel example we can look at, what if the South agreed to no more slavery except for the men over 6 foot tall. “Tall men would be too hard to control if not enslaved, don’t worry we’ll free 95% of the slaves who are under six feet.” Could you imagine if we, as an America people, found that acceptable? Some of our greatest basketball and football players, are very tall African-American men. Can you imagine living in a society where they were still kept as slaves in the South? Of course not, that is ludicrous! But at the time of the Civil War the thought of slavery being overturned was ludicrous to many people, however the abolitionist fought on. They educated the masses, they showed pictures of the brutality of slavery and eventually garnered enough support to overturn laws.
What about today? Should we educate the masses, show them pictures of those conceived in rape and shout from the roof tops their life matters? Unless we can pass a bill that has no exceptions in it, unless we can tell everyone every life matters, unless we can create a ban that does not allow any “wink, wink-lying” we will not have a real opportunity to overturn Roe v Wade. What the masses need to understand is, if a woman has the option of saying she had been raped, she will use that option in a desperate time. She will then live with the guilt of abortion for the rest of her life. The abortion will not end the memories of a rape it will only end a life, how can we live with that?
Can you look at my picture and say my life does not matter?
As an adopted daughter whose birth mother had been raped, Mary Rathke shares that even after a horrible encounter of rape, one can choose life and joy. Mary's story includes her birth mother's experience, how her adopted mother's tragic past was restored through adoption and the tough decisions she faced when her oldest son was born at 1lb 8oz. Mary is a wife, and mother of four children. She is a licensed minster and speaks monthly at the Good Samaritan Rescue Mission Chapel. She is a Savethe1 Director of the Board and the President of HELPeople, INC. She has been a part of the International March for Life Leadership conference in Rome, Italy and is endorsed by Dr James Dobson.
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Pain-Capable Abortion Bans with Exceptions are Not Pro-Life Bills bySarah St. Onge
Last week the South Carolina House voted to prohibit abortion after 20 weeks post-conception based on the strong likelihood of pain on the part of the unborn child. The law was passed without rape, incest, or fetal anomaly restrictions- a monumental achievement given the status of our current "pro-life" belief system in this country.
There is a possibility that this South Carolina legislation could pass into law- questionable is whether it will pass without those exceptions for rape, incest, or fetal anomaly. Governor Nikki Haley has expressed her support, promising to sign the bill into legislation as is, should it make it to her desk. Unfortunately supporting "no exceptions" abortion prohibitions is something that many politicians see as a political kiss of death, and many are afraid to openly do so. The few brave souls who do openly support no compromise legislation rarely offer a strong defense for their position- more often stumbling in their efforts when questioned or criticized. It remains to be seen whether the SC Senate will actually leave this an authentically pro-life law, or add those exceptions into the bill.
In addition to the bill in South Carolina, there are ten states which already have pain-capable abortion bans on the books. In addition there are other pain-capable bills presently working their way through state legislatures. For example, Ohio and Virginia are currently working on amending abortion laws to protect their most vulnerable citizens. Almost all manifestations of these laws are facing debate over exceptions for rape, incest, or fetal anomaly. Problematic in this is the nature of what the bill is trying to accomplish -- ending abortion after the point where an unborn child most likely begins to feel pain.
There is one item which seems to be ignored by those supporting these exemptions, including some pro-life supporters:
As the mother of a child born with lethal birth defect, and who did not live for very long after birth, I feel that my personal experience offers me a deeper understanding of what these laws mean. Whether an unborn child can feel pain is not an abstract concept to be fought out as political philosophy nor should it be a power maneuver by institutional trade unions (ie. ACOG) whose monopoly on women's health issues is coming to an end. It is a real question with which families will struggle when making decisions about facing an exceptional pregnancy. Babies like my daughter are purposely excluded from laws meant to protect unborn children from excruciating pain -- for no fault of their own, but rather because of society’s perception of what it means to continue a pregnancy after receiving a poor diagnosis.
There have been numerous studies, which seem to definitively prove that an unborn child can feel pain. Some studies indicate that a child at 20 weeks post-conception feels pain more acutely than a post-birth baby.
The question is, if this is the case -- why would exceptions be acceptable to anyone, especially the pro-life person?
Why is it acceptable to close our eyes to the possibility of such excruciating pain on the part of an unborn child, solely based on the events surrounding their conception or their perceived disability or life expectancy? Is there some physiological difference between babies conceived during rape and those who were not, which causes the unborn child of rape to feel pain less acutely? We know for certain that many infants with cephalic issues have active pain responses even when portions of their brains are damaged or even missing. There is no evidence that babies with anomalies feel less pain then congenitally intact infants.
The South Carolina House has taken a stand and delivered a truly pro-life piece of legislation which is a model for all other pro-life legislatures. It is also a model of what pro-life actually means for the rest of us. The understanding that pro-life means pro-all-life is something which needs to be addressed more specifically.
The majority of Americans support pain-capable abortion restrictions. Most likely a politician passing pro-life legislation was elected in part because of their life-affirming position and not through the votes of their pro-choice constituency. Yet exceptions for rape, incest, and fetal anomaly are regularly included in pro-life legislation. This is one of the most troubling aspects of this issue -- that these politicians supporting these laws are "pro-life" politicians. They represent pro-life persons when they vote. They represent you.
It is incumbent upon us to begin elucidating our positions from a logical standpoint -- if we are to support pain-capable legislation, then we need to support it for every baby, not just those who were conceived in optimal circumstances. If we create a dynamic where delegating negative value to certain groups of people is acceptable, then babies like my daughter are going to be the recipients. Unborn children will continue to be relegated a place in a strange hierarchy which assumes a pro-life title, but is discriminatory and anything but pro-life.
Abortion laws in which exceptions exist codify discrimination.
As the mother of a child born with lethal birth defect, and who did not live for very long after birth, I feel that my personal experience offers me a deeper understanding of what these laws mean. Whether an unborn child can feel pain is not an abstract concept to be fought out as political philosophy nor should it be a power maneuver by institutional trade unions (ie. ACOG) whose monopoly on women's health issues is coming to an end. It is a real question with which families will struggle when making decisions about facing an exceptional pregnancy. Babies like my daughter are purposely excluded from laws meant to protect unborn children from excruciating pain -- for no fault of their own, but rather because of society’s perception of what it means to continue a pregnancy after receiving a poor diagnosis.
There have been numerous studies, which seem to definitively prove that an unborn child can feel pain. Some studies indicate that a child at 20 weeks post-conception feels pain more acutely than a post-birth baby.
The question is, if this is the case -- why would exceptions be acceptable to anyone, especially the pro-life person?
Why is it acceptable to close our eyes to the possibility of such excruciating pain on the part of an unborn child, solely based on the events surrounding their conception or their perceived disability or life expectancy? Is there some physiological difference between babies conceived during rape and those who were not, which causes the unborn child of rape to feel pain less acutely? We know for certain that many infants with cephalic issues have active pain responses even when portions of their brains are damaged or even missing. There is no evidence that babies with anomalies feel less pain then congenitally intact infants.
The South Carolina House has taken a stand and delivered a truly pro-life piece of legislation which is a model for all other pro-life legislatures. It is also a model of what pro-life actually means for the rest of us. The understanding that pro-life means pro-all-life is something which needs to be addressed more specifically.
The majority of Americans support pain-capable abortion restrictions. Most likely a politician passing pro-life legislation was elected in part because of their life-affirming position and not through the votes of their pro-choice constituency. Yet exceptions for rape, incest, and fetal anomaly are regularly included in pro-life legislation. This is one of the most troubling aspects of this issue -- that these politicians supporting these laws are "pro-life" politicians. They represent pro-life persons when they vote. They represent you.
It is incumbent upon us to begin elucidating our positions from a logical standpoint -- if we are to support pain-capable legislation, then we need to support it for every baby, not just those who were conceived in optimal circumstances. If we create a dynamic where delegating negative value to certain groups of people is acceptable, then babies like my daughter are going to be the recipients. Unborn children will continue to be relegated a place in a strange hierarchy which assumes a pro-life title, but is discriminatory and anything but pro-life.
BIO: Sarah St. Onge is a wife, mother of 4, step-mother of 2, and pro-life blogger for Save The 1. She blogs on grief, loss, and pro-life issues pertaining to continuing a pregnancy after a lethal anomaly has been diagnosed, at www.shebringsjoy.com.
Monday, February 23, 2015
Conceived in Rape-Incest, I Was Bullied After Testifying Before the NM Legislature, by Rowena Slusser
On
Friday, February 20, 2015, I went to the New Mexico Roundhouse to speak out in
support of HB 390 Late-term Abortion Ban -- without the rape exception. My family and I got there early, and I was
excited, but nervous! This was a big step for me on so many levels. While I have shared my story with more people
than I can count, I had never spoken in front of a legislative committee with
opposition around me. Why would I go
before the committee and share how I was conceived in incest/rape? Because the lives of the rape/incest-conceived
matter, and as a follower of Christ, I must stand for what is right! A bill with the rape exception IS NOT RIGHT,
NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE SAYS! Before I go
into the details of that comment, I want to share what my day was like.
Testifying
in the hearing was a risk, a big risk. This risk has consequences. Some consequences have already presented
themselves. I have had painful comments
from people close to me. I have been
bullied by legislative and pro-life leaders. My heart is broken! Do I regret standing up, taking the risk? No, I do not! My Savior reminds me that He gives me His
peace. I am loved by Him so I do not
have to be afraid. This is His working! He will continue to lead me and give me what
to say, and I am certain that my day at the Roundhouse was the first of many
advocating for the lives of women who conceive in rape, incest, sexual abuse,
and sex trafficking, along with the lives of innocent pre-born babies who were conceived in rape, incest,
sexual abuse and sex trafficking.
The
House Regulatory and Public Affairs Committee allowed those who were against
the ban to speak first. Their testimonies
went for 2 or 3 hours. Listening to the
pro-abortion statements was difficult, to say the least. Some of the comments
were almost comical because the facts presented seemed staged. I had to cough a few times to clear my throat
so I could stifle the chuckle. It was
heartbreaking to watch soon-to-be physicians and MD’s spout the lies they
believe about abortion. Some of these women were so young! Even as I listened to them, I was praying for
God to reveal the truth to them. There
were women who were virtually shouting at the committee that it was their body,
their lives and that the legislators had no right! I sat in my chair beside my husband and
children, thinking how selfish those comments were. I saw hatred spewing from these women’s
mouths onto our legislators. It was sad.
After
the opposing side had its turn, the line of speakers for HB 390 started to line
up. Since I am in a power chair, moving around this crowded room was a
chore. When I got to the line of those who
wanted to testify in support of the bill, I started to navigate through the
stream of people. I was treated with
kindness and allowed to be second to speak. Oh man, I was conflicted! I was relieved that my task would soon be
over, but I was also so nervous! What if
I forget to properly address the committee? What if I freeze up completely? What if I just cry? What if I make a fool of myself? What if the committee or anyone else hates me
and I am mistreated? Those are just a
few of the thoughts which I was fighting against.
Though
I knew for days before that I was to speak, yet every time I would sit to write
out what I was to say, the paper stayed blank. I sought the Father for His
guidance. What did He want me to tell
this committee?
I
finally wrote down a few words on a piece of paper, while I waited to testify.
Here is what I wrote” “Madam and Mr. Chair and Committee, My name is Rowena
Slusser and I am in support of HB 390 with an amendment to remove the
rape/incest and sexual abuse exception.” I still didn’t know what else I was to tell
this legislative body. Finally, it was
my turn to the microphone. I vaguely
remember reading the introduction off the paper. I remember saying something about the
exception being a civil rights issue. The rest of my testimony is a fog. I have seen my video, so I know that I said
what was needed, but it was the Lord who put those words in my mouth!
I
told my story of having been conceived when my biological father raped his own
daughter, and how at 5 months pregnant, doctors tried to pressure my mom into a
late-term abortion. I also shared how I later became pregnant at the age of 13 when my step-father raped me,
but I tragically miscarried. I explained
to them that he would have forced an abortion upon me, which would have only
protected and enabled him. As I
testified, I remember seeing the committee through what I can only describe as
a wall of water because I was so full of emotion.
I
can only imagine how Moses felt going before Pharaoh, knowing that Pharaoh’s
heart would be hardened! What of Esther?
She becomes queen, only to go before the
king, unannounced (which is punishable by death), to speak up for the life of
her people! But my own life certainly
wasn’t on the line -- I was not in any physical danger. The bravery of these two
biblical heroes is astounding to me, while yet inspiring me. I felt as though I
was pleading for the lives of my people! Who are my people? They are men and women who were conceived in
rape or incest! They are the pre-born babies conceived in rape or incest! They
are the women who are marginalized and mistreated for wanting to keep their children!
They are the parents who have adopted a
rape or incest-conceived child! We are
the first to be offered up as a sacrifice upon the altar of the politics of
compromise. When our lives are extinguished,
so many suffer.
Out
of all the “pro-life” speakers who testified, only four of us took a stand,
asking for the rape and incest exception to be removed. Not one Albuquerque pro-life leader
stood against the exception! One of the
“pro-life” leaders recently called me a “good friend” on Facebook, but good
friends have each other’s backs.
The
line of speakers dwindled down, and I was so relieved because we had been in
the hearing for over 4 hours at that point. Then I was surprised when my husband
said that he wanted to testify! He got up there, introduced himself, and said that he supported the bill with an amendment to remove the rape, incest and sexual abuse exception. Whoa -- my husband, my
hero is standing up! He has been my
biggest support and encouragement -- I have always known that he has my back
when it came to my past and my conception, but now he was speaking out, telling
the committee that he was thankful to my mom for saying no to an abortion! He said that this exception was wrong, telling
them how much he valued me, and how much he loves me -- I was beyond words! That was MY MAN and my man was bold!!! I am so thankful for him! (Casey, I love you and respect you!)
Finally,
the last speaker testified, then the committee asked questions of the
presenters of the bill, and the vote was taken. The bill passed committee with
the exceptions in it. The vote was 4-3, along party lines. My heart broke, but I wasn’t surprised.
I
was ready to go to the hotel. My
children sat through the entire hearing and were tired. I had completed the mission set for me, and
was ready for some rest and relaxation. But
that isn’t what happened.
As
we were preparing to leave, I was approached by New Mexico House of
Representative Rod Montoya (R-San Juan County, District 1). He positioned
himself in a way which made it difficult for me to remove myself. I felt trapped as he whispered with a firm
voice in very low tones. He told us that
he had other people get up to speak for the bill because he didn’t want the
Committee to recall what the previous speaker had said -- someone else at the end who had urged that the rape exception be removed! He warned that we had to be careful with what
we say, telling me that if I continue to show that I do not fully support the
bill, I could cause it to not go through. I told him that I understood what he was
saying, but that I had to speak my conscience! He said that in the House, it wasn’t as big of
a deal, but that in the state Senate, there were two Democratic senators who won’t
vote for the bill’s passage if they heard the slightest opposition.
With
much fervor, he tried explaining to me that “at least some babies would be
saved.” To this comment, I replied that it was the babies’ lives left out of
the bill which is the problem. So then he
“assured” me that if the bill passed with the exceptions, that they would later
revisit it, and cover all lives. Despite a rape exception with no reporting
requirements, and despite a gaping “health of the mother” exception with no
standards other than the abortionist’s “opinion,” he maintained that this bill
would save 95% of the babies being aborted late-term. I told him again that the 5% is why I am
fighting, assuring him that I wouldn’t purposely try to kill the bill, but that
I will not back down from defending babies conceived the same way I was! To this, he actually eluded to me being selfish.
I
then told Representative Montoya that the only possibility of me not speaking
out was if he would email me “proof” of other abortion bills which had exceptions,
where legislators later removed the exceptions. (Mind you, I know that he
cannot do this because it hasn’t happened!) He changed the subject and again scolded me to
stay quiet! I firmly told him that I
would do what I thought was right. He again accused me that it would be my
fault if the bill didn’t pass the Senate.
At
this point, my husband saw what was going on and engaged him in conversation. I told Representative Montoya that I’ve already
considered what he was saying, but that I must not back down. My husband then asked him questions which
completely stumped him, and I was finally able to remove myself from this
“silencing” session. I have seen movies
where a politician tries to manipulate someone to change their stance, but
experiencing this in person, on such a critical matter, was surreal, and disturbing to my spirit.
This
adventure reminds me of a clip from the novel Divergent. Tris has chosen Dauntless. She has to jump
into the unknown to finalize her choice. She has to have courage and bravery! All she has known is how to be invisible as
Abnegation. Selfless, now she has to be daring -- take risk! I see myself a lot in the character of Tris. I have been sheltered in my world, raising my
children, being a stay-at-home wife and mom, serving others – all of which I
love, but it is a sort of comfort zone for me. Now I am being asked to jump out of my comfort
zone and into battle. My voice -- my
risk has been minimal. Now the Lord is calling me to scale mountaintops with
Him. Take risks.
Testifying
in the hearing was a risk, a big risk. This risk has consequences. Some consequences have already presented
themselves. I have had painful comments
from people close to me. I have been
bullied by legislative and pro-life leaders. My heart is broken! Do I regret standing up, taking the risk? No, I do not! My Savior reminds me that He gives me His
peace. I am loved by Him so I do not
have to be afraid. This is His working! He will continue to lead me and give me what
to say, and I am certain that my day at the Roundhouse was the first of many
advocating for the lives of women who conceive in rape, incest, sexual abuse,
and sex trafficking, along with the lives of innocent pre-born babies who were conceived in rape, incest,
sexual abuse and sex trafficking.
BIO: Rowena Slusser is a wife, mother of
2, and blogger for Save The 1. Read more of her story here. Conceived in rape/incest, she advocates for
the protection of all human life. Her
personal blog is “Treasure of
Life.”
Thursday, February 19, 2015
New Mexico’s Late-Term Abortion Bill is Fatally Flawed by Rebecca Kiessling
New Mexico is currently the
late-term capitol of America, so understandably, with a new Republican majority
in the House, pro-life legislators and activists are making a push to get
late-term abortion banned in New Mexico.
Although New Mexico also has a pro-life Republican Governor – Susana Martinez,
it still has a solidly Democrat-controlled Senate (25-17.) Accordingly, this legislation is not expected
to pass the Senate, and so, is a “message bill.”
But what message is being
sent? Let’s take a closer look at the legislation,
HB 390. First of all, the definition of
abortion jumped out at me as being grossly ill-defined –” 2A. ‘abortion’ means
the intentional termination of the pregnancy of a female by a person who knows
the female is pregnant. “ This
definition would encompass any induction of labor, including a c-section, where
a baby is born healthy. If you take a
look at Merriam-Webster’s
definition of abortion, it is much more clearly defined: “the termination of a pregnancy after,
accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or
fetus.”
Now let’s take a look at the
exceptions in the bill under subsection 5B, in which a physician is allowed to
perform a late-term abortion on a viable unborn child over 20 weeks
gestationally:
(1)
the physician has determined that in the physician's opinion the late-term
abortion is necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant woman;
provided, however, that the physician shall take all reasonable steps to
preserve the life and health of the fetus; or
(2)
the pregnant woman asserts that the pregnancy resulted from sexual abuse, rape
or incest.
Most pro-life activists see the “health
of the mother” language and instantly recognize that this language is code for
abortion on demand, for any reason. Even
Congress’ flawed Pain-Capable
Unborn Child Protection Act, did not have a health of the mother exception,
but a very limited life of the mother exception, specifically excluding
psychological or emotional conditions.
In Doe v
Bolton – the companion case to Roe v Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court defined “health
of the mother” as follows: “that the
medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical,
emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the
well-being of the patient. All these
factors may relate to health.” This is
why the “health of the mother” exception has lead to abortion through all nine
months of pregnancy, for any reason.
Pro-choice activists know this, but apparently, New Mexico legislators
are unaware.
The second exception is, of
course, one which personally offends members of Save The 1, given that most of
us were either conceived in rape or are mothers from rape. Why do
we deserve the death penalty for the crimes of our biological fathers? Rapists don’t even get the death penalty –
see Coker
v Georgia (1977) and in Kennedy v Louisiana
(2008), the U.S. Supreme Court said it’s “cruel and unusual punishment”
even for child molesters. So how does
the innocent child deserve the death penalty for his crime?
Again, the flawed rape-exception Pain-Capable
bill in Congress even had some level of standards which passed muster for many
pro-life activists – that the rape had to be reported. When some female Republicans threatened to
block the bill unless that reporting requirement was removed, that was enough
for pro-life activists to retreat because even those who would compromise on
the rape exception, were unwilling to compromise on the reporting
requirement. This bill doesn’t even have
a reporting requirement, which again means abortion on demand for any
reason. After all, Roe
v Wade was founded on a false claim of rape.
Lastly, this mediocre bill sets
the penalty for intentionally killing a 20-week+ unborn child at $5,000, 1 year
license suspension and 18 months in jail, since it would only be a fourth
degree felony. In footnote
54 of the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Roe v Wade, the Court pointed out that the state’s whole
argument for personhood of the unborn child is undermined by exceptions, by
excluding the mother as a principal (as this bill does,) and by the penalty for
the abortion being “significantly less than the maximum penalty for murder.” As the Roe Court put it: “If the fetus is
a person, may the penalties be different?”
So
before pro-life activists in New Mexico go jumping on the band wagon, please
stop and ask yourselves, “What kind of message are we sending?”
BIO: Rebecca Kiessling is a wife, mother of 5 ,
attorney and international pro-life speaker, sharing her story of having been
conceived in rape and nearly aborted at two back-alley abortions, but legally
protected in Michigan pre-Roe v Wade.
She’s the founder and President of Save
The 1, and co-founder of Hope
After Rape Conception.
Wednesday, February 18, 2015
Conceived in Incestuous Rape, My Mom Said NO to Abortion! by Rowena Slusser
I woke up this morning, on my 13,499th day of life. The idea that I was unplanned and conceived in incestuous rape, floods my thoughts today. Who wanted me? My mom didn’t even know she was pregnant with me. My father may have wanted me, but why would he? He raped his daughter and that is why I am here. He should have been my grandfather. Most of my biological family on my father’s side wishes I would just go away. In the world’s “tolerant ” eyes, I am a stain in their evolutionary chain. In the eyes of some “Christian pro-lifers,” I am demon spawn, or evil offspring, a bastard or anything but a person created in God’s image.
My home state of New Mexico has a bill that will go before the House Regulatory and Public Affairs Committee, which would ban late-term abortion. This bill, which if passed would save babies’ lives, excludes the lives of the babies conceived in rape, incest, or sexual abuse. Pro-lifers who say that EVERY life matters but support a bill that excludes the lives conceived in a horrid and tortuous way are acting in a hypocritical nature. Not that I am not calling pro-lifers hypocrites, but the belief that save some as long as they are not the rape/incest conceived is hypocritical. Supporting an abortion ban with any exception is the easy way. Matthew 7:12-14, “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.” Ask yourself, “Would I want to be the exception?” Christian pro-lifers should give thanks that the God who chose them didn’t put stipulation on their lives. He sent His son to die for them; each “Christian pro-lifer” by name. As Christians, we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the principalities and powers in this evil age. Again, while humans are writing and voting on this ban and others like it, my battle isn’t against flesh and blood or their blinded bias. My battle is a spiritual one. God and Him Alone is the giver of life. Any law that give the okay to murder one class of unborn children is not from God!
This bill and those like its are “feel good” bills. Pro-lifers can say that they supported something good. Imagine for a moment if God told Moses that only the Jews who were between the ages of 20 and 35 were to be rescued from Egypt! How different the story of the Exodus would be. What if Jesus said Go into only three nations and preach the Gospel. Would you be saved? What if on the cross, Jesus said that his death would only save the people with blue eyes? Would you be saved? That is what exceptions are! Can you not see that exceptions for rape, incest and sexual abuse conceived babies is doing what I described above?
We, as Christian Pro-lifers should not SETTLE for a ban with exception. Yes, New Mexico is lawless and unmoral in regards to abortion, but is having a ban with exceptions really showing the heart of Creator God? NO! NO! NO! Why are some of us supporting a bill that excludes so many lives?
So back to my story. Why would I care if I am valued? Because I am created in the image of God! I had a friend, who was conceived in rape, tell me that truly the only value at the start of our lives came from God. As I thought about what she said, I could identify. Only God had a plan for me. Psalm 139:13-16 says, “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.” Ephesians 1:4-5 reminds me that he predestined me for adoption. Ephesians 1:4-5,”even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,” Ephesians 2:10, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” This verse reminds me that I have been called to good works, which were prepared before hand for me. What can I take away from these verses? God knew me, knew how I would be conceived, knew that I would not be valued in this world. BUT He valued me, my life and gave my life meaning and a calling! This is why I stand and fight for the lives of babies conceived in rape, incest or sexual abuse.
Right now, God is knitting together a baby boy and/or girl. He is giving them distinct personalities, eye colors, life-callings and purposes. And right now, if this bill passed, these babies would be on the chopping block. Why? Because they were conceived in incest, rape or sexual abuse. This “ban” would make it legal to torture them in the womb. They would die violent and painful deaths. And think of their moms! Their moms are terrified and feel trapped. Many women are forced by their perpetrator to have an abortion. Likewise, families (even Christian families) pressure and shame women into having an abortion. This ban doesn’t protect the most vulnerable of women; instead it harms and victimizes them further. This ban is anti-woman!!!
I want to wrap up by telling you where I am today. By God’s grace and my mom telling the doctor “NO” to the abortion offered to her, I am now married 15 years and have two children. I share my story of how I have and am overcoming 16 years of incestuous rape, sexual assault and various other forms of abuse. Thankfully, I survived being raped by a stranger at age 20. My life is valued in my family by my beautiful mom, one younger brother, one older sister, two younger sisters, my beloved husband, my son, and my daughter. I have other biological family members who would like for me and my story to disappear because I choose to stand for TRUTH! My church family also supports and values my life and those like me.
Please pray as I stand before the New Mexico House Regulatory and Public Affairs Committee. I will do this on Friday, February 20, 2015 and give them my testimony. While I am aware that this ill will probably continue on with the rape exception, I must stand for the lives of the unborn left on the alter of politics. Jesus tells us in John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” Is a ban on abortion with a rape exception truly loving one another? Truly? Is this exception not a plot written by man? Proverbs 14:12 says, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.” Also Proverbs 14:15-16 tells us, “The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps. One who is wise is cautious and turns away from evil, but a fool is reckless and careless.”
I stand All unborn lives for the Glory of God. All this is pointless if it only brings glory to me or any other person. Jesus died and saved me. He chose me to glorify Him! To Jesus Christ only be the Glory. I will end with Galatians 2:20, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
BIO: Rowena Slusser is a wife, mother of 2, and blogger for Save The 1. Conceived in rape/incest, she advocates for the protection of all human life
My home state of New Mexico has a bill that will go before the House Regulatory and Public Affairs Committee, which would ban late-term abortion. This bill, which if passed would save babies’ lives, excludes the lives of the babies conceived in rape, incest, or sexual abuse. Pro-lifers who say that EVERY life matters but support a bill that excludes the lives conceived in a horrid and tortuous way are acting in a hypocritical nature. Not that I am not calling pro-lifers hypocrites, but the belief that save some as long as they are not the rape/incest conceived is hypocritical. Supporting an abortion ban with any exception is the easy way. Matthew 7:12-14, “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.” Ask yourself, “Would I want to be the exception?” Christian pro-lifers should give thanks that the God who chose them didn’t put stipulation on their lives. He sent His son to die for them; each “Christian pro-lifer” by name. As Christians, we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the principalities and powers in this evil age. Again, while humans are writing and voting on this ban and others like it, my battle isn’t against flesh and blood or their blinded bias. My battle is a spiritual one. God and Him Alone is the giver of life. Any law that give the okay to murder one class of unborn children is not from God!
This bill and those like its are “feel good” bills. Pro-lifers can say that they supported something good. Imagine for a moment if God told Moses that only the Jews who were between the ages of 20 and 35 were to be rescued from Egypt! How different the story of the Exodus would be. What if Jesus said Go into only three nations and preach the Gospel. Would you be saved? What if on the cross, Jesus said that his death would only save the people with blue eyes? Would you be saved? That is what exceptions are! Can you not see that exceptions for rape, incest and sexual abuse conceived babies is doing what I described above?
We, as Christian Pro-lifers should not SETTLE for a ban with exception. Yes, New Mexico is lawless and unmoral in regards to abortion, but is having a ban with exceptions really showing the heart of Creator God? NO! NO! NO! Why are some of us supporting a bill that excludes so many lives?
So back to my story. Why would I care if I am valued? Because I am created in the image of God! I had a friend, who was conceived in rape, tell me that truly the only value at the start of our lives came from God. As I thought about what she said, I could identify. Only God had a plan for me. Psalm 139:13-16 says, “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.” Ephesians 1:4-5 reminds me that he predestined me for adoption. Ephesians 1:4-5,”even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,” Ephesians 2:10, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” This verse reminds me that I have been called to good works, which were prepared before hand for me. What can I take away from these verses? God knew me, knew how I would be conceived, knew that I would not be valued in this world. BUT He valued me, my life and gave my life meaning and a calling! This is why I stand and fight for the lives of babies conceived in rape, incest or sexual abuse.
Right now, God is knitting together a baby boy and/or girl. He is giving them distinct personalities, eye colors, life-callings and purposes. And right now, if this bill passed, these babies would be on the chopping block. Why? Because they were conceived in incest, rape or sexual abuse. This “ban” would make it legal to torture them in the womb. They would die violent and painful deaths. And think of their moms! Their moms are terrified and feel trapped. Many women are forced by their perpetrator to have an abortion. Likewise, families (even Christian families) pressure and shame women into having an abortion. This ban doesn’t protect the most vulnerable of women; instead it harms and victimizes them further. This ban is anti-woman!!!
I want to wrap up by telling you where I am today. By God’s grace and my mom telling the doctor “NO” to the abortion offered to her, I am now married 15 years and have two children. I share my story of how I have and am overcoming 16 years of incestuous rape, sexual assault and various other forms of abuse. Thankfully, I survived being raped by a stranger at age 20. My life is valued in my family by my beautiful mom, one younger brother, one older sister, two younger sisters, my beloved husband, my son, and my daughter. I have other biological family members who would like for me and my story to disappear because I choose to stand for TRUTH! My church family also supports and values my life and those like me.Please pray as I stand before the New Mexico House Regulatory and Public Affairs Committee. I will do this on Friday, February 20, 2015 and give them my testimony. While I am aware that this ill will probably continue on with the rape exception, I must stand for the lives of the unborn left on the alter of politics. Jesus tells us in John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” Is a ban on abortion with a rape exception truly loving one another? Truly? Is this exception not a plot written by man? Proverbs 14:12 says, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.” Also Proverbs 14:15-16 tells us, “The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps. One who is wise is cautious and turns away from evil, but a fool is reckless and careless.”
I stand All unborn lives for the Glory of God. All this is pointless if it only brings glory to me or any other person. Jesus died and saved me. He chose me to glorify Him! To Jesus Christ only be the Glory. I will end with Galatians 2:20, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
BIO: Rowena Slusser is a wife, mother of 2, and blogger for Save The 1. Conceived in rape/incest, she advocates for the protection of all human life
Use Your Power to Stop Abortion ~by Darlene Pawlik
 |
| Restored Colonial One-Room Schoolhouse |
One of the ways anyone can educate the public and those in positions of power is to write a letter exposing the facts, mingling them with real people’s stories and putting out very specific actions that you want the educated to take. This can take many forms.
A letter to the editor may be to get regular people to think a certain way. The same is true of a blog post or other social media. If you have a school board member who wants to bring abortion vendors into your school, you would write to the Board member, but then try to get it published as an open letter.
This is also effective for putting pressure on legislators and other officials, such as the zoning commission of your city or town. If a letter is strong, many outlets will publish it just to incite discussion and call attention to their publication. They are not necessarily going to be on your side, but that doesn’t matter if you get the word out. Write it in such a way that the public will help to give voice to the conversation.
Below is a letter to a legislator concerning a recent public policy discussion. Notice the pattern: first, she thanks them for service, then points out positive(s), then intersperses personal information, it need not be yours, then addresses the problem head on, offers a different point of view and a potential solution.
Hooray! You have educated the person who can make a difference. If you get it published, you may educate many people, well beyond the scope of your imagination.
Dear Congresswoman Ellmers,
Thank you for your service to our great country. Thank you for your concern for trafficking victims, in particular. In your statements, you and Ms Wasserman-Schultz both identified yourselves as women, implying that you were looking out for your demographic by introducing H.R. 398, a bill to Educate and Equip Healthcare Professionals to Recognize Signs of Human Trafficking So They Can Intercede on Patients’ Behalf. This is admirable.
Sex trafficking is a very prevalent problem and teaching people in health care how to identify it,
I can more fully identify with the demographic of trafficked women. I was conceived by rape and that knowledge made me vulnerable to traffickers. I felt worth less than others because of the continued sexual abuse and neglect. I was first sold on my 14th birthday. Standing in three inches of slush that topped my sneakers, I met with the man who groomed me all summer long.
H.R. 36, the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act specifically singled out trafficking victims, making them vulnerable to the abortion industry. This further violation is abhorrent. It would serve traffickers well, keeping their victims subdued and further subjecting them to constant degradation and often brutal rapes. Covering the crime of child sexual abuse is in direct opposition to your H.R. 398.
H.R. 36 would ban the brutal practice of killing babies after 20 weeks gestation. Even if one were to suggest that a rape victim is detrimentally impacted by the pregnancy, which is dubious at best, can you justify the affirmation that a rape victim’s baby is somehow less of a human being than a child conceived with wine and roses?
Does the child’s existence warrant being hacked limb from limb and having her little head crushed or her heart being pierced and injected with potassium chloride to cause an excruciating heart attack or being burned, inside and out, with saline solution?
When the women realize what they have participated in, what will you do? As she is reaching adulthood and learns of the level of prenatal development; that her baby was fully formed and needed only weeks to grow before he or she could be delivered and given a chance for a fruitful life, are you willing to have her further torment on your conscience? Or when she delivers that dead baby and the compounded trauma relegates her to a lifetime of PTSD, will you be able to ignore the effects on society?
The text of H.R. 36 reads, in part, (ii) the pregnancy is the result of rape, or the result of incest against a minor, if the rape has been reported at any time prior to the abortion to an appropriate law enforcement agency, or if the incest against a minor has been reported at any time prior to the abortion to an appropriate law enforcement agency or to a government agency legally authorized to act on reports of child abuse or neglect.
As a runaway, I was arrested numerous times, Child In Need of Service requests were made to the local authorities. This is very common among trafficked children. There is a report of abuse or neglect by definition. I did get pregnant by a man who bought me as a house pet. He demanded I have an abortion and threatened my life, if I didn’t kill my baby. This is also common among trafficking victims.
I implore you to work to remove the rape and incest exceptions from H.R. 36. If you believe, as I believe, that women and children who have been victims of rape should not be further victimized, then you will work against the exceptions in the bill. You have already demonstrated the desire to protect your demographic. Show your courage to be their advocate in this matter.
Respectfully Submitted,
Darlene Pawlik
Follow this kind of format for all of your educational letters.
Darlene Pawlik is a Savethe1 speaker, Chair of the Educational Trust for NH Right to Life and long time homeschool mom. She resides in New England and travels to speak about trafficking, coerced abortion, and discrimination of rape-conceived victims.
Thursday, February 12, 2015
Carry to Birth Group Celebrates Defeat of Ireland Abortion Law by Sarah St. Onge
In 2010 my unborn daughter was diagnosed with a lethal birth anomaly. We continued our pregnancy, much to the consternation of our physicians, and she lived for almost two hours after birth.
As the mother of a child who was diagnosed in the womb with a life
limiting condition, I take a keen interest in abortion legislation which
seeks to destroy protections for the most vulnerable members of our society like my daughter Beatrix.
This includes
international legislation like that which was roundly defeated in
The Republic of Ireland earlier this week. Socialist politician Clare Daly proposed a
bill that would legalize terminating pregnancies in which a lethal birth
defect had been detected. These laws have often been used to weaken
limitations on abortion overall -- removing the focus from the child
involved, who has a right to life no matter how short that life will be,
and instead wrongfully focusing solely on the woman carrying the child.
During
the proceedings we heard the stories of women "compelled" to leave the Republic of
Ireland to end their children's lives. "Forced" to have their very
personal medical procedures preformed in a foreign land, these women were
not surrounded by their friends and family as they allegedly "deserved" to be.
Not
once did we hear about the value of the child whose life hung in the
balance as an individual, except in terms of how the parent quantified
that value. Not once did we hear about the humanity of the child
involved, except in terms of how the expectant mother viewed the
situation. This is disturbing to me, as the mother of one of these fragile children.
Unfortunately, the
attitude that a child's worth before birth is dependent upon a mother's
judgement is one shared by many Americans today. When you add a lethal
birth defect (or a sexual assault) to the mix, then even many pro-life
persons have trouble properly focusing on the issue of the child's humanity.
This
was abundantly evident last month when our own House of Representatives
scuttled a pain-capable abortion prohibition because of the lack of
"protections" for women who have become pregnant as a result of sexual
assault.
This bill was widely
viewed as one of the most significant pieces of pro-life legislation since the Roe v. Wade decision, was supported by the majority of Americans, and was considered to be an
easy win for House Republicans, most of whom ran on a pro-life ticket.
The votes were there. It was set to be passed on the 42nd anniversary
of Roe v. Wade.
But it failed.
It fell fast and hard over one small item. A rape exception.
Like
lethal fetal anomalies, sexual assault is a bullet point that
pro-choice activists like to use when trying to defeat pro-life
legislation. It's their trump card, and it's the last life breath of a
movement that has been slowly dying for decades.
Either
one of these exceptions can be called up at will when any pro-life
legislation is winning support, and portrayed in such a way that
progress in terms of pro-life legislation seems "anti-woman." They sway
public opinion with one sided emotional stories -- never sharing the side of parents who love their children conceived in rape or carried to birth, and because pro-life legislators fail to articulate a strong defense of all life. They throw out images of women suffering under the undue
tension of these negatively affected pregnancies, and like the arguments
by Clare Daly, they never address the humanity or worth of the baby
involved.
Because of the overwhelmingly negative association with carrying to birth, based on the inappropriately focused pro-choice narrative, parents are very rarely told of the benefits of continuing their pregnancies. This creates a dynamic where women are pressured into ending pregnancies with affected babies, thus denying families the opportunity to parent their child for the short life that they will have. During my own pregnancy with Beatrix, we faced doctors who unapologetically pushed termination even after we had clearly stated that we were not interested in ending her life.
Unlike our own
lawmakers, the Dáil seems to understand what is at stake, that the deceptively-named "Protection of Life" abortion
bill has everything to do with destroying life. The Irish legislators understand that a woman facing a
pregnancy in which a lethal diagnosis has been made is not the only
patient involved in the situation, that the child involved has the right
to protection. No person should have the right to decide when
another person should die, based on the circumstances of their
conception.
As pro-life
Americans, it would behoove us to remember that the reason we are
called "pro-life" is our unshakeable belief that all life is sacred --
even for those whose lives may not last long. In order to continue the steady
progress which has been made, we must remember that the baby in the photo below is equally as important as the women whom Clare Daly was purportedly trying to "save".
BIO: Sarah St. Onge is a wife, mother of 4, step-mother of 2, and pro-life blogger for Save The 1. She blogs on grief, loss, and pro-life issues pertaining to continuing a pregnancy after a lethal anomaly has been diagnosed, at www.shebringsjoy.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)