Save the 1 Speaker Websites
Showing posts with label Pro-Life Legislation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pro-Life Legislation. Show all posts
Saturday, March 10, 2018
We Are The 1% - The Shocking Reality Behind The Numbers, by Jim Sable
1%. It doesn’t sound like very much. If the sales tax goes up 1% in your town, you may notice the slight increase and may shop somewhere else. If your weight goes up 1% after Thanksgiving, it’s most likely only temporary. If you buy a car with 1% better gas mileage, you may not notice anything different. But, what is the impact on human life because of abortion exceptions, which amount to about 1% of cases?
Why is the 20 week abortion ban seen as a tremendous opportunity for a pro-life victory, while eliminating the rape exception is nearly at the bottom of the priority list for ending abortion? Isn’t it shocking that the prospect of annually saving 18,000 babies' lives with the 20 week ban, a laudable goal, is enthusiastically pursued, while the chance to permanently protect the 32,000 or more babies conceived from rape every year, by eliminating all traces of the rape exception, is not supported by many in leadership positions, (both pro-life and clergy), and in political office?
The rape exception is a creation of the abortion rights movement, but is accepted and promoted by some in the pro-life community out of a false sense of compassion, because it is the popular view, or because of pro-life politics. Most of these people do not consider my life at all. To them, the rape exception is only a concept.
I was conceived when my mother was attacked on her way home from work in the late summer of 1957. It is interesting to note that at the same time in 1957, members of a prominent lawyers group, The American Law Institute, (ALI), proposed and recommended that the first exceptions policy guidelines be added to state abortion prohibition laws. The ALI exceptions were: grave physical or mental health impact to the mother, evidence that the child would be born with a grave physical or mental defect, and rape and incest.
Mississippi added a rape exception in 1966. Colorado was the first state to incorporate the ALI exceptions in 1967. Thirteen states were using the ALI exceptions template by the time Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973.
I discovered my conception story in 2005, and the news was initially devastating. I have thought about my conception every day since, but, the initial pain has been replaced by a powerful pro-life energy and purpose. What is still devastating is the constant push for “exceptions” in law. It is quite a significant betrayal when the exception efforts come from the pro-life side. Their efforts, projecting them back to 1957, would have resulted in not protecting my life. Today, the exceptions target tens of thousands of babies when they are added to pro-life legislation. Our collective efforts at Save The 1 work to end the exceptions era and explain why exceptions are bad pro-life policy.
Unfortunately, those who advocate for exceptions never tell anyone when the rape exception era will end. They never tell us what has to happen in order to permanently eliminate the exceptions. They don’t seem to believe that the exceptions strategy is a broken strategy. They don’t make the connection between the rape exception and the history of the Roe v. Wade decision. They deemphasize the rape exception by saying that it only amounts to 1% of cases. This may be the most common rationale behind the promotion of the rape exception.
What is behind the facade of that 1% deflection? How can you say to a targeted group of people, “Sorry, there just aren’t enough of you to work very hard to protect?” There is a number that beyond which no one in the pro-life community could ignore. They never tell us what that number is, if they’ve even considered what it should be. It is clear that 1% is not enough. And, it is the ultimate cruelty. It is cruel to the rape-conceived. It is saying: “Your numbers are not significant enough to make it worthwhile to fight for your protection.” It is also cruel to women. Cruel and shocking. I don’t think anyone that supports exceptions has even considered it.
Being 1% is not yet enough to achieve legal protection for the rape-conceived. In order for that number to be higher and “significant” enough to be noticed, even MORE women would have to be raped and pregnant. Can you think of anything crueler than that? Is that really what it is going to take to end the “exceptions” era? Must we add countless more traumatized women to the 1% in order to surpass the mystery magic number necessary to purge exceptions from orthodox pro-life strategy? The obvious answer is NO! 1% is way more than enough.
Our founder and President, Rebecca Kiessling, discusses how exceptions impacted the Roe v. Wade decision in this article.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/rebecca-kiessling/the-trouble-with-unprincipled-incrementalism-and-allowing-for-exceptions/10150193880073154/
And this previous Save The 1 article expands on the point about the broken strategy.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/rape-exceptions-in-congress-a-broken-record
Please visit our SaveThe1.com website to learn the best responses to the defenses of the rape exception and answers to the questions you may hear. Please add the arguments presented in this short essay to bolster the information you will find on our website.
BIO
Jim Sable is a husband and father of 4 -- 3 biological sons and one recently-adopted daughter from China. He and his wife Wendy are both adopted. Conceived in rape, Jim is also a Board Member, national pro-life speaker and pro-life blogger for Save The 1.

The rape exception is a creation of the abortion rights movement, but is accepted and promoted by some in the pro-life community out of a false sense of compassion, because it is the popular view, or because of pro-life politics. Most of these people do not consider my life at all. To them, the rape exception is only a concept.
I was conceived when my mother was attacked on her way home from work in the late summer of 1957. It is interesting to note that at the same time in 1957, members of a prominent lawyers group, The American Law Institute, (ALI), proposed and recommended that the first exceptions policy guidelines be added to state abortion prohibition laws. The ALI exceptions were: grave physical or mental health impact to the mother, evidence that the child would be born with a grave physical or mental defect, and rape and incest.
Mississippi added a rape exception in 1966. Colorado was the first state to incorporate the ALI exceptions in 1967. Thirteen states were using the ALI exceptions template by the time Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973.
I discovered my conception story in 2005, and the news was initially devastating. I have thought about my conception every day since, but, the initial pain has been replaced by a powerful pro-life energy and purpose. What is still devastating is the constant push for “exceptions” in law. It is quite a significant betrayal when the exception efforts come from the pro-life side. Their efforts, projecting them back to 1957, would have resulted in not protecting my life. Today, the exceptions target tens of thousands of babies when they are added to pro-life legislation. Our collective efforts at Save The 1 work to end the exceptions era and explain why exceptions are bad pro-life policy.
Unfortunately, those who advocate for exceptions never tell anyone when the rape exception era will end. They never tell us what has to happen in order to permanently eliminate the exceptions. They don’t seem to believe that the exceptions strategy is a broken strategy. They don’t make the connection between the rape exception and the history of the Roe v. Wade decision. They deemphasize the rape exception by saying that it only amounts to 1% of cases. This may be the most common rationale behind the promotion of the rape exception.
What is behind the facade of that 1% deflection? How can you say to a targeted group of people, “Sorry, there just aren’t enough of you to work very hard to protect?” There is a number that beyond which no one in the pro-life community could ignore. They never tell us what that number is, if they’ve even considered what it should be. It is clear that 1% is not enough. And, it is the ultimate cruelty. It is cruel to the rape-conceived. It is saying: “Your numbers are not significant enough to make it worthwhile to fight for your protection.” It is also cruel to women. Cruel and shocking. I don’t think anyone that supports exceptions has even considered it.
Being 1% is not yet enough to achieve legal protection for the rape-conceived. In order for that number to be higher and “significant” enough to be noticed, even MORE women would have to be raped and pregnant. Can you think of anything crueler than that? Is that really what it is going to take to end the “exceptions” era? Must we add countless more traumatized women to the 1% in order to surpass the mystery magic number necessary to purge exceptions from orthodox pro-life strategy? The obvious answer is NO! 1% is way more than enough.
Our founder and President, Rebecca Kiessling, discusses how exceptions impacted the Roe v. Wade decision in this article.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/rebecca-kiessling/the-trouble-with-unprincipled-incrementalism-and-allowing-for-exceptions/10150193880073154/
And this previous Save The 1 article expands on the point about the broken strategy.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/rape-exceptions-in-congress-a-broken-record
Please visit our SaveThe1.com website to learn the best responses to the defenses of the rape exception and answers to the questions you may hear. Please add the arguments presented in this short essay to bolster the information you will find on our website.
BIO
Jim Sable is a husband and father of 4 -- 3 biological sons and one recently-adopted daughter from China. He and his wife Wendy are both adopted. Conceived in rape, Jim is also a Board Member, national pro-life speaker and pro-life blogger for Save The 1.
Thursday, January 11, 2018
I Was Conceived In Rape And My Life Is Not An Exception, by Heather Ann
“Your life should be an exception, you shouldn’t be born.”
Sounds harsh, right?
Can you imagine going up to another human being and telling them they don’t have the right to live? It’s unthinkable some people actually deem it acceptable to look into the eyes of another human being created in the image of God, and proclaim they shouldn’t have been born.
If you’re pro-life, you are probably nodding your head in agreement.
But what about protecting babies conceived in rape? Shouldn’t we advocate just as fiercely to protect their lives as well?
You see, I’m one of those babies who was conceived in rape. And only by the grace of God, I survived to tell my story.
My birth mother decided not to have an abortion, but she also chose not to keep me. In fact, when she brought me into this world, the hospital barely let her hold me, for fear she’d get attached.
I wasn’t even given a name.
So there I was, a nameless baby conceived in the most horrific of circumstances, without a home.
![]() |
| Heather Ann as a child. |
Thankfully, she placed me up for adoption, and at two months old I was adopted by two loving parents. Since it was a closed adoption, I was told I would never be able to meet my birth mother. But through volunteers we were able to put together the pieces, and when I was 19 years old, I met her.
She wasn’t surprised I found her. She mentioned if I was anything like her, she knew I’d find her one day. Looking back, I now see it was God’s hand who orchestrated the entire thing.
As I talked with her, she began to fill in the gaps. More importantly, she answered the question I’ve wondered my whole life, -- “Why was I not wanted, why was I given up?”
But nothing could have prepared me for her answer.
When my birth mother was 19 years old, she was drugged and raped.
As I heard her tell the story, it felt as though I were choking on glass, I felt dazed, and my heart rate increased as I listened to how I was brought into this world.
I was the daughter of a rapist.
She went on to mention how she was young, and knew she couldn’t care for me. She wanted me to have the best home possible with two parents, so she placed me up for adoption to give me a chance to thrive and succeed in life, which I have.
I am thankful she did, but the inherent shame I felt concerning how I was conceived deepened, and stayed with me for many years.
At the time, I wasn’t yet saved, sure I knew Jesus, but I didn’t really know Him. Using the gap as a stronghold, the enemy exploited my pain and shame to torment me.
But 10 years later, I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, and my life forever changed. The Lord picked up the shattered pieces of my past, and made beauty from ashes.
I understand now, my birth mother placed me up for adoption because she loved me, and wanted the best, not because I was an unwanted baby. And today I know, I am a daughter of the King, and my identity is in Christ.
I’m thankful God spared my life, and now I want to do my part to advocate for other babies who don’t yet have a voice to fight for themselves.
![]() |
| Heather Ann at the 2017 March For Life in Washington D.C. |
But you see, if it were up to most politicians, I wouldn’t be born. I would be deemed an exception, and sentenced to die, simply because of the way I was conceived.
So pro-lifers, I want to leave you with a challenge. Babies are dying, by no fault of their own. Sitting on the sidelines is easy. It’s comfortable. It won’t cause much disruption. But we aren’t called to live comfortable lives. We are called to speak up for the voiceless, the downcast, the orphans.
If not us, who?
Marching for life is a wonderful thing. It’s great to show up and network with pro-lifers across the country.
But it’s not enough.
Once you leave the streets of D.C. or wherever you march for life, I pray you take that same passion you have for protecting babies and channel your energy towards ensuring your elected officials will pass pro-life legislation, without the rape exception.
And to those of you involved in politics, who have the power to do good, do it. Don’t compromise. Don’t sell out. Don’t support legislation that has the rape exception.
Babies conceived in rape are still babies.
It’s time to wake up. We can’t go on killing innocent babies, nor deeming certain lives more valuable than others.
So pro-lifers, if you are really pro-life, be all in. Get off the fence. Stop compromising on life. Be unequivocally pro-life, without compromise, and without exception.
As Matthew 25:40 states “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for Me.”
BIO: Heather Ann is the Operations Manager for a non-profit which provides respite care for children with disabilities. In addition, she is a published freelance writer, and has written for various organizations, including Save The 1. Heather is a fierce advocate for unborn babies, and believes every baby has the right to be born, regardless of how they were conceived. You can follow her here.
Monday, August 29, 2016
Gerard Nadal: Apologist for Pro-Life Exceptions Strikes Again, by SarahSt. Onge
A short time ago, Gerard Nadal, apologist extraordinaire for pro-life exceptions, posted a social media status update which essentially claimed those of us who fought against exceptions in pro-life legislation were making "idols of our consciences". The accolades for his outrageous statement were (sadly) generally supportive from his followers.
In the past, he has also positioned himself as morally superior by declaring us "petulant" for wanting to save the lives of babies who would be passed over by laws riddled with exceptions. He was supported by his followers in this characterization of us as well.
The problem with his position is his refusal to even entertain the possibility of passing no exceptions pro-life laws. For a man who claims to have such an immense faith in a God who can work any wonder, his lack of belief in this matter is troubling.
Politics has fooled people into believing that exceptions are necessary to pass pro-life laws.
This is incorrect.
First, we need to acknowledge that when we speak of "exceptions," we are generally speaking of classes of persons targeted within legislation which prohibit abortions after 20-24 weeks, as most states allow unfettered abortion up until then.
As of late, exceptions apply to late-term abortion laws.
There have been a number of significant pieces of state-level legislation which contain no exceptions for abortions (please see footnote).
Alabama, Michigan, Indiana, and Wyoming are just a few states which do not have exceptions in their late-term abortion laws. (Note, link is a pro-choice resource because Americans United For Life which tracks pro-life legislation has made the decision not to track exceptions within abortion legislation -- a distinct indication of its relevance to them.)
It is simply not true that pro-life persons cannot pass abortion laws without exceptions: even New York, which has some of the most permissive abortion laws in the US, does not have exception clauses in its abortion cut-off.Let me repeat that:
New York does not have exceptions in their late-term abortion legislation -- the state we all lament for its high abortion rates and its war against African-American babies.
That state, has no exceptions.
This lie that exceptions are necessary has been perpetuated for too long. We are blatantly attacked by the likes of Gerard Nadal for speaking this truth, and it's time we push back!
We don't need exceptions in abortion limitations to push them through the legislative process.
When we've come to a point where the most pro-choice state in the US recognizes the right-to-life of a late-term unborn child without discrimination, yet conservative pro-life legislators in conservative, pro-life states cannot persuade other politicians to support abortion prohibitions without exceptions, this is a problem..... We need to find new, more persuasive legislators, and better pro-life leaders worthy of following and supporting.
The answer to the "abortion dilemma" is not to continue compromising -- it's to make it clear we will not elect representatives who do not take a firm stand against abortion, no matter what the circumstances.
When politicians say, "we won't get support without compromise", who do you think they are compromising with? Pro-choice legislators?
Generally speaking, pro-choice legislators will vote against virtually any pro-life law. They don't care what the parameters of the proposed legislation are.
Our allegedly pro-life legislators and leaders aren't compromising with them. When politicians and activists talk about compromise, they are talking about compromise within the pro-life contingent. It's pro-life legislators they are having to make exceptions for, Right to Life PAC-endorsed pro-life representatives who are debating the merits of these laws and their proposed exceptions.
And they're arguing the content of pro-life laws based on your potential vote. They don't want to lose you -- their pro-life constituents -- as voters.
It's time to stop this nonsense once and for all.
The state has a compelling interest in protecting all of its citizens. Science has proven the humanity of the fetus at all stages of development, regardless of the condition of conception or future outlook in terms of disability. Unborn children are citizens, and deserving of the same protections as everyone else. There is no reason for pro-life legislators to hold out on fetal anomaly, rape or incest exceptions, especially when the pro-life grass roots voters have been in the dark that these discriminatory exceptions are even within these proposed laws!
The state has a compelling interest in protecting all of its citizens. Science has proven the humanity of the fetus at all stages of development, regardless of the condition of conception or future outlook in terms of disability. Unborn children are citizens, and deserving of the same protections as everyone else. There is no reason for pro-life legislators to hold out on fetal anomaly, rape or incest exceptions, especially when the pro-life grass roots voters have been in the dark that these discriminatory exceptions are even within these proposed laws!
The ball is in our court -- your court.
Don't blame officials you've elected for not being capable of compromise. They're only doing what we are asking them to do.
Don't let pro-life "hot shots" make claims which are proven false with a minimal amount of research and lack of care -- having made the determination in their own sense of wisdom that certain children are expendable.
Don't let people convince you to compromise on your principles by creating an atmosphere of fear. Because this is what they do: they make you afraid of the collapse of any abortion legislation.
Don't let pro-life "hot shots" make claims which are proven false with a minimal amount of research and lack of care -- having made the determination in their own sense of wisdom that certain children are expendable.
Don't let people convince you to compromise on your principles by creating an atmosphere of fear. Because this is what they do: they make you afraid of the collapse of any abortion legislation.
We have the power to end exceptions in laws limiting abortions, and save lives. Other states have done it. Liberal, pro-choice-controlled states have done it.
All it would take is a unified voice of pro-life people clarifying that pro-life means pro-life. Not pro-life except for those who were conceived in rape and/or incest or those with abnormalities.
How many of you privately don't support, and are uncomfortable with, legislation which doesn't protect all preborn human life?
How many of you go along with compromise due to expediency?
How many of you don't say anything because every time you do, someone calls you heartless or tells you you're being divisive?
How many of you are tired of being called "petulant" because you're disappointed by another year of abortion legislation which doesn't save the most vulnerable?
I know I am.
(footnote: Federal law requires that all states have exceptions for life of the mother in their abortion legislation)
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.
How many of you privately don't support, and are uncomfortable with, legislation which doesn't protect all preborn human life?
How many of you go along with compromise due to expediency?
How many of you don't say anything because every time you do, someone calls you heartless or tells you you're being divisive?
How many of you are tired of being called "petulant" because you're disappointed by another year of abortion legislation which doesn't save the most vulnerable?
I know I am.
(footnote: Federal law requires that all states have exceptions for life of the mother in their abortion legislation)
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)






