Showing posts with label death penalty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death penalty. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Response to Elise Cooper About her article, The Rape Exception ~by Darlene Pawlik



American Thinker published an article by Elise Cooper. Her title, The Rape Exception, got attention. The message was that Republicans should leave the exceptions in laws. It is this thinking that has brought us abortion on demand.

I will take this apart paragraph by paragraph. Elise’s first assertion, in paragraph 1, is that rape conception is extremely rare. Rape is grossly underreported. Even so, the reported number of rape conception is significant. About 32,000 pregnancies per year are a result of rape.


Elise interviewed experts who have dealt with victims. That needs to be qualified. Were they first responders, investigators, or long-term healthcare workers? Dealing with rape is a process, not an event. Rape is a traumatic, core violation.

A first responder cannot have the same knowledge as a person who engages her over time. Trauma skews everything. Perspective, emotions, logic, attitude, perception of time, decision-making, and concentration are negatively affected.

In paragraph 2, Elise tells us that many Republicans are in agreement with the majority of Americans that exceptions should be made. The majority of the Early American South were said to approve of slavery. Does that make it right? Just because others believe something, doesn’t make it right.

It is objectively wrong to kill another human being. You would say it is wrong to kill you, right now. Why?

In paragraph 3, Elise talked to an unnamed psychologist. The title of psychologist is supposed to convey authority, but there are three completely disjointed sentences there. What does the death penalty and Second Amendment have to do with taking an innocent life in the womb on moral grounds? Guns are the great equalizer. Loss of life can occur? Victims of rape are not afforded the same parameters?  Wait what?

Is our psychologist suggesting the child deserves the death penalty for the crime of his or her father? Even those who rape do not deserve the death penalty, according to the Supreme Court. Only the most violent criminals are sentenced to death, but not without due process and among a jury of their peers. Is our psychologist suggesting the mother should be above the law? Should she be allowed to decide execution on her own?

What exactly is the psychologist saying here anyway?

Paragraph 4 emphasizes the trauma of rape, but concludes by suggesting that forcing children to carry their children to term is bad. The point is that she is already pregnant. She is already a mom. She knows there is a baby. It’s her baby. The police officer is quoted to say, “Would you force her to have the child of a horrible person?”

I know children of horrible people. I don’t think we should kill them because their parents are horrible.

She has been traumatized by rape. If you have seen what happens during abortion, you would agree that is another trauma. When she regains her ability to cope and she begins to heal from the rape, then the abortion, she will again be traumatized. She needs support and help to get through after rape. She does not need to be further victimized.

The police officer insists that choice is the key. What is the choice? Let’s be perfectly clear. The choice referred to is chopping up a baby and pulling that child from his mother’s womb. This leaves a mother of a dead baby. She is no less the victim of rape, but has compounded the impact to include the death of her child.

Elise tells us the officer has a good point. Then tells us that a UN report says that ISIS is torturing, raping and killing. Among those injured, was a nine year old, pregnant by rape. Why force her to relive nine months of torture? But, did she know immediately? One doesn’t usually know their pregnant for four to six weeks or more. So, it’s not nine months. That is disingenuous at best and a lie designed to cause confused compassion at worst.

She can be managed through her pregnancy with loving care and medical intervention that protects both patients, mom and baby. Caring for both, instead of intentionally killing.

Paragraph 6 is the only one that makes sense to me. I was conceived by violent rape, sexually abused as a child, sold into sex trafficking, and I conceived a child as a result. I have experienced this. If you have not, you cannot fully understand. That is why Elise should have interviewed people from this demographic.

Paragraph 7 takes us back to ‘her choice’. We must always define “choice”. This prosecutor deals with victims during their trauma. That is a temporary situation. Pregnancy is also always temporary. We must never make permanent decisions based on temporary situations.

In paragraph 8,9, 10 and 11 we are told the choice to kill the child is based on paternity. There are hundreds of thousands of men in prison. Should their children be killed? They are a reminder to their moms. Is the two-year-old child of a rapist on the table? They are more expensive. They need more resources. They aren’t as easily adopted as a newborn. Should she kill her?

If it is the mom’s choice, without anyone else intervening, why couldn’t she kill her teenage son, if his father rapes her or someone else for that matter?

In paragraph 12, we are reminded that laws preventing rapists from getting custody need to spread across the country. A woman, who carried to term and raised her baby, was notified that he now wanted access to the child. This is a horrifying scenario on many levels. Even if he an adult-only rapist, mom would be terrified every moment her little one is with him. If not, the child would be subjected to incestuous sexual abuse.

Sexual abuse is a core violation. It has a lifelong impact.

Ms. Cooper concludes her article stating that all interviewed said that the exception should be based on a woman’s choice. She should have interviewed us at Savethe1.

She says that women who become pregnant by rape should decide if they want to continue or prevent it.

Sorry, Elise, if she’s pregnant, she has a baby. The choice was already taken away from her. Her choice now, is to be the mother of a live baby or a dead one.


Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Threatened with a Plastic Coat Hanger by Rebecca Kiessling

I recently spoke at the University of Waterloo, in Ontario, Canada, for a Students for Life event.  The leadership team explained to me that they'd arranged for a police officer and campus security to be present because at their last event, protesters disrupted their speaker.  The disturbances included witches trying to cast spells on the pro-life guest, Canadian Member of Parliament Stephen Woodworth.
Shortly before my event, I noticed some abortion advocates entering the room with signs.  Since I've seen YouTube videos of some of my pro-life colleagues being interrupted during their speeches on college campuses, just to be safe, I asked the police officer to stay inside the room during my speech, and I clarified with him that the protesters would be escorted out if they tried to interrupt at all.  Good.  Beyond that, I truly owe the abortion activists a debt of gratitude, because they provide me with an endless supply of great material!
For anyone who's ever heard my speech, you know that much of it includes all of the horrible things which abortion supporters say to me -- things like, "You must take after your rapist father," and "Okay, so what you're saying is that if abortion had been legal, you wouldn't be here today.  Well, if your birthmother hadn't been raped, you wouldn't be here today either, so doesn't that make youpro-rape?"  People really say that to me!
I explain to them that there's a huge moral difference because I did exist, and my life would have been ended because I would have been killed through a brutal abortion.  I may not look the same as I did when I was 4 years old, or 4 days old yet unborn in my mother's womb, but that was still undeniably me, and I would have been killed. 
The typical response is then:  "But that wouldn't have been you."  Well, who would it have been?!  "That just wouldn't have been you yet."  So I ask the crowd of students:  How many of you have ultrasound photos in your baby album?  (Most do.)  And what do your parents say to you?  "I don't really know what that is.  It's some kind of glob of tissue -- I don't even know what it's doing in there!"  (Laughter ensues.)  No, of course not!  Parents say, "That was -- "  and the students finish the sentence -- "you."  They understand that.  They get it.  That was me.  They comprehend the connection.  But somehow, when it comes to the issue of abortion, all of a sudden, some "don't know what that is," or, "that wouldn't have been you."  It's complete intellectual dishonesty.
Another cherished line they'll say is, "I have no problem looking you in the eyes and saying to you that I think that your mother should have been able to abort you, and I fully understand that it would mean that you'd be dead right now.  Yeah, I have no problem doing that."  Of course, this is out of their "care for women" that they would say such a thing to a woman like me!  Can you feel the love?  Cuz I'm not feelin' it!
That's the thing -- they always talk about how much they "care about women," so I challenge them:  "I'm a woman!  Now tell me, what good is my right to anything as a woman if I don't have my right to life?"  They can never answer that question, because all other rights are worthless if you don't have your right to life.
When I speak on college campuses, the Students for Life leadership often tell me how the Feminists For Life poster of me, "Did I Deserve the Death Penalty?" gets taken down or defaced.  Under that question, they often write in large letters, "YES!!!" -- that I did deserve the death penalty.  I understand that they'd prefer it if children like me hadn't survived to put faces, voices and stories to this issue.  But their utter inhumanity actually serves the cause of life because it awakens the average student in the middle who wasn't really sure how they felt about this issue.  They in fact lose people because of their lack of reason and their cruelty.
Last week's protesters were no exception.  First of all, they held their signs during my speech -- as they sat in the back rows so that I couldn't even read their signs.  If you really want the speaker to see your signs, you might want to try sitting in the front row.
Then, about half-way through my speech, they all began to raise up plastic coat hangers -- yes,plastic.  Because nothing is more terrifying than a plastic coat hanger -- especially the teal one which a guy kept waving as he was trying to stare me down.  It was as if he thought he was threatening me with it, like I deserved to have been killed by his teal-colored plastic coat hanger.  Yeah, that happened.  One has to wonder whether he has some sort of Mommie Dearest complex.
Then, during Q & A, he called us all hypocrites for not being vegans.  I explained that many of my pro-life colleagues actually are vegans, but then I asked him how he felt about puppy abortions.  As is typical, his response was disbelief that it occurs, but when many of us assured him that it in fact does, I asked again, and his response was that he doesn't know how he feels about puppy abortions -- the same reply I get every time.  You see, it cuts them to the core to hear about violence against animals and they just can't condone it.
Another abortion activist who says that she helps deliver babies and also helps assist in abortions, asked me if I'd ever been to a termination, because if I've never been to a termination, then she says I shouldn't have the right to stand up there and speak.
I told the crowd that many may be shocked to hear -- especially given my story -- that I actually terminated three of my pregnancies prematurely.  All three of my daughters are doing quite well now.  My doctor broke my water (using something that actually resembled a wire coat hanger,) and induced labor with all three, so they are alive and well, despite my having prematurely terminated those pregnancies.  Then I asked her, "But that's not what you're talking about, is it?  When you say 'termination,' you're not talking about ones resulting in live babies, right?  Just the dead ones, or do you include the termination of pregnancies with live babies too? -- because I've participated in those."
She looked a bit confused, but the room was full of laughter.  I explained to her that the words you use are significant, so say exactly what you mean.  I asked her whether she's talking about being present at an abortion, and if so, then define abortion.  What is an abortion?  She wouldn't answer that one, of course.  They never want to talk about what an abortion really is.
So some pro-life supporters hear about protesters, they see the photos with the cruel and unusual posters, and they wonder how so many of us endure it.  First of all, the protesters are actually helping our cause with their asinine antics.  Secondly, I'm secure in my identity as a child of God and firm in His calling on my life, that nothing could deter me.  I'm energized when I'm "in the zone," fulfilling  this purpose, and knowing that lives are saved along the way because someone remembered my story.  And lastly, I'm extremely grateful for them sitting through my speech, because these protesters are lost.  I shared stories with them of pro-life activists who were once abortion rights advocates, and I offered them all hope that it's never too late to change your mind!
BIO:  Rebecca Kiessling is an international pro-life speaker, attorney, President of Save The 1 -- www.savethe1.com, and co-founder of Hope After Rape Conception -- www.hopeafterrapeconception.org