The Raving Theist

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

A Deafening Silence

February 16, 2009 | 77 Comments

Since the inauguration, the mainstream media outlets have run numerous stories about children offering political opinions and helpful advice to the new president. It’s unlikely, however, that this 12 year old girl’s words will reach his ears:

Searching around, I haven’t found much commentary about this widely-circulated video in the feminist and liberal blogosphere. Nor has Planned Parenthood yet found a similarly-articulate seventh grader to offer a rebuttal video. Why so quiet?

Comments

77 Responses to “A Deafening Silence”

  1. Pikemann Urge
    February 16th, 2009 @ 2:49 pm

    I wonder what sentencing options she thinks should be available to a judge if abortion becomes illegal.

    But no, I do agree that there are too many abortions. I am, though, concerned for the mothers here, not the foetuses.

    And she is not only wonderfully sweet but obviously very mature for her age.

  2. Lily
    February 16th, 2009 @ 3:02 pm

    You beat me to it, Pikeman. That young lady is 12 going on 35. Her poise and ability to deliver her message are astonishing. She reminds me of myself at that age. (Ducks– it’s a joke, really.)

    Pikeman– we are concerned for the mothers too. You can’t separate the mother from the child. The only question is whether the she will be the mother of a dead child or a living one. Surely, just in this one place (and there are many, many others), you have heard women mourning their lost babies. They are telling you something that society just doesn’t want to hear. But refusing to hear them doesn’t change the reality that there is something unspeakably awful in killing your own flesh and blood.

  3. P. Sue Dohnim
    February 16th, 2009 @ 4:40 pm

    Refusing to let them take my rights away is not refusing to hear them. I understand that some women regret having had an abortion, but most do not.

    The regret felt by some women does not entitle them to make my decisions for me.

  4. Carla
    February 16th, 2009 @ 4:49 pm

    How many is most?

    The non regret of some women does not entitle them to make decisions for me.

  5. Carla
    February 16th, 2009 @ 4:52 pm

    The 12 year old is amazing. Good for her! Good for the Pro life movement!I will patiently wait for the 12 year old who will be shouting the praises of “choice.”

  6. frustrated(mk)
    February 16th, 2009 @ 7:13 pm

    Wow.

  7. Cindy (FarmgirlCyn)
    February 16th, 2009 @ 7:25 pm

    Whoa. I am nearly speechless. A passion for something so intense at 12 years old….amazing.

  8. Ex ore infantium et lactentium « Peace, Love, and Joy
    February 16th, 2009 @ 8:56 pm

    […] For commentary, you can click here. […]

  9. Louise
    February 16th, 2009 @ 9:09 pm

    I wonder what sentencing options she thinks should be available to a judge if abortion becomes illegal.

    Sentence the abortionist to prison.

    Negligent/abusive husbands could probably be sentenced, as could others who have coerced a woman into having an abortion (eg her parents).

    Abortive women could be crown witnesses (or the US equivalent) and therefore free from prosecution.

  10. Shine « The Lioness
    February 16th, 2009 @ 9:54 pm

    […] The Raving Theist and Happy […]

  11. Pikemann Urge
    February 17th, 2009 @ 12:05 am

    Lily #2, it is also a point worth making that if a woman is given counselling just before an abortion it might not sink in correctly. So I would have to agree that we need *all* voices heard so that people are already thinking of these things before they happen.

    Louise #9, why do you think the mothers should not be as guilty as the abortionist?

  12. Louise
    February 17th, 2009 @ 1:37 am

    Because the abortionist is killing babies for the money (and possibly a weird kind of compassion which holds that killing innocent people is a good way to solve a difficult problem), whereas in most cases, the mother is in difficult circumstances and often has been deserted by her friends and family (or will be if she chooses to let her child live). Because she is (normally) under some duress, she should not be penalised for the hard-heartedness of others.

  13. Beelzebub
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:29 am

    Extensive cohort studies have disproved the abortion/breast cancer link. Only studies flawed by recall bias have shown minor correlations in these two events, but they should not be given a lot of credence due to the higher quality studies.

  14. Beelzebub
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:31 am

    Too bad the world is a hell of a lot more complicated than what we thought it was at 12, isn’t it?

  15. ceil
    February 17th, 2009 @ 7:04 am

    Wow, an amazing young lady. Good for her to take the time and effort to put her thoughts on video to try to reach some people who maybe just arent focusing on the rights of the child, only the mothers rights. The mother has a right not to have sex unless she is using contraception or is willing to accept the responsibility of a pregnancy. Those people who arent willing to acknowledge that this is the way not to have an abortion are just being obstinate and want what they want when they want it. Children. Grow up.

  16. Datechguy
    February 17th, 2009 @ 8:21 am

    Because as far as they are concerned she must be destroyed.

  17. Annie Banno
    February 17th, 2009 @ 9:21 am

    Bbub, re: “Extensive cohort studies have disproved the abortion/breast cancer link. Only studies flawed by recall bias have shown minor correlations in these two events, but they should not be given a lot of credence due to the higher quality studies.”

    Sources, links, proofs, please. Any new stuff since 2004? Love to see it and explore your objective-only sources. It’s always demanded of the prolifers when we cite the studies that prove the A/BC link, so please cough yours up. Thanks much.

  18. Matthew in Fairfax
    February 17th, 2009 @ 10:59 am

    Annie,

    I can provide you a link to the National Cancer Institute of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) site which was updated as recently as November 1, 2007. The site contains this bullet item:

    “Large, well-designed studies have shown no link between abortion or miscarriage and breast cancer.”

    The site is http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/wyntk/breast/allpages

    I realize that site does not contain the studies themselves, but I presume NIH is qualified to summarized them for us. Is that satisfactory?

  19. Corporal Beefheart
    February 17th, 2009 @ 12:09 pm

    Why do the so-called pro-lifers rarely stand up for the fetus once it’s born?
    Why do the Christians rail against the doctors, but never demand responsibility for the male side of the question? Paternity is a simple test to prove today.
    If you want to end abortion, merely legislate twenty years of child support by the father.
    As with many religious controversies, the real issue at hand is obscured by the framing of the discussion, c.f. Pynchon’s Proverbs For Paranoids #3: If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.
    Anti-abortionists condemn women to a life of poverty & isolation, raising unwanted children without any help from the churches or states that demand their birth.
    Pro-abortionists condemn women to emotional torture & unnatural acts by refusing to demand responsibility & honesty from men.
    A pox upon all you fools!

  20. ceil
    February 17th, 2009 @ 12:31 pm

    there is adoption as an alternative to mothers who feel they cannot raise their children on their own. Another good reason to have sex when you are married or are prepared to take the responsibility for creating a life, dont you think?
    we have several adopted children in my family and they are a blessing, not a mistake/

  21. Lily
    February 17th, 2009 @ 12:40 pm

    Captain Beefheart:

    There isn’t a word of truth in what you have written. Not one. I’d say more but I don’t think I want to feed the troll.

    If you have an honest question to ask about how we respond to mothers and babies in difficult circumstances, feel free to ask it. You will get an honest answer.

  22. frustrated(mk)
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:05 pm

    Corp,

    Why do the so-called pro-lifers rarely stand up for the fetus once it’s born?

    I’m assuming that’s a joke, right? Do you have any idea what Crisis Pregnancy centers do? Catholic Charities? How many of us foster or adopt?

    I’m thinkin’ your a comedian…how exactly do you track down a father when a woman is waiting in an abortion clinic to kill his kid?

    You got one thing right tho. The wrong questions ARE being asked. Instead of asking, “Does a woman have a right to choose?” we need to ask “What exactly is it that she is choosing”?

  23. frustrated(mk)
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:10 pm

    Corp,

    As for forcing a woman into poverty…

    Safe Haven Law

    Safe Haven law, also known in some states as Baby Moses law, is the popular name for United States laws that decriminalize leaving unharmed infants with statutorily designated private persons so that the child becomes a ward of the state. “Safe Haven” laws typically let parents remain nameless to the court, often using a numbered bracelet system as the only means of linking the baby to the mother. [1] Some States treat safe haven surrenders as child dependency or abandonment, with a complaint being filed for such in juvenile court. The parent either defaults or answers the complaint. Other States treat safe haven surrenders as adoption surrenders, hence a waiver of parental rights (see parental responsibility).

    Police stations, hospitals, rescue squads, and fire houses are all typical locations to which the safe haven law applies.[2]

    Wiki

  24. PC
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:27 pm

    Great get them while they’re young. This girl’s age makes it obvious she was brainwashed from early on.

  25. frustrated(mk)
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:39 pm

    PC,

    uh huh. As opposed to this?

    http://pro.corbis.com/images/OF006926.jpg?size=67&uid={EC9D9CC4-A3A2-4BFF-83E1-8F3412FCEF50}

  26. frustrated(mk)
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:41 pm
  27. Pikemann Urge
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:45 pm

    Louise #12, I suspect your reasoning is political, not moral: if you suggest that the mothers be held accountable at law you’d lose their support instantly.

    If a person hires a hit man to take out a third party, then both the hit man and his client are guilty. Conspiracy to murder in this case, I think.

  28. PC
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:45 pm

    Hey thats a nice picture! That little girl knows she doesn’t have to ruin her life if she doesn’t want to. Good for her. Thanks frustrated.

  29. PC
    February 17th, 2009 @ 3:47 pm

    Thank you pikeman for pointing out the louise obviously has no idea what she’s talking about.

  30. Lily
    February 17th, 2009 @ 4:03 pm

    Pikeman: Women pre Roe V Wade were not prosecuted (with 2 excptions prior to 1922. Women were considered victims of a crime. That makes sense to me since that was the stance earlier generations of feminists took.

    You can read a detailed explanation at Americans United for Life

    http://www.aul.org/Prosecution

  31. frustrated(mk)
    February 17th, 2009 @ 4:15 pm

    No problem PC. It’s nice to see you’re not a hypocrite or anything. For a minute there I was worried you were an irrational troll. @@

  32. Beelzebub
    February 17th, 2009 @ 6:00 pm

    I was using this survey article on the American Cancer Society site, which references very recent studies with high statistical power:

    http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_6x_Can_Having_an_Abortion_Cause_or_Contribute_to_Breast_Cancer.asp

  33. Barbara
    February 17th, 2009 @ 6:36 pm

    Refusing to let them take my rights away is not refusing to hear them

    I wonder how many slave owners said the same thing in the 19th century?

  34. skeptimal
    February 17th, 2009 @ 10:30 pm

    This little girl’s too young for this kind of thing, and it gives the video a creepy feel. It reminds me of Jon Benet Ramsey dancing around in make-up.

  35. Pikemann Urge
    February 18th, 2009 @ 2:25 am

    Lily #30, are the women the victims or are the foetuses the victims? Of course if the woman does not have a choice it’s obviously a crime against her (so is circumcision). Society also used to view women as men’s property even though the New Testament was not so one-sided. And on it goes.

    Skeptimal #34, I don’t think so. Children may have an opinion if they wish. They are free to change their minds, too. I’ll listen to anybody. Children my lack experience but they have a certain honesty. I don’t think kids should be excluded from constructive things they feel comfortable doing.

  36. daniel m
    February 18th, 2009 @ 4:00 am

    I wonder who her speech writer was, as well as where she gets her data – the values for abortions performed, as well as the “edge cases” (rape, incest, health reasons, etc) are just plain wrong. It’s also noticeable that when it came to pro-life data, the data was heaped higher than it should be, but when it came to pro-choice data…we get values like “some”. Bias much?

    Other than that, excellent job on the presentation. A competent answer would take her to task on her “rights” spiel – whilst some say “isn’t the fetus a human”, she said nothing about turning women into cattle which is what putting the rights of a non-sentient, non-intelligent lump of cells above that of a live, independant, sentient and hopefully intelligent woman does.

    And the deafening silence? Well, it’s easy to pretend nobody is talking when you walk around with your fingers in your ears going “lalalalALALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU”

  37. Beelzebub
    February 18th, 2009 @ 5:54 am


    Skeptimal #34, I don’t think so. Children may have an opinion if they wish. They are free to change their minds, too. I’ll listen to anybody.

    I won’t put words in Skeptimal’s mouth, but my opinion is that 12 year olds aren’t naturally interested in the abortion debate any more than they’re interested in the death penalty or the Iraq war. Their minds aren’t developed enough to support a reasoned judgment. This little girl appears to be tap dancing to the tune of her elders. I don’t really think she understands the implications of all that she says, but instead is parroting talking points. It just doesn’t seem to be a genuine presentation. What this means is that someone put her up to it or programmed her to it. Which is creepy.

  38. Beelzebub
    February 18th, 2009 @ 5:56 am

    The fact that the first part of her spiel is right out of Ray Comfort’s playbook doesn’t help.

  39. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 6:18 am

    This little girl’s too young for this kind of thing, and it gives the video a creepy feel. It reminds me of Jon Benet Ramsey dancing around in make-up.

    That may be true, but in two years she’ll be able to have sex, get pregnant and get an abortion…all without her parents knowledge.

  40. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 6:32 am

    BBub,

    I have a twelve year old daughter. She might not be able to write a speech as thorough as that, but she IS as interested in the topic.

    Yes, she has been around me all of her life, but I hardly put her up against a wall and bombard her with facts. All the “material” is readily available in my house tho. She could certainly have delivered that speech, without much prompting.

    By the age of 2, most children can grasp that abortion is wrong. By 7, lots of them can articulate why.

    Sure, some of it has been memorized. But look at Obama. He just reads off of a sheet of paper, and later when pressed on the issue, has to correct himself over and over.

    He said this at the National Prayer Breakfast…

    “But no matter what we choose to believe, let us remember that there is no religion whose central tenet is hate. There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.

    I don’t think anyone could get up and give that speech without some coaching. But so what. Having a little help, researching, reading…none of this says that she doesn’t care. She took the time to learn all of the stuff she says. That takes moxy. You’ll notice that she rarely looked at her paper, so she KNOWS her stuff. Unless she is reading from a teleprompter, which I highly doubt, as they are not in quite as much demand in your average household as, say, the toaster.

    Bottom line is, if as you say they aren’t interested in this topic, then why the heck are so many of them pregnant at 14? Why is it legal to get an abortion at 14? Why make a law, if the people that the law is made for, aren’t interested in the topic.

    If she can HAVE an abortion at 14, I’m glad she can TALK about it at 12.

  41. Louise
    February 18th, 2009 @ 6:42 am

    Louise #12, I suspect your reasoning is political, not moral: if you suggest that the mothers be held accountable at law you’d lose their support instantly.

    If a person hires a hit man to take out a third party, then both the hit man and his client are guilty. Conspiracy to murder in this case, I think.

    I am going by the historical law in certain parts of Australia; West Australia, for example.

  42. Louise
    February 18th, 2009 @ 6:46 am

    MK, she can HAVE an abortion at 12.

    are the women the victims or are the foetuses the victims?

    Both, in most circumstances.

  43. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 6:47 am

    Well, this solves the mystery of whether or not she was put up to it…

    From LifeSite News:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09021605.html

    TORONTO, February 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – 12-year-old “Lia” of Toronto has become a star at her school and on Youtube with her five-minute pro-life speech, crafted for a school competition. Despite discouragement and outright opposition, Lia’s presentation was so well done that she reportedly won the contest she was told she would be disqualified from, due to the “controversial” message of her speech.

    Lia’s mother says that the topic was of her own choosing, and that she was determined not to back down, even after teachers told her it was “too mature” and “too controversial.”

    “She was also told that if she went ahead with that topic, she would not be allowed to continue on in the speech competition,” Lia’s mother wrote in the email to the Moral Outcry blog. “Initially, I tried helping her find other topics to speak on, but, in the end, she was adamant. She just felt she wanted to continue with the topic of abortion. So she forfeited her chance to compete in order to speak on something she was passionate about.”
    The mother told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) that the girl’s homeroom teacher was supportive of Lia’s speech even though she was pro-choice. “After helping Lia do the speech she said, ‘It really got me thinking,'” the mom noted.

    At the schoolwide competition, the mom said one pro-choice teacher on the judge’s panel “didn’t even want to hear” the speech, and stepped down from the panel before Lia began. After the speech, which Lia’s family said was well-received by both students and teachers, the judges initially told Lia she had indeed been disqualified. But controversy among the judges eventually led to a reversal, and Lia’s family learned the next day that the panel agreed the girl deserved to win the competition.

    When asked what inspired Lia to pursue the topic so adamantly, her mother said it was “a little mystery.”

    While the family espouses pro-life Christian values, “it’s not like we’re out every weekend picketing,” she said. “It was just something really deep in her heart, and she just felt really passionate about it.” She added: “I kind of snicker when I see people on the Youtube video [comment box] saying ‘Oh, her mother forced her to do this’ – I’m like, ‘No, I’m on the other end, trying to make her pick another topic!’

  44. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 7:26 am

    Louise,

    My sister lives in Western Australia…Wembley?

  45. Lily
    February 18th, 2009 @ 8:14 am

    That is a great story about Lia. Imagine the lessons she learned about free speech, tolerance for the opinions of others and garden variety fairness from those judges!

  46. Renee
    February 18th, 2009 @ 8:20 am

    “This little girl’s too young for this kind of thing, and it gives the video a creepy feel. It reminds me of Jon Benet Ramsey dancing around in make-up.

    That may be true, but in two years she’ll be able to have sex, get pregnant and get an abortion…all without her parents knowledge.”

    I haven’t decided to watch the YouTube video yet, for the reason cited by skeptical.

    Yet frustrated makes a clear point, that we pretty much openly permit young teenagers to have sex, but we don’t want to talk about sexuality in it’s full mature context either, which means the needs and obligations of a child which may be created from sexual activity.

    In some places condoms are already available for eleven year olds at the school’s nurses office and the Pill is marketed to twelve year olds at my own pediatrician’s office (pamphlets in the waiting room), if these older children/young adults are fully capable having sex then we, as guardians, must follow through and discuss all the possible repercussions.

    In recent trends regarding young adults and sexuality is the recreational act of ‘sexting’, in which young adults text pictures of nude themselves and share with friends and classmates. Basically it’s free, compared to having to purchase the most recent edition of Sports Illustrated Swin Suit Special (not a lot of bathing suits in the magazine).

    For young adults we’ve infantized sexual relations, yet this is not what they need. Probably a twelve year old speaking bothers us, because a disservice has been done for sometime on how we have approach human sexuality as children prepare for adulthood.

  47. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 8:32 am

    Exactly Lily. A total disconnect. Either we save sex for adulthood, or we arm children to deal with it at a younger age. But you can’t promote it without dealing with it.

  48. Margaret Catherine
    February 18th, 2009 @ 8:43 am

    Twelve is not too young. A twelve-year-old is capable of understanding, and caring or not caring, and being determined to do *something*. Not just on abortion but on other issues; in fact, don’t we normally expect that of them?

  49. Beelzebub
    February 18th, 2009 @ 8:50 am


    For young adults we’ve infantized sexual relations, yet this is not what they need. Probably a twelve year old speaking bothers us, because a disservice has been done for sometime on how we have approach human sexuality as children prepare for adulthood.

    My objection isn’t really with her understanding of sexuality. Children are quite aware and actually rather sophisticated about sexuality long, long before mainstream opinion has ever said they should be. But I don’t think the fairly puritanical remonstrations this girl is exhibiting about “responsibility” and so on are at all natural for someone her age. Doesn’t matter if it was her apparently clueless mother, or children’s pastor or what–someone is putting words in her mouth. For those sympathetic to her message, the other exegesis is hardy less exploitative: that she’s some kind of juvenile profit excoriating a sinful world. (Don’t you know that’s what they’re thinking?) It seems there’s floor below which “pro-life” won’t descend, consuming their progeny — to protect the unborn.

  50. Beelzebub
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:00 am

    Sorry, s/profit/prophet/ I’m terribly disappointed in myself — although I can’t wholly discount the Freudian slip.

  51. Lily
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:08 am

    It is incomprehensible to me, Bbub, that you don’t think a 12 year old is mature enough to know that killing the child in the womb is wrong. I was once a 12 year old girl. I had very well-developed notions of right and wrong at that age, as most reasonably intelligent children do. Her subject matter may surprise you but since it is absolutely impossible to avoid an intimate knowledge of the subject in this society, I don’t have the slightest doubt that she understands what it is and why it is a horror.

  52. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:12 am

    BBub,

    That’s OUR point. No twelve year old should be pregnant. No twelve year old should have an abortion.

    But it happens.

    And we think there is just as much “putting words/ideas into their heads” when it comes to sexualization, as you think there is from this childs mother.

    I posted on the mother’s POV on #43. Her mother says she tried to talk this child out of it.

    Why is it so hard to believe that a 12 year old could have been so moved by the horrors of abortion that she did something about it?

    Some 12 year old wouldn’t even understand this. Others could compete with this girl. Some kids are just further along than others.

    But I don’t think the fairly puritanical remonstrations this girl is exhibiting about “responsibility” and so on are at all natural for someone her age.

    But being handed a condom by the school nurse is?

  53. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:15 am

    BBub,
    You call her remonstrations puritanical. But we call indoctrinating kids these young into believing that sex outside of marriage, sex at 14, abortion at 14, provocative clothing…etc, is hedonistic.

    We’re coming from 2 different places. What you call puritanical, we call moral.

    What we call hedonistic, you call normal.

  54. Beelzebub
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:18 am


    But being handed a condom by the school nurse is?

    They’re giving 12 year olds condoms? Really? Well, maybe I’m behind the times. Perhaps there’s something to this “early maturation” thing.

    I still think she’s a fake.

  55. Margaret Catherine
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:20 am

    Of those here…how many of you grew up after Roe v. Wade, or grew up aware of the abortion issue at all? I ask because there is a lot of discussion of what children understand about abortion, and when they understand it, and how well they understand it – but nobody seems to recall what it was like to have a child’s grasp of the issue. I do. My mother and sister were in the Rescue movement in the 80’s, they both were arrested on several occasions, and I wanted nothing more than to grow up and jump into the fray myself. I attended as many legal protests as I could; I was not dragged to any but wanted to go. Time and again in middle school, I found little ways in class of expressing a pro-life view, and getting “that look’ from my teacher. (I remember that look very well.)

    A child who is raised aware of the issue, who understands it even on a child’s level, will very easily care. And so what if they don’t have an adult’s understanding? Isn’t childhood, right down to the toys children play with, about learning to be an adult? That is what this girl is doing, and doing very well! – even the judges thought so in the end, and they don’t exactly sound like her ideological allies.

  56. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:26 am

    Margaret Catherine,

    *applause*

  57. Renee
    February 18th, 2009 @ 9:35 am

    Beelzebub,

    Our job as parents is more for our children as the age into puberty is to understand the world, rather then shelter them from it.

    A recently published book, which I read from loan at the library, is “The Case Against Adolescence: Rediscovering the Adult in Every Teen” by Dr. Robert Epstein

    http://drrobertepstein.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=10&Itemid=29

    “Dr. Epstein, longtime researcher and professor and former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today, has developed a unique and comprehensive test—the Epstein-Dumas Test of Adultness (EDTA)—that measures 14 different competencies that appear to define adult functioning in modern society. Based on scores obtained from tens of thousands of adults and teens, Dr. Epstein recently concluded that American teens are, on average, just as competent as American adults—and that adults greatly underestimate the abilities of our teens. Epstein and Dumas have also demonstrated a link between “infantilization”—the extent to which teens are treated like children—and behavioral problems in teens. ”

    Also a fun test to take yourself…

    http://howadultareyou.com/

  58. Rachael C.
    February 18th, 2009 @ 10:00 am

    Pikemann Urge,
    The whole, “pro-lifers want to jail women” argument, which has made it’s rounds at the RH Reality Check blog, has already been addressed by pro-lifer groups here.

  59. Lauren
    February 18th, 2009 @ 10:09 am

    Skeptimal says”This little girl’s too young for this kind of thing, and it gives the video a creepy feel. It reminds me of Jon Benet Ramsey dancing around in make-up.”

    This same girl could go down to an abortion clinic and have an abortion without so much as the notification of her parents. Planned Parenthood would not report her rapist (because if 12 year old is pregnant, it’s rape-end of story).

    If she is too young to even discuss abortion, don’t you think it’s a little absurd that she could have one?

  60. Rachael C.
    February 18th, 2009 @ 10:10 am

    In summary, the majority of pro-life groups say, 1)It will simply restore authority to the states to decide what can and cannot happen within their borders. 2)The women are the 2nd victims of male exploitation and driven to desperation by the circumstances surrounding their pregnancy. 3)The focus should be on providing support to pregnant and parenting women 4)The punishment and jail time should be for on abortion providers, not the women.

  61. Skeptimal
    February 18th, 2009 @ 2:38 pm

    Lauren said: “This same girl could go down to an abortion clinic and have an abortion without so much as the notification of her parents.”

    Not surprisingly given my screen name, I’m skeptical of this claim. I’m not intimately familiar with abortion law, but I doubt there is a state in the union where this girl could actually get an abortion without her parents knowing about it. I have confidence that the anti-choice groups would not miss the opportunity to exploit such an event if it were happening.

    My problem is with any child doing the work of adults. I once worked for a company where I was contacted by a nine-year-old who wanted to conduct business on behalf of her grandmother. I refused and was sorely tempted to call child protection services.

  62. Lily
    February 18th, 2009 @ 3:34 pm

    Oh, Skeptimal! It happens all the time. I can’t believe that some of the recent cases in the news haven’t caught your attention.

    Here is a link to a youtube film of a news network’s (WB33 News, Dallas Texas)investigation in 2002. One of the reports they examined was that done by a group that investiged 813 Planned Parenthood clinics. They were called by a “13 year old” who wanted an abortion because she had been impregnated by an adult boyfriend. Can you guess how many refused her and/or called the authorities as they are legally required to do?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlmbcbqrK5Y

    Most recently, a similar sting was set up by two college age pro-lifers and again, PP failed to obey the law and report the statutory rape of a 13 year old and, of course, they arranged the abortion.

    Just google “planned parenthood” “statutory rape” and you won’t be able to digest all the incidents you will find.

    More recently, here is PP covering up the rape of an 11 year old (www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/05121602.html)

    Just last Dec. Fox News revealed a sting carried out by Students for Life (I believe a California group) and you can read the transcript here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,463404,00.html

    It is all over the news and has been widely known for years that this is going on. It isn’t one or two children in the odd clinic or two, either. Someone here is likely to have statistics so I won’t bother to ferret them out.

  63. Lily
    February 18th, 2009 @ 3:40 pm

    Oops, I didn’t edit my message properly. The paragraph that starts: “Most recently, a similar sting …” should have gone away because they are the “Students for Life” that Fox interviewed (among others).

    Yes, anti “choice” groups are all over these incidents. And no, the mainstream media which are in bed with abortion lovers (like Obama) will rarely report this stuff. What can you be thinking? Put any restrictions whatsoever on the sacrament of abortion??? Prosecute the guardians of the Temple of Planned Parenthood? Perish the thought!!!

  64. Matthew in Fairfax
    February 18th, 2009 @ 4:44 pm

    I’m skeptical of this claim. I’m not intimately familiar with abortion law, but I doubt there is a state in the union where this girl could actually get an abortion without her parents knowing about it.

    This table appears to have the most recent information available, February 2009 from the Guttmacher Institute, finding 34 states with parental notification and consent laws on the books and enforced:
    http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparetable.jsp?cat=10&ind=460

    This source is from January 2007 and differs from the previous source for some states, finding six states and the District of Columbia with no laws and nine other states with notification and/or consent laws being held up by the courts and not enforceable:
    http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_pare1.htm#st
    The definition of who is a minor differs for some states.

    This source from the University of California San Francisco (also using data from Guttmacher Institute) says, “Thirty-five states currently enforce parental consent or notification laws” as of September 2008:
    http://bixbycenter.ucsf.edu/publications/files/ParentalNotification_2008Sep.pdf

    So the correct answer seems to be that in about 16 states and the District of Columbia, minors may obtain an abortion without being required to notify their parents or gain their consent. The numbers can change as the legal challenges make their way through the courts.

  65. Skeptimal
    February 18th, 2009 @ 5:03 pm

    Lily said: “They were called by a “13 year old” who wanted an abortion because she had been impregnated by an adult boyfriend. Can you guess how many refused her and/or called the authorities as they are legally required to do?”

    OK. I was wrong about whether this happens. I admit it.

    Even taking into account that Fox News is about as “fair and balanced” as a wolf in a hen-house, I can see no way that they can have fabricated this story to suit the conservative agenda. I support a woman’s right to choose, but that video is just sickening. The hypothetical children are victims of child abuse; that should be the controlling issue here.

  66. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 5:42 pm

    Skep,

    There is a lot of seedy stuff that goes on in the abortion industry. Abortion clinics are not regulated. They don’t even have to meet the standards of a veterinarians office.
    This is also documented.

    MANY abortionists have criminal records. Christina can help to verify this.

    Obama also voted 4 times NOT to put into law the mandatory protection of infants born because the abortion failed. They are just left to die. Even if they are close to viability.

    Nancy Pelosi, Obama and their ilk are pushing for FOCA laws at the state as well as federal level, which would mean that the 34 states that DO have HARD WON notification laws, would lose them.

  67. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 5:44 pm

    Skep,

    At any rate, perhaps you can understand better why we “indoctrinate” our children at an early age. This is what they are up against. Knowledge is their only weapon. Someone will have to carry on the fight after we’re gone.

    It’s sad, yes, but we did not create the circumstances where our 12 and 13 year olds would have to face realities like abortion. You guys did. If it were up to us, our kids wouldn’t even know what abortion is.

  68. frustrated(mk)
    February 18th, 2009 @ 5:51 pm

    http://www.nrlc.org/news/2003/NRL05/south_carolina_abortion_clinic_r.htm

    http://www.nrlc.org/news/2005/NRL06/KansasBillVetoed.html

    This clinic is finally being regulated…but not much.
    http://www.kaisernetwork.org/Daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=39965

    Here you have Planned Parenthood whining that if regulated, it could IMPAIR a womans safety….riiiiight…

    The proposal is certain to face challenge from abortion rights supporters.

    Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said: “Women’s ability to manage their own healthcare is at risk of being compromised by politics and ideology.”

    She said, the Associated Press reported, that the organization was concerned that the regulation posed “a serious threat to women’s healthcare by limiting the rights of patients to receive complete and accurate health information and services.”

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/presidentbush/2008/08/abortion-religi.html

  69. Lily
    February 18th, 2009 @ 7:20 pm

    Skeptimal, I really appreciate your ready acceptance of the evidence; you would be surprised how rarely I have seen that in some atheists and/or abortion supporters. Naturally, I only know a small subset but still …

    However, can you document any particularly unbalanced Fox news story? I am not talking about blowhards like O’Reilly or Hannity, who, despite their faults, do give voice to those that “big (and dying) media” ignore. I am talking about their news division. If they were right to report the story I linked to, when “big media” buried it, doesn’t it suggest that just possibly demonizing the one news organization willing to tackle these stories, serves only the bad guys?

    Well, I’m outta here. Tornado sirens are going off!

  70. Beelzebub
    February 18th, 2009 @ 10:22 pm


    Skeptimal, I really appreciate your ready acceptance of the evidence; you would be surprised how rarely I have seen that in some atheists and/or abortion supporters. Naturally, I only know a small subset but still …

    That’s pretty much par for the course for people who are in a fight for keeps. For instance, I presented source material that pretty much spells out that abortion doesn’t raise incidence of breast cancer.

    It’s my experience that religious conservatives don’t give a tiny inch, not one iota, on the issues that they’re passionate about.

  71. Pikemann Urge
    February 19th, 2009 @ 12:12 am

    Rachael C. #58, I don’t think you understood my point (probably my fault for not being clear). There is no way you can tell me, while I hold a straight face, that a woman is a victim of abortion. If abortion is wrong then the woman is as much to blame as the abortionist.

    I am not saying you want to jail women. I am saying your perspective is completely wrong.

  72. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 7:30 am

    BBub,

    Here is one prolifer who would agree with you that the verdict is still out on breast cancer. While I think that in time we might find a connection, that for now it is best to leave that argument on the side as there really isn’t definitive evidence one way or the other.

    And I think it does our cause no good to focus on it, because, as you said, it makes us look immovable in the face of evidence or lack of evidence. We actually do harm. Can’t expect to be taken seriously on other issues if we aren’t willing to concede this one.

    My daughter in law just had a miscarriage. The doctor was explaining to her what a D&C was and my daughter in law was freaking out about being “put under” and the dangers involved. The procedure was basically identical to the suction abortion procedure.

    I told her that I wished with all my heart that I could tell it was dangerous and could hurt her (because then I could say the same about suction abortions), but the bottom line is that “PHYSICALLY”, suction abortions are pretty safe. More’s the pity. It would make a good weapon, if it were true that they are unsafe.

    I really try, when it comes to the abortion issue, to stick with the proven facts and stay away from conjecture. If you lose credibility on any one facet of the argument, you risk losing credibility on all of it.

  73. Skeptimal
    February 19th, 2009 @ 9:21 am

    “I really try, when it comes to the abortion issue, to stick with the proven facts and stay away from conjecture. If you lose credibility on any one facet of the argument, you risk losing credibility on all of it.”

    That’s something about you that I really appreciate, MK.

  74. frustrated(mk)
    February 19th, 2009 @ 10:17 am

    Thanks Skep. I think you’re pretty open minded too. For a skeptic, that is… ;)

  75. Beelzebub
    February 20th, 2009 @ 3:05 am

    mk,
    Kudos from me as well.

  76. frustrated(mk)
    February 20th, 2009 @ 7:21 am

    BBub,

    All right, now I’m blushing…

  77. blogstudents
    April 3rd, 2009 @ 6:47 am

    mint page ! nice work ! and that red frame is real nice

  • Basic Assumptions

    First, there is a God.

    Continue Reading...

  • Search

  • Quote of the Day

    • Fifty Random Links

      See them all on the links page.

      • No Blogroll Links