She kills two of the kids outright, then has the evil in her to worry she might have a miscarriage later in the pregnancy? Why? They're NOT HUMAN BEINGS, ARE THEY????
Posted on 07/18/2004 4:35:00 PM PDT by vanderleun
THE REALLY AWFUL THING ABOUT AMY RICHARDS TALE AS TOLD TO AMY BARRETT in The New York Times Lives: When One Is Enough is that Amy Richards put her name on her shameful tale of selfishness.
"I found out I was having triplets when I went to my obstetrician. The doctor had just finished telling me I was going to have a low-risk pregnancy. She turned on the sonogram machine. There was a long pause, then she said, ''Are you sure you didn't take fertility drugs?'' I said, ''I'm positive.'' Peter and I were very shocked when she said there were three. ''You know, this changes everything,'' she said. ''You'll have to see a specialist.''The self-centered Ms. Richards who writes an advice column for, of course, feminist.com and has published a book called: Manifesta: Young Women Feminism and the Future, elects to undergo what is coyly titled "selective reduction." This is a nice term for the killing of one or more multiple babies in the womb. As the article puts it, "The obstetrician wasn't an expert in selective reduction, but she knew that with a shot of potassium chloride you could eliminate one or more."
"My immediate response was, I cannot have triplets. I was not married; I lived in a five-story walk-up in the East Village; I worked freelance; and I would have to go on bed rest in March. I lecture at colleges, and my biggest months are March and April. I would have to give up my main income for the rest of the year. There was a part of me that was sure I could work around that. But it was a matter of, Do I want to?"
When the time came to pick one, it was fraught with the pathetic little drama that so often overtakes these young members of our intellectual classes in urban areas:
The specialist called me back at 10 p.m. I had just finished watching a Boston Pops concert at Symphony Hall. As everybody burst into applause, I watched my cellphone vibrating, grabbed it and ran into the lobby. He told me that he does a detailed sonogram before doing a selective reduction to see if one fetus appears to be struggling. The procedure involves a shot of potassium chloride to the heart of the fetus. There are a lot more complications when a woman carries multiples. And so, from the doctor's perspective, it's a matter of trying to save the woman this trauma. After I talked to the specialist, I told Peter, ''That's what I'm going to do.'' He replied, ''What we're going to do.'' He respected what I was going through, but at a certain point, he felt that this was a decision we were making. I agreed.Hard to imagine if "Peter the Boyfriend" would have had much of a future with this woman if he'd piped up to say, "Maybe it isn't such a good idea to kill off two of my children." He'd be history and Amy would be wrapped in the arms of the sisterhood at feminist.com. But then again, if he was that kind of a man he wouldn't be with this kind of a woman.
The climax of this sordid little drama is delivered as casually as the rest of the entire episode:
When we saw the specialist, we found out that I was carrying identical twins and a stand alone. My doctors thought the stand alone was three days older. There was something psychologically comforting about that, since I wanted to have just one. Before the procedure, I was focused on relaxing. But Peter was staring at the sonogram screen thinking: Oh, my gosh, there are three heartbeats. I can't believe we're about to make two disappear. The doctor came in, and then Peter was asked to leave. I said, ''Can Peter stay?'' The doctor said no. I know Peter was offended by that.Offended? By being denied the right to be present at the execution of two of his children? Why should a man so lacking in manhood be offended? He probably made a face and then beat it to a bar, glad he'd gotten off easy, once again.
Then again, he missed the central life experience of "making two heartbeats disappear." Never a rose without a thorn.
The story, from Amy's point of view, has a happy, almost Hollywood ending, complete with a whiff of false remorse and guilt:
I went on to have a pretty seamless pregnancy. But I had a recurring feeling that this was going to come back and haunt me. Was I going to have a stillbirth or miscarry late in my pregnancy?
I had a boy, and everything is fine. But thinking about becoming pregnant again is terrifying. Am I going to have quintuplets? I would do the same thing if I had triplets again, but if I had twins, I would probably have twins. Then again, I don't know. Well, it certainly good to know that 'everything is fine' and that there is a boy survivor in the world. But it is not so good to know that Ms. Richards only took from this experience what she brought into it -- nihilism, selfishness, and an ego much bigger than her sense.
She's the very essence of the Modern Feminist of the Future, all me and no see. Triplets, no. Twins, maybe -- but maybe not.
Michelle Malkin who pointed this story out comments: " So she's terrified? I can only imagine how her surviving son will feel when he grows up and learns about the fate of his siblings."
I don't. There's nothing in Ms. Richards' character that makes me think she'll have the guts to tell him about it. I realize that means that I believe she'll finally develop a sense of shame about what she did, but I believe even the most vapid among us can grow a real moral sense. At least, that's my hope.
Hitler would be proud of Ms. Richards--and Satan smiles gleefully over her shoulder.
I hope this woman dies a slow, long, painful, death..
I feel sick.
This is wickedness, pure and simple. Evil, evil, evil!
* this isn't a slight on women in general, just a comment on the false premise that they are morally superior by virtue of their sex.
She would have loved Joseph Mengele. Now, how come 60 Minutes doesn't do a piece on this? HAHAHA, I must be losing my mind.
..and I think that's a good thing!
The more this story gets around....the more it might...just might wake up even the most jaded soccer moms & wannabe feminazis that ..
...this is reality.. compliments of Planned Parenthood and the NOW gang!!!!
One can only hope!
Here's a link to another thread that's ongoing on this very topic.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1173730/posts?page=1,50
This woman doesn't want her life "complicated" by additional unexpected births. Perhaps someday she will meet her Maker and tell Him He made a mistake.
I haven't even looked at the other thread you've mentioned. Could you post a link?
hmmmm
All killing of innocents is evil.
So then why is that woman who wouldn't have the c-section to save one of her twins in trouble. Didn't she go to jail for that?
Someday perhaps, someone will decide not to have their lives complicated by this bitch.
May the nights of endless distant cries come soon for this murderer. May she awake in her sweat, unsure of her own breathing...night after night..a torment or 44 million cries from which she can recognize those of her child angel..a torment which nothing but death can end.
And before the end comes, may she ask God for forgiveness.
..but I apologize, I've forgotten more than I knew about posting links, however, you should be able to still find it on the side link of your screen.
The title is actually ...
When one baby is enough
..and it was printed in the New York Times...(can you imagine!)
She kills two of the kids outright, then has the evil in her to worry she might have a miscarriage later in the pregnancy? Why? They're NOT HUMAN BEINGS, ARE THEY????
That depends on Ms. Richards' ethnicity. If she and Peter were "Aryans" and she destroyed 2 Aryan children, Hitler would have probably sent Ms. Richards to a concentration camp. By aborting 2 future citizens of the Reich, she was depriving the Fuhrer of "divisions for the Fuhrer" -- if they were male, or potential "mothers" of sons who would comprise "divisions for the Fuhrer." (Hitler was very pro-life for Aryans.)
If, however, she was a Jew or Peter was a Jew, he would have been very proud of her for destroying such impure "useless mouths".
John Kerry believes life begins at conception. But he also believes this woman had a right to do this; in fact, he thinks she could be allowed to take communion the same day as the "reduction".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.