Posted on 07/18/2004 4:35:00 PM PDT by vanderleun
over the last 30 yrs, while women were being "liberated" stats will show women working longer, harder, leaving children at day care, drinking more, smoking more, probably going to church less....
For what?....
for having to leave your babies home, for married couples having to pay more taxes than singles and having a distressed household and whiny children to boot....
I'd say we pretty much got suckered in...
in my work life, I can tell you that I know many women who are the only ones that work in the household....husbands stay home and do not earn a living, and still can't be counted on to put dinner on the table...
but I saw all this years and years ago....
Why? The sooner she dies, the sooner she'll face the music for this.
wouldn't it be more Christian to pray for her conversion rather than hoping for her slow death? some of the comments seem rather evil also.
Selective reduction sounds positively Hitleresque. She tries to make it sound clinical, but to me it sounds criminal.
AskAmy would not like the question I would ask her(it)...
She won't have to worry next time around if she keeps the extra kids till they're four or five years old, then kills them when she's sure the first one has taken.
Rush just highlighted the NY Times article. How simply terrible. I came straight out of my chair. I told the story to the two young ladies who also work in the office. The first said that the two should have been put up for adoption, and the second commented that God would have something to say about this. I'm sure my reaction is the same as many across the country.
My thoughts exactly. Die b**ch.
I agree to some extent, but women have ALL the choices.
cry rape, dump him keep all 3 and get child support for
all of them. or (even against his wishes) abort all 3.
It's all up to her.
what the man wants in these situations is highly irrelevant.
notice the article mentions her opinion only."Peter's" probably not allowed to stay in the room...I doubt he's allowed to have much say in anything.
just remember, all sex is rape.
Hilarious-----and perfectly apt. This kind of thing gets the full endorsement of Kerry.
The genetic relatives of the murdered twins will always, always feel the shadow of their dead relations hanging over them. No partnering abortionist doctor can relieve them of that. God gave mankind a conscience for a reason.
What will the parents say when they stand before God and He is standing with the twins they murdered? What will those twins say to their murderers as they stand, sheltered and finally untouchable, in God's care?
May God give the parents, doctor, and other medical staff repentance before they draw their last breath.
I think praying for her, yes. Jesus said that anyone who says to his brother 'you fool' is just as much a murderer than someone who takes a life. In other words, none of us are guiltless. (We've all been unjustly angry -- selfishly angry).
That said, so many of us don't want her to have the ability to do this again and feel the injustice of her killing those defenseless unborn children. The babies were independent creatures with their own DNA. It is frustrating. 'Just a shot of potassium chloride to the heart' indeed.
I heard this on Rush today. This woman's one sick, sick hillary.
How is it selfish exactly?
How is not creating two children you don't want or can't take care of, make her selfish?
Wouldn't people asking her to create children just to hand them over to strangers make those demanding it selfish?
They don't care about what she wants, her feelings or the best interest of children, just what they want. That's pretty selfish if you ask me. None of yall even know this woman. If a group of people think a dna blueprint means a baby has been created, that is their problem or Michelle's problem not hers. She can't control other people's beliefs about the evilness of eating animal meat either, but I doubt she is going to stop eating meat if she likes meat.
Well, if you can't see that having two out of three children killed so you can go on living your pleasant, comfortable life isn't selfish, I can't help you.
Her "motivations" are quite clearly stated in her own words in the article and they have nothing to do with taking care of babies and everything to do with making her life just better than it otherwise would be.
Googling this woman will bring you all you need to know about her and her motivations.
As for the use of "DNA blueprint' as some kind of pseudoscientific bit of limp language for 'baby' -- well, I can't help you there either. I'm just not a professional in those sorts of mental problems.
But you can probably find a social worker to help you get a grant.
You're not going to like this Song of Death.
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.