Posted on 08/06/2014 5:05:27 AM PDT by wagglebee
Jenny Kutner, who is the Assistant Editor of the pro-abortion website, Salon.com, announced in an August 1st article that she was having an abortion this past weekend. In the article, Kutner explains how she took measures to prevent pregnancy by placing a copper IUD in her uterus one year ago.
She writes, “I don’t want to have an abortion, which is why I got an IUD — to give myself a 99 percent chance of not having to consider the procedure for a decade, or ever. (Clearly the IUD failed, so I guess I’m the 1 percent.) What I definitely, definitely don’t want, immeasurably more than I don’t want to have an abortion, is to be pregnant or have a child. So I’m not going to. At least, not right now. ”
Then she continues by thanking her lucky stars that she no longer lives in her hometown of Texas because in New York she is trusted to make her own decision. “There are no mandated ultrasounds in New York; no condescending scripts for the doctors to read; no increasing shortage of clinics because of legal entrapments that endanger women’s health,” Kutner said.
However, she completely avoids the core of pro-life ideology, which is that the unborn child temporarily housed in a women’s body is a living person, just like the rest of us. The pro-life movement’s opposition to abortion has nothing to do with failing to trust women to make their own decisions. Rather, it is about the reality that abortion is always the wrong decision, no matter the circumstances of a woman’s pregnancy.
Ultimately, pro-life ideology is based on biology, not on semantics or a desire to remove women’s rights. It centers on the fact that an unborn baby has a separate body, separate genetic makeup, and a separate heartbeat that its mother. The growing human is very similar to you and me, and now because of advances in ultrasound technology, we can watch the child smile, yawn, stretch, suck its thumb, and even smile.
The reasonable conclusion to come to after surveying these facts is that these tiny humans should be given the same rights and protections as the rest of society. But instead of discussing any of this in her article, Kutner sticks with words like “women’s health” and “entitlement” to clarify why her decision is her “right “as an American citizen.
She concludes by saying, “I don’t know what comes next, how or if this will change who I am. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. I can’t know that now. It isn’t Saturday yet.”
One thing is certain, whether Kutner realizes it or not, her life will never be the same. Yes, she walked into a New York Planned Parenthood on Saturday pregnant, and yes, on Sunday she was no longer pregnant; but one does not walk away from a decision like that unaffected. In a matter of seconds, her baby will be ripped to shreds, and Kutner will forever be the mother of a dead baby. And with all my heart, I pray that maybe she reconsidered her decision.
In other words, NOTHING is done to point out the FACT that it's a baby and not a "clump of cells."
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
If by some chance this POS has a baby in the future will she be willing to tell that child that they could have had an older brother or sister but mommy dearest decided to have it murdered instead.
Now she can spend her Sunday mornings in bed with the New York Times, listening to NPR, and then maybe grab a cab to a favorite New York deli for brunch before taking a relaxing walk in Central Park. What a rich life she will have now that she is the mother of a dead baby.
Did this tramp mention the father at all? Imagine being a guy, knowing you had sex with her recently, reading what this woman is doing to your child?
Failed once a little over 2000 years ago, but that was an act of God.
I don’t believe she had an IUD.
You could try reading the actual article.
Did she plan to get pregnant just so she can kill something?
Eventually she’ll come to regret her decision to abort...
...but I doubt we’ll be reading that story in Salon.
That’s right - nothing that might disturb her comatose conscience.
Go ahead and flame me (I understand the argument), but I am happy that she had one....the less of her spawn that are running around, the better.
You don't have to "have" it---that is, keep it---you self-centered witch. Is nine months really too much of your life to give up to avoid murdering an innocent? Carry the baby, give birth to it, and turn it over for adoption.
Too bad sluts can get pregnant.
Those "legal entrapments" she b!tches about about are regulations to guard the health of women who suffer botched abortions at "safe-legal-rare" licensed abortuaries.
She must have swallowed Wendy Davis' BS and stand with those who'd butcher women and deny them access to emergency medical care in the event of a botched abortion. "endanger women's health" indeed
Is she going to continue playing “make a baby” without trying to accept any responsibility for her actions?
Kill your kid because that guy just wasn’t worth it?
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.