This woman thinks that we should. (H/T ECM)
Lori Ziganto writes:
According to author and columnist Virginia Ironside, most adopted kids would be better off dead. As would most children she considers “unfit”. In fact, she says, a “loving” mother would smother a sickly child with a pillow, because the “suffering” of being ill makes that life meaningless and not worth living. She made these vile assertions in defense of abortion while appearing on the BBC’s Sunday Morning Live during a discussion grossly entitled “Can abortion be a kindness?” First, her odious attempt to argue that abortion is a “loving choice” because some kids, in her mind, are unwanted. Her tunnel-visioned, sad excuse for a mind can’t seem to fathom the fact that the children are always wanted, by someone. You know, like people with hearts and compassion.
[…]To pro-abortionists, an illness is a reason to kill a baby. In fact, they believe that life is expendable for any reason if it doesn’t fit into your personal plans. This includes life that is outside of the woman’s body. Ms. Ironside, like most pro-abortionists, also fails to mention those pesky babies who won’t cooperate and who survive abortion attempts. Much like our President, who gives them so little thought that he, as a Senator in Illinois debating a Born Alive bill, said this:
As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child — however way you want to describe it — is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that it’s nonviable but there’s, let’s say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead..
However you want to describe “it”. Sort of like the suffering “things” Ms. Ironside referred to above. And, not coming out limp and dead. How dare they insist on having the human will to live and the strong spirit to survive.
This is what that fabulous, adorable Jennifer Roback Morse is always saying about feminism. The feminist idea is that relationships are never engaged in order to serve others, but only to make the strong women happy and fulfilled. Women in relationships should never have to fulfill obligations to other people, feminists tell us. Everything should be about selfishness, amusement, and personal fulfillment – including using men and children for those ends – or even killing them if they become too demanding. (Men and children are “needy” and “pouty” – they have no right to have expectations about what women should do). The feminists have forgotten that there is a purpose for the suffering that is part of self-sacrificial love.
By the way, I spent most of last night listening to Jennifer Roback Morse lectures from her conference. If you listen to the first Bill Duncan speech, (or maybe the second), he talks about this refusal to take on the natural obligations to others in a relationship context. Look, relationships can’t last if the person is unwilling to honor their commitments. If you make a vow to take on those obligations to love someone (and children) self-sacrificially then you have to do it. Whatever happened to compassion and nurturing?
And like my virginity post showed, the ability to fulfill those obligations depends on a host of other decisions that you’ll have made before you ever get married – decisions about chastity, but also decisions about volunteering, education, earning and saving. The habits you set when dealing with people of the opposite sex before you marry affects how well you can potentially treat a spouse. If you use other people like objects, you don’t suddenly magically develop the capacity to love them self-sacrificially with magic vows. You can only love as well as the decisions you make. Unselfishness has to be a practiced habit in order for the marriage to last.
UPDATE: Alisha has more here.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
How can someone justify abortion with arguments about why a fetus does not qualify as a baby, and then at the same time turn around and make statements about “being a loving mother” toward the very thing (the unborn) they say is insignificant? By their own definition, one could only be a “loving mother” to a “baby” that was already birthed.
LikeLike
Oh my Lord. You can check out my blog for more anti-child nuttery. http://far-above-rubies-and-pearls.blogspot.com/2010/10/child-free-yet-spawning-ugly.html
LikeLike
I’ll update my post to link to you. Thanks, Alisha.
LikeLike
You’re welcome. What is going on?! A society that hates children is destined for doom. They are sacrificing the future for the present. And I’ll leave it at that.
LikeLike
It’s the neopaganism that the West is moving towards. Remember that child sacrifice is an integral part of paganism. They just have a new name for it: abortion. And the god is the god of self.
LikeLike
Actually, I can’t leave it at that. My mother was adopted! So her bio mom should’ve smothered her? Thank God she had enough love at 16 to give her up to a family who loved her!
LikeLike
Oh, one more thing. A quote you might like: “Chauvinism is the brutal rape of chivalry which unfortunately bore feminism.”
LikeLike
Either chauvinism or just women being mistreated by men because they had no fathers to protect them from their own ways of evaluating men, which would be the fault of their mothers for choosing a bad husband, and so on, and so on. That’s my view. Not trying to be mean, but women need to be careful who they choose. I say this to a woman who has chosen well – you know the importance of this.
LikeLike
Again, it’s all the fault of women.
Men get a total pass from you.
Men who make vows and then skip town.
Men who put up a show of being good men, but once they win the prize they take off their masks and women find themselves stuck with a con-artist.
She either stays with the jerk or gets the heck out. Either way, according to you, it is soley HER fault.
This Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a phenomenom many women are familiar with.
http://submissiontyranny.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-creatures.html
You actually might to like the story the blog author calls on. It’s from that old tv show, “The Waltons”. Can’t get much more wholesome and conservative than that.
LikeLike
I recently made a bad decision about a woman and I blame me! I relaxed my rules about reading and writing and got creamed.
Men and women both need to get better at courting, I think.
Did you see that post I did on virginity, by the way (and marital stability)? I thought that was a useful key for both sexes in their testing.
LikeLike
Okay, fine.
I wish more women could live without men.
I wish that society didn’t teach their little girls that their identity should be found in the arms of a man.
example: “you’re nobody until somebody loves you”
I wish little girls weren’t taught, in many Christian circles, that their ONLY option it to get married and have babies. That they aren’t real women unless they do.
THEN…
MAYBE…
Women could do what you ask and just not marry, or hook up, or be friends with benefits (ETC) forcing the men ‘man-up’.
But I don’t see this happening anytime soon, not with the porn culture (that is also very much alive in Christian circles) teaching men that it is their right as men to expect sex from a woman, that THAT is what women are for. And if one female refuses to be the live version of the two-dimensional pin-up doll, it is his RIGHT and PRIVILEGE to follow his GOD-GIVEN DRIVE and pursue the next one and coerce her into that two dimensional mold that presses the live out of women.
Yeah, I’m teaching MY daughters to not find their identity in relationships. I do teach that good relationships are good and nice to have, but NOT essential to their being and womanhood.
But I fear I am one of the very few mothers who knows that I CAN teach this to them. That it is actually a Biblical teaching.
You see, Wintery. It’s not wrong what you ask of women.
But it IS impossible with both culture and much of Christian doctrine teaching otherwise.
So let’s get to the core of the issue.
What is a woman for?
She was created along with the man to fellowship with God in the cool of the day in the Garden of Eden.
Reducing her to anything less or making her have another priority OVER her fellowship with God and being a human being (i.e as secondary human being dependent on a primary human being for identity) does violence to her soul and makes her vulnerable to the things you say she shouldn’t be vulnerable to.
And this is what culture and much of Christianity does to women.
And I agree, it’s awful.
And not seeing an end to this in sight, I focus on picking up the pieces of women disillusioned by the lies they are taught and helping them find their way back to the God who wants to walk with them in the cool of the day.
Only their relationship with God is goind to heal them and make them know their value so they can make the right decisions, including the decision to remain single when men act the fool.
LikeLike
Mara, this comment is so good. I wish I had written it. Do you mind if I turn it into a post?
I totally agree with you that women are made for God, and that men are strictly optional. If a woman can find a man to love and help so that she can serve God better by serving that man, then she should do it. But that should be a cold, calculated decision – just like the decisions I make. My feelings of love happen after I weigh everything and then make the decision to serve God by loving her self-sacrificially. It’s not something that is done apart from him. It’s not done on the basis of need, it’s just another way of serving God, but through a relationship. Love should always be a choice to commit, not something done because of needs.
Thanks for writing this comment.
LikeLike
With all due respect, WK, I have to disagree with you about Mara’s comment. She made the statement:
//does violence to her soul and makes her vulnerable to the things you say she shouldn’t be vulnerable to.
And this is what culture and much of Christianity does to women.
And I agree, it’s awful.//
Say WHAT??? How did Christianity get sucked into this?
Christians get blamed for everything, it seems. From the burning of Rome to the Nazi Holocaust to the perpetration of “violence against women’s souls”. We just can’t catch a break, can we?
I’m all for women choosing their spouses carefully, instead of letting their emotional impulses lead them into marrying the wrong person. (And men shouldn’t make their decisions based solely on how attractive a female is. This gets them into a lot of trouble too. I speak from experience here).
For what its worth, the happiest women I’ve ever seen are the Christian women who follow the Biblical model of marriage. It speaks volumes that the feminist woman are always so angry and miserable.
LikeLike
Whooops, I missed that part of her comment! I think she probably meant Christian culture and not Christianity itself, though. I was sort of happy with the idea that women were made primarily for God.
So yeah, I think you’ve made a good point here, WG.
LikeLike
not with the porn culture (that is also very much alive in Christian circles) teaching men that it is their right as men to expect sex from a woman, that THAT is what women are for. And if one female refuses to be the live version of the two-dimensional pin-up doll, it is his RIGHT and PRIVILEGE to follow his GOD-GIVEN DRIVE and pursue the next one and coerce her into that two dimensional mold that presses the live out of women.
That’s not the Christian circle I’m in. The pastor I have has said from the pulpit that there is absolutely no excuse for men to look at porn; even if their wife isn’t fulfilling their sexual desire. He’s also told men that we can’t expect our wives to be sex slaves (I think that goes vice versa too). So, this Christian circle that is spoken of in the comment shouldn’t be labeled Christianity as a whole because that is totally against what is taught in the Bible. I can’t imagine finding anywhere in the Bible that gives man or woman the right to cheat on their spouse from unfulfilled sexual pleasure. Porn is cheating.
LikeLike
Mara, I know women who have dealt with the Jekyll and Hyde phenomenon. The man is one person in public (and in courting) and another person at home when married. It’s scary. It’s probably what scares me most about marriage.
But I don’t think that complementarianism is to blame. It happens to people who are egalitarians too.
LikeLike
Well, maybe somehow it’s possible for men and women to have procedures for testing prospective mates during courtship. I have a testing procedure and it’s never failed. (Sometimes it takes a while for me to abide by the results of my testing – LOL!)
LikeLike
@Wintery, I did choose well, and I thank God for His guidance. But please considerate of those-men and women- who have fallen in love and later regretted it. I kissed a few frogs before I married my prince. And you know that because I told you! And please don’t hang a noose of guilt around your own neck for your last relationship. It was a learning experience. So forgive yourself and say a prayer for her. REALLY.
LikeLike
Alisha, if you can do it, then other women have no excuse. And they shouldn’t avoid the responsibility for their choices. You did it, and they should do it. I’ll bet you had a great Dad too, and your mother gets the credit for that decision. Credit where due.
LikeLike
Regarding the crazy woman in the video. If killing an “unloved or totally unwanted” unborn baby is the act of a loving mother, does that mean that we can also kill BORN human beings who are “unloved or totally unwanted”?
It would be interesting to see how this woman would react if someone tried to murder her for those reasons.
LikeLike
Mara: “And this is what culture and much of Christianity does to women.
And I agree, it’s awful.”
wg: “Say WHAT??? How did Christianity get sucked into this?”
Wintery: “I think she probably meant Christian culture and not Christianity itself, though. I was sort of happy with the idea that women were made primarily for God.”
Back to me — Don’t really have time for this but wanted to bop in and clarify anyway.
Christianity, in it’s purest form, is the most liberating and freeing thing there is.
Jesus Christ is the greatest women’s liberator that ever lived because He is THE GREAT human liberator. He died on the Cross to set us free from sin, hell, and the grave.
imo, Jesus is also the greatest women’s liberator on a social level.
Here in the 21st century in western civilization we lose sight of just how oppressed women really were back then.
They were not allowed to be Roman citizens so they couldn’t even be second class citizens. They ranged from being property to being less that second class citizens.
Jesus taught men how to treat women.
Paul’s words in Ephesians were incredibly radical. Love your wife? Whoever heard of that? A wife wasn’t considered a companion. They had courtesans for that.
So in this, we agree.
However, it’s the tainting of Christianity in many circles that is changing it from a liberating force to an oppressive force.
wg: “For what its worth, the happiest women I’ve ever seen are the Christian women who follow the Biblical model of marriage. It speaks volumes that the feminist woman are always so angry and miserable.”
wg, perhaps the women you see really are happy and fulfilled and find their value in Jesus rather than in their role. And if so, great. More power to them.
But perhaps YOU didn’t know about a phenomenom among Christian women. Since they are taught to ‘joyfully submit’, sometimes it’s and act. It is plastic Christianity. It’s being pressed into a mold then being told they are to be joyful about it and can’t be honest about how they feel.
Perhaps none of the women you know are like this. But that doesn’t mean these women don’t exist.
Angry or not, at least feminists can be honest about how they feel.
Christian women are often scolded and chastised for being honest about how they feel. Anger is not an acceptable emotion for women in many of these circles.
So while I hope what you say is true about the women you know, I would caution you. Things aren’t always as they seem on the surface.
And yes, Wintery. Women were made primarily for God. And it is God who gets to define who and what they are. And it is God who has to work in their souls to help them find that.
Things get all weird when men jump in and try to do that for women and define submission and womanhood for women because men have certain expectation that may or may not line up with God’s expectations.
LikeLike
Jared, I appreciate all men who stand against porn. Not enough do.
Some who do, still engage in it secretly.
And some who say they stand against porn teach that Christian wives need to study nympho sites in order to learn how better to meet their husband’s sexual demands when the husband wants his wife to behave more like a porn star.
Still. Even after what I said above, I DO know there are awesome men out there who really do oppose it on every level.
LikeLike
Wintery, I just saw your Oct. 7th 1:46 am post.
If you want to use that comment, even after the discussion with wg and my clarification, feel free. If, after consideration, you change your mind, I’m fine with that.
LikeLike