The television show Friday Night Lights followed their episode dealing with abortion with another episode that only affirmed the pro-abortion perspective that was being sold in the episode I wrote about in the last article.
I won’t summarize the entire episode but here are a few clips:
In this episode, Becky, the girl who had the abortion, thanks her friend Tim, who offered his silent support of her abortion and lets him know that he was the most helpful person to her through the hardest thing she’s ever had to go through, namely, having an abortion.
The father of Becky’s now deceased child, Luke, comes from an evangelical Christian home, and his mom is, according to a NY Times “Arts” review of the episode, “portrayed as a narrow-minded fanatic who mistakes her own narcissism for virtue.”
Becky tells Luke at one point that she had a good conversation with his mom, yet, Luke’s Christian mother is also shown working behind the scenes to make somebody pay for the abortion killing of her grandchild. Perhaps in a following episode she will be vindicated but in this episode and the previous episode at least, she is placed in a rather humiliating light. She represents the pro-life position to the viewer and she is portrayed as emotionally deranged.
The pro-life position however, is not based on emotion. It is based on observable facts. Don’t misunderstand, Friday Night Lights doesn’t have to be fair to the pro-life position. The writers are free to write what they want to write. However, it should be known that they are not portraying the pro-life position accurately or fairly. This was a pro-abortion message.
And a significant part of that message was directed to men. That message? ”Men, shut up. What advice or counsel could you possibly give that would help a young woman in this position?” That’s my take on it anyway. Tim was the silent, passive, hero. Well, he did offer to give Becky a ride to the abortion clinic like a good lad.
My hope is that men rebel against this message. And I don’t just mean that I hope they shout louder at the next pro-life rally. I hope men take on a role of leadership in our culture that affirms the sanctity of human life in every possible way.
The pro-abortion lobby, already plunged deep into an abyss of insanity, would now have us believe that abortion affirms the sanctity of human life. Abortion, though emotionally difficult for women, affirms their womanhood and can be a beneficial solution to the problem child nestled in the womb. That’s the pro-abortion message behind these episodes of Friday Night Lights.
An NBC drama called Friday Night Lights covers the issue of abortion in a recent episode and it’s rousing delight in the pro-abortion lobby. In the episode a tenth grader gets pregnant and decides to have an abortion. The reason for delight amidst the pro-abortion lobby is of course, because she has the child killed.
Here’s a link to a pro-choice op-ed and the full episode. I watched it this morning and while I was moved by the writer’s depiction of the grief, the hardship, and the pressures that confront a young woman in this situation, the episode functioned on a premise I believe to be a lie.
What’s the premise? That children destroy our futures. There is an underlying assumption in this episode that tells the viewer that this young woman’s life is over if she chooses to have and raise her baby. This is a lie. The option of adoption is never mentioned and the veil is pulled over the viewers eyes from the start. All peer pressure in the episode is arrayed against the life of this pre-born child and the Texas law that requires an abortionist to describe the child and inform the woman of what happens during an abortion is vilified.
The episode ends in a curious way. The father of the child calls and tells her he will be there for her to help raise the child no matter what. She informs him that she has “taken care of it.” She hangs up and cries. The viewer is left, I suppose, to decide whether she regrets her decision or not, but only after a thorough pro-choice flogging. Of course she’s sad, but now she has her life back.
Does she?
Can we identify when we’re being fed a premise? I’m feeding my readers one right now. My premise is that pre-born children are humans deserving protection from humans and an opportunity to live.
We should out-rightly reject the premise behind this show. We should also take careful notes. These are the arguments that grease the machine that is the abortion industry in the United States of America. We have now a powerful, one-sided, pop-culture depiction of the abortion issue being praised for it’s compassionate approach to the issue. With this, we can be confident there is more to come.
Ronald Reagan said this in his 1983 essay called “Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation”:
“As we continue to work to overturn Roe v. Wade, we must also continue to lay the groundwork for a society in which abortion is not the accepted answer to unwanted pregnancy.”
How true. Both are noble efforts and we need people dedicated to both. I’m praying for a president to be elected in 2012 who gives us this kind of leadership. And I’m praying for pro-lifers to not have the patience to wait that long to lay down their lives in some form or fashion for pre-born children and the moms who are carrying them. Join us!
What cave has Megan Kelly been dwelling in? It was crystal clear to just about everyone that Bart Stupak was taking pro lifers for a ride to garner support for the health care bill. He told his constituents that he’d vote for the healthcare bill whether it covered abortion or not and then pretended to care about the issue of abortion in a case of brilliant political grandstanding. All the media’s attention was on Mr. Stupak as he wove his tangled web and then showed his filthy hand.
Well, that’s not my point really. Pay close attention to the video below at 53 seconds. The Health and Human Services Dept. of our government, headed by abortion proponent Kathleen Sebelious, gives us more of the same double speak we’ve been getting from every proponent of the health care bill. They say, abortions will “not” be covered in the federal high risk insurance plans “except in the cases of…” Wait. Stop right there. So, abortions will be covered. Period. What’s the reason for this kind of in your face deceit and double speak? Do they really think we are idiots? Do they think we are blind idiots? I have to say, they probably think even worse of us. They lie to our faces and then taunt us with the truth because they do not believe we have the zeal or the resources to confront them. This is an abuse of power.
When our government’s officials believe they can get away with saying absurd things like: “abortions will not be covered by any federal (taxpayer) dollars except when we decide to cover them…” we should be alarmed.
And what of the near complete lack of truly journalistic coverage of this? When we see this kind of poor, confusing, journalism we should be appropriately offended. More still when we see it regarding something as serious as abortion. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate Megan Kelly. I just wish she’d apply her talents to digging deep on this issue. It seems that everywhere we look in the news media, every one is missing the point.
Bottom line: We should be alarmed. Are you alarmed? If you are, what are you going to do about it? Or, what are you already doing about it? I’d love to hear. I’m hoping to hear from some young pro-lifers who are ready to commit their life to the cause of defending pre-born children with their intellect and resources, and who are committed to speaking out when our government attempts to subdue us with hazy language and double speak.
The White House is pushing Kenya’s government to adopt a new constitution that will legalize abortion in the African nation. The only restrictions to abortion would be the approval of a “trained health professional”. Such a vague restriction will surely open the door for abortion on demand much like the current situation in America.
Someone, Kenyans need to know who, drafted this constitution, and saw fit to include the worst kind of “double-speak” (to coin an Orwellian phrase) possible.
“Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues director Marie Smith told LifeNews.com, “Regrettably, this final draft contains some of the most deceptive and dangerous language on abortion ever seen in a constitution.”
“It presents constitutional protection for the unborn child by acknowledging in section 26 on Right to Life that ‘Every person has the right to life’ and that ‘The life of a person begins at conception,’” she explained. ”However, the next statement completely reverses protection for the unborn by allowing abortion when in the ‘opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law.’”
Did Elena Kagan write this provision? It sounds exactly like the double speak she used in her ethically questionable amending of a press release for the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology while working in the Clinton White House to further Clinton’s pro-abortion agenda. I jest, we know it wasn’t Kagan, but someone crafted this provision, who?
The pro-abortion lobby has set its sights on Kenya.
Did IPPF (International Planned Parenthood Federation) dangle money in front of the Kenyan government? With the pro-abortion lobby, ever slinking around in the shadows, anything is possible. IPPF has, in fact, been lobbying for the legalization of abortion in Kenya as far back, at least, as 2007.
While we ponder who is working to legalize abortion in Kenya, we know for certain that the White House has dangled money in front of the Kenyan government. And we know of the President’s aggressive support of abortion rights.
The Vice President had this to say in a speech he gave in Kenya last month:
“The United States strongly supports the process of constitutional reform. … Dare to reach for trans formative change, the kind of change that might come around only once in a lifetime,” he said. ”If you make these changes, I promise you, new foreign private investment will come in like you’ve never seen,” Biden added.
Leave it to Vice President Biden to dangle money so blatantly. Of course, the new constitution doesn’t have mainly to do with the legalization of abortion, there are other significant changes, but the legalization of abortion will transform the face of this nation, for the worse, as it has transformed ours.
Is this the Obama administration’s idea reducing the number of abortions worldwide? Or was that campaign rhetoric that won the naive favor of so many evangelicals only intended for domestic purposes?
Whatever is going on here, someone, and I think we know who, aims to invest and reap from the blood of Kenya’s children. May God in His mercy stop them.
Pro Life opposition to President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee has been robust over the past few weeks. And the continual revelations of just how radical Elena Kagan’s views on abortion are, are breathtaking.
But will it matter if her appointment is defeated and the President is sent back to the drawing board to find another appointee? After all, the trip back to the drawing board would only be a formality. Another appointee, with similar radical views on abortion, we can be sure, lies waiting in the wings, or the in the West Wing, we should say.
My opinion: Yes. It matters tremendously if Elena Kagan is denied entrance to the High Court. I hope that she never darkens the doors of the Supreme Court, and I do mean “darkens”. If the pro-life opposition can successfully expose the truth about Elena Kagan’s radical views we will have won a significant battle on behalf of pre-born children. Few issues are more important than this one. This is the right kind of issue to deny an appointee entrance to the Supreme Court over.
Let’s send President Obama back the drawing board again and again until he finally appoints someone who reveres the sanctity of human life at all stages.
As for Elena Kagan, she is not that appointee. Here’s her defense of what is commonly known as Partial Birth Abortion while working in the Clinton Administration. Kagan tampered with a medical statement from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology regarding their findings that Partial Birth Abortion was never the “only” means necessary to preserve the life or health of a mother. The ACOG actually, shockingly, (Kagan is not a medical Doctor) accepted her revisions to their statement and published a lie to stop legislation that would have banned Partial Birth Abortion (also known as Intact D & X). ACOG is a pro abortion organization.
For those wondering what Partial Birth Abortion is… Click here. And here’s a description from the pro abortion American Medical Association:
(1) The term ‘partial birth abortion’ is not a medical term. The AMA will use the term “intact dilatation and extraction”(or intact D&X) to refer to a specific procedure comprised of the following elements: deliberate dilatation of the cervix, usually over a sequence of days; instrumental or manual conversion of the fetus to a footling breech; breech extraction of the body excepting the head; and partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the fetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus. This procedure is distinct from dilatation and evacuation (D&E) procedures more commonly used to induce abortion after the first trimester. Because ‘partial birth abortion’ is not a medical term it will not be used by the AMA.
For purposes of full disclosure I’ll add that they failed to mention that scissors are used to puncture the back of the living child’s skull and then pried open so the “Doctor” can then perform their “partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the fetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus.”
Kagan also attempted to adjust the AMA’s medical statement but she was unsuccessful. Read about that attempt here.
A Pro Life Mindset. I’m Praying For All Pregnant Moms to Think This Way.
By SethSaturday, June 26, 2010 8:18
I hope Megan doesn’t mind, but what she wrote on her blog about her pre-born baby, a little girl, gripped me as I read. Read this wonderful piece of writing here.
I’ve been reading up on the new, loosened, NIH preferred guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research and I am having trouble digesting my breakfast.
The reason I’ve been reading up is because:
“On March 9, 2009, President Obama issued Executive Order 13505: Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells. The executive order states that the Secretary of Health and Human Services, through the Director of NIH, may support and conduct responsible, scientifically worthy human stem cell research, including human embryonic stem cell research, to the extent permitted by law. This is taken from the NIH website.
If I were to summarize my findings I’d say it like this as a rough draft: Clinics now have a wide open door to use the system to their monetary advantage. Human Life is once again devalued. The benefits of the strong are once again placed over the rights of the weak, in this case, the helpless children who have been developed for IVF and discarded for sundry reasons). The children who get the raw end of the deal are, once again, children with chromosomal abnormalities. In this case, they really are just the scapegoats of the supposed intellectuals. I’m referring especially to Downs Syndrome children who have become a favorite cultural target and a pleasing sacrifice to the alter of our egos. They will be, in essence, the fuel that propels this horrific research forward. Here’s a clip from the new regulations:
“Respondents noted that many embryos undergo Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). This may result in the identification of chromosomal abnormalities that would make the embryos medically unsuitable for clinical use. In addition, the IVF process may also produce embryos that are not transferred into the uterus of a woman because they are determined to be not appropriate for clinical use. Respondents suggested that hESCs derived from such embryos may be extremely valuable for scientific study, and should be considered embryos that were created for reproductive purposes and were no longer needed for this purpose. The NIH agrees with these comments. As in the draft, the final Guidelines allow for the donation of embryos that have undergone PGD.”
Who’s to stop a clinic from developing more embryos than necessary under the guise of their intended use for In Vitro Fertilization? Who’s to stop a clinic from falsifying information regarding the “health” of embryos that may be suitable for In Vitro Fertilization? Will clinics be able to withstand the siren call of delicious compensation for their embryos? Certainly not. Call me a conspiracy theorist but we can be sure this kind of devious activity is already underway. These are all things that can happen with no one knowing about it.
Human embryos are humans. I watched with horror as the character “Ray” came to the awful discovery that the invading, hostile aliens were using the humans as fertilizer to sustain their race, in the 2005 movie re-make of War of the Worlds. But such is the mentality of our depraved and increasingly utilitarian culture. The real nightmare is when you don’t need evil aliens to do what only evil aliens should do.
How long will we find it acceptable, even thinkable, to fertilize our race with the blood of our pre-born children? They’ll tell you I’m crazy for talking this way. They’ll tell you it’s all for the benefit of mankind. But these folks have unlocked a new form of cannibalism. The question is whether we will stop it before we’re on the menu.
Should the state of Louisiana shut down in order to deal with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill?
A feminist blogger made these remarks regarding the recent legislation that sets restrictions on abortion clinics in Louisiana:
“With little fanfare and recognition, a new bill has made its way through the Louisiana Legislature. While thousands in my state have found themselves unemployed and unable to feed their families due to the effects of this oil disaster, the Louisiana legislature has found something they believe more important to focus on: abortion.”
If that were the case I would stand up and cheer. I can, perhaps, in the moment, only think of one disastrous circumstance more urgent and awful than the gulf coast oil spill. That would be abortion. That would also be the current neutrality and ambivalence toward abortion in our nation.
Does the flow of oil need to be stopped, urgently? Yes. Unquestionably. This is a disaster and it is urgent. Does the flow of the blood of innocent pre-born children need to stopped? Yes. Unquestionably. It is a disaster of far greater proportions and of far greater consequence to human life and liberty.
While there are fewer and fewer things the Louisiana legislature can do to cap the underwater oil flow as the federal government continues to interrupt and delay the response, not to mention President Obama’s denying help from other nations to clean up the spill, should they cease other activities? Or just the ones that fly in the face of the feminist, environmentalist, dialectical materialist agenda?
Typically, I would not respond to an unknown feminist blog, (anymore than they would respond to an unknown pro-life blog), but I think this may be an accusation we see leveled at Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal at a much higher level in the coming weeks. We should stand prepared to answer this kind of critique as it is baseless and false.
By In folklore, shapeshifting is when an individual has the ability to alter their physical appearance. Politically speaking, Charlie Crist is a shapeshifter.
If pro-lifers have learned anything from Florida governor Charlie Crist, it is that our hope cannot be in politicians. Crist is currently running for Florida senate as an independent, on his campaign website it previously said, “Governor Crist believes strongly in the sanctity of life. While Attorney General, Charlie Crist worked with Governor Bush to successfully defend Florida’s Parental Notification law.” These pro-life actions were apparently not because of Crist’s pro-life convictions, but it seems, rather, out of a desire to get pro-life votes.
This week that message was removed from his campaign website as he is seeking to garner votes from democrats and independents. According to Newsmax.com: “When he was a Republican trying to win the Republican primary, Crist repeatedly stated he was pro-life and even said he would fight for pro-life legislation if he’s elected to the Senate.”
Americanthinker.com offers this analysis:
Former Republican, ex-pro-life advocate Charlie Crist must want that senate seat so badly he is willing to abandon both conviction and conscience. Governor Crist stands ready to fight for the right to keep the image of a baby, peacefully curled in the fetal position inside the womb, from it’s mother eyes, heart and conscience. A picture so truthful it possesses the power to change minds and deter ignorant choices…Uninformed voters hold immense promise in elections for politicians that support life when convenient, but who willingly place innocent infants on the altar of abortion, exchanging live offerings for votes bought with blood.
In some other folklore, once a shapeshifter has changed form, it becomes progressively more difficult to return to their original state. This is now officially Charlie Crist’s problem. Everyone knows he’s just another shapeshifting politician.