Sumo Merriment
Life in Bako
About sumo211


Member Since:
May 01, 2007
Last Signed In:
March 15, 2008
Profile Views:
463
Blog Views:
1005
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
bin Laden To Be Honored...
White House Greased Pig Contest
We've Been Betrayed...
Stop The Presses!...
Jerry...Got Resurrected...
Jerry...Fell Well...And Didn't Get Up Again...
Presidential Candidate Quiz...
Link Alert!
Mother's Day...Observed Through The Centuries...
This will break your heart...
Archives
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


sumo211 - > Sumo Merriment -> This will break your heart...
This will break your heart...

KelleyThis brilliant editorial retort was sent in to the Columbus Dispatch by Kelley Wenzlaff.  Kelley as you all may know - is running for the Ohio State Legislature.  Her campaign is called “Mom for the House” – and I am her Media Director.  I cannot tell you how proud I am of Kelley for writing this.  How many candidates do you know have the intestinal fortitude to state their true opinion with such clarity and compassion?  Kelley is a very rare bird indeed.  I think we need many more just like her.


David Brooks editorial of Tuesday April 24, makes a compelling, one sided case against late term abortion, while missing the point entirely.  He outlines the babies’ stages of growth in the womb, as he leads the reader into an impassioned pro life position.  Then he makes the outright lie that “when you look at the statements of the abortion rights forces, you find they can’t even look this matter in the face.”


I ask anyone who believes that to read the complete testimony offered to State Legislature by the Julia, the mother of baby Thomas, available on the web at: Uncommon Misconception. 


She says “I am the face of Late Term Abortion,” and her story is heart wrenching.  She and her husband were happily expecting their first child, but 22 weeks into the pregnancy their dreams were shattered.  Baby Thomas had a condition known as arthogryposis.  Their baby had a chromosomal disorder.  He had clubbed hands and feet.  His legs were fixed in a bent position and his arms were permanently flexed straight.  He had a cleft palate and swelling of the brain.  This poor dear child was in severe pain from the constant and excruciating muscle contractions which racked his little body, day by day, hour by hour, and minute by minute.  Believe me Mr. Brooks, his mother felt this child’s pain with every tremor of her womb.  She suffered for her baby in a way you will never comprehend. 

The abortion rights “forces” you speak of are not a brutal army of baby haters.  We are mothers, fathers, and doctors, filled with love and compassion for all human life. Where we differ from you Mr. Brooks, is through our personal experience and depth of understanding on this issue.  We understand the complexities involved because we HAVE “looked this matter in the face.” We are offended by your cheap shots, moral indignation, and attempts to focus societal shame on grieving mothers like Julia.


We differ because we trust our doctors more than your politicians.  We differ because we also trust women.  We trust them to be moral, and ethical, and intelligent, as they face these issues head on, and we certainly don’t need uninformed people like you telling well trained doctors what to do. 


As for Thomas, his mother and father made the choice end the suffering of their beloved child.  They did this with heavy hearts, after many days of deep contemplation and prayer.  They did this on the advice of their doctors, and they did it with the welfare of Baby Thomas as their primary concern.  They wanted more time to decide, but were forced to move fast because of late term abortion laws. They discovered Thomas’s condition at 22 weeks, and were told the late term abortion law of 24 weeks was their deadline.  They wanted more time to consult with medical professionals and clergy, but people like you prevented that.


Julia writes: “In a procedure very similar to an amniocentesis, Thomas’s heart was stopped with a simple injection.  In that moment, as I held my husband’s hand, I met God and handed him my precious boy to care for, for all eternity.  Over the next 17 hours I labored to deliver Thomas’s body. It was a painful experience, but the only option given to a woman at 24 weeks gestation. Thomas Stephen was born into this world just after 6:00 a.m. on November 27, 2002 – the day before Thanksgiving.  The loving nurse who’d helped us through labor cleaned his fragile body and brought him to us. We held our boy for the next hour as we said goodbye. Our own eyes confirmed what our hearts had already come to know: that Thomas was not meant for this world. Thomas’s life and death have changed our lives in ways we will never fully comprehend… Through him, I’ve grown closer to God, who understands what it is to sacrifice your only begotten son in the name of mercy.”


That Mr. Brooks, is the face of late term abortion, and no matter how many essays you write about cute little heartbeats and hands, YOU SIR, have no business in that hospital room, unless God forbid, the child you speak of is your own.


In conclusion, I ask the editorial staff of The Dispatch to consider the personal pain inflicted on real people like Julia and her husband when a one sided article like this is printed by a pundit with credentials from The New York Times.  I hope in the future The Dispatch will work hard to ensure that both sides of every issue are presented fairly, in the unbiased manner expected of professional journalism.

cross-posted fromThe Fat Lady Sings...

Posted in these Groups:
Topics: women's rights
posted by sumo211 on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 01:04 AM
Report a Violation
Viewed 99 times
20 comments from 10 users

1

posted by anonymous on May 8, 2007 at 07:35 AM
MURDER
posted by randomfactor on May 8, 2007 at 09:44 AM
Thank you for posting this, Sumo, and Anonymous, thank you for showing the true face of the antiabortion crowd:   No thought, no answers, no true concern for life.
posted by dusty1215 on May 8, 2007 at 09:49 AM
Yes, anon, we are murdering and torturing people in the name of Democracy. Do you approve of that type of murder? Or is it just the prebirth ones your concerned about? Amazing how that works  for some people.

Random. TFLS is a very passionate blogger.
posted by anonymous on May 8, 2007 at 10:22 AM
To selectively KILL your unborn child is murder. They didn't want the burden of an child they deemed abnormal. SICK parents. I hope they don't have any more children.
posted by anonymous on May 8, 2007 at 10:25 AM
This can be caused by the mothers use of drugs and alcohol.
posted by randomfactor on May 8, 2007 at 10:32 AM

So can conservatism, Anny. 

.

So what penalty would you give the mother?  Death?  Life imprisonment?  Speak up, you seem to have all the facts at hand--what penalty would you, personally, recommend for the mother?  If you don't think murder should be punished, then you have a perverted idea of what "murder" is.  But that's obvious.

posted by dusty1215 on May 8, 2007 at 10:33 AM
We are selectively killing people all over the Middle East everyday.

The cause of arthrogryposis is varied, and not entirely understood. Certainly, in many cases, abnormal nerve, muscle and connective tissue development is involved. Lack of movement of intrauterine movement is also responsible, as in oligohydramnios. Genetic factors do play a part in many cases, as do environmental factors like drugs. Incidence of arthrogryposis is one in 3,000 live births. It doesn't have to be illicit drugs either anon..and no where does it mention alcohol. The principle cause of AMC is believed to be decreased fetal movements (akinesia) caused by maternal or fetal abnormalities. It is associated with neurogenic and myopathic disorders.
posted by mattloch on May 8, 2007 at 10:36 AM
Didn't you hear Dusty? The "right to life" ends at birth.

As for anon(s), you are (all) sick beyond belief. Little to you realize that you offer the most powerful argument for abortion, preferably in the 89th trimester. You are scum. Nameless, chicken-hearted scum of the lowest order. Hell, you give scum a bad name. At least normal scum serves some useful purpose in the web of life. I can't figure out what your purpose is other than what I mentioned above.
posted by dusty1215 on May 8, 2007 at 10:39 AM
Evidently Mattloch..that always seems to be the point doesn't it? Save the fetus, but once its born..its on it's own.
posted by randomfactor on May 8, 2007 at 10:43 AM
We're waiting for your proposed penalty, "Anonymous."
posted by anonymous on May 8, 2007 at 10:57 AM
The mother should be sterilized.
posted by anonymous on May 8, 2007 at 10:57 AM
The only appropriate penalty is always Death, we all know that.
posted by Griffon64 on May 8, 2007 at 10:58 AM
Stepping off the trolling and baiting that the anonymous loves so much -

Oh hey, wait. I have something more to say about that. How much is contributed positively to this online community by allowing anonymous posting? Such a lot of that is just inflammatory comments made by persons not interested in belonging to the community or putting effort into it. How about looking at disabling anonymous posting; the worth of these blogs will probably go up. I can see the irritation of anonymous posting eventually driving away people that could help build this community, leaving behind a sad little shell of a blog framework.

Now, back to the topic. Forget the whole "Murder!" "Not murder!" thing. The point that is being made, I feel, is that, unless you know what it is like to be there, you should shut your mouth about the topic, or at least choose your words in a way that doesn't betray your folly in taking a spittle-producing stance on a topic you don't know about. And with that I agree. Talking about how a topic makes you, personally, feel, is OK. Talking as if you know the one true answer on how to handle it is not.

And that's how I feel about it ;-)
posted by anonymous on May 8, 2007 at 11:06 AM
I love the 2nd amendment, but hate the first! We the intellectually Superior agree with you out withe masses.
posted by anonymous on May 8, 2007 at 11:09 AM
I think all woman whose lives we do not like should be sterilized, than we can have a master race, don't laugh,It worked in our motherland, Germany.
posted by randomfactor on May 8, 2007 at 11:13 AM

Still waiting for the original "Anonymous" response to the appopriate penalty...

.

Spam code AWISE.  Left off the last three letters...

posted by TomW on May 8, 2007 at 11:18 AM
That does break my heart.  I absolutely hate those politicians who would try to pass a law that ignores reality.
posted by randomfactor on May 8, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Tom, I'm afraid you're going to have to narrow that field down a bit. 
posted by sumo211 on May 8, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Gang...this is precisely why I posted this.  This is something that gets people going.  It is also something that people should be forced (like anon) to realize that there are crippling birth defects out there.  One can take care of a disabled child...even one that is critically ill...but that isn't speaking to the horror of what that poor child will have to go through all their lives with pain...that's just one example.  Anyone who is normal and loves their offspring would not want that child to suffer...at all...ever!  It's people like Anon that should have to go through something like this in order to be able to walk in their shoes...and see what it is really like for that poor baby struggling to survive...and just see really for themselves what their own child feels as they go through a life like this. 

Sure it's hard on the parents...it would be for me...for anyone...but everyone has the right to make their own decisions.  Anon...would you like us to start making decisions for you?  I think from what I've read through the thread here...that people think you'd have been better off as a recipient of this procedure because of your lack of compassion toward others.  You need to start loving your fellow man and yourself more.  I don't know...but what if these people were blonde and blue eyed Anon?  That makes them automatically acceptable to as far as the ultimate race is concerned?  Even old Adolf didn't want any aberrant blondes with blue eyes born and be allowed to live.  Do you just blab at people...or do you read and study history?

Griffin64 made a great point!
posted by sagefever on May 9, 2007 at 11:06 AM
The annon's can not have possibly read or "faced" the post~ otherwise I would be forced to wonder why their mothers chose to give birth to such abominations?To know~and I do know ,having had a child who is considered disabled~the life this child would have faced would have been awful.A beautiful rebuttal,hope she is elected and has a sister to run here..
1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, please enter the text from the image on the left.
   

Our readers recommend: