Thursday, November 29, 2012

Fermanerst Sterf...

Shoot me an email at and we'll let you know when we order another batch. Thanks! 

Sunday, November 18, 2012

We Get That Y'all Think WE'RE The Clueless Ones, But Um, As If...

If I didn't know any better I'd say everything feminism is now is *gasp* kinda misogynistic. Actually I do know better, and it's all a total crock. 

Show me this modern guy who wants a full quiver of kids to carry on his family name and help him plow his fields, and I'll show you a chick who still vacuums in high heels and pearls. That dude just doesn't exist anymore. We love things more than people these days, and bottom line, kids cost too much. 

Kid's=less money for things+they ruin everything nice, thus Pregnant+Barefoot (2012)=no bueno. 

See, the modern misogynist wants commitment free sex and free abortion on demand. THAT is how he will be able to exploit a woman's mind, body, and soul and keep her in true bondage for the rest of her life. Because when you trick a woman into "fighting for her right" to go against her instinct and kill her unborn child, then tell her it was just a clump of cells, so if she feels devastated by this then she's crazy and un-liberated and setting women back, you have truly oppressed her. 

If anything will make us stronger it will be acknowledging SCIENCE (not that big, scary word again) and accepting the fact that our bodies release Oxytocin every time we slap happies. It's not fair, but science, ya know?And Oxytocin's the same chemical released during childbirth and every time we nurse our babies, so that we will bond to them and not leave them in dumpsters and stuff. I get that it's so unfeminist to admit commitment free sex and abortion aren't empowering to us, but I'll go with biology on this one, since it's been around a whole heck of a lot longer. 
So in conclusion, mainstream feminists should be pissed at science, and not us. 


Post by Destiny

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Ain't no shame in my game...

This line of thinking is a sellout to porn addicted men and corporate marketing machines. It's proven to leave women in poverty, abusive relationships, addiction and poor mental health. Is that the freedom that we're after or do we want to help young women be healthy and strong? We're missing the human heart and buying into exactly what the male dominated corporate culture wants us to...

The follow up....

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Graphic Images - Part Deux, by Kristen Walker

A while back I wrote a piece for Live Action explaining why I don't advocate the use of graphic images of aborted fetuses in most situations. This was a change from my previous position. I was converted in no small part by viewing graphic images, so I was all for them. But over time, reflecting on my conversion and talking to many people of varying opinions on abortion, I came to believe they do more harm than good.

Surprisingly (to me anyway), this article ignited a firestorm of debate among pro-lifers which apparently is still going on. Recently, Stephanie Gray wrote an article for Live Action explaining why I was super-wrong about this issue, and Paul Pauker responded ably with a rebuttal. The official position of Live Action is that graphic images are a good idea because they work. I disagree.

I have written more than once about my deep dislike of in-fighting. I think it is a silly waste of time for pro-lifers to bicker about tactics. We are on the same side. However, I accept that some feel this is a debate worth having. It seems, from my personal observance, to be almost exclusively the pro-graphic images set who insist on hashing this out ad nauseam. Most of us over here in the "don't hold up photos of mangled babies" camp kind of shrug it off and agree to disagree. I don't think holding up a graphic image makes you less pro-life, or a moron, or a bad person. I just disagree about its effectiveness.

Too often since I wrote the blog explaining why I believe graphic images are a very important tool and should be used, but sparingly and only in certain cases, I have been accused of being not pro-life enough. I have even been told: "It makes me wonder whose side you're on." I have, for the first time I can recall, been accused of moral cowardice, of capitulating to the enemy. It makes me, well, kind of angry, considering I have lost good friends and alienated family members and weirded out professional contacts and been the recipient of disgusting hate mail for my stance on the issue of abortion. Now I get to be on the receiving end of ugly comments from pro-lifers, too.

So let me be very clear, for those of you who have not been reading these blogs since February of 2010: I do not take this position to placate pro-choicers. I do not take this position because I feel scared of what people will do when they see me holding an image of an aborted fetus.

I take the position I take because I believe that when graphic images are held up willy-nilly at every protest and plastered on the sides of trucks, it does more harm than good.

I have come to this decision based on many factors, such as my own feelings and thoughts when I was pro-choice, and the ideas expressed to me by current pro-choicers and converts to the pro-life position. Now, please understand: I am not concerned that these images offend or anger pro-choicers. Our very existence does that. What does concern me is that I sincerely believe that those images, in most cases, (1) fail to accomplish what they are meant to accomplish and (2) have a further deleterious effect.

To wit: (1) they do not make pro-choicers or abortion-minded women suddenly see the human tragedy of abortion, and (2) they make us look like a bunch of crazy people.

I am well aware that this will be an unpopular opinion. I know the feeling pro-lifers get when they hold one of these signs, that righteous feeling of moral certitude. My statement that this makes us look a little nutso is going to fill the comments section with people claiming I am a covert Planned Parenthood operative, a weakling, an idiot, etc. And that's fine.

But remember: I was pro-choice. I looked at those signs. I did not see an aborted fetus. I saw crazy people holding gross signs.

I have many, many pro-choice friends and relatives. There has not been one - not one - that has ever expressed to me that an unexpected, in-your-face graphic image had any effect other than the one I just described.

I don't know how many times I've said this, but I don't think the pro-graphic image people understand: pro-choicers do not see what you see. Priests for Life, a wonderful organization, advocates showing graphic images whenever possible because "America will not reject abortion until America sees abortion." I get that, but what I don't think many of you get is when they see that image, they don't see abortion. They see something icky, forced on them by icky people.

When you hold up a huge dead baby sign in front of a clinic, you don't make pregnant women suddenly realize what they're about to do to their babies and run to you for information and hugs. You make them upset and freaked out, and worse: you make the abortion clinic seem like a safe haven from the scary people outside.

Now, there are many instances where a graphic image of an aborted fetus can be useful. For example, when I was converted, I had been given the pro-choice argument logically and patiently, over the course of a long conversation, at which point I asked to see the photographic evidence to which my friend had alluded. At that point, for the first time ever, I saw those pictures for what they were. I lived in a large city with many abortion clinics; I had seen these images before. But until I was ready to see them, I did not see them.

I think sometimes we forget that half of what we see is objective reality, and the other half is our perception. If we already think pro-lifers are wrong and crazy, all we will see when they hold up a graphic image is a vague idea of something grody. We won't think of it as a baby at all; we have already decided that it's not. We'll think it is untrue and mean, and that's about it.

I am sure there are people who have been converted by graphic images held up in front of clinics. I have no doubt that there are those who will say, "Seeing that photo on a truck/sign/billboard changed my mind." I have, however, never met one of those people. What I have met are dozens upon dozens of people for whom those images had the exact opposite effect, creating a public opinion of the pro-life movement as disrespectful, combative, and cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

That public opinion, as Paul Pauker pointed out, is translated into votes and hence into elected officials, legislators, judges. We need those people to be elected by a populace who does not see the pro-life movement as a bunch of weird lunatics.

Again: I don't mind angering or offending pro-choicers. It happens. Whatever. What I do mind is adopting a tactic that makes pro-choicers think we are crazy jerks, and that also, as far as I can tell from my personal experience, doesn't really work.

I am one of a fantastic group of ladies called New Wave Feminists. When we go do something pro-lifey, we tell people they can feel free to hold up graphic signs, but not if they want to be associated with us. We want to represent the pro-life movement as rational and approachable. We want to be the people the other side might walk up to and say, "Seriously, you look just like me, how could you be so wrong?" That opens up a dialogue that is probably not going to happen if you're holding a giant photo of a dead fetus.

You may have the opposite opinion. You may have different ideas and beliefs about what works, what doesn't, what's acceptable, what's not. And that's cool! The thing I really want the reader to take away from this is that we should not treat each other in this movement like enemies. Abortion is the enemy. We are warriors in the same battle, using different weapons, all fighting for the same victory.


Post by Kristen Walker

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Abortion in Cases of Rape

Abortion in Cases of Rape from Destiny Herndon-DeLaRosa on Vimeo.

A lot of things in this video might offend you, but the thing that should absolutely offend you the most is that fact that I say "feminist tingles." I dunno, dude. It was early. I have no excuse. That was not OK.

Click here for the iPhone friendly YouTube Version.

Monday, July 23, 2012


I was away at a literary conference all weekend, so when the story broke about Aurora, Colorado shooting Friday I could only get tidbits here and there between my sessions. My heart was breaking for the people there, the pointless destruction, and the taking of lives.

However, today someone sent me an interesting story that I had not previously seen (I apologize if it's been all over the news for the last 72 hours and I just missed it). The story inside the story in this couples interview is what got me. They have two children together and basically the boyfriend/baby daddy/father abandons his girlfriend and kids in order to save himself.

I am not necessarily saying it's what happened in this case, but.... has anyone else noticed an influx in women who have been so beat down and deceived by the "all women just want to trap you and marry you" cliché that now we allow men to actually trap us?

For instance this woman has had not one, but two of this man's children. He did not marry her. I can only imagine that it had something to do with him "not being ready" or some other equally as lame excuse but as I stated above that's pure speculation. However, no matter how she files on her taxes, she will never truly be "single" ever again. As soon as a woman has a child, she might as well be married because she is now part of a unit, an inseparable package deal for any future suitors. That's not true for men though. They can have 15 kids by 15 different women and still someone, somewhere will offer to make it 16.

Society as a whole has come to expect so much less from men. Is it because of the feminist movement? I don't know, but I often wonder. Every time they turn around we're flexing our muscles declaring how we can do it all alone, so there is no longer that sense of guilt that a 1950's deadbeat dad might have felt. Society no longer shames him in the way it once did. Because after all, we're just a bunch of marriage-starved baby-makers looking to cure our fetus fever.

But back to the original point of this post. The man below was not willing to commit to the woman who lovingly sacrificed her freedom for him, so why are we surprised when he will not sacrifice his life for her or his children when he's suddenly the one trapped?

No, the only thing that surprised me about all of this is that after fleeing the theater to save himself, and allowing a 19-year-old stranger to protect his girlfriend and kids, he actually had the balls to go in and finally propose to her. Oh, and then that she said "yes." C'mon girl.... fo' real?


Post by Destiny

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Turning the Tables on Pornography

Disclaimer, disclaimer, blah, blah, disclaimer...
Girls Will Be Girls....(NSFW...or kids) from Destiny Herndon-DeLaRosa on Vimeo.

(Side Note: Let me just clarify, the only reason this "gift" was not immediately thrown out was b/c I didn't quite know how to properly dispose of such a thing. I figured with my luck if I just tossed it in the trash a band of raccoons would likely uncovered it and it'd be rolling down my alley the next morning for all the neighbors to see. So, long and very uninteresting story short, I threw it up on the top of a shelf in a closet and forgot about it for seven years....until I realized how much said "prop" could really help drive my point home here. Geez, did I throw in enough double entendres for ya? yikes.)

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

A Graphic Image Converted Me to Pro-Life; Now Here’s Why I’m against Graphic Images

Whether or not to show graphic images of aborted babies is an eternal debate in the pro-life community, and one that will never be settled. It’s too subjective; there are too many gray areas, and each camp has too many die-hard adherents.

My opinion is based on my own experience. A graphic image of an aborted fetus played a major role in making me pro-life. I still think these images have their place, but over time I have come to believe that that place should be seriously limited, and I’ll tell you why.

I wasn’t planning on having an abortion debate the night I became pro-life. I thought I was going over to my friend’s house to play Lord of the Rings Trivial Pursuit and drink whisky after the kids were in bed. I was a self-described liberal feminist Democrat agnostic, and I was utterly dismayed by the “CHOOSE LIFE” bumper sticker on the back of my friend’s mini-van. I hadn’t seen her in a couple of years, and I knew she had married a Catholic and converted, but I sat in her living room and demanded to know when she stopped being a feminist and abandoned women’s rights.

My friend explained that she was still a feminist, and that abortion was the ultimate in misogyny. Say huh?

A long conversation ensued, during which I spouted the few pro-choice talking points I knew – “It’s a clump of cells”; “My body, my choice”; etc. – and had them smacked down, calmly and kindly, with science and sound reasoning. Because I was not a Christian – was in fact pretty hostile towards Christianity – my friend made an ethical argument, but not a religious one.

Finally, I was teetering on the brink of crossing over to the “dark side.” I had just been convinced, against my will, that abortion was a violation of human rights, exploitative to women, and – finally, literally – murder. My world was rocked, turned on its head. But I was not ready to say it out loud yet. Something was still missing from the argument.

“I want to see it,” I said. My friend told me she had seen photos and even video that had cemented her own beliefs. I was still holding on to the idea that this was “tissue” we were talking about, not a tiny person.

When I asked her for photos, she produced them. And at the moment I saw that first photo, I knew with a horrible finality that it was wrong. It was not okay and could not be okay, for any reason. It was the mangled body of a baby that had been killed.

I looked at more pictures of even tinier people, their faces almost but not quite featureless, all gossamer skin and pale blue veins and alien eyes. They were not pre-humans; they were humans, in their early stages. I knew this looking at them. “I used to be that,” I thought. I felt the same feeling: that it would be killing to end this life, that it could not ethically, logically, or scientifically be anything else.

When I left my friend’s house, I was pro-life. I hated it. I felt this new identity – this awful pro-lifeyness – twisting in me like a snake. I wanted it out. I went home and got online and read essays by angry feminists, pamphlets and articles from NARAL and NOW. I was begging the internet to make me pro-choice again. I looked up medical textbooks in my online college library. I read opinions from doctors and biologists and Supreme Court justices. I spent a week doing almost nothing but trying to be pro-choice again.

I failed. Miserably. The pro-choice arguments were weak and easily dismissed. And they could show me nothing to refute those photographs. In fact, I managed to find even more graphic photos, authenticated by physicians. I even read the words of “honest” abortionists, finally admitting that it was killing, but claiming that it was justified.

But I had seen it, and knew in my heart that it was not justifiable.

Once I accepted what I had learned, I became not just pro-life, but a pro-life activist. That conversation, and those photos, literally changed my life. Once I realized that abortion was murder, I was faced with the horrible and inescapable fact that abortion is legal. I have always loved justice and hated injustice. To me, nothing is more unjust than the ugly tyranny of abortion. The very fact that the unborn child is utterly dependent on his mother is the same thing that supposedly gives her the right to kill him. It is the ultimate in might-makes-right thinking, and it is wrong.

So if a graphic image was so important in my conversion, why am I writing an article titled “I’m against Graphic Images”?

First, the title is punchy but a little misleading. I’m not against them in every situation. In the example of my own conversion, for instance, they were used correctly, and they were invaluable.

But if my friend, instead of having the conversation with me, had thrust those photos in my face before she explained her argument, I would have been disgusted and stopped listening. If she had had a graphic image on a bumper sticker on her vehicle, I would never have brought the subject up, and would not have listened if she had. Would I have been stupid and wrong? Maybe. But it wouldn’t have mattered, would it? I would have remained pro-abortion.

I had seen graphic images of aborted fetuses before. Almost everyone has at some point. But – how do I explain this? – I did not see them.

In one case, I was attempting to find a website, typed in the URL incorrectly, and ended up with a giant photo of a mangled unborn baby in my face. I remember this well, because it helped form my resentment of the pro-life cause, and helped make me stalwart in my support for abortion “rights.”

It sounds crazy, but pretty much every former pro-choicer I know has told me the same thing. The truth is, unless someone is ready to see the image, she will not really see it. People don’t see a murdered baby. They see their own beliefs being assaulted; they see an obscene thing being shoved in their face; they see their young children being frightened and confused. They don’t see what we want them to see. Half of what we perceive is external reality; the other half happens in our minds. If you have the wrong mindset, you are not going to see the baby on that poster for what it is.

Unfortunately – and this is a gross estimate based on my years talking with many people about this, plus my own experience – for every one person who sees that image and is moved towards an understanding of abortion, there are 99 people who are simply disgusted by the person holding the sign. And that is not good for our cause.

Many highly respected and wonderful organizations – most notably Priests for Life – are convinced of the efficacy of graphic images, and use them. I don’t begrudge them this; they have the right to do it, and certainly the best of intentions.

Unfortunately, there are some who espouse graphic images not because they believe they are effective, but because they are angry that abortion is legal, and they want it shoved in people’s faces. I understand their anger, and I don’t deny that I have used images of aborted fetuses in my articles and at protests. I have had to examine my own motives. Did I hope someone would be converted by my sign? Yes, I did, but deep down I didn’t really think the images would work. I just wanted to say, “Look what you are doing. You should be ashamed.” It can be satisfying, but I believe that it accomplishes almost nothing good.

I advise against graphic images in most cases – usually when displayed publicly and openly, as a “frontline” tactic, and especially outside clinics. Can we claim to speak for women and children and yet dismiss the concerns of women who resent their children being exposed to these images? Many would do just that, claiming that it’s for their own good. As my friend Destiny, mother of four, has told me, her older children understand basically what abortion is and why it’s wrong without needing to see photos of it. “Do I need to show them pictures of a rape for them to get that it’s bad?” Whether you agree with Destiny or not, should it be up to you whether or not her children see pictures of abortion?

Every pro-life activist has to decide for him- or herself whether to use graphic images, but please: if you do decide to use them, you must get over the idea that those who don’t are not “hardcore” enough, that they are too soft and weak and not as really super-duper pro-life as you are. Some of us believe that the old adage “you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar” is quite wise. I have no problem with bluntness – as you well know if you read my blogs – and I am not suggesting that we lie; I am suggesting only that graphic images have their place, and the sidewalk is not it.

As much as I am convinced that these pictures are counterproductive when used incorrectly, when used correctly, there is nothing more convincing. We must continue to keep these images in our arsenal, to be produced when the time is right. We should never hesitate to show photos of intact fetuses, or to keep graphic abortion images available online for those who seek them out. But when we present the face of the pro-life movement to the public, we should make it one of reason and compassion.

Originally posted on


Post by Kristen Walker

Wednesday, March 21, 2012


Have you ever wondered how Planned Parenthood receives so much money in donations each year?

I mean, they already get a whopping $305.3 million from our federal government annually (a.k.a. tax payers), so they're hardly a shabby little charity. But on top of that, the community must really love and support them to be donating an additional $212.2 million a year, right?

I guess I always just assumed those donations came from the fanatical, old fauxminists at their ritzy luncheon fundraisers, but as it turns out, that's not the case at all.

A dear friend of mine was telling me how when she found out she was pregnant with her son she had to go and get an official 'Proof of Pregnancy' document before she was able to apply for Medicaid... and SURPRISE, SURPRISE, PP wasn't giving out any freebies. They told her over the phone when she scheduled her appointment to make sure she brought $40 in cash with her to the clinic.

After she was seen and received her proof of pregnancy form she went up to the counter to "check out."  The woman at the front desk proceeded to run down a very long list of services, tallying them up as she went, then telling her how today's appointment should cost her a couple hundred dollars. The blood left her face and of course she began to panic, "BUT WAIT!" the woman said, "you qualify for quite a few grants, lucky girl!" All of them of course come from the $305.3 PP gets from you and me, however, I doubt she informer her of that. After all was said and done, her total was a manageable twelve dollars. Then just as my friend began to regain her bearings and reach into her pocket for the money, the woman asks if she would like to make a donation to Planned Parenthood today...

Now she knows that the woman knows she has $40 in cash on her, and she also knows that thanks to PP's "generosity" she just saved a boatload on the services she received, so how could she not make a donation?

The nerve.

By their own definition they are a NOT-FOR-PROFIT medical facility there to reach out to poor, and un(der)insured women!

Would a food pantry ever ring up all of your items, tell you how much you should be paying, then ask you for a donation on your way out the door? I don't think so. And why is that? Because it's manipulative, and they are true non-profits... not big sleazy businesses like Planned Parenthood.

Women, especially those of us on a budget and with less than desirable health coverage (or none at all), deserve better than this. However, right now America's largest abortion providers runs a monopoly on well woman care. We must ask ourselves, why are we being sent to abortion clinics for our healthcare? Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but the answer seems pretty obvious to me.

The quickest way to eradicate poverty in the federal government's eyes is to kill poor people before they're even born.


Post by Destiny

Thursday, February 16, 2012

The Irony of "Life Threatening" Ailments...

As a mother of four I am constantly worried about my children. I have two boys and two girls, and with each of them comes a unique set of worries.

My oldest son for instance has terrible asthma. Cold weather always exacerbates this issue and at times his inhaler is a real life saver. It's so scary to watch his face as he gasps for air, hoping relief will come soon. He was born with this ailment and often the medication used to treat it is very pricey, costing upwards of $80 a pop. Because we're a family on a budget sometimes sacrifices must be made to get him the treatments he requires. But of course we make those sacrifices.

And well, my daughters I'm embarrassed to say, both have a condition called "Vagina." I myself suffer from Vagina, and used to worry that I had passed it on to them, although most medical professionals will refute that myth. But from what I hear (on it is life threatening as well. See, Vagina is a serious disease that plagues 99.9% of all women... I threw in that decimal just to be safe. And because we were all born with this preexisting condition we are increasingly susceptible to a secondary disease called Heterosexual Coitus- commonly know as Sex. Sex frequently happens to Vagina sufferers, although it is not always fatal. However, a majority of the time it is elective. Heterosexual Coitus is usually something that those living with Vagina choose to contract unlike other ailments such as (the aforementioned) asthma, or cancer, or diabetes. Yet, due to increased pressure from extremist groups throughout (read as: a group of chicks in a basement... and Bill Maher) the federal government is planning on forcing insurance companies to cover the cost of birth control pills for women with Vagina.

Now as someone who herself lives with this condition, you might be surprised to hear that I do not support this mandate. Because the bottom line is that my son can't choose 'not to have asthma.' No, chronic inflammatory disease TRULY threatens his life, and honestly, I find it offensive that his medication is viewed as "optional" whereas chemical contraceptives are being considered a necessity by our federal government. They argue that "poor women cannot always afford birth control pills." Well, what about poor children with respiratory problems? Why won't the federal government force insurance companies to pay for their medication which is much, much pricier? What makes population control, er, I mean, contraception a priority? Never mind. I think I just answered my own question.


Post by Destiny

Thursday, February 2, 2012

You just totally want to hear more about this whole SGK/PP thing, I can tell...

So..... I was uninsured for 4 years. Not because my husband and I didn't work, but because he worked hard, but for a small company with no benefits, and because I worked (hard) as a stay at home mom.

During that time I discovered an abnormality in my lady parts. I was convinced I had cervical cancer, but seeing as I had no insurance it would have been a luxury to verify my findings.

In this day and age, that was just insane to me. But going to an ER would've meant thousands of dollars of debt for my family and going to a OB would've amounted to about the same. I felt as though I had no other choice but to go to Planned Parenthood.

I imagine this is how many women feel.

However, when I considered the prospect of that, this is what I figured... the doctors at Planned Parenthood, the surgical ones at least which would've been the ones checking me out, were more than likely the same ones who provided abortions. So in turn, they were abortionists. And because I am strongly against abortion, in my opinion they were murderers. They stopped human life.

Now I don't know what others think of them... I'm sure many consider them heroes and wonderful people, but since I considered them murderers and nothing was going to change that, I was going to have to let someone who ended human lives put their hands on my body. Honestly, I could not see myself being able to remain composed enough for an exam, let alone any other type of procedure following that.

I know many people will think this is ridiculous, but it is what it is. For me, Planned Parenthood simply wasn't an option.... even though it was my only option.

And I hate that. I hate that PP was my only option. There's nothing pro-choice about having no choice at all when it comes to my health care. But that's precisely the way I felt.

As for the SGK issue, PP only offers manual breast exams NOT mammograms. Let's all go ahead and acknowledge that fact right up front. As far as I can tell, only ONE of their Texas offices (in Waco) even has the actual equipment required to provide thorough screenings.

So honestly, this has nothing to do with abortion or any of the other services they offer, it has to do with breast cancer screenings, and they fact that PP is not doing enough to adequately provide them.

Susan G. Komen stated as much just yesterday in a statement on their facebook page- "At Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the women we serve are our highest priority in everything we do. Last year, we invested $93 million in community health programs, which included 700,000 mammograms. Additionally, we began an initiative to further strengthen our grants program to be even more outcomes-driven and to allow for even greater investments in programs that directly serve women. We also implemented more stringent eligibility and performance criteria to support these strategies. While it is regrettable when changes in priorities and policies affect any of our grantees, such as a longstanding partner like Planned Parenthood, we must continue to evolve to best meet the needs of the women we serve and most fully advance our mission."

This is a good thing. I promise. Women will benefit from these changes. Perhaps we will start getting a higher caliber of care, AND actually have a choice as to who provides it.

If we'd all inform ourselves more I think that fact would become even clearer. Women deserve better....and this provides us with much better choices in the long run. We have to stop letting Planned Parenthood monopolize our health care. We deserve options. This is ultimately the most pro-choice thing for women.

{UPDATE: Scratch that. Looks like we'll still have no choice. #komenforthecave}


Post by Destiny

Sunday, January 22, 2012

Why I Have No Other Choice But To Be Pro-Life...

My mother was a sophomore at the University of Texas at Austin when she discovered she was pregnant with me. She was only 19-years-old and quickly found herself single and her world turned upside down. She moved back to Dallas, where through the help and support of family she was able to raise me, but life was not easy. As a single mom she struggled. We struggled. I grew up knowing how much my life had changed hers, and so never once did I take it for granted. It was 1983 and the option of abortion had long since lost its taboo. I knew that I could have easily been aborted and very few people would have blamed her. On the contrary actually.... many would've praised it as the "responsible" thing to do.

We struggled but there was always more than enough love to go around, and while I don't remember my mother ever pounding the pro-life message into my head, I was living proof of her commitment to it. Here and there she would teach me the value of Life and remind me that no matter how bad things got, God had something amazing in store for me... because after all, I was not "unplanned" to Him.

However, even after all I watched my mother grow through while raising me, at 16 I found myself in an almost identical situation. I was pregnant. I was single. And I was scared.

I was never confused though- at least not when it came to abortion. I KNEW that there was a life, just a valuable as my own, inside of me. I cannot begin to tell you what a comfort it was to not have to even consider that option. It truly removed so much of the "crisis" from my crisis pregnancy. Now I had time to actually evaluate all of my other options and figure out what was best for me and this precious child who in 9-months I was going to be giving birth to no matter what.

For the first 6 months I explored my true options extensively. Was I going to place this baby for adoption, or would the Lord allow me to parent Him? Through much repentance and prayer I decided to raise my son.

It was not easy. And suddenly I found myself in a very grown up world, with a lot of very grown up pressures. Now, because I had a child already, I sometimes made the dire mistake of seeing myself as society saw me- as used goods. And unfortunately, I allowed men to treat me as such. I wanted to be loved and to give my son a normal life and a family, but instead I began allowing the very sin that had caused my crisis pregnancy back into my life. I tell you this because I think many of us have a tendency to look at the woman who has three or four children all by different fathers and think, "What's wrong with you? What part of this aren't you getting?" When in actuality, they have merely gotten trapped in a vicious cycle of compromising who God made them to be and bending to the world's version of normal... all because they desperately want to feel loved and accepted. And in this day and age, we are told that allowing ourselves to be treated as a commodity is the quickest way to get that- even if we are not single mothers (yet). Women today have been sold a bill of goods and because of that evil, evil lie we are in perilous bondage. The exploitation of our bodies and self worth is what leads to the "crisis" of unplanned pregnancy and this oppression must stop if we want to see society change.

By the grace of God and the grace of God only, I did not experience any subsequent pregnancies through my promiscuity, but I know I very, very easily could have.

And Three years later, the Lord brought a wonderful man into my life, who ended up becoming my husband and an amazing father to my son. It was so overwhelming to know that even after all of the poor choices I had made, the Lord never quit pursuing my heart and never stopped trying to get me back on track. God is good. God is SO good.

Pictured: My mother and me on my wedding day.

However, my journey of refinement didn't stop there. A year into our marriage, my husband and I were elated to learn that we were pregnant with a little girl, but the excitement of that moment was short lived. Within seconds of discovering her gender, the sonographer also noticed a spot on her heart. While many people can have this spot, all children with Downs Syndrome do have this spot. My doctor had offered me a blood test a few months prior which would have possibly been able to diagnose Down Syndrome, but to his dismay I turned it down since I knew that no diagnose was going to change my commitment to the little life inside my womb. But because of this, he was constantly reminding me that there was a chance my daughter would have it. Through that pregnancy though, God allowed a really cool thing to husband and I began to realized what a blessing this child would be no matter what. She was fearfully and wonderfully made in God's image. And through declining further testing, my husband and I were able to grow together in our respect for life and our faith in the Lord.

In May of 2006 our daughter was born. She did not have Down syndrome, but I can honestly say that the second the doctor put her in my arms that diagnoses was the furthest thing from my mind. She was perfect no matter what, and her life was of great value no matter what.

I look back and realize how the world could have easily justified killing not only myself, but also my two children. We were the “could've, would've and should've's” of abortion. But through knowing the truth, His truth, even in the face of crisis we were all able to receive the greatest blessing of all- the gift of life. We must never underestimate the power of our actions or our words. My mother taught me how to respect life from a very young age and now she has a legacy that will honor her for generations to come.

Pictured: My blessings.


Post by Destiny

Monday, January 16, 2012

Pinpointing the problem...

Mainstream feminism constantly contradicts itself by asking women to play the role of the weak, ignorant victim whenever it suits their latest argument.