What’s It Worth to You?

December 10, 2009

As the debate of government-run health care drastically heats up, a very important amendment at least to me was defeated on Tuesday. Nelson’s amendment against publically funding abortions was voted against in the Senate. So as the bill stands now, we could be paying to kill babies with our tax dollars.

I went to hear Mike Huckabee speak last Friday at a fundraising event, and while I am not a Huckabee supporter, he made some comments about the worth of a human life that I have been mulling over ever since. To summarize his words:  the most important issue intrinsic to our nation is not  the war on terror or even  the economy; it is the value of a human life. If we do not fight for every human to have his or her chance to pursue life, liberty, and happiness, than we as a nation have nothing left. Everything falls apart.  He went on to say that if we continue to teach our children that life is not valuable, that it can easily be disposed of once it becomes an inconvenience, then why would they care for us as we age? What core beliefs about life would they hold dear?

I read a book once as a young girl that forever changed my life. It’s a book called Winterflight by Joseph Bayly, and I think it’s so pertinant to what we are dealing with today. It delves into the horror of a  future where human life is easily disposible, where old age and disabilities are cause for eradication. Life is no longer a beautiful and valuable gift.

Now, I don’t want to be a fear monger; but I firmly believe that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness start with our unborn babies. If we as a nation cannot protect them, if we can so easily dispose of a child because he or she would be an inconvenience  or a punishment as our President once said, then what is to stop us from a future where the old and the weak become too much of a burden as well? I agree with Gov. Huckabee on this issue. The value of a human life is truly priceless, and those of us that recognize that must never stop fighting for it.


Stupak, schmupak

November 11, 2009



Saturday could more than likely be a “day that will live in infamy” as the House voted on the most expansive take over of government this nation has ever seen, and to get the healthcare monstrosity passed, Nancy Pelosi had to concede abortion in the bill. Of course conservative dems and repubs everywhere have been duped. It’s nothing but smoking mirrors. No worries, raging liberals, your precious abortion amendment will be stripped, I’m sure.  For those of you that don’t know, the Stupak Amendment was added into the bill stating that abortions would not be publically funded by PelosiCare. But less than two days later, there is already major talk of taking it out. Consider this from White House senior staffer, Debbie Schulz on MSNBC:


“I am confident that when it comes back from the conference committee that that language won’t be there,” Wasserman Schultz said during an appearance on MSNBC. “And I think we’re all going to be working very hard, particularly the pro-choice members, to make sure that’s the case.”




And Ms. Little Debbie wasn’t the only democrat up in arms about the abortion amendment. Senator “Don’t Call Me Ma’am” Boxer  has weighed in, confident as well that the amendment will be stripped from the final bill. Even Obama says the language needs to be changed.


It’s interesting to note that there is no way this healthcare bill would have stood a chance in the House without the Stupak Amendment, and with 64 dems voting for it, there’s definitely a rift there. But what makes me so mad is that this ginormous pile of dung called healthcare reform is now making its way to the Senate with or without any Stupak Amendment. We must keep the pressure up to fight this bill, because the fact that our government would force me, a vehemently pro-life woman to pay for someone to kill their unborn child with my tax dollars is a travesty, and one I won’t stand for, nor should you.




Where’s All the Abortions?

September 17, 2009

012On ABC’s Dirty Sexy Money, one of the main characters, Karen, gets pregnant and as the story goes, the pregnancy is UNWANTED.  Needless to say she runs to the abortion clinic in her Jimmy Choos to deal with the unpleasant situation, but suddenly has a change of heart and cannot go through with it. (How truly brave of her.) So I got to thinking.  This particular situation comes up often on TV and in movies and yet 9 times out of 10 the pro-choice Hollywood writers let the characters keep the babies rather than abort them- think Sex in the City and Juno.  I wonder why that is? If abortion is such a safe, common, and easy procedure -hell it’s not even a baby- then why not depict abortions on TV and in movies? Why not let the characters like Karen actually go through with it and get on with her life?  Because after all, we don’t want her dealing with the stress of being “punished with a baby” do we?