The photo below is such an obvious publicity stunt that it amazes me that people are buying into it.  Supposedly Plastic Pelosi wants Congress to be all about children, and wow! did she ever create the touching photo op - Pelosi (a mother and grandmother) surrounded by children as she becomes the first female Speaker of the House.  Let the music swell at this historic and triumphant moment:

It would be encouraging and touching if the warm-and-fussy spin were real.  However, the “message” of the photo op is as fake as Pelosi’s apparently newly sculpted smile. 

The sad thing is that Pelosi would have condoned the killing of every single one of those children on the podium with her if their mothers had decided, after becoming pregnant, that they didn’t want the children - as long as it was at least a few minutes before their birth.  You know - a baby is merely “fetal tissue” until it’s born.  Forget the heartbeat that starts within weeks of conception, forget the hiccups that babies get before birth.  Forget the children that have been aborted but managed to live anyway - with sometimes disastrous results.  Forget the heartache and regret that so many women who choose abortion experience.  Forget that men have NO rights when it comes to their unborn children but major financial responsibility for them the second they’re born. 

Most of all, forget that abortion has NOTHING to do with a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body.  Nothing.  Absolutely nothing.  It has everything to do with a woman’s right to kill her baby.

Pelosi’s record is telling - voting 100% of the time to make sure women can get an abortion up to the last minute - making sure that partial-birth abortions are not banned - making sure that transporting minors across state lines to get abortions is not banned.  Any way an abortion can be assured, Pelosi has voted for it.

In an interview in October, Pelosi was asked about her pro-abortion stance.  Her reply was appallingly shallow:

To me it isn’t even a question. God has given us a free will. We’re all responsible for our actions. If you don’t want an abortion, you don’t believe in it, [then] don’t have one. But don’t tell somebody else what they can do in terms of honoring their responsibilities.

Oh. If you don’t agree with her, then just shut up.  But who is speaking for the baby’s rights?  Who is being the advocate for the baby who can’t speak for him/herself?  If the baby could speak up, he/she would most likely say something like, “Wait!  I want a chance at life!  If you don’t want me, then let some of the thousands of people who can’t have children and who want a baby so badly adopt me!  Is it such an awful thing to let me live?  Must you kill me so your life won’t be inconvenienced?” 

Again, the decision to abort has NOTHING to do with a woman’s control of her own body.  It has to do with killing another human being.

The facts don’t bear out the “It’s all about the children” crap Pelosi has been spreading.

Here’s a copy of Pelosi’s voting record on abortion:

• Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
• Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
• Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
• Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
• Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
• Voted NO on funding for health providers who don’t provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
• Voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
• Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
• Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
• Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
• Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
• Supported funding contraception and UN family planning. (Jul 1999)

I just found a site that has some great cartoons. It’s http://attackcartoons.com. Here are my five favorites:

By posting just a few cartoons we have now covered the war against terrorism, race relations, abortion, the Colorado nut case teacher and gay movies - and in the process most likely offended lots of people. Oh well.

Thursday Open Trackbacks: Send a trackback to this post and I will list it here. Make sure you link back to this post or blog in the post you send.

Disclaimer: trackbacks to this post do not necessarily represent the opinions or standards of THE MEDIAN SIB.

Linked to: Adam’s Blog, Third World Country, TMH Bacon Bits, Stuck on Stupid, Rhymes With Right, Blue Star Chronicles, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns,  The Uncooperative Blogger, Michelle Malkin, Code Red for our Troops, Atlas Shrugs, The Wide Awake Cafe, Blame Bush

I remember a little over five years ago when my daughter and son-in-law invited me to go with them to witness the sonogram during which they’d find out if their baby would be a boy or a girl. Of course during the sonogram, the technician would also take measurements and do other checks to make sure the baby was developing normally. I was excited. When I’d had my two pregnancies back in the 70’s, I had felt fortunate to hear the baby’s heartbeat via a stethoscope. That seemed like a pretty advanced medical achievement at that time. I had never even heard of sonograms.

As I went into the sonogram room, I told my daughter and son-in-law that I would sit off to the side. My intention was to be an observer and not intrude in any way on their experience as the baby’s parents. My resolve to stay in the background lasted about a minute.

As the technician moved the wand (is that what it’s called?) over my daughter’s belly, suddenly there on the screen was the baby! So clearly! I jumped up to get closer so I could see more clearly. As the technician moved the wand, she pointed out the baby’s beating heart, the backbone, the brain. We could already see the fingers and toes and face. When the technician told us it was definitely a girl, we all cried, “Lily!” because that was to be her name. We watched as she moved her arms and then began to suck her thumb. We were all crying with joy at the absolute miracle that was Lily - still growing inside her mother, but alive and well and very much a real baby. She was no longer a depersonalized “fetus”. She was our Lily.

When looking at a pregnant woman’s abdomen, it’s hard to visualize a baby underneath all those layers of skin and tissue. A sonogram makes it real. After seeing with clarity the baby’s features, there is no denying the human life that is there.

And that bring me to my topic. I was reading Cozy Reader the other day and saw this post referencing this article in the Lexington Herald-Leader. The article reports that a pro-life clinic in Lexington has installed a sonogram machine. It’s effective. What do patients see during their sonograms?

“We’ve had babies wave. … We’ve had babies smile. We’ve had babies suck their thumb. If they’ve had a little bit of caffeine, they’re jumping around,” said Frost, the center’s nurse manager.

Kim Conroy, Sanctity of Human Life director for Focus on the Family, says two-thirds of the women who view their fetuses on an ultrasound machine at a pregnancy resource center end up rejecting abortion.

I can understand that. Once a woman realizes that it isn’t a “fetus” but a real, live, active baby in there, abortion suddenly becomes not such a welcome choice.

However, some abortion-rights activists have opposed the use of sonograms. These are the people who claim they want women to make informed decisions. Instead of wanting to make sure that women who choose to abort their baby understand fully the ramifications of their decision, they claim that the use of sonograms puts inappropriate pressure on women.

“It’s a manipulative tool,” said Ginny Copenhefer, a former lobbyist with the Kentucky Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. “I don’t think it’s fair to heap guilt on them because they feel they have to terminate a pregnancy. That’s just the most cruel form of abuse that I can imagine.”

Again, this remark and attitude exposes the often two-faced nature of many on the left. All the talk about “pro-choice” is merely a popular sound bite. They talk the talk of informed choice but can’t walk the walk. Women should be able to make truly informed choices and understand that there are reasonable options to abortion. Better for a woman to KNOW what she is “terminating” than to live with a lifetime of regret once she learns that she ended the life of another human being - her own child.

Although the pro-abortion proponents would have us believe otherwise, the debate on abortion truly isn’t about “choice.” It isn’t about government trying to dictate what we do in the privacy of our homes. It isn’t (as I read on a pro-abortion site earlier this evening) about Christians trying to grow more Christians. That’s just silly. It’s a life and death debate about protecting babies.

Yes, there are some serious issues about unwanted children, poverty, maternity health care, child care, and many others. As a society we have trouble handling the children that are already here. And if there are laws against abortion, what do you do with women who get abortions anyway? There are major issues involved in making laws against abortion. However, there is a bottom line. There are some matters that are open to interpretation and belief. On others issues, civilized nations need to draw a line in the sand. Human life is precious. We don’t decide who has value and who is worth saving based on another person’s feelings. We should do everything we can to protect those who can’t protect themselves.