Share ideas that matter on the social web and experience
the benefits of curating the world's best content.
I don't have a Facebook, a Twitter or a LinkedIn account
Your new post is loading...
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Marilee Ritchie Hird's comment,
March 4, 6:42 PM
That isn't really why she did it. And appropriate doesn't begin to cover it. What Jill Stanek did was, as the author said, immoral. I is beyond me how people who call themselves Christian can have so little compassion.
Deanna Dahlsad's comment,
March 5, 12:41 AM
The only concern Jill Stanek has regarding "the complications women have from abortions" is that she believes these women do not suffer enough. It's not just that she doesn't want women to have abortions (I think that's a prayer every person has), but Stanek works to create a world in which no woman would be allowed to have one. Removing choice isn't just removing our fundamental right under the United States Constitution, it isn't just a matter of socio-economic class (i.e. the wealthy go elsewhere to get them), but taking away Choice is to work towards the death of more women. The next time some pro-lifer goes to vote that platform, they should accept the fact that they are voting for more women to die.
Gracie Passette's curator insight,
March 5, 4:42 PM
If we are going to be sex positive, we need to understand the realities ~ including just how far the fundamental extremists are willing to go. Please read the comments! Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
|
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Deanna Dahlsad's curator insight,
February 24, 5:50 AM
The history of domestic violence repeating itself.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
|