Missy Smith anti-abortion ad

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Not the pp, bit if it is the third trimester and the mother is in danger, wouldn't it be just as fast/safe to deliver the child alive?


Do you know anything about childbirth?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:May George Tiller rest in peace for the service he provided women like me in our darkest, most desperate hours.


Amen. Bless you Dr. Tiller.
Anonymous
I just saw this, 4 in the afternoon, with my daughter sitting right here. It sickens me that this woman stoops to such a low level to make her point. She is ashamed of herself for her mistake. The general public shouldn't have to pay the price for a choice she made years ago. I could care less about this topic, but I do care what my child was just exposed to with no warning whatsoever. If you're truly concerned about the welfare and wellbeing of our children, consider the damage just done to the children who were innocently exposed to your dimented ad. I certainly hope this lady in not elected.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Just a Q, because I never watch TV, but are these third trimester abortions? I'm not going to go to the website to look at the picture. I don't need my heart to be ripped out. I'm personally pro-life (but wouldn't impose it on other women) but just don't want to see that.


So you woudl choose not to have an abortion, but allow others to make the choice for themselves. Isn't that pretty much the definition of pro-choice?


Yes. Politically, I'm pro-choice. I said I'm "personally" pro-life. I believe it is life, I believe life is the right choice. I believe abortion is wrong. I also don't believe in legislating morality, so you're free to choose your own path. I wouldn't support any legislation that suppressed any man or woman's right to choose whether or not they want to become a parent. Does that clear it up for you?


So, what you're saying is "I'm personally against baby killing, but if someone else wants to kill their baby, it's ok."? As far as legislating morality goes, it's done all the time. There are laws against stealing, murder, rape, etc. Who's to say what they did was "wrong?" In whose eyes? If I shot you, why is that wrong? Either we have laws or we don't. You tread a very fine line in saying what's morally right and wrong. In my view, killing babies (in the womb or outside the womb) is wrong... if you believe that murder is also wrong. You can't put a distinction on which type of murder is ok if you believe murder is wrong.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I just saw this, 4 in the afternoon, with my daughter sitting right here. It sickens me that this woman stoops to such a low level to make her point. She is ashamed of herself for her mistake. The general public shouldn't have to pay the price for a choice she made years ago. I could care less about this topic, but I do care what my child was just exposed to with no warning whatsoever. If you're truly concerned about the welfare and wellbeing of our children, consider the damage just done to the children who were innocently exposed to your dimented ad. I certainly hope this lady in not elected.


At least your daughter is alive to watch it. What about the baby that was aborted in the ad? Think he or she will ever have any objections? Oh, wait, no they won't.

And, there was warning before the ad showed. Maybe you should be a more responsible parent instead of letting the tv babysit your kid.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I just saw this, 4 in the afternoon, with my daughter sitting right here. It sickens me that this woman stoops to such a low level to make her point. She is ashamed of herself for her mistake. The general public shouldn't have to pay the price for a choice she made years ago. I could care less about this topic, but I do care what my child was just exposed to with no warning whatsoever. If you're truly concerned about the welfare and wellbeing of our children, consider the damage just done to the children who were innocently exposed to your dimented ad. I certainly hope this lady in not elected.


At least your daughter is alive to watch it. What about the baby that was aborted in the ad? Think he or she will ever have any objections? Oh, wait, no they won't.

And, there was warning before the ad showed. Maybe you should be a more responsible parent instead of letting the tv babysit your kid.


So, I just checked out Missy's website which shows specifically what times and during what shows this ad is being run on. AND, funny, I didn't see any children's shows on there. Teenager shows, yes. As in old enough to get pregnant via irresponsible parenting. But I didn't see Sesame Street. So what was your "child" doing watching a show like that?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Just a Q, because I never watch TV, but are these third trimester abortions? I'm not going to go to the website to look at the picture. I don't need my heart to be ripped out. I'm personally pro-life (but wouldn't impose it on other women) but just don't want to see that.


So you woudl choose not to have an abortion, but allow others to make the choice for themselves. Isn't that pretty much the definition of pro-choice?


Yes. Politically, I'm pro-choice. I said I'm "personally" pro-life. I believe it is life, I believe life is the right choice. I believe abortion is wrong. I also don't believe in legislating morality, so you're free to choose your own path. I wouldn't support any legislation that suppressed any man or woman's right to choose whether or not they want to become a parent. Does that clear it up for you?


So, what you're saying is "I'm personally against baby killing, but if someone else wants to kill their baby, it's ok."? As far as legislating morality goes, it's done all the time. There are laws against stealing, murder, rape, etc. Who's to say what they did was "wrong?" In whose eyes? If I shot you, why is that wrong? Either we have laws or we don't. You tread a very fine line in saying what's morally right and wrong. In my view, killing babies (in the womb or outside the womb) is wrong... if you believe that murder is also wrong. You can't put a distinction on which type of murder is ok if you believe murder is wrong.


I'm not that poster, but why is this difficult to understand? Humankind has forever determined what types of killing are justifiable. We say that killing in self defense is fine. So is the death penalty. And war. And abortion. Just because all of these are legal does not mean any particular person wants to or must engage in them.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
At least your daughter is alive to watch it. What about the baby that was aborted in the ad? Think he or she will ever have any objections? Oh, wait, no they won't.

And, there was warning before the ad showed. Maybe you should be a more responsible parent instead of letting the tv babysit your kid.


Whoa. When I saw the ad there was a warning AFTER it aired. Maybe I missed the one at the start. And letting TV babysit your kid? Just because you had the news on while doing something and your child just happens to be in the room drawing or whatever, doesn't mean the TV is babysitting. I'm not even the poster you quoted.

Are you also 10/26/2010 04:27? "old enough to get pregnant via irresponsible parenting"? Really? Really?

I think I'm going to stop posting in this thread, this whole ad thing has me so upset. Alot of people were bothered by the ad, some were not. But I have read alot of mean and almost hurtful things on this thread. We are all here trying the best we can to parent our children, and live the best way we can. If you were bothered by the ad I really don't think that makes you a baby hater, and if you were not bothered by the ad it doesn't mean your a crazy nut. Sorry, I'm just really pregnant and emotional.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Just because you had the news on while doing something and your child just happens to be in the room drawing or whatever, doesn't mean the TV is babysitting.


And there is nothing on the news you wouldn't want a child to see and start asking you questions? To make the point, I'm going to take it to an extreme (I don't want a debate about the absurdity of it). Substitute porn, or a horror movie, or a gruesome war movie, or anything you wouldn't want your child to see instead of the news... it doesn't make it ok. Your child should not be in the room with you if you are that sensative to what the child sees on TV and it's not rated appropriately for that child.
Anonymous
This is why we don't have cable/satellite/TV. The American Taliban has coarsened the culture so profoundly, there's no way we want to allow this stuff into our home.

It's the same dynamic where movies broadcast on network TV are being edited so that the word "Hell" is bleeped out, but someone being shot in the face or beaten with a baseball bat is A-OK.

The Christianist Right has truly given us a fucked up sense of public morality.
Anonymous
In my view, killing babies (in the womb or outside the womb) is wrong...


Couldn't agree more. Thank goodness a fertilized egg, or an embryo, or a fetus is not a baby.
Anonymous
OP here... can we focus on the AD people? And not turn this into an abortion debate?

I'm ticked at NBC4 because I just cannot believe that the law REQUIRES them to air ANY OLD THING some "candidate" wants to air (And I agree that this is probably not a "real" candidacy, but instead a vehicle for her to put her gross/crazy ad all over the airwaves). I have to believe that there are some limits to what goes in the ad, and that if NBC4 had any legal cojones, they would refuse.

But I don't know the law in this area.

For those of you who say that they really did have to air this, would you please enlighten me on the law a bit? I refuse to believe that you must air anything any self-proclaimed "candidate" wants to air... that just doesn't make sense.
Anonymous
almost all abortions are done in the first trimester, and the shocking images of dead and dismembered babies do not resemble the reality of most abortions.

the vast majority of abortions done after the first trimester are done for medical reasons, and it is not for us to judge a family's decision not to carry on a pregnancy of a doomed infant, who is unlikely to survive its first breath. This "choice" is a heartbreaking choice for these families, aborting a long-awaited and very much wanted child, whose condition is incompatible with life.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:almost all abortions are done in the first trimester, and the shocking images of dead and dismembered babies do not resemble the reality of most abortions.

the vast majority of abortions done after the first trimester are done for medical reasons, and it is not for us to judge a family's decision not to carry on a pregnancy of a doomed infant, who is unlikely to survive its first breath. This "choice" is a heartbreaking choice for these families, aborting a long-awaited and very much wanted child, whose condition is incompatible with life.



This is an excellent point. Most of the propaganda photos used to incite irrational rear and revulsion are taken of late third-trimester fetuses--which pretty much is done exclusively for catastrophic medical reasons.

I think it's great that assholes like this Smith person--and the "pro-life" camp in general--regularly take advantage of the personal tragedy of folks who've lost wanted babies. It's a bit like if anti-war activists snuck photos of dead American servicemen, and aired them on NBC at noon. "What? You can't handle the truth??"

Disgusting.
Anonymous
I'm confused. Over the years, I recall news stories about networks refusing to air certain things ... Why are TV stations compelled to air these? I do not understand the law. What law or FCC regulation is this, specifically? Also, where did she get this footage, was it obtained legally? Did the parents give consent? Or the hospitals, doctors and/or clinics? Did they sign release forms? I doubt it. Couldn't TV stations refuse to air them on those grounds?

I think someone should investigate.

I saw these during Saturday Night Live.
Forum Index » Off-Topic
Go to: