The wife of the SCOTUS appointee
khan
Ms. Foster said Feminists for Life was committed not only to ending
abortion, but also to making it "unthinkable" by providing every woman
with the assistance she needs.
ancat...@yahoo.com
Can't read the second page (it wants you to register) but the first
page was scary enough. It's interesting that the article said she
sought out the FFL, offered her legal services and served on the board
of directors, but didn't mention that she specifically served as the
Vice President. I hope someone grills him on the influence she is
likely to have on him. Any bets on how quickly Roe v. Wade and the
death penalty will both be overturned?
dalia
Copyright New York Times Company Jul 23, 2005
Judge John G. Roberts has left little hard evidence of his views on
abortion in recent years and is widely expected to try to avoid the
issue in his coming confirmation hearings.
But there is little mystery about the views of his wife, Jane Sullivan
Roberts, a Roman Catholic lawyer from the Bronx whose pro bono work for
Feminists for Life is drawing intense interest in the ideologically
charged environment of a Supreme Court confirmation debate.
Some abortion opponents view her activities as a clear signal that the
Robertses are committed to their cause; supporters of abortion rights
fear the same thing. Others say that drawing a direct line from her
activities to how her husband might rule on the Supreme Court --
assuming that he not only shares her views, but would also act on them
to overturn 32 years of legal precedents -- is both politically risky
and in bad form.
No less a Democratic stalwart than Senator Edward M. Kennedy said, at a
breakfast meeting with reporters on Friday, that Mrs. Roberts's work
''ought to be out of bounds.''
Advocates on both sides have long acknowledged that with this issue,
the personal is often political. But Mrs. Roberts has led an
independent and unapologetic life that defies any attempt at
pigeonholing.
Mrs. Roberts, who declined to be interviewed for this article, was not
recruited by Feminists for Life, but sought the group out about a
decade ago and offered her services as a lawyer, said its president,
Serrin Foster. The group was reorganizing at the time and beginning to
focus its work on college campuses. Its mission statement, driven home
in advertising in recent years, says: ''Abortion is a reflection that
our society has failed to meet the needs of women. Women deserve better
than abortion.''
Mrs. Roberts served on the board of the organization for four years,
and later provided legal services. Ms. Foster said that as an adoptive
parent, Mrs. Roberts made contributions that included urging the group
to focus more on the needs of biological mothers, and adding a
biological mother to the board of directors.
Ms. Foster said Feminists for Life was committed not only to ending
abortion, but also to making it ''unthinkable'' by providing every
woman with the assistance she needs. Reversing Roe v. Wade, the 1973
decision that recognized a constitutional right to abortion, is a goal,
she said, ''but not enough.''
In recent years, the group has supported efforts to ban the procedure
that critics call partial-birth abortion, which is usually performed in
the second and third trimesters, as well as legislation that prohibits
transporting a minor across state lines to evade parental notification
laws. In previous years, the group weighed in on litigation seeking
further restrictions on abortion, but Ms. Foster said that was before
Mrs. Roberts joined the board.
''We're not a litigious institution now,'' Ms. Foster said. ''We
decided we were not a legal group; we were going to go after parenting
resources and pregnancy resources, and Jane was part of that
redefinition. She came on at that time.''
Sensing the highly charged atmosphere around the issue, longtime
friends and colleagues of Mrs. Roberts declined to speak this week
about her views on abortion. But they characterized her political and
social views much as her husband's friends have portrayed his in recent
days: expressly conservative, but not dogmatic.
''Jane has very strong personal convictions, politically and with
regard to her faith,'' said Christine Kearns, a friend and colleague
who has worked with Mrs. Roberts for 18 years at a law firm now called
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman. ''But as long as I've known her, I've
never known her to impose them on others or to be unwilling to listen
to other people's points of view.''
One thing is certain; Mrs. Roberts's Catholic faith has long played a
central role in her life. The daughter of a Postal Service technician
and a medical secretary, Jane Sullivan grew up the oldest of four
children in what was an Italian and Irish neighborhood in the Morris
Park section of the Bronx, where she played dodgeball in the streets
and took Irish step dancing lessons. With the family's parish church,
Our Lady of Solace, down the block and her paternal grandparents living
next door, it was a safe, close-knit existence.
The family held onto its ties to Ireland, keeping a family home in the
small town of Knocklong in the County of Limerick, where they still
gather at least every two years.
After graduating from St. Catherine's Academy, an all-girls' high
school in the Bronx, Mrs. Roberts joined the first class of women to
enter the College of the Holy Cross, in Worcester, Mass., where she
attended Mass several times a week, tutored football players in
mathematics, her major, and carved a path as a student leader. A
budding feminist even with her traditionalist streak, she was one of
four students who represented the student body in a heated dispute when
the feminist scholar Marilyn French, who taught at the college from
1972 to 1976, was denied tenure.
''We were the pioneers,'' said Connie McCaffrey, a clinical social
worker at Phillips Exeter Academy in New Hampshire who has been a close
friend of Mrs. Roberts since they met on the first day of freshman
year. ''There was a very strong sense of camaraderie among the women
who came in that year. And Janey took her responsibilities as one among
that group very seriously.''
Determined to explore the world, she graduated from Holy Cross in 1976,
traveled to Australia on a Rotary scholarship, trekked through Nepal
and backpacked around Europe before earning a master's degree in
applied mathematics from Brown in 1981 and a law degree from Georgetown
in 1984.
She has maintained close ties with Holy Cross, serving on its board.
The Rev. Charles Currie, president of the Association of Jesuit
Colleges and Universities, is also a member of the Holy Cross board and
regularly travels to its meetings with Mrs. Roberts.
''It's unfortunate in this whole discussion,'' Father Currie said,
''they're already putting it somewhat in terms of conservative/liberal.
It's always a shame when issues are reduced to that simplicity. She may
be conservative in some things, but not in others. She's much more
complex.''
In her professional life, Mrs. Roberts continued to look for the road
less traveled, establishing a specialty in the male-dominated field of
technology and communications law and earning a partnership in her
firm's global technology practice. Still, friends and family members
said, she asserted a quietly defiant individuality, negotiating
multimillion-dollar satellite deals while still driving a bright orange
Volkswagen Beetle long after she could have afforded a more expensive
car.
Friends say she met John G. Roberts in Dewey Beach, Del. ''I think she
kind of just knew he was the one,'' said her sister Mary Torre. ''He
had a great sense of humor, which in an Irish family is very
important.''
The couple married in July 1996, when they were both 41, and friends
say they immediately began discussing their desire to start a family,
even talking about children at their wedding reception.
''Most of us had gotten married in the mid-80's,'' said Richard
Lazarus, a friend and law school roommate of Mr. Roberts, ''and I can't
say that during those weddings we talked about children. We were more
focused on ourselves.''
''These were two, very accomplished, very successful lawyers,'' Mr.
Lazarus said. ''It wasn't an incidental statement. It was a shared,
very important next step, and it was a very pronounced theme.''
In 2000 the couple adopted a daughter, Josephine, and a son, John,
through what Ms. Torre said was a private adoption.
''It is a testament to the power of prayer,'' said Ms. Kearns, Mrs.
Roberts's friend. ''Who knew whether they would get any children. They
qualified to adopt. She waited, but she never, ever, was discouraged.''
After years as a hard-charging lawyer, Mrs. Roberts went part-time in
2003, designing and running an in-house professional development center
for her firm (though colleagues say her part-time hours would be
considered full-time to most people).
The Robertses' relationship, some say, has deepened their faith. ''As
it often happens, when two people get together and share a faith, it
can be magnified by their joining,'' Mr. Lazarus said. ''I think that
has been the case for them, even more so once they had the kids. But it
is a very personal faith. It does not serve, for them, as a way of
judging others.''
With the Supreme Court confirmation battle under way, when everything
from her views on abortion to her children's clothes will be under
scrutiny, Mrs. Roberts is showing her customary aplomb, friends say.
Among her only complaints is that the air-conditioning in her PT
Cruiser, which she is driving to strategy sessions at the White House,
stopped working during this, the hottest week so far in a very hot
summer. So far, she has said, she has managed to weather the heat.
[Photograph]
Judge John G. Roberts acknowledged his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts,
while accepting his nomination to the Supreme Court. Friends of Mrs.
Roberts describe her as expressly conservative, but not dogmatic.
(Photo by Jim Watson/Agence France-Presse -- Getty Images)(pg. A9);
Jane Sullivan Roberts served on the board of Feminists for Life. (Photo
by Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman L.L.P.)(pg. A1)
Marley Greiner
<ancat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122223236.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> khan wrote:
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/23/politics/politicsspecial1/23jane.html?incamp=article_popular
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/dogpe
>>
>> Ms. Foster said Feminists for Life was committed not only to ending
>> abortion, but also to making it "unthinkable" by providing every woman
>> with the assistance she needs.
It never occurs to these people that some women just don't want to be
pregnant and don't want to give birth. It's a difficult concept for the
do-gooders grasp.
>
> Can't read the second page (it wants you to register) but the first
> page was scary enough. It's interesting that the article said she
> sought out the FFL, offered her legal services and served on the board
> of directors, but didn't mention that she specifically served as the
> Vice President. I hope someone grills him on the influence she is
> likely to have on him. Any bets on how quickly Roe v. Wade and the
> death penalty will both be overturned?
A lobbyist friend in WDC knows the Roberts' slightly. She says that Mrs.
is much more conservative than Mr., though her law firm is on the whole more
liberal than his.
What I'm interested in is their kids. Both were reportedly adopted from
Central America, but they look WASPY like them. The girl was through a
"private" international adoption which sends up a red flag for me.
Marley
http://bastardette.blogspot.com
khan
> <ancat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1122223236.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>khan wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/23/politics/politicsspecial1/23jane.html?incamp=article_popular
>>>
>>>http://tinyurl.com/dogpe
>>>
>>>Ms. Foster said Feminists for Life was committed not only to ending
>>>abortion, but also to making it "unthinkable" by providing every woman
>>>with the assistance she needs.
>
>
> It never occurs to these people that some women just don't want to be
> pregnant and don't want to give birth. It's a difficult concept for the
> do-gooders grasp.
I am in a debate with a 'Feminist for Life' on another forum.
All the Same Old Shit.
If college girls are shown concern, they will gladly sprog;
Women/girls don't really want abort!0ns, they just need help;
There is no overpopulation;
Poverty is not because of overbreeding
Even though I was abused, I'm glad to be alive.
-------------
Are you saying that you would rather not have been born?
...
My parents didn't want me, and I'm awfully glad that abortion wasn't
available at that time. They abused me physically and emotionally.
You've heard this sob story before, so I won't repeat it. Thing is, I
had a terrible childhood and still have depression, probably at least
partially as a result -- but I'm deeply glad that I got the chance to be
alive. You aren't?
Malthus and, later, the Zero Population Growth movement have been very
influential in making us think that we don't have enough room or food on
the planet. People repeat "We don't have enough food or space on the
planet" as if it were gospel. In fact, we have both abundant food and
space. The problem is that we can't get food to all hungry people,
because of corruption. Ship food to starving people in Africa, and
corrupt government officials are likely to seize it and give it to their
cronies to sell -- really, to dump at unreasonably low prices. Then
those who actually raise food nearby can't sell their food at a profit.
Meanwhile, those who need the food don't get it, because they can't
afford to buy food from the corrupt cronies. So children die of
malnutrition -- but not because we can't produce enough food on the planet.
As for space, look at the huge areas of the planet that are sparsely
populated. Look at places like Chadron. There's no work there right now,
but who's to say there couldn't be? Get enough people in a place, and
work materializes. The internet has been very, very good to
entrepreneurs in out-of-the-way places, for one thing.
...
When two people have sex and a woman gets pregnant, we need to realize
that an abortion doesn't fix things. It just makes the woman unpregnant.
Actions have consequences. Sometimes it doesn't seem fair. Is it fair
that I have asthma, because my parents smoked like chimneys? Is it fair
that my sister-in-law has what used to be called multiple personality
disorder, because her father abused her sexually? We can't do anything
about the causes now. We just have to deal with the results.
...
So it is with pregnancy, as much as many in our society would like to
deny it. When pregnancy occurs, a new person is created, and the two
parties to that creation need to step up to the plate and take
responsibility for that new life. This can mean raising the child or
putting the child up for adoption. Yes, suffering is almost always
involved no matter what choice the parents make.
...
Getting rid of the child is not a responsible option, at least not in my
opinion. I'm glad your parents and mine didn't have abortions for us.
--- snip ---
Marley Greiner
"khan" <critt...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:9kTEe.199$vq2...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> Marley Greiner wrote:
>
>> <ancat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1122223236.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>khan wrote:
>>>
>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/23/politics/politicsspecial1/23jane.html?incamp=article_popular
>>>>
>>>>http://tinyurl.com/dogpe
>>>>
>>>>Ms. Foster said Feminists for Life was committed not only to ending
>>>>abortion, but also to making it "unthinkable" by providing every woman
>>>>with the assistance she needs.
>>
>>
>> It never occurs to these people that some women just don't want to be
>> pregnant and don't want to give birth. It's a difficult concept for the
>> do-gooders grasp.
Here's my comments:
>
> I am in a debate with a 'Feminist for Life' on another forum.
You have my sympathy. The poor dears don't fit in anywhere. Much of the
"life" movement hates them because they're feminists, and feminists hate
them because they are anti-abortion.. As far as I know, they aren't
anti-contraception, though. I once attended a women's lobbying workshop at
the Ohio Statehouse and ran into a couple of FFL. They said they were
always looking for speakers so I asked if I could speak sometime about
adult adoptee access to their birth records. The woman got real uptight and
says, "We don't like to discuss anything controversial."
Bwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The name of your organization is
freaking controversial! Last fall I ran into the same woman at an Ohio RTL
voter rally I was covering for my paper. She'd developed a skit for teen
RTLers and was whooping it up with a Kerry sign, pretending she was a Kerry
supporter as part of the skit. It was too weird.
>
> All the Same Old Shit.
>
> If college girls are shown concern, they will gladly sprog;
> Women/girls don't really want abort!0ns, they just need help;
> There is no overpopulation;
> Poverty is not because of overbreeding
> Even though I was abused, I'm glad to be alive.
> -------------
> Are you saying that you would rather not have been born?
This is the same old shit adoptees get. You should be glad you're alive.
You should be glad your mother didn't abort you. You should be glad you
weren't thrown into a trashcan. Blah Blah It's all bullshit. If you were
never born it means nothing. There's nothing to push against. This is the
kind of crap that only the leisue class could come up with. People who
actually have to work and don't have fancy houses, nice cars, and a
truckoad of unnecessary goods are too busy to worry about this stuff.
> ...
>
> My parents didn't want me, and I'm awfully glad that abortion wasn't
> available at that time. They abused me physically and emotionally. You've
> heard this sob story before, so I won't repeat it. Thing is, I had a
> terrible childhood and still have depression, probably at least partially
> as a result -- but I'm deeply glad that I got the chance to be alive. You
> aren't?
But if the didn't exist, they'd never have experienced this, and it would
make no difference. This type of weird thinking always sounds narcissistic
to me.
>
> Malthus and, later, the Zero Population Growth movement have been very
> influential in making us think that we don't have enough room or food on
> the planet. People repeat "We don't have enough food or space on the
> planet" as if it were gospel. In fact, we have both abundant food and
> space. The problem is that we can't get food to all hungry people, because
> of corruption. Ship food to starving people in Africa, and corrupt
> government officials are likely to seize it and give it to their cronies
> to sell -- really, to dump at unreasonably low prices. Then those who
> actually raise food nearby can't sell their food at a profit. Meanwhile,
> those who need the food don't get it, because they can't afford to buy
> food from the corrupt cronies. So children die of malnutrition -- but not
> because we can't produce enough food on the planet.
Then do something about corrupt systems!!!!
>
> As for space, look at the huge areas of the planet that are sparsely
> populated. Look at places like Chadron. There's no work there right now,
> but who's to say there couldn't be? Get enough people in a place, and work
> materializes. The internet has been very, very good to entrepreneurs in
> out-of-the-way places, for one thing.
Chardon, Ohio?
>
> ...
> When two people have sex and a woman gets pregnant, we need to realize
> that an abortion doesn't fix things. It just makes the woman unpregnant.
That's the point, doofus!
>
> Actions have consequences. Sometimes it doesn't seem fair. Is it fair that
> I have asthma, because my parents smoked like chimneys? Is it fair that my
> sister-in-law has what used to be called multiple personality disorder,
> because her father abused her sexually? We can't do anything about the
> causes now. We just have to deal with the results.
Getting an abortoin does deal with the results! Why does every "mistake"
have to end up with a life-altering consequence.
>
> ...
>
> So it is with pregnancy, as much as many in our society would like to deny
> it. When pregnancy occurs, a new person is created, and the two parties to
> that creation need to step up to the plate and take responsibility for
> that new life. This can mean raising the child or putting the child up for
> adoption. Yes, suffering is almost always involved no matter what choice
> the parents make.
> ...
>
> Getting rid of the child is not a responsible option, at least not in my
> opinion. I'm glad your parents and mine didn't have abortions for us.
And the same could be said for adoption. In fact, there's a whole weird
school of fundie thought that opposes adoption on the grounds that it
alleviates responsibility. Women should be forced to have kids they don't
want and eep them as punishment.
It's estimated that 42% of USian women have had abortions. Abortion is
normal; it's part of women's everyday health care. Pregnancies occur even
under the best of preventative circumstances. If you don't want an
abortion, dont have one.
Marley
khan
> "khan" <critt...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:9kTEe.199$vq2...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>Marley Greiner wrote:
>>
>>
>>><ancat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1122223236.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>khan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/23/politics/politicsspecial1/23jane.html?incamp=article_popular
>>>>>
>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/dogpe
>>>>>
>>>>>Ms. Foster said Feminists for Life was committed not only to ending
>>>>>abortion, but also to making it "unthinkable" by providing every woman
>>>>>with the assistance she needs.
>>>
>>>
>>>It never occurs to these people that some women just don't want to be
>>>pregnant and don't want to give birth. It's a difficult concept for the
>>>do-gooders grasp.
>
>
> Here's my comments:
>
>>I am in a debate with a 'Feminist for Life' on another forum.
>
>
> You have my sympathy. The poor dears don't fit in anywhere. Much of the
> "life" movement hates them because they're feminists, and feminists hate
> them because they are anti-abortion.. As far as I know, they aren't
> anti-contraception, though.
This particular one is.
She talked her daughter out of using BC pills for a 'female problem':
"If you get raped & the egg is fertilized & the pills prevent it from
implanting, you'll be murdering a baby."
I have never understood the "I'd be pissed if I'd been aborted" line of
thought.
>
>> ...
>>
>>My parents didn't want me, and I'm awfully glad that abortion wasn't
>>available at that time. They abused me physically and emotionally. You've
>>heard this sob story before, so I won't repeat it. Thing is, I had a
>>terrible childhood and still have depression, probably at least partially
>>as a result -- but I'm deeply glad that I got the chance to be alive. You
>>aren't?
>
>
> But if the didn't exist, they'd never have experienced this, and it would
> make no difference. This type of weird thinking always sounds narcissistic
> to me.
>
>>Malthus and, later, the Zero Population Growth movement have been very
>>influential in making us think that we don't have enough room or food on
>>the planet. People repeat "We don't have enough food or space on the
>>planet" as if it were gospel. In fact, we have both abundant food and
>>space. The problem is that we can't get food to all hungry people, because
>>of corruption. Ship food to starving people in Africa, and corrupt
>>government officials are likely to seize it and give it to their cronies
>>to sell -- really, to dump at unreasonably low prices. Then those who
>>actually raise food nearby can't sell their food at a profit. Meanwhile,
>>those who need the food don't get it, because they can't afford to buy
>>food from the corrupt cronies. So children die of malnutrition -- but not
>>because we can't produce enough food on the planet.
>
>
> Then do something about corrupt systems!!!!
Like the Catlik Church?
>
>>As for space, look at the huge areas of the planet that are sparsely
>>populated. Look at places like Chadron. There's no work there right now,
>>but who's to say there couldn't be? Get enough people in a place, and work
>>materializes. The internet has been very, very good to entrepreneurs in
>>out-of-the-way places, for one thing.
>
>
> Chardon, Ohio?
Chadron Nebraska (another poster lives there).
>
>>...
>>When two people have sex and a woman gets pregnant, we need to realize
>>that an abortion doesn't fix things. It just makes the woman unpregnant.
>
>
> That's the point, doofus!
>
>>Actions have consequences. Sometimes it doesn't seem fair. Is it fair that
>>I have asthma, because my parents smoked like chimneys? Is it fair that my
>>sister-in-law has what used to be called multiple personality disorder,
>>because her father abused her sexually? We can't do anything about the
>>causes now. We just have to deal with the results.
>
>
> Getting an abortoin does deal with the results! Why does every "mistake"
> have to end up with a life-altering consequence.
>
>>...
>>
>>So it is with pregnancy, as much as many in our society would like to deny
>>it. When pregnancy occurs, a new person is created, and the two parties to
>>that creation need to step up to the plate and take responsibility for
>>that new life. This can mean raising the child or putting the child up for
>>adoption. Yes, suffering is almost always involved no matter what choice
>>the parents make.
>> ...
>>
>>Getting rid of the child is not a responsible option, at least not in my
>>opinion. I'm glad your parents and mine didn't have abortions for us.
>
>
> And the same could be said for adoption. In fact, there's a whole weird
> school of fundie thought that opposes adoption on the grounds that it
> alleviates responsibility.
Really?
> Women should be forced to have kids they don't
> want and keep them as punishment.
>
> It's estimated that 42% of USian women have had abortions.
I did, my sister did, my mother's mother did.
I read that a large percentage of women, who have abortions, say they
are born-again xtians.
> Abortion is
> normal; it's part of women's everyday health care. Pregnancies occur even
> under the best of preventative circumstances. If you don't want an
> abortion, dont have one.
This is the same woman who looks forward to meeting & talking to her
miscarriage in heaven.
>
> Marley
>
>
REP
"Marley Greiner" <maddog...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> What I'm interested in is their kids. Both were reportedly adopted from
> Central America, but they look WASPY like them. The girl was through a
> "private" international adoption which sends up a red flag for me.
My (undoubtedly jaded) thinking was that a foreign adoption was less
likely to be problematic if the mother had second thoughts about
relinquishing. An USian would at least speak the language and attract
media attention (poor, probably young moo against rich older power
couple = sexy story, even if the relinquishing moo loses) while a
foreign mother would have a much, much harder time getting any sympathy;
after all, rich power couple is giving bought children "better life" in
bright shining America.
--
"Did Father shoot him? I will eat Grandfather for dinner."
- Helen Keller, on learning of the death of her grandfather
Abbie F.
If people didn't get knocked up in the first place, they wouldn't think
of having oney! The key to making it "unthinkable" is affordable,
safe, 100% effective birth control. 98% effective won't do for the
poor 2% stuck with an unwanted infestation. Until then, sorry, people
are going to need an alternative. Researchers, start your engines.
Green...@bellsouth.net
She's also a Professional Katlick...Katlick high school,ditto
college. This doesn't bode well for 'keep-your-Rosary-off-my-ovaries'
Pr*-Ch*icers. But of course the requisite 'her philosophy won't
interfere'statements have been issued. Yeah,OK.
The Rocket Scientist
So her people are the Sullivans from County Limerick, eh? Yep. That
explains it. Bunch o' unionists what drink Bushmill's.
Bill Sullivan
>From the Kerry Sullivans
Up the Republic!
Marley Greiner
"REP" <r...@inanna.com> wrote in message
news:Cw1Fe.218$oY...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
> In article <32TEe.30179$5N3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Marley Greiner" <maddog...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> What I'm interested in is their kids. Both were reportedly adopted from
>> Central America, but they look WASPY like them. The girl was through a
>> "private" international adoption which sends up a red flag for me.
>
> My (undoubtedly jaded) thinking was that a foreign adoption was less
> likely to be problematic if the mother had second thoughts about
> relinquishing. An USian would at least speak the language and attract
> media attention (poor, probably young moo against rich older power
> couple = sexy story, even if the relinquishing moo loses) while a
> foreign mother would have a much, much harder time getting any sympathy;
> after all, rich power couple is giving bought children "better life" in
> bright shining America.
One article I read, and I don't know which on said that the Roberts actually
talked about sprogging at their wedding reception!
Blllaaghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Marley
http://bastardette.blogspot.com
Marley Greiner
> Marley Greiner wrote:
>
>> "khan" <critt...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>> news:9kTEe.199$vq2...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Marley Greiner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>news:1122223236.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>khan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/23/politics/politicsspecial1/23jane.html?incamp=article_popular
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/dogpe
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ms. Foster said Feminists for Life was committed not only to ending
>>>>>>abortion, but also to making it "unthinkable" by providing every woman
>>>>>>with the assistance she needs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It never occurs to these people that some women just don't want to be
>>>>pregnant and don't want to give birth. It's a difficult concept for the
>>>>do-gooders grasp.
>>
>>
>>
>>>I am in a debate with a 'Feminist for Life' on another forum.
>>
>>
>> You have my sympathy. The poor dears don't fit in anywhere. Much of the
>> "life" movement hates them because they're feminists, and feminists hate
>> them because they are anti-abortion.. As far as I know, they aren't
>> anti-contraception, though.
>
> This particular one is.
>
> She talked her daughter out of using BC pills for a 'female problem': "If
> you get raped & the egg is fertilized & the pills prevent it from
> implanting, you'll be murdering a baby."
This is one of the most incredibly stupid things I've heard coming from
these people yet--and I've heard a lot. So what if her daughter's "female
problem" gets worse and she can't sprog at all. Hasn't she in some way
encouraged the death of the yet to be fertilized?
>> This is the same old shit adoptees get. You should be glad you're alive.
>> You should be glad your mother didn't abort you. You should be glad you
>> weren't thrown into a trashcan. Blah Blah It's all bullshit. If you
>> were never born it means nothing. There's nothing to push against. This
>> is the kind of crap that only the leisue class could come up with.
>> People who actually have to work and don't have fancy houses, nice cars,
>> and a truckoad of unnecessary goods are too busy to worry about this
>> stuff.
>
> I have never understood the "I'd be pissed if I'd been aborted" line of
> thought.
Yeah, how would you know if you were aborted. And of course, let's not
forget all of those thingees that are spontaneously aborted each month and
the woman doesnt even know it?
>>>
>>>Getting rid of the child is not a responsible option, at least not in my
>>>opinion. I'm glad your parents and mine didn't have abortions for us.
>>
>>
>> And the same could be said for adoption. In fact, there's a whole weird
>> school of fundie thought that opposes adoption on the grounds that it
>> alleviates responsibility.
>
> Really?
It's not real popular. There's also this other weird school of thought that
adoptees are just evil because their parents were evil, ie, had sex outside
of marriage (that is, if the adoptee is a bastard) and will carry those evil
traits into the adoptive home. Satan's spawn. This goes along with
generatinal demons. I'm about to write a blog called, Is the Anti-Christ
Adopted? but it's too hot here to think much about it.
>
>> Women should be forced to have kids they don't want and keep them as
>> punishment.
>>
>> It's estimated that 42% of USian women have had abortions.
>
> I did, my sister did, my mother's mother did.
> I read that a large percentage of women, who have abortions, say they are
> born-again xtians.
I think that's true. Abortion is always bad until you or your daughter
needs one.
>
>> Abortion is normal; it's part of women's everyday health care.
>> Pregnancies occur even under the best of preventative circumstances. If
>> you don't want an abortion, dont have one.
>
> This is the same woman who looks forward to meeting & talking to her
> miscarriage in heaven.
Sounds like a fascinating discussion they'll have.
--
Marley Elizabeth Greiner
Executive Chair, Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization
http://bastardette.blogspot.com
>
>>
>> Marley
>
>
No 33 Secretary
news:sF9Fe.33067$5N3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
That's "God's Will." Which is to say, their God is a sadistic asshole.
--
Terry Austin
www.hyperbooks.com
Campaign Cartographer now available
Karl Grüber
> This particular one is.
>
> She talked her daughter out of using BC pills for a 'female problem':
> "If you get raped & the egg is fertilized & the pills prevent it from
> implanting, you'll be murdering a baby."
Just how many women, even if they did want to sprog, would want to give
birth in this situation? I realize this is likely the wrong group to
ask, but I can't image the number of women who would jump with joy to
carry such an infestation to term would be very large. Wouldn't the
resulting sprog be much more likely to be sizzled, smothered, drowned,
or abandoned?
Once again, these nutjobs show their true colors. Too bad they don't
have the cajones to say "women are incubators and they should not have
any control over their own bodies," which is, IMNSHO, what they are
saying.
--
karlg (at) crunchyfrog (dot) net
Have no respect whatsoever for authority; forget who said it and
instead look at what he starts with, where he ends up, and ask
yourself, "Is it reasonable?"
-- Richard Feynman
REP
Omixochitl <omixoch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> REP <r...@inanna.com> wrote in
> news:Cw1Fe.218$oY...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net:
>
> > In article <32TEe.30179$5N3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> > "Marley Greiner" <maddog...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> What I'm interested in is their kids. Both were reportedly adopted
> >> from Central America, but they look WASPY like them. The girl was
> >> through a "private" international adoption which sends up a red flag
> >> for me.
> >
> > My (undoubtedly jaded) thinking was that a foreign adoption was less
> > likely to be problematic if the mother had second thoughts about
> > relinquishing. An USian would at least speak the language and attract
> > media attention (poor, probably young moo against rich older power
> > couple = sexy story, even if the relinquishing moo loses) while a
> > foreign mother would have a much, much harder time getting any
> > sympathy; after all, rich power couple is giving bought children
> > "better life" in bright shining America.
>
> Now I'm reminded of Zahara Jolie. Aren't her birth parents both dead?
> That would makes it about as hard to get her back from Angelina as
> possible.
Well, Angelina is just adding to her collection of Ethnic Designer
Dolls. It makes her look like she cares or something.