Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Planned Parenthood Celebration Jolted by Abortion Survivor [Colorado]
CatholicEducation.org ^ | May, 2006 | Ted Harvey

Posted on 06/28/2006 11:25:07 AM PDT by Salvation


Planned Parenthood Celebration Jolted by Abortion Survivor
   TED HARVEY


She sings the anthem to applause, then her secret is revealed to stunned silence.

Gianna Jessen

I want to share with you an awesome experience I had in the Colorado House of Representatives on May 8. It is a humbling experience to look back and realize that God used me to play a role in His divine orchestration.

I was leaving the House chambers for the weekend when our Democrat speaker of the House announced that the coming Monday would be the final day of this year's General Assembly. He went on to state that there were still numerous resolutions on the calendar which we would need to be addressed prior to the summer adjournment. Interestingly, he specifically mentioned that one of the resolutions we would be hearing was being carried by the House Majority Leader Alice Madden, honoring the 90th anniversary of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains.

As a strong pro-life legislator I was disgusted by the idea that we would pass a resolution honoring this 90-year legacy of genocide. I drove home that night wondering what I could say that might pierce the darkness during the debate on this heinous resolution.

On Saturday morning, I took my 8-year-old son up to the mountains to go white-water rafting. The trip lasted all day. As we were driving home, exhausted and hungry, I remembered that I had accepted an invitation to attend a fundraising dinner that night for a local pro-life organization. One of my most respected mentors had personally called me several weeks earlier and asked me to attend, so I knew I'd have to clean up and head over.

After our meal, the executive director of the organization introduced the keynote speaker. I looked up and saw walking to the stage a handicapped young lady being assisted to the microphone by a young man holding a guitar.

Her name was Gianna Jessen.

Gianna said "Hello," welcomed everyone, and then sang three of the most beautiful Christian songs I have ever heard.

She then began to give her testimony. When her biological mother was 17 years old and seven and a half months pregnant, she went to a Planned Parenthood clinic to have an abortion. As God would have it, the abortion failed and a beautiful 2-pound baby girl was brought into the world. Unfortunately, she was born with cerebral palsy and the doctors thought that she would never survive. The doctors were wrong.

Imagine the timing! A survivor of a Planned Parenthood abortion arrived in town just days before the Colorado House of Representatives was to celebrate Planned Parenthood's "wonderful" work.

As I listened to Gianna's amazing testimony, the Lord inspired me to ask her if she could stay in Denver until Monday morning so that I could introduce her on the floor of the House and tell her story. Perhaps she could even begin the final day's session by singing our country's national anthem!

To my surprise she said she would seriously consider it. If she were to agree, she wanted her accompanying guitarist to stay as well. A lady standing in line behind me waiting to meet Gianna overheard our conversation and said that she would be willing to pay for the guitarist's room. Gianna then said that she would think about it.


As I was driving home from the banquet, my cell phone rang. It was Gianna, and she immediately said, "I'm in, let's ruin this celebration." Praise God!

When Monday morning came, I awoke at 6 a.m. to write my speech before heading to the Capitol. As I wrote down the words, I could sense God's help and I knew that this was going to be a powerful moment for the pro-life movement.

Following a committee hearing, I rushed into the House chambers just as the opening morning prayer was about to be given. Between the prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, I wrote a quick note to the speaker of the House explaining that Gianna is an advocate for cerebral palsy. I took the note to the speaker and asked if I could have my friend open the last day of session by singing the national anthem. Without any hesitation the speaker took the microphone and said, "Before we begin, Representative Harvey has made available for us Gianna Jessen to sing the national anthem."

Gianna sang the most amazing rendition of The Star Spangled Banner that you could possibly imagine. Every person in the entire chamber was completely still, quiet and in awe of this frail young lady's voice.

Due to her cerebral palsy, Gianna often loses her balance, and shortly after starting to sing she grabbed my arm to stabilize herself, and I could tell that she was shaking. Suddenly, midway through the song, she forgot the words and began to hum and then said, "Please forgive me; I am so nervous." She then immediately began singing again and every House member and every guest throughout the chambers began to sing along with her to give her encouragement and to lift her up.

As I looked around the huge hall I listened to the unbelievable melody of Gianna's voice being accompanied by a choir of over 100 voices. I had chills running all over my body, and I knew that I had just witnessed an act of God.

As the song concluded the speaker of the House explained that Gianna has cerebral palsy and is an activist to bring awareness to the disease. "Let us give her a hand not only for her performance today, but also for her advocacy work," he said. The chamber immediately exploded into applause she had them all in the palm of her hand.


The speaker then called the House to order, and we proceeded as usual to allow members to make any announcements or introductions of guests. For dramatic effect, I waited until I was the last person remaining before I introduced Gianna.

As I waited for my turn, I nervously paced back and forth praying to God that he would give me the peace, confidence and the courage necessary to pull off what I knew would be one of the most dramatic and controversial moments of my political career.

While I waited, a prominent reporter from one of the major Denver newspapers walked over to Gianna and told her that her rendition captured the spirit of the national anthem more powerfully than any she had ever heard before.

Finally, I was the last person remaining. So, I proceeded to the microphone and began my speech.


At this point the chamber exploded into applause which lasted for 15-to-20 seconds. Gianna had touched their souls.


"Members, I would like to introduce you to a new friend and hero of mine — her name is Gianna Jessen. She is visiting us today from Nashville, Tennessee, where she is an accomplished recording artist.

"She has cerebral palsy and was raised in foster homes before being adopted at the age of four.

"She was born prematurely and weighed only 2 pounds at birth. She remained in the hospital for almost three months. A doctor once said she had a great will to live and that she fought for her life. Eventually she was able to leave the hospital and be placed in foster care.

"Because of her cerebral palsy, her foster mother was told that it was doubtful that she would ever crawl or walk. She could not sit up independently. Through the prayers and dedication of her foster mother, she eventually learned to sit up, crawl, then stand. Shortly before her fourth birthday, she began to walk with leg braces and a walker.

"She continued in physical therapy and after a total of four surgeries, she was able to walk without assistance.

"She still falls sometimes, but she says she has learned how to fall gracefully after falling for 29 years.

"Two years ago, she walked into a local health club and said she wanted a private trainer. At the time her legs could not lift 30 pounds. Today she can leg press 200 pounds.

"She became so physically fit that she began running marathons to raise money and awareness for cerebral palsy. She just returned last week from England where she ran in the London Marathon. It took her more than eight-and-a-half hours to complete. They were taking down the course by the time she made it to the finish line. But she made it, nonetheless. With bloody feet and aching joints, she finished the race.

"Members would you help me recognize a modern-day hero Gianna Jessen?"

At this point the chamber exploded into applause which lasted for 15-to-20 seconds. Gianna had touched their souls.


Ironically, Alice Madden, the majority leader and sponsor of the Planned Parenthood resolution, walked over to Gianna and congratulated her.

As the applause began to die down, I raised my hand to be recognized one more time.

"Mr. Speaker, members, if you would allow me just a few more moments I would appreciate your time.


"My name is Ted Harvey, not Paul Harvey, but, please, let me tell you the rest of the story."


"My name is Ted Harvey, not Paul Harvey, but, please, let me tell you the rest of the story.

"The cause of Gianna's cerebral palsy is not because of some biological freak of nature, but rather the choice of her mother.

"You see when her biological mother was 17-years-old and 7-and-a-half months pregnant, she went to a Planned Parenthood clinic to seek a late-term abortion. The abortionist performed a saline abortion on this 17-year-old girl. This procedure requires the injection of a high concentration of saline into the mother's womb, which the fetus is then bathed in and swallows, which results in the fetus being burned to death, inside and out. Within 24 hours the results are normally an induced, still-born abortion.

"As Gianna can testify, the procedure is not always 100 percent effective. Gianna is an aborted late-term fetus who was born alive. The high concentration of saline in the womb for 24 hours resulted in a lack of oxygen to her brain and is the cause of her cerebral palsy.

"Members, today, we are going to recognize the 90th anniversary of Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood…"

BANG! The gavel came down.

Just as I was finishing the last sentence of my speech — the climax of the morning — the speaker of the House gaveled me down and said, "Representative Harvey, I will allow you to continue your introduction, but not for the purposes of debating a measure now pending before the House."

At which point I said,

"Mr. Speaker, I understand. I just wanted to put a face to what we are celebrating today."

Silence.

Deafening silence.

I then walked back to my chair shaking like a leaf. The Democrats wouldn't look at me. They were fuming. It was beautiful. I have been in the Legislature for five tough years, and this made it all worthwhile.

The House majority leader wouldn't talk to me the rest of the day.

Was it because I introduced an abortion survivor, or was it because we touched her soul? She could congratulate an inspirational cerebral palsy victim and advocate, but was outraged when she discovered that the person she congratulated was also an abortion survivor.

The headline in The Denver Post the next day read "Abortion Jab Earns Rebuke." The majority leader is quoted as saying, "I think it was amazingly rude to use a human being as an example of his personal politics."

Yes, Representative Madden, Gianna Jessen is a human being. She was when she was in her mother's womb, and she was when she sang the national anthem on the floor of the Colorado House of Representatives.

The paper went on to quote Gianna, stating she was glad I told her story.

"We need to discuss the humanity of it. I'm glad to be able to speak up for children in the womb," she said. "If abortion is about women's rights, where were my rights?"

All I can say is, "Glory to God!" He orchestrated it all, every minute of it, and I was so honored to have been chosen to play a part. May we all continue to be filled with and to fight for the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ!

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Ted Harvey. "Planned Parenthood Celebration Jolted by Abortion Survivor." CERC.

Reprinted with permission of Ted Harvey.

THE AUTHOR

Ted Harvey is Assistant Minority Leader in the Colorado House of Representatives and is currently running for the State Senate. Visit his web site here. E-mail him here.

Copyright © 2006 Ted Harvey
 



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: abortion; abortionondemand; abortionsurvivor; birthdefect; birthdefects; catholiclist; cerc; cerebralpalsy; childmurder; cultureofdeath; genocide; gianna; giannajessen; infanticide; jessen; life; permanentsolution; plannedparenthood; pp; prolife; qualitylife; qualityoflife; righttolife; salineabortion; selfishact; survival; survivor; taxdollarsatwork; temporaryproblem; youpayforthis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-279 next last
To: Locomotive Breath

Nope. I'm not. I do however subscribe to elements of classic Thomist thinking on just war and find similar elements apply in other activities which might not rise to the level of war.


151 posted on 06/29/2006 5:06:17 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (If the gates of Hell prevail against it, it probably never was a church anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

90 years of Planned Parenthood in the Rocky Mountains? Is this a misprint?

Great story, btw.


152 posted on 06/29/2006 5:11:06 AM PDT by prairiebreeze (It takes ideas and optimism to win elections. The DemocRATS have neither.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FJ290; Locomotive Breath
May I ask why you are so upset over this?

No offense, but that's the kind of arguing that Liberals do. Locomotive Breath has an idea, a moral principle which is, I think VERY worth examining. My personal opinion is that LB is mistaken, but I have on very rare occasion been mistaken myself so I have to be open to the laughably minuscule possibility that I am in error this time.

It's like this, I think: Lies, misdirection, suggesting the false, are bad. Even when they are done in a good cause, at least some of their bad sequelae persist. E.g.: If today I lie to you in a morally licit way (if any) and in a good cause, tomorrow you may doubt my word and my cause when I need you to believe me.

To contend fairly, the reason or goal of the fight must be fair, and the manner of fighting must also be fair. So LB thinks that Mr. Harvey fought unfairly.

I think homicide is just as evil as lying, and I can imagine cases where homicide is licit -- for example: I have very good reason to believe that that spare tire you're toting is actually a suicide bomb -- VERY GOOD reason.

Similarly, I don't think I know enough about the parliamentary procedures and expectations of the assembly where Mr. Harvey did this. But it is at least possible that he encouraged folks to give him permission to have the young lady sing for reasons which were not his true reasons. I think it's legitimate to question this.

And I'm NOT upset, dammit!

heh heh heh

153 posted on 06/29/2006 5:21:01 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (If the gates of Hell prevail against it, it probably never was a church anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Delphinium
I hold the Constitution only slightly less holy than the Bible. I render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and give thanks daily that I live in a time and place where I have the opportunity and means to help control what Caesar (figuratively speaking) does.

We differ on means rather than ends. I don't think Harvey's actions advance the end. He may have changed some minds in his favor, I doubt it, but he almost certainly alienated others. It may have made him feel better in the short term but it did nothing to help actually achieve the end and it may have even hurt.

In the political arena, people of faith insist on making faith-based arguments that will only sway those who share that faith and alienate those who do not. This will not be enough. There are plenty of arguments against abortion that do not end with "God says so". These are the arguments that must be made if there is to be created a sufficient majority to overturn the current situation.

As far as the Bible being banned in this country, etc., people of faith often complain bitterly about the interpretation of the establishment clause of the Constitution while forgetting the rights it confers. It don't think even the most radical of atheists in this country has ever proposed that you and I be denied possession of a Bible or the chance to attend our chosen place of worship. And were they to do so, 99.999% of the country, including most of the atheists, would disagree with them and prevent it happening.
154 posted on 06/29/2006 6:49:42 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: FJ290

I would rather not win the battle and lose the war. And I'm not upset, but I think Harvey's is a bad tactic.


155 posted on 06/29/2006 6:51:02 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
However, I find the manner in which this young lady was sneaked into the Colorado House on false pretenses to be dishonest and unChristian. This is exactly the kind of stunt that gives Christians a bad name.

As I was reading it I, too, cringed when he repeatedly represented her as being a cerebral palsy advocate. That struck me as deceptive and misleading; he was withholding, even distorting, the truth. He did not invite her to appear because of her CP advocacy. But, that's the impression he gave the majority leader and the house.

156 posted on 06/29/2006 7:08:06 AM PDT by newgeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: TheClintons-STILLAnti-American

I don't agree that Christians are the ONLY group. But if you're going to hold yourself up as a standard of moral authority then you had better live it word and deed. A different (higher) standard is exactly right.


157 posted on 06/29/2006 7:19:57 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: BagCamAddict
Why not just bring the woman in and say, by the way, here's the other side of the Planned Parenthood story. So I think that's where the anger was, and that's why I agreed with the first person who posted that comment. (False pretext isn't exactly "Christian-like.")

I'm not sure "false pretext" is quite the right word, here. Everything Harvey said about her was true. Her story was deemed worthy enough to let her open the session. Everyone was upset only because Harvey went on to reveal another "inconvenient truth" about this woman, by discussing her prologue. Should she have been prevented from opening the session because she was an abortion survivor? If that was known, WOULD she have been?

Before you say that "not revealing everything up front isn't exactly Christian-like" - remember, even Jesus was known to hold back certain truths from many people, until just the right moment. (It's not like he started off by telling everyone "I'm the Son of God".)

I'm amused that everyone seems hung up on the lack of "full disclosure" in this case. That's a trait that hasn't always been Planned Parenthood's strong suit. It's hard for me to be upset that someone found a clever way to rain on their parade.
158 posted on 06/29/2006 7:46:46 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
As I was reading it I, too, cringed when he repeatedly represented her as being a cerebral palsy advocate.

Was she, or wasn't she?
159 posted on 06/29/2006 7:47:36 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
A beautiful story, we should hear similar stories more often. How God continues to protect this country after what we have done as a nation is beyond me. I realize that he is a loving God and what His Son was willing to suffer on our account saves us, BUT after killing millions of unborn children how can he continue to hear our prayers?

How can we sit idly by and watch it happen? Please make your opinions known on this issue to those that need to hear it!
160 posted on 06/29/2006 7:51:14 AM PDT by JAKraig (Joseph Kraig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BagCamAddict
I don't think my definition would change. The definition would be the same, but the age at which a baby can survive outside the womb is, and probably will continue to change. The point is not whether that "fetus" could survive if it were born in the year 2435, but whether or not it could live outside the womb TODAY. So the definition will stay the same forever, but the science/skills will change.

Maybe I don't understand your terminology. Maybe you could help by explaining how the above scenario would interact with your view on abortion.
161 posted on 06/29/2006 7:52:25 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer; Locomotive Breath
As I was reading it I, too, cringed when he repeatedly represented her as being a cerebral palsy advocate.
Was she, or wasn't she?


Never mind, I've answered my own question.

So, let's now go beat up Jesus for calling himself the Son of Man so many times, instead of coming right out and saying "Son of God" every time...
162 posted on 06/29/2006 8:09:40 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Incredible! Talk about a "stick it to ya!" moment! LOL Couldn't think of a more fitting way to address such a sick "celebration". I'm sure more than a few souls were touched that day!


163 posted on 06/29/2006 8:27:49 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Does anyone know if that resolution passed after all that happened? I saw the story a while back and couldn't find that info. Not that big an issue, but I'm just really curious!


164 posted on 06/29/2006 8:40:34 AM PDT by j_hig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom

I definitely don't think, nor did I say, that she should have been prevented from opening the session because she was an abortion survivor. That's why I said he should have just stated up front that she was an abortion survivor.

I don't know the political players involved, so I don't know if whe WOULD have been prevented from opening the session if that "inconvenient truth" had been known, but in today's world of thick animosity, she probably would have (depending on whether or not the person Harvey asked was pro-Life of pro-Choice!).

And no, Jesus didn't tell everyone he was the Son of God, but I think we can still agree that it's not Christian-like. There's a difference between a trait being "Christian-like" and an act being an exception to that rule. I simply said this wasn't "Christian-like." I didn't say it's never been done before, and I didn't say there aren't times when it's appropriate to do. But I'm sure neither you nor I think it's ok for Christians to go around living their lives and getting through life under false pretexts, backdoor slams, and blindsiding people.

And remember, just because Planned Parenthood isn't strong on "full disclosure", doesn't mean we can't hold ourselves to a higher standard. We don't have to swim in the gutter with people... that doesn't exactly make us any better than them.

I simply want everyone to act like grown-ups, be able to discuss things rationally, and treat each other with respect, regardless of whether they disagree about things. THAT, to me, is Christian-like, and I wish more so-called Christians would behave that way. (But now I am way off topic, so I apologize!)


165 posted on 06/29/2006 8:53:28 AM PDT by BagCamAddict (Prayers for the victims - human and animal - of Katrina and Rita)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom; Locomotive Breath
In my previous post, from which you quoted, I also wrote this:
He did not invite her to appear because of her CP advocacy. But, that's the impression he gave the majority leader and the house.

It appears to me he deliberately misled them. I trust you're familiar with the courtroom oath; it's not enough to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. It appears he purposely avoided telling the whole truth, with the intent of misleading his audience.

166 posted on 06/29/2006 8:57:29 AM PDT by newgeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
It appears to me he deliberately misled them.

They weren't misled - she is a CP advocate, she did everything he said she would do. If he had said nothing else afterwards, they would all still be fat, dumb and happy.

I trust you're familiar with the courtroom oath; it's not enough to tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

So, witnesses just go up and start spouting their story unprompted? They just start randomly volunteering details? Or, do they answer truthfully, but only to every question asked? Maybe you wanted to use a different analogy for this room full of lawyers called a legislature.

It appears he purposely avoided telling the whole truth, with the intent of misleading his audience.

'Intent' is subjective. As for the "whole truth", go tell it to the Son of Man...
167 posted on 06/29/2006 9:12:28 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom

For anyone else reading this, I replied to this post privately.


168 posted on 06/29/2006 9:17:09 AM PDT by BagCamAddict (Prayers for the victims - human and animal - of Katrina and Rita)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Planned Parenthood is an oxymoron. They should call it Planned Death For Potential Parents' Offspring.


169 posted on 06/29/2006 9:17:11 AM PDT by subterfuge (Call me a Jingoist, I don't care...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

A very beautiful story. Thanks for sharing.


170 posted on 06/29/2006 9:20:56 AM PDT by blitzgig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BagCamAddict
"I hope I've made sense here, but if not, tell me where I don't make sense and I'll try it again."

I don't believe it makes sense and/or I fail to see the logic.

Regarding the first point, this is what I believe I hear you saying…

According to your personal definition, the “entity” cannot survive outside the womb at <= 2 months gestation and is therefore not a baby.

Okay, I don’t agree, but I understand that.

According to your personal definition, the “entity” can survive outside the womb at => 5 months gestation and is therefore a baby.

I have a problem with that because NO fetus, not even one, can survive outside the womb at => 5 months gestation without care. Left alone they will die in short order… zero survival rate.

According to your personal definition, the entity between 2 months and 5 months gestation may or may not survive outside the womb… whether or not it is a real “baby” or a non-baby “fetus” is dependent on the care that the entity receives. So, under one set of conditions (superior care) a 5-month-gestation entity is a baby and under another set of conditions (inferior care) a 5-month-gestation entity is a non-baby “fetus.”

Again, as with the 5 months or longer gestation, I have a huge problem with this. It makes no sense to define life based on whether of not the fetus is cared for. Obviously, no care equals no survival.

Now to the second point… you try to separate “if” and for “how long” from your “could” survive equation. You really lose me here, big-time. I fail to see that logic at all. Look at it this way…

You would surely agree that a one-week-old baby, post birth, would not survive without care, correct? I’m going to assume that as a given. The same would apply to a one-day-old, post birth, baby. And it would apply to an 8-month gestation entity and it would a apply to a 5-month gestation entity and it would apply to a 3-month gestation entity and so on and so on until you get back to conception. You have a zero survival rate for all fetuses/babies/entities without care.

So, to answer “WHETHER or not a baby COULD live outside the womb…” I can only say that without care the entity CANNOT survive and never will. Therefore, you logically must do one of three things. One, you can move the definition of when a fetus becomes a baby forward to where the entity can survive entirely on its own… in order to take the external care factor out of the equation. Two, you can call the fetus a baby from conception regardless of the level of care thereby also taking the external care factor out of the equation. Or Three, you can define the level of external care that makes the difference between fetus and baby.

I believe your argument relies on the third option… i.e. dependent upon the level of care available… specifically between 2 and 5 months of gestation. That puts you back to a situational definition of a “baby” dependent upon current and changing medical technology and whether or not that level of care is available to that “fetus.” I think that is a horrific definition of life.

One more question (which may lead to an additional follow-up): If a fetus (pick any "fetus" period you like by your own definition) could survive outside the womb with readily available care and that care is denied resulting in its death, has a murder been committed?

Peace,
jw

171 posted on 06/29/2006 9:25:35 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: BagCamAddict
But I'm sure neither you nor I think it's ok for Christians to go around living their lives and getting through life under false pretexts, backdoor slams, and blindsiding people.

I think you're making an unfair comparison. If Harvey had made false statements about her to get her in the door, I would be more likely to agree that he did something wrong. However, the legislature believed they were getting a singing CP victim and advocate, that's what they were given, and they were completely satisfied with her. This entire argument is about what Harvey chose to say about her AFTER she was finished.

This entire scenario reads like one of those 'surprise-ending' parables, like the shrewd manager in Luke 16:8, or the guy buying the field with hidden treasure in Matthew 13:44. However, the way folks are reacting on this thread, I soon expect to see God's judgement pronounced on O. Henry.
172 posted on 06/29/2006 9:28:39 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Info.


173 posted on 06/29/2006 9:30:45 AM PDT by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
The majority leader is quoted as saying, "I think it was amazingly rude to use a human being as an example of his personal politics."

Did he mean that it's rude to point out what they stand for?

174 posted on 06/29/2006 9:36:21 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BagCamAddict
(And to reduce the number of people who will ask me at what point a "fetus" becomes a "baby", I'll tell you my personal definition: The point at which the baby can survive outside the womb.)

Your first post?

You last post

A baby begins its life at conception.

Sorry, now I realize that you aren't trying to make murdering a baby something else. You actually know it is murder and think it is okay.
175 posted on 06/29/2006 9:40:13 AM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

“It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish” – Mother Teresa


176 posted on 06/29/2006 9:43:00 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom

If a woman you didn't know asked to be let into your church pulpit to "witness" and you, acting in good faith, let her and then she turned out to be a radical feminist from PP would you feel like you've been lied to?


177 posted on 06/29/2006 9:45:38 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom

I think you've got that right. There was no deception. If the fact of her abortion survival had not been mentioned the oppostion would have had no objection. The mere mention of who she is as an abortion survivor set them aflame.

No motions, no arguments, no legislation, just the mere mention of her abortion survival at the hands of PP.

If honoring planned parenthood is a good idea, then why would the mere mention of how this woman survived be a problem?

The only reason it's a "problem" is because PP and it's supporters cannot honorably stand in the light of this one simple truth. They can only be honored in the dark.

I say hurrah for these brave folks.

jw


178 posted on 06/29/2006 9:49:10 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath

Sorry, I know the question wasn't for me, but my answer is no. That wouldn't be a lie at all.

Of course, my church would never give anyone the pulpit without knowing what will be taught or "witnessed."

jw


179 posted on 06/29/2006 9:54:45 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
There are plenty of arguments against abortion that do not end with "God says so"

Ofcourse there is , what do you think ALL the pro-life organizations use? The latest science.

As far as the Bible being banned in this country, etc.

If you believe the Bible, you should believe it will happen.

I don't believe Christians should shoot someone either, but what about war? Remember how we won the Revolutionary war? Our soldiers practiced gorilla warfare, instead of marching out in the open toward the enemy, which was the "proper way" to fight a war up until then. What about Christians working clandestant operations. What about Christian cops doing undercover investigations?

All these jobs require sneaking, and misrepresenting, and in some cases actually lying.
180 posted on 06/29/2006 10:02:52 AM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom
the way folks are reacting on this thread,

There seems to be only a couple of them.

Probably offended by his message
181 posted on 06/29/2006 10:06:32 AM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
If a woman you didn't know asked to be let into your church pulpit to "witness" and you, acting in good faith, let her and then she turned out to be a radical feminist from PP would you feel like you've been lied to?

Another bad analogy, since she would never be allowed to take the stage without knowing what topics she would cover. Besides, this isn't about what the woman said or did. Remember that.

But I'll play. If a random, unknown woman was sponsored by a deacon to come speak on the gospel of John, and we welcomed her, and she then SPOKE on John, and everyone enjoyed the message, and she sat down, and then the deacon said, "Oh yeah, nyah nyah, her area of expertise is MATTHEW" - well, little would happen.

But see, it's not like that. A better analogy would be if my church was an Episcopal church, and the occasion was the anniversary of the ordination of the first gay priest, and someone on the lay committee wanted to bring a woman to give a homily on inclusion and unity, and she did, and everyone loved it, and then AFTERWARD, the sponsor stood up and said, "oh, by the way, she used to be a lesbian but she has since renounced homosexuality"...THAT would be a closer parallel.

So long as the messenger was the person promised, of the character promised, and delivered the promised message, I'm not sure there's much to beef about. If there's a standing policy that "no messenger shall be A", and you lie and say "they're not A", that's bad. However, I think there's good precedent for saving 'inconvenient but not disqualifying' truths for later. Unless you think that Judge Alito shouldn't have been confirmed...
182 posted on 06/29/2006 10:07:34 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: JWinNC
So, to combine your last two posts, having not checked her out in advance, the legislature should not have allowed her to speak under any circumstances even though they had faith in their legislator's words about what she would do?

Does your church have an ideological truth scanner in the vestibule where you can tell what people are going to say? Or is it a "members only" club.

In my book, holding back information and willfully and knowingly allowing someone to misunderstand your meaning and intentions is every bit the same as a direct lie.
183 posted on 06/29/2006 10:08:29 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Delphinium
Our soldiers practiced gorilla warfare,

Minor nit:

GUERILLA:


GORILLA:



184 posted on 06/29/2006 10:12:42 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
So, to combine your last two posts, having not checked her out in advance, the legislature should not have allowed her to speak under any circumstances even though they had faith in their legislator's words about what she would do?

It's just not sinking in. THE LEGISLATURE HAD ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH ANYTHING, ANYTHING THIS WOMAN DID. It was the "postlude" that sent them into a tailspin.

Does your church have an ideological truth scanner in the vestibule where you can tell what people are going to say? Or is it a "members only" club.

I'm really interested to find out exactly what type of church you go to, because these questions are somewhat odd. Our "free form" worship tends to take place in smaller groups; our larger congregational meetings don't really lend itself well to random people running up to the pulpit on a whim. So, yes, if you're going to speak to the congregation at large, we pretty much like to know in advance what your message is, and why. Once again, I will note that the woman in question DID NOT DEVIATE FROM THE PROMISED PERFORMANCE TO THE LEGISLATURE. You're still not using a correct analogy.

In my book, holding back information and willfully and knowingly allowing someone to misunderstand your meaning and intentions is every bit the same as a direct lie.

In my Book, Jesus pretty much avoided calling Himself the Son of God unless He was directly asked (at least until very late in the game). He rode into Jerusalem knowing full well that most of the people celebrating His entry expected a rebellion against the Romans, not a willing crucifixion - and He let them wave the palm branches anyway. I guess you find Him guilty, also.
185 posted on 06/29/2006 10:26:08 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom
Another bad analogy, since she would never be allowed to take the stage without knowing what topics she would cover.

You continue to make my points for me. Harvey/Jessen represented this as a celebration of a CP survivor.

I wrote a quick note to the speaker of the House explaining that Gianna is an advocate for cerebral palsy.

It was checked out in advance. But Harvey/Jessen lied about their intentions and, having gotten the microphone, did something different and completely unrelated. Jessen was promised as "A" which was accurate and "A" was acceptable but Jessen was "A" and "B" when it was known by Harvey that "B" would be unacceptable.

The enduring message delivered to the Speaker of the House and anyone listening was that "Harvey the Christian" cannot be trusted. But the Speaker's a baby-killing infidel and it's OK to lie to them? You only have to be truthful to other Christians? Is that your point of view?
186 posted on 06/29/2006 10:31:22 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Delphinium
All these jobs require sneaking, and misrepresenting, and in some cases actually lying.

All these jobs require sanction of the higher civil authority and many Christians turn them down as a matter of conscience and many do not. Some who turn them down are subject to penalty by the civil authority. Each person can be guided only by his/her faith and conscience.
187 posted on 06/29/2006 10:31:29 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom

You continue to focus on Jessen. I'm talking about Harvey's behavior and remarks.


188 posted on 06/29/2006 10:36:07 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom

And to be more specific he told them he wanted to introduce her as a CP survivor when in fact he principally wanted to introduce her as an abortion survivor. He did this with her collusion of course.


189 posted on 06/29/2006 10:50:09 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
”So, to combine your last two posts, having not checked her out in advance, the legislature should not have allowed her to speak under any circumstances even though they had faith in their legislator's words about what she would do?”

No, I wouldn’t say that. Perhaps I need to re-read the story. I thought the only thing she did was sing the anthem and for that there was permission. I was not aware that she also spoke? I thought she did exactly what the legislator said she would do?

”Does your church have an ideological truth scanner in the vestibule where you can tell what people are going to say?

Anyone can say anything they like, just not from the pulpit. Anyone who is given the pulpit is either vetted in advance or they are already known. It would be unwise to not know.

”Or is it a "members only" club.”

Not.

“In my book, holding back information and willfully and knowingly allowing someone to misunderstand your meaning and intentions is every bit the same as a direct lie.”

I would agree with that in some cases and possibly not in others, but regardless, I don’t believe that is what happened in this matter at least as far as I know what happened.

jw

190 posted on 06/29/2006 10:58:03 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: JWinNC
I would agree with that in some cases and possibly not in others, but regardless, I don’t believe that is what happened in this matter at least as far as I know what happened.

See my post #189.
191 posted on 06/29/2006 11:03:53 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
re: 189

"...to be more specific he told them he wanted to introduce her as a CP survivor..."

I have read it five times now and cannot find this.

192 posted on 06/29/2006 11:10:52 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: JWinNC
I wrote a quick note to the speaker of the House explaining that Gianna is an advocate for cerebral palsy.

OK the actual language was "advocate" but not "survivor" but by the descriptions given apparently one look at her would indicate that she was both.
193 posted on 06/29/2006 11:13:36 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Blessed Bump!

Blessed be God forever!!!!!
194 posted on 06/29/2006 11:33:00 AM PDT by MI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom
So, using your post as an analogy springboard.

Suppose your church announces that Sunday's sermon is "The Abomination of Homosexuality". You're a church member, you don't agree, and you want to "spoil the party". So, at the last minute, you discover a lesbian woman who's a Christian singer and you want to use her to make a point. She has a history as a Christian signer and has produced several CDs of traditional hymns. Her lesbianism appears nowhere in her music. You ask the pastor if she can perform and, since time is short, based on the strength of her work and based on faith in your recommendation he agrees.

She performs traditional hymns and enthralls the congregation. The pastor and all the congregation are all clearly pleased at her great faith as expressed in her music. At that point, just before the sermon, you pounce and announce she's a lesbian and that the pastor is about to condemn her.

Have you behaved in a deceitful manner? Will you deserve the condemnation that is sure to follow from the other members of the congregation?
195 posted on 06/29/2006 11:42:22 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
You continue to make my points for me. Harvey/Jessen represented this as a celebration of a CP survivor.

Did they not celebrate that? Did SHE as a speaker cover anything else?

You insist that Harvey lied. He did not. You don't like the fact he didn't disclose everything. Fine - that's your right. There's an awful lot about yourself you haven't disclosed here. Maybe there's something about you which, if I knew it, would completely discredit you in my eyes.

Are you a Christian? Do you attend church regularly? What denomination? SHOULD any of these answers matter to how I perceive your logic? MIGHT they?
196 posted on 06/29/2006 11:42:32 AM PDT by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm confused. That "note" was to get permission for her to sing the anthem, which was given and that's all she did.

The introductions, according to the story, were later.

"...proceeded as usual to allow members to make any announcements or introductions of guests."

According to that he could have introduced her at the time he did without permission and without prior knowledge. It was their regular procedure. He didn't have to do anything to make that happen. It was the usual procedure, no deception.

Then the Speaker stops him from "debating" an issue at that time, to which he replies he understands and gives a one sentence explaination and then stands down.

It sounds to me like he used the rules and procedures to great effect without breaking them or using deception. What was so upsetting was not anything she did or said, not anything he said or did, just the simple revelation that she survived an abortion. That's all! Why could that one final fact not be celebrated as well as all the preceding?

jw


197 posted on 06/29/2006 11:43:14 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: JWinNC

Oh my, you've stated the truth of the situation ... and that will really tic off LB because misrepresenting will no longer work. Duck, incoming ...


198 posted on 06/29/2006 11:54:41 AM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: FJ290

I have told this story before. Once I met a beautiful 16 year old girl was was a result of a rape and her mother did not want to kill her own daughter even though what happened to her was very ugly. Every once in a while I think of this beautiful girl and then wonder how many other young women and men did not get the chance to live because of someone else's evil act. That beautiful girl did nothing to bring on a death sentence but so many do every day. She started out as just the being the potential of life,Gods gift.For me as a christian I believe life is given by a man and a woman and the blessing of God. Blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.


199 posted on 06/29/2006 11:56:17 AM PDT by red irish (Gods Children in the womb are to be loved too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: JWinNC

See my post #195. Would the scenario described there be a problem for you?


200 posted on 06/29/2006 11:56:52 AM PDT by Locomotive Breath (In the shuffling madness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-279 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson