Posted on 11/08/2010 12:59:18 PM PST by RobinMasters
Over the last week, excerpts of George W. Bush’s Monday-night interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer have shown a candid former president. But if a new excerpt obtained by the New York Post is any indication, the George W. Bush we may see tonight isn’t going to hold much back, and it could get graphic.
According to the Post, Bush will recall a detailed story about what set him down the path to becoming pro-life. That story includes his mother, Barbara, preserving and showing a young George one of her miscarried fetuses. From the Post:
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
Ol’ Bar is sure hardcore.
But why keep the baby in a jar, why not give it a proper burial?
Seems like the press is looking for fodder to keep the media off The great one.
Ho boy. Can’t wait for THIS story to get spun out of context by the libtards. You can already see it with some of the comments on The Blaze.
Sigh. You can’t fix stupid.
I agree on the proper burial. Keeping the baby in a jar comes off as extremely disturbing to me.
First of all, I am pro-life. My views on life were also shaped by seeing and caring for my pre-mature daughter.
But, WHO KEEPS THEIR MISCARRIAGED BABIES IN A JAR?
Barb did what??
Is she a mad scientist?
Bizarre.
Same thing happened to my son and his wife.
Read the article. She put it in a jar to bring to the hospital. Some doctors want to see the fetus to determine:
a) What went wrong, to assist in future pregnancies
b) If the entire fetus was intact or if anything remains in the woman
It’s not like she pickled the child and kept it on the frickin’ mantle.
Reading the article, it appears that the miscarriage happened at home and she was taking the jar to the hospital so they could check to make sure the miscarriage was complete.
“But, WHO KEEPS THEIR MISCARRIAGED BABIES IN A JAR?”
READ THE ARTICLE!
No one kept anything in a jar except to transport to the hospital for diagnostic purposes. I suppose you would have preferred the child get flushed?
Sheesh.
Sounds too bizarre to be true.
Is it true? Do the vast majority of Freepers not actually read an article to dig deeper into the facts?
Sadly, this seems to be the case.
See my comments above if you are too lazy to read the article itself.
In 1974 or 75, the anti-abortion lecture at my Catholic school was given by an ob-gyn who did indeed show us fetuses in jars. I’m not surprised W saw a fetus in a jar. I am a little surprised it was his own brother or sister.
I was a very small child when I saw a developmental series of fetuses in jars at a local nature museum. You could never convince me the fetus was not human after that, and yet that these babies were exhibited in this fashion was proof that they were not considered to be possessed of human dignity.
Never never would a local museum have a series of fetuses now.
I lost three babies before birth, and I would have showed them to my other children if I thought it would help them instead of distressing them. I didn’t think it would help.
As Paul Harvey would say, “Now you know the rest of the story.” Thank you for the clarification.
“If ‘pro’ is the opposite of ‘con’ what is the opposite of ‘progress’?” A little dig at the Legislatures from Mr. H.
And just for fun, from same: “Golf is a game in which you yell “fore,” shoot six, and write down five.”
No, they don’t read the articles.
As evidenced by the post FOLLOWING yours!
Sad isn’t the only word I’d use.
thank you for your clarifications...
As several freepers point out, and as mentioned on earlier threads, Barbara Bush put the miscarried fetus in a jar to bring it to the hospital, in hopes that they could figure out what went wrong.
But it seems very strange to me that a mother would show it to her small child. That is strange, indeed.
Barbara Bush was pro-choice, although she kept quiet about it while in the White House.
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.