.@WendyDavisTexas continues to run away from her abortion record: “I am #prolife”

Wendy Davis' shoes

These shoes were made for runnin’ … away from your pro-abortion record? Photo via Dallas News.

As has been previously reported, feminista darling-turned candidate for Texas governor Wendy Davis is running away as fast as she can from her abortion record.  Her “introduction” campaign video to the state of Texas last month didn’t mention the word abortion nor talk about the issue once, in spite of the fact that her rise to national prominence is based SOLELY on that one issue.

Yesterday in Brownsville, TX, the TX state senator took another giant leap away from her staunch abortion advocacy record by actually claiming that she – the one who tried to filibuster a bill that would make abortions illegal after 20 weeks – was pro-life.  Via the Valley Morning Star (bolded emphasis added by me):

But while in Brownville Tuesday, Davis revealed her campaign for governor isn’t based on her abortion filibuster and brightly colored shoes.

Her campaign stop at the University of Texas at Brownsville centered on a lesser-known filibuster of hers: one she conducted in 2011 in opposition to a budget that tried to cut $4 billion from public education.

Education, she said, was crucial to the fulfillment of what she called Texas’ promise.

“If you work hard you can become anything you desire to be in a place like Texas,” she said. “That promise was one that my state delivered to me when I was young, but the promise today really has been broken.”

Indeed, it has, ironically enough by pro-choice politicos like Wendy Davis who are perfectly ok with unborn children having the very opportunities she and her fellow Texans were given from the moment they were born away from them: The chance to be born and to have the opportunity to “become anything you desire to be.”

Continuing on:

Davis said her approach to job growth differs from the Republican plan just as her approach toward the goal of having zero abortions in Texas differs, characterizing herself as a reluctant participant in the abortion debate.

“The battle over reproductive rights and women’s health care that was waged on June 25 was not a battle I chose,” she said. “When I believe women’s health is in danger, I’m going to stand and fight to protect that.”

[…]

“This isn’t about protecting abortion. It’s about protecting women,” she said. “It’s about trusting women to make good decisions for themselves and empowering them with the tools to do that.”

[…]

“(I’m) a woman who wants desperately for others who are coming up in poverty to receive the same kind of partnership from the state that I once received so that they too can become a part of the success of Texas,” she said.

Davis suggested that her views on abortion access do not mean she does not care about life.

I am pro-life,” she said, borrowing from the label anti-abortion activists assign themselves. “I care about the life of every child: every child that goes to bed hungry, every child that goes to bed without a proper education, every child that goes to bed without being able to be a part of the Texas dream, every woman and man who worry about their children’s future and their ability to provide for that future. I care about life and I have a record of fighting for people above all else.

Only after they are born, though – not before. And that’s the problem, Ms. Davis. The unborn are people worth fighting for, too.

Related:  Wendy Davis sued her hometown newspaper (and Disney) for WHAT?

Post-20 week abortion ban in Texas still stands – for now

Texas State Senator State Senator Bob Deuell

Republican State Senator Bob Deuell, who set two pairs of infant shoes on the counter, speaks during a July TX senate hearing on a proposed abortion bill in Austin. Photo via Mike Stone / Reuters

Some news reports erroneously reported early on today that HB 2 – the hotly debated Texas abortion law pro-abortion State Senator Wendy Davis (now a gubernatorial candidate) attempted to filibuster back in June – had been “blocked” in its entirety by a federal judge, leading to a lot of  misinformation being spread initially about the ruling … including by yours truly on social media.   While it’s true that parts of the bill HAVE been blocked for the time being, the post-20 week ban on abortions, which is set to take effect tomorrow, has not been blocked as of yet and wasn’t challenged in this case.  Via the Austin American-Statesman (hat tip):

A federal judge on Monday barred Texas from enforcing a key provision of an abortion law that was to take effect Tuesday.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel’s opinion found that a provision requiring abortion doctors to gain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital “does not bear a rational relationship to the legitimate right of the state in preserving and promoting fetal life or a woman’s health.”

Yeakel also barred Texas from enforcing a provision regulating the dispensing of abortion-inducing drugs for “women for whom surgical abortion is, in the sound medical opinion of their treating physician, a significant health risk.” However, he allowed other parts of the provision, including a requirement for one extra office visit, to stand.

[…]

Abortion providers also complained that the law did not give them enough time. Hospitals have 170 days to rule on a request for privileges, but the law was to go into effect 90 days after the special legislative session ended in July.

In his ruling, Yeakel said the rule “places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus and is thus an undue burden to her.”

Gov. Rick Perry said state officials will continue efforts to enact HB 2.

[…]

The case next heads to federal appeals court, where abortion-related Texas laws have recently prevailed:

[…]

One provision of the law, a ban on abortions at 20 weeks post-fertilization, was not challenged and will take effect Tuesday. The limit, with exceptions if the mother’s life is in danger and in cases of severe fetal abnormality, is four weeks earlier than current law.

Another HB 2 provision, requiring abortion clinics meet the same requirements as day surgery centers, does not take effect until Sept. 1, 2014 and is expected to be challenged in court in the future.

It’s anticipated that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, also running for Governor, will file an emergency appeal on the ruling with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans,

#TeamWendy: Is @WendyDavisTexas running away from her pro-abortion record?

Wendy Davis' shoes

These shoes were made for runnin’ … away from your pro-abortion record? Photo via Dallas News.

National Review’s Jim Geraghty noticed this from a fundraiser email sent out by Davis supporter and San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro:

Friend –

I just had a great meeting with my friend Wendy Davis here in San Antonio.

We talked about job creation and economic empowerment for all Texans — and I left reminded of her extraordinary determination to make Texas even better than it already is.

If you caught Wendy’s announcement speech last week, you saw why she’s been able to inspire so many people, both here in Texas and across the country. I’m going to do everything I can between now and next November to make sure she gets to the Governor’s Mansion.

Show Senator Davis she’s not taking on this challenge alone — add your name to say you’re with Wendy for governor in 2014.

Wendy is fearless.

She overcame a background of poverty to put herself through Harvard law school.

She once stood for hours to filibuster a bill that would have resulted in billions of dollars in cuts to public education for our kids.

“Stood for hours” in a filibuster over …. cuts in education funding?  Geraghty rightly calls foul:

Castro (or the staffer who wrote this) is just flat-out lying.  Davis made a one-hour-and-fifteen minute filibuster in 2011 about public education spending. The only time she stood for “hours” was in her 2013 filibuster to stop a bill that would ”ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, require abortion clinics to meet the same standards that hospital-style surgical centers do, and mandate that a doctor who performs abortions have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.”

The Castro e-mail is attempting to blur the lines between the two filibusters, perhaps hoping they can fool people that the more recent and high-profile filibuster wasn’t really about late-term abortions but about education.

Nowhere in that email is the mention of abortion, and that’s not the only place you can’t find it.   Watch her four and a half minute “intro” video to the state of Texas. No mention of abortion. At all. In fact, she doesn’t even mention her party affiliation, which even the liberal LA Times noticed:

What’s missing in the four-minute-30-second spot? Any mention of Davis’ party affiliation, to wit, her affiliation with the Democratic Party.

The two-term state senator from Fort Worth is waging a decidedly uphill fight in the race to succeed Republican Gov. Rick Perry. It’s been more than two decades since Texans elected a Democratic governor,  and Republicans are riding a winning streak of more than 100 victories in statewide contests.

Although Davis vaulted to overnight celebrity on the strength of her June filibuster against antiabortion legislation, she can’t possibly win running as an abortion rights crusader or champion of the political left. That explains why she made no mention of her famous filibuster in last week’s announcement speech, focusing instead on education and accountability in Austin, the state capital.

It also explains the omission of the D-word — no, not Dallas — in her new campaign video.

But Texans needn’t worry. By the time the campaign is over, Republicans will have worked so hard tying her to the national Democratic Party that voters might think it’s Davis, not Joe Biden, who is President Obama’s understudy in the White House.

As they should. After all, hasn’t Ms. Davis’ name been mentioned as a possible VP candidate to Hillary Clinton, should the former Secretary of State decide to run for the Oval Office again? Yep.

This is all very interesting. Who would have ever thought that the “courageous” woman who “stood for hours in pink (actually rouge red) tennis shoes’ for the right to mutilate your unborn baby after 20 weeks would, in so many words, be running away from her now ‘legendary’ record on the topic – even going so far as to pose in a campaign photo with children who were fortunate enough to be born? Let’s hope she held on to those sneakers …

Late-term abortion proponent @WendyDavisTexas poses w/ kids to launch #TeamWendy Gov. campaign

The writing has been on the wall for weeks now, but yesterday late-term abortion champion Wendy Davis officially announced her campaign for Governor of Texas … with a picture of her with young children:


The irony of Ms. Davis posing with children after her now famous (infamous) attempted filibuster of a Texas bill – ultimately passed in the next special session – that would ban the brutal termination of unborn children after 20 weeks wasn’t lost on anyone. Clearly, Davis would like to put a happy face on the ugliest part of her “legacy” as a “heroine for women’s rights” – that legacy being the unconditional advocacy for the “right” to literally cut off the life of the most innocent among us before they’ve had the first chance to breathe on their own. But pro-lifers won’t be so quick to let it slide, nor will conservative Texans who will fight proudly to keep her out of the Governor’s chair.

Unsurprisingly, her close pal and Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards – daughter of the last pro-abortion female Democrat Governor of Texas Ann Richards – holds a different view, and could not contain her excitement at helping Wendy Davis launch her campaign:


“Great news for women in Texas”? For the born ones, maybe, but surely not the unborn women Wendy Davis would accept being aborted during the later weeks of pregnancy where the development of the unborn child is undeniable.

Democrats are doing their darnedest to turn Texas blue, and they believe even if Wendy Davis doesn’t win next year that she’ll make significant inroads with the more “purple” citizens of Texas. Let’s hope the Lone Star State does the right thing by resoundingly rejecting Wendy Davis at the ballot box next year, sending a message to radical liberals everywhere: far left extremists need not apply.

Wendy Davis

Gov. Wendy Davis? I pray Texans will tell her to hit the door in November 2014.

Disturbing: Congress, staff members will get abortion coverage under #Obamcare exchanges

What

Shaking my head.

Quite simply … wow:

The Office of Personnel Management ruled Monday that members of Congress and their staffs will be able to buy health care plans that pay for abortions, even though the premiums are funded largely by taxpayer money — a move that conservatives say breaks federal law on abortion funding.

Under the terms of Obamacare, lawmakers and their aides are required to ditch their government-sponsored plans and buy insurance on state-based health care exchanges, though unlike most people on the exchanges, the staffers and members will have most of the costs of their premiums paid by their employer — in this case, taxpayers.

Federal law generally prevents taxpayer money from being used to pay for abortions, but OPM said the health care plans offered through the exchange were private. The agency also said it will make sure the money is segregated so that the portion that pays for abortions comes out of the employees’ own contributions, which amounts to about a quarter of the premiums.

“While plans with such coverage may be offered on an Exchange, OPM can and will take appropriate administrative steps to ensure that the cost of any such coverage purchased by a member of Congress or a congressional staffer from a designated [exchange] is accounted for and paid by the individual rather than from the government contribution, consistent with the general prohibition on federal funds being used for this purpose,” OPM said in its ruling.

Rep. Christopher H. Smith, New Jersey Republican, said OPM is violating a law he wrote in 1983 that prohibits OPM from paying any expenses to administer plans that cover abortion, except in cases of rape or incest or when the mother’s life is in danger.

“You can’t break the law, Mr. President, and just issue a final rule as if somehow you’re comporting with the law,” Mr. Smith told The Washington Times. “We don’t want to subsidize abortion on demand, and the public is absolutely with us.”

Freaking amazing how often this  administration gets to pick and choose (and gets away with it!) what laws it wants itself and Congress to abide by and which ones they’ll ignore, while the rest of us peons have to follow the letter of the law and foot the bill as well, regardless of moral and/or religious objections.   Lonely Conservative writes in response (via):

President Obama had a press conference late this afternoon and again blabbered about how Obamacare is the law of the land and Congress should abide by it. That’s funny, because he’s constantly ignoring or scrapping the parts of the law that are politically inconvenient to him. (Not to mention all of the other laws he routinely ignores.)

[…]

The lawbreaking continues. Just today it was announced that lawmakers and their staffs can get abortion coverage under their Obamacare plans, which will be funded by the taxpayers. They say that the abortion coverage will only be funded by the share the employees pay, but how will they even separate that out?

In other news, the media continues to ignore his ongoing claim that there is no “widespread evidence” that Obamacare is hurting employment. So expect them to continue ignoring his lawlessness. By now it’s patently obvious that most of them are nothing more than another arm of the White House press office.

Move along here, nothing to see. :(

Moral Bankruptcy Continued: “Feminist” explains why sex selective abortions are “ok”

Another day, another example of the utter failure of the modern day “feminist” movement when it comes to the responsibility and accountability of women (hat tip):

When you talk about being pro-choice, sex selective abortion is often slung at you as the triumphant gotcha. “You love women so much you want them to be in charge of what grows inside their bodies, but what about the women who areaborted, have a go at answering that? ZING!”

The answer is actually remarkably simple, and it’s this: it doesn’t matter whether what’s growing inside you is liable to end up as a man or a woman. What matters is whether the person it’s growing inside – the person who is going to have to deliver the resulting baby, at not inconsiderable personal peril – actually wants to be pregnant and give birth to this child. In a world where it’s possible to end a pregnancy safely and legally, it seems like rank brutality to force anyone to carry to term against her will.

And as far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t matter why any woman wants to end her pregnancy. As the conscious and legally competent entity in the conception set-up, it’s the woman’s say that counts, and even the most terrible reason for having an abortion holds more sway than the best imaginable reason for compelling a woman to carry to term.

National Review writer Alec Torres comments:

[Writer Sarah] Ditum argues gendercide might actually be laudable. “What about when a pregnant woman lives in a society that gives her real and considerable reason to fear having a girl? . . . In those situations, a woman wouldn’t just be justified in seeking sex selective abortion; she’d be thoroughly rational in doing so,” she writes. Ditum doesn’t mention how societies where women are afraid to have female children will be served by protecting their right to kill babies of a certain gender.

Simple answer: Because the modern day “feminist” movement is NOT about “women’s rights” – it’s about abortion rights, no matter the reason – no matter the stage of pregnancy.  Once you understand this, everything else they say and do is illuminated quite revealingly.

Margaret Sanger would be darned proud of left wing tools like Ms. Ditum, wouldn’t she?  And yet leftists accuse US of being heartless, cold, uncaring ….

Flashback: 6/7/11 – Fem writer: Let’s cut down on sex-selective abortions by respecting ‘right’ to choose

Fetus

Fact: Gender equality should *always* start before birth.

UK gender abortion doctors won’t face charges because it’s “not in the public interest”

Sad and sick:

Doctors who agreed to arrange illegal abortions based on the sex of an unborn baby have been told they will not face criminal charges, despite prosecutors admitting that there is enough evidence to take them to court, it emerged on Wednesday night.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was accused of failing to uphold the law after it ruled that it would not be in the “public interest” to prosecute the two doctors exposed in an undercover Daily Telegraph investigation.

Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, on Wednesday night raised the case with the Attorney General. The two doctors were filmed agreeing to arrange terminations for women who requested them purely because they said they did not want to have a baby girl.

One of the doctors did so despite likening the practice to “female infanticide” while the other told a woman her job was not to “ask questions”.

The CPS acknowledged, following a 19-month inquiry, that there was sufficient evidence to warrant a prosecution with a “realistic prospect of conviction”. But it told police that a “public interest test” had not been met.

The CPS said that there was no need to mount a prosecution because the General Medical Council, the body which oversees the conduct of doctors, could deal with the case. However, the GMC has no criminal powers and cannot prosecute breaches of the law.

Mr Hunt voiced alarm at the decision and pressed for “urgent clarification” from the Attorney General.

He said: “We are clear that gender selection abortion is against the law and completely unacceptable.

“This is a concerning development and I have written to the Attorney General to ask for urgent clarification on the grounds for this decision.”

Sources familiar with the Scotland Yard investigation said that prosecutors saw the issue as “sensitive” and that it had become “political”.

And why has it become “sensitive” and “political”, you may ask?  We can look to a recent case right here at home – the one of baby killer “Dr.” Kermit Gosnell, who was allowed to operate his abortion clinic for years without any significant state oversight, primarily because so-called “women’s rights” advocates think too much oversight of abortion clinics amounts to “invading the privacy rights of women.” We saw that right here in North Carolina when, earlier this year, the NC General Assembly (our state legislature) pushed for laws that would protect NC women from Gosnell types. It was strongly opposed by militant feminists who lied and stated that it would shut down all but one abortion clinic here in NC.

The “feminist” response here in NC and other states to recent proposals to strengthen protections for women at abortion clinics, the state of PA cowering and bowing under pressure from supposed proponents of “the best care possible for women” to relax their inspection times and standards – which lead to the Gosnell horrors, and the fact that the cases mentioned in the above link have become “sensitive” and “political” shows us once again that when it comes to “women’s health” and abortion, feminists will chose abortion over women’s health any day of the week.   Not to mention the health of the unborn women who are aborted based on their sex. Who stands up for their rights? Certainly not feminists.  Just ask TX state Senator Wendy Davis where she stands on this and watch her dodge and weave to try and completely avoid having to admit the sickening truth about her position.

It’s a disturbing commentary on the state of modern feminism, and we must continue to push back against it – because, dammit, it IS in the public interest.

Fetus

Fact: Gender equality should *always* start before birth.

When @WendyDavisTexas raises a nice chunk of change, what is she REALLY doing?

The Dallas Morning News reports in depth on fundraising numbers for new “feminist” media/liberal darling – TX state Senator Wendy Davis (hat tip):

In the six weeks following her headline-grabbing filibuster, Wendy Davis raised $1.2 million — nearly 40 percent of it from outside Texas. Davis drew national attention following the filibuster against an abortion-restriction bill that helped shut down the Texas Senate and prompted Gov. Rick Perry to call lawmakers back into another special session. In the wake of Davis’ new-found fame, Davis has been urged by some Democrats to run for governor next year. She says she will announce her political plans — whether to run for reelection as a senator from Fort Worth or as a Democrat for governor — in a few weeks.

Her latest finance report shows that between the June 25 filibuster through July, Davis raised $793,800 from Texas and nearly $470,000 from donors outside Texas. Her biggest donor states were California ($103,694), New York ($68,764) and the Washington DC area ($59,000).

No surprise there considering the liberal bent of CA, NY, and DC, but when you think about it, what is Ms. Davis really doing when she puts on her high heels and fashionable outfits to raise money for whatever her eventual future campaign will be (whether it’s re-election to the state Senate or Governor) ? She’s whipping up the masses into a frenzy and convincing them to donate to her campaign all the while walking all over the backs of past, present, and future aborted babies.  As a friend on Facebook put it:

That’s a powerful metaphor, ST. Wendy in her fashionable Louboutins trampling all those broken little bodies.

Yes. Remember that the next time you see Ms. Davis on MSNBC or some other similar left wing network / program being fawned over by whoever she is being interviewed by at the time.  Remember that when you read stories from the mediots about how “amazing” her fundraising talents are, how “bright” her future is.  All of it, every single bit of it, is because she “stood up” against people who wanted to protect unborn babies at the 20 week mark and beyond from being mutilated by the inhumane abortion procedure that would pull their little body parts out bit by bloody piece.  Sen. Davis stood up for the “right” for a women to kill their unborn babies for any reason – not just talking about life of the mother reasons here, which would be understandable, but for ANY reason.  How much “guts” does it take to stand up for a woman’s “right” to kill her unborn child when you know what glowing national press you will receive? It’s stark, and difficult to contemplate, but it must be said.

Wendy Davis essentially tap dances on the dead bodies and graves of the millions of aborted babies who will never get the chance that she was blessed with to find their way in the world, and people should never forget that, no matter how sharp her fashion style is.

Wendy Davis

No amount of make-up, high fashion, and glamour will change the horror of what this woman advocates. Never forget. (Photo courtesy of Vogue)

Contrast: @WendyDavisTexas glamorizes abortion, while @KonniBurton humanizes the unborn

There’s much discussion and fanfare today over pro-abortion, filibuster-happy TX state senator Wendy Davis [D] being glamorously profiled on the pages of the far-left feminist magazine Vogue (the upcoming September edition).  The Politico gives us the short version of the puff piece:

The magazine’s upcoming September issue, known for being chock-full of fall fashion, features a glowing profile and a glamorous picture of Davis, a Democratic lawmaker from Fort Worth, Texas, who may be mounting a bid for governor. The piece offers a revealing look at Davis’s personal journey: how a struggling single mother went on to graduate from Harvard Law School and become a leading figure in the state’s Democratic politics, and recently garnering national attention.

[…]

This summer, she led a 13-hour filibuster (wearing pink Mizuno sneakers [actually rouge red — ST] and a blue Escada coat, Vogue noted) that temporarily derailed a restrictive abortion measure, drawing national attention from major political players — including President Barack Obama, who tweeted support for her. While the bill ultimately passed, Davis’s newfound fame hasn’t diminished as she continues to weigh a gubernatorial bid.

“You won’t change things unless you are prepared to fight, even if you don’t win,” she told Vogue, adding, “But I do hate losing.”

The magazine notes that Davis, who has two daughters, now lives in a “Spanish-style townhouse” and is dating the former mayor of Austin, who launched the “Keep Austin Weird” initiative — a ubiquitous slogan today in the Texas capital. She raised nearly $1 million in the wake of her filibuster and made the rounds on political television, sparking national chatter about her future plans.

“Even if she wasn’t beautiful, even if she didn’t wear cute pink shoes, even if she didn’t have a perfect-seeming life, it would still be a very compelling story,” said Heidi Mitchell, a writer who penned the Davis profile. “None of those things hurt,” she added.

The story dishes about Davis’s unruly curly hair and impressive closet as it also outlines the challenging political landscape Democrats face in Texas and details her rise to prominence in the state’s political apparatus.

Isn’t that just lovely and sweet and all sugary and spicy? /sarc

What’s interesting about the article is that the word abortion doesn’t  appear at all in it, though “antiabortion” is in it in three different spots, but it makes clear what hot button issue helped her rise to national prominence, what’s gotten her cult-like supporters/fanatics hoping she’ll run for the TX governor spot: abortion, and Davis’ unapologetic enthusiasm for the grossly inhumane, immoral procedure which – at 20 weeks, where the pro-life bill Davis unsuccessfully filibustered says should be the cut off point for abortion – tears unborn baby body parts out of a pregnant woman piece by brutal, bloody piece. It should also be noted that Davis is on record as supporting the premise behind Roe v. Wade, which essentially says abortion should be available and unrestricted up until around the 24 week mark. That’s 4 more weeks of development that Ms. Davis would support ripping apart – literally.

Contrast that with the woman who could be her opponent in the state senate race (Fort Worth district SD-10), should she make it past the GOP primary – Tea Party candidate and adoptive mom Konni Burton:

Republican State Senate candidate Konni Burton Wednesday released a video online of one of her own two adopted daughters attacking Davis on abortion.

“I am thankful for the strength my birth mother had when she chose to place me up for adoption,” said 22-year-old Tori Burton in the video.

“Tori was more than happy to do that,” Konni Burton said. “It was a joy to do that with her.”

Konni Burton said the idea for the video actually began with a Facebook post by Tori, who was upset with Sen. Davis.

“We decided we needed to get the message out that my children are here because they were not aborted,” candidate Burton said.

She volunteered for years at the Edna Gladney Adoption Center, campaigned hard for Sen. Ted Cruz, and said Wendy Davis’ stand on abortion — which brought her attention — will ultimately be her undoing.

Let’s hope so. Here’s the powerful video Burton released featuring adopted daughter Tori Burton:

 

Powerful, especially when Konni Burton says this:

“Wendy Davis *says* she’s standing for women, but she has forgotten the women who will never have the chance to stand for themselves because their lives were taken while still in the womb.”

Ms. Davis rakes in thousands of campaign dollars – and continues to elevate her national profile – on the backs of dead, aborted babies.  This, in spite of her own life story, which is very much a pro-life story in and of itself.  Ms. Burton, on the other hand, wants the support of the citizens of SD-10 so she can fight for the very unborn lives Ms. Davis pretends don’t matter, to give them the chance at long, productive, fulfilling lives either with their birth parents or with adoptive parents like Konni and Phil Burton themselves, the proud adoptive parents of two daughters. These are the chances that Davis’ single mother gave her, that Davis gave to her own daughters. But it’s not a chance she’s willing to go to bat for when it comes to other unborn children. In fact, she does just the opposite.  She fights for the “right” to extinguish their lives.

Dunno about you, but if I lived in Texas and in that district specifically, I know who my choice would be to represent me.  Take a wild guess.

Wendy Davis

She’ll ‘fight for the same educational opportunities’ for ‘every child’ … but she won’t fight for their right to be born.  Instead, she stands for hours for the ‘right’ to terminate them. 
Photo via @WendyDavisTexas’ Twitter feed.

NYT columnist: Pro-lifers are, in part, responsible for “roots of rape” – ST reader corrects

In a column yesterday, the NYT’s Frank Bruni tried to examine what the various mindsets are behind the “roots of rape” in America. He cited an author and psychology professor who blamed trivial things like the phrase “you throw like a girl”, and who also foolishly tried to blame the pro-life movement for ‘disrespect of a woman being able to control her own body’ – to paraphrase (via Newsbusters’ Matt Vespa by way of Memeorandum):

“We start boys off at a very early age,” Kilmartin told me during a recent phone conversation. “When the worst thing we say to a boy in sports is that he throws ‘like a girl,’ we teach boys to disrespect the feminine and disrespect women. That’s the cultural undercurrent of rape.”

Boys see women objectified in popular entertainment and tossed around like rag dolls in pornography. They encounter fewer women than men in positions of leadership. They hear politicians advocate for legislation like the Virginia anti-abortion bill that would have required women who wanted to end pregnancies to submit to an invasive vaginal ultrasound.

“Before you make a reproductive choice, you are going to be required to have somebody penetrate you with an object,” he said. “That’s very paternalistic: we know what’s right. You’re not in control of your own body.”

Sigh.

I posted the link to this article on my Facebook page, and received the following response from reader LH, who was spot on:

 TruthWow … talk about totally not getting it. 

Both abortion and birth control have allowed women to have sex without worry of getting pregnant and having an unwanted baby. Sounds good, yes? 

Let’s expand on that notion a bit … it allows women to have sex with men who are not committed to her, who may not even care for her all that much, and heck, might not even know her name. By placing herself in such an intimate environment with a man who is not a loving husband, she puts herself at enormous risk of emotional and physical abuse and violence. 

Abortion and birth control have been the greatest gift to men in all of history … sex without commitment, caring or consequences. Just wham, bam, thank you ma’am and please take care of any messes I might make. 

We won’t even get into the whole psychological ramifications of the twisted male-female relationship in these casual flings … 

No, sorry. It is the sexual revolution that these feminists hold so dear that promotes violence against women.

There are, of course, cultural outliers that contribute to the mentality that it’s “ok” to rape a woman, like the  depiction of females as mindless, submissive sex objects in magazines and broadcast media, but ironically it’s the 60s style “free love” type of “feminism”, the kind that taught a generation that it was “ok” for women to lower their standards when it came to relationships to the point that sex became nothing more than part of a laundry list of things that a woman “must” engage in during the course of the day to “satisfy” her baser urges … and who cared if she knew her partner or not? – that fostered the dangerous mindset among a minority of men that a woman is “begging for it” – even when she’s not.

ST reader Severian wrote a comment related to all of this back in July 2009 that has stuck with me ever since:

This kind of  [brutal, radical Islamofascistic] behavior is particularly repulsive to those of us raised as traditional Southern gentlemen, that is that women are special, not inferior, but superior in many ways. I was always taught that women deserve special treatment, politeness, respect, not because they are incapable of opening their own doors, etc. but as a sign of respect. They civilize us men a great deal, and add stability and grace to our society, and are the bearers of our children and future.  To me, raised as I was, mistreatment and denigration of women, especially rape, are just horrendous, with rape being one of the worst crimes a man can inflict on a woman.

Ignore what “feminists” want you to believe about the modern man.  While there are scum balls out there who don’t listen when a woman says no, most men view and respect women in the manner described by Sev above, even though some of them  have a strange way of showing it.  If they don’t feel that way, they need to learn it.  Ladies, it goes without saying that if you come across a guy who gives all indicators that this is not how he feels about you and women in general … and furthermore shows no signs of wanting to change his opinion, run. ASAP.

Back to the column, blaming, in part, the pro-life movement for the so-called “disrespecting” of the control a woman should have over her body ignores the sad reality of what pro-choice “feminists” have inadvertently enabled. Pro-lifers, in actuality, try to encourage a woman respect her body enough to not to give in to the demands our “modern” culture puts on her to “put out” every opportunity she gets.  The fact of the matter is that there are guys who are going to be the stereotypical “horn-dog” and try to get laid as often as possible (with willing women), and that’s their (bad) choice. It’s one they really SHOULD resist, ideally.  Whether they do or not, though, women should choose the safest path possible on this issue because in the long run, that’s what’s better for their body AND their state of mind and self-respect. It’s time the “experts” – and “feminists” – came to terms with this. The sooner the better, so we can all work together to try and undo the damage the sexual revolution unwittingly unleashed.