╌>

A Day of Tears for the aborted

  
Via:  XXJefferson51  •  5 years ago  •  137 comments

By:   Charlie Butts

A Day of Tears for the aborted
"It was on January 22, 1973 that the Supreme Court of the United States said they had discovered a previously unknown right in the Constitution called a right to abortion," Adams explains about why he chose January 22nd to be the annual event's date. A number of days throughout the year are set aside to commemorations like Veterans Day, Labor Day, and Memorial Day, so the pro-lifer sees no good reason why the flag should not be lowered in memory of aborted babies.

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

Abortion victims should indeed be memorialized.  This is a great step in honoring them.  Flying flags at half mast in remembrance of the fallen victims of this GoPro is a reasonable tribute.  It’s also an opportunity for closure for those who have regret for having done it.  The fight against abortion, abortion funding, federal rules that promote it, and the wrongly decided invention of this so called new right on Jan 22,1973, a day of mourning and flag lowering.  


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



A Day of Tears for the aborted



States are showing increasing interest in a call for a special day to remember aborted children.


Out of concern for the more than 62 million American children who have died so far to abortion, Ken Adams formed the  Day of Tears , a time when people and businesses who fly flags are asked to do so at half-mast.

"It was on January 22, 1973 that the Supreme Court of the United States said they had discovered a previously unknown right in the Constitution called a right to abortion," Adams explains  about why he chose January 22nd to be the annual event's date.

A number of days throughout the year are set aside to commemorations like Veterans Day, Labor Day, and Memorial Day, so the pro-lifer sees no good reason why the flag should not be lowered in memory of aborted babies.

"For the last several years, Day of Tears resolutions have been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, and it has, I believe at the current time, about 51 or 52 cosponsors in the U.S. House of Representatives," Adams reports.

But the greatest success has been in state legislatures.

"Four states have already done it, and we are working right now, and it's our hope that during this year we'll add 12 more states," he relays.

Louisiana is the latest to approve the Day of Tears Resolution.

Adams adds that the nation owes this honor to the children whose lives were ended by abortion.


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
lady in black
Professor Silent
2  lady in black    5 years ago

NOT YOUR BODY, NOT YOUR BUSINESS.

NOT YOUR MEDICAL CHOICE, NOT YOUR BUSINESS.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
2.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  lady in black @2    5 years ago
"Adams explains about why he chose January 22nd to be the annual event's date."

As if abortions never happened before January 22nd, 1973.

The fact is abortions have been occurring since the dawn of man, the only thing that changed in 1973 was that fewer women would have to be sacrificed.

While it's not our body and not our medical choice, allowing women that choice was one of the best most humane things America has done in the last half century. No one who doesn't want one is forced to get one, unless you believe that some God controls the entire process of human pregnancy which includes between 25-50% of all fertilized eggs ending up in miscarriage, then I supposed that God is forcing abortion upon millions of women each year. They claim 62 million "children" have died since 1973 yet they don't include the number of miscarriages which would be in the hundreds of millions if not more. This seed is just slimy partisan rhetoric meant to get emotional bible thumpers to burst into tears.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
2.3  Gordy327  replied to  lady in black @2    5 years ago

Exactly! That cannot be overstated enough.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Silent
3  igknorantzrulz    5 years ago

my sign says "i regret i wasn't aborted"

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
4  Thrawn 31    5 years ago
Out of concern for the more than 62 million American children who have died so far to abortion

That number is 62 million to high considering a child has never been aborted. 

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
5  evilone    5 years ago

This article is a slap in the face to any parent that's lost a real living breathing child and the author of this propaganda is a piece of garbage; not worth pissing on if he were on fire. 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
5.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  evilone @5    5 years ago

Oh Husker and his ilk don’t actually give a shit about the fetus’, this is all about getting women back in their “proper” place. 

Notice how they NEVER advocate for anything to help these fetus’ once they are actually born, in many cases they actively work against programs that would help them. 

 
 
 
Freefaller
Professor Quiet
6  Freefaller    5 years ago

A Day of Tears for the aborted

No tears here.  Not my body, not my concern

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
6.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Freefaller @6    5 years ago

Exactly. Not my problem in any way shape or form and thus I don’t care. We are not even talking about conscious living beings here.

Husker here and these idiots he is shilling for may as well be PETA trying to make me cry over my steak from last night. 

 
 
 
Freefaller
Professor Quiet
6.1.1  Freefaller  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1    5 years ago

Same here except that I should have type "not my concern except where someone tries to trample on the rights and freedoms of others"

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
6.1.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Freefaller @6.1.1    5 years ago

Indeed, I don’t care about the issue until someone like the seeder decides they get to make medical choices for my wife and daughters.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.4  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.3    5 years ago

How many kids have you adopted?

 
 
 
lady in black
Professor Silent
6.1.5  lady in black  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.3    5 years ago

A fetus does not and never will have any rights what so ever those rights belong to the woman carry said fetus.  You cannot AND NEVER WILL strip the rights of a woman for the rights of a fetus.  I'd bet you all the money in the world that even pro life women would draw the line at taking a woman's rights away.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.7  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.6    5 years ago

So, you're young enough to adopt a bunch of kids to help persuade women into having those children?

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
6.1.8  Thrawn 31  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.6    5 years ago

Got a lot more to go before there is room for all those fetus’ you want born.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.9  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.8    5 years ago

You got where I was going with that! Awesome! jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.12  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.10    5 years ago

So... that would be no. You're close to retirement; I guess that means you'll be using your retirement to coerce women into having children that weren't planned, which also lack funds to give said kids a healthy, good life even though you won't have to deal with the potential consequences.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.13  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.6    5 years ago

Good for you. You do realize how many kids are removed from homes in the US, correct?

You're not the only one that does this; however, there are far more kids than those willing to care for them.

 
 
 
lady in black
Professor Silent
6.1.14  lady in black  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.11    5 years ago

If all so called prolifers adopted all available children regardless of age or race then there wouldn't be any need for foster care.

There are over hundreds of thousands children waiting for homes.

So why aren't all prolifers adopting them?

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.15  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.6    5 years ago

One more question... your parents never divorced, correct?

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.16  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  lady in black @6.1.14    5 years ago
So why aren't all prolifers adopting them?

Because they don't want the responsibility even though they're trying to force others to bear that responsibility. But I think you knew that and it was rhetorical. jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
6.1.17  Thrawn 31  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.11    5 years ago

Again, you all have a long way to go before we have room for all those fetus’.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.20  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.19    5 years ago

Good. I wish more people did.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.21  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.18    5 years ago

I am a child of divorced parents. I also was unwanted by my mother before she even got pregnant. I was unwanted by my father after I was born. And until I was  older, my stepdad certainly didn't want me; he already had two teen boys [I became his stepdaughter when I was 8]. And last but most certainly not least, my stepmother... she still doesn't want me in her life. After my brother [step to be precise, my stepmom's youngest] passed this past January, I tried yet again, to get closer to her and that's when she told me that she's not my mother... for the second time since I was 8. 

It sucks when you realize that no one in your immediate family wanted you and I realized that before I was 10 years old. It screws with the mind. It affected me in many ways. I never felt like I had anyone to turn to and that's a hard road to go down. I had a sucky childhood and wouldn't wish anything like it on anyone. Maybe it made me a better mother. Maybe it made me a better wife. However, there's definitely something to say about being 8 or 9 years old and wondering why you were born. You have no idea what it's like to prefer to have been aborted. I don't feel that way now, but that's because I made the life I wanted for myself. 

The sad thing is... until I was an adult and pregnant with my son, no one said anything to my parents about how I was treated by them. My grandmother [mom's mom] and my uncle [only 8 years older than me and my mom's brother] were the ones to speak up. When my mother asked me if I thought she loved my daughter more than she loved me I replied in a matter of fact tone, "How could I not think that? You're far better to her than you ever were to me." She was surprised by the answer. I never prevented my children from being treated well by my parents, because it's not fair to them if I expected anything different. That doesn't mean it went unnoticed though.

My mother offered to take me to get an abortion when I found out I was pregnant with my son, because I had just filed for divorce and he's not my ex-husband's; my mother thought that I shouldn't have had any more kids. I refused. I was an adult that made my own decisions. I'm just glad that she feels differently about it now. My current husband is my son's father and we've been married for more that 12 years and together for almost 14 now.

All of the aforementioned is why my husband and I decided to take in my daughter's boyfriend. He was in a bad situation. Even if they broke up, he will stay. He's told me numerous times that I'm his mom and nothing will change that. He is the teenager that we adopted.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.23  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.22    5 years ago

No... You don't say. jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif 512

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.24  Gordy327  replied to  lady in black @6.1.14    5 years ago
There are over hundreds of thousands children waiting for homes.

And there will be even more if abortion were to be prohibited. But then, pro-lifers generally do not care or do not see the unintended consequences of prohibiting abortion, including but not limited to, the physical, psychological, and emotional ramifications to both the parent/s and child. In effect, they only care about quantity over quality.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.25  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Gordy327 @6.1.24    5 years ago
the physical, psychological, and emotional ramifications

Yep.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
6.1.26  Thrawn 31  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.22    5 years ago

Lol oh it shows. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
6.1.27  Ozzwald  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.22    5 years ago
I’m a bleeding heart Christian conservative…

Then you should be pro-choice, since your god supports abortion.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.28  Gordy327  replied to  Ozzwald @6.1.27    5 years ago
since your god supports abortion.

God also supports slavery and genocide. It's in the bible after all.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.30  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.29    5 years ago
Is death and no life at all a better alternative?

As opposed to a poor or no quality of life? Perhaps for years on end too? Doesn't sound like much of a "life" at all.

 
 
 
Freefaller
Professor Quiet
6.1.31  Freefaller  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.3    5 years ago
Like the freedom to exist and to have a life?

Please cite any legal ruling where those freedoms are given. Or as usual deflect, move the goalposts, or any of your normal games

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.32  Gordy327  replied to  Freefaller @6.1.31    5 years ago
Please cite any legal ruling where those freedoms are given.

Offhand, I'm going to assume there are none. After all these years of abortion arguments and cases before the various courts, including the SCOTUS, one would think the courts would have affirmed the "freedom to exist and to have a life." Alas, they have not. So I'm left to conclude that such a declaration (or those made in a similar vein) is nothing more than emotional based rhetoric with no intrinsic value or weight or basis in rationality.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.33  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.29    5 years ago

If I hadn't made the life I had for myself within the past 15 years, I might still feel that way. How many 8 or 9 year old kids wonder why they were born and wished they'd been aborted?

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
6.1.34  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.29    5 years ago
Is death and no life at all a better alternative?

Moreover, wouldn't that fetus become one of God's children instantly? Because it's my understanding that we are BORN sinners [according to Christianity]; however, if we're never born, wouldn't that mean that our soul would automatically return to God's loving arms?

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.35  Gordy327  replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @6.1.34    5 years ago
Moreover, wouldn't that fetus become one of God's children instantly? Because it's my understanding that we are BORN sinners [according to Christianity]; however, if we're never born, wouldn't that mean that our soul would automatically return to God's loving arms?

If one aborts, then the fetus has no sin which allows them to skip the layover on Earth and get instant access to Heaven. So a woman is actually doing the fetus a favor if they abort. If religious pro-lifers really care about the "child" (because it's clear they do not care about the woman), then they should be advocating women to have abortions for the sake of the "child." Or at the very least, not make getting an abortion difficult.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
6.1.36  Ozzwald  replied to  Gordy327 @6.1.35    5 years ago

If religious pro-lifers really care about the "child" (because it's clear they do not care about the woman), then they should be advocating women to have abortions for the sake of the "child." Or at the very least, not make getting an abortion difficult.

This is the type of argument that will make xxJefferson51 disappear from this thread.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.37  Gordy327  replied to  Ozzwald @6.1.36    5 years ago
This is the type of argument that will make xxJefferson51 disappear from this thread.

Either that or some twisted narrative which serves individual bias. Basic logic tends to have that effect. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
6.1.40  Ozzwald  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.39    5 years ago
Killing children before they reach the age of accountability before God in order to assure their salvation would if carried out end our species in a few years.

God did not feel that way when he killed all the 1st born of Egypt.  Remember our last thread, I gave you over a dozen examples of God allowing and even encouraging abortions, and a neat little video presentation.

We all were given a free will to do good or bad and some use it in a way to bring harm to others.

Why would god create someone who would chose to do harm to others?

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.42  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.41    5 years ago
What we do with the free will he gave us is up to us.  

If god gave us free will, then who are you to try and restrict a woman from using her free will to have an abortion? Supporting anti-abortion laws is as good as denying one their supposed god given free wil.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.44  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.43    5 years ago
I believe in the right of a human to have the free will to choose to live and choose life for the most innocent and defenseless among us.  

In other words, you don't support a woman's free will to choose differently than what you believe. Got it!

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.46  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.45    5 years ago

That only affirms you don't support a woman's free will to choose differently than what you believe, and you seek to deny those women their free will, as I said before!

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.48  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.47    5 years ago

Not your problem, your body, or your business! You just don't like the idea of someone exercising their free will in opposition to your own sensitivities. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
6.1.50  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.1.49    5 years ago

Thanks for confessing and proving me right!

 
 
 
lady in black
Professor Silent
8  lady in black    5 years ago

Even though I'm well past child bearing years I am thankful I live in NYS for any woman living here that can keep her choices.

 
 
 
Veronica
Professor Participates
8.1  Veronica  replied to  lady in black @8    5 years ago
NYS for any woman living here that can keep her choices.

So far - let's hope we can keep it that way.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Junior Participates
8.1.1  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Veronica @8.1    5 years ago

If I remember correctly, NY was one of the first adopters of allowing the woman to make such a choice. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
10  Hallux    5 years ago

The site from where the link comes has but 1 comment ... take note and act accordingly.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Participates
10.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Hallux @10    5 years ago

Lol.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
10.2  Gordy327  replied to  Hallux @10    5 years ago
take note and act accordingly.

I'll ignore it and not act at all. 

 
 

Who is online

devangelical


253 visitors