Gabby Giffords Rips Into J.D. Vance Over 'Childless' Comment: 'Disgraceful'
By: Philippe Naughton (The Daily Beast)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we all know Mark Kelly is on the VP A-list for a B-list Presidential candidate. We all know that Gabby Giffords is the go-to tragic victim of political violence. We understand that the unbiased liberal press wants to get back to a close horse race so they can skim off as many donor dimes as they can.
But why are Democrats so very upset about being childless while they are fighting for abortion? Isn't the whole point of abortion to remain childless? Of course, anti-religious Democrat moralists will smugly lecture us that we don't understand. So, explain it for once instead of just blowing more smoke.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) has become the latest high-profile woman to spring to the defense of Kamala Harris over J.D. Vance's remarks about "childless cat ladies."
Giffords, 54, who is married to Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), almost lost her life in an attempted assassination in January 2011 after being hit in the head by a bullet. Six other people were killed in the attack.
"Vice President @KamalaHarris is a proud mom of two remarkable stepchildren—and so am I," Giffords wrote on X. "@CaptMarkKelly and I were trying to have a baby through IVF before I was shot and that dream was stolen from us. To suggest we are somehow lesser is disgraceful."
Donald Trump's new vice presidential pick said in a Fox News interview in 2021 that the U.S. was being run by "a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too."
Among those firing back at the remarks, which went viral after being reposted this week, was Friends star Jennifer Anniston, who said on an Instagram Story that she hoped Vance's daughter would never need to undergo IVF.
Kelly, 60, who represents Arizona in the U.S. Senate, has two grown-up children from his first marriage and a baby granddaughter.
Giffords and Kelly have previously opened up about their heartbreak at not having children after the 2011 attack near Tucson, Arizona.
"Of everything that changed that day—both of us halting our careers, the beginning of a long, difficult road to recovery—we also lost something we wanted very much: the opportunity to have a child together," they wrote in a joint essay for People magazine earlier this year attacking moves to limit IVF access in Arizona.
They added: "We don't dwell on what could have been. Gabby's philosophy is 'Move ahead,' and that's what we did to rebuild our lives and find our purpose after what happened to our family. We have a vibrant family we love, including a granddaughter who brings us so much joy."
Kelly is among the frontrunners to be Harris' running mate—which would pit him against Vance in any televised VP debate. If Harris were to beat Trump, Giffords could end up as America's second lady.
Tags
Who is online
199 visitors
Fake outrage over a fake issue. Mark Kelly needs the face time to get votes. Democrats have already told us the greatest love for a child is to abort them before birth. What's the point of unrestricted abortion if not to aspire to becoming childless cat ladies?
So, do Democrats want what they don't want - or - don't want what they do want? Or is this just more worthless political doo doo. We may not be impressed but at least we're dazzled.
Fake issue? Are you claiming that Vance did not make these statements?
or
Democrats have already told us the greatest love for a child is to abort them before birth.
I don’t remember seeing that anywhere. Please provide a link.
Ridiculous, isn't it?
You said “Democrats have already told us the greatest love for a child is to abort them before birth.”. Is psychologist Dr. Laura S. Brown the Democrats spokesperson that I’ve never hear of?
Also, it seems that Nerm believes that words can mean whatever he wants them to mean.
Quotes?
He didn't say what you said he said, Nerm.
And this relates to abortion, how?
Proving the adage that when you cannot dazzle them with the brilliance of your argument the only way out is to confound them with bullshit!
What an ignorant, stupid comment. Unbelievable. Ask the women who were anxious to have children, miscarried and needed abortions to prevent septic shock.
The vast majority of abortions worldwide are motivated by poor women already having more children than they can care and provide for...
And, so could some religious democracy moralists suggest the collective You don't understand:
Financial reasons
Not the right time for a baby
Partner-related reasons
Need to focus on other children
A new baby would interfere with future opportunities
Not emotionally or mentally prepared
Health-related reasons
Want a better life for the baby than she could provide
Lack of maturity or independence
Influences from friends and/or family
Don’t want a baby or place baby for adoption
Other reasons
Eleven women (1%) gave other reasons for seeking abortion that didn’t easily fall into one of the major themes, including going through legal issues (n=3) and fear of giving birth (n=2).
No.
Most women who have abortions already have children.
That leaves 61% who have had a previous live birth.
Sometimes, it's about preserving the life, health, or fertility of the woman. Not that those things matter to some people.
Abortion is nobody else's business. Somebody who does not approve of abortions should not get one for themselves, that is the end of their decision making on abortions.
I feel the same way about marriage, if you don’t want a gay marriage don’t marry a gay person, problem solved. Who someone else marries has zero effect on anyone else.
Then somebody should explain the electoral realities of yours, Charger's and most of America's popular viewpoints on reproductive rights and marriage equality to your high and mighty MAGA Overlords, because they are on the record as being vehemently opposed to both!