Meet the lovable 10%

posted at 5:25 pm on October 28, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Boaz Reigstad is a little boy with eager eyes and a sunshiny smile who turns six this Sunday. It’s hard to see a picture of him and not smile a bit yourself. After just the briefest glimpse of the beaming child, “lovable” leaps to mind to describe him.

Reigstad also happens to have Down Syndrome. That, too, is visible in his picture — but it takes a back seat to the joy and warmth of his expression. Sadly, the apparently cheerful child is the exception to a startling rule: About 90 percent of pregnant mothers who learn their babies have Down Syndrome choose to abort. As The Blaze puts it, “That means [just] 10 percent of children are brought to term after the mother learns of the condition.”

Reigstad, then, is part of “the lovable 10 percent.”

With the help of his father, the five-year-old has captured the attention of thousands of people on Facebook, who have “liked” a picture of the little boy holding a sign that reads:

I may not be perfect, but I’m happy. I am God’s handiwork and I bear his image. I am blessed. I am the 10% of children born with Down Syndrome who survived Roe v. Wade.

Reigstad’s father, Andy, told LifeSiteNews that he took and posted the picture “to let people know that though our son is not perfect (nor are any of us), he is happy and his life is worth living.”

“We had hoped that this photo might be a small part of the tide that is turning against abortion. We wanted to speak up for those who can’t speak up for themselves.”

It’s a compelling contrast to the complaints of “the 99 percent” occupying Wall Street and other cities throughout the country. While the two “protests” — one an apologetic for the right to life, the other a convoluted cry to end crony capitalism through the redistribution of wealth — might not seem, at first glance, to pertain to one another, they matter to one another immensely, regardless of whether the OWS-ers recognize it. For, just as life is a fundamental right, so, too, is it a fundamental gift, one for which, ultimately, we can take no responsibility. While we can cooperate in bringing it about and while we most assuredly (and sadly!) can end it, we cannot, try as we might, create it out of nothing. From that simple fact alone, the seemingly proper posture from which to proceed in life is one of humility — just the opposite of the entitlement mentality we see rampant today. Ironic that so many of the same people who think government should provide its people all things out of nothing often fail to protect and defend the one gift that does arise relatively freely.

Boaz Reigstad, Down Syndrome, pro-life


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

what’s the difference between a human sperm and a human egg fertilized by a sperm 20 seconds ago?

Uh in one case life has started and not so much in the other. If you keep sperm and eggs separate they will never begin human development. You do realize that that once they join the genetic makeup has totally changed ? It is a separate human life from its mother and father.

CW on October 28, 2011 at 10:08 PM

Being pro-choice is intellectually, logically, and morally bankrupt.

OhioCoastie on October 28, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Dishonest and obfuscation are their best friends.

CW on October 28, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Look vera & salty, i understand the biology, but we’re drifting into an area of semantics that defines the true issue_”human life”vs “person”. Is there a difference? I say yes, and a fertilized egg is not a person.

That said, the decision to cut off that potential is not a trivial one.

peski on October 28, 2011 at 10:12 PM

I say yes, and a fertilized egg is not a person.

That said, the decision to cut off that potential is not a trivial one.

peski on October 28, 2011 at 10:12 PM

You say.

Well, common law recognizes the term “person” as a “human being”.

Black’s Law Dictionary (Abridged Seventh Edition):

Person 1. A human being.

Saltysam on October 28, 2011 at 10:21 PM

And federal law as makes abortion legal. Law schmaw. Dictionary schmictionary. Just admit you believe in the soul.it’s ok.

peski on October 28, 2011 at 10:31 PM

And let me make it clear_I’m against abortion and would support making it illegal. I just don’t buy the b black/white life/murder argument.

peski on October 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Amen

AH_C on October 28, 2011 at 10:49 PM

Look vera & salty, i understand the biology, but we’re drifting into an area of semantics that defines the true issue_”human life”vs “person”. Is there a difference? I say yes, and a fertilized egg is not a person.

That said, the decision to cut off that potential is not a trivial one.

peski on October 28, 2011 at 10:12 PM

(Cont’d)

…and, as I see it anyway, you’ve just changed the core of the current disagreement. You were challenging my (or rather, Vera’s) contention that it is indeed a scientific fact.

If I understand you correctly now, you are saying, forget the science aspects, let’s talk about whether or not a fertilized egg is a “person”. Correct?

I think you want to define your own terms of “person”, perhaps one that is specifically designed to remove all humanity for a fertilized egg in order to legitimize the act. Basically, in order to accept your perspective, we must first dehumanize a human being using a methodology of creating new terminologies.

So, if we must shove aside pure science, then it is you that would prefer to keep the discussion in the realm of belief and faith.

My first response to your peski on October 28, 2011 at 10:12 PM accepts your change of single focus away from science into “semantics”, but not your personal terms. Black’s law dictionary gives the first definition of “person” as “A human being”.

Court make no distinction between the two terms. This brings us squarely back to pure science, doesn’t it?

Saltysam on October 28, 2011 at 10:59 PM

A sleeping person is not a sentient entity. That means it does not know it exists. Ergo, there is no moral reason not to murder a sleeping person that might not wake up anyway, or might wake up with all their assets frozen. In fact, not terminating it is the selfish act, because to feel good about yourself, you condemn someone to live that life. You are doing nobody any favors by not terminating sleeping people. You may sleep well at night thinking that your god approves, but I wouldn’t — you might wind up murdered. And don’t tell me they don’t suffer. Whether it be incontinence, flatulence, or a million other disorders, nobody wants to be born that way. And there is only one person who can prevent that kind of existence and that person chose to do nothing.

unclesmrgol on October 28, 2011 at 11:03 PM

And federal law as makes abortion legal. Law schmaw. Dictionary schmictionary. Just admit you believe in the soul.it’s ok.

peski on October 28, 2011 at 10:31 PM

I believe in the soul. I admit it, but that fact has, in totality, been non-existent in the fundamentals of my point.

Saltysam on October 28, 2011 at 11:09 PM

Salty, sorry in. handicapped on a phone. So you’re going with a genetic definition of person_4 cells no brain no nerves no thought thought no feelings no touch no sight no smell no nothing but DNA and potential? questionis out a person after spurn penetrates egg but before chromosomes swap?

peski on October 28, 2011 at 11:22 PM

unclesmrgol on October 28, 2011 at 11:03 PM

Well said, unc.

I was thinking something similar when I read this further up:

If it can be proved that a fetus at a given stage can experience both pain and fear at an abortion, then abortion would be wrong.

keep the change on October 28, 2011 at 7:41 PM

And I thought, “well, what if you painlessly kill someone in his sleep?”

The writer’s logical implication is that it is okay to kill a sleeping person painlessly, isn’t it unc?

Saltysam on October 28, 2011 at 11:23 PM

No easy answers to any of this.

angryed on October 28, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Sure there is — the hardness only happens when one tries to evade the actuality of what is happening in an abortion.

Science leads the way. When can we determine that a single cell contains all the components of a separate human being? The answer, again, is easy.

Our common language, as well as others, also provide a clue.

Nobody says “I’m with embryo” or “I’m with fetus”. They say “I’m with child” or “I’m pregnant” (From L. pregnare — to carry) or “I’m going to have a baby”.

Nobody says “The fetus kicked” or “The fetus moved”. They say “The baby kicked” or “The baby moved.”

We live from immaturity to maturity and then, after a long and fruitful life, we die — hopefully not murdered by our mother or anyone else for that matter. All of us started as a single cell. Science is quite clear on that — until the sperm and egg combine, we have two haploid cells — one from the father, the other from the mother. The result is the diploid cell of a new human — a zygote.

California considers the fetus to be a human being — you can be charged with the murder of a fetus. An exemption has been carefully crafted into the law for abortion providers and those seeking an abortion. This is yet another place where the obviousness of humanity is expressed.

Yes, it’s all very easy — if you are pro-life.

unclesmrgol on October 28, 2011 at 11:25 PM

peski on October 28, 2011 at 11:22 PM

I’m having difficulty interpreting your latest comment, but I think I grasp the gist.

Well, I guess if you have to go to this extreme to make a point, I would say:

There is no data that disproves the theory that an unswapped chromosome penetrated egg is not a human life.

But, I’m not an expert on the biology by any means.

But look at it this way:

When having sex, you are, from the unadulterated perspective of science and biology, engaged in the act solely for the single purpose of creating human life.

Saltysam on October 28, 2011 at 11:38 PM

When you have a debate with someone, it doesn’t always have to be YOU ARE 100% WRONG 100% OF THE TIME!!! It is possible to disagree but be civil about it.

angryed on October 28, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Fifty.

Million.

Dead Babies.

50,000,000.

Kensington on October 28, 2011 at 11:47 PM

As the mother of one of these beautiful children – and the New Parent Packet Coordinator of our local DS chapter – this picture made me grin from ear to ear.

And, yes – I have been saddened by how FEW calls we get from families who have received a prenatal diagnosis; far too many of these precious angels never make it to bring great joy to their families.

TeresainFortWorth on October 28, 2011 at 11:56 PM

I kept this nice little poem in my classroom when I was a special ed teacher. It makes some people smile and some people cry. Nothing easy about this, but the poem is nice.

redwhiteblue on October 29, 2011 at 2:30 AM

A friend of mine has an adult child (late 20s) with downs.

It’s like taking care of a toddler.

And he can’t support himself, so she’s still paying for his food, clothes, etc.

She has to hire someone trained up to watch him just so she can just go to work and earn enough money to take care of her (adult) kid.

If you keep a baby with downs – major, major props. You’re giving up 30+ years of your life because you believe life is precious.

But honestly? I couldn’t stomach that. I’m not going to ruin 30+ years of my life over morality. Yeah, horrible person, baby-killer, etc. At least I’ll be free.

triple on October 29, 2011 at 4:38 AM

If you don’t want to have an abortion, I won’t judge you one way or another. I don’t see why you can’t respect the other side.

angryed on October 28, 2011 at 7:44 PM

Because the ‘other side’ condones the brutal deaths of millions of infants every year.

Siddhartha Vicious on October 29, 2011 at 6:58 AM

That’s right Animator Girl. There are no parents who dedicate their entire lives to their handicapped children.

Like this father. He’s selfish to have allowed this child continue. And their lives obviously have no joy or fulfillment in them.

hawkdriver on October 28, 2011 at 8:50 PM

That was glorious.

Siddhartha Vicious on October 29, 2011 at 7:18 AM

OK will you come over 8 hours a day and help me raise the unique human life?
Will you pay the medical bills?
Will you take over raising the unique human life when he/she is 40 and still needs help after I’m dead?

angryed on October 28, 2011 at 7:31 PM

I have a friend who had a perfect baby boy. At 18 months he had scarlet fever, and is now forever frozen mentally at that age, although his body had continued to develop normally.

I have another friend who is a therapist at Shepherd Spinal Center, where she works every day with people, some kids, who by some accident or disease are suddenly in the position of being a unique human life with medical bills in need of 24/7 care.

If that’s your criteria for keeping a child, what’s your solution when life intervenes? Do you still favor killing the unique human life rather than taking responsibility for its problems?

Quisp on October 29, 2011 at 8:07 AM

But honestly? I couldn’t stomach that. I’m not going to ruin 30+ years of my life over morality. Yeah, horrible person, baby-killer, etc. At least I’ll be free.

triple on October 29, 2011 at 4:38 AM

Pathetic.

kingsjester on October 29, 2011 at 8:32 AM

But honestly? I couldn’t stomach that. I’m not going to ruin 30+ years of my life over morality. Yeah, horrible person, baby-killer, etc. At least I’ll be free.

triple on October 29, 2011 at 4:38 AM

No, you will not be free. What you will be is selfish. That is what people are called when they choose themselves over morality. No problem though, you’ll have plenty of company!

I don’t mean to sound too harsh, I just want to clarify the meaning of your words.

2L8 on October 29, 2011 at 8:44 AM

I have a cousin with Down’s and I couldn’t picture our family without him.

Yakko77 on October 29, 2011 at 9:05 AM

What a very special little boy. He is one of God’s angels. In a society that seems to constantly emphasize what people want and take – this lovely little boy just gives. He is probably happier every day of his life than many other people without Downs Syndrome who wake up every morning unhappy.
Thank you to his father for this wonderful photograph and the message – sending a hug and a prayer to you Boaz!

IlonaE on October 29, 2011 at 9:19 AM

I am the 10% of children born with Down Syndrome who survived Roe v. Wade

Cute but inaccurate.

90% of the pregnancies were Down Syndrome is diagnosed end in abortion.

Many pro-life women don’t bother with the tests to detect DS. Some tests (amnio, for instance) can have complications, so why take the risk if you don’t intend to abort anyway? The tests are most often performed on women who want to know precisely so they can get the abortion.

And yes, I know of what I speak. I have a child with DS.

CJ on October 29, 2011 at 9:49 AM

But honestly? I couldn’t stomach that. I’m not going to ruin 30+ years of my life over morality. Yeah, horrible person, baby-killer, etc. At least I’ll be free.

triple on October 29, 2011 at 4:38 AM

Then please, don’t breed with the opposite sex. (If the thought had even occurred to you I mean.)

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 9:55 AM

But honestly? I couldn’t stomach that. I’m not going to ruin 30+ years of my life over morality. Yeah, horrible person, baby-killer, etc. At least I’ll be free.

triple on October 29, 2011 at 4:38 AM

You know, just because you and others say this part first doesn’t make it any less true.

But I do appreciate the candor of not pretending that you have the child’s best interests at heart when you decide to kill him. At least that BS dodge is off the table.

Kensington on October 29, 2011 at 10:05 AM

Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
- Matthew 19:14

Hening on October 29, 2011 at 10:22 AM

But honestly? I couldn’t stomach that. I’m not going to ruin 30+ years of my life over morality. Yeah, horrible person, baby-killer, etc. At least I’ll be free.

triple on October 29, 2011 at 4:38 AM

That is one way to look at it. But most owners of dependent dogs and cats would swear that their pets enhance their lives and make them more enjoyable despite the fact that they will be obliged to look after them through their entire lives. Sometimes giving up a little freedom can lead to greater happiness and fulfillment than having absolute freedom.

I am pro-choice and against abortion generally. I do not think that ending the prospects of a thirteen week fetus is akin to murder. I would like to see late term and partial birth abortion made illegal. Like other issues… the debate about abortion and its legality in the US is shaped by the extremes of both sides.

lexhamfox on October 29, 2011 at 10:52 AM

An angle on this subject and along these lines, I didn’t think of till this morning.
Even if pro-lifers could prove beyond all doubt in EVERYBODY’S mind, that from the moment of conception the developing cellular structure really IS a personality, you pro-choicers would still argue for the option of abortion if there is a Down-Syndrome diagnosis, because most (not necessarily all) pro-choicers also believe in “mercy-killing“.

Am I’m being too presumptuous, with that observation?

listens2glenn on October 29, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Hosea 9:11-16 “Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer. Give them, 0 Lord: what wilt thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. . .Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.”

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Luke 1:41: At the sound of Mary’s greeting, Elizabeth’s child leaped within her, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 11:06 AM

2 Kings 15:16 Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the coasts thereof from Tirzah: because they opened not to him, therefore he smote it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 11:11 AM

Exodus 21:22-23: If men strive, and hurt a women with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life.

Quoting The Bible now to subvert it’s intent is the theme rather than answering even basic questions asked you in earnest. Coward.

Better a millstone.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 11:19 AM

1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.

But maybe since you have so much time to Google The Bible, you could take a minute to answer the question I asked you. Do you care that the baby feels pain?

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 11:46 AM

In our Godless society where labels make the person – those with low self-esteem will consider having a DS child a dishonor instead of the gift it is.

If the truth be told, aborting DS babies is often little more than an ego trip!

Don L on October 29, 2011 at 11:47 AM

Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.

But maybe since you have so much time to Google The Bible, you could take a minute to answer the question I asked you. Do you care that the baby feels pain?

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 11:46 AM

We would do well to remember that Satan quoted scripture to Christ. It’s not so much the words as it is the interpretation.

Don L on October 29, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Psalm 137:9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Does it bother you that a full term baby is purposely presented for birth in the wrong diection in a late term procedure? And that without any anesthetics, a tube is forced into the base of it’s skull and it’s entire cranial cavity is envacuated and compressed? Does it bother you that in any normal circumstances this child would have birthed live?

Just say no if it doesn’t. Or you could just keep using the thread to keep on your anti-Christian rant by using verse out of context.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Exodus 12:29 And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 11:59 AM

So what Palbo. A song of those in captivity cursing the young of their foe and actually its a man quoted verse from The Bible and not the words of God. I guess you get all your good stuff from Positive Atheist Scary Quotes? (A real source folks)

But still not an argument that has anything to do with abortion. Does it not bother you that they feel pain? You’d rend your blouse over one of your liberal friends being offended by the insult de jour, but you don’t give a second thought to another human being feeling excurciating pain because of an issue you push strongly?

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Atheist coward. What you push through whatever justification you take from a Bible you don’t even believe in has killed 50 million human beings. That’s more children that were taken during The Passover.

But like I said, I would not be you for all the riches in the world. You’re to be pittied.

Pearls before swine.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 12:07 PM

“than” were taken …

I’ll look at the thread later to see if you can work up the courage to answer a question. Till then your routine of using a thread to cut/paste verse from your atheist sites is just boring.

As we speak though, the rights you push are making another human being’s last moments alive a living terror of pain. Be proud.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 12:11 PM

2 Kings 2:23-24

And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.

And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Save yourself some time and just link to the site, Pablo.

In the mean time, consider answering the question.

Does their pain at all bother you?

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Jeremiah 19:7-9

And I will make void the counsel of Judah and Jerusalem in this place; and I will cause them to fall by the sword before their enemies, and by the hands of them that seek their lives: and their carcases will I give to be meat for the fowls of the heaven, and for the beasts of the earth.

And I will make this city desolate, and an hissing; every one that passeth thereby shall be astonished and hiss because of all the plagues thereof.

And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend in the siege and straitness, wherewith their enemies, and they that seek their lives, shall straiten them.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 1:21 PM

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 1:21 PM

Coward. Gutless, coward. You’ve descended into just parroting atheist talking points.

Do you care that they feel intense pain?

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Romans 12:14

Bless those who persecute you. Don’t curse them; pray that God will bless them.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Coward.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Matthew 5:39

But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 2:45 PM

You hate Christians and they sense it. You think you have any chance making an impression on any of them by posting scripture they study every day and who obviously understand it’s context better than you?

Amusing and pathetic all at the same time. I actaully thought you were a troll with some balls. I thought you were pretty well ready to mix words with anyone. You’re kind of falling short here and looking pretty meek ducking questions.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 3:30 PM

I was completely taken back by the comment from “triple”.
No one can see into the future and you have no idea what could happen to you or any person in your life. You or they could be rendered unable to be self-sufficient – then what? If you had an accident and became disabled – should we just eliminate you?
And people with children with special needs to devote a great deal of time and that’s what parents do for their children.

And Pablo Honey – I don’t believe in atheists. I’ve seen to often when faced with extreme challenges or pain – they cry out for help. If there is no God – who are you crying to?

IlonaE on October 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

And Pablo Honey – I don’t believe in atheists. I’ve seen to often when faced with extreme challenges or pain – they cry out for help. If there is no God – who are you crying to?

I cry out to Thor.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 4:07 PM

I was completely taken back by the comment from “triple”. No one can see into the future and you have no idea what could happen to you or any person in your life. You or they could be rendered unable to be self-sufficient – then what? If you had an accident and became disabled – should we just eliminate you?

IlonaE on October 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM

I would hope that wouldn’t be necessary. Folks like triple and angryed would surely volunteer to eliminate themselves before they became a burden on anyone else.

Kensington on October 29, 2011 at 5:05 PM

“A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.”
― Joseph Stalin, noted Atheist Leader of the Soviet Union who was responsible for 10s of millions of deaths of innocent lives.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Pearls before swine.

hawkdriver on October 29, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Ouch.

listens2glenn on October 29, 2011 at 8:03 PM

I cry out to Thor.

Pablo Honey on October 29, 2011 at 4:07 PM

Hail Thor, the most powerful.

mythicknight on October 30, 2011 at 12:38 AM

Hail Thor, the most powerful.

mythicknight on October 30, 2011 at 12:38 AM

He’s a cute little boy though you have to admit. His parents love him. He’s no burden to you. Aren’t we blessed to have him in the world?

What’s your position on the fact that formed babies feel excruciating when they’re aborted? Does that matter to you to know that an issue you push so fervently causes so much anguish in such defenseless little beings?

hawkdriver on October 30, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Why is it that when we humans try to decide what life is worth we botch it so badly? I think it’s because we view it too narrowly, based on our own needs and convenience, and we ignore the true value of life. Even if you don’t believe in the soul, shouldn’t you consider the end result of your contention that some lives are best not lived? If you can decide this for others, why can’t some third party decide that for you? Your “right” to choose life or death for others is no greater than others’ choice of the same for you. My Down’s Syndrome brother lived for 24 years as little more than an infant; blind, mostly deaf, never talking, never walking…but he lived. He had value simply because he lived, despite the lives he touched and made better by his touching. Who among you is fit to decide that his life should never have been? When we reduce the value of life to an economic equation we deny our own humanity. It is the curse of free will that we make terrible choices, and that others must suffer for them.

SKYFOX on October 31, 2011 at 8:06 AM

CJ on October 29, 2011 at 9:49 AM

Thank you for your insight. I took the phrase “survived Roe v. Wade” to mean the following:

10% of the people whose mothers know they will be born with Downs, are actually allowed to be born. The rest are aborted with the power given to the mother via Roe. Roe is what has allowed the abortion of the 90%, and thus the 10% are Roe “survivors.”

Missy on October 31, 2011 at 12:39 PM

For Pete’s sake Skyfox. I’m sitting here in the airport and your post almost put me to tears. That comment of yours may be the most profound thing I’ve ever read on Hot Air.

To say “well said” would not do it justice.

God bless your family.

hawkdriver on October 31, 2011 at 2:26 PM

SKYFOX on October 31, 2011 at 8:06 AM

hawkdriver on October 31, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Just read SKYFOX,

Dittos to what hawkdriver said.

listens2glenn on November 1, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3