Imagine The Potential – Update: News Video

Today (Thursday) marks the 36th anniversary of Roe … and for those who cannot see that the decision to abort is a decision to end a life … it may well be a time of celebration. But it is not.

This is why in Washington today (Thursday) thousands also gathered to protest Roe. I wanted to give you some press reports on this but unfortunately the MSM chose not to cover it … so this is the best I can do here.

If you think one baby does not make a difference, please take the time to watch this video. It will touch you.


To mark the anniversary Cong Pence introduced legislation to end federal funding of Planned Parenthood. Click here to learn why.

Ending abortion can never be done legislatively. Never. Because you see there will always be those who will seek them out through other means and thus … endangering their own lives and of course that of the child.

Successfully putting an end to abortion requires that we all work to change the hearts and minds of people. Help them understand that life does indeed begin at conception. For if not then … then when? It also requires that we as individuals and as a community be prepared to reach out and help women who may find themselves unexpectedly pregnant

Of course none of this means that we as a society should not continue to campaign to end this practice and once again showing the world that America values life from birth to natural death.

Update: Finally some video of the event from ABC in DC

13 replies
  1. Rick-WH
    Rick-WH says:

    The first video is very, very moving.

    What if….President Obama's mother had made a different decision?

    A decision that President Obama and his supporters think is no big deal, even in the very, very late stages of pregnancy….made at least 50 million times since the Roe Decision.

    How would America be different today if there had been no Roe Decision?

    The second video, courtesy of ABC7 affiliate WJLA in Washington, was one of very few available even covering the anniversary.    The numbers are at least 200,000 for the pro-life group, 3 for the pro-abortion group (numbers from the video).  I can assure you that ABC7 is not a right wing media outlet.  It is by far the most watched and recognized television news operation in  the nation's capital.

    So, where is everybody that is pro-abortion?  They assume with President Obama and the current Congress – no need to show up.  The mass media, which did not appear to send network crews to the event, apparently felt similarly.  They must feel that no one really wants to know how strong the opposition to abortion is in this country.

    In Connecticut, abortion rates are soaring – yet the legislature will consider bills to make it even easier for young children to have abortions here without parental involvement, counseling or a waiting period.   Think about it….a mandatory waiting period to cancel a purchase of storm windows, carpeting, a vaccuum cleaner, etc. – if you change your mind.  After all, you should make a well though out, informed decision.  At a bare minimum, shouldn't we have at least the same for a proposed abortion?

  2. skepticalcynic
    skepticalcynic says:

    While I oppose abortion (seeing Obama at a PRAYER meeting was disturbing, considering his view of abortion are worse than Pelosi's, hope he was praying for forgiveness), when I talk to pro "choice" (Choice?) people, I would rather hear ANY reason for abortion but that utter RUBBISH that a fetus is NOT a human being (legally means KRAP). Tell me that an unwanted child with a nasty mom and no dad will be more likely to grow up a DETRIMENT to society and I'd have to sit there and say that abortion is STILL wrong, but the arguement is one that makes sense.  Not a child? NOT A CHILD?  They talked a whole generation of Germans into pretending that the exterminations werent happening and now a fetus is not a child……………what is it then, a suitcase, a pair of loafers maybe??

    Our nations greatest tragedy.

    • Nancy
      Nancy says:

      Let's face it, when the egg is fertilized it's not going to become a turtle, tree, tulip, fish or loafers & suitcases.  It's a BABY!!!!!

    • LadyBlue
      LadyBlue says:

      Define "Life", and then we can talk. 

      "Life begins at conception", hmmm.  If every cell in your body wasn't alive, you'd be dead. 

      The egg is alive, the sperm is alive, the blastocyst is alive, and the foetal human child is alive. Would you argue "All eggs and sperm deserve a chance" because they are alive and have the potential for human life?  Human eggs and sperm will not create turtles or puppies any more than a human blastocyst or foetus will.

      What is so "magical" about conception that life starts there?

      I would posit that your response would be "it has a human soul at that point".

      Hmmm.  I know some theologians (biblical ones at that) who would debate that with you. 

      Which is why I believe in a Parent(s) right to choose whether a pregnancy is continued or terminated, until such point that the State has a compelling CIVIC reason to step in and say otherwise.

      Up to that point, it is between the Parent(s) and their God(s); and  in consultation with their Doctors and  Spiritual advisors.

      And that is not as easy as it sounds.  Anyone who says otherwise has "land in Florida" for you.

  3. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Obama is not just an abortion supporter, he is an abortion enthusiast, possibly straying into the realm of fanaticism.  His votes against the BAIPA proved that, as did his pledge to Planned Infanticide, er, Parenthood.

  4. Anne-EH
    Anne-EH says:

    The above video, "Imagine The Potential", is a truly strong reminder that the baby before birth as shown in the video, in the brief discription would become President Barak H. Obama, but also a reminder that this is about all of us before our births. 

  5. LadyBlue
    LadyBlue says:

    What if, what if.  Beautiful – of course!  No question that abortion ends a human life, women don't have piglets!

    The egg is alive, the sperm is alive, the blastocyst is alive, human foetus that develops is alive.

    Abortion question is not "Is unborn child alive" question is "Is unborn child ensouled".

    That is religious/spiritual question/debate.  Between Parent(s) and their God(s) as long as child's life or death depends upon chance and an umbilical cord.

  6. stevendetta
    stevendetta says:

    A secualar gov can not ask questions about the "soul" it must ask only the question that science can answer, is the blastocyst/fetus human? The scientific answer is yes.  The "ensoulment"  question is a red herring.

    • LadyBlue
      LadyBlue says:

      "A secualar gov can not ask questions about the “soul” it must ask only teh question that science can answer, is the blastocyst/fetus human?"

      So now define "Human" so that we are all discussing the same concept – Without bringing soul – or some other theocratic argument – into it to try and makes "Human" any different/more entitled to life at all stages of development than any other creature on this planet.

      And then justify to me all the other "acceptable" terminations of "post-born" "human" life by deliberate act; or worse – by lack of action – lack of the basic necessities of life when there is wealth in the world to prevent it – if we (humans) only had the will.

      No.  The Ensoulment question is NOT a red herring.

      It wasn't for the eons that women have controlled their fertility with herbs and other abortificant methods up to the current day.

      It wasn't for the centuries until fairly recently that the Church claimed women had no souls and were tools of the Devil that caused the fall of Man.

      It wasn't when the Church AND State claimed that Slaves had no souls/"Personhood".

      It isn't when half the population will tell you today that animals have no souls.

      No.  The Ensoulment question is NOT a red herring, and hasn't been since mankind first contemplated that "something special" was there when you were born, which "went away" when you died – and held it to be sacred – whether you were "human" or "animal".

      Regarding Science.  A truely objective Scientist will not say "Human", they will say "Homo Sapiens", or "Potential Human" of the pre-natal condition. 

      "Human" is always qualified – live, dead, sleeping, stupored.

      Ask any woman about how important "Potentiality" is, who has gone through the heartache of carrying a child for 8 1/2 months only to lose it; or ask those of us who can't maintain a pregnancy for more than a few weeks and have to see that life disappear in a pool of blood one morning; we will tell you about the significance of the word "Potential".

      And if SkeptialCynic doesn't want to here "Not a Human", then I don't want to hear "Providence of God" (it's religion when "God" does it) when pregnancies don't stick, but "Murder" (a Civic charge) when the woman makes the soul-wrenching decision to abort the child out of her own heart-knowledge.

      I will joyously support the anti-abortion cause when every " potential human" who comes into this world is welcomed in their community, and has at least the basic necessities of enough food to stay healthy, enough shelter to be secure, enough peace to be safe, and enough love to nourish their (born) soul.

      No, until then I stick to my guns, and my belief that pregnancy is and always will be an intimately personal condition in which the outcome is nobody's business except the Parent(s), until there is a compelling CIVIC reason for the state (or anyone else) to intervene. 

      Saying "It's human" isn't reason enough to me, if the person saying it isn't going to put their convictions where their mouth is during the next 18 years after "that human" is born.

  7. Jim Vicevich
    Jim Vicevich says:

    Lady Blue … once again I am compelled to comment on one of posts, which is unusual.


    <div>T<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">he moment of conception is the first step in what we consider to be the "natural progression" of human life. A continuum until natural death. A gathering of cells is no more accurate a description of what is taking place then likening a junk yard of cars is to a cadillac at the beginning of an assembly line. </span>


    <div><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">And while you might be able to engineer the division of cells, you cannot create "the continuum of life" … the plan and purpose for which you were created and for which God as so blessed us with your life.If you measure life by a soul … then life indeed begins before conception. It is more than a soul that makes this baby valuable … it is the journey here on earth this soul has begun.</span></div>

    <div><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">As for stillbirths and miscarriages … these too are part of the continuum of life. I cannot say what God's plan is for each precious being, nor can I say why some die in the womb, others in their teens and some well past 100. I do not know. God no more designs their death than he does yours or mine. I trust my Lord.


    <div><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">It is easy for any of us to rationalize something which we cannot see as no more alive than a grouping of cells anywhere in the body. The difference is these cells will not become a finger or arm or leg. These cells have been perfectly engineered to create you … all for the glory of God. But then you either believe in God or you don't. If you do not then your debate here is mute. It has no purpose. If you do then I ask the following.</span></div>

    <div><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">Don't be swayed by popular belief around you. All I ask is you watch the video one more time. Just once. Block out all of your friends voices, imaginary circumstances, outside influences for 45 seconds. Listen to your heart. If you still feel the same then … then this was nothing more than a good honest debate on life and you and I will part our separate ways. God bless</span>



    • LadyBlue
      LadyBlue says:

      I do apologize for the reply delay, but consider me set back on my heels – by one simple statement:

      "But then you either believe in God or you don’t. If you do not then your debate here is mute."


      So Mr. Vicevitch, unless I am a "Believer", I have no grounds to discuss/debate on a topic of Governmental regulation that impacts me and my sisters?


      And which God must I be a believer in for my opinion to count? Your “Personal” God and Savior? And do I have to believe the way you do, too? 

      Does the United Church of Christ's God count? UCC runs the gamut of belief on this topic.  How about the Hebrew G-d? As one source says “…<a>the parameters determining the permissibility of abortion within halacha are subtle and complex…”

      (Oh, wait, that G-d is the same as yours?   …right…)

      What about the Hindu Gods, or the Muslim's, or the Buddhists, or the Native Americans?  Do any of their God(s) or beliefs count?  Atheist and Humanists don’t count? You can’t possibly find any common ground?


      There are native-born citizens of this country who are members of all those Religions/Philosophies too.

      Do they not count because the USA was founded on “Christian Principles”? (I’ve actually HEARD people make that argument! and perceived shades of it above)


      Hmmm… I think that whirring sound I hear is Jefferson spinning in his grave at the insinuation of a Religious test to qualify for participation in a public discourse on matters of governance.


      To answer that test anyway – Yes Mr. Vicevitch, I am a Woman of Faith, but my God teaches me differently –My God teaches me not to judge others, because their life is completely different than mine and I’m not privy God’s plans for them.  My God instructs me not to tell someone else how to live their life, because I'm going to have a tough enough row to hoe running my own life without mucking about un-bidden into someone else's (I think the Biblical admonition is to "First remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye.”, and to not be like those who “Strain at gnats while swallowing camels” …let’s not even get started on that last one for **either** side of the aisle!! ).   

      I *am* admonished to advise others in a thoughtful and prayerful way when asked; and with all humility that God will guide my words to best effect.


      Where matters of Civic Government are concerned, I believe my Religious faith should not dictate policy any more than yours should, or the Buddhists, Hindus, Native Americans or Hebrews.  

      As for the Muslim, I’ve seen Sharia law, I don’t particularly care for it, and I don’t believe the Christian version which I hear espoused by those who insist on “Christian Government”  would be any better than the Muslim version.


      The State and Federal Governments of the U.S.A. rule over people of many faiths, and must take that seriously into account.  I hold this truth to be self evident, that it is in accordance with the Founding Fathers that Government – while guided by many faiths and philosophies – must have a good CIVIC reason for dictating to someone what they can or cannot do with their own personal lives – including something as intimate as the bearing of children.

       This is in the sphere of the personal/Religious and should be guided by one's own personal/Religious beliefs and counselors.

      You asked me to watch the video again.  I have watched it many times and saw it for the wrong-minded broad-brush ideological propaganda that it is.  It could just as easily have been produced by a pro-abortion group using the final shots being Hitler, Dahmer, David Koresh or Jim Jones – Imagine the Possibilities….

      And it still would have been wrong-minded broad-brush ideological propaganda.

      I personally would strongly counsel against abortion, all things being equal and there being no other hindrances, so in that respect we are not totally different.

      Where we part ways is that there are times that I most likely *would* counsel for abortion, and I would NOT want to see abortion removed as an option by rule of law on the grounds of one group of people’s interpretation of what they read in their personal Holy Book.

      Attempting to do so opens many-too-many ugly floodgates.


      So, on this matter we will have to agree to disagree, and work toward the same result from different ends.

      I pray for both of us that Religion never becomes the test or singular basis for law in the USA, because eventually the Religion that rules may not be your own.


      All the best.

Comments are closed.