Thursday, February 9, 2012

Welcome to Stand Firm!

Want to advertise on Stand Firm? Click here for rates and info

Ragsdale Admits Pulling Speech from Web Site

Friday, April 3, 2009 • 6:43 am


In a comment at a blog run by one of the weapons-grade crazies (I won’t link, and I’d appreciate it if commenters wouldn’t either, but most of you know the one*), Katherine Rasgdale freely admits pulling her “Abortion is a Blessing” speech from her own site:

BTW, and for the record, it is true that I have taken the speech down from the blog—or made it invisible (I’m not really a blogger and don’t know how these things work). And, yes, though it is on a sermon collection blog site it was, in fact, a speech, given at a rally to conclude the defense of a clinic under siege, yet again, from anti-choice protestors who harassed and frightened the staff and patients. The clinic had been shot up in the past (the owner still had the bullet-riddled door) and everyone was feeling a bit terrorized by the protestors when they asked me to fly in to stand with, and try to comfort and inspire, the defenders.

Anyway, I removed the speech from view to try to quiet down the commenters. There’s probably a way to just stop comments but I haven’t had time to explore that—kind of busy here right now.

At first I thought it would be a good thing to let the world see what the anti-choice (anti-woman) vitriol is really like. As you’ve pointed out, those who have only encountered the anti-gay stuff have no idea just how nasty things can get when it’s women being attacked. But then ...

1) the comments kept coming and coming and my blackberry kept vibrating to announce new ones and I couldn’t deal with the constant semi-interruptions,

2) my friends were getting angry and upset. I’m used to this—been dealing with it for 25 years—but people who love me where feeling very hurt by it. Even people who barely know me were starting to feel hurt

3) I began to think that I was providing an occasion for sin by providing a place where people could spew such hate and violence.

4) I don’t want to seem to trivialize any of this by saying I was getting bored, but really .. how many ways can people find to call me amoral, demonic, sub-human scum? It was getting awfully repetitive

So, the speech is no longer available for view. If I can find time to work out how to make it available without providing opportunity for more comments I’ll try to put it up again.

And again, dear friend, thanks for your righteous indignation, your defense of all women, your clear critique, and your friendship.

KHR

Got that? Just too annoying… too inconvenient. Made her Blackberry vibrate too much. Got on her nerves. So she killed it.

Let me briefly address just one other point.

Rasgdale writes, “At first I thought it would be a good thing to let the world see what the anti-choice (anti-woman) vitriol is really like.”

No one here is “anti-woman,” ma’am. We are anti people like you claiming to be Christian priests, driving minor children across state lines without their parent’s knowledge, to have babies pulled halfway out of their wombs and their brains sucked out of their skulls with large needles.

That is what we’re against.

We oppose you - have no doubt about that - but you need to be clear exactly what it is about you we oppose. Don’t flatter yourself: It’s not because you’re a woman, or a liberal. It’s because you think murdering unborn babies is a blessing, and you’ll go to what seem like any ends to make sure it happens.

* It pops right to the top if you Google “newark episcopal crazy secrets”


42 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook
Comments:

So, the speech was originally “given at a rally to conclude the defense of a clinic under siege” but she decides to take it down because the website where it was posted was “providing an occasion for sin by providing a place where people could spew such hate and violence” via their comments.  Wow.  She’s pretty clueless about sin, hate and violence.  It’s like she’s from a moral Bizarro World.

[1] Posted by Nasty, Brutish & Short on 04-03-2009 at 07:18 AM • top

Abortion is anti-woman.  Abortion hurts women.  This isn’t rocket science.  Abortion can hurt a woman’s body, some women die.  Abortion hurts a woman’s mind, her emotions, her spirit.  They must bear the burdens of those abortions for the rest of their lives.  Abortion puts women in a place where a boyfriend, parent, even societal pressures play in to try to force her to decide to murder her child.  Abortion murders women yet unborn.  There is nothing anti women in protecting the unborn. 
Birthing is powerful.  For a woman to bring forth a child is sheer God-creative power at work within the confines of a human body.  Abortion does not empower women, it does quite the opposite.  By murdering God’s creation, by turning one’s back on the greatest creative power humanity has been given, abortion disempowers and disenfranchises women. 
I can’t believe that this woman would dare call pro-lifers “anti-woman” when she preys on young girls who don’t have the full capacity to make a major decision of any kind and enables them to murder, rips from them the power of life, and then sends them on their way to deal with the consequences on their own.

[2] Posted by Free Range Anglican on 04-03-2009 at 07:26 AM • top

Maybe we should archive this one from 1997 where she calls abortion “sacred work”:
http://www.syrf.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=16&name=DLFE-50.pdf

This “sermon” wasn’t given at an abortion clinic “under siege” or anything—just at the National Abortion Federation’s annual meeting.

[3] Posted by more martha than mary on 04-03-2009 at 07:28 AM • top

Tara, thank you for saying it so well!

[4] Posted by Cennydd on 04-03-2009 at 07:53 AM • top

Absent the spin, this explanation is credible.  But the proof is in the eating, as it were.  Will she ‘ever get around’ to putting this little talk back on line?  If she doesn’t, then she tacitly admits the speech contains a message that pro-abortionists don’t want presented beyond the narrow audience of the ideologically-committed.

Most people don’t see abortion as a holy sacrament, and will find such a presentation jarring.  People might be willing to throw their children into the ovens of Molech, but that’s a far cry from being told they should savor the moment as well.  It takes a special brand of depraved coldness to enjoy abortion as a blessing.  We shall see in Katherine Ragsdale will keep the message on line now that it has been exposed to the light.

carl

[5] Posted by carl on 04-03-2009 at 07:53 AM • top

1/2 of all abortions are on women fetus. Would abortion still be OK to her if it was just women fetuses, or is it the fact that male and female fetuses are aborted make it OK?  Is it possible that she doesn’t understand that many, many worldwide abortions are for reasons of sex selection? Surely, she knows, and since she ignores it she gives silent consent. What evil lives in her head? I love the characterization of “weapons-grade crazies”. It hits the sweet spot of informative description that unfortunately is so true.

[6] Posted by ctowles on 04-03-2009 at 07:55 AM • top

ctowles, actually probably greater than 50% of abortions are on females fetuses. Sex selection abortions are being carried out right here in the U.S. of A. They did a study of first generation immigrants here. First born children were about 50-50. Second born after first having a girl by a significant majority were male. The rate went up much higher still for the third child after having two daughters.

[7] Posted by robroy on 04-03-2009 at 08:37 AM • top

Abortion.

One dead.  One wounded.

[8] Posted by CarolynP on 04-03-2009 at 08:59 AM • top

What you’re really saying Ragsdale is that you are all for oppressing the poor and the poorest of the poor among us. Who is naked? dependant? helpless? voiceless? hungry? penniless? weak? The unborn. And you advocate to crush them. When the strong crushes the weak that is oppression.

And when these women (and men), who believed your lies, come back in need of forgiveness, do you help them? No. The fastest growing ministry in the collective church today is post-abortive healing and recovery. You’d be hard pressed to find a post-abortive healing Bible study (or anything!) in your neighborhood Episcopal Church.

stacy kramer

[9] Posted by JerryKramer on 04-03-2009 at 09:52 AM • top

Anti-choice, eh? How much choice did the baby get in its conception? How much choice does a baby get in the decision to killed in the womb? How much choice does a baby get to be partially born and left in the “dying area” because is survives an abortion? ABORTION IS ANTI-CHOICE MS. RAGSDALE!!!! ABORTION KILLS UNTOLD NUMBERS OF WOMEN WAITING TO BE BORN!!!! Meanwhile, you have a choice to make everyday. Apparently it is to kill children and future women.

[10] Posted by Festivus on 04-03-2009 at 10:02 AM • top

Just swung by that joint you don’t want to link to(don’t worry, I won’t).  Couldn’t find that comment but I did find one post where the shrieking, hysterical old harridan gets off some of the most embarrassingly juvenile name-calling I’ve ever seen from her, mostly directed at this site.  But what really sucked about it was that once again, it didn’t mention me.  What does a guy have to do to get some love? grin

[11] Posted by Christopher Johnson on 04-03-2009 at 10:07 AM • top

Hmmm.

My spirits are lifted this Friday just by hearing this news of further acclamations and commendations from TEC revisionists.  While it’s true that it’s not a bishop and in the absence of that, I don’t particularly care who is offering the praise—still we take the crumbs we can get. 

It seems clear that this blog earns the hatred, contempt, rage, and other nice things from revisionists solely because of [ahem] its having The Very Most Meanest Blogger Ever toiling away here.

; > )

Over here, we have The Very Most Meanest Divisivest Cruelest Blogger Ever In The Entire World . . . plus some Somewhat Divisive Bloggers, plus the guy from Australia.  How can anyone compete with that kind of both quality and quantity?

[12] Posted by Sarah on 04-03-2009 at 10:27 AM • top

This woman’s grey brain cells have been charred black! No wonder her thinking is dark! Lord help her!

[13] Posted by TLDillon on 04-03-2009 at 10:28 AM • top

Abortion is part, and only part, of the cult of death and the lord who rules it claims it as light.  Who better to serve him than those who would claim to belong to the Christ?  The liar gives us only what we ask for.  We choose him and his gifts.

This is not about TEC.  This is about our society and the choices we demand to have available to us.  It is about death at every level and for all time.

The prophets among us have been warning for awhile now.  Maybe we should listen.

[14] Posted by Elizabeth on 04-03-2009 at 10:31 AM • top

But what really sucked about it was that once again, it didn’t mention me.  What does a guy have to do to get some love? 

Share a few of your favorite recipes CJ…nothing like home cooking.
Intercessor

[15] Posted by Intercessor on 04-03-2009 at 10:35 AM • top

I think one should be careful of castigating the lady who is a priest.  Engaging her ideas and arguments might be more productive and the suitability of her appointment, but what is the point of attacking her personality, judging her faith?  I would agree that if she was in receipt of horrible comments on her blog that is unacceptable.

We are after all showing what it is to be Christians to the world here on this blog; and the world of all persuasions and none read what we write.

[16] Posted by Pageantmaster [Pray for +Mark Lawrence] on 04-03-2009 at 10:37 AM • top

“So she killed it.”

You’re too clever, Greg! 
Anything that is inconvenient is to be killed… Moral right and wrong are no longer the framework by which this group “thinks.”
Lord, have Mercy!
Carrie

[17] Posted by cityonahill on 04-03-2009 at 10:40 AM • top

[16] Pageantmaster, Are you suggesting she be given a pass on promoting abortion because she is a priest? For most of Christian history, her *orders* would not have been recognized and her espousal of killing babies would have been considered criminal. Perhaps I mistake your point. Bill

[18] Posted by off2 on 04-03-2009 at 11:18 AM • top

No - but I am suggesting that she personally is not subjected to attack or vilification - wrong as I believe her to be - I believe it is her views, position and this appointment which are wrong.  I am in no position to judge her personally, her faith or other aspects of her character and I also believe it is a distraction for others to do so from what is the real issue, her promotion of abortion as a Christian teacher engaged in the formation of tomorrow’s ministers.

[19] Posted by Pageantmaster [Pray for +Mark Lawrence] on 04-03-2009 at 11:26 AM • top

I had never gone to the site where Ragsdale’s comment appeared. I risked my spiritual health in doing so, and after reading Ms. What’s-Her-Name’s post and the comments, all I can say is:

What a sewer.

You’ll excuse me now, I have to go take a shower…

[20] Posted by David Fischler on 04-03-2009 at 01:18 PM • top

Pageantmaster,

We will be known by the fruit we bear.  This woman gives only death, both physical and spirital.  If that is a personal judgement—well let’s just say I don’t want her around my children.

[21] Posted by Elizabeth on 04-03-2009 at 02:35 PM • top

Well, I think we are certainly in a position to determine whether the content of her faith is consistent with that of the apostles…in fact, we are commanded to do just that in many places. Paul chastised the Galatians in Gal 1:6-9 for failing to do just that and folling John in 2 John 7-11 demands that we do it.

And by that standard this woman does not hold to the Christian faith. We cannot judge her eternal destiny but we can certainly and must certainly recognize the deficiency of the content of her faith.

[22] Posted by Matt Kennedy on 04-03-2009 at 02:44 PM • top

At first I thought it would be a good thing to let the world see what the anti-choice (anti-woman) vitriol is really like.

..Talk about hiding behind a skirt!

[23] Posted by Moot on 04-03-2009 at 03:21 PM • top

Keep standing firm, you’re in good company.

I googled, and found related blogs, one by Elizabeth Kaeton, with a post roiling about their being the incarnation of Lilith, and rationalizing the evil that she did, and other such hateful diatribes. Other mentions of eradicating the “heterosex”. Further googling found what I was looking for, where Ragsdale demands that Christian medical professionals that refuse to abandon Christ’s teachings, who refuse to abandon their conscience be banned from the medical profession. She and others make free with quotations of the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., but were he alive today, they would be attacking him, as they attack us. Here’s a quote from Dr. King Jr.

 

  “There was a time when the church was very powerful in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being “disturbers of the peace” and outside agitators. But the Christians pressed on in the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven” called to obey God rather than man. Small in number they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide.” - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

I’m a woman, was a lifelong liberal democrat, supported women’s rights, was naive about what their intent was, but my eyes have been opened. They praise Margaret Sanger, indifferent to her racism, her hatred for the poor, inferring that they were less than, she demanded their ability to reproduce be cut off, to create the same sort of “purity” that Hitler advocated for. Ragsdale and her cronies are a nest of vipers who sought to maneuver themselves into positions of power in a church when they do not respect, or believe in Christ’s teachings. They did so to destroy it, bring it down for their own sick agenda.

[24] Posted by mari on 04-03-2009 at 03:53 PM • top

Why is the whiny baby missing from her self-pitying diatribe?  Inquiring minds want to know?

[25] Posted by Bill2 on 04-03-2009 at 06:07 PM • top

It’s ironic to see a site which deplores “vitriol” and engages in so much of it.  Ms. Secrets undercuts herself by sneering at a woman who is expecting another child.  Apparently criticism is okay going one way, but not the other.  If Ms. Ragsdale is indeed getting threats of violence, she should report this to authorities.  I gather she is mostly just shocked to discover that her own defense of violence against unborn children is not a good thing, but a source of horror.

[26] Posted by Katherine on 04-03-2009 at 07:00 PM • top

“Culture of death” is right. I don’t know if this is still in vogue in the homosexual community, but they were very fond of hissing this ‘epithet’ at straight couples: “Breeders!!”
Of course, upon hearing this, my first thought was always, “Where do you think YOU came from?”

But that makes too much sense - right?

The principles that God set in motion from the very beginning were that 1) God made mankind in His image, male & female He created them. 2) He commanded them to be fruitful and multiply, and 3) Murder was always portrayed as a most vile, wretched and heinous crime.

Is it any wonder that the homosexual crazies and the pro-abortion crazies are the shock troops in this war against the Christian church, and against God Himself? Guess who’s energizing them? Combine them with those who seek to deny/twist the unalterable truth of the word written, and you have a very concentrated attack on the true light by the forces of darkness.

It seems that the dark clouds over once godly nations are growing more and more ominous almost daily. But Christians, bought by the blood of Christ and sealed by His Spirit, know this truth: “Do you not know this from of old, since man was placed on earth, that the exulting of the wicked is short, and the joy of the godless but for a moment?” (Job 20:4-5)

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

[27] Posted by GSP98 on 04-03-2009 at 07:02 PM • top

Something I need to remember today:

“I never said it would easy.  I never said it would be fun.  And I never, ever said it would be fair.  In this world, that is.”——God.

kTF!...mrb

[28] Posted by Mike Bertaut on 04-03-2009 at 08:21 PM • top

I have had to fight every instinct so far not tell from the roof tops on this. So I’ll be brief. I was adopted at birth. No idea if I was a child of rape, or a child of unwed parents, or just what. What I do know is that a woman made the decision to keep me and place me up for adoption. I have stated that any lay person that wants to have less than standard beliefs- I’d be happy to educate. Yet when a priest makes a statement that “abortion is a blessing” - (and I understand the context about the clinic that was shot up, etc. I do not condone violence to end abortions.) But any person that says “abortion is a blessing” has clearly grieved Our Lord- and when a presbyter says it- my goodness. “Thou shalt do no murder.” I mean, for the love of all that is simple. How CAN ONE PARSE THAT STATEMENT?! 

As an adopted child- I am thankful for the dedication of the strong woman who allowed me to live and who thought not only of herself but of the loved child of God she carried.

/end rant.

[29] Posted by Thomistic on 04-03-2009 at 08:50 PM • top

As an adopted child- I am thankful for the dedication of the strong woman who allowed me to live and who thought not only of herself but of the loved child of God she carried.

As an adoptive mother, so am I.

[30] Posted by Free Range Anglican on 04-03-2009 at 09:21 PM • top

Ragsdale has put up the speech again but this time on a blog rather than a group of sermons. She has also provided a commentary:

http://katherineragsdale.blogspot.com/

[31] Posted by kailash on 04-03-2009 at 10:04 PM • top

When I read the liberal position, I sense it considers pregnancy to be just one of many sexually transmitted diseases. If left untreated by abortion, it will result in a child. So, you have a choice of treatment and blessing for the love that spawned it. 

Our sexuality justifies passionate love for one another, inclusive of straights and GLBTs, and free healthcare to deal with all its consequences.

New Thing Gospel lesson for the day - God made sex good.

[32] Posted by Dr. N. on 04-03-2009 at 10:13 PM • top

Carolyn (8),
One Dead.  At Least Two Wounded.

[33] Posted by Bo on 04-03-2009 at 11:07 PM • top

How terrible of us to dare inconvenience their baby killing.

[34] Posted by Newbie Anglican on 04-04-2009 at 07:22 AM • top

If you read through the material at the RCRC website (which I don’t recommend done lightly), you will see that they truly regard a baby in utero as the enemy - as a foreign body whose sole goal seems to be to attack the “host” (the mother). And Ms. Ragsdale was on the board of the RCRC, so she’s just reflecting that organization’s point of view - an organization that TEC is officially a member of.

[35] Posted by Branford on 04-04-2009 at 08:16 AM • top

Bo (33),
Both dead, Church wounded and grieving.

[36] Posted by Dr. N. on 04-04-2009 at 03:30 PM • top

“Eradicating the heterosex?” If a clergywoman advocated it, she should be immeditely removed from the clergy and expelled from the denomination.

[37] Posted by FenelonSpoke on 04-04-2009 at 03:38 PM • top

I have to remember that when I first learned abortion was wrong it wasn’t from someone in the Episcopal church, in 1974, where I was raised.  It was in my high school biology class.  Taught by a wonderful teacher who is also Jewish and agnostic, if not atheist.  He is also an artist, and illustrated fetal development beautifully.  As the class went on and human development was described he made the point more fully that this is a separate person.  As the class was about to end he finished, loudly stating “That is why no one can say that a developing child is a part of a woman’s body!”.  In the early 70’s I recall the usual argument for pro-abortion forces was stricly that it was all about “controlling my body” and that a fetus is “part” of it.  It couldn’t be further from the truth.  Again, it wasn’t in my Episcopal parish I learned this.  It looks like no one ever will.

[38] Posted by nwlayman on 04-05-2009 at 06:28 PM • top

My opinion about abortion on demand remains the same now as it always has been:  Save for the need to perform an abortion in order to protect the life of the mother, abortion should be outlawed.  An unborn child is a person….a human being….and that child has the God-given right to live.

[39] Posted by Cennydd on 04-05-2009 at 08:04 PM • top

IMHO the liberal interprets the words “to protect the life of the mother” to include social life, professional life, etc.

[40] Posted by Dr. N. on 04-05-2009 at 08:20 PM • top

Those same folks talk about ‘the quality of life’ for those at the other end of the time-line as well.

The standard for ‘justified homicide’ is still reasonably safe (the rare ‘twinkie defense’ cases excepted), and should be the standard applied in the taking of the life of the unborn.

[41] Posted by Bo on 04-05-2009 at 08:32 PM • top

to include social life, professional life, etc.

Yeah, if you are worried that being pregnent will keep you from fitting into your prom dress, that is clearly a life threatening condition.

[42] Posted by AndrewA on 04-05-2009 at 08:59 PM • top

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.


Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere about the crisis in our church. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments that you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm, its board of directors, or its site administrators.