An Interview With Pro-Life Activist Roni Cairns

a a app for roni


By Frances Ayers


How long have you been pro-life?

While it took me a few years to transition from Pro-Choice extremist to Pro-Life, and one of the most vital moments in that transition occurred September of 2012, I officially “came out” as Pro-Life late 2013. During early 2013, I was pretty off-and-on about the Pro-Life label, but I was really on my way to being a full-blown Pro-Life advocate.

What led you to adopt the pro-life position?

I wrote a series of six blog posts that explained my transition, but perhaps the most significant moment happened in September 2012 when I met my Pro-Life friends Josh Brahm and Clinton Wilcox. I also got to meet Steven Wagner, who is a mentor at Justice For All, a Pro-Life organization in Wichita, Kansas. We all talked together for some time about abortion, and then I was asked a strange question (well, I thought it was strange at the time): “What is the moral difference between a child five minutes after birth and the fetus five minutes before birth?” It’s an excellent question. The viability of the child both five minutes before birth and that same child five minutes after birth was no different. The physical appearance of the child was no different. The only difference was its location–in and out of the womb–and for some reason, that child was completely, 100% able to be killed so long as it was located inside of the womb. That really hit me hard. This is just the short version of the story. The full story is so much more complex, but what really matters is that I stopped refusing to deny the preborn child the rights as a human being that it deserved.

What was the idea behind starting your group “Pro-Solution”?

For those that don’t know, Pro-Solution was a Facebook page and group dedicated to finding common ground between Pro-Lifers and Pro-Choicers, a means, if you will, to bridge the countless gaps that sit between the sides. It was meant as a forum to find and discuss common-ground issues between the sides to (hopefully) bring us all together, even if only a little. And do you think there is a middle ground that both Pro-Lifers and Pro-Choicers can agree on? I absolutely do. Aside from abortion legality, there are a ton of things that I have come to notice that Pro-Lifers and Pro-Choicers agree on. For example, we all agree that the foster care system needs work, that every child deserves a family. We all tend to agree that the adoption system needs an overhaul so that those who want to place children for adoption are not coerced into doing so and those that seek to adopt don’t have to pay an arm and a leg to do it.

Tell us a little bit about your blog.

My blog is called “AdminRaptor’s Corner of the Internet.” “AdminRaptor” is a nickname that I got back in 2011 thanks to friends. That’s a long story, but I still cherish the nickname. Not only have I shared my story of my conversion to the Pro-Life stance in that blog, but I have also been using it as an outlet to discuss things (mostly court cases/rulings) regarding bodily autonomy and other abortion- or Pro-Life-related posts.

Do you think there is room for liberals in the pro-life movement?

Absolutely! Pro-Life Liberal right here! I have tons of friends that are Pro-Life, both Conservative, Moderate, and Liberal. The Pro-Life stance is such that it can be so inclusive to all sorts of political stances and beliefs. There are even Pro-Life Democrats and that gives me hope! The key logic behind the Pro-Life stance is that it is wrong to kill innocent human beings. Abortion kills an innocent human being. Therefore, abortion is wrong.

What would you like to see change in the Pro-life movement?

Honestly, the only thing I would change (if I could) is the hostility toward Pro-Choicers. Hear me out: We are not going to change any hearts or minds on abortion if we are spiteful or apathetic toward their arguments. The best thing we can do as advocates against abortion is openly, honestly, and above all, compassionately address the  arguments for abortion-choice. We won’t convince anyone that the Pro-Life movement is a compassionate movement if all we do is call people murderers or other insults. We need to listen more. We don’t know what kind of experiences or traumas might have led someone to be Pro-Choice, or what arguments convinced them that abortion should be a legal right, but if we listen, we will learn, and we can then start to become better able to communicate our message with our peers. Do unto others, as they say.

Do you think men can play a part in the Pro-Life movement?

That’s like asking if a non-slave can play a part in supporting the abolition of slavery. Absolutely, men can (and do!) play a part! I can think of a number of men who are wonderful Pro-Life advocates (two have already been mentioned). I have seen so many more, but that is not to say that the Pro-Life stance is one of only men. It most certainly is not! I’m a woman! Abby Johnson, former director of a Planned Parenthood is a woman! Even Norma McCorvey, Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade herself is Pro-Life! I could go on and on about the wonderful Pro-Life advocates there are out there, but I’d never stop if I did. The Pro-Life movement continues to grow, both men and women are coming to the realization that the preborn human beings are children, are deserving of protection. The basic human right to life, to not be killed arbitrarily, belongs to all human beings–not just some! And both genders have every right to defend this most fundamental right!

What Is A Pro-life Liberal

By Frances Ayers

Pro-life Liberals support programs that enhance the quality of life during pregnancy and throughout the life cycle.We are liberal and support entitlement programs that help raise families out of poverty,whether it is food stamps,WIC,or cash assistance.We believe that all families benefit from affordable day care,housing, a “living wage”,and free or low cost job training and education.

Furthermore,we believe in affordable and accessible birth control and sex education that has proven to reduce the number of abortions.

In our view,we believe that pro-life means supporting the rights of all people, especially those who have been marginalized in society,including LGBT people.

We also support the rights of the differently abled to live a full and productive life.As pro-life liberals,we support gun control,abolishing the death penalty,and are against unjust wars.

Pro-Life In Ireland

An interview with Thomas Carty,Irish Writer and Pro-life Activist

a pro life image

By Frances Ayers

What follows is an interview I did with the Irish Pro-Lifer and Writer,Thomas Carty.He is also a Poet and Blogger and discusses his views on what it means to be pro-life and his feelings about the life of the mother exception

How long have you been pro-life?

I have been pro life all my life,coming from a traditional Catholic background, and from a First Wave Feminist household.

Can you be liberal and pro-life?

I have also been left wing all my life, and have never understood how the left can promote an idea so close to eugenics that controls the numbers of the poor, which can only serve the interests of the rich. This position I satired in my doggerel verse ” A Right Wingers Modest Proposal”
Were there any life experiences that contributed to your belief/s?
Before the advent of social welfare, with massive families and women having no rights even over whether or not she had sex with her husband it was understandable due to grinding poverty and the social situation. However, with the advent of women’s rights and the acceptance and eventual legislation for the important principle of marital rape and the prevention of same, and the advancement and affordability of contraception, a lot of these issues were dealt with avoiding the need for abortion that there may have been seen to be formerly.

I have been pushing that agenda on an ethical basis, not a faith basis over the past few years. I had been involved in a left wing grouping the Anti Austerity Alliance, which I was told “has no position on social issues (such as abortion)”, and was to be a candidate in Tullamore for them in the recent local elections.

However, pro abortion militants led by the Galway writer Kevin Higgins – husband of American writer and militant pro abortionist Susan Millar du Mars, led a smear and satire campaign, which focused on a laddish post on Facebook, and called into question the commitment to reproductive rights as they call abortion of the Socialist Party element in the AAA. Higgins is ex Socialist Party – headed by Joe Higgins, no relation of Kevins, and will do anything to pull them down.

The AAA panicked, and did not endorse the candidature as a result, thinking more of the opinions of folk who wanted the downfall of their movement than of the folk who set aside important issues for the combined common good, and everything fell apart. With the AAA, a Socialist Party member Laura Fitzgerald – who heads her own micro movement that is militant for abortion rights called ROSA – was one of the most vocal, and the slur of misogyny was applied in a half hearted denial that it was my position on abortion that got me deselected.
How have your writings reflected your beliefs?
I write a lot about all issues, including the life issue, and have approached it from all angles to explain it as I see it,and links to pieces are below. The Savita case – my blog on it being quoted extensively in the AAA spat – explained how the mother’s life should have been saved even if it meant the death of the unborn in that case.
Would you like to post a link/links to your writing?

Savita – A Tragedy of Errors

Savita and the Life Issue

It, Not I

A RIght Wingers Modest Proposal

The Shepherd, The Wolf, The Ewe and the Lamb

From the Womb She Speaks – Pro life left wing First Wave Feminist cinepoem

Comment of Kevin Higgins “The Euphenisms”

Quills at Dawn (The AAA Fiasco)

What The Virgin at Knock Really Would Have Said
It seems as if you are pro-life with exceptions.
Savita’s case was a tragedy.The baby was miscarrying, but did not do so in the expected time.Her water broke,and she was left with her cervix open for many days, leading to infection and death. A dispute ensued over whether she got the infection from the open cervix, or the infection was there already and caused the miscarriage ,rumbles on with neither side telling the full truth.

She and her husband asked for the removal of the baby,refused by her doctor ,a woman doctor ,who said “It’s not possible as Ireland is a Catholic country”. Now this is wrong on two fronts – Ireland is secular, and 30+ cases occur every year similarly, where the baby is removed to save the mother’s life, which is known about and accepted by the Catholic church.Not that it matters as to the church’s opinion when it comes to civil law, but the position of this doctor is even MORE extreme than the Catholic position.

It has been explained by the Church, a mother’s life MUST be saved. Where a woman has cancer is one example given, and needs chemo, but it may harm or cause the death of the child, she MUST get it if she wants it, and it’s not murder of the child,as the child was not targeted to be killed as in conventional abortion.

Ditto for Savita, while the removal of the child would result in its certain death – which is moot as it was miscarrying anyway – it was not to kill the child, but to try and save the mother as it was the best chance she had even though it was no guarantee.

In trying to play God, the doctor went beyond Catholic duty,and caused the deaths of mother and child, which I explained in my verse “The Sheperd, The Wolf, The Ewe and the Lamb”, and blog posts on the issue.

Its where the likes of these are abused that the problems start. Only common sense exceptions, even Youth Defense and the Catholic Church are of the opinions here.It’s a terrible thing to let a woman die of blood poisoning when  miscarrying a baby is not induced. Its where the likes of these are abused that the problems start.With the Savita case, being so pre term – notwithstanding the fact it was miscarrying anyway,the baby would have passed away on delivery.But the mother might have been saved. The family was Hindu so the catholic comment was sectarian, too, alas


In that case they should have induced labor,so she didn’t die of blood poisoning !I think Irish Catholics in America would have supported inducing to save her life.I just do not believe in actively aborting,but an early delivery might give the baby at least a slim chance.
And of course it would have saved Savita’s life

Abortion and Rape


By Robert Treat

There has often been discussion within the pro-life community over whether the rape exception should be allowed. Some argue that the child should not be punished for the crime of the father, while others argue that the woman shouldn’t have to go through a pregnancy if she didn’t consent to the sex. No one can argue that the rapist can sue his victim for custody of the child. Or at least no one should be able to. But for practical purposes, this is what has happened in the state of Massachusetts.

In 2009 a 14-year-old girl was raped and impregnated by a 20-year-old man. Her reward for choosing life for her child is that she must now share custody of that child with her rapist over the next 16 years. Over the next 16 years, she stands to have a constant reminder, not only of the rape, but also of her own powerlessness. Only time will tell how the kid fares, but under the circumstances, I’m guessing not well.

Here’s more info on this grim subject.
Robert is an Administrator for numerous groups on Facebook including,Pro-lifers In Favor Of Safer Sex And Birth Control , Pro-life Liberals,Pro-life Pagans.Pro-Life Is For All Religions, And Pro-Life Discussions.

When Did Feminists Abort The Pro-Life Position?



By Frank Ludwig

 While the idea of women’s equality is probably as old as male-dominated societies and has been promoted by writers from Plato to Mary Wollstonecraft, the first notable feminist movement didn’t come into being until the mid 19th century, following a number of publications from authors such as Margaret Fuller, Caroline Norton, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Henrik Ibsen. The aims of First-Wave Feminism were mainly their right to own property, woman’s suffrage (the right to vote) and equal rights in other areas such as education and divorce. None of them demanded the right to abortion – on the contrary, abortion was seen as a crime that was forced upon women by men who were unwilling to face up to their responsibilities, and they believed that women’s equality would end abortion for good:

‘Perhaps there will come a time when… an unmarried mother will not be despised because of her motherhood… and when the right of the unborn to be born will not be denied or interfered with.’ – Caroline Norton [1
‘Every woman knows that if she were free, she would never bear an unwished-for child, nor think of murdering one before its birth.’ – Victoria Woodhull [2]
‘When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.’ – Elizabeth Cady Stanton [3]
‘There were four hundred murders annually produced by abortion in this county alone… There must be a remedy for such a crying evil as this. But where should it be found, at least begin, if not in the complete enfranchisement and elevation of women?’ – Elizabeth Cady Stanton [4]

‘Enforced motherhood is a crime against the body of the mother and the soul of the child… But the crime of abortion is not one in which the guilt lies solely or even chiefly with the woman… I hesitate not to assert that most of this crime of child murder, abortion, infanticide, lies at the door of the male sex.’ – Matilda Joslyn Gage [5]

‘Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women.’ – Alice Paul [6]
‘I deplore the horrible crime of child-murder… No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; But oh! Thrice guilty is he who… drove her to the desperation which impels her to the crime.’ – Susan B. Anthony [7]
From the beginning of the 20th century, feminists also started promoting birth control, the main protagonists being Marie Stopes in the UK and Margaret Sanger in the US. And while they campaign for the right to use contraceptives, both of them are firmly opposed to abortion:

‘We explained what contraception was; that abortion was the wrong way – no matter how early it was performed, it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way – it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun.’ – Margaret Sanger [8]
‘I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.’ – Margaret Sanger [9]

‘When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become the foundation of a new race. There will be no killing of babies in the womb by abortion, nor through neglect in foundling homes, nor will there be infanticide.’ – Margaret Sanger [10]

‘Some ill-informed persons have the notion that when we speak of birth control, we include abortion as a method. We certainly do not.’ – Margaret Sanger [10a]

‘I was glad you gave space to the fact that the Queensland Medical Association is planning an extensive educational campaign against the evil of abortion.’ – Marie Stopes [11]

When Marie Stopes found out that her friend Avro Manhattan had pressured one of his lovers into having an abortion, she called him a murderer to his face. And when William Carpenter named his abortion shop after her, she took legal action against him. [12] – However, today’s largest abortion business in the UK bears her name since it was founded in 6217 RT (1976 CE, eighteen years after her death).

During and after the World Wars, some of the feminists’ goals were achieved, but the position of women was still far from being equal. In 6204 RT (1963 CE), Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique in which she pointed out that many women were unhappy and unfulfilled as mere housewives and mothers. This was the beginning of Second-Wave Feminism. [13]

The first abortion activists were Pat Maginnis, Rowena Gurner and Lana Phelan, who travelled and campaigned as the Army of Three in the early Sixties. In 6207 RT (1966 CE) they founded the Association to Repeal Abortion Laws (ARAL) [14]. At that time gynecologist Dr. Bernard Nathanson and Lawrence Lader, a journalist who is also counted as a founding board member of Zero Population Growth (ZPG) which demanded abortion rights as a means of population control [15], promoted abortion rights and decided to involve feminists in order to give their agenda a wider platform (‘We’re going to have to recruit the feminists; Friedan has got to put her troops into this thing’ – Lawrence Laden [16]).

They approached Betty Friedan, who in 6209 RT (1968 CE), together with Pauli Murray, wrote the NOW Bill of Rights (NOW being the National Organization for Women which she had co-founded) and which claimed in point VIII ‘the right of women to control their own reproductive lives by removing from penal codes the laws limiting access to contraceptive information and devices and laws governing abortion.’ [17] This was the first time that the demand for abortion appeared in a feminist context.

Pat Goltz was a feminist activist and member of NOW at that time. After the organization introduced abortion rights demands, she co-founded Feminists for Life (FFL) [18] and was subsequently expelled from NOW’s Ohio Chapter.

In an email to me she remembers how this change in policy was enforced: ‘NOW got its stance this way: in a convention held (in Chicago, I believe), some of the leaders wanted to pass a plank in support of abortion, but they didn’t have the votes, so they went out into the streets and recruited people to come in and vote for the plank. Some of the women involved in NOW were upset at how this was done, being basically dishonest, so they pulled out and formed their own group: the Women’s Equity Action League (made up primarily of lawyers, as I understand), but before long, WEAL also had a pro-abortion stance.

Most women were afraid to speak out. I got letters from women who told me they had been silenced, and they were afraid that if they spoke out, they would be rejected. I don’t know how many such women there were, but I got a number of women who expressed the happiness they’d found a group that supported both true feminism and the right to life. I constantly ran into women who had refused to adopt any feminist positions because the abortion issue had tainted it. […] Alice Paul expressed her pain at seeing her life’s work destroyed by an issue she didn’t even believe in.’

Alice Paul had been the main leader of the successful 1920’s suffragette movement [19]. Pat recalls: ‘I actually talked to Alice Paul before she died, and she told me that the feminists were all bitterly opposed to abortion.’

In 6210 RT (1969 CE) Friedan, Nathanson, Laden and others founded the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL) which succeeded the ARAL. [20]
(In the late Seventies Nathanson, having been one of the most prolific abortion performers in the US, saw an abortion on ultrasound imaging and, after watching the fetus suffer and struggle, became a pro-life campaigner [21]. He stated that ‘I am one of those who helped usher in this barbaric age’, wrote the book Aborting America in which he confessed to the deceitful beginnings of the pro-abortion movement and made the documentary The Silent Scream which shows a real-time abortion on ultrasound imaging which can be seen on YouTube. Some quotes from his book in which he describes how the movement used made-up statistics and opinion polls to achieve their aim can be found here.)

The euphemism ‘reproductive rights’ became one of the most popular terms of the abortion movement, just like the myth of the ‘tissue blob’ or ‘cluster of cells’ (which perfectly describe a zygote, but not an embryo or a fetus) and are religiously quoted by many supporters at every given opportunity.

Also in 6210 RT (1969 CE), a young woman in Dallas fabricated a rape story in order to obtain an abortion (she was under the impression that Texas had a rape exception). She was turned down, and her child was born and given up for adoption. The attorney handling it referred her to two female attorneys who were looking for an opportunity to challenge the US’ abortion laws, and her case went before the Supreme Court. With its infamous Roe v. Wade decision in 6214 RT (1973 CE), abortion became legal in the US. (After seeing a fetal development poster two decades later, Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff in the case, became a pro-life campaigner and has since unsuccessfully tried to have the decision overturned.) [22]

The demand for legal abortions became the mainstream position of the vast majority of feminists, which often was (and is) expressed in a militant way. Those who hold other views are (depending on their gender) considered chauvinists or traitors by many, and men are told they have no right to an opinion unless they support abortion. Some even claim that one can’t be a feminist without being pro-abortion, but the fact is that feminists before Betty Friedan strongly opposed abortion as the taking of a human life. In light of the developments of the past 45 years, the remaining pro-life feminists started organizing themselves into groups such as the aforementioned Feminists for Life (FFL) who were founded in 6215 RT (1972 CE) but ‘stand on more than two hundred years of pro-life feminist history’. [23] 

How I Evolved From A Liberal Pro-Choicer To A Liberal Pro-Lifer

By Frances Ayers
For most of my life,or at least from the time I could vote,I considered myself Pro-choice,although I believed in restrictions.About six years ago,after watching an abortion video narrated by former Planned Parenthood,Dr Nathanson,I started rethinking my position,and did some research.I read extensively on fetal development and watched other videos on the abortion procedure.I realized how wrong I had been.I was especially struck by the fact that at only 30 days gestation,the unborn child’s heart began to beat.
                                                              For many years,as a Feminist,I believed in bodily autonomy and didn’t feel anyone should have a right to control a woman’s reproductive choice,but what I wasn’t taking into consideration was that the unborn child was actually a separate person with his or her own DNA and unique personality.I also saw all Pro-lifers as ultra conservative,and didn’t realize that there were other liberals out there who were Pro-life but still supported liberal ideals like a clean environment,worker’s rights,entitlements for the poor,birth control,affordable housing,and health care.
As I became involved with some of the liberal pro-life groups I came to realize that there were many out there who shared my point of view.I decided to form my own group on Facebook over a year ago,called Liberals For A Consistent Life Ethic.Many liberal Pro-lifers also shared my opposition to the death penalty and euthanasia,so that was the idea behind the group,to network with other like minded individuals.At around that time I also became Administrator and Page Manager of Pro-Life Liberals,also on Facebook.
.                                                             I have learned through my encounters with other liberal pro-lifers that there was as much diversity as in the Pro-choice movement, for example, while some PLL’s believed in exceptions for rape and the life of the mother,others did not.         

So Why Am I Against The Death Penalty?

By Mary O’Neill McCoy

I love true crime stories, and I’ve also jumped onto the FBI profiling fandom bandwagon. Because of this, I’ve read about many cases that involve the gravest of human depravities where people kill not out of fear or in a moment of passion. They kill because they either just don’t care or, worse yet, they enjoy the act of killing and maybe even torture. Knowing what these killers have done and why, I feel absolutely no sympathy for them when they receive their final fate at the hands of state-sanctioned executioners.

So, why am I against the death penalty?

Not to sound cliché, but I believe capital punishment puts us at the level of the murderer. We render someone powerless and then kill them to satisfy our emotions—it turns us into bullies. In martial arts, we learned you only do what’s necessary to neutralize the threat. You kill if you have to, but you don’t if it’s not necessary. To go beyond what you need to do in hurting someone to render your environment safe is not honorable. I’m not convinced that we need to execute criminals to keep us safe from them.

I don’t think people who wish to kill those that have murdered someone that they love are dishonorable in their feelings and or even in their intentions. I just don’t believe that because I can see myself feeling the exact same way if I were in their shoes (which I am not) changes the fact that it’s still bullying—less offensive than the original crime, and infinitely so, but still bullying nonetheless.

I genuinely don’t feel I would be truly supportive of loved ones left behind in the wake of a fatal crime by allowing myself to get swept away along with them in their desire to kill the offender. I wouldn’t lecture them or try to make them feel bad for their desire for lethal justice; but I, in good conscience, could not help usher them further down a dark hall of unmitigated dominance and death.

What Is A Liberal Pro-lifer

By Frances Ayers

Liberal Pro-lifers support programs that enhance the quality of life during pregnancy and throughout the life cycle.We  support entitlement programs that help raise families out of poverty,whether it is food stamps,WIC,or cash assistance.We believe that all families benefit from affordable day care,housing, a “living wage”,and free or low cost job training and education.

Furthermore,we believe in affordable and accessible birth control and sex education that has proven to reduce the number of abortions.

In our view,we believe that pro-life means supporting the rights of all people, especially those who have been marginalized in society,including immigrants,and LBGT populations.

We also support the rights of the differently abled to live a full and productive life.and are against  euthanasia.As pro-life liberals,we support gun control,abolishing the death penalty,and the waging of unjust wars.