Skip to main content

Cornelia "Nina" Pillard



The Senate will vote this week on President Obama’s appointment to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Members of the pro-life community have labeled this nominee “the most liberal judicial appointment ever.” Ms. Pillard is staunchly pro-abortion and anti-abstinence education, and she is close to receiving a lifetime job on the second most powerful bench in the world.

Here are some of her more radical comments:

Nina Pillard seems to hate the idea of pregnancy itself, as she has suggested that pregnancy can make women “a class of presumptive breeders rather than reliable breadwinners and citizens.” She said that people who are “anti-choice” (pro-life) are guilty of “sex discrimination.”

She maintains that abortion should be legal because the Constitution “declares our liberty to protect our own life and health.” That is a horrible understanding of the Constitution, which is why she does not need the power to interpret the Constitution as a judge. That document never grants the power to kill a baby in order to maintain one’s own “pursuit of happiness.”

Abortion, she says, helps to free “women from historically routine conscription into maternity.” Pillard must think that man’s chief goal is to draft women into becoming baby makers; her gross mischaracterization of men could actually be labeled as “sex discrimination.”

She has also denied the reality of ultrasound technology in showing the early development of the unborn. She referred to this evidence as “deceptive images of fetuses-as-autonomous beings.” Is this a person we want on the bench? She is either that ignorant of simple science or else she is dishonest about the results.

On the issue of abstinence education Pillard is equally extreme and irresponsible. She said she would declare abstinence education as unconstitutional because curriculum is “permeated with stereotyped messages” (which is a stereotyped message). She obviously believes that abstinence education does not work, which is further proof that she is not fit for her potential position. As chairmen of Union County’s Comprehensive Health Committee, I have previously posted how well abstinence education has improved our area.

If you are concerned that someone this radical might be approved for a lifetime appointment, then contact your Senators ASAP and urge them to vote against the confirmation of Cornelia Pillard.


Let this also serve as another reminder that elections have consequences. I often hear that Roe v. Wade is the law and a President cannot change that. That is true, but these appointments show the power that each President has, so make sure that your vote is always for someone who will protect life in the womb.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

To Save a Life

(Like my blog about the peace symbol, this blog was written as a default response to all the parents, students, and other people who are asking my opinion of To Save a Life.) By now you have probably heard of the movie To Save a Life, which opened nation-wide in theaters on January 22nd. The movie deals with so many issues that teens face today, like suicide, cutting, drinking, drugs, premarital sex, teen pregnancy, and abortion. At first glance this movie looks like an awesome resource that we should recommend for our teens, parents, youth pastors, and youth workers. But a closer look at the movie reveals a few disturbing things. For starters, according to pluggedin.com, there are 2 uses of the “A” word, 5 uses of hell (used as a curse word), and once the “D” word is used. There are other crude terms used to describe a girl, and crude terms for referring to sexual activity. There is also a bedroom scene that shows a girl removing a boy’s shirt, then afterwards the girl putting he

Evangelism

“Preach the gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.” St. Francis of Assisi is given credit for this famous quote (although that exact phrasing does not appear in any of his writings), and a lot of people would think that this is a great philosophy. His actual quote was that everyone should “preach by their deeds.” Preaching with our deeds is not just a strategy, it is a necessity. We are commanded all through the Scriptures to let our light shine and be a peculiar people. People should be able to look at our lives and see that we are Christians. They should see the love of Christ readily on display, and thus feel compelled to live their lives in the same way. The sermon that we should preach with our lives is a sermon of love, joy, peace, patience, self-control, forgiveness, conviction, etc. But this idea that has emerged that says we should ONLY preach with our deeds is a heresy straight from the devil himself. Think about it: who is the one that does not want you t

What is a Curse Word?

I know. Stupid question, right? But lately I have heard Christians begin to debate what actually makes a word a curse word. Since the Bible never says, “Thou shalt not say the ‘s’ word,” how do we know that a word is bad? Because of this I have heard Christians justify cursing. The Bible gives a broad command for Christians to adhere to: let no corrupt word come out of your mouth (Ephesians 4:29). The word corrupt means rotten; therefore, we should never say a rotten word, whether it is on the list of curse words or not. First, we have to realize that there are curse words. On the night of Jesus’ arrest Peter was found guilty of using one himself. Matthew 26:74 tells us that when Peter denied knowing Jesus that he began “to curse and to swear.” This verse shows that there are curse words, and that they are wrong to use. I’m sure whatever words Peter said were not the same curse words that we have in our culture today. Here is the point: a curse word (or rotten word) is any wo