Discussion: Muted Reaction By 'Pro-Family' Groups To Family Separations

1 Like

The willingly blind hypocrisy of right wing family values. Cherry picking right and wrong. No doubt they all claim to be Christians.


Pro-family is just a marketing device, the ultimate objective is power. I’m not sure Christ would approve. Hypocrites, paid in full hypocrites.


It might seem hypocritical for “pro-life” and “pro-family” (sic.) organizations to remain silent when innocent children are ripped from their mothers’ arms. However, if the overarching goal of such organizations is to relegate women to the status of people less deserving of equal rights and legal protection, it all begins to make perfect sense.


“But the origin of that pain and confusion isn’t U.S. law or the Trump administration. That burden lies with their parents who knowingly put them in this position.”

The issue seems to be that all these wronged children, separated from their parents, had the immense misfortune of having been born. So ‘sins of the father’ and all that, I guess.


Pontius Pilate couldn’t have washed his hands more thoroughly.


Exactly. I remember interviewing RTL leaders back in late 70s. The first big organization was led by white southern dudes who hated women having careers. Okay, they didn’t say that…but it was very obvious.


The purpose of these organizations is simply to amplify Republican marketing that positions conservatives as being “in favor” of some common value (life, guns, God), and to position liberals as hating those common values.

Nothing more.


This is the exact problem with identity politics. These groups exist to keep the money flowing from their supporters. They have no real moral focus.

Advocacy on any topic should flow out of a deep seeded moral core. In this case a belief in the sanctity of human life. What these groups have shown over and over again is that for them life begins at conception and ends at birth. There only deeply held belief is the need for them to make the next big payroll.


It’s understandable that a group that’s strictly an antiabortion group would not take a stand on the separation of families. But the Susan B. Anthony List says on its ‘About’ page, “We invite you to [join us] to encircle the vulnerable ones who need us, and to fight until they are safe and free.” Sounds to me like toddlers separated from their parents are right in the wheelhouse of that description.


As Barney Frank once said. “Sure they’re pro life. They think life begins at conception and ends at birth.”


“the National Right to Life Committee and the Susan B. Anthony List said their focus on abortion is so intense that they avoid wading into other issues.” Actually it is because they are pro fetus not pro-life or pro compassion. Once the child is born they could give a rat’s a$$ if the child lives or dies. These are evil evil people.


It’s interesting to see the responses of the evangelical groups that specifically profess to be all about the well-being of families. The Family Research Council blames the parents, and Focus on the Family says ‘so what, Planned Parenthood is worse.’

And neither one gives a damn about these real families composed of actual flesh-and-blood people. Their interest is in defending a bogus Platonic ideal of a 1950s white middle-class Christianist family.

If there’s a hell, they’re on their way.


Or ask for funds to purchase the next Multi-Million dollar luxury jet for their private fleet.

1 Like

MSNBC Reporter: ‘HHS Won’t Let Us In To See The Girls’

"To tens of millions of evangelicals, adoption is a new front in the culture wars: a test of “pro-life” bona fides, a way for born again Christians to reinvent compassionate conservatism on the global stage, and a means to fulfill the “Great Commission” mandate to evangelize the nations. Influential leaders fervently promote a new “orphan theology,” urging followers to adopt en masse, with little thought for the families these “orphans” may already have.

Conservative evangelicals control much of that industry through an infrastructure of adoption agencies, ministries, political lobbying groups, and publicly-supported “crisis pregnancy centers,” which convince women not just to “choose life,” but to choose adoption. Overseas, conservative Christians preside over a spiraling boom-bust adoption market in countries where people are poor and regulations weak, and where hefty adoption fees provide lots of incentive to increase the “supply” of adoptable children, recruiting “orphans” from intact but vulnerable families.

One of the agencies mentioned in the book is Bethany Christian Services. You will, therefore, not be shocked or otherwise surprised to discover that this particular NGO is one handling these children ripped from their parents."


Substitute " pro money " for " pro family" and you will have the correct narrative.


The rest of us are living in the he’ll they are creating.

I’m sure if you asked them about child abuse they’d say the kids should’ve chosen to behave better.


…some major advocacy groups that depict themselves as “pro-family”

In their case pro-family really means pro traditional family, man in charge, no sex before marriage, no abortion, and other assorted far right retoric.

RadioLab had a story of surrogates the other week and while not 100% on target shows the $$$ involved. From $60-150K per child to the “agency” while the woman sees from $1-6K max.