kim in a shoe speaks out in support of phillips’ dangerous views

thatmom

real encouragement for real homeschooling moms

kim in a shoe speaks out in support of phillips’ dangerous views

June 12, 2008 at 5:37 pm · Filed under Uncategorized

Although there are not many people currently speaking out in support of Doug Phillips’ dangerous and deceptive views on ectopic pregnancy, Kim at Life In A Shoe has weighed in this week. I had several thoughts as I read her response to those of us who would dare to challenge the Vision Forum party line:

1. Good law and good medicine are never based on the most obscure “one in 60 million” chances that are trotted out to prove that those of us who disagree with them are not 100% pro-life.

2. Kim’s husband is the warehouse manager for Vision Forum.

3. Life In A Shoe is a what I call a “scripted blog.” How does this differ from any other blog that has the comments moderated? Whereas most people who moderate comments desire to keep offensive language or spam from being on their blogs, a scripted blog owner will not allow dissenting positions on topics to be discussed. They might allow a comment with a question to come through but only a question they are interested in answering and that will allow them to give their scripted answers. There are lots of blogs like this, including both James and Stacy McDonald’s blogs. They all picked up their cues from the brothers Bayly who have declared that allowing “unbiblical” ie (ANYONE ELSE’s) views is detrimental to the spiritual health of the reader. I have no respect for those blogs because they have established a hierachy which declares that the Holy Spirit doesn’t speak to all believers as they read God’s word. To these people, having a Berean spirit means to accept their eisegesis as Gospel and reject anyone who might actually pick up the Bible and read for themselves.

Those of us who are challenging these teachings are willing to name names and point people to the blogs where a view other than our own is published. We are not afraid of the truth. We are not concerned that someone might read an opposing opinion and actually think for themselves.

Like this:

Be the first to like this post.

Permalink

22 Comments»

Cindy K wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 6:13 pm

As a person with training in statistics and bioethics, I find it amusing that much of what Kim offers as evidence in support of her point is actually the opposite for me. Some of her arguments have the same effect on me.

It’s sad to see so many who feed off this idiocy and who promote it because that is what they desire to do — promote the saving and sanctifying Sacred Science of the cult. I’m impressed that she researched some of this and wrote an essay, but it is sad to realize that a dissenting opinion was likely “unthinkable” to her because of the dynamics of groupthink.

How many other blogs will carry this message because that is their duty and their heart — promoting Doug’s dogma?

TheNormalMiddle wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 6:25 pm

No disrespect, but I disregard ANYTHING Kim has to say. Her husband is a doug-ite and they are deep in the trenches of the VF mission and lifestyle. It would be like taking something said by one of Doug’s daughters or sons seriously. Kim will not speak out against VF or any of their crazy ideas.

She live blogged one of her births for goodness sakes. Talk about fertility cult!

REBECCA wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 8:09 pm

I find it interesting they are using the 1 in 60 million chance statistics, because when the issue was whether woman whose doctors told them they couldn’t have any more children or risk their lives, she argued that it was so rare that it shouldn’t be part of the argument. Seems they want it both ways.

Corrie wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 8:21 pm

I wonder if Mr and Mrs Shoe are involved with Mr and Mrs Patrio at Patriospeak?

I wonder if Mr Shoe goes by various aliases on other blogs while defending Doug Phillips at all cost by launching ad hominem attacks?

Just wondering.

Mark Clipper wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 8:26 pm

I can’t say whether or not Kim In A Shoe’s blog is “scripted” or not. I’ve never read it before. If she’s got a history of being scripted then maybe your article here is motivating her to change her ways? She’s let through a few contrary comments, and some good ones at that.

Personally I’m astounded by Kim’s bizarre interpretation of the statistics on ectopic pregnancies. She reads but she doesn’t comprehend how to honestly interpret the findings. On top of everything else she claims to be using the Bible as her guide for decision making. But of course it’s the RVFB (Revised Vision Forum Bible) she’s using as her guide.

Mary said it well here, http://inashoe.com/?p=2372#comment-15514 “Kim, I think there should be more clarification here…an ectopic pregnancy in the fallopian tube is 100% fatal for the baby. These account for 95% of all ectopic pregnancies. There are 5% that occur in the abdomen and have a small chance of survival. There are no accounts at all of survival in the fallopian tubes.”

The 6th Commandment isn’t just a negative command. It’s also a positive command. In other words, “Thou shalt not kill” is also a command to preserve and protect innocent life. Phillips proposes that women do nothing to seek medical treatment for a condition that has a 100% probability of the baby dying anyway, and if left untreated will cause serious harm to the mother, and perhaps her death.

Yes, I can see some merit to Kim’s “wait and see” approach. If it’s true that many EPs “resolve themselves” (spontaneously abort) anyway, them perhaps a little “wait and see” might be okay. Maybe I missed it but I didn’t see where Kim provided the proof for that.

The question I have is, how long is it prudent to wait for? Should a woman “wait” until she’s bleeding out? Should she wait until she collapses on the floor in excrutiating pain because her tube just exploded? Should she wait until sepsis sets in? Should she wait until she goes into shock?

As usual, Doug Phillips has gone off half cocked and doesn’t have any answers. All he has is his standard legalistic “thou shalt not” attitude. Thanks Doug. You’re a big help to the church. Just what the church needs. More legalism.

Cally Tyrol wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 9:24 pm

That 1 in 60 million statistic doesn’t mean bubkus (sp?) when YOU are that one person. When the doctors told me they thought Grace had Trisomy 18 (turned out she didn’t), I didn’t think that was possible because I already knew someone who’d had a baby with T18 and wasn’t it supposed to be rare? Well, as it turned out, Grace had something even more rare… a chromosomal anomily that is so rare there aren’t even any meaningful statistics on how often it happens.

Let me back up- scientists actually think that Triploidy is fairly common but those babies almost always miscarry before 8 weeks, so there’s no way to really gather statistics unless genetic testing is performed on the miscarried baby. How often does THAT happen?

Grace survivied over 20 weeks. THAT is so rare that my OB had never even heard of it happening before.

I was that one person and one of the things that made me feel worse about losing my firstborn was that her condition was so rare that the doctors couldn’t even tell me how likely it would be to happen again.

Only God’s Providence saw me through. Praise Jesus for his mercy and grace!

molleth wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 10:25 pm

I really like Kim from Life in a Shoe, for whatever it’s worth. She’s funny and fresh. (I just can’t stand what her husband’s boss teaches, etc, and I reeeeaaaally disagree with her party line stance here).

thatmom wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 11:22 pm

Mark, I call Kim’s blog “scripted” because a while back she wrote about her reasons to keep their blog pretty much closed. She cited the Bayly brothers and their reasons for kicking so many people off of their website and agreed with these two pastors that if you allow a dissenting view, God would hold you accountable for false teachings.

thatmom wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 11:25 pm

Live blogged one of her births?

Hhhhmmm….a whole new picture of podcasting suddenly came into my head, Lindsey.

Thanks a lot.

TheNormalMiddle wrote @ June 12, 2008 at 11:45 pm

Karen, I do what I can

Seriously, back when I was “in the camp” myself I remember reading her blog daily and yes, she live blogged while she ws in labor with number 7 or 8 or one of ‘em.

Also, we all know the purpose of a scripted blog—it makes it look like EVERYONE agrees with you and is towing the party line fully. It makes you look like a (little g) god.

Lynn wrote @ June 13, 2008 at 12:11 am

What, now, is Doug hiding behind Kim, and is she answering for him?

If she is, the “wait and see” approach . . . IS . . . NOT . . . WHAT . . . DOUG . . . SAID.

Kim’s “wait and see” approach for tubal pregnancy would fall under the theories of pregnancy that are totally false and unbiblical.

It is a fact that some of these tubal pregnancies are ended before the tube ruptures, and it is not certain that fetal demise has occurred. Some of the preborn are still alive when the tube ruptures.

If Kim’s “wait and see” approach means “wait until the tube has ruptured,” and that is what Doug means, too, then Karen’s point in the entry she made about him endangering the lives of women still stands — that Doug Phillips’ teaching endangers the life of women — those with tubal pregnancies. If you have to wait until you are ruptured and bleeding before surgery, then it might be too late . . .

I think Doug and company know very well they are backed into a corner on this one, and what we are going to be seeing, unfortunately, is a lot of posturing and blustering and name calling from that camp until this issue dies down.

Lynn wrote @ June 13, 2008 at 12:23 am

Kim said:
“Certain loud sectors of the blogosphere accused him of endangering the lives of countless women because he suggested they might not need to automatically and immediately abort an ectopic pregnancy.”

Molly may like Kim, but this is the first I’d read by her, and I don’t like to read people mitigating other people said.

That is NOT what Doug said. This is what he said:
“WHEREAS those theories which justify the killing of the unborn child on the basis of the circumstances of conception (as in the case of rape and incest), or even the life of the mother (ectopic pregnancies) are completely false”

“Completely false” doesn’t leave wiggle room for — let’s “wait and see if this tubal pregnancy” will “resolve itself,” and then if it doesn’t, and tubal rupture is immanent, then you can do surgery, even though the unborn baby might still be alive.”

Doug Phillips said any theory explaining why an ectopic pregnancy should be terminated is a false, unbiblical theory.

So, as I said somewhere else, what Doug (not Kim, but Doug) teaches is that you have to wait until the tube ruptures if fetal demise has not occurred.

Because if you remove the pregnancy and fetal demise has not occurred, then what you are doing falls under the theories that are totally false category.

So my only question for Doug is (not Kim, but Doug) — would he allow surgery after the tube has ruptured? Or would he still say to do nothing then?

Either way — What Doug said (not what Kim said) means that the life of the mother is endangered, if she has a tubal pregnancy that doesn’t self-limit, and the baby is still alive at the time the tube ruptures.

thatmom wrote @ June 13, 2008 at 12:55 am

“and I reeeeaaaally disagree with her party line stance here”

And her party line stance in her interview with Passionate Housewives author Stacy McDonald as they discussed the merits of the book?

Ruth Ann Wilson wrote @ June 13, 2008 at 1:16 am

“What, now, is Doug hiding behind Kim, and is she answering for him?” Yes, precisely. Doug Phillips has the reputation of hiding behind anyone who’ll defend him, including women. IOW he’ll hide behind a woman’s skirt to save himself.

I can’t help but now remember a funny parody about Doug’s response to being served some legal papers. It’s at http://swordpentrumpet.com/?p=308

Please nobody get mad at me for posting the link. It’s just silly humor.

thatmom wrote @ June 13, 2008 at 1:30 am

“I think Doug and company know very well they are backed into a corner on this one, and what we are going to be seeing, unfortunately, is a lot of posturing and blustering and name calling from that camp until this issue dies down.”

Here is another aspect I am currently exploring for an article for this blog.

I have contacted several medical needs sharing ministries to see what their position is on ectopic pregnancies. Since Doug has stated that he will not support those who are not 100% pro-life according to his standards, I have wondered where this leaves medical ministries, such as Samaritan Ministries who is highly promoted by Doug Phillips. I have written two e-mail to them trying to verify their own position and haven’t yet heard back. I also have spoken with several other such ministries and plan to write an article comparing their views when my research is done. I will keep you all posted. I would think that any homeschooling family who is a member of one of these ministries would surely like to know what would happen with their medical bills should the mom suffer from an ectopic pregnancy.

TheNormalMiddle wrote @ June 13, 2008 at 2:14 am

Something tells me we’ll see those words and that blog post by Doug regarding ectopic pregnancy VANISH before long. He is backed into a corner. Many of his own supporters won’t go all the way with this teaching, if it were just more publicized.

He’ll do what he’s done before: make all the evidence go away….

Melanie wrote @ June 13, 2008 at 10:46 pm

Great discussion here – I linked to it from my blog. Thankfully I’ve never had to face an ectopic pregnancy myself and the heartbreak that must accompany it. My heart does break for those women who have and are now being told that they have murdered their baby and had an abortion.
I know for myself that I would do all I could to keep my baby alive and continue with a pregnancy, but not if the baby would not survive and my life put at serious risk. That is folly – I have four children who need a mom too.
What irks me is the dogmatic views they hold and preach to others without ever having walked through those valley’s themselves. AND there is no grace extended to those who have sinned (in their view).

thatmom wrote @ June 14, 2008 at 12:14 am

Hi Melanie.

Oh how this hits home to me. There is nothing quite as vulnerable as a mom who has lost a child, no matter how the lost came to be. You are correct that extending grace is the only option to these dear ladies.

Jerzy wrote @ June 14, 2008 at 10:39 pm

Hi Karen,

I’m a longtime lurker (an introvert online as well as off!) and I wanted to send you a personal thank you for doing your podcasts and blog. I have gleaned so much from them and they have prevented me from following an unwise path.

About a year ago, I began listening to Kevin Swanson’s Generations radio program and reading books by him and R.C. Sproul. Jr. and from various authors peddled by Vision Forum. In other words, I began walking down the patriocentrist path. The further I went, the more burdened I became. I tried contacting Kevin, asking for his suggestions about some issues and questions that my hubby and I were wrestling with. He never responded, which was unusual because in the past, whenever I had e-mailed him questions regarding homeschooling, I had an answer within an hour.

I kept trying to resolve these issues by perusing more and more resources until I began to get information overload (I’d read a sentence and not have any memory of having read it). That’s a freaky feeling for a bookworm to have!

At about that same time, an acquaintance in Australia from a homeschooling message board I belong to posted your site address and out of curiosity, I visited. I consider it divine intervention! I began to see how horribly misled, extreme, and hypocritical these patriocentrists were! I decided to fast from all magazines, newsletters, radio programs, books, podcasts, and blogs for one month, except the Bible and your program. My mind was renewed and the Lord was able to pull me back onto the balanced path.

I look at this homeschooling/mothering season as being on a tightrope, the Bible as the rope and your program as the balancing pole.

I live in Colorado, so we’re very familiar with Doug Phillips, Kevin Swanson, et. al. The Christian Home Educators of Colorado Homeschooling Convention is taking place as I type this (there are 3 men that are highly suspect on the speakers’ list), so I’m hoping that the gentle warning I sent out to my group’s 120 members about this business with Vision Forum and the patriocentrists will cause people to think twice before swallowing this stuff hook, line, and sinker.

So Karen (and the wonderful friends you have here), be encouraged that no matter how bad the persecution gets, the Lord is using your message to help people.

thatmom wrote @ June 15, 2008 at 4:41 pm

Jerzy,

Thank you for your kind words. I am so humbled by them.

I am also intrigued that you sent out mailings to 120 families “gently warning” them about the patriocentrists. I am standing and applauding, even if you can’t see it! (well, it is a good thing you can’t see me because I am still in PJ’s!)

I would be curious to hear any reports from that conference, how people responded to the messages given by these men, etc. Colorado seems to have a stronghold on patriocentricity, from reports I have been given, as do several other states.

Hang in there and keep up the good work. I do believe if we can continually point people back to Scripture, more and more people will begin to question so many of the teachings that we are taught are “biblical.”

I am working on a podcast for next month that I am really excited about…the book of the Bible written to homeschooling moms! Doesn’t that salt your oats? )

Thanks for coming out of lurkerdom…be sure to leave a comment on one of the June podcasts so your name can go into the drawing!

birthinukraine wrote @ June 16, 2008 at 11:17 am

Thatmom,

this is a little off topic, but not totally,

have you studied the idea of “Dominion” theology and written or podcasted about it somewhere? I was just wondering b/c i don’t understand the idea fully. they want to take dominion of the earth thru childbearing? that accounts for the deemphasis on evangelism?

been wanting to ask you this for a while–if you have any resources to point me to.

thanks–anne

thatmom wrote @ June 16, 2008 at 5:51 pm

Anne, I am working on this for you. I will get back to you in a couple days with some good links.

thatmom