real encouragement for real homeschooling moms

doug phillips poses threat to lives of homeschooling moms

I live in the Midwest, smack in the middle of what people around here like to call “tornado alley.” In my town, people often swap stories of the “big one,” the tornado that took out half of the business district and damaged countless homes one lazy July afternoon in 1975. People who survived that day will tell you that now they head for the basement or storm cellar as soon as the sirens sound. They remember the damage, know the personal loss and even the tragedy that came with that twister and they will do all they can to protect themselves and those they love should another one come this direction.

On the other hand, those who have never experienced a tornado often grab an iced tea and sit on the front porch, watching as though they were in a giant screen movie theatre, telling themselves that the destruction might come to someone else but it won’t affect them.

Today, I feel as though I am in the homeschooling version of our county’s emergency services. I have been storm spotting for a while and now see the deadly twister coming my direction. It is guaranteed to take lives. It is a an F-5 on the Fujita scale, complete with 300 mile per hour winds and damage akin to “strong frame houses lifted off foundations and carried considerable distances to disintegrate.” This is where the homes of homeschooling families are headed if Doug Phillips from Vision Forum is not held accountable for his most recent rhetoric.

On March 6, 2002, Phillips published a document entitled “A Declaration of Life” where he states the following:

“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 because they are based on unbiblical and humanistic ethics, unbiblical definitions of “self defense” theory, and a rejection of the personhood of the child; and Continuing Relevance of All of Scripture.”

I am not certain if I read this when it was first published. I probably did not as I most likely assumed that his position would be one that passed genuine pro-life muster. Then, this week (June 5, 2008), Phillips, reporting on the most recent Whitherspoon Law and Public Policy conference, made this statement:

“Some Christians maintain a 100% pro-life, no abortion philosophy. Others believe that it is acceptable to abort a child in the case of rape, incest, or where the life of the mother is threatened. The latter is the position of the Orthodox Jews. And there are many additional questions presented to us by our “brave new world” that raise noodle-cookers of equal emotional challenge and philosophical complexity.”

Since I have been involved with pro-life work for nearly 30 years and have considered myself 100% pro-life, I was puzzled as to what Phillips actually meant. Imagine my shock and horror to read that a woman who faces an ectopic pregnancy, a life-threatening situation and one I have had to face, is considered to be a “murderer” and one who practices “child sacrifice” or “infanticide.” As I read through everything I could find on his website regarding this topic, it quickly became apparent that Phillips is so far out of the mainstream of Christian thought and practice that even stalwart pro-life leaders around this country and pastors who repeatedly speak out against the evils of abortion would also be painted with his defective broad brush.

In contrast to Phillips’ position, Steve Wagner from Stand to Reason makes this statement:

““When the motherʹs life is truly in danger, we must treat both the mother and child as human beings worthy of protection, for that is what they are….In an ectopic pregnancy, the newly conceived human being implants on the wall of the fallopian tube (or some other tissue) instead of on the wall of the uterus. As the embryonic human being grows, the fallopian tube will rupture causing severe blood loss and probably death. In these cases, there is no way to save the child’s life. If we do nothing, both human beings will die. Because we believe it is better to save one life than to lose two, we remove the child (causing his death) and save the mother. The death of the child is an unintended, although foreseen, consequence. So abortion in this instance is the killing of an innocent human being WITH proper justification. Notice though, this is not because the child is not human, but rather because the child is going to die no matter what. The child’s death is unavoidable, so protecting the mother becomes our primary concern.”

After reading this, I contacted Lynn Grandon, who is the director of the Peoria Dioceses Respect Life and Human Dignity office and asked her to give me the most well-reasoned pro-life argument regarding ectopic pregnancies. In the providence of God, she had most recently attended a bio-ethics conference where the topic of ectopic pregnancies was discussed at length by some of the leading Christian bio-ethicists, medical personnel, and pastors around the country. She confirmed to me that saving the life of a mother who is in a genuine life-threatening pregnancy is always considered to be a priority, as the baby would also die in this situation and she said that ectopic pregnancies certainly are in this category. In fact, ectopic pregnancy is the leading cause of death in pregnant women today. And we have to also take into consideration that there are now millions of post-abortive women and as many who have suffered from sexually transmitted diseases, both factors that increase the incidence of ectopic pregnancy.

I mentioned to her the story of the Indian mother that Phillips used as an example of an ectopic pregnancy going to full term and she stated that we should never use the oddest and most extreme cases when looking at issues such as this one. I then read to her the above quotes from Phillips and she sighed and stated that these are unreasoned, irresponsible, and dangerous. She also expressed her sadness that someone with such influence would teach such things. I heartily concurred.

Given the number of homeschooling conferences where Phillips and his supporters speak and promote their militant fecundity message, I believe it will only be a matter of time before someone’s wife or mother dies because of this foolish position on ectopic pregnancy. Phillips, being the man of influence that he is, has irresponsibly taken a position that has now gone beyond his own “declaration of life” and has been entered into the public debate amongst attendees at his 2008 Whitherspoon conferences.

Because of his determination to further this message, I would like to call upon all those who link to his blog or the Vision Forum website to remove that link and to tell him why. I would like to ask those who sell his items to refuse to do so until he has recanted this dangerous position. I would expect those who have been published through Vision Forum to contact him and express their horror at what he is saying. And, most importantly, I would ask any pastors who have supported Phillips’ ministry, including the NCFIC churches associated with him, to publicly assure their congregations that Phillips’ teaching on ectopic pregnancy is outside the orthodox view of Biblical Christianity and the sanctity of human life.

Doug Phillips has become a threat to the very lives of homeschooling mothers and it should be known. Take cover immediately.



  sarah wrote @

The twisted reality is, when this happens, the mom will be held up as a righteous martyr, and no doubt used to sell more VF materials or otherwise profit VF leadership. I am grieved.

  Julie wrote @

I am appalled. When I bled with my third baby, there was the chance she was an ectopic pregnancy and I felt like a ticking time bomb since there was no way for me to know until I could get to the nearest city the next day for an ultrasound. I am the most pro-life person you could meet and if my pregnancy had been ectopic, there would have been no question what to do. A baby cannot survive that way. I wouldn’t have even considered that as an abortion, honestly. To me, abortion’s connotation is an unwanted, inconvenient baby. Not a baby that cannot survive.

Besides, what if Doug Phillips got cancer. Would he not go to the doctor and get treated or would he just wait and have enough faith to heal himself? It’s completely inconsistent. I pray his wife never has an ectopic pregnancy.

  TheNormalMiddle wrote @

Just because Doug Phillips decideds that something is or is not sin, it does not make it so.

He’s simply sitting about, playing God.

I have no desire to see bad things happen to Doug Phillips and Vision Forum. I do however have a very strong desire to see him desposed of as the “guru” of Christian homeschooling and family life. He is so far from center, even amongst ultra conservatives that he cannot be the mouthpiece for the homeschooling movement one second longer.

I sincerely hope that Christian homeschool families, mothers, bloggers, and all that are intwined with his “mission” take a serious second look at his teachings such as this that are not on the radar, so to speak.

Don’t take my word for it. Do the research for yourself and then take a stand.

  whitney wrote @


I thought the same thing about his wife – I hope it never happens to her! What a tragedy that would be. Unfortunately, bad theology can kill. 😦

  sarah wrote @

Normal Middle, I agree with you 100%. I wish nothing but God’s blessings and peace on Doug Phillips and all those involved with him. But they must not, cannot remain as revered representatives of the home school movement anymore.

All “celebrity worship” in the home school movement should end. It’s not healthy for us or the celebrities when people like Gothard, Farris, Phillips, McDonald, Sproul, Harris, Chancey, Braddick, anyone, are held up as idols. Perhaps there is a fine line between role model and idol, but I am certain many of these people have crossed that line.

I know how important conferences are to curriculum selection, but I wish there was a way to limit vending to USED curriculum sales between moms. Many states have separate curriculum events at a different time of year, and I wish they would all do this and reduce the super-righteous-celebrity-speaker-who-peddles-materials poison. And I wish every conference would put a meaningful cap on honorarium – like $1000 plus expenses. There should be none of these $5000-$25,000 fees for home school speakers at conferences. I don’t see why state boards aren’t putting their feet down.

  Anne wrote @

…a woman who faces an ectopic pregnancy, a life-threatening situation and one I have had to face, is considered to be a “murderer” and one who practices “child sacrifice” or “infanticide.”

Hard Cases make Bad Law.
Phillips knows this.

  Cindy K wrote @

The practice of the law is not ethics. The law is concerned only with justice, requires discrimination and involves punitive measures for violation of the law. This is not so with ethics which seeks to uphold what is right, showing kindness and with the interest of preserving the interests of the parties involved. Medical ethics are focused on beneficence and the care and healing of the patient, and that necessarily does not equate to justice. Medical ethics rejects discrimination and is thus unlike the law in that what is best for the patient is not always equivalent to justice. Ethics fill the gap between justice and compassion. (This is what allows for Phillips to call for civil disobedience if the law should prohibit or limit homeschooling.)

There is also a well known saying that “hard cases make for bad law.” Ectopic pregnancies are most definitely hard cases. I can understand the cold logic of justice based on principle and God’s law, but the law is void of compassion. We as Christians were given the law, and the law could not make us righteous, so we were offered the Better Way through Christ Jesus. Phillips’ law is inadequate and a fine example of the gnat straining and camel swallowing of the Pharisees. I can understand from one perspective how a person could sit in an Ivory Tower and presume to have wisdom, free of compromise and pragmatics, but it lacks the wisdom and knowledge of experience of watching the life of a young mother slip away into death’s icy clutches.

I fear that this, as so many other decisions that come from Phillips’ Ivory Tower (which he maintains by leveling all other towers that compete against the stature of his own), that this also concerns gender bias. Some have made the claim that Phillips views women as little else than “baby machines” and machines can be replaced. Whether he ascribes to the view, as promoted by CBMW, that women are not fully the image of God (for they are made directly in and from man’s image and not directly from God’s and are of lesser essence than man) I know not. If he indeed holds to this view, then the unborn child holds greater significance and value than a wife and mother. And what if the unborn babe is male? As the receptacle of greatness, the value of the yet unborn male child will certainly be of greater value because he is closer to the Image of God than the vessel that carries him. How much more will this influence the cold, legal decision-making of patriocentricity?

Why is it that I suspect that if Doug’s wife did encounter such a condition that she would be saved? But would the follower of the Witherspoon doctrine of death believe that they held that liberty to apply ethics when the law proves inadequate and lacking due compassion for a dying woman like the leadership would? Ah, but why would we not expect to see yet another double standard as we do in other areas of the lives of these great ones who are worshiped as celebrity idols?

This is fascism at its finest. As the word originates from the bundling of same size sticks together, so women are bound together in a cold, heartless category of legal perfection. Praise God that we are not subject to the law but that the righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in us when we walk after the Spirit through the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross. What the law could not do in that it was weak though the flesh, Christ did for us so that we could walk under grace and not under the cold requirements of the law. We’ve been redeemed and delivered from the Mishnah Catechisms of the pagan patriocentricity! sola Deo gloria!

  Cindy K wrote @

Witherspoon would disavow himself from this and would likely pay to not have his name associated with such a concept. The man who called for men to give their lives, their fortune and their sacred honor by signing the Declaration of Independence, a significant influence in the lives of our founding fathers, would despise what has been said in his name, I’m sure.

  Summer wrote @

I am surprised there have not already been deaths because of this man. How horrible that he thinks so little of women, mothers, the children that would have to go on without them, and their spouses who would lose someone they love. Does he not care at all for the actual living people who would suffer from the death of the mother?

  Corrie wrote @

I am disgusted. Shame on him. Now we know the worth of a woman’s life in the eyes of Phillips and those like him. Farmers treat their cows better than this man.

These men wax eloquent about “women and children first” but they know NOTHING about putting their lives on the line. Talk about “noodle-cookers”. They sit there on their butts talking a BIG talk but, in the end, they are all too happy to send women to their deaths when the death of a child is inevitable as in ectopic pregnancies. Where are they laying down THEIR lives for the ones who are living much less the newly conceived whose death is CERTAIN?

Playing god, superiority complex, narcissistic and megalomania are to words that come to my mind when reading through his treatise on the low value/worth of a woman’s life.

Maybe if they promise the woman with an ectopic pregnancy the prize of 7 young virgin men in exchange for her martyrdom, it might get them some takers? I don’t think the Koolaid, alone, will be enough to get people to drink this swill.

I won’t hold my breath for the other Patrios to speak against him on this.

  thatmom wrote @

Link to the other article by Doug Phillips:

  thatmom wrote @

Corrie, we will know what these other men are made of as men when we see how they respond to this latest outrageous teaching that Doug has introduced into the public arena for debate.

  Corrie wrote @

I guess Andrew Sandlin was right when he said that the patrios treat their wives like they were “baby machines”.

I remember how angry and upset they all were after that article by Sandlin but it seems like it was much ado about nothing knowing how they truly feel about LIFE and the worth of a woman.

  Corrie wrote @

Expect to see more of this in Patrioland.

  Corrie wrote @

This is from the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Vol 82, Issue 1, pgs 121-126:

“Ectopic or tubal pregnancy presents a medical emergency that requires prompt treatment in order to contain risks of maternal death and morbidity, including loss of future fertility. Medical circumstances involving individual patients and resources of the prevailing health care system will determine the options and means of treatment. Termination of ectopic pregnancy does not constitute or directly implicate abortion. Any practice of deliberately delaying treatment of reliably diagnosed ectopic pregnancy, on non-clinical grounds, until rupture of the fallopian tube has occurred or is imminent, in order to justify termination of the ectopic pregnancy on grounds of saving the patient’s life, is unethical and illegal. Those who undertake or counsel deliberate delay of medically-indicated treatment can be charged with criminal offences and civil (non-criminal) liability, and medical professional misconduct. On reliable diagnosis, prompt treatment to remove ectopic pregnancy is legally justified, and ethically and legally required.”

I wonder what Doug has to say being an esquire and all? Does he bear a civil liability for teaching that it is murder to save the life of a mother when she has an ectopic pregnancy which is NOT viable?

If you read the above article about the woman in Nicauragua who was left to bleed to death, have repeated heart attacks and die because doctors were too afraid to treat her life-threatening condition, you will see the very REAL consequences Doug’s musings have to very REAL women.

Not only does an ectopic pregnancy mean death for a woman if left untreated in many situations, it could mean the end of her fertility and major organ damage if not treated.

If we are to preserve life and do no harm, then why are we doing harm to these women by letting them suffer, bleed to death and die or totally lose their fertility and any hope of having future children?

Or am I just being pragmatic and humanistic? Where do I go to get a certified document that allows me to be a god who knows it all?

  Lin wrote @

Phillips can wax eloquently with his extra biblical teaching when he is not the one risking death.

  thatmom wrote @

Corrie, I am so glad you posted this information. I, too, suspected that there might be a legal concern. Have we ever established that he has, indeed, passed a bar exam and is a licensed attorney?

The story of that poor, poor woman is horrendous. And it could be coming to your neighborhood!

  Corrie wrote @


I don’t know whether Doug is a lawyer that is licensed or just someone who went to law school but either way, he should do a little bit of studying before making such reckless statements.

I would guess that the above statement is directed towards medical professionals. They have a duty to preserve life and since an ectopic pregnancy always (one rare exception is not the rule) ends in the death of the baby, then it only stands to reason that not only the mother’s life be preserved but also her fertility and her internal organs.

I have never had an ectopic pregnancy but I have rapidly lost blood in childbirth where I had to have CPR performed on me. It happens VERY quickly and in a matter of mere minutes.

Phillips is basically recommending throwing the mother overboard while tied to her dead child if we want to properly use his lifeboat analogy. It is CERTAIN death for the baby that implants in the fallopian tube but not so for the mother. And the burden of false guilt he has now tied up on the backs of mothers who had to go through this ordeal is shameful. Calling them murderers? Please. Anyone who would allow a woman to bleed out, code and die is the murderer.

These moms faced with such a horrendous situation are not unloading unwanted babies. They don’t choose this. They would give ANYTHING for it to be different and their baby to have implanted in their wombs. How dare he lump them in with people who look at children as burdens or use abortion for birth control. These babies are very much wanted but their end is certain- they are not viable and will die before too long.

He keeps on claiming his stance is biblical. Where is he getting this from in the Bible?

I am of the opinion that this just wake up some sleepers in the Patriarchal movement. Once they see just how much these patriarchs truly care about the lives of women, they may really take note when they talk out of both sides of their mouths.

This reminds me of the dear husband in the book of Judges who threw his wife out to the perverts to be gang-raped and killed in order to save his own neck and dignity. “Better you than me, babe.” This policy could take care of the glut of young and available girls who are not getting married in Patrioland. The older women die off and the young ones move up in line.

I would also love to know how many patrio women have had ectopic pregnancies and now will be weeping and repenting because of Doug’s pronouncements?

  Cindy K wrote @

I just wrote some fairly long posts that relate to this on True Womanhood. The discussion there expands upon this and adds much to these points. There are so many nuances here. There is also a strong works based orientation to it.

This is the link to the first of a couple of posts I made discussing this stuff. There’s so much to be said, I don’t know quite where to post it all. (add the www.)

  thatmom wrote @

Corrie, I had the same thought about the guilt trips that homeschooling mom could be experiencing right now because of Doug’s pronouncements. His true colors regarding women certainly are showing.

  Corrie wrote @

Have the “scholars” at Witherspoon released their position papers? I would think they would relish the opportunity to share their biblical truths with those in error.

Also, maybe those at Witherspoon can open up a debate on this issue? I am sure they would welcome any and all fair debate by the opposition.

Does anyone know if those at Witherspoon disagreed with Doug on the issue of ectopic pregnancy? Or do they all spout the party-line?

If they all agree with Doug and all stand the same on this issue, all their assertions about how biblical and humble they are mean nothing to me.

  TheNormalMiddle wrote @

Oh, sure enough, Doug is most definately a lawyer.

I mean, check his behavior. He might not be an ambulance chaser but he’s pretty much the quintessential lawyer with dripping self-love. He has to be a lawyer! 🙂

(sorry…shameless lawyer joke)

  Cally Tyrol wrote @

My best friend has posted about this topic on our new blog “White Washed Feminists” for anyone who is interested:

  birthinukraine wrote @

ok, i’m going to risk being a little unpopular here. I’m not blanket-advocating what Doug Philips is teaching, so I will try to disassociate these comments from his statements. And as I once heard wisely said: “Give information, not advice.” So that is what i will attempt here.

Some informataion:
1. Ectopic pregnancies are life-threatening if the mom is not immediately cared for medically AFTER her tube ruptures. Life-threatening b/c of the bleeding and potential infection. (Is Philips saying that a mom shouldn’t seek medical care if her tube ruptures?)

2. If the tube ruptures, pregnancies are no longer possible from that ovary.

3. Ectopic pregnancies that happen outside the fallopian tube but inside the peritoneum (not in the uterus) can result in a live mom and baby.

4. Removing an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion.

There are a lot of factors to consider when making this decision. A list someone gave me is this:

Some things to consider when faced with an ectopic pregnancy:
1. Both baby and mother are humans loved by God equally
2. Location of the pregnancy (fallopian tube or somewhere else in the peritoneum)
3. Risks involved in continuing with the pregnancy
4. Chances mom and baby can survive the pregnancy
5. Risks involved in not continuing with the pregnancy
6. What the parents feel God is leading them to do (conscience)
7. Is the couple willing to risk the mother’s life when the baby has nearly a 0% chance of survival?
8. Is it possible to wait and see what happens without significant risk?

Anyway, just some concrete info for further rationalizing 🙂 I love all you thoughful ladies and so appreciate this blog!

  TheNormalMiddle wrote @

Well, technically a miscarriage is called a “spontaneous abortion” so I guess every mom who has a miscarriage is guilty of the sin of aborting their child?

The logic doesn’t follow, people.

We are holding mothers conscience guilty if they do not birth a brood of perfectly healthy children straight from the womb (and a non-medicated homebirth is the most righteous form of delivery, by the way)

  birthinukraine wrote @

This is neither here nor there, but it’s interesting that these type of people are so rabid about promoting large families, yet they rarely say anything about adoption, and i think caring for the orphans is much more clearly spelled out in Scripture.

(About “spontaneous abortion,” i think most people understand that this is just a medical term. It’s defined as a pregnancy that ends without outside intervention before 20 weeks gestation.)

  Julie wrote @

This has certainly got me thinking of all the different ways VF makes me concerned for the future of homeschoolers. Not to open a new can of worms, but have you read about the racism that pervades the G.A. Henty books that VF peddles for $700 a set? Please tell me what parent has the time or inclination to read every single book and determine if there are racist statements within? You would hope that you could trust a publisher like Vision Forum to produce godly literature. Apparently not.

  Amy wrote @

Hi thatmom,

I’ve been reading this blog for several months now and I just wanted to comment and say thank-you for the podcasts and your many well thought-out posts.

Somewhat related to the post, but not entirely…

In respect to Doug Phillips, and others like him I just wanted to say that I find it very tragic and sad that an unhealthy amount of the current popular leaders in homeschooling today (though certainly not all) have reputations or stories concerning them that involve abuse of their power, influence, and leadership.

I used to attend Patrick Henry College and was very and still am very appalled at the way the leadership there handled situations and conflicts. I ended up leaving in the Spring of 2006, after a big blowout between the administration and some of the professors. The lack of accountability and the prevalence of hypocrisy were very big concerns for me in that situation and it saddens me how people who have a Christian desire to show charity and grace to abusive leaders are then exploited by these same leaders as they continually commit wrongdoing and never ask for forgiveness but still expect to be thought of in the best way. Anything less I guess is slander and gossip.

Ultimately, it seems that for any people affected by abusive leadership that they will find the most healing in forgiving those who have offended them, however, it does not seem to follow that they must keep silent if they believe that someone else might be hurt in a similar way. It might be different if the situation was a one time thing or even if the abusive authority agreed to be held accountable from now on, but if they don’t agree to that there is nothing stopping them from hurting someone again. And from what I recall in the New Testament, it was always the pharisees, the abusive leaders of the day, and not the sinners whom the pharisees considered beneath them that Jesus had his harshest words for. Should we not follow his example and hold leaders more accountable for their actions because of their influence?

I also find it difficult to deal with the lack of openness that is usually present in these situations. It’s very hard to discern the truth about a situation when it’s required to be kept quiet to most people and closed to public scrutiny. In most situations, no one is ever going to be completely right but it seems rather disingenuous to play games with a situation and facts just in order to save your image.

I’d like to be able to do more to help people in these kinds of situations other than just what might look like complaining or spreading gossip to some, but I’m just not sure what that is yet…


  Cynthia Gee wrote @

“There should be none of these $5000-$25,000 fees for home school speakers at conferences. I don’t see why state boards aren’t putting their feet down.”

They’re getting $25,000 for one conference?????
Good heavens, that’s considerably more than we earn in six months! That amount of money could feed a third world VILLAGE for several years, and these mugs are getting paid that much for one conference?
Absolutely amazing.

  thatmom wrote @

So many great insights to read this morning after not logging on for a day.

Julie, the concerns regarding racism are real one. Oh, boy, are they real ones. Not only are the Henty books full of those comments, but the Elsie Dinsmore series is also rife with racist ideals. Not to mention some just plain old weird (and creepy) things. I know a woman who contacted Doug Phillips about her concerns about the graphic (and bizarre) description of a father kissing his newly married daughter good-bye after the wedding. The girl is lamenting that she just leave her father and go away with her husband. Is this a message we want our children to have? What about leaving and cleaving?

I know others who have contacted VF to ask questions regarding their views on race, given their adoration for Dabney and all things Southern. They received no answer whatsoever. What is one to think?

I am so troubled at what I am finding regarding the connections to racist groups that I am working on a new series on patriocentricity that will address this facet of it, too. Remember, one of the founders of the kinist movement in the US is a member at James and Stacy’s church and I have yet to see any of the kinist teaching refuted around here. Just putting a picture of you with black or oriental people on your blog proves nothing.

  thatmom wrote @

Amy, I am amazed at your comments because I just received my own copy of God’s Harvard, the book about Patrick Henry College. It really coincides with what you have said. In fact, just the parts I have read so far express what I have seen myself within these circles and the author has some really good insights into homeschooling in general, though she is not a homeschooler and, in fact, isn’t a Christian. Have you read this book?

  thatmom wrote @

Cynthia, I don’t think everyone who speaks at conferences gets this sort of cash but the big names make big bucks.
You can go to

and see that most of your ordinary people who give workshops have very reasonable fees. I have heard that Josh Harris commands $25,000.00 for a weekend. Also, some of the HSLDA people make bigger money and, of course, the bigger names like Phillips etc. can ask pretty good fees. And then when they sell their wares, the $ can be really good.

I don’t have an issue with people making money. I just think that the average homeschooling family who is struggling by on one income cannot live in the lifestyles that some of these people promote. I also think some of these people are pretty far removed from knowing how the average Joe and his family live. AND, I also think that some of these people actually believe in a hierarchy and a feudalistic state where they are on the top rung and deserve to live above others.

  thatmom wrote @

“This is neither here nor there, but it’s interesting that these type of people are so rabid about promoting large families, yet they rarely say anything about adoption, and i think caring for the orphans is much more clearly spelled out in Scripture.”

You have hit one of my personal hot buttons. Bill Gothard is opposed to adoption and discourages it, talking about the sins of the forefathers and how you will have an adoptive child who displays those sins and you will have to deal with it.

And here is what Stacy McDonald has had to say about adoption:

“Although I am very thankful to my adoptive parents for raising me and doing their best to love me equally with their birth-children, I have seen first
hand, in several different circumstances, that it is not God’s best. It is a result of sin and although God can do mighty things in the midst of it, there are still lasting consequences to this sin. Even in a case where the
mother is a prostitute or is raped….this is a result of sin. God’s best would be for her to repent and turn to Him. Adoption results because of
man’s hardness of heart.”

And this:

“I’m not trying to insult those who have lovingly and sacrificially adopted
children that were so sinfully discarded by their
parents. We were all adopted by our Heavenly Father! I rejoice that there are people that are willing to give these children homes, but I caution
those that are so desperate for children that they may be manipulating God to force His hand in giving them children. It can definitely be more than
you bargained for! ”

Both are saying about the same thing and both demonstrate bad theology.

  thatmom wrote @

Anne and Cally, thanks for the heads up on your new blog. Great title! I will drop by later and read head to toe!

  thatmom wrote @

***please note that I changed the title of this thread so that “life” would read “lives” so that the subject and predicate would be in agreement. I don’t know what I was thinking!!!

  Corrie wrote @


Didn’t Stacy adopt her husband’s four children?

How in the world can she make those statements when she claims another woman’s children as her own?

As she says, this is NOT God’s best. Is she encouraging the four oldest children to reach out to their real mother with the love of Christ?

I don’t mean to use “real” and say that adoptive mothers aren’t real. My step-father is more like my “real” father than my “real” father was. But, my step-dad NEVER tried to take the place of my father nor did he pretend my father didn’t exist.

It is just that the hypocrisy and inconsistency of her stance astounds me.

How can she be that passionate about her birth mother and the circumstances that forced her birth mother’s hand in giving her up for adoption but then claim another woman’s children as her own? Having read her testimony on the PW list and then later on TW, I know how she feels about her situation even though those testimonies are no longer for public viewing.

  Corrie wrote @


“1. Ectopic pregnancies are life-threatening if the mom is not immediately cared for medically AFTER her tube ruptures. Life-threatening b/c of the bleeding and potential infection. (Is Philips saying that a mom shouldn’t seek medical care if her tube ruptures?)”

Thank you for that information. I appreciate it.

Your point above is a tricky one. The woman who died in South America did so in the hospital immediately following a rupture. She was in the hospital and her blood loss was so quick and severe that she had multiple heart attacks.

No, Phillips did not say that one cannot seek treatment after a rupture.

But, the point is that it isn’t that cut and dried to say that one must seek immediate medical care after a rupture because the damage to her reproductive organs can be huge and the blood loss happens so quickly.

I would like to see more facts about seeking medical attention AFTER a rupture. How soon must one seek attention? Does one always know that she has ruptured? After all, the pain can be severe before a rupture and how is one to know when it does rupture? Many times a tube ruptures and the woman doesn’t even know.

And is it ethical to wait for a high potential of catastrophic damage to occur before medically treating someone in order to prevent loss of future fertility, major blood loss and death?

The baby trapped in a fallopian tube is not viable.

As far as calling it “abortion”, my fetal demises were all termed “elective abortion” even though the babies had died and I went in to be induced or have a D & C done.

The life and health of the mother is of primary concern. The mother who has an ectopic pregnancy WANTS that baby and would do anything to change the situation IF SHE COULD. The baby WILL die but so could she if medical treatment is denied until AFTER rupture.

  Corrie wrote @

Dear BirthinUkraine,

I really appreciate your list of things to consider. I think those are some very thoughtful suggestions to be considered if one is every faced with such an enormously painful and gut-wrenching situation as an ectopic pregnancy.

BTW, over 95% of ectopics are in the fallopian tubes. I believe .2% of them occur in the ovaries.

Do you have any stats on how many ectopic pregnancies go to term? I know of no pregnancies going to term if the pregnancy is located in the fallopian tubes.

Normal Middle,

You are so right about the righteous requirements of birth in the patrio circles. I have witnessed moms who have had c-sections being chastised and denigrated. I have witnessed moms who have baby in the hospital belittled and looked down upon as not having enough “faith”.

Me? I like having my babies in the hospital because I get served meals and taken care of and I get to watch Matlock. 🙂 If I were at home, I would have to be taking care of every one else and making meals and doing laundry and the like. I needed a break for at least 24 hours after delivering and the hospital was the best place to get that much deserved and needed break, even if it was only for a day or two. Once I had over 7 children, my doctor would order an extra day for me, all on his own initiative. Considering the very hard births and the amount of blood I lose after birth and the fact that I do not take time for myself to rest, it was important that I was forced to do this in the hospital.

I had the BEST experiences in the hospital and still remained in control of my own birth experience without being a pain in the behind of the hospital staff. I will cherish those memories and those first few days I was able to spend with my baby all alone without constant interruption and people who “needed” me.

The most important ingredient was RESPECT. I gave respect and I got it in return. Funny how that works.

I once looked into homebirth but I could not find one midwife who would take me because of my bleeding history.

But, I wouldn’t tell the diehard homebirthers that fact. I would tell give them “fluffy” reasons for why I didn’t have my babies at home- Matlock and breakfast in bed. 🙂

  birthinukraine wrote @

hi, Corrie,

just so you know where i’m coming from, my sympathies are with you all. But let’s dig out some grains of truth that may lie in the discussion here.

The woman in the NIcaragua case was not treated for at least a day or longer, is why she died. she was presenting with symptoms for some time and drs refused to help her.

To my knowledge a baby in a tube is not viable. There was a miracle case in Australia recently where the baby was in the ovary and the drs had no idea even. Mom and baby were ok.

That said, a baby in a tube is still alive and when we end the pregnancy, it technically is an abortion, is it not? I’m not saying it’s wrong necessarily, as Phillips is saying. But we have to be so very careful. Maybe more careful that we usually are when we deal with these situations and hear “ectopic pregnancy.” Ending a life is serious business. So i’m not presenting hard and fast answers, but it needs a lot of consideration. I’m not trying to make anyone feel guilty either. Please. These situations are already so emotionally painful to deal with. But what would I do? Could I risk a rupture or could I risk knowingly kiling a growing life? Ack. I don’t know. And wonderful Christians will decide differently in each situation. And that’s OK. So I don’t agree with Phillips in that way, but I think that it needs to be thought of from both angles.

Very close medical supervision would be in line for this type of situation. I’m not sure of all the medical ramifications.

It makes me wonder what people think of the pill and the possibillty that it causes abortions. Until recently, this was plainly written on the Planned Parenthood site. I am so shocked that I grew up in conservative Christian cirlces and didn’t hear of that until I was almost 30! I’m not trying to open a can of worms here either, but I just think that if it’s even possible for the pill to cause abortions, why would Christians even consider risking that? but many, many of them do.


Just trying to make the discussion profitable.

  Amy wrote @


I read God’s Harvard a few months and from what I remember about it, I thought it was a pretty fair overview of a certain aspect of PHC. Hanna Rosin was one of the only reporters who really bothered to hang around campus and actually get to know what the college believed and get to know some of the students and what they believed, so I respect her for that though I don’t always agree with her. I think that she is a very fair writer and definitely has some very good insights. When I read the book I do remember that it was not as nuanced or completely comprehensive of what really went down in the Spring of 2006 as the situation was somewhat complicated in nature as far as all the motivations and reasons involved, but that was not her main focus so I understand that.

One thing I would add… Though I think she was fair, she was certainly not really comprehensive or representative of the liberal arts students. As PHC was founded and is constantly touted as a government school, (which it does have a huge emphasis on) this is the aspect of PHC that Rosin understandably focuses on in her book.

However, originally I was attracted to PHC not because I was way into politics or campaigning, etc. but I liked their mission. I was even prepared to major in government if I had to, though I ended up being able to go as a history major. In some ways I do believe the college was founded on an unspoken assumption of many that the most culture change will happen if a person is involved with government (hence the huge emphasis on politics) but the more I studied there the more I came to think that that wasn’t really true. Not that government or legislation cannot provide change, but I think it’s more of a behavior check that cannot address the hearts of men for lasting change. Government in a sense is necessary, but it is certainly not exclusive and certainly not more important in my opinion than the liberal arts and should not be emphasized as such. When I was there, there were very brilliant students there who were not fundamentalists or mainstream evangelicals, who had no desire to go into politics, who did not have scheduled lives,etc. Many students had a very difficult time and went through periods of depression, partly because of all the pressures put on them I think. I really believe that PHC started out with good intentions but missed the mark in several instances and was not really able to carry out its mission like it should have. And the thing is, I didn’t so much have a problem with the fluctuation or unstableness of the college or even its inability to fulfill its mission in the best way since it is and was in its fledgling years and still needs/needed to work out its kinks. What I did have a problem with was the blatant misrepresentation of situations and the lying that occurred. I’m not saying that the college has never done anything good or lied about everything because it hasn’t. I was able to learn many wonderful things at PHC and was able to meet many amazing people. Despite anything bad that I experienced, I spent two of the best years of my life there and I wouldn’t change anything about it ( except I would probably sleep way more than I did and not do so many all-nighters). But anyone who was thinking of being involved with PHC as a student, donor, or worker, in all good conscience I could not recommend the school (which does sadden me) even in its present state and would probably want to give them more detailed information so they could make a more informed decision about it.


  Ruth Ann Wilson wrote @

I’m a 100% pro-life home school mom and grandmom. Or at least up until now I thought I was 100% pro-life. Our family has even picketed abortion mills. Has Doug Phillips ever done that? I’ve known some serious pro-lifers and I’ve never heard any devout pro-lifer say that a woman shouldn’t seek medical treatment for an ectopic pregnancy (and we all know what “medical treatment” means in that case).

So Phillips finds a one in ten thousand example of an ectopic pregnancy that was carried to term that didn’t kill the mother and that proves something? It proves nothing. The overwhelming medical evidence proves that an untreated ectopic pregnancy will result in the death of the mother. If the mother dies the baby dies too. So how is that “pro-life”?

This has to be the most stupid and extreme “pro-life” statement I’ve ever heard. In fact it’s not pro-life at all. I’m just shocked! Doug Phillips is the most reckless and irresponsible “pro-lifer” I’ve ever heard of. The pro-life movement doesn’t need a kook like this. He’s dangerous and something needs to be done to about him.

“Have we ever established that he has, indeed, passed a bar exam and is a licensed attorney?” By Googling around I found that Douglas W. Phillips is licensed by the Washington D.C. Bar Association. They do have a process for filing complaints against attorneys.

It looks like bar complaints may need to be related to an attorney who represents you and engages in some illegal or unethical conduct in your case. So the Bar may not take much notice if just one or two people write complaining that Phillips is saying that women with ectopic pregnancies shouldn’t seek medical treatment but attempt to carry the baby to full term, regardless of the extraordinary risks. On the other hand, the D.C. bar might consider Phillips’ to be engaging in giving public advice that conflicts with the law. In effect, Doug Phillips is endangering the lives of many women. They might consider this to be unethical, if not illegal. Certainly the D.C. Bar Assoc. could be expected to be very concerned about women’s health issues. If they received enough complaints about it they might take disciplinary action against Phillips.

  Anne wrote @

I was an unsaved nurse, although raised in the church and a christian home, working a gynecology and abortion unit in Canada. Only after I had my children did I find out that the pill not only stops ovulation but should that fail, it also makes the womb unsuitable for implantation. Therefore, perchance, you ovulate anyway and conceive the embryo cannot easily implant in the uterus and you abort.

I remember being in utter shock when I saw a wall chart in my physicians office from a birth control pharmaceutical company explaining this. I questioned my doctor about it and he affirmed this was so. He also looked like he’d swallowed a cat. This information is clearly not made known.

I then went to my church leaders, and they acted like I was nuts. Only after I produced the same chart for them, did they “prayerfully consider” to clue in the church.

People were in quite an uproar and some were very angry, not that they felt deceived by the drug company or their doctor, but that the church would broach this kind of information. They felt it was “too personal”.

Go figure.

  Kaitlyne wrote @

The more I see about Doug Phillips the more shocked I get. Is there no end of the evil this man can come up with? Before just I thought he was a bit of a misogynist, but telling women with ectopic pregancies that they can’t do anything to even save their own lives is worse than misogyny. It’s, well, I don’t know what it is. What’s worse than being a misogynist?

“I am so troubled at what I am finding regarding the connections to racist groups that I am working on a new series on patriocentricity that will address this facet of it, too.”

A friend of mine is writing a college paper on “Christian” racism and white supremacy. I’ll point him to your blog so he can follow the development of whatever you post about Doug Phillips and his racist connections.

I asked him if he’d seem anything on Doug Phillips and his connections to racist groups. He says that Doug Phillips is thought of very highly by white supremacy groups, including something called He also says that many racists avoid openly promoting and linking to Vision Forum and Doug Phillips because they know doing that would tarnish his image. They like him but they dont’ want to hurt him by being too openly cozy. So they talk in code that only other racists would get.

Here’s an example that my friend emailed me, See where it says “I live, fight, and die for these…”? Below that is a picture of two girls. The girls are Liberty and Virginia Hope Phillips. This man says he’s “PROUD TO BE A NEO NAZI CREEP WHO WILL ACTUALLY FIGHT AND DIE FOR MY PEOPLE.”

Why do white supremacists love Doug Phillips so much? My friend is still researching this, but for one thing Doug Phillips is a huge promoter of the Confederate theologian Robert L. Dabney and his book “A Defense Of Virginia and the South.” Phillips also wrote his own book, “Robert Louis Dabney, The Prophet Speaks.” It’s hard to imagine a man that was more of a racist than Dabney. His hatred for blacks is shocking. So it’s no wonder Dabney is a hero among white supremacists. It’s also no wonder that Doug Phillips is a hero among white supremacists.


  Corrie wrote @

Hi Birthinukraine,

“The woman in the NIcaragua case was not treated for at least a day or longer, is why she died. she was presenting with symptoms for some time and drs refused to help her.”

When did her tube rupture? It is my understanding that they did not help her because her tube had not ruptured. It was because of their no exception laws on abortion. They could only help her after it had ruptured.

“To my knowledge a baby in a tube is not viable. There was a miracle case in Australia recently where the baby was in the ovary and the drs had no idea even. Mom and baby were ok.”

Right. I do not think the mother ever had one symptom. This is so very rare, I am not aware of another one like it?

“That said, a baby in a tube is still alive and when we end the pregnancy, it technically is an abortion, is it not?”


“I’m not saying it’s wrong necessarily, as Phillips is saying. ”

I agree. It is not necessarily wrong. Phillips equates a woman who doesn’t want to be bothered with a pregnancy with a woman who agonizes over being treated in order to save her life and her future fertility in the case of an ectopic. He calls them both homicide/murder. This is what I take issue with.

“But we have to be so very careful. Maybe more careful that we usually are when we deal with these situations and hear “ectopic pregnancy.” ”

I totally agree and I think that women who find themselves in this situation ARE very careful about their decisions.

“Ending a life is serious business.”

Yes, it is. That is why I am completely and utterly against Phillip’s take on this subject. He is so willing to end a mother’s life/fertility AND put her through HELL when there is basically a 0% chance of life for the baby.

The ectopic pregnancy is basically ended by “Mother Nature”. We have a duty to the mother, to preserve her life since her life is easily preserved in this situation. The ectopic pregnancy will not be preserved unless technology allows for it to be reimplanted in the unterus. The baby is dead. Now, Phillips is telling us that saving a woman’s life by hastening the inevitable is wrong?

“So i’m not presenting hard and fast answers, but it needs a lot of consideration. I’m not trying to make anyone feel guilty either. ”

I can totally see that you are doing that and that you are not trying to cast guilt on anyone.

I appreciate your input on this. This is the sort of dialogue that needs to happen.

Not the Phillip’s kind where he calls heart-broken and distressed mothers “murderers”.

  Corrie wrote @

Concerning the woman who recently died of a tubal pregnancy:

“Law student Reyes was one of the three confirmed fatalities. She knew something was
horribly wrong, and went with her husband to their small town’s medical center. They
were sent to Bertha Calderon maternity hospital, more than an hour away in Managua.
There, Perez said, Reyes was given a cursory exam, sent home and told to return the
next day.

By that time, the bleeding and cramping were worse. Perez said he rushed her to a
hospital in nearby Leon, but after she had an ultrasound that confirmed her condition,
they left her bent over and in agony for hours in a waiting room. When a doctor at a
shift change saw her condition, she was rushed into surgery. She suffered three heart
attacks and an exploratory surgery. ”

The law there is that they must wait until the fetus dies before they take action. That is why it looks as if they put her in a room after the ultrasound because the fetus had not died, her tube had not ruptured and it was only AFTER the tube had ruptured while she was in that waiting room that they saw the drastic change in her condition and took her into surgery.

By that time, it was too late.

And that is my concern. After a tube ruptures, time is VERY short depending upon the location, size and other factors.

Having bled out several times due to childbirth or miscarriage, I know how fast these things can happen.

When I came down with sepsis because of part of a placenta left in, I was in the E.R. at midnight and they sent me home with antiobiotics. 2 hours later I was being rushed to the hospital and CPR had to be done in order to save my life. I was feeling totally fine (well, as fine as one can feel after giving birth to a stillborn) at 10 pm that night. I had been discharged from the hospital at 8 pm. I started getting a tiny pinpoint “stitch” in my left side around 10 pm. By midnight I had a low grade fever and the pain was getting a bit worse. A nurse friend took me back to the hospital because my doctor told me to come back immediately if I had any sort of fever. The ER staff sent me home and told me that I was “emotional” from delivering a stillborn. By 2 pm my husband found me in a huge pool of my blood, unconscious and in severe shock. That is how fast that infection worked in my body.

Even if they would have treated me at midnight, I would have had a hard time of it since it was so far gone.

Anyone who has had an abruption of the placenta knows how fast a woman can bleed out even if she gets immediate treatment.

Why put a woman in this sort of danger? Her body is a ticking time-bomb in the case of most ectopic pregnancies.

Is a woman’s life so cheap and invaluable that they would put off the inevitable (the death of the baby which is a sure thing) and prolong her suffering and physical agony and put her life in jeopardy and her future fertility in danger?

I am about as pro-life as they come but I am appalled with the likes of Phillips who dares to lump in a woman who gets an abortion with a woman whose life is in danger and the fetus WILL die no matter what.

  Kaitlyne wrote @

Before I just thought Doug Phillips was just a misogynist, but telling women with ectopic pregancies that they can’t do anything to even save their own lives is worse than misogyny. It’s, well, I don’t know what it is. What’s worse than being a misogynist?

“I am so troubled at what I am finding regarding the connections to racist groups that I am working on a new series on patriocentricity that will address this facet of it, too.”

A friend of mine is writing a college paper on “Christian” racism and white supremacy. I’ll point him to your blog so he can follow the development of whatever you post about Doug Phillips and his racist connections.

I asked him if he’d seem anything on Doug Phillips and his connections to racist groups. He says that Doug Phillips is thought of very highly by white supremacy groups, including something called He also says that many racists avoid openly promoting and linking to Vision Forum and Doug Phillips because they know doing that would tarnish his image. They like him but they dont’ want to hurt him by being too openly cozy. So they talk in code that only other racists would get.

Here’s an example that my friend emailed me, See where it says “I live, fight, and die for these…”? Below that is a picture of two girls. The girls are Liberty and Virginia Hope Phillips. This man says he’s “PROUD TO BE A NEO NAZI CREEP WHO WILL ACTUALLY FIGHT AND DIE FOR MY PEOPLE.”

Why do white supremacists love Doug Phillips so much? My friend is still researching this, but for one thing Doug Phillips is a huge promoter of the Confederate theologian Robert L. Dabney and his book “A Defense Of Virginia and the South.” Phillips also wrote his own book, “Robert Louis Dabney, The Prophet Speaks.” It’s hard to imagine a man that was more of a racist than Dabney. His hatred for blacks is shocking. So it’s no wonder Dabney is a hero among white supremacists. It’s also no wonder that Doug Phillips is a hero among white supremacists.


  birthinukraine wrote @

More information:

Ectopic pg is the main cause of 1st trimester maternal deaths. Part of that statistic may be the result of the increased number of incidents of ectopic pg today:

“The rate of ectopic pregnancies in North America climbed from less than 0.5 percent of all pregnancies in 1970 to 2 percent in 1992.Ruptured ectopic pregnancy accounts for 10 to 15 percent of all maternal deaths.”

Reasons for ectopic pg: A small percent are for no apparent reason or are due to congenital deformations. The rest are due to scarring from D&Cs or other surgeries, IUDs, Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, STDs, smoking, and other things related to choices women make concerning lifestyle, nutrition, etc.

One important factor in diagnosis and treatment is the caregiver–if you think you have an ectopic pg and your caregiver doesn’t pursue this, go to another dr right away. (If money, time, and family weren’t issues, I would probalby hospitalize myself utnil the situation was resolved 🙂

  thatmom wrote @

Be sure you all stop over at TW and read Joy’s account of the Botkin sisters presentation at the VA homeschooling conference. PRetty incriminating stuff. This is on the current thread #7 of the prairie muffin discussion:

  Corrie wrote @

“Reasons for ectopic pg: A small percent are for no apparent reason or are due to congenital deformations. The rest are due to scarring from D&Cs or other surgeries, IUDs, Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, STDs, smoking, and other things related to choices women make concerning lifestyle, nutrition, etc.”


Yes, these is important information. Like I said, it is but for the grace of God that I did NOT have an ectopic pregnancy.

In my research, it said that age was a big factor in ectopic pregnancy because the motility of the fallopian tubes decrease as a woman ages.

I know that STDs, PID, IUDs, abortions and the like account for a certain percentage of ectopics but I didn’t know that it was the main reason? I think I cited a reference above that said that age is a major contributing factor.

I had a good friend who was a virgin when she married. Her husband had only slept with one girl before he became a Christian and committed his life to Christ. He did not know it but he had chlamydia which is basically silent in men but wreaks havoc and major destruction in a woman’s reproductive organs. It causes scar tissue and infertility. I imagine that the scar tissue can cause an ectopic pregnancy.

I know other women who have been pure and faithful only to contract an STD from their spouse.

I never had an STD but I should have. I certainly “deserved” it much more than my poor friend who did nothing to “earn”her STD. I became a Christian, devoted my life to Christ and married a virgin. Up until then, I lived a less than virtuous life. I made sure to get a thorough physical after becoming a Christian to make sure that I would not hurt any potential future spouse with my past behavior.

This is good info to give to our daughters and sons. They need to know that sex outside of wedlock causes pain and hardship.

  Corrie wrote @

I just want to add that endometriosis is another major cause of ectopic pregnancy. I have had pretty severe endometriosis since I started menstruating. The doctors were surprised I was even able to get pregnancy with my first because of how much the disease had affected me.

Since I did conceive at a young age, it kept the endo at bay. I still have had problems and even pain in my hips from it but never an ectopic pregnancy.

It makes me very thankful that God spared me from such a situation and it makes me very empathetic to women who go through such an ordeal.

  Corrie wrote @

One more from the peanut gallery……

I am feeling like I need to make sure the patrios don’t take anything and run with it. This site says that STDs cause 30% – 50% of ectopic pregnancies.
That leaves at LEAST 50% due to other reasons. Certain types of birth control also contribute.

If we look at the rest of the list, we can see that other unavoidable problems can cause them, too.

I just don’t want people to be able to broad brush all ectopic pregnancies as an issue that is brought on by the evil feminists or promiscuous mothers.

Not saying that this is being done at all, just that I know how the patrios think, having been one of them, and it would be easy to take a self-righteous stance about this and assume that women who have an ectopic pregnancy are getting what they deserve because of alleged past behavior.

“What causes ectopic pregnancy?
Usually, some sort of anatomical problem exists which traps the fertilized egg in the tube. Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (PID), which leads to scarring of the tubes, is the most common cause, comprising about 30%-50% of all ectopics. Pelvic infections include chlamydia and gonorrhea.

There are a number of other factors that will put a woman at risk for an ectopic. These factors include:

a) Congenital anatomical abnormalities
b) Tumors or cysts in the tubes
c) Fibroids in the uterus, which block the tube’s entrance into the uterus
d) Endometriosis
e) Scar tissue from outside the tube, which causes constriction on the tube. This may be caused by other problems or surgery in the abdomen or pelvis, such as appendicitis
f) Previous tubal surgery: previous ectopic, tubal ligation, tubal rejoining
g) Delayed passage of the conceptus to the uterus. The conceptus may be fertilized in one tube but cause an ectopic in the opposite tube because it reaches that tube via passage through the abdominal cavity or through the uterus and back across into the other tube. Because of the increased amount of time required to travel these lenths, the conceptus becomes too big to complete its roundabout trip to the uterus.
h) Current use of progestin-only oral contraceptives
I) Infertility treatment

While there is a higher percentage of ectopic pregnancy in IUD users, the IUD does not cause ectopic pregnancies. Rather, it functions to prevent uterine pregnancies, so the only ones that can result are ectopic. The same sort of relationship exists between the use of emergency contraceptives and ectopic pregnancy. This type of contraception prevents implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterus; therefore, only ectopic pregnancies can result. Three weeks after a woman takes an emergency contraceptive, she should see her doctor for a follow-up so that, if she does develop an ectopic, it can be caught early.”


  birthinukraine wrote @

food for all your nurturing thought (ahem):

a man can have an embryo placed in his abdominal cavity and a placenta will implant on one of his organs (such as the liver) and can be carried 9 months (a C-Section performed for the delivery). Don’t know any man willing to go through the trouble or the risk, but that would be the same as an ectopic pregnancy

  thatmom wrote @

The day I talked with the woman at the Respect LIfe office, the one who had just returned from the bioethics conference, we covered some of these areas.

Here are a couple things she brought up several time because they are important to remember in this discussion.

We do not yet have the technology to transplant an embryo in an ectopic pregnancy into the uterus of the mother. When that technology is available, the rules for the pro-life physician and patient will change.

Also, there are new medications that will now allow the doctor, who is certain that the pregnancy is ectopic, to give to the mother in order for the embryo sac to dissolve so that the mother’s fertility can be preserve and surgery will not be required. The advances, while still not perfect, are,indeed, more pro-life in that they will still allow for a woman to possibly conceive in the future.

When I had an ectopic pregnancy, the doctor admitted me to the hospital and did several sonograms to be certain that it was, indeed, an ectopic pregnancy. Knowing that the baby would meet an uncertain death, he believed that the 100% pro-life thing to do would be to do all he could to save my life, thus he removed the Fallopian tube. It came down to losing one life and saving one life or losing two lives. As much as I grieved the loss of that precious baby and then the loss of my fertility, I knew that I was making THE 100% pro-life decision in this situation. I have never second guessed it.

  thatmom wrote @

Well, now if a man could only experience hot flashes, it could be interesting!

Seriously, do you have a link for this info?

  thatmom wrote @

Corrie, I, too, am concerned that there will be those who cast aspersions on those who have ectopic pregnancies because they might assume that it was the result of an immoral lifestyle.


  Corrie wrote @


Never heard of that before! LOL! Has it been done? Hopefully the guy isn’t a big drinker! 😉

Now, would it be the same as 95% of the ectopic pregnancies that occur in the tubes? Same high risk? I don’t see that an organ would burst open causing massive and quick blood loss the same as if a baby was implanted on the OUTside of the organ. Although, from what I can tell, an abdominal pregnancy is still BIG risk for bleeding and massive organ damage.


I have searched for any information about men being able to carry a baby but I can’t find one example. It would seem that if it is impossible, at this time, to transplant an ectopic pregnancy to the uterus then it would be just as if not MORE impossible to transplant a baby to a man who has NO uterus.

I found where a trans-sexual man who used to be a woman and still has his/her uterus was pregnant but that was in his/her uterus.

It doesn’t look like it has happened yet nor is it going to happen any time soon.

Even when a rare abdominal pregnancy in a woman goes to term, it is still very RARE. How many of these abdominal ectopic pregnancies have occurred? There has been the recent ovarian ectopic pregnancy but that is VERY rare, less than 1% of all ectopic pregnancies and this is the only one known that has gone to term.

I would say that a mom who is pro-life is going to do whatever it takes to go through the pregnancy. I know women who gone through pregnancies knowing the whole time that their baby would not make it more than an hour past birth. I know women who have gone as far as they could into the pregnancy, had the baby early as soon as it was viable so they could have a chance at beating an aggressive cancer, putting their life on the line for NOT aborting the baby.

But, ectopic pregnancy is a whole other ballgame. These are not viable pregnancies almost 100% of the time.

Doug Phillips’ stance is that there are NO exceptions and that includes ectopic. That is a dangerous and wreckless stance to take. It is purposefully putting the mother’s life and health in danger when there is no way the baby will survive. He says he has such a high value of life but it doesn’t seem like it at all. Why isn’t he doing all he can to preserve a woman’s life, especially when there is no hope for her baby?

I am going to contact an obstetrics’ group with this issue. I have already spoken to a lawyer about Doug’s medical advice.

It is interesting to me that Doug makes statements about how there is no imminent danger or threat to the mother but he gives us not one citation from a credible medical resource. He even goes against the Journal of Medicine in his comments.

  birthinukraine wrote @

I really don’t know if it will ever happen for real. It’s theory, and i’d assume they’d have to do it in animals first. and I just don’t picture this being appealing to men to try 🙂 If I actually find the case being referred to in that original statement, I’ll let you know. And Corrie, i was trying to be funny, i wasn’t attacking you at all 🙂

this is a very interesting site–catholic–about ectopic pg. I would encourage reading it in entirety, if possible. it’s interesting because they, ethically, do not support a direct means of aborting the ectopic pg (like Methotrexate). they say, rather, that removing the tube, for example, is ethically responsible in that it’s primary action is to serve the mom. The death of the baby is a result, not the direct intention.

So, there are a lot of complexities in this issue.

  thearchers wrote @

I’m a little baffled as to why the subject of PHC is discussed in SUCH great detail. I’m a graduate myself and of course find this subject interesting, it really has NOTHING to do with ectopic pregnancies and Doug Phillips. Lumping them together is guilt by association, sorry. And yes, I was there Spring of 2006. I’m not coming down on one side or the other, just saying it doesn’t logically follow.

  Mark Clipper wrote @

It seems like people have given a pass to Doug Phillips for way too long. Someone should have seen this coming and blown the whistle on this before. All the way back in 2003 Doug Phillips equated the abortion of an ectopic pregnancy with “Paul Hill and Justifiable Homocide”

“Though most “life of the mother” arguments for killing a baby stem from pure emotionalism, many Christians who seek to offer a rational defense of this type of abortion, usually do so by borrowing the same reinvented justifiable homicide argument embraced by Paul Hill to sanction the assassination of abortionists.”

Doug Phillips endorses the execution of Paul Hill for misapplying “justifiable homocide” and he equates a woman who seeks to save her own life from eminent death with Paul Hill’s “vigilante justice” and she is guilty of “homocide.”

Sooner or later that kind of guilt manipulation is going to wind up killing someone. Something needs to be done to prevent that. Doug Phillips must be stopped.

  Cally Tyrol wrote @

I think I’ve decided to bow out of the discussion. I don’t regret the decision that DH and I made. I don’t feel guilty about it. I think that Doug’s advice (and now Kim’s, from In a Shoe) is dangerous and anti-life.

But in trying to participate in this discussion, I found all these emotions that are just so overwhelming. I posted about it earlier on my WWF blog.

I asked Kim why everyone is claiming that there is a biblical argument for their position, but that no one was actually offering it. She responded with “Thou Shalt Not Murder.” But I couldn’t let that go. That commandment does not apply in life of the mother cases. The intention is to save the life of the mother, not to end the life of the child. I said my piece and now, I have to find some way to keep myself from going back.

But even talking about it here and on TW- safe places with people who actually care about other people- its so painful. I’m taken aback by this, I really am. And I’m disappointed in myself. We said goodbye to our Grace 4.5 years ago. I’ve had two children since then (who are VERY glad that I lived to give birth to them)… and yet, this all feels very raw.


  Mark Clipper wrote @

Doug Phillips has the right of free speech, just like everyone else does. But as the old saying goes, free speech doesn’t mean you have the freedom to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theatre. If your speech could result in the injury or death of other people, that’s where your freedom ends.

“They might consider this to be unethical, if not illegal. Certainly the D.C. Bar Assoc. could be expected to be very concerned about women’s health issues. If they received enough complaints about it they might take disciplinary action against Phillips.” Good advice.

Has everyone noticed how much Doug Phillips loves to show off his attorney title “Esquire”? I spoke to an attorney friend who tells me that most attorneys don’t use that “Esq.” title. In most circles it’s considered pretentious and in bad taste.

Doug Phillips runs the Witherspoon School Of Law and Public Policy. Clearly this is far more than just a conference or seminar about law. He calls it a “law school” and he refers to the attendees as “students” and he claims “Over the last four years, the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy has graduated hundreds of students”. Does Texas law permit an attorney to run a law school without State authorization? Probably something to pursue.

It might be good for Doug Phillips to lose his license to practice law, especially since it’s obvious that he’s publicly giving women advice that conflicts with the law, and even endangering their lives. Then he wouldn’t be able to use that pretentious title, and with it win the respect of people who may not know better.

  Joy wrote @

Cally, I am sorry this is causing so much pain…

Truly sorry.

I for one, am deeply grateful for you. I wish I could reach out across the miles and just wrap my arms around you. I am so very sorry it is so raw. I wish we weren’t having this discussion- I wish Doug Phillips would stop trying to play god.

Blessings to you dear one.

  birthinukraine wrote @

I second what Joy just wrote!

  thatmom wrote @

Mark, thanks for your encouragement and for adding your perspective. Sigh…now we are like Paul Hill.

  thatmom wrote @

Cally, I am so thankful that you are here sharing your own story. I believe the Lord will honor your willingness to be so genuine and transparent. I can barely read this stuff either. I hadn’t seen the Shoe blog’s latest until you pointed it out….where is the compassion and love that is required of a Christian? Sad, so sad.

And {{{{{}}}}} to you today!

  thatmom wrote @


I am sorry to have possibly offended you regarding PHC. I have a tendency to comment under a thread about something someone said even if it is off topic.

However, while not wanting to make PHC responsible for Vision Forum’s teachings, there is quite a strong bond and relationship between Michael Farris and Doug Phillips and it is apparent to me that Farris is moving further down the patriocentric path. Recently his wife, Vicki, endorsed the Passionate Housewives book, which puzzled me since the book seems like an indictment against places like PHC and parents like Mr. and Mrs. Farris who would send their daughters to college. And since Phillips is stating that he will support no group or organization that isn’t 100% pro-life according to his own standards, that places institutions like PHC in the position of loosing favor with Phillips or holding to a REAL pro-life position on this topic. So, actually, there is a connection.

  thatmom wrote @


this is a very interesting site–catholic–about ectopic pg. I would encourage reading it in entirety, if possible. it’s interesting because they, ethically, do not support a direct means of aborting the ectopic pg (like Methotrexate). they say, rather, that removing the tube, for example, is ethically responsible in that it’s primary action is to serve the mom. The death of the baby is a result, not the direct intention.

So, there are a lot of complexities in this issue.”

Birth, it is interesting that you brought this up because I had also read that before I talked with the woman who attended the bio-ethics conference where ectopic pregnancy was discussed at length. I went into the discussion with her thinking that that was the standard position of the Catholic church and having had that same perspective given to me when it was discovered that I had an ectopic pregnancy.

However, this woman explained to me that one of the points of discussion at the conference was the use of these drugs in the case of an ectopic pregnancy. She said that in nearly ever situation, the baby has already died outside of the uterus due to lack of oxygen supply and that they are now considering these drugs as a way of preserving a woman’s fertility and to not further risk the life of the mother.

I thought this was interesting.

  birthinukraine wrote @

thatmom: ” She said that in nearly every situation, the baby has already died outside of the uterus due to lack of oxygen supply .”

that is the kind of infomation people need to have.

  Mark Clipper wrote @

“that is the kind of infomation people need to have.” Only if it’s accurate information.

Let’s please be extra careful. You can be sure that Doug Phillips’ lackeys are monitoring this site closely. They’ll make a big deal out of anything that’s not entirely accurate, while ignoring everything else.

Here’s a question that needs to be pursued. If “in nearly every situation, the baby has already died outside of the uterus due to lack of oxygen supply”, wouldn’t all those babies have stopped developing (growing)? And if they stop developing, wouldn’t that eliminate the possibility of the fallopian tube rupturing?

I can see other medical complications from a dead baby stuck in a fallopian tube, but a ruptured fallopian tube wouldn’t likely be one, would it?

  Cindy K wrote @

Mark Clipper asks some good questions.

Babies outside the uterus may not have died due to lack of oxygen. The placenta will attach to other tissue (harming it). As the baby grows, the placenta grows. If it attaches to the peritoneal wall (the abdominal cavity and not an organ), it will eventually cause peritonitis which is deadly and has a 60% mortality rate. It will put the mother in great harm. The baby could potentially grow there and be surgically removed when at a viable gestational age, but with great harm to the mother and with great risk of not getting sufficient nutrition. If the placenta attaches to the bowel (containing stool), there will be bowel rupture at some point and that is guaranteed peritonitis. The best case might be if the placenta attaches to the outside of the uterine wall which will require a hysterectomy when the baby is delivered.

In each circumstance, as only the desidua/inner lining of the uterus is designed to supply the placenta with nutrients, there is risk that the baby will not get an adequate supply of nutrients (as in previa where the placenta attaches over the cervical os and cannot get adequate nutrition and causes bleeding. Doug said that the baby is not an opportunistic invader in ectopic pregnancy. I would completely disagree if the baby attaches to anything other than the reproductive organs somewhere and if it is in the tube. There is also the problem of retained placental fragments which is a risk after delivery or miscarriage anyway. It can produce sepsis (also with a pretty high mortality and morbidity rate) and Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation if not all of the placenta can be removed. There is also the risk of amniotic fluid embolus which is essentially the same threat as a blood clot. Amniotic fluid embolus is a risk in normal pregnancy, with a placenta that is attached to an organ that is designed for that interface.

And whether a dead baby stuck in a fallopian tube or a dead baby in a ruptured fallopian tube (we do not have technology to replant that baby and by the time that tube ruptures, that baby is dying). The complications are the same. DIC, embolius, infection either in the uterus/tube, peritoneum (abd. cavity) or with infection jumping into the blood stream due to the high level of communication with the blood supply. All are deadly. The ruptured tube just adds the direct communication with the peritoneum and additional tissue trauma that has even greater potential for sepsis and definite hemorrhage complication.

This opinion comes from my medical training (I’ve held advanced certification in a number of clinical areas, have over 10 years of full-time experience in ICU alone , and I have done case management of all hospital patients for insurance companies for cost containment (tracking clinical progress of every hospitalized patient covered by the local company), and with 22 years in the profession as an RN. I’ve also completed coursework in a nurse practitioner program before having to drop out because my husband was in a car accident and needed care. It is from this experience that I draw my “utilitarian” understanding.

And in that understanding, most of the discussion that I’ve read of on this subject by the VF affiliates is poorly informed and a straining of gnats and swallowing camels. But what do I know? I’m a WWF and a utilitarian communist Marxist baby hater rejector of the kingdom architecture and wear a skirt as is appropriate for my lesser gender.

  Cindy K wrote @

Note: For those who didn’t pick up on that, I’m saying that anything or anyone that competes with the VF message is countered with ad hominem abusive arguments and propaganda technique.

  Corrie wrote @

Cindy K,

Thank you so very much for giving us a MEDICAL evaluation of ectopic pregnancy.

Also, you are exactly correct that anyone who competes with the VF message is countered with ad hominem and abusive arguments. Karen and I just experienced this very thing on another blog and it just further illustrates how Doug Phillips and Co. really don’t mean that there should be open discussion about this issue, they are just saying it.

  thatmom wrote @

Mark, I know that women can have a pregnancy that is labeled as a “blighted ovum” where her body can continue to respond as though there is a growing child in the uterus. Also, women can have tumors that give the appearance and symptoms of a growing pregnancy. With the introduction of ultrasound, these things do not progress nearly as long as they would otherwise.

  thatmom wrote @


Thank you for being so precise and accurate in all you said. I have told you many times I am NOT a medical person….I loathe needing to apply a band-aid.

  Cindy K wrote @

About the malignant pregnancy. That is a condition called hyadiform mole. A molar pregnancy progresses like a normal one for awhile but it is cancerous. There is no baby and it used to be detectable only when the heartbeat would have been detected. With ultrasound, they are pretty easy to identify and the recovery statistics are great.

The situation is emergent. The woman will lose her uterus as the primary and immediate treatment is hysterectomy. She has to go on what I was taught to be a pretty aggressive and long course of chemotherapy immediately. It’s bad, bad news.

Another thing that came out of my unique ICU experience with critically ill OB patients…

Before I worked in this particular ICU, my only exposure to any OB patients was whenever I worked or was “pulled” to cover in recovery room following anesthesia. I worked in two hospitals that did NO abortions (save life-saving ones for ectopics). So really, until then — after about 6 years as an RN — I thought that the “life of the mother” cases were pretty rare. Depending where you work and the populations you care for (I worked with indigents in the Deep South), there are a lot of them all the time. We also received transfer patients from other hospitals because we piloted equipment and treatments that were not yet mainstream and were still in clinical trials or still in early stages of development. So I saw the sickest of the sick. And there were plenty.

That “experience” and “utilitarianism” really did change how I viewed these arguments. I was there with real patients — lots of them — who were dying and were pregnant. I would not be so passionate about the whole discussion were it not for this providential place that I believe God gave me. Those “life of the mother” arguments would be nameless, faceless people in a notebook at a conference. But these are women that I’ve cared for, babies that I was a part of helping save, mothers whose lives were saved, babies that made it and dead women that I’ve put toe tags on and shrouded for the morgue. And I’ve been to a host of ethics conferences in the DC area with Pelegrino at Georgetown and a whole rotation of different experts with the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity.

  thatmom wrote @

Cindy, is a blighted ovum different than a malignant pregnancy? One of my miscarriages was labeled as such and there was no mention of it being cancerous, only that the baby had died very early on and was not seen in the earliest sonogram, though the placenta was there.

  Cindy K wrote @

First off, re-reading here, I spelled hydatidiform wrong. It should be easy as it is transliterated from Greek. It is the combination of the words for “water” and “millstone” (so you have a “false/millstone” pregnancy with many cysts that would have otherwise been the fingerlet projections of the placenta that drink from the mother’s uterine lining but instead become many little fluid filled pouches or cysts). And I was in error as well as only some molar pregnancies result in cancer, but they are highly likely to produce cancer if they do not get all the fragments. You should not get pregnant for a year so that they can monitor hormones to make sure that the possible retained fragments that may have been missed do not start growing. So you sort-of hold your breath for a year and hope that you don’t get cancer. The chemo is miserable if you have to undergo it. There is a genetic error that causes many little cysts to grow and there is never a baby. I guess my point was and what was on my mind in that previous post is that it is a deadly thing to ignore… Without treatment, it does become cancerous and the follow up when it is treated is pretty awful.

Blighted ovum is different in that there is a normal early pregnancy, and you have all the necessary components of a pregnancy but no baby. It’s hard to detect on an early ultrasound because the pregnancy looks normal. I don’t think that there is ever a baby at any time, but that could be wrong. Again, this can be a dangerous condition, because if that tissue does not all resolve in a miscarriage, the retained tissue can become a source of infection or a deadly clotting condition as the body tries to absorb the placenta.

  thatmom wrote @

Cindy, thanks for all the medical updates. The extent of my expertise is to tell a mom to keep dark colored wash clothes handy so children can’t see their own blood!

  Cindy K wrote @


Ah. Dark towels. Mothers of most daughters don’t worry about these things…

It’s really weird because I sound much like I’m in favor of medical intervention. I actually think that medical doctors, especially ones that have been trained over the past 10 -15 years are taught to intervene far more often than they should. This is especially true in pregnancy.

I love home births and am certified in the management of pain during childbirth without the use of drugs. I love the whole concept of finding a good midwife for prenatal and ante and post partum care without necessarily seeking out an MD/DO for intervention.

I am also trained to resist doctors if I believe that what they have ordered violates ethical standards or does not follow standards of care. I am the patient’s advocate when I am their nurse, and their best interest becomes my primary duty, be that complying with medical orders, questioning them or refusing them. I had my coworkers in tears laughing because I told the director of surgery that he should expect to see a particular clinical finding as he had ignored the patient’s age and protein level resulting in a pronounced side effect of a particular drug. (Essentially I talked to him in the same manner that I would talk to a resident which took my coworkers by surprise.) So I am not trained to be a shrinking violet that just folds in response to standards, ideas or particular persons.

All that said, I hold what I believe is a balanced view of seeking medical care during pregnancy. Though I personally do not have issues with ultrasound, I do honor those who believe that it could possibly endanger unborn babies who are exposed to US. (Lots of natural health folks resist the use of US.) A good midwife who renders competent prenatal care will be able to identify problems like a blighted ovary or a molar pregnancy and should make appropriate referrals. So though I am not mindless and take issues with many of the aggressive aspects of traditional medicine, this is not to say that I am completely opposed to it either. Getting a good midwife who is well trained and very competent is essential and may well be a challenge. Some states honor and permit lay midwifery as well, and for the majority of people, this is likely adequate and safe for them. But there again, the midwife needs to know when to refer someone for expert care. We cannot check our minds at the door or on our bedposts either. We need to be responsible and faithful stewards with whatever God has entrusted to us, and I believe that we need to rely as much upon faith as we do upon our own internal resources and that includes reason. We need to live in balance as well. Just as this is important for our spiritual lives, this is true for our physical health, particularly when we are bringing forth new life.

I have very legitimate concerns for those who resist medical care and even supportive care from traditional medicine, especially having seen some of these hard and unusual cases. Though medicine can be very paternalistic and may effectively take away our autonomy in many cases, it is not something that should be feared and resisted. As women age and as the entire population becomes more prone to diabetes, this is a concern during pregnancy and should be monitored. Women need good prenatal care because the consequences can be very life threatening, something I wish for every woman to be able to avoid. Some conditions can be managed, and with intervention, the ill effects can be mitigated, managed, limited or avoided all together. When it is appropriate to seek intervention, it is vital and something that I believe honors God because it honors the Imago Dei that dwells in woman as much as it does in unborn babies.

  sarah: Egalitarian Feminist wrote @

Just this once, in this one post, I shall give Doug the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he doesn’t know that there is a difference between fallopian, ovarian, and abdominal ectopics. Just maybe. 98% of ecoptics are fallopian and pose an immediate and high risk of death to mom. Fallopian ectopics, by their very biology, cannot result in a live baby. The other 2% of the time, if it’s an abdominal ectopic, then there is a 10% survival rate for baby. There is still a risk of death to mom, and she must be hospitalized if she wants to try to carry to term. If Doug thinks ectopics are all abdominal, then I could see his point and not think it was grossly sinister.

  Eliza wrote @

I know it was this is type of thinking that killed my grandmother, back in 1933. The hospitial she was in, where she was a nurse, believed in saving the child at all costs even when it was obvious it was too late. So my mom and her sister lost a sibling and a mom.

I am very concerned with the ideas that are being promoted by this organization, Vision Forum, in the name of Christ.

What can we do about it besides a Boycott. Can we write to him as moms from the Homeschool Community?

As he continues to gain influence in the circles of our homeschooling communities those of us who try not to add extra dogma to the teaching of the scriptures begin to feel like we don’t fit into the homeschool community, the prarie muffins are dividing the church. What can we do?

I know I feel excluded by those righteous ones, isn’t that a sign of elitism?

  thatmom wrote @

Sarah, I see what you are saying. But I don’t buy it.

We are not talking about some Bubba here. Since we have read so many things he has written that have made Scripture mold around his worldview, I suspect this is also the case. Remember how he uses Numbers 30 to “prove” that the Bible teaches that women are never to leave a father’s home until given in marriage? Remember his statement that patriarchy, as taught by him, is part of the “grand sweep of revelation?” My gut feeling tells me this is the same thing. We will have to “wait and see.”

  thatmom wrote @

“As he continues to gain influence in the circles of our homeschooling communities those of us who try not to add extra dogma to the teaching of the scriptures begin to feel like we don’t fit into the homeschool community, the prairie muffins are dividing the church. What can we do?”

You have brought up something interesting, Eliza.

A few weeks ago R.C. Sproul Jr. defined himself as being part of what he calls “movement” homeschoolers, ie, those who homeschool by conviction vs those who want to feel good about themselves and what they are doing for little Mary or Johnny.

Now, this week, Kevin Swanson, in his usual hyperbolic fashion, claims there are two groups, “those who want to get their children into heaven and those who want to get their children into Harvard.”

I find these statements to be offensive and irresponsible as well as divisive. It appears that it is their way or the highway and they refuse to acknowledge that the reasons we homeschool are valid reasons for Christians, that we, too, live by conviction. Their irresponsible and near-sited views of higher education may end up giving them sons who cannot support wives who would like to stay home and homeschool their children but cannot because daddy only make minimum wage at the car wash.

So, my opinion is that if they are going to insist on naming two groups, we ought to do all that we can to define ourselves, hence the name “relationship homeschooler” that I have chosen to use. It certainly defines who I am and what I believe and, as I said last week, I intend to use this phrase far and wide and with as must gusto as possible!

The other thing I think we absolutely can do about this is to be sure that our local and state homeschooling leaders 1) know we will not be supporting their events if the patriocentric speakers come and 2) really understand the patriocentric agenda and all that it entails. We need to do our research, present the facts, and continue to faithfully teach our children.

We also need to be prepared when those people who have bought the patriocentric lies begin to melt down and need love and support from others who “get it” about these teachings. I think this is already happening.

  Corrie wrote @

It looks to me as the if the patrios are on a course of self-destruction and will eventually implode.

Does anyone take what Kevin Swanson says seriously? I am still finding it hard to understand why he is a popular speaker. What is the draw?

  Cindy K wrote @

Karen wrote: We are not talking about some Bubba here.


I don’t wholeheartedly agree with this. I actually think, having worked with great numbers of different physicians and with many attorneys, I think Doug would make a better physician. Most physicians in medicine today, or those trained over the past 30 years, don’t really make decisions and do a lot of free-thinking. They plug information that they’ve collected through assessment into the huge number of lists and algorithms and flow charts they memorize to decide what to do. At least that’s what 80% of them do. When things don’t add up or patients show unusual and atypical signs or responses to treatment, they get angry — including getting angry at the patients.

There is also some speculation in healthcare that because physicians spend so much time studying to get all those “A”s, they leave a great deal of emotional development in the dust. So you end up having emotional 15 year olds crammed in 30 year old bodies. (The response of anger and “fit pitching” is so common among doctors when things don’t go their way, their co-workers from many professions have actually considered this.) There is generally at least one person in every venue I’ve ever worked that is familiar with this theory (and it’s not me!).

Now, attorneys that are good are generally free thinkers that are very original. They follow logic algorithms, but they are very flexible and innovative in their thinking and in their ability to assess others. They are good at thinking three steps ahead of you in terms of what approach you will take in a conversation and can anticipate several ways at how things will unfold in a discussion. From what I know of Doug Phillips, he either lacks the ability to do this or he is so uptight that he doesn’t exercise or articulate this ability very well. Having listened to his father, Howard, on hundreds of tapes from the Constitution/Taxpayers party after supporting them for 15 years, when Doug does seem to stretch to say something broad or innovative, I recognize it as a quote from his father — and sometimes’s it’s eerie because it is so similar. (If Doug could just stick to repeating his father and nothing else, we would probably not be having this conversation. Howard always spoke with great grace to people without personally condemning them so rudely. It has made me wonder now whether this garbage is just Doug or whether Doug heard grace in his father’s speeches and something very different at home in private conversation and in all the mentoring he claims he received from Dad.)

People have said that Doug is a good lawyer, but he’s missing the boat on grace. I don’t know that, from my experience, that I would call Doug a good lawyer. He has more in common with the “jerk lawyers” who put people on the stand or get them in depositions and spend most of their efforts intimidating witnesses with anger and emotional manipulation rather than shrewd logic. I don’t think Doug can “bend” himself that much. He is a terrible prude who seems to always be giving some smaltzy schtick in public. (I can only hope that he is more like a down-to-earth Christian and full of grace in private. I never saw it in church with him.)

I don’t think his hard foundationalism (his rigid way he makes sense of what is true through his epistemology) allows for him to be too flexible. In other words, I don’t think that he prays the prayer of serenity (the whole version) or he skips the line that says “taking this world as it is and not as I would have it.” The world has to conform to Doug and Doug doesn’t adapt to the world because everything is expected to conform to his wants and needs. (Just watch him when he’s interracting with those young men that he hauls around with him when he’s mentoring them. I thought he was intolerant and abusive because they can’t read his mind or put his papers away correctly in his portfolio. They seem more to me like servants to him and not as those he’s supposedly helping to prepare for “Biblical” Christian service to the Body of Christ.) If you don’t say “how high” when Doug says “jump,” you or an idea is devalued because it doesn’t fit his foundationalist basic beliefs. Its’ an arrogant way to think when you are not balanced and flexible in general. Letter of the law and logic lovers who do not have a healthy balance of grace, empathy and compassion who are foundationalists become haughty and arrogant rather quickly. Most attorneys are coherentists which allows them the adaptability to be really, really good at their jobs. (Most of the Federal Visionists are coherentists which is why their theories are weird but they aren’t as functionally and miserably restrictive.)

So I guess it all depends on how you define a Bubba. If a restricted thinker classifies as a Bubba, then I think it applies to Doug.

  Corrie wrote @

“Though medicine can be very paternalistic and may effectively take away our autonomy in many cases, it is not something that should be feared and resisted. ”

Ha! Cindy K, this is funny.

The patrios should be jumping at the chance to get medical treatment! They love paternalism. They push it on everyone else as if it is the best thing in the world. They tell others it is good for them.

But, notice how they themselves resist paternalism? Why is paternalism good for everyone else but not for the patrios? Why should a woman love to give up her autonomy and consider it a blessing but then they turn around and tell us how bad it is when they are asked to do the same and then they fight against anything that might even have a whiff of paternalism?

Why are they not practicing what they preach? Why are they tying up heavy burdens on others’ backs and not lifting a finger themselves?

I agree with your statement that proper medical care should not be something feared and resisted. God gave us a brain and we should use it. The patrios like to demonize the medical establishment any chance they get but when their lives are truly in danger they might see that most doctors and nurses have their well-being first and foremost. I am thankful for Harvard trained doctors (in spite of the goofy statement of Swanson) and we would be up a creek if we had to depend on doctors who learned how to operate in their kitchen under the tutelage of their parents.

It seems to me that the patriarchalist doctrine is a self-serving one where all the perks flow to the top and where “do as I say, not as I do” is the motto. It is a system where they get to decide that the want of having their own way is not selfish unless found in an underling. It is a system where they demand submission and subservience from underlings but will writhe in their body and gnash their teeth if submission and cooperation is expected of them. It is a system where the Top-Dogs are all HIGHLY educated but they instruct underlings to not partake in the Baal-worshiping institutions that they were privileged to go to.

This is a system where only an elite few are able to partake of the things that all others are told is wrong. It is a nice set-up because it insures that the Top-Dogs get to stay at the top.

Now we have patriarchalists dispensing medical advice as if they were experts and skewing statistics and downplaying the seriousness of tubal pregnancies.

Will the real murderer please stand up?

  Anon wrote @

” He has more in common with the “jerk lawyers” who put people on the stand or get them in depositions and spend most of their efforts intimidating witnesses with anger and emotional manipulation rather than shrewd logic.”

Kind of like when Doug flies two of his top interns a couple of thousand miles away dressed in black suits and sunglasses in order to interrogate and force a signed confession of a person who they suspect is involved in some internet conspiracy between kinists and an excommunicated couple from his church? The two thugs come, unannounced, into the church one Sunday morning insisting to the pastor of this patriarchal, family reformational church that they must talk to one of his church-goers. So they take the church-goer into a back room and threaten and intimidate him for 2 hours.

The only thing missing from the two thugs is the light pen in order to make the person forget they were ever there.

Is this the kind of thing you are talking about?

And from what I know, this is not an isolated incident. Is this how Christians conduct themselves?

  Cindy K wrote @

I heard about this “men in black” thing, too. I saw a second party email about how Doug sent people to harrass Chad Degenhart to sign a confession and turn over his hard drive so that they could have evidence to use against someone that they wanted to sue. (If they only knew how many people saw those emails, they would be sick.)

I guess these guys think that everyone is a dumb “Bubba” chump that cannot observe how they really are. The inner circle all walk around like royalty, but they treat those outside their leadership group like some kind of feudal slaves or villeins. The servant-leader trains for leadership by running around behind one of them like they are the King of England. You learn to be a leader by being the hired help that you treat like hired help? (Sorry. That’s not mentoring!) If you’ve demonstrated a high enough level of servitude and submission, they throw you some crumbs.

I wish that the interns and the former VF cast offs would talk about things. Maybe in time? I know that when I got out of my spiritual abuse experience, I was gripped with fear for years. You really don’t want to sow discord among the brethren, but we are also supposed to shout from the rooftops what is done in private. And I had not suffered at the hand of an attorney who threatens to sue all of his critics. Maybe people like Brian Howell who was fired from VF will eventually talk about his experience. Pray that he finds healing and comfort and real grace (not this ersatz grace that these ersatz Calvinists claim).

  Corrie wrote @

“I guess these guys think that everyone is a dumb “Bubba” chump that cannot observe how they really are. ”


LOL! I guess so. The people who have observed what they really are made of are called names and said to be “unhappy” with their homes and lives and that is why they criticize. Of course! Couldn’t be that they are thugs, tyrants and spiritual bullies who cry to Mommy the first sign of a little heat.

I know all about the situation that you spoke of. There is a document brought with Bob Renaud (he was one of the “Men in Black”) to James McDonald’s church for Chad to sign. It was a confession of his alleged involvement in the “vast internet conspiracy” (what a joke!). The thing is that Doug has been after him for a long time and tried to get him excommunicated from his former church (now also part of James’ “presbytery”) pastored by Erber all because someone made a not so favorable comment on Chad’s blog about Doug. Chad moved away and Erber’s church never followed through with the excommunication. Now, they storm-troop James’ church, demand to talk with Chad and no one laughs at them and tells them to take a hike? To be fair, not all was well, at least not for a while, between James and Doug.

Where are the true shepherds who beat off the wolves when they are threatening the sheep?

I guess all that is left is some bleating ewes or “bovines” as Doug calls them.

The funny part is how I know all of this.

I hope that people do start talking about these spiritual bullies and exposing the light of day to what is really going on.

The reality is that these people need to get real lives and real jobs so they will be too busy to be concerned about whether or not someone doesn’t always gush over their teachings instead of chasing down people with thugs dressed like cheesy mafiosos using empty threats to try and get their way. And anyone who thinks that VF/Doug is lily-white even after looking at the sophomoric antics of Chancey and Mrs. Binoculars has got to get some counseling.

Truth IS stranger than fiction.

  Cindy K wrote @


My husband says that if I wrote this all this drama queen stuff up in a novel and sent it to a publisher, they would send it back and tell me to write a more believable version.

  Corrie wrote @

LOL! I think your husband is right!

  thatmom wrote @

The men in black stuff is just plain weird. I mean, who lives like this? Seriously, I know NOBODY outside of the patriocentric circles who carries on with this sort of drama. Well, sort of. Once I had to go to city court to testify when my neighbor’s dog killed another dog and I saw the whole thing. It was on a Monday morning and while I was waiting my turn, I sat in the lobby at the police station watching in awe as all these women were hauled in. They had been arrested for brawling in the bars over the weekend. They had black eyes, swollen lips, and were still arguing with each other. All I needed was popcorn. Your “Men in Black” reminded me of this. Perhaps church courts can be just as weird. Ya think?

  thatmom wrote @


I don’t know how I missed this link when you posted it nearly 2 months ago. This week there have been quite a few people going through my blog archives and researching the patriocentrists so I was reading through this thread and the comments again when I found this remarkable link. Thanks for the heads up and I hope everyone looks at this.

  Beth wrote @

All the bad news coming out about Doug Phillips has really hit our family hard. It’s caused us to realize how important it is to never put our hope in any man. Doug Phillips was our hero, and that was our mistake. My mistake especially. My husband doesn’t have much time to check everything re home schooling curriculum, pleasure reading books, conferences, etc. He trusts me to do the research before I buy anything like that for our family, and re Doug Phillips and Vision Forum. My husband trusted me and I trust Doug because, well, he was Doug. I’ve had to repent to my husband AND my children.

“Thanks for the heads up and I hope everyone looks at this.”

I looked. That is so shocking! I don’t know why I didn’t see these Doug Phillips white supremacy connections before. I really should have. It’s not like I hadn’t ordered a lot of Vision Forum materials that contains such blatantly hateful content. It’s all right there in black and white. No wonder the white supremacists love Doug Phillips.

Doug sells many old books that call Blacks “niggers” and speak very demeaningly of Black people. The first time I saw it I was disturbed, but I also found myself trying to justify it away. I thought, “Okay, but it comes from Doug Phillips and he’s a trusted Christian home school leader. He speaks at so many home school conferences. So he obviously couldn’t be a racist himself. Right? It must be okay. We’ll just have to overlook all these bad words in these Vision Forum books.”

I allowed myself to be desensitized because it was Doug Phillips. If I’d seen it from anywhere else I would have been furious and demanded my money back. Now I can plainly see what a terrible mistake that was and how it even corrupted my children’s thinking. I even overheard one of my daughters talking to a friend and referring to Blacks as “niggers.” It was one of the most shocking things I’d ever heard any of my children say. When I asked her where she got such hateful language she said, “From Elsie Dinsmore. Is that bad mommie?” Now just imagine what a tough time I had trying to explain to my kids that just because we ordered those books from a Christian home schooling ministry doesn’t mean that the content is safe. “But if it’s not safe, mommie, why did you order it from them? Why would you be so careful about what you let us see on television and movies and internet but not about Vision Forum?”

What a mess, but I have to take responsibility and say it’s all my own fault. As Christians we’re not supposed to check our brains at the door and blindly trust any man just because he says he’s a Christian and just because he’s a “respected Christian home school leader.” May the Lord deliver me from ever making such foolish assumptions again. I’m done with trusting men like Doug Phillips and Vision Forum.

  Ex-CP Member wrote @

An interesting backstory here goes to show the utter self-righteous hypocrisy of Doug Phillips and his father Howard Phillips, founder of the Constitution Party. The Constitution Party used to be the largest political third-party in the country, and it was experiencing impressive growth. That’s not the case anymore. Several years ago there was a mass exodus due in large part to the traitorous actions of the party’s founder, Howard Phillips (father to Doug Phillips).

I used to be a member of that party. Its motto is “Principle over politics.” After years of finding myself a disillusioned Republican, I thought I’d finally found my home in the CP. I found out what a bunch of meaningless fluff that was when Howard Phillips sold out to the Mormons in the Nevada state party over abortion. Mormons believe that abortion is not only acceptable in the case of rape and incest, it’s often even encouraged. Mormons call those babies “womb trespassers.” They believe that babies conceived by rape and incest have no right to exist. Mormon women are often encouraged to kill them, even by their own pastors.

Howard Phillips sided with the Mormons and said that it was a matter of “state’s rights” and that the other CP state parties couldn’t impose their will on the Nevada party. The Nevada party was completely out of accord with CP’s national platform which doesn’t make allowances for rape and incest. The personhood of the baby is acknowledged in all cases. There was never any question or the slightest challenge, even by the Nevada party, that they were out of compliance with the National party’s constitution, a constitution which the Nevada party swore they would comply with.

Many of us wanted to throw the Nevada party out. Howard fought hard to keep them in, showing his true colors. For years he’d ridiculed the “big tent” philosophy of the Republicans, and he was right to do so. When forced to make a tough decision, he went big tent himself.

Like thousands of others, I left the CP in disgust. We were betrayed by Howard Phillips, “Mr. Principle Over Politics.” What hypocrisy! And this is the party that son Doug Phillips champions to this day, even though it’s been taken over by a hypocritical and phony Mormon “pro-life” position, with the aid of Howard Phillips.

What is so utterly bizarre is that Doug Phillips continues to openly support his father Howard and the Constitution Party, even though Howard sold the Constitution Party out on abortion (in the case of rape and incest). Yet, Doug also takes a position on abortion that is as extreme as it gets (no exceptions of any kind, ever, including in the case of ectopic pregnancy), a position that no one in the Constitution Party has or ever would be willing to argue themselves. Nothing about this makes any sense.

When it comes to Howard Phillips and Doug Phillips there is no consistency at all between what they claim they believe and what they actually put into practice. They are two of the biggest hypocrites and Pharisees I’ve ever seen in my life.

  thatmom wrote @

“I allowed myself to be desensitized because it was Doug Phillips.”

Beth, what a profound statement. I am so grateful that you shared your own story so it can be a warning to others. Sadly, what you have shared is true in so many homes. So often I shake my head, wondering how people can so blindly follow leaders without ever questioning their outrageous statements. Far too many people are willing to overlook teachings and eventually they are desensitized, allowing themselves and their families to become further and further entrenched.

It is interesting to me that women working outside the home, daughters who go to college, and fathers who don’t own their own businesses are the target of ridicule and vitriol but racists and hypocrites and those who aren’t honest about their own lives are revered and honored.

Lord, help us all to be Bereans.

  thatmom wrote @


You have made an excellent point.

I had forgotten about Howard Phillips’ abortion position that accommodated the Mormons’ teachings. It is absolutely hypocritical to now say that ending an ectopic pregnancy to save the life of a mom is “abortion and murder.” I keep asking myself what is in this for Phillips and the Constitution Party? Any thoughts?

[…] by not caring about the needs of women in crisis pregnancies but only talking about the babies, as some homeschooling leaders have demonstrated, we are missing one of the greatest opportunities we have of covenantally reaching out to families. […]

  Jean Manness wrote @

Do you know if Doug Phillips-buddy RC Sproul Jr also teaches that women with ectopic pregnancies should die rather than seeking medical intervention? I ask because I stumbled onto this rather brilliant line in a song parody on RC Sproul Jr.

“Ectopic pregnancy? You die.
At least if truly you’re pro-life.”

Dying makes you prolife? This is some of the most twisted thinking I’ve ever seen in the prolife movement.

  thatmom wrote @

Wow, Jean.

It is my understanding that at one time this was his teaching but he backed off when questioned about it. If someone could confirm that it would be great. If anyone has his e-mail, it might be helpful if we asked him directly.

BTW, I am still waiting for a couple sources to get back to me with statements and then I will be posting another article about this topic regarding Samaritan Ministries and their position on this.

  Jack Brooks wrote @

The Bible permits the killing of another human being in four situations: as a legal punishment for a crime that merits death; in war; in self-defense; and in defense of another. And the defense of another is not always performed in the context of preventing a crime.

The aborting of an ectopic pregnancy falls under this fourth category. It might be similar to a situation where a mentally-ill person is suffering an hallucination. He picks up a knife, and is preparing to stab his mother because he is hallucinating that she is a monster.

If I came upon such a situation, and I had a weapon, what should I do? I would have to shoot the schizophrenic person, or konk them on the head, or something, regardless of the fact that the mentally-ill person was an innocent.

The ectopic pregnancy situation is an even worse scenario, since there is only one option. It’s as if I come upon the schizophrenic son at the very instant of just about plunging a knife into his mother, all I have available to me is a gun, and my only target is his heart. — not his leg, arm, or shoulder, but his heart. What should I do? I should shoot him.

The ectopic infant is also an innocent, like the mentally ill offspring in the story. If the ectopic infant is left alone, it is almost a certainty that it will kill the mother, and so you’ll have two deaths instead of one, with the mother’s death having been avoidable. The mother’s life has to be saved, assuming the mother agrees of course. This is nothing like bearing a Down’s Syndrome baby to term. The Down’s Syndrome child poses greater challenges to the parents’ faith and resources, but is not a threat to life.

  thatmom wrote @

Pastor Jack,

Thanks for those words. Logic in this area seems to have eluded those who are trying to guilt women into carrying ectopic pregnancies. (see the podcast series on militant fecundity)

  Cindy K wrote @

In addition to Pastor Jack Brooks’ description, I though I would add this private comment to me from a physician for a national, pro-life organization when I inquired about this issue. This is a physician who works for a PRO-LIFE group that focuses on crisis pregnancy center support as it central mission:

There have been several things written on this. . .nothing that I have off the top of my head but that the idea of “double effect” applies. These people unfortunately do not understand that over 99% of the time in the ectopic pregnancy there is no baby/fetus. There is only placenta or trophoblastic tissue. There is never formed a fetus and so it is not an “abortion” to remove placenta or dead tissue. In the specific, and unfortuntate event, that you actually see a fetus in a tube with a heart beat, you still would operate to remove the fetus, who would die as a result of its removal. You would not intend to kill the fetus nor do anything to kill it. The baby dies as a result of the removal of the blood supply and its prematurity. So, your intention is not death, but your action may lead to it. The idea of “double effect”. . .an action may cause an unintended consequence. Been around this block many times. . .will not let a woman bleed to death with a ruptured ectopic to further a really insane view and even one that is seen in the vast majority of ectopics.

The mere fact that the HCG levels in an ectopic pregnancy do not rise at healthy levels means that, based on this MD’s information, if there is a baby, it is not getting sufficient blood, oxygen and nutrients from the mother in order to grow. What happens when you don’t provide a child or an adult for that matter with sufficient nutrients and oxygen? As a nurse, I’m fully qualified to say that without nutrients and oxygen, tissues become unhealthy and die. That’s what a bedsore comes from. That’s why burn patients have to be debrided to remove dead tissue. Any tissue that does not get oxygen and nutrients becomes unhealthy and dies. Normal ADEQUATE growth requires an adequate blood supply. When the blood supply for a sustained non-ectopic pregnancy fails, that baby cannot survive (abrupteo placenta, incompetent cervix, ect.) unless the disorder is corrected. An ectopic pregnancy is not correctable, and let me note that if a woman retains placenta fragments, etc., from the pregnancy, it is very harmful and becomes deadly. In those circumstances also, it does present a serious, serious harm to the woman, though that baby (or placenta or whatever) is not an ethical “willful aggressor” as Phillips has stated. (Doug cannot separate the ethical from the physiology which is often flawed. By his own definition, that means that my own immune system which overreacts and shuts down my lungs when I get near a certain set of allergens is not a “willful aggressor” either, but my immune system will cause a sequence of events that will kill me if untreated. My own body is not “willfully” aggressive against me, but it is flawed and imperfect with the potential to threaten my life. An unborn baby is not a willful aggressor, but flawed physiology that is subject to disorder and disease is separate, and unfortunately, pregnancy is subject to our human frailty.)

  Cindy K wrote @

Jean Manness wrote: Do you know if Doug Phillips-buddy RC Sproul Jr also teaches that women with ectopic pregnancies should die rather than seeking medical intervention?

I wrote to a former member of RC Sproul, Jr’s church who stated this:

RC Jr used to hold to the Doug Phillips’ position on ectopic pregnancies, and that was well known within St. Peter. How far that knowledge extended outside the cult I can’t say. I believe that at least once he did publish something on it (perhaps Covenant News) and he received some whithering criticism.

He contacted me later to give me this reference, though there may be more:

  thatmom wrote @

Cindy, that is quite interesting. If you find any more things written by RC that support this notion or that indicate that he has changed his position, please update us.

  Kathy wrote @

My husband and I attended a counseling conference this weekend, and I asked one of the instructors his opinion of Doug Phillips’ stance on ectopic pregnancy. This instructor is a practicing ob/gyn, a deacon in a Regular Baptist church, a certified Biblical counselor, and a frequent speaker on medical issues.

He said ectopic pregnancies are not viable, and questioned whether the “miraculous” cases were true ectopics. He asked what would the doctor “wait and see” for, and said that doing this would cause the death of thousands of women.

The look on his face when he asked if Phillips was a physician and I said “No, an attorney,” said it all.

  thatmom wrote @

Kathy, thank you so much for sharing this information with us. I have received the same response repeatedly when I have asked pro-life leaders the same questions. In fact, I have been nearly dismissed as a nut for asking those questions, the Phillips (and Samaritan Ministries) position is so ridiculous.

You have brought up an aspect of all of this that needs to be addressed and not dismissed. What about the counseling perspective? I am certain that there will come a time when some mom who is either a Samaritan subscriber or a reader of Doug’s blog will have an ectopic pregnancy and will contact a crisis pregnancy center or some other counselor for their input and those counselors had better be prepared with an informed answer.

  anika wrote @

Last year at ICHE (this is Illiniois Christian Home Educators Conference) Norm Wakefield was a key note speaker. He spoke harshly and profoundly against what he coined ” Standard Bearing” and “Standard Bearers”.. and Issues of utter Idolatry with in the home school Christian Community, Issues of LEADERS playing the part of Pharisees, adding to scripture, rules and standards of unbearable weight.
Jesus said his yoke was easy … His burden light…
These standards are EVER changing, all together too difficult to even follow…
Thank you for your post. It really just brought that VERY powerful message, back to memory… Norm was so firm, his heart so desperate, so earnest to see THIS stop! Funny this was the first time in I think… 15 years he is not even coming to ICHE….

  thatmom wrote @

Anika, here is a link to articles on that topic by Norm Wakefield.

I, too, am praying for the homeschooling leadership in Illinois.

  Judy Vanden Bosch wrote @

I agree that barring therapeutic abortion, in the face of TRULY hopeless ectopic pregnancy, is wrong. I do wonder, however, if all who are enraged at this stance (and perhaps a few others) by Doug Phillips, are ready to enter the fray commensurately on the MANY much more serious problems of other leaders and stores. Are all of us willing to stay away from ANY store whose owner holds ill-conceived ideas? That would make shopping difficult. Do you even know the beliefs of most of the businesses and leaders you support through purchases or donations?

Doug Phillips and Vision Forum have done a LOT of good! Are we so willing to villify them over this one error? Does it outweigh the good they’ve done? And if we apply an equally stringent standard to ALL other leaders/companies, will we have any left?

His position on this is wrong, in my opinion, but far less dangerous than many other common positions today. This one, at least, presents a risk to an ADULT – capable (in general) of determining her own path. I far prefer it to so many other wrong positions I see these days. (FYI – I, too, have suffered a ruptured ectopic pregnancy, and I am in the medical field, so I do not speak out of ignorance.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: