Is Abortion Murder? Jack Nicholson’s Response Silenced Everyone!

  • Thread starter Thread starter LongingSoul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LongingSoul

Guest
thepoliticalinsider.com/is-abortion-murder-jack-nicholsons-response-silenced-everyone/?utm_source=SailThru%26utm_medium

*Jack Nicholson is 76 years old, and is a Hollywood legend. He has starred in at least 65 films since 1958. But unlike the rest of Hollywood, he is 100% anti-abortion in all cases, and for a VERY good reason.

As he explained in a classic interview, it was only due to the moral character of his grandmother and mother that kept him from being aborted.

In 1937 his mother was young – only 17 years old – and as a showgirl dancer, having a child would have been an incredible burden. Jack was raised by his maternal grandparents, John Nicholson and Ethel May. He believed they were his real parents until 1974, when he learned the truth after June Francis, his birth mother, died of cancer.*
 
LongingSoul said:
thepoliticalinsider.com/is-abortion-murder-jack-nicholsons-response-silenced-everyone/?utm_source=SailThru%26utm_medium

*Jack Nicholson is 76 years old, and is a Hollywood legend. He has starred in at least 65 films since 1958. But unlike the rest of Hollywood, he is 100% anti-abortion in all cases, and for a VERY good reason.

As he explained in a classic interview, it was only due to the moral character of his grandmother and mother that kept him from being aborted.

In 1937 his mother was young – only 17 years old – and as a showgirl dancer, having a child would have been an incredible burden. Jack was raised by his maternal grandparents, John Nicholson and Ethel May. He believed they were his real parents until 1974, when he learned the truth after June Francis, his birth mother, died of cancer.*
Click to expand...
:clapping:
 
DaddyGirl said:
What does the publication mean when it states in it’s headline that Jack’s response “silenced EVERYONE”.

Whom, exactly, did it silence?
Click to expand...
Not you apparently :ehh:
DaddyGirl said:
They are taking the quotes from a one-on-one interview he gave to Rolling Stone in 1986–nearly thirty years ago…doesn’t seem to be an audience in attendance…and nothing in the article about people being shocked or quieted.

Also, he doesn’t say in the interview that he’s against abortion in all cases.
Click to expand...
Not much wiggle room…
I’m very contra my constituency in terms of abortion because I’m positively against it. I don’t have the right to any other view. My only emotion is gratitude, literally, for my life.
DaddyGirl said:
And he doesn’t say anything about his mother/grandmother’s “moral character” as the writer says.

He does, though, praise the strong, rebel, independent spirit of the women in his family.
“These were strong women — made their own way in a period of time when it just wasn’t done that much,” he says.
Click to expand...
Why are you so intent upon spinning his words?

Must be the journalist in you, I suppose. 🤷

Others must agree with your views even when they don’t?
 
DaddyGirl said:
What does the publication mean when it states in it’s headline that Jack’s response “silenced EVERYONE”.

Whom, exactly, did it silence?

They are taking the quotes from a one-on-one interview he gave to Rolling Stone in 1986–nearly thirty years ago…doesn’t seem to be an audience in attendance…and nothing in the article about people being shocked or quieted.
Click to expand...
Peter_Plato said:
Not you apparently :ehh:
Click to expand...
It’s still a good question.
 
Peter_Plato said:
Not you apparently :ehh:

Not much wiggle room…
I’m very contra my constituency in terms of abortion because I’m positively against it. I don’t have the right to any other view. My only emotion is gratitude, literally, for my life.

Why are you so intent upon spinning his words?

Must be the journalist in you, I suppose. 🤷

Others must agree with your views even when they don’t?
Click to expand...
Amen.
It’s a Catholic forum. Of course we’re going to champion someone with the guts to speak the truth.
 
DaddyGirl said:
What does the publication mean when it states in it’s headline that Jack’s response “silenced EVERYONE”.

Whom, exactly, did it silence?

They are taking the quotes from a one-on-one interview he gave to Rolling Stone in 1986–nearly thirty years ago…doesn’t seem to be an audience in attendance…and nothing in the article about people being shocked or quieted.

Also, he doesn’t say in the interview that he’s against abortion in all cases.
And he doesn’t say anything about his mother/grandmother’s “moral character” as the writer says.

He does, though, praise the strong, rebel, independent spirit of the women in his family.
“These were strong women — made their own way in a period of time when it just wasn’t done that much,” he says.

.
Click to expand...
seagal said:
It’s still a good question.
Click to expand...
I agree.

While I agree (wholeheartedly) with Jack’s views, whom exactly did he silence?

This article seems to be an opinion piece. The headline seems to be of the sensationalist type to try and get you to click on it, like the links on the side:
  • When Asked About His Faith in God, Steve Harvey Silenced Every Atheist!
  • Dr. Ben Carson ATTACKED by Angry Atheist, But in Just 7 Seconds he Sets them Straight!
  • Director Clint Eastwood Just Made a HUGE Announcement About Donald Trump!
  • Duggar Family Just Made a HUGE Announcement – Liberals Are FREAKING OUT!
It must be true! They have *exclamation marks! *And CAPITALS! :rolleyes:
 
I thought all Hollywood movie stars were pro-choice. I was suprised to hear that one of them was not because I’ve never heard a star come out against it before. Shocking!
 
DaddyGirl said:
What does the publication mean when it states in it’s headline that Jack’s response “silenced EVERYONE”.

Whom, exactly, did it silence?

They are taking the quotes from a one-on-one interview he gave to Rolling Stone in 1986–nearly thirty years ago…doesn’t seem to be an audience in attendance…and nothing in the article about people being shocked or quieted.

Also, he doesn’t say in the interview that he’s against abortion in all cases.
And he doesn’t say anything about his mother/grandmother’s “moral character” as the writer says.

He does, though, praise the strong, rebel, independent spirit of the women in his family.
“These were strong women — made their own way in a period of time when it just wasn’t done that much,” he says.

.
Click to expand...
Can you name another Hollywood star who openly opposes abortion?
 
DaddyGirl said:
What does the publication mean when it states in it’s headline that Jack’s response “silenced EVERYONE”.

Whom, exactly, did it silence?

They are taking the quotes from a one-on-one interview he gave to Rolling Stone in 1986–nearly thirty years ago…doesn’t seem to be an audience in attendance…and nothing in the article about people being shocked or quieted.

Also, he doesn’t say in the interview that he’s against abortion in all cases.
And he doesn’t say anything about his mother/grandmother’s “moral character” as the writer says.

He does, though, praise the strong, rebel, independent spirit of the women in his family.
“These were strong women — made their own way in a period of time when it just wasn’t done that much,” he says.

.
Click to expand...
The quality of the journalism wasn’t the point of the post. I’d never heard the story before and thought it was worth sharing which I imagine was the reason it was written. It refers back to a 1984 Rolling Stone interview where he expressed that he was ‘positively against [abortion]’. He didn’t make qualifications beyond that.

*"I’m very contra my constituency in terms of abortion because I’m positively against it. I don’t have the right to any other view.

“My only emotion is gratitude, literally, for my life,” said Nicholson. "[If June and Ethel had been] of less character, I never would have gotten to live. These women gave me the gift of life*.

His mother and grandmother were Catholics and he himself attributes their decision not to abort as a quality of their ‘character’ so it’s reasonable to assume they were conforming to Catholic moral teaching.

Anyway, sorry you found it all so offensive.
 
LongingSoul said:
The quality of the journalism wasn’t the point of the post. I’d never heard the story before and thought it was worth sharing which I imagine was the reason it was written. It refers back to a 1984 Rolling Stone interview where he expressed that he was ‘positively against [abortion]’. He didn’t make qualifications beyond that.

*"I’m very contra my constituency in terms of abortion because I’m positively against it. I don’t have the right to any other view.

“My only emotion is gratitude, literally, for my life,” said Nicholson. "[If June and Ethel had been] of less character, I never would have gotten to live. These women gave me the gift of life*.

His mother and grandmother were Catholics and he himself attributes their decision not to abort as a quality of their ‘character’ so it’s reasonable to assume they were conforming to Catholic moral teaching.

Anyway, sorry you found it all so offensive.
Click to expand...
We can all CHOOSE to be offended by anything another says. I choose to not read between the lines and find something that might offend me. Most people don’t try to be offensive. Get over it.
 
mary_bobo said:
We can all CHOOSE to be offended by anything another says. I choose to not read between the lines and find something that might offend me. Most people don’t try to be offensive. Get over it.
Click to expand...
Huh?
 
seagal said:
It’s still a good question.
Click to expand...
It WOULD have been a good question had she left it at that.

The problem is she loses all credibility when she complains about the journalistic license of Lifesite and then goes on in the latter part of her post to engage in some license™ of her own about Nicholson and how he might feel different today based upon his support for “the strong, rebel, independent spirit of the women in his family” as if only modern women who choose abortion are of that type today. That is, of course, her own brand of license™ which is definitely NOT permitted to Lifesite. :rolleyes:
DaddyGirl said:
He does, though, praise the strong, rebel, independent spirit of the women in his family.
“These were strong women — made their own way in a period of time when it just wasn’t done that much,” he says.
Click to expand...
If she is against the use of license or rhetoric in journalism, insisting that everything that appears in news stories be literally true for reasons of journalistic integrity, then she needs to show her own brand of integrity and apply the principle consistently.
If Lifesite shouldn’t engage in agenda driven speculation about what might have been the case when Nicholson said what he did, then DaddyGirl shouldn’t engage in speculation regarding what the “strong women” in his family would do today to push her own agenda.

Before someone begins yelling, “Tu quoque! Tu quoque!” I would answer that courts of law hold to the principle of “clean hands;” that someone making accusations about others ought to show they are not guilty of the same “crime” before proceeding to trial and a lynching.

Yes, I know, I am using rhetoric. I like rhetoric. It has its place. And recall, I am not the one being inconsistent with regard to being offended when it is used by others, but not so much when I do.:hmmm:
 
Peter_Plato said:
It WOULD have been a good question had she left it at that.

The problem is she loses all credibility when she complains about the journalistic license of Lifesite and then goes on in the latter part of her post to engage in some license™ of her own about Nicholson and how he might feel different today based upon his support for “the strong, rebel, independent spirit of the women in his family” as if only modern women who choose abortion are of that type today. That is, of course, her own brand of license™ which is definitely NOT permitted to Lifesite. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
This particular article, while clipped from a lengthier LIfeSite article, was actually posted on *The Political Insider. *They’re the ones who went to town with the histrionic headline.
If she is against the use of license or rhetoric in journalism, insisting that everything that appears in news stories be literally true for reasons of journalistic integrity, then she needs to show her own brand of integrity and apply the principle consistently.
If Lifesite shouldn’t engage in agenda driven speculation about what might have been the case when Nicholson said what he did, then DaddyGirl shouldn’t engage in speculation regarding what the “strong women” in his family would do today to push her own agenda.
Click to expand...
What agenda? I think you’re reading more into her post than she intended.

I had the same reaction when I read it, and felt the same annoyance when I realized it was just another cheap gimmick that many sites use to get readers hooked (TPI, not LifeSite).

My beef isn’t with the story, I think it’s commendable for Mr. Nicholson to publicly share his unpopular views. My beef is with the not-quite-dishonest way TPI makes you think that 1) this statement was made recently, and 2) that he shocked and silenced the many (presumed) critics who were there when he said it.

Maybe the OP could have linked to the original LifeSite article which lists 5 (count 'em, 5) male celebrities who are openly pro-life.
 
pianistclare said:
Amen.
It’s a Catholic forum. Of course we’re going to champion someone with the guts to speak the truth.
Click to expand...
There are more than a few who need that reminder.

This is a Catholic forum. And I can’t be the only who resents anyone coming here intent upon changing how or what we, as Catholics, think.
 
seagal said:
This particular article, while clipped from a lengthier LIfeSite article, was actually posted on *The Political Insider. *They’re the ones who went to town with the histrionic headline.

What agenda? I think you’re reading more into her post than she intended.

I had the same reaction when I read it, and felt the same annoyance when I realized it was just another cheap gimmick that many sites use to get readers hooked (TPI, not LifeSite).

My beef isn’t with the story, I think it’s commendable for Mr. Nicholson to publicly share his unpopular views. My beef is with the not-quite-dishonest way TPI makes you think that 1) this statement was made recently, and 2) that he shocked and silenced the many (presumed) critics who were there when he said it.

Maybe the OP could have linked to the original LifeSite article which lists 5 (count 'em, 5) male celebrities who are openly pro-life.
Click to expand...
I didn’t think that it was a recent article because it had referred to the ‘classic’ interview. I’d immediately googled for that interview and while I could find a full transcript of the 1986 interview where he also mentions his opposition to abortion… I could only find the RS cover of the earlier 1984 interview where he spoke about the moral character of his mother and grandmother. There are however excerpts of that interview around the net… which I have posted.

I didn’t post the Lifesite link because it is two years old. I’d come across the Political Insider piece yesterday and was surprised and pleased to learn this about Jack Nicholson. It is a perennial relevant issue and being reminded of the fact that a tough Hollywood star could be courageous enough to be open despite the general Hollywood view… is inspiring. I’m sure that somewhere, whenever the information is read by people, a few are inspired to be more open about their opposition to abortion rather than hide it not to harm their public image.

Anyway, holy moley, this didn’t go like I thought it would.
 
LongingSoul said:
I didn’t think that it was a recent article because it had referred to the ‘classic’ interview. I’d immediately googled for that interview and while I could find a full transcript of the 1986 interview where he also mentions his opposition to abortion… I could only find the RS cover of the earlier 1984 interview where he spoke about the moral character of his mother and grandmother. There are however excerpts of that interview around the net… which I have posted.

I didn’t post the Lifesite link because it is two years old. I’d come across the Political Insider piece yesterday and was surprised and pleased to learn this about Jack Nicholson. It is a perennial relevant issue and being reminded of the fact that a tough Hollywood star could be courageous enough to be open despite the general Hollywood view… is inspiring. I’m sure that somewhere, whenever the information is read by people, a few are inspired to be more open about their opposition to abortion rather than hide it not to harm their public image.

Anyway, holy moley, this didn’t go like I thought it would.
Click to expand...
Things did get a little out of hand didn’t they :o There was nothing wrong with posting that link. I (and I think a couple of others) was just (over)reacting to the way the site chose to present the story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top