“Planned Parenthood Prez a “Role Model” for Women? In What Universe?” and My Take

See on Scoop.itFrom The Pews’ Puter…

When a prominent magazine issues a list titled, ““The 100 Most Influential People in the World,” you expect to be…oh, I don’t know…inspired?

While the Passion that Misty shows is the same passion and feeling that many of us share…

We must go back and look at the denotation, not the connotation of Influential, or Influence:

in·flu·ence
[in-floo-uhns] noun, verb, in·flu·enced, in·flu·enc·ing.

noun
1.
the capacity or power of persons or things to be a compelling force on or produce effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of others: He used family influence to get the contract.

2.
the action or process of producing effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of another or others: Her mother’s influence made her stay.

3.
a person or thing that exerts influence: He is an influence for the good.

While Richards is far from being an Ideal, Positive, Just, or Loving Influence, she did Influence our country, our media and our lives greatly.

Thus, I do not like that she or some of the other women on the list are there, but they have had some influence in our World, in our Nation.

Sorry….

See on www.catholicsistas.com

Advertisements

2 thoughts on ““Planned Parenthood Prez a “Role Model” for Women? In What Universe?” and My Take

Add yours

  1. You completely missed Misty’s point. All others on the list (well, except American women) are an influence for the good. TIME was most certainly not claiming that Cecile influenced our world negatively. Their biography on her instead points out the so-called positivee influence she has. The TIME article isn’t about people who are simply effective in gaining followers regardless of their good or bad connotation. If so Lila Rose, Abby Johnson, and a few other conservative, pro-life women would have been nominated.

    So while I can’t argue with the definitions you supplied for influential, I can disagree with the connotation in which TIME uses the word. TIME clearly intends readers to be inspired by those on their list. However, like Misty, I’m left instead with a dirty taste in my mouth. God bless!

    Like

    1. Thank you for your comment 🙂 I am much obliged!

      TIME will of course take a positive spin on Richards. It is to be expected. Their appeal needs to be across the board.

      Cardinal Dolan for Catholics, Richards for Pro-Choicers, and Inspiring individuals from other countries for us all 😉
      They are a For Profit Mag.

      Our view of negative on Richards, does not however, change the denotation.

      Does it stink? Does it leave a dirty taste in many mouths? YES!!

      There is much we can do though!! We can make our voices LOUDER! And I think, I believe, that many of us are beginning to speak up against items such as this one.
      Of course, Prayer never hurts either 😉

      God Love You and again, thank you for stopping by ♥

      Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

w

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: