Gretchen Voss, the self-celebrated writer who calls her abortion, "the easiest decision I've ever made," is out for destruction again -- but this time she's attacking more than just a helpless fetus. Apparently, destroying the life of her own child (because it was going to be born handicapped) wasn't enough for Voss. In a recent article in Marie Claire, Voss tries to destroy the young life of Pastor Melissa Scott’s ministry by rewriting rumors from the porn blogs and presenting them as her own ideas.

Malicious bloggers have been trying to paint Scott with the Barbi Bridges brush for years. While the allegations have never been proven (Barbi Bridges is rumored to be living in Las Vegas), Voss straddled the same dangerous fence that the reporters who attacked Rush Limbaugh did, when they wrote false accusations about him based on the blogs. Years ago most of us learned "not believe everything we read on the internet," but Voss apparently is new to the web or too lazy to do her research. (To be fair, some say Marie Claire pushed her too hard with impossible deadlines.) So, when the truth about Barbi comes out, it could be a very interesting turn of events.

Voss wasn’t able to prove her allegations against Pastor Scott (that’s why she uses the words "allegedly" and "reportedly" a lot), and then was angered when Scott dismissed her aggressive questions about her past, refusing to roll over and expose her soft underbelly to the pen-wielding piranha.

Whenever I read someone as judgmental as Voss, I have to wonder what skeletons they’re hiding in their own closet. But, since Voss isn’t nearly as influential or interesting as Pastor Melissa Scott, it’s doubtful anyone would ever care to dig. So, I read other articles by Voss, and it wasn’t until I read about her abortion that I realized she wasn’t as transparent as her contrived image suggests.

Hardly surprising that Voss has elicited sympathy from hard-left feminists who call her abortion "courageous," but, I totally disagree with that label. I think it's the people who help the handicapped that are the courageous ones -- not people who eradicate them and then justify the deed with some long-winded rationale. No doubt, raising a handicapped child is a challenge. But truly courageous people take up that challenge every day.

Read the article for yourself, and if you possess an ounce of perception, you’ll see the real reason behind all of Voss's noble excuses for "terminating her pregnancy" is that a retarded child is an INCONVENIENCE. Voss’s "easiest decision I ever made" was to take the easy way out. The easiest way for Voss to shirk the responsibility of raising a handicapped child was to end its life, or as she prefers to phrase it: "Terminate the pregnancy."  

I wonder if the judgmental Voss (who was so busy scouring the porn blogs for dirt on Pastor Melissa Scott) ever took the time to learn that when Scott was younger, she worked with retarded children. Isn't that ironic? While the morally-superior Voss sits railing accusations against Pastor Scott, at a different time in history, a younger Gretchen Voss killed a retarded child, while a younger Melissa Scott helped retarded children assimilate into society. One spent their time selflessly building up, while the other selfishly destroyed. That is one interesting difference between the two that continues to this day.

It's hard for someone as self-absorbed as Voss to understand that retarded people can actually be a great source of joy. Who knows? Maybe if Gretchen would have taken on the challenge to help someone who really needed it, she could have had a real purpose in life instead of wasting it writing cathartic pieces about her alcoholic mother and trying to ruin the careers of others.

If Voss demands transparency from the victims she seeks to ruin on the pages of Marie Claire, she should at least come clean herself. Instead, like the child-molester who claims, "I’m not a pedophile, I am a lover of children," Voss minimizes her deed: "I didn’t kill a baby, I merely terminated the pregnancy." And then to cap it off, she tries to slip this ridiculous comment past us: "We wanted what was best for the baby." (I’m assuming the "we" means she’s married to another one of these malleable, modern-day metrosexuals who lets his wife lead him around by the nose.) That’s the biggest lie of the entire article. She didn’t want what was best for the baby, she wanted what was best for herself. If Gretchen demands complete transparency from others, then she can at least be honest when writing about herself. Excuses and rationales are easy to see through.