NARAL Washington auctions an abortion
This past weekend NARAL Pro-Choice Washington held its 30th Annual Liberty Ball Auction & Masquerade.
NARAL links on its site to a blog post by Afternoon Jolt at publicola.net, who attended the event and reported:
If you didn’t get the idea from today’s Morning Fizz, NARAL’s Saturday night fundraiser was cool. Auctioning off a first-trimester abortion is audacious.
Today’s news: NARAL raised $113,000….
Morning Fizz is apparently Afternoon Jolt in the, well, morning. And Morning Fizz expounded:
Among the auction items were a holiday dinner with the governor (who was in attendance); a framed and autographed picture of WNBA champs the Storm… a 16 GB iPad; lots of fancy dinners; wine tours; and getaways to places such as the San Juan Islands, Orcas, Hawaii, Mexico, South Africa.
But one prize stayed true the politics at hand: “Fund a first-trimester abortion at Aurora Medical Services for a woman in need,” fair market value $530. West Seattle activist Christi Stapleton won that for $550.
There was a vasectomy on the auction block too, fair market value $940. “Girls, buy this for your boyfriend. How about just buying it and giving it so somebody who really should have one?” It went for $100. Only one person bid.
I found the NARAL’s auction guide online, which strangely didn’t mention the abortion and vasectomy auction items. But yes, there was that holiday dinner with the guv at his mansion, which seems to me should be illegal but obviously is not. Click to enlarge…
Given that NARAL’s entire reason for existence is to promote abortions, it should come as no surprise that it would auction off abortions. There’s nothing wrong with it, right?
So why did the pro-abort publicola.net blogger feel the need to call the move “audacious”? Even way cool supporters like him/her recognize that celebrating abortions is at the very least bizarre, even at an event raising money for abortions.
But again, given that NARAL’s entire reason for existence is to promote abortions, I did find these auction items creepy. Click to enlarge…
I don’t know what these business owners were thinking to support an organization that only wants to put them out of business. People sure are stupid. What an example demonstrating that support of the culture of death results in not only others’ but one’s own demise. Satan never stops.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I was about to “like” this article, for it to show up on my facebook page for all my friends to see… UNTIL I saw your final paragraph. I really do think you’d take a look at your own “DO’S for commenting,” becaue I’d be embarrased to have this type of name-calling in an article which I recommend. A professor once told me, “Let the facts talk.” You can allude to their “stupidity,” but, please don’t outright state it. It’s not helping the cause :(
See you at Saturday’s SFLI Summit :)
NARAL makes me feel like a schoolteacher with a problem student, a student who is resorting to more and more desperate and dangerous stunts to try to get everyone’s attention and prevent the class from moving forward.
They put so much energy into denying children the right to live. If they put that energy into actually figuring out that children are human beings with rights, and fighting for those rights instead of fighting to have them murdered, perhaps they might actually do the world some good for a change.
“I don’t know what these business owners were thinking to support an organization that only wants to put them out of business.”
Yep, because PP wants to abort every baby. evar.
Well, Megs, it pretty much seems that way. What is it….Only WANTED children? Pfft. Unplanned pregnancy does not mean unwanted child. Pro-aborts champion abortion, period, at all costs, for any reason.
What girlfriend would buy a boyfriend a vasectomy? What?
Stupid. Stupid and desperate.
The auctioning off of abortion doesn’t surprise me in the least.
Megs,
I don’t think that PP wants to abort every baby. Just every baby that comes in with their mommy.
To do this ghoulish thing in the same month that Halloween is celebrated is consistent, and, whether they know it or not, indicative of who they are in alignment with.
These people have lost their minds.
Any person/company that participated in this event should be boycotted/de-elected.
“Girls, buy this for your boyfriend. How about just buying it and giving it so somebody who really should have one?” It went for $100. Only one person bid.
Pardon me, but don’t you think giving the “gift” of a vasectomy to a guy you think “really should have one” is BEYOND rude?! Wow… the man-hatred is just really palpable in that. Or “here, honey, to prove how much I love you, I want to make absolutely certain you can never impregnate me or any other woman and can never pass on those characteristics of yours to future generations.” Ah, what a long-lasting, truly accepting and loving relationship…
Carla: I don’t think that PP wants to abort every baby. Just every baby that comes in with their mommy.
I agree.
And wow, maybe if NARAL Pro-Choice NY had this same brilliant idea of auctioning off abortions in NYC, they wouldn’t feel the need to go after the crisis pregnancy centers…
I don’t think that PP wants to abort every baby. Just every baby that comes in with their mommy.
Perfect, Carla. Perfect.
Ugh. They make me so ill. Bleah. This article made me nauseated.
Oh, the irony of NARAL calling their party a “masquerade”. The whole abortion industry is fueled by the lie that abortion helps women.
Sad to see there was a vacation donated by popular travel guy, Rick Steves. What’s he thinking?
Kel:
If you want to prevent abortion, why are vasectomies so appalling? What does a “truly accepting” relationship mean to you? More of that “God opens the womb/women should never be able to control their fertility” crap?
Well you might be right. Planned Parenthood isn’t looking to abort every baby. Upper middle class, white babies conceived through their new IVF programs for lesbians are probably ok by them.
Auctioning off the death of a child at ritzy gala is probably one of the most bizarre and morbid things I’ve read in a while- like something you’d see in a Stanley Kubrick movie.
If you want to prevent abortion, why are vasectomies so appalling?
Vasectomies aren’t appalling to me, but giving one as a “gift” to someone you think “needs one” is just insulting.
What does a “truly accepting” relationship mean to you? More of that “God opens the womb/women should never be able to control their fertility” crap?
A truly accepting relationship would mean you DON’T bid on a vasectomy and give it as a gift to your boyfriend. Unless of course, the two of you have first agreed that neither one of you ever wants any children. In that case, go for it. You’re not killing any babies, so do what you want.
And actually, I have 3 children, all of whom are gifts from God. When we *tried* to get pregnant, I couldn’t, and when we weren’t *trying* I got pregnant. So, who’s really in control of their fertility? No one. Even those who are artificially inseminated or have IVF are not guaranteed that they will conceive and carry a child to term. There is only the illusion of control.
Seriously, an abortion and a vacetomy auctioned off? That is beyond off-putting. It made me think of when you have to clean up a dead bug off the floor or vomit for that matter. It’s really gross and in a lot of ways nauseating!
NARAL auctions a Choice.
I wonder if Governor Gregoire stole the “dinner at the mansion” auction idea from former KS governor and current HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius! George Tiller was the highest bidder for Sebelius’ dinner. It would be interesting to know who won this one.
I’m surprised the photography package isn’t an abortion photo session. Really, if abortion is such great thing for women, why not do a photo session. The package above includes up to 4 people — I wonder if they would count the baby as a person or not?
Pardon me, but don’t you think giving the “gift” of a vasectomy to a guy you think “really should have one” is BEYOND rude?!
Seriously. Hellooooooo, eugenics.
Plus, talk about “biology is destiny” – as if the children of guys you don’t like will turn out exactly like their fathers. Who among us doesn’t know a perfectly nice and good person whose father is a jerk?
Kel: Exactly, you don’t tell your boyfriend “here, have a vasectomy” out of nowhere. That’s just insulting. I notice they’re not auctioning off tubal ligations and saying, “Guys, buy this for your girlfriend or someone you think should really have one.”
Pretty sure, via the description, they didn’t auction an abortion. They auctioned off the right to fund an abortion. Which is basically the same as anyone who donates to an Abortion Fund.
But hey. It’s not like we need reality anyway!
Oh Kushie, like there’s a difference. Talking out of both sides of your mouth again, I see. What does an abortion fund do, but fund an abortion?
“We’re not auctioning SLAVES, we’re just auctioning a slavery FUND.”
Y’all go over to Kushie’s blog and look at the comment section of her latest post. Then let’s have a talk about reality.
…..oh, and giving a vasectomy to someone you think needs one? Is someone imposing their opinions, values, choice, morality, etc., on someone else here…..hmmmmmmm?
Obscene.
“Masquerade Ball” indeed. The masquerade that abortion is “good”, that it’s “health care” and that it is “liberating”.
This entire concept of auctioning a free abortion is just nauseating.
Just when I think NARAL can’t sink any lower…
Cranky Catholic: EXCELLENT PHOTO !!!
As for the “photography package”…I can just hear it now: “Oh ! Is this photo album your wedding pictures ?”
“No. They’re the pictures of the free abortion I won. Everyone who was involved got their picture taken. I used the money I would have spent on some really darling shoes and a purse.”
Kel: Exactly, you don’t tell your boyfriend “here, have a vasectomy” out of nowhere. That’s just insulting. I notice they’re not auctioning off tubal ligations and saying, “Guys, buy this for your girlfriend or someone you think should really have one.”
No kidding, Marauder. After all, that would be *gasp* suggesting what a woman should do with HER BODY. I guess the idea behind the vasectomy funding is “since what you do with YOUR body might affect MY body, you should really take care of that.” If we were to tell things like that to women, they would probably start ranting about “teh patriarchyyyy.”
The desperation to avoid perceived (and some actual) oppression by men has led to women oppressing those weaker than themselves (their own children). It’s disgusting and sad.
This, just like the 10:10 “blow up our skeptical enemies!” video and the CIRM embryonic research poetry contest, demonstrates how tone-deaf some people are with regard to message. Their plan is to make abortion appear as “normal” as possible, but they’re only alienating a bunch of people in the middle.
Cranky: awesome!!
And yes, giving your boyfriend a gift snipping IS a way of saying, “Hey, who needs your DNA? No one!” Snipping may not be abortive, but it’s not a compliment to your boyfriend’s looks or intelligence.
This story reminds me of a photograph I saw on the website of one of the abortion clinics I pray at. The photo showed the staff smiling and they all seemed to be holding the surgical instruments of abortion in their hands. They seemed amused, I wasn’t at all. The devil loves desensitization. I’m still praying for them all, and especially the young mothers with child.
People are stupid… The NEA, National Education Association supports Planned Parenthood and abortion. And they wonder why so many teachers cannot find jobs. Stupid!
Sick, sick, SICK!!!
I would be all for the vasectomy auction if it were for a man who has testicular cancer. Otherwise, just like many explain about contraception, it’s like telling him, “I love you, just not all of you. I don’t want your reproductive parts.”
Sex is the highest act of love you can give to someone. That would include accepting everything that comes with your partner. Telling the love of your life that you don’t accept everything about him is completely disrespectful.
Also, even though I know some people here may not agree with me, telling the love of your life to get a vasectomy is like telling God, “I refuse to accept your gifts,” because children are gifts from God. So it also shows utter disrespect to God.
How anyone could be okay with that is beyond me. Then again, I’m Catholic, and my faith is a huge part of my life, so I see things in a different light than others do.
Oh, and getting a vasectomy does not mean that the man won’t impregnate the woman afterward. It is possible, since the canal can grow back, there can be left over sperm, and because the doctors sometimes screw up. Therefore, if they mean for that vasectomy to be used as contraception, it doesn’t mean that pregnancy won’t occur.
What I find nauseating is the utterly acidic, spiteful vitriol on display here. The absolute twisted logic and fallacious utterances in relation to some of the points is gobsmacking.
Yes, you hate abortion and usually abortionists. And sometimes those who have abortions. And certainly anyone who supports women’s choice by their activities pertaining to the subject.
Let’s inject a bit of rationality.
1. Pro-choice people do not hate babies. That is such an immensely ludicrous thing to say that it really weakens your position substantially.
‘I don’t think that PP wants to abort every baby. Just every baby that comes in with their mommy.’ – do you realize just how extremist and irrational that sounds to any observer outside of your own ‘team’? The abortion voucher will be used by someone who CHOOSES to have an abortion and will just be happy they are able to afford one.
2. The vasectomy thing. Lighten up! The fact that it only brought $100 seems to indicate that it was seen as more of a joke thing by the ‘audience’. Or it may have been that someone who had already decided – in concert with their partner – that they wanted a vasectomy, thought it was a good deal. ‘Eugenics’!?! Good grief! Maybe they couldn’t find a donor to offer a tubal ligation, they are somewhat more expensive than a vasectomy.
‘Snipping may not be abortive, but it’s not a compliment to your boyfriend’s looks or intelligence.’ and “I love you, just not all of you. I don’t want your reproductive parts.” – what a leap of wild assumption! They might already have six children for all you know and are just desperate to not have more.
3. The photo package. Again, pro-choice people love their children as much as anti-choice people, are just as proud of them, and like nice portraits of them just as much as anyone.
‘Their plan is to make abortion appear as “normal” as possible’ – it already is.
‘but they’re only alienating a bunch of people in the middle.’ – you think? And how are rantings and ravings like those demonstrated above seen by ‘the middle’?
I really do suggest you re-read what some of you have written and consider how it would be seen by most people out there. If your behavior at your ‘prayer vigils’ outside clinics reflected what is displayed above you would be viewed as a melee of screaming lunatics. You do yourselves no favors.
Do you honestly think I care what you think of me and my “ranting” about abortion? Do you honestly think I care if you think anything I say “weakens my position?” I could care less how I am seen by proaborts.
You have no idea what it is like to hold an I Regret My Abortion sign and have some stranger walk up to you and spit in your face. And still I stand there.
One more time just to make sure that you understand I do not give a rip what proaborts think of me or how I may “look” or “sound” to them. That you are so concerned about it gobsmacks me.
bmmg39: “Their plan is to make abortion appear as ‘normal’ as possible’”
cranium: “…it already is.”
To people like you, yes. To most people, including many people who describe themselves as pro-choice, abortion is a gravely serious matter, not something to be auctioned off as if it’s a new work of cross-stitch.
bmmg39: “but they’re only alienating a bunch of people in the middle.”
cranium: “ – you think? And how are rantings and ravings like those demonstrated above seen by ‘the middle’?”
Referring to something outrageous as “outrageous” does not make one outrageous. And I don’t see a whole lot of ranting and raving here. Perhaps you should leave attempts at rationality to someone more qualified.
“You have no idea what it is like to hold an I Regret My Abortion sign and have some stranger walk up to you and spit in your face. And still I stand there.”
Carla, you are super special and a wonderful witness for life! I think I can safely say that we all love and pray for you. You know you must be doing something good in the fight against this evil when bad things like this happen. Be of strong heart, my friend.
“AMEN ! ” to what Angel said.
You GO, Carla !!!
Carla, you are displaying the exact behavior I was talking about.
‘I could care less how I am seen by proaborts’ – but what about the ‘bunch of people in the middle’? That was my point.
‘I do not give a rip what proaborts think of me or how I may “look” or “sound” to them’ – it’s not pro-choicers you need to worry about.
bmmg39 actually provides a good example for us, allow me to elucidate – referring to something as ‘outrageous’ does not make it ‘outrageous’, and doing so may make the ‘bunch of people in the middle’ think that you are, well, ‘outrageous’.
You don’t see a lot of ranting and raving bmmg39? – from the article:
‘entire reason for existence is to promote abortions’ (stated twice) – not exactly a truly accurate statement. Their existence is to provide choice and to try to prevent people such as you from removing that choice.
‘I did find these auction items creepy.’ – cakes and a photo portrait? Really? Because pro-choicers can’t do anything ‘normal’, ‘happy’ or family oriented? Talk about alienating the majority!
‘culture of death’ – actually it’s a culture of freedom and choice. Unless pro-choice people start wearing stanic robes and drooling blood, guess who looks more ‘loon’ to the ‘bunch of people in the middle’?
and from peoples comments:
‘Pro-aborts champion abortion, period, at all costs, for any reason.’
‘I don’t think that PP wants to abort every baby. Just every baby that comes in with their mommy’
‘I’m surprised the photography package isn’t an abortion photo session’
so if you want to talk about rationality, why don’t you plaster a few of the quotes above on placards and go waltzing down the street with them. You’d soon get a few opinions on your rationality.
Don’t be gobsmacked Carla; while I have no wish to assist you in your campaigning or provide any sort of advice on it (yes, yes, I know that would never be accepted anyway), I just thought it was worth pointing out that if you are going to ‘throw’ things at pro-choice people, be careful of the ‘collateral damage’ if you get too enthusiastic about it.
It comes as no surprise that they make fun and money of some serious life changing operations with their auction of an abortion and a vasectomy …heck they fought for women to kill their own babies.
to cranium, if they were truly for “choice” why didn’t they auction off a chance to help a woman not have an abortion?
Cranium —
I think you need to re-read your own comments here. Here are your points from above:
1. Pro-choice people do not hate babies. That is such an immensely ludicrous thing to say that it really weakens your position substantially.
—- Perhaps they don’t hate all babies, only those appearing at the wrong time, with the wrong chromosomes or being produced by the wrong people. Promoting the killing of some babies, means pro-aborts don’t love babies in general and in fact hate some enough to fund their killing.
2. The vasectomy thing. Lighten up!
—- Sterilizing people is a real knee-slapper.
3. The photo package. Again, pro-choice people love their children as much as anti-choice people, are just as proud of them, and like nice portraits of them just as much as anyone.
— I suppose that may be true, unless their portrait leaves out the one they decided wasn’t picture perfect enough to join the family. I suppose it may be hard to imagine that pro-life people think loving parents welcome and are proud of what God gives them.
I can’t imagine eating a kid’s birthday cake that was purchased with a certificate the mom got for paying to kill other children. For me it’s hard to imagine a happy social gathering with an auction that is raising money to kill babies, it shows a real detachment.
ann marie – not having an abortion is a free procedure.
LB, your response is unsubstantiated.
1. it’s not ‘promoted’
2. ‘pro-aborts don’t love babies in general’ – just as immensely ludicrous as earlier
3. it’s not about ‘hate’
4. ‘sterilizing people is a real knee-slapper’ – what’s that all about then? It’s bad if it is forced on people, just like an enforced gestation. People choose to have vasectomies or tubal ligations, do you have a problem with that? I’ve had a vasectomy – my choice – and I don’t see anything that warrants your sarcastic remark.
5. ‘I suppose it may be hard to imagine that pro-life people think loving parents welcome and are proud of what God gives them. ‘ – well, apart from the fact that not everyone attributes god, pro-choice people are just as proud and welcoming of the children they give birth to as anti-choice people are. Do you have any evidence otherwise?
If they were detached, why were they there supporting something they agree with?
You have yet to demonstrate “ranting and raving.” You have shown statements with which you disagree; that’s about it. (Of course, given that you do not grasp that human fetuses are human beings, that isn’t surprising.)
As I stated earlier bmmg39, if you wrote some of those things on placards and walked down the street you would be seen in the same light as westboro.
Even the first commenter mentioned the ‘language’ and I don’t think they’re pro-choice.
They weren’t just statements that I disgaree with, some were utterly, demonstrably fallacious.
Auctioning off the death of an innocent human being. I’m sickened to the core.
If I need your advice, Cran on how to go about my “campaign”(telling my abortion story)I’ll let you know. Until then I shall carry on.
I will not sit down. I will not shut up. I will never stop talking about how my abortion hurt me. I will never stop reaching out to other women who are struggling after their abortions.
Yesterday I met with someone for lunch. She shared the horrifying details of her abortion with me. You will probably never understand how amazing that is but that is fine with me. She sought me out because she knows that I am out here for her and other women like her.
Oh and it is you and Nick(somg)and Joanie and Megs that continue to fan the flames of my continuing to speak out!! The notion you have that abortion “helps” women is a lie on its face and you can only put your hands over your ears and go LALALALALALALA to those that have struggled and suffered immensely after their abortions.
Sterility? Yes! Breast cancer? Yes! Depression? Yes! Suicidal thoughts and attempts? Yes! Drug Abuse? Yes! Nightmares? Yes! There is a sisterhood among post abortive women and all of the above has happened to us. We have been forced and coerced and flat out LIED to and we will not be silent about that!
My fellow post abortive moms know The Truth of what our abortions have done to our children, to our bodies, to our lives and YOU CANNOT REFUTE personal stories of abortion. We are a force to be reckoned with.
“We are a force to be reckoned with.”
Love it.
RRRRAAAAWWWWWRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:)
Cranium wrote:
What I find nauseating is the utterly acidic, spiteful vitriol on display here. The absolute twisted logic and fallacious utterances in relation to some of the points is gobsmacking.
Hm. This is the same fellow who wrote:
Go on, add the sticker. It’ll just reinforce that you are as mentally deficient as the mindless morons you support.
No, I’m not laughing that hard yet. Just the ‘zoop zoop’ of the bulging eyeballs of people confronted with reality along with the ‘crackle pop’ of the veins in their temples over their little dreamworlds being shattered.
A 30-second Google search reveals the hypocrisy of the troll. Try to resist the urge to feed him, y’all, and maybe he’ll move on to greener
bridges… er… pastures.Hey, we love you all!…and God loves you all as well.
Angel & bmmg39: Amen to all you have said.
:) Carla, you’re too awesome for words…
“RAWR!”, indeed! Trolls and pro-aborts, beware!
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:1FaOPcsFEqeCyM:http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b64/darkwing104/MollyVikingMO.jpg&t=1
Paladin,
:)
You are in my state!(along with Joan)
That cat looks just like mine! RAWR!!
You are in my state!
I’m truly honoured to share a state with Carla, Viking Kitty of the North!
(along with Joan)
Er… (*cough, cough*)… um…
I’m truly honoured to share a state with Carla, Viking Kitty of the North!
“The notion you have that abortion “helps” women is a lie on its face and you can only put your hands over your ears and go LALALALALALALA to those that have struggled and suffered immensely after their abortions.”
I don’t doubt that abortion was a bad choice for you and lots of other women. I’m not saying “abortion invariably helps all women,” or that “abortion never has negative consequences.” I do know that it’s paternalistic to universalize one’s experiences, to try to speak for ALL women. That’s what you’re trying to do. I think it’s great that you lend an ear to women in pain, but seriously? To claim that all women suffer from abortion, and if they don’t, they will suffer, or are merely suppressing all their pain? Paternalistic.
Megan,
I think you meant to say “maternalistic”.
:)
Cranium,
I get what you’re saying and I try to stay away from that kind of language b/c it never did anything to convince me when I was pro-choice. I don’t think a lot of PP/Pro-abort people think they hate babies or children b/c they don’t think children are even involved here. And certainly pro-choice people love their children. The intellectual disconnect is that your child – not some potential OTHER child, but that specific child that you love so much could have been aborted at an earlier stage of development. You could have made that choice and according to your own beliefs, that would be ok. So from a pro-life perspective there is always a selfish element or at least an intelectually dishonest one to the pro-choice claim to love babies/children b/c that love is not unconditional. Only children who pass the mother’s “want” test or the “product is good enough” test, get to continue their development. I was really struck by the post a few weeks ago of the pictures of the embryos and the young children they developed into. That’s what abortion takes away. Not potential people, but specific unrepeatable, genetically unique human beings.
As for PP not wanting to abort: If they were completely indifferent between choices – which is what you’re saying, that they don’t PREFER abortions over other choices – then they would be absolutely perfectly indifferent between performing an abortion on every pregnant woman who walks through their doors, never performing another abortion again, or any mix of the two. I don’t really buy that given the financial motivators here and the fact that PP really looks at abortion as a good thing for many cases. But even if we stipulate to the completely unbiased indifference, it’s only slight hyperbole to say that they WANT to abort every baby who comes in with its mom, b/c they certainly would not MIND aborting every baby that comes in with its mom and doing so actually provides them with their only profit…so…bonus.
Megan, we’ve been over this innumerable times: your use of the words “help” and “harm” are so vague and equivocal as to be almost useless. I could (if I were to be equally illogical) claim that a poverty-stricken, single mom who freely chooses to hire an assassin to kidnap and murder three of her five kids would be a “help” to her (and she might even experience some temporary and/or incomplete “relief” from the outcome), since it would eliminate much of her “burden” (of food, clothing, time, and even burial services). But I think you have enough reasoning power to see two things: (1) the “relief” will, for anyone with even a shred of conscience, soon be overcome by the negative impact of what she’s done; and (2) no sane person would call such an arrangement a “good” thing, even if (hypothetically) a “Planned Parenthood v. State of Texas” supreme court case made such a thing legal in all 50 states. True?
Abortion kills a growing child, Megs and hurts women.
Whooopsies. There I said it again!! Abortion hurts women! Oh no. There I go saying it and being all paternalistic.
How has your abortion “helped” you Megs?
Not going to argue that with you today. All of the children I didn’t abort are home from school.
“The “relief” will, for anyone with even a shred of conscience, soon be overcome by the negative impact of what she’s done;”
Nope. Again, imposing your standard of morality. Guess I could say that anyone who doesn’t contribute to, say, AIDS relief organizations doesn’t have a conscience, either.
“Not going to argue that with you today. All of the children I didn’t abort are home from school.”
That’s very nice, Carla. Is that supposed to make me feel remorseful that I’m not beholden to an infant right now? Ooops, missed the chance to…struggle raising a kid on student loans? Give a child up for adoption and wonder every day what has become of him/her? Oops, guess I shouldn’t have been having sex in the first place. Bad Megs!
I didn’t abort 6 of my children. Fact. They are home from school today. Fact. We raked some leaves and jumped in the piles. Fact.
What part of any of my statements of fact have to do with you, Megan??!!
Guess I could say that anyone who doesn’t contribute to, say, AIDS relief organizations doesn’t have a conscience, either.
Well, except for the fact that INACTION does not amount to ACTION. NOT giving to a relief organization isn’t the same as infecting someone with AIDS. Abortion is a direct action which takes another’s life.
:) Kel, you’re faster at the draw than I am…
Megan wrote, in reply to my comment:
[Paladin]
“The “relief” will, for anyone with even a shred of conscience, soon be overcome by the negative impact of what she’s done;”
[Megan]
Nope. Again, imposing your standard of morality. Guess I could say that anyone who doesn’t contribute to, say, AIDS relief organizations doesn’t have a conscience, either.
Are you seriously equivocating a refusal to make a non-obligatory gift of charity with a refusal to murder? Your “logic” seems to have taken a beating on this one, milady.
That’s very nice, Carla. Is that supposed to make me feel remorseful that I’m not beholden to an infant right now? Ooops, missed the chance to…struggle raising a kid on student loans?
Good grief, Megan! Do you have even the slightest idea how callous and selfish that makes you sound? “Yippee! I never have to inconvenience myself for someone else’s sake!” Forgive me, but that sounds shallower than shallow. God help you if you ever decide to marry; a marriage based on mutual selfishness is a near-infallible recipe for hell on earth (and almost certain divorce, or worse)…
Give a child up for adoption and wonder every day what has become of him/her?
(*wry look*) Yes, it’d be much more reassuring to know that your child is staying put, right in the graveyard where you left her. Are you even thinking about what you’re saying?
Two words.
OPEN.ADOPTION.
I love when pro-aborts try to tell us we’re weakening our position. Ha ha! You all pick on little unborn babies to kill and you think we gotta make nicey nice to impress you? If helpless little baby doesn’t impress you, then curbin’ my snarky sense of humor isn’t going to help either. And besides, when God made me, which he did, he did not put me on this planet to win a popularity contest with murderers.
To all our pro-choice friends here: please tell us what assistance NARAL provides for women who want to carry their babies to term.
By the by, a friend of mine found out she’s pregnant. She is not married. She is not sure her boyfriend is going to stay with her. Guess where she went? Planned Parenthood. She left there in tears, because (AND I SWEAR TO GOD THIS IS WHAT SHE TOLD ME) all they kept doing was trying to sell her abortion. She went for help, and they wouldn’t answer her questions.
She is now going to a CPC which is excellent…..And I told her that we will all help her through this, and that children aren’t mistakes. I told her that her life is NOT over, and she is NOT going to have to give everything up….She’ll just have to do a little re-routing, that’s all. I did it. She can too. I did it with nothing. She’s got a little more support. She’s going to be fine, and so is her baby.
MaryLee,
THANK YOU!!! Thank you for being that kind of a friend to someone in a crisis, someone who needs support and love and help! You have saved two lives, you know.
From the bottom of my heart THANK YOU!
I heart MaryLee! :) That was true love in action…
And besides, when God made me, which he did, he did not put me on this planet to win a popularity contest with murderers.
Darn right.
And MaryLee, that is so great that you’re being there for your friend in her time of need.
Even if some women don’t regret their abortion, it still doesn’t make it okay. They could be sociopaths or merely misguided/ignorant.
Carla, thank you for all your wise and TRUE words in this forum.
“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” – Ben Franklin
Megan, You have spent enough time here now that it’s high time to let go of some of your pride.
Your unwillingness to learn even the basics on this topic is becoming downright shameful.
Mary Lee —
Thank you for supporting your friend. I was in her place 20 years ago, everyone telling me that my life was over and that my “problem” could be taken care of without anyone knowing. The PP folks kept calling after my visit to set up an appointment. But God was by my side, even though I was scared out of my mind. Things were hard in many ways, but also so awesome to discover that my life and my daughter’s were only really beginning.
My “problem” is my wonderful daughter who is away at her second year in college — on the rowing team, meeting her scholarship goals and having the time of her life. Sure, my life was re-routed dramatically, but also filled with marvelous joys. I’m still a single mom, but have done well in my career and socially — life is good.
Most of my nephews and nieces were adopted with joy and have great lives – and are on their way to families of there own. Their birth mothers are real heros in my eyes.
Please tell your friend to stand tall and choose the best for all involved. No one in any situation has an easy path, there is always challenge. But without challenge can you every taste triumph? She is in my prayers.
Hm, that’s too bad. My experience at PP was different–I was asked, over and over again, whether I was making a decision of my own volition, and whether I had considered the alternatives. But seeing as I went to PP and not an adoption agency or Medicaid office, my mind was already made up. Good to know that I did have other options at my disposal, though…
“God help you if you ever decide to marry; a marriage based on mutual selfishness is a near-infallible recipe for hell on earth (and almost certain divorce, or worse)…”
Or worse! Haha! The doom, the horror! Should I start reading Dr. Laura’s advice on how to properly cater to all my partner’s desires and sexual whims? Also, forgive me for not wanting to “re-route” my entire life. I plan to adopt, and I’ll do so when I’ve prepared for it sufficiently. Oh no! Family planning! The horror!!!!
Acknowledging my selfishness is a smart thing: Why have a child right now when I know I’d feel regretful? Plus, I’m fulfilling a very important role: people like MaryLee can morally one-up me and feel superior for having “toughed it out” when I recognized my limits. Having a kid isn’t a noble act, in and of itself.
As though MaryLee had a thought in her head about ONE UP MEGAN when she decided to have her child!!!
Contrary to what you think Megan, It Ain’t All About You!!!
“Good grief, Megan! Do you have even the slightest idea how callous and selfish that makes you sound? “Yippee! I never have to inconvenience myself for someone else’s sake!” Forgive me, but that sounds shallower than shallow. God help you if you ever decide to marry; a marriage based on mutual selfishness is a near-infallible recipe for hell on earth (and almost certain divorce, or worse)…”
There is nothing wrong with preferring to delay having children, or to have an abortion if you accidentally get pregnant before you’re ready. Doesn’t sound selfish or shallow to me.
Megan —
I hope you really do some soul searching before adopting. While you may think that adopting on your timetable and getting the infant of your choice will ensure a perfect parenting experience for you; you will find even the perfect-looking kid comes as an idividual who has their own personality. Hopefully you can deal with having to adapt to that wildcard in your plan. Or perhaps you can find the right agency that will take the kid back when it doesn’t meet your needs — like some dog breeders do.
The little secret about parenting is that it isn’t about the parent, it’s about the child. I truly pray that you will open you heart and see babies as unique individuals before you go forward with your plan.
“The little secret about parenting is that it isn’t about the parent, it’s about the child. I truly pray that you will open you heart and see babies as unique individuals before you go forward with your plan.”
would you say the same thing to a woman who was going to get pregnant and have a child the usual way?
‘Sterility? Yes! Breast cancer? Yes! Depression? Yes! Suicidal thoughts and attempts? Yes! Drug Abuse? Yes! Nightmares? Yes!’ – I have little doubt about these traumas Carla (except for the breast cancer bit, that’s been well discredited). The same traumas also affect the women who are unable to have an abortion.
‘There is a sisterhood among post abortive women’ – that’s good. Pity there isn’t one for forced-birth women.
‘We are a force to be reckoned with.’ – yes I know. You’re never going to stop abortion though.
‘RRRRAAAAWWWWWRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!’ – wicked! Is that a bit of Helen Reddy or is it broader than that? :-)
Paladin, how are you?
Context:
[n] discourse that surrounds a language unit and helps to determine its interpretation
[n] the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event; “the historical context”
Audience:
[n] a conference (usually with someone important); “he had a consultation with the judge”; “he requested an audience with the king”
[n] a gathering of spectators or listeners at a (usually public) performance; “the audience applauded”; “someone in the audience began to cough”
[n] THE PART OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC INTERESTED IN A SOURCE OF INFORMATION or entertainment; “every artist needs an audience”; “the broadcast reached an audience of millions”
[n] an opportunity to state your case and be heard; “they condemned him without a hearing”; “he saw that he had lost his audience”
Do you wish me to elaborate?
I love cats! Thanks for that ;-)
Hal –
I do actually offer the same advice to first time moms of all types.
It’s easy to think babies are somehow either copies of their parents or blanks, but they do come as individuals. Because they are individuals, knowing early that the first job is for parent and child to become acquainted, takes alot of the self and babybook pressure off of the parent. It also is the beginning of mutual respect between parent and child.
When my daughter was deliverered they laid her on my chest and she lifted up her head and looked me right in the eyes. It was astonishing, and the fact that this was a unique person flooded over me.
My ardently pro-choice mother was a foster mom for several years when I was young. You know why? Because BORN children matter, not the six-week-old unborn with fabricated *personalities.*
Oh, I know, I know. God opens the womb, God closes the womb, God expects women to offer up their bodies without complaint, and if they don’t, the vice squad can cry “selfishness” and “careerist hussy!” You put your life on hold, MaryLee, that’s great. Bully for you. Do you recall the percentage of teenagers who end up finishing high school after they get pregnant? (Check the stats for Mississippi–oh-so-pro-life, also with the highest infant morality rate in the country. Where are all the CPC’s??????) I guess these girls were just too weak to get their lives back on track after they “re-routed” their lives.
Your mother must be so proud of her ardently proabortion daughter.
Megan —
I’m puzzled by your answer. You say you are pro-choice, as if you honor all choices as valid. But your comment shows that you don’t and you go on and judge all women who choose life as somehow lower than you.
Does that make you pro-abort and misogynist or class-ist or racist? You cite statistics, but those represent real persons who’s lives you are de-valuing. Do only highschool grads have value — if they have no value — what do you want to have done with them? Isn’t it their choice how they choose to live their lives?
By the way, when did you became an individual? At six weeks were you destined to be a boy? or a fish or what exactly? Weren’t you a someone at that time? Aren’t you lucky (blessed) your ardently pro-choice mom didn’t bring the axe down on you?
I don’t care if you respond, I just hope you really think about how easily you dismiss the miracle of life, because you are part of that miracle too.
“Because BORN children matter”
Your finally right on one point Megan!
Born children do matter. Those who are born alive and those who are born dead. Some unborn children die due to natural causes and many are murdered by a family member. But you are right, they all matter because they are a part of our human family just like you and I are.
Thanks for acknowledging their humanity and proclaiming that all BORN children matter.
Yes, my mother is QUITE proud of me. If I started going around, moaning about unborn children, she’d probably tell me to stuff it.
“Do only highschool grads have value?”
So…you’ve construed my statements for…contempt? No, I don’t look down on girls who drop out of high school to have a baby, but I certainly feel bad that they will be missing out on valuable intellectual enrichment and the opportunity to build relationships with their peers. Not to mention the abysmal state of the job market for people without GED’s…Last time I checked, we encourage kids to attend a certain amount of school. It’s a civil right to get a basic education in this country, no?
Why the rhetorical shift, LB? One minute you pro-lifers talk about how society needs to “support” disadvantaged pregnant women, but when you face the reality that in an ardently pro-life climate such as Mississippi most pregnant teens aren’t obtaining the education the state promised them, you soft-pedal on the issue. What happens to the wider “sociocultural” context you yap on and on about? Suddenly you appropriate and warp some pro-choice rhetoric and start yammering about me devaluing someone’s choice? Strange logic.
Megan – honestly…what are you talking about?
1. “Why have a child right now when I know I’d feel regretful?” Well as long as you don’t feel regretful I guess it’s all good that you eliminated a very specific human being (who don’t need personalities to be human). Just like if your pro-choice mother had chosen to abort Megan the fetus, then Megan the angry commenter would not be here. But as long as you’re warm and fuzzy about it, that trumps all.
2. Marylee is not out to “one-up” you (insecure much) but there’s a reason that people admire others who display selflessness. I’m sorry you’re annoyed that society values that over selfishness. Maybe there will come a day when stories of overcoming adversity won’t resonate with people, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
3. I suspect poverty drives MS stats more than anything else – I read an article about that very thing once. I’ll try to find it, not that you’ll let facts get in your way.
4. Loving born and unborn children is not mutually exclusive.
Wow, talk about rhetorical shift! I notice you have moved from my statement about individual personalities in the pre-born — to mocking it — to refusing to answer any of the questions. Me thinks you protests too much.
So all your negative remarks don’t show you judging those women? You only see them as statistics not individuals.
Your socio-cultural comment seems out of left field from our continuing conversation. I see the class, color, location, educational level of the expecting mother as irrelevant to the value of the women and their pre-born children.
Really, I think you know you have lost on this line and should come haunt the board another day.
Good night.
“I see the class, color, location, educational level of the expecting mother as irrelevant to the value of the women and their pre-born children.”
Let me re-phrase: In a pro-life state like Mississippi, with only one functioning abortion clinic, why do few pregnant high school girls complete high school? Surely pro-lifers value education as much as the rest of society. Where is the PRO-LIFE support for these girls who choose (or really, have no choice) to continue their pregnancies? Is this what the rest of the US will look like if abortion is criminalized?
Also, for the record, I’m not talking about abortion right now, but the lies your group promulgates about helping women. So much for the largesse of those crisis pregnancy centers–guess there aren’t that many outside the Midwest?
Just rereading some comments. Megan I don’t even think you are aware that you refuse to answer questions, continually hopping along some bunny trail and project, project, project. Oh and you love to rapid fire questions at us! You also twist so many comments to be about you.
Look at your comment above. You are going on and on about Mississippi after copying a statement made by LB. You could have just agreed with her statement or disagreed with it giving specific reasons why you disagree.
I happen to agree with that, LB!
I do love your BIG GIRL WORDS though like promulgate and largesse and ardent. Those will become my words for today. I shall try to use each of them in a sentence when I converse.
New word for you. Bloviate
Hal wrote:
There is nothing wrong with preferring to delay having children,
I agree with you, up to that point.
or to have an abortion if you accidentally get pregnant before you’re ready.
Slightly reworded:
“…or to kill one’s children [of whatever age they reach before legal emancipation] if one discovers that one simply isn’t as ready for the responsibility as one originally thought”
Doesn’t sound selfish or shallow to me.
I can really only shake my head in appalled wonder, when you say that.
Cranium,
You know the rules: if you put your troll suit away and play nice, I’ll be happy to talk to you. If you persist in walking about in your new line of Armani Troll Wear™ and flaming to your left and right while ignoring all points of substance, then I’ll continue ignoring you. Your choice, fellow.
Re: context: you *did* note that I supplied hyperlinks to the sources, didn’t you? I’ll let the reader decide if the context was sufficient, or not.
(*sigh*) See, Megan, this is why I periodically doubt the wisdom of trying to have a conversation with you: you seem level-headed and cogent for a few comments, and then you flip out and dispense some of the most outrageous, knee-jerk, non-sequitur-esque garbage! If you want to discuss these things, you might want to keep a bit more of a lid on your impulsiveness…
Hal
October 14th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
There is nothing wrong with preferring to delay having children, or to have an abortion if you accidentally get pregnant before you’re ready. Doesn’t sound selfish or shallow to me.
It *isn’t* selfish to kill an innocent human being for the sake of convenience? Wow. :|
I will put it as simply as possible, without phrasing it as a question!
There is one abortion clinic in Mississippi, something Ms. Stanek has crowed about in the past. The teen pregnancy and high school dropout rates are abysmally low in this state. I simply wonder where all the pro-lifers are who tell women they’ll simply need to re-route their lives for the sake of having a baby, because it seems like most of these girls are not attaining what they set out to attain, or even what a decent civil society expects them to attain: a high school diploma.
I’m not sure how that expectation is “devaluing.”
Also, I’m not sure when I got a personality. I do know that I attained the right to life when I was born, i.e. no longer in my mother’s body. Also, it doesn’t really bother me that my mom could have chosen abortion. She and my father could have had sex on a different night, or under different circumstances, all resulting in a different potential me. Six weeks, not at all: little difference.
I think I’ve answered all the questinos, Carla, though you’ve curiously dodged mine (your weird belief that women are all vulnerable when they show up to abortion clinics yet can *tots* exercise free choice when they have sex…sounds like two different women!
megan
October 14th, 2010 at 8:06 pm
Do you recall the percentage of teenagers who end up finishing high school after they get pregnant? (Check the stats for Mississippi–oh-so-pro-life, also with the highest infant morality rate in the country. Where are all the CPC’s??????) I guess these girls were just too weak to get their lives back on track after they “re-routed” their lives.
Were these teens *forced* to parent? They could have chosen adoption. It is in fact an option! :)
megan
October 15th, 2010 at 9:58 am
There is one abortion clinic in Mississippi, something Ms. Stanek has crowed about in the past. The teen pregnancy and high school dropout rates are abysmally low in this state. I simply wonder where all the pro-lifers are who tell women they’ll simply need to re-route their lives for the sake of having a baby, because it seems like most of these girls are not attaining what they set out to attain, or even what a decent civil society expects them to attain: a high school diploma.
And why isn’t that abortion clinic helping the girls either? Abortion isn’t the only option. Why aren’t these girls offered adoption as an alternative to parenting? The only thing your statements are proving here is that Mississipi NEEDS CPCs! Your statements even indicate that these girls could have obtained their high school diplomas if only there had been a CPC there to help them do so. Did you notice what you were implying? ;)
your weird belief that women are all vulnerable when they show up to abortion clinics yet can *tots* exercise free choice when they have sex…sounds like two different women!
Megan,
Is this a question?
Where are all the CPC’s???
Well Megan, here is a list of centers in Mississippi that help women.
http://ramahinternational.org/mississippi.html
That’s 29 to 1. I like that!
Cranium: “As I stated earlier bmmg39, if you wrote some of those things on placards and walked down the street you would be seen in the same light as westboro.”
If you put ANYTHING in bold letters onto placards, there will be some people wondering what you’re so upset about. Comparing with Westboro is a bit of a stretch. Okay, I’m understating things. Comparing the reactions here to the ending of innocent human beings’ lives to people protesting military funerals and saying “God hates —s” is about eight steps beyond crazy. Tone down some of your rhetoric is you’d like to be taken seriously here or elsewhere.
“Even the first commenter mentioned the ‘language’ and I don’t think they’re pro-choice.”
What commenter was that? The first commenter on THIS thread was Diana, who criticized the use of the word “stupid” to describe NARAL’s actions here.
Yeah, good one Paladin. ‘…your new line of Armani Troll Wear™ and flaming to your left and right while ignoring all points of substance…’ – nice dig, but to me it smacks of spraying a can of ‘stinko’ over a nice fragrance (armani perhaps).
I did not dismiss the claims of trauma of some post-abort women. I pointed out that some women who are denied abortions also suffer various traumas but that it is not widely recognized or measured in any quantitative or qualitative manner.
So how is that ‘ignoring all points of substance’?
And where is the ‘flaming to your left and right’ any more than that displayed by others? I wouldn’t flame to my ‘left’ anyway now would I ;-)
‘you *did* note that I supplied hyperlinks to the sources, didn’t you? I’ll let the reader decide if the context was sufficient, or not.’ – sure did. I’m happy to let them decide too, even though most would be hostile to my position.
bmmg39, I’m just pointing out that ANY extreme demonstrations in regard to sensitive issues – by either side – can be seen as almost threatening behavior by many people. Yes Diana critcized the use of something as basic and innocuous as ‘stupid’. But that’s here, on this site, from one anti-choicer to the group of anti-choicers. Extrapolate that to the ‘outside world’ and think about it.
— except you haven’t pointed to any actual examples of anything that could be construed as threatening. Diana criticized for the use of the word “stupid.” If calling someone “stupid” is a threatening act, then I guess you’ll have to condemn all the people who’ve called George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, or Christine O’Donnell “stupid” over the past ten years.
“Your statements even indicate that these girls could have obtained their high school diplomas if only there had been a CPC there to help them do so. Did you notice what you were implying? ”
Sure. CPC’s purport to help women, to support them through difficult times. Yet the reality for pregnant girls in a pro-life state is kind of shocking. It doesn’t matter how many CPCs there are if they’re not helping girls improve their life prospects like they CLAIM to do. Is the solution adoption and finish high school, or parent and drop out in the tenth grade?
But I realize that community centers like CPC’s can’t “do it all.” Okay. But one would *think* that in a pro-life-dominated state there would be POLICIES in place to help as many young girls as possible, beyond CPC’s. This seems like a grim indication of what life under pro-life control would be like. No abortion, okay, yet no true structural-level support or policies that make life easier for poor and pregnant women. Also, the maternal mortality rate in Mississippi is terrifying.
Abortion isn’t a “panacea,” definitely not. But states that have liberal abortion policies also tend to have stronger social programs for disadvantaged women. You’d expect that places dominated by a pro-life mentality would offer the same programs, or at least support them nominally, but the reality is that they don’t. I’m not sure why state-funded prenatal care, better access to healthcare, well child programs, Head Start programs, etc. aren’t on the mainstream pro-life agenda, but they’re not. They’re vehemently opposed. See the latest nonsense from ardent pro-lifer Rand Paul:
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2010/10/11/index.html
Also, I’d say that ”pregnancy centers” perpetuating lies about emergency contraception (like many on that list you provided due) aren’t “pro-woman.” Gee, EC exposes the body to hormones? What do you think pregnancy does?
Aaaahhhhh! bmmg39, I did not mean threatening in a violent manner. I meant threatening as in intrusive, invasive, annoying or offensive. Like when you walk down the street and some salesperson plants themselves in your path and tries to sell you something. You don’t want to know about it, you feel it is taking your time, you just want it out of your face. And you won’t ever buy anything from THEM!
The point I’m trying to get across is that if an anti-choicer on an anti-choice site is offended by the word ‘stupid’, how do you think people in the street will feel if you carry placards with some of the earlier-mentioned quotes on them.
Synthetic hormones=EC
A body produces hormones naturally during pregnancy.
Um. How old are you, Megan? You must know about a woman’s body producing estrogen and progesterone naturally?
I think you should move to Mississippi and find out how to get all of these young girls through high school. I think that is a very noble cause but instead you might just want to keep throwing out statements about Mississippi and how they don’t do this and don’t do that…………………I don’t know why CPC’s in Mississippi don’t do what you want them to do, Megs.
“Like when you walk down the street and some salesperson plants themselves in your path and tries to sell you something. You don’t want to know about it, you feel it is taking your time, you just want it out of your face. And you won’t ever buy anything from THEM!”
Okay. So you’re saying many people would find these pro-life messages not threatening but annoying if people were to put them on placards and get in people’s faces. But they’re NOT putting them on placards and getting in people’s faces. They’re expressing their views on a blog that has introduced the topic. So you STILL really don’t have anything to complain about.
Megan
October 15th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Sure. CPC’s purport to help women, to support them through difficult times. Yet the reality for pregnant girls in a pro-life state is kind of shocking. It doesn’t matter how many CPCs there are if they’re not helping girls improve their life prospects like they CLAIM to do. Is the solution adoption and finish high school, or parent and drop out in the tenth grade?
I don’t profess to know a lot about Mississipi. I’m from Canada. But the two solutions you listed, “adoption and finish high school, or parent and drop out in the tenth grade” are essentially the only two choices that can be made in a teen pregnancy. If you add the third choice of abortion, it’s actually the same as the first choice “adoption and finish high school” – the only difference is that the baby is dead. So, I don’t see how abortion could possibly be a better option than adoption.
But I realize that community centers like CPC’s can’t “do it all.” Okay. But one would *think* that in a pro-life-dominated state there would be POLICIES in place to help as many young girls as possible, beyond CPC’s. This seems like a grim indication of what life under pro-life control would be like. No abortion, okay, yet no true structural-level support or policies that make life easier for poor and pregnant women. Also, the maternal mortality rate in Mississippi is terrifying.
This is how it was prior to the legalization of abortion-on-demand, too. The cold, hard truth is that teen pregnancy is indeed a crisis for many women and life is not going to be a bed of roses for them. But at the end of the day, the question isn’t, does abortion solve this problem (perhaps for the woman, but certainly not for the child!), but rather, Is it okay to kill innocent human beings for the sake of convenience? Morally, the answer is no. Anyone who claims otherwise, has to jump through many hoops and twist many words to try to support their view. The prolifer is not claiming that an unplanned pregnancy is always going to have a happy ending. That’s not the case. All we’re trying to do is put an end to the mass slaughter of innocent babies. All these other social issues remain and need to be dealt with too. The world is a complicated place. Many solutions are needed because there are many problems. The average person can only fight one or two causes at a time. A prolifer can’t do it all. It’s impossible. We do as much as we can.
Like I said, I don’t know a lot about Mississipi but what I’ve observed in my own country, my own province in particular, is this: the teen girls who did not abort but chose to parent and drop out of school were lower class girls with low IQs and some special needs as well. These girls were unlikely to finish high school and attend college anyway. Would adoption have helped them? It’s difficult to say. These girls tend to get pregnant often, so the situation might repeat itself over and over and over. Adoption at least prevents the killing of an innocent baby, but it certainly can’t solve the issues in the woman’s life that led her to an accidental pregnancy in the first place. Unlike parenting, however, it does free up more future options for her, just as abortion would do.
What I’ve also witnessed in my province is that the higher class teen girls with higher IQs were the ones on birth control and who chose abortion if accidentally pg. Those who did decide to parent (rare but some do), finished high school through correspondence and waited a couple extra years before attending college than their peers, but when it was all said and done, were able to accomplish the same goals. So, the way I look at this is not that, oh, if a teen gets pregnant and chooses to parent, she’ll never finish high school and go to college – but rather, what is the type of girl who is most likely to keep a teen pregnancy (parent) and is she the type of girl who would’ve been able to finish high school anyway? Usually not. And even if they do finish high school, they tend to live with their parents for many many years afterwards, or go from one dysfunctional relationship to another, and college is never even remotely an option for them, illegitimate children or not. :/ These are social issues that can not be “solved” with abortion or any other option. At least adoption prevents the death of the innocent fetus. Another benefit to adoption is that the child has the chance at a better life than his/her mother had.
You might argue that at least abortion is preventing more of these lower class individuals from filling the world, but then you’re right into that ugly sphere of eugenics where the waters get muddy real fast. Killing innocent human beings can never be the right solution to social problems. Killing innocent human beings is evil, therefore, abortion is evil. And that is the sole reason prolifers fight it.
Megan
October 15th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Also, the maternal mortality rate in Mississippi is terrifying.
This is a separate issue from abortion and teen pregnancy.
Why is the maternal mortality rate so high in Mississipi? Again, I don’t know a lot about the area, but I would guess that some of the driving issues might be poverty, lack of health insurance and prenatal care, as well as obesity. Obesity in particular greatly increases the risk of pregnancy complications and c-section. And c-section increases the risk of maternal and infant mortality rates and subsequent pregnancies are more likely to end in c-section as well, and the risks get higher and higher and higher. A vicious cycle.
So, if poverty is driving an obesity epidemic, for example, how does abortion solve that problem? What is needed is access to healthy food! If junk food is cheaper than healthy food, it’s no wonder obesity is a problem. Abortion doesn’t solve the obesity problem, it only ends the life of an innocent human being.
Again, maternal mortality rates are a separate issues from teen pregnancy. Obviously, a woman might choose abortion for fear of dying in childbirth, but why must that be her only option? To me, this is like throwing condoms at AIDs-ridden countries. It’s a bandage attempt that doesn’t even remotely solve the underlying issue, and in fact exacerbates the problem. Just one example would be this: repeated abortions increase the risk of preterm labor, which increases the use of medical interventions such as c-section, which in turn increase the risk of maternal death. Killing babies is not the solution to high maternal mortality rates. Women deserve better!
Bekah:
If you didn’t read my post closely, I said abortion wasn’t a panacea for all social ills, obviously. I’m countering MaryLee’s claim that “pro-lifers are pro-women.” Well, they nearly stopped the practice of abortion in Mississippi, yet there’s still rampant poverty, lack of health care, and high maternal mortality rates. This state of affairs communicates one message to me: pro-life social policy cares only about bringing kids into the world, even if this is a world where they’ll be destined for poverty and ill-health.
Bringing more abortion clinics into Mississippi will not prevent girls from getting pregnant, but pro-choice policy tends to bring with it more liberal social reforms. We care about women and the world their kids are born into. We want women to have the choices of when to get pregnant, if they’ll remain pregnant, and how they’ll parent their kids. That much can’t be said for pro-life policymakers, who tout crisis pregnancy centers as the solution for poor pregnant women, but which is really a bandaid. I can’t think of many pro-lifers who ardently support sex education and social welfare programs as much as they champion the rights of the unborn.
Megan
October 16th, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Bekah:
If you didn’t read my post closely, I said abortion wasn’t a panacea for all social ills, obviously. I’m countering MaryLee’s claim that “pro-lifers are pro-women.” Well, they nearly stopped the practice of abortion in Mississippi, yet there’s still rampant poverty, lack of health care, and high maternal mortality rates. This state of affairs communicates one message to me: pro-life social policy cares only about bringing kids into the world, even if this is a world where they’ll be destined for poverty and ill-health.
I totally understand where you’re coming from here. It definitely sounds like not enough is being done for the women of Mississipi. Things are different in Canada. We have universal health care, child tax benefits (which are incredibly helpful for low-income families!), paid maternity leave, and welfare. I would have to say that it is thus easier for our CPCs to help women here, than in certain areas of the states, because we have so many resources at our disposal to aid them with.
One of the obvious problems I see in the states is that for women without health insurance, it’s cheaper to have an abortion than to pay for childbirth in the hospital. It forces the low-income mother into a terrible position. In Canada, abortion is free and so is hospital childbirth, so there is no need to chose abortion for that reason. Licensed midwives are free too if a safe homebirth is desired. I wonder how many women in the states have risky homebirths solely because they can’t afford a hospital birth. Perhaps this is one of the reasons maternal mortality is so high in Mississipi. While homebirth is safer than a hospital birth for a low-risk, healthy pregnant woman with a licensed midwife, it is extremely dangerous for a high-risk pregnancy to be delivered at home unassisted; for both mom and baby. But I can see that indigent women might feel they have no choice but give birth unassisted at home. :/
Bringing more abortion clinics into Mississippi will not prevent girls from getting pregnant, but pro-choice policy tends to bring with it more liberal social reforms.
I don’t see how bringing more abortion clinics into Mississippi is going to allow for social reform. If the majority of voters there are voting against social reform, then it’s more voters interested in social reform that are needed, not abortion clinics. Abortion clinics are not going to decrease poverty, obesity or crime, they aren’t going to lower the maternal mortality rates (if anything, they probably increase them!), and they aren’t going to help teen mothers graduate from high school either. Abortion clinics serve one purpose: they kill innocent babies. Now, you might argue that these abortion clinics will also be providing birth control which will prevent unplanned pregnancies, but any health clinic can provide birth control – it needn’t be an abortion clinic.
I can’t think of many pro-lifers who ardently support sex education and social welfare programs as much as they champion the rights of the unborn.
I understand your viewpoint. Again, things are different in Canada. I have been criticized before for supporting universal health care. It’s difficult for me to relate to some prolifers who want poor women to keep their babies but then vote against social reforms that would make motherhood more manageable. It seems counterproductive to me.
Megan isn’t playing one-upmanship. This is one-downmanship.
I was just reporting something that is happening to my friend. She is doing her research. She looked up abortion. She watched videos of abortions. She cried and cried and cried and cried. She said, “I didn’t realize this is what it is.” Nobody lectured her, nobody talked about God, nobody forced her to do ANYTHING. But she is a smart girl and had questions. Planned Parenthood doesn’t call the child a baby—but my friend says “They KNOW it’s a baby.” The CPC she is going to is filled with educated and compassionate women. I had two long talks with her and now she’s excited about her child. I said to her, “It will be difficult; but life is difficult. It will be worth it, especially when you see that little heart beating on the ultrasound.” My pro “choice” beliefs were changed radically when I saw my baby–at eight weeks–on the ultrasound. I loved her immediately. I loved her even though she “inconvenienced” me. It’s still not “perfect” because nothing is perfect. Life isn’t fair. It isn’t easy. We don’t always get what we want….nor do we DESERVE to get everything we want. Children are not a right. They are not things to be gotten, or gotten rid of when inconvenient. They are a privelege. They are persons who deserve to live. Who the hell are we to decide whose life is worth something and who is expendable? Who are we to kill our children in the name of a concept, a flimsy one too, at that: the name of “choice”? Give me a break already. Megan, the fact that you spend so much time trying to justify your decisions, and being defensive and insecure (even when people AREN’T addressing you) says more than enough about your views and your state of mind. Only pro-aborts waste their time and their breath and their energy justifying this killing. It cannot be justified. I wish you well, Megan, and I wish you everything good in life. I do, also, feel very, very sad for you, whether you want me to or not. Your posts don’t anger me; they make me feel really sad, especially because of the obvious good you could do in the world if you put your energies into something that wasn’t so destructive, something life-affirming, something good, and true.
Great post MaryLee. I feel bad for Megan too even though I doubt she would believe it. It is quite obvious to most of us that she is grasping at any straw possible to try to defend the “choice” she made.
What to eat for lunch is a choice. Whether to kill children or not should not be a choice in our world.
The answer to unwanted children is to want them not kill them.
I don’t believe there is any such thing as an unwanted child. What pro-aborts do is devalue something that has inherent value. This is an age-old tactic….it makes it easier to dispose of something if you insist it has no value.
It should also be noted that many abused children were wanted at first and became unwanted later on. The same can be said of “unwanted” children who soon became very wanted after birth. Feelings are fickle.