Today! “Ask Them What They Mean By ‘Choice’” Blog Day
FINAL UPDATE, 1/24, 5:30a: I continued to receive requests to participate in our “Ask Them What They Mean By ‘Choice'” Blog Day from pro-lifers even as the day ended. I have updated the list to showcase the 111 pro-life bloggers who used January 21 to expose “choice” as the code word for killing preborn innocence children with only 2-1/2 days notice.
NARAL posted its list of 90 participants for its “Blog for Choice” Day that morning, fewer than ours with much more notice.
And, as previously discussed, we completely overwhelmed the pro-aborts on Twitter.
This was quite a positive learning experience for me, and I have used the example of what you accomplished by this endeavor many times the past couple days here in Washington when discussing online pro-life activism with friends and colleagues.
Perhaps liberals owned social media back in the day but no more, that’s for sure. I think this was definitely an indicator that pro-lifers have come into our own for online advocacy of the sanctity of preborn human life.
UPDATE 1/21, 4p: Well, lol. NARAL couldn’t compete with pro-lifers on Twitter with its #BlogforChoiceDay hashtag and had to create a new one mid-morning: #Tweet4Choice. Lol. Bravo, pro-lifers!
UPDATE 1/21, 1:50a: Today’s the day! 87 89 95 99 pro-life bloggers* have signed up to respond to NARAL’s “Blog for Choice Day” with our own “Ask Them What They MEAN By ‘CHOICE‘ Blog Day.” When you write something on your blog, post a link in my comments section.
Facebook users please click “Like” to this post and add your own comment.
Twitter users please add hashtags #BlogforChoiceDay and #prochoice to your tweets. Also copy @NARAL and @JillStanek if you have room. I’ll try to retweet. Some pro-life Twitter samples already spotted:
@ProLifeBlogs: @matttbastard what do u mean by “choice”? These kids had no choice http://ow.ly/3HC5K #prochoice @NARAL #BlogforChoiceDay
@ajenable Im #prolife b/c stabbing babies w scissors in utero or out shld NEVER b a choice! #abortion #prochoice @NARAL
@JackYoest Yes, @JillStanek gets it right: Its not #prochoice, its a “Mean Choice” http://bit.ly/fOACGk @NARAL #prolife #BlogforChoiceDay
NARAL gives great fodder for discussion:
We truly need people talking about choice now that anti-choice John Boehner is speaker….
Say what? Exactly what choice does NARAL want people to talk about?
* I may not be able to add any more blogs to the list on page 2. My schedule is jam-packed today. If you want to cosponsor our Blog Day and are not listed, please add your name in the comments section.
UPDATE 1/20, 9:20a: Response to tomorrow’s “Ask Them What They Mean By ‘Choice’ Blog Day,” aka “Blog Against Pro-Abort Cover-Up Rhetoric for Killing Children Day,” has been overwhelming!
In the past 40 hours 67 bloggers have signed up to spend some amount of their day tomorrow disallowing pro-aborts from posting about their ambiguous blathery “Blog for Choice Day” unanswered. Pro-lifers will ask them to explain what “choice” actually means.
And we’re not just talking blogging. All pro-lifers can participate by posting on social media such as Facebook and Twitter, too.
On Twitter use the hashtag #prochoice and copy @NARAL and @JillStanek if you have room on your messages. Then track the #prochoice hashtag throughout the day and respond to pro-abort tweets.
Bloggers – FB and tweet links to your posts, including the hashtag and @NARAL, @JillStanek.
Since NARAL is the sponsor of the other side’s blog celebration of the freedom to kill innocent babies, here is NARAL’s contact info:
NARAL email: CAN@ProChoiceAmerica.org
NARAL on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/naralprochoiceamerica
NARAL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/naral – aka @NARAL
NARAL on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/prochoiceamerica
I’m not guaranteeing pro-life messages will get through or stay up, but you can try.
Also google “Blog for Choice” frequently throughout the day, since NARAL has asked its supporters to tag their posts with that phrase. Try to comment on their posts.
Always maintain decorum.
NARAL has yet to post the names of the blogs participating. If it ever does, I’ll crosspost.
I’m having a hard time keeping up with bloggers emailing their desire to participate. Will update the list when I can.
1/18, 4:22p: When NARAL announced a “Blog for Choice Day,” to be held this Friday, January 21, my blood boiled.
How dare they celebrate the upcoming 38th anniversary of the infamous Roe v. Wade decision with their ambiguous claptrap.
Over 50 million babies have been killed in America since that terrible day, most certainly nothing to cheer about, unless you’re in Rome at the Colosseum perhaps.
So pro-life bloggers are banding together to sponsor a counter “Ask Them What They Mean When They Say ‘Choice’ Blog Day” on the same day, January 21.
We’re also encouraging all pro-lifers on Twitter and Facebook to participate.
The idea is simple. Any time any of us reads pro-aborts spouting their obscure “choice” rhetoric on a blog, website, Facebook, or Twitter, we call them out on it. We ask them to explain what the “choice” is.
Is it to eat carrots rather than broccoli? To wear red instead of blue? No, of course “choice” is code for killing babies. What’s their problem with the A-word?
Yes, this is a shameless scheme to suck oxygen out of the pro-aborts’ social media universe, to deny them any time whatsoever to support abortion without defending it.
Co-sponsors thus far…
5 and Counting
11 On My Own
40 Days for Life
A Catholic Mom in Hawaii
A Star of Hope
Abby Johnson
Abigail Seidman – The Abortion Nurse’s Daughter
Abortion in Washington
Accepting Abundance
American Life League (Judie Brown)
And Sometimes Tea
The Anti-Modernist
Axe Swipe
Big Blue Wave
The Black Kettle
Blatherings
Bro Jer’s Blog
C5’s Simian Roadhouse
Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform
Catholic Dads HQ
Catholic Fire
Catholic Heart and Mind
Catholic Preachy
CatholicVote.org
The Center for Women of Faith in Culture
Cheeky Pink Girl
Citizens 4 Freedom
The Cloakroom (FRC blog)
Coming Home (Dr. Gerard Nadal)
Concerned for Life
Constitutionally Right
Crazy Cat Lady Mews
Daughters of the Heavenly King
Debunking Atheists
Defend Us in the Battle
Don’t Buy the Abortion Lie
Exultet
Faith of the Fathers
First State for Life
Flash Point
The Four Last Things
From Beginning to End… and Back Again
Freedom Eden
Generations for Life
God is at Work in You
Hear Their Cries
Hawaii Right to Life
Hudson Valley Patriots
I Am Joe Sales
Illinois Review
The Immoderate Blog
In Him We Live
Is Anybody There?
Joseph Karl Publishing
Josiah Concept Ministries
KatyPunditThe Lady in the Pew
Lake Co. Right to Life Blog
Latter Days Ministry
LifeNews.com (Steve Ertelt)
LisaGraas.com
Little Catholic Bubble
LiveAction.org (Lila Rose)
Living on Faith
Man with Black Hat
Maureen’s Thoughts
Mom and Then Some
Mommy Life
Musings of a Catholic Mom
NowABetterWorld
On Pilgrimage
OneMom
One Voice
The Passionate Pro-Lifer
The Political Housewyf
Pro Ecclesia * Pro Familia * Pro Civitate
Pro-Life Action League
ProLifeBlogs.com
Pro-Life MN blog
Pro-Life in TN (Susie Allen)
Pro-Life Tribe
Pro-Life Wisconsin
Radiant Cross Right to Life
Random Thoughts and Musings
Run With Life
The Screllos
SecularProLife.org
SFO Mom
Shoved to Them
Sober Catholic
Social Justice Begins in the Womb
Speaking 4 Life
Stand for Life
Star-Studded Super Step (Andy Moore in New Zealand)
Students for Life of America
TFP Student Action
ThatMom.com
The Suzy B Blog (Susan B. Anthony List)
Teri O’Brien
ThatMom.com
Thoughts of a Regular Guy
Today Again
Training Happy Hearts
Truth or Scare
Van Maren Traditionalist Views
View from the Choir
Vital Signs
What Does Mike Think?
Wheat & Weeds
Where the Rubber Hits the Road
Worship From the Heart
Zeal for Your House Consumes Me
Email me and I’ll add your blog to the list. Feel free to use our graphic.
Notice “MEAN” and “CHOICE” are highlighted in the graphic, because that’s what “choice” is – mean. Thanks to Kimberly P. for coming up with the concept.
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.
Frankly, I think it’s best just to ignore their little circle-jerk as it grows ever smaller and smaller.
Count me in Jill!!
Christina,
Jill is doing something noteworthy here. he Culture of Death thrives because they have engaged in verbal engineering. The key to their engineering is rather simple.
The reality of their words is the polar opposite of what they say.
“Choice” is really compulsion or coercion.
“Planned Parenthood” doesn’t do pre-natal care, only preventing life or killing it.
“Safe, legal, rare” really mean “Expedient, violation of Natural Law, and abundant.
You get the idea. The only way to open people’s eyes is to get them to grasp the ugly lie of their vocabulary.
I’m down. You can expect to be met with the usual sloganeering of ‘we support all choices’ (even as they condemn motherhood as a deadly disease/slavery/killer of women etc, CPCs as dens of evil and adoption as a non choice) I’ve enjoyed the response I’ve gotten when I’ve asked ‘if abortion was illegal would you be tweeting about birthing rights?’ Gets mighty quiet when you ask that. LOL.
Choice = option to chose to terminate or continue a pregnancy as well as have the ability to chose and be able to obtain the means to prevent a pregnancy. Quite simple. “Planned Parenthood” = the ability to plan whether one should become pregnant and the outcome of one’s pregnancies. Quite simple, actually. And word to Dr. Nadal – not all those who choose to terminate a pregnancy are “co-erced” insasmuch as you think that this is the case. And once again, there are a number of states in which the majority are pro-choice. Your prayers will do nothing to change that – with all due respect.
CC,
I leave most of the prayers to those who are far holier than myself. The scientific facts are changing the landscape, facts easily observed in CPC’s on a sonogram, which is why NARAL and PP are trying to shut CPC’s down—and YES, we have a screen shot of NARAL/NY stating that as their goal.
No, CC, with NARAL’s stated goal they don’t want CPC’s offering women the means to continue their unexpected pregnancies.
Nice try, though.
“No, CC, with NARAL’s stated goal they don’t want CPC’s offering women the means to continue their unexpected pregnancies”
So you’re saying that sonograms should be mandatory? Funny, I when I had cervical polyps removed, nobody forced me to look at the sonogram. “Offering” sonograms is one thing, but forcing them is another. But it’s all about shame – you’re “killing this “baby” -right?
And good luck with criminalizing abortion in New England – even with GOP types in NH and Maine, ain’t gonna happen. Sorry. As was our founder, Roger Williams, we believe in individual liberty of conscience. Too bad for the RC bishops. Good for us.
And too bad for RC bishop Tobin that we, in RI, have a pro-choice, Episcopalian (RI’s Episcopalian bishop is a woman!) governor, Linc Chafee, for the next four years. Threats to withhold holy communion won’t work. And the sad (?!) thing is that those in the Catholic pews don’t really care!!!
Mirabile Dictu!
Wow, isn’t that interesting? No one brought up Catholicism or prayer or anything religious here except for the lone pro-abort. :D Well, I have always found that to be interesting, anyway. I think CC is sliiiightly obsessed.
Perhaps, CC, you should remember that pro-aborts can’t have it both ways. Either terminating a pregnancy is a “difficult decision” (why, I’m not sure) and women should be informed of what they’re ACTUALLY about to do (end the life of a preborn, developing human) via ultrasound, or it’s like having a polyp removed.
CC, you are wrong. Wrong about abortion, wrong about “choice” but most severely wrong about prayer. It is, in fact, the only thing that will change the hearts and minds of people and turn our nation back to God and back to a respect for human life. It’s tempting to get angry with people like you for your snide and arrogant comments, but what you really are is pitiful and ignorant and hardened. Only God in His mercy can heal that. Prayer is the medicine.
It is not “criminalize”, it is “prohibit”. You cannot make something a crime if it is not already.
Killing human beings at any point in our lives violates our rights and is a crime. Killing us in the unborn stage is every bit the crime that killing us in the born stage is. This is a moral reality even if people who lack moral and spiritual development are either unwilling or unable to recognize this.
We do not plan to prohibit prenatal homicide in New England. That would make as much sense as trying to prohibit human slavery in Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, etc. in the nineteenth century. We intend to pass a federal statute which only requires that we get the support of half the Senate and half the House, rather than trying to get all fifty states, including abortionist backwaters like New England, New York, California, the Pacific Northwest and my home state of Maryland, which also happened to be a slave state before the Civil War.
There is no “conscience” in destroying human beings to satisfy psychological needs. Prenatal homicide is a terrible crime which no amount of pathetic rationalization can change. Those who support this terrible crime against innocent human beings are among the most morally backward members of our species.
Jennifer, CC only makes comments like that because she’s obsessed with the Catholic Church and religion. She likes to goad people in attempt to start fights and get entire threads off topic. She does it quite often.
I’ve never met a humble atheist. :D
Sonograms are already a routine part of prenatal care. They’re used to determine the baby’s age. The real questions are:
1) Should abortion centers perform sonograms, like REAL ob/gyns, or should they cut costs by using inferior methods like guessing gestational age based on the mother’s missed period?
2) If they do a sonogram, should they be allowed to turn the screen away from the mother– for fear of instantly debunking her belief, originating in propoganda, that it’s a “ball of cells”– or should mothers be entitled to see the truth for themselves?
CC is a fallen-away Catholic. These types absolutely have to do everything they can to smear the Church so they can feel justifed (not to mention self-righteous) in leaving it.
As I’ve said before, CC, it seems to be like a drug for you. Why don’t you see if you can kick the habit? Maybe repenting and going to Confession will help.
In all the state laws I know of mandating pre-abortion sonograms, the woman is offered a chane to see the baby. She can say no if she wants.
In all the state laws I know of mandating pre-abortion sonograms, the woman is offered a chane to see the baby. She can say no if she wants.
This is correct as far as understand it as well, Lori. She can refuse.
It’s all about shame? I saw my sonograms repeatedly when I had ovarian cysts. Was my doctor trying to shame me? I’ve seen my dental x-rays before the dentist began work, was he trying to shame me? My orthodontist made a 3-d cast of my teeth and used it to explain where the braces would go and how the changes would be made. Was he trying to shame me?
Pro-aborts keep trying to make it seem like abortion is just another medical procedure. If so, they are sabotaging their own credibility by constantly fighting every ‘normal’ medical diagnoistic tool that might go along with prenatal homicide. AND, many women fudge the truth when asked about how far along their pregnancy is, so ultrasounds are that much more important. And wouldn’t you want that for the mother’s safety as well? And while we’re at it, why do pro-aborts fight every other thing that would protect the mother’s (if not the babies’) life? Why don’t abortion mills have crash carts? Why don’t they have trained, certified anesthesiologists? Why don’t they have admitting priviledges at nearby hospitals? Why do they resist regulations that even a vet’s office adheres to?
Why? Because it’s murder for hire. All bets are off when you’re killing people’s pre-born children.
CC,
Catholics in the pew care. It’s the catholycs who like to use the title only as a cover for the morality of self who don’t care. You know absolutely nothing about the circumstances under which communion should be withheld and the reasons for doing so. It’s not a cookie for the little puppies to come get for sitting quietly through mass.
Your cervical polyps weren’t a genetically distinct member of the human species. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess they didn’t have a heatrbeat either. If you had been ‘forced’ to look at them, I doubt you would have hesitated for a nanosecond to continue with the removal. If an ultrasound won’t show anything that would change a woman’s mind, then what’s the dilemma? From a medical perspective, an u/s should be performed on EVERY woman seeking an abortion to confirm gestational age and she should be offered the opportunity to view that. What are you trying to hide from these women?
CC,
You’re hallucinating again. Nobody mentioned making sonograms mandatory. Quite the opposite. Your side wants to shut the centers where they are provided for free.
Also, are you using “cervical polyps” as a new euphemism for a baby, or are you actually referring to legitimate pre-cancerous growths that arise as a result of HPV infections not prevented by the condoms you and Planed Parenthood advocate?
“But it’s all about shame – you’re ‘killing’ this ‘baby’ -right?”
Wrong again! It’s about disabusing women of your side’s lie that “It’s just a blob of tissue.” It’s about something quite alien to you in your post-abortive rage, CC.
It’s about showing women the TRUTH. It’s about INTEGRITY, about integrating the truth of the baby’s human identity into her decision making so that the mother doesn’t join the long, long, horrifically LONG line of post-abortive women who mourn the loss of the baby they never would have aborted had they “only known”.
Rage on against the Bishops and the Catholic Church CC. Rage on. But all of your screams and slurs can’t drown the fact that you killed your own baby. It can’t drown the invitation from Jesus to be reconciled with Him, with your baby, and with yourself. It can’t drown out the love of Carla and the other post-abortive mothers here who wait for you with open and loving arms.
Surrender to God’s love and mercy, and sooner rather than later. The rebellion consumes far more energy than the surrender. Remember the Psalmist:
“If today you hear His voice, harden not your heart.”
I’m in!
CC – you have prayers from this Lutheran-turned-Catholic.
It’s unfortunate that most people have it backwards when it comes to the bishops supposedly denying the Eucharist to those who have supported or taken part in abortions.
As you all probably know, if a Catholic takes part in an abortion, he or she excommunicates him or herself from the Catholic Church, and must go and talk with their priest (sometimes their bishop) to have the excommunication lifted. Direct abortion, the intentional killing of a completely innocent and defenseless human life, is one of the worst things you can possibly do.
St. Paul makes it all very clear:
“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
-1 Corinthians 11:27-29
A person who has excommunicated himself and is in a state of mortal sin should not receive the Eucharist, because in doing so, he is eating and drinking judgement on himself. If a priest or bishop were to fail to point out to his people that they should not receive the Eucharist while in such a state, he would not be looking out for their best interest.
An excommunicated person in mortal sin who receives the Eucharist isn’t hurting the Catholic Church, isn’t hurting God, and isn’t hurting Jesus. He is hurting only himself. The person must be brought back into communion with the Church and absolved of sin first.
CC, this non-religious exchange on my blog turned one “pro-choice” reader into a pro-lifer. I’d love for you to engage the dialogue:
http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2010/07/responding-to-christa.html
“Your prayers will do nothing to change that – with all due respect.”
CC,
I am so sad for you. I can’t imagine a life as empty and sad as yours. Constantly posting one after another ad hominem bitter attack on Jill’s blog, and I suspect on many others, only so that you can go and brag to your ‘friends’ over on wildly pro-abortion webpages.
And then you say something like this and it literally brings tears to my eyes because I feel so horribly for you. I hope that He finds a way in. I hope that you let Him open your heart and mind to Him. Because your existence without His presence must be a void.
CC, know that although you still have not found your way to Him, He is always making paths, and I will be praying for your conversion. When you finally learn to open the door to trust, I know that He will be there waiting for you with arms open. I wish you well & send my love.
To be honest, I am tired of it from both sides. You are either pro-abortion or anti-abortion. It’s a rarity to find someone who is truely pro-all-choice (including theft, murder, etc without consequence from the law) or pro-all-life (regarding the dealth penalty and vegetarianism). Even if you are one of those very few people, the issue is abortion, so why detract from the topic with loaded nomenclature?
I find anti-abortionists aren’t afraid to use the word abortion and expose it for what it is. Pro-abortionists would rather distort reality to justify convenience at the expense of human uterine life and resulting life thereafter.
“Choice” is really compulsion or coercion.
Coming from the side of the debate that’s trying to force women to carry to term, remove her options for preventing pregnancy, and is willing to withhold medication from women on the possibility that it might affect a pregnancy, this is frankly quite laughable.
It’s ridiculous the ways that our society tries to impose its ideas of ‘right’ on a woman the minute she becomes pregnant. It’s like as soon as she conceives she doesn’t matter anymore except as a container for a baby to grow in. Her needs and desires apparently aren’t worth considering anymore. Abortion is only the tip of the iceburg in this regard.
Jayn:
Killing human beings is a crime at any point in our lives. What is it about this basic and unarguable concept that you do not understand?
Do not we impose our ideas of “right” on everyone at all times? Would you not want “right” imposed on someone who wanted to murder you, rape you or steal from you?
If killing human beings in the unborn stage is a violation of rights, a crime (it is), then it should be, must be prohibited. If it is not a crime, then prove it in your next comment without any abortionist doublespeak or evasion.
A person’s rights extend only to the point where they do not infringe on another person’s rights. From a natural law perspective, if two rights are in conflict, one person’s right to live generally trumps the other person’s needs and desires.
Killing human beings is a crime at any point in our lives.
Except to protect our own rights. No one has any right to use my body–I cannot be forced to donate blood or organs, even when I’m dead, or to let a homeless person sleep in my sparebedroom or eat my food. One person’s right to live does not give them permission to traipse over another person’s rights to body or property. Now, you can disagree with me on moral grounds–I have no problems with that, and in the above examples it would certainly be generous of me to do any of those things–but from a perspective of human rights, I see no problem with abortion, and thus no reason it should be prohibited.
Where else do you think a baby should grow, Jayn? What do you think a human uterus is for?
Before you consent to pregnancy maybe you should not consent to having sex. The choice needs to be made BEFORE your child is conceived.
Actually, there is NO conflict. All human beings have an inalienable right to live according to our nature. That means that, as placental mammals, we have a fundamental right to live in the bodies of our mothers for nine months and to receive care and support from them.
There is and can be NO “right” to kill our unborn children and refuse to provide for their needs.
The abortionist mentality is completely contrary to our nature and is therefore hanging in midair as it is entirely lacking any philosophical or logical foundation. It is based on human self interest and the satisfaction of psychological needs.
This abortionist mentality, which is contrary to our nature, would properly apply only to living beings whose biology is different from ours.
The abortionist mentality is contrary to placental mammalian biology and is therefore objectively wrong.
It is ludicrous, absurd and ridiculous to assert “rights” not based on the nature of the living being in question.
I think this blog day is a good idea; I’m sick of all the euphemisms surrounding abortion. The “Blog For Choice” people probably aren’t blogging about affordable pre-natal care or access to adoption information. It’s all about one choice – abortion.
It is based on human self interest and the satisfaction of psychological needs.
Interesting point, since humans are by nature self-interested. That’s pretty much the defining characteristic of capitalism.
The “Blog For Choice” people probably aren’t blogging about affordable pre-natal care or access to adoption information.
The pro-choice blogs I follow do talk about these things on top of abortion. Choice doesn’t mean much if the options are unavaliable. There does tend to be a bit more about abortion since it’s under the most direct attack, but feminists are interested in improving all three options to the extent possible.
john lewandowski:
i agree with everything you say, save for one caveat.
they are not only harming themselves–they are, in fact, also harming the Church. i obviously have no way of proving this, but if you look at the absolute hysteria in which former/lapsed Catholics like CC [they can call themselves whatever they want but we know, once Catholic, always catholics] raile against the Church… if you look at how “progressive” and “Catholics for choice’ rail against Her from within… you don’t think that this hardness of heart, the absolute expulsion and repulsion of God has to do, in part, through repeated communion with our Blessed Lord and Savior in the most Holy Sacrament of the Altar while in a state of mortal sin?
No, Jayn, they are not. Abortion is the primary concern of the pro “choice” community. “Choice” is a euphemism. If it was about “choice,” then why does the pro-abort community pick on CPCs constantly? Why are women kept in the dark about this “legal” and “safe” “medical procedure”….and why are pro-aborts so against ultrasounds? No, this is about abortion, PERIOD. Abortion is wrong, it has always been wrong, it always WILL be wrong. We have no right to “choose” to kill our own children; to infringe on our children’s bodily autonomy so that we can live as we feel we’re entitled. That is a horrifying thought, absolutely horrifying. This isn’t about women’s bodies and women’s lives…it’s about women’s LIFESTYLES. There is a difference. Abortion kills. It is a destructive procedure; it is not MEDICINE. Babies are not tumors, or parasites; pregnancy is not a disease that needs to be cured.
If the pro-abortion community really were for choice, then there wouldn’t be so much obfuscation and double-speak. Women who have had abortions and women who fight to for the so-called “right” to “abort” their babies don’t want to feel they’ve done anything wrong. But whether they want to feel that or not, nothing will change the fact that abortion kills a child, and, frankly, is the most ANTI-FEMINIST thing I can think of. You want to level the playing field? Stop aborting your babies. We’re not going to get much farther if we are killing our children and calling it “liberty,” if we are destroying their bodies, and calling their little bodies “OUR” bodies.
It’s not about “choice,” it’s about the “choice” to abort, period, for whatever reason. What good can possibly come of that? Look at what a mess this world is now. It’s a mess because we think it’s okay–not only OKAY, but a RIGHT–to dismember and incinerate our babies so we can keep our boyfriend/keep our job/stay in college….This is equality? Doesn’t sound like it.
How can any one be so naive as to believe that if Roe V Wade had never happened ,we would actually have 50 million more people in America today?And even if we did,would this necessarily be good for the country?
Do anti-choicers actually believe that there would not have been any abortions since 1973
without Roe V Wade,or even few of them? Remember-if abortion ever becomes illegal again in America,it will not be”safe,legal and rare”. It will be unsafe,illegal and common.
Or that that were only a few abortions before 1973? That abortion was not already very common and often extremely dangerous? Or that it will be possible to enforce th elaw if abortion becomes illegal again?
Anti-choicers like to say that without Roe V Wade,we would have many more scientists,doctors,teachers,scholars,thinkers, etc. Possibly.But we would also have a lot more
murderers,thieves, drug addicts, serial killers, physically and sexually abused and neglected children, more sociopaths, etc.
Roe V Wade has also saved the lives of who knows how many women who would have died from botched illegal abortions,or whose health would have been permanently ruined.
Abortion is a sad,tragic, and ugly thing to happen. But it is also a necessary evil.
Like it or not,abortion is here to stay,and there is nothing you can do about this.Period.
That’s scary reasoning, Rob Berger. “Like it or not, abortion is here to stay”…..LOL Seriously. There will be a day when we will be horrified that we not only permitted such a horrible action, but made money from it and celebrated it.
Yes, there are A LOT of things we can do about this. First, we need to examine why women feel/felt the need to seek abortions in the first place. Why do women feel they might need to abort? Gee, maybe if we didn’t feel we had to sacrifice our child in order to [fill in the blank], then abortion wouldn’t be so rampant. In the 50s and 60s, women were stigmatized if they were pregnant out of wedlock. We don’t live in that world anymore. We are realizing what abortion is; an act of desperation. It will always be an act of desperation.
Rape, murder, lies, perjury, stealing, these will be around too, forever. Should we make them legal too? And spare me the “sentient being,” “already born” and ridiculous qualifying and functionalist arguments pro-aborts rely on. They don’t hold water. Either we are persons, from the beginning to the end, or we are not. We do not arbitrarily become persons, and we have no right to DEHUMANIZE any human beings, at any stage. So, really, what will it be? If we can impinge on the bodily autonomy and right to live of the most innocent of all of us, why do we have laws that try to prevent rape and murder? What is the point? It’s not about women’s bodies and women’s health. It’s about women becoming the oppressors of their own children, instead of their champions. It is about women claiming that their children’s lives are worth less than a pair of shoes. It is about women claiming that they have a right to murder their own children in the name of “choice.” No. I will not get used to it, and yes, there are many things we can do about it.
Excellent Mary Lee!!
Hi Robert,
Why is abortion sad, tragic, ugly and evil?
Hi John,
Direct abortion, the intentional killing of a completely innocent and defenseless human life, is one of the worst things you can possibly do.
How does the Catholic church reach out to post abortive women? Has does a statement like that help a woman break her silence?
Hey Carla. I know your question was directed to John, but let me try and help answer it. First of all, one important point that John forgot to mention is that the penalty of excommunication can not occur unless you KNOW that the penalty is attached. So a Catholic who partakes in an abortion but is not aware of the canonical penalty is not automatically excommunicated. I believe I can find this in canon law if anyone wishes to see the reference.
But more to the point. The penalty of excommunication is attached to direct abortion not as a punishment, but so that the individual will know how serious a sin it is. As you know, Carla, even from discussions here on Jill’s blog many people have NO IDEA what abortion is and what it does. They have been indoctrinated by a culture of lies that says it is only a clump of cells and no big deal to partake in an abortion. Lots of people have one, so how can it be bad, right? Well, this is teh Church’s way of emphasizing above the cultural voice to make as clear as possible to her members teh serious gravity of abortion.
Now that being said, there are two points that I think show why something like this is reasonable. First is teh nature of excommunication. It does not mean you go to hell nor is it something that is permanent. Rather it says that you are cut off from the sacraments, which according to Catholic doctrine, are the ordinary ways by which we receive God’s grace. Again, this emphasizes that one has taken their sins so far and to give them a big message about the seriousness of what they have done. Think of it being akin to say a parent kicking his child out of teh house because of a big drug habit that he refuses to try and stop. Though it could be argued that when a child is deep into drugs is when the child needs the parents the most, sometimes a parent is justified in kicking the child out of teh house to emphasize how serious what they are doing is. But just like the parent/child scenario, the Catholic Church can and will ALWAYS welcome teh repentant excommunicated back into the Church. In fact, since abortion is such a “popular” sin, there is a special dispensation from Pope John Paul II (I think) to allow the local bishop to give his authority to a priests to allow the excommunicated back into the Church. For all teh other automatic excommunication offenses, you have to make a special appeal to Rome itself, but when it comes to abortion, you can easily become rectified again just by going to your local priest.
The other point I wanted to mention is the flip side of pointing out teh gravity of abortion. In the Catholic Church, we MUST emphasize BOTH the seriousness of teh sin of abortion AND the loving healing power of God, that he can and will always forgive you no matter what you have done. Thus we have groups like Priests for Life, who I know you are very close with. As you know, their whole mission is to preach the forgiveness of God to those who have suffered an abortion. There are many other groups taht emphasize the healing nature of God.
But teh point is, I really think one needs to have a strong emphasis on BOTH the gravity of abortion and teh forgiveness for participation in an abortion. And sometimes they overlap where, I would argue, discipline is the beginning of the healing process.
So I hope that makes some sense, Carla. God love you.
Robert:
I counted thirteen separate fallacies in your comment. It is not true that Roe vs Wade saved the lives of large numbers of women. There were only 39 deaths from illegal acts of prenatal homicide in 1972, the year before Roe vs Wade. The numbers had been trending down for decades. Roe vs Wade had essentially no effect.
If prenatal homicide had remained illegal in most places there would still have been a lot of unborn children killed, but over the years millions of lives would have been saved.
To argue that you cannot stop criminal abortion is ludicrous. I have been giving this a lot of thought for many years and have come to the conclusion that we can suppress this crime by better than 90% with aggressive law enforcement combined with an army of hundreds of thousands of pro-life volunteers rooting out criminal abortionist activity.
Prenatal homicide is actually a very difficult crime to commit. It requires a building or facility, electricity, lighting, specialized equipment, someone with knowledge and training and say 15 or 20 minutes. It is in no way like killing someone with a rifle at long range or handgun at closer range. It is very different from and very much more difficult than a drug deal on a street corner which can go down in 10 seconds.
Criminal abortionists do not often get repeat customers and so have to constantly advertise their “services”. They are therefore constantly at risk of detection. The lines of communication in an abortion crime “industry” are exceptionally vulnerable to infiltration and disruption.
Prior to 1967 we did not have an organized unborn human rights movement. Now we know far more about how to set up stings and traps to deter and/or apprehend mothers, fathers and criminal abortionists who try to kill unborn children. A huge network of pro-life activists would be deployed to help law enforcement disrupt abortion crime networks and prevent the killing of unborn children.
To suggest that there is NOTHING that can be done to combat the terrible crime of prenatal homicide is preposterous. I guess you must believe that there is nothing that we can do to stop ANY crime, since the challenges are fundamentally the same.
Direct abortion, the intentional killing of a completely innocent and defenseless human life, is one of the worst things you can possibly do.
How does the Catholic church reach out to post abortive women? Has does a statement like that help a woman break her silence?
Carla, it is always followed by explaining that if we confess, God is good and just to forgive us. Also abundant in the Church are offers of help, like Rachel’s Vineyard retreats (liberally advertised in signage, in the bulletin, through announcements and so forth).
I am not sure what alternative you suggest, given that John’s statement is true? Is there some way to break this truth to people in pieces or more gently?
It was an honest question. Trying to understand. I did not grow up Catholic. If you did and always knew what you are talking about here and then had an abortion is that already completely understood by that Catholic woman? She knows what she has done is The Worst Thing anyone could ever do?
I have always been shown unconditional love in my family of believers regardless of what I have done in my life and nobody has EVER said that to me. I am grateful for that.
we can keep our boyfriend/keep our job/stay in college….This is equality? Doesn’t sound like it
This caught my eye mainly because women have still not achieved equality in the workplace precisely because of our ability to bear children and the cultural expectation that we will. (Well, among other things, which I won’t touch on here). Having children will hinder a woman’s career in many ways–sometimes it can hurt a man’s, but the father image can also be helpful to him. But even without children, women can sometimes get sidelined to less prestigious roles because of the belief that they will later on have children and become less reliable workers. Nevermind that men are perfectly capable of being caregivers, our culture says that the mother should drive the kid to all the doctor’s appointments, the mother is the only one expected to take time off for a new child, the mother is supposed to take on all the childrearing duties, regardless of other considerations like, say, a job or her own wellbeing.
Is it equality? No, it isn’t, and it’s partly because of how sexist our society is. Women aren’t valued–not as mothers, and even less as people. Despite all the strides forward we have made, women still have to insist on being treated with respect for us to get any at all, while men get it by virtue of being male. Having children makes that even harder, because we are expected to be mothers before all else–even before being ourselves.
Frankly, this is the main reason I’m putting off having children right now. I want to establish myself as a person, to have that anchor point before adding motherhood to my identity, lest I get swept away and lost in my value to someone else. I’ve spent most of my life having my identity being tied to someone else–Jane’s daughter or Joe’s wife. I don’t want to be someone’s mother before having a chance to be just Jayn.
Jayn, WHY should having a baby hurt a woman’s career? And how is KILLING the baby justice?
It shouldn’t hurt a woman’s career. But it does. And right now, that’s the world we live in.
So, killing our babies is the answer? Obviously not. Maybe we should be demanding actual equality instead of the right to kill our babies so we can fit in with the patriarchy.
And Jayn, we are never “JUST JAYN.” We are someone’s daughter, someone’s cousin, someone’s friend, someone’s employee, someone’s boss. We don’t belong to ourselves. We are not put on this earth to satisfy ourselves. We are not entitled to the life we believe we deserve. We can make choices NOT to become pregnant, but once we are pregnant, we are already someone’s mother. We have no right to take away the life of our child because we “aren’t ready.” Or because we “don’t want” the child. If we stopped this solipsism and relativism, this world wouldn’t be such a disgrace.
The answer is not more killing, and it’s certainly not the killing of our own children in the name of “LIBERTY.” That’s not liberty. That’s oppression. That is ANTI-FEMINIST. Abortion is ANTI-WOMAN and ANTI-LIFE, and ANTI-anything good in this world. It is selfish, destructive, and horrifying. Until we realize our rights aren’t diametrically opposed to our unborn children’s….but intrinsically LINKED, then we will continue to have a messy, awful world. Women don’t HAVE to abort, and we shouldn’t proclaim it as justice, when it really just keeps us enslaved, frankly. We should be saying “We get pregnant, get used to it!” We should try to create a society where the “answer” isn’t killing someone who never gets a say in the matter. How in the world any woman could actually support abortion as a feminist right is beyond me; it should be unthinkable. And if that sounds idealistic, so be it. Martin Luther King Jr. was an idealist. So was Eleanor Roosevelt. We need to be idealistic, especially in a matter this grave.
Carla,
The premeditated, intentional, and examined murder of your own child may, in fact, be the worst thing a person could possibly do, although I doubt it, personally. You have a great deal of work with post-abortive women under your belt. How many of the women you counsel would describe their abortions as intentional and examined (of course I mean before the fact)? Would you? I am a practicing faithful Catholic and can’t imagine telling a post-abortive woman that what they’d done is “the worst thing anyone could do.”
That said, we must not trivialize the reality of abortion. I know that you realize this. So it is quite understandable that to someone who does not fully understand, The Catholic Church’s approach to abortion may sometimes seem too harsh to the woman. Understand, though, that most faithful Catholics are on your side and also see the woman as a second victim in the scenario of abortion.
Carla,
There was no mal-intent with my first answer. It wasn’t defensive. And my question to you was an honest question as well, with no malice at all: Is there a better way to address the severity of abortion? Do you think it doesn’t need to be addressed? Do you think the severity of one’s sins is irrelevant because forgiveness is forgiveness whether you’ve stolen a pack of gum from 7-11 or robbed the store for thousands of dollars at gunpoint? I think a lot of it is a question of theology and the “all sins are equal” folks vs. the “No, they are not.” folks. More importantly, how do we best help post-abortive women, by simply saying that abortion is wrong and not HOW wrong so they can ask forgiveness? Because regardless of theological nuances: acknowledging sins and confessing them is how God forgives us. Is the degree of wrongness in abortion counterproductive? Because that concerns me. Let me tell you why:
I work with a black evangelical mega-church that has a pregnancy center and post-abortion ministry. It’s understood that abortion is bad- but not HOW bad, in part because so many, many, many of the women have had abortions and they are conscientious about their feelings. The problem is, the reluctance to address HOW bad leads women to think it’s not SO bad, but merely frowned upon. This is evident EVERYWHERE. Just this last week, I joined my best friend for a ladies’ Bible study and the speaker talked about how Planned Parenthood offered a young lawyer a job making a ton of money and how she was reluctant because QUOTE, “That organization isn’t altogether honoring of the Lord.” Not, “That organization MURDERS hundreds of thousands of babies a year” but, “It’s not altogether honoring of the Lord.” So this lawyer called her mother to talk about whether or not she should take the job with the number one killer of children in the world and her mother said, “No.” Thank God she listened and didn’t sell her soul. Later she found out her great aunt died during an abortion and saw that as confirmation that she made the right choice not to work with the abortion giant. Who needs confirmation not to work with serial killers who prey on babies? Well, when you reduce abortion to just one of any other kind of sin, equivalent to say, a one-night-stand or being caught with pornography, you can consider such a job that should be completely unthinkable. Case in point: how this educated, obviously intelligent woman who is a committed Christian could CONSIDER working for an organization whose primary job is killing children, like I would reconsider renting videos from one store if I found out they rent pornography, shows that the severity of abortion is downplayed. To this church and this culture: those two sins on par with eachother, but I would say killing a child is infinitely more damaging and evil than viewing a pornographic movie. One is a bad sin against one’s own body and an exploitation of women (horrible), but another deprives a child of his/her entire life of earth and everyone on earth of that child. I would say that abortion is infinitely worse.
The Catholic Church agrees that some things are gravely evil and some things are wrong, but not as wrong (mortal sins of a grave nature and venial sins of a lesser nature). Even non-believers have such an eschelon and consider murder the ultimate evil, especially the murder of a child. If you ask someone the worst thing anyone can ever do, murder is considered universally at the top of even the secular list. Murder is considered the worst of crimes with the highest penalty, since justice demands that the wrongs be made right according to their severity. You don’t lock someone up for life for stealing gum and you don’t give community service to a murderer. It’s not Catholic or non-Catholic. This view that there is a severity to one’s actions is pretty much universal. The only difference is that society has changed it’s view on what is and is not murder. Abortion is not considered murder. Euthanasia, either. In spite of society’s change in definition, mine has not.
The Catholic Church has not changed their definition either. Most woman can tell you the Church’s stance on abortion, Catholic or not, the Church is so vocal and active that people know the Church’s stance. So I would venture to say that Catholic women, by virtue of all of the discussion, DO know the severity of abortion, even if they have chosen to think otherwise. If there is any confusion, it actually stems from all of the post-abortion healing ministries in the Church that feel like they must downgrade the truth about the severity of abortion in order to not hurt anyone’s feelings. Now, I am not suggesting that these ministries are doing something wrong- I am merely honestly answering your honest question.
I know this is apples and oranges, but the very nature of being a Christian demands that everyone accept the truth of their own sin. Christ can’t save someone against their will. Someone must recognize their failing and ask for forgiveness, resolve to change. Every Christian must do this to be a Christian and do it on a regular basis, too. I have done horrible, awful, shameful, disgusting bad things- and worse, not once, on an ongoing basis for months on months sometimes. The point of noting the severity of one’s sins is not to be condemning, because Christ redeems everyone, from the least sinner to the most sinner to the same state of grace- but if I don’t know how serious my actions are or the evil of my actions are downplayed systematically so I don’t feel so bad about them, what ensues is a culture that has more of a bad thing because it’s not properly abhorred? For example, look at the epidemic of single motherhood. No one wants to embarrass or shame a woman who gets pregnant outside of marriage- that’s not the goal, but in trying to show compassion to these women without standing firm to the truth of how wrong sex outside of marriages is, we’ve ushered in an era of fatherless children, gangs, poverty and young ladies without fathers repeating this cycle of injustice. Having sex outside of marriage IS severe, because it damages innocent children who grow up without the basics that God intended. This ultimately hurts society, too.
I am merely saying that yes, you speak the truth in love, but whitewashing the truth isn’t loving nor is it helpful. Nay, I think it’s harmful. Now, there is love and tact that must be paramount when dealing with such huge issues and I will gratefully accept your advice on how to do that. But I don’t think downplaying how truly bad abortion is results is true healing and peace. I think acknowledging it COUPLED with the truth that always follows of the complete forgiveness of God is the answer. The enemy likes to tell women that abortion is no big deal before she does it (so she’ll do it) and that it’s the worst thing in the world after it’s over (so she will hide from God). Unfortunately, post-abortion ministries have resorted to telling women, “It’s not so bad” out of compassion, echoing the first lie that leads women to abortion in the first place. Acknowledging that God loves and welcomes her unconditionally no matter how bad abortion truly is is a testimony to His love. If we just stand on truth (in love), we’ll see that the truth shows the greatest love.
Jayn,
I’m sure that encouraging more women to experience the trauma of abortion will equalize the workplace a bunch. *eyeroll*
I recognize that there is an inequality in the workplace, but I (a woman) am so sick and tired of hearing about it as an excuse. I’ve known more than one female coworker to blame inequality on their self-imposed circumstances. Women who were constantly late, lazy or inappropriate in one way or another who felt that their circumstances were somehow orchestrated. The reality is that for most of us, this unbalanced expectation that our employers/coworkers have is nothing that we cannot overcome.
Hi Jacque,
Who is whitewashing?
You may think what you like about women who abort. The Catholic Church may think what it would like about women who abort but the one who FULLY KNOWS deep in her soul what she has done is the woman who aborts. There is no one on this earth that can know the darkness of realizing the horror of “choice” except another woman who has been there and Jesus who died for it. BELIEVE ME. WE KNOW.
As for post abortive ministries how do you know what they say? How do you know they downgrade the truth?
I have heard enough from so called Christian prolifers that I am a whore, a slut, should have kept my legs shut and I got what I paid for.
Those around me that have loved me through it all would NEVER say anything of the sort to my face. Never say “That is the worst possible thing you could ever do, Carla.” Maybe they think it. Not my concern. Saying it? They wouldn’t.
They know I am not accountable to them. I am not accountable to any mortal man or woman for what I have done. I am accountable to God for my abortion and PRAISE HIM He has pronounced me forgiven!! That debt has been paid!!
Carla,
I am intimately acquainted with just about every type of post-abortion healing curricula there is. Forgiven and Set Free, Theresa Burke’s work. I could name more, but they are all on my shelf. I often send these books to women who are not yet ready to go to see someone like you. I never do any post-abortive counseling myself but always send women to trained professionals. I have considered going on retreats, but it seems macabre to go and listen to others’ horror and not share. So I haven’t been a part of the group. But yes, I do know what post-abortive ministries say. Very, very well. It comes with having post-abortive women contact you on a regular basis. You see someone in agony and you do whatever you can to ease their pain. I thinking sometimes that does involve not acknowledging the gravity of something and some curriculum does do that. Like I said in my lengthy response, I think some CULTURES do that.
I answered your honest question (quite at length, which was apparently unread) and am taking your wrath. But you haven’t answered my questions. You don’t have to, but villifying and falsely accusing me of degrading you when I have not does absolutely nothing. I actually want answers to my questions. It seems more and more that your supposably honest question is anything but, but merely an excuse to indignantly lash out at someone for offending you. Case in point, how you often question prolifers on whether or not we think you should go to jail. That’s not an honest question, but an excuse to rant when anyone gives you an honest answer. If you don’t want an honest answer, don’t ask honest questions- but if you intend to ignore the answers and ascend a soapbox maligning those who have the guts to respond, people will stop responding. Or is that your intention?
This is so not my wrath or indignation. I am not offended.
Any woman who finds herself NEEDING and WANTING healing for her abortion KNOWS what she has done. It should go without saying. I won’t be the one to stand as a Rachel’s Vineyard facilitator and make sure they know that what they have done is the worst thing they could ever possibly do.
I think it’s called rubbing salt in a wound.
Well, of course not! And no one would enter a Weight Watchers meeting and call everybody fat. If they are there, they knew they need to lose weight and like you said, “rubbing salt in the wound” doesn’t help.
The difference is, society looks more harshly upon between who overeat and under-exercise and condemns that more than killing children. Surely, if Weight Watchers adopted a compassionate, “it’s not your fault” philosophy- It would fail. Worse, if society accepted this idea that people have no control over what they eat or how much exercise they get, maybe things would be worse than they are. People have People HAVE accepted the lie that people can’t control their sexual behavior, that sex is a “need” that must be met- and that’s led to untold numbers of children aborted or born into bad situations.
I know I am mixing metaphors, but no one suggests rubbing salt in the wound. What John, MaryRose and myself did say is not to downplay the gravity of abortion. We think what John says is a true statement, but it is followed by the equally true statements of forgiveness and reconciliation. If it need not be said (as in certain circumstances) it need not be said. Sadly, though, the opposite statement of “abortion is no big deal” is OFTEN said. Where is the middle ground that respects the truth?
If I have found an excuse to “rant” about going to jail then please forgive me.
I have a husband and family and the thought of leaving them to sit in jail is beyond comprehension. But punishment for a past abortion might be a possibility and yes that directly affects me and my life.
Do I think it is my intention to have people stop responding to me? No.
Do I think I ascend a soapbox to malign others who may or may not have the guts to respond? No.
Abortion is a very big deal!! And no one knows that better than the women who paid for the killing of their own flesh and blood and have repented for it. It is a very heavy burden to bear and I could not do it save for the grace of God and those that love me unconditionally.
And Jacque? I wish I could put into words what it was like to feel the full weight of my sin of abortion and NOT KNOW what to do with it.
Well it drove me to a suicide attempt. Someday maybe I will be able to find the words but for now this mom has BEEN FORGIVEN MUCH!!
Carla,
“I have heard enough from so called Christian prolifers that I am a whore, a slut, should have kept my legs shut and I got what I paid for.”
that makes me sick–how Christians can be so uncharitable like that.
i hope you’re not thinking though, that the attitudes that jacqueline is expressing–i.e., the attitudes of the Catholic Church–are anything close to being like those that you express in the quote above. i think you’re right… that a lot of times when Catholics speak they are assuming too much about how a non Catholic might be interpretting their remarks.
But, lest it go unsaid, the Catholic church absolutely never, ever, ever in a million years would condone speaking to women in such a way. yes, we recognize culpability. yes, we acknowledge that CONTRITION [i.e., admitting one’s role in one’s sins] is a requisite component of repentance. but yes, like you, we also recognize that we are not accountable to any mortal man, but to God alone.
Also, jacqueline is right… the Church most certainly does not have an all-sins-are-equal mentality. however, what she’s left out, and what possibly is contributing to this disagreement, is the fact that the church teaches that in order for a sin to be mortal, a person must recognize the gravity of the action, and ascent to it anyway. note how in the quote you pulled from john, he said “the **intentional** killing”. thus, masturbation is wrong. it is sinful. the gravity of masturbation grows exponentially once a person understands lust, understands the effects of masturbation, has been taught about purity, and actively aligns one’s will to go against God and with the devil. “to whom much is given…” etc. So yes, we too agree with you and say that many women do not understand fully what abortions are, that they are often lied to, that they often genuinely, whole-heartedly believe that what they are doing is removing a “clump of cells” or a meaningless blob of tissue from their body.
Going back to the excommunication issue, one thing that has not been emphasized enough is the part of the theology behind excommunication which emphasizes the mercy of the action. it is not only just to “wake up” a woman from the gravity of her sins. no… it is to prevent further hardness of heart and corruption of soul. John quoted 1 Corinthians 11 27-29 above. Catholics believe that to allow a post-abortive woman, who was fully knowledgeable of the gravity of her actions, to continue receiving our Blessed Lord’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity would do her no service–it would merely cause her to eat and drink condemnation upon herself, to make her sick in body and soul.
Dear Carla, i hope that maybe this has been helpful in some way.
Thank you lux, I appreciate what you wrote. Do i understand it fully? No. But I will trust that Catholic women do. Especially post abortive Catholic women.
The name calling? Yes. I have heard it and read it quite a bit over the years but that is not for me to take on anymore. The shame over my abortion is gone and I will speak out as one who has been forgiven and set free.
Carla,
You really think jail is a possibility? How? In what way? HUH? Ex-post-facto laws are unconstitutional. You can never face a legal consequence if something is legal at the time you do it and later becomes illegal. You have nothing to fear. I must be missing something.
All I can get that I can turn into an answer to my question is that we have to be careful when talking about the seriousness of abortion because of those who are in pain and what they may do to themselves (or be reticent to find help). No one was suggesting anything other than that.
Never, anywhere, ever have I denigrated your pain and what you’ve been through. Never have I called you any of those horrible things nor would I. I am sorry that people have said those things to you.
Lux-
Culpability is something I never touched on and is something outside of human understanding anyway- That’s precisely one of the reasons why we can’t judge. We can’t know someone’s mental state, understanding of right and wrong and so on. Most of all we can’t judge because we are not the perfect and just creator of all, we are all guilty, but also because we can’t know if people are aware that certain actions are grave when they commit them. God knows. We try to mimic this as best as we can in the justice system with premeditated vs. crimes of passion but we just can’t know. That’s one of the many reasons why I oppose the death penalty. Human justice is always imperfect. And that’s why that question of “should women who participate in abortions” go to jail is a hard question to answer- you can’t know what degree of responsibility anyone truly has.
P.S. the attitudes that called Carla names aren’t just anti-Catholic, they are anti-ALL Christian faith traditions.
Dear Jacqueline:
“Lux-
Nothing I said is at odds with Catholic teaching. I thought you went and corrected yourself but I see now that you haven’t.”
This statement confuses me. i don’t believe that i ever said you said anything that was at odds with Catholic teaching. i certainly didn’t say as much explicitly, and that’s not what i intended either. my whole premise was that i think you two are more closely aligned with one another, and i think that some of the miscommunication that is occurring is due to the fact that you are Catholic, and Carla is not, and sometimes we do not realize how foreign our Catholic worldview can be to others who do not live it. the whole point of my post was to clarify what i thought you were saying for Carla’s sake.
When the conversation has come up about post abortive women going to jail I have been surprised(maybe I shouldn’t be)at the number of people that have agreed that I should go to jail. That makes me go HUH? WHAT?
I will have to take your word for it that it will never come to pass.
I never said you have called me names, Jacque. I threw that out there as examples of the judgment that many of us face. There is nothing I can do about it. And I agree it is not Catholic, nor Christian.
Comparing abortion to murder,rape,stealing and lying etc is ridiculous.These are immoral acts.Abortion is not.It is not done for the same reasons that some people murder and rape.
It is done mostly because women cannot afford to take care of children and do not want to see them grow up in abject poverty.And please don’t give me all that B.S. about all the help available to poor pregnant women.
That’s a blatant lie.If there were,there wouldn’t be so many abortions. And adoption is not a realistic solution. It’s not “dehumanizing” fetuses to abort them. It’s a tragic but necessary sacrifice.
What is dehumanizing is forcing children to grow up in abject poverty and malnutrition.
That’s infinitely worse than being born.
Stories about the tragically high abortion rates amaong poor black women being the result of some racist plot to eliminate blacks are a crock. Not a shredpoor pregnant women no matter what their skin color,there would be far fewer abortions in America.
Repealing Obamacare is not a good idea,because it would provide more help to the poor and thus decrease abortions. Abortion is NOT murder.Only a born person can be murdered.
It’s not done out of malivce but desperation.
Yes, comparing abortion to murder and rape is ludicrous.
“It’s not done out of malivce but desperation. Yes, comparing abortion to murder and rape is ludicrous.”
Robert Berger,
Have you read the news story about the murder case in PA? Jill has a post on it, and here’s a CNN report. (Scroll to the end of the article where MURDER charges are listed.) It is a slippery slope to say that abortion is a necessary evil and this is your evidence.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/19/pennsylvania.abortion.doctor/?hpt=T1
“What is dehumanizing is forcing children to grow up in abject poverty and malnutrition.” ” That’s infinitely worse than being born”.
Robert Berger,
I would like to take a poll of 1000 poor children and ask them if they agree with you.
Would you change your mind if you were outnumbered?
“Like it or not,abortion is here to stay,and there is nothing you can do about this”
I just love when pro-aborts are reduced to this kind of hysteria. It must really bug them that abortion is all over the news in the last couple years, after decades of pro-aborts complacently believing their deathmongering was a permanent social fixture. They cried, “the election was about the economy!” when clearly there was a lot of pro-life energy moving and shaking all levels of government in November.
Pro-aborts haven’t seen anything yet.
A lot of post-abortive women who are older, now that so much time has passed, are finding their way into the pro-life movement. We are women, hear us roar, abortion’s too big to ignore, and we know too much to go back and pretend. Rroowwerr!!
(just be glad you don’t hear my bad singing!).
Robert Berger, oh goodness. Why is it “ridiculous” to compare abortion to rape or murder? Why? And none of the functionalist “already born” tripe. It boils down to this: Either the unborn are human, or they are NOT human. They don’t BECOME human, they ARE human, at that stage of life. They are not a POTENTIAL person, they are a person WITH POTENTIAL. Therefore, it is the pro-abortion community that is arbitrarily giving and taking the personhood and humanity of beings who are already HUMAN PERSONS. Logic and science and philosophy prove this. It is not convenient for me to admit that the unborn are persons, but after eleven years of research, that is the only conclusion one can come to, if one is truly honest.
Now, since we know that abortion kills, and it kills a human person, then HOW is that different from rape or murder? We cut up the body of another, against its will. The babies fight to stay alive. We dismember them, and burn them, or throw them in the garbage. So we infringe on their bodily autonomy. As a rape survivor, I have no problem seeing that abortion is the same–if not worse–than the sexual assault I lived through.
If you still want to argue that the unborn aren’t persons because you don’t “feel” they are or you don’t “want” them to be, then we cannot have a discussion. I am not adding value to something that has none–the pro-abortion community takes away the humanity and personhood that is inherent in these little babies from the start. It is convenient, because to kill something or someone, we have to find an excuse; the easiest is to claim it is not human. As a woman–and quite a liberal one in most other ways–I cannot understand how abortion is a linchpin to my liberty. That is an appalling idea; to kill someone in order to get what you want. Obviously, being aware that the unborn babies are persons with the right to live means I must be conscious and mindful in my daily decisions, but shouldn’t we always be mindful?
Moreover, abortion is a horrible violation of women; it is degrading and violent. To strip a baby out of his or her mother’s womb is feminism? That ISN’T like rape? Or murder? It sounds suspiciously like both at the same time.
Jill, can’t raise your e-mail up. Could you please include my blog, The Orate Fratres, as a participant on the 21st. Thanks, Jim
Jacque,
There is a mothers going to jail comment on the Bernard Nathanson thread.
I’ll be nice.
I decided to inaugurate my brand-spankin’ new pro-life dreamwidth blog today with my thoughts on the recent news, if anyone is curious.
There is no reason why women, given proper support, can’t be mothers and develop other aspects of their lives, hold jobs, et cetera. Queen Victoria was Queen of Britain, Ireland, and Empress of India as well as the mother of nine children. She obviously had a lot of help with those nine children, but then again, she had an enormously important job. If Queen Victoria could be a monarch and have nine children, in a time when women were thought to be inferior to men, why can’t a modern woman – who lives in a much more equal world – manage to have, say, four children and be a doctor or lawyer or architect or artist or anything else?
To have an abortion because you think you’ll never achieve anything if you don’t is to accept that you’re not strong, you’re not tough, and you’re not competent. Mary Lee is right: women get pregnant, and everyone else should get used to it. The world has only had, like, since the dawn of time to do so. Queen Victoria didn’t even like being pregnant (according to Wikipedia), but she had the babies, recovered, and went back to presiding over the empire. Considering that she was crazily in love with Prince Albert and they kept having kids until a few years before his death, it looks like she went back to her sex life as well. She had babies and everyone else just had to deal with it.
Look at all the blogs that have signed up! Awesome.
Hey Carla-
You are always nice. But I can’t join in, I’m studying. :(
I am still deeply disturbed that you think it’s possible for you to do jail time. It’s not. Talk to any lawyer. It can never happen.
Please do not be deeply disturbed.
I am always curious about what others think about post abortive moms and jail time. They are of the opinion that I should be punished and I want to hear the reasoning behind that. I want to pick some brains. Emailing my lawyer right now. :)
NOW STUDY WOMAN!!
Good- I think your lawyer will explain that since there was no law broken at the time, there is nothing to jail you for. It’s called ex-post-facto law and it’s in Article III I think of the Constitution. It’s on the final exam I give my students.
Please pray for me. If I bomb this test, I lose everything- I don’t get to finish my Ph.D. and I lose my job, too. I need grace.
Then why in the world do people want to put us in jail? That’s why I ask them. To understand their reasoning.
I am praying right now, Jacqueline.
I can briefly explain: It’s not that anyone wants anyone in jail. It’s about consistency and justice. Someone who smothers their infant with a pillow would be sent to jail for that, however, if someone has a doctor stick scissors in their child’s skull and suck out their brains in the birth canal- they don’t. The crime and the resulting harm are the same: A child has lost their life. Yet, one faces justice and the other doesn’t. If an unborn child is a human being on par with an infant, a toddler, or an adult, the penalties should be the same for killing them regardless of location. In fact, the whole pro-life premise is that human beings ARE equal.
So why should there be no penalty for killing one child and jail time for killing another child, just outside the womb. What are we saying other than that an unborn child is less valuable than a born one and if so, why should abortion be illegal at all? If there are no penalties for abortion, there is no point in criminalizing it. Only THERE IS a point in criminalizing it- to save babies and women from the pain.
Regarding the mother/jail discussion: during an abortion, the mother is not the one doing the killing. The abortionist doctor is.
Eric- paid by and with the full consent and cooperation of the mother. In the justice system, that makes them equally accountable. Should a mother that hires a thug to kill her infant and holds the infant down during the murder not face charges?
That makes no sense.
Jacqueline — good analogy, in which one could argue a mother’s culpability as hiring an assassin, accomplice in a murder, etc. The killer, however, still remains the abortionist.
What about those that are coerced and forced by others to abort?
What about chemical abortives like RU-486? Is the one that dispensed it the killer, or the woman who takes it.
Carla, this is why there are lengthy trials when human beings are killed, accidentally or pursposefully. Like a drunk driver that kills a pedestrian did not INTEND to, but he/she is still responsible for that death. They aren’t charged with first degree murder but maybe manslaughter. Coercion or force plays a role, too, of course, making a murder charge manslaughter, etc. I can’t speak to every case. If you asked me if someone who killed another person should go to jail and for how long, I’d need to know the circumstances. Self-defense? Jealous rage? This matters.
All I know is that abortion kills a human being just like all other human beings and killing a unborn child needs to be punishable by law just like other killings are.
And too bad for RC bishop Tobin that we, in RI, have a pro-choice, Episcopalian (RI’s Episcopalian bishop is a woman!) governor, Linc Chafee, for the next four years. Threats to withhold holy communion won’t work. And the sad (?!) thing is that those in the Catholic pews don’t really care!!!
So, you talked to every last one of those Catholics in the pews of ALL the Catholic Churches in the whole state of Rhode Island and they ALL said they don’t care? CC, that’s impressive. I never knew anyone to be able to talk to every single Catholic (and get every single Catholic’s feedback) in a State unless it was a mandatory survey (and most aren’t). So you personally have talked to ALL the Catholics in the State of Rhode Island and they ALL don’t care. Rhode Island might be small, but I have trouble believing that NOBODY in ANY of the pews cares.
[Robert Berger] …are immoral acts.Abortion is not.
Robert Berger–Yes, abortion IS immoral. It most definitely is immoral.
[Robert Berger] That’s a blatant lie.If there were,there wouldn’t be so many abortions. And adoption is not a realistic solution. It’s not “dehumanizing” fetuses to abort them. It’s a tragic but necessary sacrifice.
Sacrificing a pre-born human beings life is NOT a necessary sacrifice. Adoption isn’t unrealistic, the system isn’t perfect, granted, but systems can be fixed if people work at it. And it most certainly IS dehumanizing to abort. Essentially the abortion/choice side of the argument has said pre-born human beings aren’t really human until they reach such and such point and I have yet to see the abortion/choice side come up with an agreement on WHEN life begins and WHEN the pre-born being is human. There isn’t an overall agreement on that in the abortion/choice camp. However, the majority of pro-lifers agree that life begins at the moment of conception and that the pre-born being is always human from that moment of conception until death.
[Robert Berger] What is dehumanizing is forcing children to grow up in abject poverty and malnutrition.
That’s infinitely worse than being born.
So you want people to kill off other humans because people in poverty will NEVER EVER get out of poverty? (I’ve heard of people’s cirumstances changing–it takes work and time, but there are possibilities if people learn to work together–which does often happen that people DO work together).
(just be glad you don’t hear my bad singing!).
Ninek–I’m sure it’s not that bad. Besides, it’s better than somethings that are around.
It’s a tragic but necessary sacrifice.
By Berger’s “logic,” and philosophy of population control, the victims of terrorist attacks are really just (unknowingly) sacrificing themselves for the good of the population (which is apparently what unborn children are doing as well. Tragic, but necessary sacrifice, right?) Fewer people, less overcrowding and fewer mouths to feed. The terrorists should be commended for a job well done. They’re saving the planet and eliminating poverty by blowing up themselves and as many others as possible in the process. And also, surely those terrorists are helping to rid the world of religious conflict as well, blowing each other up a little at a time. Golly, Robert, until you convinced me that the slaughter of the unborn is a necessary sacrifice, I never would have even thought of the good these terrorists have done throughout our overpopulated, impoverished world. Thank you, Thank you, Robert, for enlightening me.
I’m sure if given the “choice,” all those victims of bombings (and of 9/11) would have been happy to sacrifice themselves to help solve the problem of overpopulation. And I’m sure every unborn child would feel the same way.
/sarcasm
And Robert, it’s really not cool at all, FYI, to keep coming here and spouting your bigoted drivel about the impoverished, implying they aren’t worth anything simply because they are poor. And it’s also pretty ridiculous that you never respond to any of the logical, well-thought out posts of pro-lifers here. You’re like a broken record. “Kill the poor, abortion is necessary, it helps people not to suffer, and saves the planet! Oh, and btw, the Catholic Church and all it stands for – like solid marriages based on biblical foundations in which children could be raised in a loving environment (oh, the horrors, even worse than being born into poverty!)- is the worst evil the world has ever known!”
*gag*
Maybe Robert Berger will be willing to make the “tragic but necessary sacrifice” of his own life to lessen overpopulation and save us all. Or at least one baby.
By the way bergermeister I find it infinitely comforting that what is dehumanizing is not in fact denying the human personhood of the unborn but is rather letting young children suffer in poverty. Better they should have their limbs torn and head crushed than suffer this agony of poverty.
Jacque,
What about informed consent? I never had a pregnancy test or an ultrasound. I was shown a filmstrip with a bunch of red circles, I was told it was “just a bunch of cells” I was never told there was ANY risk.
I was lied to by omission.
If abortion had been illegal I would have NEVER sought one.
If I would have seen the ultrasound I NEVER would have had one.
If I was given the chance to see the facts of fetal development I NEVER would have
had one.
Anyway, hows the studying going?
Carla,
I know I’m late jumping on this bandwagon again but I wanted to add a little something to some of the sentiments that other Catholics on this thread have expressed. The truth of the matter is that for too long we as Catholics had poor Catechesis, that is to say that we didn’t know what we as a Church teach and why. As a result, you see poor Catholics like Nancy Pelosi who twist the teachings of saints to their own sinful means.
The good news is that there is a hunger in our Church for better understanding of our Faith, and as a result there is an upswing in the amount of education the average Catholic is receiving about the what and why of the Church! :) Praise God, we are getting much better apologists out there, who are teaching not only non-Catholics but also less knowledgeable (in the subject) Catholics! :)
I bring this up because while many Catholics might not be as aware of some of the complexities of the subjects addressed, more and more are learning daily! ^_^
Jacquie,
“killing a unborn child needs to be punishable by law just like other killings are”
No, no, no, no! A thousand times no!
Please think of the repercussions, should women who commit abortions be punished by law.
First of all, how are we going to catch ’em? Women who have abortions don’t have a red A branded into their foreheads. And, we’re talking about a corpse that is, in most cases, the size of a thimble. Easily disposed of. There is NO WAY that we could ever come close to catching all the women who abort.
Secondly, consider who would be the women who we do catch. There are going to be some women who suffer physical or emotional repercussions from their abortions. These are going to be the women that we catch. The woman who has no regrets and suffers no physical consequences will stay silent about her abortion.
But here’s the really frightening part: if we start prosecuting women who have abortions, women who suffer complications won’t come forward. Even a minor infection can become lethal if it is left untreated. It is hard to escape the conclusion that women will die needlessly if we start prosecuting women. NOBODY wants to see that happen.
We don’t have to take vengeance into our own hands in order to save babies.
Hi Jill,
I have started writing on my blog to support today’s pro-life initiative.
http://theanti-modernist.blogspot.com/2011/01/pro-life-is-not-ant-choice.html
Let’s all hope that today is a productive and life affirming day.
May the horrors of such “choice” become clear to those who support the murder of children. http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/2011/01/choose-life.html
Thank you for doing this! I just found you through Conversion diary and so wanted to support this! http://traininghappyhearts.blogspot.com/2011/01/from-sledding-to-screentime-football-to.html
Melissa:
We MUST prosecute mothers and fathers, as well as criminal abortionists and all others, who kill or attempt to kill human beings in the unborn stage.
They are after all committing or trying to commit violent lethal crimes against helpless innocent human beings.
We prosecute people for killing or attempting to kill ALL born humans from newborns up through 100 year olds, do we not? Why should unborn human beings not enjoy the same legal and actual physical protection that both you and I, as well as all other human beings, enjoy? Are they a lower form of humanity? Do their lives not matter as much as ours? How will you protect them if you do not, well, actually protect them? How will you deter mothers and fathers from attempting the crime of prenatal homicide if you say to them “please do not kill your unborn child, because if you do, you will get away with it”? Do we take this irrational approach with ANY other crime?
We born humans must start treating the unborn with full respect as legitimate and full members of the human community. How can we in good conscience not offer them full and complete legal protection? The hard fact is this: if you would legally permit mothers to kill their unborn children and get away with it, you are not pro-life, since you are taking the same position as NARAL, Planned Parenthood and Emily’s List.
The whole idea behind prosecuting mothers and fathers for the crime of prenatal homicide is to prevent them from killing their children. We do not want to apprehend them after they have killed. That is difficult to do and the children are already dead. We want to use the threat of prosecution to deter them from committing the crime and then we want to apprehend those who do try. The whole idea is to save the lives of millions of children by preventing prenatal homicide in the first place. This also saves mothers from the pain and sorrow of killing their children.
On the subject of mothers who injure themselves attempting to kill their unborn children, this problem also exists with regard to murder, rape and armed robbery. This is not an argument in favor of legalizing those crimes, nor is it an argument in favor of not prosecuting them. If you commit a crime, you are responsible for the consequences. Injury and death are unfortunately possibilities when anyone attempts to commit any violent crime. It is a very good argument, not against holding people accountable for their crimes, but against anyone committing a crime. In reality, it will act as an additional deterrent to committing the crime.
If we have an aggressive campaign of enforcement of prenatal homicide laws, attacking both sides of the transaction, I believe we can achieve better than 90% suppression of this crime. We just have to decide if we really want to stop the killing or not.
I just checked out the Facebook event for “Blogs for Choice Day” and there are only 3 members signed up to attend.
The bishops, priests and nuns (sisters) wanted Obama and his administration in office, they got them, at the expense of the unborn. Just look how Obama, his wayward catholics, increased the evil of abortion in our country and others, since taking office. Liberalism, collective salvation, social justice, common ground, are signs that hang in hell. Pray, Pray, Pray, for those catholics who voted the culture of death in office. You’ll see them as they line up for communion. God help the one Holy True Church! This guy was murdering the born and unborn before this administration, but they truly support his mission. Research Obama when the issue of “live births” was voted on. Our bishops knew his record, but allowed the flock to vote for the pits of hell. How will they explain it to God and millions of those who never felt life, only sissors?
I’m in! Along with Delaware Right to Life’s blog! Please add us!
Melissa,
Yes, yes, yes- A thousand times yes! Think about the implications of what you suggest, because you can not make something illegal without a penalty. You can strategically go after the abortionists themselves (like going after drug dealers rather than users), but in this case there is a victim that could only be killed with the mother’s cooperation, compensation and consent. That can not be acceptable.
The fact that a woman might not seek medical care after an abortion is akin to a robber being shot and being afraid to seek medical care because he would get caught- Should there be no penalty for robbery?
We have no way of catching all the rapists, either, but I don’t believe that inability to prosecute a difficult crime is reason to eliminate penalties. In fact, if we had no penalty for rape, rapists would be less likely to kill their victims to avoid being caught! Should we then have no penalty for the rape for the sake of victims that would be killed by offenders afraid of being prosecuted? I would still say no, because rape is a serious, violent crime and we don’t tolerate that in society. Abortion is a serious, violent crime and we shouldn’t tolerate it either.
I fail also to see how only catching women in deep despair about their abortions is a bad thing- rather it’s an opportunity to help them. Moreover, I think most women in that state would have mitigating circumstances that would not lead them to jail. If a woman is deeply marred after seeing an ultrasound of her baby and thinking, “I didn’t know this is what the baby I aborted looked like.” she did not have full knowledge and consent enough to face a penalty. But perhaps finding her offers a chance to help her. Women who have no remorse can not be helped anyway- so those that are caught are given help they need.
Women don’t get a pass. As a woman, I am just as responsible for my actions as anyone else. When we compassionately paint all women as ignorant victims who don’t know what they are doing, we do a disservice to women. Worse, it’s just not true.
Choice or Child: http://catholicdadshq.blogspot.com/2011/01/choice-or-child.html
Louis and Martianne, added your blogs, thanks!
Thanks for hosting this project! Hope to see you at the March for Life on Monday!
http://momn3boys.blogspot.com/2011/01/7-takes-7-choices.html
If a woman is deeply marred after seeing an ultrasound of her baby and thinking, “I didn’t know this is what the baby I aborted looked like.” she did not have full knowledge and consent enough to face a penalty.
Thank you.
Abortion clinics are not in the informed consent business. They are very specific when it comes to what their workers can and cannot say(not baby!!)and are trained to say “a bunch of cells” not disclose any fetal information or risks of abortion and they are there to SELL abortion.
PS If abortion had been illegal I would not have sought one. Every single one of my post abortive friends have said the same thing. The law will once again be used to deter young women from killing their own children through abortion. And we will be there to offer all of the support, encouragement and love they need to have their babies or put them up for adoption.
Carla wrote:
If you did and always knew what you are talking about here and then had an abortion is that already completely understood by that Catholic woman? She knows what she has done is The Worst Thing anyone could ever do?
Just for the record: it isn’t the worst thing anyone could ever do. The worst thing we could ever do is kill God… and we did that already. And He rose again. :) Divine Mercy, I trust in You.
Here’s my link:
Is This What Choice Is All About?
Thanks for organizing this effort!
An Open Letter to the Abortion Industry at Daughters of the Heavenly King http://wp.me/pE1AW-6W
Is this what you mean by choice?
http://dontbuytheabortionlie.blogspot.com/2011/01/is-this-what-you-mean-when-you-say.html
Paladin,
Just for the record: it isn’t the worst thing anyone could ever do. The worst thing we could ever do is kill God… and we did that already. And He rose again. Divine Mercy, I trust in You.
This statement made me cry. From someone who has been struggling and questioning my faith for the past few years, this small paragraph has touched me more than any lecture, conversation or mass I’ve attended recently. Thank you.
We’ve actually thrashed this issue (of punishment/culpability of women who procure abortions) out in other threads, at length, already. Two principles to keep in mind:
1) The primary purpose of law (despite the squawks of moral relativists to the contrary) is to enforce morality. Any arguments about pragmatism or utility (i.e. “laws are meant to control behaviour”) completely beg the question, and miss the point, since the whole point of controlling behaviour is to preserve life, liberty, etc., and only a moral code can tell us that denying these things to others is “wrong”, anyway.
2) It is immoral to punish someone for an evil act if they were not culpable (i.e. blameworthy) for doing (e.g. they did so ignorantly, or they were coerced, etc.), just as it would be immoral for me, if I were a judge, to throw you into prison for drinking “power drinks”, simply because I wanted to “start a new initiative for healthy food consumption” and make an example of you.
3) It is equally immoral to enact a punishment that has no proportion to the culpability of the person who committed the immoral act. (Our prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishment” is simply a civil, legal recognition of this already-existing moral fact.)
I’ve heard the abortion-tolerant side use the (painfully illogical) cry of “It’s acceptable, because it’s the law of the land!” I’d rather our (pro-life) side not fall into the same error, on the other side. Yes, abortion is one of the profound horrors of the human race, and it’s an inhuman crime. No, we cannot use that fact to paint all abortive mothers with one brush, and “lock them all away” for Murder 1. Some of those mothers may well be (subjectively) guilty of Murder 1, and they should be punished accordingly. Others may well be so brainwashed and/or coerced that their culpability is virtually nil. Most abortive mothers would probably be somewhere in the middle, on one side or the other (and I personally believe that the “coerced/brainwashed” side is the “heavier” side, number-wise). But let’s not hear any more of this nonsense about “punishing all women for abortion”, as if a blanket policy could fix the problem, or satisfy justice (i.e. TRUE justice, as opposed to the inflamed personal passions of well-meaning but militant anti-abortion people).
Again: wars are won with resolve, not with rage. This war will be won with level heads, not with hysterical ravings, over-generalizations, or attempts to choke mercy in order to “serve justice”.
:) God be praised, Len… and God bless you!
SecularProLife.org’s contribution is here. It’s a response to those who say that “pro-choice” means supporting abortion, adoption, and parenting.
I’m participating! Here’s my link:
A Tale of One Baby and Many Babies
One thing that I think we all need to be mindful of is that once abortion is illegal, meting out punishment is not going to be up to us. It will be up to judges, prosecutors and juries. Passing personhood amendments is going to assure that an abortion is going to be, legally, the taking of a human life and it SHOULD be treated as such, legally. No differently than a woman hiring someone to murder her child, or killing her already born child herself. Certainly many women have abortions because they are desperate or coerced. MANY crimes are committed because of these reasons. A 14 year old gang-banger commits a drive-by because he is ordered to by his higher-up and fears for his own life. Should he be let off scott-free? Of course our judges should keep these factors in consideration and sentence accordingly, but we must accept consequences for our actions, no matter how scared we are when we commit them. I know several women who have had abortions. Honestly, none of them have admitted to me that they were forced or felt pressured to do so. Some of them felt desperate, but they were not forced. I strongly feel that none of these women, at lest the ones I know well, would not have killed their babies if abortion was illegal.
Of course we cannot retroactively charge women who have had legal abortions with any sort of crime. That’s absolutely crazy and I don’t know of a single person who would support such a thing. Well, maybe those people who run that “Nuremberg files” website, or whatever it is. If there is anyone here who thinks that post-abortive women should be criminally charged for having legal abortions in the past, please speak up because I would love to see your argument for that.
http://gerardnadal.com/2011/01/21/naral-blogging-for-choice-part-i/
“Paladin,
Just for the record: it isn’t the worst thing anyone could ever do. The worst thing we could ever do is kill God… and we did that already. And He rose again. Divine Mercy, I trust in You.
This statement made me cry. From someone who has been struggling and questioning my faith for the past few years, this small paragraph has touched me more than any lecture, conversation or mass I’ve attended recently. Thank you.”
LIKE :)
My entry for “Ask Them What They Mean By ‘Choice’” Blog Day on my blog, Ecce Homo:
http://eccehomocatholic.blogspot.com/2011/01/fast-and-pray-for-unborn-tomorrow.html
:) Bobby, you FaceBook addict, you…
Jacqueline – Exactly what you said. 100% agree.
Len – it’s not just crazy, it’s actually explicitly forbidden by the constitution (In 2 separate places, in fact – once for the federal government and once for the states). These women/men/doctors will NEVER face prosecution for participating in a legal abortion. Period.
Carla, I came late to this discussion, but I remember you saying multiple times that you would not have had an abortion if it had been illegal, and then you repeated it here:
“PS If abortion had been illegal I would not have sought one. Every single one of my post abortive friends have said the same thing. The law will once again be used to deter young women from killing their own children through abortion.”
The question is not then what should happen to you, and I think it’s disingenuous to frame it that way. You had an abortion when it was legal, and had it been illegal you would not have had an abortion. The question is about women who have abortions when abortion is illegal.
For the record I don’t support jail penalties for women who abort, but it’s logically inconsistent to believe that when people talk about this issue, they are talking about you. :)
I would like to participate, too. Here’s my post:
http://redcardigan.blogspot.com/2011/01/i-choose-life-pro-choice-people-choose.html
I said, earlier:
Two principles to keep in mind:
(*sigh*) …and then the math teacher goes on to list THREE principles. Can you tell it’s the end of the week?
By the way: could I ask prayers of everyone (who’s so inclined)? I’m going on the March for Life (in D.C.) for the first time, and I have something of a case of the jitters! It’s one thing for me to talk in the abstract about how much I fall short of true holiness… but when I’m about to get a taste of battle nearer the front lines, I feel so inadequate to the task (of fighting the principalities and powers)! Thank you all!
And I said, earlier:
I strongly feel that none of these women, at lest the ones I know well, would not have killed their babies if abortion was illegal.
When I should have said:
I strongly feel that none of these women, at lest the ones I know well, would have killed their babies if abortion was illegal.
And Paladin, I have never been to a March for Life, but I think that the adrenaline rush that you will get from being surrounded by so many people united to fight for the rights of the unborn will quickly override any jitters you might have. Enjoy yourself!
We get the answer concerning the will of God for us in the matter from Deuteronomy 30:19 – “I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore CHOOSE LIFE, THAT BOTH THOU AND THY SEED MAY LIVE:” That is indeed the ONLY godly “choice”:)!
http://coucoumelle.blogspot.com/2011/01/choice.html
http://rjsciurus.com/archives/1381
Thanks for doing this!!
http://thescrellos.blogspot.com/2011/01/dear-pro-choice-ers-what-do-you-mean-by.html
Praying for you Paladin!!! IT IS JUST SO AMAZING YOU WON’T EVEN BELIEVE IT!!! Absolutely awe inspiring. Drink it all in, brother.
You really know how to rally the troops, Jill. If a very tall fellow wearing a red Cabela’s winter coat sees you on Monday and waves, it’s me. Smile for the camera, dear.
http://stblogustine.blogspot.com/2011/01/choice-is-euphemism-and-its-all-they.html
http://deus-ex-machina-secundus.blogspot.com/2011/01/oh-what-power-there-is-in-language.html
Thanks Jill for the great idea!!
Hi Alexandra,
Thank you for telling me that I am being logically inconsistent and disingenuous.
I reserve the right to comment on any or all or zero threads about abortion and post abortive women going to jail. In fact I reserve the right to comment about anything that pops into my head regardless of what others may or may not think of it. Just like you.
There are people that truly believe I should go to jail. Whether abortion was legal or not at the time of my abortion. I like to cover all the bases.
Have a good day!! :)
:) Thanks, Carla! T-minus one hour (until leaving), and counting…
…from one disingenuous, logically inconsistent Jesus freak to another, that is…
Ack! Thank you, too, Len! Sorry… I skipped your comment, the first time around!
God speed, Paladin!! Head to The Dubliner if you get a chance. :)
Jill, Gerard, Abby, etc usually hang there.
Maybe some year I will be joining you!!
I find it really difficult when pro-abortion advocates claim that abortion equals equality of the sexes. First, how many men have had abortions? Second, a young man could argue that the unexpected child conceived of his union is not compatible with his lifestyle, his career, his income, his marital state or his desire to complete his education and therefore he should not be compelled to acknowledge, pay child support or provide insurance for said child. Imagine, now, that the state supported these arguments and declared compulsory child support a violation of the man’s “choice”.
True, a father will never carry an unborn child within his body. Equally true is the fact that no mother will ever sit inside a waiting room, or drive the father of her child into a clinic to dispose of their child. No mother will ever have to say, I had no say because the child was not within my body.
Abortion did not make men and women equal, it made us adversaries in regards to that which has been given to us as the gift of our union to be cherished, loved, nurtured and heroically protected with our own lives – our children.
I just posted the question (etc) at my blog here: http://wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com/2011/01/ask-them-what-they-mean-by-choice-blog.html .
Hey all,
I went on the NARAL blog post about today’s “Blog For Choice”. There’s a commenter there who claims we don’t know “the true meaning of ‘choice'” (specifically mentioned Jill Stanek and her efforts on today) so I went ahead and asked that commenter to enlighten us.
Bravo Cathy! YES! EXACTLY!!!!!! I love that post.
*HUGS CATHY*
——————————
Comment deleted by author.
Here’s a link to a list of the NARAL bloggers who are participating:
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/get-involved/online-day-of-action/bfcd11-main.html
I’m working on my own blog post and will post a link when my entry is up.
God bless you, Jill, for organizing this counter-movement.
Praise God! Pro-lifers will have a special place in heaven! (Pro-abort/choicer converts will too!)
Paladin,
Praying for you and everyone who is participating in the March for Life.
NARAL’s facebook admin booted me and deleted my comments. So much for a dialogue. Their web-blog should’ve had crickets playing in the background…..zzzzzz
Dan, they are on the edge of their keyboards!! My comment was deleted in less than 5 seconds!!! Go life!!!!
oo! One of mine just lasted for 9 minutes! Some poor anti-lifer must have had to take a bathroom break, lol!!!
Thanks for doing this, Jill. As the survivor of a failed abortion attempt, certainly I find the rhetoric of ‘choice’ very hard to swallow, as that choice of abortion would have rendered me choiceless and lifeless. Here is my blog entry for ‘Ask them what they mean by choice?’
http://www.melissaohden.com/communications/ask-them-what-they-mean-by-choice-my-death
Thanks, Jill, that was more fun than “wack-a-mole” at a carnival.
My blog post is up at “Don’t Know Much About the Rosary?”
http://rosaryinfo.blogspot.com/2011/01/ask-them-what-they-mean-by-choice-i-say.html
Wow! It took less than a minute for them to delete my comment on the Blog For Choice site. Here’s what I wrote:
What do you mean by choice? Really– What IS the choice exactly? Please explain!
If you delete this comment then it will tell me more than 10,000 words that you really don’t defend your CHOICE because you can’t answer to it.
I just updated my post on my blog here: http://wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com/2011/01/ask-them-what-they-mean-by-choice-blog.html .
Good day.
Just for fun, I added another post on the NARAL blog site. This one was deleted in about 30 seconds:
Wow! My challenging comment deleted in less than a minute. Pretty impressive. How many people do you have at computers deleting the avalanche of pro-life responses that you refuse to debate. So much for our free speech! How sad that you only have 3 itty bitty little comments from your own supporters, and two from the same person. Let’s see how quickly you can delete this post.
“There are people that truly believe I should go to jail. Whether abortion was legal or not at the time of my abortion. I like to cover all the bases.”
I have never seen anyone say that! Here or elsewhere? Knowing that this is legally impossible, do you really think that punishment for a past abortion might be a possibility?
You seem very sarcastic right now and I’m not sure why. I did not call you disingenuous, I said that framing a discussion about future treatment of aborting women as a legal judgment on women who have had past abortions is disingenuous and logically inconsistent. It is. If someone is talking about punishing women in the future for abortions in the past, then it’s not, and I would love to see those conversations because I’d love to give those people a piece of my mind!
Alexandra,
You clearly missed the other post where this was discussed. Suffice to say, Carla has reasons to feel a little bit like she had ought to clarify regarding legal repercussions for abortion.
Alexandra,
This is not the only site I visit. :)
I understand that it is impossible to convict women for having an abortion when it is permissible to do so. I know that.
I like to pick the brains of those that believe I should go to jail even though my abortion was “legal.” I try to understand why they believe that.
Please accept my apologies for my sarcasm. It was acting up today.
I would love to see Alexandra give someone a piece of her mind!!
Whoops, sorry, must’ve accidentally turned off comments in one of my rushed updates at an airport yesterday. Might’ve been the time I accidentally deleted this post for one long, horrifying minute.
“that was more fun than “wack-a-mole” at a carnival.” – Ninek. I agree!
Keith Olbermann gives abrupt goodbye to MSNBC show
By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer – Sat Jan 22, 3:49 am ET
Well it seem Keith Blowharderman’s ‘COUNTDOWN’ has finally reached ‘zero’ and we have ‘lift off’.
Just hope he reachs a non-decaying orbit in that alternate universe where everything else revolves around him, where his mind dwelt, but not his mouth.
May he conitnue to bask in the non-existent rays of his own intellect.
This just in: Astronomers at NASA have just announced the discovery of a new ‘blackhole’.
“As blackholes go, it’s rather ordinary”, said one un-named scientist.
“We might not have detected it for a long time if had not been for all the noise it was generating and the fact it’s orbit was erratic and in the opposite direction of all the other bodies in it’s vicinity.
NASA has announced it will host a on line contest to name the newest addition to the list of burned out former stars.
Robert Berger says: January 19, 2011 at 10:34 am
“Abortion is a sad,tragic, and ugly thing to happen. But it is also a necessary evil.”
==============================================================
Pardon me while I re-calibrate my meter for measuring ‘stupid’.
[humming tune from Jeopardy while I patiently wait for process to be completed.]
Wow!
If we wanted to get a photo of your smiling face, would you have to make an appoinment for a colonoscopy?
Bergermeister,
Please explain to us why having an inanimate parasitic blob of tissue removed from an otherwise healthy woman’s uterus is “sad or tragic or ugly or an ‘evil’, necesesary or not.
Jill says “I’ve enjoyed the response I’ve gotten when I’ve asked ‘if abortion was illegal would you be tweeting about birthing rights?’ Gets mighty quiet when you ask that. LOL.”
I’m betting the reason it gets quiet when you ask that is because nobody has any clue what you’re trying to say; I have no clue what you’re referring to and asked a couple friends to read the question and they can’t figure out what you’re getting at, either. Would you clarify, please? What do you mean by “birthing rights”, and how is it an issue that is related to the legality of abortion?
Pro-choice? You’re not pro-choice until you choose yourself.
I am reminded of one verse….”Jesus wept.” I wrote from my personal life.
http://wp.me/ppric-hr
I tried posting on NARAL’s blog because there was this commenter there who said pro-lifers don’t “know the true meaning of choice” so I asked her what it was. My comment got deleted. I posted again (I wasn’t rude, I didn’t curse, all I said was “What is ‘the true meaning of choice’?” –my first post said at the end “Enlighten us.” or something to that affect, my subsequent tries only said “What is ‘the true meaning of choice’?”). They were all deleted.
So I emailed NARAL’s blog person. The email was returned undeliverable.
Bottom line: They refused to answer me and everytime I asked, deleted my question and never told me why, never said anything, just deleted it and sent my email back undeliverable.
Some of the 90 pro-abortion blogs did NOT actually participate. I went down the line of them because I was going to counter post in their comments. One lady didn’t post anything at all on her blog that day.
Some pro-abortionists try to tell us that we can’t put the abortion genie back in the bottle. That’s irrelevant: we’re going to break the bottle and banish the genie to oblivion forever.
Ninek,
Oh I know what you mean. I clicked on one of the blogs and the blog in question totally had nothing to do with being pro-choice/pro-abort or anything like that. Best I figure is what my mother said: they just wanted to get internet traffic on their blog.
:) I’m back, I survived, and I was blown away (at the March for Life)! Thank you all for your prayers; they were precious and very much needed (and effective)!
@Carla: :) You’re talking to the teetotaller of the bunch… but if you ever go there (and bring Jill, Dr. Nadal, etc.), and if our tight schedule permits, I’ll bite my knuckle and brave the pub to keep you company! (If memory serves, I think I owe you at least one hug, which I can finally pay! Heck, I’ll even hug your husband, if he won’t shoot me!)
Seriously, though… thanks again, everyone. It’d take far too long to describe the overwhelming things that happened there (externally, and “internally”–inside me), but it was utterly, overwhelmingly good… even the painful parts.
We shall raise our glasses of water high and share a toast to life!! ((Paladin))
There aren’t enough words to describe The March are there??
So glad you are back safe and sound in the state that we share. :)
(*laugh*) Yeah, I can be an amusing person to bring along to restaurants/pubs, as a teetotaller with plentiful food allergies:
Waiter/Bartender: “What’ll you have?”
Me: “Er… air, actually. Nothing else, thanks!”
Waiter/Bartender: “Hey, so long as you leave a good tip, breathe away!”
As for the March: not only was I hit by the HUGE impact of the March, but God was using the entire pilgrimage to do some serious earth-moving in my soul. Let there be no doubt in anyone’s mind: God can multi-task! :)
(I was also seriously laughing *hard* when I heard the MSM reports of crowd estimates “in the thousands”! Good grief! Our group was in the VERY back, after TFP [Tradition, Family, Property: they had a brass band, and a choir of bagpipes! :) ], and right before the line of police at the end [on foot, and on horseback] trying to hurry us along; and my informal, on-the-spot participant estimates [hey, I used math! :) ] gave me a rough figure of 30-40,000 people between us and the next stoplight! Figure that there were about four stoplights between us and the intersection where the marchers were turning (and God only knows how many were on the two “legs” of street after the turn), and you can get the picture. “Thousands”, my foot! One might as well say that the federal deficit “numbers in the many dozens of dollars”. Technically true, but just a wee bit misleading…)
I could just kick myself for missing this one … by a full week yet! And just the day before went off on William Saletan vis-a-vis the Gosnell case (http://tonylayne.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-roe-must-goupdated.html)! OOooo, I hateth myself!