Stanek weekend question: Where are “obvious places” religious leaders can help lower NYC’s soaring abortion rates?
The news of the New York City area’s egregious abortion rates has grabbed national headlines and sobered even abortion proponents. According to liberal Slate on January 7:
Pro-choice and pro-life groups alike are shuddering at the news that 4 out of every 10 pregnancies in NYC ends in abortion. Data released Friday by the city’s Health Dept. reveals that in 2009, there were 87,273 abortions and 126,774 live births. The abortion rate broke down along demographic and geographic lines: 60% for black women, 41% for Hispanics, 22% for Asians and 20% for white women….
Overall, the Big Apple’s abortion rate is more than twice the national average of 19%. Pro-choice groups say the numbers are proof that the city needs more effective sex education and more accessible contraception. Pro-life advocates say sex ed and contraception are already widespread enough. “There’s candy bowls on people’s desks with condoms,” NY Archbishop Timothy Dolan said, calling the numbers “downright chilling.”
A CBS News story contained an interesting line:
[R]eligious leaders also criticized public schools sex education programs that include condom distribution.
The Health Department report points out some obvious places for religious leaders to start.
Teenage pregnancies and abortions are down from previous years, but women aged 20 to 24 had more than 1 out of every 4 induced pregnancy terminations performed in the city last year, which has been about the rate for the last decade.
Where do you think are “some obvious places for religious leaders to start” lowering the abortion rate?
As an aside, the New York Sun provided excellent coverage of this issue.
[The graphic, via CoverJunkie.com, is the cover of New York magazine, August 8, 1989. Click to enlarge.]

True NYC is the abortion capitol, BUT …
I won’t be one to say NYC aborts 4 out of 10 pregnancies. The statistic is misleading since there’s no accounting for how many of those abortions were given to women traveling from out-of-city.
The obvious places would be in their own churches. Very few churches even mention abortion and many are actually pro-abortion. Consequently, most in the congregations never even think about the issue let alone have a negative view of abortion. If the those in the pews were taught to be outraged by abortion this culture of death could very well change.
Is there any place in the country where it is more expensive to raise a baby than New York City?
I am a New Yorker – lived in the city for a long time. I am pro life also – it’s what defines my humanity, but a grand percentage of NYers look at abortion as a good and necessary thing, and God forbid you try to go against them – they will almost, if not kill you! The problem is that there’s a lot of urban cynicism at play here, there is also a very large (not Christian) educated elite urban class that is involved in Leftist politics and has seen to (for decades) that abortion is the law of the land in this state. North Eastern Catholics are also to blame for being spineless and not wanting to take a stand – for not wanting to be involved, because they feel that they have other important things to to, or afraid to rock the very powerful abortion movement that resides here. I always feel like I am lost here.
There are a lot of church going Afro Americans and Latinos here – for years we have been hearing how supposedly “socially conservative” they are, but in the long run, it doesn’t matter how anti abortion they might be privately – ultimately they bow down to the Democratic party behemoth here and abortion is never mentioned because the Democratic party is the big sugar daddy here. Look how Mario and Andrew Cuomo, two alleged Roman Catholics got elected here in NY!
The Catholic Church is also to blame – why haven’t they manned up and excommunicated all pro choice Catholics?
Even a lot of “Republicans” here are pro abortion!
Also the mainline Marxist Protestant establishment being run out of Riverside Church and the infamous National Council of Churches is also behind abortion in NY.
I can’t write anymore – I am incoherent because I am so angry right now!
Margret Sanger’s plans have been carried out successfully in NY – the termination of undesirables. Pure Nazism, all in the name of urban New York Times liberal elitism – an elitism that has forgotten that many of their very own ancestors where once also considered “undesirables” and not human, and also perished in the gas chambers and concentration camps of fascist hate.
Mario – Same thing here in New Mexico. We have a high percentage of Hispanic Catholics who are supposed to be against abortion. But in every election most of them vote for the pro-abortion democrats because their families have voted democrat for several generations.
“Margret Sanger’s plans have been carried out successfully in NY – the termination of undesirables.”
You obviously haven’t been to New York City if you think all the undesirables have been terminated.
Monte – bills like the immigrations reforms that the GOP wants (like repealing amendments) has also influenced the hispanic vote.
Looking at the demographics, I’d say that colleges would be a good, obvious place to start. Not just the ones we culturally think of as “real” colleges, like NYU and Columbia, but the community colleges and CUNY schools, with higher minority populations, where students often don’t have parents footing the bill, and probably experience finances as a stronger coercive force when considering abortion.
I would also say that, looking at the age/demographic statistics, a certain amount of the older pregnancies are probably being aborted due to testing that suggests fetal abnormalities, and so education re: down syndrome would be another obvious place to start. This demographic can be trickier to reach, because they are probably more able to insulate themselves from the reasons that most women find “grounds” for abortion – money, family pressure, etc – but the motivation comes from simply not wanting to parent a disabled child. Obviously one cannot go into private doctor’s offices and forcibly educate women, but perhaps a very positive, public presence of support for people with Down Syndrome, some kind of PR campaign with actual support backing it up, might be a start. There is, in NYC, a growing support of “larger” families – three or four or five children – it’s almost a social status thing. To be so fortunate to have the means to provide for so much love and happiness in your own home. That’s not really the result of anyone campaigning in favor of larger families, but rather the result of people naturally realizing the joy of children over space/material items/etc – but my point is, people actually are open to love, and life. They have just, in some cases, forgotten that they are. Some active public presence supporting a parent’s love for disabled children might be able to in some small way ameliorate the high rates of abortion for children with fetal abnormalities, among older women, who are more likely to have the means to support them but lack the inclination or the courage.
I wonder how fertility treatments and IVF factor into these numbers – are selectively reduced pregnancies taken into account? Because that could be a big factor as well. And, as noted before, NYC does get a significant number of women traveling here from other areas, which likely skew the numbers higher than they should be for the actual NYC population.
“Monte – bills like the immigrations reforms that the GOP wants (like repealing amendments) has also influenced the hispanic vote.”
But… but… they’re socially conservative! That should totally override any other concerns they could possibly have!
“You obviously haven’t been to New York City if you think all the undesirables have been terminated.”
Sometimes I feel bad that we give Joan such a hard time on this site. Then Joan types a sentence like this. Your name is going in the Book of Intercessions, again. $40.
I lived and worked in NY. I think leaving saved my life. Cynicism is a widespread social disease in that place.
Cranky Catholic,
WRONG ON ALL COUNTS!!!!
The data are all there, and I’m going to demonstrate that the statistics are the same whether we are calculating only NYC residents, or NYC residents and non residents together.
The 2009 Vital statistics data may be linked to here:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/vs/2009sum.pdf
Live Birth Data
Table 4.7 (page 75)
The very first number in the column on the left (Live Birth) shows a total of 126,774 live births in NYC. If you scroll down that column to the bottom three numbers they show:
NYC resident birth rate = 116,752
Non-resident births = 10,020
Residence Unknown = 2
Total Live Births = 126,774
Induced Abortion Data
Table 4.13 (Page 85)
The Left Column of numbers (Total). Fourth number down shows 87,273 Induced Terminations as a total for New York City. Below that, in order, are the totals for the five boroughs (Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island) followed by Non-Residents.
Induced Terminations in Non-residents = 7,091
Viable Pregnancies {Live Births+Induced Abortions NYC 2009 (Residents+Non-Residents)}
126,774 Live Births + 87,273 Induced Abortions = 214,047 Viable Pregnancies
87,273 Induced Abortions divided by 214,047 Viable Pregnancies = 0.40772
Which is 40.772% (41% after rounding) of all pregnancies having ended in abortion.
If we subtract the non-resident numbers from the resident numbers, we get the following:
Viable Pregnancies {Live Births+Induced Abortions NYC 2009 (NYC Residents ONLY)}
116,752 Live Births + 80,182 Induced Abortions = 196,934 Viable Pregnancies
80,182 Induced Abortions divided by 196,934 Viable Pregnancies = 0.40715
Which is 40.715% (41% after rounding) of NYC Resident pregnancies having ended in abortion.
40.772 % NYC Resident &Non-Resident vs. 40.175% NYC Residents only.
So, Cranky, the numbers are identical. Next time, read the data before impugning Jill’s credibility.
College? Start earlier: Pre-K!
I feel that the real problem here is that our churches have become publicly silent. They have placed their tax-exemption status above the God they claim to serve first. Churches do not have freedom of speech. They are preaching a gospel that is designed not to offend anyone, which is not the gospel at all. The true gospel is offensive. It causes discomfort as one’s heart is pierced with the truth. Pastor’s are preaching in fear now – fear of money & fear of man. I think that we need to encourage our pastors to break free from their bondage — to become loud voices in the public square once again – the John the Baptist’s — preaching “prepare ye the way of the Lord”. I feel strongly, also, that high-school aged children / college-aged children need to be educated about the development of a baby in the womb (with parental consent, of course, when it comes to minors) – with visual aids such as the fetal models, video’s depicting the develpment of a human baby, ultrasound images with the corresponding pictures of the baby once it has been born. I think we need to go around to churches, providing seminars to the congregations with the pro-life evidence as I have described. We can also try to present our seminars to colleges who will allow us. When I read about mothers who change their minds away from abortion once they see their baby on the ultrasound — it says to me that they really didn’t realize that it truly was a human baby already — with a face, arms & legs — they need to SEE to believe and to understand. Also we need to deal with the fears that may accompany a pregnancy. The churches can certainly re-affirm their commitment to helping those in their communities who are faced with a difficult pregnancy and child-rearing issues — to provide them with the spiritual, emotional, and physical resources that they may need — or at least direct them to those resources. I feel also that we need to establish stronger pro-life voting blocks in our local areas. The organization in our area is poor — with very few trying to take on too much — and many of those so committed to the cause are really aging. The Catholic churches in our area seem to be the only ones who have pro-life / respect life committes that the congregants have formed. The protestant churches don’t seem to have any outside connections to the pro-life movement — only a few posters or reading material here and there. We need to get committees started in them — all connected to a larger pro-life voting block of some sort. The congregants have to be the ones to do it at this point, as most of the preachers don’t want to touch anything politically sensitive. I live in New York, and I truly believe that there are way more pro-life people but that we are just disorganized — most people voting in ignornance down party lines — either assuming a pro-life position under the Republican/conservative lines (which you can’t count on at all here), or just not thinking about the importance of a pro-life position at all when they vote — thinking that the democratic party are the ones that help the poor people (so they think that they are helping themselves and others — being charitable — by voting that way). Well — just a few thoughts :)
ninek, until joan clarifies I’m interpreting that statement to simply mean that NYC is full of people SANGER might have considered undesirable – non-white, essentially – but not actually calling those people undesirable herself. You have to admit, however prevalent abortion is in NY, it’s not had the effect on NYC that Sanger probably would have hoped for.
As a lifelong New Yorker, I am fine with lots of people feeling that this city just “isn’t for them,” but I do bristle at blanket assertions like, “cynicism is a social disease here.” I have rarely found another city as likely to induce optimism, compassion, and a concern for my neighbors. I usually feel like the people who move here from other places are the cynical ones – it can be a hard lifestyle to adjust to, and that adjustment can harden some people very fast - but growing up here, I grew up with the daily knowledge that it was impossible to prevent my actions from affecting my neighbors, and thus grew up with a quiet, private sense of compassion in everyday activities that makes life kind and pleasant for as many people as possible.
Alexandra,
I agree with you- we need education and support for parents and children with any sort of disability (I really hate that word, but I lack a better one). I know that any sort of public assistance can go down in flames by an angry body of people (see Healthcare), but we truly cannot expect to see the abortion rate drop without these sorts of programs. True, we can offer emotional support and we can change the social culture to be less intolerant- that would go a long way. But we cannot diminish the value of physical support- every child should have access to teachers who are qualified to work with them and have a real passion for education, for example.
Real, tangible support goes a very long way.
——————————————————————-
By the way, how have you been? :)
Here are some suggestions for ending or reducing prenatal homicide in New York:
1. The Catholic Church has been asleep at the wheel for 45 years and it is now time for the church founded by Jesus to step up to the plate and demand an end to the Abortion Holocaust. Let Archbishop Dolan go to Governor Cuomo and plead with him to, no demand that he give up his support for the killing of unborn children. He and the other bishops should visit all “Catholic” members of the state legislature and local political leaders around the state, as well as members of Congress, and make the same demand of them: give up your support for child killing or you will be excommunicated from the Catholic Church and we will do everything possible to defeat you in the future, the hell with our tax exempt status. The bishops should announce that they will no longer tolerate any politicians who support prenatal homicide and masquerade as “Catholics”. In other words, finally start treating the killing of our children as the “unspeakable crime” and the “grave moral evil” which the Church has always recognized it to be.
2. Do everything humanly possible to educate people, especially in the minority communities, that killing unborn children is not a “choice” but a “crime” and is something that no woman or man must ever do. Get everyone you can to take a “No Abortion” pledge (“I hereby promise never to kill my unborn child or assist in killing anyone else’s unborn child”, something like that). Try to create an anti-abortion culture, try to instill in everyone possible a strong revulsion to this vile practice.
3. Get all pro-life political leaders in the state to hold a press conference to denounce the killing of unborn children in New York. Have them condemn in the strongest possible terms the criminal abortionist movement and the abortion crime industry. Plead with everyone in that movement and industry to stop supporting and committing crimes against unborn children, to have a change of heart and to come over and join us in trying to stop the killing and to protect our unborn children.
4. Organize large numbers of pro-life activists to talk to their abortionist friends to reason with them, to explain to them the humanity of the unborn, to show them pictures and videos proving that these children are real human beings, so as to change their hearts and minds. Raise money to place ads on television, showing pictures and videos of the unborn to a large audience.
5. Have a well organized, well trained group of people in front of each killing facility, preferably with video equipment, who know how to persuade mothers not to kill their unborn children. The goal would be to save as many lives as possible while ultimately pushing each facility below break even and into the red, hopefully driving them out of business.
The point is, this is the killing of human beings, the future of our race. We have tolerated it for far too long now. Everyone in our movement needs to find a way to come together and use every means at our disposal to end (or at least greatly reduce) the killing as soon as possible. These horrible statistics from New York City could finally be the thing which gets our movement going to try to put an end to this human tragedy.
“ninek, until joan clarifies I’m interpreting that statement to simply mean that NYC is full of people SANGER might have considered undesirable – non-white, essentially – but not actually calling those people undesirable herself. You have to admit, however prevalent abortion is in NY, it’s not had the effect on NYC that Sanger probably would have hoped for.”
It was really more of a tongue-in-cheek remark than anything. The people here aren’t much for humor, though, apparently.
I think the simplest thing at the most basic level is to persuade the clergy to actually preach against abortion. They have a captive audience every week; so why not, Mr. Clergy Man?
Fr. Pavone is a great example. The topic could be about trees, and he would still find a way to stick abortion in the conversation.
“1. The Catholic Church has been asleep at the wheel for 45 years and it is now time for the church founded by Jesus to step up to the plate and demand an end to the Abortion Holocaust. Let Archbishop Dolan go to Governor Cuomo and plead with him to, no demand that he give up his support for the killing of unborn children. He and the other bishops should visit all “Catholic” members of the state legislature and local political leaders around the state, as well as members of Congress, and make the same demand of them: give up your support for child killing or you will be excommunicated from the Catholic Church and we will do everything possible to defeat you in the future, the hell with our tax exempt status. The bishops should announce that they will no longer tolerate any politicians who support prenatal homicide and masquerade as “Catholics”. In other words, finally start treating the killing of our children as the “unspeakable crime” and the “grave moral evil” which the Church has always recognized it to be.”
You really don’t understand this “democracy” thing very well, do you? It’s not the place of the clergy to make threats against politicians or demand that they do anything. This is why the separation of church and state is such an important, bedrock principle of a functioning pluralist society, and is the real genius of American legal culture. As you have demonstrated, there are people who think nothing of using church muscle to strong-arm democratically-elected leaders into undemocratically enacting their moral and religious beliefs into law. That’s not how a free society works.
Alexandra, I’ve lived in a lot of places. I have only one friend left from NY. I can’t tell you how un-optimistic they were. I found strangers to be helpful when I asked for directions or needed a hand getting groceries through a door. But many of my so-called friends seemed to have defined their priorities by what was of use to them rather than loyalty. It could have been their own depression, their growing concern with the superficial, or perhaps they viewed ME as a useless relic. The people I worked for were also real downers; they treated employees badly. So, I moved away. Connecticut, however, and the towns further north, they still contain some good friends. I came away thinking that they thought it was fashionable and cool to be super-critical and to say no as often as possible. Maybe I had just gravitated to the wrong people.
That’s all too much information and doesn’t really prove a point. I felt the place had become gray and dark and cold. I don’t feel that way about where i live now.
Joe, are you Catholic?
He’s not a real Catholic.
There, two can play that game.
ninek, there’s a difference between saying “I felt the place was dark and cold,” and saying, “the place is socially diseased.” No place is right for every single person. But NYC is wonderful for many people. That’s all.
Boyfriend and girlfriend live in NY, NJ, or CT. Go to to NYC and get an abortion = 7091.
I see this possibility:
Girl lives in NY or NJ, boyfriend lives in NYC. Writes down boyfriend’s borough of residence on medical form.
It was really more of a tongue-in-cheek remark than anything. The people here aren’t much for humor, though, apparently.
I for one love humor joan! Some of your posts have actually made me laugh out loud.
Especially the ones where you claim to be Catholic. Now that I know those are more than likely tongue-in-cheek remarks as well, there not nearly as funny. Oh well.
joan 11:49am
LOL. Clergy aren’t supposed to strong arm politicians? Ever hear of the Revs. Sharpton and Jackson? You lefties are all for seperation of church and state, except when its clergy supporting your causes.
Exactly where is “seperation of church and state” written anywhere? It ain’t in the Constitution. I’m old enough to remember that no one howled these words when Dr. King led a very religiously oriented civil rights movement from his church pulpit. You think Dr.King didn’t intimidate a few politicians? Come to think of it, they didn’t say much either when Clinton and Cuomo politicked from the pulpits of black churches.
In fact joan, were you to do some serious historical research you would discover, much to your horror I’m sure, that religious people have played a very active role in influencing social policy in this country. You would be aghast to discover that Quakers formed the first anti-slavery society in the American colonies and remained a very active force in the underground railroad and abolitionist movement.
The list goes on but this should probably be broken to you gently so do your own research.
I am not a “real Catholic”, I am a lapsed Catholic because I do not accept all of Church teaching.
This is not a “free society”, very far from it. As a libertarian, I know what a free society is and this government controlled society is not it. The government should be strictly limited to protecting humans, born and unborn, from violence and exercising a few other essential functions. The modern super state goes far beyond that ideal.
Yes, the Church has as much right as anyone else to lobby for its agenda to be enacted. Once again, Joan, your piece contains numerous fallacies. Separation of Church and State means that there is to be no established Church of America, like the Church of England. It does NOT mean churches cannot participate in the political process any way they like.
Churches have every right to, and should, urge the government to fulfill its obligations under natural law to protect our inalienable natural rights, including the most basic right of all: the right to life, to live a full human lifespan.
Let me state for the record that I find it incredible that there are large numbers of human beings in society who have a tremendous ignorance of basic human rights. These same people believe in the absurd, completely refuted and logically impossible “idea” that all human beings can be killed in the first nine months of our lives and each one of us can be deprived of our entire human lifespans. This is a conclusion which is simply NOT possible, if we have inalienable natural rights based on our nature. If we have such rights (and we do), then we have a right to live a full human lifespan in accordance with our placental mammal biology, as we were created by God and Nature to do.
The abortionist (anti-life) mentality is contrary to our nature as living beings and therefore MUST be wrong. It is a sad testament to the ignorance and blindness of humanity that so many millions of human beings, all former unborn children, support unlimited killing of all human beings who come after them, accepting this objective fallacy for no other reason than to satisfy their psychological and cultural needs.
It is high time that all supporters of unlimited violence against human beings reject their unsound position and accept the basic truth that all human beings should be protected from violence throughout our lives.
The anti-choice clergy can mobilize and mount their crusade. But then the pro-choice clergy will respond. Hmmm, clergy fight club? I’d love to see Bishop Egan in some wrestling tights.
“there is also a very large (not Christian) educated elite urban class that is involved in Leftist politics and has seen to (for decades) that abortion is the law of the land in this state”
And which demographic group is that? You do realize that NY is governed by the vote of the people and if the people’s vote is pro-choice, that’s the end of it.
CC,
Check you history. Clergy supporting abortion were making themselves heard and forming their own organizations in the infancy of the abortion legalization movement.
“Have them condemn in the strongest possible terms the criminal abortionist movement and the abortion crime industry”
The Catholic bishops in RI and Mass. tried that. Didn’t work!
I remember when a friend of mine, an Episcopalian woman priest, used to lobby at the state house against anti-choice legislation. She was constantly harrangued by anti-choicers who told her she was going to hell. It was funny to see. A woman with a Roman collar being yelled at by those who told her she was a “baby killer.” Suffice to say, those who yelled (and brought their funny photos) so did no prevail. People who saw them thought that they were quite – ah – tacky.
Given the cost of living in NY. (I have relatives – a young professional couple both of whom are making a six figure income) who live in Brooklyn and pay big bucks for rent and for food. I can understand why poor minority women would terminate their pregnancies. Given the costs of social services for these folks, abortion is, from a fiduciary perspective, saving the city money. And if women want to terminate, why is it a problem for society? It’s the woman’s business and nobody else’s.
Ex-GOP Voter says: January 8, 2011 at 10:19 am
“Is there any place in the country where it is more expensive to raise a baby than New York City?”
==============================================================
Ex-RINO
Are you implying that people are choosing to ‘choice’ their children because they are unwilling to share what is left of their wealth with their own flesh and blood?
The question is ‘begged’:
Why is it so expensive to live in New York City?
Hint: New York City is located in New York State.
Here is link to the answer provided by Governor Andrew Cuomo
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/05/nyregion/20110105-cuomo-state.html?ref=andrewmcuomo#
The solution is NOT more government, but less, much less.
If anyone is really concerned about the high abortion rates in New York City and seriously wants to reduce them, then the first step is to stop funding them.
‘Your body, your choice’
THen ‘your responsibiltity, YOUR money’, not ours!
Joan, I’m so relieved that was a joke.
Joe, make an appointment to talk with someone in your local parish or diocese. I doubt all the bishops are reading Jill’s blog’s comments.
Excellent graphic from New Yorker Magazine a la 1989. I thought it was current and was thrilled to see it……until I read the notation at the end of Jill’s article. No, that would be too good to be true! One can hope though!
I’m confused as to why the Health Department would be asking religious leaders to help reduce abortion. They are a secular agency in a supposedly secular, “Church should not interfere with State policy” country. What would Kathleen Sebelius say about this intertwining of Church and State ideals? What about the head of Planned Parenthood? (I can’t believe I don’t remember her name, Richards, something)…. but she seems to be especially silent on this recent news story.
To attempt to answer the weekend question, I think the obvious place religious leaders can start to help lower elective abortion is ..
reach out by using the mass media – exactly in the way that Archbishop Timothy Dolan has in NY. Use the internet (I believe JPII stressed this strongly), encourage pro-life families to get involved in their church communities and beyond, forming pro-life groups (every Church should have one!) in public and parochial schools, and stress the importance of the family throughout one’s life. Stress that one or two children does not have to be the societal norm. Siblings are blessings to each other and I believe it is true that children who grow up with more siblings tend to get along with people better, in general.
CC,
You bring up a good point about the cost of living in NY. Instead of aborting a child in NYC – move to a more rural area. Virtual mansions are available in other parts of the country for the price of a house or apartment in NYC – if one is willing to forgo some of the “benefits” of city living.
You ask why termination is a problem for society? Yikes. Find a good book on the sociology of the family for some answers. Or dwell on the meaning of the Golden Rule as it pertains to taking the life of another person.
“Virtual mansions are available in other parts of the country for the price of a house or apartment in NYC – if one is willing to forgo some of the “benefits” of city living”
But the problem with that is that the employment situation is very different in those areas with “virtual mansions.” The type of work that my relatives do would not be available in rural areas. And even the “suburbs” around major cities are expensive. The Boston burbs are very pricey and add to that the inconvenience and expense of transportation.
But perhaps the media would be helpful. You could solicit contributions from donors to run some anti-choice ads on Fox News. Bill O’Reilly is anti-choice and perhaps you could get him to more abortion related commentary. BTW, is he an official part of your movement?
Janet – moving away is not a viable option for many people, and it’s not always about the ‘benefits’ of city living. Especially at a time when it’s not exactly easy to find a new job. And especially when moving out of the city means all kinds of new expenses, like buying a car, without which you often can’t get to work in a more suburban setting. Whole industries are centered here – mine included. Moving away from NYC, in my industry, means moving away from like 80% of the reliable full-time work you can find.
I live modestly, in a modest neighborhood in Queens. I am fortunate enough to be able to afford to live within 30-40 minutes of where I work (Times Square), but if I went much further away, the savings in rent/cost of living would be eaten up by the expense of increased commuting costs. Moving to a smaller town would mean changing careers entirely. And that doesn’t even take into account the support network I’d be giving up if I moved – my family lives here, and provides valuable support when I need it, and the same is true of many lower-income people in this city. Relocating is not always a feasible solution to the cost of living.
“But perhaps the media would be helpful. You could solicit contributions from donors to run some anti-choice ads on Fox News. Bill O’Reilly is anti-choice and perhaps you could get him to more abortion related commentary. BTW, is he an official part of your movement?”
Fox News has been pretty strongly pro-life voice already. I don’t think Bill O’Reilly has ever spoken out against early-term abortion so I wouldn’t call him “anti-choice” or even “pro-life”. He usually reserves his comments for stories about late-term abortion. I don’t know what you mean by ”an official part of your movement”.
Actually, by using media, I don’t mean we should try to convert media personalities to the pro-life position, I mean that pro-lifers should be vocal via the media – tv, radio talk shows, etc….. Rush Limbaugh talks about abortion from time to time. There’s no reason pro-lifers can’t call him up on “Open-line Fridays” to alert his listeners to the latest news on abortion related topics.
I don’t know what you mean by ”an official part of your movement
Does Bill give speeches at pro-life functions or churches. If not, maybe you could enlist him because he is very popular.
CC and Alexandra,
Sometimes people have to make difficult life choices when they have financial difficulties. I have a friend who decided to homeschool all of her children so that she and her out-of-work husband could afford to stay in their suburban home. He started his own business earning much less than his professional salary but they’ve survived and she is happily expecting her fifth child. She would never sacrifice her child’s life for more money.
City-dwellers who think they’ll need a car if they move away forget that some suburbs have their own bus systems, it is possible to find a job in the neighborhood where one lives. If a person chooses a career where their job choices are limited, then that’s a problem. They may be forced to train for a new career. But often, it’s not the case.
The topic of city living came up because someone suggested that money problems can make abortion necessary and my point is that money issues can’t take precedence over the dignity of each and every life.
CC,
“Does Bill give speeches at pro-life functions or churches. If not, maybe you could enlist him because he is very popular.”
Oh, please…. be real.
CC 1:45PM
In spite of being an accused sex offender I’m sure Bill’s a real prince.
“The topic of city living came up because someone suggested that money problems can make abortion necessary and my point is that money issues can’t take precedence over the dignity of each and every life.”
Janet, I am not saying that money issues take precedence over the dignity of each and every life. I’m saying that the solution to city-dwellers’ money issues is not always to simply move. I know, even just from visiting the suburban areas around NYC, that suburban bus programs often do not adequately replace cars. I’m a veteran public transit user, but when visiting towns outside the city, I need to rent a car. And most suburbs I know of DON’T have viable economies on their own such that people can work in their own neigborhoods.
Cities rely on the people who struggle to live there as much as they rely on the people so wealthy that they raise the cost of living for everyone else, and so cities need to react to those realities when prioritizing their financial realities. The cost of city living came up because it is a real concern for people in cities, which is the demographic we’re discussing. The solution is not for only rich people to live in cities, but for cities to adapt to their unique circumstances and answer to the needs of all their citizens. Money issues in cities can be a coercive factor in abortion, and admitting that does not excuse abortion – it’s a valid discussion that needs to be had, and the answers are not always simple.
Mary: 10, Joe: 9, Joan: 0, CC: -10, for those of you keeping score at home.
I think people at least subconciously think the First Amendment, when it says: “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion” think it’s saying that government shouldn’t show any “respect” for religion. But “respecting” is quaint English for “regarding” or “about”. In other words, keep their noses out of individual churches.
Bill O’Reilly bugs me when, bending over backwards like usual, he refers to the soon-to-be-born as “potential life”. No, Bill, they’re actual lives. They’re potential doctors, teachers, or broadcasters.
For one thing, we need to stop letting it pass when people make jokes in poor taste which attempt to lessen the sacredness of life.
Joan, this joke of yours is, unsurprisingly, a symptom of a greater illness.
Did it ever occur to you anti-choicers here that the tragically high abortion rate in NYC is the result of poverty? There are a lot of poor people in New York.It’s a big city.
To blame Margaret Sanger for abortion in NYC or anywhere else is beyond ludicrous.
Abortion would still be common even if she had never existed or did not advocate a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.
And do you you still think that making abortion illegal again would do anything to stop abortion? In fact,it will INCREASE it.It always does and always has. This is not the right way to deal with the problem. There has to be much more help available to poor pregnant women,married or single.If there were enough, there would be far fewer abortions here.
Can’t you anti-choicers put two and two together? On EWTN I heard some one recently say that Margaret Sanger was pro-choice because she “hated large families”.
Unbelievable. How idiotic can you get? She came from a large and desperately poor family and knew first hand what a terrible thing it is for children to grow up this way.That’s why she
advocated abortion and contraception. Anti-choicers just don’t realize that poor people cannot provide decent care for large families.
She didn’t hate large families. Hardly any one does,including me. And reports of her being a racist have been shown to be a fabrication.Inititially she allied herself with racist hate groups, but soon distanced herself. Sanger wasn’t a racist;she was a realist.
Dearest Robert Berger,
Have you read any of Sanger’s books?
Didn’t think so.
I have read two of them, her autobiography and “Woman and the New Race”.
She was definitely, without question, a bigot. With statements like “native white race”, her level of racial tolerance was anemic at best.
She dedicated a chapter to the evils of having a large family. Here’s one gem from her own pen:””The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
Now you tell me, genius, how she hardly hated large families.
Robert Berger,
What I find appalling is your defense of a woman who inspired such virulent anti-semites as Hitler and the KKK.
Hi Hans Johnson, 3:28PM
If I may expand somewhat on you excellent post. This amendment also stated that the gov’t could not establish a religion as well as not interfere in the free exercise of religion. This was to guarantee freedom of religion, or the right to practice no religion. No where does this amendment suggest that religious people are supposed to roll over and play dead when it comes to politics and social issues. Thankfully for our country they never have.
Get over it American Left.
(Ken, to Ex-GOP): Are you implying that people are choosing to ‘choice’ their children because they are unwilling to share what is left of their wealth with their own flesh and blood?
Ken, it costs $100,000 to $300,000 to raise a kid to age 18, usually. One of the biggest if not the biggest reasons that people choose to end pregnancies is because of finances.
(Hans): Bill O’Reilly bugs me when, bending over backwards like usual, he refers to the soon-to-be-born as “potential life”. No, Bill, they’re actual lives. They’re potential doctors, teachers, or broadcasters.
Hans, I certainly agree with you there. I didn’t know that about Wild Bill, but certainly, the unborn are living organisms.
Robert: Why do you keep saying that prohibiting the crime of prenatal homicide will INCREASE it? If it is done right, I am convinced we will massively DECREASE it.
This is one of the more irrational arguments I have heard from an opponent of the human being’s fundamental right to live a full human lifespan.
Please explain.
“To blame Margaret Sanger for abortion in NYC or anywhere else is beyond ludicrous.”
Robert Berger,
She was a huge supporter of the contraceptive mentality, founding the American Birth Control League and paving the way for BIG Abortion in the USA. She certainly should bear her share of the blame.
Now if poverty is responsible for the high rates of abortion in NYC as you say, then the last thing the USA should be doing is exporting contraceptives and abortion paraphernalia to the impoverished countries of Africa and beyond, because abortion rates will explode there as well. No, it’s irresponsible sexual activity and a society that says abortion is a necessary evil that causes unwanted pregnancy and more abortion. Not poverty.
“If anyone is really concerned about the high abortion rates in New York City and seriously wants to reduce them, then the first step is to stop funding them.”
Your bro ken,
You hit the nail on the head.
~ ~ ~
Joe @ 4:38,
I wonder the same thing. Robert?
If you want an interesting article about pro-abortion “Catholics” who have political power and why the Church will do next to nothing to discipline them, go to this site:
http://www.christorchaos.com
Click on the January 8th article entitled:
“‘Lucky’ Mario May Not Be So ‘Lucky’ In The End”
Doug says: January 8, 2011 at 4:28 pm
“(Ken, to Ex-GOP): Are you implying that people are choosing to ‘choice’ their children because they are unwilling to share what is left of their wealth with their own flesh and blood?”
“Ken, it costs $100,000 to $300,000 to raise a kid to age 18, usually. One of the biggest if not the biggest reasons that people choose to end pregnancies is because of finances.”
Doug,
My wife and I have conceieved, provided for and homeschooled 5 children to adulthood.
My wife worked outside the home briefly before we had children. I never earned more than fifty thousand dollars a year in the 29 years we have been married.
Neither of us are beneficiaries of a trust fund.
I challenge your assertion that it costs a hundred thousand dollars to raise a child to the age of 18. Your must be relying on ‘government’ data.
Our bodies, our choice, our children our responsibility. Just get the heck out our way.
Just to clarify when I use the word ‘wealth’ I am not referring to being ‘rich’ as the world understands ‘rich’, particulary liberals when they demand the ‘rich’ to pay their fair share.
Wealth includes, but is not limited to, material assets. There are some things that are priceless and therefore ‘money’ cannot buy, but absent them, no person could be considered ‘wealthy’.
The primary reason women and their sperm donors choose to choice their child is ‘selfishness’ and a dearth of hope.
“Pro-choice and pro-life groups alike are shuddering at the news that 4 out of every 10 pregnancies in NYC ends in abortion.”
Pro-life groups may be greived by the abortion rates in NYC, but I doubt that the ‘dead babies r us’/’satans posse’ mob are shuddering at the news. They probably think it is a good start and are dreaming up ways to increase the abortion rate.
‘satan’s posse’ members are probably disappointed that the rates are not HIGHER, particulary among ethic minorities, but I doubt they are ‘shuddering’.
Their favorite winter season song is “White Christmas’.
Why would the PA groups be shuddering? What’s wrong with abortion? What does one expect when something is legalized and made readily accessible? Would we be aghast that legalized car theft resulted in a massive increase in car thefts?
“No, it’s irresponsible sexual activity”
Ah, the old blame those slutty single gals argument so often heard by those who would love the “sluts” if they had the babies. And if married people want to be “responsible,” the “pro-life” movement would deny them contraception.
“exporting contraceptives and abortion paraphernalia to the impoverished countries of Africa and beyond, because abortion rates will explode there as well”
And the problem there is what? Oh right, impoverished women need to have more babies. That’s the ticket.
“The rich get rich and the poor get babies. Ain’t we got fun!”
“My wife and I have conceieved, provided for and homeschooled 5 children to adulthood”
Just curious. How many of your children went to college? And if they did, were you able to pay the full tuition without any type of financial aid?
What does one expect when something is legalized and made readily accessible?
Like consumption of alcohol. Yes, there are alcoholics but would you suggest that we go back to prohibition?
Bottom line. If my young female relatives (one of whom lives in NYC and just had a planned child) want to have an abortion, what business is it of yours? Their bodies, their choice.
“Satan’s Posse” – Here’s the thing, not everybody in NYC believes in Satan. Sorry.
As expected, Robert Berger has no answer and no backup for his false assertions.
Typical of the Berger Man.
Robert Berger,
What a charming fellow you are, asking us to connect the dots. I’ll take you up on that suggestion.
Let’s see…
Blacks and Hispanics are disproportionately poorer than whites.
New York Has a high cost of living.
New York has generous social services, which costs people like Robert Berger higher taxes, meaning less take-home pay for Mr. Berger.
Abortion is paid for by Medicaid (Over 43,000 per year paid for by New York State, 80% of which are Black & Hispanic abortions).
HEY!!! I GET IT!!!
Let’s kill these kids, wholesale! It will reduce the suffering of their mothers, cost much less in social services (One good medicaid abortion is pennies on the dollar, right Robert?!), save Robert Berger and his fellow travelers a ton of tax money, and eliminate poverty at its root by killing off the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum.
The only problem with your economic logic, Robert, is that we’ve butchered 3.3 million Black & Hispanic babies since 1970 and our inner-city neighborhoods are more crime-ridden, more saturated with STD’s, more economically depressed, more ravaged by fatherlessness, more impoverished through illiteracy than at any time in U.S. history.
3.3 million dead babies later, Harlem and Bed-Stuy should look like Scarsdale and Beverly Hills, by your twisted logic.
Start reading Sanger in her own words. She hated large families, the handicapped, and worst of all, blacks. I’ve made it easy. All the essential reading, and a 1-hour video of her with Mike Wallace are right here:
http://gerardnadal.com/category/margaret-sanger/
Thanks for helping me to connect the dots, Robert. I’m taking a shower now.
Oh, and Robert…
Here is a glaring self-contradiction:
On EWTN I heard some one recently say that Margaret Sanger was pro-choice because she “hated large families”.
Unbelievable. How idiotic can you get? She came from a large and desperately poor family and knew first hand what a terrible thing it is for children to grow up this way.That’s why she advocated abortion and contraception.
CC 5:46PM
You’re not addressing my question. Why do PA folks “shudder” at the NYC abortion rate?
“Where do you think are some obvious places for religious leaders to start lowering the abortion rate?”
The first obvious place religious leaders need to begin to lower the soaring abortion rate in New York is their own dark, cold, hardened, cowardly hearts.
If they’re apathetic, they need to repent for being lukewarm before the Lord vomits them out of His Mouth.
If they support prenatal homicide, they need to repent for their complicity in this ongoing genocide of innocent little children.
The second place they should start is in their bellies. They need some fire in their bellies. They need to cry out to God in prayer, repentance and intercession.
The third place is in the pulpit, where they need to raise up a strong authoritative voice condemning abortion as the worst genocide in the history of man. They need to publicly indict voters that vote for politicians who support prenatal homicide as accessories to murder.
Is there a company of religious leaders that will raise their voices in defense of the weakest among us who are being mercilessly slaughtered?
Someone needs to cry out against the brutal injustice, the live dismemberment of defenseless children.
You’re not addressing my question. Why do PA folks “shudder” at the NYC abortion rate?
Beats me. I’m not shuddering. I don’t have a problem with it at all.
I see this place is still overrun with trolls. I’m actually kind of surprised that none of you have blamed Stanek for the attempted murder of Rep. Giffords. Surely if Sarah Palin is responsible for the actions of an anti-religion, anti-Constitution anarchist, Stanek must be to blame as well, after all, Rep. Giffords is a pro-abortion vote in Congress, and her opponent in the November election was pro-life. So let’s blame Stanek, Fr. Pavone, Nellie Gray, etc, why don’t we?
Anyway, the answer to Stanek’s question is self-evident – religious leaders need to actually preach the Gospel for a change. As President Obama likes to remind us, a major part of the message of Jesus Christ is that whatever we do to the least of these, we do unto Christ himself. It cannot be denied that there are none weaker or poorer than the unborn. If we ignore the unborn child as he is put to death by his parents, then we ignore Christ himself being put to death. The parable of The Good Samaritan shows that Christians are not supposed to ignore those who are suffering, regardless of what society thinks of them. In the case of the unborn, society rejects their very humanity.
In addition, the entire redemptive act of Jesus Christ being born into the world as a human in order to eventually suffer and die as the great Sacrifice for the sin of the world begins with the Annunciation and the conception of Jesus in the womb of his mother. To support abortion is a rejection of the Gospel on just about the most basic level; the only way to more clearly reject the Gospel would be to proclaim that you don’t believe in Jesus at all or that you flatly reject him.
If you wish to reject Jesus Christ, you have every right to do so. I’m sure that all of the trolls reject him. But it is hypocritical and ridiculous to reject Jesus and refer to yourself as “Christian” at the same time. Not that that will stop anyone from doing so; I’m just saying.
Of course, attempting to explain any of this is a waste of time, but that’s just the way it is.
“Beats me. I’m not shuddering. I don’t have a problem with it at all.”
I don’t either. I’m not sure why there is supposed to be some kind of cut-off where the abortion rate goes from “okay” to shudder-inducing. NYC has high rates of poverty and it’s an expensive place to live on top of that; it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the abortion rate is higher there than in other places. Personally I’d like to see what the rates are for Los Angeles, Chicago, and other major American cities. I think that, put into context, New York’s rate wouldn’t seem so unusual.
what a shame for NYC, plus you have their city councilors harassing pregnancy care centers… you tube is a disgrace.
Monte says:
January 8, 2011 at 10:37 am
Mario – Same thing here in New Mexico. We have a high percentage of Hispanic Catholics who are supposed to be against abortion. But in every election most of them vote for the pro-abortion democrats because their families have voted democrat for several generations.
Hi Monte. It’s great to see a fellow New Mexican. I have never understood why being Hispanic equates to voting Democrat. When I announced to my family I was no longer a Democrat, it was as if I forsake my Hispanic heritage. What’s frustrating is the Hispanics blindly vote Democrat. They do not really research the issues. They are stuck on “Republicans are for the rich and victimizing the poor” and “Democrats care for the poor.”
Just curious. How many of your children went to college? And if they did, were you able to pay the full tuition without any type of financial aid?
CC,
A lot of kids that are homeschooled are more articluate, make better grades and are more polite. There’s been more colleges in recent years getting on board with having home schooled children join their ranks for these reasons.
My younger brother (who is now in Graduate School at Texas Tech working on his PH.D.–he just recently was conferred his Masters Degree) was home schooled from kindergarten until he went off to college.
He got a full all 4 years paid scholarship to Goucher College (his first choice) and made fantastic grades there (I think he graduated either Cum Laude or Summa Cum Laude). From there, he got into Texas Tech and has done very well there, as well. From Tech he received his Masters and will continue there for his Ph.D.
Every person I know who has talked to my brother commented on how mature, articulate, and smart he is. (Talking people who aren’t family and people who are family).
4 out of 5 of my sisters home school their children. Three of my nephews have gone to a college (I think Johns Hopkins, but I could be mistaken) for CTY (Center For Talented Youth) programs in the summer. I expect based on what I have seen great things in their academic futures.
The nieces and nephews who are home schooled are smart, well mannered, articulate and have a wide interest in many things from Science to literary interests.
I was home schooled for 4 years. I learned a lot during those years, and value the experiences. It helped me a lot when I entered high school.
Home schooling has become quite popular. There are now Home Schooling groups and some of the home schooling parents might know a foreign language and teach it, others might have some other knowledge they pass on.
In fact, what we learn first is what we learn at home–how to talk, how to walk, manners, how to eat, rules, cause and effect. To an extent every child is home schooled one way or another. Some families just take it further.
However, there are colleges (and I’m sure Goucher and Texas Tech are not the only ones) that will take a home schooled child and even offer scholarship chances to them.
Just curious. How many of your children went to college? And if they did, were you able to pay the full tuition without any type of financial aid?
CC,
Nice try. The numbers were in reference to raising a child to age 18. Most young adults entering college are *shocker* 18 already. ;)
AMEN! John Lewandowski.
Hi John Lewandowski,
Give them time, they will try. I can already see Keith Blowharderman and Rachel Madcow wailing as to how “rhetoric” causes lunatics to go on rampages, as if otherwise they would be normal law abiding citizens tending their gardens. Sarah Palin’s comment about “crosshairs” will cause lefties to go beserk. Apparently a movie about the “assassination” of President Bush is an example of freedom of speech and would never inspire anyone who otherwise would have never taken a shot at Bush.
In the meantime, our prayers, thoughts, and best wishes are with the Congresswoman, the other victims, and all their families.
joan and CC,
Apparently you never heard that the goal was for abortion to be legal and rare. At least the two of you are more honest than most of your cohorts.
This might throw a big monkey wrench in the leftist rampage. Apparently the “alleged” shooter’s favorite reading material was “The Communist Manifesto” and Hitler’s ”Mein Kempf”. Two hard core leftist books.
Yes you read that right, Hiter was a socialist, not “right wing” by any stretch. Read Johah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” for a real history of the American left.
Wonderful to see you back, John Lewandowski. I have missed you. I hope you are doing well. God love you.
All my statistics are absolutely true and well-backed up by the facts. It’s true;whenever a nation has made abortion illegal after it had been legal,the abortion rate has skyrocketed.
This happened in Romania under the megalomaniacal idiot Nicolae Ceaucescu (Chow-SHESS-coo) who made abortion as well as contraceptives illegal in the 1960s,causing a catastrophe from which that nation has yet to recover.
The rate of women dying from abortions increased %700. Women of childbearing age were under constant government surveillance for pregnancy. And an enormous number of children were born to desperately poor parents who could not support them,and they were put in horrible government orphanages where they were physically and sexually abused,malnourished and deprived of all affection,leaving them permanently disabled and unable to develop normally.
And illegal abortion remained rampant. There is a powerful and disturbing movie about this horrible era in Romanian history whose exact name I don’t recall,something about a specific number of days or hours. I recommend it to all anti-choicers. It may majke them think about how horrible it is to make abortion illegal. Making abortion illegal does not work.It never has and never will. It is disastrously counterproductive.
Whatever Margaret Sangers views on race were, she is NOT to blame in any way,shape or form for the existence of abortion today. It would have remained just as common without her.
The only way to deal with abortion effectively is to decrease poverty as much as possible,make sure that contraceptives are always available ,and to increase help to the poor. If I and others are pro-choice it’s not because we like abortion and want them to happen,and no pro-choicer wants the number of abortions to increas eanywhere.
It’s because we realize that you can never stop abortion by making it illegal. This only makes a bad situation far,far worse.
What Ceausescu did makes me ashamed that I have Romanian blood in me.
Robert Berger 9:29am
Get your facts straight about Romania. Yes the dictator banned contraception, but this was to facilitate his deranged idea of growing the population into some kind of industrial world power. Women were to have a minimum of 5 children, after that they could have all the contraception and abortions they wanted. What you neglect to mention Robert is that the dictator Ceausescu also forced austerity and starvation on his people as part of this grand scheme. One Romanian woman said she in fact wanted more children, but life was so difficult that something as basic as obtaining a bottle a milk to feed her children meant a trip to the black market, and a likely prison term. How could she possibly have more children when the ones she had were already hungry, cold, and underclothed? People lived in perpetual cold, darkness, hunger, and despair. In addition to this, women were expected to produce children. Is it any wonder women were driven to such desperation? This can hardly have anything to do with “choice”.
The best analogy Robert was if during the Great Depression President Roosevelt had decreed that every American woman, no matter how desperate her circumstances, must bear a minimum of 5 children. We likely would have seen the same situation as in Romania. My great aunts and grandmother each had two, and they had arrived before the Depression.
The orphanages were also part of Ceausescu’s plan. These children were to be the future citizens and subjects of the great republic Ceausescu envisioned. His future foot soldiers. These children were not necessarily unwanted but parents were unable to care for them, largely due to Ceausescu’s austerity. They interviewed the family of one such “orphan” and they lived no better than their child in the orphanage. In fact they didn’t live as well. During times of such hunger and deprivation parents have sold children into slavery, killed them, or gave them to a passing stranger hoping the child would find a better life. During the Stalin engineered Ukrainian famine, starving mothers stowed their starving children onto outgoing trains, hoping a kind stranger would take pity on them.
Very tragic what some parents will do in times of such desperation, eh Robert?
What Ceausescu did to his citizens should make anyone’s blood curdle, not cause you to be ashamed.
CC says:
January 8, 2011 at 5:45 pm
“Just curious. How many of your children went to college? And if they did, were you able to pay the full tuition without any type of financial aid?”
===============================================================
cc,
As of this writing all five of our children are still living at home. Our youngest daugher is in her first semester at the local community college. My son took a semester off from college to work to get himself some ‘wheels’.
I expect him to re-enroll the next semester.
My oldest daughter will graduate from the University of Texas at Arlington in 2011.
My wife and I have NOT been able to give them any financial assistance other than to provide food and housing.
They are all paying their own way thru school by working, scholarships, and grants. None are borrowing money for their education.
I have a sister who has invested in them by helping them with their tuition. None of them have refused her help, but all of them have tried to do as much as they can for themselves.
My hope is that they will all graduate with at least a bachelors degree.
I have challenged them all to discover the gifts that GOD has given them and learn how to use those gifts to turn $20 into $40.
My desirie is that eventually they all will be self-employed and produce enough wealth to meet their needs and wants and to invest in other people who are good investments as GOD reveals those people to them.
They are all generous and hospitable and I am sure they will leave this world better than they found it.
If I had my choice between my diploma and a sister, I’d take the sister.
Anyway, Joe I suggested you speak in person to a member of the Catholic church for a reason. It is face to face where we will make the most change. Also, if you are not a member of the church anymore, then you’re directives to the church are less compelling. I have friend who skirts paying taxes and doesn’t vote. When he talks about “they” should do this and “they” the government should do that, can you see why I don’t give him as much cred as a tax paying voter?
Yes, we can all see what a big honkin’ sinner Nancy Pelosi is. That’s obvious. However, what if the Catholic church starts witch-hunting everyone? The pro-choice lady who sits next to me in the pew every Sunday? Should the priest turn her away at the altar? The man who attends his gay son’s “wedding”? Should the priest turn him away? Or, by turning the smaller fry away, are we not missing an opportunity to work with them toward their own conversion of heart? Witch hunting can turn into dirty business, Joe. The Church’s reputation is still marked by the Inquisition, is it not? And that ended centuries ago.
Allow me to provide some context for my above post which admittedly is pretty harsh.
The most important moment of a religious leader’s life will be the day they stand before the Lord Jesus Christ to give an account of their lives. As ministers in the NYC area, they would have been called to serve and influence their community for the cause of Christ. Among the many duties of a minister of the Gospel is to be a source of strength, provision and protection for widows and orphans. A child in the womb who has been emotionally abandoned by their parents, disowned and forsaken qualifies as an orphan. When the parents of such children then plot to kill these children,
by the hundreds,
everyday,
on their watch,
these so called ministers have a moral obligation to do everything in their power to “Deliver those who are drawn toward death, and hold back those stumbling to the slaughter.” Pr 24.11
So they can fall on their face and seek God for His mercy, grace and divine strategies to combat this raging evil or they can continue in their slumber and silence.
God has given each of us a job to do, a race to run, to fight against injustice and influence our generation for righteousness. If we are faithful to our calling, we will be rewarded with gold, silver, precious stones, crowns and authority in the age to come. If not, we will suffer loss.
It’s our choice.
Robert:
One example please of a government which has prohibited the crime of prenatal homicide and seen its prevalence INCREASE. Do you think that prohibiting other crimes makes them more prevalent? If that is the case, should we not “legalize” murder (postnatal homicide), rape, armed robbery, etc, so that we can see a decline in the incidence of those crimes?
If you do it right and have vigorous effective law enforcement backed up by an army of hundreds of thousands of pro-life volunteers, I believe you can make criminal abortion very difficult to commit. If you have pregnant pro-life women visit every gynecologist every week and try to flush them out, that is, try to pay them to kill their children, after many are arrested, they will learn that they can neither commit the crime of unborn child killing, nor can they refer these women to outside criminal abortionists. Fake criminal abortion stings will be set up everywhere in place of the arrested real criminals and mothers will quickly realize that the odds are high that they will be caught. Most mothers thinking of killing their children are ambivalent are not militant NOW, NARAL, Planned Parenthood or Emily’s List types. If they think they will be arrested, they will for the most part not even try to kill their children. Of those who do try, a very large percentage will be apprehended.
If 1,000,000 mothers might theoretically want to kill their unborn, but 70% are deterred by the real threat of arrest from the large network of stings out there, you will be down to only 300,000 who will try to hire a criminal abortionist. If 70% of them are arrested (which they would be if you have simply a 2 to 1 ratio of “fake” to “real” criminal abortion centers operating), only 30% will actually kill their children and get away with it. 30% of 300,000 is 90,000. 90,000 is only 9% of 1,000,000. Simply by setting up an aggressive network of volunteers cooperating with law enforcement, you achieve a staggering 91% reduction in the prenatal homicide rate. I think you can suppress abortion crime by better than 95% simply by having a highly developed and efficient and well thought out tactical doctrine of suppression which you run to perfection.
The math here is, I believe, quite remarkable and we can be very effective at stopping this difficult to commit crime. Remember, before 1967, we had essentially no organized unborn human rights movement. Today, we are better organized than ever and could possibly put a million or more volunteers in the field, doing everything possible to flush out criminal operators and to stop the killing.
I have given this area a great deal of thought and I can assure you that your “argument” that prohibiting prenatal homicide increases the rate of this crime is just plain ludicrous.
John Lewandowski:
Good to hear from you. No, your comments are not a waste of time: Your logic is perfectly clear and a pleasure to read. As a friend often comments–we work in the sewer, neverthess our job is to bring Christ into the world. Keep plugging away my friend.
(Ken): I challenge your assertion that it costs a hundred thousand dollars to raise a child to the age of 18. Your must be relying on ‘government’ data.
I just Googled it, Ken. Plenty of non-governmental sources too. $100,000 is just a tad over $100 per week.
(Joan): I’m not sure why there is supposed to be some kind of cut-off where the abortion rate goes from “okay” to shudder-inducing. NYC has high rates of poverty and it’s an expensive place to live on top of that; it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the abortion rate is higher there than in other places.
True, Joan. If anything, I’d say a good bit of the dismay comes from the feeling that preventing an unwanted pregnancy is preferable to ending one.
I’m not sure I get to throw stones. I’m in Austin, which just did the sign thing at CPCs, It’s also the city that has just had it’s second major newspaper article in the free press about finding a leader for the new “no kill” animal shelter. Last year a press put out a book about the “horrible” home for unwed mothers that had been in operation for decades.
I would think, though, while we are speaking of Sanger, we might want to put Frances Fox Piven up for some abuse. In the sixties, she co- wrote, with her husband, about the Cloward- Piven strategy of putting as many people as possible on welfare, to break the system. I didn’t live there- I lived in New Orleans, which went from a pleasant southern city, to the sort of place where some people could rationally say that a katrina was justice, and an improvement.
All sorts of minority families signed up for welfare. Then there simply weren’t any families, any fathers to protect their kids. PJ O’Rourke went to Wall Street, and asked a trader “Where’s the black people?” trying to be very with it. The trader said “They’re next.” The trader listed out all the other poor people who had started at runners, and laborers on Wall Street, and then worked their way up to wealth and influence. The “they’re next” didn’t happen. We ought, right now, to have wealthy black commodity traders- Trading Places should be a hallmark of way back when, not a thought exercise. Little half- homeless teenage boys ought to be fetching lunches for Wall Street big-wigs, learning the ropes. Some of them are fetching sandwiches for rap moguls.
There isn’t any privacy when you are poor- there isn’t any freedom to tell a gov’t worker that they should jump in a lake, when they say a child is a burden. There isn’t a daddy to protect the vulnerable mom, if you’re following welfare rules. I have three kids. My husband had to go tell his own mother to jump in a lake when she wasn’t happy about the third pregnancy. I don’t know what I would have done, on my own.
For that matter, where are the pushcarts? Why are the only tiny, small, enterprises drugs out of a car? Why not tee-shirts, and rap CDs, and homemade jeans? Why not? That’s how New York got rich before. If you know you can scramble to support yourself, and someone else, you aren’t afraid. It’s how jewish cart peddlers ended up with doctor grandsons. ( this is in malcolm gladwell)
how’s about a marriage initiative? married people keep their infants, right? I mean, I have two neighbors. both had children at eighteen. the white guy married his wife, and is building this good life- he’s getting a high school degree, he’s talking to a military recruiter, he has a good enough job in the meanwhile- he’ s working 18 hour days to take care of the baby, his wife has a job while she’s pregnant, I don’t know their plans. The guy down the street- same sit- knocked up his girlfriend, he moved into his girlfriends’ family’s house, and three years in ” he’s not sure he’s ready or able to get married.” I don’t see how that bar could be so high. He’s already learned to deal with the in-laws. He has a job. They have a kid.
This is me just brainstorming. I don’t know. I don’t even know how to navigate in my own city. I mean, everyone I know has children, and loves children. I had to google the cpc sign thing- and I know one of the people promoting this, and that guy doesn’t have children, and doesn’t even have the prospect of children. I’m not sure why he’s doing this. Even the highly anti-religious people in a playgroup collected goods for a teenage single mom. I don’t know who these people are, who get active about CPCs.
ari
I am saddened, but not surprised, by the high rate of abortion among black women in NYC. A previous poster was right in saying that the black church is beholden to the Democratic Party, which is one reason why the pastors are afraid to speak out. I mentioned my Catholic friends have to stand a certain number of feet from the church when passing out prolife literature, but pro-abortion politicians are welcomed with open arms at the black churches. I’ve even heard pastors endorse candidates from the pulpit (and they are always Dems, of course). I’m so disgusted by these churches that I left a long time ago and have no intention of going back. The situation is the same all over the country. There are a few pastors here and there that address the issue, but they are rare. How tragic and ironic that black people are the most religious people in the country, but have the most abortions.
I hate to air black folks dirty laundry in public, but there is a great deal of promiscuity and sexual irresponsibility in the black community. I see it with my own eyes every day. Also, sadly, the AA community is gripped by violence. Ninety percent of the murders committed here are committed by young black men, and 90 percent of the victims are other black males. If there is little respect for life outside of the womb, why should there be any for life inside it?
Doug says:
January 9, 2011 at 1:56 pm
(Ken): I challenge your assertion that it costs a hundred thousand dollars to raise a child to the age of 18. Your must be relying on ‘government’ data.
I just Googled it, Ken. Plenty of non-governmental sources too. $100,000 is just a tad over $100 per week.
===========================================================
I stand corrected.
It helps to explain the balance [or lack thereof] in my savings account.
American churches in general no longer preach the Gospel which includes the inevitability of suffering for those that try to live by it.
Instead from the likes of Joel O’Steen, Joyce Myers, etc.,etc.,etc. we get the Gospel of “what’s in it for me and what will you do for me today God”.
HisMan,
“Suffering” only by the standards we have imposed upon ourselves. True suffering is disconnect from God.
I have suffering friends all around me, MaryRose. It is IN their suffering and their struggling that they feel Him moving and redeeming their pain.
The Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit. Psalm 34:18
And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast. 1Peter 5:10
It may be an interim time for poor folks to abort because they can’t afford to raise a child in NYC. However, with the up-coming failure of all kinds of government ‘income support’ programs (like welfare), will spell the end to abortion-at-birth. Instead of gov’t assurance ‘that the golden-years will in fact be gold’ IF PEOPLES’ LARGE FAMILIES WILL SUPPLY AN aging COUPLES’ INCOME (and social) SECURITY. This ‘choice’ will be::: 1) failing government handouts + starvation + euthanasia (abortion for aging-humans) vs 2) larger families that support their own/are intrinsically pro-life.
Doug, do everything to appease your in-laws’ family. It may be their tolerance/affection towards you (even if you think them ‘quaint) that will allow you to live.
“For that matter, where are the pushcarts? Why are the only tiny, small, enterprises drugs out of a car? Why not tee-shirts, and rap CDs, and homemade jeans?”
You haven’t spent much time in NYC, have you?
Phillymiss, good to see you! I wanted to make sure you caught my reply on the other thread – I had more info about that essay I told you about. I’m on my phone so I can’t easily find and link to the discussion because I can’t access the full site, but I will have an opportunity to do so later this evening. :)
Just curious. How many of your children went to college? And if they did, were you able to pay the full tuition without any type of financial aid?
Wow, CC- Where are your priorities? I came from a wealthy family of only two children and I still have student loan debt, because I value my education and don’t take it for granted. I decided it was worth paying for myself. I value it so much, that I teach at a university today.
But let’s suppose my parents outright paid for my education- I would trade all of my degrees for ONE more sibling. Ask anyone to choose between not killing their brother and sister and going to college debt-free- How depraved must someone be to choose college over a sibling? In fact, I had all sorts of luxuries as a child that I would trade for a lifetime of one more sibling, especially since my sister and I are caring for my ill mother by ourselves.
Moreover, my best friends were both raised in POVERTY, one the oldest of seven from a single mom and the other an only child from a married man and single woman who never made more than 5 dollars an hour her whole life. My best girl friend is the only one to finish high school and she paid her way through on grants and loans and has a masters now. The other enrolled in ROTC and that paid his bachelor’s, got a masters while in service and paid for his second masters with the GI bill. Education has less to do with circumstances and more to do with fortitude. Ever notice how spoiled kids who have mommy and daddy pay for their bachelors typically ONLY have a bachelors?
Yor Bro Ken- I did my masters at UTA! What church do y’all attend? Are we neighbors? I live off 360 and Brown. :)
Carla, I truly believe that if I understood Him fully, I would not suffer. I would be able to rise from my self and see how He is using my suffering to do great things. Does that make sense? My mind cannot comprehend Him though my soul knows Him, and so I suffer in this world.
Excellent post Phillymiss. I am saddened by these statistics as well, especially the number of AA babies being slaughtered in their mother’s wombs. The silence of AA ministers is deafening while the murder of innocent unborn babies goes rappant.But I pray this will improve with ministers like Rev. Walter Hoye, Bishop Harry Jackson and others speaking out. I agree the promotion of the political “party of death” and the promotion of political candidates from the pulpit who “have never seen an abortion law they didn’t like”, translates into the devaluation of human life throughout the entire community. Star Parker’s book Uncle Sam’s Plantation” addresses this issue very well.
Phillymiss, I pray that you and your family are doing well and will have many blessings in 2011.
Oh BTW, on another thread I saw your question regarding whether abortion numbers have declined in the US. The CDC Abortion Surveillance US 2006 reported ”Among the 46 areas (not all states report) that reported data consistently during 1996-2006, decreases in the total reported number, rate and ration of abortions were attributable primarily to reductions before 2001. During the previous decade (1997-2006), reported abortion numbers, rates and ratios decreased 5.7%,8.8% and 14.8% respectively, most of these declines occured before 2001. During the previous year (2005-2006), the total number of abortions increase 3.1%, and the abortion rate increased 3.2%, the abortion ratio was stable.” The complete report is at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5808a1.htm?s_cid=ss5808a1_e Hope this helps. God bless.
I am not disconnected from the God who knows me intimately.
I see now how God has used my suffering for my good and for His glory. My suffering in this world brings me closer to Him. I would not trade my pain for ANYTHING in this world.
I will suffer in this world until I go home. I will understand Him fully when I am in His presence.
I have friends in deep pain today. They know the only One who understands that pain and will alleviate their suffering is Him.
Carla,
I believe that we have different definitions for suffering.
I do not mean to trivialize the pain of those around us, but to put it into perspective. I mourn for the loss of my baby sister, even while I remind myself that she is in Christ’s loving arms. Were I to understand more fully His Kingdom, I would rejoice in her eternal salvation. As it is, I mourn my own loss.
My father-in-law has severe physical ailment. I do not mean that he would not still experience corporeal suffering were he to realize God fully but that his spirit would rejoice although his body failed him.
There is a great deal of pain in our world, and when we see how He uses it to connect us with Himself, we can see glory in that pain.
never been. that’s why I’m asking questions, not spouting off on what I don’t know. Like I said, I read Malcolm Gladwell, and then I read magazine articles saying the city council had to subsidize a grocery store. In my town, around the uni, there are trailers selling fruit, which was what the city council in ny was trying to subsidize. I know I keep reading articles about how the city wholesale destroys businesses, or doesn’t maintain roads, and so on. Having worked at a business that was dying b/c of a highway project, I wondered why the city council was so blithe about destroying people’s businesses.
I’m not in a position to “stow thrones.” My city totally passed the cpc sign law. and totally is trying to have a no-kill animal shelter. and, again, I don’t know how to proceed. I mean, there are five, six, very nice, plush abortion facilities, that I can think of. there’s one aging, little, scorned home for unwed moms.
I’m still trying to figure out how the very childless, relationshipless, clueless, trustafarian guy got to be such a voice for putting up signs at a cpc. it takes a girlfriend, and you know, sex, to even be in danger of needing to use one of those places. so I’m really not seeing how an aging, balding, dim loser has anything to say about babies.
I don’t know. a line by line blessing of anyone having a kid? I know that my friends thought that they were cutting edge and funny to say harsh things every last time I showed up with a new infant. and what they didn’t get is- it was each and every last one of them. It was the worst, closest to shunning thing in my whole life. I was in my thirties, my husband had a good job, the kids were healthy and happy and wanted- and yet, every last person I knew felt the urge to say nasty things. ” you know where they come from, don’ t you?” ” you breeder….moo..cow…zero…nothing…your brain fell out your vag when you had this one…..” My family, too- “you look like a stupid housewife washing dishes by hand…( my mother, when I picked up a flowered shirt, and said it was pretty.)” I was washing dishes by hand- so we could live in an inexpensive apartment while dh finished school and I could stay home and nurse. Moo-cow, breeder, zero- my dad’s wife. she has four kids, but somehow- I was a moo-cow for nursing. she had “lost” her custody battles- and all her kids were raised by someone else. I was “brain-dead” for raising my children myself. Why did my husband “keep me barefoot and pregnant?” Ugh..we married b/c we wanted children, lots of children, and frankly,he’s a better dad than I am a mother. His mother, yelling in frustration- “Why!” and then leaving, slamming the door. I felt like a shamed sixteen year old being caught out at prom, rather than the person bringing her another beloved grandchild. I won’t say the rest of what she said, it was so horrible.
Personally, I adore Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, b/c they make having half a dozen kids a dirty, sexy cutting edge starlet sort of thing to do. I love that they have pictures of shopping for diapers. I love that the gossip mags have starlets having babies. Bless their trendy, shallow little hearts. it might make the girl who comes after me’s life easier.
ari
I guess so, MaryRose.
I am thankful that all of my suffering will be ended one day. Until then on this side of heaven I have One who redeems my pain and draws me closer to Himself through it.
I rejoice that my friends are in heaven and miss them because I am human.
“I love that they have pictures of shopping for diapers. I love that the gossip mags have starlets having babies. Bless their trendy, shallow little hearts. it might make the girl who comes after me’s life easier.”
AMEN to that Ari!! I love how the starlets smile on, without politics, without lectures, just smile and pose with their beautiful pregnant bellies. I also hope this helps women now and in the future. This is 2011, people, we don’t have to live in the anti-child dark ages any more!
Ah. ari, there are quite a few “small businesses” selling stuff on the street, including fruit and – yes – rap music, although the guys selling rap music usually cluster in areas where they think they can intimidate tourists into buying, rather than where they might actually reach new audiences. I buy my coffee every morning from a man who sells it out of a cart he owns. I buy soup three days a week from a man who sells it out of a cart he owns. I buy fruit to keep in my office from any number of men I pass on corners with little fruit stands.
Tourist areas are overrun with street vendors. Some of them - in Soho and Union Square, especially – sell some moderately interesting, unique items. Lots of them – in Times Square and Columbus Circle, etc – don’t.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kryan70/469757198/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tschopper/37532277/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dyakowitz/5310424094/
I pass four bodegas and independently-owned grocery stores on the 6-minute walk from my subway stop to my Queens apartment. To say nothing of the dozens of little independent accessory and cheap jewelry shops that span my neighborhood’s main street. The article you read about the city subsidizing fruit carts was likely more about access to fruit in hard-to-reach, poverty-stricken neighborhoods, than about the impossibility of maintaining a small business in NYC.
Practically every time I go to the theater I end up buying a new pashmina-style scarf – since you can barely get to any theater without passing one of six scarf vendors I know of in Times Square, there’s no reason to feel chilly ever again. To say nothing of the pairs of gloves I’ve bought on unexpectedly cold days, without ever setting foot in a store. The men who noticed the bomb in the SUV in Times Square were all, I believe, owners of street carts who sell merchandise and food for a living. There are lots of small businesses in NYC, from the one-man fruit stand to the neighborhood grocery store. The city has lots of problems, but to imagine that there are no more independent businesses is inaccurate.
Sometimes re: the pro-abort crowd I think, to paraphrase Jesus, “let the dead abort the dead” -like begets like after all. But this wouldnt reflect the reality of the nature of the majority of abortion candidates. No, the majority of the pro-abort voice are the dead- priveleged, mainly white ’educated’ liberal elites. Poisoned daughters of Babylon exporting the filth of their adulteries into the seas of humanity. The nations are drunk on the wine of her fornication…..
“You really don’t understand this “democracy” thing very well, do you?”
.
No, you don’t understand it.
.
” It’s not the place of the clergy to make threats against politicians or demand that they do anything.”
.
Yes, it is. As citizens they have every right to make demands on their representatives.
.
“ This is why the separation of church and state is such an important, bedrock principle of a functioning pluralist society, and is the real genius of American legal culture.”
.
Exactly backwards. Separation of church and state exists to protect the church from the state, not the other way around.
.
The US constitution specifically prohibits the government from interfering with religion. It does not prohibit anyone, religious or not, from influencing the government. It is called “consent of the governed”
“No, the majority of the pro-abort voice are the dead- priveleged, mainly white ’educated’ liberal elites. Poisoned daughters of Babylon exporting the filth of their adulteries into the seas of humanity…”
Wow, are you a pal of Scott Roeder’s? I guess you hate liberal Jews and Protestants who don’t hold to your beliefs. “Poisoned daughter’s of Babylon” – so women who have abortions are all sluts? As I say Wow. Dude has some serious problems and one hopes he doesn’t have a gun.
Mr. Berger:On increasing abortion: You have shown that insane social policies (such as forced childbearing–which WAS the case in Romania–and enforced poverty can increase the abortion rate even when abortion is illegal (for some–those with 5 children were allowed abortions). You have not shown how outlawing abortion ALONE can increase the abortion rate. Even if outlawing abortion did not prevent even one woman from getting one, this would require women who would not have sought a legal abortion to seek an illegal one. It doesn’t make sense.
Have you noticed how the people who are helping poor pregnant women are always pro-lifers? If you claim it’s so important, why don’t you do it?
CC:
Does anyone’s life ever matter? Isn’t everyone a son or a daughter? Aren’t many people spouses and parents? Aren’t most people someone’s friend? We all enrich each other. Would you be missing out if your best friend was aborted? You would probably have another best friend, you might say. But if your best friend were murdered after her birth and before you knew her, the affect might be the same. A child aborted by a relative of yours might one day have been my son- or daughter-in-law, doctor, or even my child through adoption. The child you aborted might have been my friend. He or she might have enriched the human race by being an artist, or discovered a new medicine, or invented a better mousetrap. Or that child might have had a negative impact. Either way, we will never know–on earth at least. But the same might be said of young children who die.
Before my father-in-law met my mother-in-law he had another wife and daughter. But his wife killed her daughter and herself. I have a sister-in-law I never knew. I think she was in her early teens when she died. I don’t know if my in-laws would have met or married had my husband’s father been the single father of a young girl. His mother was also a young widow. If their spouses had not died, my spouse and his brother wouldn’t be here. But that does not make their deaths good. If my husband’s older sister had lived, she would likely have children–nieces and nephews I will never have. So because her mother killed her, my life is missing people that might have been in it. Why would it be different if she had been killed before birth?
Her life affected her father, her grandmother, her classmates.
I have lost children to miscarriage. These losses affected me deeply. However small they were, my children are always my children. They are part of my lives. Their lives affected my husband and I. I have grieved with friends who have experienced miscarriage. I miss those children as well. One friend was pregnant when I was pregnant with my son, but she lost her baby. It was a painful loss for me–I had envisioned them growing up together, but now that won’t happen. My son will never miss the friend he didn’t have, really, because he never knew him or her–but there is something there to be missed.
We are connected. God loves us all. He has a plan for everyone.
Hi YCW,
PAs often use Romania as an “example” of forced childbearing but conveniently don’t mention that this was the policy of a deranged tyrant who also forced starvation and deprivation on his people as part of the same warped strategy.
Its like arguing that Ukrainian mothers putting their children on trains heading out of the Ukraine was “proof” of what happens when children are not wanted. No its what happens when a tyrant engineers a famine and starving mothers hope someone will take pity on a starving child.
@CC: First and foremost I do not think being pregnant and possibly abortive makes a women a slut. And it’s not a word I ever use or think for that matter. I’ve done plenty of fornication and have only relatively recently found sexual continence. I too was poisened by Babylon- its mores and maxims- way deep in my soul. But funnily enough I always loved and welcomed children and have never been keen on abortion especially when embryo begins to look human. Abortion is essentially an anglo saxon, protestant export to the world- Historically, taboo in black and hispanic communities. What a bequeathment to the world!
I do consider being pro-abort a kind of sickness a moral blindspot, a poison in/ of the soul.
I do view Babylon as a spiritual metaphor and an actual and prophetic place. Read Rev:c18. Thats where my languge comes from.
ps. I don’t have a gun and have seen enough violence to last me a lifetime thanks.
Being pro abort is a sickness…a very evil sickness in the soul!
Being anti-choice is a sickness….a very evil sickness in the soul !
The only problem with your economic logic, Robert, is that we’ve butchered 3.3 million Black & Hispanic babies since 1970 and our inner-city neighborhoods are more crime-ridden, more saturated with STD’s, more economically depressed, more ravaged by fatherlessness, more impoverished through illiteracy than at any time in U.S. histoRY
Good point, Doc. Yes, the economy is partly to blame, but if abortion is such a boon to poor women, why are they getting poorer?
Phillymiss, I pray that you and your family are doing well and will have many blessings in 2011.
Thanks, you too. Did I mention that my son’s girlfriend is five months pregnant? Neither of them have jobs or any money to speak of. It’s going to be a tough road ahead so I would appreciate it if all my prolife friends would keep us in your prayers.
Just curious. How many of your children went to college? And if they did, were you able to pay the full tuition without any type of financial aid?
From what I understand, homeschooled children actually do pretty well in college. And to be frank, I think that college is overemphasized in our society. Recently there was an interesting article in the New York Times about the glut of law-school grads. There’s always a need for skilled and semi-skilled workers, but for some reason people that work with their hands are denigrated in our society, and i don’t know why. Roofers, electricians, and other blue-collar workers can make good money.
And about the cost of raising a child:
Lot of crock.
First, the second kid is a whole lot cheaper.
Second, there is so little they actually need. Sometimes my kids play with their new toys; sometimes the favorite toy is an old cookie tin. I don’t think they’d be impoverished if all they had to play with was cookie tins, cardboard boxes, spoons, and the likes. They have way more clothes than they need, and most of those were gifts or bought second hand. The only major purchase I personally bought new was the crib (and it’s being reused now). The carseats were new but gifts or free from insurance; the new cradle Grandpa made for them.
Food is the main necessary expense, but it’s hard to measure how much of that is a necessary cost. Candy is pretty expensive. Rice is pretty cheap. Kids aren’t better off with more candy and less rice.
There’s also so much conflation of want with need. I don’t have to spend money throwing parties, or buying as much as I do at Christmas. Those are things I want to do and to spend my money on. Just because I do something doesn’t mean I had to do it. If I buy my daughter a new dress, and my friend with no children buys a new shirt for himself, does that mean that either person needed those things? No, it just is how we are using our disposable income. I enjoy buying clothes for my kids; others enjoy buying books or clothes for themselves or expensive restaurant dinners or vacations. How much is spent on the average child is not the same as how much that child costs.
YCW: I find that $100k figure suspicious as well. Feminists For Life has an excellent book about raising children on a shoestring: http://www.feministsforlife.org/covetable_stuff/large/kids-on-a-shoestring.jpg
There are many ways to economize, even with a large family. When my children were young I saved money by sewing their clothes. My daughter was a flower girl in my sister’s wedding. I made her a long linen dress with a lace overlay for about $50.00. A similar dress would have cost at least twice as much in a store. I haven’t done much sewing lately, but I am going to start again. It is time-consuming, but besides saving money, it’s fun.
Eating a diet consisting mostly of whole grains and veggies, with meat just once or twice a week, also saves cash, and is much healthier. I used to have a big garden in the summer. The kids loved to help out. If you haven’t tasted home grown melons, cukes, carrots, etc., you’re missing out — they taste much, much better than the stuff you buy in stores. And kids are much more willing to eat the dreaded veggies if they actually help grow them!
(JohnnyMac): However, with the up-coming failure of all kinds of government ‘income support’ programs (like welfare), will spell the end to abortion-at-birth. Instead of gov’t assurance ‘that the golden-years will in fact be gold’ IF PEOPLES’ LARGE FAMILIES WILL SUPPLY AN aging COUPLES’ INCOME (and social) SECURITY. This ‘choice’ will be::: 1) failing government handouts + starvation + euthanasia (abortion for aging-humans) vs 2) larger families that support their own/are intrinsically pro-life.
Doug, do everything to appease your in-laws’ family. It may be their tolerance/affection towards you (even if you think them ‘quaint) that will allow you to live.
John, my wife and I have thought about this, and we’ll both have our own directives.
You’re right that tough times are a-comin’. But viewing it as a Ponzi scheme, i.e. a big family supporting two or one old people, only works if and when such a population increase can be maintained, and that is not the case now. Also, the younger workers would have to have jobs and make enough to support the old people, and that is far from a certainty (given the socio-economic reality of the US). More and more, we see the reverse – the younger generations staying at home longer and getting various types of support from the older people more than in the past.
(YCW): If I buy my daughter a new dress, and my friend with no children buys a new shirt for himself, does that mean that either person needed those things? No, it just is how we are using our disposable income. I enjoy buying clothes for my kids; others enjoy buying books or clothes for themselves or expensive restaurant dinners or vacations. How much is spent on the average child is not the same as how much that child costs.
Certainly, you can say that. But it’s still all the same thing. Yes, most parents could spend less, but they do not want to. Whether one is truly just “scraping by,” and says, “There is no way I/we can afford another kid,” or if one chooses to spend the $100 per week, $200 per week, $300 per week, etc., and also says, “There is no way I/we can afford another kid,” the economy and income levels, and that disposable income you mention, have an effect.
Phillymiss I will indeed be praying for you, your son, his girlfriend and their baby. I know as a mom, myself, our children weigh so heavy on our hearts when we see difficulties ahead for them. But your unborn grandchild is still a gift from God. I like what Rick Warren said in his book The Purpose Driven Life, (I am paraphrasing) “You are not an accident, your parents may not have planned you but God planned you and has a divine purpose for your life.” My favorite scripture is Jeremiah 29:11 “For I know the plans I have for you says God, plans to prosper you not for your destruction or to harm you but to give you a future and a hope.? I pray your son and his girlfriend will commit to God, to each other and to this precious baby for a lifetime in the God-given sacred covenant of marriage.
Eating a diet consisting mostly of whole grains and veggies, with meat just once or twice a week, also saves cash, and is much healthier. I used to have a big garden in the summer. The kids loved to help out. If you haven’t tasted home grown melons, cukes, carrots, etc., you’re missing out — they taste much, much better than the stuff you buy in stores. And kids are much more willing to eat the dreaded veggies if they actually help grow them!
: ) Upon that we certainly agree, Phillymiss.
Back about 10 years, my brother and sister-in-law were planting a garden, and their kids helped. Beans, corn, etc,… All went into the ground on a hot early summer day.
About 3 a.m. the next morning, the parents were woken up by a violent thunderstorm, and also by 3 year old Nick, who was jumping up and down on their bed, yelling that he wanted to go outside (in a torrential downpour) to see if the plants had come up yet.
Doug, my point was simply that the statistics are a lot of crock and there’s no easy way to determine what kids need to cost.
I didn’t want to let that sort of figure stand because it might scare people, and it doesn’t need to. And the more kids you have, the less costly it gets per kid. If I were to get pregnant soon, I wouldn’t need to worry at all about a crib, or clothes, or formula, or a car seat, because I have all of those things. I probably wouldn’t need to buy a thing for my child for the first year after his or her birth, except diapers and wipes, and then he or she would start really needing food… but when I’m already cooking for 4, cooking for 5 isn’t a huge jump. I have enough sources of hand-me-downs to avoid ever buying clothes if I don’t want, and there’s no way we need more toys. It doesn’t cost me anymore for childcare because I do my own. With insurance my costs for birth are capped at $1000 (unless I want to do something that isn’t covered, like a homebirth) and I will get a free carseat or breast pump. If I needed the help I know where I could get free or low-cost food and diapers.
@Doug – Thanks for the cute story. Try this company for cheap seeds:
pinetreeseeds.com
They have some hard-to-find greens if you’re into salads and good customer service.
I heard that home gardens are more and more popular because of the economy. It’s nice to see something positive come out of such a terrible situation.
Now if I could only get my two cats to be vegetarians . . .
The notion that the tragically high abortion rate among black women in America today is the result of a deliberate genocidal plot is beyond ludicrous. Pure poppycock !
If there were more government support to subsidize poor pregnant black women,and poor pregnant women in general, there would be far fewer black abortions,and abortions period.
Ironically,the Obamacare which conservatives are so vehemently opposed to could quite possibly lower the abortion rate considerably. But if conservatives get their way economically,
it won’t do a thing to prevent abortions,and probably increase them.
And eliminating help for the poor,which many conservatives want to do,will be catastrophic.
And welcome back,John Lewandowski. Back when you were still posting here,you called me an idiot. I don’t care,that’s your right and free speech.I won’t drag myself down to your level.
But your rigidly anti-choice stance is still dead wrong.
Robert Berger,
How could Obamacare lower the abortion rate considerably? Hypothetically, of course.
Is free money the answer? Really?
Janet – when the Mass health care reform went into place, abortion rates dropped:
http://healthpolicyandreform.nejm.org/?p=3178
Ex-GOP,
As I understand the article you link to, the researcher does not prove nor state that ObamaCare will considerably reduce the abortion rate. He concludes that ObamaCare will not increase the rate considerably. That doesn’t address the question I posed to Robert Berger.
Interestingly, the author presents the following:
There has been some controversy about whether the availability of state Medicaid funding for abortion increases abortion rates. One study showed a statistically insignificant effect of Medicaidfunding on the abortion rate, which (if the association was not simply due to chance) was about 95% less determinative than the most significant factor: employment of the male sexual partner, which substantially decreases the likelihood that a woman will seek an abortion.5 Wright J. Reducing abortion in America: the effect of socioeconomic factors. Washington, DC: Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, November 2008. (Accessed March 16, 2010, at http://www.catholicsinalliance.org/files/CACG_Final.pdf.)
Janet – I found that part you posted interesting as well.
Correlation can’t prove or disprove anything, and he states the numbers are tough to predict (as there are a lot of factors) – but in Mass, more people got health care coverage, and the rate of abortion dropped. That is opposite of all those who have said that Health care reform would lead to lots more abortions.
(Young Christian Woman): Doug, my point was simply that the statistics are a lot of crock and there’s no easy way to determine what kids need to cost.
I understand that per your example, another kid can practically be “free,” but I also imagine that the studies take an average, and it also makes a lot of difference how much money the family has, period.
In any case, I think it’s obvious that the economy does have an effect on people’s willingness to have a kid or have more.