Vasectomy = condoms = abortion?
This is government injecting itself into a highly personal medical decision. It is a violation of women’s rights. And it is clearly both hostile and demeaning to women (who aren’t trusted to make decisions themselves).
Where, I wonder, is the law forcing men who want a vasectomy to get counseling from people who oppose that procedure?
Where is the law banning the sale of condoms to men until they wait 3 days and get counseling from religious orders that oppose contraception?
~Mary Anna Towler, publisher and editor of Rochester City Newspaper, railing against the new SD law requiring a 3-day waiting period and PRC visit before obtaining an abortion, March 23
Mar.24, 2011 6:00 am |
Contraception, Legislation inspirations |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Let’s ignore the fact that a vasectomy does not kill a growing baby for a minute and consider this; my husband had to wait several days after his initial consult before getting his done, and he had to have my written consent (agreement) to do so.
Not so with abortion.
aren’t there laws saying you can’t get sterilized prior to a certain age?
Gee, pro-aborts, you would think that a procedure this serious would warrant a waiting period. You don’t waltz in a plastic surgeon’s and get your nose done. You don’t even get your tonsils removed without a waiting period.
“Abort! Abort as quickly as possible! Don’t ask questions!” That’s what pro “choice” is all about!
The government injects itself into highly personal decisions all the time.
I don’t agree with that, of course, however I want the government to be all over any “highly personal medical procedure” that is intended to take the life of someone, especially innocent unborn children who cannot defend themselves. They have the right to live and that is one of the only legitimate purposes of government – to protect the lives of it’s citizens.
MaryLee, I highly doubt that anyone “waltzes” into a clinic to get an abortion. That’s a lie your side perpetuates to make women who want to get abortions seem like cavalier harlots. As it stands right now, most clinics *couldn’t* do same-day abortions even if they *wanted* to, since there’s such a shortage of qualified physicians trained to perform them. And there are laws in place mandating that women get screened and counseled beforehand, so this extra “three day waiting period” is just designed to make it as hard as possible for a woman in SD to get an abortion. Do you know how big the state of South Dakota is? It’s huge. It’s rural. There’s one abortion provider. Three days of waiting means three days of taking off work, driving potentially for hours, finding childcare for the kids a woman already has, etc. etc.
Oh. And as far as I know, mandatory waiting periods for other medical procedures aren’t thinly veiled attempts to impose conservative Christian viewpoints on patients. If you can find a secular pregnancy resource center in SD, I’ll be darned.
What is being largely ignored by the MSM is that this law is not just about a waiting period. It requires screening to make sure the woman or girl is not being coerced and to assess her risk factors for psychological problems after abortion. It also requires that she be given information about alternatives. This is standard practice for medical procedures. All this law does is force abortion businesses to act with a minimum of respect for the rights and well-being of women. Of course, if they actually were to do that they couldn’t stay in business — which is why the abortion industry is so strongly opposed to this law.
And as far as I know, mandatory waiting periods for other medical procedures aren’t thinly veiled attempts to impose conservative Christian viewpoints on patients.
The fact that the fetus is a human life is a “conservative Christian viewpoint?” Really? Gosh, that’s funny – I didn’t read that in my Bible. I read it in my biology textbook.
If you can find a secular pregnancy resource center in SD, I’ll be darned.
And you’re also aware that most food pantries, homeless shelters, maternity homes, etc, are also Christian-based or at least Christian-founded. But apparently, the fact that they’re “Christian” overshadows the fact that they actually HELP PEOPLE.
If you can find an atheist pregnancy resource center, homeless shelter, maternity home, etc, please do link to one.
It requires screening to make sure the woman or girl is not being coerced and to assess her risk factors for psychological problems after abortion.
Oh, but Amy, don’t you KNOW? The only women/girls who are “coerced” are the ones who enter pregnancy resource centers! The only ones who have psychological problems were nuts to begin with!
It’s like MAGIC, I tell ya.
My husband recently had a vasectomy, and I had to sign off on it. Sadly, fathers have no rights to their in utero children, even as the state protects my right to my presumed future children.
But this editorial writer is drawing a false analogy in the first place. Vasectomies don’t take human lives. Abortions do.
Yeah Kel, and people aren’t FORCED to go to those other, religiously-affiliated organizations. This law mandates it. Big difference. And like I said, abortion clinics do pre-procedure counseling as a rule of thumb. If these lawmakers really wanted to shore up the informed consent bit, though, they’d work with existing clinics to improve screening measures, not outsource this process to places that don’t have any regulations about what can pass as valid “information,” i.e. emotional browbeating will now count as “counseling.”
Why aren’t you similarly concerned that pregnant woman aren’t being psychologically manipulated into giving birth? Are you concerned that OB’s aren’t properly assessing women’s mental and emotional health? Oh wait, it doesn’t matter what the woman wants, feels or thinks when she’s pregnant. If she was coerced into it, pff! Rape’s just God’s little gift to women who didn’t know they secretly wanted a baby.
Megan said: And like I said, abortion clinics do pre-procedure counseling as a rule of thumb.
This is true, but they have a financial incentive to abort.
It seems like the people here are pretty well aware (and supportive) of the actual, intended purpose of this law: to simply make it much more difficult to get an abortion. If the law’s only function is to act as a roadblock to the exercise of a constitutional right, that makes it unconstitutional. I imagine the federal court(s) that inevitably review the law will come to this same conclusion.
Megan, there are 7 secular Birthright CPC’s in SD.
*edited from 4 to 7, I thought they had all the birthright centers together on the site I was reading, but they actually had it grouped by region.
Hi Megan,
I wasn’t a cavalier harlot before my abortion. Were you? My “counseling” went something like this at the mill. “Will that be Visa or Mastercard today?”
I grew up in ND. One abortion clinic there too. Just like SD. Do you finally feel compassion for women? All of the rural Dakota women who have endured forced and coerced pregnancy and childbirth?
ppppphhhhhtttt
But, but, but–abortion is never used as birth control, right?
So how come she compares abortion to birth control?
http://www.birthright.org/htmpages/philo.htm
“BIRTHRIGHT DOES NOT
…use “scare tactics” or pressure.
…show abortion slides or pictures.
…picket or harass abortion clinics.
…evangelize.
…lobby for legislative changes or engage in the public debate on abortion. ”
”
BIRTHRIGHT GIVES
…its services free of charge. A tax-exempt, charitable organization, Birthright exists because of the financial and moral support of its donors and volunteers. It is independent, interdenominational, and not affiliated with any religious or political group or public agency.
Doesn’t Germany require you to do essentially the same thing prior to an abortion? Get counseling from people trying to talk you out of it, review biological information, learn about resources available to help you continue a pregnancy, etc.? Obviously not exactly, but I feel like it’s similar isn’t it?
Yeah, they’re all about “imposing a Christian viewpoint” on people in Germany.
It seems like the people here are pretty well aware (and supportive) of the actual, intended purpose of this law: to simply make it much more difficult to get an abortion.
It would seem so. And you would agree with this law as well right? If it makes abortions RARE then you are all for it as well, Joan. R-A-R-E!!
“Do you finally feel compassion for women? All of the rural Dakota women who have endured forced and coerced pregnancy and childbirth?”
Actually yeah Carla, I do. I have quite a few friends from ND and so it’s terrible to imagine anything like that happening to them.
“How dare you tell me to wait 3 days to get a gun!” Said a woman who shot her “mouthy” kids.
Women who are determined to kill their offspring won’t be dissuaded by a CPC or a waiting period. Women who are having a crisis that will pass with a couple days to think it over may be saving themselves the regret of a lifetime. My mom told me a story about a rip-roarin’ argument she had with my dad. What if she had rushed to an abortuary? The argument was resolved and I was safe. And as far as “waltz”, Megan, what do you call it when a ghoul like cc meets a girl at her car and looms over her until she’s through the door of the abbatoir? It’s like a cult, where they don’t let new members have a moment to think.
Trust women!! Just don’t trust women who don’t kill children for a living??
Anything like what, Megan? Having to wait 3 days to get an abortion or talk to a secular group who just wants to help the woman get on Medicaid and find a doctor? Oh, the horror!
As others have said, most people have to wait a lot longer than 3 days for an elective surgical procedure. I had to wait 2 months to get my wisdom teeth pulled. How will I ever recover from such a hardship?
Oh, I dunno, Lauren. I’d say dealing with a pregnancy is a tad more urgent than getting your teeth pulled, especially if there’s a time-limit on when that procedure can be performed. Oh, and you weren’t forced to wait to get dental surgery because some quack legislator deems you unfit to make this decision yourself. Stop pretending that this law is designed to actually help anybody. It’s insulting.
Three or four of you in here have made bad decisions. They aren’t my bad decisions and they aren’t the bad decisions of other women. It’s extremely arrogant to subsume my story and the stories of others under your one big anti-abortion, evils-of-nonprocreative-sex narrative.
Is it possible for pro-aborts to leave religion OUT OF a discussion on abortion?
I bet if the Catholic Church became pro-abortion, the pro-aborts would become pro-life in a heart-beat and whine how the Church advocates killing babies. Ugh.
Could we stick to the topic at hand? Talk in a civil tone?
Thanks. Stepping off my soapbox now.
Hi Megan,
ND friends? Lovely! It hasn’t happened to your friends and it hasn’t happened to mine. Any links to the rates of ND forced pregnancy and childbirth?
Several of my friends(and my sister)drove hours to get to the only ND abortion mill. They now deeply regret their abortions.(except my sister) Everyone knows where to go and how long it takes to drive there and how much they charge. No worries. Others didn’t want an abortion and kept their babies. Imagine!!
If you live in a rural area you will do whatever it takes to pay someone to kill your child OR you will seek out the help and support you need to raise that baby.
Janet,
I can’t stand it when religion is shoved down my throat either.
“It would seem so. And you would agree with this law as well right? If it makes abortions RARE then you are all for it as well, Joan. R-A-R-E!!”
I never said anything about making abortion rare. The supply should be allowed to meet the demand. If you want to lower the demand, address the circumstantial factors that cause women to seek abortions in the first place, like financial insecurity or poor access to contraceptives.
And I find it curious that you’d leave the Christian conservative paradise of North Dakota for the godless liberal Madison.
“How dare you tell me to wait 3 days to get a gun!” Said a woman who shot her “mouthy” kids.”
Oh, very cute. Except for the little fact that waiting periods for guns exist in order to facilitate criminal background checks and waiting periods for abortions exist only to impede access to a constitutional right.
“Women who are having a crisis that will pass with a couple days to think it over may be saving themselves the regret of a lifetime.”
Can’t be much of a personal “crisis” if it only lasts a few days. Maybe they should make the law two weeks instead? You know, to protect women from themselves during more extended crises. Do you have any speculation as to why the lawmakers in South Dakota didn’t make it a 336-hour waiting period instead? Do they just not care about women having a crisis that lasts exactly 2 weeks or less?
“Megan, what do you call it when a ghoul like cc meets a girl at her car and looms over her until she’s through the door of the abbatoir?”
Friendly reminder: if you’re on the wrong side of the issues here, the commenting rules do not apply to people making personal attacks against you.
Actually, Megan, my wait time for my surgery was a direct result of legislation. I found a different dentist who would have performed my surgery sooner, but my mom didn’t approve of him because a drug-addicted teen ager died under his care 15 years earlier. Because I was only 16 at the time, I couldn’t make the decision to go with the quicker surgeon.
I would think that the fact that my teeth were in danger of undoing 5 years worth of orthodontics is a pretty pressing matter, but I still didn’t get to make the decision for myself.
As you know, I’m sure, under Doe v. Bolton, abortion is legal during all 9 months of pregnancy for any reason. The “health” of the mother is defined so broadly that any woman can meet it. A woman has 280 days to end her pregnancy. 3 days is nothing.
And like I said, abortion clinics do pre-procedure counseling as a rule of thumb.
Does that counseling include information on fetal development (besides saying “it’s not a baby. It’s a fetus. It’s just a clump of cells at this point.”)? Does that counseling include information on the possible psychological risks of an abortion? (i actually just saw ONE abortion clinic’s website that basically admitted to post-traumatic abortion stress).
If these lawmakers really wanted to shore up the informed consent bit, though, they’d work with existing clinics to improve screening measures, not outsource this process to places that don’t have any regulations about what can pass as valid “information,” i.e. emotional browbeating will now count as “counseling.”
Really, Megan? “Emotional browbeating?” If that were to ever even occur, I suppose in your mind that’s worse than being lied to by the clinic waiting to take your credit card for your “procedure.”
When directly asked in undercover investigations, the clinics have been shown to answer DISHONESTLY to women about fetal development. In other words, they lie to them. THAT is emotional manipulation (to assuage the woman’s natural conscience – psychological validation – and believe me, if you have to “justify” what you’re doing, then you probably shouldn’t be doing it) so they can get their money.
“Oh, very cute. Except for the little fact that waiting periods for guns exist in order to facilitate criminal background checks and waiting periods for abortions exist only to impede access to a constitutional right.”
LMAO! Wow. You do realize that gun ownership is a constitutional right, right?
Unlike abortion, it’s actualy in the bill of rights. It’s not a enumeration of a penumbra.
Oh, and BTW, waiting periods for guns exist to keep someone from killing another person.
Carla, are you serious? You throw out spurious statistics–“60% of abortions are coerced”–and then seemingly refuse to believe that, by the same token, women are also coerced into pregnancies they’d rather end by families, partners, etc. Rape occurs on a continuum, you know. Most of them aren’t reported.
Joan,
Supply should meet demand. Yes. Yes. Of course. Of course. Contraceptives are available everywhere, financial insecurity can be solved by going to a Life Care Center where everything is FREE.
You find it curious that I moved out of the state of ND??
I had no idea that little babies were forcing themselves by the millions on unwitting unwilling women!!
Should we try to find out what they want? oh… life? NOOOOOO!!!!
Quick abort before they can stop you!!!! Don’t wait!
Don’t look at their sweet faces!
Think only about yourself and abort, abort, abort, quick!!!!!!!
What an insidious plan these babies have?
To be your beloved children?
OH THE HORROR!!!!!!!
How quickly would you like to be able to pay someone to shred them?
Children are the most precious of Gods earthly blessings! They are not pests.
They do not need to be exterminated.
Why care whether they are shredded today vs.3 days?
Serious Profits and Serious Bloodlust!
Women who are determined to kill their offspring won’t be dissuaded by a CPC or a waiting period.
This is very true, ninek. If they are that determined, they’ll do it anyway. I had at least one client at our CPC who took the info we gave her, aborted, then later came back to ask me to PLEASE talk to her two young friends about how valuable they are and the importance of abstinence. Browbeating, hmm? I don’t think they’d come back if we “browbeat” them, now would they.
a constitutional right
For the record, there is nothing in the United States Constitution granting a right to abortion. The “right” to abortion was created by the U.S. Supreme Court, denying hundreds of years of legal precedent, not to mention the will of the people. Abortion laws (pro or against) should be legislated, not decreed by nine people appointed for a lifetime.
Megan,
Why do you always throw out rape when it only accounts for less than 1% of all abortions??
I asked if you had any stats on the poor, rural ND women that have been forced into pregnancy and childbirth. My guess is no.
No Carla, I don’t have a statistic precisely because it’s something that’s hard to measure–which is the same reason your side can only keep reiterating that general CI of “60%” like some pro-life game of telephone. Coercive sex happens on a continuum, from violent to psychological manipulation.
I don’t know what makes you so certain that pregnant women are all having babies completely of their own volition. If a woman can get pressured into having an abortion by a partner, she can just as equally get pressured into having his baby. Works both ways.
I don’t know what makes you so certain that pregnant women are all having babies completely of their own volition. If a woman can get pressured into having an abortion by a partner, she can just as equally get pressured into having his baby. Works both ways.
Did you ever think that perhaps if an abused woman were to go ahead and abort, she might actually end up dead along with her child? I do not see how abortion is the solution to domestic abuse. Sometimes, a pregnancy is what wakes a woman up to see that she needs to get out, to save herself AND her child.
Were you being abused when you had your abortion, Megan? How about most of your college friends?
“Oh, and BTW, waiting periods for guns exist to keep someone from killing another person.”
The point is, there is a compelling government interest that justifies waiting periods for guns. There is absolutely no government interest at stake in arbitrarily forcing women to wait 3 days to get an abortion, apart from simply making it difficult to get an abortion. Making it harder to exercise a constitutional right for its own sake cannot be a legitimate government interest.
“Supply should meet demand. Yes. Yes. Of course. Of course. Contraceptives are available everywhere, financial insecurity can be solved by going to a Life Care Center where everything is FREE.”
Really? A “Life Care Center” will provide an impoverished woman with a home, job skills, and an income, and magically make any substance abuse problems or criminal backgrounds go away on top of it? That’s amazing!
“You find it curious that I moved out of the state of ND??”
I would just think that you’d be happier surrounded by the “real Americans” in an overwhelmingly religious, politically conservative state.
“I asked if you had any stats on the poor, rural ND women that have been forced into pregnancy and childbirth. My guess is no.”
She should just do what ninek does when asked to provide the source for her statistics and say “go find them yourself”.
Well I am thinking that you aren’t being intellectually honest here. I mean how many blog posts has Jill posted on men that beat and kill their women who refuse abortion? Happens all the time. And there are the men who slip something in their girlfriends drink to induce abortion.
I don’t buy it, Megan. That women are “forced into birthing their babies” at the rate that women are forced to abort. btw There is no force involved in a pregnancy. A baby grows of its own volition.
Have a good day.
Joan,
You have no idea what would make me happier. My state turning red is a start. I am nowhere near Madison.
At my life care center we have helped women with a place to live, and a job, and of course there are referrals to substance abuse programs. There is an excellent program near me for those that are in abusive situations. So I guess my answer to you is YES!!
We do not promise to make any situation “go away.” Abortion mills do that.
“There is absolutely no government interest at stake in arbitrarily forcing women to wait 3 days to get an abortion, apart from simply making it difficult to get an abortion. Making it harder to exercise a constitutional right for its own sake cannot be a legitimate government interest.”
Per Casey the state has a legitimate interest in protecting prenatal life. A waiting period is a rational means to this end.
If you can find an atheist pregnancy resource center, homeless shelter, maternity home, etc, please do link to one.
Good point. I always hear atheists talk about how stupid, evil, narrow-minded, etc., people of faith (particularly Christians) are but it seems that there are very few charitable organizations run by atheists (I have heard, however, that the Red Cross was started by one).
“Really? A “Life Care Center” will provide an impoverished woman with a home, job skills, and an income, and magically make any substance abuse problems or criminal backgrounds go away on top of it? That’s amazing!”
Yep. Pro-life centers help women connect with maternity homes which provide both housing and, many times, an education. If a woman would rather live on her own, pro-life centers help connect her with programs like Section 8. Pro-life centers help women get on medicaid or prenatal chip and refer to medical programs to help deal with substance abuse issues. They also offer help with getting on TANF or WIC.
Do abortion clinics do any of this? No. They kill her baby and send her on her way.
Doesn’t Germany require you to do essentially the same thing prior to an abortion?
Good point about waiting periods in Germany. Pro-aborts often ignore the fact that abortion laws in many (not all, of course) European countries are more restrictive than in the U.s. Not only is there a 72 hour waiting period in Germany, mandatory counseling is also required. Counseling and waiting periods are also required in Belgium and the Netherlands. Even very liberal countries such as Denmark and Norway require counseling (but no waiting periods).
In secular France. From Wikipedia: It is customary to schedule abortions one week after the patient demands it as a “cool-off” period, but this delay can be shortened if the patient is getting close to the 12-week limit.
Here’s a link to an article that details waiting periods/counseling in different countries:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/waiting.html
At my life care center we have helped women with a place to stay, and a job, and of course there are referrals to substance abuse programs. There is an excellent program near me for those that are in abusive situations. So I guess my answer to you is YES!!
We always hear about how CPC’s “mislead” women, but many offer services that go beyond just helping with problem pregnancies. I had an adult client who had very poor eyesight, but in PA medicare only pays for eyeglasses for people under 18. My local prolife group helped me buy glasses for this woman, and lousy vision had nothing to do with problem pregnancies. How about the pro-choicers in SD get together and help those women who have to pay for childcare, etc., because of that draconian three-day waiting period?
And doesn’t the administration of RU-486 require a woman to go to a doctor/clinic more than once? It seems that this would impose some hardship, too?
Lastly, I am very surprised that a wife must consent to her husband’s vasectomy. I never heard of that before, I guess you learn something new every day.
Megs there is a great need for legal counsel for those that are being forced against their will to abort. There is also the need for abortionists to know they CANNOT perform an abortion on a woman who not consenting to it. A woman has a right to NOT have an abortion. My lawyer friend started this.
The Center Against Forced Abortion
http://www.txjf.org/pages.asp?pageid=99931
I googled forced abortion and forced pregnancy and childbirth. You can too.
“Per Casey the state has a legitimate interest in protecting prenatal life. A waiting period is a rational means to this end.”
The state only has a compelling governmental interest in protecting “prenatal life” past the point of viability. Because this law does not recognize that distinction, it is an undue burden on the constitutional right to abortion.
“Good point. I always hear atheists talk about how stupid, evil, narrow-minded, etc., people of faith (particularly Christians) are but it seems that there are very few charitable organizations run by atheists (I have heard, however, that the Red Cross was started by one).”
Here’s one you might have heard of: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
“Good point about waiting periods in Germany. Pro-aborts often ignore the fact that abortion laws in many (not all, of course) European countries are more restrictive than in the U.s. Not only is there a 72 hour waiting period in Germany, mandatory counseling is also required. Counseling and waiting periods are also required in Belgium and the Netherlands. Even very liberal countries such as Denmark and Norway require counseling (but no waiting periods).”
Citizens of European countries are not protected by the Constitution of the United States.
Wow, I so stand corrected. I didn’t realize my mom was the only woman in the entire known universe to have gotten angry and stayed angry for almost two days. Imagine the DNA I must have inherited!
Golly, I wish I had a link to some statistics about women, men, and anger, lol! In case the abortion fans didn’t realize, this is a pro-life website. So, we usually give pro-life sources, which we’ve done ad nauseum, and which the other side constantly invalidates as being biased. So, tell me again why I should cast my pearls before you over and over? We’ve given so many links already and all you do is whine that they’re too pro-life.
In addition, cc brags about being an escort and she’s quite proud of it. If I call her anything else she says I’m being misogynistic, but ghoul is unisex, so I’m actually being more politically correct than usual. I used the word ‘hag’ once and no one liked that. Crazy cat lady might fit, but someday that’ll probably apply to me as well, haha!
If it’s just a clump of cells, I don’t see why abortion fans are getting their knickers in a bunch over this. In real reality, we are talking about the taking of a human life. While some gals have no conscience or guilt about it, many do. I think it’s worth a few days wait. After all, we have to wait for every other medical procedure that isn’t an emergency. Abortion fans are the biggest hypocrites: they keep nagging about legitimizing abortion and making it like everything else, but turn around and ask for exceptions to all other normal medical procedures. They don’t want inspections of clinics, they don’t want standards of cleanliness, they don’t want to abide by Hipaa’s privacy rules, and they don’t want admitting procedures to nearby emergency rooms, nor do they have crash carts in their so called clinics.
Grow a pair of ovaries, ladies, if you want to be like the rest of the medical community, start acting like the rest of the medical community.
“ Because this law does not recognize that distinction, it is an undue burden on the constitutional right to abortion.”
Not true. States can innact restrictions and waiting periods prior to viability.
” I think it’s worth a few days wait. After all, we have to wait for every other medical procedure that isn’t an emergency.”
Not as a result of laws specifically intended to make it difficult and painful to get those procedures.
“Not true. States can innact restrictions and waiting periods prior to viability.”
I’d like some examples of such laws that have been upheld in federal court.
A shout-out to my fellow native North Dakotans! (I live in AZ now.)
You know what I love about ND, St. Gianna’s Maternity Home for young girls in crisis pregnancies. Fabulous place!
http://saintgiannahome.org/
A shout right back to you, JoAnna!! ND!!
Thank you for the link too!! Wonderful!
joan said – The supply should be allowed to meet the demand.
joan – you really are pretty sick – the supply of children should be allowed to meet the demand of abortion?
Even if you flip it – the supply of abortions should be allowed to meet the demand for them – you’re still treating abortion as a commodity.
Just as with CC – your eugenics is showing.
And read the link about who “St. Gianna” was. She was a wife, mother and PHYSICIAN (Gee…she did that AND had kids!) who “sacrificed her own life so that her unborn child could live”.
No, I’m not Catholic, but I read about St. Gianna before.
Has anyone ever returned anything after they bought it.
Has anyone ever changed their mind?
Even home and car dealers are now offering return policies.
Imagine if all your decisions were THIS final.
If you change your mind tomorrow, you don’t get your baby back.
Some women will lose their fertility all together.
Isn’t that worth some time to think?
or is there another motivation altogether,
“…. Turn that table, time is money….”
Joan, please furnish us with proof that the waiting period is purely an evil Christian pro-life tactic designed to make your life harder when you just can’t wait to kill your child.
Joan, please also furnish us with the “real” abortion pictures that you claim exist when you accuse us of using “doctored” or “faked” photographs. I’m waiting. **cue Jeopardy theme song.**
Joan, please furnish us with proof that the Catholic Church’s Magisterium has declared that a Catholic can be pro-abortion. A link will suffice.
“If you want to lower the demand, address the circumstantial factors that cause women to seek abortions in the first place, like financial insecurity or poor access to contraceptives.”
Joan, please provide us with proof that only poor women who can’t get contraceptives need abortions. And please provide us with proof that affluent women aren’t getting abortions for convenience, sex selection, and to avoid being fat in their wedding dress. A link will suffice.
Megan, I never said women “waltz” into abortion clinics. I was talking about plastic surgery. But now that you mention it, some women DO “waltz” in and take it about as seriously as a manicure. So is it no big deal, or a serious procedure? You can’t have it both ways. Anyone with a brain would agree that a waiting period is a good idea. Yeesh.
I’m confused. If poor women cannot afford contraception how can they afford abortions?
Yeesh. Abortions are between $400-$700!!
Maybe Joan’s links will shed some light.
Joan, you need to get your facts straight. PP v. Casey completely revised the framework and made it clear that the state has an interest in the potential fetal life from the outset – even to the point of favoring childbirth over abortion, though abortions can only be restricted after the point of viability. Prior to viability, the standard for abortion legislation is that it can’t impose an undue burden (“substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus”). A 24 hour waiting period for all abortions was specifically upheld in Casey and 24 states currently have a waiting period of some length even for non-viable abortions. The SD law has the longest waiting period, but it is by no means certain that it will be struck down.
Joan, please furnish us with proof that the waiting period is purely an evil Christian pro-life tactic designed to make your life harder when you just can’t wait to kill your child.
The point that I was trying to make about waiting periods in European countries such as France is that these are liberal, basically secular nations and they have had waiting periods in place for decades, without all the pro-abortion hysteria seen here.
Carla says:
March 24, 2011 at 2:40 pm
I’m confused. If poor women cannot afford contraception how can they afford abortions? Yeesh. Abortions are between $400-$700!!
Maybe Joan’s links will shed some light.
How much does a years’ worth of BC cost in cash, not insured? I’ve never had to buy it, and I have no idea.
My doctor put me on the pill (yes, I’m a pro-lifer on the pill…..it needed to be done since my system is so out of whack), and it costs me all of FIVE DOLLARS a month. FIVE DOLLARS! Highway robbery, I tell ya.
Now, should I get pregnant on the pill, my husband and I are prepared and would welcome the child. My doc put me on to regulate my cycle and to help me stop having debilitating PMDD…..and even though we don’t have much money at all, I am STILL able to afford birth control and would not even think of aborting my child.
So if the local Reformed Jewish community, Episcopalians, UCC, and Unitaritan church folks got together to form their own crisis pregancy centers with abortion being offered as an option, you folks would be OK with that?
“Joan, please furnish us with proof that the waiting period is purely an evil Christian pro-life tactic designed to make your life harder when you just can’t wait to kill your child.”
Would you also like me to furnish you with “proof” that poll taxes were meant to disenfranchise black voters? I would hope that the legislators in South Dakota wouldn’t be dumb enough to explicitly state, in the legislative record or some other context, that the purpose of this law is to burden abortion rights.
“Joan, please provide us with proof that only poor women who can’t get contraceptives need abortions. And please provide us with proof that affluent women aren’t getting abortions for convenience, sex selection, and to avoid being fat in their wedding dress. A link will suffice.”
I didn’t make either of those claims. Try reading what I wrote, very slowly, and see if you can figure out the plain meaning of my words, then try again.
“Joan, you need to get your facts straight. PP v. Casey completely revised the framework and made it clear that the state has an interest in the potential fetal life from the outset – even to the point of favoring childbirth over abortion, though abortions can only be restricted after the point of viability. Prior to viability, the standard for abortion legislation is that it can’t impose an undue burden (“substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus”). A 24 hour waiting period for all abortions was specifically upheld in Casey and 24 states currently have a waiting period of some length even for non-viable abortions. The SD law has the longest waiting period, but it is by no means certain that it will be struck down.”
Note that I said compelling governmental interest, not merely “interest”. The state clearly has no compelling governmental interest to favor childbirth over abortion prior to the point of viability if it can’t actually forbid abortions prior to that point. A 72-hour waiting period is considerably more of a burden than a 24-hour one and I think any court would clearly recognize that, especially given the individual circumstances in South Dakota.
“The point that I was trying to make about waiting periods in European countries such as France is that these are liberal, basically secular nations and they have had waiting periods in place for decades, without all the pro-abortion hysteria seen here.”
That’s probably because, insofar as I can tell, those countries don’t have large, well-funded, religious movements attempting to make abortion illegal, or failing that, as hard as possible to get. The calculus that informs the perception of threats to reproductive health rights is simply different there. If France or Germany had politically powerful, well-connected evangelical Christian “god squads” attempting to manipulate electoral politics in the way that the United States does, I’m sure there would be public outcries over additional abortion restrictions there too.
CC, if the religious organizations created a crisis pregnancy center(s) that also referred for abortion without committing them on the premises, then YES! That is a great step in the right direction. After all, wouldn’t Reformed Jewish community, Episcopalians, UCC, and Unitaritan church folks want to increase their numbers by birth as well as conversion?
The important thing I see is to keep the pregnancy centers separate from abortion facilities for obvious reasons: do women waiting for abortions really want to sit in the same waiting room as women happily chatting about their ultrasounds and baby showers?
Wait, what? Did I just agree with cc? Holy popcorn, Batman!
I am looking forward to the demise of Roe v Wade, but meanwhile, I’ll accept an increase in the number of CPC’s. I don’t care if they’re Buddhist, Episcopalian, or atheist.
Wait, I thought CC said “with abortion being offered as an option”…….did I miss something?
Option could mean different things. Option as in, you can go down the road and get one, or option meaning you can go through the third door on the right. That’s why I said, I’d be more ok with referral, though Roe v Wade has got to go the way of the dodo bird and the tyranosaurus rex. Can you imagine an arrowed sign in the waiting room, “abortions to the left” and “deliveries to the right?” AW-kward. Although, maybe it would make women change their minds in the waiting room because the other moms would be so cheerful and they’d want to feel better too.
Nah, I don’t think it would work in the same building. We could hear the girls screaming from the “second waiting room.” They had us undress, separated us from our clothes and shoes, and left us waiting in “room #2.” Looking back, I wondered if it was a deterrent to flight: take their shoes and clothes away in the middle of a New York winter. I wouldn’t imagine most girls would go running out to the parking lot nekkid and barefoot.
2 questions:
1. If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, what is the reason that the child, an innocent bystander, should receive the death penalty for the actions of a rapist?
2. Where in the Constitution does it give mothers the right to kill their children at will? And what kind of society are we to support such barbarism anyway?
Don’t have to answer, just think about it.
Joan – I’ll repeat. You need to get your facts straight. The Court abandoned strict scrutiny of abortion regulations, which would require a compelling state interest. In pre-Casey cases the Court had held that the state had a compelling interest in fetal life post-viability which allowed restriction and even prohibition of abortion (w/ health exceptions) post-viability). In Casey, the strict scrutiny standard was abandoned in favor of the undue burden test. So pre-viability, legislation is reviewed to see if it imposes and undue burden on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion. Waiting periods have been regularly upheld under this standard and half the states have them in place. The framework of Roe has all but been overturned. You need to keep up.
I should clarify – there is no more pre/post viability framework. Under Roe, abortion was a “fundamental right” subject to strict scrutiny (it could only be restricted to serve a compelling state interest which essentially eliminated all regulation pre-viability except regulation related to maternal health). That was abandoned in Casey in favor of an intermediate standard of scrutiny (undue burden) and the Court made clear that the state’s interest in fetal life was there at the outset (not just at viability). All abortion legislation is reviewed under the undue burden test which is much more permissive. So in City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1983) the Court struck down a 24 hour waiting period using the Roe framework. That case was overruled in Casey when they upheld a waiting period using the new undue burden framework.
Since you’re all about things are right because they’re legal, don’t you think you should know what the law is?
1. If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, what is the reason that the child, an innocent bystander, should receive the death penalty for the actions of a rapist?
Now isn’t that the oddest of phenomena. In order to be a “bystander,” you have to be able to bear witness to an event. Doesn’t seem that a pre-sentient being is really capable of that, but whatever, let the illogical analogies flow. You know though, if you ask Carla, she’ll tell you that there’s no such thing as a coerced pregnancy. Guess women weren’t really raped if a nice, shiny new baby is the end result. Rape: God’s gift to women who were kidding themselves into thinking they didn’t actually want a baby.
No they were raped. And rape is the only situation in which a woman has no choice in a pregnancy. It is unfair. It’s repulsive. But there is only one guilty party – the rapist. The woman is innocent. The fetus is innocent. Another act of violence cannot undo the injustice that’s been committed – it can only compound it. Maybe bystander is the wrong word, but the question is the same. Why should an innocent life pay the penalty for the actions of another. It all comes back to that question.
How sentient is a sleeping “by-lyer” who is hit by a stray drive-by bullet? We can’t judge a person’s humanity by how “up to snuff” they are at any particular moment.
If they’re an innocent member of the human species and not causing or threatening great bodily harm to another, no one has the right to do the same to them.
“If they’re an innocent member of the human species and not causing or threatening great bodily harm to another, no one has the right to do the same to them.”
So by that criteria pregnancy would be an exception. It can be risky, especially for the unprepared, and often DOES “threaten great bodily harm,” Sorry but a condition subjecting my body to the possibility of hypertension, eclampsia, diabetes, depression, weight gain, incredible fatigue and maybe even a great big tear along my perineum constitutes a “threat of great bodily harm.” And ps. the term “innocent” isn’t relevant when talking about something that’s pre-sentient and incapable of rational thought and moral judgment.
Some abortion fans aren’t capable of rational thought and moral judgment. Just sayin’.
Megan wrote:
“the term “innocent” isn’t relevant when talking about something that’s pre-sentient and incapable of rational thought and moral judgment.”
So you would find no problem in killing a small child? No one thinks rationally until several years of age. No one makes moral judgments until about 6 or 7 years of age, which is why the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Eucharist are held off until then.
As for the health problems caused by pregnancy, all of them can be treated. For eclampsia, the child can be delivered. Diabetes just requires a slight change in diet. Pulmonary hypertension requires immediate intervention, which can then save both lives. Abortion has actually been known to make hypertension worse. To treat depression, one can take anti-depressants. Eating right and exercising (which you’re supposed to do anyway) can treat weight gain. To fight fatigue, go for a jog, do some stretching, or even just take an hour nap in the middle of the day.
As for perineal tears, don’t get an episiotomy, as they can lead to worse tears. From babycenter.com:
“Doing perineal massage in your third trimester may help make the skin of your perineum more stretchy and make it less likely that you’ll tearing or need an episiotomy.
“You’re also less likely to tear if you have a slow, controlled delivery that allows plenty of time for your perineum to stretch to accommodate your baby. This can mean waiting and fighting the urge to push for a while when the baby’s head is crowning, for example.
“Some research has shown that giving birth lying on your side may help you deliver your baby more slowly — although not all women find this position comfortable.
“Look for a practitioner who doesn’t routinely perform episiotomies and is comfortable and experienced at helping women give birth with an intact perineum.”
You pro-“choicers” make it seem like pregnancy is something that is deadly, when millions of women have children every year, and have been doing so for millions of years. It’s not like it’s unnatural. In fact, child bearing is the most natural thing in the world, as we were made to procreate. That’s the human species’ specific purpose. Why mess with nature? If women didn’t have children, our species would die out. In fact, it makes women stronger, because then you become a mama bear, and know that you would move Heaven and Earth for that child. Not to mention the fact that women have to be strong in order to carry children. If your body weren’t strong enough, you would not conceive, and even if you somehow did, you would miscarry.
Plus, men would never be able to withstand the pain of birth, which tells you that women are definitely stronger. Child bearing is a source of pride. Elizabeth Cady Stanton had a flag raised above her house when she gave birth to her children, and then she would stroll them out in public, back in a time when children weren’t seen before their school age. Why can’t all women be that proud to be women, that they celebrate the one thing that separates us from men, instead of insisting on being just like men? Not celebrating that difference, and insisting on being just like men would only put us on the same playing field, and never give us the chance to be known as “the stronger sex”. Do you want to join the male gender? Or do you want to be a woman and celebrate the differences that make us women? Are you proud to be a woman or not?
Hi Megs,
I wasn’t talking about rape. You were.
Coerced into pregnancy and childbirth. That is what we were talking about.
Coercion vs VIOLENCE.
Try to keep up and do not put words into my mouth.
Oh – so this is the post where all the abortion-choicers are congregating – instead of the one with the CBR video study of lies and truth.
Come on, Chris. You know the drill.
They like to hide.
I am immensely proud of my Governor, Dennis Daugaard, and our wonderful South Dakota State Legislature, and of the people of South Dakota for PERSEVERING! If Mary Anna Towler does not like our informed consent, or any of our other life-affirming laws, she can stay out of our state.
In 2003-2004 South Dakota undertook a comprehensive study of abortion and post-abortive effects on women, of which all our legislators since that time have the opportunity to avail themselves. This revealing report is available on line and you can find it by googling South Dakota Abortion Task Force Report. The result of that report has been South Dakota consistently and courageously leading the way on life-affirming legislation. Portions of the report have been used in Supreme Court cases; most notably the Carhart case upholding the “partial birth abortion ban.”
It will take our elected officials’ courage and the prayers of the saints for these victories to continue. I, for one, am committed to praying through.
What everybody said after Megan’s response to my post! Good job, people! :)
Why are we splitting hairs, Carla? Women can be coerced into getting abortions. Women can also be coerced into continuing pregnancies they don’t want, whether by their partner’s psychological manipulation, direct violence, or being unable to access abortion services. Isn’t that the intended outcome of your abortion ban? To coerce women who would otherwise have chosen abortion into giving birth? Not really sure what the confusion is here.
Hi Amy,
Women have been giving birth forever and surviving and also dying or sustaining sustaining pregnancy-related complications. For such a supposedly “intentional” process, there sure are lots of flaws. And no, I don’t want to “be a man,” whatever that means. I just don’t particularly feel like using my body to have children right now, maybe never. The female body can do a lot of stuff besides have babies (which is awesome), so I don’t think carrying a pregnancy should necessarily define my “womanhood.”
I am not splitting hairs. I am not the one confused.
You know though, if you ask Carla, she’ll tell you that there’s no such thing as a coerced pregnancy.
The difference is between having a dead baby or having a live baby. I am sure you think that CPC’s COERCE women throughout pregnancy right? I thought women were SMART and EMPOWERED unless they walk into a CPC!!
So done talking in circles with you Megan. Have a good weekend!!
People of either sex can be coerced into having a sexual encounter they don’t want.
No one can be coerced into a pregnancy they don’t want.
:>) .
And what do you mean by that, ninek? Sure a woman can be pressured into keeping an unwanted pregnancy. Sure you’ve heard that so-endearing “Baby if you love me you’ll have my son” line before. If that isn’t psychological manipulation I’m not sure what is. And we’ve heard at least one individual in this forum say he doesn’t oppose men forcibly preventing their partners from getting abortions.
Why are you soft-pedaling, Carla? Yes whichever way you slice it abortion ends a life. Check. That’s not what I was talking about. By making abortion a criminal act, wouldn’t you by definition be coercing women who don’t want to be pregnant into keeping these pregnancies? I don’t care how many carseats or pampers or whatever CPCs might shower these women with. Coercion is coercion.
Carla, have a great weekend, but don’t forget: all pro-lifers know about the secret of the CPC: the invisible, undetectable, but very effective Brain-Dimmer 3000 that is mounted over the doorway. It’s guaranteed to turn even Gloria Steinem into a bare-foot and pregnant Stepford wife. LOL!!!
OMG, LOL is in the dictionary!! ;>) .
I’m sorry that you’ve been drinking the Margaret Sanger kool-aid, Megan, but conception is a naturally occuring phenomenon. If a woman has sex with a man that she doesn’t want, it is the sexual experience that is coerced, not the pregnancy.
You’re really invested in the idea that if you don’t want to be pregnant, you don’t have to be pregnant, and I can see that. However, if a woman has sex with a man because he hopes they’ll conceive, she doesn’t have the right to kill the child because she wishes she hadn’t. “Abortion rights” is a bumper sticker, not a truth.
If you don’t want to get pregnant, ladies, don’t have sex during the fertile part of your cycle, or as PP says, “Waist up!”
If a man forces himself on a woman, that’s against the law. It would be nice if women worried more about that than killing children. You don’t have a real problem with coercion, but you do have a problem with pregnancy. You aren’t interested in fixing the coercion but rather making the child pay with its life for the actions of his parents.
“Sure you’ve heard that so-endearing “Baby if you love me you’ll have my son” line before.”
Actually, no, you’re the first one to try it on me. I’m not interested in having any of your children, Megan, but I’m flattered that you’d ask. LOL!
Ninek,
TAG, You’re it!!
I thought we were keeping the Brain Dimmer 3000 top secret? Oh well, I wanted to let you know that we just ordered the Brain Dimmer 6000!! Upgrade! But I am probably just soft pedaling.
Yes, soft pedalling is how we power them, 1) so the power drain isn’t noticable on our utility bill, and 2) it’s so green!
“You aren’t interested in fixing the coercion but rather making the child pay with its life for the actions of his parents.”
Do you think your argument’s more compelling if you keep harping on the absurdity that pro-choicers are on some kind of “anti-fetus” crusade? Sorry but I don’t have an explicit interest in whether women decide to end their pregnancies or not. I just want the option to be on the table. Quite frankly I think your insanely blind devotion to the pre-born comes to the fore when you talk about women who’ve been raped. Way to take away any shred of agency a woman might have in this terrible, terrible circumstance. It’s not compassion but barbarism.
If you think I’m going to subject an innocent child to the death penalty because his father is a criminal; you’re wrong.
I live and work in the US and I can tell you that pro-choice activists spend a ton of time, money, and energy promoting and defending abortion. I do NOT see the same women spending even a fraction of the energy and resources on preventing rape. We can’t prevent rape by abortion. We can’t treat rape through abortion. In fact, rape victims give birth to their children at a slightly higher percentage rate than the rest of the women who don’t procure abortions. It is YOU who does not care about rape victims. You spend ALL your time HERE harping on feticide. What solution do you have to the crime of rape, besides killing the children, half of whose DNA comes from their mothers?
If my devotion to children is insane, call me crazy. I also do a ton of volunteer work raising money for a local grade school, a wonderful university (I paid a student’s full time tuition for a year!), AND I volunteer with the elderly. So don’t EVEN think you’re going to mount your high horse and accuse me of single minded devotion to the pre-born (not that there’d be anything wrong with that).
Abortion does not belong ON THE TABLE, but ironic that you used that phrase. I guess you think that after being raped, it’s some kind of liberating experience to climb up on a table, naked, and let a stranger rip a child from your womb, leaving you bleeding for the next three weeks. I say again; you do NOT show compassion for women at all; you consistently show hostility to the pre-born.
Megan, you seem very committed to abortion. I promise you, I am more stubborn than you, more patient that you, and more committed to my cause than you are to yours. Your resolve will wilt before mine. I will fight for the pre-born until I run out of breath and my heart stops beating.
One day, Roe V Wade will be just a dark blot in our history, and abortion will be a rumor among humanity, a byword of bygone days. This war against children will end, and WE will be on the side of victory. Oo Ra!
@ ninek, 8:53 & 9:06,
Bravo!
Why aren’t you similarly concerned that pregnant woman aren’t being psychologically manipulated into giving birth?
You can’t psychologically manipulate a person into giving birth! Giving birth is the natural termination of a pregnancy, except in the instance of miscarriage, where you often still give birth, only to a stillborn child. No one can manipulate anyone into giving birth, but they can try to stop a woman from killing, rather than giving birth to, the child that’s growing in her womb.
By making abortion a criminal act, wouldn’t you by definition be coercing women who don’t want to be pregnant into keeping these pregnancies?
You can’t keep a pregnancy. A pregnancy is a biological state that must terminate within a typical 9 month period. You can keep a BABY. It’s amazing the euphemisms you must use to justify killing babies.
Yes whichever way you slice it abortion ends a life. Check.
Then why don’t you cut the crap? You admit abortion ends a life. Stop hiding behind twisted words and phrases to make killing children sound less horrific.
The female body can do a lot of stuff besides have babies (which is awesome), so I don’t think carrying a pregnancy should necessarily define my “womanhood.”
You don’t carry a pregnancy. You carry a child. You are pregnant. You have a pregnancy. This need to refer to unborn children as “pregnancies” because terminating a pregnancy sounds better than terminating a baby is intentionally disingenuous and completely illogical. QUIT IT.
I agree, having a baby doesn’t define my womanhood. A childless woman is just as much a woman as the mother of many. A woman with a full hysterectomy is still as much a woman as the woman with all her reproductive organs. Biology makes a woman a woman and biology dictates that women be ABLE to carry children. Whether she can or does is secondary, but childbearing is an aspect (a privilege even) of womanhood. Those that act like it’s some sort of curse or fetter are the ultimate misogynists.
You also admit that your abortion ended the life of your child, Megan?
Jacqueline – 12:35: AMEN.
“I live and work in the US and I can tell you that pro-choice activists spend a ton of time, money, and energy promoting and defending abortion. I do NOT see the same women spending even a fraction of the energy and resources on preventing rape. We can’t prevent rape by abortion. We can’t treat rape through abortion.
Really? Weren’t you the poster who criticized Take Back the Night for demonizing men? Hmmm. FYI, pro-choicers aren’t actively trying to redefine rape to suit our political agenda…cough John Boehner, cough cough. Some compassion. Also, do you think describing abortion in graphic terms is going to horrify me or something? I could talk about heart surgery in the same way. Big deal. It’s not your decision to make, ninek or Carla. Not.your.decision.to.make. I’m sorry if you both had crappy abortion experiences. Some women have crappy pregnancy and motherhood experiences. One of my relatives had a pregnancy complication that festered unnoticed for 12 years and came back as a massive infection that nearly killed her. What if she got on a platform and said that women should stop having babies? Would look pretty arrogant and ridiculous.
Megan, You have admitted that abortion ends a life, actually the life of one’s own child.
Would you stand outside of Planned Parenthood holding a sign that says, “Abortion ends a life” in support of your stance? Maybe you could have on a t-shirt that shows a picture of an aborted fetus since you are so proud that you support ending human life.
If you are unwilling to do this to promote your enlightened view, I’d be interested in knowing why.
How did abortion help you, Megan? How did it heal you? How did it empower you?
We are not talking about heart surgery, or crappy pregnancies or crappy motherhoods. We are not talking about massive infections that almost kill our loved ones.
We are talking about the fact that abortion kills a growing preborn human child.
How did your child NOT die in your abortion? How are you NOT a mother?
The word crappy hardly describes my experience with abortion and you are not sorry.
Megan, people don’t oppose abortion because they “had a bad experience.” It’s not like a Thai restaurant or a hairdresser. They oppose abortion because it kills children. I have never had any abortion experience and I oppose abortion because it kills children. I also know it hurts women and oppose it on those grounds. Not everything people do is based on self-interest. Some people care about others.
Welp Carla, there was nothing wrong with me in the first place, so I can’t say that abortion was a “healing” process. I have a black, evil and self-centered heart (preparing the anathemas for you!) so it wasn’t much of an ordeal. But go ahead, say it: the contuining existence of a six-week old embryo was more important than my mental and emotional well-being. I should have just manned up and relegated myself to incubator status. Oh well.
ps: Get over yourself, Jackie.
That is not what I asked you. But you just stated that your mental and emotional well being were more important.
HOW did abortion help you make a “better” life for yourself? Did it deliver what it promised?
Should of…..will never get us anywhere. Women are not incubators. They will never be incubators. They are moms. You are a mom. I am a mom.
I continue to pray for you, Megan. I care about you very much whether you believe me or not. Someday you might need me.
I was never under myself, Meg. :) But you really should woman up and realize that its infinitely easier to cop to one’s own mistakes rather than trying to rewrite biology and the laws of physics to justify yourself. Think about it: you just called every female human being who carries a child a incubator. How misogynistic and dehumanizing. My mother is a person. Every mother is a person. It is infinitely easier to cut the crap than keep digging yourself a hole. Nothing you can concoct changes the truth. Rationalizations don’t fix anything, and in your case, they are lies. You killed your son/daughter because you didn’t want to keep him/her yourself. If you wanted him/her your supposed issue with being an “incubator” would suddenly disappear. And one day, you will likely want to be an “incubator”, so we know that is yet another of your self-delusions. It doesn’t work. Stop already.
Megan, I think you forgot to answer my questions.
Hi Praxedes,
I wouldn’t want to steal your thunder.
Hi Jacqueline,
By saying that a woman must subordinate her interests to her fetus’ “interest” in continuing its life, you are effectively treating this woman as an incubator. You are saying that her emotional and potentially physical well being don’t matter. Is that somehow not true?
You don’t have to steal from me what I’m willing to give you Megan.
I’ll make up the sign and a bumper sticker for you: “I know abortion kills humans but I support and promote it anyway.”
If your not willing to stand up and speak the truth for all to see, you’re not real firm in your beliefs.
But go ahead, say it: the contuining existence of a six-week old embryo was more important than my mental and emotional well-being. I should have just manned up and relegated myself to incubator status.
“six-week old embryo” – Six minutes, six days, six weeks, six months. Same DNA. Nice job at dehumanizing, though.
“incubator status” – If you really despise your capacity to reproduce this much, Megan, I suggest counseling.
I’m gonna go check on my 3 fully-incubated, former embryos now. Goodnight.
Megan, predictably, you whined on again about how great it is to kill babies and how awful pregnancy is, and totally ignored what I said about rape. You have no compassion for rape victims at all; you think killing the child is some kind of therapy. You say nothing about how we can help women, how we can help men. (Women aren’t the only ones who get raped, men can be victims too and you betcha they don’t want to talk about it). Men who are incarcerated for rape need to be rehabilitated, when possible, but you just think kill the babies and let it all go.
Your six week old developing child did have more right to life than you had right not to be inconvenienced. The child doesn’t deserve to die because you’re having a temporary hard time. It’s only temporary, and adoption is available if you don’t want to or can’t raise your own child.
And as far as abortion being a traumatic experience, many women have been put under general anesthesia. So, in a way, they didn’t consciously experience the trauma. But I know first hand from witnessing it and comforting young women who were crying and bleeding, that when they wake up, they know their baby is dead.
You proved my point correct, Megan, by droning on about abortion and not saying one constructive thing about how else you would show compassion to a rape victim. So, you know what? Maybe your unborn child was a better, more decent human being than you, but none of us will ever know because you killed him.
Just because you CAN kill someone smaller than you doesn’t make it right. Many of us pro-lifers have tried all kinds of logical comparisons to help abortion fans see the light. But it often doesn’t bear fruit. Abortion fans like Megan wouldn’t dare kill a grown relative, or coworker or a shopper in line in front of her at the supermarket. Why? Because they’re bigger and she’s afraid of the consequences.
Roe V Wade, judicial atrocity that it was, has sickened two generations of women already. In order to live with themselves, many women like Megan must cling tenaciously to their mantras such as “my life is more important than yours”. Those of us who are on the other side of that know, it gets better. When you first face what you did to your own child, it’s very hard. But humans are amazingly resilient. We have an amazing capacity to heal.
The hard thing for me to face was exactly what I said to Megan above: maybe my child was a better human being than I. Maybe she would have been smarter, stronger, more loving, more creative, or cured cancer. I was wrong to allow myself to be rushed into an abortuary. After entering, I should have run out, naked except for my paper slippers, into the cold New York winter and saved her life. I took a wonderful little person out of this world, and that crime remains part of my history. If I were still pro-choice, I’d take the blood of other children on my hands. Being a pro-life activist, my part in murder has ended. There is a measurable point, a moment where my participation in death came to an end, and my participation in life began. I wish for all post-abortive women to find healing, however they can. Religious retreats may not appeal to some women, but there are so many other ways to help make the world a better place for the next generation. Even Megan would help improve the world, if only she’d give it a chance.
You want to stop rape? Let women make decisions about their own bodies. Stop making our bodies a public dumping ground for bogus conservative morality. Let’s start there.
Oh and ninek–nice try at hurting my feelings. Too bad you’re forgetting that I probably would have been the one raising that kid, so odds are he/she would have turned out just as soulless and wretched as me. It’s funny, though–if women can’t be trusted to keep their pregnancies, why in the world would you trust them to be decent mothers?
“Abortion fans like Megan wouldn’t dare kill a grown relative, or coworker or a shopper in line in front of her at the supermarket. Why? Because they’re bigger and she’s afraid of the consequences.”
Well that’s some garbage right there. US conservativism is inherently violent, didn’t you know? I don’t know too many pro-choicers who support aggressive militarism, the death penalty, and unfettered gun rights, but whatever.
Megan, you have it turned around (well, you have a lot turned around). Mothers aren’t reduced to incubators. Incubators are a pale, pathetic reduction of a mother’s womb.
Again with abortion helps rape victims. Really Megan?
Maybe abortion cures baldness too?
I’m a registered Democrat, and I’m against the death penalty and unjust war. But nice of you to stereotype everyone who opposes infanticide and feticide, according to your “conservatives are evil” fantasy.
Or perhaps you are unfazed by the international multi-billion dollar (or is it trillion?) porn industry that literally uses both men and women as a dumping ground? I think that might just have a wee bit more do with the objectification of women and men, seeing the body as merely a commodity, than war, which by the way I have never made a comment on here. You do not know my opinion of the wars in which the US is and has been involved, so you are talking out your other end, as per usual.
I’m sorry, ladies, but the only treatment for rape is abortion. So, don’t bother going to a cognitive therapist or finding a counselor you can trust, don’t bother seeking medical attention for your physical wounds, nope sorry, you’re just going to have to kill your baby and get on with your lives. And guys? I’m just real extra sorry that we can’t abort anything of yours when you get raped, but you see abortion is the only compassionate thing, according to Megan.
Oh, obviously Megsy has been asleep this past week but here’s a newsflash: Mr. Pro-Abortion Don’t You Dare Save Babies That Survive Abortion Barack Hussein Obama has put OUR American soldiers on the line for a war that Congress did NOT approve. And Gitmos is still open. And we’re still in Iraq. Nice try, but you’re wrongity mc wrong again, Megarama. Well, that’s all the futility in the face of ignorance I can dish out for one eve. Good night and have a pleasant tomorrow!
Too bad you’re forgetting that I probably would have been the one raising that kid, so odds are he/she would have turned out just as soulless and wretched as me.
The odds are lower than you think Megan. You’re not giving young people enough credit to decipher right from wrong. I know children that learned only one, but very important, thing from their parent:
They learned exactly who they didn’t want to be like when they grew up. And that was enough.
You want to stop rape? Let women make decisions about their own bodies. Stop making our bodies a public dumping ground for bogus conservative morality. Let’s start there.
Now that I’ve had a good night’s rest, I still curious to see how Megan connects the dots above:
Do tell how abortion stops rape.
Do tell how aborted babies in garbage bins and dumps are “bogus conservative morality”
Start there. I’m all ears.
“I’m sorry, ladies, but the only treatment for rape is abortion. So, don’t bother going to a cognitive therapist or finding a counselor you can trust, don’t bother seeking medical attention for your physical wounds, nope sorry, you’re just going to have to kill your baby and get on with your lives.”
Very cute again, ninek. How about this? We both stop making assumptions about each other’s lives, what we do and don’t do, believe and don’t believe. Several of my friends–women and one man, actually–have been victims of sexual abuse and assault. (The guy was the victim of a homophobic nutjob). If you think I “pushed abortion” to try and be supportive when they were dealing with this, you’re dead wrong. It’s a good thing my friends didn’t have to make that decision, thanks to EC (which lots of pro-lifers oppose). But honestly, it sickens me to think that anybody would try to tell them what to do with their bodies and futures in this situation, and then frame it as compassion. Morality aside, you don’t know whether abortion or continuing with the pregnancy would have been a more “therapeutic” option for them. You don’t know these women. Your experiences aren’t theirs. One of them knew the rapist really well. We saw him every day. We talked about the possibility of her having gotten pregnant. She couldn’t imagine seeing this jerk every day, trying to take him to court, and then carrying around his baby. How humiliating, she said. Her words, not mine. If she said she would have wanted to keep a baby conceived in rape, those would have been her words, her decision, too. Not mine, not yours, not the state’s. Hers.
So now that we’ve dispensed with that dumb pretext, when you say that the pre-born deserve the right to life, you’re saying that a woman’s mental, emotional, and physical health matter less. That’s not compassion, sorry.
Let’s reframe your question, ninek: how does it help a woman to take away any shred of agency she might have in a rape crisis?
Legalizing, promoting and supporting victimizing and killing other humans because you yourself have been victimized is crazy, crazy thinking.
Victimizing others to deal with your own pain is wrong in so many ways.
Conversly, knowing you did the right thing in spite of someone else doing the wrong thing to you is very healing. Taking the high road — similar to forgiving those who have wronged you.
Megan,
Your comments make me so sad. Sad. My heart is heavy for you today and the way you type away to rationalize and justify and oh my….you remind me of myself way back when.
I love you, girl. I do. I can’t help it.
If you called your mother an incubator what do you think she would say? :P
Why do people indulge Megan’s constant need to concoct false sympathy by directing the debate towards rape? Megan wasn’t raped and neither are 99% of the women that kill their kids. They simply made a child and chose to kill that child. We all know that Megan supports killing children in any and all circumstances but knows that people aren’t altogether pitying of women that choose to make children and then choose to kill them. It’s easier to make a bogus argument that women are victims of the “oppression” of a baby when she honestly had nothing to do with the choice to make that baby- so that’s Megan’s go-to. It’s completely dishonest and just another one of her flailing attempts to salve the conscience in her constant bid to self-justify. Stop biting and maybe we can begin to start to maybe hopefully get a shred of an iota of intellectual honesty from her.
For the sake of my many, many friends who unfortunately have mothers of questionable or ill character, I must say that a child’s personality and values aren’t doomed when they are raised by amoral or immoral people. My best friend is the oldest of 7 from a mother that never married a one of her 6 baby-daddies and was unfit and neglectful across the board. She has raised her little sister and in spite of having nothing, is the most incredibly generous and wonderful woman in the world. She and her husband went out on a date (which I love because then I have my two godsons to myself) and I ended up doing 6 loads of laundry after the boys went to sleep- I noticed that 80% of the t-shirts I folded read “volunteer” for various causes. So many shirts. One of the latest dates they volunteered together. Rochelle came from nothing and gives no matter what she has. She is the first to finish high school in her family and now has a masters degree, increasing her ability to give. My best friend Gloria, the daughter of a drug addict father and an abusive mother- she is and was always giving even as a completely destitute single mother. She finished college and is doing well now, but her charity has never slowed in spite of having abusive parents and nothing to her name. She always has something going on for a family she heard about who’s house burned down or a sick child. She has a masters degree now, too. And, my best friend Justin is the product of an affair between his mom and a married man, who wanted him dead, but his mother only kept him to use him to try to get the cheating scumbag back (which didn’t work). She never held a job for long and Justin lived a rough life in poverty, taking care of the two of them. She took such bad care of herself that she progressively lost her limbs to diabetes and he takes care of her still (not killing him, although she did it for selfish reasons, was the best decision she ever made). By the way, he has two masters degrees now (well, once I finish proofreading the latest thesis and send it back he will). These are but a handful of the people who came from “bad” parents and yet ended up blessing the world.
Megan, I mention their accomplishments because they didn’t have parents to put them through college like you and I did, but they still managed to do it all without killing any children. Gloria did it raising a daughter alone. She did her masters with 3 children, one of them an infant. So your insinuation that college can only happen in certain circumstances by limiting family size in order to finance it for the kids or by having the ability to abort any children that you make along the way that might create an inconvenience is a patent insult.
Being raised by a selfish person does not ensure a selfish child. Many times, they see the fruits and emptiness of those people’s me-first decisions and choose a different life. Sadly, your me-first decision, Megan means that your child will never have that chance.
P.S. My friend Lauren comments here. Ask her about her mother. :)
and now has a masters degree, increasing her ability to give
Knowing quite a few parents who have a masters and quite a few that don’t have any college, I personally don’t equate success and/or morality with years of education. Some of the most selfish people I know have been raised by ‘educated’ elites.
Why do people indulge Megan’s constant need to concoct false sympathy by directing the debate towards rape?
I can’t speak for anyone else here, Jacqueline, but I don’t consider my comments to be induldging Megan or anyone else. I have responsed to Megan comments like I have to many others here because I have something to add and because I care about her. IMHO, just about all responses to those with differing views could be considered ‘biting’.
Hi Jacqueline,
I’m not trying to concoct false sympathy. I believe I responded first to somebody else talking about coerced abortions by saying that pregnancy can just as well be unwillingly forced on a woman. Researchers are starting to do way more research now on birth controls sabotage and intimate partner violence involving reproductive control via psychological manipulation. These kinds of coercive sexual experiences are more common than we think. They’re not always violent. They go unreported. I think it’s unconscionable to further dictate how a woman should use or not use her body by denying her access to abortion. But you’re right, Jacque. I don’t want the state to do rape audits on women to make sure they’ve experienced enough trama to merit an abortion paid for by medicaid (john boehner, cough cough). It’s not my business to question a woman’s intentions. I wish all women who wanted to keep their pregnancies could do so. I wish we lived in a world where everybody had good healthcare, access to social support, affordable housing and healthy food, etc. Unfortunately that’s not currently the case. And even if this were the case–if a woman were the most materially advantaged person on the planet–it still wouldn’t be my place to tell her what to do with that body of hers.
Knowing quite a few parents who have a masters and quite a few that don’t have any college, I personally don’t equate success and/or morality with years of education.
Megan does. Megan has said over and over again that her parents choice to only have kids they could afford to send to college was good because she equates a good life to being able to become educated (i.e. it’s immoral to have kids that you can’t educate). As I said in my second paragraph, my friends became ultra-educated with no help from their parents. One even managed to get her education as a struggling single mother and later as the mother of many. I don’t equate success/morality with years of education either, but I am offended that Megan would imply that people can only be educated if they are from a small family so Mom/Dad can pay or if they kill any children they create. Megan has outright insinuated both- multiple times. That’s why my comment was to her, as evidence by the entire second paragraph that began with “Megan.”
I can’t speak for anyone else here, Jacqueline, but I don’t consider my comments to be induldging Megan or anyone else.
You can talk about anything you want, but surely you see right through this veneer. It’s not even clever. Constantly steering the conversation towards women in third world countries without access to proper nutrition, women with serious medical problems or rape victims is a transparent attempt to justify the unjustifiable and avoid making a case for what they truly support: the ability to kill a child if it gets in their way. They don’t really care about these people. Megan supports killing children in any circumstance. These smokescreens she makes are because she knows has an unsympathetic position and must resort to these rare circumstances to muster some justification that masks the truth that abortion is an inherently, consistently selfish act. These folks want to harp on the exception because they know that the rule is generally about irresponsibility/selfishness. Just so we don’t get bogged down talking about 1% of abortions simply because those are the only types for which they can form an argument, I typically just say, “So we can talk about the bulk of the issue and move on, I will just agree with you that you can kill children in rape/incest and these extreme rare cases. Now, what about the 99% of abortions is the affluent Western world.” Of course I don’t agree with killing children in any circumstance, but these people pervert abortion in rape/incest cases to feign some degree of compassion when their support of abortion is for predominately for self-centered reasons. We all know that, but yet we let ourselves get pulled into this same conversation that is just an attempt to distract from the real issue. These people pull this with the death penalty, too. Megan just did it. It’s cliche and textbook. I oppose the death penalty, so that shuts it down, but we can’t let people drag the conversation into impertinent places, especially when they are having these conversations to continue deluding themselves rather than getting the help they need. Indulging the irrelevant allows them to hang on to their rationalizations longer, delaying conversion and healing.
No matter what the extreme circumstance, in any debate, we always win. We don’t have to justify NOT killing children- they have to justify killing children. So it’s a waste of time to try to convince people that support killing children in any circumstance that they shouldn’t kill them in a particularly hard circumstance. It’s counter-productive if it’s productive at all. That’s all I’m saying.
Megan,
Yes, you are. The cliche changes of subject, the mantras, the carefully-worded euphemisms like “pregnancy” instead of baby or even fetus. None of it is intellectually honest- All of it is clearly a desperate attempt to defend yourself, what you’ve done and your ability to continue your lifestyle and do it in the future. It’s not even opaque. It’s quite clear.
I won’t dignify that “people can have sex willingly but be impregnated against their will” stuff because it’s assault to responsibility. You consent to risking pregnancy when you consent to sex, no matter what. So when it happens, you have nothing to complain about. It was your choice.
I will refute the lie that women can’t keep their “pregnancies.” Pregnancies are not something that can be taken away from you. It’s a natural state of existence. Women pay to have people take their “pregnancies” away. If you meant keep their babies, then you are also wrong. Welfare is comprehensive and biased towards children. A kid in Head Start gets 2 out of their 3 meals for free M-F, and food stamps for food on the evenings and weekends and cash payments from TANF. Grants for schooling exist, too. There is so much that I know about because I set it up for women. Moreover, we aren’t talking about women keeping their children in this conversation- just not killing them. Adoption is an option, but it involves denial of self and concern for the child. Women will have babies in less than ideal circumstances if they want the baby. They will kill the baby if they don’t. Making an appeal on behalf of the child to the abortion-minded woman rarely works. Most children who are spared are only spared because the mother decided to “want” them.
But once again, this “concern” for women in need is another smokescreen. Like you said, you support abortion not because of this, but in every case. But once again, cases of the most material advantaged woman on the planet don’t evoke sympathy, so you once again fall back of the poor women that you exploit to make a case for abortion availability for women like you. It’s all about you.
You always win? Really? Then why is abortion legal, Jacqueline, if the righteousness of your position is so self-evident? Why are there a million women who get abortions every year–are they all selfish and deluded? “Selfishness”–the ultimate anathema. Using the old “women who abort are so selfish!” just makes you look naive and judgmental. And anyway, self-preservation’s part of the human condition. If you can’t trust a woman to assess her mental, emotional and physical condition and make an informed decision based on that, how could you ever trust her to be a mother?
Also, there’s a big difference between willingly doing something for another person and having the state mandate it.
And anyway, self-preservation’s part of the human condition.
Which is why a baby in the womb will try get away from the abortionist’s instruments.
The state doesn’t mandate doing something for someone else, but the state can prohibit people hurting another person. Abortion hurts another person.
Megan, because people know what virtue is doesn’t mean they practice it. Look at marital infidelity. Does the fact that people and governments do wrong things make them right things? No. It makes people that do/support it wrong. The truth here is self-evident, you just have a vested personal interest in telling yourself otherwise.
Yes, self-preservation is a part of the human condition, BECAUSE HUMAN BEINGS ARE WORTH PRESERVING (even humans not yet born). But it’s also virtuous and noble to choose others over self. That’s what makes a hero heroic, is it not? People that risk their self for others are heralded for their sacrifice and bravery and they well should be.
Abortion is not self-preservation. It’s lifestyle preservation. It’s not a baby’s life vs. a mother’s life. It’s a baby’s life vs. a mother’s desires. Not exactly fair, is it?
Roe V Wade was an atrocity based on a lie. It was embraced and advanced by people who wanted to make money. Norma McCorvey was never raped. She just wanted an abortion. The feminists who used her knew she was lying. Bernard Nathanson admitted the death tolls from illegal abortions were just a simple made up number. A lie.
Abortion is used by pedophiles, pimps, and prostitutes to destroy the children that would expose and inconvenience them. Abortion does nothing for a rape victim. It takes more than 8 or 9 months to recover, physically and/or psychologically. But as said above many abortions are perpetrated on healthy women who willingly had sex and merely don’t want to be shamed, exposed, or inconvenienced. Others are performed on women who are coerced or forced. There have been many unjust laws in human history. Abortion is only one of those many.
Carla, God bless you! Would that God would light a fire in all our hearts. Perhaps post-abortion recovery is like drug addiction: some people have to hit rock bottom before they can begin the long climb upwards.
Megan, with every breath you take, you have a new chance to rejoin the human race. You had a chance today say something actually compassionate. You can’t. You’ve got nothing.
I repeat: You’ve got nothing.
Megan @ 3:52 “If you can’t trust a woman to assess her mental, emotional and physical condition and make an informed decision based on that, how could you ever trust her to be a mother?”
Megan, I’m going to call you on this lame attempt to rephrase the bumper sticker slogan “You can’t trust me with a choice? How can you trust me with a child?”
Newsflash: Women are mothers at their children’s conception. You were a mother as soon as your child was conceived. An abortion does not change that fact; it makes you the mother of a dead child. Your body knew it and began, before you were even aware of your daughter or son, to prepare to feed and care for him or her.
You already admitted that a child is killed in every abortion. It takes a child to make a mother. So it’s not a matter of anyone “trusting” a woman to be a mother, it’s EXPECTING mothers to not kill the children that are ALREADY living as a result of their mothers’ consensual act (99% of the time).
I’m not saying we should tell a woman what to do with her body; I’m saying we should not let anybody do away with the baby’s body.
I was thinking: maybe the compassionate kind of law would be instead: a boss can’t fire you if you need to take a leave of absence after a physical assault, up to a year, be you male or female? That would actually do something compassionate for all parties. You could even have the law make it a privacy violation for the boss to know exactly the details of the physical assault. I used to work as a temp, and I could have just as easily been filling in for an assault victim until he or she returned to work. Why not? Maybe that’s a better solution.
God bless you, ninek!!
I too look back and wish I would have told every worker at the mill to shove it and ran out before my daughter lost her life!!
I thank you for your powerful voice here!
Thanks so much Carla! You inspire me!
I am not personally aware of men sabotaging anyone’s birthcontrol in my family, but I have known a gal who sabotaged her own. Thankfully, her husband was delighted, but she took a risk in being secretive. That being said, the lowest abortion statistics are still pretty high. Even 17% of pre-born children not being allowed to live is a pretty high number. Now, we don’t condone men sabotaging a woman’s birth control but two things:
1. Sex is how babies are made and all women should know that no birth control is 100% successful at preventing conception.
2. In a species, such as humans, how can we be suprised that members of the species will step up their efforts to procreate and see that their own DNA makes it to the next generation. We are biologically driven to procreate and nurture our young. It takes a lot of convincing to get us to do otherwise (especially evidenced by Planned Parenthood’s targeting of children as young as 5. They know that if they leave kids alone, they will find out that sex makes babies).
And one of the ugly truths about rape is this (for Megan):
It is an ugly experience. Sometimes it leads to conception. Some people are even murdered during the act. There is NOTHING that can undo it, once a person has had the misfortune to experience such a terrible thing. Killing a child doesn’t undo it. Killing a child doesn’t prevent it. If a man rapes me on Thursday, and I take the ‘morning after pill’ on Saturday, what is to prevent him from raping someone else on Sunday? Nothing.
In order to combat rape, we need to do one crazy thing: We need to ask men who’ve been convicted: “What lead to your actions?” “What could have prevented it?” And we need to listen to whatever answer they give us and try to figure this out. I’m willing to bet that no convicted rapist is going to say, “Gosh, as soon as the lady had her abortion, I was instantly cured of this violent impulse.”
The sex studies of the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s have not served us at all. Many of them were fraudulent at worst and faulty at best. We need a new vision.
It is so sad that women have to convince or “trick” their own HUSBANDS into having children. When did marriage and children become two separate things? That’s just another injustice of birth control for women.