Bumper sticker of the day
Birth control is for sissies.
~ Mother of five and moderator Bethany sporting her latest bumper sticker via her Facebook page, August 15
Commenting Rules
Do's
- “Criticize ideas, not people.”
- Create one original moniker and stick with it.
- Please use a unique name.
- Be civil and considerate.
- Read fully and consider carefully before responding.
Do Not's
- Blasphemy will not be tolerated.
- No swearing or slandering of others.
- No deliberate inflammatory comments.
- Do not violate another’s privacy.
- Do not threaten fellow commenters or anyone else.
- No personal, racial, ethnic or gender-based insults/slurs.
- Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
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.
LOL!
Go Bethany! :)
i like it! i sport on that says Don’t Believe The Liberal Media’s i get honks WA es thumbs up and people have stopped me to ask me where i. got it and one man gave me a Glenn Beck book!_
Great message!
But if the designer of the bumper sticker asked for my opinion, I’d suggest that next time, he should use an easier-to-read font, and make the text bigger. I’d guess that most people who see this bumper sticker aren’t able to actually read it.
Ha! I love it!
Birth control is for SISSIES?! Yep, that’s EXACTLY why I choose to have a tubal ligation after going through with an unplanned pregnancy that endangered me and the child I carried because of serious medical problems I have. Just too much of a damned coward to want to threaten my sacred life and the sacred lives of any children I might have otherwise conceived, How selfish and wimpy of me, hunh?!
I still miss my AR “Choose Life” plates. Anyone in WI working on getting them here? I WANT TO HALP!!
Do you really think that is what the bumper sticker is referring to, Marysia? People who use birth control because they have medical conditions that a pregnancy would endanger?
Birth control (safe, non-abortifacient birth control) is also for people who wish to space their children. What’s wrong with that (BTW, I’m not Catholic).
This anti-contraception mentality some people in the pro-life movement has is a real turn-off for many people.
i don’t consider a tubal location birth control. you aren’t. killing Antone
should say not killing anyone it’s like a vasectomy -or a hysterectomy you are just done with making kids
i also like Abortion the ultimate Child Abuse
Xalisae,
http://www.choose-life.org/
I was asked to help but I have too much on my plate.
Contact Russ Amerling. There is a group working on it in WI I do believe!!
Heather, birth control doesn’t equal “killing anyone.” Condoms are birth control. There are also other barrier methods, vasectomies, and of course, the contraceptive pill.
h says:
August 17, 2011 at 10:41 am
i like it! i sport on that says Don’t Believe The Liberal Media’s i get honks WA es thumbs up and people have stopped me to ask me where i. got it and one man gave me a Glenn Beck book!
_________________________________________________
We have the same bumper sticker as you, h, but no one has ever honked or commented about it….yet.
“Do you really think that is what the bumper sticker is referring to, Marysia? People who use birth control because they have medical conditions that a pregnancy would endanger?”
Well, in fairness, the bumper sticker doesn’t specify which group of people it’s alright to disparage as “sissies” for practicing responsible sex. Maybe if it had a disclaimer at the bottom specifically excluding couples who are avoiding pregnancy for medical conditions that would be endangered by it, then we’d know that the owner of the car only intends to lampoon people who practice birth control for stupid, selfish reasons like not being able to afford another child.
Bumper stickers with fine print? LOL!!!!
Hal said: Heather, birth control doesn’t equal “killing anyone.”
Not true – PPA and many others consider abortion a form of birth control – a controlled birth, in which someone is killed – torn to pieces actually.
I think you’re confusing contraception with birth control. Halting conception doesn’t kill anyone because they don’t exist yet.
I *have* heard anti-contraception folks denounce people like me as self-centered, ungodly, deficient in faith, etc! And tell me things like I should have been a lifelong celibate, even though G*d sent me a wonderful spouse-hey, thanks for reinforcing the stereotype that us people with disabilities are supposed to be asexual.
No, not everyone practices contraception b/c of medical problems. But there are a lot more of us who do than contraception opponents seem to think.
I have also heard some enemies of contraception belittle and trivialize the physical hardships that can arise with any pregnancy. As small as it is among otherwise healthy people w/ health care access in the wealthier nations, there *is* a risk of injury and death.
one can love children (I certainly do, & have fought for children for decades) while desiring not to pop one out every 9 months-or even ever, at all. I am no less of a person or a woman b/c I have one child and made prayerful, constructive choices about pregnancy prevention.
And anyway, pregnancy *prevention* *is* a matter of a woman’s right to *her own* body. that’s not selfishness-that’s constructive self-protection and self-care, and care for her loved ones. it’s only when conception actually occurs that there are two bodies, the mother’s and the baby’s.
If someone wants to rely on abstinence and/or NFP, or have a large family, that is a matter of their reproductive rights. Just as it is a matter of mine, and millions of others, to use other prevention methods and have small numbers of children, or none at all.
Pamela give it time and you might:)
Phillymiss,
This anti-contraception mentality some people in the pro-life movement has is a real turn-off for many people.
Without reviving the 350+ comment contraception debate, I would wager that the pro-contraception mentality is a turn off for many people too. But we all disagree on many things – politics, gay marriage (not going down THAT road either), religious beliefs etc. In the category of non-abortifacient true conception prevention, we’ll probably have to agree to disagree b/c those opposed to it are as much apart of the movement as those in favor of it. Not that I mind the occasional 350 comment discussion
To me the message this bumper sticker tries to deliver in one catchy sentence:
Being both a responsible person and being naturally open to reproduction requires a certain kind of inner strength, fortitude or courage that someone using medical birth control methods does not have to face. Exposing oneself to reproductive “risk” is exciting and develops a personal character to be proud of.
It is also a slam on the character of people who (for whatever reason) rely on medically administered birth control or contraception. It implies that there is something bad about using birth control because one would not say “Seatbelts are for sissies” unless there was something wrong about using them and that going without is somehow better. (Which may be true in some special circumstances.)
The final problem with this sticker is that it attempts to build oneself up by putting others down.
Er… before *too* many people “dog-pile” onto Bethany, may I add something?
First, I think everyone knows that bumper-stickers cannot, without attaching an appendix as thick as a telephone directory (and perhaps dragged behind the car?), cover every nuance and every exception, nor are they intended to do anything but convey a pithy, core message. If anyone here (or anywhere) seriously thinks that Bethany (regardless of her own position on the topic, per se) was deliberately trying to demean or wound anyone who contracepts (for whatever reason), then I’d advise them to take a few deep breaths, calm themselves, have some sense, and get to know her by reading what she writes on a plethora of subjects; the very idea that she (of all people) would go out of her way to harm others is sheer nonsense.
Secondly: is it too far-fetched to think that she might have meant this as a tongue-in-cheek, humourous way to celebrate her openness to life (and to encourage others to do likewise)? I do wonder if we’d hear such “harrumphing” if the bumper-sticker had said, “Hand-rails on roller-coasters are for wimps!” Am I the only one who thinks that this was meant to be light-hearted? Perhaps it struck a close-to-the-surface nerve in some… but I really don’t think any lack of concern was intended, do you?
Am I the only one who thinks that this was meant to be light-hearted?
No, you’re not.
Clearly, the bumper sticker is supposed to elicit a chuckle.
CT – “Without reviving the 350+ comment contraception debate, I would wager that the pro-contraception mentality is a turn off for many people too.”
I can clear that one up right now, CT; the pro-contraception mentality IS a turn off for every Catholic (and therefore a large portion of the pro-life movement).
Frankly, the only reason we can work together in spite of that (and other disagreements) is that we recognize common enemies (i.e. abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, etc). Unfortunately, when (not if) these enemies fall, I have every reason to believe that the pro-life movement will become much smaller again, as history has certainly shown that the ease with which allies can be found is directly proportional to the perceived threat of the enemy against whom you unite. Abortion is a very visible threat and we are rightly united against it. Contraception, sadly, is not so obvious, and thus fewer will join to fight it.
For what it’s worth, I can assure you that I seldom think less of people who cannot see the dangers of contraception, for its effects are much more subtle.
Saying that you must use artificial birth control for health reasons is like saying you must take lipitor because you eat so much cholesterol.
Duh! You don’t have to have use artificial birth control unless you have no self control. “oh no, you’re slut shaming!” No, but that’s what pro-aborts always say if we suggest they might be able to do something other than sexual intercourse during the most fertile part of their cycle.
We live in a ‘pill for this and pill for that’ culture. My best friend’s doctor prescribed lipitor without even asking once about her diet. What if you eat a lot of eggs, fried foods, hamburgers? Do you really think that it’s healthy to eat all that and just take a drug? You don’t think it might be more prudent to refrain from certain foods or eat them in moderation?
Same goes for sex. No one ever died because they couldn’t have sexual intercourse on a certain day and time. Have some self control, use some creativity!! If you had a yeast infection, would you and your partner keep passing it back and forth because you can’t control yourselves? Of course not! But when it comes to birth control, oh suddenly people just can’t deal, they must have sex without thinking or planning! Oh, we’re just asking too much to expect human beings to use those big brains taking up all that space in their skulls!
It’s ridiculous.
As my parents’ seventh child I couldn’t agree more. My parents weren’t sissies and neither am I. Life is great!
I will gladly be a sissy if it means I don’t end up like my parents.
Bumper sticker is funny, though.
Ninek, while I agree with the main message in your last post, I’m not so sure about your very first statement: “Saying that you must use artificial birth control for health reasons is like saying you must take lipitor because you eat so much cholesterol.”
I seem to recall that some women can experience severe hormonal imbalances for which the only feasible solution is, sadly, the birth control pill…for a while, anyway. If that’s true (and I stress IF, since I’m really not sure at all), I would argue that it is a valid health reason to use the pill.
Other than that, yeah, self-control and being responsible with one’s sexuality do wonders.
I think Bethany’s bumper sticker is CUTE….lighten up, folks!
I think the Pill is over-prescribed, especially for “hormone imbalance” and/or making periods monthly if they are irregular. For example, if your endocrine glands are malfunctioning, what is the cause? Giving someone pills to make their period more convenient isn’t solving the underlying problem. I think our doctors reach for their prescription pads far too often. We too often treat the human body like a machine that breaks instead of a living system that can be helped or hindered. With all of our technology, I am disappointed that we don’t try harder to solve our health problems.
For instance, our health care problem in America isn’t because we don’t have enough bureaucrats and it isn’t going to be solved by creating a larger group of bureaucrats. What uninsured people need is basic care, and access to care. How can that be solved by a paid desk-worker who needs to deny enough care to pay their own salary? The cost of our health care is dramatically inflated to pay for all the other things and people that aren’t directly involved in the doctor-patient relationship. Ok, off my soap box for a while…
Pamela:
–I think Bethany’s bumper sticker is CUTE….lighten up, folks!–
I will *not* lighten up over something that makes light of my right to be alive and well as possible, and my right to avoid conceiving babies who might die before they’re born b/c of my medical issues. Over something that makes light of people’s right to prevent pregnancy as they choose and not as someone else forces them to do.
Ninek:
–Saying that you must use artificial birth control for health reasons is like saying you must take lipitor because you eat so much cholesterol.
Duh! You don’t have to have use artificial birth control unless you have no self control.–
Excuse me?!! You obviously don’t know a damned thing about me, or about millions of other human beings who exercise plenty of self-control, self-discipline, and responsibility in our sexual and reproductive lives–BY using the very methods you don’t approve of.
I have PLENTY of self-control. If I didn’t have it, my medical issues would have killed me a long time ago. Taking the greatest care to refrain from further pregnancies was but one expression of that lifesaving self-control.
Like all slut shamers-you are the one who ought to be ashamed of yourself. If women weren’t so shamed for having sex or using family planning or becoming pregnant in “unauthorized” circumstances-the abortion rate would plummet.
EVERY method of pregnancy prevention requires responsibility taking. Taking the pill? You have to remember to take it the same time every day, in the correct sequence. You have to make sure you don’t run out. For example.
Barrier methods? They come with their own responsibilities, like taking them out of the drawer and using them correctly each & every time you have sex.
Vasectomy or tubal ligation? They involve the responsibility to carefully think through the decision with one’s partner and make sure this permanent solution is the right one. And the commitment to go through surgery (*nonkilling* possibly lifesaving surgery) to carry out that responsibility.
*All* pregnancy prevention methods involve the responsibility of knowing that even if they are used correctly & consistently, no matter how small the probability, there is still the chance they will not work as intended-and that means a baby.
Such responsibility taking isn’t somehow magically transformed into feckless, irresponsible, baby-hating, God-hating, utterly selfcentered pursuit of destructive pleasures b/c it is applied to means & ends that you don’t approve of.
What do you imagine, anyway-that people who use “artificial” methods boink away 24/7 to the disregard of everything else? Sorry to disappoint you, Ninek, but in fact we have wellrounded lives, like most everyday human beings, and treat ourselves and our partners as fullfledged human beings, not disembodied genitalia to abuse at our whim.
And–are you aware that there are in fact real medical contraindications to NFP? Yes, it can be highly effective, but some women have health problems that make pregnancy so risky, they need a method that is even more effective. Also there are medical conditions and medications for chronic illnesses that disrupt cervical mucus, the timing of ovulation, body temperature so that these bodily signs cannot be read for the purposes of NFP.
Duh! You don’t have to have use artificial birth control unless you have no self control. “oh no, you’re slut shaming!” No, but that’s what pro-aborts always say if we suggest they might be able to do something other than sexual intercourse during the most fertile part of their cycle.
I’m sad that I’ll have to get a reversal before I’ll be able to have children with my fiance after he and I are married, but I’m glad I had my tubes tied at the behest of my ex-husband, because HE had no self-control, and he said himself that he regretted ever urging me to have the surgery because he would’ve just raped me to get me pregnant again in an attempt to keep me with him when I was thinking about leaving him because he was starting to hit me. So go ahead and hate on people who contracept all you want. It doesn’t phase me. And Marysia, you know you’re not doing anything wrong. Just like I know I’m not doing anything wrong. If you really know that to be true, don’t let this talk even phase you.
I think the bumper sticker is amusing.
Ninek makes many good points and conveys them in a very common sense way.
don’t. forget that the pill has caused death in women because it can cause blood clots Norplant had to be taken off the market because women’s. arms were getting infected just sayin
birth control has killed people but even though i like the bumper sticker i don’t know. how safe I’d be with it on my car. someone might beat me because Cleveland is the new Detroit!
and we can thank our pie eyed mayor Frank Jackson and that elf Dennis kucinich for that. in other words the DUMBocRATS!
Paladin, you are absolutely right…it is meant to be lighthearted and get a chuckle out of people. I have many pro-contraceptive friends who found it funny. You nailed exactly what it was meant to convey.
Marysia, I am not sure why you are so extremely sensitive about this.
My bumper sticker has nothing to do with what you have been through, and was not intended to judge or criticize you in any way. I thought it was obvious it is tongue in cheek, but I guess some people are just more sensitive to what they perceive as criticism.
Seems to be a hot topic. I really enjoyed reading all of the comments and perspectives on this one. Thanks
Pope Paul VI institute also helps with hormone imbalances and irregular monthly. using natural methods and not pills that contain artificial hormones.
Love the Bumper Sticker!
Bethany, it reminds me of a quirky little thing I have attached to my keychain:
Get on your knees and fight like a man!
(in case anyone’s not sure, it’s talking about prayer)
Xalisae-Thank you, I *know* that neither you nor I have done anything wrong. I’m just sick of all the insinuations and outright statements that women like you or I-most women in fact-are evildoers or morally suspect for our conscientious decisions. We don’t deserve this stuff.
Bethany- So why am I so “extremely sensitive about this,” something that “has nothing to do with what you have been through, and was not intended to judge or criticize you in any way”?
First of all, you cannot fend off responsibility for your actions by blaming me for my alleged “extreme sensitivity.”
If this is a sensitive issue-well, when people’s lives and wellbeing are trivialized, they do tend to get p*ssed. The anger is a valid response.
Maybe you did not intend to judge or criticize-but that does not mean your action cannot have unintended and offensive consequences.
Now, the following are not opinions I actually hold; there are good reasons to use NFP, just as there are good reasons not to-and it is not my call to make for anyone else, anyway.
But…suppose…I was uninformed & mean enough to have a bumpersticker that said “NFP is for prudes” or “NFP is for papal syncophants”-and you didn’t like it one bit. But I then told you “Oh, I didn’t mean to judge or criticize you, you’re just being extremely sensitive”-wonder how YOU would feel about THAT.
Also, I am well aware of the anticontraception movement in this country and worldwide and its goals. It professes to be prolife, but at the end of the day, it really doesn’t seem to care whether women like me, or unborn babies we would endanger by conceiving, live or die.
It is truly breathtaking to be confronted with an entire political cause that finds you & yours, & millions of human beings like you & yours, disposable.
I don’t know if you, Bethany, personally want to deny other people access to contraception-but relentless digs at the characters of women-and men-who conscientiously, responsibly choose birth control are par for the course for this movement. And I for one am tired of it. Especially because these slurs are being used this very moment to deny people access to the family planning methods of their choice.
So-a little bit of “harmless fun”– for you– is not so harmless.
Marysia, if you had a bumper sticker that said NFP is for prudes, I’d say go for it. I might even laugh a little. Even if I liked the idea of NFP, I wouldn’t care…why would I?. It’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it, aren’t you? But I don’t think you think people should be allowed to difffer in opinion with you ( thus the reason you turned a molehill into a mountain). Lighten up and learn to laugh sometime. :0)
“I don’t know if you, Bethany, personally want to deny other people access to contraception”
I assume you mean “free” (ie tax funded) contraceptives. I have no problem with people purchasing their own bc pills.
“It is truly breathtaking to be confronted with an entire political cause that finds you & yours, & millions of human beings like you & yours, disposable.”
You have just summed up the pro-choice cause.
I think you missed my point about not letting it phase you though. Butthurt is unbecoming, no matter who you are. Get over it. What anyone here thinks of how you or I arrange our fallopian tubes has anything to do with the MOST IMPORTANT THING. PERIOD. We’re here to save lives of those being killed, wholesale in the womb. Keep your priorities straight, please.
Bethany-I laugh plenty, and deal with differences of opinion all the time.
And why are you assuming that I am prochoice on abortion? I’m not.
Marysia, I realize it is frustrating to be called names or looked down on for this stuff. There was one thread (350+ comments) where I argued about this and was really offended. But really, I don’t think you are going to get anywhere and it isn’t an issue I think anyone will budge on. And really, it is just a snarky bumper sticker.
Marysia, as for why I assume you are not pro-life, I might say that it is probably for the same reason you make the assumption that I am a misogynist who wants to control the lives of every woman, or who doesn’t care about your life.. Maybe my assumption is wrong. I know yours were.
What are your views on abortion and the law? I seem to notice that on the website you link to, that question is evaded:
“What is your stand on abortion and the law? Our members hold a range of views on this subject.”
Why would you be involved with a group who may or may not hold the view that every unborn life should be protected if you are pro-life?
I saw the bumper sticker and assumed it was a tongue-in-cheek answer to all those lovely people who feel the need to comment to women with four or more children, “Don’t you know what causes that? Haven’t you heard of birth control?”
Kel, absolutely! I get that comment all of the time. Especially after baby #5. It feels good to have some kind of fun answer.
Kel & Bethany_ I would *never* go up to anybody especially somebody I don’t know and make comments about their family size, small or large.
But if you want to find some comic relief over people who do that-please don’t get it at the expense of people who choose to use birth control.
Contraceptive users or my purported “oversensitivity” as one-theseare not the problems. The problem is folks who pronounce insulting judgments about their sexual & reproductive lives of others.
Bethany-If I wasn’t prolife on abortion, I would not have gone through my one and only pregnancy, which was unintended despite all efforts to the contrary and was immensely difficult for reasons of health, poverty, disrupted life plans and most of all ostracism from some folks who should have supported us but refused.
I wouldn’t have spent decades working my rump off to make sure that women have alternatives to abortion-no matter who branded me a misogynist or a childhater for embracing all lives, born and already born as sacred.
All Our Lives has members and supporters from many countries with many different laws and legal approaches to abortion itself. Thus our focus is on the relief of health and social inequities that cause abortion across the world, whatever its legal status.
To say that we are “anti unborn” or “pro abortion” or not for protecting unborn babies would be like calling an anti-tobacco group that takes a similar approach (as many do, to great & lfiesaving practical good) “pro smoking deaths.”
To say that we are “anti unborn” or “pro abortion” or not for protecting unborn babies would be like calling an anti-tobacco group that takes a similar approach (as many do, to great & lfiesaving practical good) “pro smoking deaths.”
That’s actually not what I said, Marysia. I asked why you would be involved actively with a group like this when they might support abortions, if you are pro-life. If you were an anti tobacco activist, would you work together with a group of people who thought tobacco was healthy and actually worked to promote smoking? It makes no sense to me.
And you failed to answer my question (what is your stance on abortion and the law). Telling me about things you’ve done in your life doesn’t do anything to prove to me that you are pro-life or not. I know personally people who have risked their lives to carry a child, but are pro-abortion. I have family members who have 6 or more children and still are pro-abortion. The question I asked was direct, and you evaded it, just as the question is evaded on the website.
Maybe I should ask another question: Do you want to merely reduce abortions or see them made illegal?
The catchphrase of the bumper sticker is actually funny, and pointed, in a couple of ways. After all, what do we think of when we here “sissies”? The word usually connotes that something is “like a female.” What is called “birth control” — in reality, contraception which prevents conception, rather than the “birth control” of abortion that prevents birth — is usually taken by females. Males have only 2 contraceptives, condoms and vasectomy, available to them while we “sissies” have a wide away of “birth control” options available to us. On another level, nothing is more intrinsically female than pregnancy and childbirth. But the catchphrase suggests that female controlling birth are somehow weak and scared — qualities associated with femininity — and that these feminine emotional qualities make females afraid of that which is most deeply female, carrying a pregnancy to term and giving birth.
I would *never* go up to anybody especially somebody I don’t know and make comments about their family size, small or large.
Ok. But we’re not talking about you. And you act as though this doesn’t happen. Let me tell you-as the oldest of 6 kids in my family, that kind of thing DOES happen, and I think this bumper sticker is funny because of that, even though I happen to currently be willfully infertile.
Seriously. You’re being very oversensitive. Please stop.
My parents got comments on their six kids too, especially since I was so much younger than my siblings. “Didn’t you learn your lesson with the first five??!!!” I get comments and I only have two kids, because I look young, which I find amusing. I would let it go, Marysia.
FYI, Marysia, I happen to be against hormonal and/or potentially abortifacient birth control. I used the Pill years ago before i really knew all the ramifications and have used non hormonal methods as well, so I really am not “anti” all forms of birth control.
I’ve seen the attitudes toward people with more than 2 or 3 kids, quite often. I think this bumper sticker is a good response to those people. Isn’t it funny that my grandfather’s generation seemed to be ok with large families? Nowadays those same families are labeled irresponsible. My grandfather’s mom who had 10 kids, and the families today I see who are joyfully receiving as many children as God gives them, really are taking on a lot. They’re not sissies – and that is not a comparative statement. I think it speaks volumes that so many are bent out of shape over this bumper sticker which is supposed to be lighthearted and tongue in cheek.
“Didn’t you learn your lesson with the first five??!!!”
You have GOT to be kidding me, Jack. How revolting.
Nope, not kidding. People are vicious to large families a lot of times. I remember when I was five or so my sisters took me to park, and some lady thought that my oldest sister (13 years older than me) was our mother. She was ranting and raving about how young people having large families was destroying the nation and blah blah blah ignorance blah blah. I mean, I really don’t want a big family, but it isn’t anyone’s business how many kids other people have. And none of anyone’s business if they think I am too young to have any.
My personal favorite was when some lady asked my mother if we all had the same dad. That’s super rude.
That silencing, scapegoating technique of branding someone “oversensitive” does not work with me.
Bethany-All Our Lives does *not* “promote abortion.” For example, we have a resource directory to assist pregnant women, but we do not refer for abortion.
I am not “evading” your question simply because the answer that does not slot neatly into the predetermined categories of the US abortion debate.
The issue of legal/illegal is not the only important matter regarding abortion. Our organization focuses on the very much neglected but deeper and more decisive question of why so many women have abortions worldwide and what they and their children need instead.
No. I’m calling a spade a spade, and you’re acting butthurt about something when there’s nothing there to be butthurt about, even after two separate people who support your point of view in regards to contraception have told you that you’re making an a$$ out of yourself.
There are other things to be done to help women and children in need regardless of whether abortion is legal or illegal, but making the killing of human beings in utero a crime legally giving every human being equal protection under the law is PARAMOUNT.
Blech. The utter stupidity of otherwise intelligent people, when you face them with (*gasp!*) a family with more than one or two children, is beyond belief. It need not even come from fanatical “zero-population-growth” people, or fanatical “reduce the carbon foot-print” people; average, everyday people have been conditioned, through decades of self-absorption, to react primally and see children as a burden to be avoided, rather than as a gift to be cherished. A plenitude of pretexts and lame excuses (which I suspect were cobbled together after-the-fact) follow this mentality: “Don’t you know how much it costs to raise a child?”, etc.
I’ve become firmly convinced that the main resistance to large families is due to the implicit “challenge” that it gives to our own selfishness. If I were (unconsciously) limiting my family to one or two children in order to preserve a self-gratifying life-style, I could easily take the very existence of a large family as a sort of “silent rebuke” that stabs my conscience… much like the very existence of Trig Palin scalds the consciences of pro-aborts without Sarah Palin so much as saying a word to them. The reactions of such people could, if put into clear words, be translated: “You’re making me uncomfortable, since you’re showing me that I may be less than I should be; and I don’t want to be reminded of that. I want you to shut up; and since you’re ‘speaking’ with existence rather than with words, I want your existence to ‘shut up’–i.e. I want you not to exist.” I’m reminded of the Scripture passage in Wisdom 2:12-20:
If anyone doubts, just check out any thread dealing with the Duggar Family, or of Trig Palin, and watch the (literally) deadly comments appear.
Xalisae wrote:
There are other things to be done to help women and children in need regardless of whether abortion is legal or illegal, but making the killing of human beings in utero a crime legally giving every human being equal protection under the law is PARAMOUNT.
Amen. In some circles, this is known as “walking and chewing gum at the same time”… a feat which most normal humans can master, with a bit of practise.
Paladin:
–I’ve become firmly convinced that the main resistance to large families is due to the implicit “challenge” that it gives to our own selfishness. If I were (unconsciously) limiting my family to one or two children in order to preserve a self-gratifying life-style–
Fertility and generativity are not necessarily the same thing.
There are selfish people with large families. There are unselfish people with large families.
There are selfish people with no or one or two kids. There are unselfish people with no or one or two kids.
It’s not about how many kids you have, per se. It’s about what you give back while you are on this Earth.
For some people, giving back involves raising more than two kids. For some people it does not, it involves other contributions.
Marysia, I still see no direct answer as to what your position is on the legality of abortion. I think your non answer speaks for itself.
Paladin, 3:09 Amen
Xalisae, I am glad that even though we differ on this issue, you can see the humor in the bumper sticker!
Xalisae:
-making the killing of human beings in utero a crime legally giving every human being equal protection under the law is PARAMOUNT.–
Paladin:
–Amen. In some circles, this is known as “walking and chewing gum at the same time”… a feat which most normal humans can master, with a bit of practise. –
So, should every organization do everything that is associated with its cause? Or should it maybe focus on the most neglected area, the one of most need, the one where it can stand to have the most & best impact?
Paladin,
I love what you wrote very much! I have read those deadly comments about Trig Palin. His mere presence is enough to stir up so much hatred!
“So, should every organization do everything that is associated with its cause? Or should it maybe focus on the most neglected area, the one of most need, the one where it can stand to have the most & best impact?”
No, it isn’t wrong. I agree with you. I do much more good for the pro-life helping the unwanted street kids than I would anywhere else. But no matter where anyone is working on the pro-life cause, they should still be voting and supporting measures to restrict and criminalize abortion.
What is my position?
My position is that if all the energy spent in intractable arguments over whether or not abortion should be legal was channeled instead into actually doing real world, concrete things to make sure people can prevent unintended pregnancies and get through and beyond any difficult pregnancies that occur-it would be a piece of cake to ensure that *both* women and children, born and unborn, had all their human rights under the law.
A nonanswer and an evasion to some. But to me, and the people I have been able to help in the real world, and will help in the future–*including* unborn babies-it’s a practical, lifelong commitment.
Marysia wrote, in reply to my comment:
[Paladin]
I’ve become firmly convinced that the main resistance to large families is due to the implicit “challenge” that it gives to our own selfishness. If I were (unconsciously) limiting my family to one or two children in order to preserve a self-gratifying life-style [...]
[Marysia]
Fertility and generativity are not necessarily the same thing.
(??) Er… depending on your definitions, that might (or might not) be true… but I don’t take your meaning. Could you clarify?
There are selfish people with large families. There are unselfish people with large families.
Of course. Nowhere did I say that it was utterly impossible for those with large families to be selfish, and perhaps in many ways. But can you not agree that such families, at very least, are not selfish in the “I’ll minimize my children to maximize my life-style” paradigm? I would also argue (though I didn’t mention this earlier) that, if a family is unselfish in so primal an area as parenthood, they have a great advantage (and plenty of good training/practise) in becoming less selfish in many other (and lesser) areas… but again, that was an extra point.
There are selfish people with no or one or two kids. There are unselfish people with no or one or two kids.
That depends very much what you mean; I’d suggest that conflating all possible “selfishness” or “unselfishness” isn’t very helpful; there is a vast number of ways in which humans can be selfish; but surely you think it’s good if a particular family chooses unselfishness in this key area, yes? I’d hardly agree with the insinuation that such a choice is utterly irrelevant (i.e. “who cares if they have lits of kids? They could still be selfish jerks!”); since some people fail in many respects, do you find it irrelevant that they succeed in another? I, for one, do not.
It’s not about how many kids you have, per se. It’s about what you give back while you are on this Earth.
(??) I’m afraid this is so vague as to be opaque, and it smacks somewhat of “ecological humanism”; to whom, exactly, would one “give back”, and by what standards would you judge those gifts to be good, bad, adequate, or inadequate? Again: my main point was to praise those who embrace generosity in their openness to new life (and the profound training in self-sacrifice which comes with it) and to caution those who reject such openness for self-centred reasons (while asserting that this “persecution of large families” is a key symptom of that disease).
For some people, giving back involves raising more than two kids. For some people it does not, it involves other contributions.
That might well be true, in select cases. (My wife and I, for example, are incapable of having children, and other circumstances make it non-feasible to adopt; so we “give back” by mentoring younger people, by contributing as generously as we can [mostly with time and effort, but also financially] to the Church and to other worthy charities, by my teaching efforts, etc.) But it side-steps my point, which was to warn against the danger of egocentrism and selfishness such as is displayed in the snide, hateful, etc., comments against those with large families. I’d go so far as to say that such a disease is in near-epidemic proportions.
Forgive me if I didn’t address your points adequately; but, I confess, I’m really not quite clear on what they were!
I do believe it is just as rude and snide to assume things about families with less children, honestly. I don’t care who has how many kids, but I find galling when big family believers assign motives to me I don’t have. It’s just as rude as the population control nuts who try to lecture me about my age or how I am killing the planet if I have another.
Marysia wrote:
So, should every organization do everything that is associated with its cause? Or should it maybe focus on the most neglected area, the one of most need, the one where it can stand to have the most & best impact?
I think you may be presenting a false dilemma, here, since merely “taking an ideological stand against abortion” would not impair your other charitable efforts, in the least. How could they? Take my own firmly-held (and firmly-stated) statement: “I assert that every human person, existing from the very moment of conception, has the inalienable right to life until natural death, and that it is morally obligatory for that right to be safeguarded absolutely in law.” Did that take any money out of my pocket (which would otherwise have gone to feed the poor, or support a pregnancy care center–both of which my wife and I do, by the way), or take away any significant amount of time by which my wife and I can volunteer my services? I don’t see how; and (no offense) I think any statements to the contrary are simply silly.
A nonanswer and an evasion to some. But to me, and the people I have been able to help in the real world, and will help in the future–*including* unborn babies-it’s a practical, lifelong commitment.
That sounds very handsome; but again, your particular situation does not at all demand an “either/or, not both” choice from you, or from anyone. Surely you see that? How are “helping in society” and “taking a firm, clear stand against the murder of the unborn” mutually exclusive? How is it not possible to do both, and to do both as easily as not? (I’d even argue that they’re synergistic: that it’s *easier* to do both, rather than choosing one or the other… since the conviction of your position can fuel your passion for charity, and your efforts at charity can reinforce your conviction that your defense of life is good and just!)
But no matter where anyone is working on the pro-life cause, they should still be voting and supporting measures to restrict and criminalize abortion.
YES.
Thanks, Jack.
Jack,
I’m not sure whether your last comment was directed (in part, or otherwise) to me, but just to clarify my own position: I do not suggest that every last family with a “small” number of children is the result of selfishness (or else my wife and I would fall under the indictment, even more than you!), nor do I even say that every last family whose number of children is “small” through the conscious choice of the parents is necessarily the result of selfishness; there are some, I’m sure, who have good, carefully-discerned, unselfish reasons for doing so.
My first point was to attribute selfishness to those who persecute, insult, etc., large families (with my suspicions about their reasons outlined above); my second point was to assert that this very type of selfishness, to greater of lesser degrees, is extremely wide-spread in our Western culture. I really don’t see how anyone could credibly deny that, frankly… but no, I wasn’t “targetting” anyone as “selfish” simply by a raw computation of children! (I can imagine it now: “x = # of children; if x <= 2, then print, “You’re selfish!”
)
Oh, I didn’t mean you Paladin, I know your position as you have stated it before. I was making a point I have seen the rudeness on both sides of the argument. I understand why Marysia would be frustrated.
Ah. Noted and logged!
Jack. i will agree with you about large families. and rude people. i only have one brother and my dad died in 96. my girlfriend has 5 kids and they would get a little rowdy when she took them out. one day she told me she was in the grocery store and the kids were wild. she said an old woman approached and said “oh my i hope you’re fixed dear!”
We have been trying to help women who are pregnant but the abortion advocates keep fighting us, fighting us in New York, fighting us in San Francisco, fighting Crisis Pregnancy Centers all over the country, fighting our right to free speech, etc. etc. It is not enough to keep your head down and try to help pregnant women because the enemies of the unborn are NOT keeping their heads down at all!
I agree X, abortion MUST BE MADE ILLEGAL, worldwide, forever.
also my exes. brother has 9. his wife gets dirty looks and rude comments too!this sticker is an “in your face” to those rude people!
My position is that if all the energy spent in intractable arguments over whether or not abortion should be legal was channeled instead into actually doing real world, concrete things to make sure people can prevent unintended pregnancies and get through and beyond any difficult pregnancies that occur-it would be a piece of cake to ensure that *both* women and children, born and unborn, had all their human rights under the law.
And to me, your position is naive and wrong, from my own experience. I’ve talked to women who weren’t afraid. I’ve talked to women who weren’t poor. I’ve talked to women who weren’t being forced, or pressured. These women wanted for NOTHING. You know why they killed their babies? So they’d have more free time to go to Disneyworld with their significant others (and 0 living children). So they’d have enough money for another $500 dollar pair of shoes. So they’d have the resources to go on a European vacation. We need laws to protect the children of women like these, because there is nothing you could give them that will make them stop killing their children.
xalisae you are sooooo right! were you the one who told us about aborting so she’s could backpack across Europe? you see this is why i cannot label all women who abort victims! oh yes there are many but others will abort for self absorbed reasons! my sister in law had 2 or 3 abortions. she owns her home and she and her husband make good money. she has a substantial amount of money in the bank and they own their cars and a beautiful summer camper by the lake
she had plenty of money. to welcome a baby she just doesn’t. want to be bothered
sorry. should say were you the one who told us of the woman who aborted to go backpacking …..but my sister in law was not some pregnant kid in a crisis
she was a grown woman using no protection and when the pregnancy stick turned pink she plopped her money down and said “give me my abortions ” she just wasn’t willing to give up that freedom
There’s a website for young women that’s pro-life and populated by post-abortive teens and 20 somethings plus young mothers. (I won’t name it because it is remarkably free of trolls and wouldn’t it be nice to keep it that way).
On the site, young women can post a question for the others to answer. One young woman posted that even though she was engaged to the daddy and not in a crisis, she wanted to get an abortion because SHE DIDN’T WANT TO BE FAT IN HER WEDDING DRESS. I couldn’t make this stuff up.
Oops, and guess that girl would make just an AWESOME mother, eh ninek?
JackBorsch says:
August 18, 2011 at 2:34 pm
My personal favorite was when some lady asked my mother if we all had the same dad. That’s super rude.
(Denise) I saw a TV program in which a divorced woman with a large family was asked by another woman, “Are all those children your ex-husband’s?” The woman queried answered, “If you forgive me for not answering, I’ll forgive you for asking.”
Oops, and guess that girl would make just an AWESOME mother, eh ninek?
Better a lackluster mother than a dead baby, eh Megan?
ninek the day my friend aborted she was filling out her paper work and the girl across from her explained “i don’t want to lose my figure”
you never know the. joy that baby could bring. Singer Pink gave birth a few months ago she used to sign thhe pro choice roster. today she is over the moon over her new baby girl and I’m happy for her. she just keeps telling the world “I’m in love with my baby”
Xalisae:
–And to me, your position is naive and wrong, from my own experience–
You may disagree with my approach, but it hardly stems from naivete. I have been working on these issues as an activist and human services professional 25+ years, on the ground. My perspective is deeply shaped by where I have lived my whole adult life, in an inner city majority Black neighborhood.
As a pregnancy counselor and in other capacities I have borne witness to countless stories of crisis pregnancy and abortion, and am quite familiar with the historical and scientific literatures on these issues. I have been through a crisis pregnancy myself, and helped my own child through & beyond hers-am helping to raise a young man of color now, which is not a task for the naive or the faint of heart in this society.
And from this vantage point-I will assert that the stereotype of the woman who fecklessly, coldly, thoughtlessly aborts is just that. I have met very, very few women who even give that appearance, And in my experience, whenever someone appears to be feckless, cold, shallow, etc-there is something much, much deeper going on.
For example, who knows, but the woman who fears not being able to fit in her wedding dress may be terrified that her unexpected pregnancy means she will fail to fit into some role assigned her. The shame and judgment heaped on women with “unauthorized” pregnancies is considerable.
To heap outrage upon this woman, even before you know what’s really going on-that means you undercut your ability to understand what is really going on with her, whatever that may be, and help her find some other way.
As a pregnancy counselor and in other capacities I have borne witness to countless stories of crisis pregnancy and abortion, and am quite familiar with the historical and scientific literatures on these issues. I have been through a crisis pregnancy myself, and helped my own child through & beyond hers-am helping to raise a young man of color now, which is not a task for the naive or the faint of heart in this society.
Good comments, Marysia. There is thinking in silhouette, and then there is the reality of the complex people that we are. My wife’s a teacher, High School, southwest of Atlanta, GA, and everybody is an individual story.
Doug,
There’s also something called the “straw-man fallacy”. I don’t remember anyone on this board (much less on this thread) saying that every last post-abortive mother was 100% callous, concerned only about fitting into her new dress, and the like; so it’s rather facile for anyone (such as Marysia) to build an entire rejoinder on a “crusade” against that sort of “caricature-using”. Rather, we (and I) were asking Marysia why she was so loath to commit to a firmly anti-abortion position; given what she’s said so far, her reluctance is rather puzzling.
I would add, however, that there DO exist mothers who had their children killed for such shallow reasons; that’s plain fact, provable, and easy enough to find with a Google search.
To heap outrage upon this woman, even before you know what’s really going on-that means you undercut your ability to understand what is really going on with her, whatever that may be, and help her find some other way.
What’s really going on…well…what she told me was that her fun and objects are more important than the life of her embryonic child. And that was what SHE told ME. I don’t WANT to “understand” that.
Oops, and guess that girl would make just an AWESOME mother, eh ninek?
(*sigh*) Speaking of trolls…
just tell people what pro abortion people do you know “don’t. like abortion. don’t have one” tell em “don’t like my bumper sticker don’t. buy it”
i came across an interesting site. where abortionists were actually disgusted. with some of the reasons women gave for aborting. one abortionist said. that a woman wanted to abort because she and her husband were remodeling their home ands it wasn’t finished
he did the abortion but remained disgusted. with her
Marysia, when someone is so reluctant to say outright that they are against abortion, I think it’s safe to assume they are not really pro-life. It shouldn’t be like pulling teeth to get a pro-lifer to say, “Yes, I think abortion should be illegal.”
I didn’t have time to read all the comments but just had to comment on this one. I *love* this bumper sticker. A perfect tongue in cheek response to all those people who see a mom with more than two kids (or more than one in the under 5 age) and get an immediate snear. Even if they don’t *say* it they are practically shouting ‘don’t you know how that happens?’ Or ‘haven’t you ever heard of birth control’? (Or some similiar anti-kid sentiment).
if I was less of one maybe I could have another couple kids. (I’m being tongue-in-cheek too, I have a very high pain tolerance but the comment is still accurate, I very much wish I could be functional enough to care for my kids off my meds so we could have more!)
My husband and I use a mix of fertility awareness and barrier methods, not because I want to but because I’m on meds that are dangerous during pregnancy and, while pregnancy wouldn’t be dangerous, I would be crippled by pain by having to be off my meds. I’m confident enough in myself to say I’m a sissie
I also want to chime in briefly on NFP and the anti-contraceptive stance. Sex during marriage is a Biblical mandate. The only time a married couple is supposed to avoid sex is for short periods of pre-arranged and mutally agreed upon times of prayer and fasting. Sex is important to a good marriage, it melds spouses into one flesh, which is the actual Biblical reason given for not having sex outside of marriage, because that bonding is meant to last for life. It’s mental, emotional, and physical benefits far supercede mearly it’s possible procreative ability. Moreover God gave us, especially women, hormone flucuations that make sex more enjoyable and wanted during certain times of the woman’s cycle. Traditional Catholic NFP not only completely ignores the Biblical mandate to only abstain from sex for short times of prayer and fasting (to be positive you won’t get pregnant for a ‘very serious reason’ if you follow NFP as published by the Catholic church you could end up, depending upon the woman’s cycle, not having sex 3 weeks out of every month, and that doesn’t count a woman’s period when many couples aren’t comfortable engaging in sex.) but it also ignores the God-given enjoyment of sex, especially for the woman who may have to spend year after year having a sexual relation with her spouse wherein she gets the emotional and mental satifaction and binding without the physical enjoyment because they are coming together only when her physical body, due to hormones, isn’t interested.
If we were all perfect then there would be no reason for contraceptives, and every married couple could welcome with open arms a pregnancy that didn’t pain mother or baby and always ended in a perfect, painless birth and a new addition to a growing family. If we lived closer to perfection, like Eve, maybe we each could have the 200+ kids tradition says she had. But we don’t. We live in a fallen world where pregnancies can be life threatening or life-taking to either mother or child, where pain and death stalk us all, where feeding an extra mouth is more complicated than having the menfolk plant an extra acre of vegetables, and where God has given us the creativity, know-how, and drive to make as many work-arounds as we can think of to this fallen condition, such as medicine to counter-act sickness, commerce to counter-act cities, the ability to digest meat as a food source to counter the destruction of the flood on plant life, even though we weren’t created to consume it, internationally recognized symbols and concepts to counter the language disperal of Babel, and, yes, even ways to avoid pregnancy if a couple seeks to avoid pregnancy, initially a ‘very good’ thing that now is part of the fallen world that groaneth just like everything else.
I want a big family, I want to raise a quiverful of my husband’s children born of my womb, but pregnancy at this time would leave me in agony and my two current children without a functional mom for the duration. And there are other women out there who may suffer worse fates during a pregnancy. If I were to become pregnant then we know we’d manage without killing our child, even if it meant I had to move in with my parents across country with the kids while my husband stays to work. But when you live in a fallen world a lot of the time your choice isn’t between good and bad, it’s between bad and worse. The Bible calls children a blessing, and some couples are not as blessed as others. But it doesn’t call childlessness or limited children a sin.
Wow, Jespren.
:: waves to Bethany ::
In what is hopefully a good-natured humorous view, I can see a lot of people around the country seeing that bumper-sticker and then “Alabama” and saying to themselves, “It figures…..”
Opening a bag of peanuts on an airliner might cause health problems for the rare fellow passenger who has a hypersensitive allergic reaction.
The liberal solution: ban peanunts on airliners.
The common sense solution: Put the onus on the hyperallergenic individual to protect his/her/it’s own health. You know, the same way they do it all the rest of the time.
There is no solution for hypersensitive artificial flowers who are only interested in exagerating peripheral issues in order to divert attention from the core issue by ‘beating their breasts’ in feined indignance and complaining about their hurt ‘feelings’.
['cowgirl up' and get over yourself]
‘birth control’ is misnomer/euphemism. It is not about control but prevention.
The ‘birth control pill’ is not a contra-ceptive. It does not prevent ‘conception’. It does not stop ovulation or eliminate conception.
[The same folks who want to re-define marriage also want to re-defince 'conception' to mean 'implantation'.]
Elective abortion’s primary funciton is not ‘birth control’, but ‘live birth prevention’; the intent to produce OTHER than a ‘live birth’.
The goal of every ‘elective abortion’ is a dead baby.
Jespren, I agree with you about NFP, our cycles and libido at certain times of the month…your post explains at least one reason why I am not an advocate of NFP…I also think it stems from the same mindset as the contraceptive mindset that allows for bc pills too. (I’m not trying to start anything or judge anyone here who practices NFP by saying that….that’s just how I personally feel for me and my family).
I’m sorry to hear about your medical problems. I do not know the specifics, but I hope that there is a way to fix the source of the problem where one day you won’t have to take medication and you won’t have the pain anymore! That sounds like a terrible situation to have to live in, especially since you do desire more children. I hope one day you’ll be able to have the other children you want without having to worry about being in pain.
Doug, I could totally see people doing that. lol
“Opening a bag of peanuts on an airliner might cause health problems for the rare fellow passenger who has a hypersensitive allergic reaction. The liberal solution: ban peanunts on airliners.”
You nailed it, Ken!
Bethany, thanks. My pain is secondary to a genetic condition that causes frequent joint sublaxations, dislocations, and resultant muscular/skeletal issues. It’s possible it will get somewhat better, more likely that it will stay the same or get worse. But, they may come out with a more pregnancy-friendly pain med that works, or a different treatment in the future. For now, once my youngest is done being a nurseling there is another med we can try that may noticably improve my day to day pain level. We are then planning on adopting lots of kids to get our big, happy, lively ‘quiverful’ family. There are lots of kids that could do with a good home, and we hope to provide for many of them. I was lucky to be able to have 2 pregnancies, I was told from childhood that I might not be able to carry or birth a child do to a malformation of my hips. But it ended up being minor enough that is was just a pain issue, not a danger issue. So I’m blessed that God gave me 2 kids womb-born, and I hope He’ll bring us lots more that are heart-born (adopted).
Ken: Opening a bag of peanuts on an airliner might cause health problems for the rare fellow passenger who has a hypersensitive allergic reaction.
The liberal solution: ban peanuts on airliners.
Or it might be a conservative solution. Myself, I’m not for banning peanuts or abortion.
Ken:
–Opening a bag of peanuts on an airliner might cause health problems for the rare fellow passenger who has a hypersensitive allergic reaction.–
Your use of this analogy suggests a lack of information about food allergies and potentially, rapidly fatal anaphylactic reactions. Peanut and other food allergies are often scoffed at and trivialized, but they are really serious business.
People with peanut & other food allergies can work diligently to avoid the triggering allergen, only to be exposed suddenly and inadvertently because of reasons beyond their control. And for some, all it takes to trigger anaphylaxis is a very small exposure.
http://www.foodallergy.org/page/myths
My daughter almost died once from anaphylaxis due to an inadvertent food allergen exposure. If you are prolife, then surely you will care about human beings like her who can die from this, just like you are concerned about deaths from abortion.
–There is no solution for hypersensitive artificial flowers who are only interested in exagerating peripheral issues in order to divert attention from the core issue by ‘beating their breasts’ in feined indignance and complaining about their hurt ‘feelings’.–
There is probably no convincing at least some of the folks here, but I repeat: You cannot silence and throw the blame back on me on the grounds I am some “hypersensitive artificial flower.”
For one, I am made of pretty tough stuff. If you knew what I have gotten through in my life, & am still getting though-if you had all the evidence before you- the daily, regular, lifelong encounters with mortality and human cruelty and injustice- you would probably be moved to agree.
Or engage in a ridiculous bit of cognitive distortion in order to maintain the absurd fiction of my “hypersensitivity.”
Yeah, I have my faults, to be sure, but a faint heart is not one of them.
And a 25+year commitment to improving women’s lives for their sake and the sake of their unborn & already-born children is not evidence of personal weakness, to say the least.
Anyone who thinks it is: well, you are welcome to try it. It’s not for wusses.
Nor is it some diversionary, breastbeating exaggeration of peripheral issues. It is a profoundly prolife dealing spot-on with the issue of abolishing abortion.
Prolife enough to occasion rejection, ostracism, and namecalling from many who are prochoice, as well as many who are prolife. I persist in the face of that, too, though it really gets old, being pressed into service as the rubbish bin for other people’s projections, frankly.
Other people can focus on the law if they want. I want to do something that in my careful assessment can make a tangible difference, and I don’t see that with focusing on the law, anytime soon. Call me every inapplicable name in the book, but I stay this prayerful course for definite, concrete solutions.
Jespren:
– I want a big family, I want to raise a quiverful of my husband’s children born of my womb, but pregnancy at this time would leave me in agony and my two current children without a functional mom for the duration. –
Jespren, I am sorry that you have health problems that interfere with your wish for a large family.
But I wonder about your references to “quiverfull.”
Are not your children yours as well as your husband’s-after all, who carried them for nine months, nursed them, (possibly) has given them most of the care they need to stay alive and well.
And the “quiverfull” ideology has no place for women whose bodies b/c of disabilities/health problems cannot sustain however many pregnancies will happen to them w/o the use of any family planning.
If it has no place for women like you or like me or millions of us-maybe it’s “quiverfull” that is wrong. Not us.
For one, I am made of pretty tough stuff. If you knew what I have gotten through in my life, & am still getting though-
Yes. Obviously you’ve been around the block and are one tough cookie, judging by your reaction to a JOKE posted on a blog on the internet that wasn’t even about you.
If it has no place for women like you or like me or millions of us-maybe it’s “quiverfull” that is wrong. Not us.
The NFL has no place for me. I suck as a quarterback and I just can’t do defense. THE NFL IS WRONG!!!
Man, is your reasoning ever screwed, lady. Personally opposing contraception is not a personal attack or affront to you if you contracept. Certain (religiously-based) beliefs are not a personal attack or affront to you if you do not share those beliefs. You really need to put down your cross for a second and take a look around.
Oh yeah, and just because we’re still not clear here: Do you think abortion should be illegal? A “yes” or “no” would suffice.
To be fair X, sometimes anti-contraception believers do personally attack those who don’t agree. So do some religious believers. I haven’t seen it on this thread, except for the possible exception of ninek’s comment. It is what happens when people fervently disagree. I do think that Marysia is overreacting in this instance.
Xalisae-
A yes or no does not suffice, because it does not address the critical issue of real-world impact of legislation upon both women and babies.
I am not opposed to or threatened by people who want large families having them.
I *am* concerned about quiverfull specifically b/c it is not simply about large families.
And yes, if someone can’t be a quarterback in the quiverfull game-it could very well mean not that they are personal failures, but that the game is unjustly rigged against certain people, that there is something wrong with the NFL.
A “mere” joke can encode all sorts of offensive meanings that need to be brought out in the open.
xalasie lol
Marysia: And yes, if someone can’t be a quarterback in the quiverfull game-it could very well mean not that they are personal failures, but that the game is unjustly rigged against certain people, that there is something wrong with the NFL.
Yeah, not everybody can be a pro football player, obviously. A greater number of people can have a lot of kids, but there too – not everybody, not every woman. Nor will people necessarily want to play pro ball or have a lot of kids.
And you know, really – screw the peanuts on the airplane. Gimme some o’ those roasted, salted, sweet almonds – now those things are the bomb.
I’m sorry, you were talking, but all I heard was “I have teh butthurt, blah blah blah.”
Don’t want to make abortion illegal? Welcome to “You Are Part of the Problem”, population: YOU. I’m most concerned with the “real-world impact” that our current lack of legislation has on over 3,000 human beings who are killed by abortion in the United States EACH DAY. Your priorities are f-d. Thanks for showing how much so.
I don’t see Quiverfull people dragging women they don’t know out into the streets in the middle of the night and inseminating them. They can play their game, and we can play ours, but asserting that their game is “wrong” because they’re playing football and we’re playing lacrosse is asinine. And nobody HAS to be “Quiverfull”. If they don’t like it, they should stop playing.
People who think a joke “can encode all sorts of offensive meanings that need to be brought out into the open” are commonly referred to as “oversensitive”. This is another aspect of the problem of racism rearing its ugly head. Part of the reason race relations are so poor these days is precisely because no one is allowed to laugh about certain things anymore. The world would be a better place if people like them and you could manage to remove the 2×4′s from their posteriors.
Jack:
To be fair X, sometimes anti-contraception believers do personally attack those who don’t agree. So do some religious believers. I haven’t seen it on this thread, except for the possible exception of ninek’s comment.
I know. And with the position I take in this matter, I’ve experienced it myself. Which is why it is particularly angering when someone like what’s-her-face pops out reeling and rioting against something that isn’t even mean-spirited, spiteful, or confrontational in the least. Because I’ve had to talk to a lot of people here about this to get any respect at all on the matter, initially, and now I have it, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to let some little hypersensitive chica come in, throw a tantrum, and ruin it for me. I recognized when things started to go downhill. That’s why I posted my first comment with my history and VERY personal experience with the matter to remind people CIVILLY, CALMLY, and in a FRIENDLY MANNER that there are situations they are failing to take into account, and could you please remember some of your friends are and have been in bad situations that made something like this at the very least advantageous and at the most a necessity. I appreciate the concern, but I’ve been here for quite some time, and this woman is not doing me any favors.
Yeah, not everybody can be a pro football player, obviously. A greater number of people can have a lot of kids, but there too – not everybody, not every woman. Nor will people necessarily want to play pro ball or have a lot of kids.
No one here is MAKING anyone go to try-outs, Doug.
Marysia, my use of the term ‘quiverful’ is just in reference to the Bible verse that says a man with a quiverful of children is blessed. That’s not to say he’s more blessed than I or that I’m not blessed or that the kids aren’t mine too (of my womb and yes, nursed by my breasts). But most women I know, myself included, find ‘giving’ kids to their husband a unique and blessed event. Handing the child you have supported and nurished and already know to your husband and proclaiming ‘here is your son/daughter!’ Is a blessing that is a unique experience that only happens after you have carried and birthed the child. I know with my kids, almost 3 and 16 months, they are still so much ‘me’, we are still practically a single organism that watching my husband play with ‘his kids’ is a joy completely separate from playing with them myself. And if I could I would bless him like that again and again! As far as the ‘quiverful movement’, the only thing I know about it is it endorses big families. So can’t speak about it specfically. But the Bible does note there are specific blessings for men and specific blessings for women when it comes to children. Frankly I think they get the short end of the stick.
Technically the term ‘quiverful’ just means ‘as many as will fit in your quiver’ (a quiver being a pouch to carry arrows most commonly), and could mean anywhere from a handful to a couple dozen of arrows depending upon the type and size of both arrows and quivers. It’s not a hard number like ‘score’ or ‘fortnight’. I was just using it as a general reference to ‘a lot’. Personally I always felt 7 would be good, then 5 more adopted after the first group started leaving the nest, for a total of 12 kids. Sounds ideal to me 
“Yeah, not everybody can be a pro football player, obviously. A greater number of people can have a lot of kids, but there too – not everybody, not every woman. Nor will people necessarily want to play pro ball or have a lot of kids.”
Madame X: No one here is MAKING anyone go to try-outs, Doug.
Is that why that girl didn’t like my “forward pass”?
But seriously, yeah, sounds good – nobody’s forced to be a pro football player nor have a whole lot of chilluns.
Jespren: But the Bible does note there are specific blessings for men and specific blessings for women when it comes to children. Frankly I think they get the short end of the stick.
Must… Resist… the urge to make a bad joke….
Xalisae:
–People who think a joke “can encode all sorts of offensive meanings that need to be brought out into the open” are commonly referred to as “oversensitive”. This is another aspect of the problem of racism rearing its ugly head. Part of the reason race relations are so poor these days is precisely because no one is allowed to laugh about certain things anymore. The world would be a better place if people like them and you could manage to remove the 2×4′s from their posteriors.–
If you have a worldview that identifies poor race relations as caused by some people’s “oversensitivity” to racist jokes, and not b/c of the white privilege that still results in, perpetuates and makes those jokes socially acceptable to some…well, no wonder we seem to be talking past each other.
Race relations are poor b/c people of color are subjected to systematic injustices, and when they protest, whitefolks smack them down, in part by trivializing their concerns and denying that there’s really any problem. Speaking live from the color line…
There are many ways to speak frankly about racial issues- and other diversity issues, like dfferences in family size- w/o resort to offensive humor.
One person’s “harmless joke” may very well be another person’s “nasty salt in the wound from being treated as disposable.” Why pour salt into someone’s wounds?
Doug, you crack me up.
I understand X, I just feel sympathy because I know that it sucks to be internet butthurt because of some personal problem and make a spectacle of yourself. But you are right, those of us that hit on her side of the issue, for reasons just as serious as her, aren’t freaking over a bumper sticker.
Marysia, seriously?? I have really dark humor, so maybe I am a bad judge, but is it really that big of a deal? It’s humor, the whole point of it is to laugh at the ridiculousness and horror of life, including racism. If you don’t laugh you will go insane. Xalisae is right that SOME of the racial tension in the US is due to this PC tiptoeing crap. I find it incredibly annoying (as a mixed race person) that people tiptoe around my heritage, not wanting to offend me by asking but curious. A little honesty would be much appreciated.
Sure, white privilege exists. The system is ingrained in (mostly) unconscious racism and sexism. But what in the world do you hope to accomplish by complaining about humor? It’s a snarky bumper sticker, it’s an off-color joke, it’s Foxworthy making fun of rednecks, it’s Chappelle making fun of ALL races. Save the righteous indignation for something else. I will go laugh at jokes about men, Latinos, southerners, abuse victims, poor people, and every other category I fit into and realize my indignation is better used on actual problems.
Marysia, I find it really puzzling why you have went on and on endlessly posting about how offended you are by a bumper sticker (which I think is a pretty funny inside joke btw) but cannot find it in your “oversensitive” heart to be “offended” about unborn babies being dismembered and mutilated in their mother’s wombs to the tune of 3,000 a day. Talk about puzzling? Hmmm? Talk about misplaced priorities…
Jack, you are so right about tension and Chappelle, for example, who certainly could drain all the tension out of a room. Too bad, IMO, that he left his TV show to concentrate on stand-up, but can’t really blame him.
In like manner, Carlos Mencia and George Lopez rule at such jokes too. Oh yeah – Chris Rock….
Xalisae, you rock.
Marysia, @ your comments regarding quiverfull (something you clearly know nothing about). You are more worried about people reproducing than about people aborting. That is not pro-life.
Prolifer L:
–cannot find it in your “oversensitive” heart to be “offended” about unborn babies being dismembered and mutilated in their mother’s wombs to the tune of 3,000 a day. Talk about puzzling? Hmmm? Talk about misplaced priorities…–
I *am* disturbed by this. Profoundly. It’s why I do what I have done for 25+ years.
Bethany:
–Marysia, @ your comments regarding quiverfull (something you clearly know nothing about). You are more worried about people reproducing than about people aborting. That is not pro-life. –
Hunh? Not sure where you got this. I have said that I am not against people having large families, if that’s what they want, and don’t seek to impose it on others who want something else. It’s not my call anyway.
As for my alleged “ignorance” of quiverfull and related ideologies-I am quite familiar, from the time I was a child, with such ideologies, and the damage they can cause-that I have witnessed myself. I have kept track of this issue over the decades, and am concerned about their resurgence.
I do not object to them b/c they lead people to reproduce. I object to them b/c they are based on gender inequality rather than equality, and though not always but sometimes actually result in domestic violence. “Family privacy” is no more valid a screen for discrimination and domestic violence than it is for abortion.
Marysia-
By getting offended at jokes that are off-color, you give them power. No one can have any power over you that you don’t give them. Get help.
My father is white, my mother is Mexican. There is only one single time in my Mom’s life (and only recently) that anything to do with her race has ever been a factor in anything about her life, and that’s just been recently (which I feel is because by giving stupid crap credence by making a big fuss over it, whites feel like they’re being demonized, making them more resentful, and not only adding to racism, but fostering it in people who otherwise wouldn’t be). I’ve never seen doors opened for my father that weren’t opened likewise for my mother, and none of us kids have ever had a hard time about being “mixed”. My dad make constant jokes about Mexicans when we were growing up. It desensitized us to them, and they were coming from our father who we knew loved us. To this day they hold no power over us because we’ve heard it all before and laugh it off for the stupidity it is. You do us all a disservice by even giving any of this nonsense a second of thought.
It’s why I do what I have done for 25+ years.
And yet you won’t get behind us in saying that abortion should be illegal? Odd.
Finally-if Quiverfull is so bad, then people should leave it. I would. But I also wouldn’t get butthurt by those people who are in it who choose to be in it. They are also welcome to think whatever they like about me, because of my race/gender/etc. I am also welcome to not give a f- what they think. ^_^
Thank you Jack, for the backup, and Bethany, for the compliment. *hearts*
Xalisae-I am glad that your family escaped overt discrimination (assuming they did; there could be another side to this story). But there is still plenty of both overt and covert discrimination that thwarts people through no fault of their own.
Speaking here as a multiply disabled woman who grew up in an intensely misogynist, ablist environment and had to learn elsewhere that I was a person with rights. Also I’m soneone who comes from two different white but genocided ethnic groups, has lived with poverty, and has a Black/White family in a majority Black and poor environment.
Jokes are not the worst thing people from any of these discriminated against groups face. In my neighborhood we have gun violence, poverty, malnutrition, unemployment & job discrimination, substandard schools, a killing and life stunting lack of access to health care, among other things..
But you know what, if anybody jokes about how my grandchild is a little n-word, or a little thug-in-waiting-and a lot of people have!–they definitely get an earful (at least!) from Grandma Tiger.
And if anybody maligns Grandma Tiger-she is also a person of dignity and worth, and will defend herself, through nonviolent means.
Making something illegal/legal, putting all the energies and resources in that question, is not always or necessarily the most constructive way to deal with an issue. There are many other prolifers who agree, though maybe not around these parts.
I have many reasons for this conclusion, but one big one is that proposals to ban abortion almost never, ever have written right into then any support-let alone robust, substantive support-for everything and anything nonviolent that will help women prevent, complete, and get beyond crisis pregnancies. To address the fetus alone as if there wasn’t a woman there too just pits woman v. fetus even further.
A lot of prolifers complain how abortion is an abandonment of women-but the very laws they propose only say “don’t do it, it’s wrong” and then proceed to abandon millions of women, and their children, especially poor people, people of color, people with disabilities…you name it.
In some European countries, however, laws on abortion have real alternatives expressly written into them. No the situation isn’t perfect by any means, but it’s better than here…Helping women make other choices is a real social priority, and one that most people don’t grumble about paying tax dollars for.
Many Latin American countries have legal bans on abortion, fetal and sometimes even female personhood on paper, but very high abortion rates-they don’t have this same commitment. But in Scandinavian countries for example abortion is permitted on fairly broad grounds at least earlier in pregnancy=and yet their abortion rates are much, much lower than in latin america or in the US.
Legal/illegal is hardly the only thing that drives the abortion rate. Especially in the US, with its sorry excuse for a social safety net.
Jespren
Theres a product called coral reef calcium it is excellent for pain. You can get it at a GNC it comes in a brown bottle and has a silver and blue label. If your allergic to fish you can’t take it. I found out about this product when surgery was suggested for my back. I lived in chronic pain. If you decide to try it let me know if it works for you. It’s 30.00 a bottle but it’s well worth it. Other stores carry coral reef calcium but the only one I found to be effective is the one sold at a GNC center. Hope this helps with your pain.I know what your saying about pain. Pain affects your whole outlook. Don’t give up though with prayer my mri actually showed improvement without surgery. I just have to be careful not to be moving any heavy furniture or lifting on heavy things. At one time I could not even tie my shoe. God bless you and I hope this product works for you.
Myrtle miller, thanks, I’ll look into it. One of the problems with treatment is I’m very resistant to analgesics (which is part of the condition), and what they call a fast metabolizer (which is just me and means I burn through stuff really fast) so I can walk around like normal, still in pain, while on a dose of morphine that would floor most people twice my size, and vicodin might as well be a sugar pill. (Oh, and stitches are *fun* because all the numbing agents used are analgesics and lidocaine lasts about 2 minutes) My new(ish) doctor has me on a NSAID and a non-analgesic muscel relaxer, which works a lot better on the overall pain level but doesn’t help much with acute pain when something goes out (my wrist won’t stop dislocating this week). It’s a 50% inheritance rate so likelihood is one of my kids has it, but you can have it without being a sufferer. Not everyone with my condition (Ehlers-Danlos Hypermobility) has a pain and/or injury problem. Some times it just means you’re really flexible (like carnival flexible) and scar badly. So we are hoping since we know to watch out and be careful that my kids won’t have any real issues. Most of my issues stem from not being diagnosed until I was in my early 20s.
Ok. So you don’t think people can improve themselves because the deck is stacked. Whatever. You think everyone means well, they’re just misunderstood or oppressed. Right.
The small town that my dad moved us to that broke us financially after the first drive-by shooting 2 blocks away from where we lived in California had a lot of poor people. There were white poor people and black poor people and black people that were successful and white people that were successful. White people get in crappy situations just like any other ethnicity does. Ugh. I don’t even feel like arguing with you anymore. So I won’t. Have fun getting offended at everyone who is oppressing you everywhere all the time. I bet your life must be happy and fun. XD
an old woman approached and said “oh my i hope you’re fixed dear!”
h, my wife lost a baby in utero at around 18 weeks and from that point on there was one obgyn in particular, a man, who recommended genetic testing and amniocentisis and all kinds of crap to my wife and began discouraging more children. When we had our next kid while we were in the delivery room he had the gaul to ask me when I was going to get snipped. I told him he would have to catch me in my casket cause there is no chance while I’m alive (we actually had a laugh about it at the time). Needless to say that we avoided him with future visits to the obgyn and we now have six kids. I’m lovin having a large family and feel blessed that my wife has been able to be a stay-at-home mom since our first.
TS hope you are well. it just goes to show you that we really are living in a pro abortion society. my mom never came up against it because she only had 2 i guess that’s the ideal number for some. nevertheless it did indeed happen to my friend and 3 of her kids are now teens. could you imagine asking a woman “how many abortions have you had”"?
Xalisae:
–Ok. So you don’t think people can improve themselves because the deck is stacked. Whatever. You think everyone means well, they’re just misunderstood or oppressed. Right.
The small town that my dad moved us to that broke us financially after the first drive-by shooting 2 blocks away from where we lived in California had a lot of poor people. There were white poor people and black poor people and black people that were successful and white people that were successful. White people get in crappy situations just like any other ethnicity does. Ugh. I don’t even feel like arguing with you anymore. So I won’t. Have fun getting offended at everyone who is oppressing you everywhere all the time. I bet your life must be happy and fun. XD–
Yes, actually, there is a *lot* of joy in my life. I both give and receive!! Ask me about my grandson. Ask my grandson about me. (:
In fact, I wouldn’t have lasted as long as I have as an activist if there wasn’t a lot of joy in my life.
Some of the most joyful people I know are longtime activists, in fact.
Yes, white people get in crappy situations too, and some groups of white people are treated as more equal than others. If you will note, for one, I have already identified myself as belonging to two groups of white people who have experienced genocide.
Did I say anything about people not being able to improve themselves b/c the deck is stacked against them? No. But the deck *is* stacked, and things need not be-should not be-this way.
It can be overwhelming to face the realities of humanmade oppression and injustice on this planet. I understand the temptations to minimize or deny it, having once succumbed to these myself. But when there is G*d’s infinite mercy and justice to lean upon & draw from-what reason in the end do any of us have *not* to face it & fight the good fight, nonviolently?
At any rate, I need to attend now to an elderly, chronically ill pet. She is among the many joys in my life & i feel so grateful for her & want to do right by her.
If anyone wants to continue this conversation, please do so at marysia at sign allourlives.org
Because “fighting the good fight” is making the “good fight” worse/harder to fight. You’re fighting against yourself and you don’t even realize it. Have fun! ^_^
Any percieved advancement-whether it be through legislative, legal, or institutional policy changes (in regards to sexism or racism)-which is forced, is just that: FORCED. And people don’t like being forced to behave in a certain way when it comes to their own personal thoughts and actions. They will naturally rebel.
xalisae I’m just a sitting here in a little disbelief that this woman continues to prattle on with you over a BUMPER sticker!
Marysia,
If you’ll humour me, for a moment (since some of my questions got lost in the flow of messages, apparently, above): could you please answer a few questions, as clearly as you can? I’m not trying to play “gotcha”; I’m trying to figure out what you truly believe about some of these core issues… and your previous answers have been very (and I’d say “unnecessarily”) evasive.
1) Do you believe that a direct, willed abortion (as opposed to a miscarriage) is morally evil? In other words, do you think that anyone who knowingly, willfully and freely chooses to kill their child by abortion is doing an evil act?
2) Do you believe that human personhood (and, with it, the inalienable right to life) begins at the moment of conception?
I’m still a bit confused about your above answers. Had you said, “Yes, I’m convinced that abortion is a moral evil, but I can’t give money to every last charity; some of my prior commitments take precedence, for me”, I doubt many people would have objected (I certainly wouldn’t have done so!), since it’s quite true that we have limited time, money, etc., to give, and to give to one often means denying help to another. But when you say, “I refuse to take a verbal stand against abortion, because my other charities/efforts [which also serve the pro-life cause] come first!”, that seems rather bizarre… since I see no way that a declaration like that could possibly take away from your current efforts.
If you’re afraid of “going on record as being anti-abortion” because you think we’ll somehow force you to transfer all of your donations of time and money to the Pro-Life Action League [an excellent organization, I might add!], or some such thing, please rest assured that this isn’t the case! Given that: do you see why we’re a bit confused by your reluctance to go “on-record” as being against abortion, and wishing it to be recognized in law as a crime (like all other murders), albeit with different application (given the massive brain-washing/disinformation campaign that women have endured for decades, on the subject–”it’s only a clump of cells!”, etc.)?
palaidin you have some great posts I’ve. been reading them on other threads. i just wanted to add that if a person can’t answer a question then they are conflicted or confused. I’m pro life easy enough. i like pizza. i don’t like jazz music – see easy as pie
Jack-
I don’t know how I missed this comment from you, but it’s totally awesome! I’m the oldest of 6 kids, the youngest in our family being my youngest brother who is 13 years younger than I am!
AWESOMESAUCE!
Paladin:
–your previous answers have been very (and I’d say “unnecessarily”) evasive.–
Well, for one, it’s kind of difficult to explain my stance to folks who apparently have already decided I am a hypersensitive a**h***.
Prolife and prochoice people alike demand: “So, legal or illegal? Legal or illegal?” And then decree “you’re evasive!” when I don’t deliver the goods (or bads) according to the dictated terms.
I’m *not* evading the issue. It may appear-appear-like that because *my answer doesn’t fit either expected & demanded category & is more complicated.*
It i comes from another place-a place of witnessing & believing that this is not the deepest and most decisive question-legal/illegal- our society should be asking about abortion.
The deepest & most decisive questions are these: Why do so many women end up in situations where they feel abortion-taking their own prenatal children’s lives- is their only or least bad choice? What can we do to help them and their children during & ever after pregnancy-and before, in the way of sex education & pregnancy prevention?
These questions would remain on a massive scale if abortion were banned tomorrow.
The way the legal/illegal debate plays out in the US-these matters, the most vital ones concerning abortion, get completely lost in the shuffle.
–1) Do you believe that a direct, willed abortion (as opposed to a miscarriage) is morally evil? In other words, do you think that anyone who knowingly, willfully and freely chooses to kill their child by abortion is doing an evil act?–
I suspect your religious language & theology differ from mine.
But I do think that almost every intentional lifetaking of any human being, born or unborn, is inherently destructive and to be avoided & opposed.
Merely opposing and proscribing acts of violence is not enough if we are to truly revere all lives. We have the responsibility to practice active nonviolence and help one another avoid and prevent acts of violence.
I have never met *anyone* who just up & decided to fecklessly, coldly kill their fetus for the h*ll of it. They were responding to real hardships and pressures that no one should have ever subjected them to-that’s violence against human beings too. The answer is not more violence-but this reality does mean we shouldn’t sling around hard*ss judgmentality about what awful people those who have abortions are and how utterly different they are from us *virtuous* folk.
(I also oppose the killing of animals & am a longtime vegetarian/parttime vegan-but for now, we can stick to the issue of violence against human beings.)
–2) Do you believe that human personhood (and, with it, the inalienable right to life) begins at the moment of conception?–
Yes, if you mean by personhood, fullfledged membership in the human race. And if life begins at conception, that means pregnancy is a matter of one fullfledged member of the human race carrying another inside her body and life.
But if the legal/illegal debate just severs the woman and fetus in two and picks one over the other, whichever side is taken-that’s violence too, and I want no part of it.
“I don’t know how I missed this comment from you, but it’s totally awesome! I’m the oldest of 6 kids, the youngest in our family being my youngest brother who is 13 years younger than I am!”
O_o!! That’s nuts, if I didn’t know better I would think you were my oldest sis Amelia, you do sound a lot like her. Meaning that you rock, since she is my favorite. Another coincidence, my mom is Latina (not Mexican though, Cuban) and my dad is white.
“But if the legal/illegal debate just severs the woman and fetus in two and picks one over the other, whichever side is taken-that’s violence too, and I want no part of it.”
Would you favor a more incremental approach to criminalizing abortion, with stops along the way to make sure that social services and programs to assist women are being properly supported and funded?
And yay for vegetarians, btw.
Marysia – I do not understand your hand wringing over this notion of legality. Lots of people steal out of necessity. We can still say stealing should be illegal even if we simultaneously work to make sure that necessity is addressed. Unless you take the stand that we can’t make something criminal until we make it unnecessary for anyone to commit the crime (at which point, query why we need a law at all).
If abortion is not a moral evil, then there is no need to reduce it, except to help women who don’t want to abort but feel they have to. But a high number of women who want to abort would pose no dilemma. If abortion IS a moral evil then we cannot allow it. At their core, our criminal laws exist to prevent people from exerting violent force against other people. That doesn’t mean women who seek abortions a aren’t sympathetic or that we shouldn’t devote time to addressing the reasons that caused them to seek an abortion in the first place. It just means that a civilized society can’t sanction legal murder.
Jack- I hope Daniel turns out to be as cool as you.
Marysia – I’ve been one of the women you’re talking about. Did I need help? YES. But I know firsthand that there is no excuse to kill your child. None. And I’ve talked to women who have been in far, far, FAR better circumstances for a child than I ever could’ve imagined who simply did not want to deal with a child who aborted. So I just don’t see your point.
Excellent post, CT.
Marysia wrote:
Prolife and prochoice people alike demand: “So, legal or illegal? Legal or illegal?” And then decree “you’re evasive!” when I don’t deliver the goods (or bads) according to the dictated terms.
I’m still not clear on why you think the “dictated terms” are so unreasonable. Some questions do, in fact, have clear, “nuance-free” answers… and I’d argue that this is one of them. I’m starting to think that your position is “no, it should not be made illegal, in general”, but that you’re afraid of being pilloried for what you think will be an unpopular view, so you refuse to answer; only an emotional reason such as that would easily explain your evasion, since the raw logical issue is rather straight-forward and well-defined (and lends itself to a clear answer).
I’m *not* evading the issue. It may appear-appear-like that because *my answer doesn’t fit either expected & demanded category & is more complicated.*
Let me speak for myself: I’m not crouching, like a tiger in the brush, waiting for you to answer so that I can “pounce” on you immediately! I’d be more than willing to let you add whatever qualifiers you wish; I add some, myself (e.g. on the whole, the mothers should be treated differently than the abortionist should be treated, etc.). Care to try that?
It i comes from another place-a place of witnessing & believing that this is not the deepest and most decisive question-legal/illegal- our society should be asking about abortion.
Even if that were true (and it’s possible): what possible difference would that make, and why would it require you to be “cagey”? There are plenty of questions that are “non-fundamental” which are still quite easy to answer with a “yes” or “no” (albeit with whatever qualifiers are necessary); why would the relative importance of the question make any difference to the “answerability” of the question at all?
The deepest & most decisive questions are these: Why do so many women end up in situations where they feel abortion-taking their own prenatal children’s lives- is their only or least bad choice? What can we do to help them and their children during & ever after pregnancy-and before, in the way of sex education & pregnancy prevention?
And I’ll say again, as I’ve said interminably in the past (and on this thread, as well): nothing, whatsoever, would prevent you from addressing such concerns (as we do, as well, who work at and/or support Pregnancy Care Centres) AT THE SAME TIME that you address the fundamental issue of ethics (i.e. should abortion be forbidden by force of law). One would not interefere with the other, in the LEAST. Is that now quite clear? (Forgive the touch of impatience, but: it’s rather wearying to type the same thing interminably, only to have it utterly ignored in subsequent comments on the topic!)
These questions would remain on a massive scale if abortion were banned tomorrow.
Of course. No one is suggesting that banning abortion would be the end of the story; banning abortion is NECESSARY, but not SUFFICIENT.
The way the legal/illegal debate plays out in the US-these matters, the most vital ones concerning abortion, get completely lost in the shuffle.
That might be, in some cases… but again, for individuals who wrestle with the moral issue itself, that’s quite irrelevant.
[Paladin]
Do you believe that a direct, willed abortion (as opposed to a miscarriage) is morally evil? In other words, do you think that anyone who knowingly, willfully and freely chooses to kill their child by abortion is doing an evil act?
[Marysia]
I suspect your religious language & theology differ from mine.
Perhaps… though I’d note that I see no religious words there, at all, nor did I reference theology (or God) at all. Ethics can be discussed, even among people who (inexplicably) abstract from the existence of God.
But I do think that almost every intentional lifetaking of any human being, born or unborn, is inherently destructive and to be avoided & opposed.
All right; now: how should it be opposed, in addition to “changing hearts and minds” (which, we both agree, is utterly necessary)? For those who are dead-set on killing their children at this very minute, should we be morally/legally empowered to stop them (as we are empowered to stop a murder of a post-born child or adult)?
Merely opposing and proscribing acts of violence is not enough if we are to truly revere all lives.
Of course. But see above: no one (save perhaps you?) is suggesting that we must choose only one or the other (and not both). I’d really appreciate an explanation, one of these times, as to why you think “both” isn’t workable!
We have the responsibility to practice active nonviolence and help one another avoid and prevent acts of violence.
Of course.
I have never met *anyone* who just up & decided to fecklessly, coldly kill their fetus for the h*ll of it.
Three answers to that:
1) You have not “met” every post-abortive mother in the world; some have aborted for outrageously shallow reasons (e.g. sex-selection, wanting to fit into a particular dress, etc.). More to the point: you may also not have met any of the plentiful abortionists who kill unborn children for money; granted, they might not do it for “the thrill” or “the h*ll of it”, but most would consider money to be a very base reason for killing, yes?
2) It is not at all necessary to have such an extreme, sociopathic (or sadistic) mother, in order to talk about outlawing the practice. For example: have you met anyone who “just up & decided to fecklessly, coldly kill a born human being for the h*ll of it”? I haven’t.
3) Criminal laws are meant to restrain *all* people, not just the few “inhuman-seeming monsters” who seem to kill with abandon. I hardly understand why you’d bring up such an extreme example, in the first place… unless you think that only such “cold-blooded killers” should ever be punished?
They were responding to real hardships and pressures that no one should have ever subjected them to-that’s violence against human beings too. The answer is not more violence-but this reality does mean we shouldn’t sling around hard*ss judgmentality about what awful people those who have abortions are and how utterly different they are from us *virtuous* folk.
You’re painting a picture of utter extremes… and I’d gently remind you that, even in cases of established criminal laws against murder, it doesn’t work like that. Premeditated murder is handles differently than is negligent homicide; a lack of remorse is handled much more differently than is a case where a terrorized, abused wife suddenly “snaps” and kills her abuser. Surely you see this? And yet, I don’t think you’d find that to be a compelling reason to erase all anti-murder laws… right? It’s not at all a safe issue merely to “leave to the changing of hearts and minds” (which, again, is a good and necessary thing to do, as we both agree). Criminal law is, in general, necessary for those who WISH TO BREAK IT, not for those who wish to keep it.
[Paladin]
Do you believe that human personhood (and, with it, the inalienable right to life) begins at the moment of conception?
[Marysia]
Yes, if you mean by personhood, fullfledged membership in the human race.
I do mean precisely that, yes… from the moment of conception until natural death.
And if life begins at conception, that means pregnancy is a matter of one fullfledged member of the human race carrying another inside her body and life.
That is quite true. (I do wonder why you’d bring this up… unless you’re subscribing to the abortion-tolerant idea that the woman, on the idea of so-called “bodily autonomy”, has no obligation to maintain a life which is inside her… even if that life is her own daughter?)
But if the legal/illegal debate just severs the woman and fetus in two and picks one over the other, whichever side is taken-that’s violence too, and I want no part of it.
(??) I’m afraid your syntax wasn’t clear enough for me to take your meaning, quite clearly, and I’m also (to the extent that I understood your comment) not at all sure you’ve considered the differences in moral gravity between the possible outcomes (e.g. feelings of mother vs. dismemberment and death of the child; most would consider the latter to be of far greater importance). Are you suggesting that the protection of the unborn child from murder would “pick one over the other, and do violence to the woman”? (Some abortion-tolerant [and often post-abortive] commenters do… but I was under the impression that you were pro-life. Can you clarify?) We (pro-lifers) believe that every direct, willed abortion does violence to the baby (by killing him/her, usually in horrific ways which wouldn’t be permitted against cats or dogs for an instant) and to the mother (talk to Carla, for details) and to society (by degrading the general respect for human life); we want to forbid abortion for the same reasons that we want to forbid the wanton murder of infants, toddlers, kindergartners, and older children: we believe that it is always and everywhere wrong (i.e. evil, morally illicit, not morally allowable) to murder another person.
Are you under the impression that we (pro-lifers on this board, and in general) are chevalier about the suffering of women who find themselves in “crisis pregnancies”? Please understand that this is not true at all; even a cursory reading of our comments (see especially those of the post-abortive and repentant mothers who have found healing after their abortions) should show you that! Every last pro-life Pregnancy Care Center is staffed by people who love both the mother and the child(ren); as the saying goes: “Why can’t we love them BOTH?” The artificial choice of “one or the other” has caused more grief than have many other errors in the history of humanity.
JackBorsch:
–Would you favor a more incremental approach to criminalizing abortion, with stops along the way to make sure that social services and programs to assist women are being properly supported and funded?
And yay for vegetarians, btw.–
Well, I’m glad you agree about being veg.
A more incremental approach? Sounds better-but still I have questions. Criminalize who? And to what purpose? Criminalize via the very same criminal “justice” system that like increased acceptability of abortion in US society originated historically in the eugenics movement? That hasn’t a clue whether in the context of abortion or not how to simultaneously respect the dual humanity of the woman-with-child?
Unfortunately, I haven’t yet heard about an incremental approach that advocates a social welfare plan robust, comprehensive, and wellfunded enough to make a real-world difference.
CT and others hear have referred to my stance as “handwringing.” I do take action, and have been taking it a long time. Just not what some folks here might define as real action.
xalisae:
–Marysia – I’ve been one of the women you’re talking about. Did I need help? YES. But I know firsthand that there is no excuse to kill your child. None. And I’ve talked to women who have been in far, far, FAR better circumstances for a child than I ever could’ve imagined who simply did not want to deal with a child who aborted. So I just don’t see your point.–
xalisae, I am really sorry to hear that you have been through abortion, as well as the other reproductive traumas you have mentioned.
But I think there is a big difference between trying to *understand* why people get involved in an act of violence and “making excuses.” How can we learn to help people not get involved in that act if we don’t deeply and compassionately understand why this happens?
Also, with abortion I see and hear that many women solely blame themselves, and the larger society -whether prolife or prochoice-is perfectly happen to throw the entire, huge, heavy burden of responsibility onto their shoulders.
But every abortion story I have ever heard includes a very strong element of immense failed responsibility of *others*-male partners, other family members, entire communities and countries-to that woman and that child. And this is also affirmed by scientific studies of the reasons why women have abortions.
I have never had an abortion myself, but I did go through with an immensely difficult unplanned pregnancy, and have helped my daughter through and beyond hers. (And if anyone’s wondering, no I have never helped anyone to get an abortion, or recommended it-though I am always at the ready to help someone *not* have one.) I have known women who had abortions in what sound to me like less dire circumstances-and wondered what made the difference between their pregnancy outcomes and mine, or my daughter’s…
But not to trivialize what *they* were facing. To understand. To face, and identify, the so often neglected and even outright denied, elements of *social* responsibility and complicity in abortion.
Oh. Ok. I get it now. You’re a moonbat!
1.) I’m not post-abortive. That’s how I know that even in the crappiest of crappy circumstances-like those I was in-you don’t have to kill your child. Because I didn’t.
2.) If you doubt the existence of women who abort just because they don’t feel like pregnancy/childbirth and think there’s nothing wrong with killing their children in abortion pretty much just because they feel like it, then please go to twitter sometime. They DO exist. They are plentiful. I have spoken with many. You might be older than me, but you are far more naive than I’ll ever be able to be any longer.
3.) Criminality should exist for actions which are and should be deemed “criminal”. It’s called justice. You might not like it, but the rest of the world is pretty fond of it. Especially me. Killing your child-I do not give a rat’s rear why-should be a criminal act, because it’s wrong.
Marysia
Way to miss the point. The point is in what other circumstance do we need to make it unnecessary for someone to have an inkling to do violence to another before we legally restrain them from doing it? We shouldn’t make it illegal for people to steal until we have “a social welfare plan robust, comprehensive, and wellfunded enough to make a real-world difference’ in people’s feeling they need to steal.
Are you or are you not on board with that statement?
“I do take action, and have been taking it a long time. Just not what some folks here might define as real action.”
No one said you didn’t . But plenty of people here take just as much action and don’t have to twist themselves into logical knots over legality. As Paladin has said over and over – a view that abortion should be illegal in NO WAY interferes w/ your ability to do exactly what you’re already doing.
Apologies to anyone else who is trying to do so-but how possible is it to have a productive conversation about substantive issues in a forum where I have been relentlessly characterized as a moonbat, hopelessly naive, hypersensitive a**h***, etc.?
Those are ridiculous charges. But they do unduly burden and trip up the discussion.
If anyone here wants to converse respectfully, we can do that elsewhere, and later. Just drop me a line.
I am perfectly capable of facing and dealing with the questions raised, even if you don’t like or agree with all my answers. But right now I have a sick pet to take care of.
lol yes marysia, because it takes so much more time to type “I think abortion should be illegal” than that paragraph above about your pet. Totally understand.
Marysia,
Sorry about your pet. I’m a big time animal lover. Hope s/he’s ok.
I think the easiest thing to do is just try to respond to the substance of people’s arguments. The worst that can happen is that if they’re really out of line, you end up looking like the bigger person. Everyone gets a little upset and can take things personally that aren’t meant personally. But you’ve really doubled down on this. You could make your points about contraception without the personal offense. If your points are good, they should stand whether you personally have a reason to be offended or not. The more you refuse to engage in favor of harping on what you perceive as a personal attack on you, the less likely it seems that you actually want to converse respectfully about the issue, as you claim to want to do.
The more you refuse to engage in favor of harping on what you perceive as a personal attack on you, the less likely it seems that you actually want to converse respectfully about the issue, as you claim to want to do.
THIS^
Thank you, CT.
And let me explain to you the difference between an “a$$” and an “a**h***”. The latter is someone who is a jerk for being a jerk’s sake. Was that a Freudian slip? Because no one here called you that.
The former (what you WERE called), is someone who is making a complete fool or spectacle of themselves in some manner. Which you were, because of your oversensitivity.
I don’t think you are hopelessly naive. I think you’re quite capable of opening your eyes and seeing that not everyone is a poor widdoo victim of some white man’s mean old system.
Some women abort because they just. don’t. feeeeeeel like letting their child live. And that is the one and only reason they abort. Because pregnancy and birth would impede them in their self-serving and rather opulent lifestyle.
They say if you know a demon’s true name you gain power over it and you can banish it. I guess this one is called “moonbat”. XD
Not so fast, xalisae. I am *taking care of a sick animal.* Not scared off by your gratuitous insults.
If you have time to say this, you have time to say something of substance. At this point I don’t think you’re capable of doing so. Put up, or shut up.
lol, u mad?
“put up or shut up” = not a game i play. it’s rigged, bullying, sadistic.
i have plenty to say of substance. its substantiality doesn’t rely on you giving it personal validation.
right now my computer time is limited (all my comments take time & care to craft). my limited energies (from multiple, profoundly fatiguing disabilities) now mostly are for my sick animal, my grandchild, and myself so i don’t land in the hospital again from heat illness (to wh, people w/ my particular impairments are vulnerable).
if you think this is the life of a weak airhead, you can come live it for me.
“put up or shut up” = not a game i play. it’s rigged, bullying, sadistic.
You mean to-the-point, and only used by people who aren’t full of b.s.? Yeah. I know.
its substantiality doesn’t rely on you giving it personal validation.
Then why waste your time here at all?
right now my computer time is limited (all my comments take time & care to craft). my limited energies (from multiple, profoundly fatiguing disabilities) now mostly are for my sick animal, my grandchild, and myself so i don’t land in the hospital again from heat illness (to wh, people w/ my particular impairments are vulnerable).
for all the time it’s taken you to say why you’re not saying anything, you could’ve said something. Durrrrrrrrrr.
Still waiting. Did your dog die or something? Since you first mentioned your pet, 12,000 children have died at the hands of doctors hired by their own family members in the U.S. alone.