Planned Parenthood now recommends THREE simultaneous forms of birth control
Back in the day the birth control pill was the answer to all of anti-life’s problems. Listen to this naive song by Loretta Lynn, recorded in 1972. Read lyrics to “The Pill” here…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DcdONaKSQM[/youtube]
53+ million abortions later, “Oh, daddy, don’t you worry none, ’cause mama’s got the pill,” rings a bit hollow.
Not to worry. With the proliferation of STD’s – and unintended pregnancies, shock – the contraception/abortion industry started recommending that couples use two forms of birth control simultaneously, The Pill and condoms…
Now Planned Parenthood is recommending a back-up for the back-up – for those times when one takes The Pill carelessly and the condom breaks….
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhNX8XFtKsk&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]
Yes, on sale soon at Planned Parenthood will be megadoses of female steroids, aka emergency contraceptives, to be taken in conjunction with microdoses, aka The Pill.
All this with the news just out of a newly identified – and deadly – risk of the latest class of birth control pills.
How soon before they begin offering a back-up for the back-up of the back-up? Don’t laugh. It’s coming. Back in 1972 no one could have imagined where we’re at today in our elusive efforts to have sex without consequences.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I can’t believe I even have to point this out but here we go anyway… You guys do know that the pill does not protect against most STD’s right? You do understand that using more than one type of birth control will protect people from a heck of a lot more than just pregnancy right? The pill still stops most pregnancies but that is all… and as AIDS kills people… maybe using the pill and a condom is a good idea.
Contraceptive use increases abortions, according to statistics. I don’t have the link on me, but a search should turn it up, if you’re interested.
Biggz – don’t bother. Sex is only for procreation and only in marriage. Logic doesn’t work within that worldview.
You guys are killing me tonight!!!
I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time.
Thank you, Biggz. Thank you, Kat.
That was my first time listening to Loretta Lynn. This will also be my last time. I’ll not sully my ears with the “music” of anyone who chortles out such baby-bashing, anti-life trash.
Contraceptive use increases abortions, according to statistics. I don’t have the link on me, but a search should turn it up, if you’re interested.
Naw. This really isn’t true. I realize you’re probably arguing that contraceptives have a fail rate of <x>, so that given an infinite amount of time someone will get pregnant while using one and will have an abortion, whereas if they didn’t have sex at all they wouldn’t get pregnant and would thusly have no need for abortion. This is true, but it ignores the fact that we live in a world where people will have sex, and in such a world contraceptive use will cause the abortion rate to be lower in absence of a situation in which people have sex without contraceptives.
Now, with that being said, readily accessible abortion decreases contraceptive use. If you have abortion to fall back on, you’re less likely to use contraceptives than you would if getting pregnant meant giving birth and taking care of a child. That’s a simple, ugly truth most pro-choicers don’t want to acknowledge. New York is a good example of this. Both abortion and contraceptives are readily available, yet the abortion rate is sky high and the contraceptive use rate is pretty darn low.
Other issues aside – stock up??? Stock up on massive doses of hormones so that you can take them whenever you have an oops w/out supervision of a doctor or pharmacist? Don’t be more careful – just stock up!! It was absolute lunacy to make this available OTC (even if you support it being available at all).
“the answer to all of anti-life’s problems.” – what an odd thing to say.
The parts of contaception I do not condone is people taking contraceptives that cause abortion and people using abortion as contraception.
LittleZ,
I know that facts from the CDC don’t impress you, but the truth is that even CDC sees little value in condoms as preventative of STD’s
http://gerardnadal.com/2010/02/09/planned-parenthood-in-new-initiative-targets-10-year-old-children-with-condoms-that-dont-work/
I guess that pro-marriage PSA idea I mentioned a few months ago wasn’t so far off. The couple followed PP’s advice about back-up “protection” and ended up in suits of armor.
Nice bit of cross-promotion Gerard.
“This means that, under real-world conditions, a woman whose sexual partners use condoms for every act of sexual intercourse has a 15 percent chance of becoming pregnant in a year” – wouldn’t that be assuming that every act of unprotected sex results in pregnancy? Not very realistic.
Human Life International – biased much?
I didn’t see anything about usage rates of condoms. Wasn’t there a stage a while back where people started to think that diseases had ‘abated’ and reduced their protection usage?
I’m sure you’ll let me know if I have misread or missed something in the article you linked :-)
Don’t bash contraceptives. They are a necessary part of the struggle to prevent the problem pregnancies that lead to abortion, babies placed for adoption, babies abandoned, babies neglected and other negatives associated with problem pregnancies. They are not all of the solution. As I’ve said before, what is desperately needed is an organization that will replace Planned Parenthood — an organization that will reject abortion while advocating contraception for the people who engage in a particular type of sex but don’t want it to lead to pregnancy and ALSO advocate abstinence and sexual alternatives. The number of people abstaining from all sexual activity can be increased. The number of people abstaining from the specific type of sex that leads to pregnancy can be increased. However, it may not be realistic to believe that the only people engaging in that sort of activity will be those prepared to become parents. Prostitution is not called the world’s oldest profession for nothing. It’s called the world oldest profession because it’s been around for a very, very long time.
Before people hammer at me for accepting irresponsible sexual activity, I will add that in the world I work for, people will relate to each other more on an intellectual than a sexual basis. In the world I work for, sexual exploitation will not be a commonplace.
But in the world I live in, contraception is a good and an important good that prevents tragedies.
People are free to have their own opinions and express them here.
How “good” is contraception when it fails?
Carla says:
September 9, 2011 at 8:29 am
People are free to have their own opinions and express them here.
How “good” is contraception when it fails?
(Denise) Many contraceptives have records that show them as extremely effective. Thus, they prevent pregnancies that might have been problem pregnancies and had negative results such as abortion, baby abandonment, placing the baby for adoption or a child raised in a home that was neglectful or even abusive.
One could believe in principle that people can and should try to prevent pregnancies if they wish to engage in a particular sexual expression but are not prepared for parenthood. One could also believe that any female engaging in this expression should be PREPARED to carry to term and give birth if such contraception fails. While I’m not gung-ho on adoption, it could be accepted that this is a better outcome for a pregnancy than abortion and that females whose contraceptives fail can choose to place unplanned pregnancies for adoption. It could also be believed that females engaging in this type of sex must be prepared to either start families or accept a growing family should the contraceptive fail.
Again, while nothing is foolproof, some contraceptives have high rates of effectiveness.
I favor encouraging people to relate to each other on non-sexual bases.
You didn’t answer my question.
Carla says:
September 9, 2011 at 9:18 am
You didn’t answer my question.
(Denise) You question was: “How ‘good’ is contraception when it fails?”
I don’t know how to answer that. It is good when it is effective. When it fails, the female has an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. That pregnancy has many possible outcomes, some of the all right and others tragic.
Reality,
No cross-promotion at all. I’m a moderator here, and work as part of a team with Jill. She actually prefers shorter posts here, so I link to the lengthier posts I’ve written, rather than unduly burden the combox here, but nice try at being obnoxious.
As for condom usage having abated, I’m sure that you are just as prepared to back your assertion on that as I have with my many links to CDC.
The ball is in your court. You make an assertion, you back it with objective data.
The prevention crowd has been at it for 80 years now. Nothing they’ve come up with has worked. Women still get unintentionally pregnant. Unwanted pregnancies still end in abortion by the millions. Their latest is a backup-backup to the backup? Seriously? And when all that fails they’re ready with an abortion to fix your problem! Let’s just face this: the joint spectres of STD’s, unintended pregnancy, and death by stroke, not to mention untold emotional harm, are too powerful for you and your plans. There is and alway has been only one way to fend them off with certitude. Unrealistic, you say? Well, what do you realists have on tap for us next when your triple backup fails, as it certainly will? Mandatory sterilization? Then what?
If you always do what you’ve always done you will always get what you have always gotten.
All PP has ever spouted is MORE contraception, MORE abortions, MORE “safe sex” education.
And here we are.
EPIC FAIL!
“problem pregnancies that lead to abortion, babies placed for adoption, babies abandoned, babies neglected and other negatives associated with problem pregnancies.”
Ooh I know this game, but I haven’t played it since kindergarten. I think I remember how it goes, though. Here’s a list of things, but one of them doesn’t belong – which one? *raises hand and waves it around* “ADOPTION!!”
CT says:
September 9, 2011 at 11:27 am
“problem pregnancies that lead to abortion, babies placed for adoption, babies abandoned, babies neglected and other negatives associated with problem pregnancies.” Ooh I know this game, but I haven’t played it since kindergarten. I think I remember how it goes, though. Here’s a list of things, but one of them doesn’t belong – which one? *raises hand and waves it around* “ADOPTION!!”
(Denise) It belongs there although it is quite arguably less tragic than abortion. A female who has given a baby up for adoption is often terribly haunted by it. She may be psychologically scarred by the experience of carrying to term, giving birth and then handing the baby over to someone else to raise. I have read statements by women who placed babies for adoption and suffered trauma and depression as a result. One woman said she often plunged into depression after the birthday of the baby she placed for adoption. A pregnant married woman who planned to place her baby for adoption said, “The past few months have been sheer hell.”
Adoptees have higher rates of many negative things indicating psychological problems associated with feelings of abandonment. I believe Carla doesn’t want me to specify what those problems are but you can log onto crimemagazine.com and read the article about “The Forensics of Adoption.”
For Regina: males are the ones usually seeking the sort of sex that leads to pregnancy. How do we persuade them to avoid this sort of activity?
In light of new data on unintended pregnancy between 2001-2006 released by the Guttmacher Institute in the last few weeks, as well as information from Planned Parenthood’s own annual reports, here’s what we find:
Between 2001-2006, the nation’s unintended pregnancy rate increased slightly from 48% to 49%.
During this time, the number of so-called “emergency contraception” kits provided annually by Planned Parenthood increased by a whopping 213%.
During this time, although the overall abortion rate nationwide decreased negligibly, Planned Parenthood’s abortion numbers increased by 36%.
And yet Planned Parenthood still insists emergency contraception is “effective” and expects us to be fool enough to believe them.
Mr. Jansen,
Boys and men are the ones who usually seek out the activity that leaves girls and women pregnant. How can we persuade boys and men to eschew this activity?
“problem pregnancies that lead to abortion, babies placed for adoption, babies abandoned, babies neglected and other negatives associated with problem pregnancies.”
Ooh I know this game, but I haven’t played it since kindergarten. I think I remember how it goes, though. Here’s a list of things, but one of them doesn’t belong – which one? *raises hand and waves it around* “ADOPTION!!”
OH, noooo, Denise Noe is anti-adoption because she thinks adoption breeds serial killers.
Kel says:
September 9, 2011 at 12:39 pm
“problem pregnancies that lead to abortion, babies placed for adoption, babies abandoned, babies neglected and other negatives associated with problem pregnancies.”
Ooh I know this game, but I haven’t played it since kindergarten. I think I remember how it goes, though. Here’s a list of things, but one of them doesn’t belong – which one? *raises hand and waves it around* “ADOPTION!!”
OH, noooo, Denise Noe is anti-adoption because she thinks adoption breeds serial killers.
(Denise) I would not describe myself as “anti-adoption.” Rather, I have a realistic view of adoption and the fact that it is often linked with negatives. For example, don’t you think it likely that a girl or woman who places a baby for adoption might –especially if its a closed adoption as all adoptions used to — be haunted by wondering what became of her baby? Isn’t it likely that after carrying it for 9 months and giving birth that she might mourn if she turns her baby over to someone else to raise? I have read about girls and women who gave babies up for adoption and experienced extreme emotional difficulties as a result. Some argue they suffer less than those who abort but they DO suffer.
Adoptees have, by definition, a kind of dual identity. Although this is less true with open adoptions, they often have their roots cut off from them. The fact is, adoptees are 2-3% of the population — and 16% of serial murderers. They are 15 times more likely to kill their adoptive parents than other people are to kill their parents. At far more prosaic levels, they are more likely to suffer from a variety of psychological problems. None of this means that adoption should be done away with. It means that it is one of the painful results of an unplanned pregnancy.
Yes, I can think of good coming from an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. The pregnant female accepts the pregnancy and welcomes the new member into the family or starts a family. She has the financial and emotional wherewithal to be a good mother to the baby even though the pregnancy was unplanned.
Mr. Jansen,
Boys and men are the ones who usually seek out the activity that leaves girls and women pregnant. How can we persuade boys and men to eschew this activity?
Well unless they’re rapists a “no” from the woman will do. From a moral standpoint, urging men to practice sexual self-control is good. But from a sheer practicality standpoint, the woman needs to take responsibility for herself considering that she’s going to bear the lion’s share of consequences in the STD/pregnancy dept.
Denise, Of course adoption can be emotionally hard. But in no universe does it belong on a list w/ abortion, abandonment, neglect, and abuse. Hard does not = morally evil.
CT says:
September 9, 2011 at 2:43 pm
Denise, Of course adoption can be emotionally hard. But in no universe does it belong on a list w/ abortion, abandonment, neglect, and abuse. Hard does not = morally evil.
(Denise) It wasn’t a list of “morally evil.” It was a list of “negatives.” Again, the point might be being missed. The point is to reduce problem pregnancies.
CT says:
September 9, 2011 at 2:42 pm
Mr. Jansen,Boys and men are the ones who usually seek out the activity that leaves girls and women pregnant. How can we persuade boys and men to eschew this activity?Well unless they’re rapists a “no” from the woman will do. From a moral standpoint, urging men to practice sexual self-control is good. But from a sheer practicality standpoint, the woman needs to take responsibility for herself considering that she’s going to bear the lion’s share of consequences in the STD/pregnancy dept.
(Denise) As long as boys and men seek a particular type of activity they will find it. That is why prostitution is called the world’s oldest profession. If there is a market, SOMEONE will fill that market. Thus, it makes sense that we’ve got to try to undermine the market.
Janet Baker says:
September 8, 2011 at 8:40 pm
That was my first time listening to Loretta Lynn. This will also be my last time. I’ll not sully my ears with the “music” of anyone who chortles out such baby-bashing, anti-life trash.
(Denise) Give Loretta Lynn another try. She was no radical feminist. She said, “Maybe what we should do is fire all the women and give all the men raises so they can support their families.” She criticized feminists as woman who just “carry on.”
(Denise) As long as boys and men seek a particular type of activity they will find it. That is why prostitution is called the world’s oldest profession. If there is a market, SOMEONE will fill that market. Thus, it makes sense that we’ve got to try to undermine the market.
As a Catholic, I certainly have no problem undermining the current sex market. But a demand is nothing w/out supply. It takes two to tango.
You may not have meant it as a list of moral evils, but that’s what they all were aside from adoption. Adoption doesn’t belong in a list of ‘negatives’ that are really the mother doing bad things to her child. Adoption is a good thing that is emotionally hard.
CT says:
September 9, 2011 at 5:02 pm
You may not have meant it as a list of moral evils, but that’s what they all were aside from adoption. Adoption doesn’t belong in a list of ‘negatives’ that are really the mother doing bad things to her child. Adoption is a good thing that is emotionally hard.
(Denise) I didn’t intend to indicate moral condemnation of girls and women who place babies for adoption. I’m sorry if it sounded like I was doing that.
Gees Gerard, obnoxious? You do seem to be a bit defensive sometimes :-)
I made no assertions Gerard, I asked a question.
You did make an assertion. You said that if condoms have an 85% success rate then a woman has a 15% chance of falling pregnant. This disregards a raft of pertinent factors.
And I didn’t see any information regarding the changing rates of condom usage over the periods that your disease graphs covered.
Yet your article’s aim was to espouse that condom usage is of very little value in protecting against pregnancies and the contraction of diseases. Makes your argument seem a bit moot.
That is why I asked the question.
(Denise) I didn’t intend to indicate moral condemnation of girls and women who place babies for adoption. I’m sorry if it sounded like I was doing that.
Understood. The list presented like that was just jarring.
Reality,
Learn to read. My aricle goes into great detail about the steady rise of most STD’s since the 1960’s, especially during the time of the AIDS pandemic (1983- present) when condom sales increased exponentially. Against this backdrop, you say:
“And I didn’t see any information regarding the changing rates of condom usage over the periods that your disease graphs covered.”
That leads me to my second admonition:
Learn English grammar. That isn’t a question, as you protest. It is a declarative statement statement, an assertion. So my original challenge stands. You assert that condom usage has fallen, and I want the empiric evidence in terms of condom manufacture and sales to back that assertion. A question would look like this:
“Did condom sales and usage decline?” or “Did condom manufacture and sales increase?”
You made an assertion, so provide the data to back it.
Am I a bit testy here? Yes. This is serious stuff and there’s a difference between being a troll and all out buffoonery. I do suppose that you have a condom industry report?
Janet Baker says:
September 8, 2011 at 8:40 pm
That was my first time listening to Loretta Lynn. This will also be my last time. I’ll not sully my ears with the “music” of anyone who chortles out such baby-bashing, anti-life trash.
(Denise) Loretta Lynn was a mother of 6 children. That she sang a song applauding the Pill shouldn’t be taken as meaning she condoned abortion. Many people support contraception specifically because they think it might prevent abortion. They don’t believe that only those who want to reproduce will engage in the sort of sex that can impregnate the female.
While Loretta Lynn was a mother of 6, abortion criminalization advocate Nellie Gray is childless as was abortion criminalization advocate the late Mildred Faye Jefferson.
Regina says:
September 9, 2011 at 10:13 am
The prevention crowd has been at it for 80 years now. Nothing they’ve come up with has worked. Women still get unintentionally pregnant. Unwanted pregnancies still end in abortion by the millions. Their latest is a backup-backup to the backup? Seriously? And when all that fails they’re ready with an abortion to fix your problem! Let’s just face this: the joint spectres of STD’s, unintended pregnancy, and death by stroke, not to mention untold emotional harm, are too powerful for you and your plans. There is and alway has been only one way to fend them off with certitude.
(Denise) What can be done to make celibacy more popular?
Learn to read.
“And I didn’t see any information regarding the changing rates of condom usage over the periods that your disease graphs covered.”
because there wasn’t any such information amongst your graphs. Makes it difficult to draw accurate conclusions.
Learn English grammar. “That isn’t a question, as you protest. It is a declarative statement statement, an assertion.”
Wasn’t there a stage a while back where people started to think that diseases had ‘abated’ and reduced their protection usage?
Starts with ‘wasn’t’ and ends with a question mark.
“So my original challenge stands.” – no, it falls.
“You assert that condom usage has fallen, and I want the empiric evidence in terms of condom manufacture and sales to back that assertion.” – I made no such assertion. And wouldn’t usage rates be more important than just manufacture and sales?
An assertion would look like this:
“There was a stage a while back where people started to think that diseases had ‘abated’ and reduced their protection usage.”
I made no such assertion and indeed asked why you didn’t provide the data.
“Am I a bit testy here? Yes.” – because I pointed out a flaw in your article’s attempt to assert something due to it’s lacking all the impacting data-sets.
“This is serious stuff” – yes it is, that’s why I questioned it.
“and there’s a difference between being a troll and all out buffoonery.” – strawman.
“I do suppose that you have a condom industry report?” – no, that’s why I asked you, because you didn’t provide it despite it’s relevance to the assertions in your article.
One final question – people have sex. Are they less likely to suffer an unwanted pregnancy or contract a disease if they use a condom than if they don’t? Yes or no?
CT says:
September 9, 2011 at 2:43 pm
Denise, Of course adoption can be emotionally hard. But in no universe does it belong on a list w/ abortion, abandonment, neglect, and abuse. Hard does not = morally evil.
(Denise) Children who are neglected do not necessarily have mothers who are in any way evil. They might have mothers who deeply love and cherish them and who try to be conscientious mothers but fail because they lack the resources to adequately care for their children.
Denise’s continual criticism of adoption is like a marquee lit up around her name: “I’m adopted and I’m still angry!!!”
And stop blaming men for everything. We all live in this world together.
ninek says:
September 12, 2011 at 10:46 am
Denise’s continual criticism of adoption is like a marquee lit up around her name: “I’m adopted and I’m still angry!!!”>>
(Denise) I am not adopted.
<<And stop blaming men for everything. We all live in this world together.>>
(Denise) I DON’T blame men for everything. I personally much prefer the company of men to that of women. I have more male friends than female friends.
People want to decrease sexual activity because it often has tragic consequences. If we’re going to do that, we have to address where this activity starts.
Yes, but you blamed boys/men in a comment above. Scroll up and see. I’m sure you prefer men to women but you still blame them. And your constant harping against adoption is odd so you likely do have some personal ax to grind. No one here ever describes adoption as all sunshine and rainbows, yet you constantly feel the need to tell us how negative it is (from your point of view).
Without adoption we might not have iphones or a lot of other neat high tech products that people like so much and now find so useful. And that’s just to name one example of a so-called unwanted child who went on to achieve great things. Our personal lives and world history is full of such stories. But you go ahead and lump adoption in with your own litany of woes. I will continue to recommend it and help remove the social stigma that people such as yourself try to maintain against adoption.
ninek says:
September 12, 2011 at 1:04 pm
Yes, but you blamed boys/men in a comment above. Scroll up and see. I’m sure you prefer men to women but you still blame them.
(Denise) Many people believe that the way to address problem pregnancies and STDs is to promote abstinence from sex. If we’re going to do that, it makes sense that we must focus on males since they are the ones who usually seek partnered sex. That’s not blaming boys and men, that’s trying to deal with a reality — if one believes in promoting sexual abstinence.
<<And your constant harping against adoption is odd so you likely do have some personal ax to grind. No one here ever describes adoption as all sunshine and rainbows, yet you constantly feel the need to tell us how negative it is (from your point of view).
Without adoption we might not have iphones or a lot of other neat high tech products that people like so much and now find so useful. And that’s just to name one example of a so-called unwanted child who went on to achieve great things. Our personal lives and world history is full of such stories. But you go ahead and lump adoption in with your own litany of woes. I will continue to recommend it and help remove the social stigma that people such as yourself try to maintain against adoption.>>
(Denise) I used to believe that we should encourage females with problem pregnancies to carry to term and place babies for adoption. I even suggested they be lauded as heroines and that we form ceremonies such as special relinquishment showers and the like to honor them. However, when I suggested a relinquishment shower, someone called the suggestion “macabre and foul.” Another likened it to a party for a cancer victim.
In addition, when I was suggesting such a campaign, I was unaware that adoptees, who are 2-3% of the population, are 16% of serial murderers and that they are 15 times more likely than other people to murder their parents. I was also unaware of the more prosaic emotional and behavioral problems statistically more common in adoptees.
Regarding Steve Jobs: Do you think he would have achieved nothing had he been raised by the woman who carried for 9 months and gave birth to him?
There are websites run by females who gave babies up for adoption in which they encourage mothers who give birth to keep their babies. They don’t say they wish they had aborted. They say they regret giving the baby up for adoption instead of raising the child. I have read many birthmothers who say they were haunted by giving the baby up and had severe psychological problems as a direct result.
I’m all for the practice of open adoption which may alleviate many problems on both sides. As far as recommending adoption, I know it is necessary sometimes but people should know exactly what the statistics say about the special problems of females who place babies for adoption and of adoptees. Prospective adoptive parents would also do well to consider the difficulties their adopted kids are likely to face.
Blah blah blah, you haven’t disproved a thing I said about you. You just jump right into harping against adoption, again. Tell me it’s not personal. Oh, boo hoo, you suggested something that someone else didn’t like, so let’s just chuck it all! BS. Adoption is a lot better than abortion. Planned Parenthood’s adoption referrals DROPPED instead of increased. That’s marketing, not because of social stigma. We aren’t going to combat the social stigma against adoption with a bunch of long winded negative posts like yours.
Males seek partnered sex? Oh really? Girls are just little wallflowers these days?
The reason some females don’t like their female peers is because they are competing too hard for the attention of the males in their lives.
ninek says:
September 12, 2011 at 3:46 pm
Blah blah blah, you haven’t disproved a thing I said about you. You just jump right into harping against adoption, again. Tell me it’s not personal. Oh, boo hoo, you suggested something that someone else didn’t like, so let’s just chuck it all!
(Denise) Do you think it would be good to have a relinquishment shower for females place babies for adoption?
<< BS. Adoption is a lot better than abortion. Planned Parenthood’s adoption referrals DROPPED instead of increased. That’s marketing, not because of social stigma. We aren’t going to combat the social stigma against adoption with a bunch of long winded negative posts like yours.>>
(Denise) Would there be over a million babies a year relinquished if adoption just had better marketing?
If the trauma suffered by birthmothers is a myth, fine. Perhaps it doesn’t cause depression and females are not in fact haunted by giving babies up.
<<Males seek partnered sex? Oh really? Girls are just little wallflowers these days?>>
(Denise) I was just saying that — in general — it is boys and men who seek the partnered sex that leads to pregnancy. That’s why we must concentrate on them to promote abstinence. Of course, promoting abstinence isn’t the only way to decrease problem pregnancies.
If all pregnancies were desire by the female who became pregnant, wouldn’t few be aborted?
Wouldn’t few be placed for adoption as well?
When did I say that “the trauma suffered by birthmothers is a myth, fine”?
I didn’t, Denise. You are projecting.
Relinquishment shower? It does sound distasteful. Have you asked a birth mother or an adoptive mother about what their own experiences were? In my family relatives have both given children for adoption and adopted children. Based on their experiences, I can’t imagine what snacks and games you’d play at a relinquishment shower. It’s painful for the birth mother, emotionally, and a “shower” is usually a lighthearted celebration. But, if a birth mother were religious and the adoptive parents also religious, I can imagine that having a clergy member help them through the transition might be nice. See, a ‘shower’ is not a good idea, but you may be on the right track this way: birth mothers do fare better if the people they love are supportive rather than combative.
What I’m idly curious about is your very tenacious anti-adoption comments. You are so naive that I assume you are under 25 and that you either were adopted or close to someone who is adopted. If not, then I can’t imagine why you are so stubbornly, consistently, naggingly anti-adoption if it hasn’t affected you personally.
I also, in my armchair analysis, think that it is high time you stop this hero/villain business about men and boys. They are humans, they don’t really come in two types. I also recommend you watch a little movie that was quite popular called “When Harry Met Sally.” Take it from me, all those charming boys who you think are your buddies? They think with a little patience, they can get with you eventually. I’m not projecting: I’ve got decades of experience with male friends. I have a few that are actually brotherly, but most, well, they were just waiting…
When did I say that “the trauma suffered by birthmothers is a myth, fine”?
I didn’t, Denise. You are projecting.
Relinquishment shower? It does sound distasteful. Have you asked a birth mother or an adoptive mother about what their own experiences were? In my family relatives have both given children for adoption and adopted children. Based on their experiences, I can’t imagine what snacks and games you’d play at a relinquishment shower. It’s painful for the birth mother, emotionally, and a “shower” is usually a lighthearted celebration. But, if a birth mother were religious and the adoptive parents also religious, I can imagine that having a clergy member help them through the transition might be nice. See, a ‘shower’ is not a good idea, but you may be on the right track this way: birth mothers do fare better if the people they love are supportive rather than combative.
(Denise) You’ve made my point. A pregnancy that ends with the female placing the baby for adoption is painful for the birthmother. It is a trauma that can leave her with many bad feelings and haunted. Thus, if it is possible, pregnancies that don’t end with the birthmother raising her own child are to be avoided.
<<What I’m idly curious about is your very tenacious anti-adoption comments. You are so naive that I assume you are under 25 and that you either were adopted or close to someone who is adopted. >>
(Denise) I’m 54. I used to be very pro-adoption until I read “The Forensics of Adoption.” That got me thinking about the few adoptees I know. It got me asking people close to me about adoptees that they know. I also began thinking about what I’ve read about birthmothers and the trauma they suffer. Then I began reading more. That’s the basis for my view on adoption. I’m not against adoption but believe that it may always be necessary. For example, a mother may die young and her children may have to be adopted. I’m just pointing out that adoption is inherently a troubled system.
<< If not, then I can’t imagine why you are so stubbornly, consistently, naggingly anti-adoption if it hasn’t affected you personally.>>
(Denise) Again, it relates to what I’ve read.
<<I also, in my armchair analysis, think that it is high time you stop this hero/villain business about men and boys. They are humans, they don’t really come in two types. >>
(Denise) I don’t have such a perception. Some people believe that encouraging abstinence is the main way to avoid problem pregnancies. From the abstinence perspective, it is important to reach boys and men since they are — still today — the ones who are most likely to seek sexual partners.
<< I also recommend you watch a little movie that was quite popular called “When Harry Met Sally.” Take it from me, all those charming boys who you think are your buddies? They think with a little patience, they can get with you eventually. I’m not projecting: I’ve got decades of experience with male friends. I have a few that are actually brotherly, but most, well, they were just waiting…>>
(Denise) This would be true if I were young and pretty. I’m not. Some of the men with whom I’m friends are less than half my age. They usually want young and pretty women for girlfriends. Some of my close male friends are gay. One told me bluntly that he doesn’t find me attractive. The human male is biologically programmed to be attracted to females within the primary reproductive age range. I’m quite a bit over that age range.
Based on something you merely read, with no life experience to back it up, you’re coming on here time and time again with a hammering, anti-adoption agenda?? If a percentage of serial killers were adopted, what about the other 84%???????? Calling your logic merely faulty is being generous.
Wow. I will save myself the trouble next time.
Planned UnParenthood has a hostile, anti-family, anti-female, anti-baby, pro-money agenda. I hope anyone reading Jill’s blog that still defends PP has a wake-up call, and soon.
ninek says:
September 12, 2011 at 8:24 pm
Based on something you merely read, with no life experience to back it up, you’re coming on here time and time again with a hammering, anti-adoption agenda?? If a percentage of serial killers were adopted, what about the other 84%???????? Calling your logic merely faulty is being generous.
(Denise) I’m not “anti-adoption.” Adoption is necessary in some cases. I don’t want it abolished. I’m trying to be realistic about adoption. For example, the simple fact is that few females with problem pregnancies carry to term and place for adoption. Here is an article exploring the reasons why: http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/postionpapers/41-Why-Few-Women-Choose-Adoption.pdf
You might want to address WHY so few females have babies and place them for adoption. Are there reasons this choice is so very unpopular?
Obviously most serial murderers aren’t adopted. Neither are most parricides. The Menendez brothers weren’t adopted. The point is that adoptees are vastly over-represented as serial murderers and parricides. Adoptees also tend to have more behavioral and emotional problems in general than the general population.
Since you want to promote adoption, I’ll throw out a scenario that will help you: a wealthy family adopts a baby and hires the birthmother as the live-in babysitter. The family gets an heir or heiress. The birthmother must care for the baby according to the dictates of the adoptive mother and father but she does not have the “empty arms” that one birthmother complained of having after giving the baby up for adoption.
Denise Noe: “we must focus on males since they are the ones who usually seek partnered sex”
Where did you get this “fact”?
And the key word in your statement is partnered. Both men and women need to be encouraged to forgo the pleasures of sex if they are not willing to behave responsibly if a new life should result. And no, killing that new life is not responsible.
Kat: Sex is only for procreation and only in marriage.
Very wrong – most sex is for pleasure, not for procreation.
Doug, I think Kat’s post was sarcastic.
If sex was only for procreation (which we all know it’s not, and that’s about the lamest strawman ever), then we would have been designed to become pregnant at any time during a cycle instead of a small fertile window.
Kel, I do believe you’re right. Sorry, Kat.
“Only for procreation” – well, there are those who believe that….
Hey wait a minute – we were “designed”? ;)