Life Links 10-17-11
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- China is abuzz after a toddler was hit by a van and then at least 18 people passed by the bleeding toddler without doing anything to help the wounded child.
The Daily Telegraph posted video
of the incident (reposted below), caught on camera, along with various comments regarding how China is becoming a land without morals. The girl, named Yueyue, is in critical condition.
- A doctor in Uganda has been arrested after allegedly performing an abortion on a minor whom he allegedly impregnated. The abortion seems to have been against her will.
- New Jersey’s cuts to family planning funding have lowered the number of clients visiting Planned Parenthood:From June 2010 to June 2011, Planned Parenthood and similar providers statewide saw 16,340 fewer visits to their centers, Planned Parenthood of New Jersey’s statewide coordinator Michele Jaker said. She said there were 81,978 visits to centers statewide from June 2009 to June 2010. That number was down 20 percent just one year later, to 65,638.
- One of Washington State’s largest hospital systems will stop performing abortions when it merges with a Catholic-run health organization. However, Swedish Medical Center (Seattle campus pictured left) says it will help pay for a new Planned Parenthood abortion clinic opening in 2012:A secular institution with five hospitals and 11,000 employees, Swedish announced last week that is it seeking an affiliation with Providence Health & Services, a Catholic group. Based in Renton, Providence has 27 hospitals across five states and nearly 53,000 employees. Each organization also has many clinics….
On late Friday, Swedish announced that it will transition services for elective abortions to a new Planned Parenthood center in First Hill. The company said it will help underwrite the costs of establishing the center.
Another article notes that Swedish will refer women to Planned Parenthood for abortion:
“I’m extremely pleased that this has the potential to work for everybody,” said Chris Charbonneau, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest. “Our plan is to make sure that not a single woman can’t get the services they need.”
Planned Parenthood’s local CEO even claims abortions at Planned Parenthood are safer than abortions at hospitals because hospitals unnecessarily “medicalize” them:
Both Tizon and Charbonneau said abortions are more often — and more appropriately — performed in a clinic than in a hospital.
“Swedish should never have been doing those things in a hospital, anyway,” Charbonneau said. “We have really perfected the office procedure. When you take people into a hospital, you add a level of complications and danger,” unnecessarily medicalizing the procedure and typically making it more expensive, she said.
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.
Those people in China that passed by a dying toddler in the street are the result of China’s one-child policy. They are all hardened to the killing of children because they have decades of being forced to kill their own children in the womb. Liberal Americans (like Biden) have trouble understanding this because they think that with all the government control and one-child policy to keep the environment clean and to keep population under control they should be living in a Utopia by now. They even have government run health care to meet their needs so how could they possibly be so insensitive to others? God help the United States of America and guide us down the better path. Help us overcome our foes who would infect the minds of our citizens with their support of the abortion mentality and vote to turn our country towards a government control ‘utopia’ of indifference. Amen
China’s problems go deeper than amorality or callousness towards other people. Gang activity and other organized crime is common in urban areas, and those passersby may very well have thought that what they were seeing was part of a kidnapping or extortion plot.
Naturally, that injured toddler is a girl.
So, so disturbing.
It’s hard for me to believe that 20 people passing by a bleeding child in the street is a simple “bystander effect.” If this were an injured adult, I could see that *maybe* people wouldn’t want to get involved, but a small child like this??
Makes you wonder if people assumed she was just left there for dead on purpose and decided it was acceptable. :(
The story about the Chinese toddler is just horrific! I won’t watch the video. Oh, poor little Yueyue! Thank God she has such loving parents.
Regarding the Swedish Medical Center story, I’m curious how hospitals “unnecessarily medicalize” the abortion procedure. What on earth did the PP CEO mean by that?
yes – rationalize man’s inhumanity to man.
While that scenario Joan might have happened – it’s just like the United States and other parts of the world where we have grown cold to others’ difficulties – in the poor, the homeless, the disabled, the marginalized, to genocide and other injustices …
and yes – those aborted and those moms who are suffering when they think there is no other choice.
We are smarter, more loving, more able to help – IF we allow our hearts to feel and have us act humanely in all situations. As Mother Theresa said (paraphrasing) – how can we expect people to help and care for one another when we tolerate mothers being able to end their children’s lives via abortion?
poor child. hope she is ok…
So regarding the 16,340 less visits to NJ PP centers:
Do you know if women who received care at PP are now getting it from other providers, or at county health centers? Because that’s what a pro-lifer who at least pretends to care about women would ensure, no? Or are you swapping the “compassionate pro-lifer” persona today for the “I love personal responsibility and eat my bootstraps for breakfast” act? Pro-lifers, so many faces, only one agenda.
Megan, “compassionate pro-lifer who loves personal responsibility” I get. But what did you mean by “eat my bootstraps for breakfast”?
People who cannot see that violence to those outside the womb is directly tied to violence inside the womb need to see this.
Megan: I do have one agenda. YOU BETCHA. Social justice and peace for all. Both begin at the beginning, and that’s the womb, sister.
Have to pray for Yueyue… the comments in the link are saying she’s passed. It’s horrifying to even think about and I couldn’t bear to watch the video. I’d be up all night with nightmares.
joan says:
” those passersby may very well have thought that what they were seeing was part of a kidnapping or extortion plot. ”
And somehow that makes it better? You make no sense.
I shared the article about China on my FB. Have some friends and family who live there, they need to realize how wrong this is :(
As for New Jersey – I live in Jersey, and am very happy to hear that the numbers are dropping – but very disturbed to see how high the numbers are! Wow, never saw those numbers before. New Jersey is very pro-“choice” and most people that I know are for abortion, even some “Christians.” I was very pleased with Christie’s repeal of funding for abortion – the one good thing he has done for this state!
Praying that the numbers will continue to drop, and that minds will continue to change!
“And somehow that makes it better? You make no sense.”
A kidnapping or extortion plot targeting sympathetic passersby who involve themselves in something like this and then wake up in a bathtub missing a kidney 3 hours later. Sorry if that wasn’t blatantly clear. I’ll try to dumb it down a notch for your benefit henceforth.
Organ theft is a myth, except in a few isolated incidents…
I watched that video and wished I hadn’t. I doubt it has anything to do with abortion, though. We have cases in the US of people being murdered in the street and no one even calling 911, or that woman who was raped on a pool table in a bar and no one helping her either. I think it would be a little odd to decide that this poor girl’s fate was due to abortion. Can’t we just leave her out of politics? Poor little kid.
Jack, it’s not that “this poor girl’s fate was due to abortion” but to the gradual callousing of a society against human life in general. At least, that’s how I see it. Abortion is a symptom of a greater problem – that we seemingly do not value any human life as much as our own.
I saw another news article about this earlier today. It wouldn’t surprise me if the girl had already passed because at the time of the writing of the article I read she was in a coma and not expected to live.
Also, she was run over *twice*. The first vehicle that ran her over did not even stop. Apparently the driver was driving slow enough to have seen her and stopped before hitting her but for whatever bizarre reason just ran her over instead. The second vehicle just ran her over like a dead animal in the street and kept on trucking. Absolutely disgusting. It’s hard to even fathom the coldness of not only the people that ran her over, but those who passed by and did nothing to help her. She’s a child, for pete’s sake!
That poor child, wow. That is just outright distressing. That poor baby!
Pretty hard not to associate the general apathy and devaluing of children (especially females) in China with the one-child policy.
As for the hospitals medicalising abortions and adding a “level of complications and danger”, I wonder what these ‘complications’ and ‘dangers’ are? The danger of exposing the complications of abortion, maybe? It suits the industry to be in the privacy of an office setting – it is easier to cover things up there!
Wow Joan. What color is the sky in your world? Any thoughts about a child lying in the street and people passing by doing nothing to help?? Besides the delusion you came up with I mean. Any sympathy for a helpless bleeding baby girl? Any outrage at those who walk on by?
I thought not.
I can’t bear to watch it.
Praying for that sweet little girl and her family.
Joan, you are one disturbed individual. Everything you say on here is so cold, calloused and inhuman. Yeah, its part of a kidnapping. Did you hear about the guy who saw a man yank a little girl into a van and he CHASED the van and saved that girl’s life? If I saw a child bleeding on a road I wouldn’t care if it what I was witnessing was part of a kidnapping plot. I would stop and help that child! But thats the difference between you and me. When I see innocent human life I have an urge to protect it. When you see innocent human life you have an urge to see it suffer and die.
Get help Joan.
Oh and Joan, if you are so concerned about organ theft, I take it that you are opposed to medical research companies taking livers and kidneys and brains out of babies from late termabortions while they are still living? Thats been documented too. Thats been going in the US. And you’re probably salivating with glee just thinking about it.
The existence of criminal gangs who are so calloused as to steal people’s vital organs and the existence of people so calloused they would pass by a dying child in the street are not two different problems. One is not a “deeper” problem than the other. They are the same problem.
Oh, and joan: thanks for calling is dumb because some weren’t aware of a particular fact you knew. Real classy.
Anyone who would say, “Rather a toddler die than I get mixed up in something and get hurt or die myself,” is a cowardly wuss.
I do think that the general value for the unborn in a society effects the way we treat people as a whole. If we don’t get life in the womb right…. what else do we miss? I do realize there are other societal factors that contribute to this but we cant discount the lack of value of the unborn.
Sadly this little girl died. I believe this incident is a reflection both of how children are treated in China and how girls are treated too. The Chinese love their children and they are often portrayed as very heartless. But many many women suffer terribly in silence because many women have seen their baby girls dumped into buckets of slop to die or left at orphanages to be adopted by wealthy Westerners. Most midwives have killed many babies and it is something that is rarely spoken of. Read Message from and Unknown Chinese Mother: Stories of Loss and Love by Xinran Xue. Babies are often left abandoned to die in public toilets in China. The author personally experienced derision and admonishment when she rescued one such child herself.
The sad fact is that the West has done very little to put any sort of pressure on China to change. We all continue to do business with them because the bottom line is profit. I use to try to purchase non-Chinese items but it’s almost impossible now and likely we’ve made China too powerful an economy to force change.
I think folks need to be slow to jump in with a definitive “here’s why” on the horrific incident in China. One child policy problem in China? Sure – I could agree that the country devalues both children and women. But you can’t discount other factors as well:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/17/world/asia/china-toddler-hit-and-run/index.html
Part of that article – ‘In recent years, assisting victims in traffic accidents or other emergency situations has become controversial in China. In an attempt to cover costly medical expenses, several senior citizens, injured in accidents that were their own fault, turned against people who helped them at the scene by suing the good Samaritans for compensation, according to state media.’
In America, the frequent thing I heard as a kid was “don’t pick up hitch hikers – they might kidnap and kill you”. I wonder in China if this mentality in regards to helping people who were hurt is spreading. Again, I don’t know enough to definitively say “here’s the reason” – I’m just saying that it might be more complicated than we think.
At least they arrested the scumbags who ran her over. (Both of them.)
I can’t understand why the Chinese gov’t would think it a good idea to *punish* Good Samaritans. I hope this little girl’s death forces them to re-evaluate their position on these court rulings, *and* re-evaluate their hearts as well.
I am so sorry that she died such a horrible death. :(
This story breaks my heart.
EXGOP,
Any society that allows the brutal killing of the least of their members will show a general coarsening for ALL life over time. A disregard for life at other stages. IMHO. Of course.
“I think folks need to be slow to jump in with a definitive “here’s why” on the horrific incident in China. One child policy problem in China? Sure – I could agree that the country devalues both children and women.”
Ex-RINO, your mind has now almost completely closed to things Godly. That is the only explanation why you and VP Joe Biden have trouble understanding that China’s one-child policy of murdering wanted babies (viable or not) devalues ALL human life.
truth – I think you need to cease and disist from using your name.
A truth seeker, well, seeks truth. They don’t jump to assumptions and discount any other views.
Two things:
1) In my post I said ”Sure – I could agree that the country devalues both children and women.” I did not ignore the fact that it plays into the equation.
2) There are possibly lots of factors – including one THAT WAS WRITTEN IN THE ARTICLE BY AN OUTSIDE SOURCE. I didn’t make it up. I posted it as an OPTION and something to consider as part of the whole equation.
My relationship with God is quite fine, thank you. If you are so quick to judge others based on simple interactions on a website, I would double check how yours is doing.
Why did I watch the video? I’m sick to my stomach. That poor, poor girl, oh poor baby, I would’ve thought the very first instinctual reaction of ANYONE would be to dash straight to the little girl and help her, no thoughts, just run and help an injured child… I would’ve swerved around an animal, or gotten out of the car and shooed one away, if I were driving that slow – but a little baby girl? Good grief!! Oh little Yueyue, why didn’t anyone come and help you? I hope she’s in a place where she feels no pain and she’s loved now, I wish she didn’t have to suffer like that… poor, poor baby…
Glad I did not watch the video. No violence to any human – born or unborn.
When we finally recognize us – our humanity – in another, then we will start to ‘get it.’
Life to all humans, born or unborn. it’s only natural.
Ex-RINO, On the one hand you ‘could’ agree that the one child policy devalues the life of women and children. On the other hand all God fearing people (and some atheists and agnostics) are certain that the one child policy devalues all human life. Your request that we remain ‘open-minded’ about wether or not the one child policy is responsible for the Chinese peoples indifference to that dying baby girl is beyond liberalism and instead places your thinking in the realm of hedonistic narcissism.
truth -
are you even being serious, or are you just trying to save odd things tonight?
So can you definitively say, 100%, that the one child policy was the only factor in this incident? If so, how do you back your conclusion?
Does that mean that every single time a toddler gets hit in China, that same thing happens?
In America then, in general, I think we would more quickly stop for a toddler hit by a van. Does that mean that you believe that we properly value children in our society? If so, what does that do to your abortion beliefs? If not, how do you reconcile that both countries value children too little, yet our cultures react much differently?
I’m really interested – you seem, again, to believe that there is absolutely no chance that any other factor, whatsoever, plays into this – so please, back up your assertion.
Ex-RINO, it is not about wether or not there could be other factors. It is that their one child policy IS a factor. Notice I said IS a factor and not COULD BE a factor. And I like to back up my assertions with logic and rational thinking. If a society as a whole deems it acceptable to coerce/force women to abort children (this is China under the one child policy) then it is logical for a person to conclude that same society does not their value children much. And if a society engages in repetitive behaviour that shows disregard for human life it is rational to assert that those behaviours will lead them to disregard life more easily then in a society where life is respected. I can’t make you see but my voice can be your “canary in a coal mine”. You have reached a point where logical and rational reasoning is not enough to persuade you that the one child policy is a gross disrespect for life that has infected the Chinese society like a sickness. What will it take to convince you? Are you going to withhold judgement until they do clinical studies on the behavioural effects of China’s one child policy?
truth – you say I’ve “reached a point where logical and rational reasoning is not enough to persuade you that the one child policy is a gross disrespect for life that has infected the Chinese society like a sickness”
First off, I think that whole statement is absurd.
Second off, you then ask ‘what will it take to convince you”
I asked you about 8 questions – you can start with those:
So can you definitively say, 100%, that the one child policy was the only factor in this incident? (as a reminder, I said it was probably a factor, but through out another fact, presented by the journalist in the CNN article -which you quickly discounted)
If so, how do you back your conclusion?
Does that mean that every single time a toddler gets hit in China, that same thing happens?
(assuming people in America would stop more quickly) Does that mean that you believe that we properly value children in our society?
If so, what does that do to your abortion beliefs?
If not, how do you reconcile that both countries value children too little, yet our cultures react much differently?
Again – if there is any doubt:
– I believe that the one-child policy has made a difference in China in the devaluing of children’s life.
– Logically, I can’t discount that other factors might be at play, and might be a bigger factor than that. We’re looking at one incident – so declaring with a broad sweeping brush that it has to be one thing is very, very tough to do. You were extremely quick, in your quest for truth, to discount what CNN said as a POSSIBILITY? Have you spent some time researching Chinese lawsuits and feel that those individuals who passed by the toddler would not be ones who would be intimidated by possible judgments, but instead don’t like kids?
truth – also, your last line is almost laughable. I’m the one who withheld judgement – and got scolded by the “seeker” fot it!
– I believe that the one-child policy has made a difference in China in the devaluing of children’s life.
Ex-RINO ,
My response to your questions is that I do not now, nor have I ever stated, that there could not be other issues (besides the one child policy) that cause people in China to walk by an injured child instead of rendering assistance to the child. If you find such a post exists then show me the post including time stamp and I will respond but I am certain you will find that no such post exists (except in your head).
I am glad to see you are now speaking truthfully about the impact China’s one child policy has had on the people in this video; by dropping the word ‘could’ in your assesment of China’s one-child policy being responsible for creating a society where people would walk past injured children.
Note the difference in your first statement which I objected to:
One child policy problem in China? Sure – I could agree that the country devalues both children and women.”
and your second statement which I do not object to:
– I believe that the one-child policy has made a difference in China in the devaluing of children’s life.
We still might disagree then – if I were a scientist, I could not simply look at that video and fully, without a doubt, say what factored in.
Now, I say that in general, the one child policy definitely impacts how they view children.
I just can’t make the leap you did in regards to saying both that:
– It DEFINITELY was a key reason
– Anyone suggesting otherwise was ungodly
You did not definitely state that there could not be another issue, but when another issue was suggested, you essentially called me ungodly, which was completely out of line.
Saying that the one child policy treats childrens lives as expendable. The actions of the people who ignored this hurt child definitely showed they comsidered this child to be expendable. It is not a LEAP. Why would you feel need to speak in defense of the one child policy on a thread such as this where it is being admoished for being the ungodly policy that it is? Why question wether such a policy is to blame when it is completely rational to conclude that it is a huge contributing factor. Why play the devil’s advocate for such a god-forsaken policy on a thread that includes a video of Chinese people passing by a dying little girl with indifference? Ask yourself why you chose to be devil’s advocate?
truth – where did I DEFEND it? Ever? Seriously?
If a German and a Frenchman go up to a guy and a shot rings out, and you said the German did it, and I said I thought the Frenchman might have done it, are either of us DEFENDING the other?
Do you know what defend means?
Again though, where did I DEFEND it?
I said: Those people in China that passed by a dying toddler in the street are the result of China’s one-child policy. They are all hardened to the killing of children because they have decades of being forced to kill their own children in the womb.
Your defense of the one child policy came in the form of you saying that I shouldn’t be so fast to jump on the one child policy as being the reason they passed by this dying 18 month old baby girl lying in the street bleeding to death. I say it is 100 times more likely to be the reason then them being worried about getting sued (by the baby I guess?) for the baby’s medical expenses.
Leaving a baby to bleed to death and die in the gutter would never cross the mind of God fearing people. I contend that getting sued for helping this 18 month old child would never even cross the minds of God fearing people.
Truth -
With all due respect, this is a one of the largest assaults on logic that I’ve seen in a long time.
Under your reasoning, blaming anything that happened during WW2 on anything BUT the nazis would be defending the nazis, which again, is just plain ignorant.
I posted a bunch of questions earlier, that you of course couldn’t answer. You would need to interview the people that passed by – you’d need more incidents like this. Quite frankly, all we have to work with is a video.
Could those folks have passed by because they don’t value children? Sure. Keep in mind though that one of the passer by folks HAS a child with them – so do they not value children?
Could those folks have passed by because they were afraid of being blamed for what happened? Who knows?
Could they have passed by for a variety of reasons?
Quite frankly, we don’t know. Unless you have more info, I haven’t seen interviews or other commentary on it.
So what we’re doing is GUESSING.
Your first post was a definitive statement – it left no wiggle room, no room for debate, no room for questioning. It was a massive jump to a conclusion.
All I simply said was that the one child policy could be a factor. The reasoning behind the CNN article could be a factor. In fact, for every single person that walked by, they could have different reasoning.
Now, again, I’d rather be slow to judge in these situations. You came out, guns flying – here’s the reason. I simply said while it could be a reason, it could be other things. We don’t know.
Two last thoughts –
– I think it is slightly funny that in your own defense of your thoughts, you posted yet another reason – and that is that there are few Christians in their nation (and thus, are not God fearing people).
– Last – I’m not going to stoop as low as to say thinking from somebody is or isn’t godly. I’ll let a higher being be the judge of that, knowing that the measuring stick I would apply to you is the same measuring stick that will be used on me someday.
Truth -
Here’s another article -you’ll want to write the author and let them know they are stupid and ungodly for throwing out other theories:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/asia-pacific/chinese-toddler-struck-by-van-ignored-by-passersby/article2203695/
Truth -
In this article, the mother blames herself. Please contact her asap and let her know she also is stupid and ungodly, and that the only thing that MUST be an option, according to you, is the one child policy:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/10/chinese-toddlers-hit-and-run-mother-praises-rescuer/
Truth – this is going to be a long night for you. You also need to contact the Chinese Ministry of Heath (I think this article really speaks volumes of the culture in China, though my guess is that you won’t read it since it doesn’t speak only to your claim):
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/10/19/chinese-toddler-yue-yue-brain-dead/
Ex-RINO,
It is logical to attribute the lack of care those Chinese people showed by walking and riding past that dying girl to be a characteristic caused in great part by their society’s one child policy which is a practice of exterminating their young.
It is logical to say that God fearing people who happened upon that poor little girl would not walk past a dying baby in the street. At least not people who feared God the Father of Jesus Christ.
You can spin it any way your liberal mind bends but you won’t convince anybody but yourself.
Truth – but you didn’t say “it was logical”
You said: “Those people in China that passed by a dying toddler in the street are the result of China’s one-child policy”
Is there some gray area in there I’m missing?
If there was any doubt that this was the ONLY option you saw, when a national news story suggested anything different, you said it was ungodly to suggest otherwise.
Again, my only issue with this thread and what you’ve said is that when any other options were mentioned, you have essentially said that your view is the only one that has any validity, and to disagree with un-Christian. I think that’s a bunch of bull and lacks any sense of logic what-so-ever.
So, I’ll ask a quick question – should be easy to answer – are you 100% certain that for ever passer-by in this situation, that the only factor in their mind was that children aren’t important, and that believe came from the one-child policy?
Ex-RINO,
You must have missed this on my earlier post when I responded to that question already at 12:40 pm but I’ll repost it for you here:
My response to your questions is that I do not now, nor have I ever stated, that there could not be other issues (besides the one child policy) that cause people in China to walk by an injured child instead of rendering assistance to the child. If you find such a post exists then show me the post including time stamp and I will respond but I am certain you will find that no such post exists (except in your head).
I can say with 100% certainty that every passer-by there was a lack of value attributed to stopping and helping that dying baby girl and that their lack of compassion was congruent to what China’s one-child policy teaches them in terms of it being an agressive extermination of children and therefore the one child policy is a logical contributing factor to the lack of compassion the passers-by might have towards children.
I will comment on something you stated above though when you said:
“If there was any doubt that this was the ONLY option you saw, when a national news story suggested anything different, you said it was ungodly to suggest otherwise.”
I would not expect any state-run media outlets in China to admit as much. Rather, I would expect them to try and spin it like you are trying to spin it and deflect blame away from their one-child policy. It would be really naive to think that they wouldn’t.
truth
Given you…I think that is about the best I can hope for – thanks.
Ex-RINO, It comes naturally for me to stand up against patently evil things like abortion and China’s one child policy. This horrific incident and the actions of the passers-by ARE a blight on humanity. The one child policy IS THE cause for the Chinese societys callous disregard for the welfare of their children. Any attempts to deflect the cause from the one child policy to other things like fear of getting sued is to ignore the how all encompassing things like the forced extermination of children can be on a societys health. Laws suing ‘good samaritans’ spawn from the one child mentality. May Jesus Christ bless and protect us all from wiles and divisions that the devil would place between us.
truth -
I’m going to put out a bit of an olive branch here because I feel like we’re going to continue to run into disagreements on the board, and I’d like to at least feel like we know where each other is coming from. I’m going to do my best to choose my words carefully – if you see something you don’t agree with, please know that with this post, I come in peace.
You and I are different people. And a key difference I see is I think you are more emotionally driven and I’m more logically driven.
Now, in saying that, I think both ways have their benefit, and both ways have their fault. I don’t think one way is better than the other. I also don’t believe that you are illogical, and I don’t believe I have no emotion…I just believe that if we were honest (based on what I know about you, which is only from this board) this might be the conclusion. I know it is for me.
So you see this story and you think “China is a horrific nation because of this policy, so certainly, that policy is the cause of this horrific behavior.
I see this story and say “China is a horrific nation and that results in a lot of bad things. The one child policy is a bad thing. This incident is a bad thing. But I know in singular situations like this, it is tough to say exactly what the cause is.
So you have your conclusion. For me, I like to read articles. I like to look at it at other angles.
Now, neither of us know if any of our conclusions are right – again, if we’re honest, we’d have to see interviews with the people, we’d have to have tests done (if we were looking at it scientifically).
But you feel comfortable in your conclusion, and I feel comfortable in mine (that it could be a number of things, or a combination of things).
So, are you a terrible person because you moved fast to a conclusion? No. You aren’t like me, and I feel comfortable prodding you a bit in regards to your certainty on the conclusion – but it certainly isn’t bad.
In the same way, I’d like to think that there is nothing wrong in trying to find out more about the situation. We’re talking about a nation that actually tells their people not to help an elderly person that has stumbled on the street – so there are a lot of factors at play – and not jumping on a conclusion on it and trying to understand these various factors – I don’t see them as a bad thing.
So, just understand that about me. I don’t get easily excited, emotional, mad, or happy about things – and that’s just me.
Hope all else is well –
lol. But just looking for other possible answers does not make you rational. And we can’t always know answers definitively. So we analyze the facts as we know them and make ‘logical’ conclusions. Looking at other possible reasons or anomalies in any situation is ok but it is not logical to ignore the obvious cause and effect of the one child policy. The constant exposure to people being forced to accept the killing of children as “ok” is 100% certain to make people more passive about ignoring another dying child. That is why I asked you if you needed a scientific study on the effects of one child policy before you could say that the one child policy has hardened the citizens of China to the point where they passively accept the murder of their children (I call the forced abortion murder wether China’s government has legalized it or not). And you can look to other possible motives from gang killings to worries about being sued but they don’t make nearly as much sense and wouldn’t be nearly as prevalent of an influence on their society as the heinous one child policy is.
Debate is a good thing. I know it is worth while and know that I learn from these discussions or I wouldn’t spend so much time on the board. Perhaps the “cause” is not the one child policy because the Chinese people would probably NOT even choose to be subjected to the one child policy in the first place if they had their choice. Perhaps the cause is the Communist regime which subjugates these people and forces them to live under ungodly laws like the one child policy which have inevitably hardened these people to the point where exposure to the heart-wrenching experience of dying children is the norm and walking by one more is just typical. That is really sad but it is likely the truth. At this point I will just say peace be with you too Ex-RINO and ask that God opens our eyes to the truth.
Truthseeker, what say you about cases in the US about rapes murders, and child abuse being ignored by passerby?
If I were to guess at possible scenarios they would include people who felt helpless or feared for themselves if they got involved. Our government and the laws in the US would back a person up and help them out if they got involved so most US citizens today would help unless there were extenuating circumstances.
– I think it is slightly funny that in your own defense of your thoughts, you posted yet another reason – and that is that there are few Christians in their nation (and thus, are not God fearing people).
Ex-RINO. Christians are not the only God fearing people in the world so your premise is false to begin with. But even if I were to accept your false premise their ungodliness would still it would still be the one child policy that is directly responsible for ‘normalizing’ exposure to the killing of children. The policy would have the same chilling effect on both the Godly and the ungodly alike.
http://www.life.com sadly reported today that the child succumbed to her injuries.
“If there was any doubt that this was the ONLY option you saw, when a national news story suggested anything different, you said it was ungodly to suggest otherwise.”
Ex-RINO, I did not say that at all. It had nothing to do with people offering other options. It had to do with your uncertainty about the effects that the one child policy has on the Chineses people. I will post what I said again. It had more to do with attempting to explain inability to see that the one child policy has had numbing effect to the killing of children because the one child policy forces them to live through that nightmare over and over on a daily basis could be that your mind is not able to comprehend things Godly. It may or may not have been a correct assertion; but lets not make what I said into something other than what it was.
“your mind has now almost completely closed to things Godly. That is the only explanation why you and VP Joe Biden have trouble understanding that China’s one-child policy of murdering wanted babies (viable or not) devalues ALL human life.”
truth -
Have a great evening. I keep thinking of ways to throw all logic and rational thought out the window so I can best explain this to you…but I haven’t been able to so far. Again, I can’t make an overly emotional person logical – so I feel stuck here.
Maybe one day. I don’t get drunk. so this could be tough.
Peace –
Ex-RINO, If you think your logical now, then by all means have a few drinks; it couldn’t hurt.
BTW – At first you only thought you ‘could agree’ the one child policy caused Chinese society to devalue life. Now, thanks to my prodding, you ‘believe’ without a doubt that the one child policy has caused the Chinese people to devalue life. Proof that you have successfully taken down that barrier that was blocking your mind to things Godly :)
For those seeking truth on this matter – more analysis and news on the killing:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/22/world/asia/china-toddler-reaction/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
truth -
On your last statement – if you believe that to be fact, than you either misread my posts or I didn’t convey it clearly enough. I think there’s a lot of things that have caused folks in China to devalue life, including their one child policy. I simply couldn’t leap to the conclusion that this was the only cause of folks passing by.
That’s all.
Ex-RINO, I didn’t misread your posts. I reposted your posts several times to make it clear. Infact I reposted them again just one post ago.
If you want the truth in analysis on the people who passed by the dying toddler then do some soul searching on how these people submit to the one child policy. If you live in society of neighbors that are complicit to government sanctioned killing of your children on a regular basis then why be so shocked that neighbors could walk past your 18 month old girl? The truth is obvious and the ‘soul searching’ that doesn’t lead you back to the one child policy is a denial of the obvious.
BTW- Did you notice that the article you spun us to regarding ‘soul searching’ did not even mention the one child policy by name? Is it possible that you seek the opinion of writers who spin the analysis away from blaming the “ELEPANT IN THE ROOM” named
the abortion industry?
truth – you interpreted my initial statement of ‘One child policy problem in China? Sure – I could agree that the country devalues both children and women. But you can’t discount other factors as well’ as meaning that I don’t believe the one child policy devalues life in China.
First off, I said I could agree to that – but I was also making a statement that while I can buy that argument, I also believe other factors may be at play.
That’s it.
These situations though have happened in other countries and times through history (not exactly like this of course) – but I think in all those situations, we have to not rush to judgement (since the sample size is a dozen or so people out of millions, and in China’s case, billions of people), and because we can quickly jump past other factors that should be considered. I mean, the Kitty Genovese story happened right here in America – no one child policy at all – but lessons to certainly be learned.
Ex-RINO,
Kitty Genovese. I did go back and look at her story. Notice how you had to go back 60 years for your example of the “bystander effect” in the US? And that hardly compares with what happened in China. 18 people did not knowingly walk past Kitty when they knew she was in need of help. I am sure it could be spun to make it look like people did but there is no evidence anybody doing anything close to that. Lessons to be learned sure from her death, yes. Be vigilant and err on the side of making sure people in distress get the help they need. But this does not even close to being a valid comparison of people in the US behaving the way those bystanders in China behaved when they walked and drove past that baby girl.
As far as the US goes, I am certain that just having legalized abortion occuring in the US for 30 years now is taking a toll on the way neighbors help one another. The loss of respect for the sanctity of life grows every day we let this evil permeate our society.
People won’t admit it publicly…polls say over 90% of us are personally pro life but many of those same people allow others to kill their babies if they want to. These same people are the “bystanders” of the future.
Truth – there are a lot of examples of you research – I took that example because it was in the last of the articles that I posted (which I’m guessing you didn’t read any of).
(which I’m guessing you didn’t read any of).
Ex-RINO, I am sure you are guessing wrong; thus my comments to you above pointing out that your article did not even mention the one-child policy. Could it be you are not reading what I am posting? Or maybe you are getting emotional about this…
What do you think about my assertion the people who are personally pro-life but legally pro-choice likely being the bystanders of the future?
Just so I’m clear – can you define what you mean by both personally pro-life, and legally pro-choice?
For instance, most people I know have never had an abortion or driven somebody to an abortion (does that make them pro-life), but have also never voted for or against abortion – so how do you define the two (before I answer).
I have a few friends living in China and they all pointed to a fear of financial responsibility or litigation as the likely culprit for something like this. One friend said:
“If you stop to help someone you don’t know like that, you could be blamed and held responsible and made to pay a lot of money. If an old lady falls down in the street, you don’t stop to help her up because then you’ll have to pay (she or someone else might say you pushed her). Police are rarely involved in things because they’re so corrupt, so people take care of this kind of thing by assigning a person blame, then working out a price to cover the deed, and frequently a crowd will form to chime in on who was at fault and ensuring that the aggrieved party gets their money. The result is that nobody wants to help a random person on the street. The reason the scavenger stopped is probably because she doesn’t have any money anyway.”
Another friend corroborated:
“Yeah.. This is one of the things I have been explained as well. If you help someone, it’s assumed that it’s because you are guilty (and even if not, it might just happen as previously explained) And if not that, if you take someone to the hospital and the person has no cash or card on them, you are made to pay for their treatment before anyone helps them in the hospital (maybe even if the person has the money, not sure). So those are some of the reasons why you wouldn’t even have onlookers – just people who completely ignore. I have witnessed two situations in China myself. When we tried to help, get someone to call the ambulance etc (because we hadn’t known enough Chinese to do it ourselves) nobody would and we were actually told to stay back and warned to do anything.
It is horrible. Sad thing is especially most of the people are aware that nobody would help them in the same situation so they’ve learnt to just ignore and look after themselves and themselves only. There is definitely lower value placed on the individual as compared to other societies. (most companies elsewhere, as bad as they might be, wouldn’t knowingly put poison in baby food either to stretch their margins, there’s serious lack of .. Don’t know how to word it properly but you get what I mean.)”
Just so I’m clear – can you define what you mean by both personally pro-life, and legally pro-choice?
Sure, let me clarify for you.
personally pro-life – a person says they would never personally make the choice to commit abortion on themselves but this person also supports all peoples choice to commit abortion. Legally.
pro-choice – supports all peoples choice to commit abortion. Legally or not.
Let me clarify again. And I left one category out.
1) pro-life – against everybody’s choice to commit abortion. Legally or not.
2) pro-life personally but pro-choice legally- a person says they would never personally make the choice to commit abortion on themselves but this person also supports all peoples choice to commit abortion legally.
3) pro-choice – supports all peoples choice to commit abortion. Legally or not.
Well, there are different levels of pro-life as well. Some want it illegal in every and all circumstances. Some want a couple exceptions. The lines are not as easily defined as all that.
Truthseeker, I agree that the one child policy is a travesty and leads to all sorts of horrors. However, there are other factors. A collectivist attitude, the bystander effect, the fear of reprisal that Alexandra mentioned, the patriarchal set-up where females are worth less than males. A lot of things are at play here, and I think you were way out of line to question Ex’s commitment to God here.
Alexandra, what you are saying sounds like lawlessnes. From what I hear the people who ran the baby over have both been arrested by the police. I know I can’t completely comprehend the mentality of living under communist rule but I am sure that fairness and justice are a lot harder to come by then it is in the US. I could see people being afraid to contact the authorities because the authorities are so corrupt that they would stage them as being responsible and extort money from them. But these bystanders passed over helping this poor girl and whatever the reason it does not change the fact that the only way they could do that is if their hearts have been hardened to her suffering. And the one child policy would go a long way to hardening the hearts of the Chinese people.
I am making this point now with Ex-RINO by asserting that in the US it is the people who are personally pro-life but legally pro-choice who will likely be bystanders in the future.
A lot of things are at play here, and I think you were way out of line to question Ex’s commitment to God here.
Jack, maybe you missed my comment earlier I told Ex I did not question her commitment to God. You can reference my response to that here if you’d like.
October 21, 2011 at 10:51 pm
Jack, what are your thoughts on my assertion that people who are personally pro-life but legally pro-choice who will likely be bystanders in the future.
Well, there are different levels of pro-life as well. Some want it illegal in every and all circumstances. Some want a couple exceptions. The lines are not as easily defined as all that.
That is true Jack and for the sake of this discussion we can say their is a life of the mother exception.
I think those who really advocate for abortion would be more likely to be the bystanders, if there is a correlation at all. The personally pro-life people appear to have a lot of complain, usually. I know several who were shocked out of their political views by viewing the real effects of abortion. I can’t see most of them standing by while a child dies.
There is definitely lower value placed on the individual as compared to other societies. (most companies elsewhere, as bad as they might be, wouldn’t knowingly put poison in baby food either to stretch their margins, there’s serious lack of .. Don’t know how to word it properly but you get what I mean.)”
Stupidity of this company comes to mind Alexandra. Poisoning babies is not going sell more baby food.
Compassion, not complain, in my earlier post, lol. Stupid phone.
I think those who really advocate for abortion would be more likely to be the bystanders, if there is a correlation at all. The personally pro-life people appear to have a lot of complain, usually. I know several who were shocked out of their political views by viewing the real effects of abortion. I can’t see most of them standing by while a child dies.
I agree to a certain extent Jack. But their are still a lot of personally pro-life people who are aware of what abortion is. They are the bystanders in the war on abortion. The pro-choice people are the perps. They are the deathscorts and the abortion mill workers and the abortionists.
Only the walking dead; people who are dead inside could walk by a dying baby girl in the street. Regardless of fear of extortion or any other motive. And the Chinese people have had their hearts hardened to such a great extent that they are able to rationalize it is ok to walk past that injured baby girl. The answer lies in determining what has caused these people to harden their hearts so.
Ask your friends this Alexandra. Ask them what might be most likely to have caused the Chinese people to so casually discard a little girls life? If they say money then ask them what has conditioned so many members of their society place a higher value on money then on caring for this little girl. I was out picketing in the 40 days for life campaign the other day and of the of the signs read “pregnant women need help not abortion”. Maybe our society isn’t too far removed from the notion that abortion (killing children) is ok if you can’t afford them too. In fact financial strain was written in as a valid exception to Russia’s recent so-called anti abortion legislation. May God help the United States of America from following the Chinese and Russian people in this mindset. Where the abortion is accepted practice, bystanders will follow.
Ask them what might be most likely to have caused the Chinese people to so casually discard a little girls life?
I…did. They answered about the ingrained fear of litigiousness and financial responsibility. I don’t think it’s a conscious valuing of money over the girl’s life, but sort of the type of thing that you see in the US when people – especially women – don’t stop to help a broken down car. Just a subconscious but ingrained idea that something bad could happen to you – look away before you can think about it, think of something else. You can claim that Kitty Genovese happened decades ago but just last year a woman in NYC was butchered by her boyfriend; she screamed for 20 minutes and her neighbors heard it and nobody did anything. Bystander effect is real.
Last year a little boy left his backpack on the subway next to me. I was going to turn it in to the lost and found but I looked in the backpack first and found a phone number. I called the number and got in touch with his father, who was very happy that I didn’t turn the bag over to the MTA – it’s a cumbersome process and the lost and found is in a really inconvenient location. The dad was SHOCKED that I had the courage to look inside the backpack, and truth be told I was actually very scared to myself for a while. I took it to an isolated corner of the subway station, in case it exploded (lol), so that I would probably be the only one hurt. I kept telling myself, it was just a boy, I saw him myself; but then some small part of me kept saying: that’s the perfect cover! By the time I unzipped the zipper, my heart was racing; but I finally decided that I would rather die in a world of my choosing than live in a world where I can’t give a little boy his school books back without involving a bomb squad and two city government agencies. When we met for the hand-off, the dad and I actually had a very pleasant conversation – I gave him a tour of the theater I was working in at the time, and he told me about his job (he was a journalist), and he called his co-workers to tell them that I was real after all, because they all apparently thought no one would be so crazy. No one would even touch an abandoned bag on a subway; any rational person would either just get off the train or tell the cops.
No one’s life was hanging in the balance there – understatement of the year – but everyone I’ve told that story to has expressed some amount of surprise that I even touched the backpack, much less opened it. Even people who think they are so “civilized” because they live in a small town where they would have known exactly whose backpack it was just by seeing it – generally speaking, they wouldn’t touch a strange back on a NYC subway. Truth be told, as I was riding with it in my hands waiting to get off the train, I had visions of it exploding right there in my lap, with my body as ground zero; my parents insisting valiantly to the press that I would never have brought a bomb onto a train, that it couldn’t have been mine, something must have happened that put that bomb in my hands. We live in a culture of fear and suspicion; we don’t always act rationally. It was an 8-year old boy’s backpack and it had me sweating bullets.
I think that the one-child policy and the indifference towards a dying toddler stem from the same root, which is a culture that values the collective over the individual (and thus a culture in which the individual must fiercely look out for himself), rather than one causing the other. A devaluing of individual people is the cause of these two and many other problems.
You may think it’s bad policy to add toxic materials to baby food, pet food, toys, or anything else – but absent corporate regulations, companies do, and have. People – there in China and here in the US – buy it because it’s cheaper, not wanting to know WHY it’s so cheap. (Don’t look too closely! Think about something else!) I have a lot of respect for China and its culture, but I try not to buy anything made there. I buy USA-made whenever possible; I support small local businesses and I pay attention to what’s in things, to why things cost what they do. The individual matters to me, and I think a nation that values individuals is a nation with a valuable collective.
I think that the one-child policy and the indifference towards a dying toddler stem from the same root, which is a culture that values the collective over the individual (and thus a culture in which the individual must fiercely look out for himself), rather than one causing the other. A devaluing of individual people is the cause of these two and many other problems.
Alexandra, Sounds like you are saying a devaluing of individual people is the cause of the one child policy and the bystander effect. That certainly makes sense from a logical stand point. It also makes sense that the Communist regime as a government is the origin of the mindset that devalues the indidual life. As a result of this they pass laws like the one child policy. Note that this policy is not popular and not enforced strictly in the rural areas where the government tentacles don’t extend. Each day with the one child policy in place then causes the devaluing of a childs life in the psyche of the Chinese society (especially in urban areas) which in turn would lead to a greater prevalence of the bystander effect.
So I would agree that only an entity (The Communist Regime) that devalues individual human life would create/implement a one child policy. But I still say that the Chinese people are being co-opted into devaluing the individual human life by the Communist regime and the greatest way they do this is through implementation of the one child policy. Which in turn leads to a prevalence of the bystander effect.
Alexandra and Jack – thanks for jumping in and adding some thoughtful comments.
Truth - two things:
1) I’m a guy
2) So are you saying you take back your original statement of ‘my mind being closed off to all things Godly’? You sort of took it back, and suggested to Jack you took it back – but rereading the post you reference, I think it is still unclear – so please, clarify.
My comment was to you when I believed you had stated that you were uncertain or not sure wether or not the one child policy’s devalues human life.
You used the phrase could agree that the one child policy’s devalues human life as opposed to saying you agree that the one child policy’s devalues human life . I certainly would have been shocked if you reiterated that you were uncertain didn’t understand that the one child policy definitely does devalue human life then I might wonder if their mind was closed off to all things Godly. I would chalk it up to a poor choice of wording that lead me to misunderstand what your meant to say .