(Prolifer)ations 11-29-11
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- At the Abolitionist Society of Oklahoma, Brian Biggs encourages religious pro-lifers not to shy away from using religious arguments for the pro-life position.
- The Anti Abortion Gang has been actively engaging abortion proponents on Twitter regarding reports of a woman who claimed to miscarry after being pepper sprayed at an Occupy event. This leads AAG to ask where pro-choicers would draw the line of support for a pregnant woman who engaged in risky behavior that caused a miscarriage.
- Accepting Abundance profiles Whole Women’s Health, a six-clinic abortion conglomerate which offers private abortion care, complete with special herbal teas and post-abortion care baskets. This same business blogs about its proudly displayed banner proclaiming “Good Women Have Abortions,” and its director says they “worship” their patients, encouraging them to “honor [themselves] and respect the journey [they] have been on.” Guess there’s nothing like VIP treatment while you kill your child.
- In another Abolitionist Society post, an African-American adoptee expresses thankfulness for her life and family. In the Black community, adoption is the choice for only 1% of those experiencing unplanned pregnancies.
- Americans United for Life condemns the United Nations’ push to liberalize abortion laws in Peru:
In one of the most recent acts of social imperialism by the United Nations, the CEDAW Committee determined that Peru must compensate a girl for being denied an abortion and liberalize its abortion policies. This is only the most recent example of a United Nations committee overstepping its bounds to incorrectly imply that there is an international human right to abortion. This is simply not the case, as the recently published San Jose Articles point out.
- The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition gives readers an overview of current abortion laws and pending regulations in the United States.
- Generations for Life was encouraged by the recent National Catholic Youth Conference which was held in NYC, the abortion capital. Attendance was over 22,000.
- Mommy Life posts a video imagining what it would have been like if Twitter had been around when Jesus began His ministry:
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 am saddened, but not surprised, by the very low percentage of black women who place their children for adoption. For years, the media has been saying, in so many words, that black children are unwanted. Sometimes this is done indirectly, as in stories about “blue ribbon babies” (healthy black males). I even heard a prominent black female politician say “black males are unadoptable.”
Statements such as this are not only offensive and racist, but untrue.
I’d like to know more about the “Sadly, in the Black community, adoption is the choice for only 1% of those experiencing unplanned pregnancies.” What about foster parentage, what about raised by the mother, father, or other family member? To say that stat all by itself like that on an anti-abortion blog would imply that all the others are aborted. That’s simply not true. I’d like to know more about the other 99% of unplanned pregnancies in the “Black community”. Emphasis on ethnicity not mine.
Per the national campaign to prevent teen pregnancy the teen rates among all races are :
55% chose parenting (single)
27% choose abortion
less than 1% choose adoption
the rest end in miscarriage.
How about “Good Women Own up to Their Responsibilities!”
Duck – this is just UNWANTED pregnancies. And yes – the abortion rate is VERY HIGH amoung the black comminuty – esp. in big cities. There are many African-American children in foster care – but that happens in situations when they are taken away from their parents for one reason or another – not because they are unwanted, but because they are in “the system” after their parents made a mistake.
My cousins have a few foster children (though they are white – it doesn’t matter) and none of them are ”unwanted” - they were born addicted to drugs or there parents ended up in jail and they had no one to care for them.
So they get to live with my cousins who love them :) They’ve even officially adopted one of the boys after his mother gave up custody of him :)
I would like the actual statistics for the rest of the 99%. They should be available where ever the author got the 1% statistic. If not there, then continue following back source after source till we find the original place where the 1% quote came from. I’m well aware that this is for unplanned preganacies. I would just like to know what happens to the other 99% of those unplanned pregnancies for that particular community. That’s what I’m asking for. If the 1% statistic is available then the rest should be too.
Amber, I’m glad your family works in the foster to adoption community. I know maney people who do that as well.
Well, I’m assuming that if they are unwanted pregnancies they are aborting if not giving up for adoption – unless we are to include those who did not want to get pregnant but are doing the right thing and taking responsibility and keeping (parenting) the child, like Susie broke down for the national teen pregnancy statistics.
But yes – it’s always good to look for sources.
The twitter video is AMAZING!! Wow!
I agree, Amber. LOVE it! :D
I just shared it all over the place on FB! haha loved it so much!
Duck, it looks like Susie posted where she for the statistic from in her comment, above yours.
Kel, that’s not the Black Community statistic where the 1% came from. Since the post claims only 1% result in adoption, and on a prolife blog implying the rest are aborted, I wanted to see the full stats for the unplanned pregnancies in the Black Community. If the 1% is accurate, the other 99% should be accounted for.
Duck, I don’t believe anyone “implied that the rest are aborted.” You may have chosen to interpret it in that way, but I would think it obvious that not all the other unplanned pregnancies end in abortion.
This blog covers a wide array of subjects: abortion, adoption, STDs, pregnancy, legislation, etc. For you to claim that a statistic given somehow points to anything other than that statistic is a stretch.
If a statistic source cannot be provided for this claim, I’ll put a retraction in this post.
Thanks.
Ok, thanks. I apologize, you are correct about the adoption and other topics. Thanks for trying to find the other 99% statistics. :)
I’m curious about what you guys think of this study:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-11/uog-aed112911.php
A link has been added in the post as a reference for the adoption statistics.
My response to that study is: http://www.abstinenceworks.org/evidence-it-works-mainmenu-45 and my response is also that checking state numbers is not a good method for checking sex ed effectiveness, as sex ed curricula are determined at the district level.
I’m sorry but abstinenceworks.org is clearly not an unbiased source. When will you guys learn that getting all your facts from websites that ONLY agree with you isn’t a good way to look at the world?
Thanks for the source link. However, the “sadly” part still implies that whatever happens to the other 99% of the Black community children of unplanned pregnancies is not pleasant. Given the blog reference, not pleasant would most likely mean abortion. That source your provided, still doesn’t say what happens to the other 99% of unplanned pregnancies in the black community, whether it’s “sadly” or not.
Duck, I see your point on the word “sadly.” I will remove the word and hope that your dissatisfaction with the wording and/or links provided in this post are now over and that we can end this discussion.
I would agree that being aborted is not pleasant and sad. Choosing adoption for your child is not a bad option. Unfortunately, the option for a teen pregnancy are always parent or abort. Why not consider adoption especially now with the advent of open and semi open adoption. Birth mothers who choose adoption are brave, courageous and selfless. They are putting the interest of their child first in many cases. What a shame that women would consider it better to make a decision to abort because they fear people will think poorly of them to make an adoption plan.
The wonderful post is from a young teen who was adopted and thankful for it. She did not hate her birth mother but wanted to thank and honor her for her choice. Why is it when the choice of adoption is put out there it is met with hostility???
I’m sorry but maybe you should read the studies at abstinenceworks.org instead of copping an attitude.
This is one from 2010. If you don’t want to be open-minded enough to read about it, don’t. http://abcnews.go.com/WN/study-abstinence-works/story?id=9731048
And FYI, there are no truly unbiased sources anymore, just like there are no people without biases or worldviews.
And it’s obvious, since you posted a completely off-topic post here in order to try and provoke the readers of this blog that you are a troll.
Elizabeth, if you didn’t read the cited studies from the website I linked to, then perhaps it’s YOU that needs to learn that getting all your facts from websites you only deem “unbiased” might not be a good way to look at the world.
You’re inches from being banned.
Kel, I’m sorry – I think I’ve been very polite here and I’m honestly just here to LISTEN and decide my worldview on abortion. I’m not trying to troll – I just noticed that abstinence only sex education is a topic that has been discussed before on this website and when I saw the latest study to come out I wanted to see what you guys thought about it. Banning someone just because they disagree with you is ridiculous and you’re taking your mod duties too far.
As for the rest, I’ll look at the site but OF COURSE they’re only going to post studies that go along with their worldview, correct? Correct. When I read studies I choose not to read anything posted on websites that lean too liberal or too conservative because I just want honest scientific facts. How does this not make sense to you?
And for the record I’m neither pro-choice or pro-life… I lean heavily progressive on a lot of social issues but have been trying to do more research and think harder about abortion to see how I feel. I don’t know what your problem with me is but I’m not trolling. Why is the discussion only okay when you 100% agree with it?
OH but I read the ABC study and I have to say I really liked this part
“Instead, the study took a less traditional approach, discussing the drawbacks to having sex early, such as unplanned pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Teachers even made kids list the pros and cons of having sex themselves.”
I personally did not have sex until after high school and would wish for my children to do the same. High school is too young and too early and I know I was unprepared for any consequences or emotions that came along with it. Believe me, I like the idea of abstinent teenagers.
You haven’t said anything about the study I linked to yet though.
This is actually the exact approach I intend to take with my children about sex education so there you go. Thanks for linking to the ABC study.
“We began by talking to children and trying to understand their motivations, reasons for engaging in the behaviors from their perspectives,” says John Jemmott III, a psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania and the lead author of the study.
“[Researchers] simply said delay,” Brown says. “Wait a bit. Sex is serious. It has risks. And we just recommend you wait until you’re older.”
As for the rest, I’ll look at the site but OF COURSE they’re only going to post studies that go along with their worldview, correct?
Elizabeth, did you or did you not link me to a site that agrees with your own worldview?
Did you or did you not just admit to not reading the link and studies posted because you believed they would not agree with your worldview?
Did you or did you not derail this thread by posting a link which has nothing to do with the topic of this thread?
An awful lot of discussion has gone on here for several years now. Try posting pro-life positions on other pro-choice websites. You’ll be lucky if your comments stay up for more than a few minutes before they’re deleted.
So let’s not whine about how unfair we all are here and how we “take our mod duties too far.” If you don’t like it, you don’t have to post here.
You haven’t said anything about the study I linked to yet though.
Apparently, you didn’t even read what I wrote, let alone the site I linked to in response. My statement was “…checking state numbers is not a good method for checking sex ed effectiveness, as sex ed curricula are determined at the district level.”
Kel, I never stated my worldview. I saw an article that made me think of the Jill Stanek commenters and decided to post it here. THAT’S ALL!! It was intended to start a discussion (like the rest of this blog, correct?) because I THOUGHT it was pertinent to the point of this blog. I wasn’t trying to start a fight, believe me. I’m sorry if I “derailed” the original conversation but since there wasn’t another post talking about sex education I thought this would be a good one since it was kind of a catch-all for a few different points.
Calm down, honestly. Your inability to listen to even a tiny bit of something you don’t agree with is going to keep you back in the dark ages.
I subbed at a high school today and saw a kid with this shirt on:
Front: VIRGINITY ROCKS!!!!
Back: I have love for my wife, and I haven’t even met her yet.
I LOVED this shirt because it was so BOLD!
Kids at my school wore shirts the health teachers sold that said “Hugs are great, sex can wait” but it was the girl who slept around who wore the shirts because they were tight fitting and had cute fonts in pink letters….bleh.
This shirt today was just your typical black tee with white font and was specific to boys – which is different!
I felt very proud of him and I didn’t even know him :)
Kel, that would surely end my confusion and desire for more statistics. Thank you, seriously. :)
And FYI, there are no truly unbiased sources anymore, just like there are no people without biases or worldviews.
Kel, true. I have found just a couple academic sites that are as close to un-bias as one can get, in the fact that they display all the facts without interpreting whether something is good or bad, etc. But yeah, mostly everything like everyone has a bias.
Calm down, honestly. Your inability to listen to even a tiny bit of something you don’t agree with is going to keep you back in the dark ages.
I listen all day, every day. I read all the pro-choice comments that are submitted to this blog. You have come here and have accused us of many things already – of not being open minded enough, of being judgmental, of being anti-feminist. The list goes on.
Your worldview has come through loud and clear from the beginning, Elizabeth, from the first day you attempted thread derailment with discussion of transgendered persons.
What have I not listened to, Elizabeth? I actually READ your link, which is more than I can say for you.
If you want to start a discussion that is off topic, do so on your own blog or on an open community message board. This is a blog which allows comments on the posts. It is not an open discussion, free for all message board.
And if you would like to converse via email with pro-life persons on topics which are not discussed here, we have all of the moderators’ emails listed in the sidebar for your convenience.