(Prolifer)ations 12-27-11
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.
- Timmerie’s Blog has a guest post by a homeschooled Catholic teen who is reaching out to women experiencing unplanned pregnancies before they ever reach the “front lines” of an abortion clinic. She seeks out and counsels these women online at places like YahooAnswers and YouTube.
- Wesley J. Smith comments on a Mark Steyn editorial regarding the consequences of the Baby Boomer generation’s decision to dramatically limit family size. Smith writes that along with this decision came a changed view toward sacrifice, ushering in an entitlement mentality which is so prevalent today.
- Secular Pro-Life shares a pro-life poem read in a non-Christian, pro-choice Unitarian Universalist church each year at Christmas.
- Right to Life of Michigan discusses the controversy over the opening of a new Planned Parenthood in MI’s Oakland County. Officials claim they don’t know yet whether they will perform abortions there, but there’s a problem with that story:… Lori Lamerand [CEO of PP Mid and South Michigan] told pro-abortion Detroit News columnist Laura Berman in June of 2011 that PP was planning on performing abortions at this facility despite protests from the neighboring hotel owners. The article which notes PP’s plans to perform abortions at the Oakland County facility is even posted on PP’s web site.
- John Smeaton is participating in the “Dark Glasses” campaign in support of blind Chinese political prisoner Chen Guangcheng and encourages readers to do the same.
- ProWomanProLife reports on conjoined twins born in Brazil where abortion is highly restricted. Their mother received the twins, who have two heads but share one body, with joy. She named the boys Emanoel and Jesus (pictured left).
- Reflections of a Paralytic draws us to a pro-life essay by Msgr. Charles Pope on bioethics and the birth of Christ.
- Pro-Life Action League writes about how pro-abortion media bias has played a large role in shaping abortion debate by portraying pro-lifers as heartless and pro-choice killing as rational.
- Alveda King of Priests for Life has a guest post by Matt Bowman encouraging parents of children with Downsyndrome to consider adoption instead of abortion:The National Down Syndrome Adoption Network both supports parents in choosing adoption of their own children with special needs if they feel they are not in a position to parent them, and helps parents interested in adopting to link up with such families or with older children.
- ProLife NZ points out that since studies by the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges show abortion does not improve the mental health of women, “… doctors who authorise abortions in order to protect a woman’s mental health are doing it on the basis of a false belief not supported by the medical evidence. In other words the vast majority of abortions in this country are technically illegal.”
- Pro-Life Wisconsin gives an account of one of their Empty Manger Caroling efforts at an abortion clinic in Milwaukee where police officers attempted to get the carolers to leave. Apparently, the director at this clinic recently quit.
- Mommy Life displays Planned Parenthood’s Christmas appeal for money – which, in typical PP fashion, does not mention the “A” word.
[Photo via DailyMail]
Dec.27, 2011 3:30 pm |
Blogs |
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 saw the conjoined twin story elsewhere the other day and it really bothered me that they were refering to them as a single instead of a plural. The article kept referencing ‘the child’, ‘the baby’, or ‘the newborn’. And the picture that it displayed was cented on the right head, leaving the left head looking like a sprawled addendum to a ‘normal’ child. It was a weird article and just left me feeling like the writer wanted to just remove one of the heads. *shakes head* it was disturbing.
There is a set of similarly conjoined twin girls here in the United States who are now teens or older. There have been some TV specials on them.
One commenter on an article I read stated they should “just terminate one of the heads.” ??!!
Mary,
Love these two!! :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkKWApOAG2g
“She seeks out and counsels these women online at places like YahooAnswers and YouTube.”
Right. A home schooled Catholic school student is practicing therapy without a license. So much for professional standards.
CC, for the vast majority of human history people have relied upon and sought cousel from their friends, family, and peers. “Professionals” are what one sees when your first line of defense, family, friends, and peers,are not availible, they are a fall back and a poor second place, not the ‘gold standard’. Thinking you need a “professional” to help with daily life problems is like thinking you have to go to a trained cheif to cook a night’s dinner. When you can’t remember what temp to put the chicken on, most people have the good sense to call mom or grandma.
A ‘home schooled catholic teen’ is hardly likely to have a whole lot of life experience or have much knowledge of ways which fall outside her narrow and restricted view of the world.
She’s not ‘counselling’, she’s just imparting limited and faith-based views.
the teen is more likely to have knowledge about fetal development than a “councilor” at the abortion mill, especially if she has any siblings younger than her and saw their ULTRASOUNDS, the WINDOW to the WOMB!
So are you Reality. Everyone is limited, we’re human, not omniscent. Experience isn’t the only tool in couseling. For instance, if I’m failing at raising polite, respectful kids, I don’t want advise from someone else who failed to raise polite, respectful kids, nor advise from impolite, irrespectable adults. I want advice from parents who succeeded in raising polite, respectful kids or from polite, respectful adults. An unhappy teenager who is considering sleeping with her/his boy/girlfriend’s best friend hardly needs advice from someone who made the same mistake. They need advice from someone who can say ‘there is a better way, and look, I have lived it’.
I didn’t even have a boyfriend until I was a senior in high school. All my friends were in serial relationships. They all knew each other were having sex, yet when someone had a relationship issue they didn’t go to each other for advice, they came to ply my ear. Most people realize inheriently that you don’t ask from advice from someone who is struggling with the same problem. They are great for moral support, yes, and can make a world of difference in healing hurts, but you look for advice in people who haven’t made the same mistake, who made better choices and are happier in them then you are in yours.
The lie that homeschoolers are some sort of social shut ins with no social skills is a myth. Homeschoolers don’t just outscore their public school peers in scholastic achievement, they are exposed to more real-world situations, more diverse age groups, and rate higher on healthy social interactions and maturity than publicly educated teenagers. I expect this young women has a great deal to impart to her struggling peers.
A teen who avoids pregnancy and illegal drugs does in fact have something to offer other teens struggling with issues. An educated counselor may not exactly have solutions to avoid drugs and pregnancy if they were not disciplined in those areas as a teen.
“ULTRASOUNDS, the WINDOW to the WOMB!” – except when an abnormality is suspected then its ‘no, no, you don’t need to see’, in case they may decide to terminate.
Neatly wrapped little bundle of assumptions there Jespren.
“they are exposed to more real-world situations” – not really.
“I expect this young women has a great deal to impart to her struggling peers.” – no, she has a quite limited range of information and experience to impart.
“A teen who avoids pregnancy and illegal drugs does in fact have something to offer other teens struggling with issues.” – depends on why and how they have avoided pregnancy and illegal drugs.
CC and Reality,
Correct me if I’m wrong but if memory serves me correctly, PP had teen “peer counselling” on sex and birth control. I have just done some googling and apparently they still do.
Do you consider these teens any more qualified to “counsel” than a “home schooled Catholic teen”?
Hi Carla,
Thank you for the video. Aren’t they just amazing!
I remember how people told John Travolta and his wife as well that they “owed” the world something where his late autistic son was concerned.
Good for such parents as the Travoltas and those of Abby and Brittany who put only the best interests of their special children first and foremost and let the world know they don’t owe it squat!!
They are trained in a wide range of areas before being permitted to do any counselling Mary.
So yes, they are considerably more qualified than a home schooled catholic teen.
Hi Eric,
Excellent point. Just as a teen who has experienced pregnancy and drug abuse can offer insight, why not one who has avoided it?
Personally, I think the MTV series “Teen Mom” and “16 and pregnant” should be required viewing for every high school student.
Reality,
So teens who are “trained” but have no professional credentials are just fine as “counsellors”. Didn’t you have an issue with the lack of professional credentials?
I stand corrected. Its CC who has an issue with professional credentials. You are concerned about “life experiences”.
So why do you assume PP trained teen “counselors” have the life experience required to “counsel”?
Hi Mary, unfortunately many people who consider themselves pro-choice will have an issue with a homeschooled teen as counselor because many cannot fathom remaining abstinent as a teen, or that doing so is odd at best or completely abnormal and worthy of disgust at worst. Some pro-choice commenters appear to pride themselves on “education” as the *only* worthwhile value, and only “educated” people have worthy ideas. While education is certainly important, other values such as discipline, integrity, self-control, loyalty, dedication, and hard work do not require education and are far more valuable to society.
Mary, the people who are selected to undertake the training are assessed first (being a post-abortive whore isn’t a requirement), then given extensive training in a number of areas.
While I don’t know a lot about the girl mentioned above, if she is a home schooled catholic teen without broader experience and training then she has not had the societal and peer group exposure of others, let alone specific training.
I don’t have a problem with teens deciding that they wish to abstain from sex. Most don’t though. And the problem with those that fall into ‘abstinence programs’ is that the adherence rate is pretty poor. And have you heard about some of the practices some of them undertake so they can still claim to be ‘virgins’?
“discipline, integrity, self-control, loyalty, dedication, and hard work do not require education” – really?
Awesome! Then I am totally qualified and stuff to talk to girls about that stuff since I’ve “been there, done that”, right Pro-Legal-Abortionists?!
I can’t wait to take my seat at Planned Parenthood and tell the kids all about how waiting for sex is be best option, talk to them about failure rates of contraception methods, enlighten them on how the growth and development of every human being begins at conception, and that if we are talking about the growth and development of a human being inside THEIR uterus the human being in question is their child to whom they have an obligation and responsibility! I mean, I’ve lived it-I have two kids (one of whom was conceived in a crisis pregnancy before I was married) and I am the oldest of 6 kids. I’ve studied it-I’ve completed college Biology. And, I’m a secularist so I don’t have any of that icky religious bias!
When do I start?!
Reality 10:21PM
The credentials of the people who do the selection and training are…..what??
“Mary, the people who are selected to undertake the training are assessed first (being a post-abortive whore isn’t a requirement), then given extensive training in a number of areas.”
Yeah, assessed to see if they are easily brainwashed and controllable and then trained to proclaim to others that killing humans is a healthy choice. Do ya think they’d take either of my teens?
P.S. I find it very offending that you call people whores whether they are post-abortive or not. Not cool.
“talking about the growth and development of a human being inside THEIR uterus the human being in question is their child to whom they have an obligation and responsibility.”
If this is an example of pro-life “counseling” it couldn’t be further from what counseling is about as it is a subjective statement of a particular set of values. You obviously completed a biology course; but you obviously have not taken any counseling courses.
But yeah, somebody who comes from a strict anti-choice religious background should be “counseling” on the internet.
Jespren – agreed, I saw a headline “Baby born with two heads” I was like…it doesn’t really work that way? Two seperate babies.
Yes, and a bitter old death mongering crone should be ushering teens into a butcher shop…
Anyone who thinks the above comment is about themselves is “projecting.” Lol!
You know, once upon a time I was a teen and I was complaining bitterly about my lot in life. One of my friends just blurted out, “Why don’t you just grow up and stop feeling sorry for yourself!” The amazing thing is that he didn’t have a certificate of training or anything, but that nugget stayed with me to this day. He was right of course!
Now, in the-only-good-baby-is-a-dead-baby camp, the only teen who can counsel is one who will recommend the Final Solution to the crisis pregnancy. Live babies don’t buy Cecile new shoes, people! Have some compassion!
If this is an example of pro-life “counseling” it couldn’t be further from what counseling is about as it is a subjective statement of a particular set of values.
Nah. I just kinda looked at all the other situations in which parents are accountable for the care and well-being of their offspring in society and figured that would and should also be applied to those same children even at their very youngest stages. The fact it currently is not is what is commonly known as “injustice”.
It demonstrates a distinct lack of life experience and broad social interaction to assume homeschooled children lack the social awareness and life experience nessecary to give advice on public opinion boards like yahooanswers etc. Also, elevating siad forum to a “proffessionals only” status does the same. You have no idea what courses or training this teen has studied and/or undergone before beginning thier life saving ministry.
P.s. pardon my spelling mistakes, I was public schooled and my nook doesn’t have spellcheck!
Just knowing someone is home schooled doesn’t mean anything, really, unless you know the person yourself. People raise their home schoolers in all different situations. Some sequester their kids to a point that I think is unhealthy, some enroll the kids in independent classes and sports and they get a lot of socialization. Or they could “unschool” like my mother did, and the kids basically do and learn whatever they want. :) All I am saying is, it’s ridiculous to assume that you know what experiences this girl has, what knowledge she has, or what she is capable of based on her religion and home schooled status.
I do think, however, that it is way less effective for someone who hasn’t been through the things that someone is going through to be telling others what to do. I never listened to that as a teenager. People who remained virgins, never touched drugs, never drank… yeah, all they did was make me feel guilty and weak. I did listen, eventually, to people who had been through similar situations and actually had something to say other than “don’t do it”. I think that a teenager talking to adult women might not be all that effective. But I’m pessimistic, kudos to her for at least trying and showing people some care.
Reality says:
I don’t have a problem with teens deciding that they wish to abstain from sex. Most don’t though.
************************************************
Not according to the CDC. 54% of high school students have not had sexual intercourse.
http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/sexualbehaviors/index.htm
“Then I am totally qualified and stuff to talk to girls about that stuff since I’ve “been there, done that” – nope, you haven’t undertaken any training.
Mary – http://www.illinoisrighttolife.org/PeerCounseling.htm
“Yeah, assessed to see if they are easily brainwashed and controllable and then trained to proclaim to others that killing humans is a healthy choice. Do ya think they’d take either of my teens?” – probably not, I dare say you’ve already got your own form of brainwashing and controls in place.
“P.S. I find it very offending” – apologies praxedes, I was just demonstrating that it isn’t a requirement that they be sexually active or have had an abortion.
“the-only-good-baby-is-a-dead-baby camp, the only teen who can counsel is one who will recommend the Final Solution to the crisis pregnancy” – and this is why you will lose.
Interesting data Lrning. The study incorporated high school students of all ages. If you dig a little deeper you’ll find that by the time they reach grade 11 it’s 53% who have had sex and 62.3% in grade 12, you know, about the time of reaching the age of consent.
Carla, thanks for that video. I remember seeing them on Oprah years ago and wondering how they were doing. Nice to see they are doing well!
Reality,
So who is teaching the students and what are their credentials?
Funny how any kid with values that aren’t pro-abortion and pro-sex-whenever are considered “brainwashed.”
Jack – my friends used to roll their eyes at my pro-abstinence advice. But after several got HPV and experienced unplanned pregnancies and a lot of heartbreak, I hope they realize I wasn’t “guilting” them at all. I was trying to spare them some serious consequences.
“Jack – my friends used to roll their eyes at my pro-abstinence advice. But after several got HPV and experienced unplanned pregnancies and a lot of heartbreak, I hope they realize I wasn’t “guilting” them at all. I was trying to spare them some serious consequences.”
Oh I know, and the people who tried to tell me different (like my wife, way before we got together) weren’t trying to make me feel guilty or shamed either. I realize that now. But a teenager with self-esteem issues might be more apt to listen to someone who has made the same mistakes, because it’s kind of easy for even the most well-intentioned advice to sound judgmental coming from someone who hasn’t (even if it isn’t intended judgmentally). Just an observation on my part.
I don’t know Mary. You could ring (805) 963-2445 x 143 and ask.
It includes self-esteem, decision-making, family and relationship communication, puberty, sexual health, HIV/AIDS and other current topics. Participants are taught when to seek adult guidance and when to refer peers for professional assistance. Students are required to complete homework and field assignments, which include taking care of the infant simulator, Baby Think It Over, and visiting local social services agencies.
I’d be hard-pressed to think that most of those topics could be taught in a particularly partisan manner.
“I don’t have a problem with teens deciding that they wish to abstain from sex.”
This should go without saying. Interesting that you felt the need to state it, though.
“Most don’t though.”
Wrong. Most do. You weren’t talking about high school seniors, Reality. You were talking about all teens. With all the garbage your ilk throws at teens, it’s amazing any still abstain at all.
Does anyone know the teen stats for abstaining before legalized abortion?
“Interesting that you felt the need to state it, though.” – if you had bothered to read properly before going off half-cocked you’d note that I said this in response to Eric’s statement “unfortunately many people who consider themselves pro-choice ……. cannot fathom remaining abstinent as a teen, or that doing so is odd at best or completely abnormal and worthy of disgust at worst.”
“Wrong. Most do.” – that’s not what the data says.
“You weren’t talking about high school seniors, Reality. You were talking about all teens.” – I love the way you try to put words into peoples mouths to suit your own agenda.
At no stage have I condoned the breaking of age of consent laws.
So when I speak of teenagers having sex I am speaking of those for whom it is legal to do so.
Does anyone know the teen stats for abstaining now? Accurate, verifiable stats?
If, for the sake of argument, we included all teens regardless of age of consent, then these stats are incomplete. They only include those in high school.
What about those who aren’t in high school? The ones who are absent because they’re pregnant? Or not currently studying?
Or the ones who have completed high school and are 18 or 19 years old and more likely to be sexually active, how would that affect the overall rate of ‘teens’ having sex?
Reality,
Whoa, easy cobra. I wasn’t even thinking age of consent but you got a tad defensive there, Reality. I was thinking of teens who admit on anonymous polls to being sexually active.
How many teen girls are on hormonal birth control now vs. before legalized abortion? Do you think it is more now than then? How many teen boys (or girls) buy condoms (or get them free from PP)? Do you think it is more now or back then?
Oh, I forgot to bring up STDs and teens. More now or before
R v W.?
“I wasn’t even thinking age of consent but you got a tad defensive there,” – you can call it ‘defensive’ if you wish, I just get fed up with you distorting what has been said or ignoring half of it so you can make spurious accusations in an attempt to devalue what is being said or who is saying it.
“How many teen girls are on hormonal birth control now vs. before legalized abortion?” – dunno, but the quality, variety and availability is vastly improved over what it was then so that would indicate a greater willingness to use it.
“Do you think it is more now than then?” – quite likely. Teens do a whole lot of stuff earlier than my generation did.
“How many teen boys (or girls) buy condoms (or get them free from PP)?” – the data supplied earlier canvassed this, take a look, somewhere around page 145 I think. PP isn’t the only organisation which supplies free condoms.
“Do you think it is more now or back then?” – I’d guess more because of STDs. We also have more seatbelts and airbags in cars.
“STDs and teens. More now or before R v W.?” – when did accurate reports start being collated? Overall number or rate per sexually active person. Do we include STD’s which weren’t identified or recognised back then?
Why don’t we interview 1000 people in their 90s and ask how old they were when they first had sex. Then ask them how many STDs they had by the age of 30. Then ask them how many sexual partners they had by age 30.
Then ask the same question of the people who are now in their 30s.
“Teens do a whole lot of stuff earlier than my generation did.” Like what?
You are welcome for the videos of Abby and Brittany. :)
They are amazing and I love watching them go about their normal teen lives!!
Reality,
This post abortive whore is calling it a night.
Sleep well.
We could do that but I don’t see how it would be particularly relevant.
Different times. Different social mores on many topics.
Different products, goods and medicine.
Different careers, education and opportunities.
They are too vastly different for any logical comparisons. A lot of people didn’t do certain things purely out of fear.
We can’t turn back time, Pandora’s box is open, cliche, cliche.
More teens have cars. My unsupported observation is that more alcohol is consumed. Contraception is better and more available (most people I knew didn’t have sex only because of the fear of pregnancy). My first ‘sound system’ was a crystal set. Computers? Heck, calculators didn’t arrive until I was in high school. Gap year?
“This post abortive whore is calling it a night” – that’s dreadful! Who called you that?
Sleep tight :-)
You did.
:P
“(most people I knew didn’t have sex only because of the fear of pregnancy).”
Right.
And they were better off all around for not having sex at an early age. Less heartache. Less drama and fights. Less STDs. Less divorce. Less fatherless homes. Less depression/cutting/suicide. Less alcohol/drug abuse. Less premarital sex. Less hormones put into growing bodies/brains. Less piercings/tattoos. Less porn/sex addictions. Less using people/objectification. Less teen prostitution/sex slaves. Less abortion.
The fear was there because teens are not emotionally, mentally, spiritually and sometimes not physically ready for sex. Fear can keep you from getting hurt. Like not getting up on any icy roof or driving with out your seat belt. Or not having sex because you aren’t ready to parent.
Teens haven’t changed in the sense that they are more ready to have sex. The world around them has changed and told them there doesn’t have to be consequences to their immature behaviors. We can just kill any consequence of your immature choice rather than holding you accountable. If you don’t think PP loves that more teens are sexually active, you are in severe denial. They don’t care about teens. They don’t care that teens are being used/molested by adults. PP care about money.
On average, what teens do you believe are happier, emotionally healthier and more stable? Those having sex or those abstaining?
How many folks who lost their virginity as a teen regret it? How many folks who remained virgins as teens regret it?
Do the math. Without a calculator even — something we old folks can do! (:
Really? Okay, let’s take a good look at this.
Firstly, I explained to Praxedes earlier that my statement “the people who are selected to undertake the training are assessed first (being a post-abortive whore isn’t a requirement), then given extensive training in a number of areas” was made because “I was just demonstrating that it isn’t a requirement that they be sexually active or have had an abortion.”
Did you want to be a PP peer counsellor?
Secondly, while there may be a small number of post-abortive women who could be considered ‘whorish’ in their behavior, the fact is that the vast majority of post-abortive women are not at all ‘whorish’. By the same token, not all ‘whorish’ women would be post-abortive. You would know this as well as I do.
So for you to even allude to a presumption that I said such a thing of you only leads me to consider that you lack intellectual rigour or veracity in your approach to the matter, much like someone who would state “the-only-good-baby-is-a-dead-baby camp” in regards to pro-choicers, knowing only too well that all but an infinitesimal number harbor no such thought.
Praxedes, I agree with the main gist of your comment. I don’t agree that sex is a main contributing factor of some of the things you mentioned? Piercings and tattoos? And honestly, I have seen drug and alcohol use tend to cause risky sexual behavior, not the other way around.
“And they were better off all around for not having sex at an early age.” – were they really? Show me your psychology degree and I’ll show you mine.
My what a vast array of social ‘ills’ you attribute to people having sex before they’re 21! Or is it 30?
When did that first film about the ‘horrors and dangers’ of pot use come out? 1950’s? Earlier.
How about you ask some of those 90 year olds about this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flapper
Remember when Elvis first appeared on television?
You speak of an era when hypocrisy reigned supreme. When women were ‘kept in their place’. When child and spouse abuse was the silent if not invisible weapon of control.
There is nothing intrinsically bad about pre-marital sex. Rape within marriage was quite common.
Remember when women could obtain little sachets of animal blood to help them pass the ‘post-wedding bedsheet inspection’?
“The fear was there because teens are not emotionally, mentally, spiritually and sometimes not physically ready for sex” – no, the fear was because of the potential retribution from the self-appointed arbiters of society.
“Teens haven’t changed in the sense that they are more ready to have sex.” – what about when 12 and 14 year olds were married off?
“The world around them has changed and told them there doesn’t have to be consequences to their immature behaviors” – who says they are ‘immature’ behaviors?
“If you don’t think PP loves that more teens are sexually active, you are in severe denial.” – you do realise that conspiracy theorists don’t get taken seriously don’t you?
“On average, what teens do you believe are happier, emotionally healthier and more stable? Those having sex or those abstaining? How many folks who lost their virginity as a teen regret it? How many folks who remained virgins as teens regret it?” – who can be sure, not I and not you.
Hi Reality,
You do know what a smiley face means don’t you????
I could care less whether you think or feel or believe that post abortive women are whores or whorish. Or not.
But the fact remains that you wrote it, dude. Easier to blame the reader’s intelligence than take responsibility for your words? Own it and then put a sock in it.
Reality says:
“And they were better off all around for not having sex at an early age.” – were they really? Show me your psychology degree and I’ll show you mine.
***************************************************
Teens that don’t have sex are much better off than those that do. Even the “safest” sex in the world can’t protect them from what happens in their BRAINS while being intimate. Not only is abstinence until marriage healthiest physically, it’s healthiest from a mental standpoint as well. I heartily recommend this book for ALL parents and anyone else interested in the topic.
http://www.amazon.com/Hooked-Science-Casual-Affecting-Children/dp/0802450601
After reading this book I concluded that we are wired to bond with just one sex partner, especially woman. As a believer in God, it makes perfect sense to me that God would design us in such a way. The book doesn’t talk about God or us being wired for only one partner. It simply covers the science of what happens in the brain during intimacy, and what happens when those bonds are broken again and again through having multiple sex partners.
Jack, I can’t be sure what causes what with teens but I have been working with teens for some time now and when I first started I was shocked at the difference from when I was a teen.
There is a darkness surrounding many teens that I believe does stem from issues like early sex, molestation, porn exposure, abortion. So much depression and anger. Cutting was not heard of when I was growing up. Aids was not heard of. I was shocked when I first heard of “friends with benefits” and group sex among middle schoolers! We were big stuff if we held hands with a boy at the roller rink in high school!
I agree that alcohol/drugs cause risky sexual behaviors as well and then the two feed off each other. I don’t believe that deep down teens feel good about their sexual behaviors so they use more drugs/alcohol and it just circles. Most teens who have sex and then break up with that partner will be sexually active with the next one. They seem to go from sexual relationship to sexual relationship. I think many teens use because they have been molested/raped or abused. I know that is when I started to drink heavily. I believe more should be done to prosecute those who knowingly provide drugs and alcohol to underage people.
Reality, I see that girls are still “kept in their place.” The disrespect of young women is atrocious. WAY worse than it was when I was in high school in the early 80s at least in my area. I think many girls are becoming immune to it. I’ve asked girls what they think about comments that I hear boys make to them and about them and they seem oblivious. I don’t dispute that it was bad in your era, Reality, I’m just saying that I believe it is still bad but in a different way. Abortion did not empower women.
“My what a vast array of social ‘ills’ you attribute to people having sex before they’re 21! Or is it 30?”
I thought we were talking teenagers. I know I was and thought you were too. Sorry if I confused you in any way.
“no, the fear was because of the potential retribution from the self-appointed arbiters of society.”
Maybe in some cases. I didn’t have sex as a teen because I wasn’t ready to be a parent and I knew that sex could cause that. I also planned on saving myself for my future husband and knew that the boys around me were not thinking of commitment. If you want to behave like an adult, you should be ready to face responsibility like one.
“who says they are ‘immature’ behaviors?”
Do you think kids who can’t even afford their own bc should be having sex?
“what about when 12 and 14 year olds were married off?”
Do you think this was in their best interest? I don’t.
“you do realise that conspiracy theorists don’t get taken seriously don’t you?”
How many kids do you think PP tells, “you are worth waiting for.”? How many kids does PP tell, “stay away from porn, it’s not
“who can be sure, not I and not you.”
I work with teens. I see the choices of those who are sexually active and those who aren’t. I see those who carry a heaviness around them and those that don’t. I see who are the drama kings and queens and emotional cripples.
I have zero regrets about choosing to remain a virgin as a teen and am glad I was encouraged to do so by caring adults in my life. You?
In the context in which you used the smiley face Carla, it would normally appear to indicate that you did possess an understanding that what I said did not mean that I thought all post-abortive women to be ‘whorish’. Or all ‘whorish’ women to be post-abortive.
Yet it would seem I was right to be reticent about accepting that indication, as evinced by your later statement “But the fact remains that you wrote it, dude. Easier to blame the reader’s intelligence than take responsibility for your words? Own it and then put a sock in it.” – which appears to indicate that you either didn’t read my words, didn’t understand them, or chose to respond in a somewhat less than honest fashion. Which is it?
Lrning, I took a quick look at the book you provided a link to, some reviews of it and the backgrounds of its authors.
It would appear that apart from those who like abstinence programs and those who are of the same mindset, such as advocates against non-marital sex, it is not highly regarded.
“it assumes that correlation implies causation”
“the psuedoscientific speculation that the book seems to use in supporting a particular view”
“A lot of the science in the book was biased, open to debate, and lacked real evidence.”
“saying ridiculous things such as…..sex is similar to cocaine. Cocaine actually blocks the dopamine receptors …..Sex, simply just releases neurotransmitters such as dopamine”
“they came at the task with a very definite agenda, one that seems to skew the results and thus makes their work ultimately not very credible”
“Joe McIlhaney, a Bush-appointed advisor to the CDC, has teamed up with Freda Bush (no relation but another Dubya advisor) to write this highly sex-negative book. Both are known to be abstinence-only advocates, and McIlhaney even had the audacity to testify to Congress that compehensive sex education did not work despite much evidence that it actually does”
“This book is full of pseudoscience designed to promote a particular philosphical belief. If you are expecting any actual scienctific analysis look elsewhere”
“There is a darkness surrounding many teens that I believe does stem from issues like early sex, molestation, porn exposure, abortion.” – you believe. How scientific.
“Cutting was not heard of when I was growing up.” – I heard of it. You need to remember that many things such as this simply weren’t widely ‘exposed’.
“Aids was not heard of.” – neither were a lot of things. The first AIDS case is currently known to have been in 1959.
“I was shocked when I first heard of “friends with benefits” and group sex among middle schoolers!” – so was I until the lady I went on to marry told me about what some people she knew were doing – in 1975.
“I agree that alcohol/drugs cause risky sexual behaviors as well” – me too.
“I don’t believe that deep down teens feel good about their sexual behaviors so they use more drugs/alcohol and it just circles.” – I don’t agree.
“Most teens who have sex and then break up with that partner will be sexually active with the next one” – well duh, how often do people stop doing something they find pleasurable once they’ve started.
“I don’t dispute that it was bad in your era, Reality, I’m just saying that I believe it is still bad but in a different way.” – well yes, history shows us this. There are still ‘bad’ things.
“Abortion did not empower women.” – yeah, it did.
“I thought we were talking teenagers” – we were. Perhaps I should have said “having sex before they’re 20! Or is it 30?” because it is sex below that age that to which you attribute various social ills.
“I didn’t have sex as a teen because I wasn’t ready to be a parent and I knew that sex could cause that.” – and nowadays that risk is lessened.
“I also planned on saving myself for my future husband” – completely your choice.
“knew that the boys around me were not thinking of commitment” – not all females think that sex requires commitment either.
“If you want to behave like an adult, you should be ready to face responsibility like one.” – yes, deal with it, not avoid it.
“Do you think kids who can’t even afford their own bc should be having sex?” – there are adults who can’t afford bc! What an odd deciding factor.
“yeah, it did”
This is your belief. What you believe is empowering is way different than what I believe is empowering.
I didn’t need to kill my children in order to become equal to proabort boy-men.
“What you believe is empowering is way different than what I believe is empowering.” – well obviously. Isn’t it great that we have diversity and choice.
“I didn’t need to kill my children in order to become equal to proabort boy-men.” – I think you’ll find that women who choose abortion aren’t seeking to be equal to ‘proabort boy-men’.
I didn’t need to promote forced gestation in order to become equal to patriarchal power-mongers.
I wonder what the life expectancy is for conjoined twins? Either way, how amazing!
“I didn’t need to promote forced gestation in order to become equal to patriarchal power-mongers.”
Right. Your power comes in promoting the killing of the youngest humans among us under the guise of caring about women. What a man you are. You’ve fooled your share of naive women in your life I am sure. “Do whatever you want, honey. I trust you! It’s your body after all” or “Do what you want sweetheart, but since it is your body and your choice, don’t expect me to help out. This isn’t what I wanted.”
REAL men are prolife and take care of and protect the lives they help create and don’t lay it all on women to take care of.
Why do you insist on coming here? There are zero prolife women here who will fall for your crap. Interesting how proabort boy-men can’t see that THEY ARE the patriarchal power-mongers.
“Abortion did not empower women.” – yeah, it did.
Reality…being “liberated” from your mother’s womb before you are sufficiently able to sustain your life on the outside is not very empowering. That medical waste bucket doesn’t empower anyone. My daughter is an empowered young woman today because I was an empowered young woman when I became pregnant with her and refused to sacrifice her life to make mine and that of her father’s more comfortable. Abortion isn’t empowering to women.
The only ‘power’ I possess or wish to possess is that which I have over myself. Unlike so many here who seek to have power over others.
I do not ‘promote’ the killing of fetuses. I promote and support the right of women to make their own choice.
I do not fool women, I’ll leave that to those who wish to control their choices and dictate how they lead their lives.
If I come across ‘naive’ women my aim is to inform them, not mislead them with propaganda aimed at restricting their choices to what someone else believes.
I’m one who says “do what you want, I will support you in whatever choice you make”. You will probably refuse to accept this because it won’t suit your little agenda that pro-choice men believe all pregnancies should be terminated and that women are only there for our pleasure. That is why you will lose.
Real men support women in whatever choices they make rather than dictate to them and attempt to control their fertility and lives.
“Interesting how proabort boy-men can’t see that THEY ARE the patriarchal power-mongers.” – an ad hominem and futile attack.
The fact that you had the ability and freedom to make that choice is your empowerment xalisae. For other women, theirs is that they do choose abortion.
Your daughter is an empowered young woman because she also has the ability and freedom to make a choice. What would your statement be if she was a son instead?
Despite the farcical fallacies stated here about pro-choicers, I am against men forcing women to have an abortion just as much as you are. I support womens right to choose.
that’s funny, because I didn’t feel that empowered BECAUSE I had to make that “choice”, I felt more empowered IN SPITE OF that fact.
It was a pretty hard fight attempting to maintain my power, pride, and confidence in the face of the horror of finding out that my gestating child’s life was not protected by law the same way mine was. It was the horror of learning that my parent(s) could’ve legally opted to have me killed as long as I was young enough that was absolutely world-shattering for me.
No, the fact that we as a gender and society as a whole can be accepting of such barbarism and practice such atrocities was not empowering. It was sickening to learn.
What would my statement be if she was a son instead? Being reminded that every man who is alive in the world today once clung to his mother is a testament to our raw power.
But, I happen to think there’s something sadly poetic about the one child who I was forced to have to “choose” being born a female. It’s almost amusing that I’m constantly told how empowering abortion is for females when I think about the fact that had she been aborted, she’d to this day be the only female I’d have ever known personally to be killed by violence-and it would’ve been a violence perpetrated against her by another woman: me.
“I didn’t feel that empowered BECAUSE I had to make that “choice”, I felt more empowered IN SPITE OF that fact” – fair enough. Not completely logical but it isn’t always so when it comes to this sort of thing.
“the horror of finding out that my gestating child’s life was not protected by law the same way mine was” – the law only says it’s your choice, no-one elses. You and your fetus are the only ones the law doesn’t stand between.
“the horror of learning that my parent(s) could’ve legally opted to have me killed as long as I was young enough that was absolutely world-shattering for me.” – yes, but they didn’t. And if they had then you would have no knowledge or ‘presence of mind’ that they did.
“No, the fact that we as a gender and society as a whole can be accepting of such barbarism and practice such atrocities was not empowering” – yet enslaving others according to your beliefs is?
“Being reminded that every man who is alive in the world today once clung to his mother is a testament to our raw power.” – raw power? And how empowering is that for a son?
“the one child who I was forced to have to “choose” ” – you weren’t forced to have to choose whether to keep your fetus or not. The choice is there if you want it but you simply have to say ‘there is no choice for me’.
“the horror of finding out that my gestating child’s life was not protected by law the same way mine was” – the law only says it’s your choice, no-one elses. You and your fetus are the only ones the law doesn’t stand between.
Yeah. And the law says that my mom can’t choose to kill me and have it be legal, as opposed to the fact that the law said it would’ve been legal for me to choose to kill my daughter back then, hence my observation that her life was not protected by the law to the same extent mine was at that time. Dur-hur. I WANTED the law to “stand between” someone who wanted to kill my daughter and her-even if that person was me.
“the horror of learning that my parent(s) could’ve legally opted to have me killed as long as I was young enough that was absolutely world-shattering for me.” – yes, but they didn’t. And if they had then you would have no knowledge or ‘presence of mind’ that they did.
Oh, well, that makes it all okay then! 9_9
No, Reality. Just because my parents didn’t doesn’t mean I’m okay with the fact that it would’ve been legal for them to do it if they HAD done it. The fact that I wouldn’t have known what they were doing at the time doesn’t make the fact that I would’ve had this life I’m living now taken from me unjustly back then. I also don’t support it being legal for someone to kill me if I’m sleeping or under anesthesia. “What they don’t know won’t hurt ’em!” is not a healthy life philosophy to maintain. Please get help.
yet enslaving others according to your beliefs is?
Umm…no. The reason I didn’t kill my daughter wasn’t because of some “belief”, it was that she’s a human being and that would’ve been a violation of her rights, regardless of whether or not I wanted her at that time. And, come to find out, carrying and bearing an “unwanted” child actually entailed no “enslavement” whatsoever. I was still able to go about my business, vote, seek employment, attend college, own property, etc. Fancy that.
“Being reminded that every man who is alive in the world today once clung to his mother is a testament to our raw power.” – raw power? And how empowering is that for a son?
I’m sorry, I thought we were talking about things that are empowering for WOMEN and how the oppressive patriarchy is actually on YOUR side of things even though you rant and rail to the contrary. Which is funny, considering you’re a man and pro-choice, and I’m a woman and pro-life. Like…a man who was oppressing me wanted me to get an abortion, and the child who would’ve been killed was female, and abortion’s supposed to be “empowering” and “liberating” to females. It’s just kinda got me tickled.
The act of giving life is liberating and empowering for women. You can’t understand that, because (1.)you are a man, and (2.) you spend all of your time here championing death. I’m sure this is all hard for you to understand. Giving life isn’t as empowering for the sons we bring into this world as it is for us, but it is for them to a lesser degree because they can respect us knowing we would never harm them just because it was legal, and it gives them value of themselves because WE value them as human beings even when “they wouldn’t know the difference”, as you stated earlier.
But…this was quite the tangent, Reality, since we were talking about WOMEN. Please do try and stay on topic in the future. I know exchanging with a woman who hasn’t let the machine of abortion-driven by the patriarchy-tarnish her strength and confidence must be frightening for you, but it’s important that you get this nonsense about abortion being “empowering” out of your head, because it’s absolute bullocks and it just makes you look ridiculous.
you weren’t forced to have to choose whether to keep your fetus or not. The choice is there if you want it but you simply have to say ‘there is no choice for me’.
If there is another option, legally, then you are choosing by default since there are no constraints on any action taken to the contrary. If killing her was urged as a course of action, and I had to say, “No, after giving this issue thought I will not kill her.”, I have made a choice, and one that was contrary to the choice which was advised/asked of me. I didn’t ignore everything for 9 months and then “oh, whuddaya know, a baby popped out!”. I’m sorry, but with abortion being legal, the “choice” you guys are talking about CONSTANTLY (you even put it in the name you’ve given your group, for crying outloud!) boils down to either killing your child, or not killing your child, and it is there by default EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
Even if it is someone who would never DREAM of getting an abortion, if there is not an express mandate by law defending every human being’s right to live, then that “choice” in “pro-choice” is there to say that every single gestating human being’s life is just a choice, and they can be killed and disposed of if you choose, or allowed to continue living if you choose.
It’s the same reason you don’t have protestors hanging out outside liquor stores begging people not to drive drunk. There are laws against drunk driving that protect bystanders from it and work to prevent people from doing it, so nobody HAS to do that, because the law has removed that as a valid choice. It’s either “drive sober, or not at all.” as far as the law is concerned-no choice about it.
I’m one who says “do what you want, I will support you in whatever choice you make”.
Absolutely believable! You take no responsibility in spite of being an equal partner in creating the child. You lay it all on her (then later you can say, “it’s what you wanted after all, sweety poo).
You’re just as bad as the guys who aggressively say, “Get rid of it.” You’re saying the same thing but just in a sickening sweet, passive way. Guys like you are a dime a dozen and I warn women to stay away from all boy-men.
No backbone. No set.
The fact that I wouldn’t have known what they were doing at the time doesn’t make the fact that I would’ve had this life I’m living now taken from me unjustly back then *acceptable.
Praxedes,
Any man who tells a woman it is “her choice” is hardly helping her. It is his excuse so he does not have to lift a finger to offer real help and support when she needs it the most. It is abandonment. She is left alone to often make the “choice” of abortion when she could have, in all reality raised that child with help and encouragement and his conviction to stand by her and do what is right for her and their child.
Cowardice. Plain and simple.
Boy-men is right.
“You’re saying the same thing but just in a sickening sweet, passive way. Guys like you are a dime a dozen and I warn women to stay away from all boy-men.”
Yes, because one must give birth at all costs. Even if a man gets a woman pregnant to keep her under his control. But no no, the pro-life “feminists” don’t talk about that end of the coercion spectrum because…babies. ’nuff said.
“I WANTED the law to “stand between” someone who wanted to kill my daughter and her-even if that person was me.” – why, did you not trust yourself?
“I also don’t support it being legal for someone to kill me if I’m sleeping or under anesthesia. “What they don’t know won’t hurt ‘em!” is not a healthy life philosophy to maintain.” – me neither, unless the person concerned has made a clear and specific request that this be done. “Please get help.” – not required.
“it was that she’s a human being and that would’ve been a violation of her rights, regardless of whether or not I wanted her at that time.” – that would be a belief then.
“I was still able to go about my business, vote, seek employment, attend college, own property, etc. Fancy that.” – good for you. It isn’t like that for everyone, so they make their own choice.
“the oppressive patriarchy is actually on YOUR side of things” – no its not, its on the side of those who would oppress women for reasons of power and control.
“I know exchanging with a woman who hasn’t let the machine of abortion-driven by the patriarchy-tarnish her strength and confidence must be frightening for you,” – actually its more amusing, mixed with mild surprise that you allow yourself to be fooled by the patriarchal constructs that you support.
“but it’s important that you get this nonsense about abortion being “empowering” out of your head, because it’s absolute bullocks and it just makes you look ridiculous.” – it’s not nonsense. What’s nonsense is falling for the lies that are used to enslave women via the denial of their control of their own fertility.
“You take no responsibility in spite of being an equal partner in creating the child” – do you not understand what the word ‘support’ means then?
“Guys like you are a dime a dozen and I warn women to stay away from all boy-men. No backbone. No set.” – more ad hominem and futile slurs.
“Any man who tells a woman it is “her choice” is hardly helping her.” – why? If he offers to support her whatever her choice then he is helping her. Or do you prefer that the man make the decisionn for her? You people keep ranting about men who pressure women to abort and then you still rant when a man says that it is the womans decision and he will support her choice. You just can’t deal with it.
“It is his excuse so he does not have to lift a finger to offer real help and support when she needs it the most. It is abandonment.” – balderdash!
“She is left alone to often make the “choice” of abortion when she could have, in all reality raised that child with help and encouragement and his conviction to stand by her and do what is right for her and their child.” – which is where the ‘I will support your choice’ comes into it.
“Cowardice. Plain and simple.” – oh yawn.
“Boy-men is right.” – and ‘flock’ seems pretty accurate sometimes too.
why, did you not trust yourself?
It has nothing to do with that. Did you miss the bit where I said I objected passionately to the lack of lawful protection and recognition as a human being that my daughter experience in utero?
Oh, I guess slaves should’ve just been content with being able to be free in non-slave states and just trusted the white man instead of fighting for recognition of their humanity by law. Riiiight.
me neither, unless the person concerned has made a clear and specific request that this be done.
Not if you support legal abortion. But keep lying to yourself. It’s cute.
– that would be a belief then.
No, it’s a recognition of fact. I can see how you could confuse that with “belief” though, since your position is based entirely upon treating your personal belief as fact.
It isn’t like that for everyone, so they make their own choice.
Um, the inverse isn’t true for ANYONE. I don’t know one person who has their property taken from them, is barred from attending classes, etc., just because they are pregnant. You’re delusional.
– no its not, its on the side of those who would oppress women for reasons of power and control.
“NO U!” Great rebuttal, buddy.
Oppression? Power? Control? Have you been reading ANYTHING I’ve been saying about WHY I vote how I vote, and support Pro-Life like I do? Exactly what about what I have been trying to tell you expresses a desire to “oppress” us so that I can gain power/control? How does wanting lawful recognition and protection of human rights for gestating human beings like my children once were translate to that?! Are you daft?
actually its more amusing, mixed with mild surprise that you allow yourself to be fooled by the patriarchal constructs that you support.
If I’m being duped so badly, please explain to me how aborting my daughter would’ve been empowering to either of us as women. ENLIGHTEN ME, MASSAH!
What’s nonsense is falling for the lies that are used to enslave women via the denial of their control of their own fertility.
“nuh-uh!” – once again, masterful rebuttal, good sir! 9_9
Also, you are DEFINITELY talking to the wrong Pro-Lifer about us being allowed control of our own fertility. I support contraception and have my tubes tied, dude. I’m all about controlling some fertility. HOWEVER, we are talking about ABORTION. That means that the women in question (myself included) have already exhibited their fertility, and that fertility has thwarted attempts at being controlled. You are simply advocating that women be allowed to IGNORE that failure at the cost of another human being’s life, and that I cannot abide.
Once again, no enslavement. No oppression. Just your paranoid delusions about women being shackled to their ovens/kitchen sinks and thinking that somehow paying enough blood of their own children will prevent this non-existent threat.
We just want the killing to stop. Get real, Reality.
“Did you miss the bit…..” – no, nor did I miss the bit where you said “I WANTED the law to “stand between” someone…..even if that person was me.”
“Not if you support legal abortion.” – a fetus isn’t a person. But keep lying to yourself. Although it’s not exactly cute.
“No, it’s a recognition of fact.” – no, its still just your belief that “it was that she’s a human being and that would’ve been a violation of her rights.”
“I can see how you could confuse that with “belief” though, since your position is based entirely upon treating your personal belief as fact.” – and you are doing….?
“Um, the inverse isn’t true for ANYONE.” – um, yes it is actually. They may not physically be able to attend classes or work due to medical impacts of pregnancy. They may lose a job due to their pregnancy or impacts that arise from it. They may fall behind or even out of study they are undertaking. They may even be rejected by their family. There are a number of potential negative impacts.
“NO U!” Great rebuttal, buddy.” – yet it contained more words and meaning than what you have written as a response.
“Are you daft?” – and here you are telling women that they must continue an inwanted pregnancy with all the impacts that potentially go with it.
“please explain to me how aborting my daughter would’ve been empowering to either of us as women” – as I have said more than once, it is your ability to choose whether or not to continue with an unplanned/unwanted pregnancy that empowers you. What you do with that choice is the delivery of that empowerment. Rather than someone else saying ‘no, no, you mustn’t’ or ‘yes, yes, you must’.
“once again, masterful rebuttal, good sir! 9_9” – and again, an inability to respond other than with a poor attempt at a bon mot.
“Get real, Reality.” – I am, abortion has always been with us and always will. It was made legal because the majority want it so. There are those who wish to control women by any means so that there is a 50% less chance of their power, control and authority being challenged. Those who would stop abortion, followed closely by those who would outlaw contraception, followed by those who would ban sex outside of marriage.
“Even if a man gets a woman pregnant to keep her under his control.”
Even if a woman gets pregnant on purpose to keep him under his control.
Men don’t have a say about whether their child lives or dies. If she lies and told him she was on the pill, has an IUD, is fixed, or is infertile and becomes pregnant why shouldn’t he get to have a say? She gets to choose even if she gets pregnant to keep him under her control.
Oh that’s right. Because we TRUST WOMEN and because it’s HER BODY. Even though we all know that not all women are trustworthy and it’s not her body that dies during an abortion.
Your right about one thing though, Megan. Abortion is all about control. “I wasn’t able to control my actions but I’m damn well going to control whether this kid lives or dies — because that will empower me and my gender.” Gag.
I do wonder what a pro-life guy is supposed to do if the woman pregnant with his child wants to abort, though. You can’t exactly force her to remain pregnant. It’s a sad situation all around.
Dear Jack,
Their stories are the most heart breaking for me. They begged and pleaded with their girlfriends or their wives to NOT do it. They wanted their child to live. They offered help and support and anything and everything so they could parent that child. I have read that they were on their knees with tears running down their faces asking one more time…..
And she went ahead with the abortion.
There is a book of letters a man wrote to his child. The child that he loved and wanted that was aborted. The child he still loves and wants.
If I find the title I will link to it.
“I do wonder what a pro-life guy is supposed to do if the woman pregnant with his child wants to abort, though.”
A pro-life guy sleeping with a woman who calls herself pro-choice is just not thinking clearly and is taking a risk, and unfortunately it is the child’s life that ends up at risk.