Quote of the Day 12-30-10
To have a group of OB/GYN doctors terminating fetuses just outside our door, to force our mothers and their babies [to] drive through a common driveway, driving by the front of an abortion clinic, in order to park in our lot to have their babies cared for is an atrocity.
We are here to prevent infant diseases, and they are here to end infant lives. We may not have the legal right to get them to move but we will do anything in our power to vocalize our personal disgust with their mission.
~Pediatrician Dr. Steve Brinn, commenting on abortionist Martin Haskell’s recent move next door to Brinn’s practice in Sharonville, OH, as quoted by Baptist Press, December 29
Dec.30, 2010 7:00 am |
Quote of the Day |
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 join you in vocalizing my personal disgust with their mission!!
In a way I think being next to a pediatrician’s office wont really help this abortion business. Mother’s who will be walking in to have an abortion might just change their mind once they see other parents bringing their children to the pediatrician’s office…I hope this would be the case…
I agree with Jm. This may be a blessing. To put a human face on what they are doing.
Good for Dr. Brinn.
Someone needs to tell that doctor that they’re not infants, they’re just clumps of cells. 9_9
Here’s hoping that Dr Brinn takes advantage of every square inch of wall, fence and window space in his practice that’s visible from the vantage point of those entering the abortion facility. I’d suggest some lovely fetal development pictures and facts, the number of the local PRC, and perhaps an offer to give free ultrasounds and ongoing help to any of Dr Haskell’s patients. Another option would be if he was to donate the space to a PRC and move his practice to a quieter spot.
Dr Haskell isn’t very smart, or he’s desperate (or both!). There’s a reason PRCs try to set up right next to abortion facilities- because we know that even at the last possible moment, abortion seeking women change their minds. Sometimes they go to the clinic still looking for a way out. Dr Brinn’s office has just become a prime pro-life battlefield.
I just wish Dr. Brinn hadn’t said “terminating fetuses”. As a pediatrician, he should know it’s “killing babies”.
Given that he says later in the quote “they are here to end infant lives” I don’t think it’s fair to suggest he is engaging in verbal side-stepping.
I’m excited about 2011…looking forward to some great battles/confrontations with the pro-child killing mob.
I like Dr. Brinn’s spirit.
I hear you Pamela because the abortion advocates use the word ‘fetus’ a lot, and to them it helps them to not think of it as a ‘baby.’
However, I am so pleased that Dr. Brinn took the initiative to complain. I’m also pleased that the Baptist Press not only published this story, but they also describe what a ‘partial birth abortion’ is. I was talking to a group of 20-something women earlier this year and they had no idea how such an abortion was done. They were horrified and speechless when I described it. People need to know how violent and cruel abortions are.
ninek,
I have had the same experience. While talking with some prolifers(in name only)they simply had no idea what a PBA was!!
Go Dr. Brinn! You sound like a conscientious and caring physician. Very rare these days.
If I was a mom troubled with the abortion decision and unsure with what I was about to do (as most are… their own words) I think seeing children and babies going in with their parents to the pediatricians would make me rethink what I was about to do. So you are spot on JM.
Alice, I wasn’t suggesting ANYTHING. It was merely a comment. I appreciate what the doctor was saying, I said I just WISH he hadn’t used those particular words. Don’t assign me “ulterior motives”. Than You, Ninek, for “havin’ my back”. ;)
Having grown up in a country where an innate morality & common decency and not religious fervour is the norm I can only wonder at some of the comments that are published on this thread (and Jill Stanek your website). Whilst everyone has the right to their opinion – whether prompted by religious beliefs or not – I have to say that I think it most unChristian to state that one of your fans ‘look[s] forward to battles/confrontations with the child killing mob’. Surely this callous attitude is exactly the one that you believe you are striving against.
The posters that you use to form your argument against abortion appear to be devoid of certain facts. The majority of women have terminations in their first trimester, whilst the pictures you show are foetuses are more advanced. Does this not misrepresent the true case and put you in the same light as those that you accuse? What do you say to women that have fallen pregnant through rape? Who do not have the emotional strength or monetary advantages to look after an unborn child when they find pregnancy upon them? Would your answer to this be that the women have the children cannot look after them and we find more children in care being left with no proper carers, role models or more children with no feeling of self-worth in the world?
No woman takes the decision of termination easily, it is well thought through and based on logical reasoning of her circumstances. To stand outside an abortion clinic and make someone feel that they cannot go in due to a marauding crowd outside is not an acting on behalf of God but simply bullying – the very thing that you are accusing the doctors of who provide a service to women who are making a very difficult decision.
It seems that your anti-abortion stance is not so black and white, rather that it is more to do with the misguided belief that these women are promiscuous. What happened to Christian forgiveness & understanding? According to the Bible only God is infallible. People make errors of judgement and no-one should think themselves above this
Oh, well then, cool. I think we are on the same page, then. :)
What I really like about this quote is that I think the abortionist’s relocation to be right next door to a pediatrician is an attempt to play into the usual abortion apologist’s narrative of abortion being part of a comprehensive medical package that churns out happy little families with perfect little lives. But nobody fits into that narrative better than a pediatrician, and to have the doctors who do the real work of looking after the health of mothers and children so loudly, publicly, and vehemently reject the abortion-is-a-good-thing line is just fantastic. Not only is this a rejection of abortion, it’s a direct assault on the entire “pro-choice, pro-hearts, pro-rainbows” line.
UK
December 30th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I’m not going to reply to all of your post, partially because you seem to be trying to group the entire pro-life movement (which is an anti-establishment movement, which makes it diverse and slightly disorganized, just by the very nature of what anti-establishment movements are) onto one website.
So, instead, I’m going to grab your last two paragraphs, which are…problematic, to say the least.
No woman takes the decision of termination easily, it is well thought through and based on logical reasoning of her circumstances. To stand outside an abortion clinic and make someone feel that they cannot go in due to a marauding crowd outside is not an acting on behalf of God but simply bullying – the very thing that you are accusing the doctors of who provide a service to women who are making a very difficult decision.
It seems that your anti-abortion stance is not so black and white, rather that it is more to do with the misguided belief that these women are promiscuous. What happened to Christian forgiveness & understanding? According to the Bible only God is infallible. People make errors of judgement and no-one should think themselves above this
Okay, first off, let’s simplify this, so that I can get an easier handle on the argument you’re trying to make.
Item: Women struggle to make the decision to abort.
Item: Protesting outside of abortion offices is intrinsically threatening.
Item: Pro-lifers accuse abortionists of bullying women into abortions.
Item: Pro-lifers do not oppose abortion based on moral reasons, but rather because they feel women who abort are promiscuous.
Item: Pro-lifers are religious, but not forgiving.
Item: Human beings are fallible.
Conclusion 1: Because women struggle so much to make the decision to abort, any abortion actually undergone is morally defensible.
Conclusion 2: Pro-lifers are hypocrites since they bully people away from abortion offices but accuse abortionists of bullying women into them.
Conclusion 3: Pro-lifers are hypocrites since they are religious but do not forgive promiscuous women.
Conclusion 4: Pro-lifers are human and can not therefore be certain they are morally correct.
That’s…a lot of items.
Okay, as to your first conclusion, it’s based on a faulty premise. Actually, all of them are, but I’ll get to the others in turn. In fact, you point out the problem with this conclusion yourself. People make mistakes. The fact that someone agonizes over a decision does not protect them from making the wrong decision. In fact, if it were impossible to make a wrong decision, there would be no agony in the deciding. Furthermore, there are numerous examples of women who do choose to abort for frivolous, spurious, selfish, and downright idiotic reasons. It’s not the norm, but it most definitely does happen. This conclusion is self-destructing.
Second, protesting, regardless of location, is not intrinsically threatening. True, a protest does express displeasure, but displeasure is not intrinsically threatening, either. To suggest that any protesting group, regardless of what they are trying to say, must not express that displeasure in ways that actually make an impact on the thing they’re trying to change smacks of censorship and has no place in a democratic society. But even if it were intrinsically threatening, this would only make pro-lifers hypocrites. It would not justify the conclusion that abortion is therefore morally defensible. And since the primary pro-life claim is that it is not, even if this conclusion were not false, it does not undermine the pro-life position.
Third, not all pro-lifers are religious. Many are post abortive. Lots of pro-lifers who are religious have very close pro-life and pro-choice friends who are not religious and are promiscuous, and those friendships persist, promiscuity notwithstanding. This conclusion is based on stereotyping, generalizations, assumptions, and twaddle. I am not offended, but it is offensive and I would recommend never saying it again.
Fourth, the fact that humans can make mistakes does not call into question every single bit of knowledge ever assembled by humanity. It is possible to claim knowledge without claiming omniscience. The fact that you can be wrong about things does not mean you are wrong about a particular thing. Pro-lifers do not claim to know everything. We claim to know that killing children is wrong. I suck at quantum mechanics, but the baby-killing thing I’ve got down.
Maybe you’re a troll and this post will make no difference to you. But I don’t get the troll vibe from you, so hopefully that won’t be the case. I hope you had a Merry Christmas and have a Happy New Year.
What do you say to women that have fallen pregnant through rape? Who do not have the emotional strength or monetary advantages to look after an unborn child when they find pregnancy upon them? Would your answer to this be that the women have the children cannot look after them and we find more children in care being left with no proper carers, role models or more children with no feeling of self-worth in the world?
First of all, self-worth is just that, the worth you’ve given or earned for yourself. I know plenty of people who have more self-worth than they deserve, in good and bad living situations.
Now, as for the “what would you say to…” questions….
Take every woman on an abortionist’s table for the last 2 days. Imagine that they were removed from those situations, and it is 8 years down the line. Now, you’re standing in front of every roughly 7 or 8 year old child that is the result of that action. How do you TELL THEM that they should be dead, and that you’re ok with that? How do you TELL THEM that you really would’ve preferred their mothers had had the choice to kill them?
Having grown up in a country where an innate morality & common decency and not religious fervour is the norm I can only wonder at some of the comments that are published on this thread (and Jill Stanek your website).
So, your innate morality and common decency must tell you that killing unborn human life is fine and dandy. How nice of you to just pick a thread at RANDOM where you could lob your pro-choice grenade over the wall. :D Do you have anything to say about the topic on THIS thread? If you actually read the threads, you will find many of us do not need to use any religious reasoning whatsoever for our pro-life stance. There are atheists and agnostics among us as well.
The posters that you use to form your argument against abortion appear to be devoid of certain facts. The majority of women have terminations in their first trimester, whilst the pictures you show are foetuses are more advanced.
What posters? Are you talking about photos of first trimester humans like these, at 7 weeks? http://www.first-care.org/issues/fetaldevelopment/tabid/1091/Default.aspx If not, I have no idea what posters you’re referring to.
Does this not misrepresent the true case and put you in the same light as those that you accuse?
No one is misrepresenting the facts here. Abortion kills 1st, 2nd, and 3rd trimester developing humans. And frankly, no matter what photos or posters we choose to use, pro-aborts continue to claim that they are “fake.” (As if chopped up arms and dismembered limbs are too far-fetched a thing to think might be present when a first trimester child – who HAS all those parts – is dismembered in utero.)
What do you say to women that have fallen pregnant through rape? Who do not have the emotional strength or monetary advantages to look after an unborn child when they find pregnancy upon them? Would your answer to this be that the women have the children cannot look after them and we find more children in care being left with no proper carers, role models or more children with no feeling of self-worth in the world?
Would it matter to you what we said? You would still believe in the right of a woman to kill her unborn child for any reason whatsoever. 2% of all abortions are rape and incest cases. 2%. But even if it weren’t that small a percentage, please explain to me how any child should be punished for the crimes of her father. Please explain to me how anything I do or do not say could change the fact that a growing, living human being is killed during an abortion.
No woman takes the decision of termination easily
Clearly, you’ve not spoken with many women who have aborted. Many look at it as no more than a minor surgical procedure. And in one breath, you’ve said “Oh, you’re disingenuous, because you only show 2nd trimester fetal photos, and abortion doesn’t really look like THAT,” implying abortion must be no big deal because most women have them so early, but in the next breath, you’ve said it’s not an easy decision. Well, why not? If it’s just a little blob of nothing, then why the difficulty?
it is well thought through and based on logical reasoning of her circumstances.
Once again, clearly you have not spoken to many women who have aborted or considered abortion. 60% of all abortions are coerced in some way.
To stand outside an abortion clinic and make someone feel that they cannot go in due to a marauding crowd outside is not an acting on behalf of God but simply bullying – the very thing that you are accusing the doctors of who provide a service to women who are making a very difficult decision.
Many women have thanked those sidewalk counselors (most of whom are standing, peacefully praying and offering fetal development literature to women outside clinics, and many even offer to adopt their babies and pay for all expenses, did you know that?) for being there. Many women have admitted that had those prayerful protestors NOT been there, they would have made the biggest mistake of their lives.
If you object to religious zealotry, why bring up God or what you believe to be a “godly” or “ungodly” attitude? It always makes me laugh when those who have such disdain for religion seek to wield it as a weapon against those who actually have faith.
It seems that your anti-abortion stance is not so black and white, rather that it is more to do with the misguided belief that these women are promiscuous.
i have absolutely no idea where you’re getting this. Did you make this up?
No one has to be promiscuous in order to consider an abortion. However, are you aware that at least half of all women obtaining abortions are not doing so for the first time? They’re repeat offenders.
What happened to Christian forgiveness & understanding?
If someone is penitent and seeks forgiveness for their abortions (though from the way you’ve presented it, why would they need forgiveness if they’ve done nothing wrong??), believe me, they are welcomed with open arms. Many women here at Jill’s site had abortions in their past, sought forgiveness after many years of struggling, and are now helping others not to make the same mistake they did.
According to the Bible only God is infallible. People make errors of judgement and no-one should think themselves above this
Do you believe having an abortion may be an “error in judgment?” Do you believe God’s Word, which speaks multiple times about the unborn as human beings who are known by God? If you do not believe in God or in His Word, then you have no premise by which to speak to Christians about something you clearly know so little.
Apologies for the lengthy post.
Dear UK,
Welcome to Jill’s blog!
I’m sorry if it disheartens you, but there’s not much point in answering your points in great detail, as they have already been addressed here, thousands of times.
In a nutshell:
You’re right- a humble, gracious debate is best, but if you have a look around, you’ll discover that there are people who comment on this blog who believe that a child does not acquire the right not to be killed until their umbilical cord is cut. There are more who argue that inducing labour of an otherwise viable (if offered medical care) child and then leaving that child to die by neglect, or killing that child seconds before birth with a needle of poison to the heart or a pair of scissors to the back of the head.
We are mostly humble, gentle, gracious people here, willing to engage in rational debate, but when the subject matter strikes so close to the heart of who we are as humans, emotions occasionally get the better of us. Dr Haskell is a pioneer in the field of late-term abortions, and engages in practices that the vast majority of educated, rational human beings would be absolutely repulsed by.
I’m not sure which pictures and posters you are referring to. The embryology texts and fetal models that we use at my pregnancy resource centers are of humans of the age when most abortions take place, and are created with widely accepted, scientifically accurate data. The model of a 7 week fetus is about the size of a jellybean, and clearly has ten fingers and ten toes, a tiny face with eyes, nose, mouth and ears, and when we look at a human that age with our ultrasound machine, we hear a steadily beating heart and see just what the model shows, plus movement. If you are of the belief, as many visitors to this blog are, that abortion simply removes a “clump of cells,” then we invite you to join the rest of us in the 21st century. Wishing for something to be what it is not does not make it so.
But before I get completely lost down that rabbit trail, we do not oppose abortion because babies are cute. We oppose the killing of all innocent humans regardless of their size, level of development, environment, or degree of dependency because we believe in human equality based on our common DNA.
To the woman who conceives due to rape, I offer unconditional love, support, and trauma care, and would not wish upon her another act of violence, especially against her innocent child. I have friends who were conceived in rape. You are welcome to look them in the eye and tell them that they should have been killed because of what their evil father did to their mother. See http://www.conceivedinrape.com
However, since rape, incest and severe deformity accounts for less than 1% of abortions, can we please spend 99% of our time and energy focussing on the other abortions, which are mostly for social-economic reasons, on the offspring of women and their partners who had the option to prevent the pregnancy, but did not?
As for women who are pregnant in less than ideal circumstances, there are so many other options available to them that do not involve the destruction of their child. Most pro-choice people do not suggest that we should gas all the elderly because nursing homes are overcrowded and impersonal, or fire bomb refugee camps because there is nowhere for those people to go.
When human beings are faced with great challenges, we can either fight, or flight. The pro-life person fights- we find a way to birth our children, and we stretch, grow, mature, imagine, invent and achieve so much more than we ever thought ourselves capable of. We solve problems, make space, improve technologies, protect rights of all people equally and remind the world that women deserve better than abortion.
I am a true feminist. I am perfectly equal with men exactly as I am, while my womb is empty, or growing a child, or while I am raising that child to adulthood. I do not need an invasive surgery or poisonous medications to make me equal to a man. If my fertility makes me less than him, than it is society that needs to change, not my natural biology.
Yes, we all make errors of judgement. Yes, we should all be gracious to each other, speaking the truth in love, and leaving the judging to God. Yes, we should be offering each other unconditional care and compassion regardless of past mistakes.
Abortion is none of these. It is not loving, not caring, not compassionate. It is violent, ugly, unnatural, degrading, and as pro-choice-to-abort-humans people so often demonstrate, so abhorrent to us, that many hide behind euphemisms rather than embrace the truth.
It is not “Christian” as far as I understand it, to embrace the death of innocent people. It is not judgement to speak the truth, in love- that abortion kills human beings, and often hurts their mothers, fathers and all of the rest of us in the process. It is Christian to love your neighbour as yourself, even if that neighbour is newly conceived, even if that love comes at great personal cost.
I pray that you’re not just a one-time troll, and that you stick around, open your eyes and heart, and allow your thoughts and ideas to be challenged by a movement that truly wants the best for every single person on the face of this planet, born or unborn. Pregnancy is temporary, and each new life brings endless possibilities, but abortion brings death, forever. Choose life, so that you AND your children may live.
I appreciate that my comments on this post are far from the norm but I think debate upon issues are healthy. And Alice I appreciate the fact that you realise I may not be a troll :) Merry Xmas to you also but we just have differing opinions on a particular subject that is all.
Kel:
1) My innate morality and common decency does not compel me to launch any grenades over any such wall. I am merely commenting on the fact that this website is run and moderated by someone who has religious beliefs & you would be a fool to say that strong religious beliefs (or indeed any strongly held beliefs) do not govern thoughts and ideas of what are right and wrong.
2.)The poster that I am referring to is the one that is shown on this website and shows that of an advanced foetus, I cannot comment on the link that you gave as it does not work.
3) You state that abortion kills humans in 1st, 2nd and 3rd trimester. Most abortions are carried out in the first trimester when cells are mainly a zygote and not even formed as a foetus yet. Those taking place later are primarily done due to medical complications or due to the severe mental or physical distress of the mother. I would ask you the question that if you are so determined not to lose any life would you sacrifice the life of a mother who may die due to complications in order to save her child?
4) I reiterate that women do not take the choice of termination easily. Human beings are both logical and emotional creatures. Whilst one might think that things may turn out all rosy the logical conclusion is that they often don’t and I think it takes a strong minded individual to make this decision. I said the decision was difficult – not that it was wrong.
5) You say that 2% of abortions are rape & incest cases, please elaborate on where you gained this information? 2% in my opinion is still too high for crimes of this abominable nature – you say this as if it is justifiable due to the percentage. But 2% of what number of women suffer this? To answer your question: no child should be punished for the sins of their father but just as equally valid is why should the mother?
6) I would ask what this foetal development literature involved before I could draw a conclusion on whether I thought the women were being harassed on a public pavement by people who have no business telling them what to do.
7) I believe you contradict your own argument in regard to promiscuity. You detail that I must have made it up but then say that the majority of women who have abortion are ‘repeat offenders’. If this doesn’t smell of judgement and conviction I don’t know what does. Just to make a point women are entitled to have sex, enjoy it and to do it with whom they wish – just the same as men are. Ask yourself a question, would you be so quick to condemn if it was your body in this position?
8) You sought to remind me earlier that it was not a religious stance that you had and that you had many athiests who felt the same on this particular topic. Your word choice of ‘penitence and forgiveness’ does not seem wholly without religious fervour. There may be some women who regret having abortions in the past, I am not here to dispute that, but what I am saying is that there are many women who do not because the circumstances they found themselves in at the time meant that they decided they did not want to bring children in to this world – why should they be subjected to the regrets of others that they do not share?
9)I did not refer to an abortion as an ‘error of judgement’ what I referred to was perhaps the circumstances that led someone to be pregnant when they did not wish to bring a child into the world. To answer your other point, I may not believe in God but that does not mean that I know nothing of religion – to say that to someone show’s ones own ignorance of matters that they do not take care to learn because it does not fit with their beliefs.
I must also apologise for the lengthy post and also if I came across rudely in my first post. This was not the intention but merely to demonstrate a different point of view that seemed to be lacking in all the posts thus far on the blog. I respect other peoples opinions but I also expect them to respect mine. Kel, I hope this answers your questions..I have the feeling that you will make me aware if it does not.
Hi UK. Nice to talk with you.
“Most abortions are carried out in the first trimester when cells are mainly a zygote and not even formed as a foetus yet. ”
I don’t have any time right now, but one thing I would like to point out is that I think you mean “embryo” here, not zygote. When the organism in question is traveling towards implantation, it is a blastocyst and has already left teh zygote stage. After implantation, I believe it is then in teh embryo stage, and not in the fetal stage until maybe 8 weeks… Either way, I don’t believe we have any technology to even be able to detect pregnancy before implantation, so an abortion would be impossible. In fact, if one holds to the “implantation” definition of prgnancy, then it is a logical contradiction to talk about aborting a zygote. In any event, it is just a matter of semantics and doesn’t at all affect what you are saying, but it should be pointed out that you are talking about an embryo, not a zygote. God love you.
I am a true feminist. I am perfectly equal with men exactly as I am, while my womb is empty, or growing a child, or while I am raising that child to adulthood. I do not need an invasive surgery or poisonous medications to make me equal to a man. If my fertility makes me less than him, than it is society that needs to change, not my natural biology.
Woohoo! Rock on, Michelle! :D Awesome post.
2.)The poster that I am referring to is the one that is shown on this website and shows that of an advanced foetus, I cannot comment on the link that you gave as it does not work.
Could you give us a link to the particular page that contains the poster to which you refer? This site being what it is, pictures of the unborn in virtually every stage of development are relatively common, to understate the case.
Huh. That’s weird about that link not working. Hopefully this one will work: http://www.first-care.org/Portals/35/images/7Weeks.jpg
I would ask you the question that if you are so determined not to lose any life would you sacrifice the life of a mother who may die due to complications in order to save her child?
Efforts should be made to save both the life of the mother and her child. If the child dies as a secondary result of life-saving treatment offered to the mother, this is not an elective abortion. It is a tragedy, but not an elective abortion. Abortion, however, should not be the action taken to save the life of the mother.
You detail that I must have made it up but then say that the majority of women who have abortion are ‘repeat offenders’.
Because the majority of women having abortions are not having their first. They are having repeat abortions. This does not necessarily imply promiscuity. What it says to me is that there is no regret for their actions and they are utilizing it as a form of birth control.
You say that 2% of abortions are rape & incest cases, please elaborate on where you gained this information?
The Guttmacher Institute. http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html
2% in my opinion is still too high for crimes of this abominable nature – you say this as if it is justifiable due to the percentage.
Of course rape and incest are never justifiable. And neither is abortion. My point is that bringing up the smallest percentage in order to try and paint us as the most heartless of human beings is disingenuous. Most women are not in this situation when they abort.
But 2% of what number of women suffer this? To answer your question: no child should be punished for the sins of their father but just as equally valid is why should the mother?
The child has more to lose – his or her life. The mother does not stand to lose her existence. Killing an innocent person as a punishment is a little harsh, don’t you agree?
Your word choice of ‘penitence and forgiveness’ does not seem wholly without religious fervour.
Pardon me, but you are the one who brought up “forgiveness” in the first place. You stated: “What happened to Christian forgiveness & understanding?” If you didn’t want me to reference “forgiveness” then why did you bring it up? You remind me of my formerly atheist friend who used to get angry whenever he’d bring up God or church and I’d answer his questions, only for him to say, “Why does this always come up with you?!?” lol Don’t bring it up if you don’t want it addressed. Simple enough. :D
I did not refer to an abortion as an ‘error of judgement’ what I referred to was perhaps the circumstances that led someone to be pregnant when they did not wish to bring a child into the world.
You said, “According to the Bible only God is infallible. People make errors of judgement and no-one should think themselves above this” and to that I asked if you believed it was possible for an abortion to be an error in judgment. You said people make errors of judgment. Is it possible that a woman choosing to abort might be making that error of judgment you say no one is above?
Cha-Ching! That’s the first $2 toward the CPC’s. That would buy at least a couple diapers.
UK seems to have lumped up a whole basket of pro-abortion arguments. It would have been a lot easier to reply if UK had only picked a couple of issues, perhaps relating to the story about the pediatrician.
Sidewalk counselors are very different from the angrier-gory-signs-yelling type of folks. Honestly I see less and less of that and more peaceful demonstration. I can speak for the people I have stood with – we gather at the clinics not to bully but because children are being murdered. Healthy women are electing to kill healthy developing babies. I’m so sick of explaining the difference between for example an ectopic pregnancy and an elective abortion but there is a difference. Too bad the abortion advocates turn a blind eye to it.
Hey UK,
I can see how a new visitor to this blog might consider my above post rather extreme. Allow me to clarify:
In order for you to understand the reasons for my pro-life sentiments, you would have to consider the following scenario: Imagine a physician who sets up shop as a women’s health provider. Picture him advertising “family planning” and attracting patients from a 50 mile radius. Now imagine that the service he provides is restructuring the size of families by killing the youngest members, children between the ages of 2 and 5.
Hideous? Criminal? Evil?
UK, we see no distinction between children above or below the cervix. We don’t believe location, geography, the child’s current state of development, a father’s unwillingness to provide for his family or the emotions of a mother in crisis have any bearing on the inherent worth of a precious innocent child. A person’s life begins at conception and as a man I am compelled to defend innocent children from being slaughtered.
I don’t know what circumstances in your life helped shape your advocacy for a women’s right to choose to kill her child or how much you’ve studied the issue.
Have you ever seen an abortion? That would be a good place to start. Study the videos posted here and here. Take a good look at the pictures of mutilated 8 or 10 or 12 week old fetuses here.
Hopefully, your conscience will instruct you that what you are observing is a horrific injustice. There is a very good chance however that your heart has been hardened through the lies propagated by the abortion industry and you will feel no empathy for these most vulnerable members of the human family. If the latter is the case, please be warned that by taking sides against these persons and supporting their genocide, as far as Heaven is concerned you are complicit in their slaughter.
But there’s hope for you UK. You don’t have to remain a member of the pro child-killing mob. Ask God for understanding and He will give it to you.
These children could use another voice to plead their case for justice.
All this talk about “terminations” and “fetuses” and “agonizing decisions” and “forgiveness” and “religious” and all the rest of it is very interesting but ultimately completely irrelevant. We do not use this kind of language or have this kind of “debate” with regard to any other crime. Only the crime of prenatal homicide is treated in this highly irrational and absurd way, for reasons which I cannot yet, even after all these decades of studying the subject of unborn human rights, quite fully comprehend.
The reality is this: We human beings are placental mammals and have an inalienable natural right to live according to our nature, to live a full human lifespan. As placental mammals, we live through an unborn stage and a born stage, both of which are intrinsic and necessary for our existence. Therefore, we have a fundamental right to live through all these necessary stages of our lives. Killing us at any point throughout our entire natural human lifespans therefore violates our rights and is a CRIME. This crime therefore should be completely prohibited and all those who commit or attempt to commit the crime of prenatal homicide should be prosecuted and subject to appropriate criminal penalties. This is exactly the same as the appropriate response for the crime of postnatal homicide.
All “arguments” advanced to rationalize the killing of human beings, whether born or unborn, are fallacies and have all been refuted repeatedly and relentlessly.
The only thing left to do is to prohibit the crime of prenatal homicide, as we already have with postnatal homicide, and enforce the law to stop this terrible and indefensible destruction of human beings.