They just don't have a clue.

.....and the freak show continues.

They have clues. They're just ignoring them because they're blinded by their self-deception.

Man, they really are mentally deranged aren't they?

Guess my brother is right.

Yeah, this is a pretty standard pro-choice argument. It should be obviously false -- and it is, to a pro-lifer -- but it continues to make the rounds of the pro-choice echo chamber.

In order to understand the argument, you have to understand the pro-choice mindset. Pro-choicers aren't thinking about unborn children. If they were, most of them would become pro-lifers. Pro-choicers are totally focused on the "choice" that a pregnant woman makes about whether or not to abort. If a pro-choicer thinks about the unborn child at all, s/he is usually looking for ways to disregard the child. As in: "Fetal defects mean that the z/e/f wasn't going to survive anyway...."

Once you understand the pro-choicers' focus on choice, then the silly argument starts to make a wee bit of sense. If the government can compel one choice -- not to abort -- then it can also compel the other choice. Then the only way to preserve free choice is to keep the government out of the decision altogether.

However, as Jill mentioned:
But specifically, any and all plans to outlaw abortion are solely based on the fact that the entity being aborted is a human being, a legal person....

... which is absolutely correct. This pro-choice argument has its roots in the fundamental inability of (some) pro-choicers to understand the pro-life position. We don't really care about "choice" ... we want to save children from being killed.

That's kind of a twisted argument.

Wow. You really are stupid aren't you? It was quite clear that Jill was writing in terms of legal arguments and that if a door closes on one thing, that then there is a cause and effect that opens the door to other things. Grab a dictionary, look up the hard words and perhaps you might understand. I doubt it. But maybe.

I wouldn't have put it as bluntly as Southern Pro, but I think it is entirely fair to say: beware of unintended consequences. Remove choice from a woman and give it to the government, and then what happens when the government changes its mind? I don't think it is twisted or deranged at all, especially in the age of a Bush administration that says one thing and then does the exact opposite, on a fairly regular basis.

Southern Pro,
yeah, kindof like OUR Jill's comparison to slavery...yep! definately opened that other door, didn't it? You're really from the south & can't grasp how silly the "other Jill's" concept is? Did you happen to skip right over the slavery part?

I think you may need more than just a dictionary!

Ray said, "Remove choice from a woman and give it to the government..."

Huh? How exactly would this "removal" equal the government getting the "choice".

Carnival Jill said, ..."that if we outlaw a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy, there is no legal argument against forcing a woman to terminate a pregnancy, or disallowing certain people from reproducing."

Huh? outlaw the woman's right because the baby would have the right to life! How on earth would the government then force a woman to terminate if its argument was that the baby has a right to life in the first place?

Disallowing certain people from reproducing because abortion is outlawed? Explain this one, please!

What are they putting in the drinks at this carnival?

That was an incredibly shallow reading of Jill's post. Perhaps you only read until you found a paragraph you could blatantly distort to suit your purposes?

Jill was addressing legal arguments. The legal arguments in favor of choice are predicated on constitutional rights to privacy. Once you deny a woman the right to privacy in regard to her own body, then a key component of individual liberty is lost.

She never said that the day after Roe v. Wade gets overturned women will be forced into abortions or sterilizations, she said that if you destroy the right to privacy, then there's no limit to what can be done to you.

Also, you should be careful when speaking about forced sterilization like it's all in the past. It may be illegal, but coerced sterilization happens in the US all the time.

As does coerced abortions.

Yes, coerced abortions happen too.

But, since the pro-choice movement doesn't promote coerced abortion, that's hardly a valid argument here.

CRUNCH!

Cap'n said, "the pro-choice movement doesn't promote coerced abortion"

no...they just coerce young, naive girls into having abortions to promote their "movement"

you know, ever since they outlawed the choice to murder and steal, I'm kinda afaid the government might force me to murder or steal.

absurd.

Jasper, what's absurd is letting the government decide who gets to have, or doesn't get to have, an abortion.

We'll I think the pro-choicers have a point here. I really worried that the government might make me steal one day. If they can prevent me from stealing, who's to say they can't make me steal.

..they realize that abortion is murder and the taking of a innocent human life (Note to Hal: without a trial or hearing), so they're coming up with othre excuses.

Guess what Hal? There are many instances already where the government tells us what we can do and what we can't do with our bodies.

Both sides fail. Pffttt. One side refuses to understand that for some it is very much about rights to their own body. And the other side can't understand for some in the opposition it isn't about controlling a woman's body at all.

Sad lot.

Jasper, what's absurd is letting the government decide who gets to have, or doesn't get to have, an abortion.

Posted by: Hal at January 2, 2008 5:13 PM----------------------- No. It's absurd that there are 1.3 million abortions a year.

"One side refuses to understand that for some it is very much about rights to their own body."

what about the rights of the unborn baby? Can I send my son out in the cold, he's using my resources to feed him and keep him warm.

Maybe you can stick around and enlighten us all Shayne.

Carrie: "Guess what Hal? There are many instances already where the government tells us what we can do and what we can't do with our bodies."

Usually, that's a bad idea that doesn't work out well.

Hal, I agree with you in most cases. I didn't agree when the government took those painkillers off the market a few years ago. Many people said that was their only relief and that they wanted to keep taking them knowing the risks. I was completely opposed to the government's response in that case. (I don't know if they ever put it back on the market). I do think that the government should get involved when another person's action could kill another, i.e. drunk driving. _

Carrie, I agree with the drunk driving example.

I don't know why the symbol "_" appeared at the end of my post. I am hoping it is not some kind of insult. If it is, I apoplogize Hal.

no insult I'm aware of. No need to apologize. Have a good night.

That clown picture is terrifying. I hate clowns. Eesh.

AB Laura:

A:Learn how to write a coherent sentence.
B:The slavery argument is stupid and nonsensical.

Erin,
I was thinking the same thing! That clown is really freaking me out!

Southern Pro, (carni at large),

In regards to A: Please show me where my sentence was not coherent? Oh wait..."southern pro"...I guess I'll have to type s l o w e r next time. my bad!

In regards to B: Slavery was an anaology to Carnival Jill's statement...not an argument. Here, I'll help you out...(typing slower now...)

analogy: a comparison between two things that are similar in some way, often used to help explain something or make it easier to understand

argument: debate or discussion about whether something is correct

...hope that helps!

BTW Southern Pro, I must say that your use of the "A" and "B" was pretty creative...no one has thought of that yet. Kudos to your originality!

"The slavery argument is stupid and nonsensical. "

no, it's perfect actually.

But specifically, any and all plans to outlaw abortion are solely based on the fact that the entity being aborted is a human being, a legal person, eradicating the legality of a China abortion syndrome in the U.S.

I dearly wish this were true, but the currently dominant legal strategy for outlawing abortion is to elect a president to appoint Supreme Court justices who will overrule Roe v. Wade on the grounds that there is no Constitutional right to privacy. The unborn child wasn't a legal person before Roe v. Wade and wouldn't be afterward, under this strategy.

Erin I am so with you on the clown picture. I have always hated them and wondered why. Now I know. Gah!

Jen R,

then why did Roe bother with the trimester issues 1st, 2nd etc. if that was the case.

btw: theres no such thing as a "right to privacy", it was invented to suit the pro-aborts needs.

Because it asserted that as the embryo/fetus became older and more *like* a human person, that protecting that person-like entity became a "compelling state interest" that could override the right to privacy in some cases. That doesn't mean that the unborn child was considered a legal person prior to the decision.

The right to privacy suits the needs of everyone who doesn't want their personal decisions (that do not impinge on the rights of others) subject to the whim of whoever can get enough political power.

Jen R, are you pro life???

Jen R wrote:
I dearly wish this were true, but the currently dominant legal strategy for outlawing abortion is to elect a president to appoint Supreme Court justices who will overrule Roe v. Wade on the grounds that there is no Constitutional right to privacy.

Okay, we have to be really precise here. There are two specific problems with the execrable state of abortion law in the United States:
First -- and most important -- the inherent rights of the unborn child are not acknowledged as they should be. Some regulation is allowed toward the end of the pregnancy, but even these baby steps are inconsistent.
Second, the Roe court acted in the general trend of activist judges, making up the law to suit their own policy preferences.

Despite your doubts, Jen, the rights of the child actually are being addressed. For example, see the Fetal Pain Awareness Act. I believe that the PBA decision also includes language that acknowledges the rights of the unborn child. And of course, there's also the Human Life Amendment, which the pro-life purists are trumpeting.

(I think the HLA would be a very good thing indeed ... but I also think it's not going to happen any time soon.)

The issue of judicial activism must also be addressed if Roe is ever going to fall. However, this issue is really much bigger than abortion. Judges should merely interpret the laws, not write them. We have allowed the least-democratic branch of our government to seize an inordinate amount of power. Unelected judges are overturning laws that have been written by elected legislatures and signed by elected executives. Naturally, if such laws clearly contradict the Constitution, then the judges are doing the right thing. However, modern jurisprudence seems to have strayed awfully far away from the clear words of the Constitution and into "penumbras" and "emanations" of those penumbras.

Personally, I'd love for the Congress to flex their own Constitutional muscles a bit:
In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. (from Article III, Section 2)

Jen, there is no Constitutional right to privacy. Search the Constitution yourself. It's not there. You could argue that there should be a Constitutional right to privacy, and I would agree with you -- as long as the right to privacy didn't allow you to kill someone else. However, a plain and simple reading of the US Constitution does not reveal any right to privacy that is broad enough to include abortion.

Heather: yes. Why do you ask?

a plain and simple reading of the US Constitution does not reveal any right to privacy that is broad enough to include abortion.

Well, yes and no. It doesn't reveal any right to privacy that is broad enough to include the decision to kill a legal person, thank goodness. Even Roe said that if the unborn were legal persons, the right to privacy would not be enough to allow for generally legalized abortion. Unfortunately, they're not considered legal persons, and never have been in this country. THAT's what needs to change.

Jen,

who will you be voting for in the Pres. Elections? All of the Democrats are pro-aborts.

I don't think Jill is arguing that the anti-abortion crowd is about to push for forced sterilizations or forced abortions. The point is that the anti-abortion crowd IS unwittingly pushing to deprive women of the legal rights that would protect us from forced sterilization or forced abortions.

And I don't think that the issue of forced sterilization or forced abortion is a false one. We all know about China's policy. Who is to say that as global warming becomes more of a concern that someone won't advocate extreme measures to control the population? Who is to say that people concerned about the expense of providing welfare to single mothers won't try to coerce them to undergo sterilization or abortion? Who is to say that there aren't parents out there who would try to force their underage daughters to have abortions against their will? Indeed, the latter may be happening now, just as some young girls and women are coerced by parents and significant others into continuing unwanted pregnancy. The point is that there are all sorts of reasons the State might use to either force women to have more babies or fewer babies -- that is scary and that is why the right to choose should be in the hands of the woman.

Also, I think stating that today's pro-choicers are somehow tainted by the old idea of eugenics is a really dishonest and misleading argument. I am no expert on Margaret Sanger, but assuming she did in fact promote eugenics, that fact is entirely unrelated to the validity of the pro-choice movement TODAY. Sadly, racism was ordinary and accepted 100 years ago. I doubt that too many people from the past would pass a purity test with regard to racism and sexism. After all, the fact that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves does not invalidate the many ideas of his upon which the United States is based.

We all know about China's policy.

Yes. We sure do.. Guess who supports China's one child policy? Planned Parenthood.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/news-articles-press/politics-policy-issues/international-issues/unfpa-funding-13134.htm

Planned parenthood, wants to restore funding to the UNFPA, which supports coerced abortion and forced sterilizations in China. According to Alan Guttmacher, "Few women dispute that women's lives are better now than in the past..." (referring to their feelings on China's "family planning programs")."

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3006804.html

A PP VP, Frederick Jaffee, offered the following specific proposals in 1970 for the U.S. to reduce its population growth:

# Encourage homosexuality
# Compulsory abortion for out-of-wedlock pregnancies
# Compulsory sterilization of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three
# Childbearing confined to only a limited number of adults with payments to encourage abortions
# Fertility control agents in our water supply
# Discontinue tax relief to parents

Frederick Jaffee, Vice President, Planned Parenthood ---World Population, Family Planning Perspectives, October 1970.

Bethany,
WOW!!! I thought I had all of the reasons in the world to hate PP, but you've added more...

# Fertility control agents in our water supply

This one has to top the list..

unbelievable!

jasper, I haven't decided yet. I haven't wanted to spend a lot of time trying to decide between candidates when: a) it was freakin' 2007 and b) most of them will be eliminated by the time my state's primary comes around anyway.

Yeah, Laura, and they want you to think they care about your bodily autonomy!

Laura, are you subscribed to stopp.org? If you subscribe, every week you can be sent the latest new information on the fight against Planned Parenthood.

Oops the link is actually:
http://www.all.org/stopp/

Thanks, Bethany! I wasn't but will do that right now!!

(I don't know if I can handle any more hate for PP than I already have, but I guess I'll have to bite the bullet "know my enemies" better.)

:)

Done!

Thanks again, Bethany!

Laura, I can't agree more. I feel the exact same way about PP.

Carrie,

Trying to get any side to understand the other is generally a futile effort. I'd rather waste my time on potentially more productive activity.

Thanks for the offer though.

She blinded me with science.

Shayne opined:
Trying to get any side to understand the other is generally a futile effort. I'd rather waste my time on potentially more productive activity.

The one flaw in your argument is that many pro-lifers (like me) are former pro-choicers. Jill posted my conversion story last Spring:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/05/conversion_stor.html

So, yeah, some pro-lifers do understand pro-choicers, because we've been there, done that, and bought the t-shirt. (Literally.)

Very good post, Naaman. :)

There are three others here who have been converted from pro-choice to pro-life over the last year ...and we are so thankful for this. Like Naaman said it really can be very worthwhile debating, if you really are interested in helping the other side to understand your views.

" The point is that the anti-abortion crowd IS unwittingly pushing to deprive women of the legal rights that would protect us from forced sterilization or forced abortions."

And the supporters of the Thirteenth Amendment DID unwitting push to deprive women and men of the legal rights that would protect us from governmentally enforced slavery?

Sorry. Jill's counter-example hits the nail on the head. NO ONE maintains that the government is entitled to enforce any activity that they are entitled to prohibit, and anyone who tries to claim that is not thinking straight.

Slavery and stealing are not good comparisons. Think about suicide, it is illegal to take your OWN life. That is another time when MY BODY MY CHOICE should be used. The government can put someone in jail (or usually a psych ward) for trying to hurt themselves and no one else. That is ridiculous.

If abortion is made illegal, the government will probably be able to lock up pregnant women who have unwanted pregnancies to make sure they will carry to term and not hurt their own body, or what is growing inside it.

That is not acceptable.

Thank you, Naaman for your story! I am thankful that God opened your eyes.

Just out of curiosity...and I'm really not trying to be antagonistic...but as a pro-choice woman who was pro-life for a very long time, I've gotta wonder...

Has it even occurred to you what the result of criminalizing abortion would be? Banning the procedure won't stop the practice. It just makes it more dangerous.

No matter how you feel about the rights of the unborn, you've gotta realize that women have been inducing their own miscarriages for a very long time and it will continue whether or not they're permitted to do it in a doctor's office.

Advocating for the criminalization of abortion is a futile attempt to control another person. That's just not possible.

Has it even occurred to you what the result of criminalizing abortion would be? Banning the procedure won't stop the practice. It just makes it more dangerous.

So, should we make rape legal since it will happen anyway?

Ha. Comparing abortion to rape. That's really funny.

You missed a key point of that argument. That criminalizing abortion makes it more dangerous. Abortion can be safe or it can be unsafe. Legal abortion is more likely to safe than illegal abortion.

So I guess the question is this: Do you care more about the lives of the people already born, or is it just the unborn that you advocate for?

Your rape response falls apart because whether rape is legal or illegal, the act is still the same, although the incidence may slightly drop if it is illegal. There is a huge difference between a legal abortion (where a woman visits her doctor and undergoes a simple, safe, medical procedure) and illegal abortion where a woman...oh...say sticks a bleach-soaked rag into her vagina causing her to hemorrhage

Let's just decriminalize drunk driving. Many people arrested for DUI have had several previous arrests. Since the laws against DUI don't stop drunk drivers, let's just repeal the laws. No matter how we feel about innocent bystanders, why should we criminalize DUI when the desperate drunks are going to drink anyways. We should have a clinic that attempts to teach drunks how to drive in safe manner so they don't endanger themselves.

Sorry Cap'n. Your response falls apart. Are you saying that women aren't smart enough to know that sticking a bleach-soaked rag into their vagina will cause them some harm?

Cap'n, do you think decriminalizing certain acts will make it safer for the one committing the criminal act? The act would still be the same, but it would be performed under conditions that would make it a safer environment for the criminal. For example, free condoms for rapists and clean needles for junkies(please note I am not really advocating this).

You missed a key point of that argument. That criminalizing abortion makes it more dangerous. Abortion can be safe or it can be unsafe. Legal abortion is more likely to safe than illegal abortion.

Abortion is NEVER safe for the victim of abortion, the unborn child. Just as rape is NEVER safe for the victim of rape. And murder is NEVER safe for the victim of murder. Abortion can never be safe for it's victims.

Sorry Cap'n. Your response falls apart. Are you saying that women aren't smart enough to know that sticking a bleach-soaked rag into their vagina will cause them some harm?

Carrie, didn't you know women are flipping idiots unless they are choosing to have a legal abortion? No one could expect a woman to be intelligent enough to understand that a bleach soaked rag could harm her, but every woman should know how to use birth control properly! lol

Bethany, and they accuse us of patronising women. lol

Good point Bethany. Decriminalizing an act does not make it safer for the victim.

I keep forgetting that my abortion was so simple and so safe. I am so glad that I am reminded how simple it was for me and how safe it was for my baby and I.

Of course a woman knows that unsafe methods of abortion are unsafe. But a lot of women are so desperate to end a pregnancy that they'll go to great links to do so. That doesn't make her stupid. It means she'd rather die or inflict permanent harm on her body than have a baby.

And still, no one has answered my question. Despite the fact that I tried to point out that I wasn't trying to start an argument, I just really want to know. I don't really know any pro-choice people, so I can't just go ask a friend.

Is it more important to you to protect an unborn person than someone who has already been born?

It is important to protect an unborn person.
It is important to protect a person already born.

I was desperate. What I really wanted and needed in my desperate state was compassion. I sacrificed my child because I felt my career, my future was in jeopardy. Was it? No. I really do wish someone would have talked to me and told me the truth. That maybe they would have listened and tried to understand and offered so much better for me and my child.

Cap'n, is it more important to you to protect an adult rather than a child? Are adults who make can make their own choices more important to you than defenseless children who have no choice? Is Joel Steinberg more important to you than the daughter he killed? (ask a silly question, get one aimed right back at you)

Cap'n, you have come onto this board to admonish us for caring about unborn children, not to ask a sincere question. I am not buying what you are selling.

Well, you have to make a choice. I'm not saying either of them are particularly good choices, but you still have to choose one.

No matter which side you take in the abortion debate, you're valuing one life above another. You either think the unborn have rights, or you think women have rights. You really can't have it both ways.

Carla,
I'm very sorry that you had to endure a horrible situation. I'm sorry that you don't feel like you got any compassion. I know how that goes. I've been there (not in your exact situation, of course, but I've had an unplanned pregnancy and been in need of compassion)

But I was talked to and told the truth. I was provided with information to make my decision. Even though I couldn't talk to my family or friends about my situation, I did find people that helped me through that very difficult time. And just so you know, I found them at Planned Parenthood.

I'm truly sorry that you were hurt...that you're still hurting...but it's not like that for everyone.

lol. I don't think I'll be taking orders from you any time soon Cap'n. I "have to choose"? Or what will happen if I don't? Will you give me a cyber raspberry? Some people don't value one life above another. Some people think each life has equal value. Valuing one doesn't take away from your concern for someone else. Every heard of a parent who tells a child that I love you all the same?

Of course it's possible to value both, but in order to do that, you can't be pro-life or pro-choice.

I said if you take sides in the debate then you're making a choice.

Saying you value women and the unborn equally and are pro-life, sounds as ridiculous to me as me saying that i value women and the unborn equally and am pro-choice would sound to you.

and I'm not here to "admonish" you for caring about the unborn. I'm here to figure out why you do. That's the part I don't get.

I am not still hurting. I have been healed.
So you are saying the people at PP told you all about adoption and maybe keeping your baby? They gave you all of the options?
My "counselor" said, "Will that be Visa or Mastercard today?"

Carla,

I'm glad you're not hurting anymore.

Yup, PP gave me all the options. When the test came back positive the counselor asked me if I had decided what my next step would be. I told her I had no idea and I would need time to think about it, so she explained how long I had to make a decision if I wanted to terminate the pregnancy. Then she gave me some stuff to read about adoption, abortion, and pre-natal care so I was prepared for whatever I decided. They also referred me to a counseling program for victims of sexual assault due to the circumstances surrounding my pregnancy.

I always had a good experience at that clinic no matter what I went in for--and I went there a lot, although that was the only time it was pregnancy related. The other times were for STD screenings and annual exams...and many times just to be supportive for a friend.

I have, however, been to other PP clinics for screenings where I felt the people were a little...abrasive. So I'm sure there are good and bad PP employees.

I'm sorry you got a bad one.

oh...and Carrie,

I know it's really hard to gauge someone's tone in online forums. And since I'm the only dissenter here, I get why you're skeptical of me.

But seriously...it might be beneficial for both of us if you could stop trying to shut me down and answer my questions. Cause I really am just curious about the pro-life perspective. I remember why I was pro-life, but none of those reasons apply to me anymore and none of them are good reasons to ban the practice. So honestly, I'm just curious.

And you kept your baby?

No, Carla, I didn't. I considered the options that I had and I decided to have an abortion.

It was the hardest decision I've ever had to make. My life was a big mess then. I didn't have anyone to help me (I had friends, but because of the school we were at, I was unable to talk to them about it...I didn't tell anyone other than my counselor for 4 years). Plus, I was a wreck--traumatized, far from home, and 19.

I only had bad choices. I picked the one that made the most sense to me.

So, you were prolife and then you had the abortion and now you are prochoice?
Does your choice still make sense to you? I am curious. I really would like to know.

I was pro-life until I found out I was pregnant. Then I was just really, really confused. Even when I decided to have an abortion, I wasn't sure if I was really pro-choice. I still believed all the stereotypes that I'd heard growing up in the pro-life movement. When those turned out not to be true for me, I had to rethink things. I sort of wavered in the middle ground for a while before I decided I was definitely pro-choice. It probably took me 1.5-2 years to get there.

My choice still makes sense to me. I'm not thrilled about it, but I don't regret it. A couple years after my abortion I was a nanny for a family that had kids the same age my child would've been. That definitely got me thinking...but I've never doubted the choice that I made.

If I were to get pregnant again...which is impossible unless I get raped again...I don't know that I would make the same decision. I probably wouldn't keep the baby, but adoption seems like a more viable option now that I'm older and can afford to take care of myself long enough to find an adoptive family.

So even though I think it was the best decision then, I don't know if it would be the best decision now.

Ok Cap'n. I don't like the prochoice position that women need to be saved from themselves. They know the consequences of dangerous abortion procedures. I view women and unborn children as having equal value. I also recognize that unborn children are more vulnerable than women. Unborn children do not have a voice. They don't get the option of deciding whether or not they get to live. Women have options even if they feel they don't. Recognizing that one party is more vulnerable and more in need of protection doesn't take away from the value that I place on the other party. I see fetuses the same as other children. I view the prochoice position as seeing human beings as collectibles in Kovel's price guide-more value is placed on the collectibles that are the oldest and that are in the best condition.

Cap'n, I used to be prochoice. I was until my mid-thirties(now in my late-thirties). I understand the prochoice position, I just don't agree with it. It was a gradual process for me. I started agreeing with more restrictions until I found myself prolife, which was rather a shock to me. (I find the prochoice position to be just as patronizing as many prochoicers find us to be.)

Cap'n, one last thing, I view abortion as the killing of a child. Killing children is wrong. It was wrong for Susan Smith to do and it is wrong for all the mothers and fathers that walk into abortion mills on a daily basis. I don't think that parents should have a right to kill their children even if the children are unwanted. The fact that some women may choose to have illegal abortions if abortion is outlawed is not a reason to sanction infanticide. Desperate women and men who may harm themselves because they didn't get an opportunity to legally kill their child is not a reason to make that killing legal. You can see my position as inconsistent or silly. That is your right. I don't worry about how prochoicers view my opinions. That's probably why I don't get why prochoicers get so upset when someone calls them a proabort. It doesn't change their position at all. It is just the opinion of the person using term proabort. Anyways, I really wasn't looking to get into any long debates. I am mainly here to connect with other prolifers and make some connections with prochoicers who don't mock me(like Hal,Doug,Midnite,Dan,Sally).

Go Carrie, you're a pretty smart and well-spoken lady.

Cap'n,

I am just sincerely wondering here. Did the abortion make dealing with the sexual assault easier? I don't really know your story..only what I've read in your posts..so I am thinking that you got pregnant as the result of a sexual assault? If I read wrong, please let me know. Also, what made you change your position exactly from pro-life to pro-choice?

Carrie,

Good posts - and where you say, I view abortion as the killing of a child, that is understandable and not arguable - you feel as you do. So I like that. I also appreciate your mention of Susan Smith - it does go both ways. I also appreciate you noting that not all Pro-Choicers mock you. Heck, I hope nobody does.

Best,

Doug

Your rape response falls apart because whether rape is legal or illegal, the act is still the same, although the incidence may slightly drop if it is illegal. There is a huge difference between a legal abortion (where a woman visits her doctor and undergoes a simple, safe, medical procedure) and illegal abortion where a woman...oh...say sticks a bleach-soaked rag into her vagina causing her to hemorrhage

Posted by: Cap'n at January 4, 2008 1:18 PM The answer to this is simple. Don't have sex if it may come down to you sticking a bleach soaked rag into your vagina.

Cap'n, can you please post proof of how many women died from illegal abortions?

"No matter which side you take in the abortion debate, you're valuing one life above another. You either think the unborn have rights, or you think women have rights. You really can't have it both ways."

By that argument, people are entitled to shoot trespassers who set so much as a foot on their property, because either the property owners have rights or the trespassers have rights.

No one is entitled to sacrifice anyone else's life for a right less than one's own life.

Except, of course, that there are women who go for the bleach-soaked rag even when abortion is legal. Even when they actually have already made an appointment for the safe and legal abortion.

A tiny fraction, but then, only a tiny fraction of women resorted to that sort of method when abortion was illegal. Legality does not confer sanity.

mischief, you're gonna have to do better than that. Abortion is NOT safe. Who told you that? Women are dying in America's abortion clinics TODAY. Aren't you outraged? DON'T HAVE SEX IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE PREGNANT! You must take responsibility for your actions.

Any woman who would stuff a bleach soaked rag into her vagina, is a flaming idiot!

I have a question for all of you - what do you think about this study: http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2007/10/11/index.html

Quick summary of what I get from that article: The Guttmacher Institute and the World Health Organization (WHO) just did a study that found that:
* abortion rates have dropped significantly in countries where abortion is legal
* abortions occurred in approx. the same rates in developed regions and in undeveloped regions
* abortion is largely illegal and unsafe in developing regions and legal and safe in developed regions
* worldwide, per year - 70,000 women die due to unsafe abortions and an additional five million suffer permanent or temporary disability

I honestly want to know what your reaction to that is -
* disbelief of the study?
* a different reading of the study?
* those 5,070,000 women (per year) somehow deserve what they get?
* or is it something else?

I ask because as someone who has worked overseas doing humanitarian medical work, I honestly have no idea what the pro-lifers think, and I'd really honestly like to know. It's a bit of a stumper for me.

cd,
This may sound cold to you, but I personally have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for a woman who sticks who knows what up her vagina in a desperate attempt to kill an innocent child. Does she deserve it? No. But if it happens, I guess it's the risk she took in her desperate, insane attempt.

In addition, the statement "* worldwide, per year - 70,000 women die due to unsafe abortions and an additional five million suffer permanent or temporary disability"

They are always illusive on this one...is this due to illegal abortions, or legal ones, or both?

cd,
Not to mention that Dr. Sharon Camp is also the president & CEO of the Guttmacher Institute.

Seems like she was quite the advocate for abortion - especially worldwide!
(1-888-NOT-2-LATE) - LMAO

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sharon_Camp

So honestly, anything the Guttmacher Institute puts into print about abortion is nothing but biased "studies" to me....

Any woman who would stuff a bleach soaked rag into her vagina, is a flaming idiot!

Gotta say I'm with you on this one Heather.

I don't care what's legal/illegal..how freaking stupid would you have to be to think THAT is a good idea?

Elizabeth,

Yes, I got pregnant from a sexual assault. I'm not sure if I would say that having an abortion made dealing with the assault easier. I suppose in order to really form an opinion about that I would have to have two pregnancies resulting from rape: one that I terminated and one that I did not. Since I don't feel like getting pregnant from a rape again (not that I'd know how to go about that if I did want to), I can't really answer your question.

I do know that it took me a very long time to recover from being raped. I believed then and I still believe now that there is no way I could've given birth to the child of the man who raped me. I realize that there are women who could...and have given birth to their rapists' babies. I don't speak for them. I speak for me. I couldn't have done it.

As for what made me change from pro-life to pro-choice, that's pretty simple. Getting pregnant at 19, while at a Christian school that would've expelled me, with parents who would've disowned me, with no way to provide for a child or even get proper pre-natal care, turned me pro-choice. Or at least that started the change.... As I said before, I didn't start identifying with the pro-choice movement until a couple of years after I had an abortion. I still had a lot to work through....and honestly, I expected to feel differently after my abortion than I did. I mean, I didn't feel fabulous about it, but I didn't feel any regret either.

As for all of the people who made comments about how people shouldn't have sex unless they're willing to have a baby, I have to point out (even though it's not going to go over well in this forum) that it's possible to have sex and guarantee you won't get pregnant. One word: lesbianism.

And do you really want to make the "Don't have sex if you don't wanna get pregnant" argument? I mean, considering human sexuality is innate and not something that we can just deny (no matter how hard some people try), it sounds like you're equating pregnancy to punishment. And I don't think that's a very compassionate way to think of babies either....

I realize that there are women who could...and have given birth to their rapists' babies.

Why is the baby always the mother's baby until there is a rapist involved...then all of a sudden, the baby is "the rapists" baby?

That baby wasn't the rapists baby, Cap'n. That baby was your baby.

As for what made me change from pro-life to pro-choice, that's pretty simple. Getting pregnant at 19, while at a Christian school that would've expelled me, with parents who would've disowned me, with no way to provide for a child or even get proper pre-natal care, turned me pro-choice.

Cap'n, you seem like a very nice woman. But you are wrong about the idea that you were pro-life before. You may have felt that abortion was "wrong" before, but you didn't actually feel that it was murder, or you would have never chosen that path.
Christian schools would have been foolish to expell you. Their foolishness doesn't give you an excuse to kill your child.
Your parents would have been foolish to disown you, and you don't know that they would have.
Their potential foolishness doesn't give you excuse to kill your child.
If you were truly pro-life before, you would have been absolutely against having an abortion, and would have chosen the high road, no matter what pressures you were up against.

In all tenderness, you were always pro-'choice', your true colors just came out when you were put to the test.

Like I said, I think you are a very nice person but I think you just have some misconceptions about what "pro-life" means.

And do you really want to make the "Don't have sex if you don't wanna get pregnant" argument? I mean, considering human sexuality is innate and not something that we can just deny (no matter how hard some people try), it sounds like you're equating pregnancy to punishment. And I don't think that's a very compassionate way to think of babies either....

Why do you consider it not compassionate to babies to say prevent rather than kill?

And it is very possible to remain abstinent before marriage. My husband and I were in a relationship for 2 years before getting married, and didn't have sex at all. We had lots of huggin, lots of kissin, and lots of love notes.

Bethany,

I have to agree with you on this one definitely. You do seem like a nice person Cap'n. But I suspect you were always pro-choice as well. All those scenarios you just described would "probably" happen. You made a decision based off of what the rest of the world would think or do to you as a result of you getting pregnant. NOT about what was best for you. I got pregnant at 19 too...and I was pretty damn sure I was getting kicked out. That had NO effect on my baby's life however. I was keeping her anyway. If her grandparents and uncles didn't want to know her, it was their loss...but she still deserved to live anyway. It's really easy to call yourself pro-life until you're actually faced with having to go through with that decision. Again, I'm not saying this in an attacking way at all, Cap'n..I certainly sympathize with you and am sorry you felt the way you did about your situation.

Thanks, Elizabeth...

I forgot to mention that I am sorry that you were raped, Cap'n. I have been sexually assaulted before when I was 12 (luckily my virginity was not taken away from me because the guy heard voices and ran) and I know how terrifying it is.

I understand the emotions that would have run high had I become pregnant as a result of rape.

I could never kill a little life that was inside of me though..Why would I victimize another person for the crimes of his father? The rapist deserves to rot in jail for what he did...the baby didn't deserve the death penalty for simply existing.

Cap'n, I too struggled with the rape/abortion issue. I USED to think that abortion would be best in a case such as that. I have since had a change of heart. I am terribly sorry about the fact that you were raped.

Cap'n:

I am also curious as to why your parents and school would have kicked you out after becoming pregnant in a situation which you had no control over. I am not questioning you being raped in any way, I am more curious as to the rationale of your family being okay with kicking you out because you got pregnant as the result of a rape.

Elizabeth, good question.

Hmm...well...those are all good questions. They're also complicated questions, but I'll try to respond without pouring out my entire life story.

So. I was raped by someone that I knew. Someone from my school. Someone who had a lot more influence than I did. I was having such a hard time believing that it happened, I honestly didn't think anyone else would believe me either. I never reported it, because I was too scared. I knew that if someone found out I was pregnant, no one would wait around to hear how it happened.

The administration at the school didn't have a whole lot of compassion. They pretended to, but when the chips were down they erred on the side of judgment rather than kindness. I know all people aren't like that. I also know all Christian schools aren't like that. It just happens that I was at a bad one.

As for my family...well...they wouldn't have believed me. I know many of you probably find that hard to accept, because most parents would see that their child was hurting and not worry about the details. My parents...not so much. They did eventually disown me. It just wasn't for the abortion.

As for the comments about me never really being pro-life...I don't think you're entirely wrong. I grew up in a small town where everyone went to church and had the same political views. So it's possible that I was only pro-life because it was all I knew. Actually, that's definitely why I was pro-life. My parents sheltered me a whole lot, so while I truly believed in the message of the pro-life movement, I never really had the chance to consider anything else. While I disagree with the assumption that I didn't ever really believe it, I do think it's possible that my pro-life views were easily swayed because it wasn't something I decided for myself. It was just something I was told.

And that wasn't the only belief that changed. I was already struggling with my religious views before I was raped, so that probably had a lot to do with it too. My pro-life views were based on my religious views and since my faith was pretty shaky when I got pregnant, I suppose most of the stuff I believed about being pro-life didn't so much hold up anymore.

Oh...and thanks for being polite about all this. I really didn't come here to start a fight.

Cap'n, I can totally sympathize when you write that your family wouldn't have believed you. I come from a family like that. I actually had most of my family turn their backs on me for a similiar situation(minus the pregnancy part). My life has been better without their toxicity and I hope your life is too.

Cap'n,

I am very sorry you found yourself in a situation where you were NOT believed and disowned by your own family. That is awful and I can't imagine having to go through that. There may be several things we disagree on, but I am sorry your family wouldn't support you during what seems like an awful time in your life. It is unfortunate when the people we are better off without in our lives are the very people we have an actual physical connection to.

Initially, my pro-life views were based off of a religious standpoint as well. As I learned more and more about the different sides of abortion that have, in my mind, nothing to do with religion, the more disgusted I became with the whole idea of it. Now, my views don't really have anything necessarily to do with my religion. I could argue against abortion without bringing God, the bible, or religion into it. It is interesting that the more information you got, the more pro-choice you became, and the more information I got, the more pro-life I became. I guess it depends on the kind of information you're looking for really. But your pro-life views weren't based in anything substantial in your mind, so they didn't hold much water when it came time to deal with the situation. I think THAT is why people like Bethany and myself say that you weren't really pro-life to begin with. If it were something you believed in your heart of hearts, you wouldn't have dealt with the situation the way you did. Your pro-life views were based on what other people felt about the issue, not what YOU felt about it.

Do you feel you are pro-choice now because you want to reject the things you were "taught" to believe growing up?

Elizabeth,
Hmm...I don't think that's so much it anymore. I definitely went through a big rebellious phase after my abortion when I was trying to break away from all that I had known before. I don't really feel that way anymore. After separating myself from the beliefs that were forced on me growing up, I've been able to look back and take what I feel are good messages from that time and let go of the things that I think hurt me. So I don't think I'm pro-choice just for the sake of being rebellious.

I'm pro-choice now because I think I should get a say in what happens to my body. I don't think it's anyone else's business...least of all the government.

I understand that you believe I took the life of an innocent child. I really don't see it that way. I don't believe life begins at conception.

That doesn't mean I can't appreciate your perspective. But I disagree. And ultimately, it's my body. You can try to make me feel guilty, but it won't work. And you can make it illegal, but you still can't end abortion.

So if you nice folks (and I truly do appreciate everyone being kind and understanding) really want to stop abortion, maybe you should stop blaming doctors, or Planned Parenthood, or Roe for giving them access and start asking why they don't want to be mothers.

And maybe if our country was a little more child-friendly (where kids don't end up homeless, or hungry, or without health care) I would've chosen to keep my baby.

My point is, I think both pro-choice and pro-life people need to change the way abortion is discussed, because we're not getting anywhere calling each other murderers or woman-haters. or whatever else people shout at each other these days.

I don't believe life begins at conception.

Why don't you believe that life begins at conception? Many abortion proponents don't even deny this anymore because it is very hard to deny anymore with all of the scientific evidence out there. (I can share some of the evidence if you are interested) I'm not sure where you get the idea that it does not begin at conception?

Cap'n, I miscarried earlier last year, around February, when I was only 6 weeks along. I miscarried naturally and was able to see what I lost. I took pictures and I want to share them with you, so you can see how beautiful unborn children are at such an early stage. I named my baby "blessing" as it was too early for me to know if it was a boy or a girl (lab tests could have told me but I couldn't bear the thought of not being able to bury my child).

When the baby came out, I held him/her in my hand for this photo:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/bethanyf.jpg

and this one:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/bethanyd.jpg

I realized that the baby needed to be immersed in liquid and so I put the baby in a bag full of water, and immediately I was able to see features of my baby, in such great detail. It was quite an amazing and surreal experience, to see my baby. It gave me closure, knowing that I got to see my baby and say goodbye before my husband and I buried Blessing under 5 weeping cherry trees. We miss our baby so much (she/he would have been about 4 months old now).

Here are closeups:
Blessing's hands:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/babyblessing2%20%282%29.jpg

Blessing, in whole - you can see fingers, toes, ears, the nose, the belly, the mouth, etc.
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/bethanyc.jpg

Here is the ultrasound picture that I received the day they told me the baby had died:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/bethanye.jpg

And here are more pictures:

http://www.preciousinfants.com/babyblessing111.jpg

Very closeup:
http://www.preciousinfants.com/babyblessingtwo.jpg

So if you nice folks (and I truly do appreciate everyone being kind and understanding) really want to stop abortion, maybe you should stop blaming doctors, or Planned Parenthood, or Roe for giving them access and start asking why they don't want to be mothers.
And maybe if our country was a little more child-friendly (where kids don't end up homeless, or hungry, or without health care) I would've chosen to keep my baby.

Cap'n, I understand where you are coming from, but you are wrong about this. There are about 1000 more CPC's out there (could be more, since it's been a while since I read that number) than there are Planned Parenthoods, all of whom dispense freely formula, diapers, maternity clothes, referrals to free medical care, shelter, food, baby clothes, baby beds, cribs, free teen mother support groups, local resources, etc. These places are always ready and willing to help a mother in need, with no strings attached. I have been working on a CPC myself for about a year. The problem was not that there are not resources out there for you, Cap'n..it is that you did not know they were there, or where to look.
If you'll go to this link:
http://www.pregnancycenters.org/advantage.asp
You'll see lots of places around your area which have CPC's. There are also adoption agencies all over the place. There are 1.3 million people ready and waiting to adopt, yes, even children with disabilities, and only 50,000 children made available to adopt per year. There are so many people ready and waiting to love children. To say that there aren't resources out there for women with children is just not understanding or seeing what is available for them.

Bethany,

I'm truly sorry for your loss. I won't pretend to know how hard that must've been. I can only imagine.

I know how fetal development happens. I know the stages and all of that. But, that has nothing to do with my not believing life begins at conception. I'm trying to figure out how to explain this in a way that won't sound patronizing, because I'm not trying to be. But, I'll give it a shot....

The question of where life begins is (for me) a spiritual one and not a biological one. Because people are more than cells and tissue, I don't think the fact that a fetus has cells and tissue proves that it is a life.

Now, I don't honestly think that you believe people are just cells and tissue either...I won't guess as to what you do believe only because I try not to make broad generalizations about the religious views of any movement, despite the fact that the pro-life movement seems to be overwhelmingly Christian in nature. I've had Psalms 22 and 139 quoted at me enough times to feel relatively safe in that assumption. Still, I won't assume that of you unless you choose to make your religious views known.

At any rate...I'm not a Christian. I don't believe life begins at conception. Even from a strictly biological standpoint, I don't think life begins at conception. Implantation, yes. Conception, no.

As for CPCs, I did actually call one when I found out I was pregnant. They were...well...a little harsh. I called just to ask for information and when I told them I was pregnant and trying to decide what I wanted to do, I got a lecture about how God would never forgive me if I killed my baby. Plus, the lady made me feel like a whore. Considering I didn't even choose to have sex, it was pretty offensive.

And that still would've meant telling my parents...and I was really trying to avoid them disowning me (again, that didn't actually work, but it was a big motivating factor at the time).

I realize I talked to one person at one CPC and I'm sure not everyone is like that. In fact, I'm sure you're not like that, Bethany. You seem like a very kind person.

Still...that was my experience. I've had a few encounters with CPCs since then, and several encounters with people who work for them and they all seem to be...well...Christian. Which is perfectly fine for Christians...or even religious seekers, but that does disqualify them for me.

Bethany, there are efforts under foot to open a cpc in my community. It is probably a few years away though.

Carrie, that is wonderful. I hope that it will come together very soon.

******************************************

I'm truly sorry for your loss. I won't pretend to know how hard that must've been. I can only imagine.

Thank you, Cap'n...I really do appreciate that.

Now, I don't honestly think that you believe people are just cells and tissue either...I won't guess as to what you do believe only because I try not to make broad generalizations about the religious views of any movement, despite the fact that the pro-life movement seems to be overwhelmingly Christian in nature. I've had Psalms 22 and 139 quoted at me enough times to feel relatively safe in that assumption. Still, I won't assume that of you unless you choose to make your religious views known.

Well, I am a protestant Christian, so yes you would be correct about that. ;) Of course, my views of when life begins are confirmed by the Bible, but, at the same time, the Bible isn't my sole basis for why abortion is wrong, anymore than it is the sole basis for why I believe rape or murder are wrong. There are enough reasons that one can be totally anti-abortion without even regarding the Bible. This is why there are groups such as the Athiest Pro-life league.

At any rate...I'm not a Christian. I don't believe life begins at conception. Even from a strictly biological standpoint, I don't think life begins at conception. Implantation, yes. Conception, no.

Most abortions are performed way after the baby has already implanted itself into the womb, at around 12 weeks, after the heart has begun beating and the brain waves have begun, and the fingers and toes are completely developed. The baby can even suck his or her thumb at this point. Do you believe that after implantation that life has begun however it is not worthy of protection because the baby is at a lesser stage of development? If you believe life begins at implantation, then why would you be supportive of killing an unborn baby after implantation?

As for CPCs, I did actually call one when I found out I was pregnant. They were...well...a little harsh. I called just to ask for information and when I told them I was pregnant and trying to decide what I wanted to do, I got a lecture about how God would never forgive me if I killed my baby. Plus, the lady made me feel like a whore. Considering I didn't even choose to have sex, it was pretty offensive.

I am very sorry to hear that, Cap'n. If the woman said that God would never forgive you, she was absolutely incorrect. God can forgive all sins. It hurts me to think there might have been someone who made you feel bad, especially since you had been raped. Did the woman you spoke with know you had been raped? And what was it she said that made you feel like a whore? Was it just a feeling or was it just something specific that she said?

And that still would've meant telling my parents...and I was really trying to avoid them disowning me (again, that didn't actually work, but it was a big motivating factor at the time).

Your parents were absolutely wrong to make you feel this way, and especially for disowning you. And I am very sorry that they did this. The fact that you felt that you would be disowned for choosing life is one reason that I feel "choice" isn't really about choice. I feel that you were used, and then used again. You were raped, then, you felt forced to protect your rapist, you felt forced to have an abortion, and I don't think you really made the choice that you really wanted to make, Cap'n. :( I think you probably wished circumstances were different, and you probably really wanted to keep your child. (I'm sorry if I'm reading too much into what you say).

I realize I talked to one person at one CPC and I'm sure not everyone is like that. In fact, I'm sure you're not like that, Bethany. You seem like a very kind person.

Thank you, Cap'n, you do too. (hugs) By the way, can I ask you a question, about your screenname...I'm just curious about what made you come up with cap'n? ;) If you dont want to say, you don't have to, I'm just curious.

Still...that was my experience. I've had a few encounters with CPCs since then, and several encounters with people who work for them and they all seem to be...well...Christian.

Were they all as terrible as the first experience? And also, I'm curious why you went back to a CPC at all? Hope you don't mind all the questions.

Which is perfectly fine for Christians...or even religious seekers, but that does disqualify them for me.

Is it possible that Christians offend you partially because of your parents, and hurt you feel due to their hypocrisy? (I hope you don't mind me saying that they showed hypocrisy by their actions.. I'm sure you still love them, and they you, but I feel if they were religious and yet disowned you for any reason, at all, they are certainly not showing Christ and his love and compassion- remember the prodigal son's father and his example- If they claim to be Christian, I would be highly doubtful of that).

Blessings...hope you have a wonderful night.

Cap'n,

With all due respect, just because facts don't support your rationalization of human life does not make them any less factual. I believe the sky is purple, does that make it purple? You said that you believe life begins at implantation right? Well most people don't find out they are pregnant until AFTER implantation obviously..so you do accept that people who have an abortion after that ARE in fact ending a life? I am sorry for everything you have had to go through, Cap'n, but your refusal to accept and even acknowledge FACTS does not make them any less than what they are.

Again, there is no offense intended at all.

I will write more later..but it is time for dinner!

I think maybe I obfuscated my point about when I believe life begins by throwing in the implantation thing.

What I meant by bringing that up was if I judged life in strictly biological terms, then I would say it begins at implantation, not conception.

But I don't. I understand that the Bible gives you reason to believe that an unborn child has a soul. I don't believe that. I know that probably seems like a rather lame point, but that is what I believe based on my personal spirituality. That's why I don't believe that life begins at conception. I don't believe life begins at implantation either, but I think that if you're working from a strictly biological argument there's much more evidence for life beginning at implantation than conception.

Sorry if I wasn't entirely clear with my first post. Online communication is tricky sometimes....

As for my other encounters with CPCs, they were generally in a pseudo-political atmosphere. I used to work for a pro-choice organization and when we ran information tables at community festivals, the festival organizers would always put our table next to the CPCs, the right-to-life groups, and the church groups. I suppose they thought it was funny.

We (the pro-choice people) basically stuck to our table and tried our best to ignore the pointed comments other organizations would make about us. It was common to have people from those groups approach us...sometimes just to ask questions, often times to offer to pray for us, but occasionally someone crossed a line and caused some drama. I try not to judge the pro-life movement by those encounters. It's not like I talked to any of them randomly on the street. We knew we were ideological adversaries from the beginning. It's tough to be impartial in that sort of scenario. Still...it reaffirmed my experience with the CPC I called and the pro-life movement as I remembered it, both from when I took part in pro-life actions as a teenager and from the protesters that always seem to be outside the abortion clinic in my community.

There was one other encounter with a CPC that actually wasn't so horrible. My cousin got pregnant at 16 and went to a CPC. I was in college at the time, but I went to see her and she seemed to be doing alright. She didn't have any complaints about the way she was treated or how people talked to her, although the kind of counseling she got there was certainly not the kind of counseling I would've wanted if I had chosen that route. It was a good place for cousin to go, but...well...she and I are very different people.

As for the name...it's a nickname from my college days. After my abortion, I left Christian school and transferred to a larger state university. I was part of the campus feminist group and one year for Take Back the Night I convinced a bunch of my friends to dress up like pirates for the event. So we dubbed ourselves Pirates Against Rape. I was the Cap'n. My college friends still call me Cap'n, so it was the first thing I thought of when considering online pseudonyms.

Apparently, it wasn't a very original idea. There's a myspace page for Pirates Against Rape, but we didn't start it.

Oops...I left out two of Bethany's questions.

I do think you're reading a little too much in to what I say, but that's largely because I through out the possibility that I might've kept my baby if I'd had a way to get pre-natal care. I probably wouldn't have. It's possible that I would've chosen adoption if I'd had a safe place to go, a way to get pre-natal care, and found a decent adoptive family.

I suppose it's possible that I could've decided to keep it, I guess I can't say definitively one way or another. But I doubt it. I never wanted children. I still don't want children. That could change with time, but as of now, I'm not interested.

I know that my feelings about Christians stem from my rigid, fundamentalist upbringing and my bad relationship with my parents. I'm working on that.

I feel I should also mention that it's not really Christians that offend me. Some Christians are certainly offensive, but you can find offensive people in any group. Some Christian movements offend me. Some Christian theology offends me. Some Christian rhetoric offends me. But I've worked really hard to not attach those things to all people who identify as Christian. I'm still working on it.

And no...it doesn't offend me that you call my parents hypocrites. I know that's what they were. Unfortunately, they had the support of many of their peers when they chose to kick me out of their lives...so it wasn't just them. In fact, my mom was really upset about it. She writes me a letter once a year or so. I know she wants things to be better between us, but she doesn't want to accept me for who I am...and I can't really do much about that. I also know that she had know Biblical basis for giving me the boot. Jesus certainly wouldn't have.

Pardon the typos...I should really learn to slow my fingers down.