"The most prolific mother was the wife of Feodor Vassilyev, who had 69 children between 1725 and 1765." http://www.somethingworthwhile.com/item.asp?calday=07_23_2001
She was from Russia.
Does anyone know what type of sex education they have in Russia?

And didn't you already post this video?

No, you might be thinking of the undercover documentary from Spain.

No I remember the "don't clench the doctors arm part." Are you sure this is a new one? Maybe I saw it on a related video from one you put up here.

The still shot from the video might get some raised eyebrows (at the very least) from some of your readers, Jill.

I know it's a half naked woman but given the context I don't think it could be considered sexual. Maybe obscene...

Jill may not realize that it's like that, actually.
The screen shots happen automatically.. I know Jill didn't set it that way herself. I should let her know by email what it looks like, and maybe we can figure out a way to change it.

@ Bethany
My Mom and I were watching Dr. Phil. His wife said that she never raised at her two children. My Mom and I agree that it is impossible to raise children yourself and never raise your voice at them. What do you think?

It slays me that the word "cro**h" is not allowed on this board, but every week we get a new and graphic look at someone's hot pocket - sometimes without their permission! (Kind of a felony...)

Well, at least it's tamer than the "crush porn."

Even when I was watching the sweetest six year old boy I raised my voice at least once. (I thought he had been kidnapped while i was cleaning mud off my shoe, he was hiding in his back yard)

Jess --

Just Google "sex education in russia." From the looks of it, there is very little sex education in Russia because the Roman Orthodox Church opposes it.

Obviously, lack of sex education leads to huge numbers of abortions.

Why can't we say crotch? Can we say vagina? We should be able to say vagina, it's a medical term for a part of your body.

That woman who is the head of surgery is so honest. At least she admits it is legalized murder..she's not putting all the niceties on it like people here attempt to do. She isn't attempting to rationalize the baby into anything else than what it is: A BABY. She also admits how everyone suffers..the patient..the staff.

The whole video just made me very sad. For EVERYONE.

*Russian orthodox church, lol

I just want to add that I think Russia is a very beautiful and interesting country.

My Mom and I were watching Dr. Phil. His wife said that she never raised at her two children. My Mom and I agree that it is impossible to raise children yourself and never raise your voice at them. What do you think?

Absolutely! lol

@ Elizabeth
I too appreciate her honesty. Abortion isn't a fun or pretty thing but like she said, some of these women don't have any other options. They can bring an orphan into this world or they can terminate the pregnancy. I think this goes beyond whether or not we think abortion is bad or whatever.

Forgot to mention...anyone who says they have NEVER raised their voice with their children is a liar...
lol

I too appreciate her honesty. Abortion isn't a fun or pretty thing but like she said, some of these women don't have any other options. They can bring an orphan into this world or they can terminate the pregnancy. I think this goes beyond whether or not we think abortion is bad or whatever.

I'd rather be an orphan than be dead. At least if I were an orphan I'd have a chance at life.

I haven't watched this video, but I pretty much know what I might see. The story is an important one, because it shows what happens when people lose hope.

I feel for these poor people living in such difficult conditions, but abortion doesn't solve already existing problems, and unless you can see the future, you can't be certain that a baby will make things even worse. A baby can bring immeasurable hope and joy to a family, a fact that we too quickly forget.

I'm just not sure why they think they can't raise the baby? That part was confusing to me I guess.

Oh and Jess, It IS impossible to not raise your voice to your child at times. Like when they kick over the dog's water bowl on purpose..or take their whole plate of food that you just gave them to eat and dump it onto the floor and the dog standing under their chair.

Those OF COURSE are hypothetical scenarios that I wouldn't know a thing about. lol.

Hi Jess.

"They can bring an orphan into this world or they can terminate the pregnancy. "

Why don't we just kill orphans then?

@ Bethany
I knew you would understand : ) I think it was wrong of her to make people who yell at children seem like monsters. Yeah yelling isn't the best way to deal with problems but when a five year old child say, throws their shoes at your head when you're trying to be nice to them it's hard to control the volume of your voice.
I think it's because Robin had like three nannies and a housekeeper.

"When I had delivered the child and looked at it, they told me it was a girl. I felt kind of sorry for it."

"When I had delivered the child and looked at it, they told me it was a girl. I felt kind of sorry for it."

I know Bethany! She should really feel sorry for herself for what an awful thing she did to her little girl.

I knew you would understand : ) I think it was wrong of her to make people who yell at children seem like monsters. Yeah yelling isn't the best way to deal with problems but when a five year old child say, throws their shoes at your head when you're trying to be nice to them it's hard to control the volume of your voice.
I think it's because Robin had like three nannies and a housekeeper.

yeah, that would make it easier! I doubt I'd yell at my kids ever if I had a housekeeper and nanny to take care of all their messes. Just this morning my littlest one got a whole floss dispenser and unraveled all of the floss around chairs, under the table, around all of his toys, and all around his body. I had to cut him out of it...
Then he emptied a case of 350 BBs that go to Caleb's BBgun onto the kitchen floor. That took forever to clean up. LOL
When stuff like this happens on a daily basis, it's not difficult to find yourself yelling, "Oh no! What are you doing now!!!" over and over. lol

Glorious, just glorious.

Not too long ago the Russian govt. was practically begging couples to conceive and offering them all sorts of perks, and here's Dr. Irina admitting to the "degrading and very tough " work of killing Russia's future. That's right, killing. She said it herself:

"Physically and psychologicaly it's tough. Having to kill these children."

Explain the sense in that, ladies and gentlemen.

I know Bethany! She should really feel sorry for herself for what an awful thing she did to her little girl.

I know...ugh! :-(

Comprehensive sex education.

That seems to be the cure-all for anything related to sex. Pregnancy, HIV, Syphilis.....and so on.

In 1988 I had comprehensive sex education from the school and from the Mom who was an RN who witnesses a "botched" abortion. (I just found out about that! My Dad told me about it - he thought I knew!)

We were one of the first school districts in Indiana to initiate comprehensive sex ed and it was a Catholic High School. (and yes, it was comprehenisive. Everything I learned was accurate information)

Since then - in America: Abortion has increased. The CDC reported in November that Syphilis and Gonorrhea has hit an all time especially in the 14 - 24 year olds. American has the highest Teen Pregnancy rate among developed countries. 9.1 million new Sexually Transmitted Infections among 14 - 24 year olds are reported to the CDC every year. Over 18 million new STI's are reported overall. (For those that missed it - 1/2 of all STI's reported are among the youngest group.)

Tell me - when is comprehensive sex ed going to start working?

If it hasn't worked here, why does anyone think it will work there?

@ Bobby
"Why don't we just kill the orphans?"
No Bobby I disagree with you I don't think we should kill the orphans. I think since the fetus is inside of the mother she has to choice to have to removed whichever way she want's based on what she feels would be best for her life and the life of the child. And orphan is not infingeing on anyone's bodily autonomy.

@Elizabeth
"or take their whole plate of food that you just gave them to eat and dump it onto the floor"
I've had that happen to me more times then I can count. I used to work in a daycare center mainly with toddlers, sometimes infants and preschoolers. The worst was when they would draw on the walls...with poop.
I don't know how family friendly Russia is, I mean I don't know how hard it would be to raise a child, especially when the mother is so young.

That's why I have to admire folks like Jill who are relentless in ending this scourge.

For so many it's an intellectual agreement: Yeah, I'm pro-choice, so there!

Enter Jill and others like her who have seen choice for what it truly is, and it's just a matter of lifting the curtain for all to see.

Which really gets the debater's ball rolling, doesn't it?

@ Bethany
"I had to cut him out of it... "
Well at least that made me "lol"

@valerie
Do we really have comprehensive sex education? We have more abstinence education don't we? And aren't teen pregnancies more common in abstinent only education states? We also have a big problem of denial about where sex can lead and what sex really means (aka shouldn't be used as a means to get popularity/love). IMO, at least.

@ carder
Are those perks only for married couples having kids?

Carder, Amen. Thank goodness for people like Jill, who have the courage to say what needs to be said. She never gives up, no matter what kind of horrible things people say to her to discourage her on a daily basis. I think I might have given up due to some of the attacks that happen here, but not Jill. She just keeps going on, showing people the truth day after day.

Jess,

"And orphan is not infingeing on anyone's bodily autonomy."

True. At that point, it's infringing on the government's tax system, my air, your water, everyone's natural resources, and adding to the poop in the world. Something that the Choice Sisterhood on this board tend to insinuate.

Slaughter'em, I say. Heck, they already are.

Jess,

"And orphan is not infingeing on anyone's bodily autonomy."

So the right to "bodily autonomy" trumps an innocent human being's right to life?

That's right, Carder. The orphans are infringing on my monetary autonomy.

Jess -

"And orphan is not infingeing on anyone's bodily autonomy."

True - but the orphan certainly is infringing on the financial stresses of the country. why is that different?

If it is only murder when the baby is outside of the Mother, than why is Scott Peterson in jail for two counts of murder?

Once again - Only one person gets to establish the worth of another human being. If that one person says "human" than a person who kills the human while in utero is a murderer. However, if that one person says "it" than a person who kills it is an abortionist.

Same science. Same biology. Same human genetic code. Same murder - just different worth.

Pathetic.

Jess,

To answer your question, yes, the target was married couples. Jill had a post about it several months ago.

Since Russia's replacement level is below average witht the rest of Europe, the gov't was offering things like cash, appliances, and other doo-dads. Sadly funny in a way.

Why do the Orthodox Churches get all the blame for abortions?

If you're not having sex before marriage, you're not going to have babies out of wedlock and you're not going to have abortions.

It seems that these Orthodox Churches have the right idea when it comes to sex ed.

@carder
Yes but I think everyone agrees that air is free, for the time being. Unless air objects, that is. And stop badmouthing orphans. As if they didn't have enough problems.

@Bobby
Yes, I believe bodily autonomy, freedom to have your body for yourself only along with your mind and your thoughts and your feelings trumps the right for someone to use your body to develop their own.

Good to see you back, Bambino.

So Jess, suppose I have written a beautiful proof of The Riemann Hypothesis (the biggest unsolved problem in mathematics). I put it in my desk, under lock and key. That night, someone breaks into my office, steals my proof, and threatens to publishe it under his own name. That proof was MY idea, from MY mind. The person has violated my mental autonomy. Can I shoot him to keep him from publishing it?

@ valerie
The fetus wasn't in Scott's body therefore not his decision.

@Anon
"If you're not having sex before marriage, you're not going to have babies out of wedlock"
As long as you know what sex is so you know what to avoid doing.

@carder
Well these were young girls who were not married therefore would not benefit from the benefits. And weren't those benefits only for people who gave birth on a certain day?

Yes but I think everyone agrees that air is free, for the time being. Unless air objects, that is. And stop badmouthing orphans. As if they didn't have enough problems.

Carder wasn't badmouthing orphans...you were saying that if someone's just going to be an orphan that it is okay to kill them. Carder was doing some reflective listening to let you see how that sounds.

Thanks, Carder, although I'm really not "back" yet, just happen to be on. I'll be back sometime next week.

Stop badmouthing orphans?

I never have. Just going with the tangent that was brought up.

Perhaps you might want to redirect that comment to your Sistahs in the Cause.

@Bobby
You could shoot him. You'd probably go to jail though. Or you could argue that since you wrote it down it is out of your mind and free for everyone. My dream is still only in my head. If you read my mind, I might just have to kill you.

The fetus wasn't in Scott's body therefore not his decision.

Jess, My kids came out of my body, do I own them? Are they an extension of my body? What about when they're first delivered, but still attached to the umbilical cord? They are still extensions of my body...can I kill them then? See, where do you draw the line?

@ carder
Stop this mudslinging. You and Bobby are ganging up on me. Pick on someone your own size.

Jess -

"Do we really have comprehensive sex education?
We have more abstinence education don't we?"

We have TRUE comprehensive sex education. It stresses abstinence, but gives information on contraception, condoms etc.

"And aren't teen pregnancies more common in abstinent only education states?"

The media greatly exagerated the report. There were about 12 studies done on the subject. 3 of them were in area's where the teen pregnancy rate did increase. The other area's decreased - but no one heard about that. I'm not sure what "abstinence only" education is to be honest. I've been doing research on it and all the programs (outside of private school systems)that claim abstinence only give information on contraception, pregnancy...etc....

"We also have a big problem of denial about where sex can lead and what sex really means (aka shouldn't be used as a means to get popularity/love). IMO, at least."

You are so right! We shove sex at our children and then wonder why they are so screwed up in that department.

Jess, do you really not see the points they are trying to get you to see?
How can you say it is okay for a woman to kill her baby, even after viability, simply because it might be orphaned? Then turn around and say that Carder shouldn't badmouth orphans because they have "enough problems"...wouldn't you think that being killed is a pretty huge problem?

Jess,

"Well these were young girls who were not married therefore would not benefit from the benefits. And weren't those benefits only for people who gave birth on a certain day?"

You're right, which is why I'm baffled. The replacement level was there, but not coming from the "correct" segment of the population: single, teenage moms.

Perhaps a different strategy could have been used. Support the babies that already exist...don't maul'em.

Simplistic, I know, but it could have probably spared Dr. Irina physical and psychological degradation.

But Jess, the person, in the truest sense of the phrase, violated my mental autonomy. The person was uninvited to USE the contents of my mind, just like the fetus is uninvited to USE the women's body. Sure, I wrote it down, but writing it down no more consents to someone reading it than sex does to becoming pregnant, right? I'm not trying to be flippant or rude to you, Jess, but I really believe this concept of "bodily autonomy" (which, to your credit by the way, is only one of two arguments in favor of abortion-choice that actually doesn't beg the question) is unfounded and can not be shown.

@Bethany
When they are inside of you, yes, you do own them. And you just cut the umbilical cord and it's done. I guess you could just choose to give birth naturally at a certain point, but they won't survive and are not sentient or have enough of a central nervous system at say 3 weeks.

Jess,
UGGHHHH! Where did you learn of this whole bodily autonomy farce? Some dope smokin' hippie professor? It is the lamest excuse I have ever heard for supporting abortion.

You invited that baby into your womb when you had sex. Sex was meant to be pleasurable so people would pro-create. If it weren't pleasurable there would be no procreation.

"If you're not having sex before marriage, you're not going to have babies out of wedlock and you're not going to have abortions."

Anonymous2 -- did you or have you been abstaining from sexual intercourse until marriage? And have you lived in Russia, and been a pregnant woman there (married or not) and tried to provide for your children?

Jess, please don't feel that I mean to mudsling or gang up on you. What I want to try and show you, though, is the logical ramifications of the abortion-choice mentality. If you feel ganged up on, we don't have to discuss this anymore. The last thing I want to do is intimidate or bully someone. I hope this makes sense. God love you, Jess.

@ Bobby
It's out of your mind, on paper, so it's not really yours anymore you know?

@Bethany
I know what you're saying. I would like it more if these women had the abortions before the point of viability. Why do you think they wait so long?

Jess -

"@ valerie
The fetus wasn't in Scott's body therefore not his decision. "

I'll repeat again -

Same science. Same biology. Same human genetic code. Same murder - just different worth.

It all comes down to worth. Only one person deems the worth of a baby. No one else. Just one person based on worth. "Is my child worthy enough to live? Is my child worthy enough for me to slow my life down for less than a year? Is my child worth me missing one semester of school? Is my child worth me loosing my boyfriend who knocked me up? Is my child worthy enough to live even though it was my actions that caused this childs creation?"

see? It all comes down to the worth of a human being.

Jess,

First of all, you're too pretty for me to be picking on you. If that's really you in the Snap album.

Secondly, I know that sarcasm tends to be misunderstood in cyberspace, so my apologies.

Thirdly, the stronger overtaking the weaker (picking your own size...)could be a glaring common denominator in these life issues, IMO.

Jess, in answer to your question, I have no idea why they wait that long. I don't know why anyone would have an abortion at all, ay any stage of pregnancy, though.
According to Guttmacher, the majority of late term abortions happen when a girl is trying to hide her pregnancy, and eventually is becoming too large to hide it anymore, or the girl actually doesnt realize she is pregnant until it is later in the pregnancy. Either way, it's not a good excuse to kill another human being. Jess, I honestly think you are a good person,and I hope that eventually you will be able to understand what we're trying to get across to you. I wish you could see how horrible abortion is. How dreadful it is that people will willingly choose to end another human life, for selfish reasons. And also how many people are willing and waiting desperately for a child of their own, and others are just killing theirs like it's nothing.

How much could it hurt them to stay pregnant another couple of weeks, deliver the baby, and give it to someone? If you know someone who is pregnant and does not want their baby, please tell me. I will adopt the child.

@Bobby
Thank you, God love you too.

@Sandy
"UGGHHHH! Where did you learn of this whole bodily autonomy farce? Some dope smokin' hippie professor? It is the lamest excuse I have ever heard for supporting abortion."
Is this better:
"Ew babies are gross and I don't want to get fat...ewww"
I think I might have heard it from a pro-lifer referring to a fetus, actually. We all know what bodily autonomy is, and we all, to a degree I think, respect it. We just disagree as to whether it trumps a fetuses right to life. I think people, in general, have a right to life. But I think bodily autonomy is greater then that for several reasons. If you take away our right to choose, will you eventually take away our right to exercise while pregnant, use contraceptives, anti-depressents? What about if a woman miscarriages, will she be charged with manslaughter? Do you understand where I'm going with this?

According to figures published by the World Bank at the end of last year, 20 percent of the Russian population lives below the poverty line, which is defined as a monthly income of 1,000 roubles (less than 30 euros, or $38).

"The great majority of Russian families are teetering on the edge of poverty. The World Bank has calculated that an average decrease in income of 10 percent would produce a 50 percent rise in the poverty rate. The majority of the poor in Russia are to be found among working families headed by adults with average technical professional training, and in families with children."
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/mar2005/russ-m11.shtml

There is no real programme for sex education in schools despite a 10-year discussion in government, a fact which incenses many campaigners.

"A 14-year-old receives no sex education but he can already be convicted for the crime of rape," says Dr Grebesheva.
***********
"She is particularly concerned about the problem of pregnancies in orphanages, where children often live through puberty together without any proper adult supervision. These pregnancies are often not known about until after 12 weeks."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3093152.stm

I second Bambino. We have enough bullies on this site!

Wait listen to this please, if abortion become illegal, and someone is late for their period, say by a month or two, and then they get their period, could someone say they think that person was pregnant then aborted? And if so will that woman be charged?

If you take away our right to choose, will you eventually take away our right to exercise while pregnant, use contraceptives, anti-depressents? What about if a woman miscarriages, will she be charged with manslaughter? Do you understand where I'm going with this?

Exercising is good for you while pregnant.
Contraceptives were available before Roe vs wade...
Anti-depressants and other medications were also available to pregnant women before Roe, unless I'm mistaken.

Wait listen to this please, if abortion become illegal, and someone is late for their period, say by a month or two, and then they get their period, could someone say they think that person was pregnant then aborted? And if so will that woman be charged?

Jess, what were women charged with for miscarriage pre-Roe?

Lord have mercy, Bethany, if it were that simple.

Mother Theresa said the same thing, did you know that?

After watching that video, makes me want to fly to Moscow right now.

@Bethany
Thank you for your concern. You are a good person and I enjoy discussing this with you.

@SamanthaT
"A 14-year-old receives no sex education but he can already be convicted for the crime of rape," says Dr Grebesheva."
I've heard stories about couples in their thirties who are unable to conceive, upon visiting a doctor they discover the source of their infertility is the fact that they have never had sex, not understanding what it was.
The author of the book, I think the title was The Guide To Hot Sex said she thought she knew everything about sex but was surprised her first time when the guy began to move (aka thrust). So yeah you need to at least know what is what, the basics.

Jess -

A miscarriage is natural. Something Mother nature intended to happen.

A surgical abortion (or a forced miscarriage in the case of medical abortion) is not natural. It is forced by man.

In your analagy I would be committing murder if my parent died of natural causes while in my home. It is natural and unpreventable. Abortion is unnatural and preventalbe.

Carder,

I'll sit next to you on the plane!

@ Bethany
I think I have heard stories of women harassed by police after having a miscarriage. I'll look for them, hang on, I'll search the web. But do you understand my concern?

Carder -

"Mother Theresa said the same thing, did you know that?"

Mother Teresa said what?

No lie, at my former parish there was a family that adopted ten, yes, ten Russians orphans at once. These orphanse were all siblings ranging from 16 to 2 years old. Our local paper documented that whole odyssey from when they first met the orphans on an exchange program here in Florida all the way to when they came back as one big happy family from Russia.

My parish assisted them with meals for months as they got adjusted to life plus ten.

Gotta love selflessness.

@valerie
I meant that some women might not be able to convince police that it was natural. If they fall sown the stairs whose to say they didn't do it on purpose?

Hey there again Jess!

"Wait listen to this please, if abortion become illegal, and someone is late for their period, say by a month or two, and then they get their period, could someone say they think that person was pregnant then aborted? And if so will that woman be charged?"

One needs to have reason to suspect that an abortion took place. So, just like today when we find someone dead in their home, we don't assume they were murdered unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise. So unless there is ample evidence (and first of all, reason to believe that an abortion took place), such a case would not involve any legal ramifications.

Valerie,

Mother Theresa said what Bethany said, "If you know someone who is pregnant and does not want their baby, please tell me. I will adopt the child."

No lie, at my former parish there was a family that adopted ten, yes, ten Russians orphans at once. These orphanse were all siblings ranging from 16 to 2 years old. Our local paper documented that whole odyssey from when they first met the orphans on an exchange program here in Florida all the way to when they came back as one big happy family from Russia.

My parish assisted them with meals for months as they got adjusted to life plus ten.

Gotta love selflessness.

Carder,

That gives me faith in humanity. I love people like that.

Jess -

Just an FYI - the baby is so protected by the amniotic fluid and the mother's body falling down the stairs very rarely causes a miscarriage, and if it does it isn't immediate and women would be in the hospital if the fall was that bad.

Forced abortions can be detected in a medical exam. Toxicology reports will show if a woman took an overdose of certain herbal meds to force the abortion and can detect chemical meds as well. And if any internal methods were used the uterus would show signs of intrusion. With a spontaneous abortion (aka miscarriage) there would be no signs of force.

Plus - if a woman missed one period and then miscarried why would the cops be called? It doesn't make sense to me.

@Bobby
A fall down the stairs is the first thing that comes to mind. That would seem like they wanted to abort. What about certain herbs and essences? They could abort using them, or take them not knowing they cause abortion. What would happen to them? Who would moniter this?

@valerie
If someone has a grudge against them?
I know a few positions in different types of exercises that cause fetal death. Maybe the person didn't know they were pregnant or didn't know the dangers?
I also heard taking too many laxitives causes miscarriages. And constipation is common during pregnancy.

Jess,

You seem sincere about this. Which is a nice change from some of the vociferous exchanges here.

In short, it's like what Jaqueline of happy memory once posted: there's nothing about pro-choice-ism that can't be resolved with pro-life answers.

And I am being friendly here ;0)

Jess,

"A fall down the stairs is the first thing that comes to mind. That would seem like they wanted to abort. What about certain herbs and essences? They could abort using them, or take them not knowing they cause abortion. What would happen to them? Who would moniter this?"

If I understand you correctly, your first sentence asks what about a women who intentianally throws herself down the stairs in order to kill the fetus, correct? It's just like someone who hits and kills someone with their car. It could have been an accident, or it could have been intentional and made to look like an accident. The law tries to figure out which is correct.

As far as the herbs goes, the same kind of principle applies. One feeds their child peanut butter, and it turns out that the child is allergic to peanut butter and dies. Well, it needs to be investigated, just like your herb situation. Just like anyone on trial, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Does that make sense?

Carder -

Thanks for clarifying that! ;-)

I was very confused! normal state for me though!

I would also say the same thing! I've looked into adoption and it is so expensive! $5,000 for domestic adoption and over $10,000 for going out of the country. If I spent that money on the adoption, I wouldn't have enough money left to properly care for the child!

I looked into adopting through the "system" but we don't qualify. Can you believe that?! They won't because my Mom committed suicide and I'm on antidepressants and we dont' have any family to speak of that would be around! It's really annoying.

"In short, it's like what Jaqueline of happy memory once posted"

"Of happy memory"? Nothing happened to her, did it?

Once again, my sarcasm just isn't flying.

No, Bambino, I don't think she's hurt. Just haven't seen the sparks fly off the keyboard since she hasn't posted in such a long while.

With the exception of MK, of course.

Jill,

When you finally get a response from David Kinsella, ask him if he has any intentions of following up on any of those poor moaning moms, say, some years from now.

That's been one of my biggest question marks since I saw the "Abortion Clinic" documentary in the summer: What's happened to those girls now? Are they alive? With children? Proud? Remorseful? Cavalier?

@Bobby
Yeah it does make sense. But then wouldn't it just be as easy to abort?
http://www.sisterzeus.com/Abortif.htm
And it would just be more dangerous and worse for everyone. We need to find stop unwanted pregnancies. Every pregnancy should be wanted.

@carder
Well I do have a uterus, lol. So I guess I am sincere about finding smart, useful solutions to this problems. Women's health problems are grossly ignored in this country.

@valerie
No, it has to be more then $5,000 in total. Where did you find that?

I couldn't adopt a child now regardless. It would be like, "ok here's the drawer you're going to live in. Are you hungry? We have Ramen."

valerie --

In 1988 I had comprehensive sex education from the school and from the Mom who was an RN who witnesses a "botched" abortion. (I just found out about that! My Dad told me about it - he thought I knew!)

We were one of the first school districts in Indiana to initiate comprehensive sex ed and it was a Catholic High School. (and yes, it was comprehenisive. Everything I learned was accurate information)

Since then - in America: Abortion has increased.

That's not true at all. Abortion rates in the US have been declining steadily since 1981, and are at their lowest levels since 1974.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/94822

I couldn't adopt a child now regardless. It would be like, "ok here's the drawer you're going to live in. Are you hungry? We have Ramen."

LOL.

Jess,

"Yeah it does make sense. But then wouldn't it just be as easy to abort?"

Well, perhaps. If people can find ways to skirt around the law, then there needs to be measures taken to prevent that, though I don't know what such measures might be in the herbal case you brought up. But that is really besides the point. Consider for the sake of argument that 1) abortion is prima facie murder of an innocent, intrinsically valuable human being and 2) the fetus' right to life trumps the right to bodily autonomy. If one accepts both premises 1) and 2), then it follows that the law must protect them.

And I agree with you about needing to stop unwanted pregnancies, but again, if we accept 1) and 2) above, then killing the fetus is not an option. So really, the entire debate focuses on those two premises.

Answer me this.

Why aren't those tell-all abortion documentaries and flicks not making headlines on the Big Abortion websites?

Why is it that pro-lifers will show what it is and Big Abortion won't?

I think I know the answer from our choicers, so spare me the flames. Thanks.

@carder
What pro-choice sites are you going to? I only come to this site, even though it's pro-life, because I like the discussion.

Why aren't those tell-all abortion documentaries and flicks not making headlines on the Big Abortion websites?

Why is it that pro-lifers will show what it is and Big Abortion won't?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'Cause no one's all that interested.

The MOTHER OF ALL ABORTION DOCUMENTARIES "Lake of Fire" is released to home video on March 11th. You can put it on you Netflix queue.
You can rent all of the latest abortion documentaries there.

In dealing with unwanted pregnancies, it's not the pregnancy that is bad, it's the unwantedness of the pregnancy and the desire to get rid of it that is the moral dilemma. I think we need to educate people to respect and value human life - to reduce unwantedness, thus reducing abortion.

I would venture to say that 99 % of pro-lifers are not in favor of prosecuting a woman for her abortion, but for prosecuting the doctor who performs them. I think the idea of throwing the woman in jail was probably created by the PC'rs to sensationalize the issue and encourage sympathy for the women to further their agenda.

Samantha, to answer your question, I did intentionally obstain from sex before marriage, and I didn't marry until the age of 33. I wasn't locked-up in a convent somewhere. I dated. It wasn't easy. Of course it wasn't always easy, but looking back, I wouldn't do it any other way.

I think I have heard stories of women harassed by police after having a miscarriage. I'll look for them, hang on, I'll search the web. But do you understand my concern?

Yes,I definitely understand what you're saying, Jess...

I think Bobby's 3:38 post was an excellent answer to the question...what do you think about what he said there? :)

By the way, I second what Carder said about Jess. It really is nice to talk to someone who seems to be sincerely trying to discuss this (as opposed to people like Laura who are just trying to find some way to spin it and turn it into something sarcastic or a joke)

I actually really enjoy talking to someone when I feel that they are sincere, no matter what their beliefs are.

At least this pro-abort Dr. is honest enough to say what abortion is - legalized murder, albeit in such a matter of fact way.

If we could get the dishonest pro-aborts on this site to demonstrate the same sort of integrity, perhaps, we could start the conversation.

Until then, we pro-lifers get to agonize over the systematic and legal extermination of innocent infants by their own mothers and those who would assist them.

By the way, despite this doctor's honest description of what an abortion is, she is still culpable for killing these children and will ultimately be held responsible for their blood.

http://news.aol.com/health/story/_a/us-abortion-rate-lowest-since-1974/20080117145809990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

Abortion Rates are at a record low in the US...

Out of 6,578 people;
49% said that abortions should stay legal
27% said that "" should be illegal
24% said they should be legal in certain circumstances....

And y'all are upset why??

Midnite678:

If murder rates were down in this country should we fire the police? Should we not prosecute murderers?

The murder of one infant is too much.

The goal is to terminate abortion and not innocent children.

It's a life not a choice. If one says that life begins at birth then the assumption is that it was dead when it was in the womb. Tell me, how does life erupt from something dead? There are simply no scientific examples of life beginning from something dead....name just one.

How's the snozzola?

@Bethany + Bobby
I don't have enough faith in the legal system to assume there wouldn't be a witch hunt. I personally want the Army of God to have as little influence in my life as possible. There are a lot of psychotic uber conservative hateful "Christians" out there and yes, I would love for things to go bad for them (not you two but I think you know who I mean). I don't even mean HisMan. HisMan is pretty good at the whole, "I'll find out where you live and throw things at you" but there's a whole nuther scary side I don't want getting power.

And I also personally love Laura. She's funny and often comes up with good points and almost always cites her sources.

Honestly HisMan, you would love to see me hit by lightening wouldn't you?

I think Zeke is worse then HisMan though. There are those out there though worse then him.

If I saw either I'd probably just run away. And nothing would ever get accomplished.

Midnite,

That's 51% of the people who think it should be illegal or legal only in certain circumstances, most often rape, incest, or threat to the life of the mother. These circumstances account for less than 3% of the abortions performed.
No, we really shouldn't be upset by those numbers, in fact I find them very encouraging.

Jess,

With the limited time on my hands, I briefly visited and searched NARAL, NOW, P. PARENTHOOD, and RH Reality Check. Searching for "Killing Girls" did not result in the documentary. Perhaps it's premature at this point.

Laura-turned-Fascist,

I would venture to say that in addition to indifference, it just wouldn't be good publicity to support a documentary that has the title "Killing Girls". And a degraded abortionist spinning out pro-life quotes doesn't help the cause none too much.

They'd probably fare better with a different title such as "Autonomy In Action" or "Orphans Not".

Or maybe "Teen Vodka".

I'd like to see a source for your claims about the abortion rate in Russia and the availability of contraceptives there.

When I was there (1984) the economy was dysfunctional, so you couldn't get contraceptives, and abortion was the most common method of reproductive control.

My bet would be that as contraceptives have become available, the abortion rate in Russia would drop considerably--it has a long way to drop!

Remember the LANCET article a few weeks ago and the Katha Pollit article in THE NATION? That article said Eastern Europe has seen the greatest decline in abortion rates as contraceptives have become available there.

I had a Russian roommate in college who had 4 abortions at the time, which was 3 years ago, 2 of them in the year and a half I lived with her.

When I told her that as much as I'm pro choice, dialating the cervix THAT many times in such a short period of time could potentially make it harder for her to have children in the future, and she may want to think about an IUD, she just rolled her eyes and made a comment to me about Americans being too obsessed with health problems they have no control over.

She grew up in Russia, where there is no sex education other than movies and peers.

I know Jill and some of the others on this board are opposed to contraception and comprehensive sex ed, but I ask you to consider this...

She and I were the same age...about the same income level, and lived in the same house. We both had similar lifestyles. We both had steady boyfriends with whom we were sexually active.

I had comprehensive sex ed through the Unitarian church, and was on the pill AND using condoms.

She grew up in Russia with no sex ed, and thought the pill made her fat and condoms smelled bad.

She had 4 abortions.

I had none.

She contracted HPV.

I didn't.

No documentary or very honest nurse is going to change the typical Russian woman's view of abortion. Plain and simple, their culture and education system is ENORMOUSLY different from ours, and they just don't see abortion the way Americans do...even pro choice Americans.

I would venture to say that in addition to indifference, it just wouldn't be good publicity to support a documentary that has the title "Killing Girls". And a degraded abortionist spinning out pro-life quotes doesn't help the cause none too much.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hollywood is run by total whores.
If there was money to be made on a documentary like "Killing Girls" it would be shown on every movie screen and television in America.
The truth is that there's no market for a documentary like that. (You'll notice that documentaries like "Fahrenheit 911" "March of the Penguins" "Jesus Camp" "Winged Migration" or "Sicko" make it to plenty of screens, and get tons of network play.)

SOMG,

According to the video, contraceptives are available and the doctor couldn't understand why the women didn't use them.

They just don't see abortion the way Americans do...even pro choice Americans.

The woman who was the head of surgery obviously did..she in fact called it "legalized murder."

It is interesting to see how other cultures perceive these issues though. It makes me glad I am an American, because at least over here there are people who are outraged by abortion. Over there, they just don't know enough to care. Which makes me quite sad. I would get a plane ticket in a heartbeat if I had the money...or room in this house of 7 people, 2 dogs, and cat.

Elizabeth,

Just as some cultures view killing girls and women for "honor" and relegating women to second class citizenship acceptable.

Like you, I am thankful to be American.

One of my professional ballet dancer friends who I have performed with a couple of times is from Cuba and once we were talking about what Cuba is like and he said: "If you're lucky enough to be born in America, you're lucky enough." Spoken from the mouth of somebody who KNOWS.

Amanda,

There is some difference between America and Russia when it comes to abortion. But, both kill innocent unborn children by the millions.

It used to be that being pregnant was a protective factor and that pregnant women had a lower death rate than women who were not pregnant of the same age.

Not anymore! Now being pregnant makes one more likely to die. The number one cause of death for pregnant women is homicide. In the majority of cases the woman is killed in retaliation for refusing to abort. So much for a woman's right to choose. The so called pro-choice movement is been deafeningly silent about this, so don't count on help from them, ladies.

While the killings of these pregnant women is in no way the fault of the woman and is totally the fault of the person doing the killing, there are still some things that women can do to protect themselves.

Before you start a relationship with someone, find out if he's pro-life. Don't proceed with a relationship with someone who is NOT pro-life. In no case should you marry or have sex with someone who is pro-choice. If you end up pregnant, he might only supports a woman's right to choose IF you choose abortion as HE wants; his choice, not yours. If you wants to choose life, he's against your right to choose. He might even kill you to prevent the baby from being born.

If you're already pregnant, if the man in your life has some rough edges to his personality, and he is NOT pro-life, then maybe it is best to keep the pregnancy a secret. Since abortion is legal in all nine months of pregnancy, you might have to keep the secret until after the baby is born. Otherwise you may be faced with a coerced 8 month abortion, instead of a coerced 3 month abortion. Later abortions are harder on both the baby and the mother.

You may have to leave town for a while. Your local Crisis Pregnancy Center can help you with that, and a place to stay.

The law is on your side, you are not legally obligated to have an abortion.

Also pray about the situation.
God bless you.

Wow...paranoia much?

and there you have it.... proof of the massive failure of our education system. Good God, that made my head hurt.

Jess,

The only lightning I want to strike you is the light(ning) of truth....the truth that abortion is murder and not condoned by the Creator.

No, I do not wnat anyone to be hurt by lightning or any other calamity. Why do you think we pro-lifers spend so much time trying to reason with you guys?

I am trying to protect people, especially pro-aborts, from themselves and I am sorry but I have to take a hard line.

Abortion is destructive and is not a solution to an unwanted infant. Faith and trust in God is the solution. That means that while things may be dark for a while in the difficult situation of an unintended or unwanted pregnancy, the mature and right thing to do is to have the baby, deal with the consequences, and watch that baby become a blessing. It takes time and patience but what in life that is good doesn't take time?

If God instituted goverment for the protection of us all, even the unborn, it needs to eliminate accessibility to abortion.

"In the majority of cases the woman is killed in retaliation for refusing to abort."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What a load.
FAR AND AWAY the greatest cause of hostility in a married relationship is money. Substance abuse is also a common factor.
I've never heard "refusing to abort" as a popular path to homicide.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"If you're already pregnant, if the man in your life has some rough edges to his personality, and he is NOT pro-life, then maybe it is best to keep the pregnancy a secret. Since abortion is legal in all nine months of pregnancy, you might have to keep the secret until after the baby is born. Otherwise you may be faced with a coerced 8 month abortion, instead of a coerced 3 month abortion. Later abortions are harder on both the baby and the mother."

...And then sue for child support.
Hon, you're a known quantity. No one has ever been "coerced" into an abortion. They choose abortion of their own free will and take responsibility for their decision.

Why do you call yourself FF?

Please answer, thanks.

Why do you call yourself FF?

Please answer, thanks.

Posted by: HisMan at January 17, 2008 10:51 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I was "Laura," but we suddenly had three "Lauras" on the board. It was confusing.
Truthseeker called me a "FetusFascist" and I liked it.

So Fetus Fascist, you think that nobody ever got coerced into an abortion? I suggest that you go to the Google search page and enter in "forced abortion," or "coerced abortion." Then push enter and see what comes up. Then read some of the stuff there.

What you learn doing this will curl your hair. It's women giving personal testimonies of what they went through. But these stories are only from women who survived. There are also some second hand stories about women who can't tell their stories, because they are dead for refusing abortion.

Is anyone else having problems uploading videos on youtube?

CeeCee:

Hi.

Nice to meet you.

I understand fully what you are trying to say.

What percentage of abortions do you think are forced or coerced versus those that are made by choice?

Also, I believe there's a form of subtle coercion in the sense that if a woman felt she could survive financially she would never have an abortion. So, those women who are pregnant and have a boyfriend that would leave them, or if they were single and in school, etc., etc., decide to have a abortion when, under different corcumstances, wouldn't.

Isn't it up to us then as pro-lifers to identify those issues and try to help as much as we could?

There are coerced abortions in China, but not in USA.

Ultimately, the patients choose for themselves. Emotional pressure is not coersion.

This is just another excuse to meddle with women making their own decisions.

The disciples approached Jesus and said, "Who is the greatest in the Kingdom of heaven? He called a child over, placed it in their midst, and said, "Amen, I say to you unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the Kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the Kindom of heaven. And whosoever receives one child such as this in my name receives me.

See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my heavenly Father.

Matthew 18: 1-5, 10

SOMG 12:28am,

Have you never heard of emotional abuse and just how destructive it can be? What do you mean emotional pressure is not coercion?
Ignoring her, threatening to abandon and actually abandoning the woman, threats of violence if she doesn't abort, denigrating her, badgering her with what an unnessary expense and bother another baby is.
Yes SOMG, emotional pressure is definitely coercion.

Abortion is evil.

"The most prolific mother was the wife of Feodor Vassilyev, who had 69 children between 1725 and 1765." She was from Russia."

Jess: Does anyone know what type of sex education they have in Russia?

It must be incredible if it enables women to have that many kids.

Just this morning my littlest one got a whole floss dispenser and unraveled all of the floss around chairs, under the table, around all of his toys, and all around his body. I had to cut him out of it... Then he emptied a case of 350 BBs that go to Caleb's BBgun onto the kitchen floor. That took forever to clean up. LOL

Ha! Love those stories, Bethany! Classics.

Doug

Just haven't seen the sparks fly off the keyboard since she (Jacqueline) hasn't posted in such a long while.

Carder - right on - her "fire" really does come across, doesn't it? I miss her.

Mary, you wrote: "Ignoring her, threatening to abandon and actually abandoning the woman, threats of violence if she doesn't abort, denigrating her, badgering her with what an unnessary expense and bother another baby is."

I agree that the threat of violence would constitute coersion. If that happens, she can go to the police.

However, ignoring her, threatening to abandon her, actually abandoning her, denigrating her, and badgering her are NOT coersion.

The sensationalism about so-called "coerced abortions" is just another excuse for government to interfere with the patients' decisions.

Agreed, SoMG. Coercion, either way, is not what Pro-Choicers want.

Anonymous,

With threats of violence its not a simple matter of going to the police. She may be too fearful and the police may not necessarily be able to do much more than take a report and advise the woman. The police can't go after him for what he might do.

I have to completely disagree that the rest is not coercion. It most certainly can be. The woman may abort because of fear for her safety, continuous badgering and lack of support and concern, fear of loss of security for herself and children, fear of losing a man she loves, fear of months of mental cruelty and denigration.
Yes, this is coercion.

What are your feelings on Crisis Pregnancy Centers, anonymous?

Ha! Love those stories, Bethany! Classics.
Doug

Thanks, Doug...I have plenty more...involving crisco, olive oil, croutons and toothpaste, and poop. lol

Mary, completely agreed! If anyone thinks those things are not coercion, they have never met anyone in an abusive (physically or emotionally) relationship.

SoMg, have you ever been in an abusive or controlling relationship, do you know how hard it is to go to the police or to get help, especially when you're emotionally, physically, or financially dependent on the person? You claim to oppose coercion, but turn a blind eye to it and minimize these women's experiences. Obviously they know better than you what they did or did not experience and for you to say otherwise, unless you've walked in every one of those women's shoes, is ridiculous! No, of course stories of coercion or negative outcomes after an abortion isn't what pro-choicers want to acknowledge, because it tarnishes the images of their sacred sacrement (or right of passage as some would say) of abortion

Agreed, SoMG. Coercion, either way, is not what Pro-Choicers want.

What are pro-choicers doing to prevent coercion from boyfriends/husbands,etc, Doug? Shutting your eyes and saying it doesn't happen doesn't change reality. Where is the action that pro-choicers who do not like coercion are taking to prevent this from happening to women who are emotionally pressured into abortion by their partner?

You have claimed in the past that evidence that women feel no regret after abortion is shown because there are women here who claim to have abortions and not regret it.

Yet, you also seem to feel that the fact that women are coerced into abortion by their partner is false, even though several people in the last few months have claimed this happened to them.

Why the double standard, Doug? Why do you believe some women and not others?

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/dec/06121306.html
Pro-Abortion Groups Fighting Michigan Ban on Coerced Abortion
NOW says bill’s proposed 24 hour waiting period is a violation of women’s rights

By Hilary White

LANSING, December 13, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Abortion advocates are trying to halt the passage of a set of five bills, collectively called the Coercive Abortion Bills, that aim to protect women from coerced abortion. The bills are being considered by the Michigan Senate Health Policy Committee, having already passed the House this summer.

The bills have enraged the Michigan branch of the National Organization of Women who say the bill’s proposed 24 hour waiting period is a violation of women’s rights. Kary Moss, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan wrote on the NOW website that if Michigan lawmakers want to help women “avoid pregnancy,” they ought to subsidize contraceptives. Her only suggestion to address the problem of coerced abortion was to recommend increasing funding for battered women’s shelters

The bills however, were crafted after statistics and stories of women and girls being forced or threatened to have abortions, often by their families, came to light.

One bill, HB 5879, requires a physician to perform a Coercion and Intimidation Screening and include in the acknowledgement and consent form “I understand that it is illegal for anyone to coerce or intimidate me into seeking an abortion.”

Another lays down the screening stipulations which include a requirement that the physician give the patient information on how to contact law enforcement and domestic violence shelters if she says she is being intimidated or coerced. Child Protective Services must be contacted if the patient is under 18 and says she is being coerced or intimidated.

HB 5882 establishes criminal penalties. If the pregnant woman is under the age of 18 and the perpetrator of the coercion is the adult father of the unborn child, the punishment would be imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $5000, or both.

The bills’ definition of “coercion” includes, “physical abuse, stalking, filing or threat to file for divorce, withdrawal or threat to withdraw financial support, change or threaten to change an existing housing arrangement, terminate or change in conditions of employment.”

The Michigan bills recognize that women who abort their children are often under pressure from family members, boyfriends or husbands. An even more sinister side is the evidence that shows the abortion industry is colluding with adult men who sexually abuse young girls and use the local abortion facility to cover up their misdeeds.

Elliot Institute Director Dr. David Reardon co-authored a Medical Science Monitor study of American and Russian women that found that 64 percent of American women who had abortions reported that they felt pressured to abort by others.

Michigan Right to Life notes that statistics show that the leading cause of death of pregnant women is homicide. One study published in 2005 in the American Journal of Public Health showed that pregnant black women are up to 7 times more likely to die by violence than white women.

Recent news reports have spurred on the passage of the bills. In one case in the state of New York a pregnant teenage girl was forced by her mother to drink turpentine in an effort to abort the child.

This September, a Maine couple was charged with kidnapping when they attempted to force their pregnant daughter to have an abortion across state lines. Nicholas and Lola Kampf had tied their daughter up in the back of their car and the girl was able to call 911 when she asked to be released to use the bathroom.

In November, news reports carried the story of a teenage girl who was taken to an Illinois abortion facility by the man who raped her.

Bethany,

You would think NOW would be in the front lines supporting laws against coercion.
What better way to protect freedom of choice?

Man charged with assault in stillbirth
1/11/2008, 6:37 a.m. EST
The Associated Press

WESTLAND, Mich. (AP) — A 24-year-old college student faces life in prison on charges of killing his girlfriend's unborn child by beating her.

Westland police allege Daniel Jarrett II of Wayne threw the 19-year-old to the ground several times and kicked her in the abdomen after she told him she didn't get an abortion.

The Detroit News and WDIV-TV report Jarrett turned himself in three days after the January 3 incident.
http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/news-49/1200051861192450.xml&storylist=newsmichigan

Sorry, here's the full article:

Man charged with assault in stillbirth
1/11/2008, 6:37 a.m. EST
The Associated Press

WESTLAND, Mich. (AP) — A 24-year-old college student faces life in prison on charges of killing his girlfriend's unborn child by beating her.

Westland police allege Daniel Jarrett II of Wayne threw the 19-year-old to the ground several times and kicked her in the abdomen after she told him she didn't get an abortion.

The Detroit News and WDIV-TV report Jarrett turned himself in three days after the January 3 incident.

The Texas woman was five months' pregnant. Labor was induced after doctors discovered the fetus had no heartbeat, and the 21-week-old was delivered stillborn.

Police didn't reveal the gender.

Jarrett is charged with assault of a pregnant woman causing a miscarriage/stillbirth.

A preliminary hearing is set for Thursday.
http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/news-49/1200051861192450.xml&storylist=newsmichigan

Most abortions are coerced or unwanted, based on insufficient information:

64% involve coercion. A study published in a major international medical journal found that 64% of American women who had abortions felt pressured by others.(1) Coercion can include loss of home, job or family, and even violent assault.(2)

Up to 83% wanted to have the baby. In a survey of women who sought help after abortion, 83% said they would have carried to term if they had received support from the baby’s father, their family, or other important people in their lives.(3)

In 95% of cases, men play a central role in the decision to abort according to a survey of women at abortion clinics.(4)

Husbands and boyfriends threaten women at the clinic. A former abortion clinic security guard testified before the Massachusetts legislature that women were routinely threatened and abused by the husbands and boyfriends who took them to the clinics to make sure they had abortions.(5)

Dangerous consequences if she resists. Coercion can escalate to violence and even murder.(2) Homicide is the leading killer of pregnant women.(6)

The “Forced Abortion in America” report includes examples of molesters posing as fathers to procure cover-up abortions and women being fired, beaten, shot, stabbed, tortured or killed for refusing to abort.(2)

Not given enough information.

• 67% said they received no counseling beforehand.

• 84% reported they received inadequate counseling beforehand.

• 54% were not sure about their decision at the time, yet 79% were not counseled about alternatives.(1)

Rushed into abortion. Many women may be making hasty, ill-considered decisions for abortion, according to journal articles by the National Abortion Federation. (7) One in five women served by their clinics are philosophically and morally opposed to abortion.(8) A recent study found that 52% needed more time to make their decision.(1)

Deception and sales tactics. Many who sought answers and help, instead encountered pressure from “counselors” trained to sell abortions in profit-driven clinics.(9) In a survey of women experiencing problems after abortion:

• 66% said counselor’s advice was very biased

• 44% hoped to find an alternative

• 60% were uncertain of their decision

• 71% felt their questions were ignored or trivialized.(3)

Source:
1. VM Rue et. al., “Induced abortion and traumatic stress: A preliminary comparison of American and Russian women,” Medical Science Monitor 10(10): SR5-16, 2004.

2. See the special report, “Forced Abortion in America,” at www.unchoice.info/resources.htm.

3. D. Reardon, Aborted Women, Silent No More (Springfield: IL, Acorn Books, 2002)

4. M.K. Zimmerman, Psassages Through Abortion (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1977)

5. Brian McQuarrie, “Guard, clinic at odds at abortion hearing,” Boston Globe, April 16, 1999.

6. I.L. Horton and D. Cheng, “Enhanced Surveillance for Pregnancy-Associated Mortality-Maryland, 1993-1998,” JAMA 285(11): 1455-1459 (2001); see also J. Mcfarlane et. al., "Abuse During Pregnancy and Femicide: Urgent Implications for Women's Health," Obstetrics & Gynecology 100: 27-36 (2002).

7. U. Landy, “Abortion Counseling – A Component of Medical Care,” Clinics in Obs/Gyn 13(1):33-41, 1986.

8. J. Woo, “Abortion Doctor’s Patients Broaden Suits,” Wall Street Journal Oct. 28, 1994, B12:1.

9. Carol Everett with Jack Shaw,, Blood Money (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Books, 1992).

Compiled by
http://www.clinicquotes.com/

From http://www.afterabortion.info/PAR/V8/n1/coercedabortions.html

Lorena Rivera, a 21-year-old legal receptionist, disappeared while on her way to work in Oklahoma City in April 1997. More than a month later, her body was found buried in a shallow grave. Rivera, 21 weeks pregnant and the mother of a three-year-old son, had been shot twice and beaten to death.

Rivera's friends testified at her killer's trial that Rivera was delighted to be having a baby. Apparently her 20-year-old boyfriend, Nathaniel Dee Smith, was not. Police say Smith murdered Rivera because she refused to have an abortion and he didn't want to pay child support. Smith was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. (The Oklahoman, 6/2/99)

Sadly, women who resist the pressure of others to abort often face violent, and even deadly, reprisals. It is not uncommon for attacks on reluctant women to take place even on the doorstep of an abortion clinic. In one incident that led to prosecution for assault and battery, a man began to beat his girlfriend when she balked at the clinic door and refused to enter (The Washington Times, 8/18/97).

According to the sworn testimony of Richard Seron, a security guard wounded during an abortion clinic shooting in 1994, such conduct is not uncommon. According to Seron, the greatest threat to women near abortion clinics is not from pro-life protestors, but rather from the men who are accompanying their wives or girlfriends to the clinic. (Boston Globe, 4/16/99)

Examples of murder stemming from women refusing abortion are shockingly common. Here are a few examples from recent news reports.

* Sonya Hayes of Toledo, Ohio, refused to abort because of her religious convictions. Her boyfriend, Terrance Davis, 27, allegedly shot her in the stomach, killing her and her unborn son. Prosecutors have said it was obvious that the gunman was aiming for the unborn child when he fired the gun. (Associated Press, 2/8/00)

* In California, Alfred E. Smith was convicted of second-degree murder for killing his pregnant girlfriend in 1997, then burning her car in an attempt to hide the body. Prosecutors said Smith killed his girlfriend, Deborah Moody, for refusing to have an abortion because of her religious beliefs. (Los Angeles Times, 5/21/98)

* In Wyoming, 38-year-old Kevin Robinson was convicted for killing 15-year-old Daphne Sulk because she refused to get an abortion. Defense attorneys countered that Robinson and the victim did not know each other well. (Village Voice, 10/3/98)

* In Great Britain, Brian Smith repeatedly stabbed Amanda Hunter in the stomach, planning to kill her and her seven-month-old baby. Both survived, however, and Smith was sentenced to life in prison. (Electronic Telegraph, 11/23/99)

More from the same source- I wanted to break it up a little:

* In Arkansas, four men have been charged with capital murder under the state's new Fetal Protection Act for beating a women who was due to give birth any day, resulting in the death of her baby daughter. Police say one of the men, Eric Bullock, was the woman's boyfriend and that he hired the other men to attack her after she refused to have an abortion. Shawana Pace told police that she pleaded for her baby's life as she was beaten, and that one of the men told her, "Your baby is dying tonight." (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 11/9/99)

* In New York, a 32-year-old medical resident was charged with assault and unauthorized practice of medicine for performing an unwanted abortion on his girlfriend. Police said that Mark Redeker blindfolded his girlfriend, tied her up, and injected her with a drug that caused her to miscarry. (Pro-Life Infonet, 9/3/98)

* Nicholas Griffin, a Florida law school graduate, was sentenced to five years probation and 250 hours of community service for trying to force his ex-girlfriend to abort their daughter. Griffin had hired friends to blackmail his girlfriend by threatening to mail copies of a videotape the couple had made of themselves having sex to the woman's family, friends and employer unless she had the abortion. (Miami Herald, 2/7/99)

* A female inmate is suing the Hawaii state corrections system after a nurse injected the birth control drug Depo-Provera into her abdomen when she was processed into prison, causing the death of her unborn child. The lawsuit alleges that the nurse knew of the pregnancy and that the inmate was told she would be put in solitary confinement if the intake process did not go smoothly. (Honolulu Star Bulletin, 8/3/99)

* Shontrese Otrey won a $25,000 settlement from Emergency Shelters, Inc., of Richmond, Va., after she was pressured by staff members to get an abortion. Otrey said she was told that the shelter did not provide services for pregnant homeless women. She stated that a staff member drove her to the bank to withdraw money for the abortion, then took her to the abortion clinic. (Richmond Times Dispatch, 10/29/99)

* Nicole Bergstrom Ek of Minnesota won an out-of-court settlement of an undisclosed amount from her employer, Duluth Little Stores, after her boss tried to pressure her to abort. Ek said her boss mistreated her while she was pregnant and threatened to push her down the stairs during her sixth month of pregnancy. (Pro-Life Infonet, 8/2/99)

* A federal judge in Florida has dismissed a lawsuit against an abortion clinic brought by a woman who says she was held down by staff members when she tried to leave in the middle of an abortion. The woman said she experienced severe pain during the abortion and made repeated requests to be taken to the emergency room. The lawsuit contended that actions by staff members at Aware Woman Center for Choice in Melbourne violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, but the judge disagreed and dismissed the case. He also ruled the women could not pursue the case under an alias. (Associated Press, 1/8/00)

Quoting FF (Laura):
"I've never heard "refusing to abort" as a popular path to homicide."

" No one has ever been "coerced" into an abortion. "

"Nothing shatters the illusion of choice as fast as clear evidence that most abortions are unwanted, coerced or even forced, and that the aftermath of this counterfeit "choice" is literally traumatizing and killing women."

http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/1135/26/

I would venture to say that 99 % of pro-lifers are not in favor of prosecuting a woman for her abortion, but for prosecuting the doctor who performs them. I think the idea of throwing the woman in jail was probably created by the PC'rs to sensationalize the issue and encourage sympathy for the women to further their agenda.

This is really important to understand. We are not out to punish women. Of course, abortions will still happen. But this isn't about rounding up all the women in the country who abort. It's about making a statement, as a country, that we won't allow this in our home. We are better than that.

Any "doctor" who preforms them should be held accountable, but the practical aspects of "catching" every women that aborts are nigh impossible.

So please don't think that we're all rubbing our hands together, Snidely Whiplash style, and saying "ooooooh, there gonna get theres!"

The first step is to make continuing the pregnancy worthwhile. The second is to make people understand that sex leads to pregnancy...and that once you are pregnant, you are pregnant. If you choose to play russian roulette and try using birth control, but it fails, well thems the consequences. Period.

In my house, I give all the girls that date my boys the same speech. It's not that abortion is an option that we reject...It's that abortion is simply NOT an option...

MK,

And what would happen if any of those girls responded by saying that they did not share your convictions?

Rachel,

SoMg, have you ever been in an abusive or controlling relationship

You'll need to clarify which end of the relationship you mean...

THE COERCION!

In the past month I've had three - count 'em three - different religious groups come to my door. They continue to leave literature all the time.
They have threatened my very existence. Apparently if I don't succumb to their magic invisible sky fairy, I will never know eternal life, and will be given some sort of death sentence.
Shouldn't people who use this sort of coercion - much less threaten my very life - be lined up against a wall and shot?
...Or should I act like an American adult and make my own decisions?
Anyone who can be "coerced" into making that sort of decision against their will is WAY too stupid and passive to be raising children.

Anon,

My sons feel the same way, and wouldn't be "sexually" invovlved with a girl that would abort...

One son called me from California because a friend of his got a girl pregnant and she aborted the child against his wishes. I met the guy and we talked for hours. I was there when the phone call from the girl came. Suffice it to say, the guy is a wreck.

My other son has been dating the same girl for 8 years...she feels as we do.

The other son married the girl he got pregnant and they just had their second baby...she was prochoice when I met her, but after talking (and viewing those graphic pics you guys hate) she changed her mind.

Thank God, I haven't had to deal with a girl that radically pro-choice, or to watch one of my grandchild killed, but I can tell you I would do EVERYTHING IN MY POWER, to prevent it from happening...including adopting the baby, paying for anything that needed to be paid for, and tying her up for nine months...okay, maybe not that last one...but seriously, I don't think any of my kids would be party to aborting...

Let's get Dr. Irina and Dr. Wicklund together over some vodka and let the camera roll.

Our own documentary. "Fetal Attraction" or "No Respect".

I've never heard "refusing to abort" as a popular path to homicide."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No, homicide is the leading cause of death among pregnant American women. The majority of those deaths involve disputes over money or substance abuse. Are you planning on outlawing money to prevent the murder of pregnant women?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

" No one has ever been "coerced" into an abortion. "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yup, because in the very end we all make our own decisions. When Susan Smith decided to kill her two small children in order to hold on to her boyfriend, did we accuse him of "coercion," or did we just make her totally accountable for her own ADULT DECISION?

Laura,

But we DID hold her accountable for killing her children, didn't we. Not so with women who kill them younger...

Anyone who can be "coerced" into making that sort of decision against their will is WAY too stupid and passive to be raising children.

...And FF explains how she thinks women who choose abortion are stupid.

In the past month I've had three - count 'em three - different religious groups come to my door. They continue to leave literature all the time.

Are you in a serious, emotionally attached relationship (not to mention sexual) with your religious groups, Laura? Do you love these religious groups, Laura?

Cause if not, I don't see the correlation here.

Laura, aka FF: Were you the one who found the article about the reprogrammed adult stem cells actually using embryonic DNA, and if so, could you send me a link to the article? And if anyone else here knows what I'm talking about and can send me in the right direction, I'd be eternally grateful. I wanted to bring the article into my embryonic development course in biology, thanks. :D

Anyone who can be "coerced" into making that sort of decision against their will is WAY too stupid and passive to be raising children.

...and FF explains how she agrees with the baby code put forth by Margaret Sanger.

*********

Article 1. The purpose of the American Baby Code should be to provide for a better distribution of babies. to assist couples who wish to prevent overproduction of offspring and thus to reduce the burden of charity and taxation for public relief and to protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit.

Article 2. Birth control clinics shall be permitted to function as services of government health departments or under the support of charity, or as nonprofit, self-sustaining agencies subject to inspection and control by public authorities.

Article 3. A marriage license shall in itself give husband and wife only the right to a common household and not the right to parenthood.

Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for parenthood.

Article 5. Permits for parenthood shall be issued by government authorities to married couples upon application, providing the parents are financially able to support the expected child, have the qualifications needed for proper rearing of the child, have no transmissible diseases, and on the woman's part no indication that maternity is likely to result in death or permanent injury to health.

Article 6. No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.

Article 7. Every county shall be assisted administratively by the state in the effort to maintain a direct ratio between the county birth rate and its index of child welfare. When the county records show an unfavorable variation from this ratio the county shall be taxed by the State.... The revenues thus obtained shall be expended by the State within the given county in giving financial support to birth control....

Article 8. Feeble-minded persons, habitual congenital criminals, those afflicted with inheritable diseases, and others found biologically unfit should be sterilized or in cases of doubt should be isolated as to prevent the perpetuation of their afflictions by breeding.

But we DID hold her accountable for killing her children, didn't we. Not so with women who kill them younger...

Posted by: mk at January 18, 2008 10:19 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yes, but it must be ENTIRELY her boyfriend's fault for coercing her to make that decision. You know, 'cause women are too stupid to make decisions like that...
Let her go, lock up the boyfriend (sarc)

Laura, aka FF: Were you the one who found the article about the reprogrammed adult stem cells actually using embryonic DNA, and if so, could you send me a link to the article? And if anyone else here knows what I'm talking about and can send me in the right direction, I'd be eternally grateful. I wanted to bring the article into my embryonic development course in biology, thanks. :D

Posted by: Lyssie at January 18, 2008 10:26 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2008/jan/08010803.html

FF 10:14am

Susan Smith's boyfriend had no knowledge of her intention to kill her children nor did he in any way shape of form suggest she should. He had ended the relationship with her and in her sick head she saw this as a way of holding on to him.
One could hardly accuse him of coercion.

Thanks, FF. That's a big help. :D

One could hardly accuse him of coercion.

Posted by: Mary at January 18, 2008 10:42 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No, no, no-
He broke up with her because he didn't want kids - his letter was brought up as evidence in her trial.
Clearly he "coerced" her to make that decision. It's all his fault (sarc)

...And FF explains how she thinks women who choose abortion are stupid.

Posted by: Bethany at January 18, 2008 10:20 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No, often the decision to have an abortion is the smartest one a women can make.
It's certainly better than cranking out a brat you never wanted and leaving him to suffer while you go party.
If a woman told you that she neglected her toddler and partied "because my boyfriend wouldn't love me unless I did," would you consider her too stupid to raise a child?
I would...

FF,

I realize you're being sarcastic. There are real life situations however where women are coerced and threatened.

Apparently college football star Ray Carruth had threatened the life of a girlfriend if she didn't have an abortion so she aborted. Another girlfriend who went to term with her pregnancy was shot and killed by a hired thug of Carruth's, the child survived with severe disabilities.

Coercion can come in the form of physical threats and /or emotional abuse. The first girlfriend apparently had good reason to fear for her life, as is seen with the death of the second girlfriend.

Are you in a serious, emotionally attached relationship (not to mention sexual) with your religious groups, Laura? Do you love these religious groups, Laura?

Posted by: Bethany at January 18, 2008 10:22 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I don't love them, but I've had sex with all of them. The noviates at Sacred Heart are a pack of TOTAL hotties..

No, often the decision to have an abortion is the smartest one a women can make.
It's certainly better than cranking out a brat you never wanted and leaving him to suffer while you go party.
If a woman told you that she neglected her toddler and partied "because my boyfriend wouldn't love me unless I did," would you consider her too stupid to raise a child?

Nice spin, Laura, but it is not going to work.

Carder,

you wrote,

Glorious, just glorious.

Not too long ago the Russian govt. was practically begging couples to conceive and offering them all sorts of perks, and here's Dr. Irina admitting to the "degrading and very tough " work of killing Russia's future. That's right, killing. She said it herself:

"Physically and psychologicaly it's tough. Having to kill these children."

Explain the sense in that, ladies and gentlemen.

Posted by: carder at January 17, 2008 2:52 PM

The Russian govt gave incentives for folks to have more kids because their population is in massive decline. They are losing over 700,000 a year. Children cost far less than they contribute when they become workers. These are the same people who will be the next generation. Europe will lose 75% of its population by 2100. That is a far greater burden than daycare for kids while moms work. The main problem these women have is they live in a country with a terribly exploitive govt that doesn't care about its people.

No WAY, hippie. Cite where you found that Europe will lose 75% of it's population by 2100. I don't buy it for a second.

Afterabortion.com--that's David C. Reardon's site.

LOL. David C. Reardon again. What a clown! He probably made up half the examples.

All of the examples have sources cited for them, SOMG.

(The Oklahoman, 6/2/99)
(The Washington Times, 8/18/97).
(Boston Globe, 4/16/99)
(Associated Press, 2/8/00)
(Los Angeles Times, 5/21/98)
(Village Voice, 10/3/98)
(Electronic Telegraph, 11/23/99)
(Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 11/9/99)
(Pro-Life Infonet, 9/3/98)
(Miami Herald, 2/7/99)
(Honolulu Star Bulletin, 8/3/99)
(Richmond Times Dispatch, 10/29/99)
(Pro-Life Infonet, 8/2/99)
(Associated Press, 1/8/00)

Erin,

yes way

Just google europe depopulation and you will find more than you ever wanted from analysts from all over the political spectrum. It is no secret.

http://www.globalaging.org/health/world/depopulationeuropejapan.htm

http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3431156.html

If you know the fertility rate you can calculate the population change for a country.

For example the US is 2.1 children per woman. So our population is stable. It grows due to immigration.

The fertility rate is half the number of of children per woman because each woman on average has to replace two people one male and one female for population to remain the same.

In Europe the average in 1.4 per woman, which is a declining population. After a generation there are 1.4 for every two in the preceding generation. The total fertility rate is half that of the births per woman. So for Europe that is 0.7.

So assume Europe has 500 million multiply by 0.7 to get the population after twenty years (one generation). Multiply by that number by 0.7 again to get the population after 40 years. Multiply that number by 0.7 to get the population in 60 years.

After you multiply by 0.7 five times, the cumulative reduction about 75%.

It is math, but it is pretty simple math.

No WAY, hippie. Cite where you found that Europe will lose 75% of it's population by 2100. I don't buy it for a second.

Posted by: Erin at January 18, 2008 2:51 PM

Reality doesn't depend on your recognizing it.

You can live in denial but reality is still here, without your approval.

Ahhh, I see what you're getting at. It's replacement rates that you're talking about, not general population.

Erin,

Yes of course. If people move to Europe in droves their population will not diminish, and could increase. However, that is not likely. Demographers predict a 75% reduction in the total population by 2100. That means in 2100 there will be 230 Europeans for every 1000 there were in 2000.

As one economist put it, how the economies will survive is not obvious. No economic systems work with shrinking population.

Thank God, I haven't had to deal with a girl that radically pro-choice, or to watch one of my grandchild killed, but I can tell you I would do EVERYTHING IN MY POWER, to prevent it from happening...including adopting the baby, paying for anything that needed to be paid for, and tying her up for nine months...okay, maybe not that last one...but seriously, I don't think any of my kids would be party to aborting...

MK, you are an awesome lady..you and my mom would get along GREAT. She said she would adopt my daughter if I decided I didn't want to be a mom.

SOMG and Doug said:
**********

The sensationalism about so-called "coerced abortions" is just another excuse for government to interfere with the patients' decisions.

Posted by: SoMG at January 18, 2008 7:46 AM

Agreed, SoMG. Coercion, either way, is not what Pro-Choicers want.

Posted by: Doug at January 18, 2008 7:54 AM
****************

These girls did NOT want to get bortions. They were told they needed to cause the baby would be a able to support the baby. What movie were you guys watching. Couldn't your hear the girl screaming "Mom, why do I have to do this?"

SOMG and Doug said:
**********
The sensationalism about so-called "coerced abortions" is just another excuse for government to interfere with the patients' decisions.

Posted by: SoMG at January 18, 2008 7:46 AM

Agreed, SoMG. Coercion, either way, is not what Pro-Choicers want.

Posted by: Doug at January 18, 2008 7:54 AM
****************

These girls did NOT want to get abortions. They were told they needed to get the abortion cause they could not support a baby. What movie were you guys watching? Couldn't your hear the girl crying over and over "Mom, do I have to do this, why?" And the abortionist was saying the girls that scream like that are cowards. There wasdefinitely coercion going on there. In the US it is more financially based discrimination. The statistics show plain and simple that the vast majority of abortions are performed on lower income women. Our health care/insurance system is more than happy to remove the "burden" for the poor to prevent paying benefits on another dependent later.

Truthseeker, right. The abortionist's reply to the girl who was screaming,"I'm trying to help you, don't you know" and "don't be a coward". Yeah, definitely no coercion going on there. @@

PC people will argue that women are not coerced into abortion and women should be strong enough to resist coerced abortion.

Why is it then that when women walk into CPCs they suddenly turn into helpless simpering wimps who can be coerced into doing what they don't really want to do, which is carrying their pregnancies to term?

Rmember Vlad?

I emaied him and asked him to give his perspective of the Eastern Bloc attitude on abortion. Haven't heard from him yet, but it should prove interesting. I don't know if he's from Russia, but his name sounds close enough.

PC people will argue that women are not coerced into abortion and women should be strong enough to resist coerced abortion.

Why is it then that when women walk into CPCs they suddenly turn into helpless simpering wimps who can be coerced into doing what they don't really want to do, which is carrying their pregnancies to term?

Posted by: Mary at January 19, 2008 8:50 PM
...............................................

Good question. Why do you believe that coercion is only employed upon those that make choices that you don't believe that you would make?

Rmember Vlad?

I emaied him and asked him to give his perspective of the Eastern Bloc attitude on abortion. Haven't heard from him yet, but it should prove interesting. I don't know if he's from Russia, but his name sounds close enough.

Posted by: carder at January 20, 2008 7:33 AM

.....................................

You think that his handle sounds Russian so he might have some insight on Russia?

Sally,

Its the PC people who have squawked that CPCs coerce women. However, they deny that women can be coerced into abortion. I maintain that CPCs are not in a position to coerce women. Clients always have the option to get up and leave and break all contact. A woman in an abusive relationship, dependent on a man or her parents, or being threatened does not have such an option.

Did you notice that when the doc described the procedure and drugs etc. she never mentioned pain relief? The women flatly stated that the pain was terrible and got worse. They never said anything about pain relief.

What are pro-choicers doing to prevent coercion from boyfriends/husbands,etc, Doug? Shutting your eyes and saying it doesn't happen doesn't change reality. Where is the action that pro-choicers who do not like coercion are taking to prevent this from happening to women who are emotionally pressured into abortion by their partner?

Bethany, didn't say it doesn't happen. I said I don't want coercion, either way. It's not up to me to try and interfere in two peoples' relationship, and how in the heck would I even know such was going on, between two people, other than in the rarest of circumstances? I don't even know anybody who's pregnant, to begin with. I'm just saying I am Pro-Choice for the woman, either way.
......

You have claimed in the past that evidence that women feel no regret after abortion is shown because there are women here who claim to have abortions and not regret it.

Yes - there are some with no regrets, and the vast majority of women who have abortions are glad they did, and would do the same thing again in similar circumstances. And of course there are some women who really do regret having abortions, on balance.
......

Yet, you also seem to feel that the fact that women are coerced into abortion by their partner is false, even though several people in the last few months have claimed this happened to them.

No, I don't seem to feel that way.
......

Why the double standard, Doug? Why do you believe some women and not others?

You're just mistaken about what I said.

As one economist put it, how the economies will survive is not obvious. No economic systems work with shrinking population.

Good Grief.... The above is predicated upon the belief that there has to be "expansion" for survival, and that is not true. Deficit-financing breeds that kind of thing, as increasing numbers of people "to pay for it in the future" sounds good.

How will the economies survive? The same way as always - there is the production of things and payment for them; there is commerce.

Doug

It's not up to me to try and interfere in two peoples' relationship, and how in the heck would I even know such was going on, between two people, other than in the rarest of circumstances? I don't even know anybody who's pregnant, to begin with. I'm just saying I am Pro-Choice for the woman, either way.

so if a man is abusing his wife, and threatening her into abortion, you do not feel that you have a right to make efforts to stop that from occurring?

Of course you can't know every situation, but you can take action to ensure that this stops happening so frequently. Right now, it is not rare at all. At least 40 percent of women who have abortions are being pressured or threatened into it by their partners.

Do you support the 24 hour waiting period for women, along with the abuse screening before abortion? This would help prevent MUCH of the abuse that is happening today.

Bethany, I do favor trying to stop a man from coercing a women, either way. It's her decision, and I say let her make it uncoerced.

On the "40%" - where did you get that? I doubt it's that much.

Yes to abuse screening, no to a 24 hour period. Many women are sure they want an abortion, and they should not have to wait.