Penance

sad.jpgI received this email today from Amanda:

Dear Jill,

I have decided it's time for me to face what I have done in the past. It isn't religion that has driven me here, but my own life and the life of my surviving child each day, mine under the shadow that follows me, my past....

When I was 14 I became pregnant, and my mother made me have an abortion. I know people can't "make" you do it, but at 14 I didn't know or feel I had any choice. Nor was I aware of just what abortion really meant. I remember seeing the baby in the ultrasound that day.

I could see a little person and the image has never left me. Now I know there were other options for this child. And I carry that with me every day.

As if that isn't terrible enough, I had a second abortion early 2005. At this point I had a child so I should have known just what I was doing. Honestly, I can't tell you what it was that made me do it. Well, I had looked into adoption and the agencies and attorneys I had spoken with said that because of the situation with the father I probably wouldn't be able to put it up for adoption. I was hardly able to care for my child I had. I know it is NO justification for TAKING A LIFE. I know.

Something has deeply changed inside me. I have read about babies suffering through abortions. I guess we (people who would have or have had abortions) have dehumanized these little people. I really didn't see it that way before. I guess I wish my mother had not led me to believe that it was the best choice. Again, I have no excuse.

After the second one (and I cried as I was coaxed by the clinic staff) I swore to myself I had made a mistake. More than a mistake. Much more. To add to these feelings I had a son who died of SIDS at a later date. The preciousness of LIFE really hit me then. How could I have been so blind?

I am not a religious person, yet I pray for aborted babies. I pray people will search for the better alternative. And I hope people will pray for the children I destroyed. I am so sorry. I can't be sorry enough.

I am now expecting my final child. A planned pregnancy. I apologize to this one daily for not cherishing his or her siblings as I should have. Babies have only us to trust and depend on. How can we betray that? And worse, treat them like they are trash? I cherish my children. I am deeply sorry for what I have done. I do what I can to make up for it. I try and do good things in this world and raise my children to love and cherish life and people.

And I can't wait to cherish what I've been so lucky to receive, a baby that is protected carefully. Others died to make me really aware of just how precious he/she is. And I hope every aborted child somehow serves in this way, so their tiny lives and deaths are not entirely in vain.

I'm not a bad person. Please know that. I wrote this to finally make my feelings public and apologize to this world for what I've done. Thank you for being compassionate and championing a cause that needs you.

I responded with encouraging thoughts to Amanda and told her I would post her note per her request. If you have any thoughts to add, Amanda will be reading this. Moderators are requested to delete any inappropriate comments on this post. Save those for a different post. This is not the time.

[Photo courtesy of SaveOne, a wonderful post-abortive organization]


Comments:

Oh Sweet Baby Girl,

This is the pain and joy of life...that it goes on.
The joy I feel at your new understanding of LIFE is so great that it diminishes the pain that I feel for the times that you chose it's opposite.

Know that there is ALWAYS forgiveness. ALWAYS mercy. ALWAYS a new day...

Your babies have forgiven you because they are rollicking with their brothers and sisters in heaven.

Their greatest pain was not the procedure itself, but the separation from your love. The loneliness and sense of abandonment. If you reach out to them now, that pain will be erased. They are STILL your children. They still need and long for their mother. Speak with them daily. Tell them about their siblings. Sing them their lullabies. You WILL hold them one day. And you will be able to look them in the eye and say "You were NOT forgotten, and you ARE loved"...

God bless you and keep you...
Your witness alone to the thousands of women out their struggling with their own pain, is enough to know that good CAN come from evil...

peace.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 9:41 AM


Amanda, thank you for speaking out against abortion. This is what we mean by PAS. Abortion hurts women. I'm sorry for your pain. I second MK's post!

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 9:45 AM


Amanda,
What you did takes courage and integrity. God has forgiven you. God bless.

Still looking for a house is Massachusetts??

Posted by: jasper at September 7, 2007 9:55 AM


Amanda ... thanks for writing to Jill. To take a little aside here, you know what former smokers are like, right? Really driven people you can barely be around because of their new-found fervor for life. Well, that's what we women who have had abortions are all about. When we realize what we've done is dead wrong, then after whatever time is necessary to get to the next step, we can help change the world. Your babies in heaven are fine ... they're hanging with my little girl as we speak. Ask for their assistance (and remember to ask Christ too!) in how you can best help out with the elimination of abortion from this earth. They will answer! I promise! God love you.

Posted by: Net at September 7, 2007 10:27 AM


*Hugs*
I admire your courage and honesty! I also congratulate you on your pregnancy. I wish you the best of luck.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 10:36 AM


Laura sorry this was not appropriate. Jill told you that any disrespectful posts would be deleted.

You are welcome to repost your feelings in a less offensive way.

-Lauren

Posted by: Laura at September 7, 2007 10:41 AM


Laura,
Are you serious? Are you kidding me? I am first going to say that even though it was ultimately Amanda choice when she was 14 to have an abortion parents and other things influence these decisions. Deciding to overpower your PARENT when you are FOURTEEN and say "nope I'm not having an abortion" would be pretty hard to do. You have no idea what her parents would have said or done. Maybe they would have thrown her out on the street or disowned her. Can you imagine losing your family and being forced to take care of yourself at the age of 14?

Secondly show some respect! It takes courage to do what Amanda did. Where you see it or not.

I am also willing to bet your comment will be deleted.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 10:51 AM


Deciding to overpower your PARENT when you are FOURTEEN and say "nope I'm not having an abortion" would be pretty hard to do.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have to assume she was out having sex without her parent's blessing. When did the headstrong wild child suddenly become the meek, obedient daughter?
What's her point? Does she want abortion outlawed?

Posted by: Laura at September 7, 2007 11:02 AM


Laura:

My God, I am pro-choice, but shut up!! What happens to a 14 year old is dictated by their parents. Yes, she chose to have sex. But if a mother tells her child "you will do this or I'll throw you out of my house and disown you", the child obeys and does what he/she is told (this happened to my friend. She was forced into an abortion by her mother). I feel this wrong.

Just as I can not tell her woman what she can not do with body, no one should tell another woman what she has to do with her body.

You make the Pro-Choice Side look horrible BTW.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 11:08 AM


Also,

Amanda: I am sorry that you were forced into your first abortion and felt "coaxed" into your second. No one should make another human do something that he or she does not want to do. I hope that one day you will find peace.

::Hugs::

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 11:09 AM


Oh my gosh Laura! I have sex without my parents blessing. Does that mean I am a "headstrong, wild child?" I am far from that.

Her point was to express herself. To open up to someone and share her story.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 11:09 AM


You ROCK, my friend midnite!

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 11:10 AM


Well said midnite! Thanks for the help. I am pro-choice too.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 11:11 AM


::blushes::

Thanks Bobby & JM :-)

How is everyone the beautiful morning?

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 11:13 AM


I'm alright MK, I had a rough week with my students so I took the day off. Currently they are working on a 10 page math packet.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 11:16 AM


Math packet???? Are you a math teacher JM?

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 11:18 AM


eeeekkk, 10 page math packet? Rough! I dont get along with math.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 11:18 AM


"Others died to make me really aware of just how precious he/she is."

Funny how that works isn't it? I have never had an abortion but can empathize all the same. It makes things much more clear when you see your own child's mortality.

Posted by: Rosie at September 7, 2007 11:19 AM


Yes I am a math teacher. I have four separate blocks of students and they all will be doing this math packet today. Pretty basic stuff. Multiplication, rounding etc.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 11:20 AM


Cool! I do math too! Us mathematicians have to stick together. God lobe you, JM.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 11:22 AM


Oops! lobe=love

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 11:22 AM


Bobby, No school today for you? or is it your prep time?

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 11:26 AM


I'm still in school, actually. I'm a graduate student in math, so I spend my days playing on the computer and downloading podcasts. I do some math sometimes, though. We're on quarters, so class doesn't start till the end of the month, at which time I'll actually have to start getting serious, hehe. God loVe you, JM.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 11:34 AM


Laura,

I appears that she has taken responsibility for what she did. Apparently that was not enough and she needed to "express herself" (as JM stated). Sometimes taking responsibility is not enough for some people. Everyone deals with different things differently. And you attacking her is not helping the PC side. We are supposed to support every choice a woman makes. Even if that choice is to later regret an abortion.

We support ALL choices women make, and this forum is a culmination of our undeniable support of a woman who chooses to give birth, one who chooses to put their child up for adoption, or one who chooses to abort. There is no one singular answer or choice, and those of us here support a woman through whatever she chooses as best for her body, her mind, her family, or herself.
Support a Woman's Right to Chose on Facebook. The mission statement says it all Laura. Read it.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 11:41 AM


I very rarely agree with anything mk says but this time I think she has some good advice. Your children are looking down on you from heaven and they know that they are loved.
Good luck and God bless sweetie

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 11:50 AM


I hope you don't delete this because it's OT but yeah, pro choice means CHOICE. It doesn't mean you have to get an abortion if you are young or poor or whatever. It means you can have as many or as few children as you want. I think that is one of the reasons I support same sex adoption.

Oh on that note - Amanda I hope you don't have any hard feelings towards your mother. I'm sure she thought she was saving you from a whole lot of pain, giving you a chance for a better life.
Thanks for listening and shareing : )

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 11:55 AM


Yes I am the same Jess that said she was going to throw her tampon at protestors.

I expect I'll be a regular here now.

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 11:56 AM


Jess, we tend to get a bit off topic around here!

Generally, the only reason anything gets deleted is if it is spam or a double post.

This thread is a bit more sensitive, and we will be editing hurtful posts directed at Amanda.

You're fine.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2007 11:59 AM


AWWW jess, it's okay! Glad you're back!!

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 12:00 PM


*small cough* I am very sorry that Amanda feels this way. Really, I am. But you can't use cases like this to generalize how all post-abortive women feel about it. Just a note.

Posted by: Erin at September 7, 2007 12:00 PM


Midnite,
That was awesome. You saved me from having to bring up the pro-abort, pro-choice argument again. Pro-choice would mean being supportive of ALL women.

Jess,
What? You mean you don't write down every word I say and keep it close to your heart? I'm devastated! :)

Laura,
I'm really disappointed in you. You had a chance to take the high road here. I've seen you do it before. I love your sense of humor and I love your witty sarcasm...but this was not the time or place. I think an apology is in order. Not for feeling what you feel, but for disregarding someones feelings when you were expressly asked to tread lightly...

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 12:04 PM


Mk, my ex boyfriends mother once told me that if I ever got pregnant she would make me abort. So I said, as sweet as pie, "Like hell you're getting a say in what happens to my uterus!". Yeah, now I'm with a guy who is confident that I am smart enough to make the right choice when it comes to my children.

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 12:10 PM


Erin, I don't think that most of us believe abortion should be illegal because some women are harmed by it. I understand why you would think that, because we talk about both abortion hurting women and wanting abortion illegal.

We talk about abortion hurting women because the abortion industry has manufactured a huge, irrational PR campaign that abortion exists in a vacuum and no women are ever harmed because of it. We know differently. We want women who are hurting to know that we are here to support them. We also want women who are considering abortion will not always leave them with "relief", but instead deep emotional pain.

For me at least, this is outside of the legality debate.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2007 12:12 PM


Hey folks,

time for a wee bit of history, many months BEFORE midnite came on board and everyone else here, Amanda was the first articulate PC to put this fledgling site through its paces - yes, before MK, HisMan and the rest of the PL helpers. And she did run both Jill and I crazy, with her immense knowledge and dedication to PC.

What she has done here is absolutely immense .......

in tears ... ((((PEACE Amanda))))) and much, much thanks.

Your kids DO have a super-Mom!

love you,
John

Posted by: John McDonell at September 7, 2007 12:12 PM


Is this the same Amanda? Works for PP?

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 12:15 PM


Erin,

To use Amandas story (on this post anyway) to further our agenda would be just as crass as Lauras comments...

The word ALL and FEEL can NEVER be used in the same sentence. For every person there is a different, complex reaction.

But the fact remains that some women do share her feelings of regret, and I for one am very touched that Amanda chose to share those feelings here on Jill's site. I am so happy that Jill's site is a "safe" place for pro-choice and pro-life alike.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 12:16 PM


I couldn't imagine taking this story to an all pro choice blog.

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 12:21 PM


"I for one am very touched that Amanda chose to share those feelings here on Jill's site. I am so happy that Jill's site is a "safe" place for pro-choice and pro-life alike."

Ditto

Posted by: Anonymous at September 7, 2007 12:22 PM


That last post with anonymous was mine.. opps

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 12:26 PM


Amanda...wait, this isn't the Amanda I know, right? The one that worked for PP? And...no, it's not, because I've seen her posting on SAWRTC recently. Hrm. Confusion.

Posted by: Erin at September 7, 2007 12:29 PM


Heather: No it is not

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 12:30 PM


John, no, this isn't the same Amanda.

Heather, 12:21p, said: "I couldn't imagine taking this story to an all pro choice blog."

and

MK, 12:16p, said (with a JM ditto): "I for one am very touched that Amanda chose to share those feelings here on Jill's site. I am so happy that Jill's site is a 'safe' place for pro-choice and pro-life alike."

You raise good points. Obviously, it is pro-lifers that post-abortive women look to for comfort and help after the fact, not pro-aborts. Isn't that interesting. You'd think it would be the other way around.

Just why is it pro-lifers aren't the ones who tell post-abortive mothers to suck it up, told you so? By all rights, they should be.

And isn't it interesting that we have developed the tools to provide comfort and help, not pro-aborts?

Worst of all, the most rabid, like Laura, forbid regrets and even add insults, which is unconscionable.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at September 7, 2007 12:34 PM


Well, thanks for clearing that up guys. I figured it out after reading the e-mail again. I knew Amanda didn't have kids.

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 12:34 PM


oh, this is not the Amanda who use to work at PP?

Posted by: jasper at September 7, 2007 12:40 PM


Jill, I've often wondered that myself. I went to an all PC site a few times. Every other word was F***, S*** and D***. I don't always have the best vocabulary, but this stuff was bad! They all took turns making fun of someone or something. I didn't get it. Texas Red has it down to a science. Laura, maybe you are starting to like us. *puts fingers real close, almost touching*....just a smidgen?

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 12:41 PM


jasper, no. That Amanda didn't have kids.

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 12:43 PM


If anyone came to me after having and regreting their abortion I would be there to listen to them and just be there for them. If they felt like it was the death of a child then I would treat it as the death of a child. If they treated it as if it were a blob of cells I would treat it like a blob of cells. And then if they wanted my opinion I would give it to them.

And yeah I'm pro-choice by the way if you haven't noticed.

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 12:50 PM


Just why is it pro-lifers aren't the ones who tell post-abortive mothers to suck it up, told you so? By all rights, they should be.

And isn't it interesting that we have developed the tools to provide comfort and help, not pro-aborts?

Jill: That is not always the case. I would more than be willing to talk to someone who said that they regretted their abortion. And please, just once say Pro-Choice. Have you not noticed that I am not a pro abort by now??

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 12:50 PM


Actually, I ran a search for PC "support groups." I wasn't able to find one. Midnite, I'm sure you and jess would be understanding about abortion. You have shown that here. I'm talking about these die hards. The Pro Choicer who only sees it one way. Their way. "Get over it." "You have no reason to be sad." That's what I'm talking about.

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 1:02 PM


Well those people suck. Just like the extremists on your side suck.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 1:06 PM


Amanda, you have done a very brave thing here to open up and speak about your feelings. I am so sorry about what happened when you were 14, and I am thankful that you have come to realize since that abortion and the last, how precious life is. I am also so terribly sorry for the loss of your other child by SIDS. That must have been so difficult for you. I can't even imagine. I hope that you have found comfort since that day.

MaryKay is right, there is ALWAYS forgiveness, there is ALWAYS mercy.... We care about you and appreciate what you are now doing in support of life.

Best wishes on your new pregnancy. (((hugs)))

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2007 1:07 PM


Ok those people are pro-aborts, but midnite and I are pro-choice and we support all choices (or at least I do, ican't speak for her).

Like when I'm eating with people and they find out I'm a veg they always are so apologetic. But it's like, just because I do it doesn't mean everyone else has to. Some vegans hate me because i drink milk and eat cheese.

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 1:11 PM


Oh Bethany I was reading in your blog about the once-a-month-cooking and I'm just wondering what you do for other meals (breakfast and lunch) and if you only shop for those also only once a month. Yeah I'm starting observation in cardio rehab and nutrition so I'm really interested. From what I've seen though it looks healthy and tasty (if I ate meat lol).

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 1:15 PM


Ok those people are pro-aborts, but midnite and I are pro-choice and we support all choices (or at least I do, ican't speak for her).

Jess: Regarding that you can speak for me. I am not a pro abort, I am pro choice as I described what all I support in a post above.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 1:20 PM


Thank you for your story, Amanda.

I too thought it might have been the same girl, but this Amanda seemed older than the one we know.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2007 1:21 PM


My bad - 'Amanda' in my country is a very unusual name - so, I figured there'd be only one ...

At any rate, what you did was superb ... so do not go around kicking yourself .... just hang around here a bit and you will be loved !!!!!!!

Posted by: John McDonell at September 7, 2007 1:22 PM


"Well those people suck. Just like the extremists on your side suck."

That made me laugh out loud.

I get kind of tired being called a pro-abort too. I support all choices. Just like many pro-choice individuals. I have been relatively respectful here, do I have off days.. Yeah of course I do. But I would like the respect in return.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 1:22 PM


John,

What country are you from?

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 1:24 PM


Well I'm off to eat lunch with my brother. Then i'm going to watch some tv, correct some papers and then go get a massage. I'll check in later. Have a great day everyone.

Posted by: JM at September 7, 2007 1:27 PM


Later JM. Hurray for math!

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 1:28 PM


JM, you took my advice? About massage? Enjoyyyyy!

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 1:29 PM


Well at least it made you laugh JM. And it is a true statement...

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 1:30 PM


MK,
If I remember correctly John is from Canada. Am I right John???

Posted by: Rosie at September 7, 2007 1:40 PM


Oh Bethany I was reading in your blog about the once-a-month-cooking and I'm just wondering what you do for other meals (breakfast and lunch) and if you only shop for those also only once a month. Yeah I'm starting observation in cardio rehab and nutrition so I'm really interested. From what I've seen though it looks healthy and tasty (if I ate meat lol).

Jess, thank you! I actually do the rest of the cooking daily...although I have considered doing lunches once a month too. I buy certain things weekly, like eggs, butter, lettuce, bread. We have sandwiches, leftovers, soups, etc for lunches.
For breakfast, the kids usually have toast, and I usually have nothing but coffee, and occasionally an egg.

I did actually make a whole bunch of burritos at one time though. These work great for a quick lunch.

You can do this with almost any kind of burrito filling and they turn out great...you can see the pictures here:
http://bethany.preciousinfants.com/2007/05/21/lots-of-burritos.aspx

And a folding burritos tutorial here (someone asked me how to fold them with both ends closed):
http://bethany.preciousinfants.com/2007/05/23/how-to-roll-a-burrito.aspx

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2007 1:42 PM


Bethany,
On the cooking note...awhile back you expressed interest in some spanish beans recipes. Basically, if you have access to any Goya brand beans in the hispanic section of the grocery store, you can't go wrong with the recipes they print on the back of the can. I would add cilantro if they don't have it on the list of ingredients. Let me know if you need further suggestions.

And Amanda, thank you. What a cross to bear. May you see your little ones in heaven...

Posted by: carder at September 7, 2007 2:00 PM


Bethany, I am getting hungry!!

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 2:00 PM


Hmmmmm.....I didn't know the name Amanda was rare in Canada. I guess you learn something new everyday. :-)


BTW, Amanda, good luck with your pregnancy, may your child be born healthy and happy. :-)

Posted by: JKeller at September 7, 2007 2:03 PM


SOMG: Shove it

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 2:12 PM


Somg, shove it

Posted by: Heather at September 7, 2007 2:13 PM


SoMG, Laura... you both are skating on thin ice here. Tone it down. This post is NOT a place to be snarky or break someone down.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2007 2:14 PM


SOMG, Laura, your comments were deleted. SOMG, we have already answered your question several times in different topics. Please respect the rules.
Thanks.

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2007 2:21 PM


Carder, thanks for the tip!

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2007 2:21 PM


It seems to me that Amanda is already suffering enough; A punishment would be redundant. God love you, SoMG.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 2:22 PM


Bobby Bambino, would you say the same about someone who killed an ALREADY-BORN child and then felt guilty? He's already suffering enough, so don't punish him?

Posted by: SoMG at September 7, 2007 2:26 PM


And I really don't see what you're all so upset about.

You believe abortion is murder, right?

So all I'm asking is, how should Amanda be punished for hiring people to murder her unborn children?

Why is that such an upsetting question for you?

Posted by: SoMG at September 7, 2007 2:32 PM


No, I wouldn't. Abortion is legal in this country.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 2:33 PM


Thanks, Bobby...you beat me to it. :)

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2007 2:36 PM


Now that is a pro abort (not me)

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 2:37 PM


I'd be happy to discuss this more, SoMG, but I don't think this is the post for it. God love you.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2007 2:39 PM


SoMG, Bobby, let's move the discussion on punishment for abortion to the "hardball" thread, Ok?

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2007 2:48 PM


Amanda -

Thank you for your strength and your words. It took alot of courage to come here and say those things. All your children are with you and love you.

We know that you are not a bad person. Most women who have abortions are not bad. They are misled. Can you see how your story has brought most of us together? The PL and PC on the same side in support of you. Thank you for that as well. We will never accomplish anything in these debates if we never see the human side of each other.

No matter what anyone says, it is only God who can judge your actions. Only God knows what is truly in your heart and He knows of your pain before your abortions, during and now. Don't let the Laura's and SOMG's of this world get you down. They are just a handful of people. The rest are people who are here for you.

May God bless you and your family.

Posted by: valerie at September 7, 2007 2:53 PM


Hi gang,

yep I is from Canada - you know that c-c-cold place! Actually, it may be my generation too ... we now have the phenomenon of kids being named with the unusual names of characters from American soaps. In line with this, my friend Jennifer claimed a minimum of seven 'Jennifer's' in each grade school class, while in school

& midnite makes my life so simple re. 'pro-choice' is a meaningless term, because it means anything what colour towels (besides pink) do you want, YOUR CHOICE .... please defend my right/choice to be a Nazi; ... a communist then; .... how about my defense of flat-earth ... on and on! [In rather a strange way being PC is actually more cruel than being pro-abort. You can remain indifferent to the inclusion of being supportive person. YOUR choice, non?]

I think that many are in the pro-choice camp because it's cool to be different or, at least oppose the smallzie Pl (who all sound like Bible-thumpers and so-squeaky-clean). One of the biggest problems with being cool for so long (like laura & SoMG), when you turn cold, you cannot see the CHANGE from difference to indifference!

Posted by: John McDonell at September 7, 2007 3:33 PM


John:
Pro Choice is not a "meaningless" term when it comes to women's reproductive health (at least to me). You can chose to be pro Nazi or pro KKK if you so wish (but seeing as it does not pertain to a woman's reproductive health), I will not openly support you.

I support ALL choices women make; and an undeniable support of a woman who chooses to give birth, one who chooses to put their child up for adoption, or one who chooses to abort. There is no one singular answer or choice, and I support a woman through whatever she chooses as best for her body, her mind, her family, or herself.

Have I made my self crystal clear yet??

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 3:50 PM


And Also John;

I do not try to be different by "choosing" the other side (I am just different in general, not by what I support, but b/c of who I am). I have said many times on here that I would not (personally) have an abortion unless 1. I was raped or 2. my life was in danger (aka, if I didn't abort, I would die). But I do not feel that I have the right to tell another human what they can or can not do with their own body. Did I think it was stupid of my cousin to get his girlfriend's initials tattooed on his arm in bright pink letters? Yes, I did. Did I tell him not to do it? Nope, b/c it's not my body. Do you see the point I am making here?

I am not trying to be cool either. I was not cool in high school (and did not care either) so why in the hell would I try now that I am adult?

Also, please do not compare me to Laura or SOMG. They represent the fanatical side of my position just like Zeke and HisMan represent the fanatical side of your camp. Do I agree with what Laura and SOMG have to say most of the time? Nope, I think they have no empathy for the human race, and that truly saddens me beyond belief. Do you personally think that AIDS is a "gay disease" and is God's "divine intervention" to wipe the world of homosexuals? Once again, there are nuts on every side of every issue. Does that mean that he/she represents everyone who agrees/disagrees with an issue? Nope, it does not. I don't think that ever single PL is like Robert Rudolph. That would be truly ignorant.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 4:01 PM


I must say Midnite...I feel a parental pride for you today...standing up to Laura and SoMG even tho it meant siding with the enemy...you rock!

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 4:17 PM


MK:

I told you I can have my moments when it suits me. But honestly they way they were talking about this Amanda girl just pisses me off. I mean when someone decides to do something and then later regrets it (be it abortion, marriage, anything), it is sad.

You do not rub it in their face (especially when they can hear you, or see what you are saying). Also, if a woman has miscarriage, would they attack her in the same form? I don't know, but it just bothers me when people attack someone for something that they regret. Especially when they are trying to save someone from the same mistake (they believe) that they made.

(And Jasper/HisMan said I have no empathy)

And you just made my day MK, thank you (and no you're not the enemy. We just have different opinions on some topics, and that is just fine.)

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 4:23 PM


Midnite:

"I support ALL choices women make" (in reference to reproductive health)

When would this 'choice' be going to far? Some "choicers" believe a woman has a certain time after birth to "abort". Who in the 'choice' organization makes the decision of which choice is right and which choice would be going too far?

"Did I think it was stupid of my cousin to get his girlfriend's initials tattooed on his arm in bright pink letters? Yes, I did. Did I tell him not to do it? Nope, b/c it's not my body."

Did you at least tell him how stupid it is? ;-)

"Do you personally think that AIDS is a "gay disease" and is God's "divine intervention" to wipe the world of homosexuals? "

You know that I have to say this right? If DNA can prove a "gay" gene it won't be AIDS that will wipe the world of homosexuals. It could be abortion. Never forget that 90% of Down's children are aborted and I don't think they are discriminated against as much as gay's are.


ALSO -

I agree with MK. You are standing up for your beliefs and not letting some organization/group to tell you what to think and how to act. I'm really glad you are here.

;-)

Posted by: valerie at September 7, 2007 4:40 PM


Zeke, there is a way to state your opinion that is not hurtful, this was not it.

-Lauren.

Posted by: Zeke13:19 at September 7, 2007 4:41 PM


but midnite,

over and over .... you say you choose to be human. In logic your choice is +A - +B or +A + +B where +A is Mom; +B(is her baby) ...and '+' living; '-' dead. Please note that the +B means that the baby is alive is both cases ... so, your choice is keeping a live baby living or making a live baby dead ... and this is a right (for pregnant humans)? In must be some kind of pretend humanity that will choose to kill its own.

Abortion wil not cause a woman to be un-pregnant as much as it will cause death to her offspring. The baby is the one purposely/selectively killed in abortion .... 'pro-choice' is a choice to obscure what is direct. It does no favors!

Posted by: John McDonell at September 7, 2007 4:50 PM


Thanks Valerie :-)

And yes I told him I thought it was stupid, and he agrees with me now that they broke up.

Also, I don't always agree with other choicers, b/c honestly I don't have to (and some them I think are aliens, aka not human). I have my own opinions on the topic and they are the only ones that I follow.

When would this 'choice' be going to far? Some "choicers" believe a woman has a certain time after birth to "abort". Who in the 'choice' organization makes the decision of which choice is right and which choice would be going too far?
I don't think third trimester abortions should be done unless they are necessary to save a woman's life (no silly shit like I am depressed. Real life danger to the mother). I don't think it is the "choice organizations" right to chose, it should be up to the woman. Nor should it be old white men on Capital Hill telling her the right choice to make.

"Aborting a child" after birth? I think that is infanticide, murder and illegal. If the woman in question is mentally ill, get her the help she needs. If she had a culpable mental state, causation & actus reas; well send her ass to jail and throw away the key (I say this b/c most of y'all are against the death penalty, and I am not. Another topic for another time).

If the mother doesn't want to abort, but doesn't want to keep her child; let me help her find an adoption agency that will make sure her baby finds a good home. If she wants to keep her child, more power to her. Let me help her find some programs to help her along the way if she needs them.
---------------------
Does that make any sense or did I just ramble too long?

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 4:55 PM


over and over .... you say you choose to be human. In logic your choice is +A - +B or +A + +B where +A is Mom; +B(is her baby) ...and '+' living; '-' dead. Please note that the +B means that the baby is alive is both cases ... so, your choice is keeping a live baby living or making a live baby dead ... and this is a right (for pregnant humans)? In must be some kind of pretend humanity that will choose to kill its own.

Abortion will not cause a woman to be un-pregnant as much as it will cause death to her offspring. The baby is the one purposely/selectively killed in abortion .... 'pro-choice' is a choice to obscure what is direct. It does no favors!

First let me note that I did not chose to be human. Hell I did not chose to be born. I just was. And sometimes I think my mother waisted nine months of her life (but that is a horse of a different color for another time as well).

Yes, I know what abortion does. It kills a human. But it is still to this day legal in America (and other countries as well). Where we disagree is how much "Rights" you afford this unborn child. Why should this child have more rights than a live human does? (I think we have discussed this before at length if I am not mistaken).

And yes the death (as you say) of her fetus will make her un-pregnant. And that, apparently is the outcome said woman desires.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 5:09 PM


"I did actually make a whole bunch of burritos at one time though. These work great for a quick lunch."

I love bean burritos! Thanks!

If we learned anything today I hope it was that there are good and bad people on each side and if we really want things to change then we have to not only be empathetic but sympathetic.

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2007 5:24 PM


Midnight, children and disabled people have "more" rights than able bodied adults. While I would be charged with neglect if I kicked my 2 year old son out on the streets, my in laws could kick my 21 year old brother in law out of their house and no one would bat an eye. (Well, other than those who would say "He's 21 and still living at home?!?!")

My point is, children are a protected class in our society. The fact that such class exists immediatley nulifies any argument regarding "special rights" not existing.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2007 5:40 PM


Um, yes it does Lauren. You can not be forced to keep me alive, nor can I be forced to keep you alive. No adult human can be forced into that situation.

Posted by: midnite678 at September 7, 2007 5:46 PM


Lauren, that was an excellent point.

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2007 6:00 PM


The death penalty is not a deterrant. The highest crime rates are in states where they execute the most prisoners.

Jesus, Zeke, I wonder sometimes how you can be so unforgiving. Is there a heart under there?

Also, Valerie, simply finding the gay gene would not be enough to know if the child you are carrying will be gay or not.
simply put, we would have to know whether it was dominant or recessive, or complex (on different loci). I think it would be very hard to predict, esp. if the gene would not represent a condition (i.e. risks to health).

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2007 6:03 PM


Midnite, you argued that there were no "special rights for certain people", I showed you that there are.

Your only argument is to prove that A)Rights are weighted and B) In this weighted system the right to bodily domain superceeds the right to life.

I do not think this is possible, especially if we look to our constitution as a guide to our rights.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2007 6:06 PM


Thanks, Bethany.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2007 6:11 PM


Bethany: For breakfast, the kids usually have toast, and I usually have nothing but coffee, and occasionally an egg.

I think that's the greatest breakfast - just coffee. Sure, there are various reasons why this isn't that good, overall, but it's fast and easy and lunch or supper isn't that far away and you haven't done much in the morning, yet...

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2007 7:54 PM


John: yep I is from Canada - you know that c-c-cold place!

Lots of good people in Canada. I think the average Canadian is nicer than the average American.

Worked in Canada from 1986 through 1994, and lived there the last 4 years, in Nova Scotia.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2007 7:59 PM


Midnite -

"Also, I don't always agree with other choicers, b/c honestly I don't have to (and some them I think are aliens, aka not human). I have my own opinions on the topic and they are the only ones that I follow. "

I think that is my biggest problem with the Pro-Choice movement. There is no uniformity. Everything is just so wishy washy and no one will make a decision. Sure, you all make individuale decisions, but there is no guidence; no mentorship. I know that Pro-Life have some disagreements too....but we have very vocal decision makers. Some PC say no abortion after first trimester, others say into second is okay. some say the baby is human, others say the baby is a blob of tissue. There are no ideas as to when life starts - that is left to the individuale to decide. There are no ideas on life of mother when the baby is viable - why isn't it considered murder when a baby is aborted but could have lived outside the womb? 3rd trimester abortions are the riskiest of all abortions - yet some still say "life of mother" when the only way to remove the baby one way or another is the same. Only difference is in one method that baby lives, in the other the baby dies. No difference to the mother. (not to mention the AMA can't even come up with a legit "life of mother" reason for abortion when the baby is viable.)

Gee, now whose babbling? I guess what I am saying is that no one will make a decision in the PC group. Sure, they say keep abortion legal, but no one knows when limitations should be set.

"I don't think it is the "choice organizations" right to chose, it should be up to the woman."

But shouldn't the "choice" people provide some sort of guidence? In Pro-Life we are told that the answer is life no matter what. If we think any other way than we are really pro-choice with limitations. Someone has made a decision. Not all may agree with it, but at least a decision was made.

but I digress....

""Aborting a child" after birth? I think that is infanticide, murder and illegal. "

Actually that wasn't the case until the partial birth abortion was banned. Until then, if the baby was accidently born, S/he didn't even get a chance to fight for life. The doctor would take that chance away. Also, why wasn't it murder when 3/4 of the baby was out of the mother's body?

---- I know I'm asking you question you can't possibly answer outside of your opinion. And to be honest, I would understand if you just ignored this post all together. ;-)

Posted by: valerie at September 7, 2007 9:03 PM


PIP -

"Also, Valerie, simply finding the gay gene would not be enough to know if the child you are carrying will be gay or not.
simply put, we would have to know whether it was dominant or recessive, or complex (on different loci). I think it would be very hard to predict, esp. if the gene would not represent a condition (i.e. risks to health)."

The triple screen and quad screen tests are not that 100% accurate. And since 90% of postives are being aborted, no one can say for sure how accurate the screenings are now. There are alot of false-positives and false-negatives.

What you say about the test not being enough for people to want to abort - same thing was said when the Trisomy 18 was first discussed. Now we have researchers finding out how they can test earlier so abortions can be done at the safest time for the mother.

Don't turn your back on this one PIP - you have no idea how society will react.

Posted by: valerie at September 7, 2007 9:17 PM


"I think that is my biggest problem with the Pro-Choice movement. There is no uniformity. Everything is just so wishy washy and no one will make a decision."

Amen Valerie.

Posted by: jasper at September 7, 2007 9:25 PM


Jess,

If we learned anything today I hope it was that there are good and bad people on each side and if we really want things to change then we have to not only be empathetic but sympathetic.

The fact that you view this site and these posts as an opportunity to "learn something" is awesome. It speaks volumes about you. We might agree on more than you think. I too view these discussions as learning experiences. That was really nice to hear. Thanks.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 10:36 PM


Valerie: I think that is my biggest problem with the Pro-Choice movement. There is no uniformity. Everything is just so wishy washy and no one will make a decision. Sure, you all make individual decisions, but there is no guidance; no mentorship. I know that Pro-Life have some disagreements too....but we have very vocal decision makers.

Nothing "wishy-washy" about it, Valerie. To viability, leave it to the woman. Who needs "guidance" for that? Who needs "mentorship"? We don't need to be told how to think.

.......


Some PC say no abortion after first trimester, others say into second is okay. some say the baby is human, others say the baby is a blob of tissue.

Yes, some people feel different about the second trimester. If you see somebody say "the baby is not human," then they are wrong. "Blob of tissue" - applies at some stages depending on the observer. Heck, we're all "blobs of tissue," looking at it one way.

......

There are no ideas as to when life starts - that is left to the individuale to decide.

Not really. Continuing or ending the pregnancy is what is left to the individual.

.......


There are no ideas on life of mother when the baby is viable - why isn't it considered murder when a baby is aborted but could have lived outside the womb? 3rd trimester abortions are the riskiest of all abortions - yet some still say "life of mother" when the only way to remove the baby one way or another is the same. Only difference is in one method that baby lives, in the other the baby dies. No difference to the mother. (not to mention the AMA can't even come up with a legit "life of mother" reason for abortion when the baby is viable.)

Most times the pregnancy can be ended by inducing delivery after viability. There are some cases of gestational diabetes, heart disease, etc., occasionally there are factors like the position of the fetus in the womb which complicates things further, but abortion in the third trimester is very rare to start with, and those are usually for atypical reasons, not because the woman just doesn't want to be pregnant.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2007 10:44 PM


Doug,
To viability, leave it to the woman.

That's your valuation. If it was everyones then we wouldn't have had to pass the "Born Alive" act, or ban partial birth abortion...Apparently many people believe that past viability is okay. Including people on this board.


but abortion in the third trimester is very rare to start with, and those are usually for atypical reasons, not because the woman just doesn't want to be pregnant.

I may be rarer, but 4,000 a year is not rare. And they ARE done because the woman just doesn't want to be pregnant...it's too late tonight but if you want me to tomorrow, I'll give you plenty of examples. Plenty!

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 10:59 PM


According to a 1987 study that included specific data about late abortions (i.e. abortions “at 16 or more weeks' gestation”),[8] women reported that various reasons contributed to their having a late abortion:

* 71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation
* 48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
* 33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
* 24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
* 8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
* 8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
* 6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
* 6% Woman didn't know timing is important
* 5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
* 2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
* 11% Other


wikipedia

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:02 PM


Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's annual study on abortion statistics does not calculate the exact gestational age for abortions performed past the 20th week, there is no exact data for the number of abortions performed after viability. [14] In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year.[15]

wikipedia

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:05 PM


* More than a million abortions every year is a staggeringly high figure, especially when one considers that the number of unborn babies who die every year from abortion is higher than all American casualties from the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I & 11, the Korean War, Vietnam, and Persian Gulf Wars combined.
o Abortions 1.5 million/year
o Gulf War less than 200
o Vietnam War 58,151
o Korean War 54,246
o WW II 407,316
o WW I 116,708
o Civil War 498,332
o Revol. War 25,324
o Total War Deaths 1,043,569

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:06 PM


Nearly all of the 1.3 million abortions a year are done because the woman did not want to be pregnant at that particular time (although 70% say they intend to have children in the future). The majority of women undergoing an abortion give one or more of the following reasons:

* a baby would interfere with work, school, or other responsibilities (75%)
* cannot afford to have a child (66%)
* do not want to be a single parent or have problems in the relationship with their husband or partner (50%)
* Only 1% of women aborting say they have been advised that their unborn baby has a defect, and only I% say they became pregnant by rape or incest. (Facts in Brief, The Alan Guttmacher Institute, September 1995.)

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:07 PM


* Almost half of the women undergoing an abortion - - 46% - - have already had at least one previous abortion,' a percentage which has tripled since 1974. In 1983, 39% of abortion patients reported having 1, 2, 3, or more abortions; in 1974 the percentage was 15. (Facts in Brief, Alan Guttmacher Institute, September 1995.)

* Now, at least 15% of the women have had 2 or more abortions. The Alan Guttmacher Institute has not published a breakdown on repeat abortions recently, but in 1987 26.9% of abortion patients reported I previous abortion, 10.7 had 2, and 5.3 reported 3 or more earlier abortions. ("Characteristics of U.S. Women Having Abortions, 1982-1983," Family Planning Perspectives, January/February 1987, p. 3.)

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:07 PM


* In 1984, then-Surgeon General C. Everett Koop estimated that about 4,000 "third trimester" (after 26 weeks) abortions occur each year in the United States, and that "less than five percent of that number have induced abortion because of a known defect in the fetus."

* Dr. Martin Haskell, who specializes in partial-birth abortions which are done on late-term babies, reported that he had performed over 1,000 of these abortions himself. The late Dr. James McMahon admitted performing over 2,000.

* An employee of Kansas abortionist George Tiller wrote in 1991, "I saw the medical records of every abortion patient for a period of over six months. At least (conservatively) an average of ten (24-30-week gestation) late-term abortions were done each week" in that facility alone - - which would be over 500 a year.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:09 PM


http://www.californiaprolife.org/abortion/aborstats.html

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:09 PM


Doug,

You've got to get out more...

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:10 PM


Jasper,

I am LOVING your quotes...good job...have a biscuit!

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2007 11:12 PM


"Don't turn your back on this one PIP - you have no idea how society will react."
I agree--Remember, I agree with you!! But I do think that it will take lots and lots of time before we ever develop a viable test. We haven't even looked at embryotic factors--which help determine how genetic factors are expressed.Although I am pro-life, for obvious reasons I don't support such a thing to be a reason for abortion--but I think we have a lot of time to pass legislation before hand, if we do find a genetic link.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 8, 2007 12:47 AM


Lauren, you wrote: "Your only argument is to prove that A)Rights are weighted and B) In this weighted system the right to bodily domain superceeds the right to life. "

Your point B is obviously true, otherwise we would take lifesaving blood by force from unwilling donors.

Posted by: SoMG at September 8, 2007 1:40 AM


Not to mention transplantable organs. Did you know it's safer to donate a kidney for transplant than it is to undergo childbirth? (A typical person has six times more nephron tissue than he needs, and the remaining kidney will increase in size and function over time).

Posted by: SoMG at September 8, 2007 1:49 AM


"I think that is my biggest problem with the Pro-Choice movement. There is no uniformity. Everything is just so wishy washy and no one will make a decision."

I don't think that's fair, Valerie.

I think the Pro-Life movement doesn't have all that much uniformity either.

Posted by: Stephanie at September 8, 2007 3:03 AM


Stephanie,

Ask a pro choicer when life begins and you'll get as many answers as people you ask.

Ask a pro lifer the same question, and you'll get one answer...at conception.

Ask a pro-choicer when it's okay to have an abortion and you'll get as many answers as people you ask.

Ask a pro-lifer and you'll get one, or two. Never, or when the life of the mother is in immediate danger.

Posted by: mk at September 8, 2007 6:29 AM


When I read Amandaīs letter, my heart just went out to her. I think her story shows the many ways women are undervalued and pushed around. I hope in her current situation she is finally loved, respected and valued.

We say women now have rights, but sometimes I think that is just on paper. I read an article in Seventeen magazine about 12 years ago which reported answers from a recent reader survey. One of the questions was about why teens have sex. The editors were concerned that the top reason was not curiosity or pleasure but rather that girls wanted companionship. It made me sad to think that girls felt so isolated that they felt to have a friend they have to do what he wants. Then when she gets pregnant, she has to do what mom wants. These girls are cheated by their partners who donīt stand by them, mistreated by parents who force and coerce abortions. When will they be loved?

On a previous thread, someone commented that 1957 was the highest rate of teen pregnancy, but didnīt mention that almost all were married. There is a difference. Mid century American values werenīt perfect but at least society and men in particular believed that pregnant teens at least deserved the minimal protection afforded by marriage. Now men feel entitled to have sex without providing for their families and have the girlsī family force her to abort and parents feel entitled to do it.
This is not choice, it is abuse.

Many may remember the term "shotgun wedding" describing the situation of forcing a reluctant young man to marry his pregnant girlfriend. While this is hardly ideal, it shows societyīs attutude that we have to be responsible for our actions. Also the two people being pressured to marry had voluntarily slept together (probably often), so it is not like they were strangers. I donīt endorse this approach to relationships, I just use the example to show the attitude of the times.

Now look how far we have come. Girls being coerced into sex, then forced into abortion instead of marriage. Then society tells her "it is your fault, it was your choice, you know you really wanted it." It just sickens and saddens me. Maybe all she wanted was a friend and someone to listen.

After all she has been through, I hope Amanda enjoys many beautiful times with her family. I hope she is ever there to listen to her children in good times and bad and to be a friend and to teach them that they are already precious and donīt have to achieve something in order to be loved, so they can love and value others as well.

All the best to Amanda

Posted by: hippie at September 8, 2007 8:49 AM


That was a beautiful post Amanda...

It reminds me of the saying:

Men use "love" to get sex.
Women use "sex" to get love.

and I love the line about most teens in 1957 being married...

Posted by: mk at September 8, 2007 10:51 AM


If you look at some the things that pc crowd types, it IS very confusing.

Posted by: Heather at September 8, 2007 10:54 AM


SoMG, I can just as easily argue that point B is false by saying that one conjoined twin can't kill the other off simply because they share a kidney. Unless the situation is such that either one will die, or both, the right to life wins out over the right to bodily domain.

Posted by: lauren at September 8, 2007 10:55 AM


"I think that is my biggest problem with the Pro-Choice movement. There is no uniformity. Everything is just so wishy washy and no one will make a decision."

That's called Freedom. Everyone can make their own decisions.

Posted by: Hal at September 8, 2007 11:16 AM


Hey, I'm all for freedom and decision making. I just have a problem with a child being killed in the process. That's not acceptable.

Posted by: Heather at September 8, 2007 12:15 PM


Hal,

The following comment overlooks some important features of the human condition:

"That's called Freedom. Everyone can make their own decisions."

Posted by: Hal at September 8, 2007 11:16 AM

Just due to the nature of the human condition, each person at times is unable to make his or her own decision.

How then should society deal with those who cannot decide?

How shall we balance the desires of those who can decide when they conflict with those who cannot?

Our country was founded on the liberal proposition that it is "self evident that all men are created equal". . . . "with inalienable rights among them life,"

We can take the liberal interpretation of all to mean all, even the defenseless, dependent, and incapacitated.

Or we can say that we just mean those who can exercise and defend their rights.

I canīt help it, it just makes me think of Nietzsche. He believed the latter. Ironically he spent the last ten years of his life incapacitated and cared for by others. Then add the 20 years of his youth and childhood. Since he only lived to 59, that means that his welfare for 50% of his life was guaranteed by others.

In our nation we have Medicare for the provision of health care for those over 65. Those set to benefit have advocated for the program on their own behalf. Maybe we can say they are trying to be responsible and proactive and pay Medicare taxes now for services later. Unfortunately the program is underfunded and their children will pay trillions to fund the difference.

What would we say of our nation if we paid a tax for the provision of similar services for children from conception to say age 18? We would be securing rights for those who cannot decide or advocate for themselves. They are not free to decide for themselves.

How do we treat those who are not free to choose? Do we give them the same rights because it is so obvious that we are all equal and all deserve the same rights to life?

The founders of our nation said yes, all equal.

Nietzsche said no, only the fit.

Only some are able to choose.
However, all deserve rights even those who cannot choose.

Posted by: hippie at September 8, 2007 3:47 PM


Hippie, I have no objection to giving rights to the "defenseless, dependent, and incapacitated" people who have been born.

Posted by: Hal at September 8, 2007 7:16 PM


"To viability, leave it to the woman."

MK: That's your valuation. If it was everyones then we wouldn't have had to pass the "Born Alive" act, or ban partial birth abortion...Apparently many people believe that past viability is okay. Including people on this board.


I don't think it is any substantial part of the pro-choice "platform" is there is one, for third-trimester abortions to be on a truly "elective" basis. By far, the vast majority of the pro-choicers I know aren't really worried about restrictions after viability / in the third trimester. If the argument ended now, with elective abortion okay to viability, I don't think you'd see many pro-choicers bumming, at all.

Banning D & X abortions didn't affect anything - the same pregnancies can be ended for the same reasons at the same time in gestation.

I don't think people on this board are for elective abortions after viability - I may have missed something but I don't remember seeing anything such.

.....

but abortion in the third trimester is very rare to start with, and those are usually for atypical reasons, not because the woman just doesn't want to be pregnant.

I may be rarer, but 4,000 a year is not rare. And they ARE done because the woman just doesn't want to be pregnant...it's too late tonight but if you want me to tomorrow, I'll give you plenty of examples. Plenty!

Well, ante up, MK - because the JAMA says it's 500 - 600 third trimester abortions per year (why the difference in our figures?), and these are typically for danger to the woman or severe fetal deficiency. I'm interested in what proof you have of third-trimester abortions on an "elective" basis.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2007 8:55 PM


Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's annual study on abortion statistics does not calculate the exact gestational age for abortions performed past the 20th week, there is no exact data for the number of abortions performed after viability. [14] In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year.[15]

MK - yeah, and the frequency of abortions is going down fast, week-by-week, there.

A thousand or a little more after 24 weeks fits well with the 500-600 number for the third trimester.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2007 8:57 PM


MK: In 1984, then-Surgeon General C. Everett Koop estimated that about 4,000 "third trimester" (after 26 weeks) abortions occur each year in the United States, and that "less than five percent of that number have induced abortion because of a known defect in the fetus."

Koop was wrong about many things, and his estimate isn't confirmed, at all. Unless things really were different in 1984. Nowadays, it's 500-600 in the third trimester.

.....

* Dr. Martin Haskell, who specializes in partial-birth abortions which are done on late-term babies, reported that he had performed over 1,000 of these abortions himself. The late Dr. James McMahon admitted performing over 2,000.

Meaningless - what is "late-term"? Could be 20 weeks, 21 weeks, etc.

.....

* An employee of Kansas abortionist George Tiller wrote in 1991, "I saw the medical records of every abortion patient for a period of over six months. At least (conservatively) an average of ten (24-30-week gestation) late-term abortions were done each week" in that facility alone - - which would be over 500 a year.

Hearsay, for starters. Also, the 24th and 25th week, which have a higher incidence than later weeks, are not in the third trimester.

.....

Doug, You've got to get out more...

Been through this many times before, MK. So much obfuscation and inaccuracy has to be gotten through before we really get to the thrid trimester, all the vague "late-term" and "post-viability" stuff, etc.

However, I do have to go back to the jobsite tonight to help the other guy do some stuff....sigh. Dagnabbit.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2007 9:03 PM


Hippie: The founders of our nation said yes, all equal.

Nietzsche said no, only the fit.

Only some are able to choose. However, all deserve rights even those who cannot choose.

Hippie, some great Nietzsche quotes:

"Thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!"

"when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

I love this stuff.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2007 11:46 PM


This is a 'strange' interpretation of the Constitution that I would like explained (by Hal, Doug or SoMG): the constitution while making no direct reference to unborn humans or their status ... this is interpreted by pro-aborts as an 'option to kill". How so?

Humans also have a powerful urge to protect ... their, property, their country, their way-of-life, etc. And Americans are also very much implicated here. How come this 'right to kill' dominates a powerful sense to protect.

The picture of the vulture waiting for the starving child to die (posted here by Laura), reminds me that protecting vulnerable humans is a human trait. Discarding vulnerable humans, places us with the species - vultures.

How can you think that abortion services render little besides lining an abortionist pocket with money? Does SoMG, PP need protecting? [It seems we 'protect' vultures, non?

Posted by: John McDonell at September 9, 2007 7:55 AM


John: This is a 'strange' interpretation of the Constitution that I would like explained (by Hal, Doug or SoMG): the constitution while making no direct reference to unborn humans or their status ... this is interpreted by pro-aborts as an 'option to kill". How so?

John, the unborn aren't mentioned in the Constitution, and there's no precedent for treating them as if they're protected under it. I would say that the woman's liberty and "right to happiness" argues for letting her keep the freedom she now has in the matter.

When the Constitution was written, as well as before that and after it, abortion was legal to a point in gestation. And yes, in an abortion the embryo or fetus is killed.

......


Humans also have a powerful urge to protect ... their, property, their country, their way-of-life, etc. And Americans are also very much implicated here. How come this 'right to kill' dominates a powerful sense to protect.

You know that there are big disagreements about this, but to a large extent it's arguing protecting the woman and what she wants versus protecting the unborn life.

.......

The picture of the vulture waiting for the starving child to die (posted here by Laura), reminds me that protecting vulnerable humans is a human trait. Discarding vulnerable humans, places us with the species - vultures.

And all other species as well. Not every life will be preserved (to say the least). It's the way of the world. We humans have more consciousness about such issues, but the bottom line is still wanted or unwanted.

.......


How can you think that abortion services render little besides lining an abortionist pocket with money? Does SoMG, PP need protecting? [It seems we 'protect' vultures, non?

It's a medical procedure that is wanted, sometimes. Few doctors will work for no money, regardless of what they're doing.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at September 9, 2007 10:01 PM


This is the Amanda that originally wrote the letter. (No, I do not know any of you.) I just wanted to thank you for your kindness and support. It means a lot to me. As for the comments about a willful child having sex with or without my parents' blessing... My parents are/were not good parents. They were neglectful and abusive and I was homeless a good portion of my teen years as well as while I was pregnant with my now 4-year old. I chose to give him life and for that I was thrown out of my boyfriend's home, and then my mother's after going to her home because both parties insisted I have an abortion. At that point I was 20 years old so I had my own feelings about life and a right to exist and I didn't want to take that away from this child. But at 14 I only really had the ethical training my parents had given me and I was afraid and I hadn't been taught anything about the value of human life. I know I had my own mind, but I believe we are largely products of our environment, particularly when we're children. I am less likely to give that excuse to adults, however, because we then have the wherewithal and experience and education to make good decisions. Again, I did make some bad decisions. it's taken me some time to realize the person I want to be and separate myself from my past. I apologize again for what I have done. I know it's not much but all I can do is offer love for the people I've done wrong and be sure to be the best parent I can to the children I am fortunate to have now.

Thank you all, again, for the encouragement and compassion. I have the same for you and wish you all the best in your personal lives, as well. Give your own children a big hug for all those that never were.

XOXO
Amanda

Posted by: Amanda at September 10, 2007 10:53 AM