Pro-lifers “target” blacks
Love the title KaiserNetwork.org, a group that supports abortion, gave its blurb this morning about pregnancy care centers reaching out to black women in urban areas: “NPR program features discussion on antiabortion groups targeting blacks in urban communities.”
“Targeting”? Let’s get this straight. PRCs want to save black children and educate and support their mothers, and this is “targeting”?
Meanwhile, according to Alan Guttmacher, Planned Parenthood’s research unit…
Most abortion providers (95%) are also located in metropolitan areas, increasing access to abortion there.
So, duh, also according to Guttmacher…
Black and Hispanic women have higher abortion rates than non-Hispanic white women do…. Over time, women having abortions have become increasingly likely to be poor, nonwhite and unmarried, and to already have one or more children.
The Kaiser story repeated the word “targeting” in relation to PRCs, while remaining tight-lipped about the true culprits, clearly engaged in black genocide:
The Los Angeles Times last week examined antiabortion groups that are targeting urban communities that they have “long considered hostile turf” to draw more blacks to support their advocacy. According to CDC statistics, blacks account for 13% of the population in the U.S., and black women make up 37% of women who undergo abortions.
[Photo, courtesy of LATimes, is of a Texas mother who decided not to abort after being counseled at a PRC.]
“Ross said disparities in the number of black women who undergo abortions are caused by “a number of factors,” including a need for increased sex education and more “honest conversations about sex”
Dear God in heaven, how much more can we possibly talk about sex! It’s everywhere. Obviously, these women know how to “do it”, so somebody, somewhere is talkin’ to someone!
They also neglect to mention that it the black community itself that is targeting black women.
These people aren’t fools. Abortion comes on the tails of slavery, and they have had enough!
Black people have been beaten, lynched, enslaved and treated like human garbage for years. They fought bravely for their rights as human beings in this country. Many of them died so that their children could live to see a better society.
Only to turn around and use this freedom to pay the white man to kill their babies.
Irony of ironies!
Insanity of insanities…
According to the US Census Bureau, blacks make up around 13% of the population and whites around 73%. In 2003 the poverty rate for whites was 8.2%. The poverty rate for blacks was 24.4%. That’s pretty significant, right? When you consider that the average pregnancy costs around $30,000 if there are no complications and the average abortion costs around $500, there you go.
Samantha,
While this is true, it doesn’t cost anything to abstain. If you can’t afford to raise a baby then you can’t afford to have sex.
The black population as a whole has a ton of problems. No fathers, poverty…
The solution is to pull these people up, not eliminate them. Welfare is not the answer, education is. But not education on birth control, education on taking responsibilty for the births that do occur. Education so they can get better jobs. Education so they stop using drugs.
I am by no means saying that simply being black means you will have all these problems. I don’t even think it is a black problem. I think it’s a poor problem.
I’ll bet if you checked the stats in poorer appalachia you’d find similar problems.
I do however think that blacks and hispanics are being targeted by the abortion industry because I firmly believe that this is an attempt to stay their population.
While racism is on the books as being a “bad” thing, there is still a huge faction of the population that would like to see these people eliminated. And I believe these are the wealthier people in our country. In a way they are still slaves. They are still “contained” if you will.
1 out of every three black babies are aborted. That’s 1/3 of their population, simply vanished. If this wasn’t about race, then that statistic would be in every newspaper in the country, trying to educate black women to the fact that they are helping to eliminate their race. But you never hear about this. Why? I say, because it is a good thing in the eyes of the elite. And if the black people in this country can do the dirty work for them, well, all the better.
mk
Off topic, yet topical.
In our church today, we celebrate a very important feast day. The feast of the Annunciation or Our Lord.
Today is the day that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and 9 months from today he will leave the protection of His mothers womb and enter the world.
When the angel Gabriel came to Mary, He did not tell her that she had to give birth to the savior. There was no threat. No indication, that if she said no, she would no longer be welcomed in the family of God. Just an invitation.
And she said: “Let it be done unto me according to thy will”
I remember the feeling when the little pink line shows up on the stick…the awestruck moment when you are a little in shock. The realization that you and your husband have taken part in the creation of a new person. The understanding that for a little while, you will never be alone. You will always have a “little someone” with you, where ever you go. He’ll hear the same music you hear, eat the same food you eat, learn his fathers voice, get to know the dog’s bark, and fall asleep to the sound of your heartbeat.
Do you think Mary felt these same things?
This is a portion of a prayer that we say at the clinic every Saturday. Just thought it was appropriate.
Jesus, knit so wonderfully in the womb of Mary
Jesus, uniquely human in the womb of Mary
Jesus, subject to human development in the womb of Mary
Jesus, whose Precious Blood first flowed through tiny arteries and veins in the womb of Mary
Jesus, hidden nine months in the womb of Mary
Jesus, begotten by God, nourished by the substance and blood of His Most Holy Mother in the womb of Mary
Jesus, whose holy limbs, first budded in the womb of Mary
Jesus, whose Godhead the world cannot contain, weighing only a few grams in the womb of Mary
Jesus, divine immensity, once measuring only tenths of an inch in the womb of Mary
Jesus, who was to suffer the agony and passion of death, accepting the human capacity for pain and grief in the womb of Mary.
Pray for us
Amen
MK
MK and Jill –
What you, and this article failed to point out is that the infant mortality rate for African Americans is more than double that of whites. So this is not an issue of abortion, but of maternal child health in general.
14.7 out of every 100,000 African American infants die before their first birthday. This means that without abortion, this number would be even higher – as Infant Mortality can be directly attributed to poverty, and poverty is most often the reason for abortions.
This SHOULD be one area where pro lifers and pro choicers can agree, but once again, people get so wrapped up in the politics of it, that they fail to see actual solutions. Abstinence is NOT a solution here – because many of these couples who are experiencing abortion and infant mortality are indeed married. We cant very well expect married couples to stop having sex just because they are poor. Thats just a watered down version of eugenics, which we can ALL agree is not something to strive for.
Proof that abstinence-focused education doesn’t work? The high school for pregnant teens I’ve been doing my internship at is almost entirely Latino Catholics who are having babies because they thought contraception was a sin, but had sex anyway. Yes – these particular students are keeping their babies, but 6 out of the 24 in the class I teach in have already had abortions with past pregnancies.
Should we really be differentiating between the ones who die via abortion or die after they’re born? Either way – when there is such a racial disparity, something is obviously wrong here. But if we focus only on abortion, we ignore the problem itself.
So in this case, by putting on the blinders, BOTH sides get wrapped up in politics and ignore the problem at hand. You’re arguing over semantics and generalizations while we continue to have one of the worst infant mortality rates of the civilized world. NO ONE brings THAT FACT up when they’re running for office. Which leads many people to believe pro-lifers stop caring about the baby as long as its born.
Amanda,
according to Guttmacher…
Black and Hispanic women have higher abortion rates than non-Hispanic white women do…. Over time, women having abortions have become increasingly likely to be poor, nonwhite and unmarried, and to already have one or more children.
The majority according to a pro-choice source are unmarried.
The girls in your high school class are unmarried.
Contraception is a sin. Good for those girls.
Unmarried sex is also a sin. Not so good for those girls.
You didn’t say whether or not your school is teaching abstinence. You only said these girls were Catholic. Perhaps a class with mothers and daughters and a well-formed priest could clear some things up.
Handing them birth control won’t help. Find me some statistics of a non-catholic group of 24 high school age girls who are “using” birth control and I’ll bet the statistics are higher. Or at least the same. The difference is in the number who are not killing their babies. Maybe a few classes on adoption, social skills, the seriousness of exclusive relationships in your teens…
again: boys use love to get sex; girls use sex to get love.
If they understood this, they’d be less likely to played by the boys.
mk
“The solution is to pull these people up, not eliminate them. Welfare is not the answer, education is. But not education on birth control, education on taking responsibility for the births that do occur. Education so they can get better jobs. Education so they stop using drugs.”
You’ll also notice that I addressed the fact that much needs to be done outside of the “sex” issue to help these people, all poor people, to succeed. But killing their children is just not it. That’s simply erasing the evidence that there is a problem. Like using a band-aid. I want to go to the root of the problem. If poverty is the reason, let’s work on ending poverty. If drugs are the problem, let’s work on getting rid of drugs. If missing fathers are the problem, let’s have parenting classes.
We, the pro-lifers, must take some responsibility ourselves, for not doing more to get to the crux of the problems, as well as trying to put a stop to the deaths of innocents.
mk
The theme here seems to be education. I think we can all agree that education is the key to ending abortion (as well as infant mortality in some instances.) But the question is: what kind of education is needed? Most of what I read says that sex education and contraception to be readily available would greatly reduce abortion.
My question is: How long before we see that those forms of education are not working?
In the late 1800’s Sarah F. Norton wrote in the Woodhull & Claflin’s Weekly newspaper that a way to end abortion was when
Amanda, 12:40p, stated: “What you, and this article failed to point out is that the infant mortality rate for African Americans is more than double that of whites.”
I alluded to the solution for that when I said PRCs not only save preborn babies from being aborted but also “educate and support mothers.”
Of course Kaiser didn’t point that out because doing so would force it to reveal part of what PRCs do is educate mothers on how to care for their children.
All the PRCs I’ve ever worked with provide an educational workbook and/or video and/or classroom series on pregnancy and baby care.
Pregnant mothers are motivated to go through the series by earning Mommy Money, which they can spend on clothing for both mother and baby, diapers, hygiene products, baby furniture, strollers, etc.
PRCs also make money available if need be for ob/gyn care, legal help, and shelter. Some PRCs actually provide shelter.
Valerie and Jill,
Go, Girls, Go!!!
Go, Go, Go!!!
mk
I’m still holding out for my artificial womb idea. Maybe I should go into biotech, instead of just bio. I could help develop this technology (ALONGSIDE PRO-LIFERS, ISN’T THAT A KICK IN THE HEAD).Then everyone would be happy, and I’d be proud to see that women not ready to give birth or be mothers get their bodily autonomy back and fetuses grow into babies.
I said it before and I’ll say it again….
The point of abortion isn’t to a end a life, it’s to end an unwanted pregnancy. The fact that a life ends is a sad symptom…which is why we must do more to come up with technology to support early-term abortions (the vast majority of them). If the abortions occur early in the pregnancy, prior to the point where women become “attached” or bonded, to the fetus, then adoption of the resulting baby would be so much easier on a woman.
And just think….even ectopic pregancies might be saved in an artificial womb. The possibilities are endless??
It’s just that I think no one is trying hard enough to find the solution….
We’re just all concentrating on what’s “right or wrong”. We need to work together, find common ground, and benefit both women and potential babies…we need to stop making women feel either obligated to sacrifice their bodies for 9 months or obligated to end a potential life through the definition of abortion that we have now.
Personally, I would love to see the definition of abortion mean ONLY “the termination of a pregnancy”, and NOT “the termination of a life”.
The definition must change. Until then, we can’t satisfy either side with arguments about “right or wrong”.
MK – while as always, I know your thoughts are coming from a kind place, its a little judgemental for you to assume that these girls are being “played” by the boys. In most cases, the fathers are about the same age, if not only a year or so older, and were just as clueless as the girls were…the blind leading the blind as they say. Most of these girls, by the age of 12 or 13, have enough savy and street smarts not to let themselves “get played”.
My conversation with a 13 year old who had a 6 month old (concieved at 12) last week went as followed:
Me: Is it safe for me to assume this pregnancy was unplanned?
Her: Yeah
Me: So what are you doing now to make sure it doesn’t happen again
Her: I dunno
Me: You dont know? Have you used any birth control since you had your son?
Her: No – the lady at the church thing I went to when I was pregnant says it gives you cancer
Me: So then are you still having sex?
Her: (in a very…well DUH kinda tone) Yup.
So there ya go – Catholic girls who are getting pro abstinence, anti contraception education are getting the anti contraception part, but ignoring the pro abstinence part. That won’t do any good for EITHER side of the abortion debate.
Also – I never said the majority of these women were married, I said that a significant percentage of them are – enough so to make it a little silly for us to think they should stop having sex just because they’re poor.
Valerie – the abortion rates in the US have actually been decreasing for years. Yes – there was a pretty big spike in the years following Roe V Wade, but since the 80s, the rates have been on the decline. Not coincidentally, since the AIDS crisis broke in the 80s and condoms became far more socially acceptable and available.
Do I think every 13 year old girl should be put on the pill? Absolutely not. But should they all know what a condom is, where to get it, and how to use it? YES. Not just to prevent unwanted pregnancy, but diseases as well.
Amanda, who impregnated the girl when she was 12?
her 14 year old boyfriend (13 when the baby was concieved), whom she is still with, and she’s actually living with him and his parents because her parents kicked her out, but she claims they sleep in separate beds as an agreement with his parents for letting her stay there for free. Her staying with them is also contigent on her staying in school, because she had stopped going for a while – which is why she’s at the special school even though she already had her baby.
Jill,
Out of all that Amanda just said all you can respond with is who got the girl pregnant?
Danielle,
Many times a 12 year old girl gets pregnant by a much older man. This is statuatory rape and more often than not goes unreported. I’m sure Jill has posted the story about the “phone calls” covertly made to clinics. And I’m sure she was going to point out that lots of men get away with rape because the girls won’t “give them up”.
There wasn’t much else to say about what Amanda wrote.
Again, we are not saying that condoms should be illegal. We realize that much of the world thinks having sex at 13 is perfectly respectable. We’re saying that if they weren’t having sex at 13 there would be no need for an abortion.
And abortion rates have declined, but we also have medical abortions now, which don’t get counted with surgical abortions. So it’s hard to say.
It’s also possible, just possible, that abortion rates have gone down because the word is getting out letting people know what abortion really entails. People may hate those pictures, but they speak a thousand words.
mk
Amanda,
MK – while as always, I know your thoughts are coming from a kind place, its a little judgemental for you to assume that these girls are being “played” by the boys. In most cases, the fathers are about the same age, if not only a year or so older, and were just as clueless as the girls were…the blind leading the blind as they say. Most of these girls, by the age of 12 or 13, have enough savvy and street smarts not to let themselves “get played”.
I realize that this might sound cold, but as the mother of five boys, I’m telling you, that’s what boys want.
This is the way I explained it to my ten year old when she was eight.
Every girl is given a candy bar when she is born. It’s wrapped in beautiful paper and is meant to be opened and eaten when you are much older.
At some point in time, boys are going to notice that you have a candy bar, and they don’t. They are going to want that candy bar. Some of them will pretend to be your friend. Some of them will tell you you are beautiful. Some of them might just try to take that candy bar from you.
Some of the girls are going to like all the attention that the boys are paying to them to get their candy bars. Many of them will give their candy bars away. But once a boy has eaten a girls candy bar, he is no longer going to need the girl, and he will go looking for a different girl who still has her candy bar.
Some girls will only let the boys take a bite of their candy bar. Then they’ll go try to get a bite off of another girls candy bar. The poor girl is left with a bit-out-of-candy bar, and all the really nice boys won’t ever want to eat her candy bar. Germs, and cooties…yuck!
Some girls will just wave the candy bar in front of the boys. This will make the boys angry and they will tease her.
But the smart girl? Well, she will keep her candy bar locked away in a safe place. And some day, when she is ready, she will meet a boy who will love her even though he doesn’t know she has a candy bar. Then they can stand in front of God, and their moms and dads and tell each other how much they love each other. That night, they can go home and the girl can present the boy with her unopened, perfectly new, candy bar and they can open it together and share it.
La La Land? Maybe, but if she follows my advice, one thing is for sure, she won’t need an abortion.
A true feminist realizes that the one thing that makes her “different” and special is her ability to have children. In all other ways, we are equal to men. But in this, we are superior. No man has created a child without a woman, but once, a long time ago, a woman co-created a child without a man.
I can be anything that a man can be. But he can NEVER be a mother. This is a great gift and a great responsibility. And to give it away is to give away our power. It is the only thing that we have that we can control. It has caused wars, and it has destroyed men. It has also built them up and created dynasties. It is powerful. It should not be wielded lightly.
MK
Amanda – Abortions happen world wide. Not just America. When I said as a society, I meant as nations, as humans, as everyone. America may be experiencing a slight decline but other nations are increasing. The United Nations has decided that they are the playground bully and forcing nations to make abortion legal for any and all reasons.
Alyssa – Changing the definition of abortion in the dictionary isn’t going to change the fact that a seperate, living human will have its life terminated. Also, changing the definition of what is right and wrong isn’t going to make it “all better”. The concept of morality is what has made humans better people. All through history nations tried to rationalize the concept of human slavery and say that it was a moral thing to do. Was it? Just because it was accepted?
Many people criticize the Catholic Church (and many other faiths) for “not recognizing that time has changed”. Just because time changed, does that change the definition of morality? Living a moral life is extrememly difficult and hard to follow. What kind of teachings would it be if it catered to the whims of society? What kind of teachings would it be if it changed its definitions just to suit the people? I would say that kind of church was run by a politian.
We know that smoking is wrong because it causes many different kinds of illness and diseases especially cancer. We know that eating trans fats and other fatty foods is wrong because it causes heart problems and obesity which leads to many health problems. Why can’t we see the promiscuous sex is wrong? It causes Chlamydia, CMV, genital warts, gonorrhea, hepatitis, herpes, HPV, PID, scabes, syphilis, UTI’s, not to mention HIV and AIDS. How many did a miss? Everytime we tell someone it is okay to have casual sex, even with a condom, we are telling them it is okay to play russian roulette. Condoms are not 100% and they break. Long ago scientists said that if there was a filter on a cigarette it would be okay to smoke them. They were wrong.
Mother Nature is telling us that this is wrong. She has given us all the signs, symptoms and diseases to correct our behavior. When will we listen? How many people have to die before we realize that a hedonistic lifstyle is not the way that will improve us as a species?
Amanda,you had written on another post that HIPAA prevents you from reporting sexual abuse of a minor.Do you have anything in writing on that?
Here is an article from the Yale Law Journal…
basically, we can beg and plead for a victim to give us permission to report, but if they dont give us permission, we cant report.
http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=1313
Do you not find this puzzling … a minor who legally is the same as a parent (so the parents are victims too) cannot legally tell the parents of something happening to her [its a: ‘let’s not tell the left hand what the right is doing’].
Amanda, momof3 was asking about sex abuse of minors. I’ve rebutted you before (forget where) that medical personnel are mandated reporters of minor sex abuse in all 50 states.
Wrongo.
if the victim denies you permission to report the crime, you CANNOT report the crime.
The victim needs to actually say “You do not have my permission to report this” or something to that effect. If they dont say anything, we can report it, but if they express feelings of fear or that their life could be in danger by the crime being reported, we absolutely CANNOT report it.
And if you think this only goes on in abortion clinics, you’re completely dilluded. Ask any ER nurse how many times they’ve done a rape kit on a patient named Jane Doe or Anonymous.
And you havent rebutted a single thing Ive said with any shred of actual proof or citations besides your own completely biased opinion. I, however, just provided a link to an article in the YALE LAW JOURNAL stating that without the permission of the victim, sexual assaults cannot be reported to the police. Find me an article from a reputable source that refutes that, and we’ll actually have something to talk about. HIPAA regulations usurp reporting laws in medical facilities. I dont think it applies to schools though.
Heres another article, this one from the AMA:
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2006/05/15/gvsb0515.htm
“In a decision hailed by the medical community for protecting adolescent patients’ confidentiality, the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas ruled in April that health care professionals are not required to report all underage sexual activity as child abuse.”
Wow,Amanda.I am shocked at what I’ve just read.What about incest? I never realized HIPAA protected so much. Thanks for the links though.
No, momof3, Amanda is wrong. Her 12:44p link indicates something far different than her original thesis, which was that HIPAA actually prohibits reporting of child sex abuse.
Amanda’s 12:44p link says a federal judge ruled in 2006 that “health care professionals are not required to report all underage sexual activity as child abuse,” which indicates the opposite understanding.
See pg 3 of this pdf: http://www.dcfs.state.nv.us/ChildFatalities/ChildProtServices/CPS-ParentGuide-08-07-06.pdf, which states (after first indicating child sex abuse qualifies as child abuse):
Nothing in the Federal privacy rules or law prohibits mandatory reporters from reporting child abuse and neglect to the appropriate authorities. In fact, the Federal privacy law explicitly allows reporting of child abuse and neglect consistent with State law as an exception to general rules requiring the confidentiality of health records….
The HIPAA Privacy Rule allows covered entities to disclose protected health information to report known or suspected child abuse or neglect….
Valerie, you completely missed the point of my post. I was saying that this idea might one day lead to the point where TWO lives can benefit, not just one. There is nothing immoral about an artificial womb. Why would you come back to the fact that it’s “terminating a life” when I specifically stated that the purpose of it was to free a woman from the hazards of pregnancy AND to allow an aborted fetus to develop. What did you not understand? Or are you so blinded by your moral screamings that you didn’t comprehend the point I very succinctly put across to you?
MK, I agree with you on the power of being a woman and being able to bear children. The point we’re trying to make over here in this camp is that we should be able to decide WHEN we want this power to be used…no one else should decide it for us.
Alyssa,
I couldn’t agree more. So if you decide that this is not the right time, you’re best course of action would be to refrain from having sex.
Our point is that that is the moment your choice should be made.
If I get pregnant, I will abort the baby…therefore I must avoid getting pregnant at all costs because I am simply not ready to be a mother.
As you know, in the Catholic Faith, children must make their first confession before they make their first communion.
Two years ago, when my daughter was making hers, a mother approached the rel. ed. director and claimed that she didn’t feel her daughter was ready to make her first confession. She was too nervous.
The response? If your child is not ready to make her first confession, then by all means she should wait. However, she cannot make her first communion until she is ready to make her first confession.
In the same vein, we are saying that if you are not ready to be a mother, then you are not ready to have sex.
They go hand in hand, not because the pro-lifers say so, but because that is the way our bodies were created. You can use all the birth control you want, but if you’re not ready for the responsibility of motherhood, you are not ready for the responsibility of sex. They can’t be separated.
MK
Jill – right or wrong, abuse and neglect are viewed differently from rape. From what I’ve read, incest falls under the abuse category, and in that case, reporting is mandatory. But rape is different. All of the information I have for the paper I’d done was regarding age 18, or in some states 16, and up:
From the National Center for Victims of Crime:
“Sexual assault and rape are serious crimes. As a sexual assault survivor, you have the right to report the crime to the police. This decision is one ONLY YOU can make.”
http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32361#5
This is an article about Anonymous Reporting, which is perfectly legal, and what PP encourages for those who refuse to report:
http://new.vawnet.org/Assoc_Files_VAWnet/FB699_blindSV.pdf
This is the current law on the books in Connecticut – no mandatory reporting for rape… sorry Jill.
http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/rape_rept_ct.pdf
Here is the current law on the books in Michigan – also no mandatory reporting for rape:
http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/rape_rept_mi.pdf
Here is the current law on the books in Massachusetts – while reporting rape is mandatory, they do not have to provide ANY information about the victim – including age, name, address, or any identifying information. This is actually the way that most PPs operate – we report any patient who says they were raped, but if they do not wish to report their crime, THEY CANNOT BE FORCED TO. All we do is report that “a female reported being raped” along with any details the victim WISHES to provide.
http://www.nhpeas.ang.af.mil/hro/SAPRP/SAPRMALAWS.pdf
Now for minors, this chart breaks down reporting laws in each of the 50 states. Yes, Jill is right that all 50 states have mandatory reporting for child abuse and neglect, but not specifically rape. You’ll also see that many states allow anonymous reporting, as I mentioned PP does, for minors who believe they may be in danger by reporting the crime.
http://nicic.org/Downloads/PDF/Library/021772.pdf
Alyssa –
I did not misunderstand. I was explaining why I disagree with you. Changing definitions will not make anything easier on us. You were the one who said ‘terminating life’ “Personally, I would love to see the definition of abortion mean ONLY “the termination of a pregnancy”, and NOT “the termination of a life”. ” And I explained to you that no matter the definition, it is still a life that is ending.
I was also responding to your final sentence “The definition must change. Until then, we can’t satisfy either side with arguments about “right or wrong”.” No one can change what it right and what is wrong. Let’s say that I steal from you and then say that my definition of what is right and wrong is different from yours. Would that work? Could I use that argument in court?
What part of my post was “moral screamings”? I put forth an idea that morality cannot change because society finds it too difficult to live that way. I then provided a hypothesis in support of this.
Amanda, we are speaking specifically about minor sexual abuse.
You have made a declarative statement at least twice on this site that HIPAA (privacy law re: medical information for those who don’t know) forbids a medical professional from reporting minor sexual abuse.
I have made a declarative statement saying you are wrong.
I am not trying to beat you down. I solely want the correct information to go out. So when you concede all 50 states have mandatory reporting laws for child abuse but say, “but not specifically rape,” you are still wrong.
Federal law on reporting child abuse includes minor sexual sexual abuse, as the link I gave at 1:04p stated.
My concern was;Let’s say that a 12 year old becomes impregnated by her 19 year old bf.,and she goes to PP for an abortion.Wouldn’t the staff’s first question be “Who did this to you?”When it is found to be a 19 year old male,what is the protocol?Is this girl just turned back over to the pedophile? She may become pregnant again.
MK:
what about a physically mature but mentally immature or “retarded” person? Do you make her wear a chastity belt or do you give her a hysterectomy? You can’t lock her away for nine months, she lives in the community. She gets taken advantage of because, let’s be honest here, men have very loose morals when faced with an ‘easy’ lay. The man told her he was a doctor and had to take her temperature. She obviously gets pregnant, because your wonderful church tells her it’s sinful to use contraception. She doesn’t understand what sex is because she doesn’t understand what sex is. She understands the word sin because you’ve pumped her full of garbage about the devil, hellfire and damnation, which is medieval nonsense designed to scare the uneducated, and she, poor girl, is definitely uneducable.
How can you say she is a sinner when it’s not her fault she got pregnant?
Resolve this issue so she doesn’t have to carry the baby to term, because mentally she can’t cope with it.
I’d advise that somebody keep an eye on her!!
Amanda has given very clear examples of state legislation, Jill. I think you’re trying to confuse the issue.
momof3:
one of the people that was supposed to be ‘keeping an eye on her’ made her pregnant… Now what?
This happens.
All over the developed world and no doubt, the under-developed world too. All the time.
And the people doing this pretend that they’re ‘pillars of society’.
Again, I ask you, Valerie, is there anything morally wrong with an artificial womb? And if my definition can’t change, then what would this procedure be called?
Alyssa – You will have to go into further explaination of an artificial womb. As I understand it no definitions would have to be changed.
If I have this wrong, please correct me. An artificial womb would be a place to ‘hold’ the embryo or fetus until the mother is ready to be a mother. And then the embryo or fetus would be placed back into the mother’s womb.
If this is the case, then there wouldn’t be an abortion so that definition wouldn’t have to change.
I still do not believe that the definition of right and wrong can change either. So, I’m confused as to what definitions have to be changed in order to call it an artificial womb.
I know that I did not answer your specific question. It would be unfair to you if I was incorrect on what this is and try to morally judge it.
No, what I mean is that this artificial womb device would harbor, support, and allow the fetus to grow much as it would inside a woman. There would be no “holding” or “storing” until the woman is ready. It would still be an abortion, per se, because the woman has ABORTED a pregnancy, but not the life that has been usurping her body to survive. This satisfies most pro-lifers and pro-choicers. The fetus lives, the woman isn’t forced to be a government baby chamber.
Catherine –
You make a very valid point. But what do you do to the person that got her pregnant? Do you end the pregnancy and not tell anyone? If you tell what this man did, then everyone would know what happened so the stigma of her being pregnant wouldn’t be there.
Another question: Why would she be mentally incapable of carrying a child? If she cannot handle this, then how could she handle the responsibility of birth control? If the intention is that she can never be pregnant because of her mental problems then what would be wrong with a tubal ligation. (And before you say the Catholic Church doesn’t allow this I will tell you that they do. I had the Church’s blessing to have my tubes tied because I cannot physically or mentally handle another pregnancy. The procedure was even done at St. Vincent’s hopsital.) And if it is the person who is watching her got her pregnant, then you cannot trust them to handle the birth control either.
I think I just talked myself into a circle. Now I’m dizzy.
Alyssa –
I was already dizzy from my last post, now you’ve got me trying to visualize that!
Do I think it is morally wrong, yup! The Mother’s body not only protects the fetus as it grows but her body also knows what kind of nurishment the baby needs. How could something that is not a human body know this? This is why we get cravings when we are pregnant, it is the babies way of telling us what they need. The artifical womb would also deprive the baby of so many aspects of growing, especially with the intimate relationship with the mother.
(And I would also believe my incorrect definition of an artifical womb would be immoral as well.)
I think it would destroy respect for our children. It would make our children more like property than a living being that we share our lives with and raise to the best of our ability.
But – That is just my opinion. And we already know that we have different opinions when it comes to this. ;-)
The point of it is that a woman who DOESN’T want that bond can see to it that the life continues, but doesn’t have to sacrifice her body. Don’t you think that the artificial womb would already account for the things given to the fetus through the mother’s body? That is the point, to imitate the womb. The artificial womb would also serve to protect and nourish a fetus (most likely even better than a woman’s body if the technology gets good enough…you can’t always eat exactly what the fetus craves, but nutrients can always be added through whatever means the artificial womb provides). Of course the device wouldn’t know what the fetus needs, the doctors that operate it do. That’s like saying a nutritionist doesn’t know what we need to grow and live. If I don’t want something growing in my body, it is my right to take it out. But likewise, if you think it has a right to live, I can satisfy you as well by giving it that chance. That isn’t selfish.
Again, a woman shouldn’t be forced to go through pregnancy much as she shouldn’t be forced to have an abortion. Personally, I’m terrified of labor and birth. If I don’t want to experience it, I shouldn’t have to.
I’m not afraid of the pain, I’m afraid of the havoc it could wreak on my body. I saw what it did to my mom and I would never EVER condone forcing a woman to go through that. EVER. My mom made a choice to go through with it, so I respect that…but she would NEVER support forcing a woman to suffer like she did.
Alyssa,
please, get off the artificial womb bit … it is much more technically demanding than you could ever imagine in 1000ys. One little thing you probably do not know is that magnetic energy stimulates growth. Part of a woman’s physiology fabricates/manipulates molecules in a distinct sequence to form specific magnetic lines … under which a fetus can grow.
[I doubt very much that SOMG or any of you folks exposed to classic biochem courses have ever studied this. Just as he thought the whole concept of DNA-structure being influenced by nutrient deficiencies (zinc) was preposterous, the same kind of response is expected here.]
Alyssa –
You are always saying that a woman has to “sacrafice her body” to have a baby. What do you mean by that? Because on this end it sounds extrememly selfish and self centered, but the artificial womb idea (though I disagree with it) does show that you are thinking about the wrongs and rights of abortion and consequences, which is not selfish…..
You cornered me to answer your question, now I’m going to corner you. Does morality change on the whims of society? Why would we have to even consider the concept of an artifical womb if we took responsibility for our actions? If you believe you are sacraficing your body to have a child and not wanting to bond with that child, then why risk it? Why put yourself through that?
I do feel obligated to explain further my situation. If I don’t, I will be a hypocrite. I had my tubes tied which is suppose to not be allowed by the faith. But I got approval. 1st – If I get pregnant again there is an 70 – 80% chance that I will not survive. Not the pregnancy nor survive an abortion. 2nd – Natural family planning does not work with me because my body does not ‘cycle’ correctly. (For the men’s sake I will not go into detail and make the assumption that the women understand what I am saying.) Even fertility test were inaccurate with me. Now my husband and I could always refrain from intercourse but as everyone always brings up when discussing such topics, what if I were to be raped. That would not be fair to my family or to me.
Are you denying, as someone who could have died from another pregnancy, that it isn’t a ‘SACRIFICE’ for a woman to make to go through pregnancy? Ridiculous. I said it before…my mom went through hell and she would NEVER imagine forcing another woman to do so. And it’s not selfish. You wouldn’t consider someone selfish for not giving someone a kidney or to live off of his/her bodily resources. It doesn’t even matter if the person who is in need of those resources was put in that situation by the person from whom they seek the resources. It’s illegal to force them to give up their bodies. Unwanted pregnancy is the same idea.
You bring up the point that “why would I put myself in that situation?” You view sex as something that should result in pregnancy. Again, we’re back the point that you think sex is for one thing, and I think it has another meaning. I know it causes people to bond (ie. your “unitive” principle). But I don’t believe that it’s impossible to separate the “procreative” principle. And you yourself said that NFP doesn’t work for you. So why should it be forced upon other women? I know it wouldn’t work for me either, because I have a horribly inaccurate cycle. That’s why birth control needs to be used responsibly…and why abortion should be a last resort only if it’s the best choice for the woman involved.
I also have another point to raise…
Many of you pro-lifers have expressed the following opinion that abortion, no matter what, is evil.
ie…someone has said that when faced with taking away a woman’s bodily autonomy and having an abortion, the abortion would be the lesser of the two evils. To which most of you replied, “there is no such thing as a lesser of two evils, as in evil is evil is evil”.
So you deny that restricting someone’s bodily autonomy is evil? Would that, indeed, be a virtue? Because the last time I checked, it was also evil to make someone a slave to another person.
Evil is evil is evil. In this case, you pro-lifers DO seem to think there is an acceptable “lesser evil”.
Great.
Pregnancy is not a sacracfice. Pregnancy is completely natural which is why every female from the beginning of time should have the ability to be pregnant. (I said ‘should’ so not to exclude the women that for medical reasons cannot, they are still female)
I have no idea where you get the idea that I believe sex is for procreation only, because it is not. That is why many religions teach NFP. Because sex is an important part of a relationship. Which is why I got advice before getting my tubes tied, because sex is more than procreation.
I guess I am not making myself clear. I think the confusion may be the idea on contraception. My earlier post I said that having contraception readily available doesn’t decrease the rate of abortion. I am not saying that contraception, as a choice, is something that someone can not do. What I mean is that contraception is not 100% even when used perfectly. So, my question is if you know, without any doubt, that you would abort if you got pregnant even with the aid of contraception why would you risk it? Which takes us back to my question which hasn’t been answered. Does morality change because society wants it to? I am talking about abortion. Just because you take all precautions but still get pregnant does this mean that abortion is now morally right?
Hopefully I have done a better job of explaining myself.
As for the evil thing. I’m a bit confused, I haven’t been on here long enough I guess. Even the Catholic Church agrees that there is a lessor of two evils. The rubella vaccine is an example. It was developed through 2 aborted fetus’ (how do you make fetus plural? ugg.. I need sleep) which should mean that it should not be used, however it would be ‘evil’ to put a child through this disease when there is a way to prevent it. I can get you the link (if I can find it again) if you want on that. In comparison why is it not evil to have a woman complete her pregnancy? Because, with the exception of rape and incest, the woman’s action caused the pregnancy which means responsiblity must be taken. As for the child, there is nothing the child did to get the disease, the child is innocent (or adult if that is the case with rubella).
*sigh*
Again, I view pregnancy as something different than you. It may be natural, but it’s still a sacrifice because it isn’t necessary for the survival of the person going through it. For the species, yes…but there are more than enough people CHOOSING to be pregnant to maintain the population. Again, I consider it to be a HUGE sacrifice after knowing what my mom went through…and nothing will ever change that.
Also, I believe that any woman who WANTS to get pregnant should have that right and ability. But I don’t believe that women who never want children, even if they are fertile, should have to be pregnant. You’re saying that only the women that lack the ability should never get pregnant. I say the women that never want to be pregnant shouldn’t have to be, even if they want to have sex with their significant others.
Hi Alyssa,
please understand – what your Mom went through does NOT mean you will have the same experience. The exact same thing applies (maybe even more-so) to Danielle. Almost all the problems with pregnancy/delivery are preventable … by using appropriate nutrients. This includes depressions. Here is the list of these: zinc(30 mg) + taurine @500mg; bone-broth; flax tea; chlorella; Maerl http://www.4yourtype.com/prodinfo.asp?number=NP052
I don’t fear the complications. I would go through them willingly if it was my choice to bear a child. I believe women are by no means the “weaker” sex when it comes to pain. The only thing I fear is forcing women to endure the pain against their will. Women are strong, yes…but they shouldn’t be FORCED to show their strength.
My mom is the strongest woman I know. I love her with all my heart and I would’ve supported any of her decisions regarding her pregnancy and its complications. Even if that means I wouldn’t be here today. I love and respect my mom too much to take away her rights as a woman and as a human being that has inalienable rights to not have her bodily integrity infringed upon.
believe me, having a mom like her has made me able to take anything. I don’t fear for myself if I were to become pregnant. :)
There is an interesting analogy you anti-choicers keep avoiding.
An unwanted pregnancy is, in effect, a parasite.
The obvious thing to do with a parasite is remove it, before it can become the ultimate parasite, an unwanted child.
Anti-choicers are so very keen to use emotive language with respect to zygotes/embryos etc, but if anyone dares use it back, you get all upset, and use more emotive language and personal attacks. So, from now on I’ll refer to an unwanted pregnancy as a parasite, because that’s what it is. Furthermore, it turns its mother into a parasite on society.
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/05/post_28.html
Colorado Right to Life has added this banner to its Truth Truck: CRTL unfurled the banner at this year’s Martin Luther King, Jr., March in Denver. CRTL has lately been targeting the new Planned Parenthood in Parker, and plans to…
CRTL exposes Planned Parenthood’s scalpel on blacks
Colorado Right to Life has added this banner to its Truth Truck: CRTL unfurled the banner at this year’s Martin Luther King, Jr., March in Denver. CRTL has lately been targeting the new Planned Parenthood in Parker, and plans to…