Jivin J’s Life Links 12-28-10
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- Markai Durham, who will be featured tonight on MTV’s No Easy Decision special on abortion, posted a question regarding abortion on her Facebook page at the end of October. One comment by Markai (on November 10 at 8:31 a.m.) shows she is depressingly ignorant about fetal development:
Telisia- This Is A Fault That Many People Have. Its Not A Baby At All Until I Think You 3rd Trimester (I Could Be Mistaken) Its Only A Fetus Which Means Its Only A GROUP OF CELLS TRYING TO FORM INTO SOMEONE.
- As a likely result of Planned Parenthood’s new policy to force all affiliates to provide abortions, PP of Southwest Oregon has just started offering RU-486 abortions. This has caused a Catholic charity in the area to sever ties with the United Way donations since the local United Way gives money to PP:
PP of Southwest OR decided to provide the abortion pills at its Eugene and Ashland clinics because agency leaders could see that abortion would eventually be unavailable as doctors who perform surgical abortions near retirement, said Cynthia Pappas, CEO of PP.
- The Washington Post has a long article on pro-life legislation (focusing primarily on NE’s fetal pain law) which could test what abortion restrictions the Supreme Court will accept and how Gonzales v. Carhart has encouraged pro-lifers to continue in efforts to chip away at Roe v. Wade:
Some abortion rights supporters say privately that a challenge might come if another state adopts NE’s model, as seems likely. Those who were active in passing the law seem almost disappointed that the challenge has not arrived yet.
“We can’t say with any certainty that this is going to meet constitutional muster,” said NE Right to Life Executive Director Julie Schmit-Albin. “But you know what, from our perspective, if we aren’t bucking up against Roe, we’re not doing our job.
“So we did our job in Nebraska and now it’s time for the other states to do their job.”
- Thai authorities continue to crack down on illegal abortion clinics:
The Soi Ramkhamhaeng 97 clinic, together with Ms. Noknoi, faces 3 charges: opening illegal clinics, which carries a 3-year jail sentence; providing medical services without licenses (3-year jail term), and carrying out illegal abortions (2-year jail term).
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
An embryo isn’t a teenager for over a decade, what difference does that make? It it ok to kill people because they don’t have a certain label? Oh, sorry, that lady down the street thinks you’re not really a baby yet, so we can kill you.
We’ve got vibrator and condom commercials on television and still our young people lack the basic knowledge of biology.
Markai just gave the reasons why pro-lifers can never get behind “Lets give everyone condoms and they won’t have abortions.” But Markai just pointed out people she knew whose birth control failed, and all the ways birth control can and does fail. She meant to show why abortion should always be available. But all did was show why birth control will never eradicate abortion. Which begs the question why her mom made condoms available and allowed her daughter to have sex when she was just a kid herself knowing FULL WELL birth control fails! These moms who let their daughters flirt with danger through premarital sex (hello…STDs!) boggle my mind.
Its Only A Fetus Which Means Its Only A GROUP OF CELLS TRYING TO FORM INTO SOMEONE.
Okay, that did make me laugh. : D
I am STILL a group of cells trying to become someone, lol!
LOL, ninek! ;)
allowed her daughter to have sex
*raises eyebrow* Because teenagers are so well-known for listening to their parents, so if we just tell them to ‘just say no’ they’ll stay virgins.
More seriously, the biggest issue with this argument is the implication that, absent birth control, teenagers will opt not to have sex, when the evidence shows that, absent birth control, teenagers will likely opt to have unprotected sex. Obviously, no sex is safer than protected sex, but they’re both safer than sex without use of birth control.
There is no such thing as “safe sex.”
“We can’t say with any certainty that this is going to meet constitutional muster,” said NE Right to Life Executive Director Julie Schmit-Albin. “But you know what, from our perspective, if we aren’t bucking up against Roe, we’re not doing our job.
“So we did our job in Nebraska and now it’s time for the other states to do their job.”
What does it say about the integrity of a person or organization and their willingness to play by the rules when they’re promoting legislation that they openly concede may be unconstitutional?
Birth control often fails and then what? The problem with teens having sex is that their brains aren’t fully developed; they don’t have the ability to discern long term consequences. How will today’s hook up affect them tomorrow or next year? We tell young people to eat their vegetables, brush their teeth, wear seatbelts, and more. Isn’t it crazy that they actually do these things? Why, when it comes to sex, do some people think we should just throw up our hands and leave young people without guidance? That’s just illogical. They may rebel, but they still need guidance. They need older adults to care about them, not exploit them. Throwing condoms at young people is not teaching them to respect their bodies. Planned Parenthood WANTS young people to be reckless because it makes them $$$$$$$.
The problem today isn’t a lack of condoms and pills. One of the problems is divorced and single parents who are more concerned with their own love lives than the welfare of their children. My parents knew our schedules and knew our friends. It’s a shame that’s so old fashioned and rare.
Jayn, don’t answer me, but ask yourself:
Why does Planned Parenthood leave a jar of free condoms on the counter and yet charges $500 for an abortion? Hmmm? Hmmm???
Why, when it comes to sex, do some people think we should just throw up our hands and leave young people without guidance?
That’s not what I’m saying. Even the most effective programs at getting teens to delay sexual activity will often see them having sex before graduation. So leaving them without information on and access to contraception still leaves them at a disadvantage when (not if, but when) they do become sexually active.
Why does Planned Parenthood leave a jar of free condoms on the counter and yet charges $500 for an abortion?
Because you can buy, what, a thousand condoms for the price of one abortion? Pretty easy to figure out which one it’s more realistic to provide free of charge.
Jayn, you need to think about that math a little harder. Think now. Why don’t the jars of condoms ruin Planned Parenthood’s business? Why don’t all the pills they dispense ruin their business? Why would they kill over 1,000 via abortions daily if the pills and the condoms are so good at preventing pregnancy?
Jayn, don’t just snap back with an answer. Mull this one over for a while.
Let me give you a comparison. Bars often serve salty snacks. Why? Because it makes people PAY for more drinks. Cheap peanuts = expensive drinks. OK, talk amongst yourselves…
joan
December 28th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
What does it say about the integrity of a person or organization and their willingness to play by the rules when they’re promoting legislation that they openly concede may be unconstitutional?
Two things spring to mind.
One: The group is aware that the Constitution is not perfect or necessarily right in all cases.
This is hardly a shock. We’ve had to amend the thing twenty-seven times and will likely do so a few more times again in the future. There are contradictions about what “playing by the rules” means within the Constitution itself. Obviously this is hardly pushing the boundaries of revolutionary and anti-integrity thinking here.
Two: The group is aware that constitutionality is not always something that is immediately obvious.
Again, this is not a novel concept. In fact, we have an entire branch of government dedicated to figuring out exactly what that entails in one given case or another. The Supreme Court constantly argues over what is or isn’t constitutional and “test cases” are an established and accepted part of the American legal reality. Once more, hardly a blow to a group’s integrity.
…I really shouldn’t feed the troll, but I find I can not help myself on this particular instance.
Jayn, if you research the back story a little you would know that Markai’s mom gave her daughter condoms and allowed her to have sex in her house. DUMB idea if you ask me.
Now this girl has one baby and has had one abortion. Awesome way to embark on your adult life.
Good news, Jayn!!!
70% of highschoolers are virgins! :) PP needs to step up their propaganda!! Take Care Down There just isn’t promoting promiscuity like it was supposed to :(
http://townhall.com/news/religion/2010/10/15/70_of_high_school_students_are_virgins,_study_reports
(ninek): I am STILL a group of cells trying to become someone, lol!
Ha! Right on – I know it doesn’t fit with everybody’s philosophical/religious views, but I’ve often wondered if perhaps the purpose of life is to discover the purpose of life. It’s great to see some of your sense of humor.
Let me give you a comparison. Bars often serve salty snacks. Why? Because it makes people PAY for more drinks. Cheap peanuts = expensive drinks. OK, talk amongst yourselves…
Perhaps, in some cases, “more drinks” does apply. But take it from one who has ample (to say the least) experience in bars that many drinks will be sold, peanuts or no.
I do think that were there no available condoms, the incidence of teens having sex, for example, would decrease. Yet would that mean less unwanted pregnancies? I do not think so – the decline in cases of sex would not be enough to outweigh the increased number of pregnancies due to the unavailable contraception.
Watching this “No Easy Decision”. First, Markai said “I already love this baby” when thinking about abortion. So why think about killing it?
Second, the abortion clinic says it uses “gentle suction” to remove the baby. Every woman I have ever talked to said how violent it was and how much it HURT. Gentle? Why not just tell the truth abortionists!
They thought abortion was the best option because they wanted to give their baby the “best life” but not even life to the other one. The dad won’t work two jobs.
She cried on the way to the clinic. Nuff said.
The counselor was allowed to be her nurse during the abortion. How professional. And she lied and said it was a ball of cells not a baby. She was 6 weeks. Bethany, was your 6 week old miscarried baby a ball of cells? I seem to remember Precious had a face and arms, legs, fingers and toes. Why must pro-choicers lie? TELL THE SCIENTIFIC TRUTH TO MARKAI!
Markai, your daughter doesn’t need THINGS. She needs family and you just took her sibling from her.
Dr. Drew goes on about abortion is “the safest procedure”. Yes, Dr. Drew. Tell that to Eileen Smith whose daughter is dead because of this “safest procedure”.
“This is hardly a shock. We’ve had to amend the thing twenty-seven times and will likely do so a few more times again in the future. There are contradictions about what “playing by the rules” means within the Constitution itself. Obviously this is hardly pushing the boundaries of revolutionary and anti-integrity thinking here.”
There is a constitutionally-prescribed method of amending it. Trying to shove through legislation that is, on its face, constitutionally dubious or even unconstitutional is not that method.
“Two: The group is aware that constitutionality is not always something that is immediately obvious.”
The person quoted openly expressed doubt that the law is constitutional. There is a difference between testing the waters of a constitutionally vague area of law (a new and novel way of applying the Commerce Clause, for example) and cramming through legislation that is specifically designed to attack existing judicial precedent on a topic that has already been settled. If I was a judge this is precisely the kind of thing I’d be itching to strike down.
“Once more, hardly a blow to a group’s integrity.”
Well, it’s not really a blow to the group’s integrity because organizations like this, that have made it their entire purpose for existing to undermine and eventually do away with a constitutional right, simply have none to begin with.
(Joan): What does it say about the integrity of a person or organization and their willingness to play by the rules when they’re promoting legislation that they openly concede may be unconstitutional?
They have an agenda, and they realize that what they advocate may be struck down as unconstitutional. If a pro-slavery group was pushing against anti-slavery laws and past Supreme Court decisions, it could well be the same deal.
I don’t think such “rolls of the dice” necessarily mean anything big, and in this case:
Nebraska’s antiabortion attorney general, Joe Bruning, agreed not to pursue appeals or try to enforce the law. He said he was convinced that courts would not uphold it and that further litigation “would only mean paying a million dollars to Planned Parenthood” in legal fees.
None of these women on the show can say “abortion”. They say “procedure” and then say how relieved they were and how okay they are and just now the one just broke down crying. oh, you’re okay with it are you? Who cries over a clump of cells? Cells are dying in my body as I type this and I won’t lose any sleep crying over their demise tonight.
The one post-abortive mom says she wants to adopt but could not have given her baby up for adoption! What kind of absurdity is that? If every woman was like YOU there would be NO BABIES TO ADOPT!
Dr. Drew goes on about abortion is “the safest procedure”. Yes, Dr. Drew. Tell that to Eileen Smith whose daughter is dead because of this “safest procedure”.
Sydney, there is no way to know beforehand what will be the outcome of every single specific procedure. Meanwhile, the overall safety of things can be known. By your logic, you’d be condemning women continuing pregnancies because it brings more risk than does having an early-term abortion, i.e. not only one name of a woman who died because she took that course in a given year could be trotted out, but many….
There is a mortality rate for women who carry to term and/or give birth, and it’s an accepted risk, as with many medical procedures.
Thats not what he said Doug. He did not mention any risks. AT ALL. He droned on and on how SAFE it is. If he wants to be fair and balanced as MTV says they are treating this subject he should not have made it sound risk-FREE which he did and it clearly is NOT.
Who is Dr. Drew to tell married people to contracept? He is telling these married couples to use condoms (which FAIL). Shove off Dr. Drew!
(Alice): One: The group is aware that the Constitution is not perfect or necessarily right in all cases.
This is hardly a shock. We’ve had to amend the thing twenty-seven times and will likely do so a few more times again in the future. There are contradictions about what “playing by the rules” means within the Constitution itself. Obviously this is hardly pushing the boundaries of revolutionary and anti-integrity thinking here.
Two: The group is aware that constitutionality is not always something that is immediately obvious.
Again, this is not a novel concept. In fact, we have an entire branch of government dedicated to figuring out exactly what that entails in one given case or another. The Supreme Court constantly argues over what is or isn’t constitutional and “test cases” are an established and accepted part of the American legal reality. Once more, hardly a blow to a group’s integrity.
: D Preach it, Sister! I figure you do realize that some of what you are saying is anathema to a good bit of the pro-life crowd, but that was a good post you made.
In the given case, the Nebraska Attorney General, who is said to be anti-abortion, doesn’t see it as worth pursuing, and he may well be right – there are any number of ‘grandstanders’ or people who will pursue frivolous (?) things just because they can, usually without personal cost to them.
No matter there, really – I think it’s awesome that an evident pro-lifer would make the post you made!
Doug
That’s not what he said Doug. He did not mention any risks. AT ALL. He droned on and on how SAFE it is. If he wants to be fair and balanced as MTV says they are treating this subject he should not have made it sound risk-FREE which he did and it clearly is NOT.
Okay, fair enough, Sydney. If he truly represented it as having no risks, then he’s in the wrong there. I admit I don’t know which “Dr. Drew” this is – it’s not the one on the “Celebrity Rehab” thing, is it?
The one and only
Okay, having not seen it, I don’t know for sure, but also sure would think it’s trying for a “known” doctor and ratings, and I gotta say, even as a pro-choicer, that ol’ Doc Drew has to be taken in context of a TV show content provider.
Bars often serve salty snacks.
And my parents keep a box of free pens by the door for their customers. It doesn’t help their buisness any–it’s just a courtesy.
Doug,
Do you know anything about the Laura Hope Smith case? Do you know the specific risks that the abortionist took with Laura’s life? How her death could have been prevented had he followed BASIC medical safety procedures? Surely you have read the countless blog posts Jill has written about the case!! Put Laura Hope Smith’s into the search box.
Here is something for you
Jayn, I am trying to help you but if you want to be PP’s doting, obedient, unquestioning Little B, go right ahead.
It’s true looking around that for years many people who would otherwise have been actively pro-life were passive and demoralized. Unfortunately for the abortionists, they have woken up and are taking action. (oh no the election results were all about the ecomony, lol!). Abortion is going bye-bye, and good riddance to it. Why are so many formerly pro-choice women now actively pro-life? If being pro-choice is so cool and empowering how come you’re losing ground every single day?
Why is it I never think of what I really want to say until like an hour after I’ve already made a response?
ninek, it doesn’t really matter what PP does, if they charge for condoms or give free abortions, because you’d still have an argument for why they don’t really care about helping people. If they were completely volunteer-run, didn’t charge for any services, and never performed abortions, I’m willing to bet you’d still come up with an alterior motive for them. So, I’m not having this argument with you.
“If they were completely volunteer-run, didn’t charge for any services, and never performed abortions…”
Jayn, you just described a Crisis Pregnancy Center: volunteer run, no abortions, really help women with referrals, material good such as cribs and clothes, and some even have doctors on staff and ultrasound machines. I love CPC’s, support them financially when I can!
And for you other pro-choicers out there, ask yourselves another question: Why did I and three of my friends become pro-life each alone and on our own? Three women I know who used to be like me, pro-choice and feminazi, are now ACTIVELY pro-life. Active means financially contributing to CPC’s, marching in the Walks for Life, blogging, and more. We were not recruited by anyone in the pro-life movement. I repeat for emphasis: we were NOT recruited. I sought out other pro-life people on my own. Why? If abortion is so empowering, why are we converting without being recruited? Why are we trying to stop other women from making the same mistake? Why? Ask yourselves. Because the blogsphere theory that Amanda Marcotte and the other minions will tell you, women turn pro-life because they are bullied by other pro-lifers. I have never found this to be the case (Carla can probably back me up on this). So why perpetuate the myth of the woman-hating-pro-lifer? Why set up a straw man enemy that doesn’t exist? No wonder you’re losing.
Well Jayn we’d still say they were killing babies but maybe we’d think their motives were a little more woman centered. The fact is CPC’s are 100% volunteer run, donation funded and no director of a CPC makes a million dollars off what she does. Enter Cecile Richards who lives in a swanky NYC apartment, just recently remodeled and is a millionaire. PP not only gobbles up MILLIONS of tax dollars and asks for more but they CHARGE these poor poor women in desperate situations quite a lot of money for the privilege of killing their children. My friend was a poor college student and got an abortion at PP and they wouldn’t even give her the pill for free. She said they nickeled and dimed her for every little thing they could. Typical. PP is about making money not helping women.
Condoms fail, and the pill fails (my son is here and proof of that). PP wants people to rely on contraception because when it fails they will run to one of their clinics and pay them to murder their inconvenient children!
Totally back you up on that, Ninek. Found my own way out in my own time and pretty much sat on the computer googling resources and fetal development and ordering books like Forbidden Grief. Once I became more bold in my convictions I found prolife groups and volunteer opportunities and ways to let my voice be heard.
I didn’t start becoming active in the movement until I was able to tell my story and have something to offer other post abortive women. Hope and healing.
Carla, the medical personnel should have been trained on CPR, and it does look like the anesthesia was done improperly. The doctor was reckless and got a jail sentence, and had had prior troubles at at least one hospital – he had threatened nurses.
So, I would say that at least as far as being a doctor, he’s a bad guy. This is still just one case, however. He was a gynecologist – what if he had resulted in the death of a woman giving childbirth? And women do die giving birth, some mistakes get made, etc. Are you going to try and paint the entire thing of continuing pregnancies and giving birth as bad, because of that?
There are still over a million abortions per year in the US, correct? I’ll be the first to note that there is some risk, and that not every single case will proceed without problems. The fact remains that it’s frequently wrong to generalize from the particular.
Same for Catholic priests – there have been hundreds, thousands, (tens of thousands?) of cases of abuse in the United States alone. From this, do we impugn everybody, there? Do we say that all priests are necessarily bad? No, we don’t.
Golly gee whiz Doug how did I know you would type that??!!
I really was hoping you had learned SOMETHING in the years you have been here.
“It was only one doctor Carla. He’s a bad guy.”
How comforting for Eileen Smith, Laura’s mother.(who is a friend of mine btw)
Have you not paid any attention to the number of posts Jill writes on the quack abortionists that think they are above the law? There is a pattern.
NO. We will not be going down the abusive Catholic priests rabbit trail either.
I’ll be the first to note that there is some risk, and that not every single case will proceed without problems.
As far as medical procedures go, abortion is extremely safe. The risk of complications is very low compared to many other procedures. I see similar arguments all too often about psychiatric drugs, where people draw from the horrible experiences some people have had with them. But those negative experiences don’t negate the good those drugs have done for others.
Sorry, these kinds of arguments kind of bug me. Yes, it sucks for those people who experience negative, or even fatal, complications from any medical procedure (or mistake). But if we used those rare cases as reasons for banning medicines or medical procedures, we’d wind up with no medical system at all. It is impossible to ever eliminate all risk–the best we can do is make the risks as small as possible.
Abortion is not a safe medical procedure for at least one of those involved. Abortion is the removal of a human life from the womb of his/her mother. It is not a “medical procedure with rare negative consequences.” It’s not like getting your appendix out. If it were, people wouldn’t feel the need to say it should be “safe, legal and rare” or that it’s a “heartbreaking choice” to make. To try and paint it as equivalent to any other medical procedure is just being disingenuous.
Have you not paid any attention to the number of posts Jill writes on the quack abortionists that think they are above the law? There is a pattern.
NO. We will not be going down the abusive Catholic priests rabbit trail either.
Carla, same deal. Good grief, talk about “a pattern…” It’s still illogical to generalize from the particular.
I’ve never had a nightmare that my appendix came back to confront me. My friends didn’t suggest I drink away the grief after having my wisdom tooth extracted.
Meanwhile, one post-abortive friend is now sterile due to scarring and complications. Another is so petrified of intimate relations, she hasn’t had a boyfriend for over a decade. For some mysterious reason, no one has the same reaction to lasic surgery or knee surgery. Why?
After my appendectomy, even though I’d been under general anesthesia, me and my body knew that something invasive and painful had happened. So in one way, we might compare abortion to surgery: Even though I didn’t introduce him to my family, something painful has happened. It is undeniable. A person is missing. A grandchild is missing. A cousin is missing. A niece or nephew is missing. People have died. Not “potential people” but real living growing little people. An appendix or a wisdom tooth is not a person.
Doug,
It’s almost 30 degrees here and sunny. The mountains of snow we have are melting although we are heading into some kind of New Year’s Eve freezing rain/snow storm.
Let’s stick to weather old friend.
It is impossible to ever eliminate all risk–the best we can do is make the risks as small as possible.
It is impossible to eliminate all the people we don’t want, the best we can do is eliminate them while they’re still as small as possible. Lol!
Jayn, your fearmongering comment that if we eliminate abortion, then we’d end up with no medicine is such faulty logic! All the time, we hear news stories about medications that have to be removed from pharmacies because of deaths or side effects. I am very disappointed that you repeat so much rhetoric that I’ve heard and read before. I think the pro-choice camp is sorely lacking original thought.
(ninek): Jayn, your fearmongering comment that if we eliminate abortion, then we’d end up with no medicine is such faulty logic!
That’s not what she said. What she did say is a point well-taken, and it was entirely logical.
Carla, for the 3rd year in a row, we worked for WE Energies in Wisconsin from late October into December. November wasn’t a bad month, but as you know Winter came for real after that.
I’ve been in Atlanta for a week, and thank goodness – the east coast and the airports have been so messed up. I shudder to think….. Back to work next week, Pittsburgh. Bummer.
See?
We can totally be the weather forecasters of Jill’s blog!!
And now back to you, Doug.
Only because there seems to be no point in arguing abortion with you, Doug. It’s been 3 years now you know! Happy Anniversary! :)
Oh and Doug?
Although this is not weather related this is Laura Hope Smith related.
Her mother, Eileen Smith is in the news today!!
http://www.lifenews.com/2010/12/29/mother-of-woman-who-died-in-abortion-named-person-of-year/
Doug, please wipe off your glasses:
Jayn wrote: ”But if we used those rare cases as reasons for banning medicines or medical procedures, we’d wind up with no medical system at all.”
Are we not talking about women who’ve died from legal abortion? Women who’ve been scarred and damaged? We are indeed. I didn’t just fall off the turnip truck, Doug, lol! (uh-oh, did I just date myself saying turnip truck? Excuse me while I go pop a Geritol.).
But seriously, abortion is not medicine. It’s legalized child murder.
Carla, I agree to a large extent – for you and I to “argue abortion” is stuff we’ve done many times before and it really just boils down to us wanting different things and making different assumptions.
Same for the physical reality of what happens in an abortion, the physical nature of the unborn, etc. – there too I don’t think I have much of an argument with you.
But on points of logic some things will still “light me up,” and generalizing from the particular is one of them.
Back a while, I saw the statistic that there was a period of time when among Boy Scout leaders, sexually abusive adults or those suspected of it were being kicked out at the rate of one every two days. I was like, “WHAT?!”
Later I saw that there were so many adults involved that the rate was really not as bad as a first glance might imply. Currently there are over half a million Boy Scout adult leaders.
ninek, do you really think that no one has ever had complications from lasic or knee surgery? That none of the myriad medications still on the market have the potential for lethal side effects? I have medicine on my kitchen counter right now that carries an increased risk of seizures, among other things. But the risk is judged as being small enough that the drug is still allowed on the market.
I’m not saying that banning abortion will lead to dismantling the health care system. I’m saying that banning anything that’s ever caused a death will eventually lead to banning everything. There is no ‘100% safe’ in medicine, just ‘safe enough’.
Ninek, how you know I wear glasses? : D
Are we not talking about women who’ve died from legal abortion? Women who’ve been scarred and damaged? We are indeed. I didn’t just fall off the turnip truck, Doug, lol! (uh-oh, did I just date myself saying turnip truck? Excuse me while I go pop a Geritol.).
But seriously, abortion is not medicine. It’s legalized child murder.
Having an abortion is a medical procedure, and yes – we can talk about women who’ve died from legal abortions. We can also talk about women who die from continuing pregnancies and giving birth. Jayn’s point stands there too – very rare instances do not make a sound basis upon which to ban a procedure.
Or, as I’ve mentioned many times – if we object to abortion due to the risk to the woman, then we can only logically object to continuing pregnancy and giving birth, since to a point in gestation it’s safer to have the abortion. For very early term abortions, it’s much, much safer.
How many women die in the US each year from having abortions? 10? 20? How many die from childbirth? 200? (Last average number I saw there was 237.) You don’t ban on statistics like these. We don’t ban people driving automobiles even though tens of thousands of women as well as men die in wrecks every year.
“Child” or not is subjective, and murder is defined by the law, not by you not liking abortion. Turnip trucks are fine, and the expression makes perfect sense to me. I like rutabagas too. And for driving slow in the left lane, I say Life Imprisonment. If while talking on the phone or texting, then the Death Penalty.
Jayn,
Please post the links to the organizations that have banded together to stop knee surgery or stop lasic surgery. Can’t find them? That’s because they actually correct ailments. And I do not have a single friend, relative, or aquaintence who was traumatized by necessary surgery, though it wasn’t a picnic. Please, do find a picture of a group of pro-eyeglasses activists protesting in front of the lasic clinic. I’d love to see what their slogans and signs might look like. Lol!
Abortion corrects nothing. Abortion kills a healthy child in a healthy mother. And as for pre-emptive abortions on at-risk children diagnosed in utero with health problems, they are also still murder. As long as a person is alive, it is murder to kill them. I will eventually die. If you kill me even five minutes before I would die naturally, it is murder.
Doug,
I forgot to mention: I don’t object to abortion only because of the negative impact on the mother. That’s a part of it. The primary objection I have is that it kills a living, developing human being. As God is my witness, I would trade my life for my child’s today if I could.
Joan:
If it turned out that Nebraska’s law was constitutional, and it was instituted in the other 50 states, you’d be okay with it, right?