Pro-life news brief 11-28-12
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- For some reason the editorial board of the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel thinks a poll showing the public favors more restrictions on abortion is a good argument against adding more restrictions to abortion:
Public polling shows that most people in the U.S. favor the idea of legal abortion. A CBS News/New York Times poll in September is typical. It found that 42% thought abortion should be “generally available,” while 35% said “available under stricter limits” and 20% said “not permitted.”
- Abortionist Willie Parker (pictured left) and other Mississippi abortionists were unable to obtain admitting privileges at any hospital near Jackson, MS so the state’s lone abortion clinic has filed suit to prevent the state of Mississippi from enforcing the law which went into effect in July:
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Sam Mims, R-McComb, said the clinic has had ample time to comply with the new law. He also denied the clinic’s claims that the law hands over control to the hospitals, whose application denials could force its closure.“The legislature doesn’t control what hospitals in the Jackson metro area do,” Mims said. “They have their own committees and bylaws set up, and they have to make the best decisions.” Mims said it’s up to the judge now.
The clinic’s providers already are board-certified ob-gyns, but only one had admitting privileges at the time of the law’s passage. That physician provides only limited service at the clinic…. Those who provide the majority of procedures, including Dr. Willie Parker, were denied privileges after a months-long effort by the clinic to obtain them.
- Why does abortionist Jill June (pictured right) think seeing 4D ultrasound images will shame, coerce or make a woman change her mind about getting an abortion? It’s just a clump of cells, right?
An anti-abortion group wants Nebraska lawmakers to pass legislation that requires four-dimensional ultrasound images of human fetuses to be posted on a state website. So-called 4-D ultrasounds take images of the fetus from several angles, showing such things as facial features and capturing movement.Jill June, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, said women should have all the information they need to decide whether to have abortions.
“Such information should support a woman, help her make the best decision for herself, her family and her circumstances, and enable her to take care of her health and well-being. Information should not be provided with the intent of shaming, coercing or making a woman change her mind,” she said.
[Photos via salem-news.com, journalstar.com]
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.
Let’s activize for Heartbeat Bill #2.
Informed consent for abortion!!
When women see the ultrasound they MIGHT choose life and well, we can’t have that now can we? Especially when one makes their living killing.
And how much clearer can it get?
Those that are proabortion are only about ONE CHOICE! Abortion.
I was so shamed when I went to all of my OB/GYN appointments and saw the ultrasounds of my babies. Shame, shame, shame.
I don’t know anyone who is exclusively ‘pro-abortion’. I know pro-choice folk, like myself. Anyone who might be exclusively ‘pro-abortion’ is actually as anti-choice as you are.
So you volunteer at CPC’s Reality?
You give of your time and talents and $$ to support abortion vulnerable pregnant women that have chosen life?
You advocate for adoption every chance you get?
Time to cut the crap.
Hey Reality, want to see someone who is pro-abortion?
https://www.jillstanek.com/2009/04/new-episcopal-divinity-school-prez-abortion-is-a-blessing-holy-work-abortionists-are-saints/#more-3407
April 6, 2009: Jill posts about Episcopal theologian Katherine Ragsdale, who said “abortion is a blessing” and called abortion “holy work”
Amusingly, down in the comments, Reality observes “She’s right, you know”
“So you volunteer at CPC’s Reality?” – Not at CPC’s Carla, I’m less than comfortable with the methods and ethics displayed by some. Instead I offer some of my time to assist in other community support activities for other needy groups.
“You give of your time and talents and $$ to support abortion vulnerable pregnant women that have chosen life?” – Not currently but I certainly have done so in the past. Time, talents and $$.
“You advocate for adoption every chance you get?” – when someone asks me then of course, equally with all other options available.
“Time to cut the crap.” – indeed.
prolifist, the lady is pro-choice, not exclusively pro-abortion. And I said what I did because she is right to say that we should be thankful that abortion is one of the options availavle for women when needed. Of course, since I am atheist, my response was somewhat tongue in cheek as I wouldn’t use terms such as ‘a blessing’ or ‘holy work’.
If you are prochoice on abortion you are proabortion.
Good for you, Reality. You almost don’t really help pregnant women see ALL of the choices.
There is one that kills an innocent human being that you are fine and dandy with women choosing though right?
“If you are prochoice on abortion you are proabortion” – and you said “Those that are proabortion are only about ONE CHOICE! Abortion.” – which is patently false. Isn’t it.
Thank you. Although it might not suit what you and some others here wish to think, do or say about pro-choice folk such as myself, I don’t actually actively promote abortion. When asked, I ensure people are aware of all the options available to them – equally. I simply believe that women have the right to choose.
The right to choose to pay someone to kill her own child. Proabortion.
Got it.
What, you’re disagreeing with yourself now are you? How does that work?
But you can’t argue that you aren’t anti-choice now can you.
If you do not consider Ragsdale to be “pro-abortion,” then I’m at a loss to understand what you mean by the term. If you say you’re “pro-gun,” you mean that guns can be a positive good in society, and can be of great value to those who choose to own them. When you say you’re “pro-gay marriage,” you mean that gay marriage is a positive good in society, and can be of great value to those who choose to enter into one. You are not saying that all citizens should own guns, or that all gays should get married. Yet that seems to be the sort of definition you are trying to use for “pro-abortion.”
If you think that abortion is frequently the right choice, frequently a positive good for society, and frequently a blessing, why are you hesitant to call yourself “pro-abortion”?
“If you do not consider Ragsdale to be “pro-abortion,” then I’m at a loss to understand what you mean by the term” – it was Carla who stated “Those that are proabortion are only about ONE CHOICE! Abortion”. Since I, and Ragsdale are not only about one choice, applying the term pro-abortion is flawed.
I’m far from ‘pro-gun’, but leaving that aside, being ‘pro-gun’ because they can be a positive good in society is all and only about the ‘gun’. It doesn’t include arrows, slingshots or donuts.
I don’t consider abortion to be the only positive good for society in regards to pregnancy outcomes. It is one of them. Give birth and be a parent, give birth and adopt out, or terminate the pregnancy.
I’m pro marriage equality. Straight couples as well as gay couples.
Define ‘frequently’.
So, Reality, just one question: Do you think it odd that abortionists want to hide what a “fetus” looks like in a woman’s body, if they are in favor of women making informed choices?
Your premise is wrong LifeJoy.
“Your premise is wrong LifeJoy.”
So, your answer to my question is yes.
Your question is based on a false premise. It does not elicit a yes or no answer.
An ultrasound reveals “what” a woman wants to terminate. Agreed?
Let’s try this one: Do you think it odd that abortionists want to not reveal what a “fetus” looks like in a woman’s body, if they are in favor of women making informed choices?
A slight alteration to the structure of the wording of your question based on a false premise doesn’t change the fact that its still based on a false premise LifeJoy. Try asking a real question.
I’ll ask a different question, Reality. Do you think that a woman seeing an ultrasound and having her fetus’s development described to her before she has an abortion will affect abortion rates (meaning, less of them might happen) and do you think that’s a positive thing?
Finally, a rational approach.
Yes Jack, I do think it will have a very small downward affect on abortion rates. All the anti-choicers jump for joy in 3…2…1…
But the push to force this on women is just plain wrong.
It’ll be positive if the woman concerned stays happy with deciding not to proceed with abortion, very negative if she regrets changing her mind later. Perhaps this is where adoption could be the best outcome.
Hopefully it will lead people to take better and more careful contraceptive measures.
The increasing use of drugs such as RU486 will help too.
After all, the bottom line is empowering and protecting women from the attempts at control by others.
Choice.
” Yes Jack, I do think it will have a very small downward affect on abortion rates. All the anti-choicers jump for joy in 3…2…1…
But the push to force this on women is just plain wrong.”
See, this type of attitude is why you guys get called “pro-abortion”. I have trouble not seeing that as a pro-abortion mindset. If you admit it might lower abortion rates, but then turn around and say it’s wrong, there’s not much I can say to that besides I can’t understand how that’s not “pro-abortion”.
” It’ll be positive if the woman concerned stays happy with deciding not to proceed with abortion, very negative if she regrets changing her mind later. Perhaps this is where adoption could be the best outcome.”
This is where I think you guys go a little towards crazy town, lol. We all make decisions we regret. Less information would seem to me to cause even more of these “regretful decisions”. Is that a logical conclusion? If a woman has an abortion, like some of the women on this board have, because she wasn’t aware of the development of her fetus and she severely regrets that abortion, do you find that as tragic as a woman who later has issues parenting her unwanted child and gives him/her up for adoption? It’s like you guys insist that a woman keeping her child because of this “forced information, but still having the option of adoption, is more tragic than a woman who aborts because of LESS information and has no options to rectify that mistake. I don’t understand.
” Hopefully it will lead people to take better and more careful contraceptive measures.
The increasing use of drugs such as RU486 will help too.”
I would love it if people used better contraception, possibly more information could help that. RU-486 is still an abortion though, I would not like to see it used ever, certainly not more.
” After all, the bottom line is empowering and protecting women from the attempts at control by others.
Choice.”
Eh, it’s kinda bs honestly. Women do not make choices in a vacuum anymore than men do. And we are all “controlled” to some extent by laws and societal constraints. Pro-lifers simply believe that those laws should also control attempts to harm unborn humans, and pro-choicers don’t believe that unborn humans deserve that legal protection. This is why these conversations always end up at an impasse, because while you can only see the woman, we see another human who is in need of “choice” as well.
“If you admit it might lower abortion rates, but then turn around and say it’s wrong” – uh uh, not quite. Woman walks into clinic “I’m pregnant, I don’t want to be, I’d like an abortion.” Doctor says “Let me show you a scan of the developing fetus inside you.” Woman says “No thanks, I’m not interested, I know what’s inside me, I just want an abortion.” – it isn’t wrong to offer to show her, its wrong to attempt to force her to see something she doesn’t want to. If she does agree to view the scan, all well and good.
“I don’t understand” – I call BS on this ‘women don’t know what’s happening inside them’ business. The only reason there have been attempts to force women to view scans when they don’t want to is to try to trigger an emotional response which might change their mind. They might just change it back again later too. The whole thing smacks of retail sales and advertsing trickery, like when someone some days ago suggested using aromas etc. to lull women into making a different choice. ‘Buy the shiny ring’ becomes ‘keep your fetus’.
Better RU486 in the first few days than a full abortion at 6-12 weeks.
You sum up our different viewpoints quite succinctly Jack.
I call BS on this ‘women don’t know what’s happening inside them’ business.
Not BS at all. I knew all about fetal development from books and photos before I even got pregnant with my first, but when I went in for my ultrasound, I didn’t expect to see so much movement and such… perfect formation. Kicking and turning, a perfectly formed little spine and limbs… I was shocked by it.
I was 24 years old. I recall another person on this board saying how shocked she was by her child’s ultrasound as well, and I believe she was also 24. We were by no means uneducated women. And yet to see that despite the fact that we hadn’t even felt movement yet, there were lives – very active ones – growing within our wombs… It was quite the learning experience.
Carla tells her story of having aborted and later miscarrying at the same number of weeks. And that is what opened her eyes to the truth about the life she had chosen to end years earlier.
Seeing the full scope of what one is considering – the ending of another human life – is important. Some women don’t change their minds at all. But for those who do, that little piece of education may have saved them from years of pain and suffering.
“Woman walks into clinic “I’m pregnant, I don’t want to be, I’d like an abortion.” Doctor says “Let me show you a scan of the developing fetus inside you.” Woman says “No thanks, I’m not interested, I know what’s inside me, I just want an abortion.” – it isn’t wrong to offer to show her, its wrong to attempt to force her to see something she doesn’t want to. If she does agree to view the scan, all well and good.”
Explain to me how it is wrong. When I got my ankle surgery, I didn’t want to hear about the risks. I’m quite squeamish and paranoid about being under anesthesia, so the last thing I wanted to hear was a catalog of things that could possibly happen during this surgery. But they were apparently required to divulge the risks and have me sign off on that, and so they did even though I didn’t want to hear it and already had a good idea of what could go wrong. I don’t understand how abortion is a special case, where a patient shouldn’t hear what is actually going on with the procedure. Do you not see something strange there?
“I call BS on this ‘women don’t know what’s happening inside them’ business. The only reason there have been attempts to force women to view scans when they don’t want to is to try to trigger an emotional response which might change their mind. They might just change it back again later too. The whole thing smacks of retail sales and advertsing trickery, like when someone some days ago suggested using aromas etc. to lull women into making a different choice. ‘Buy the shiny ring’ becomes ‘keep your fetus’.”
Oh there are some women who don’t know much about fetal development, not all abortion-seeking women but some, especially if they are young. There are several women on this board who could tell you how unprepared and uninformed they were. Now, it’s obviously not every woman, or maybe not even close to the majority. But there are some that are unaware.
“emotional response”… is that solely a bad thing, even from a pro-choice point of view? I have a couple friends who didn’t realize how ambivalent they were about actually going through with an abortion until they saw they ultrasound, then they realized that they couldn’t do it. Is that necessarily bad? You kinda skipped past my questions before. Is it more tragic that a woman ends up with an unwanted child but still has the option of adoption, or is it more tragic that a woman gets an abortion she regrets and has zero options, she just has to live with that decision?
There is a vast difference between explaining the risks of a procedure you are about to undertake and showing a scan Jack. Women should be told of the risks they face when undergoing an abortion. But should they be able to force you to view a scan of your ankle if you didn’t want to see it? I didn’t want to view my colonoscopy and there was no pressure that I did so. But the risks of the procedure were quite rightly explained to me.
“Is it more tragic that a woman ends up with an unwanted child but still has the option of adoption, or is it more tragic that a woman gets an abortion she regrets and has zero options, she just has to live with that decision?” – equally tragic I’d say.
” “Is it more tragic that a woman ends up with an unwanted child but still has the option of adoption, or is it more tragic that a woman gets an abortion she regrets and has zero options, she just has to live with that decision?” – equally tragic I’d say”
How is that equally tragic for either the child or the mother? I really would like to understand where you are coming from here. Okay, let’s leave the child out of it at first and just focus on the woman.
In the first scenario the woman has a child she doesn’t really want to raise. That sucks. My mother didn’t want me, it was terrible for her. Very sad. But there are still options in this scenario. She can adopt out. She can get counseling and try to work out her problems with parenting. She can have the father, if he’s involved and willing (if he isn’t he should be legally responsible), take over the majority of parenting duties. She can even go my mom’s way and just treat the kid like garbage, lol. Plenty of options here.
In the second scenario, the baby is dead. There isn’t any option there for her. She can’t take it back, she can’t fix it. Her only real option here is counseling. Even having more children doesn’t bring back that one. I don’t see how the situations are equivalently tragic, even without bringing the baby and it’s rights and feelings into it.
Some women know the development, but some women don’t. I had a basic idea of development when I got pregnant, but it wasn’t until I read a pregnancy book and saw the ultrasounds I really got a better sense as to what was going on. The 4-D ultrasound I saw was incredible to me. I’d never seen such clarity in an ultrasound picture.
I agree with JackBorsch. We have to sign consent forms detailing risks about certain proceedures, I don’t know why abortion should be excluded from this in any way. I would think the pro-choicers would be all for informed consent especially since they claim they’re so “pro-women”. If the unborn human in question is just a bunch of cells and not a human baby then what do the people in the industry have to fear from showing ultrasounds, even 4-D ones? Wouldn’t they WANT women to be informed? After all, if it’s all about the woman’s choice, then it only makes sense for her to make an informed decision.
Giving up a child is going to hurt a lot more than never having had it. It always hurts more to lose something we’ve had than to never have something in the first place.
“We have to sign consent forms detailing risks about certain proceedures, I don’t know why abortion should be excluded from this in any way.” – agreed, but a scan isn’t part of detailing the risks.
“what do the people in the industry have to fear from showing ultrasounds,” – nothing, the problem is in forcing women to view them when they don’t want to.
“After all, if it’s all about the woman’s choice, then it only makes sense for her to make an informed decision” – yes, and if she says she doesn’t want to see the scan of a developing fetus she shouldn’t be forced to.
“Giving up a child is going to hurt a lot more than never having had it. It always hurts more to lose something we’ve had than to never have something in the first place.”
Isn’t that just putting your interpretation on what you think a fetus is on women who regret their abortions? Some women who regret them may simply regret that they didn’t have a child. Others, like Carla, realize that they had a child, a human being, and that child died. I am sure that is just as painful for her as someone who mourns their child that they gave up for adoption (adoption in general is not something I think is all unicorns and fairies, but at least there is a live child out of it and a hope of a reunion, even if it’s small).
Reality,
Wouldn’t requiring the woman to look at her scan really work to YOUR and HER advantage? What better way to reassure her that this is not a human life but instead just a clump of cells? Just think of the peace of mind you can give this woman.
“Giving up a child is going to hurt a lot more than never having had it. It always hurts more to lose something we’ve had than to never have something in the first place.”
And you know this how exactly?
You have put your child up for adoption?
You are a post abortive woman named Carla? You have suffered two miscarriages after your abortion? One child you held in your hand and saw for yourself how precious and perfect your baby was at 10 weeks? And then you knew the TRUTH but it was too late for your first child?
Don’t bother to type YOU DON’T SPEAK FOR ALL WOMEN.
yawn
How about you try speaking for yourself?
The central horror of abortion is the death of an innocent human being. No amount of rhetoric will EVER change the truth of that.
Her name is Aubrey. She is my daughter.
If only I had known………
They lied. My baby died.
Thank you Jack.
PS
Women aren’t FORCED to see the ultrasound or hear the heartbeat. It is offered to them. They can refuse to see the truth. Abortionists routinely do ultrasounds before they kill the child so why not turn the screen and show the woman her living baby?
I always find it interesting that proaborts pick and choose what they claim to be FORCED.
Why is it that women get abortions when having a baby would make the mother wealthy? Kacey Jordan had an abortion even though she knew she was pregnant by an “A-list celebrity.” The $ she could have gotten in child support would have made both her and the child wealthy. She wouldn’t have had to either place for adoption or care for the baby much but could have hired paid caregivers to take care of the baby and report to her.
Famous groupie Connie Hamzy got pregnant 3 times and aborted. Again, had she sued the rock star who impregnated her for child support, she could have become wealthy.
Why do women abort when having a baby would ensure they get rich?
It’s always in these discussions of regulations that the true colors of the pro-choicer shows. They care more about abortion than women.
Anyone pro-choicer that truly cares about women would not fight against regulations that can improve abortion outcomes for women, they would be demanding them. What other medical procedure has such a high rate of regret without the possibility of a reversal? Pro-aborts don’t want to study and understand the lifelong agony that regret can produce. They argue that the apparent increases in suicide and other negative outcomes for women that have had abortions is all hogwash instead of insisting that research be done to get to the bottom of this issue. Anyone that truly cares about women and their choices would want to fully understand how to best help women. If you think it’s acceptable that some women live in lifelong pain after this “choice”, you are pro-abortion. If you think it’s acceptable that some women die when better care/clinic inspections/regulations could have saved them, you are pro-abortion.
Amen Lrning!!
I was lied to by omission.
I will carry the burden of paying someone to kill my first child until the day I die. The regret is beyond belief.
To truly “trust women” is to trust they can handle all the information available.
Indeed Hans!!
Tell them THE TRUTH!
If there are post abortive women reading this and you are struggling please email me!!
carla@jillstanek.com
I would love to be here for you!! There is healing after abortion.
Eventually we all have to face the truth of what’s going on.
It was easy for people to keep up slavery because they decided slaves weren’t really people. They were treated as objects, to keep around or dispose of as those in charge of the slave trade or those who kept slaves saw fit. Eventually, though, those against slavery won out because slavery–and treating other humans as sub-human without dignity–is wrong.
During the Nazi regime Jews and others who disagreed with Nazis (including Catholics, and other groups, not just Jews) were seen as sub-human…not really human, not worthy to be allowed to live. The Nazis fell because people saw the truth of what was wrong with it. That treating other human beings as sub-human is wrong.
Whenever we treat another human being–whether in the very early stages of development, or elderly, or at the end of their life as anything less than a human being with human dignity we fall into the same trap others before us have fallen into–that we can pick and choose which humans are human, which is simply the case. Just because a developing fetus (baby) looks more like a clump of cells does not mean that’s what it is in essence. Human egg and sperm come together to make human being. If such a being was just a clump of cells then it wouldn’t be the union of human egg and human sperm, it would just be cells. We’re all made up of clumps of cells–our hair is dead cells, our skin has cells, inside of us are cells. We’re all a pack of walking, talking, thinking, and in most cases, developing clumps of cells–we just look more like regular humans than the sum total of the clumps of cells we are.
Why should unborn humans be treated as less than human just because of their developmental stage? Why should it be okay to abort said being simply because they don’t LOOK like the rest of us?
I don’t understand how we can abolish slavery, be horrified by the Holocaust, be upset by people being treated badly by others, but don’t bat an eyelash if a woman aborts her unborn baby. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
Yeah, maybe ultrasounds wouldn’t change everybody’s mind, but it’s time we all faced the truth. We humans aren’t pregnant with just cells, we’re pregnant with a new life–how that life looks should NOT determine whether or not said life is treated with dignity and respect and given the same basic right given to us by nature to live.
(For the record, yes, I have been pregnant. Yes, I know how scary pregnancy can be. Yes, I know how annoying some parts of pregnancy can be, yes I know that in the beginning my offspring didn’t look very much like a human, but I knew I was pregnant with a human being).
As to adoption–I know people who have given up their child for adoption. I know people who have been adopted. As hard as it might’ve been, I’ve heard SO MANY women say they were grateful they gave their child that chance to live. I know a woman who had contemplated abortion. She sat down and talked about her thoughts with someone (wasn’t me they talked to, but someone I know) who heard her out and talked about it with her. In a letter to me this woman said she was grateful to that person because that person helped her decide to put her child up for adoption. Now she’s happily married with children and says it was the best decision she could’ve made for her baby.
I’m not saying adoption is an easy decision, but I am saying there’s a great deal of good to be had from it. And based on stories I’ve heard and what I’m witnessing in society (and even people saying they do not regret the abortions) I see no ultimate good coming of abortion.
They (Pro-aborts) are against it because they KNOW that if a woman SEES her baby-
Sees the TRUTH-that it’s NOT “just a clump of cells”, but a moving, LIVING being with a heartbeat- nine times out of ten, they will choose NOT to give someone money to kill that child.
Ohh, nooo…can’t have THAT, now can we? They just HAVE to have that (blood) money!
If abortionists were in it to help WOMEN…abortions would all be FREE, now wouldn’t they?
The only ones the abortion industry are “helping” are THEMSELVES…to whatever money they can get their blood-soaked hands on.
Again with the “anti-choicers” thing…it’s getting laughable.
Carla, you’re beautiful. Hugs!!!
Reality, I simply don’t understand why you won’t be called “pro-abortion” because the only choice we truly disagree on is the choice of abortion. People debating war are described as “pro-war” or “anti-war,” those debating slavery are termed as “pro-slavery” or “anti-slavery.” Keeping the terms consistent is imperative.
BUT. I’ll stop, because Jack et al have done an incredible job keeping it civil and bringing up excellent points! I was cheering the whole way!!
Hugs to you LB!!
HEY!!
This is what I have been up to dear friends!!
http://outcrywisconsin.blogspot.com/2012/11/out-there.html
“YOU DON’T SPEAK FOR ALL WOMEN” – neither do you Carla, neither do you.
I’m so sorry Carla, I tried to ignore this out of the “not letting threads get hijacked” thing but I can’t anymore, it’s just….
” Why do women abort when having a baby would ensure they get rich? “
Come on Denise, just… come on. Most people in general are not so utilitarian that they will pop out a kid just to make some money. Some people are that way. Most are not.
You seem to be perplexed that women don’t always follow the stereotype of wanting to be taken care of and “getting herself pregnant” to do so.
Hi Libertybelle,
Good point. The PA crowd is the only one I know that doesn’t seem to like what they advocate for very much and don’t even want to acknowledge what they advocate.
People who didn’t like slavery opposed it, they didn’t support anyone’s right to choose to own a slave. People who advocated civil rights supported it and called it what it was, support for civil rights.
BTW, pro-abortion people were called just that at one time, pro-abortion. Pro-choice came about as an effort to make abortion a little more palatable. We’re not talking about aborting, we’re talking about choosing.
JackBorsch says:
November 29, 2012 at 5:19 pm
I’m so sorry Carla, I tried to ignore this out of the “not letting threads get hijacked” thing but I can’t anymore, it’s just…. ” Why do women abort when having a baby would ensure they get rich? “
Come on Denise, just… come on. Most people in general are not so utilitarian that they will pop out a kid just to make some money. Some people are that way. Most are not. You seem to be perplexed that women don’t always follow the stereotype of wanting to be taken care of and “getting herself pregnant” to do so.
(Denise) Kacey Jordan and Connie Hamzy aren’t radical feminist types who are all upset about being “taken care of” by men or who think it’s degrading for a woman to financially benefit from her relationship with a man. Both of them to some extent or another receive goodies through associations with men. Kacey Jordan is a porn actress and part-time hooker. Connie Hamzy primarily supports herself through “straight” jobs but she’s not averse to getting a present from a rocker since she is a groupie (which is not a job as they aren’t paid).
Since they are not rad-fem types, it would make sense for them to have their babies and legally get child support. The child support would be so high that they could retire from their usual jobs while hiring childminders to actually do most of the child care. The pregnancies gave these women a chance to get rich and they aborted anyway. That defies common sense.
I NEVER use the expression “get themselves pregnant” unless we’re talking about sperm donation.
My heart breaks for you, Carla. You are indeed helping people by sharing your experience with others. God bless you in your efforts and as you rest in the peace and joy of complete forgiveness.
Reality,
Indeed I don’t. I Regret My Abortion.
What part of “I” do proaborts not understand?
PS
Thank you for being civil. I appreciate that very much. :)
LifeJoy,
All is well. The joy of seeing babies that have been saved because I told my story heals my heart more and more.
Thank you so much. :)
“Indeed I don’t. I Regret My Abortion.” – that is understood. We all make choices in life that we may come to regret. If you regretted getting married for whatever reason, would you agitate for the outlawing of marriage?
“What part of “I” do proaborts not understand?” – the part that says that “I” have the authority to tell a woman she must gestate and deliver when she wishes not to. Or that “I” am the all-knowing arbiter of how others must live their lives.
:-)
No comparison to make Reality. My daughter was suctioned out of my body with a vacuum hose and torn to pieces. Paid for by me. I am no different than a mom who wants to warn other moms of something that hurts deeply and doesn’t want anyone to go through it.
I Regret My Abortion.
What part of that has anything to do with authority to tell a woman what to do???
It is stating a simple and profound FACT. A TRUTH that I live everysingleflippinday.
Abortion kills and wounds. And arguing a personal story of abortion is futile. For you. Personal stories of regret are irrefutable, Reality.
And with that I bid you good night. Sleep tight.
“I Regret My Abortion.” – yes you do. But that is not grounds for preventing other women from having an abortion if thats what they want, any more than regretting a marriage would be grounds for preventing others from marrying.
“What part of that has anything to do with authority to tell a woman what to do???” – its part of the anti-choice raison d’etre.
Sweet dreams :-)
It would be so much more refreshing if the Planned Parenthood staff and supporters would just cut the crap. At least be honest. No one is going to feel shame or guilt if the ultrasound image truly shows just a “clump of cells” or “a blob of tissue”. If there is nothing to see, then there is nothing to worry about. Right? If you are as ethical as you say you are about informed consent, you would want to give the mother every opportunity to change her mind. If she changes her mind after viewing the ultrasound, she was not a good candidate for an abortion in the first place. The ones who would have changed their minds are the ones who will regret the abortion later.
As for the pro-choice or pro-abortion nomeclature. I look at this way. If A = B, and B = C, then A = C.
If you are pro (A) a woman’s right to choose (B),
and she chooses abortion (C),
then you are pro(A) abortion (C).
It’s just a pity that B doesn’t equal C in your equation Joanne.
Reality,
Tonite I watched the movie “Lincoln”. In it a congressman was saying that as much as he hated slavery, it just wasn’t feasible to end it. What would happen to all these freed slaves who couldn’t possibly manage life on their own?
Do you suppose this congressman was “pro-choice” on slavery? While he abhored it himself, he wasn’t about to end it and deny others the “right” to own a slave? Its an argument that does make sense, don’t you agree?
Doesn’t that argument about the country being overrun by the freed slaves, who of course were completely helpless and incapable, kind of remind you of the argument often made by your side as to what would happen if all these “unwanted” children were allowed to be born?
Amazing isn’t it Reality, how the more things change the more they stay the same?
No
Reality,
Well maybe it isn’t so amazing after all, but just a fact of life.
Mary, I find your slavery story to be a false analogy.
Therefore the whole ‘stay the same’ thing is moot in this instance.
“Amazing isn’t it Reality, how the more things change the more they stay the same?”
Right on, Mary! I have also heard that people used to say concerning those who spoke out and condemned slavery: Don’t push your religion on me!
Reality,
GOOD MORNING!
I find your marriage story to be a false analogy.
You forget my motivation, Reality. It is love. To keep women from harm and their babies from dying. Love. I love them. I love them too much to sit back and watch them do it and not try to offer them something better, something life affirming, something they won’t regret.
Perhaps the sun will shine today and you could crack your brain open just a tad to let that sun shine in. And maybe, just maybe admit to yourself that abortion just might be WRONG.
Oh and when someone tells you about something that hurt them deeply the rational and appropriate and loving response? “I’m so sorry.”
You don’t argue endlessly, compare their experience to something incomparable and pretend that their grief and pain didn’t really happen, or accuse them of something that is not their motivation.
Shame on you for trying to deny my grief as a post abortive mother who loves her daughter.
Abortion hurt me.
The more you try to argue this irrefutable fact the more you seem gasp PROABORTION!!
Reality,
I think you are just shocked to discover that the issue of “choice” is really not unique and the analogy is not moot, but making you a tad uncomfortable. I must admit I was surprised that my long used analogy was more spot on than I thought.
Apparently it was considered perfectly rational to oppose slavery, yet support it being legal. ”Concerns” about the burden the “unwanted”, be they freed black slaves or unborn children, could pose on the social and political system are nothing new, but a question that has long been a part of our nation’s, and human, history.
BTW, I would recommend the movie to everyone on this blog. It was incredible, moved me to tears at the end. It certainly displayed the very human side of Lincoln, the master lawyer and politician, and that everything old is new again.
Hi Carla,
Thank you for your concern and dedication. I greatly admire you and your determination to spare other women your anguish.
As with anything in our lives we deeply regret, we reach out to others in an effort to spare them. We may succeed, we may not, but we will not stop trying.
Thank you and keep up the good fight.
Thank you Mary.
I greatly admire you as well.
I shall fight the good fight with you!
Hi lifejoy,
Thank you. I hope you will get to see this movie. I am still so moved by it. I may not like Steven Spielberg’s politics but will never deny the man’s immense talent. The acting was beyond description and no historical detail overlooked.
I was surprised that it was brought out in the movie that Republicans were the strongest proponents of abolishing slavery. It was the Democrats who had to have their arms twisted to support the 13th Amendment. Spielberg brought out other interesting historical points such as the unequal treatment of black Union troops who nonetheless displayed incredible courage and dedication.
Arguments were brought up as to whether blacks would be considered equals, allowed to vote, and horror of horrors…..women getting the vote! Gasp!! Who knows what horrors the 13th Amendment would spawn! Again, sound familiar?
Hi Carla,
Thank you as well for the kind words. They mean a lot coming from you.
Mary,
Your anaology was SPOT ON! The pro-choicers are going to not see the connection because it would mean having to change how they view abortion…which, would mean changing their position…which, it’s tough for anyone to change how they think about almost anything.
WE cannot MAKE them change their minds, we can only present the Truth. Hopefully more and more will see the truth.
As someone who is religious, I pray for this. I know not everyone is religious, but those who are, I recommend prayer. For those who aren’t religious, at least think positive thoughts.
Hi Mother in Texas,
Thank you for the kind words.
The congressman sounded to me like he was pro choice on slavery. I would think Reality would agree whole heartedly that this is a perfectly logical argument and would also agree that those who opposed slavery had no right to force their beliefs on others.
“I find your marriage story to be a false analogy.” – oh well, the more things change… :-)
“You forget my motivation, Reality. It is love…..I love them too much to sit back and watch them do it and not try to offer them something better, something life affirming, something they won’t regret.” – yes, as it would be if the scenario was applied to marriage.
“Perhaps the sun will shine today and you could crack your brain open just a tad to let that sun shine in. And maybe, just maybe admit to yourself that abortion just might be WRONG” – the sun shines every day where I live. And it has shone upon me for many decades, lighting up the world, and all I see is confirmation that abortion isn’t wrong.
“Oh and when someone tells you about something that hurt them deeply the rational and appropriate and loving response? “I’m so sorry.” – I have done so in the past. I’m not going to do so every time we ‘speak’.
“Shame on you for trying to deny my grief” – I have not denied your grief. I simply don’t find it justifies your attempts to harangue others.
I regret my abortion.
Maybe you should try accepting this as fact.
Good luck.
If you are unable to discern that I have quite clearly accepted that fact that you regret your abortion then I can only ponder that you are lacking in either honesty or comprehension.
That is not the point that I have been debating with you, and you know it.
Is he always this eristic?
“Is he always this eristic?”
Erstic= the word of the day.
I’m loving this, what a week!
So many utterly and blatantly ludicrous little pithy mots from some of you.
The number of times when, immediately after I’ve written “2+2=4”, someone has screamed “why won’t you just admit that 2+2=4!”
Your desperation is positively redolent.
Is it just because of the election outcome, or is there more to it?
What’s ‘erstic’ JDC?
A thousand times, YES!, Navi.
Ha! I feel like a stainless steel kettle being accused of being black by a full set of black pots. :-)
The constant volleys of spitballs sent in my direction in the last few days demonstrates the vacuity of your armoury.
Just because you don’t agree with the arguments put forth doesn’t mean they are without merit or logic.
Jack its not the arguments that have been put forth. It is the sheer inanity of some short phrases and the total denial of things I have actually said that I am talking about.
Hi, Mary – I will definitely see the movie, especially on your recommendation. I am reading Metaxas’ Wilberforce biography right now. So far sooooooo good! I think we should emphasize the notion of human rights strongly in the pro-life movement, particularly within certain circles. Because that is definitely what the most basic right to life is, but also because it has both emotional and “academic elitist” appeal.
I am envisioning a more general human rights organization that highlights right to life … Does anyone know of something like that? Meaning, it focuses on other issues besides abortion, yet is deeply pro-life and actively does pro-life work? Embedding the pro-life position and allying with human rights is a strategy I’d like to hear about.
Total denial of things.
Yes Reality. I feel the same way about you.
:)
You make me laugh. So I thank you for that.
Hi Lifejoy,
I promise you won’t be disappointed. I understand there was a movie out about Wilberforce some years ago. You should check out Youtube or amazon.com.
I think we in the PL movement can take some reassurance from the fact that these great struggles to end slavery took decades, even centuries. Civil rights was also along struggle.
People would dedicate their lives to ending this evil, never to see it end. Through decades of setbacks, disappointments, election losses, indifference, and stagnation these people maintained the one and only thing that would guarantee their success: Persistance.