What to say to a woman who is happy about her abortion
We could demonstrate that abortion is wrong even if every single post-abortive woman had positive feelings about her abortion….
I think women should consider whether abortion is not a wise decision, but we also want them thinking about how some things can be wrong even if they don’t affect us negatively.
For example, the head of a corporation that irreparably harms the environment or kills whales around Antarctica may not feel any guilt from that, and he may not suffer any loss in profit either. Yet it may still be immoral to harm whales or the environment in that way….
Here’s what I would never do: Say that you don’t believe the person in front of you. “But everybody is affected by abortion!” “You may not feel guilt yet, but you will later.” Statements like that will not be helpful.
~ Josh Brahm, Education Director for Right to Life of Central California and host of podcast turned radio/TV show, Life Report: Pro-Life Talk. Real World Answers, responding to a question about how to address a woman who says abortion has improved her life, JoshBrahm.com, March 18
[Photo via joshbrahm.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.
Josh makes a really good point here. As far as I can tell, the morality of any other action is not normally determined by the feelings of the person committing it. So why would abortion be any different?
I really dont know what I would say except. “I will pray for you.” Ive never ever heard any woman say she was happy but many believe they feel relieved or made the right choice for themselves. I also might point her to abortion healing groups since shd might have a change of heart.
I keep going back and forth with a girl who is pc on a pc blog. She insists abortion is healthcare. I finally told her I know of 2 women personally who are sterile because of botched abortions. How is this good for them? I told her I will PRAY for you. I havent heard back from her since.
If an immoral act (like an abortion) did not seem to provide a good solution to a problem or offer a means to obtain what you desire no one would ever commit them.
“The woman saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes, and the tree was desirable for gaining wisdom. So she took some of its fruit and ate it.” Gen. 3:6
He’s got a great point. People doing all kinds of things sometimes don’t feel remorse about them and maybe never will, but whether or not it’s okay to do such things doesn’t depend on how the person doing them feels about it.
JDC: As far as I can tell, the morality of any other action is not normally determined by the feelings of the person committing it. So why would abortion be any different?
You’re talking about differences of opinion. Morality is feelings.
You may not agree with how a given person feels or acts, certainly, and it may be that a given group also disagrees, or “the gov’t” or the existing law, or a majority of people, etc.
From what Josh has said, I like him. He’s sensible, IMO, and lacking in pretense, in general.
We could demonstrate that abortion is wrong even if every single post-abortive woman had positive feelings about her abortion….
Well, here is one pretense… This is really just saying that “we” then disagree with all those women.
____
For example, the head of a corporation that irreparably harms the environment or kills whales around Antarctica may not feel any guilt from that, and he may not suffer any loss in profit either. Yet it may still be immoral to harm whales or the environment in that way….
That’s a pretty out-of-kilter comparison, though. When we are talking about somebody profiting from “ irreparably harming the environment” then it’s quite a loaded statement, and who, really, is going to disagree about the “wrong,” there? As we know, opinion about abortion being legal is much more divided.
___
Here’s what I would never do: Say that you don’t believe the person in front of you. “But everybody is affected by abortion!” “You may not feel guilt yet, but you will later.” Statements like that will not be helpful.
I agree, and here Josh is back to his sensible self, and I applaud his pragmatic and realistic way of discussing things with pro-choicers. From what I’ve seen in the prior thread about him, here, and on his website, he does have a lot of good thoughts and a rational, down-to-earth manner.
but whether or not it’s okay to do such things doesn’t depend on how the person doing them feels about it.
“Okay” in whose opinion, Jacque? ; )
““Okay” in whose opinion, Jacque? ; )”
I generally look at it to see if a behavior is causing harm to non-consenting parties. Abortion involves a human fetus who is unable to have any input on the situation, at all, and it’s their life at stake.
I’ve had women briefly tell me the circumstances of their abortion and offer it as a positive un-regretted decision. They did it as sort of a “Ha. So there. In your face.” offensive. Then, they immediately walked away. They were not interested in anything other than their own narrative.
Doug: “Morality is feelings.”
Thought leads to Emotion that leads to Behavior that leads to another Emotion about the Behavior.
Well, I always thought that morality is a belief system that one has acquired through environmental influences and that emotions (the feelings) are a result of the consequences of the morally-driven behavior, but what do I know….
ThomasR: Well, I always thought that morality is a belief system that one has acquired through environmental influences and that emotions (the feelings) are a result of the consequences of the morally-driven behavior, but what do I know….
Thomas, I don’t think we are really disagreeing. Yeah, morality can be called a belief system – it is beliefs, after all. You feeling or thinking that abortion is wrong is the same thing as you believing it’s wrong.
Environmental influences - yes, without doubt. I wonder about the extent of ‘nature’ versus ‘nurture’ as far as our morality, if that is an influence as well. Also would be very interested in what people would think if they were raised without any outside input, i.e. they were left entirely to formulate their own thoughts on the matter.
but whether or not it’s okay to do such things doesn’t depend on how the person doing them feels about it.
“Okay” in whose opinion, Jacque?
Jack: I generally look at it to see if a behavior is causing harm to non-consenting parties. Abortion involves a human fetus who is unable to have any input on the situation, at all, and it’s their life at stake.
Without arguing, Jack, here we have “okay or not” coming down to your feeling about it.
Doug, we are disagreeing because morality is not feelings – it is cognition that allows us to engage in whatever behaviors we choose to. Feelings only reinforce (either positively or negatively) the thoughts that made us engage in the behavior(s) in the first place but feelings do not guide our actions a priori.
Thomas R: Doug, we are disagreeing because morality is not feelings – it is cognition that allows us to engage in whatever behaviors we choose to.
TR, there we do disagree – it’s not “cognition.” It’s not stumbling over a bucket of water in your driveway; it’s valuation, it’s how you perceive things, your viewpoint, it’s how you feel about something as far as the good/bad/right/wrong in the moral realm.
Person A says “there is no matter or energy in the universe.” Person B says there is. Matters of external fact like that are one thing.
Then we come to the moral realm. Is female genital mutilation right or wrong? There are hundreds of millions or billions of people that think it’s right. The rest of us think it’s wrong. It depends on our religious/cultural viewpoint. It is relative to us as individuals and as groups – the very definition of subjective.
Valuation is driven by the thought process Doug – its the prefrontal cortex at work evaluating intent. Some affect areas of the brain are triggered by moral valuation but they are secondary to our thinking. Have you ever met a person whose morality is driven by emotion rather than cognition? Think about that and come to a conclusion for yourself. We think first feel about it second…..
I’ve got to say also, in your comment above you used the word THINK quite a bit rather than FEEL. So in essence you also follow the cognitive model of morality. Do not reduce us to beings without a mind.
Thomas, saying, “I feel it’s wrong,” or “I think it’s wrong,” is the same thing.
We definitely have minds, and valuation is a conscious thought process.
Have you ever met a person whose morality is driven by emotion rather than cognition?
Yes, and everybody on earth is that way. It all comes down to desire, to what we want the most, or that for which we have the least distaste.
You want all the unborn to live more than you want women to retain the freedom they currently have – you want abortion to be illegal. That’s your valuation. You may be right about the prefrontal cortex and valuation – I’m not sure. Regardless, it’s conscious internal thought/feeling at work.
Desire is not only the source of morality, it’s what provides all our motivation. From among our available options, we choose that which we want the most, or that for which we have the least distaste.
I can answer to the question in the headline:”What to say to a woman who is happy about her abortion”:
The best reply would be “I am happy you feel you made a good decision”
You want all the unborn to live more than you want women to retain the freedom they currently have
Because nothing screams FREEDOM for women more than having the legal right to kill our children!
“You want all the unborn to live more than you want women to retain the freedom they currently have. ”
Praxedes: Because nothing screams FREEDOM for women more than having the legal right to kill our children!
It’s hardly “a child” when most miscarriages or abortions occur. What I said about Thomas’s wants is true. He values one more than the other.
Most spontaneous or chosen abortions occur earlier in pregnancy. In the beginning, there is just one fertilized egg, and failure to implant is common. Most spontaneous abortions occur in the first 12 weeks. For induced abortions, 99% occur at 20 weeks or less, 89% at 12 weeks or less, and 63% at 8 weeks or less.
My husband and I miscarried our very loved child around 8 weeks. We were blessed to have seen and heard his heartbeat the day before we lost him. I have an ultrasound photo of him. He existed. He was loved.
He was the the only child we had together and the only biological child my husband will probably ever have.
You are your five followers are heartless and have my sincere pity.
If s/he wasn’t a human, you didn’t have a miscarriage or an abortion.
What exact day did my children become my children, Doug? Heck, give me the week.
Doug: In the beginning, there is just one fertilized egg, and failure to implant is common.
It’s okay, sciencing is hard.
Yes, in the beginning there is a fertilized egg. But then when that egg is fertilized, it’s a new person. A new human is made. Biology: Caution: May Not Support Political Talking Points ;)
Most spontaneous abortions occur in the first 12 weeks.
A “spontaneous abortion” is tragic. Do you know what a 12 week olkd fetus looks like? It’s got a heartbeat; fingerprints; its entire DNA. All there at 12 weeks. That’s the end of the first trimester. The first third of the pregnancy. And ask any mum who’s miscarried; it’s tragic no matter when that baby was lost.
For induced abortions, 99% occur at 20 weeks or less, 89% at 12 weeks or less, and 63% at 8 weeks or less.
Whoah there nelly. Those numbers are confusing. Please explain where you’re getting the data. Thanks.
Also, ah so 20 weeks. Did you know that this is the week they do the biophysical profile? This is the week they monitor heart and brain activity and bone density? They can see hair at this ultrasound. And gender as well. It’s approximately halfway through. The baby’s got a personality at this point as well.
Finally read the piece in itself and not just the comments. So that guy (probably with a lot of pregnancies in his life!) thinks it is ok shaming women for the decision they made. I just wonder what he thinks gives him that right to comment on other peoples decisions. That is the dividing line between pro women and “pro lifers”: we give you the right you want to deny us.
Christine and her ‘borts are so FREE that they feel the need to lurk around a prolife blog proclaiming their rights to kill children.
we give you the right you want to deny us.
I don’t want to deny anyone of their life. It belongs to them. If you want to kill, kill alone. I was never given the right to kill humans from the Almighty and I sure in heck am not going to take such a right from you. You want the right to kill, it’s on you.
Who is the almighty you are referring to?
Praxedes: You are your five followers are heartless and have my sincere pity.
No, not any more than other people who would not force the continuance of unwanted pregnancies, or who would not force women to have abortions against their will.
“Human” is certainly there all along. The egg are sperm are human, and the fertilized egg is a human organism, different from the egg and sperm.
LibertyBelle: Yes, in the beginning there is a fertilized egg. But then when that egg is fertilized, it’s a new person. A new human is made. Biology: Caution: May Not Support Political Talking Points.
Biology doesn’t say “person,” LB. Biology says living human organism. Personhood is a societal construct. As a country, we attribute full personhood at birth. I think there usually is “a person” there later in gestation, a sensate being that can feel and has awareness. Sometime in the weeks in the 20s is when I say it usually is present. And, as far as “person or not,” birth really doesn’t make a difference to me, i.e. the full-term, born baby is the same as the full-term baby that’s still to be born.
Likewise, keep the body alive by pumping oxygen, nutrients, etc., through the vessels, and remove the brain. Is that still “a person”? I say no – still a “human organism,” still unique DNA, but it’s our brains that make us “people” and the singular species on earth that we are. My opinion.
____
A “spontaneous abortion” is tragic. Do you know what a 12 week old fetus looks like? It’s got a heartbeat; fingerprints; its entire DNA. All there at 12 weeks. That’s the end of the first trimester. The first third of the pregnancy. And ask any mum who’s miscarried; it’s tragic no matter when that baby was lost.
No argument there. Yes – when the pregnancy is wanted – it can be very sad.
____
“For induced abortions, 99% occur at 20 weeks or less, 89% at 12 weeks or less, and 63% at 8 weeks or less.”
Whoah there nelly. Those numbers are confusing. Please explain where you’re getting the data. Thanks.
http://www.guttmacher.org/ Left side of the page, near the top – ‘RESOURCES ON” … “Abortion.”
Then, “TOP RESOURCES” and then “Induced Abortion in the United States.”
They’re really not confusing – if 99% are at 20 weeks or less, and 89% at 12 weeks or less, then 10% will be from 13 to 20 weeks. As you go farther out in gestation time, a greater percentage is encompassed.
____
Also, ah so 20 weeks. Did you know that this is the week they do the biophysical profile? This is the week they monitor heart and brain activity and bone density? They can see hair at this ultrasound. And gender as well. It’s approximately halfway through. The baby’s got a personality at this point as well.
I had never heard of a biophysical profile until you said it, right there. Not that it matters, here, but webmd.com says:
A BPP is commonly done in the last trimester of pregnancy. If there is a chance that your baby may have problems during your pregnancy (high-risk pregnancy), a BPP may be done by 32 to 34 weeks or earlier. Some women with high-risk pregnancies may have a BPP test every week or twice a week in the third trimester.
The only thing I would take issue with is your use of “personality.” Going with something like, “The pattern of collective character, behavioral, temperamental, emotional, and mental traits of a person” – I see it as coming from both “nature” and “nurture.”
For the unborn, there’s going to be a lot more personality at 39 or 40 weeks than there is at 20, given normal development. Without going into the vagaries of “nurture” in the womb, the “nature” part may be starting to be apparent at 20 weeks, i.e. many women feel the baby kicking/moving by then, and different babies will be different in that respect – you can say that’s an element of their personality.
So, “a personality at 20 weeks.” I guess for some babies you can say that. I’d add that at 9 months it’ll be there for almost all babies, and in much greater degree than at 20 weeks.
No, not any more than other people who would not force the continuance of unwanted pregnancies
Pregnancies always end naturally, it doesn’t matter if the woman wants to be pregnant or doesn’t want to be pregnant. Her being pregnant will end.
You support women ending the lives of humans they don’t want in spite of the fact that there are other people who want those children.
If a human is there all along, why do you insist on using silly word combinations like “unwanted pregnancies”? You support women having the legal right to kill humans, their own children. The children they are responsible for creating but who are inconvenient for them.
Christine, the same Almighty that quietly and compassionately tugs at your heart time after time bringing you and your silent supporters here to read what we write.
God Bless you all.
“You want all the unborn to live more than you want women to retain the freedom they currently have – you want abortion to be illegal. ”
“It’s hardly “a child” when most miscarriages or abortions occur. What I said about Thomas’s wants is true. He values one more than the other.”
You got carried away there Doug about assuming the above about me. I began commenting here in June 2013. There is enough material for you to browse through on me…. I value the woman and her child equally thus strife to save both. My purpose is life-affirming. And I am proud of that…
And since we are evaluating here – your prefence is reducing the woman to an animal in the way she treats her offspring.
Abortion is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. Does that mean anything to you???
Oh Doug. You forgot to tell me the exact week my children became my children. I’ll wait.
Praxedes, what brings me here is the vain hope that some of you “pro lifers” one day might realize that what you want to achieve always have and always will hurt women. Read this…
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/health/views/03essa.html?_r=4&
Christine, I did and have read similar articles in the pass. Now you read this….
http://teens.webmd.com/cutting-self-injury?page=2
Do you support legalizing self injury and giving teens safe and affordable places to do so? A clean place they can pay to go and cut their bodies legally (credit card or cash accepted)? Because there will always be those who harm themselves you know.
In all seriousness, I believe compassionate humans are called to help other humans that are in crisis, whether they are a teen who is cutting themselves or a woman in a crisis pregnancy. We should not encourage them to harm themselves and/or kill innocent humans. You do realize that most women who abort are pressured to abort their baby, don’t you? That’s not choice. That’s coercion. Stop supporting the coercion of women.
P.S. What week do you think my children became my children?
How about for once giving a source for your claim of most women etc? Or is it hearsay as most of “pro lifers” constantly inexact assertions?
unchoice.com
How about for once telling me the exact week my children became my children. Heck, at this point just give me the month.
The day you started to see them as your children. Your turn: most means what in percent, source and link, please
Sorry I honestly did not see your source reference. But since it is a “pro life” site I guess it is biased. And even if it is not biased, what difference does it make? Are your forced pregnancies for those women who want an abortion one inch better than a forced abortion? Not in my opinion. Both are acts of denying women reproductive rights. In fact both are acts of violence against women. I do not support one of them. You support one. Why do you not think women are capable of making decisions re themselves?
No problem, Christine. I believe that you did not initially see my source reference. Abortion has caused more violence against women, not less. If the decision to abort was just about women, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. But you are forgetting about the human that is giving the woman the label of “pregnant” in the first place. These humans deserve the right to live just as much as you or I.
I know women who did not “feel” like mothers until well after their babies were born. Should these moms be given the right to kill born baby because of how they feel? Heck, there were days during the teen years that I felt that my children came from Pluto!
Praxedes: Oh Doug. You forgot to tell me the exact week my children became my children. I’ll wait.
We’re not going to agree on the definition of “children,” Praxedes.
I’ve long said that in the end, arguing over “child” or not, and even “baby” or not is pointless. There will always be people who essentially stand on one side or the other, there, and stomp their feet, asserting over and over that they are right, and that their opponents are wrong. It really never goes anywhere.
It is also a much more personal thing for you than for me, and re your post last night at 9:08 p.m. – that was a good one, and I understand, and I would not dream of saying you should not feel that way.
I’ve never said that being pro-life means anybody is “bad” or “stupid,” and if you see the unborn, all the way through gestation, as I see them near the end of it, or as babies are after birth, then no surprise you’re pro-life.
So in Doug’s world, what makes a human worthy of not being killed is the label slapped on him/her by his/her mother. Got it.
The loss of our son is not personal or private to me or my husband. Why would it be? I have no issues talking about Samuel with anyone, including you.
We all know the reasons many ‘borts believe abortion is a personal and private issue though. . . . .
as I see them near the end of it
What week do you see THEM as worthy of your protection?
“There will always be people who essentially stand on one side or the other, there, and stomp their feet, asserting over and over that they are right, and that their opponents are wrong. ”
Are you describing yourself Doug? I ask because what you wrote above is what I see you doing….
“There will always be people who essentially stand on one side or the other, there, and stomp their feet, asserting over and over that they are right, and that their opponents are wrong. ”
TR: Are you describing yourself Doug? I ask because what you wrote above is what I see you doing….
No, Thomas – I’m not saying, “Abortion is okay because it’s not a “baby.” Subjective terms aside, we can agree on some things, and we will disagree on others – that is where the abortion debate is. Worrying over subjective terminology is fruitless.
Praxedes: So in Doug’s world, what makes a human worthy of not being killed is the label slapped on him/her by his/her mother. Got it.
Oh jeez… No you don’t – you are overgeneralizing to a ridiculous degree. For starters, born, aware, thinking, feeling, emotional people with a history of relationships already behind them are much different from the unborn, to a point in gestation.
For the unborn – it really does not matter what the mother says, as far as “baby” or not, or “child” or not. Some women choose to continue pregnancies, regardless of the terms they use, and some women choose to end pregnancies, again – regardless of the terms they use, and regardless if they self-identifed as “pro-life” to that point in time.
____
The loss of our son is not personal or private to me or my husband. Why would it be? I have no issues talking about Samuel with anyone, including you.
I can’t agree with that, and no disrespect at all intended. I didn’t say it was a private matter, but it most certainly is personal to you.
You have a connection with miscarriage that is, frankly, infinitely closer than anything I have or ever will have with miscarriage or abortion. I’ve never gotten anybody pregnant, and my wife has had a hysterectomy.
I know you’ve been substantially irritated with me at times, but I’ve never tried to “troll” you – I’m not going to say you are wrong to feel a certain way, because you are not. It’s up to you, not to me.
I would not demean the emotion of any woman who had a miscarriage, or had an abortion.
____
We all know the reasons many ‘borts believe abortion is a personal and private issue though. . . . .
Maybe you do – it depends on the situation. If somebody is actually “pro-abortion,” then they are not pro-choice, in the first place. And if you bring up the admittedly-bad people who coerce women into things, against those women’s will, whether it be having an abortion they don’t want, or trying to force them to continue a pregnancy they don’t want, that too is not what “pro-choice” is about, and I wouldn’t be arguing with you in the first place.
____
“I’ve never said that being pro-life means anybody is “bad” or “stupid,” and if you see the unborn, all the way through gestation, as I see them near the end of it, or as babies are after birth, then no surprise you’re pro-life.
What week do you see THEM as worthy of your protection?
“My protection.” If it was up to me, then if I was the father it would come down to whether I and the woman wanted to have a kid.
But I take your question, in general – I’d draw the line at 24 weeks. Given that it’s really not up to me, and that uniform laws work best, I go with 20 weeks – there we are ‘erring on the side of safety’ if anything.
“What I said about Thomas’s wants is true. He values one more than the other.”
TR: You got carried away there Doug about assuming the above about me. I began commenting here in June 2013. There is enough material for you to browse through on me…. I value the woman and her child equally thus strife to save both. My purpose is life-affirming. And I am proud of that…
No “assumption,” Thomas. What I said is true: ”You want all the unborn to live more than you want women to retain the freedom they currently have – you want abortion to be illegal.”
____
And since we are evaluating here – your preference is reducing the woman to an animal in the way she treats her offspring. Abortion is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. Does that mean anything to you???
I don’t think it’s up to you to determine what’s too “temporary” for the woman to worry about. I’m for letting the woman decide what is best for her – this is the direct opposite of being “an animal,” it’s making a conscious decision.
“Worrying over subjective terminology is fruitless.”
And yet, Doug, pro-aborts call a baby in the womb a blob of cells. Its as subjective as one can get. Obviously when subjectivity is displayed by pro-aborts, it does not concern you as much as when you can observe it from Pro-lifers. Yes?
TR: Obviously when subjectivity is displayed by pro-aborts, it does not concern you as much as when you can observe it from Pro-lifers. Yes?
No. It’s the same for both sides. As I said, above:
“I’ve long said that in the end, arguing over “child” or not, and even “baby” or not is pointless. There will always be people who essentially stand on one side or the other, there, and stomp their feet, asserting over and over that they are right, and that their opponents are wrong. It really never goes anywhere.”
___
And yet, Doug, pro-aborts call a baby in the womb a blob of cells. Its as subjective as one can get.
Thomas, there is a time when it really is just a blob of cells, though it’s not a long time in the entire scheme of gestation. If people are maintaining that it’s the case longer than what is true, that’s really not “subjective,” it’s just plain wrong.
That’s what pro-aborts are maintaining Doug but what is purposefully omitted is that all of the genetic encoding is there from conception for a new human being. Pro-aborts purposefully convolute that with their blob of cells analogy to take away that powerful fact from the equation only to have the “freedom” to destroy this developing human being at whim. It’s not freedom Doug to be allowed to murder your own offspring and those that think this liberates women – contribute to the dehumanization of our society.
TR: That’s what pro-aborts are maintaining Doug but what is purposefully omitted is that all of the genetic encoding is there from conception for a new human being.
Thomas, you’re generalizing from the particular, at best. You’d be just as correct saying “all pro-lifers are woman-slavers.”
____
It’s not freedom Doug to be allowed to murder your own offspring and those that think this liberates women – contribute to the dehumanization of our society.
That’s just more rhetoric, Thomas. You not being in favor of something does not make it “murder.”
Women having abortions doesn’t “dehumanize” our society any more than women having miscarriages does.
“Women having abortions doesn’t “dehumanize” our society any more than women having miscarriages does.”
So someone agrees with you supporting abortions. Who could it be, I think I know. Well anyway – in case you don’t know miscarriage is mostly involuntary but abortion is voluntary and premeditated. That’s the difference.
Thomas, of course miscarriage is involuntary, and abortion is voluntary (pro-choicers definitely want it to be voluntary and not forced).
In both cases, while a “human organism” dies, it’s not aware of anything, not conscious, has no sensation, emotion, etc. If a woman or couple wants to have kids, then a miscarriage can be very sad, if the pregnancy was known about. If not, then not – it happens “all the time.”
Likewise, there can be a mixture of feelings about having an abortion. But nowhere in this are we “dehumanizing our society.” We’re human, and sometimes miscarriages occur, and sometimes pregnancies are not wanted and are ended by abortion.