Stanek weekend question: How do we persuade pro-choicers?
It’s a decades-old question. How do we persuade abortion proponents?
Pro-choicer Julie was converted by the aborted babies themselves. I was just forwarded a video of Julie’s touching testimony, posted on YouTube March 1 by the Genocide Awareness Project. GAP came to the University of North Florida in 2009 and just made a return appearance, which was when Julie approached the team…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNmCtv-fCfM[/youtube]
Epilogue, writes GAP: “During Open Mike, Julie asked for the microphone and announced to the crowd that our pictures had followed her home and changed her life.”
Wow, beautiful. We know that no matter how loudly the other side protests, showing the reality of abortion is effective.
Online and in conversation we spend a lot of time dialoguing. Reader Marie wrote me this week:
It really blows me away how volatile people become when you ask respectful questions about their thoughts on abortion. I continue to get called all sorts of ugly names, and I enjoy asking people to reply with links that help me understand their assertions. THEY NEVER DO!!!
I have had several people, after I posted the link to the Netherlands infanticide information, ask me if I don’t see a difference between a clump of cells and a newborn baby. The question is, why do they? And at which point do they see a difference?
Marie suggested some thought-provoking questions:
Do you agree that another adult should not be able to take a minor to obtain a nose job (or some other physical change)? (of course linking into parental consents and why they inconvenience rapists)
At which age in fetal development (from conception until complete delivery from mother’s body) should an infant/fetus have a legally protected right to life? (linking to infanticide piece)
Should we prosecute women who deliver infants at home and then kill them? (linking to pieces you have written)
Do you think there would be any differences in the relationships of couples who use contraception and couples who practice Natural Family Planning? (link to websites about NFP)
Do you support informing women of their legal rights in relation to their health care? (in relation to abortionists telling women they can listen to the fetal heartbeat)
Marie concluded:
I have come to realize firsthand that some people are so poorly educated on these topics they will simply robotically repeat any talking points put out by PP. It burns them up to be asked to clarify their opinions! But I think by strategically planning questions that make them think we are showing them our respect and interest, we can really lead them into reflecting on the information they have been fed and have memorized from their PP leaders.
Do you have other thought-provoking questions to ask? Or a story to tell of a conversion of a friend or family member, and how it happened?
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.
I called myself “pro-choice” in my younger and stupider days … about 30 years ago. Then, I started to hear from Christian friends about their views on abortion. Eventually, I went to a screening of “Silent Scream” to see what I could learn. What I saw turned my stomach.
Education does work. It takes time and patience, but it does work and, in my opinion, is the single-best way to rid our society of this evil.
I’ve noticed when you calmly try to present them with facts about fetal development, they resort to the generic: “I believe in a woman’s right to chose” but they won’t directly answer questions like, when is it not just a clump of cells? Then they go onto say, “So are you going to take care of all these orphans?” when I point out that adoption is an excellent way to go. I think so many think of abortion in an abstract way thinking that’s a procedure that makes the baby go POOF! If they actually educated themselves on what a brutal procedure it is, I think more would become pro-life. One thing that is always consistant in my experience is that they don’t have a good way of backing up their opinion. I say this as someone who used to be pro-choice and it took actually finding out what abortion actually is before I changed.
I think we should bring them to the Cross and ask to think about what it means in addition to doing all the practical things such as displaying the GAP ads and witnessing.
We should also encourage pro-choicers to go to pregnancy crisis centres in order to witness all the good work that pro-lifers do for the born so that they can stop saying pro-lifers only care for the preborn.
We need to show how the virtues of being pro-life are not only life affirming for the pre-born but are good for society as a whole as well:
Here is a start of pro-life virtues. Perhaps others could add to this list:
– sacrificial love – the sacrifice of the Mother and Father who decide to bring their child;
– The open attiude and willingness to suffering for another human being;
– a hopeful attitude towards the future one self and one’s offspring;
– the respect for all life, including life that is not as developed as oneself;
– self-relieance;
– trust in others;
– the ability to trust in nature and not dictate terms to the natrual order;
@Tyler I’m also a Christian and it’s my hope all find Christ, but I always make a point to not bring in religion when I discuss these things. Most of the time, the person you’re talking to is probably is agnostic or similar so bringing in faith won’t reach them or make them automatically erect a wall and tune you out.
It is situational. It depends on who your audience is – for example, a pregnant mother, academic pro-choicers, pro-choicers who troll websites, the homosexual community using the pro-choice movement as cover for their own agenda, etc…
I think not demonizing choicers is a good start, lol. I have persuaded some, mostly just politeness and logic will eventually get to some people.
I think the pictures help, especially in mobilizing the women who aren’t actively proabortion but don’t really get what the fuss is about.
The pictures clearly delineate what all the fuss is about. There’s no POOF! and the baby is gone. For all the rhetoric about choice, what proaborts are left with is blood and dead babies (who never had a CHANCE, much less a CHOICE) and injured mothers.
Julie heard the ‘pop’.
But it was not the graphics alone that changed her mind.
Her heart was changed first.
“And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him — the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the reverential and obedient fear of the Lord —”
“[For I always pray to] the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, that He may grant you a spirit of wisdom and revelation [of insight into mysteries and secrets] in the [deep and intimate] knowledge of Him”…
The Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation rested upon Julie and she experienced the light of HIS love.
No justice, no peace.
Know justice, know Peace.
We change them by being an example of love. When they get confronted with the truth they will naturally stikre out and may even get abusive but we cannot respond in kind. Most have not been exposed to the truth or have placed themselves in a state of denial to block obvious truths in order to avoid the pain and guilt that it would bring to their consciences. For example the assertion that the baby is just a clump of cells….it has now been blown out of the water by ultrasound but even now some people will not admit what is now scientific proof. Then there are the ones who would say that life does not begin until implantation etc… they are in a state of mind that is able to live in denial of obvious scientific truths so it takes patience and time. It is hard and we may feel tempted to strike back when they lash out but we must not. Like the girl in this video said. Most pro-choice to kill babies in the womb people (except those who are actually involved in the abortion industry) are victims too.
Being pro-choice to kill babies in the womb is an illness and society as a whole will need to treat it that way with legislation and counseling or people will continue to fall prey to Planned Parenthood and their propoganda.
Graphic images of aborted babies-I get mine from Priests for Life because they’ve all been pathologist certified; medical illustrations of the abortion procedure, including images of the collection jar after the procedure and images of the biohazard containers aborted babies are placed in after, images of aborted fetuses that have been reassembled by pathologists after the procedure (explaining that the abortionist has to be sure he has ‘gotten it all’); images of the Stericycle trucks that will haul off the remains for disposal. The average American that identifies as prochoice has no idea what the choice actually entails, the visuals are irrefutable and I’ve seen minds change immediately. It also doesn’t hurt to have a handheld ultrasound ;). Bone up on your prolife refutations for commonly asked questions/commonly used epithets-JivinJ has an excellent resouce (see the top blogs section here) there are also several other excellent tutorials on how to refute common proabortion arguments/assertions (Randy Alcorn has a really comprehensive one you can Google). Most importantly, remain calm and check your emotions, easier said than done but it gets easier with practice. We find it helpful not to approach the women but let them come to us, and they do. When they walk away anyways, you swallow the heartbreak and try again for the next people who come along. Don’t give up. There are times you will fail. The times you don’t will carry you through, especially when you get to meet someone who’s alive because you stood up and said something.
just keep telling them the truth. show them pictures. i have the book which has that picture of all of the poor little dead souls. ive shown it to women if they want to see it. many are curious and they WANT to see it. you would be surprised that a lot of women were disgusted and in tears. they told me ” i would never have an abortion.” now if they do then at least they know heather told them and showed them it was murder. also converting takes time. some arent going to make it. keep em in prayer. if they convert God gets the praise! i dont owe my conversion to man. im glad people prayed for me. i owe it to God.
“I think we should bring them to the Cross and ask to think about what it means in addition to doing all the practical things such as displaying the GAP ads and witnessing.”
Oh right, way to bring in non-Christians. Once again, this underscores the belief that the pro-life movement is basically a bizarre, Christian cult.
“Graphic images of aborted babies-I get mine from Priests for Life because they’ve all been pathologist certified”
Oh, right, “Priests for Life” doesn’t have an agenda. “Pathologist certified?” Anybody can post anything on the internet. If this fetus porn is “certified,” I have a PhD from Harvard.
Once again, this underscores the belief that the pro-life movement is basically a bizarre, Christian cult.
CC, it is NOT bizarre for a person to care for babies in the womb. It IS insane for a person to kill a babies in the womb.
*tossing the turkey baster* go fetch, boy!
“CC, it is NOT bizarre for a person to care for babies in the womb. It IS insane for a person to kill a babies in the womb”
That is your opinion which is not universally held by the legal, scientific, medical, and faith communities. And your self righteous, dogmatic opinion continues to alienate your movement from the reality based community that respects a woman’s right to privacy.
*tossing the turkey baster* go fetch, boy!
Oh, snap. Your comedic stylings are just so witty. Perhaps you should write for the Daily Show! But here’s the thing, at least I didn’t damage myself like an acquaintance who douched with Physo-Hex which was an acne medication. Oh, right. Those slatternly women who didn’t accept their “gifts” from god deserved everything they got. And that’s the persuasiveness of the pro-choice argument. When abortion was illegal, those women who didn’t go to Canada or get themselves a “D & C” could end up dead or maimed. The pro-life movement doesn’t care about that.
And that’s why your conversion rates will be very, very small.
There’s certification here:
http://www.abortionno.org/index.php/abortion_pictures/verifying_photograph_authenticity/
If that doesn’t cut it for you, I would recommend taking out an embryology textbook and comparing the drawings to the photographs, taking into account things like size reference and abortion technique. You might suddenly find it very difficult to argue that the images are fake.
MPQ lol! yeah that good old turkey baster fetish!
“There’s certification here:”
ROFLMAO – From the radical anti-choice “Center for Bioethical Reform.” Surely you jest.
And BTW, how do we know that “Julie,” whose life was “changed,” wasn’t a cleverly placed “plant.” That’s how the travelling medicine shows got folks to buy their wares. They’d have somebody “testify” that the product was life changing! It’s a con that’s very, very old and very effective as affirmed by PT Barnum in his quote about “suckers.”
Don’t feed the trolls. Not sure why CC hangs out here. You’d think he/she would have better use for his/her time. Ignore them and they will get bored and go away.
Oh right, way to bring in non-Christians.
I saw this on a previous thread. There was talk about how Reform Judaism should be “redacted.”
Reform Judaism’s stand on abortion is in basic agreement with Orthodox Judaism. So, if you want to “redact” one, you’ll have to “redact” both.
And, no, it’s not my job to educate you. If you want to know what the position is, talk to a rabbi or read the responsa.
Also, when talking about “redacting” Judaism, keep in mind that they now have nuclear weapons.
When I was younger, I heard the “my body my choice” mantra so much that it seemed to make sense. As I got older and became educated about fetal development, I couldn’t believe my former belief! It wasn’t until I went on Priests For Life website and actually saw aborted humans that the reality really sunk in. It was very sobering and I could not stop crying. I also watched Dr. Bernard Nathanson’s Silent Sream and that was sheer horror.
The youth in our middle schools, since so many educators believe that they should know about sexuality and reproduction, should be required to see the various abortion procedures, fetal development (maybe this is shown already), and what abortion is and does. It kills a human life, period. Our kids want the truth. This is where I believe the culture will start to change to respecting all human life at all stages.
But the prochoice movement does care about those women who are wounded/killed when self aborting, huh. Just look at this list of prochoice feminist orgs that are helping these women and their families:
oops. There are none.
CC, what do you know about the Christian religion?
CC, what does love mean to you? How would you define love?
is it just me or does cc seem out of control today? i loved pro life actress Patricia Heatons reply to a girl who said ” i had an abortion so i would have something to do with my time.” Heaton said ” raising your children DOES give you something to do with your time.” hahaha love her! if cc had kids she probably wouldnt spend most of her time instructing people to kill theirs.
How do we know *you* aren’t a (cough) cleverly placed plant, CC? You have documentation of your turkey baster abortion, along with graphic images? Any proof at all? Fiction is clearly not your forte. Jump off. You lost. Again. Later people, too nice outside to be indoors today :)
“When they walk away anyways, you swallow the heartbreak and try again for the next people who come along. Don’t give up. There are times you will fail. The times you don’t will carry you through, especially when you get to meet someone who’s alive because you stood up and said something.”
Timely and well said, MPQ. Trolls and extremists don’t want to know that we really do care. It would unravel them and their post-abortive armor. It is love and care that drives so many people in the pro-life movement. Recently, I’ve realized that we need to work on the ob/gyns who refer mothers to these places to have their new children destroyed. Not every girl who shows up is desperate and broke. Some have jobs. Some have health insurances. Some have a doctor who offered them prenatal care at the same time they book appointments for their patients at these places. Some mothers leave these well decorated, clean doctor’s offices to go to shoddy, unregulated facilities where an act will be committed that can never be taken back. Some little children who knew or overheard the talk will know now, and for the rest of their lives that SOMEONE not someTHING is missing from their lives. A new toy or a goldfish isn’t going to make it all better.
Extremists like our trolls here have wrapped themselves up in their own rhetoric. They can’t possibly accept that abortion breaks hearts. No, they must continue to believe that we are evil rotten women contollers who hate everything. Yeah. That must be what I’m feeling right now. Sure, these must be tears of hate. You betcha.
How do we change this? I’ve got to start working on the doctors who refer.
heck yeah not a flake of snow here. this is when bad blizzards usually hit! you could wear shorts out there!
CC, the pro-life message is a message about love and the Christian message is also about love. The Christian message; however, teaches how to love in addition to being about love. It teaches us that love involves forgiveness, and that it involves sacrifices, and, oddly enough, that it involves suffering too. Love is not easy or sentimental, love is not adequately expressed in a Hallmark card; love is expressed most fully and succinctly by the Crucifix and the Eucharist, but it can also be seen when a Mother gives birth and welcomes her child into the world.
For me, the pictures of abortion tweaked my conscience about abortion, and prompted me to find out more about what is really going on. However, it was my hearing pro-life counsellor and then witnessing two sidewalk counsellors in action that showed me what the pro-life movement is all about – it is not about just saving the unborn, it is about saving a family, and thereby society. Seeing the love they had for these young pregnant women. These ladies focused on the Mom, they did not judge her, they supported her. Seeing and meeting the frontline pro-life volunteers and pregnancy crisis centre workers changed the way I view pro-lifers, Christians, and especially Catholics. The humility of these women and men is amazing. Often times these helpers are no better off financially than those they are helping. A lot of them have walked in the same shoes as those shoes taking steps toward the Clinic.
Christian arguments against abortion… I never found particularly convincing, is the thing. If you are trying to talk to someone who doesn’t share your religion about abortion, it doesn’t really mean much to them to try to use God to convince them.
CC? Hah, I just realized the moniker is same initials as Catholic Church! The church you hate so much, but she would open her arms to you and never refuse you, despite her having members that are sinful.
Jack the Christian “argument” is love. If that doesn’t work I don’t know what will.
The logic of love, the logic of Christ is not rational, it is supra-rational.
Seeing that abortion is not banned by either Reform or Orthodox Judaism, you should respect that.
@Tyler, beautifully said. About a month ago, I watched an episode of Defending Life on EWTN. I wish I could remember this priest’s name, but in the interview he said he spends five hours a day outside abortion clinics. He talks to the girls/women and shows them love. Even if they still decide to abort, he hands them his card on the way out and shares with them the love of God. No judgement, just love.
mp, you better check again about Orthodox Judaism.
However, this is not a religious argument per se. Christians don’t support the pro-life position because of their religion they support it because their religion teaches them what loves means.
The pro-life position and message is supported by both the logic of love and the scientific evidence about when life begins.
Doe, I have borrowed most of my words and thoughts from men and women wiser than me.
mp, you better check again about Orthodox Judaism.
I suggest you read the responsa. I have.
However, this is not a religious argument. Christians don’t support the pro-life position because of the religion they support it because their religion teaches them what loves means.
Sorry, Tyler, but that statement is contradictory on its face.
mp, Orthodox Judaism does not advocate abortion and for that matter neither does Reform Judaism. It is not accurate to portray their position as pro-abortion. If abortion was made illegal it is highly unlikely neither one of these religions would object.
Furthermore, my statement is not contradictory as long as you understand that the Christian message is about love, and that love does not reside with Christians alone. If you believe love only resides within the Christian community that your statement would be correct.
mp, what is your view on love?
Tyler,
What Jack is saying is that, if you approach someone who is pro-abortion and also not religious, and bring up religious arguments or talk about God to them or whatever, all that is going to do is make them tune you out. They will not listen to you AT ALL, and they’ll just write you off as a nutcase. (example: CC)
Keeping religion out of it-at least initially-will help you.
It is not accurate to portray their position as pro-abortion. If abortion was made illegal it is highly unlikely neither one of these religions would object.
Tyler, you may have “The Truth,” whatever that is, but I have the facts.
Although they don’t recognize so-called “on-demand” abortion, both Reform and Orthodox Jews recognize abortion in the case of rape, incest, health of the mother, or genetic disease, among other reasons.
mp, what is your view on love?
Don’t patronize me. Just stick to the facts, OK?
Look, Tyler, and whoever else may be listening, here’s the bottom line.
If you want to criminalize abortion for Christians that’s your business, but there are ways of dealing with it without criminalizing it for those who don’t share your beliefs.
When you start talking about criminalizing it for all people, for all faiths, then you’re walking on someone else’s lawn.
You can call them “trolls” if you like, or call them “sluts,” whatever suits you.
But don’t–do not–walk on their lawn.
xalisae, I understand your point but I am trying to say something different than that (obviously I am failing). A Christian does need to speak about God to show or reveal his religion, he just has to act in a loving and compassionate manner.
xalisae, as an aside, could you explain how a secularist explains love or justifies acting in a loving manner. I recognize that many secular pro-lifers are motivated by compassion, I am just wondering how they understand and explain that compassion. I have read Dawkins evolutionary take on love and even he finds his own answer is an unsatisfactory in explaining the logic of love.
mp who called anyone a slut?
xalisae, I need your help here. Can you please tell people I never called you a slut and that I was only against contraceptives that I believe cause abortions of embryoes, little people. xalisae, I know you were just trying to make that being on OC doesn’t make one a slut but some people will think I called you that when i never did. I never even said that people who use OC are promiscuous.
Mp, yeah, can’t really make laws religion-specific. It doesn’t work that way. If enough people agree that the unborn are deserving of protecting, then we will end up getting laws that prohibit it.
mp who called any sluts?
meh.
Please don’t feign ignorance. It’s all over this blog.
Slut, whore, prostitute, even “mangina,” which was a new one for me.
meh.
Have a good day.
mp, please quote the person who called you a “slut”.
Good lord Tyler, people call names on this blog all the time, lol. You can’t have missed it.
x, I meant to say: A Christian doesn’t need to speak about God to show or reveal his religion, (s)he just has to act in a loving and compassionate manner.
x, I meant to say: A Christian doesn’t need to speak about God to show or reveal his religion, (s)he just has to act in a loving and compassionate manner.
Tyler, I assume you’re not a used car salesman, so I’m going to help you out here for the first and last time.
Your writing should read:
x, I meant to say: A Christian doesn’t need to speak about God to show or reveal his religion, (s)he just has to be loving and compassionate.
Have a good day.
meh.
If you want to criminalize abortion for Christians that’s your business, but there are ways of dealing with it without criminalizing it for those who don’t share your beliefs.]
1.) I’m not Christian, or even religious.
2.) When Jewish kids are being killed in utero they’re just as dead as an atheist’s kid who gets killed in an abortion, and they’re both just as dead as a Christian’s kid who gets killed in an abortion. This is not a religious issue. This is a human rights issue, and children deserve protection of their lives by law regardless of what religion they are or how their parent(s) feel(s) about them. If abortion didn’t kill anybody, you MIGHT have a point.
3.) ANYBODY having an abortion kill violating the right to life of someone else. THAT is “walking on someone else’s lawn”, and shouldn’t be allowed by law, regardless of what religion they are.
Was the civil rights movement a “Christian cult”? Its most famous leader was a reverend who constantly brought up Jesus, after all…
I think that you can’t really persuade someone until you understand why they are pro-choice. There are a lot of “reasons” people hold as the core of their pro-choice convictions, and you can’t really change anyone’s mind unless you know what their personal core conviction is. Bobby is good at that – at finding out why a specific person is pro-choice, and debating from that point.
my husband is Orthodox Jewish and I am Christian. uuuuummmmm we are both pro life! like x said dead id dead. it doesnt matter what you believe in. please stop christian bashing and live and let live. anyway when i stand in front of an abortion clinic i dont call women sluts but you should hear the women going in and their filthy mouths. the pro aborts spew the most hate. its your own guilt so you gotta blame it on someone!
Tyler,
asking me to explain love is something I am incapable of, I’m afraid. You’ve finally caught me at a loss for words.
I do try to explain it to my children and fiance, but I’ve yet to complete either task. I’ve been trying to explain it to my daughter now for more than 9 years, my son a little more than 4, and my fiance every day for 2 years, coming up on the 15th of this month.
If I cannot aptly phrase it to any of them, even given the extreme lengths of time I’ve tried desperately to do so, I doubt I can here and for you.
It is not something that can be explained-only felt.
mp im assuming youre a woman. you need to know that when i stand on that abortion clinic sidewalk with my graphic abortion sign i have been called every name in the book. people assume that we are all a bunch of nutso christians. 2 people in the group are athiests. we dont care! we just want to show women going in what an abortion looks like. the best day is when a woman thanks us and says ” im not doing this.”
Pro-Choice = Pro-Death. Some folks believe in God and some folks believe THEY are god and can do anything they want including the right to kill.
many of the women i knew who had abortions believed in God when they did it. so why are christians against abortion nuts? ive believed in God since i was a kid. im not brainwashed. im not miserable. im not crazy. the women who aborted did so because it was legal. at that time they thought it was a good idea because of college or a relationship gone bad or maybe they were just selfish at the time. Plenty grew up and lived to regret their abortions. why is it that you pro deathers resent us for being in front of the clinic so much? and what gives you the right to judge us for being there? we are paying for your abortions.
I came to the pro life position in earnest by reading the transcript of statements before the Supreme Court
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/RusePBAonTrial.pdf
Basically if people see the truth, most will be profoundly disgusted. The extremely depraved doctor capable of such needless brutality is a fairly rare critter. It is hard to get the truth out because pro aborts are ubiquitous in public education administration and stifle free speech of teachers and students. They are similarly widespread in the media.
It is probably hard to be both overtly pro-iife and get hired as a journalist.
xalisae, what do you say to your fiancé, your daughter and your son?
I must admit it warms me to think of you explaining love to them, gee, would I ever like to eavesdrop on those conversations. I mean this sincerely.
mp, I appreciate and like your clarification: being loving is better than acting loving. Thank-you. (I am glad my Mom didn’t know about my future poor typing/keyboarding and grammar skills when she was pregnant with me – who knows what could’ve happened.)
mp, 2012:
“If you want to criminalize abortion for Christians that’s your business, but there are ways of dealing with it without criminalizing it for those who don’t share your beliefs.”
mp, Mississippi, circa 1860:
If you want to criminalize slavery for Christians that’s your business, but there are ways of dealing with it without criminalizing it for those who don’t share your beliefs.
its like the saying goes…..if you dont stand for something you will fall for anything. dont shove your pro choice agenda down my throat.
I graduated from high school in 1980. Back then, it was even easier to dismiss abortion as purely a theory, the baby just a clump of cells–all the usual arguments from the mainstream media. But then one day, people from Ohio Right to Life came to my parish religion class and showed us booklets that included pictures of aborted babies. I’ll never forget one baby girl. She had a full head of beautiful dark hair and was at least 24 weeks old. She’d been burned to death, externally and internally, by a saline abortion. I actually cried over the horrible grimace on her face. It’s outrageous to suggest that these children don’t feel pain.
As I’ve become more active in the prolife movement and have prayed outside Planned Parenthood with many post-abortive women, I increasingly recognize the desperate need to fight to protect innocent human life. Most women have been coerced into having an abortion and are horrified when they see the pictures of aborted babies. The best way to convert people is to show them the truth in pictures. The two best sources to find the pictures are Priests for Life and the website, abortionno.org, who also runs the Genocide Awareness Project described above.
Thanks to you, Jill, and many others in the alternative media, the truth behind Obama, the HHS and the culture of death they are now forcing on us, is coming to light. Pray for the conversion of the pro-aborts. Also pray that with our help, God will defeat the culture of death. Remember, He always wins.
mp, 2012:
“If you want to criminalize abortion for Christians that’s your business, but there are ways of dealing with it without criminalizing it for those who don’t share your beliefs.”
mp, Mississippi, circa 1860:
If you want to criminalize slavery for Christians that’s your business, but there are ways of dealing with it without criminalizing it for those who don’t share your beliefs.
meh. You should be able to do better.
No, mp. YOU should be able to do better.
Come on over to the side of life. We gots cookies!
say cc if abortion is such a wonderful choice and a comfortable procedure then why do the women i know say ” i would never have another abortion!”? i mean they TOLD me it was awful. the physical pain some are stuck in the emotional pain. abortion is final. our yellow pages advertises more and more adoption adds and post abortion healing now more than ever before. im so glad to see this. whats wrong mp? did you have an abortion? come on and join us. huge misconception about the pro life side. many of us were once pro choice at one time. then we came into the truth.
Julia, your story makes me want to cry. I was born at 28 weeks.
CC said: “I have a PhD from Harvard.”
Doctorate holder, heal thyself.
It is not something that can be explained-only felt.
I believe love is a choice. A choice I struggle with and fail at daily.
Matthew, Chapter 5 says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.”
“Come on over to the side of life. We gots cookies!”
Lol, that’s why I have the pic up that I do. Darth Vader and the Cookie Monster. :p
mp,
I believe that comment on the other thread was that Reformed Judaism was a redacted religion. As are many Christian denominations that at least figuratively blacken out inconvenient lines from the Bible.
hans lol! ;)
I believe that comment on the other thread was that Reformed Judaism was a redacted religion.
There is Reform Judaism, but no Reformed Judaism.
Just as there is no Krishtianity.
Of course, there are also those here who think that Reform Judaism has no “religious authenticity,” whatever that is.
And, whatever it is, good luck with it.
Heck. I’m a slow reader, so let me address the topic.
We really do have to reach them when they’re young, like this young lady. When they’re older they get in a menatl rut. You can seldom teach an old dog new tricks. The trolls here are invested in their non-belief of very real and vulnerable lives.
mp,
Mea culpa and oy vey!
but see thats the problem. its usually the pro choicers going into the clinic for an abortion and THEY always bring up religion. it is just as RUDE to bash someone who is religious and someone who does not share your POV. we are all different and i resent people who say we must accept this and we must accept that. im a free thinker. i dont have to accept a thing! i reject abortion. its bad for women. its bad for men. its bad for society in general. its bad for the abortionist and his or her staff. some women think the pictures are fake. im serious. one day a woman stood and argued ” that aint real.” thats all she kept repeating. she studied the pic in disbelief.
mp, you think ANY religion has no veracity, so what’s the big deal? If I ascribe to a certain set of beliefs (IE Jesus is the Son of God), then I must most certainly deny the claims of the set of beliefs that directly contradict it (Ie, He’s not the Son of God). That’s Philosophy 101.
Between us, you and me, one of is correct. There is one truth. That will take care of itself.
But in the end, we should have protected these innocent babies, or they didn’t mean much. You most certainly have come out in error on this, and that, too, will take care of itself. Bless your heart.
mp, you think ANY religion has no veracity …
Please don’t tell me that I said something I most emphatically did not say.
Thank you.
i take the most issue with cc. note every post is chritian bashing. oh cc rejects good and accepts evil. i was reading a book about how an abortionist ripped off a little boys arm and he was born alive ( its soooooo hard for me to type this) eh anyway the abortionist said ” i cant let this baby live and strangled him to death.
this is common in abortion clinics. some living children are indeed finished off. some are put in an ice cooler and taken away for science experiments. alive!!! also one abortionist explained ” aborted babies are just rubbish. they are trash.” isnt that a nice thing to say about a womans aborted baby. im so very sad this evil act is legal.
For the longest time i never talked about abortion – anywhere – and especially with strangers. Now I just bring up the topic whenever I feel like it. I have yet to have a bad experience in person. In the process I have had a few women open up and tell me about the abortions they have had, and how they have regretted them. I used to think that by talking about abortion I would be shouted down by radical feminist types. I now think that these radical feminists are much fewer in number than I previously thought and that the average woman actually wants to talk about abortion and finds it fascinating that I want to talk about it. Most have said that they would like more men to take an interest in the topic. My experience, and the desires of the women I have met, have not been reported in the MSM. The MSM must have all the radical feminists working for them.
I must qualify the above comment by admitting my experience has been different at the clinic but not much different.
tyler likewise! i bring it up if i feel the time is right and you can usually get a woman to open up or admit to an abortion. one girl told me ” my mom told me i was too young and to have an abortion. i feel like sh*t about it.” yet another cried her eyes out to me over an abortion shed had in 99 i believe. she told me about nightmares of her baby girl crying or coming to her in the night. she cried and thrust her face in her hands ” i killed my daughter. i murdered her. shes gooooooooone.” omg it was horrible. i told her ” its okay you can tell me.” she continued ” i could only talk to a lady in Texas about this. now im telling you because you knew about it years ago. im gonna burn in hell.” i soothed her. i gave her a copy of ” ILL HOLD YOU IN HEAVEN” where are the understanding pro aborts who told her this mess was a good idea?
i went to a site and one woman got involved with a married man and became pregnant. they met in church. he dumped her after talking her into an abortion. she was falling apart because he went back to his wife. and on and on she went about how sad she was that he refused to be with her anymore. yet another woman asked ” im going to a new obgyn and i dont want to tell him about my abortion. i think im going to start writing NO when they ask if you have ever had an abortion. why so much pain shame and guilt i wondered.
How do we persuade pro-choicers? Such a great question. It really depends on why they are pro-choice.
When I was pro-choice, it was because I didn’t think legislators should be able to determine what I could do with my body. Especially since most legislators were men. But then one day I stumbled upon pictures of aborted babies. I was completely shocked. I had never really thought about what actually happened during an abortion. I identified solely with the pregnant woman and I never even considered the fetus. WHAM! Once I saw those pictures, I was forever changed.
For pro-choicers that have never thought about abortion from the perspective of the unborn, the pictures can be very effective.
Hmm, Reform Judaism. Now there is a robust group.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/WillYourGrandchildrenBeJews/
Based on the National Jewish Population survey, it will take 10 reform Jews to make 1 great grandchild. Going the way of the Dodo bird, those folks are. They drank too much of their own kool aid.
!nteresting link hippie.
ClosedCranium
Keep listening for the ‘pop’.
Bigots just like you convinced themselves that black africans were sub-human.
No amount of sound logic or appeals to their compassion had the power to dis-abuse them of their bigotry.
You are no different than the anti-semites and white supremicists who spout their inane hatred to this day.
You are as vile as any whip wielding plantation overseer.
mp says:
Tyler, you may have “The Truth,” whatever that is, but I have the facts.
Although they don’t recognize so-called “on-demand” abortion, both Reform and Orthodox Jews recognize abortion in the case of rape, incest, health of the mother, or genetic disease, among other reasons.
Here is another look at this:
Is there justification in Judaism for the practice of abortion? An excellent essay on the matter is linked below.
For those whose busy schedules do not permit a reading of the link here is an attempt to consolidate the highlights of the ten-page essay.
In Judaism and Abortion: The Hijacking of a Tradition author Richard Nadler undertakes an examination of current view, held largely by reform Judaism, “that the fetus lacks an independent, juridical personality in rabbinic law.”
The source for this conclusion is attributed primarily to the book: Marital Relations, Birth Control and Abortion in Jewish Law by David M. Feldman. The edition of the book that Nadler references contains a “glowing endorsement from Dr. Alan F. Guttmacher.” Nadler goes on to say that “in the journals of Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist Judaism, one is hard pressed to find an article on abortion that fails to reference Feldman’s tome, or to build on his conclusions.” He continues, “it is the only book on the topic that most English speaking Jews have ever seen.”
Through his own independent survey of Jewish laws and traditions Nadler deconstructs the basis of Feldman’s conclusions. He goes on to say “…in one respect Feldman is correct: There is no single “firm and direct” basis in Jewish law forbidding abortion on demand. In fact there are ten. Orthodox authorities have forbidden or restricted abortion on the following bases:
Retzicah—abortion is murder.
Abizraihu—that abortion, by destroying a hereditary line, is akin to murder, sharing some of its “appurtenances,” or consequences.
Pr’u ur’vu—that abortion violates the obligation to people the earth with God’s servants.
Hash-hatat zera—that abortion unlawfully wastes male seed, which contains potential human life.
Chabbala—that abortion is the wrongful wounding of the mother, the fetus, or both.
Nezikim—that abortion unlawfully deprives the parents of a value in property.
Bal tash’chith—that abortion unlawfully deprives the community of something of value.
Pikuah nefesh—that the affirmative responsibility to protect and preserve human life applies to the fetus.
Chalell Olov Shabbat Echad Kiday SheYsihmor Shabbatot Harbeh—that the developing human life of the fetus requires its preservation, overriding other laws, as in the case of “violating on Sabbath so that many Sabbaths may be kept.”
Siyog—that abortion is banned preventatively, as a hedge against other sexual sins that might flow from it.
Nadler then goes on to summarize each of the above. He continues further on “…the falsification of Jewish teaching on abortion is the result of a systematic deconstruction undertaken by David Feldman and other non-Orthodox scholars from the middle of the 20th century.” “For Reform Jewish leaders the deconstruction was simple: These Jews rejected the authority of Orthodox teaching.”
Feldman concludes: “Absent Jewish theology, the progressive scholar might deconstruct Judaism’s magnificent 5,700 year pro-life tradition into a squabble among advocates of conflicting theories and conflicting punishments. Adjudicating among these with standards individualistic and humanistic rather than sacerdotal and covenantal, he might eventually conclude that Judaism had no pro-life tradition at all. And his views, disseminated through the seminaries of liberal Judaism, might inform a whole generation of rabbis and their congregants.” “That is the point that most—not all—American Jews have reached in the abortion debate. But that is not what traditional Judaism teaches.”
href=”http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3798/is_200601/ai_n17186907/?tag=content;col1″ rel=”nofollow”>http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3798/is_200601/ai_n17186907/?tag=content;col1
He goes on to say “…in one respect Feldman is correct: There is no single “firm and direct” basis in Jewish law forbidding abortion on demand. In fact there are ten. Orthodox authorities have forbidden or restricted abortion on the following bases:
Tyler, what exactly is the point of this?
I specifically said, in my comment earlier today, that both Reform and Orthodox Judaism are basically agreed that abortion “on demand” is not acceptable.
Please read what I wrote.
OK, Tyler, you asked for this. Here’s your so-called authority on Reform and Orthodox Judaism.
Richard Nadler Was Pavlov’s dog violinist, became conservative activist.(News)(Obituary)
Article from: St Louis Post-Dispatch (MO) | June 5, 2009 | Copyright
Byline: MICHAEL D. SORKIN msorkin@post-dispatch.com > 314-340-8347
Richard Nadler, 60, who died Saturday (May 30, 2009) in Kansas City, didn’t always have the conservative traits that marked him as a writer, editor, TV personality and political activist.
Mr. Nadler grew up in University City and dropped out of high school in 1966 to pursue his first career: music.
Under the name Siegfried Carver, he played violin for the local rock-jazz group Pavlov’s Dog. Mr. Nadler toured the country as concertmaster with several classical music groups, and played at Duff’s restaurant here.
Sorry.
Again, and as I said before, if you want to know what the position is, read the responsa.
But, no, you dig around in the detritus and find a piece written by a National Review hack that suits your purposes.
FAIL.
Christians oppose abortion not because the Bible explicitly condemns it. Rather the Bible commands us to help the poor and defend the weak and injured, therefore we oppose abortion. I suppose non-Christian faiths don’t care about such things, because if they did we would see something other than an army of Christians at the March for Life. Therefore the solution to abortion is conversion to Christianity. Note that not everyone who attends Mass or calls himself a “Christian” actually is one. The Bible itself makes that clear.
I suppose non-Christian faiths don’t care about such things, because if they did we would see something other than an army of Christians at the March for Life.
I suggest that, instead of “supposing,” you take the time to read the Judaic Responsa, then you’d know. You wouldn’t have to “suppose.”
“Based on the National Jewish Population survey, it will take 10 reform Jews to make 1 great grandchild. Going the way of the Dodo bird, those folks are. They drank too much of their own kool aid.”
—————————————–
Hitler helped.
I could say that they concentrate on quality, not quantity, but you might not find that observation particularly helpful.
If there are any atheists or agnostics pro-lifers in the room who haven’t been following the thread over at https://www.jillstanek.com/2012/03/washpo-ultrasoundrape-strategy-a-pretty-big-blunder/ , it may be worth your time to check it out. I’ve laid out at least the general philosophical base for many on the secular pro-choice side. If you’re a pro-lifer who’s never had a rigorous philosophical argument with a pro-choicer–if your only experience is with the most generic and superficial pro-choice arguments–it’s worth exploring the more educated and considered arguments, even just briefly.
I’m sure it’s not new for many of you, but it’s far from the “clump of cells”/”my body, my right” one-liners that some of you have referenced.
(And yeah, that probably sounds kinda pompous–“Come here, let me educate you!”–but it’s not meant to be. Might be something new to somebody, might not. But it may at least be a few more people in an interesting discussion, anyway.)
mp,
Those references were made by Jerry, not Tyler. FAIl!
Those references were made by Jerry, not Tyler. FAIl!
meh.
Original post: how engagement with pro-choicers works in our heads.
Comment thread: how engagement with pro-choicers works in the real world.
Moving someone to a new position on any issue, particularly abortion, is a long process. It may culminate in some moment of sudden understanding, as it sometimes does for people seeing those graphic images of abortion, but the idea (or the principles behind it) have to get their claws in a long, long time before that moment. We, as a movement, are not very good at playing “the long game.” We try to win the whole argument in three paragraphs. Take cc / mp in this thread (and, mp, I hope you will not mind my taking you as a teaching case): we hit her with the basic arguments, and they’re basically good arguments, but then, rather than focusing on core differences, we start correcting one another about obscure points in Jewish law — which is TOTALLY irrelevant to the pro-life case. Whether or not Jews of various stripes think it’s okay to kill babies, that’s *their* bag. It has nothing whatsoever to do with whether the killing of babies can be accepted in a civilized society.
To conceive it in military terms: we are charging at terrain not because it is valuable, but because we think we can win it. Maybe we can, maybe we can’t, but meanwhile we are leaving the high-value terrain — the argumentative premises which, if captured, we could use to bombard the rest of her battle lines — uncontested, while we dwell on trivialities and pithy rejoinders. I may well disagree with mp’s understanding of Jewish law, and I may object to some of her more sarcastic lines, but there’s not a chance in heck I’m going to engage on those grounds, even if I think I can win the debate… because it gains the pro-life cause almost nothing to do so.
CC / MP has stated repeatedly that she considers the personhood rights of the unborn child a “relative” truth — one that is held by some religious but which cannot be imposed on the rest of society. This is the first gun she fired, and it’s what’s holding together her opposition to legislation against abortion. (She has a fallback position which concerns the dangers of illegal abortion, but that’s a much weaker argument on both logical and factual levels, and can be dispatched swiftly once the front lines have fallen.) We have already observed that this is inconsistent with the views she presumably holds about Negroes: she believes they are really persons and really have rights, even when there is no consensus about those rights in American society. It’s a fatally flawed position, for that and many other reasons well-understood. Hit it over and over and over again, dealing narrowly with objections, refusing to be feinted into battles over less valuable ground, citing facts and Supreme Court opinions and moral philosophy and any other authority SHE recognizes (meaning, not the Christian Bible). Maintain a close range: show her that many smart atheists and other non-Christians are pro-life, and always always ALWAYS demonstrate your total understanding and empathy for her position, how she came to it, and the authorities who support it (even if you find it quite difficult to emphasize with, say, Ruth Bader Ginsberg). That’s how you plant the seeds for conversion.
I guess what I’m saying is, you win converts the same way you win a war: you identify what’s holding the opponent’s position together — whether that’s an argumentative premise, a prejudice, an emotional reaction, a loyalty to another person, or anything else under the sun — and draw the opponent away from that ground, by argument, appeal to emotions or authority, a counter-demonstration of the prejudice, whatever. You go after these things whether they’re weak or strong, because they, and nothing else, are sustaining the opponent’s willingness to oppose you. It takes a lot longer to win the battles, but, when you win the battles, you actually make some progress in the war, which almost never happens in the usual abortion conversations.
I don’t know. Maybe that sounds cynical. But, hey, we aren’t the Church Militant for nothing. We should continue to get better at this.
Ugh. First comment; didn’t know the paragraph spacing was going to break down like that. Sorry my wall of text is so ugly.
BCSWowbagger: thanks for that awesome post! Do you have a blog or page that you argue on? Your approach is absolutely how I’d like to approach things, though you explained it in a far better way than I ever could. :)
proud to be pro-choice: Apply that mentality to slavery, where the worth of a human life was determined by its owner.
I think you’ll find that with the words changed, your post would have an intolerable stench to it.
The self-righteous lunacy of being “for choice” entirely and always begs the question of what the choice happens to be. Pro-lifers are as pro-choice as you. However, just as you would not be pro-choice with regard to slavery because you know blacks are humans entitled to the same rights as anyone else, pro-lifers are not pro-choice with regard to the unborn because they believe that the unborn are entitled to the right to life.
You obviously disagree that they possess this right to life, just as many believed slaves’ value fell short of full human rights. So valuing “choice” is a no-brainer, given your starting point. It’s not some brave moral stand, or “moderate” view. It’s what follows naturally, clumsily, and automatically from not valuing the unborn as possessing a right to life.
And I think you can see that just as with slavery, the moment you believe that life has value any sense of “choice” just as automatically falls away, and we’re obliged to carve out space in our own behavior to recognize the rights, whether of slaves or of the unborn.
So, so much pro-choice rhetoric reflects a complete incapacity to grasp this simple point.
proud to be pro-choice said : I don’t like other people’s opinions or beliefs or religious views or morals shoved down my throat…what may be right for you, might not be right for someone else.
Should laws be subjective or objective? In other words, should laws apply to everyone or only some?
How are you different from newly conceived human beings other than development time, nutrition and security?
Should the powerful defend the weak, prey upon the weak, or destroy the weak?
When do you believe abortion (the killing of an innocent human being) is morally wrong, if ever?
Proud to be pro-choice, you don’t like other people’s morality shoved down your throat, huh? So I take it you’re an anarchist? You think rape, theft, burglary, homicide should be legal? After all, every law we have is someone else’s morality being shoved down your throat. There are segments of our population who don’t think rape is wrong. They do it. By making laws saying that if you rape you will be locked up, is that other people shoving their morality down the rapist’s throat?
And btw, I don’t know anyone who doesn’t like choice. I love choice. I like choices when it comes to my clothes, my lipstick, my sons’ clothes, my car, where I’ll live, what I’ll eat, what school I will send my kids to….I LOVE CHOICE.
What I don’t like is killing innocent human beings. That is what abortion is. And that is what you support. You are not “pro-choice”. Everyone is pro-choice to some extent. You are pro-abortion.
I’ve heard that “wanted pregnancy” argument before. It’s flawed. No woman I know who is nauseous, clammy, and overall unwell from morning sickness in early pregnancy is going to feel as if she fully celebrates the life within her, much less someone who considers the pregnancy a crisis either because she’s unmarried, a student, poor, or just that it was unexpected. BUT, that does not mean that she will not adore her baby once she adjusts to the idea, once the morning sickness subsides, once she holds the baby in her arms for the first time. Abortion is shortsighted. We are not doing anyone a favor by encouraging them to make a shortsighted decision while they are ill and out of sorts, while hormones are surging through their bodies, while they are emotionally frail. In fact, I view abortion as abusive to women. I have four children, two of whom were a big surprise. I adore them ALL. And I am not a wealthy person. I was not prepared financially or even emotionally to have each child. But they are my greatest joy. Even if a woman chooses life and is not the best mother in the world, very few don’t want their own children and those who do express that sentiment are often sociopaths. Like I said, that whole every child a wanted child is a flawed argument.
“How do we persuade abortion proponents?”
It’s very simple, show them pictures and videos of mutilated unborn children. If they are still ‘pro-choice’ after that, the hell with them.
You DO have to cut through the b.s. to the “Why?”, however, I find that when that is finally done (“I had an abortion.”, “I know people who are friends or loved ones who have had abortions.”, etc.,) that the party in question tends to become rather angry or even rage-filled toward you, and I tend to not deal well with people directing anger at me. I suppose I lack compassion and am prone to retaliation.
But, the pro-legal-abortion position I find tends to be almost completely emotionally-based and driven. Most people who favor keeping it legal who have no underlying reason, who were just basically only presented that as a default position easily come around when faced with the facts and reality of who gestating human beings are.
I find group 1 impossible to reach for someone like myself. Group 2 I deal with quite easily. /shrug
Also, John Lewandowski,
I find your remark about Christianity highly insulting. Christians by no means have the monopoly on being Pro-Life. secularprolife.org
To conceive it in military terms …
Wow, just wow. You people are like the Bourbons, you remember everything, but have learned nothing.
By all means, conceive the argument in military terms. Double-down. Don’t retreat, reload.
As I’ve said before, you’ll marginalize yourselves into irrelevance.
I think we need to get young people to talk about abortion. It was seldom talked about when I was in high school. Numbers attract numbers and if you show young people ultrasounds and talk to them about the rights of the unborn before they become brainwashed, we win. Talk with them from a humanitarian standpoint, not a religious one. We need to encourage them to vote for prolife candidates once they turn 18.
I had two teenage boys tell me recently that they expressed that they oppose abortion in their health class at the public high school. One of these young men is one of the most popular in his class and this helps sway other young people.
The female teacher said on the order of, “you can believe what you want but you can’t push that belief on others” and changed the subject. I wonder if the discussion would have been stopped if they said they opposed tonsillectomies.
Funny how abortion is “health care” when you support it but a belief when you don’t.
In order not to alienate the secular pro-lifers I want to make an effort to talk less about sex in the my discussions of abortion and contraceptives and more about the morality of the specific technologies that are used.
Although as a Christian I see that there is a proper place and time when one should engage in sex, I am not anti-sex like most Christians, Sure I see that certain types of sexual behaviour are not morally appealing to me; but they these types of sexual behaviours are not really relevant to the issue of the life of the unborn. It is never the sexual behaviour that is the pro-life issue, it is always the contraceptive technology that is the pro-life issue. It is certain contraceptive technology that kills the unborn that is the problem.
I also think we need to find a better term for sexual activity that uses contraceptive methods that result in killing the unborn. For example, the term recreational sex is apt in the Sandra Fluke discussion since she gets into funding issues and helps distinguish the use of bc for medical purposes and bc used for non-medical purposes; however, this term has a tendency to make pro-lifers appear prudish and anti-sex. From a strictly non-sectarian pro-life position I think the concern is not Ms. Fluke’s or another other person’s sex life per se. I think the concern is whether the type of sexual behavior she permits and promotes results in the death of the unborn. Does anyone know what term can be applied to the sexual behavior that does this, that results in the death of the unborn, the sex that utilizes birth control technology that results in aborting the unborn? Is there a term already? If not can we use the term “abortive sex.” Sterilized sex and contracepted sex are not accurate enough. From a legal perspective I am against all and only abortifacients while I am not against condoms, tubal ligation, and vasectomies legallly speaking.
With that said I think as a rule it is probably easier to convert a person to Christianity than it is to convert a person to the pro-life position, but there are execptions to every rule.
“mp,
Those references were made by Jerry, not Tyler. FAIl! ”
Thanks for pointing this out Hans.
xalisae, what did you John L. say that you find so insulting? What comment did he make that was so offensive?
Soooo…. Reality check, what exactly was in my uterus a few months ago? A fish? A dog? You’re a bright one aren’t you? not human? you do realize that species REPRODUCE AFTER THEIR OWN KIND. So after my husband and I made love and I conceived… I was carrying ANOTHER HUMAN. Not a fish. Not a blob. Not a dog. Not an alien. A HUMAN.
He is now a fetus, not an embryo. Is he a HUMAN fetus? Or a dog or horse fetus? I mean….you speak so matter of fact but yet what you say is sooo….dumb.
intelligent people know that embryos aren’t humans.
Intelligent humans know that pregnant HUMANS are pregnant with HUMAN embryos. If you think HUMAN females are ever pregnant with any other sort of embryo (like cat, giraffe, sloth, etc.), you have a major screw loose.
Sorry if this is above your pay-grade, reality check.
“reality has a liberal bias”…after you drop acid. lol.
Tyler,
He said something along the lines of the only way to get everyone to be Pro-Life is to maje everyone convert to Christianity, which is not only absurd on its face, but in my opinion absolutely threatening along the lines of things like the Crusades. Also, DEFINITELY anti-American.
xalisae – thanks for clarifying. I re-read his comment. I can see why you think that his comments might be anti-American but I read his comments differently. When I read his comments I did’t think he was saying that Christianity is the only way to make everyone prolife, I thought he was asserting that converting to Christianity would help create more prolifers. I agree with this point but I recognize that some Christian denominations are not pro-life. (Although my understanding of Christianity makes me wonder if one can be a Christian and pro-choice, I often suspect that the two positions are mutually exclusive.)
BTW, the Crusades have been unfairly protrayed as an agressive assault by Christianity against Muslims/Turks. But I believe that the Crusades originated as a defensive strategy, and as an effort to free the Holy Land from its invaders.
Xalisae, I don’t think you have to be a Christian to be pro-life but I absolutely think you have to be pro-life to be a Christian. To be pro-abortion flies in the face of God’s Word.
Glad to have secularist pro-lifers on here. We need your voices too!
xalisae,
It bothers me that you feel insulted. I can’t speak for John L., but as I see it, you are in a special position being one of the secular pro-lifers on this board. You’ve got the ear of those who hate religion. John L. isn’t suggesting a Crusader-type, forced conversion to Christianity of all Americans. I’m sure he’s talking about “conversion” of heart and mind to the Christian ideals of loving thy neighbor as thyself and all that that entails – the beatitudes (a few of which John mentioned) and the Ten Commandments, etc… He’s not insulting you – you already posses those desirable ideals without the formality of religious conversion! That’s how I see it. Take care.
I really don’t think our top priority should be changing the hearts of pro-choicers. The Supreme Court when passing RoevWade concentrated on the viability of the fetus. Fetal viability is occuring at early periods in gestation and babies are living even when they are born at 21 weeks. I think the primary focus should be educating the public about what the law states and on the survival rates of babies that are being born early in the gestational period, if I were in need of immediate rescue I would hope those who wanted to rescue me weren’t waiting for the approval or concensus of those who didn’t.
Rasqual’s comment at 8:31 a.m. ought to be printed as a form letter to all pro-choicers. That’s where we stand in a nutshell.
Tyler, you’re welcome. If only I typed “Fail!” right! It would have packed more punch! :)
I know another who uses it to stabilize her moods and clear up her skin
Maybe her moods and skin would stabilize if her behavior did.
Meh. Taking birth control made my moods go crazy. I think it just has something to do with female hormones. I was sick as a dog when I was pregnant with my daughter, but when I was pregnant with my son, I didn’t even know I was pregnant for quite some time.
@John L. 3/10/12, 10:51pm
I don’t agree with those that are pro-abortion needing to convert to Christianity. Their hearts need to be converted to being pro-life. There’s too much disunity within Christianity and Judaism.
Many abortion “rights” supporters are post-abortive. If we can show them compassion and forgiveness, we may be able to persuade them to stop supporting legal abortion.
Bottom line, the average person is open to the truth.
Pictures are extremely effective.
Every teen should see them. Massively powerful.
Way out folks that are absolutely committed to pro choice politics are very few and far between. They are grossly over represented on this board. If abortion were politically popular, we wouldn’t have the current pro abortion administration bringing up contraception.
Recent polls show about 18% of the population support abortion on demand.
28% support legal abortion with heavy restrictions like they have in Europe.
28% except for rape or incest.
16% illegal except to save mother’s life.
(obviously some didn’t answer)
Interestingly people like me who self identify as liberal, 21%, outnumber those who like abortion on demand, 18%. So, that means at least 3% of liberals are pro-life. Since I personally know conservatives that are pro aborts, I would say there are even more pro life liberals like me.
Anyway, that just reinforces the point that pro aborts have literally retreated because they have moved back to contraception from abortion. Abortion is a loser politically as the arguments for it have evaporated with everyone now seeing ultrasound images and more and more people are seeing aborted babies.
recent abortion poll
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1212/abortion-gun-control-opinion-gender-gap
pro-choice is the same as pro-violence because the pro-choice advocates are talking about abortion. Abortion is an act of violence. There is no denying the violence, whether it be by suction, by extraction, by chemical poisoning to cause “fetal demise”. All brutal, all maiming methods. Pro-choice advocates are no better than any other “blood, guts and gore” psychopatn. Not too much you can say to them. Now the people who haven’t given much thought about abortion, we can reason with them using logic and facts.
Most people get abortions because they don’t want to be a parent to a child at this time. They are not thinking about how their decision affects the child. Most people don’t want to be thought of being someone who would torture . We in the pro-life movement try to persuade them that they don’t need to mutilate their child – they have other options to explore.
Here’s an idea. Make sure pro-choices understand you’re not against birth control, pre martial sex, gay rights, etc. Let them know that banning abortion isn’t just the first step of your larger agenda. Convince them that many women who are getting abortions are do so because they don’t believe they have a choice, that they don’t believe they have the resources to raise a child. That “pro choice” doesn’t mean getting an abortion because you’re desperate, afraid and poor. Ask people to work with you to help young women who are afraid not to have an abortion. Then, let the women who truly do want abortion have them.
Here’s an idea. Make sure pro-choices understand you’re not against birth control, pre martial sex, gay rights, etc. Let them know that banning abortion isn’t just the first step of your larger agenda. Convince them that many women who are getting abortions are do so because they don’t believe they have a choice, that they don’t believe they have the resources to raise a child. That “pro choice” doesn’t mean getting an abortion because you’re desperate, afraid and poor. Ask people to work with you to help young women who are afraid not to have an abortion.
Thunderous applause, Hal! I miss having you around as a regular commenter.
Hal,
-birth control is too broad and vague of a category – for some abortion is birth control;
-pre-marital sex is not moral in the Christianity, but no one is asking to make it illegal – but please feel free to explain what good pre-marital sex does for the couple involved, the potential children, families, and society as a whole. Seriously, I want to hear a reason defence of pre-marital sex. It is one thing to be liberal but at least provide reasons for being liberal. Freedom by itself, without a corresponding concept of justice, is not good;
– homosexuality – again please identify the good that this does for the people involved and society as whole. Why is society better off with people engaging in homosexuality. No-one is for criminalizing homosexuals; although many would like to see homosexuals embrace chastity or heterosexuality;
“That “pro choice” doesn’t mean getting an abortion because you’re desperate, afraid and poor.” – what are other adjectives would you have us use? BTW, does poor include poor in spirit?
“Ask people to work with you to help young women who are afraid not to have an abortion. Then, let the women who truly do want abortion have them.” – that happens anyways, would you like to see anything on behalf of the aborted child now?
Tyler, I’m not going to reargue the homosexual issue right now. there is a lot on the web that can explain to you why all people, including gay people, should be able to share their lives with the ones they love (and have our support in doing so)
Pre marital sex is a choice free adults get to make. Doesn’t matter if it’s”good” or “bad” for society. It’s up to the couple involved. That’s freedom. And in my country, freedom is considered important.
Personally, I think it’s a good idea to postpone marriage and children until at least the mid-twenties. I think a healthy sex life and healthy relationships between 18 and 25 make a lot of sense. Of course, some people have a different value system, and may want to marry earlier (or never). In general, there are a lot of people who are not married and want to have sexual relations. I’m fine with that.
Hi Hal!!
I do not know where Bobby Bambino is lately but I can call him for you.
BOBBY BAMBINOOOOOOOOOOO….HAL WANTS TO TALK TO YOU RIGHT NOW!!!
PS I disagree with pretty much everything you just wrote. Big surprise there I know.
“That “pro choice” doesn’t mean getting an abortion because you’re desperate, afraid and poor.” – what are other adjectives would you have us use? BTW, does poor include poor in spirit?
He’s saying that pro-choice DOES NOT mean accepting “I’m poor” or “I’m scared” as totally acceptable normal reasons to have an abortion. He’s not objecting to people being called desperate or afraid or poor, he’s objecting to the common reality that women abort BECAUSE they are desperate or afraid or poor. A lot of the time, pro-choice people are in such a rush to support women in their choices that they don’t really examine whether those choices are coerced or not. Like, to any pro-choice person, “I had an abortion because I couldn’t afford to have a baby” should NOT be a totally awesome, a-ok situation. Hal is saying “convince pro-choicers of this,” which is a worthwhile endeavor.
The day that I realized that the majority of the abortion stories I heard had coercive circumstances was the day I really weakened as a pro-choice person. I don’t mean “My mother said I had to abort.” Everybody knows that’s coercion. I mean, “I had an abortion so that I could finish school.” Lots of pro-choicers are so conditioned to accept the reality of our current social and educational structure that it never occurs to them that THIS TOO IS COERCION.
Many women just never hear that they HAVE a choice, that there are equal choices and equal support for them. If all women hear is “Well, you COULD keep the baby, but you’ll have to drop out of school,” or “You COULD keep the baby, but formula and diapers are expensive!” or whatever, it all essentially comes down to, “Well, you COULD keep the baby, but you’d be completely and utterly alone,” they’re not making a choice; they’re just reacting to the world they are told is out there, and that is a world where no one and nothing is willing or able to help a young scared pregnant woman do anything except walk through the doors of an abortion clinic. Choosing abortion in that circumstance is a coerced choice, not a free choice. And being pro-choice should mean that that is UNACCEPTABLE.
Thanks Carla!
See you around. Best wishes to you and your family.
Wow – one of the best threads in quite a while.
Tom Ambrose: Eventually, I went to a screening of “Silent Scream” to see what I could learn. What I saw turned my stomach.
‘Silent Scream’ has long been discredited – the makers admitted some things were faked and misrepresented. Any objections to abortion on that basis is actually an argument for legal abortion. Some pro-life organizations have instructed their representatives not to refer to it, as it discredits them by association.
____
J: I’ve noticed when you calmly try to present them with facts about fetal development, they resort to the generic: “I believe in a woman’s right to chose” but they won’t directly answer questions like, when is it not just a clump of cells?
Well, that can actually be argued, and pretty much settled. In truth, the physical reality of the unborn is really not the argument, i.e, since Nilsson’s pictures from the 1960’s we’ve pretty much been able to “see.”
____
Tyler: I think we should bring them to the Cross and ask to think about what it means in addition to doing all the practical things such as displaying the GAP ads and witnessing.
Honestly (and no offense meant), put down the Crack pipe.
___
Jack: I think not demonizing choicers is a good start, lol. I have persuaded some, mostly just politeness and logic will eventually get to some people.
Indeed, Jack, if they end up valuing things as you see them. Quite a reasonable comment. Likewise, so do some people go to Pro-Choice.
___
mp: But, no, you dig around in the detritus and find a piece written by a National Review hack that suits your purposes.
FAIL.
Yeah, you’ll have that, frequently.
____
Hal: Tyler, I’m not going to reargue the homosexual issue right now. there is a lot on the web that can explain to you why all people, including gay people, should be able to share their lives with the ones they love (and have our support in doing so)
Pre marital sex is a choice free adults get to make. Doesn’t matter if it’s”good” or “bad” for society. It’s up to the couple involved. That’s freedom. And in my country, freedom is considered important.
Personally, I think it’s a good idea to postpone marriage and children until at least the mid-twenties. I think a healthy sex life and healthy relationships between 18 and 25 make a lot of sense. Of course, some people have a different value system, and may want to marry earlier (or never). In general, there are a lot of people who are not married and want to have sexual relations. I’m fine with that.
As usual, very well said, Hal. The rights issues for homosexuals will die out fairly quickly, in the grand scheme of things, in the future. Good grief – the uproar over inter-racial dating and marriage made the current controversy look like small potatoes. You’d have thought the world was ending right this minute… :)
There’s no “going back,” a la Santorum, who, if you ask him, will say that sex is just for getting pregnant. Hello…..
Doug, you really crack me up sometimes. ;)
Just one thing:
“ Well, that can actually be argued, and pretty much settled. In truth, the physical reality of the unborn is really not the argument, i.e, since Nilsson’s pictures from the 1960?s we’ve pretty much been able to “see.””
Well, you can’t really say that without noticing how many people argue about it, and use the “clump of cells” (still! in 2012!) argument, or the “can’t feel pain” (still up in the air, for the most part) argument, for example. Personally, my reasons for opposing abortion have little to nothing to do with how formed/how pain sensitive/sentient the unborn are, but you can’t deny that a lot of pro-choice people still use those type of arguments to argue for abortion.
Thanks Alexandra, you explained what I was trying to say.
Doug, I agree. We’re winning most of the issues that matter. Now if we could just solve this abortion quandary, we’d be all set.
Doug: “Well, that can actually be argued, and pretty much settled. In truth, the physical reality of the unborn is really not the argument”
Really? When pro-choice noobs still trot out either “it’s not human!” or “it’s not alive!” ?
But pro-choicers don’t really have a stake in educating their idiot class otherwise. As long as ignorance and delusion serve the cause. Let sleeping dogs lie, and all that…
“Honestly (and no offense meant), put down the Crack pipe.”
knew you were following along.
“Pre marital sex is a choice free adults get to make. Doesn’t matter if it’s”good” or “bad” for society. It’s up to the couple involved. That’s freedom. And in my country, freedom is considered important.”
Hal, no doubt freedom is important; but it is not the only value that is important. We should be able to discuss and promote those other values that are good. Liberals have put blinders on the public so that they think the only good is freedom. Furthermore, pre-marital sex is not morally neutral because it impacts the mentality and outlook that a person will have toward other issues, and it has a tendency to promote out-of-wedlock births and single mothers.
Doug, do children have a right to a Mother and a Father?
Doug, Vannah, Reality, and VS please watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVxz71ygHbk&feature=player_embedded#!
Rasqual: “But pro-choicers don’t really have a stake in educating their idiot class otherwise. As long as their ignorance and delusion serve the cause…”
Fascinating to see views like this expressed on a thread dedicated to “How do we persuade pro-choicers.” Hint, calling us “idiots” and “ignorant” might not be effective persuasion.
Hal, there are some pro-choicers who are die-hard (no pun intended) pro-aborts. These are usually the pro-choicers who are extremely anti-religious, typically male, and often homosexual. These individuals usually have reasons for being pro-choice that are never discussed and have nothing to do with women, reproduction, or the unborn.
The pro-lifer does need to continually remind the general public that the pro-choice position ultimately boils down to supporting one choice: the choice to abort/kill the unborn. Keeping this informative insight in mind while conversing with average pro-choice person is important and can often change their mind on the issue.
Not sure how that justifies calling us “idiots.”
PS: I’m extremely anti-religious, and male. I am not homosexual, not that there’s anything wrong with that.
I don’t think you understand my point, Hal — which is that your “idiot class” is the cohort you see no need in educating. Pro-lifers certainly see education of such folk as a boon.
Their ignorance is an asset to your side, because you realize that among folks who are pro-choice because they believe the fetus is not human, not alive, or neither — among them are many who would not be pro-choice if they were to learn otherwise. You don’t need people to be smart. Ignorance serves your cause just fine.
You have no stake in informing those you deem useful idiots.
Personally, I’m not as interested in those who are vulnerable to emotion in argument as I am those who are capable of feeling rational shame for bearing all the marks of stupidity. Pointing out such stupidity and calling it by name — especially when it supports a murderous ideology — has its place in the canons of persuasion. Those who cannot imagine that the fetus is human and alive (a surprisingly high number of pro-choice folk in the margins) probably cannot imagine it because they cannot imagine that all the vunderful pregnancy termination providers would ever — being such Nice People don’tcha know — do something to harm a living human. Ergo, it must be inhuman, or non-alive. Because abortionists are such nice people. You know, they have children, go to church — all that. They can’t be moral monsters destroying human life. Can they?
Then there are the pro-choicers who, of course, understand that yes — this is destruction of human life. Valuable human life, even. And they’d not regret the loss of some yokels to the pro-life side if they became aware of this horrendous truth. But to this vanguard class, embracing this truth and yet embracing abortion is important. This would be, shall we call it, the priesthood class of the pro-choice movement — those who consecrate the sacrifice of the unborn on the altar of the regnant self. This is the body and blood of the innocent, poured out for the empowerment of the self.
I’m not in the least worried about offending such True Believers. Their souls are beyond being offended. Language of offense, on their lips, is merely calculated for rhetorical effect.
One other thing, Hal. Persuading some people depends on authenticity, which in part depends on whether one’s demeanor matches one’s content. One doesn’t speak of horrific injustice in terms of impartial detachment. One doesn’t speak amiably of a pleasant drive in the country, then adopt the same tone in debating the merits of dismembering unborn children inside the human cradle architected (whether by nature or God) to protect them.
I’ll be damned if I’m going to defer to the conversational sensibilities of someone so insensate that they not only care nothing for the lives of unborn children, but imagine that the rhetorical habits of their defenders are a greater offense than the abortionist’s axe.
We are talking about unborn, defenseless children mutilated in their human cradle. We shall talk in ways that reflect that we are not talking about a pleasant drive in the country.
Okay, rasqual, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. Good luck with your endeavors.
Thanks, Hal! The cheery disposition of the life-indifferent is a wonder to behold!
Ah, to be free of the burden of conscience and concerned only with one’s own comfort, unhindered by pesky parasites. That would be the life!
Darn the luck, it ain’t my fate.
Livin’ a-way up North, those abolitionists could’ve shrugged it all off and lived a carefree, “pay no attention to the pedigree of that cotton blouse” lifestyle amid the comfort slave labor brought the entire nation. Sure seems stupid of ’em to embrace melancholy and frustration fighting such a cause.
Darn the luck, it’s the pro-life fate.
rasqual, we all have our pet causes. I fight the good fight on mine, like you do on yours. It doesn’t bother me that you are anti-abortion. Nor does it bother me that you might be trying to get abortion outlawed. If I thought you had any chance of succeeding, I might be a bit unnerved. But since I don’t, I’m not.
Hal, there is nothing “wrong” with a homosexual person, there is something wrong with a pro-choice homosexual person: namely their pro-choice position.
Jack: Well, you can’t really say that without noticing how many people argue about it, and use the “clump of cells” (still! in 2012!) argument, or the “can’t feel pain” (still up in the air, for the most part) argument, for example. Personally, my reasons for opposing abortion have little to nothing to do with how formed/how pain sensitive/sentient the unborn are, but you can’t deny that a lot of pro-choice people still use those type of arguments to argue for abortion.
If somebody is saying, “Abortion is okay because of …..” and then inserting something that is provable, demonstrably false, then that’s just plain silly. Pretty quickly, in gestation, it’s not just “a clump of cells.”
Doug: “Well, that can actually be argued, and pretty much settled. In truth, the physical reality of the unborn is really not the argument”
Rasqual: Really? When pro-choice noobs still trot out either “it’s not human!” or “it’s not alive!” ?
But pro-choicers don’t really have a stake in educating their idiot class otherwise. As long as ignorance and delusion serve the cause. Let sleeping dogs lie, and all that…
Well, Rasqual, it certainly applies to pro-lifers, too, the “brainwaves at 6 weeks” types and those at whom “The Silent Scream” et al are aimed.
Tyler: Doug, do children have a right to a Mother and a Father?
Tyler, I think it’s certainly better, all other things being equal, if they do. No, there’s nothing demonstrable there, nothing inherent at all as far as “rights,” period, but the general feeling is that it “should be that way,” versus other ways. For huge numbers of kids, one or even both parents gets killed or are otherwise unavailable, and in no way can we necessarily just “plug in” another parent or two – it’s often not going to work out the best that way.
That said, I don’t think it’s really “right” for a kid to lose their parents at a comparatively young age. It’d be exceedingly rare, if ever, for it to be the kid’s fault – but either way, the universe is not “fair” in these matters.
____
Tyler: Hal, there are some pro-choicers who are die-hard (no pun intended) pro-aborts. These are usually the pro-choicers who are extremely anti-religious, typically male, and often homosexual.
Tyler, here, you are really marginalizing yourself. Honestly, it makes you sound like a nutjob.
The point however, Doug, is that pro-lifers would prefer that their ranks know more. Pro-choicers, IMO, prefer ignorance concerning the unborn. Only against a palate of ignorance can the rhetoric of “parasite” and the like be splattered.
Rasqual, totally depends on how you look at it. One could as easily say that pro-lifers want their ranks to be superstitious and infinitely vulnerable to the logical fallacies of appealing to authority, begging the question, etc.
Pro-Choicer’s don’t “prefer ignorance concerning the unborn.” I’d argue just as strongly as you would with somebody who insisted upon things that are provable to be physically untrue. The “parasite” argument is not that big a thing, really.
Doug,
Why should homosexuals care about “reproductive rights” at all?
Tyler, if they care about other people not suffering, then would it not follow?
And hey – are comments now allowed to continue “forever”? :P
Doug, they mentioned something about this on the blog enhancements post. It seems comments were only being closed before because of problems with spam, we allegedly have been solved.
Gosh I hope that some of the old arguments don’t get restarted now that comments are back up, lol.
Hey Jack, my first thought was “great, now that Doonesbury thread will never die!!!”.
Thanks, JDC – you’re right. Rock and Roll! :P
mike asked in his anti-abortion comment “should rape be legal? women have been raped for the last 2 000 years with men turning a blind eye to it and even condoning it. in war time it is still acceptable for women and girls to be raped, even today. let’s not forget nicolai ceceuscue, who ordered his soldiers to rape women and then made abortion illegal.
i take great offense as a women of your statement
as for the comment near the top of the comment page ‘that pro-choicers mentioned orphans when bullied about their abortion views-
the prrochoicers should have mentioned the orphans in north american orphanages-the truly unwanted children-children born from drug-addicted mums, children with mental health issues, etc, in other words the imperfect and non-innocent children. where is their right to live in a stable, loving home? when will you prolifers encourage childless people to adopt these children (not babies) or adopt them yourself?
the statement about all children are wanted and loved is b.s. where is the outcry of the prolifers for homes for these children? or are they less valuable because they are not in a women’s womb. i work with these children and are sickened by how they are passed by people ‘who are desperate for a child’
The most common and more “valuable” argument that I see from pro-choicers/pro-abortion/anti-lifers is that the “blob” or zygote is not human, it might have human DNA, but it is not considered a human being (and thus should have no protective rights). I am more under the impression that most abortions are done near the conception time, when the baby is considered this “non-human being” by such activists.
However, I often wonder about a few things:
*the sperm and egg are separate beings that are identical to the father or mother, respectively
*when the egg and sperm combine, they create a separate entity that contains its own special DNA that is different from both parents
*from conception, this special entity that has its own DNA, it is most certainly alive (until killed): feeds, maintains an environment, adapts, responds to stimuli, reproduces, organized, and grows
*from conception, this entity is at least clearly human, you could not successfully make this baby out to be a gorilla, shoe, pickle, puppy, etcetera
*the zygote is clearly a stage of human development (otherwise, what on earth is it?) just like a difference between a baby and a teenager, both a baby and a teenager have different responsibilities, but both have a right to life
*some people have diseases that cause scaly skin or terrible consequences (try looking up elephant man) and others are born with thick hair all over their body (like a gorilla), if they do not “look” like human beings, even with the DNA being human, should we consider them human beings?
*some diseases cause people to have no feeling, so they could be stabbed and bleeding, but their body does not acknowledge it and chances are they are contagious and have life-threatening wounds, should we kill them to end what is occurring?
*some children have terrible constant pain… should the mother be allowed to end such misery?
_______
Pro-choice/anti-life/pro-abortion specifically talk about the woman and want ignore the life within her, her choice should overrule any right for the “thing” to live.
Pro-life/anti-choice/anti-abortion specifically talk about the right for the life within the woman to live, the woman is most certainly a concern, but the life of the child should overrule her choice.
The chances of a woman’s life being in danger from pregnancy are about as rare as the chance for a woman to get pregnant from rape, both are most certainly unfortunate, but the primary goal should be to save both. One or both (very rare) might die from a woman’s life being in danger, but at least the attempt was to save both and not to just end one life on purpose.
So, what does that leave for the reasons to abort? Pretty much anything, which is pretty much all about the woman who’s life probably “only in danger” of having to take responsibility.
Abortion is a temporary way to respond to pregnancy and it cheapens life (perhaps not “human being” life according to pro-choicers) seeing as life from conception is so often considered a disease or a parasite that needs to be removed.
Simply saying, avoid the act of creating life if you do not think you are ready to take responsibility, just as you should avoid putting nude images on the internet if you are not ready for the likely chance of harassment by perverts or the possibility of you losing your job. If such mistakes do occur, responsibility is a good way to go just as you should not commit suicide for losing your job/harassment, you should not kill your baby because it was “accidental”.
People have sex, that does not mean we should cradle them and find the easiest way out when a “mistake” is made, it means we should encourage them to take responsibility for “such mistakes” and help out if the woman is having problems. I find it sad that many families supposedly will not help when one member is pregnant and will encourage abortion, but there are plenty of people/places who want to help, if you look.
Besides, what if the woman makes the “mistake” of going through with the pregnancy? What if she regrets it and now she has to STILL use her own body to take care of this helpless child? Why should such “choices” end at birth? What about her job, school, her BODY then? Why should she have to suffer if she no longer wants the child? Adoption? Well, that is the excuse pro-lifers use for abortion, but why should the child suffer possible abuse, neglect, etcetera from the adoption agencies? If a woman is pregnant again, is it not easier to kill the born child and allow the woman the 9 months to get things back together?
Adoption is a wonderful way to preserve life and the woman can be “free of responsibility” from then on. I fail to see why “pro-choicers” have such a problem with “neglect and abuse” in adoption agencies when they are fine with “neglect and abuse” from the womb if the woman chooses it. At least the child lived, there is no right for the child to be happy or live in a wonderful home with spoils, but there is the right for the child to live.