This past week I have been especially saddened by the rhetoric and zeal regarding the defunding of Planned Parenthood and the passage of Virginia’s new regulations that will essentially close almost all abortion provider clinics.
But that isn’t really what I want to discuss, what I want to discuss is the overwhelming disconnect I see emanating from social conservatives. Let me say this, as strongly as I can, being pro-life does not end once you “stop” an abortion. For those that so passionately advocate on behalf of those poor innocent “unborn”, where, I ask, where is that same compassion for human beings once they take their first breath, not only at the beginning of their lives, but along the journey of life, until, in the end, we all must make our final peace and move through that last cycle of life, death.
Where are all these social conservatives when social workers, whose job is to save children and the elderly from abuse, are underfunded but overworked? Where are all these social conservatives when critical programs like head start, which feed America’s hungry children, are cut? Why does compassion seem to end upon birth? Why are so many of our elderly choosing between medicine or food?
Last week, when I took my little Rachael to the doctor, there was an elderly woman at the front desk so I sat down, waiting to pay my co-pay. An empty waiting room amplifies every word, and even though she spoke every so softly, it was impossible not to overhear her conversation with the receptonist, and it broke my heart.
From her gentle but halting voice, to her slight frame, everything about her seemed fragile to me. Probably in her early seventies, gray short whispy hair, slighty unkempt, framed her chiseled face. She explained to the receptionist that she had lost her job, along with her insurance, and that all she had was social security and medicare. Although she had applied for disability, she was waiting for approval. She asked the receptionist what help was out there for her, what changes had been made in medicare with the passage of the health care bill.
Her self- pay was fifty dollars, she asked several times , the same questions, what changes had been made to Medicare, what assistance was available to her. Patiently, the receptionist responded each time , with the same answer, “I will see what I can find out for her, not to worry”.
Finally, after several minutes, the elderly woman said she had to go “find the funds” to pay for her visit. Find the funds?! Where does one “find funds” I wondered. She left the office and I walked up to the receptionist, almost in tears. I told her that I was simply “heartbroken” by what I had overheard. I handed her my credit card and told her that if she could not find the funds, I wanted to pay. Then I thought, no, I wanted to pay even if she “found the funds”, which is exactly what I told the receptionist. She seemed so frail, she needed that fifty dollars more than me.
Shortly thereafter, while waiting to see the doctor with the kids, having left my credit card at the front desk, the receptionist returned, along with my credit card. She said the woman wanted to thank the anonymous person who had offered ” so kindly” offered to pay, but while she was able, she wanted to pay for herself.
So, I ask you, all you conservatives who defend the “rights” of the unborn, how do you defend the “rights” of those that are born, no matter what stage in they are in life? Being pro-life, in my opinion, requires a lifelong commitment, not just when its easy, not just when all one has to do bemoan all those lost “babies, but when have to put your money where your mouth is once the “unborn” are born.
Elena,
I understand your point. And your statement is a call to exercise charity. And”pro-life” people do that. However, I don’t understand what limit your are putting on this commitment. Are you saying, that because pro-life, or anti-abortion, people don’t fund all support programs that completely take care of all ills and provide free health care that they are hypocrites for believing that fetuses should be allowed to live? I mean, that’s what you seem to be implying.
I agree that that more people should exercise charity. I also believe that discussions about the level of funding in government “charity” programs is a valid discussion. I even agree that temporary safety nets in a rich society is a good thing.
Are we a rich society anymore? You want “social conservatives” to take responsibility for every child that lives instead of being aborted. Are you really willing to make such a deal if it was possible? I’m sure that many “pro-life” people would take you up on it.
Being pro-life means that you want those with a right to life to live. Even the woman in your account wants to pay her own way.
I don’t have an answer to your question other than, yes, I’ve tried to help the less fortunate. But I really don’t understand what it is that you truly expect people to do. Pay more taxes? Contribute to charity? Take care of all the children as an alternative to abortion?
And what “rights” of those that are born, no matter what stage in they are in life” does this mean? A right to life is just that. No more. No less. Is it good to help those less fortunate? Absolutely. But what rights are you talking about? I’m not going to put words, if I can help it, into your mouth.
If you only mean that the assorted governments of the US fund more social programs to help those in need, what are our priorities? Our federal government already is in the hole for over 2 trillion dollars this year. Many state governments have billions in debt. Medicare, SS, and other programs consumes our total tax base. Canada and England have found single payer health care to be budget breakers.
So, what do we cut to take care of everybody? How do we supply the same degree of services in medicine by letting the government run it. I’m not trying to be flip or dodge your question.
I think that you post is wonderful and its a very good question. However, the premise is that because one is “pro-life” that person now has a responsibility to support everyone that is in need. Be aware that, by your logic in the above article, being pro-choice would apparently absolve you of supporting those “rights” of the born.
The discussion is not whether we are our brother’s keeper (because if we are not who is?), but to what extent are we our brother’s keeper and what is the system by which we provide that support.
Other than my charitable duty to my fellow man, and the political/philosophical idea that, in some cases, a rich society should provide some sort of safety net, I reject your premise that pro-life people are hypocrites because most don’t support the liberal idea of large government programs or “free health care.”
http://www.slate.com/id/2286464/
The old observation that “Pro-lifers only carry about babies before they are born,
and pro-choicers only after they are born” too often rings true.
The right is incoherent when it damns abortion AND, at the same time, seeks to
defund support for basic prenatal and childhood care.
The left is incoherent when it supports “pro-choice” and then bashes those
who demand key health and safety protections for those seeking an abortion.
@Big Dog
I am all in favor of anything that makes abortion safer for women. I will bash any fake bills whose purpose is to limit abortion and make it more costly and less accessible. That is what happened yesterday. I cannot think of 1 way yesterday’s bill will make abortion safer. Not 1 single way.
I renounce it and every lawmaker who voted for it.
Thank you, Elena. In so many of these debates about compassion, people opposed to “paying for others” come up with the comment: “I guess you’ll be happy to pay for it then”. The thing is, some people who care about human rights and dignity ARE happy to pay. Thank you for being one of them. I go to a site called Care2 and follow the immigration debate there. An article was posted about an Arizona (I think it was Arizona) bill that would demand everyone provide proof of citizenship at hospital emergency rooms. Comments akin to the following were made again and and again to those of us who opposed: “OK we’ll just send all the medical bills to you. Har har.” A woman posted that she would be more than happy to adopt an undocumented family and support their effort to establish a secure footing here, medical bills and all. Thank God for that woman.
Big Dog,
Who is bashing protections for women seeking safe abortions? I think it is disgusting what happened to those women in Pennsylvania, especially because there had been many complaints filed against that clinic. I would like to know why they were ignored! Pro-choice advocates must be able to question when clinics are bad or else we don’t stand for the health and safety of women. However, having said that, what happened the VA state legislature has nothing to do with the health and safety of women. In fact, that kind of over regulation, if placed into all settings that qualify for outpatient care, will surely bankrupt most doctors in all facets of medicine in this state.
@I am bashing fake protections for women seeking safe abortions. TRAP laws are to limit abortion. They do not make abortion safer. They do not make abortion safer. How about regularly scheduled visits from health agencies for compliance? That does more for women than mandating the size of the parking lot for God’s sake.
It really is time for people to inform themselves about what is going down here and stop relying on sentimentality. If there was truly concern for health, then offices performing oral surgery, colonoscopies, vasectomies, cosmetic and eye surgery would all have just been included in the the new law. Notice their absence?
Tell me why those services weren’t included? Is someone trying to say that a vasectomy is safer? I bet no man has the nads to get on this blog and tell me that vasectomy isn’t a pretty special surgery.
Oh, my other question big dog is how do “pro-lifers” only care for babies after they are born? What does that mean, we don’t believe in pre-natal care for women who want to carry their babies to term? We don’t believe in comprehenstive health care for women? I am not sure what you mean, can you clarify. Thanks.
@BoyThreeOne
I keep meaning to call the doctors office and ask if there is a way that, if patients wanted, they could contribute to a needy copay fund.
http://www.slate.com/id/2286496/
This whole issue has a long history.
@Cargosquid
I’m curious what government “safety nets” you support, and what your commitment is to charitable giving. Do you believe in financially supporting programs that offer life-saving care to impoverished people? You personally support such programs and donate to them? Are there any particular ones you think are up to the task of taking up the slack if government support is withdrawn?
@Elena
That’s a wonderful idea.
“Life saving care to impoverished people” is a broad topic. I support that hospitals should treat those that seek treatment in emergency rooms. I support temporary welfare programs and unemployment insurance. I support WIC, though I believe it should be reformed. I support subsidized medical clinics for the impoverished that should be limited to the poor. I even support that the government should pay for a lot of such things. I’m not going to go research each and every program that the feds and the state/local gov’ts provide and write a detailed list.
I also believe that all of things are services that we, as a society, have decided to GIVE people. They are not RIGHTS. And, I believe that if society wants to provide more of such things, especially at the federal level, then amend the Constitution to authorize it. At the State level, there is no need, except as the respective state constitutions allow or ban such services.
And if we have no money, how do we pay for them?
As for my charity giving, I’ll keep that private.
Elena,
Pro-choice should never slide, as its critics often claim, into
being pro-abortion. An abortion must always be the last option.
Clinics should always meet the highest medical standards.
Everyone needs to step back and look at the demographics of
abortion. The patients are often young, unwed, poor, minorities, many
with young children already who they struggle to provide for. They , quite often,
aren’t in a position to fully check the quality and history of a clinic.
They may well be unable to find a good clinic without help; just as they would be
unable to have and raise a child, without, by default, government help.
“How do we pay for them?”
We change our priorities.
Since 2001, we’ve spent $1,157,396,727,731 on 2 wars (as of 3 minutes ago). I don’t know how much the bank bailouts cost.
@Cargo, if the government is going to make women have children, then it seems only right that they help pay for them.
The social do-gooders can’t stand there and insist that someone bear a child and then say that person is on their own to raise the child. Not everyone has the means to raise a child to adulthood. I have raised 3 to full adulthood and it isn’t cheap.
What I see are these same people, the social conservatives, trying to cut off various programs that assist those less fortunate. Now that I resent.
Big Dog, I agree with you however…do you honestly think this idiotic disingenuous law that passed yesterday will help one woman, poor, or unpoor, young or more mature, have a safer abortion? If it will, please tell me how.
It is a ploy to reduce abortion. That is all it was. Trickery and connivery and shame on the people who voted yes.
Since this subject has come up….let’s just talk about bad medical practices for a moment. What can we do about them? We know they exist from accounts of places in PA and FL. How about health departments getting involved in all outpatient practices. What checks and balances are there to make sure everyone is licensed, the place is clean and sterile? What checks are in place to make sure OSHA regulations are followed?
These are things we need to look at, not just with abortion services but with all clinic situations. Let’s not let bogus ‘safety regulations’ stand for bona fide standards and verification that these standards are being carried out in all clinics in Virginia.
Here’s one way you can help mothers-to-be and families in our area.
http://www.manassasmidwifery.com/Donate-to-Manassas-Midwifery-.html
The general sentiment when it comes to social programs is that the average American doesn’t mind helping children, he’ll be damned if he’ll help the worthless shiftless parents. That’s why “welfare” type programs have narrow support — the inability to empathize and feel “there, but for the Grace of God, go I”.
While we spend much more money on programs in which a wide swath of the public benefits — Soc. Sec., Medicare, home mortgage deduction — programs that help the needy are ostracized because people feel that poor folk deserve their lot.
Cindy, neat information. Thank you.
Here’s more:
Currently Prince William Hospital won’t allow midwives to have privileges to attend births of their own prenatal clients. There are local midwives who provide prenatal and postpartum care for their clients, but since they aren’t given hospital privileges these women deliver with Prince William Hospital OB Hospitalists.
The Hospitalists are great doctors and are happy to deliver the babies of the midwifery clients. But, from the woman’s perspective, this doctor in the hospital is a stranger to her. Though this is a beautiful facility and the Hospitalists and nurses are hospitable, newborns are brought to the nursery for 3-5hrs for screening, observations, and newborn care.
The reasoning is parents have not spoken out for any changes needing to be made.
Please take the survey at
http://novamidwife.weebly.com/about-us.html
Cindy, I’m actually in support of NPs (Nurse Practioners) having more autonomy and being used more like GPs. I think it’s an overall win win for our healthcare system but I don’t want to go way off topic.
I understand that there is a lot of hurt and anger over what the senate passed but if the GA got it wrong this will be changed in a few years.
Having had a midwife, two actually, for the birth of my daughter, I can definately share how great that experience was for me and our family. However, it was just recently in the state of Virginia that having a “licensed” midwife at your birth was legal. You could have an UNLICESENED midwife and that was legal! Can you imagine, the stupidity!
Senator Colgan wrote me a personal letter back, thanking me for the picture of my children, after I had sent him long letter urging him to approve legal midwifery in Virginia. In fact, what I said was, if he was for women having babies, than a pro life stance also meant providing women with the choice of WHO would be attending her birth and if the HEALTH of pregnant women was his goal, then a certified midwife was the appropriate alternative.
Birthing with a midwife was more than half the cost of a regular doctor.
I have a good friend who is a nurse midwife, and it is a fabulous way to practice nursing. I don’t know anyone who loves her nursing job as much as she does. The level of care midwives provide is OUTSTANDING. I wish I was better educated about them when I was having my kids.
“Where are all these social conservatives when…”
Well, there’s Birthright, for one (which I donate to), that offers:
* Free pregnancy testing
* Completely confidential help
* Non-judgmental and caring advice
* Friendship and emotional support
* Legal, medical, and educational referrals
* Prenatal information
* Maternity and baby clothes
* Housing referrals
* Social agency referrals
* Information on other community services
* Adoption information
http://www.birthright.org/
Then there’s Project Rachel, there to care in a nonjudgmental way women who suffer emotional consequences after abortion.
I will never apologize for being concerned about the life of the unborn. I will never apologize for believing that something with a brain, 10 fingers, 10 toes and clearly identifiable sex organs residing in a womb is a baby and not merely a “fetus” or “embryo” or “potential.” I do not feel compelled to answer for every spending cut on every social program that impacts women and children. All I can control is my own little corner of the world, and Birthright feels right to me, because it cares for both the mother and the unborn baby. There are alternatives to abortion. Women are free to choose those alternatives, too, and very often those alternatives do not carry the emotional baggage that abortion often carries.
I’m not in a position to tell someone who is pro-choice that they are “wrong,” and I understand that abortion is the law of the land. But broad-brushing “social conservatives” as not caring about what happens to women and “unwanted” children is an insult when so many of them are out there helping regardless of their personal beliefs.
On a related issue, would I participate as a nurse in an abortion procedure? Absolutely, unequivocally NOT, even if it cost me my job. But would I help care for a woman post-abortion? Absolutely, unequivocally YES. There is a difference.
Emma,
“All I can control is my own little corner of the world, and Birthright feels right to me, because it cares for both the mother and the unborn baby. There are alternatives to abortion. Women are free to choose those alternatives, too, and very often those alternatives do not carry the emotional baggage that abortion often carries. ”
I could not agree more with your statement. I believe, every choice, when it involves an unplanned pregnancy has its emotional baggage, no matter what option you choose. In my life I have known young women who have kept their babies and also chosen, early on, to terminate their pregnancy.
I apologize to you if I have offended you in a “broadbrush” manner. I am not asking anyone to apologize for being against abortion. That is not what this conversation is about. It is about forcing someone else to do something they may not want to do when it comes to their own body. I commend organizations for offering real help to women when they are in crisis. How long term is this help from birthright?
Elena,
As a conservative, the principle I hold to is the answer to every social ill, is not a government program. That said, I do support properly administered programs that provide for the basics of the poor; food, shelter, education, basic medical care. I also support charitable organizations, faith-based or civic, that fill the gaps. Take the Lions for example. When I upgrade my hearing aids, or get new glasses, I’ll donate the old. They’ll give them to a poor person, who otherwise couldn’t afford them.
My views on abortion flow from my faith: Life begins at conception. Jerimiah 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you. Before you were born, I set you apart for my holy purpose”. My views on charity are from the same. Most importantly, my views on campassion for the “poor in spirit” come from the beatitudes.
One reason why I am so anti-planned parenthood, is I understand who Margret Sanger was, what her views were regarding the poor and minorities, and what her goals for the organization were. I recently learned of a sobering statistic: 60% of all African American pregnancies in NYC, are terminated through abortion. It would seem to me that the goals of the founder of planned parenthood are alive and well. (http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html)
@Steve, it sounds like you are blaming Margaret Sanger for black abortions. She has been dead 40 years and certainly was not the only woman who felt the need to make certain women, especially poor women, had access to birth control. Margaret Sanger is one of my heroes.
There has been much disinformation spread about Sanger and Planned Parenthood that simply is not true.
As to Jerimiah 1:5, if we take the words literally, it sounds as though we are actually talking about life beginning long before conception. Don’t get me going…
Pro Choice people believe that all options are open to women, including giving birth. I am very dedicated to all choices remaining open to women.
Emma, don’t you feel it is disingenuous, however, for regulations involving hall and door width and parking lot size to be enacted for abortion providers and at the same time all funding for Planned Parenthood is cut off?
It seems to me that the way to cut down on the number of abortions is be as far reaching with birth control as humanly possible.
Steve,
Did you support the welfare reform act in the 90’s? The poorer and less educated the higher the birthrate. What we need are MORE accessible Planned Parenthoods in the minority communities, not less. The shared commong goal is to lessen the need for abortion. how does one do that, through education and affordable womens health care services.
What bothers me is that the federal government has inserted itself into our most basic most personal issues, my right to my body and how sexuality is viewed. As long as I can remember, only abstinence has been taught in sex ed, and yet, all current and past research invalidates the premise that abstinence only prevents early sexual intercourse. Prevention is the means to stop unwanted pregnancies, but many of those in the poor communities are written off, are left behind. What has been cut by the Republicans? Those programs that help build communities into more viable successful places for people. The issue of abortion in minority communities really has nothing to do with unprotected sex, but the lack of real meaningful interventions to change the cycle that traps most people in those circumstances. My dad was a huge part of Sarge Shrivers “war on poverty” and they were making inroads. But what happened, the Vietnam War. It’s interesting how investing dollars in death seems to be so much more palatable then investing that kind of energy and resources to help people bring themselves out of the cycle of poverty.
I am old enough to know people who had to go through hell to get an abortion. And trust me when I tell you that there was no Birthright back in those days.
Why might a person want an abortion? Back in those days you got fired from your job for being pregnant, much less pregnant and unmarried. You lost your health care if you got fired. You had no way to support a child.
I have a close friend who had a semi legal abortion about 3 years before Roe was handed down. DC was test casing its way through legalizing abortion, thus the semi legal. In the first place, it costs 2 times the amount of her monthly take home pay THEN. Secondly, it involved an attorney, a psychiatrist, and an OB/gyn and having the procedure done in a hospital. The psychiatrist was the real evil end of the equation. He was abusive and it sounds like to me, nuttier than any patient he ever had. I am still friends with this person and she does not regret her decision at all. It enabled her to do many things with her life including having a son who she loves and adores. If she has been damaged, the damage came from the nut bag shrink who threatened to withhold his certification from her. The certification signature was needed for her to be able to get the abortion.
All of this is clean and sanitized compared to the girl I knew who went the back alley route and ended up in the hospital with her name in the paper.
Society needs to get a lot kinder before I will go on record saying I want to stop abortion. Actually I will never say it. I formed my opinion on this topic as a child when Miss Sherri Finkbine (Romper Room) had taken Thalidamide and was denied an abortion. She had to go out of the country to finally get one but it was a huge controversy. She was destined to have a child with flippers rather than arms and legs. I decided as a kid that life is tough enough without having to get through it with flippers. To me, fetal anomoly is a compelling reason to have an abortion.
Its never wise to mess with older women on this topic.
@Steve Thomas
That’s quite a leap to blame Sanger for the number of recently terminated pregnancies in NYC. Do you think that the African-American women who terminated their pregnacies might have felt there were few available resources for help in raising a child? How many were teenagers? Do you think a 14 year old should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term?
If you’re looking at organization founders and wanting to smear an organization, look no further than one with whom you should be familiar – John Tanton (of FAIR fame). Goose, gander.
Censored,
The flaw in your logic is I am not, nor have ever been a member of FAIR. As a matter of fact, when the organization I was part of, (HSM) went in a direction that was in conflict with my blooming faith, I made a decision to go my own way. So you can refer to aquatic fowl all you want, but the comparison fails. I have spoken face to face with folks on this blog who I believe deserved an accounting from me and they know where I am coming from.
I hope to get the opportunity to meet you on Sunday. I would like to share my testimony on this topic. I prefer not to put it out here in cyberspace. While I doubt I’ll change your position on abortion, I do believe you’d have a better understanding of where I am coming from.
I just want to say that I think this has been a great discussion. No one has gone off the deep end with personal insults or irrational hyperbole.
Thank you to everyone.
@Elena I don’t think there is a rigid “cutoff” for Birthright services, which are completely free of charge. I would imagine that once a woman is on her feet she is able to move forward with her life, and that is the goal.
We all have had to make difficult choices in our lives. I did when I was 19 and I don’t regret it, not one bit. The journey of my life, to this moment, this instant, is exactly where I was suppose to be. I have two beautiful children a wonderful husband and have made meaninful differences in my community, whether in saving green space or stopping hatred from growing. G-d meant for me to be here, in this place, at this time, I fully believe that in my heart.
Oh, and Sanger’s views on eugenics and minorities are very well documented. We can go down that road if you wish, or we can agree that her motives were questionable, and thus a reasonable objection to planned parenthoods receiving public funds, for the purpose of terminating pregancies.
While the argument can be made that the Roe decision established a right for women to terminate a pregnancy, it did not establish a right for the procedure to be subsidized by taxpayers. The equality the constitution provides for is “equality under the law”. It’s not “economic equality” “medical equality” or “reproductive equality”. Yes, I am sure poor people experience “unwanted pregnancies” all the time. They have the same rights that I do. They have a right not to have unprotected sex. The women have the same right to say “no” as any other woman. They have the same access to contraception that I do. They can make the decision to look at the calendar and say “I’m ovulating. We aren’t going to take the chance, even with that 50-cent condom.” Yes, abstinance-only education has no fail-safe. I agree. Abstinance and Contraception need to be taught together. Yes, there are socio-economic forces at play here, as well as cultural issues to deal with, such as the messages being sent in pop-culture. But my faith tells me you won’t solve society’s ills by killing the innocent. 50 million since Roe. 60 percent of African American pregnancies terminated. To me, that’s 50 million souls. Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and Hitler didn’t kill that many combined (no, I am not comparing women who seek a legal procedure to megalomaniac genocidal murdererd) I am just saying we should be equally shocked and appalled by this. There very well may be individual exceptions (rape, incest, severe defect, atropic pregnancies, multiple fertilization) that we can and should consider as rationale justifications, but these are the “rare” part of “safe, legal, & rare” phrase we hear bandied about, IMHO.
Elena,
I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that what you did for that woman was exactly how I think we should approach this, and this is what Paul spoke of in Ephesians. I am trying to approach every day with a servant’s heart, and your actions epitomize this. “For if you do these things to the least of us, you do them to me”.
Hopefully I will get to see you on Sunday, both kids are dealing with the flu, but if not, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this very emotinal subject.
And one last thought before I retire to a good movie, and a glass of grape:
I don’t condem any woman who has made this choice. I am in no position to judge anyone’s sins except my own, and I understand that all sin is equal in His eyes. Therefore, I have fallen just as short of His glory as anyone else. For those who have made this decision, I pray for them to receive mercy, just as I ask for mercy to be shown to me. For all of us on either side of the debate, I believe we imperfect people, are all part of a perfect plan.
@Steve, I think most people are either fetus focused or woman focused. I am woman focused. Let’s start with Sanger. In a society where it was commonplace for women to be pregnant most of their reproductive lives, I believe she and many other women did a great thing teaching women how to prevent becoming pregnant.
I can go back through my own family and look at the number of children per family. My grandfather came from a family of 9 siblings. His father from about the same size. My grandparents and their siblings didn’t have litters. Somewhere in the early part of the 20th century, people learned to prevent pregnancy. The grave yards changed also. Grave stones from the 18th and 19th century were often of young women of child bearing age. that stopped in the 20th century, or perhaps I should say became a less common occurrence.
Margaret Sanger had some interesting ideas. She was part of the early 20th century progressive thinkers. She wasn’t alone in her thinking. I tend to judge others in their place and time. She was arrested for publishing contraceptive information. She dedicated herself to controlling pregnancy after being summoned to treat an unconscious immigrant woman with her stepping stone children surrounding her screaming and crying. A self induced abortion was the culprit.
Sadly, wives haven’t always had the power or the ability to say no. Only recently. has spousal rape even been recognized. So our choices that you described really didn’t come in to play until fairly recently.
This is the Margaret Sanger I hold in high esteem. I hope you will take the time to read it.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jsanger.htm
@Elena
Two agencies that have not come up are the Area Agency on Aging and the Department of Social Services both of which may well have been able to help this woman. I am surprised the person at the desk didn’t mention either one of them.
Moon,
I too have a mother who was 1 of 10. Every one of them considered a blessing by my Grandparents. Yes, many headstones bore the names of mothers who perished in childbirth, but many more bore the names of children who died of illness. That is one reason why parents chose to have larger families in the 18th & 19th centuries. So now we should dispense with “natural selection” and just go to. “Euthenasia”. Afterall, they are poor and unwanted. It’s not fair to bring them into such a terribly unjust world?
I will also concede that historically, women did not have the right to say “no”, as far as the law and society were concerned. But considering that today women, regardless of their age and marital status do have the right (and the law to sustain this), foregive me, but I believe your point moot.
In as much as there are certain individuals, who inspite of their human flaws, I could not convince you of their virtues, I hope you will respect my views on Sanger. I pray that God had mercy on her soul.
The poiint I am driving at is, contrary to the opinions of some expressed here, not every pro-lifer is a mysogenist, bent on keeping women “barefoot and pregnant”, no more so than every pro-choicer is party to genocide. You make very rationale arguments as to why you are pro-choice, much of it based on personal experience. Why do you so readily reject the arguments of the pro-lifers, whose positions may be based on experiences as well?
In an earlier thread, one commentor basically said “you lack a uterus, and therefore lack standing”. I have read comments threatening to hang Delegate Miller and Senator Colgan up by their feet, for voting their convictions. I get it. You are pro-choice, and you believe this based on solid reasoning. Does that automatically make the reasoning of the pro-lifer suspect?
Back in the 90s I had a friend who was a single mom. She was pregnant. After she had her baby I remember our church went to a “pro-life” rally downtown. They probably went right by her apartment complex on their way down there. No one ever visited her except a couple of us who were her friends. I was angry at them. They cared so much about the unborn, but didn’t give a [gratuitous profanity deleted by moderator] one who was just born.
But I realize now that it’s easy to be anti-abortion. In fact, it’s easy to hold a political or religious view. It’s hard to care about someone.
[I didn’t delete any part of this comment…MH]
El Guapo,
When it’s about condemnation, perhaps that’s easy. Dismissing someone because they are liberal or conservative, a person of faith or secular is easy. Loving your neighbor and praying for your enemy is not easy. Trying to understand where the other side is coming from is not easy. Trying to maintain a civil, respectful debate about a subject frought with emotion isn’t easy.
Thanks for the info George! Two kids dealing with flu for the last week I have been distracted. But my goal, hoping by next week all are recovered, is to call the doctors office and discuss what I heard in hopes of helping, ensuring that there are available resources is critical!
“I think most people are either fetus focused or woman focused.”
I think it’s possible to be both. Trust me, it’s not an easy place to be.
@Emma, I don’t know if it is possible or not. It seems to me that one would always be trying to trump the other if we got in to an either/or situation.
If I were anti choice, I would not have exceptions other than life of the mother. I wouldn’t make exceptions for rape or incest because I would be fetus focused. The fetus had nothing to do with its existence. However, I am not willing to ever tell any woman or girl that she must bear the child of a rapist or family member.
So, I am pro choice. I do understand why people don’t want to pay for someone else’s abortion as a conscience thing. The Hyde Amendment takes care of that. That’s a concession because most of us don’t get line item vetos when it comes to how our tax money is spent.
I actually think if everyone takes care of themselves…does what their own conscience dictates and stays out of everyone else’s business unless asked to enter, most people would find their comfort zone. I heard on TV last night, again, that all the Tea Party wants in less government intrusion into their personal lives. WEll, it doesn’t get more personal than this. Yet this wave of anti choice, anti contraception legislation seems to have swept over us since the Tea Party came to office. I think maybe someone is speaking with forked tongue on that one. When I start matching up names and the TP test, it looks like I am on to something.
Dear Steve,
I respect your strong conviction about life begins at conception, I disagree, frozen zygotes intended for invitro simply to not inhabit the same moral responsibility as a viable living baby or grown human being to me, but we can respectfullly disagree and I think that is really important.
I know you have the best intentions in trying to explain your strong beliefs, but I have been bothered by an analogy you made, albeit one you tried to somewhat negate after you wrote it.
“50 million since Roe. 60 percent of African American pregnancies terminated. To me, that’s 50 million souls. Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and Hitler didn’t kill that many combined (no, I am not comparing women who seek a legal procedure to megalomaniac genocidal murdererd) I am just saying we should be equally shocked and appalled by this.”
I cannot express how much I viserally disagree with the premise that one should be equally shocked by the torture and murder perpectrated by the likes of Hitler to abortion. Throwing toddlers up in the air and then having them land on a nazi bayonet is not the same as a woman obtaining an abortion. Having women and children undress so that they can be shot naked into a mass grave they dug themselves is not equal to abortion. Performing “medical” experiments on human beings only so that you can kill them and cut them up to see what “happened” is not the same as abortion. My list goes on and on, the horror of the Holocaust is only two cousins removed from myself.
@Steve Thomas
“Euthenasia”, “sin”, genocide – these just sound like bombs thrown to stifle discussion. It might work for stirring up fear for political candidates but does little to further discussion.
Again, most people avoid discussing politics and religion because those topics are personal and most people have made up their minds about the subjects. We who blog just happen to be political junkies or concerned citizens and therefore violate at least the “politics” part. I’ve no intention of getting into any religious argument because I hold no religious beliefs and have no desire to be converted to any.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/opinion/26blow.html?_r=1&hp
Hopefully more voters will soon realize the GOP hypocrisy on this issue.
Protect the unborn AND born.
“I cannot express how much I viserally disagree with the premise that one should be equally shocked by the torture and murder perpectrated by the likes of Hitler to abortion.”
Elena,
It was not my intention to make a moral comparison between the woman and the dictator. Let me be clear: I don’t view the actions of the woman as evil, as the actions of the dictator are beyond evil. I was making a comparison of scale. 50 million is quite a number. 50 million lives. Who knows what those 50 million Americans could have accomplished, or the children these souls might have had.
Sorry if the analogy bothered you. No malice was intended.