Blog for choice day, 2009

Interesting. If the woman decides she does not want the child, her partner has no say whatsoever in the matter of which you speak.

It's a shame how people can be so passive when it comes to a human life. According to this blog..."it should really be something that is decided by the woman, her partner, and her doctor." Makes me wonder, shouldn't God come into play here somewhere? As a matter of fact, he should take priority, but that is what this world has come to. He's probably looking down with a lot of disappointment.

He's gotten off to a horrible start so far. We will have a Treasury Secretary who has had major problems paying his taxes and he'll be running the IRS. Something terribly wrong with that picture. He is planning to close down the terrorist prison in Cuba. Where will they go?...Will they be released after being returned to their home countries?...Will they begin to plan other attacks on the U.S.? Who knows? He is going to give terrorists more rights as far as how they are treated when arrested. Should they be treated like regular citizens? I think not. They're out to destroy our country and our way of life. And now this abortion reversal. We're getting change alright and it's starting to look very bad for the safety, security, and values of this country.

I personally am pro choice even though I am against late term abortions. I do not know if I would be able to have an abortion because I have never been put in the situation where I needed one. Abortion is a choice by the mother because it is the mother who must endure the pain and the responsibility of the child, in most cases. Maybe if more fathers would step up to the plate and be real fathers instead of a picture in a scrapbook, the abortion rate would drop.

I am so undecided on this matter. I am against late term abortions, anything after 24 weeks.

When does life begin? At conception? So...twins. Twins do not develop until several days, even a week after conception. Do they share one soul until then, or are there two...? What about chimeras? People who have absorbed a twin that may have never been detected. (They actually have two sets of DNA. Everyone carries mitochondrial DNA, which is their mother's DNA.) Do they have two souls? What about conjoined twins? Especially conjoined twins who cannot survive if they are separated. Too many unknowns for me to make a definitive decision. I do know that woman have had abortions long before men decided they should be outlawed.

I use to be somewhat pro-choice but then after thinking about it for a few years; I decided that an abortion is no different than a mother throwing a child in the lake to drown and any other method of killing. I do however believe that abortion is ok in the case that having a baby would risk the mother's life or rape/incest (even though I would rather see adoptions in that scenario but I can understand a woman not wanting to deal with a nine month reminder of what happened and the mental trauma from it).

That is just my opinion and belief . . . if someone believes otherwise then that is their prerogative. Many times though abortions are chosen as a matter of convenience which is sad and pathetic. It just comes down to personal responsibility.

memyselfi - you're right in that this is not in character with my normal blog posts, however, abortion rights is something that I believe in. I guess my small part in activism for the cause in on blog for choice day. There aren't very many causes that I am vocal about (maybe 3 or 4 that I can think of offhand), which is probably why I never really write about them.

quantumcat - you said "I'm "pro-choice" because I hate the idea that a government entity that could forbid reproductive choice re abortion and contraception could mandate sterilization or infanticide with equal ease."

and

"before we insist that a woman bear a child for nine months,we'd better prove to her that we and she can commit to that new being from the moment it makes its presence known until it can survive without our counsel and protection."

I'd have to say that I agree.

quantumcat said "Let a woman have compassionate and professional health care,a way of supporting herself and her children,back-up from her kith,kin and community and a world that cares for and respects children (even they when they are conceived under less than ideal circumstances) and,maybe,there will be fewer people who jettison their children-before or after they are born."

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I sometimes wonder if people who have those "pro-life" plates really are "pro-life". Are they or for that matter am I "pro-life" in the daily choices I make as to whether or not I will share what I have with those who are less fortunate? Am I involved in electing representatives in our government who will put human need first and corporate greed second? Am I willing to maybe pay a little extra taxes or do with a little less so that EVERYONE will be able to at least have their basic human needs met when they are unable to meet them themselves. Do I want to continue to have more than enough for myself and let things fall as they may for my fellow human beings? Do I give thought to my fellow citizens in this country who die daily because they aren't able to get healthcare..in some cases even when they have insurance? It is very easy to say "pro-life" but not so easy when you really think about the responsiblity we must live up to to be able to truly be "pro-life".

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I sometimes wonder if people who have those "pro-life" plates really are "pro-life". Are they or for that matter am I "pro-life" in the daily choices I make as to whether or not I will share what I have with those who are less fortunate? Am I involved in electing representatives in our government who will put human need first and corporate greed second? Am I willing to maybe pay a little extra taxes or do with a little less so that EVERYONE will be able to at least have their basic human needs met when they are unable to meet them themselves. Do I want to continue to have more than enough for myself and let things fall as they may for my fellow human beings? Do I give thought to my fellow citizens in this country who die daily because they aren't able to get healthcare..in some cases even when they have insurance? It is very easy to say "pro-life" but not so easy when you really think about the responsiblity we must live up to to be able to truly be "pro-life".

-- Posted by hemmaw on Fri, Jan 23, 2009, at 9:07 PM

AMEN!

greasemonkey

and? your comment disgusts me and it disturbs me to no end that there are people who think they can tell others what to do in their lives with their body, like they know what is best for them!!

If you do not want to have an abortion then don't have one, if you don't want to marry a gay then by all means don't marry one but don't be so pretentious to believe that you can dictate what others do. Just because it is wrong for you does not make it wrong for everyone.

I am sure with you being a Pro Lifer you think those murderers should set in prison their entire lives instead of receiving the death penalty. Or does your Pro Life attitude only pertain to a unborn fetus.

I would not consider an abortion, but I would also not consider bombing an abortion clinic to get my point across. I would not harass those who go to clinics. Many of them are in fragile emotional states and need support-not condemnation.

I would counsel (and have) to go ahead and have the baby and put him/her up for adoption. I am not a health-care or social worker but after losing 3 I have been on the side of wondering if I would ever be able to carry a baby full-term.

There are many more couples who are unable to have babies who are on waiting lists to adopt. Is nine months of a "healthy" pregnancy too much to sacrifice to save a child and to provide a child-less couple with that joy? It is different if the mother's health is at risk.

I agree that those who speak so fervently of being pro-life should be volunteering at orphanages, etc. to support their pro-life choice and should be giving more to the churches if they think that it is their job to care for the homeless. It breaks my heart to see these little ones lonely, hungry, and/or abused--even killed traumatically. At least with an abortion, they don't have to live that life of pain.

I can see, especially in these economic times, how some people would be devastated to know that they are expecting and don't know how they are even going to get to a hospital when ours won't let them in. Where were the pro-lifers when that decision was made?

I think if the government takes all funding away and allows abortions to be illegal then they are taking away our freedom of making our own choices. I also think if they do that many many people will still get an abortion in very unsafe environments. People have had abortions in many unsafe places for many generations. I think they should still have good clean environment to go to have an abortion but they also must talk with a therapist about the deep down issue as to why the would choose that route.

Yes DoubleJ I have heard of adoption I have also heard of Foster care because there are already more children waiting to be adopted than there are people wanting them.

I guess it is all in according what one believes happens after death. I personally believe in reincarnation. I would much rather have the chance at being born again into a family that wanted me instead of being born into a family who gave me away to live with people who saw me only as a government check.

I assume you believe once you are dead...you are just dead and I understand that theory.

Here is the difference in what we believe, I believe it is actually giving the child a second chance at a happy life, you see it as murder.

Maybe it would be a good idea to step back and possibly ask someone who has lived in foster care their entire young lives..which option they would have chosen if they could have..

And BTW before you even ask, I am a firm believer of the Right to Die also.

Please do not twist my words devan.

You know as well as I the Laws of the Land says it is murder to kill another living breathing human being. Just ask Doctor Kevorkian.

I simply believe we all have the right to die with dignity. Dr Kevorkian believed this also.

He assisted people end their own life, people who were dying with no hope of recovery, not random people he thought had miserable lives. The Right to Die is probably one of the most truly unselfish acts any member of a family can give their loved ones. I know I truly would not want my family to have to endure years of watching me slowly die. That is not what I want or how I would like to be remembered and it should be my choice to die with dignity.

Devan

Everything about Life and Death is like playing the lottery..from children being born with horrible diseases to teenagers dying with cancer to middle age men and woman dying from heart attacks or strokes. The lottery even comes to play before birth in the natural sense in the form of miscarriages. It's all about the numbers you draw.

But how many women were even sentenced to prison for having an abortion? You are correct though abortion use to be against the law. When they bring back the law to make abortion illegal maybe they will bring back the witch hunts also and burn those at the stake who dare speak their minds or maybe they will bring back stoning anyone who commits adultery (maybe I should invest in a rock quarry just in case this happens, that would sure to be a booming business)

You may be right about the numbers you draw, but since Roe v Wade the odds sure got worse for the unborn Posted by devan on Sat, Jan 24, 2009, at 8:28 PM

No Devan abortions just got safer they do not have to be performed in dirty backrooms now. Women can actually have a doctor perform an abortion. There have been abortions since the beginning of time. They just wasn't in the public eye, so you didn't see what was happening. Typical American attitude: If I don't see it : It doesn't happen.

even if fewer women suffered harm, more babies died. I don't see any way to make death safer.

-- Posted by devan on Sun, Jan 25, 2009, at 1:28 PM

Devan,

If you will look at how the pro-abortion crowd talks you will see how they justify things. For one they say pro-"choice" not pro-"baby murder" so it sounds better. Then instead of calling it a baby, they call it a fetus, and apparently a fetus is not alive (according to them)so it is ok to kill it in a most horrible manner.

Very well said, greasemonkey. This is the same retort that comes from the mouths and apparently the fingers of the pro-choice crowd when they are confronted by an informed opponent. I am a male and can only speak from a male standpoint. I feel it very unfair that as a man, I have no legal recourse if my wife, or girl friend if I were not married, chose to have an abortion. It seems that the life is (oh' I forgot it's not a life yet) created by two people, be it an accident or not. The two have created another and it should be a consensus between the two as to what should be done. Believe it or not there are responsible men out there that would bring a child up by themselves if given the chance. This is the part of the court decision that I don't like, it's only pro choice if you are the female

"Until a fetus is able to live without the mother's support the fetus is not a baby it is just a fetus with the potential of becoming a baby."

by Dinatin

Do pray tell, just when does the moment occur when the fetus stops being a potential baby and becomes an actual baby? And, at that moment is the abortion morally right, even though it is "legal"? Just curious.

Please do not try to be so naive as to say you think a fetus born at 3 months had any chance of living because we both know there is nothing further from the truth. Thus the fetus is not viable at 3 months. This is the 1st trimester this is when abortions should be performed. You can not judge other's morals by yours just because it is wrong for you to do something because of your morals don't mean it is wrong in everyone's mind. We can not base laws on morals. Everyone's morals are different, look around and see for yourself. I am sure you do things other's believe to be immoral, should the laws change to fit their morals or should the laws allow you to chose your own morals?

Dianatn . . . yet we judge the morals of criminals when they kill someone or steal or various other crimes? Should we not judge their actions anymore because their morals say that it is ok to murder someone because they believe it is fine to do?

Abortion is ending a life of a future individual . . . how can anyone say that is not killing someone?

Considering everybody has different morals and different beliefs of what is right or wrong..whose morals do we use as a guideline?

Yours, Mine, Michael Bell's, The Catholics, The Baptist or maybe The Muslim's. I guess that would mean being gay would be against the law if we use some morals, what punishment should there be for being gay or adultery or fornication or a woman walking around without wearing a hijab. What makes your morals any better than anyone else's morals and gives you any right to think you can push your morals on anyone? The answer is simple my friend it is all about choice. No one has ever tried to force you or anyone else to have an abortion ..abortion is between the mother and her God. If she can live with the fact of abortion then you should have no problem with it either. Although I do agree if the father is a part of the mother's life or wants to be a part of the baby's life he should be given some consideration in the decision.

No its not about who's morals. Last I checked murder was pretty much accepted to be immoral. Regardless if your christian,athiest,hindu, or jedi. Abortion is just a legal form of murder, just because its legal don't make it right.

I am kind of iffy on who should pay for abortions and who shouldn't. I see both sides of this..people who are pro-life feel like they are supporting abortions through their taxes. But if we stop government funded abortions the very ones who need them the most will not receive them..those people being the poor, the people who can not afford to raise a child will not be able to afford an abortion. I do not like my tax money going to support drug addicts or acholics or even their rehab but we both know we all support them whether we agree with their behavior or not.

I think that there is a distinct difference between the 3 month old infant and the 3 year old fetus, in that the 3 month old infant, while still dependant on someone, is not necessarily entirely dependant upon a specific person. A mother could easily dispose of her unwanted 3 month old child without killing it. That is simply not the case for a 3 month old fetus. It does not matter how you look at it, until a fetus can be viable without depending upon a specific mother who does not want it, its will to live is secondary. Here is a thought exercise. If I had a disease and could only live by being attached to your body, sharing your sustenance and feeding off of you, you may or may not choose to allow me that life. If you were asked to allow me to feed from you, and you refused, would you be a murderer? Perhaps morally, but when we look to our long history of jurisprudence we see that no, you are clearly not a murderer in that situation. Better yet, I am down on my luck living under the river bridge and you know that I am hungry. If you decide not to feed me and I die, does that imply that you have committed a crime? What about legally forced transplants? Rights, even the right to live, tend to end at the point where another's rights begin, and that must be my moral authority.

I am all for the poor reproducing, provided that is their choice and they are prepared for that responsibility. I am guessing Dianatn was pointing out that for a very poor young lady, getting an abortion would represent a much larger hurdle than for the average middle class lady who had an unplanned pregnancy, and that for the former, the consequences of not having the desired abortion likely carries much more weight, not only for the mother, but also for the child.

I do agree with the pro-life people in one respect. I believe that abortion is wrong. It is not something I would like to pay for through my tax payments, or out of my own pocket. That being said, I am not consulted when bombs being dropped in my name kill children, or for that matter, when the political and economic policies implemented in my behalf starve children either. I mean if murder is immoral in all cases, let's look at all of them. We live in a world full of injustice and every life has value. We could spend the rest of our lives enumerating all the murders committed under our sun. What is the point? I imagine if we look forward to the future, by creating conditions that relegate the concept of abortion to the history books, we would be much better off.

If I had a disease and could only live by being attached to your body, sharing your sustenance and feeding off of you, you may or may not choose to allow me that life. If you were asked to allow me to feed from you, and you refused, would you be a murderer?

-- Posted by memyselfi on Thu, Jan 29, 2009, at 3:36 AM

That is a totally different scenario. For one you are leaving out the fact their was behaviour involved to get pregnant, the stork didnt just drop these babies off. And second what baby gets the chance to ask if they can "feed" from its mother?

dianatn,

I know we dont force anyone to have abortions (not yet anyway), but that seems to be the pro-abortion crowds attitude. That abortion should be used as a tool to combat poverty,I have even read that on this blog.

I have never heard you say anything like that Chantel nor have I heard any of the commenter's say that.

There are many insurance companies that pay for abortions but every policy is different.

There was a choice for bad behaviour. Also that is not my main reason for opposing abortion. The main reason is I can not condone murder of innocent children. It is not about freedom or choice and those who say it is are kidding thenselves, or are just morally bankrupt.

The way yall come across is we would have less poverty if we had more abortions.

-- Posted by greasemonkey on Thu, Jan 29, 2009, at 6:13 PM

I do NOT agree with that at all, and like Dianatn pointed out - none of us are even hinting at that.

Do you honestly think that the only children in foster care come from poor parents? Please get a grip...

How easy it is to twist words to make them sound as you wish... never have any of us suggested that a woman should ever have an abortion unless SHE wanted one.

Where is all this outcry when we KNOW that countries across the world are experiencing mass genocide? Do any of the pro-lifers here donate to such causes to intervene and rescue these children.. Do any of you launch localized campaigns encouraging adoption or foster parenting?... Do any of you counsel at teen pregnancy centers or volunteer at outreach centers for disaffected citizens? Do any any of you DO ANYTHING to help alleviate the situation or do you find it much easier to sit behind your computer screen and gripe about why you think it's wrong. It may very well be "immoral" in your eyes, but to sit around and argue with your fellow pro-choice citizens about why it is presumed wrong, is pathetic. And to think, the same people who do not wish for contraceptives to be available to teenagers, are usually the very same one's who think sex really waits until marriage, and finds themselves scratching their heads wondering, how did my child get pregnant?

Where is all this outcry when we KNOW that countries across the world are experiencing mass genocide?

-- Posted by nascarfanatic on Fri, Jan 30, 2009, at 5:54 PM

The outcry is right under your nose. The mass genocide is abortion. I support a crisis pregnancy center. What do you do?

so I am doing my part to provide a haven for the millions of kids who have no home, family, or shelter, and that you and others can't do a thing for.

-- Posted by nascarfanatic on Fri, Jan 30, 2009, at 10:53 PM

These blogs shouldn't be just about negative things. Tell us more about how you help in this.