Home - List All Discussions

Compassion Deficit Syndrome

A diagnosis for ALL proaborts

by: lukesmom

http://prenatalpartner...ife.....Deficit.htm
"><br ">http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/TouchingOurHearts/CompassionDeficit.htm
<br ">http://.....ife...Deficit.htm
Compassion Deficit Syndrome
Identified as Factor in Death of Millions
By Kathy Ratkiewicz
People who suffer from the disorder known as "compassion deficit syndrome"(CDS), which affects a great many individuals in our society, and has been a decisive factor in the death of millions, tend to have jaded world-views.
Instead of seeing children with Down syndrome as beautiful little people with almond-shaped eyes and winning smiles, they see "things" who "suffer from mental retardation" and are "deformed." Instead of seeing children, they see "choices"; instead of recognizing the humanity of people with disabilities, they tend to see them as "burdens" to be thrown off at all costs.
Unlike other syndromes, those who suffer from CDS are not born with the syndrome fully intact; it develops gradually. There are no generalized physical characteristics, but they do share common mental characteristics: over time their brains apparently malfunction to the extent that they believe that the best way to deal with people with other types of "handicaps" is to kill them. A striking characteristic of the syndrome is that those afflicted by it do not recognize the fact that they are, in fact, more disabled than the people they deem unworthy of life.
The real danger in the syndrome, however, lies in the fact that the brain malfunction serves to trick the CDS sufferer into believing that what he advocates is a desirable course of action; in some cases, the malfunction has progressed to such an extent that the CDS sufferer even believes that what he is advocating is an acceptable, moral, and even desirable solution to the problem of "unwanted" children or individuals.
They do have their creative sides, however. In order to accomplish their goal of ridding the world of 'unwanted' individuals, those afflicted with CDS tend to use words fraught with mystery, words like "fetus" and "termination" when referring to "unborn babies" and "abortion." "Quality of life" also gets a lot of use, and CDS sufferers are extremely gifted in bringing it into discussions, no matter how great a stretch is needed to make it "fit."
They spin great swelling stories about children with disabilities: for example, they tend to lean heavily toward using the words "suffer," "retarded" and "deformity" whenever possible to try to help convince expectant parents that the "loving option" is to "terminate the pregnancy" of a "down syndrome fetus." They also excel in the medical arts, devising tests - not for the purpose of healing individuals, as would be the natural inclination of those not afflicted with CDS - but for the express purpose of eliminating those whom they have decided are not worthy of life.
Another almost universal feature of those afflicted with CDS is that they see themselves as compassionate, sensible and practical in their approach to unborn babies with disabilities. They speak of their "concern" for the child and parents, should the child be born "disabled." They speak of "options" and may say, "We only want what is best for you and your baby." They see themselves as compassionate when they are glad that new methods of detecting "deformities" in utero are found - not so that they can cure the baby - but for the single purpose of giving mothers the "choice" of getting a "safe" abortion.
In reality, their hearts have become so hardened that they are incapable of understanding the joy that can be found in parenting a child with disabilities, as they focus on -and exaggerate- the negative aspects. A further, almost diagnostic characteristic of CDS, is the apparent inability of those afflicted with it to understand the concepts of nurturing, selfless love, and basic respect for life. They do not understand that you can accept and love a child, simply because he IS.
At present, since there is no known physical cure for those afflicted with CDS, the best approach is prevention. There is evidence to suggest that teaching children moral absolutes such as "Thou shalt not kill," and "Do unto others as you would have them to do unto you," are some of the best means at hand to stop the spread of this deadly syndrome. That - and lots of prayer.

reply from: 4given

Great article! How befitting. Not only a child with disabilities, but as demonstrated regularly, any unborn, unwanted child. Look at the exchange yesterday. A woman that moved beyond seeing her child as a product of a traumatic rape, did not abort or place her up for adoption. Rather than ignoring the positive example, her desire to do the right thing by her baby, became an attack on her personally. That is just one of many examples I have witnessed here. Basic morals and as the article states, lots of prayer!

reply from: Teresa18

This is a great article that describes the pro-aborts perfectly. This needs to continue to be bumped.

reply from: AV2BH

thanks for sharing... this is a great read.

reply from: yoda

A perfect description of many proaborts.

reply from: 4given

I have to bump this.. just in case anyone missed it!

reply from: yoda

Right. We don't want any proaborts to miss reading this.

reply from: 4given

Bump for the hate mongers.. suffering from CDS

reply from: Skippy

You know, I think I can live with having compassion for women in difficult situations instead of only having compassion for fetuses.

reply from: yoda

That's not the problem, skippy-poo.
The problem is that you can't have compassion for BOTH at the same time.
Apparently, you just don't have enough "compassion" to go around for two people at the same time...... one at a time is your limit, I guess.

reply from: lukesmom

That is too bad Skippy. I see you as so much more. Why do you limit yourself? There are too many women hurt by abortion, so even if you are only compassionate toward women, how can you discount their emotional and sometimes physical pain?

reply from: 4given

Why not both? I have compassion on the plight of both humans in an unfortunate situation. I can honestly say that I realize women often can see no other option. Unfortunately many of them have not been offered any other solution. There are so many that don't fully understand what an abortion does. Just that it ends an unwanted pregnancy. Women need to be counseled, educated, encouraged and given more options than abortion. I will always fight for those without a voice. Women have overcome many less than favorable situations and still given life to their children.

reply from: jujujellybean

Yah, Skippy. WHY THE HECK IS THIS A BATTLE BETWEEN THE WOMEN AND THE BABIES? Can't we just defend both? Why is it a pick and choose matter? Why does it need to be?

reply from: yoda

Ah, but skippy-poo is afflicted with that old proabort disorder, "compassion deficit syndrome", juju.
So, she's only got enough "compassion" for one person at a time... never two.

reply from: jujujellybean

Yes I suppose so. That so annoying why can't we just love everyone? It's like saying that because I think humans are better than animals I don't love animals. Give me a break. I love them even more knowing they depend on me and love me because I treated them with love!

reply from: GratiaPlena

No, you only care about women going in for abortions.
Not the women who cut themselves because of their previous abortions. Not the women who reject abortion but still need help. Not the women who beg the abortionist to let her go because she changed her mind. Not the women who are being forced/coerced into their abortions.
The list goes on and on. You don't care about women in difficult situations.

reply from: Skippy

That is too bad Skippy. I see you as so much more. Why do you limit yourself? There are too many women hurt by abortion, so even if you are only compassionate toward women, how can you discount their emotional and sometimes physical pain?
I don't discount anyone's pain. I just find it controlling, paternalistic, and condescending to hear people say that women shouldn't be allowed abortions because some of them later regret it.
The vast majority of women who suffer from emotional distress after an abortion fall into one of two categories: Those that were already emotionally distressed before the abortion, and those who didn't really want an abortion. I am sorry that they feel bad about their abortions, but I do not think it is the government's job to try to prevent people from making decisions that turn out to be wrong for them.
The majority of women do NOT regret their abortions. Whatever their reasons for deciding to terminate a pregnancy, they seem to be able to live with the aftermath just fine. So I'm just not willing to tell all those women, who are in a situation where they feel abortion is the best solution to their problem, No, sorry, an embryo is more important than you.
That just wouldn't be compassionate.

reply from: yoda

And yet...... you endorse the violent killing of unborn babies, as if it did not matter to you at all.
What a contradiction, skippy-poo.... can you say "hypocrite"? Can you say "compassion deficit syndrome"?

reply from: yoda

~bump~ for skippy-poo, who doesn't believe in "compassion".

reply from: xnavy

BUMP FOR ANYONE LIKE VEXING

reply from: yoda

Good thing you didn't say "For anyone who LIKES Vexing"......

reply from: sander

I couldn't resist Yoda, good one!
But, what a stunning article. The author points out what I've known for years, this abortion issue has been and will always be a battle of words.
Change the focus (gee, guess we see that here often enough), it's a ploy the proaborts KNEW in advance was the only way to win the right to this abhorent practice.
Their hearts have been hardened, it had to be so...how else could they live with themselves?
The only thing they NEVER counted on was that the battle would still be raging 35 years later. They underestimated the perserverence of the pro life people and didn't properly caculate the advances in sience. Which one day will finally so catch up to them there'll be no "choice" but to reconize the un-born child has the same constitutional rights we all have and they also live under the "Bill of Rights". That little document that says we have the RIGHT TO LIFE!

reply from: yoda

Words are our main weapons, and pictures are our best ones. We have to try to reach hearts and change minds, and take over the legislatures and courts by rising in popular opinion, one heart at a time.

reply from: ProInformed

Great article!
I read an article back in the late 80's or early 90's about something called 'arrested psycho-social-development' (or something like that?). The article/author gave no indication of a direct link to the abortion debate, but IMHO it sure did explain a lot about how so many pro-aborts seem so casual about their killing.
The article explained how normally children go through a stage of development that hels them develop the capacity for nurturing. This stage is around 10 years old and is supposed to last for several years in order for the ability to be compassionate to be fully developed. During this stage children are normally very interested in caring for pets, playing with dolls and stuffed animals, and babysitting. But this stage of child development is disappearing as children are switching their focus to sex/dating at an earlier and earlier age. The article blamed this premature interest in the opposite sex/sex for ending the compassion development stage too soon. And it said that was causing our society to become less compassionate and more violent.
I think it also said something about the longer a person waited to have sex, the more psychologically mature that person would be; there was something about their psychological/social development becoming 'arrested' if they had sex too early. Apparently if a person becomes sexually active too early they don't develop very mature ways of interracting in their relationships.
Anyway, I've noticed some little girls giving up playing with dolls at much earlier ages than they used to. And our society has become more violent - not just more sex-obsessed...

reply from: ProInformed

No, you only care about women going in for abortions.
Not the women who cut themselves because of their previous abortions. Not the women who reject abortion but still need help. Not the women who beg the abortionist to let her go because she changed her mind. Not the women who are being forced/coerced into their abortions.
The list goes on and on. You don't care about women in difficult situations.
Exactly! Pro-aborts routinely reveal they have no compassion for the victims of the abortion industry. IMHO they only pretend concern for women or women's rights... just one of the many things they pretend concern about as an excuse to defend abortion on demand. Their #1 priority is defending abortion - not women. And they don't really care about victims of child abuse, rape, poverty, or any of the other causes they feign concern about either. They just use those victims in order to defend abortion.
They really do seem to be able to care about only one thing - keeping abortion legal so they can have sex minus compassion and committment.
Oh sure they will claim they care about women's rights... until confronted with an example of a woman being denied the patient protection right of informed consent... then they make fun of the woman for believing the lies the abortion clinic 'counselor' told her. They say they care about women's health too... until confronted with a woman killed by so-called 'safe' legal abortion... and they have no problem with the abortion industry covering up those deaths.

reply from: carolemarie

And I think that lack of real concern for women is becoming more and more clear. If they were truly concerned with women they would be supporting responsible behavior, not advocating sleeping around that is damaging to women both psychologicially and physically. They would be advocating protecting children from those who would exploit them and use them. They would be condeming prostitution instead of endorsing it.

reply from: ProInformed

hmmmm...
I found this chart of psycho-social development:
http://psychology.about.com/library/bl_psychosocial_summary.htm
">http://psychology.about.com/li...ial_summary.htm
It doesn't even show the stage when the capacity for compassion gets developed and practiced! No doubt it is a reflection of the newer more selfish attitude that has permeated society. There is a stage much later in life where the individual is finally expected to shift away from total seflishness towards caring for others... um minus any practice or development of that ability... and after getting used to decades of self-absorption. No wonder a lot of people choose to have a mid-life crisis, commit adultery, and dump their spouse and kids instead when they reach that age. After all those years of getting to play adult without actually having to be one, they probably think having a spouse and family that depends on them being mature and committed is some sort of cruel punishment LOL.
I also noticed that the 'young adult' stage has been extended up to 40 years old! LOL BTW, the 'adult-child' stage is totally artificial IMHO. I remember when society and individuals got along just fine without an overlap of childishly delaying adult responsibilities while prematurely endulging in adult priveledges... let alone allowing people to avoid being a responsible adult until they are 40!
Apparently skipping or shortening the stage of development when caretaking and compassion is developed, then indulging in DECADES of 'young adulthood' ('child-adult') results in a lot of people never being able to give up selfishness and childishness to become responsible, compassionate adults.
My guess is all that allowing them to enjoy the benefits of adulthood minus the responsibilities of adulthood... for decades... gets too ingrained.

reply from: ProInformed

Skippy - you are lying.
You are lying when you imply that pro-lifers only have compassion for fetuses. You have seen much evidence here that proves otherwise. Pro-lifers also care about women as well as already born children.
You are also lying when you claim that you have compassion for women in difficult situations. You do not show compassion for women who have been lied to, injured, or killed by the abortion industry. You ONLY have compassion for the women who want/defend abortion. That is not a genuine concern for women - just devotion to abortion.
Just because you can only care about one thing (defending abortion) that does not mean pro-lifers are similarly inflicted with such an extremely limited capacity for compassion.

reply from: yoda

Skippy is a classic example of "Compassion Deficit Syndrome".
Skippy just cannot conceive of having compassion for two people at once... one is her limit.

reply from: ProInformed

Sociopathic tendencies are on the rise in our society.
IMHO this is directly proportional to the shortening or elimination of the stage in child development when compassion is normally practiced and developed (instead of being prematurely replaced with involvement with sex), plus the indulgence in an extended artificial stage called 'adult-child' (during which an expectation of entitlement devoid of responsibility sets in).
Sociopaths think it's OK to tell lies and to pretend they care about other people in order to get what they want.
http://www.hss.caltech.edu/~mcafee/Bin/sb.html

reply from: xnavy

bump and for those that are chrisitian, happy easter and Praise the Lord God for His son Jesus Christ

reply from: faithman

Sounds like some in the "pro-life movement". They pretend to be for the womb child, but actually promote a self serving hidden agenda.

reply from: faithman

I couldn't resist Yoda, good one!
But, what a stunning article. The author points out what I've known for years, this abortion issue has been and will always be a battle of words.
Change the focus (gee, guess we see that here often enough), it's a ploy the proaborts KNEW in advance was the only way to win the right to this abhorent practice.
Their hearts have been hardened, it had to be so...how else could they live with themselves?
The only thing they NEVER counted on was that the battle would still be raging 35 years later. They underestimated the perserverence of the pro life people and didn't properly caculate the advances in sience. Which one day will finally so catch up to them there'll be no "choice" but to reconize the un-born child has the same constitutional rights we all have and they also live under the "Bill of Rights". That little document that says we have the RIGHT TO LIFE!
The sad fact is they have that one covered as well. Look up FOCA on the net. It is also a fact that as we speak the secular humanist socialist are working to do away with our constitutional republic. Part of the free trade treaties [NAFTA, FTAA] is a plan to make us one big super state of the western hemis sphere. Part of these treaties is the tribunal of the western hemisphere. An unelected, secret panel, that will be the final say in all legal matters. Even if the supreme court should over turn roe, this super court could over rule it. And I guarantee they are sold out pro-abort.

reply from: jujujellybean

And still, isn't it funny how they continue to persist they do it for the good of the woman? When people use that argument, I usually go into hysterics.

reply from: sander

Yet, the proaborts say there's no such thing as genocide in relation to abortion.
And try to deny that this is the outcome Planned Parenthood has supported all along.
It's a symptom of people who can't look past their own needs and wants. It's lazy and selfish to the hilt.

reply from: Smurfy

Sounds like utter rubbish to me.
I'm pro-choice and I see nothing wrong with (for example) Down's symdrome children. If parents wish to raise a Down's person, that's their perogative. Why would I want to run into their home and kill their child that they love, simply because it has a genetic abnormality?
That's just preposterous.
Unfortunately, the parents of many Down's people cannot handle the constant care and attention required of them, so they foist the child off to an institution that caters to such conditions.
If I'm so lacking in compassion, why have I worked with such children myself, without killing them all? Why do I donate to two charities designed to look out for children in terrible situations - children who, even with my assistance, may never be anything more than a rice farmer?
Clearly, the article is the niave theory of someone who has not actually interviewed and colated data from real pro-choice people. It's based on hearsay, prejudice and hate.
Which is ironic, since it's about 'lack of compassion'.

reply from: sander

Clearly, smurf didn't like seeing herself in the article.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, how could we be so "cruel" as to post a true description of a proabort poster like that?

reply from: rsg007

How is it a "true" description? What are the author's qualifications? Does she know the intimate thoughts of every person who is pro-choice?
It is really a very damaging essay. It masquerades as a medical article, but I'm betting the author is not a doctor. She makes claims that sound scientific, but offers no shred of actual evidence.
She insults people who are pro-choice. She does nothing to actually advance the pro-life cause or maintain a healthy and civil debate about the issues.
If you want to be taken seriously as pro-lifers, you should condemn bigotry and hatred such as this.

reply from: yoda

Nah.... I meant the one particular proabort that was mentioned.
"Bigotry"? You think proaborts deserve the same protection as the minority races? That's almost funny.....

reply from: lukesmom

How is it a "true" description? What are the author's qualifications? Does she know the intimate thoughts of every person who is pro-choice?
It is really a very damaging essay. It masquerades as a medical article, but I'm betting the author is not a doctor. She makes claims that sound scientific, but offers no shred of actual evidence.
She insults people who are pro-choice. She does nothing to actually advance the pro-life cause or maintain a healthy and civil debate about the issues.
If you want to be taken seriously as pro-lifers, you should condemn bigotry and hatred such as this.
The auther of this is not a doctor but she is even more of an expert; she is the mother of a child with Down Syndrome. She is not giving "scientific" facts but instead the facts of her child's life. She has endured the comments of ignorant who cannot understand having a disabled child. I have also been called many names and accused of causing my child pain, being a drain on society, causing insurance rates to go up and abusing insurance and medical facilities all because I allowed my child to live before he died natually. If you looked at the link you will see this was written by a mother and posted on a site for parents who carried to term dispite being pushed to do otherwise eventhough you proaborts suppably "celebrate" choice. Riiiiggght. This mother was not promoting the prolife cause but instead promoting her childs right to live without all the negative connitations from everyone who doesn't agree.
Sorry you feel so insulted, maybe look in the mirror. Nothing is more insulting than saying or insinuating a "type" of person is not deserving of life because they are different.

reply from: Smurfy

Saying or insinuating that people want to see Down's children murdered, simply because they are pro-choice, comes pretty close.

reply from: lukesmom

Saying or insinuating that people want to see Down's children murdered, simply because they are pro-choice, comes pretty close.
Quite obviously you have never walked in the shoes of having a child with a disability or a deformity when you ask make a statement like that. Look at the rates of abortion with the prenatal diagnosis of Down Syndrome as well as many other diagnosises.

reply from: Smurfy

I helped look after such children after their parents decided they couldn't handle them anymore.
So STFU about what you know nothing about.
Besides, if I said that you advocate women having the right to vote taken off them, because you are pro-life, wouldn't you be offended?
Stop playing stupid semantics games and wake up.

reply from: lukesmom

I helped look after such children after their parents decided they couldn't handle them anymore.
So STFU about what you know nothing about.
Besides, if I said that you advocate women having the right to vote taken off them, because you are pro-life, wouldn't you be offended?
Stop playing stupid semantics games and wake up.
1-helping look after "such children" is NOT the same as being a parent (or the person) who is told their child is not worth living by sactioning abortion for others like their children.
2-STFU means what?
3-I am not "playing" a game. I am trying to "wake up" the ignorant regarding the right of EVERYONE to live the life they were given. Time for you proaborts to "wake up" your moral conscience which is what the mom who wrote the above was also trying to do.

reply from: 4given

Pro-lifer's don't abort their children- Down's or other. It is only those that refer to murder as "choice" who do.

reply from: 4given

I helped look after such children after their parents decided they couldn't handle them anymore.
So you have authority to speak on behalf of the mother's that did not abort their special needs babes or have someone "look after" it? How exactly did you look after children that were disabled or otherwise? What were there disabilities if any?
Again, you will not disrespect another woman that clearly knows far more than you ever could about disability, despair and dignity. In life and in work! Do not disrespect another mother here. Have you walked in the shoes of a mother who is pregnant with a disabled or deformed child?.........
Here are the comments you made in another thread in regards to Down's children..
So again, are you saying that Trans people or yourself are above those with Down Syndrome or other genetic differences? You didn't answer that question.

reply from: lukesmom

People with disabilities are no longer "institutionalized" in the US. In fact there was a huge trend to close institutions for the mentally disabled in the late '80's and '90's. There is actually a great demand to adopt babies with Down Syndrome. In fact there are more parents wanting to specifically adopt these babies than there are babies thanks to abortion.

Well aren't you special and quite deserving of a pat on the back if you do say so yourself.
What is wrong with being a rice farmer? Sounds like a far more productive and morally acceptable occupation than working in or supporting an abortion clinic. Maybe you would like to abort all future rice farmers along with all the other groups proaborts hate to see living.
This mom doesn't have to interview anybody or collect colated data as she has experienced the REAL prochoice movement in being pushed to destroy her child before he/she was born. LOL, the words "compassion", "unborn" and "proabort" just don't jive honey. Talk about ironic!

reply from: lukesmom

Don't forget the rice farmers!

reply from: 4given

Compassion unborn: proabort:
Nope- Doesn't work here either..

reply from: Teresa18

You support the CHOICE of parents to kill their child with Down's Syndrome during the the first nine months of his/her life in the womb simply because he/she is handicapped.
There are couples in the United States waiting to adopt who will adopt a child with Down's Syndrome. Just because the biological parents can not handle the care, does not mean the child does not have the right to life.

reply from: Teresa18

I've read estimates that as many as 90% of children diagnosed with Down's Syndrome are aborted. When you support abortion on demand, you support abortion for whatever reason the woman/couple decides.

reply from: Smurfy

I do indeed support all choices.
However, the article states that I think Down's kids shouldn't be allowed to live, simply because I'm pro-choice.
As I have stated, quite clearly, I have no problem with Down's kids existing - and I am pro-choice - therefore it is wrong on at least one count (and doubtless many more counts).
No matter how much you try and paint me as a hater of Down's people, I am not.
Feel free to keep trying though; despite the fact you can't actually make me hate them, no matter what you say.
There are more than enough of them out there for adoption.
How does the biological parents being unable to cope and putting the child in an institution equate to not giving the child a right to life?
You're not making sense.

reply from: JosieCashew

I read a bunch of stories about parents who had a child with Down syndrome aborted, and most, if not all, of the reasons given for why they chose to abort the the child had to do with the child's potential physical and medical problems. Now, it is true that people with Down syndrome often do have such problems, I'm wondering if they were just afraid to say that the main reason for the abortion was simply that they did not want a mentally disabled child...

reply from: Smurfy

Sorry, what does this have to do with me supposedly wanting to kill every Down's kid, simply because I am pro-choice?
Focus. Get back with the program.
Sorry, but I don't think she does know more. We looked after all sorts of young adults with conditions ranging from mild schizophrenia to Prader-Willi syndrome (which was particularly grueling, when you walk in to find that the kid is eating a dead mouse out of a mouse trap).
But anyway, what does this have to do with me supposedly wanting to kill Down's kids, smply because I'm pro-choice?
The comments were a result of YOU saying that trans people are lesser human beings, lesser than Down's people.
This is because you are an intollerant religious bigot - who also takes things out of completely out of context to formulate a strawman built of lies.
Again, what does this have to do with me supposedly wanting to kill Down's kids, smply because I'm pro-choice?
Nope, YOU stated that trans people shouldn't be allowed to breed, like Down's people. YOU equated the two groups and brought up the breeding issue.
I pointed out that it was unfair to make such a statement about trans people not being allowed to breed, based on their condition.
Unlike you, I think we're all equal.
You, however, seem to think trans people are somehow subhuman - and equate them with Down's people, which suggest you also think they are subhuman.
But...
...what does this have to do with me supposedly wanting to kill Down's kids, smply because I'm pro-choice?

reply from: Teresa18

Institution? Do you know there are waiting lists to adopt children with Down's Syndrome?
http://www.showmenews.com/2006/Feb/20060205News025.asp

http://encyclopedia.adoption.com/entry/Down-syndrome/117/1.html

http://www.dsagc.com/adoption.asp

reply from: Smurfy

There are plenty out there.
What are they waiting for?
I do wonder though, why do they specifically want a Down's child? It smacks of some really odd ulterior motive. You did say 'specifically'. Why wouldn't they want to take on any other kind of disabled child? Why Downs?
Very suspicious.
Precisely, that was my point.
If I had 'compassion deficit disorder' I'd say "Well, I'm not giving my money to them, since he'll never be anything but a rice farmer."
Understand?
Probably not.
Really? Do you have any actual evidence of this happening?
Or is this more hearsay that you expect to wash, like Tiller throwing a fetus on the street?

reply from: Smurfy

Why do they specifically want children with Down's?

reply from: Teresa18

The first link has some reasons why people want those children.

reply from: Smurfy

The first link has some reasons why people want those children.
What does this have to do with me wanting to (apparently) kill Down's children?
Do you have any proof that -I- want to exterminate them?

reply from: lukesmom

Boy are the names for your stupidity running through my mind you stupid *****. I lived this! The difference is my son did not have Down's and I wish with all my heart he would have. 5 years ago Iwas being told to terminate my unborn "deformed" son. I don't need evidence as I lived it and talk almost daily with other moms who have lived this. The link to our story is in my signature line, take a look if you don't believe me. Read the stories, but I bet you won't. http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/
I have worked with children and adults of ALL developmental disabilities in an institution here in WI for 11 years. I have seen and worked with and loved the "worst of the worst". None of that even compares with being a parent and being told to kill your child becuase of a poor prenatal diagnosis. 99% of people with disabilities were instiutionalized BEFORE the 80's. And I would like to know where you were that was soooo unregulated and staffed with idiots that would have a rat? Have you even looked at the site provided for adoption of children with Down Syndrome. Doubt it as you are too busy patting yourself on the back and spouting assumptions you know nothing about. Parents wanting to adopt these children often have an affected child or sib of their own and have so fallen in love that they want to give a home and save another child from being killed needlessly by it's mother. If you want to read some "wonderful" comments about prochoicers loving the preborn disabled take a look at this thread:http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=606938&boardsparam=Page%3D1
The really nasty stuff from "prochoicers" was removed. You are a classic CDS sufferer and being a "prochoicer" your words not mine as mine would be proabort. You talk the talk, you distroy because of "potential" problems, you make me sick.

reply from: lukesmom

Does she owe NOTHING to the life she has already created? And don't give me that drival about saving her child from "future pain". I also didn't "CHOSE" to continue a life that was already created. There was no choice as you insinuate. Why isn't every unborn child given the same right and respect of life that you were given? I know their reasons for aborting and whether they admit it or not, the biggest reason is simple fear.

reply from: lukesmom

Maybe she doesn't think so.
Maybe she shouldn't have created a life then if she wants to kill it at the first sign of adversity.

So it seemed obvious that you chose not to.
I "chose" not to rip my dog from limb to limb when he is annoying me right now. I don't choose to kill my learning disabled son when frustrated with him doing homework, I don't choose to gun down irritating and irresponsible people that I encounter daily. So I guess I did choose to allow my son to live until his preordained natural death, same as I did in all the examples above. Now if I would actually choose to kill someone or something, as in my pet, I would be arrested and spend my life in prison. Not so if I killed my disabled unborn son. Where is the difference?
My, aren't you lucky and you would deny others the basics your mother gave you. Seems selfish and self serving with a huge dose of CDS.

reply from: lukesmom

Too late. Whether she ctt or aborts, she is going to "watch" her child die. Of course her life and her feelings are of concern to me. Often I am "helping" pick up the pieces. It was also mothers like me that are ensuring moms get to actually hear they can ctt as often they are told they have "no choice but to terminate". It is moms like me that share their stories and change other peoples views and percepltions and help with fears of the unknown. It is moms like me that have established hospice to help moms ctt and make memories. So, yes, all women who go through a poor prenatal diagnosis are my concern.
LOL, how "ridiculous and impossible" was life pre Roe vs Wade? Again-EVERYONE HAS THE GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO CONTINUE THE LIFE THEY WERE GIVEN AT CONCEPTION. Too simplistic for you?

reply from: lukesmom

EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE THE LIFE THEY WERE GIVEN AT CONCEPTION. Reads the same.

reply from: lukesmom

Duh, I can assure you, "stupid" isn't written across my forehead. Of course there were abortions pre Roe, same as there was murder before there was a law against that. But there was not the availability and social exceptance pre Roe. The easy access we have now to abortions creates increased promiscuity and lack of responsibility for one's actions and an "easy" way out of a situation that pre Roe, most woman lived with. The consequences of sex is pregnancy, the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy was marriage, adoption or single motherhood. All which allow continued life to the innocent party, the unborn. Roe vs Wade changed all that and allowed a legal "quick fix". LOL, a quick fix with the side effect of regret, depression, etc that many women live with today.
I don't see how "one size fits all" relates to allowing life to continue in regards to the unborn.

reply from: lukesmom

well first of all, here in the USA, our founding fathers. Take a look at the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. and "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"

reply from: JosieCashew

"Treated as more than a mother?" Don't most women who are raising children have other aspects to their life as well, especially in the last 30-something years?

reply from: lukesmom

More than a mother???? LOL, I think I am going to die laughing! I am a mother and a wife and a daughter and a sister and a friend and a coworker and a neighbor and a nurse and a volunteer and a.... I could go on and on. What century are you living in? Is there anyone alive who is a "mother" only?
And yes, I am well aware you were talking about the woman, here we talk about that other life you proaborts like to discount and forget...the unborn baby. HELLO!

reply from: lukesmom

I am assuming you are a man. I am 50 yrs old, LOL I have seen and lived alot. If you don't want to be a mother that is quite easy without killing an innocent. Do I really have to go over that for you? I'd rather not as I think you are bright enough to figure out how NOT to be a parent without abortion. Women are and always have been more than "just a mother". You just have to dig a little. I think you are short changing women a lot. Is that all you have to give? Don't tell me that today stay at home dads are nothing more than "just" dads? Come on, you can do better than this.

reply from: Smurfy

Boy are the names for your stupidity running through my mind you stupid *****. I lived this! The difference is my son did not have Down's and I wish with all my heart he would have. 5 years ago Iwas being told to terminate my unborn "deformed" son. I don't need evidence as I lived it and talk almost daily with other moms who have lived this. The link to our story is in my signature line, take a look if you don't believe me. Read the stories, but I bet you won't. http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/
I have worked with children and adults of ALL developmental disabilities in an institution here in WI for 11 years. I have seen and worked with and loved the "worst of the worst". None of that even compares with being a parent and being told to kill your child becuase of a poor prenatal diagnosis. 99% of people with disabilities were instiutionalized BEFORE the 80's. And I would like to know where you were that was soooo unregulated and staffed with idiots that would have a rat? Have you even looked at the site provided for adoption of children with Down Syndrome. Doubt it as you are too busy patting yourself on the back and spouting assumptions you know nothing about. Parents wanting to adopt these children often have an affected child or sib of their own and have so fallen in love that they want to give a home and save another child from being killed needlessly by it's mother. If you want to read some "wonderful" comments about prochoicers loving the preborn disabled take a look at this thread:http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=606938&boardsparam=Page%3D1
">http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboa...sparam=Page%3D1
The really nasty stuff from "prochoicers" was removed. You are a classic CDS sufferer and being a "prochoicer" your words not mine as mine would be proabort. You talk the talk, you distroy because of "potential" problems, you make me sick.
What does this have to do with me wanting to (apparently) kill Down's children?
Do you have any proof that -I- want to exterminate them?

reply from: 4given

You are the one who did/does so. Save it. Nobody is buying your "take" on the conversation. You are a liar. Read again.
Again, pro-lifers don't kill Down's children- only proabort "choicers" do.
So again, are you saying that Trans people or yourself are above those with Down Syndrome or other genetic differences? You didn't answer that question.
Once again, I said no such thing. You are incompetent and dishonest. Down Syndrome men and women are sub-human?

reply from: Smurfy

You are the one who did/does so. Save it. Nobody is buying your "take" on the conversation. You are a liar. Read again.
Again, pro-lifers don't kill Down's children- only proabort "choicers" do.
So again, are you saying that Trans people or yourself are above those with Down Syndrome or other genetic differences? You didn't answer that question.
Once again, I said no such thing. You are incompetent and dishonest. Down Syndrome men and women are sub-human?
What does this have to do with me wanting to (apparently) kill Down's children?
Do you have any proof that -I- want to exterminate them?

reply from: 4given

Answer my questions and I will again answer yours.

reply from: faithman

Boy are the names for your stupidity running through my mind you stupid *****. I lived this! The difference is my son did not have Down's and I wish with all my heart he would have. 5 years ago Iwas being told to terminate my unborn "deformed" son. I don't need evidence as I lived it and talk almost daily with other moms who have lived this. The link to our story is in my signature line, take a look if you don't believe me. Read the stories, but I bet you won't. http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/
I have worked with children and adults of ALL developmental disabilities in an institution here in WI for 11 years. I have seen and worked with and loved the "worst of the worst". None of that even compares with being a parent and being told to kill your child becuase of a poor prenatal diagnosis. 99% of people with disabilities were instiutionalized BEFORE the 80's. And I would like to know where you were that was soooo unregulated and staffed with idiots that would have a rat? Have you even looked at the site provided for adoption of children with Down Syndrome. Doubt it as you are too busy patting yourself on the back and spouting assumptions you know nothing about. Parents wanting to adopt these children often have an affected child or sib of their own and have so fallen in love that they want to give a home and save another child from being killed needlessly by it's mother. If you want to read some "wonderful" comments about prochoicers loving the preborn disabled take a look at this thread:http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=606938&boardsparam=Page%3D1
">http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboa...sparam=Page%3D1
The really nasty stuff from "prochoicers" was removed. You are a classic CDS sufferer and being a "prochoicer" your words not mine as mine would be proabort. You talk the talk, you distroy because of "potential" problems, you make me sick.
What does this have to do with me wanting to (apparently) kill Down's children?
Do you have any proof that -I- want to exterminate them?
Would you prefur we use the word consent? When you suport abortion on demand, you consent to over 90% of downs children being aborted. When we advocate abortion on demand, you consent to the racist aggenda of Planned Parenthood. When you suport abortion on demand, you consent to a future gay genocide, if a prenatal test makes a genetic conection. When you are a pro-abort, you must consent, and take posession of all that goes with it. Less than 1% of abortions are preformed for medical reasons, which were legal pre-roe. But over 98% of abortions are purely elective, for any reason. Whether you are an out spoken killer of downs children, your consent makes it posible.

reply from: 4given

Friend-
I appreciate your patience here.. She isn't here to learn the truth. I know she is here to distract others from the bitter and vicious reality that is abortion. I believe she knows full well what she supports, as you do as well.. Pray! Let the womb be a protected place- Let the baby in the womb be recognized as a human being worthy of protection! In Jesus Name.. Let the supporters of this twisted cause be pricked with the reality of their support to destroy innocent lives- Stand up and call upon a generation that will be Your voice. Break the covenant of death! Rise up a culture of life.. In Agreement, In Jesus Name..

reply from: Teresa18

This exact point doesn't. You said:
I showed you there is a waiting list. You then asked me why. I said the first article gave some reasons.
Now, above I did say that you support the choice to abort them to be legalized. That is why 90% of them are killed before they are even born.

reply from: Smurfy

Hello?
How does that prove that I want to go into people's homes and murder their Down's kids.
Have you been following this thread all the way through?
Why would I want to do such a thing?
Can you prove that I would?
What does your post have to do with me wanting to (apparently) kill Down's children?
Do you have any proof that -I- want to exterminate them?

reply from: NewMom

Jouer avec fou = TO PLAY WITH INSANITY/ PLAYING WITH CRAZY.

reply from: yoda

I head a saying once that I think applies here: "Women will not reach equality with men by climbing over the dead bodies of their children".

reply from: lukesmom

You got that right Yoda. Now Mr french man, I know my history and I know about women's rights. I come from a long line of very strong women. No they couldn't always vote but they were NEVER defined by their uterus. Actually being valued for their virginity is an advantage. You very much under value women of history and women of today. I can tell you my female ancesters were NOT second class citizens and my 104 yr old aunt would have been insulted by that insinuation. Somehow you miss what a woman is and the strengths she has.
Now no woman can get pregnant if she doesn't have sex. Abstanance has a 100% success rate.

reply from: Smurfy

Except when they are raped.
Abstinence isn't a 100% success rate.
And interestingly enough, abstinence fails more often than various methods of birth control. Taking a pill is easy. Trying not to screw your boyfriend when you're really horny is ridiculously hard, hence the failure rate of abstinence.

reply from: rsg007

Actually, women being valued for their virginity is a clear example of how women were and are considered second class citizens: If a woman is not a virgin (in some cultures and times), she is considered "unclean," "impure," or a "whore." Funny how the same doesn't apply to the men who want these virgin women. A woman should be able to have sex with whomever she wants, whenever she wants, without fear of being considered unclean. Virgin women being desirable is just another example of how women's rights over their own bodies are manipulated by men.

reply from: rsg007

I head a saying once that I think applies here: "Women will not reach equality with men by climbing over the dead bodies of their children".
No, women will never reach equality with men unless they have the same rights over their bodies as men do. This includes the right to have an abortion if a woman wishes to. There is nothing men don't have a say in about their bodies. Now, you might say women are "blessed" with the ability to carry a child, but you could also say they are cursed in having to deal with the dilemmas that come with pregnancy.

reply from: lukesmom

You very much forget the unborn person's right to their body.

reply from: rsg007

Which actually are to live or not to live--those are the true rights an unborn child. Please see the new topic I posted.

reply from: sk1bianca

you see... this kind of thinking got women to believe that motherhood is a form of oppression.
some time ago, women didn't have to work. the husband did all the work, he had the obligation to provide for his family. that's HIS "curse"... all she had to do was take care of the house and raise the children.
today, a woman would rather go to work 10 hours/day, or even have several jobs, just to prove to herself (or to this twisted society!) that she's "on her own", that she's "free"... a fabricated "equality" with men became more important then the love of a child.
abortion doesn't make women look stronger or braver or "equal" to men... it's humiliating, disgusting, cruel and dangerous.
by the way... if a woman get pregnant and decides to have an abortion and KILL the child she's "emancipated". if a man gets a woman pregnant and leaves her (he "chooses" not to be a father), or if he abandons his child, he's a jerk. pretty "equal", isn't it?

reply from: yoda

Men don't have the right to kill their unborn children, and they should not. No one should have the right to electively kill an innocent human being.
Women have the right to remain childless for their entire lives, without killing anyone.
Equality does not include the right to electively kill innocents.

reply from: rsg007

Men don't have the right to kill their unborn children, and they should not. No one should have the right to electively kill an innocent human being.
Women have the right to remain childless for their entire lives, without killing anyone.
Equality does not include the right to electively kill innocents.
You conveniently ignored my point about men's rights over their bodies versus women's rights over their bodies. Care to address that?

reply from: nancyu

Boy are the names for your stupidity running through my mind you stupid *****. I lived this! The difference is my son did not have Down's and I wish with all my heart he would have. 5 years ago Iwas being told to terminate my unborn "deformed" son. I don't need evidence as I lived it and talk almost daily with other moms who have lived this. The link to our story is in my signature line, take a look if you don't believe me. Read the stories, but I bet you won't. http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/
I have worked with children and adults of ALL developmental disabilities in an institution here in WI for 11 years. I have seen and worked with and loved the "worst of the worst". None of that even compares with being a parent and being told to kill your child becuase of a poor prenatal diagnosis. 99% of people with disabilities were instiutionalized BEFORE the 80's. And I would like to know where you were that was soooo unregulated and staffed with idiots that would have a rat? Have you even looked at the site provided for adoption of children with Down Syndrome. Doubt it as you are too busy patting yourself on the back and spouting assumptions you know nothing about. Parents wanting to adopt these children often have an affected child or sib of their own and have so fallen in love that they want to give a home and save another child from being killed needlessly by it's mother. If you want to read some "wonderful" comments about prochoicers loving the preborn disabled take a look at this thread:http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboa...sparam=Page%3D1
<br ">http://boards.msn.com/...boa.....%3D1
The really nasty stuff from "prochoicers" was removed. You are a classic CDS sufferer and being a "prochoicer" your words not mine as mine would be proabort. You talk the talk, you distroy because of "potential" problems, you make me sick.
What does this have to do with me wanting to (apparently) kill Down's children?
Do you have any proof that -I- want to exterminate them?
You are here. That is the proof.
You are here defending a woman's "right to choose"kill her down's syndrome child, or any other child, for any reason, whatsoever.

reply from: nancyu

Being cursed with having to deal with dilemmas that come with pregnancy? Holy *****. You are one sick, pathetic, selfish puppy.
Women as selfish as you can go to a DR and have her insides removed making it impossible for her to conceive a child. Then you will achieve your precious equality.
But that even isn't enough, you demand the right to choose take away that person's life which is already conceived.
If you happened to be in my home and you saw me attempting to kill my child what would you do? Would you do everything you could to stop me, or would you say, "oh, well, its her home, her choice"?

reply from: yoda

It has no relevance to the elective killing of innocent human beings, and that's all I'm interested in discussing with you. This is an abortion forum, not an "equal rights" forum.

reply from: rsg007

Abortion rights are about equal rights.

reply from: rsg007

Being cursed with having to deal with dilemmas that come with pregnancy? Holy *****. You are one sick, pathetic, selfish puppy.
Women as selfish as you can go to a DR and have her insides removed making it impossible for her to conceive a child. Then you will achieve your precious equality.
But that even isn't enough, you demand the right to choose take away that person's life which is already conceived.
If you happened to be in my home and you saw me attempting to kill my child what would you do? Would you do everything you could to stop me, or would you say, "oh, well, its her home, her choice"?
A woman shouldn't have to remove a part of her own body to become equal with men. She should simply be able to opt out of having a child, like men can.
And if I saw you about to kill your own child in your own home I would try to stop you and/or call the cops. Murder is illegal. Abortion is not.

reply from: Smurfy

So are you.
This is not evidence that i want to run into people's home and (supposedly) want to put a bullet through the skull of their kid with Downs.
Please, if you're going to step into a discussion, read the whole thread first, hmmm?

reply from: ieatbabieswithketchup

You people are hilarious. SAVE THE BABIES!!! OMG THE BABIES NEED TO BE SAVED SO THEY CAN BE BORN TO COCAINE ADDICTED MOTHERS!!!!

reply from: Smurfy

How does this give proof that I want to go into people's homes and murder their Down's children.
Can ANYONE give me proof of me wanting to do this?

reply from: 4given

Aborted lives fed to the slaughtering hands.. To whom? Selfishness? Sobriety?
I grieve with my heart and soul- There is no justification.. What happens to these addicted children? Would their lives be better sucked and spat into a canister or incinerated? What is best for the addicted babes? The product of a parent addicted? Are abortive mothers typically cocaine addicted? What is your experience with abortion?

reply from: 4given

How is the ability to electively kill one's child as a woman equal to the law/ act in regard to a man?

reply from: rsg007

A man is legally able to have complete control over what happens to his own body. A woman should be able to have this too. It is not about "killing one's child," but about having full bodily autonomy. Nobody who has been born has the right to infringe on anyone's bodily autonomy. Those who have not been born should not have that right either, and thanks to the law, they don't.

reply from: 4given

So your argument is about the legality of abortion? Have you had an abortion? What is your experience with abortion, personally or otherwise?

reply from: Teresa18

Are you addicted to cocaine?

reply from: Smurfy

It's quite simple.
Anti-choicers want the unborn to have the same rights as born people.
Yet born people don't have the right to inhabit another born person's body.
Clearly, the unborn are VERY different to the born and should be treated accordingly - i.e. they should not have the rights of a born person, because they HAVE NOT BEEN BORN.

reply from: yoda

And yet, killing is exactly the "solution" you propose.
And yet, that is exactly what you wish for women to be able to do to their unborn babies.
How ironic.

reply from: JasonFontaine

The EGG is not dead.
That's the story here.
It has no head.
No legs.
No mouth to be fed.
SCIENCE proves
This egg will shed....
And, those that don't
Those that won't
Have special meaning...
Just think about the egg...Pro-Aborts say this is just a clump of cells...
This is the fascinating aspect to the argument...the EGG..the EGG...is NOT dead!
http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=1f9bfdc1dcb45a30c73b
The video is not so important - it's the imagery of the egg......and YOU all should support this...
http://web.mac.com/jasonfontaine

reply from: lukesmom

My second child was born at 9:10 AM so by what you are saying is that at 9:09 AM she was "different" than she was at birth and therefore could have been killed by abortion and that would have been ok?
Not very logical even in my nonlogical brain.

reply from: faithman

My second child was born at 9:10 AM so by what you are saying is that at 9:09 AM she was "different" than she was at birth and therefore could have been killed by abortion and that would have been ok?
Not very logical even in my nonlogical brain.
The problem smurfy the [prodeath scanc is having, is the fact thew constitution already recognizes the preborn, and secures the blessing of life for them. 40 words into the constitution is the word posterity. Poserity means fututre generations. We can not find anything in the constitution that says momma has the right to kill in private. But we do see in the pre-amble, which sets the very spirit of the document, that womb children are to be blessed and secured, no tortured and thrown away on a whim.

reply from: faithman

And yet, that is exactly what you wish for women to be able to do to their unborn babies.
A fetus has no bodily autonomy, so your point is incorrect.
The problem you prodeath scancs are having, is the fact the constitution already recognizes the preborn, and secures the blessing of life for them. 40 words into the constitution is the word posterity. Poserity means fututre generations. We can not find anything in the constitution that says momma has the right to kill in private. But we do see in the pre-amble, which sets the very spirit of the document, that womb children are to be blessed and secured, no tortured and thrown away on a whim.
This never was an issue of "autonomy", but is an issue of personhood.

reply from: Smurfy

She certainly was different, she was still dependent on your body for survival.
What would be the point of killing a nine month baby? Carrying it for that long suggests a desire to give birth.

reply from: lukesmom

One minute later she was no longer dependant? Come on, your'e reaching here. I have read of several full term babies being aborted due to anomilies (sp?).
Does that matter as you support abortion at any time for any reason or non reason?

reply from: Smurfy

One minute later she was no longer attached to your body, which was directly and unconsciously providing her with oxygen, sustenance, waste removal, etc.
Have I stated that I support abortion at any time for any reason?
You seem very keen to construct my beliefs for me, at every opportunity you get.

reply from: lukesmom

Actually she was waaaayyyy past the age of viability and didn't "need" that sustenance and could easily have survived if born earlier.
Am I mistaken? You are "prochoice" or a proabort and support the prochoice platform of abortion rights for all women for any reason at any time?

reply from: lukesmom

LOL, That is one heck of an impression especially since you really aren't that important to me.

reply from: Smurfy

She could also have died the instant she was born. Life is a delicate thing.
Anyway...
I don't think you actually care what I think.
I think you're just looking for excuses to attack other people and the pro-life/pro-choice debate is the perfect medium for this.
Of course, I could be wrong.
Regardless, I don't think you're worth interacting with anymore; you can't be civil.

reply from: lukesmom

As I am the mother of 2 angels, you don't have to tell me.
You are right.
I only attack when attacked or when I see an innocent who can't defend themselves being attacked. I don't see you fitting into the last catagory.
And we were playing so nice too. Darn.

reply from: yoda

That's fascinating. You speak of "bodily autonomy" as if it was an organ of the body, rather than an arbitrary right awarded by those who hold power in this country.
It's like you had put someone in jail, and then claimed to have the right to execute them because they are in jail.
You are responsible for their situation, and now you claim that their situation justifies killing them.
Fascinating.

reply from: yoda

Do you know the meaning of the word "arbitrary"? I am tempted to post the definition, but I'm told that you proaborts hate that and I'm not supposed to upset a proabort.
Yes, that's right.... I'm misogynistic, I hate kids, old people, and anyone else I may have left out. Does that satisfy your desire to heap personal scorn on me, instead of addressing this issue?
All political rights (such as the right to life) are awarded by those who have the power to award them, and therefore all of them are arbitrary, whether "deserved" (in the opinion of the powerful) or not. Therefore it is totally hypocritical to condemn an unborn child to death because that child has not been awarded the right to life by those who have the power to grant rights, the born who control this country.

reply from: yoda

Yes, and she's the one who can kill that baby and justify it because "It doesn't have the right to life, because I didn't give it the right to life".
And you don't see the contradiction there, right?

reply from: lukesmom

The "right to life" is already granted at conception. What the prolife movement is asking that women allow that life, already granted at conception, to continue and not be prematurely ended.

reply from: lukesmom

I'm a woman and I agree with Yoda.

reply from: lukesmom

The "right to life" is already granted at conception.
By whom?
By whomever created that life, be it God the creator, for the religious amoung us, or be it the humans who had intercourse and caused this life to be created.

reply from: lukesmom

I'm a woman and I agree with Yoda.
I guess I wasn't clear. I meant women who want to make their own choices.
No you where clear and I understood you but I want to make you understand that prolife women also want women to have choices but not at the expense of killing their own children.

reply from: carolemarie

The "right to life" is already granted at conception.
By whom?
I am glad that you asked that!
By God, who exists and is the only source of morality. Otherwise it is up to us to decide what is a moral act and what isn't. You can be right and Yoda can be right at the same time if it is up to the individual.
But morality is established by God and He is against abortion. He calls it immoral so it is.
It doesn't matter if women want it to be true, or if you don't want it to be true. Morality of an act is decided by God. And if He decided to let a pregnancy occur, than killing the baby is wrong and evil.

reply from: cracrat

Why is this thread directed at me? What have I said or done that leads you to conclude I am without compassion?

reply from: yoda

No, that's exactly how you feel too, you just won't admit it. You don't want women to have the "choice" of selling their babies on the black market, do you? We don't want them to kill those babies either.

reply from: lukesmom

Bumping for the "prochoice" and "proabort" newbees so they can recognise and possibly seek treatment for this disorder.

reply from: Cecilia

My my, considering your comments towards me I find it ironic that you would insinuate that all prochoicers are deficit in compassion. I think antiabortionists who knock away anyone's feelings about their own individual situation in favor of what they think is best is narcissistic and completely devoid of compassion. Of course, you limit this compassion only towards the fetus and anyone else be damned.

reply from: lukesmom

My my, considering your comments towards me I find it ironic that you would insinuate that all prochoicers are deficit in compassion. I think antiabortionists who knock away anyone's feelings about their own individual situation in favor of what they think is best is narcissistic and completely devoid of compassion. Of course, you limit this compassion only towards the fetus and anyone else be damned.
No, I feel compassion toward all women who are in a difficult situation or pregnancy. But while I feel compassion and sometimes empathy, I will never, ever condone the killing of the forgotten innocent to better the mother's situation. There are alternatives to killing the one person who can't speak for themselves. What is really sad is the woman who sacrifice their child can't even begin to understand what they have lost and that doesn't mean losing their child but also a piece of themselves, their integrety, their "soul" as in a part of themselves.
I feel compassion for your situation. It is a situation I have never been in but I can tell you, if it would have been a born child, you would not have killed him/her to better your situation. Would you have?

reply from: yoda

Wow.... talk about a compassion deficit syndrome.... how about "I don't care what happens to anyone's children but my own".......

reply from: lukesmom

Exactly why it needed to be "bumped". Hope bossy doesn't babysit other kids 'cause their lives would be toast in a disaster.

reply from: Cecilia

My my, considering your comments towards me I find it ironic that you would insinuate that all prochoicers are deficit in compassion. I think antiabortionists who knock away anyone's feelings about their own individual situation in favor of what they think is best is narcissistic and completely devoid of compassion. Of course, you limit this compassion only towards the fetus and anyone else be damned.
No, I feel compassion toward all women who are in a difficult situation or pregnancy. But while I feel compassion and sometimes empathy, I will never, ever condone the killing of the forgotten innocent to better the mother's situation. There are alternatives to killing the one person who can't speak for themselves. What is really sad is the woman who sacrifice their child can't even begin to understand what they have lost and that doesn't mean losing their child but also a piece of themselves, their integrety, their "soul" as in a part of themselves.
I feel compassion for your situation. It is a situation I have never been in but I can tell you, if it would have been a born child, you would not have killed him/her to better your situation. Would you have?
No, of course not, but there the fundamental difference that we will not agree on is that I see a dramatic difference between a 6 week fetus and a born child. And I do not agree with that emotional jumbo about integrity. Having never had an abortion yourself you would not understand do that is fine I forgive your presumptions.

reply from: lukesmom

My my, considering your comments towards me I find it ironic that you would insinuate that all prochoicers are deficit in compassion. I think antiabortionists who knock away anyone's feelings about their own individual situation in favor of what they think is best is narcissistic and completely devoid of compassion. Of course, you limit this compassion only towards the fetus and anyone else be damned.
No, I feel compassion toward all women who are in a difficult situation or pregnancy. But while I feel compassion and sometimes empathy, I will never, ever condone the killing of the forgotten innocent to better the mother's situation. There are alternatives to killing the one person who can't speak for themselves. What is really sad is the woman who sacrifice their child can't even begin to understand what they have lost and that doesn't mean losing their child but also a piece of themselves, their integrety, their "soul" as in a part of themselves.
I feel compassion for your situation. It is a situation I have never been in but I can tell you, if it would have been a born child, you would not have killed him/her to better your situation. Would you have?
No, of course not, but there the fundamental difference that we will not agree on is that I see a dramatic difference between a 6 week fetus and a born child. And I do not agree with that emotional jumbo about integrity. Having never had an abortion yourself you would not understand do that is fine I forgive your presumptions.
Having actually faced the so called choice to kill one of my children, I do not and never will understand. No, I haven't killed one of my own so thankfully will never have to live what you have to live with. I do know no matter what, I will NEVER kill my own child, no matter what. So much for presumptions.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I think it's terrible you accuse them (and indirectly ME) of this. I do not and DID not have a deficit of compassion. Pro-choicers can be very compassionate people. This attack is unprecedented. Yes, pro-choicers attack pro-lifers and I did it too as a pro-choicer. But I do not do it now. I don't attack pro-choicers in general nor do I attack pro-lifers in general. You want to attack specific people? At least have some proof. But don't attack a whole group of people. Otherwise, you have no defense when people attack YOU. Fighting back is not the solution.

reply from: Witness

Originally posted by: lukesmom
">http://prenatalpartner...ife......htm
Compassion Deficit Syndrome
Identified as Factor in Death of Millions
By Kathy Ratkiewicz
People who suffer from the disorder known as "compassion deficit syndrome"(CDS), which affects a great many individuals in our society, and has been a decisive factor in the death of millions, tend to have jaded world-views.
Instead of seeing children with Down syndrome as beautiful little people with almond-shaped eyes and winning smiles, they see "things" who "suffer from mental retardation" and are "deformed." Instead of seeing children, they see "choices"; instead of recognizing the humanity of people with disabilities, they tend to see them as "burdens" to be thrown off at all costs.
Unlike other syndromes, those who suffer from CDS are not born with the syndrome fully intact; it develops gradually. There are no generalized physical characteristics, but they do share common mental characteristics: over time their brains apparently malfunction to the extent that they believe that the best way to deal with people with other types of "handicaps" is to kill them. A striking characteristic of the syndrome is that those afflicted by it do not recognize the fact that they are, in fact, more disabled than the people they deem unworthy of life.
The real danger in the syndrome, however, lies in the fact that the brain malfunction serves to trick the CDS sufferer into believing that what he advocates is a desirable course of action; in some cases, the malfunction has progressed to such an extent that the CDS sufferer even believes that what he is advocating is an acceptable, moral, and even desirable solution to the problem of "unwanted" children or individuals.
They do have their creative sides, however. In order to accomplish their goal of ridding the world of 'unwanted' individuals, those afflicted with CDS tend to use words fraught with mystery, words like "fetus" and "termination" when referring to "unborn babies" and "abortion." "Quality of life" also gets a lot of use, and CDS sufferers are extremely gifted in bringing it into discussions, no matter how great a stretch is needed to make it "fit."
They spin great swelling stories about children with disabilities: for example, they tend to lean heavily toward using the words "suffer," "retarded" and "deformity" whenever possible to try to help convince expectant parents that the "loving option" is to "terminate the pregnancy" of a "down syndrome fetus." They also excel in the medical arts, devising tests - not for the purpose of healing individuals, as would be the natural inclination of those not afflicted with CDS - but for the express purpose of eliminating those whom they have decided are not worthy of life.
Another almost universal feature of those afflicted with CDS is that they see themselves as compassionate, sensible and practical in their approach to unborn babies with disabilities. They speak of their "concern" for the child and parents, should the child be born "disabled." They speak of "options" and may say, "We only want what is best for you and your baby." They see themselves as compassionate when they are glad that new methods of detecting "deformities" in utero are found - not so that they can cure the baby - but for the single purpose of giving mothers the "choice" of getting a "safe" abortion.
In reality, their hearts have become so hardened that they are incapable of understanding the joy that can be found in parenting a child with disabilities, as they focus on -and exaggerate- the negative aspects. A further, almost diagnostic characteristic of CDS, is the apparent inability of those afflicted with it to understand the concepts of nurturing, selfless love, and basic respect for life. They do not understand that you can accept and love a child, simply because he IS.
At present, since there is no known physical cure for those afflicted with CDS, the best approach is prevention. There is evidence to suggest that teaching children moral absolutes such as "Thou shalt not kill," and "Do unto others as you would have them to do unto you," are some of the best means at hand to stop the spread of this deadly syndrome. That - and lots of prayer.
Excellent read! Good job.

reply from: yoda

I have no doubt. The problem is in the selective nature of their compassion.
They do not seem to feel any compassion, for example, for unborn babies.

reply from: yoda

Just how "dramatic" is the difference between a newborn and an adult?
And how does "drama" justify killing?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I have no doubt. The problem is in the selective nature of their compassion.
They do not seem to feel any compassion, for example, for unborn babies.
Not all of them are like that.

reply from: yoda

Maybe not, but that type is very, very rare, I suspect. I've never met such a person.

reply from: lukesmom

Lib, You can take this as you want. I didn't write this, a mother who's son has DS did. It happens to be very true though. If the "shoe fits; wear it" and if it doesn't don't. Sounds like something may have hit a little close to home though. Not nice looking too closely at closely held beliefs?

reply from: Cecilia

If I was pregnant willingly I do not think I would abort a DS baby. I have a hard time hearing about women who do. It is one thing to face an unwanted, unconsented pregnancy and the myriad of problems someone faces with that, it is another to purposefully become pregnant and find out there is a problem and dispose of it.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I could make up mental conditions for everyone I meet that I happen to disagree with. That doesn't make me right. Like how many people think that having faith is a mental condition. My dad thinks that people who drive away from cops are mentally insane. ALL of them. But making sweeping generalizations is wrong no matter what you're saying. Even if you're being nice and saying "all brunettes are smart!" you're still WRONG.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I am not going to abort any of my children unless I'm going to die and premature birth/c-section is completely unavailable. As for the unwanted pregnancy, these days I wouldn't abort either. I can't say I would have for sure back when I was in college, but I would definitely have considered it. It wouldn't have helped though; I had a lot of other problems going on and an abortion wouldn't have fixed those problems.

reply from: Witness

We get our attitude about certain groups from how members of those groups treat us or act around us. For my part this piece rings true, because the pro-aborts I've had first hand knowledge of are without compassion. In fact, they behave, as a group, much like raving lunatics. I mean, they point their cars at us and gun the engines. They threaten to kill us. Get the picture people. I'm standing off to the side with a handmade baby blanket and heart-warming picture of a baby. Yet, they feel like they have the right to run over me? I mean, I've seen some fairly bizarre things and there wasn't any provacation for them, either. Someone begging you to let your child live is not someone who deserves to be physically attacked. Further, the child in the womb is not a terrorist. So, to say that you need the right to kill it for invading -- like that's even possible -- your womb, is more than a little insane. And, certainly, what the child endures for your need of choice is without compassion.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I've only met a few "pro-aborts" and was not pro-abortion myself. I was pro-choice, and most of the people I knew were also pro-choice. Yes, pro-aborts do seem to lack compassion for the unborn. I certainly did not behave like a raving lunatic or try to kill/run over anyone. In fact, I never even told people not to be pro-life, since that was their CHOICE.

reply from: Cecilia

Being what they perceive as HARASSED when they are going to a PRIVATE, legal medical appointment that is no one else's business does drive people to the extreme. Perhaps they feel that they too are entitled to dish out some harassment. That's what people like you have driven them to.
Yes, those that oppose abortion have an outstanding amount of compassion for others and show it by protesting outside medical clinics, sometime violently, harrassing the staff, harassing the patients, taking photos of patients entering the buildings, doing violent acts against the personnel who work there, calling women who use birth control "skancs", supporting legislation that restricts health care for pregnant women, supporting spending cuts for under priviledged, stating that women in abusive situations should just call 911 and leave while ignoring th reality, stating that those who support choice lack compassion, calling them mentally insane, and so forth.
How many of your can defend yourselves and say honestly that you are compassionate? Maybe selectively compassionate?

reply from: Cecilia

I could make up mental conditions for everyone I meet that I happen to disagree with. That doesn't make me right. Like how many people think that having faith is a mental condition. My dad thinks that people who drive away from cops are mentally insane. ALL of them. But making sweeping generalizations is wrong no matter what you're saying. Even if you're being nice and saying "all brunettes are smart!" you're still WRONG.
You seem to stress individual situations and unwilling to generalize. Good for you. Therefore, when you hear about women aborting you will be sure to place emphasis on her individual situation instead of making a judgement call preemptively?

reply from: Cecilia

Are you compassionate, CP?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I could make up mental conditions for everyone I meet that I happen to disagree with. That doesn't make me right. Like how many people think that having faith is a mental condition. My dad thinks that people who drive away from cops are mentally insane. ALL of them. But making sweeping generalizations is wrong no matter what you're saying. Even if you're being nice and saying "all brunettes are smart!" you're still WRONG.
You seem to stress individual situations and unwilling to generalize. Good for you. Therefore, when you hear about women aborting you will be sure to place emphasis on her individual situation instead of making a judgement call preemptively?
When I hear about a woman aborting, I want to know why. Obviously any time a parent kills their child it is a unique situation, but being unique doesn't make it right.

reply from: Witness

Posted by joueravecfou: Being what they perceive as HARASSED when they are going to a PRIVATE, legal medical appointment that is no one else's business does drive people to the extreme. Perhaps they feel that they too are entitled to dish out some harassment. That's what people like you have driven them to.
So, you actually believe that offering someone a free handmade baby blanket and assist in calm quiet tones is grounds to run them over?

reply from: Cecilia

I could make up mental conditions for everyone I meet that I happen to disagree with. That doesn't make me right. Like how many people think that having faith is a mental condition. My dad thinks that people who drive away from cops are mentally insane. ALL of them. But making sweeping generalizations is wrong no matter what you're saying. Even if you're being nice and saying "all brunettes are smart!" you're still WRONG.
You seem to stress individual situations and unwilling to generalize. Good for you. Therefore, when you hear about women aborting you will be sure to place emphasis on her individual situation instead of making a judgement call preemptively?
When I hear about a woman aborting, I want to know why. Obviously any time a parent kills their child it is a unique situation, but being unique doesn't make it right.
I really doubt it any of your business, but then you are semi pro life, so you want it to be your business.

reply from: Witness

Posted by Cecilia: Yes, those that oppose abortion have an outstanding amount of compassion for others and show it by protesting outside medical clinics, sometime violently, harrassing the staff, harassing the patients, taking photos of patients entering the buildings, doing violent acts against the personnel who work there, calling women who use birth control "skancs", supporting legislation that restricts health care for pregnant women, supporting spending cuts for under priviledged, stating that women in abusive situations should just call 911 and leave while ignoring th reality, stating that those who support choice lack compassion, calling them mentally insane, and so forth.
How many of your can defend yourselves and say honestly that you are compassionate? Maybe selectively compassionate?
Compassion is trying to comfort a hysterical mother who just realized she killed her child while the security guards and police are coming up behind you with their hands on their guns. Been there. Have you?

reply from: Cecilia

Is this compassion?: Yes, those that oppose abortion have an outstanding amount of compassion for others and show it by protesting outside medical clinics, sometime violently, harrassing the staff, harassing the patients, taking photos of patients entering the buildings, doing violent acts against the personnel who work there, calling women who use birth control "skancs", supporting legislation that restricts health care for pregnant women, supporting spending cuts for under priviledged, stating that women in abusive situations should just call 911 and leave while ignoring th reality, stating that those who support choice lack compassion, calling them mentally insane, and so forth.

reply from: sweet

is it really true that some mothers realize immediately after the abortion that theykilled their child?

reply from: Witness

Further, I have never called a woman a -- what did you say? -- "*****" or something? You assume far too much.

reply from: Cecilia

is it really true that some mothers realize immediately after the abortion that theykilled their child?
This is ridiculous. Of course abortion kills their child; they go into it knowing already ahead of time and that is exactly why they do it. It's not shocking.
For the woman who was hysterical, she made the wrong decision. Not every woman is like her.

reply from: sweet

Is this compassion?: Yes, those that oppose abortion have an outstanding amount of compassion for others and show it by protesting outside medical clinics, sometime violently, harrassing the staff, harassing the patients, taking photos of patients entering the buildings, doing violent acts against the personnel who work there, calling women who use birth control "skancs", supporting legislation that restricts health care for pregnant women, supporting spending cuts for under priviledged, stating that women in abusive situations should just call 911 and leave while ignoring th reality, stating that those who support choice lack compassion, calling them mentally insane, and so forth.
this couldnt possibly be an abortion defense.

reply from: Cecilia

Is this compassion?: Yes, those that oppose abortion have an outstanding amount of compassion for others and show it by protesting outside medical clinics, sometime violently, harrassing the staff, harassing the patients, taking photos of patients entering the buildings, doing violent acts against the personnel who work there, calling women who use birth control "skancs", supporting legislation that restricts health care for pregnant women, supporting spending cuts for under priviledged, stating that women in abusive situations should just call 911 and leave while ignoring th reality, stating that those who support choice lack compassion, calling them mentally insane, and so forth.
this couldnt possibly be an abortion defense.
And it's not; it's about the topic of this thread. The poster put it out that people who support abortion choice lack compassion. I find it on the other side of the fence as well.
It would be nothing short of miraculous for someone antiabortion to admit that yes, the people who commit these acts may lack compassion. I'm not waiting for it.

reply from: Witness

Posted by Cecilia: This is ridiculous. Of course abortion kills their child; they go into it knowing already ahead of time and that is exactly why they do it. It's not shocking.
For the woman who was hysterical, she made the wrong decision. Not every woman is like her.
It sounds like you'd be surprised at how many women aren't prepared for what an abortion really is.

reply from: Witness

Posted by Cecilia: Is this compassion?: Yes, those that oppose abortion have an outstanding amount of compassion for others and show it by protesting outside medical clinics, sometime violently, harrassing the staff, harassing the patients, taking photos of patients entering the buildings, doing violent acts against the personnel who work there, calling women who use birth control "skancs", supporting legislation that restricts health care for pregnant women, supporting spending cuts for under priviledged, stating that women in abusive situations should just call 911 and leave while ignoring th reality, stating that those who support choice lack compassion, calling them mentally insane, and so forth.
If you were one of the many women we've helped, you'd call it compassion. If you were one that we comforted, you'd call it compassion. Mothers weep over our blankets and welcome our hugs. Your list of accusations is like my saying you tried to run me over, threatened me, or harassed me. Do you do those things? Not every on-site witness is how you describe them, either.
It seems to me that you need to see us as bad so you won't have to think about the good we really do.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I could make up mental conditions for everyone I meet that I happen to disagree with. That doesn't make me right. Like how many people think that having faith is a mental condition. My dad thinks that people who drive away from cops are mentally insane. ALL of them. But making sweeping generalizations is wrong no matter what you're saying. Even if you're being nice and saying "all brunettes are smart!" you're still WRONG.
You seem to stress individual situations and unwilling to generalize. Good for you. Therefore, when you hear about women aborting you will be sure to place emphasis on her individual situation instead of making a judgement call preemptively?
When I hear about a woman aborting, I want to know why. Obviously any time a parent kills their child it is a unique situation, but being unique doesn't make it right.
I really doubt it any of your business, but then you are semi pro life, so you want it to be your business.
*groans*
I'll say the same thing I say every time. It's not ME who actually needs to know, but a doctor sure does. If it is a healthy mother and a healthy pregnancy then I do not see any reason at all to abort.

reply from: yoda

It's irrelevant at to whether proaborts lack compassion in general, it's relevant as to whether they lack compassion for unborn human beings specifically. And of course, that's the only way that they could advocate for their destruction, isn't it?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

It's irrelevant at to whether proaborts lack compassion in general, it's relevant as to whether they lack compassion for unborn human beings specifically. And of course, that's the only way that they could advocate for their destruction, isn't it?
That's either 100% true or 90% true. Pro-abortion people DO have a complete lack of compassion for the unborn. Pro-choicers on the other hand, have compassion for SOME babies: wanted, healthy ones.

reply from: Cecilia

It would be nothing short of miraculous for someone antiabortion to admit that yes, the people who commit these acts may lack compassion.
You can "groan" all you like, but your real cause isn't the involvement of doctors, it's the involvement of political leaders.

reply from: nancyu

Are you compassionate, CP?
I almost can't believe you could ask this (but then I consider the source) How can you say CP has no compassion? I don't even like him very much, but I can see that he is compassionate. You must not have read any of what he has written. Do you think he does this for sport? He's lived this.
In you, I see only compassion for yourself. Can you muster any compassion at all for the child that you helped to kill?
I'm asking this question honestly with no sarcasm: Would it be too painful for you to allow yourself to feel any compassion for your child?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You can "groan" all you like, but your real cause isn't the involvement of doctors, it's the involvement of political leaders.
I am not a typical pro-lifer so please stop assuming I am. I'm voting for Obama, by the way. I hate Bush, and I'm not a fan of Palin. So how is my cause political?
I am extremely interested in the involvement of doctors and counselors in abortion.

reply from: Cecilia

Are you compassionate, CP?
I almost can't believe you could ask this (but then I consider the source) How can you say CP has no compassion? I don't even like him very much, but I can see that he is compassionate. You must not have read any of what he has written. Do you think he does this for sport? He's lived this.
In you, I see only compassion for yourself. Can you muster any compassion at all for the child that you helped to kill?
I'm asking this question honestly with no sarcasm: Would it be too painful for you to allow yourself to feel any compassion for your child?
Still no one has condemned the acts of anti abortionists as lacking compassion, but are quick to jump down my throat for asking about it. Have you any courage to admit it nancyu?
What CP, and you, do not realize, or choose not to understand is that there are women who do not want their children. And it is highly presumptuous to assume that every woman does, and his statement lacked any concern for those who have desires different from yours or his. The answer is yes, 'if you cared about me, you would let me have an abortion, because that is what I want, not what you want'.
I have some compassion for the fetus I aborted, yes. I am quite sorry the situation wasn't different.

reply from: Cecilia

You can "groan" all you like, but your real cause isn't the involvement of doctors, it's the involvement of political leaders.
I am not a typical pro-lifer so please stop assuming I am. I'm voting for Obama, by the way. I hate Bush, and I'm not a fan of Palin. So how is my cause political?
I am extremely interested in the involvement of doctors and counselors in abortion.
Are you interested in abolishing abortion? And how?
Ultimately, even if you advocate education as means to lower abortion rates, a person who is antiabortion wants abortion to be illegal. That's judges and lawyers not doctors and counselors.
Don't forget women. You didn't say you were interested in the involvment of women, just doctors and counselors. I assume that was implied you meant women, too?

reply from: sarah4president

You can "groan" all you like, but your real cause isn't the involvement of doctors, it's the involvement of political leaders.
I am not a typical pro-lifer so please stop assuming I am. I'm voting for Obama, by the way. I hate Bush, and I'm not a fan of Palin. So how is my cause political?
I am extremely interested in the involvement of doctors and counselors in abortion.
You're not a prolifer at all if you are voting for Obama.

reply from: cracrat

You don't honestly believe that anything'll change if McCain/Palin wins do you? Bush was emphatically pro-life, had control of both Houses of Congress and didn't manage to advance the cause one iota.

reply from: Witness

Originally posted by: Witness
So, you actually believe that offering someone a free handmade baby blanket and assist in calm quiet tones is grounds to run them over?
What I said was that they believe THEIR aggressive actions are warranted based on the perceived harassment. Also, it seems that no one was actually run over. You can wrap your "benign" ideas in all the baby blankets you want, but it's still harassment.
harass -- to trouble by repeated attacks, incursions, etc.
No, offering free baby blankets and assistance doesn't meet the requirements.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

If you are impeding their way, it is harrassment. Offering a baby blanket repeatedly can be considered very troubling, especially since the woman is heading off to kill her own baby.
I at least hope you only protest and abortion-only clinics and not planned parenthoods. I know I'd be pissed off to no end if I were going in for birth control or just a pap smear and someone shoved a blanket in my face.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Whatever; that's your choice to say "I don't think you're a pro-lifer if you're voting for Obama", but you cannot make the claim to say NO pro-lifer will vote for Obama. I know a VERY pro-life friend who was even adopted as a child, yet he thinks Obama is great. Then again my friend is highly intelligent. He's also atheist, yet doesn't mind Obama's strong religious core at all.
Being pro-life does not define my entire existence. I am a person and I happen to be pro-life, but I don't introduce myself as "I'm pro-life!". I have a NAME, an identity and a life. I am interested in other things than just abortion.
I vote on a lot more than JUST abortion, and to be 100% honest, McCain/Palin's platform is terrible in my opinion. So that's why I'm not voting for them. It has nothing to do with abortion. I am not a 1-issue voter, I think doing so is incredibly stupid. In fact, I'm a little bothered by how Obama voted on the partial-birth ban, BUT his platform is OVER ALL much more to my liking.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You can "groan" all you like, but your real cause isn't the involvement of doctors, it's the involvement of political leaders.
I am not a typical pro-lifer so please stop assuming I am. I'm voting for Obama, by the way. I hate Bush, and I'm not a fan of Palin. So how is my cause political?
I am extremely interested in the involvement of doctors and counselors in abortion.
Are you interested in abolishing abortion? And how?
Of course I am.
Firstly, I'd like to see a bill go through congress that forces all states to adopt a clear, consistent pre-abortion counseling system. All women should see the same materials and the same videos, the waiting period should be consistent, etc. Secondly, along with that, I'd like to see governmental regulation of the abortion industry, just like there is regulation of the pharmecuticals industry. Right there, I think a lot of bad abortion clinics will be closed purely because they are not healthy.
Doing the above won't instantly remove the "right" to abort, so the crazy femi-nazis won't freak out. As much. lol.
Next, the abortion limit should be lowered to NO elective abortion past 9 weeks. There again countless lives will be saved, some abortion "rights" will be maintained, but slowly, peoples opinions on it will be changing too.
Finally, there would be a gradual lowering of the elective abortion date, unless by that point the country is ready as a whole to end it once and for all.
The reason I have this plan is because I know you cannot change a country with one law. Freeing the slaves did not end discrimination. Banning alcohol did not stop drinking. You can't make fell-swoop laws like that to change something so dramatic, especially when it takes away percieved "rights". Yes, suddenly banning it would reduce the abortion rate but many women are going to suffer. I want a solution where lives begin to be saved, but women aren't needlessly dying. That's why the plan is a few years long.
You can't instantly change a culture, and we have a culture of death right now. You have to guide that culture. Millions of women think they have the right to kill their child in the womb. It is THEY whom you have to convince. That's why I think it's ridiculous when pro-lifers say pro-choicers don't matter. You know what pro-choicers are doing? Converting pro-lifers. THEY realise that the born people in this debate matter too. Fetuses can't vote. Women can. You have to convince THEM.
I do advocate eduation of course, but that's not enough alone. Although abortion rates have dropped among eduacted women over the past decade, abortion among the uneducated has stayed high. Clearly, education does work and needs to continue. But something else must be done for the uneducated.
Duh, only a sexist pig would even let such an assumption enter their mind.

reply from: Cecilia

Not a surprise that no one has yet condemned the acts of antiabortionists as lacking in compassion.
What bad abortion clinics do you have in mind? If you know something now you should report it now.
Changing the law will automatically change people's opinions? How are you going to accomplish?

reply from: yoda

Right...... so they kill them. Yes, we know that.
Oh yeah, I can just see the compassion in your post........

reply from: yoda

Testify, SISTER!!
GO SARAH!

reply from: yoda

Yes she can. Your imaginary prolife friend notwithstanding, NO pro-lifer will vote for Obama.

reply from: yoda

Which makes you, by definition, a prochoicer.

reply from: yoda

Of course not. But as has been said, "Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless".
-Dr. Martin Luther King

reply from: LiberalChiRo

What bad abortion clinics do you have in mind? If you know something now you should report it now.
Of course I don't know of any in specific. I'm not a researcher. However I have heard reports from both pro-lifers and pro-choicers and I've read news articles about horrors that have occurred in abortion clinics, such as women not receiving proper ultrasounds and the baby being older than expected, women being left to abort alone in a room and having to watch their child die; injections for late term abortions that are either completely forgotten or done incorrectly leading to live births where the child is then stabbed to death... Clinics that don't provide adaquet sedation/anesthesia, clinics that abort late-term babies for elective reasons even though that's illegal... the list goes on and on.
Don't you agree these clinics are NOT the best place for the health of the woman at least?
Changing the law will automatically change people's opinions? How are you going to accomplish?
Currently, 90% of all abortions occur between week 12. Lowering the limit to week 9 isn't going to make much of a dent, and it STILL leaves women a chance to abort. They just have to do it sooner if they are doing it for elective reasons. This law isn't going to change anyone's opinion and it's not meant to. But because it is a COMPROMISE, I feel there's a high likelyhood of it getting votes from moderates on both sides of the issue, plus votes from pro-lifers. I can't imagine a pro-lifer voting AGAINST a bill that lowers the time period for elective abortions.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Testify, SISTER!!
GO SARAH!
I'll be sure to tell my adopted, pro-life friend he's not pro-life. He'll laugh at you. But he's not a single-item voter either.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Yes she can. Your imaginary prolife friend notwithstanding, NO pro-lifer will vote for Obama.
He's not imaginary. Why would you even bother saying that? I never even think that the people you talk about are fake. You're just saying that because you hate to be contradicted.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Which makes you, by definition, a prochoicer.
No, it doesn't. That's your PERSONAL opinion, but by all definitions of your precious online dictionaries, one needs to only feel the unborn deserves life to be pro-life. There is NO mention of "wanting abortion to be illegal RIGHTNOW".

reply from: yoda

What does imaginary laughter sound like?

reply from: yoda

Wow, you have no shame at all.
Every statement that contains no indicators of the future or past tense is understood to be in the present tense, which means RIGHT NOW.
But that's okay, I understand your allergy to the truth.
pro-life adjective against open access to abortion: in favor of bringing the human fetus to full term, especially by campaigning against open access to abortion and against experimentation on embryos http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736610

pro-life adjective opposed to the belief that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion if she does not want to have a baby
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63328&dict=CALD

pro-life -adj.
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/pro-life

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
pro-life -adjective opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-life&r=66

pro-life adjective supporting the belief that it is immoral for a pregnant woman to have the freedom to choose to have an abortion (= an operation to end a pregnancy) if she does not want to have a baby http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=prolife*1+0&dict=A

reply from: Cecilia

Sounds as if you haven't done any research, just been reading alot of antiabortion articles. You can't name specifics.
I think you have a good point that lowering from 12 to 9 would be acceptable compromise. It's sorry that medical surgeries have to be legislated and determined whether or not they are acceptable by lawyers and judges instead of doctors and patients.

reply from: yoda

No, if you are doing that, you are breaking a federal law and will go to prison.
Ever hear of the FACE law?

reply from: yoda

NOT to the babies that are less than 9 weeks old, it wouldn't. They would still die, remember? But isn't it just sweet and nice of you to COMPROMISE AWAY the lives of thousands upon thousands of babies?
Is capital punishment by lethal injection a "medical procedure"?
Should it's use be determined by legislators, lawyers and judges..... or by doctors and convicted felons?

reply from: Cecilia

Women have rights that convicted felons do not.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Sounds as if you haven't done any research, just been reading alot of antiabortion articles. You can't name specifics.
Actually much of what I speak of was not told to me by pro-lifers but pro-choicers, OR read in the news. The news is stereotypically liberal, so if THEY are reporting these atrocities (such as the woman who aborted in the bathroom of the clinic and watched her child die in her arms while the nurse refused to call 911) then I'm sorry, but they are of a real nature and you should be concerned about them.
I think you have a good point that lowering from 12 to 9 would be acceptable compromise. It's sorry that medical surgeries have to be legislated and determined whether or not they are acceptable by lawyers and judges instead of doctors and patients.
I feel because the child is a patient too, that its rights have to be guaranteed by a judge, since clearly the mothers and doctors don't care. Civil rights shouldn't have had to be a legal issue but it was, women's rights shouldn't have had to be a legal issue but it was, and the same will have to happen for unborn rights. You shouldn't HAVE to legislate the right to live, but apparently we do.

reply from: Witness

Posted by joueravecfou:
Harass: to annoy persistently to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct. Clearly it does.
By that interpretation they harass me. One: By aiming their cars at me -- remember I'm not standing in front of them, but over to the side where they have to make an extra effort to get at me. Two: by screaming obscenities or flipping me off. I don't curse these women. I beg them. That may be uncomfortable, but it's not illegal or immoral. Three: By causing me severe mental anguish over the death of their children.
Contrasted to a baby blanket, I think they

reply from: Witness

Posted by LiberalChiRo:
If you are impeding their way, it is harrassment. Offering a baby blanket repeatedly can be considered very troubling, especially since the woman is heading off to kill her own baby.
I at least hope you only protest and abortion-only clinics and not planned parenthoods. I know I'd be pissed off to no end if I were going in for birth control or just a pap smear and someone shoved a blanket in my face.
I don't shove blankets in their faces. I offer blankets in hopes they'll choose to cuddle, not kill.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Even offering and moving your arm in their direction can be considered "shoving" and blocking their way. You have to remember how sensitive these women are to anyone implying they are killing a real human being, a baby.

reply from: scopia1982

Nothing that happens in these clinics surprises me. I dont understand why these clinics are often not subjected to the same regulations and inspections that other medical offices and clinics are. Even my vet has more regulations and inspections than the local slaughter house. Yet when legislation comes up to make them just as accountable they complain that it would block a woman's reproductive freedom. It is all about money. And they know that most likely they would be shut down for health code violations and their goes their profits. If they are providing legitiment medical services they should not have any problems. My uncle is a doctor and told on a few occassions that abortionists are persona non grata in the medical community. Often they have been unsuccessful in other areas of medicine, hence relegated to lowliest occupation of medicine, performing abortions.

reply from: Caidenbug

I always thought that if you become a doctor it was because you wanted to help people and here are doctors that are killing babies and hurting women. I guess your right scopia, if some can't make money in the area of medicine that they wanted to they will do anything to make the money. It's so sad that money has become more important then human life.

reply from: Witness

Posted by LiberalChiRo:Even offering and moving your arm in their direction can be considered "shoving" and blocking their way. You have to remember how sensitive these women are to anyone implying they are killing a real human being, a baby.
Sorry, I'm too busy remembering the vast majority I've seen leaving crying their eyes out and those that begged me to "do something" after it was too late! You have your compassion in the wrong order. I can't bring those children back to life. So, I try to stop the agony before it starts. If my blankets offend them, I can deal with that. It's far superior than trying to alievate their misery after they've seen what they've done. Knowing I might have prevented it . . . now that's something I'd have trouble dealing with.

reply from: Witness

Posted by LiberalChiRo:Even offering and moving your arm in their direction can be considered "shoving" and blocking their way. You have to remember how sensitive these women are to anyone implying they are killing a real human being, a baby.
Sorry, I'm too busy remembering the vast majority I've seen leaving crying their eyes out and those that begged me to "do something" after it was too late! You have your compassion in the wrong order. I can't bring those children back to life. So, I try to stop the agony before it starts. If my blankets offend them, I can deal with that. It's far superior than trying to alievate their misery after they've seen what they've done. Knowing I might have prevented it . . . now that's something I'd have trouble dealing with.

reply from: Witness

Posted by LiberalChiRo:Even offering and moving your arm in their direction can be considered "shoving" and blocking their way. You have to remember how sensitive these women are to anyone implying they are killing a real human being, a baby.
Sorry, I'm too busy remembering the vast majority I've seen leaving crying their eyes out and those that begged me to "do something" after it was too late! You have your compassion in the wrong order. I can't bring those children back to life. So, I try to stop the agony before it starts. If my blankets offend them, I can deal with that. It's far superior than trying to alievate their misery after they've seen what they've done. Knowing I might have prevented it . . . now that's something I'd have trouble dealing with.

reply from: Witness

Posted by LiberalChiRo:Even offering and moving your arm in their direction can be considered "shoving" and blocking their way. You have to remember how sensitive these women are to anyone implying they are killing a real human being, a baby.
Sorry, I'm too busy remembering the vast majority I've seen leaving crying their eyes out and those that begged me to "do something" after it was too late! You have your compassion in the wrong order. I can't bring those children back to life. So, I try to stop the agony before it starts. If my blankets offend them, I can deal with that. It's far superior than trying to alievate their misery after they've seen what they've done. Knowing I might have prevented it . . . now that's something I'd have trouble dealing with.

reply from: Witness

Posted by LiberalChiRo:Even offering and moving your arm in their direction can be considered "shoving" and blocking their way. You have to remember how sensitive these women are to anyone implying they are killing a real human being, a baby.
Sorry, I'm too busy remembering the vast majority I've seen leaving crying their eyes out and those that begged me to "do something" after it was too late! You have your compassion in the wrong order. I can't bring those children back to life. So, I try to stop the agony before it starts. If my blankets offend them, I can deal with that. It's far superior than trying to alievate their misery after they've seen what they've done. Knowing I might have prevented it . . . now that's something I'd have trouble dealing with.
Oh, and you're behind the curve . . . not even the abortionists here argue it isn't a child. Rather, their contention is that since it's just being sent on to Jesus, killing it is perfectedly acceptable.
BTW, late term mothers are often told to birth their dead children in the toilet. So, they get a firsthand look at what abortion really is. You should try to comfort someone who's been through something like that before you say I should give up what I do. I have and I still see everyone of those mother's faces and remember how helpless I felt to only be able to put my arms around them and cry with them. You can't possibly know what that's like.

reply from: Caidenbug

witness I think what you do is great no matter what these fools say. This is a prolife forum so Im not sure why proabortionist are even here. Don't they have somewhere else they can support murder!?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I'm not saying don't be there; I'm just reminding you that when you don't get the reaction you'er hoping for, to remember the strain these women are under. I am not at all saying not to help women who have aborted and regret it. This is why I think pre-abortion counseling needs to be beefed up. I hate seeing women regret.
Most women don't regret their abortion.
Uh, I haven't heard a single pro-choicer on this forum call the unborn a child. They all maintain that it is not. If you're talking about that crazy person in the article then so what?
I don't believe that, sorry. Source? And if it's a "late term" abortion then they'd be going through real labor and delivery; you can't do that into a toilet.
I am not saying you should give it up; did you see that anywhere? No.
I can guess, so yes I can possibly know. I've had loved ones die, so I know what death is like. Stop assuming other people can't possibly have a clue. It is human nature to empathise with each other.
And again, do remember that most women don't regret the abortion. I think pre-abortion counseling needs a lot of work to catch the minority of women who DO regret, at least until abortion can be made illegal.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Who are you talking about in particular? I don't think there is a single pro-abortion person on this forum. A couple of pro-choicers are here, though.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

They definitely should be!! I'm shocked at how unregulated the industry is.
Preciesely.

reply from: Witness

Sweet, sorry I missed your question earlier. Often mothers are told to birth their dead children into the toiltet. So, yes, they know exactly what they've done and, yes, it freaks a lot of them out.

reply from: nancyu

Good question. It's pretty clear to me they are only here to harass. They have nothing intelligent to say, ever. They must feel threatened. Their precious right to choose to murder their own children is in jeopardy.
I agree that witness is doing great things. It's safe to ignore the pro aborts, they're weak. They can't defend their support for abortion and they know it.

reply from: Witness

Posted by joueravecfou: Originally posted by: Witness
By that interpretation they harass me.
Perhaps you could explain how someone attending a private, medical appointment to which you were NOT invited is harassment of YOU.
One: By aiming their cars at me -- remember I'm not standing in front of them, but over to the side where they have to make an extra effort to get at me.
So a car facing you makes you uncomfortable. Perhaps you should stay at home then. And by all means, stay out of parking lots. I hear that no matter which way you turn, there's a car facing you.
Two: by screaming obscenities or flipping me off.
As I previously mentioned, your presence there at their private, medical appointment is perceived as warranting their aggressive tactics. After all, the sole purpose of your attendance is to harass them, regardless of your blankets. That's how they see it anyway. If you're so upset, perhaps you should stay home.
Three: By causing me severe mental anguish over the death of their children.
Cry me a river. Well, at least you still have a sense of humor. Really, this was quite funny! What makes you think anyone gives half a crap about your mental anguish when you desire nothing more than to impose the same upon someone else. Why would it matter if some random stranger feels anguish over someone else's life? Hint: it doesn't.
Contrasted to a baby blanket, I think they
Whoops, missing rest of sentence....
Perhaps you should pay better attention. I'm not IN the parking lot. I'm not IN FRONT of them. I am on the sidewalk where it is perfectedly legal for me to be. And it's not FACING the car that's the problem. It's being able to put my hand on its hood while on the sidewalk because the speeded up and veered onto the sidewalk.
And, NO, I won't stay home. I provide a needed and mostly appreciated service. You assume too much. There those that are abusive, but the worse case of regret I ever tried to comfort was a young women who had abused me all week. Your black heart may not be able to comprehend it, but my tolerance of her abuse was to her advantage.
Further, the idea that we SHOULDN'T care about each other is inherently flawed. Do you think you're on the planet alone? If people didn't have a vested interest in the well-being of their fellow man, there'd be no reason to have laws to protect anyone. What are you, 10?

reply from: Witness

I don't know why this thread has trouble with some of my posts -- cutting off lines and repeating partial posts so many times. The whole site was malfunctioning this morning. I apologize for any inconvenience.

reply from: yoda

I only wish they were more sensitive to that issue.

reply from: yoda

Right, no one here supports the legality of elective abortion.
pro-a·bor·tion adjective - favoring legal access to abortion: in favor of open legal access to voluntary abortion http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736813 (SINCE REMOVED!)
pro-abortion SYLLABICATION: pro-a·bor·tion PRONUNCIATION: pr-bôrshn ADJECTIVE: Favoring or supporting legalized abortion. http://www.bartleby.com/61/27/P0572700.html

Main Entry: pro·abor·tion Pronunciation: (')prO-&-'bor-sh&n Function: adjective : favoring the legalization of abortion -pro·abor·tion·ist /-sh(&-)n&st/ noun http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-abortion

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - pro·a·bor·tion - adjective: PROCHOICE http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=proabortion&r=66
Proabortion: PROCHOICE http://dictionary.infoplease.com/proabortion

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No problem! Hey, if you want to quote a post, you can either click on the "Quote" word in the bottom right corner of the quote you want to post, or copy the text of the other person and place a [ q ] at the beginning of their text and a [/ q ] at the end, but without spaces.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics