Home - List All Discussions

Need some help responding...........

Late Term Abortion

by: jharmsen

Hi there, I'm new here and very much a pro-lifer.
I am a member of the social networking site, facebook - and as I was watching CNN (hate that channel) last night and watching the coverage on the Tiller killing, I updated my status message on Facebook to read:
"Is absolutely DISGUSTED by Dr. Warren Hern on CNN right now. Whoever thinks late term abortion is ok, should die. I think I need to go for a run before I start throwing punches at the TV. SUCH BULL SH*T.
Well, I come into work this morning, do my usual routin and check my facebook - I have two messages from a friend back home in Minnesota that read:
Julie,
I had a late term abortion during my last pregnancy. A desperately wanted child. DESPERATELY. She was my 3rd child. Her name was Parker Hope Lindstrom. She was my hope. Our first child died of SIDS. Our second, Ollie is alive and thriving, and the absolute joy of my life. When we found out that Parker had such severe chromosomal abnormalities that she could NEVER live outside the womb (she didn't have a stomach, her heart did not have all of the chambers, and multiple other defects that were consistent with a condition called Trisomy 18 - and she had the worst of all of them) we had to make a HEARTBREAKING decision. This was the worst of all choices for me, but in order to keep my family in tact - and not have to go through the intense grief of losing a child after birth again, I made it.
So, if you think I should die for that, fine. I would have you know that I have already died twice. You're a mom now, you should understand that unconditional love for your child. I have it for all of mine, all three. Even Parker. I made a choice, and I live with it. Even though part of me has died TWICE. I recommend looking into finding some compassion in your heart. People who have late term abortions don't do it because it's the "easy way out" or because the just "don't feel like being pregnant." They do it because they have had to make a horribly painful choice. Now that you know someone who has had to do it... a good church going Christian who has made the difficult choice, maybe you'll think about your statement that I should DIE. I feel sorry for you.
When/if you change your stance, you can let me know.
C
Now tell me how I respond to that!!! I've started to reply several times and I don't even know where to begin!
I would love some input!!
Thanks in advance!
Julie

reply from: faithman

No one on the life side has said that we should deny life saving medical treatment to anyone. What this issue is about, is the 98% plus elective abortions, done for non medical reasons. The loss of a loved one is the same no matter what age. At those times in my own life, it was those who were simply there that provided the most comfort. There are no words, so the best thing is to keep your mouth shut, and just be there. They will work thru it. Just be the sounding board. Grief generally takes a good year or better to work thru. Just be a friend, an ear, and a comfort. And don't listen to low life borthead scum bag scancs on this forum.

reply from: ProInformed

READ and pass this info on to your friend:
http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9603/articles/goodwin.html

I was lied to and told that I 'had to abort for medical reasons' too, so was my sister, and so was the sister-in-law of one of my friends.
We all found out we were lied to in order to try to convince us to abort.
My sister and I didn't find out the truth until after our babies were killed.
My sister almost died from her so-called 'safe & legal' 2nd trimester abortion - spent a week in intensive care. She found out later that she didn't have the right to be warned about the risks of the abortion, that the abortion might kill her.
The abortion industry lobby groups oppose all legislative attempts to grant pregnant women the patient protection right of informed consent. She also found out that the real reason she was told that she had to abort, that her baby would die anyway before or shortly after birth, was because the doctor was worried he might get sued IF a presecription medicine he had given her MIGHT have maybe caused some problems with the baby.
I was told that both me and my baby would most likely die if I didn't have a 1st trimester abortion ASAP. I had an appointment for just a pregnancy test at one of the clinics that women are falsey assured is 'pro-choice/pro-woman'. But a saleswoman disguised as a nurse told me that the blood test showed there was something seriously wrong with both me and my baby, that both me and my baby would die if I didn't abort ASAP. I found out years later that she was lying to me, the Rh negative blood factor I have did NOT mean that in a first pregnancy there was any danger to either the mother or the baby, and that all that had to be done to protect me and my babies in future pregnancies was to get a certain kind of shot after each pregnancy. BTW, until I learned the truth I told others that my abortion was an example of a medically necessary abortion, just like your friend is doing now. UNtil I leanred the truth I honestly thought (and said) that an abortion saved my life.
My friend's sister-in-law was luckier, I gave her info about what late-term abortionists do to babies and encouraged her to get a 2nd opinion. She went to a different doctor who told her the truth - that there were babies who DID survive with the same medical problems her baby had and that some of those babies even lived relatively normal healthy lives. Unfortunately her baby did die a few weeks later, but her baby girl died peacefully in the warmth and safety of her loving mommy's womb - not being barbarically and brutally killed by an abortionist that the mother hired! The family was VERY thankful that they were given the opportunity to NOT be complicit in the death of their baby girl, that they were given info that at least gave their baby girl a chance to live as long as she could without being cruelly killed.

reply from: galen

Love your sister, and hold firm your stance on late term abortion. IF what you say is true possibly you should not have been so blatant about how you expressed yourself, however the cat is out of the bag for both of you. Niether of you can change what has been done or said. However you can tell each other that you still care, and hopefully hear each other out and get some counseling.
I think proinformed is correct and she may not know if she was lied to or not. Possibly you both should go to the prenatal partners for life website and look at some of the interviews/ stories there to see if any of them fit your situation. good luck.

reply from: galen

Also Tiller circumvented many rules in order to allow women to have even 3rd trimester AB's for very trivial reasons..
was your sister one of Tiller's patients?

reply from: ProInformed

"Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal illness such as cancer or leukemia, and if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save life."
Alan Guttmacher, M.D.
Although many women are told they 'need to abort for medical reasons' the truth is there is no such thing as a medical condition, of either the mother or the baby, that requires the baby being purposely and brutally killed.
BTW, the above quote is from an abortion industry rep so it can't be easily ignored as 'pro-life-propaganda';
The Guttmacher Institute is the research branch of Planned Parenthood.
THE reasons women are lied to and pressured to abort are:
- because the doctors are worried about their own liability if they do not convince
those women to abort
- the doctors know that if the woman suffers complications from an abortion
vs complications from pregnancy/childbirth he is much safer from lawsuit and
the powerful wealthy abortion industry will help defend him
- the doctors know that they are legally required to warn mothers about all the
possible risks of not aborting or they could be sued BUT they are NOT
legally required to warn mothers about all the possible risks of abortion
http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9603/articles/goodwin.html

BTW, the very same choicists who eagerly exploit your friend's tragedy now will turn on her and attack her viciously when she learns the truth and tries to warn other women to not trust the pro-abort lies that caused her to allow her baby to be killed.

reply from: Skippy

I seriously doubt the friendship can be salvaged. So just send her a quick message telling her you are sorry for her pain, and sorry for adding to it, and leave it at that.

reply from: BossMomma

Given the severity of the childs condition I do not think that abortion was immoral, the baby would have had no quality of life for the short span of time it had on this earth if born alive. In such cases one cannot judge the parents of a doomed infant for ending a life that never would have even taken off.

reply from: galen

if she was a Tiller patient.. probably so.
and if not probably not.

reply from: BossMomma

I wonder if PI thinks the government is watching her through her tv or computer screen? She kinda reminds me of Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. Genetisists do not lie about fetal anomoly to trick people into abortion, they work too hard to gain that status to risk it. I'm busting ass just to get my CMA, I can only imagine the grind genetisists have to endure.

reply from: BossMomma

PI made the choice like 99% of women make the choice, she plunked her money on the counter and, she spread her legs for the abortion. No one forced her, no one pinned her to the table and knocked her out, each action she took to end her childs life was a voluntary action. She has no one to blame but herself for a poorly made decision.

reply from: jharmsen

I think I will apologize for the die statement, but not apologize for my stance on abortion. I don't understand why a mother would abort her child if the child was not going to live outside the womb. Even if the child is going to die, I don't think a parent has the right to make that decision. This decision was made to "protect" the living outside the womb, not to protect a growing baby. I have heard of many instances where a handicapped child is delivered and the parent at least has a few moments with that child before the child passes. The passing of the child is in the hands of God and not determined by an abortionist.

reply from: galen

ask LM how many docs have tried to use genetic info to convince a woman to abort and were wrong.... genetics can be used both ways in this argument.
Tiller was a master of manipulation... its why even the choicers were against him most of the time.

reply from: Faramir

Do you have any links to any prochoice sources that criticize Tiller?
Anything I see on the internet about him by prochoicers is favorable. He's practically a saint to them.

reply from: faithman

Once again. If you are this persons friend, then it is not words and "issues" that she needs. She needs a friend, and a comfort. She may very well come to your conclusions, and needs to find you standing there to help her thru the guilt and pain. If that is going to be to big a stretch, then back off and leave it completely alone.

reply from: churchmouse

For whatever the reason she still killed her child.
Is she a Christian?
You have every right to express your views. Late term abortions are violent and they are acts of murder. Sometimes the truth hurts. We want others to side with us so we are not alone. She wants to feel that what she did was the right thing to do. You can disagree with that and should but do it in a loving way.
If she is a Christian she should know what she did. Today with all the information about fetal development the facts are easy to get. Maybe she has read the Bible and it is making her uncomfortable. In her heart maybe she knows and wants others to tell her she is mistaken, I dont know. The Word certainly convicted me after I had mine.
She killed her child because it was not perfect and should have let God do the taking. If she is a Christian she should repent and ask Gods forgiveness.
If the friendship cant be mended then so be it. You still need to speak the truth.
Just do it in a loving way.

reply from: galen

Do you have any links to any prochoice sources that criticize Tiller?
Anything I see on the internet about him by prochoicers is favorable. He's practically a saint to them.
_______________
Actually i was trying to link that one... but most of the sites are down / swamped... but ask Yuuki and Yoda... they can tell you firsthand about thier arguments on other sites... and Yuuki has had them on this forum also.

reply from: galen

___________________
no many docs will not look at an unfavorable test and do a second or third to confirm... and begin to bully a woman into abortion... some will no longer treat a patient if they choose to continue the pregnancy.
why not ask women who have been through this... they are all over the web.

reply from: ProInformed

It is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that she will be able to avoid learning the truth for the rest of her life. Besides pro-life educational efforts, the people who care about her telling her the truth, or media attention (biased as it is) about late-term abortion legislation... she may encounter medical professionals who tell the truth.
Even women who purposely try to protect themselves from learning the truth, women who carefully avoid all pro-lifers and pro-life info, are unlikely to be successful at avoiding the truth forever.
I knew some pro-lifers but they didn't tell me the truth - probably because they were afraid they'd upset me.
I learned the truth about fetal development from just an ordinary prenatal class in another prengnacy. Since I didn't know I had any reason to suspect the 'nurse' at the 'pro-choice/pro-woman' clinic wheere I went for a pregnancy test had lied to me about how big and developed my baby was, I ALSO didn't realize that the info I would be shown in a prenatal class would be something that would shock or upset me.
I learned the truth about the Rh blood factor from a nurse midwife at a birthing center I was going to for prenatal care. That is also where I learned that having had just one previous 1st trimester abortion increased the risks to me and my babies in future pregnancies, putting me in a 'higher risk' category so I was told I might not get to deliver at the birthing center instead of the back-up hospital they were affiliated with.
That birthing center (NOT a pro-life center) allowed and encouraged patients to read their own medical records while sitting in the waiting room. That is how I found out after my first living daughter had to be delivered by C-section that the surgeon had noted 'extensive uterine scarring'. I was told that it was caused by the suction device used in the abortion and was most likely the reason I'd had 5 miscarriages - that the uterine scarring was causing the placental implantation problems.
I had to have a C-section because even after both 20+ hours of natural, plus several hours of induced labor, my cervix was not even dilated a centimeter.
Still I didn't want to have another C-section for my 2nd living baby so I took a specialized VBAC course offered by the C-section Prevention Movement. That course also stated what the birthing center had told me - that a previous abortion can cause problems in future pregnancies, including the cervix being so damaged by the sudden forced dilation that scar tissue can form preventing the cervix from being able to dilate naturally in the future. All three of my living children had to be delivered by C-section because in each of those pregnancies my cervix would not dilate with natural or induced labor.
I learned the truth about post-abortion trauma by experiencing it myself - six months of nightmares and depression.
I learned the truth about the abortion industry and their lobby groups and choicist defenders by the way they treated me when I tried to report what I thought was just one 'bad apple' clinic and instead of caring about women being lied to and harmed they made fun of me and threatened me and my children.
It would be REALLY, REALLY, REALLY hard for a woman to spend the rest of her life NOT finding out the truth. Meanwhile her personal tragedy will be exploited by the abortion industry as a supposed example of a woman whose abortion was 'medically necessary' FOR THE PURPOSE OF inflicting the same tragedy on other trusting women. The sooner a woman learns the truth the better - for both the women whose babies were killed by abortionists and the women they influence by telling their tragic stories to.

reply from: 4choice4all

I agree. Also...did her story move you to think that perhaps your previous view was narrow and skewed? Or do you still believe that everyone that seeks a late term abortion should die? If it's the former...reach out in love and mend your friendship. If its the later, God help you.

reply from: Skippy

Once again. If you are this persons friend, then it is not words and "issues" that she needs. She needs a friend, and a comfort. She may very well come to your conclusions, and needs to find you standing there to help her thru the guilt and pain. If that is going to be to big a stretch, then back off and leave it completely alone.
You know, for someone who can be the nastiest {bleep} in the universe, you sure do come up with some wise and kind thoughts now and again.

reply from: AshMarie88

Would it be ok to kill a man in jail even if he already had a deadly illness that would kill him months later?
How about a child in the hospital who will die in 2 hours and is on life support? Should they take life support off before his NATURAL death?
So what you're saying is, the abortion was "ok" because the baby would die anyway? Aborting the child to prevent her NATURAL death from occuring?????????????????????

reply from: ProInformed

You might also want to check out the thread about the lie that abortion is sometimes needed to save the life of the mother:
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6585&enterthread=y<br /><br
In your friend's case she was not told that lie but the doctors most likely greatly exaggerated the problems with her baby BECAUSE doctors are aware of the fact that they are at risk for 'wrongful life' lawsuits if they don't try to push abortion if the baby might have any problems.
Most likely your friend believed what she was being told,
naturally never suspecting that a doctor would have a motive to lie to her.
What prenatal tests did your friend have done and what % of accuracy can they guarantee?
What was your friend told about what was going to be done to her baby by the abortionist?
And even if your friend's baby really was having health problems as severe as she was told, the truth is the only way she can assure herself that purposely killing her baby was better than her baby dying a natural death, is because she doesn't (YET) know the full truth.
Even if you don't tell her the truth she most likely will find out someday.
Until she learns the truth she will continue to tell others that her abortion was medically necessary and the abortion industry will exploit her tragedy to endanger even more mothers and babies. And she will probably also 'encourage' other mothers to allow their babies ot be killed.
She might not believe you when you tell her the truth;
she might react with anger or hurt;
but when she both learns and accepts the truth,
she will either be upset with you for NOT telling her the truth sooner,
or she will thank you for being honest with her sooner so she could speak up to protect other women and babies from abortion.
Your friend's baby, AND your friend, were victims of an abortionist who only pretended concern for them.

reply from: AshMarie88

The baby was going to die any way, why MURDER her before her natural death? At least she would have got a chance to breathe, too, and the mom might have felt a bit better! She's upset - murder upsets people.

reply from: Banned Member

I certainly hope that if I am ever being kept alive by machines some one who loves me will pull the plug. You're not really alive if it's artificial.
Pro-informed, how dare you. You've never even spoken to this woman, you have no idea what she went through. You have no right to just jump to the assumption that she was lied to. Thank God you can't actually talk to her yourself. You'd fill her head with propaganda & lies. You are an awful person.

reply from: ProInformed

Also, she will learn the truth when she hears about mothers who were told to abort because their babies were supposedly so severely deformed that they couldn't live... but then their babies were born with either no or only mild health problems.

reply from: nancyu

Your friend has told a sad story, and whether or not it is true, her reason (or excuse) for having a late term abortion is a rare one:
In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), an affiliate of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), collected questionnaires from 1,900 women who were at abortion clinics procuring abortions. Of the 1,900, "420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks." These 420 women were asked to choose among a menu of reasons why they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. Only two percent (2%) said "a fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy," compared to 71% who responded "did not recognize that she was pregnant or misjudged gestation," 48% who said "found it hard to make arrangements," and 33% who said "was afraid to tell her partner or parents." The report did not indicate that any of the 420 late abortions were performed because of maternal health problems. ["Why Do Women Have Abortions?," Family Planning Perspectives, July/August 1988.]
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/pbafact9.html

reply from: faithman

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/AbortionPictures/47.html [click blue text]

reply from: nancyu

Your friend has told a sad story, and whether or not it is true, her reason (or excuse) for having a late term abortion is a rare one:
In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), an affiliate of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), collected questionnaires from 1,900 women who were at abortion clinics procuring abortions. Of the 1,900, "420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks." These 420 women were asked to choose among a menu of reasons why they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. Only two percent (2%) said "a fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy," compared to 71% who responded "did not recognize that she was pregnant or misjudged gestation," 48% who said "found it hard to make arrangements," and 33% who said "was afraid to tell her partner or parents." The report did not indicate that any of the 420 late abortions were performed because of maternal health problems. ["Why Do Women Have Abortions?," Family Planning Perspectives, July/August 1988.]
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/pbafact9.html
Let me add that "Late term" doesn't make an abortion more (or less) wrong than any other abortion. "Restrictions" on abortion don't make logical sense to me. Killing is killing, murder is murder. It's not rocket science to determine the difference.
A person is a person regardless of his age and location. If the mother's life is threatened of course she is justified in ending her pregnancy, but the child should not be intentionally killed under any circumstance.
This phrase catches my attention:
I don't understand her logic here. She killed her child before he was born, so she would not have to grieve after he was born ??? Doesn't compute.

reply from: faithman

Your friend has told a sad story, and whether or not it is true, her reason (or excuse) for having a late term abortion is a rare one:
In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), an affiliate of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), collected questionnaires from 1,900 women who were at abortion clinics procuring abortions. Of the 1,900, "420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks." These 420 women were asked to choose among a menu of reasons why they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. Only two percent (2%) said "a fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy," compared to 71% who responded "did not recognize that she was pregnant or misjudged gestation," 48% who said "found it hard to make arrangements," and 33% who said "was afraid to tell her partner or parents." The report did not indicate that any of the 420 late abortions were performed because of maternal health problems. ["Why Do Women Have Abortions?," Family Planning Perspectives, July/August 1988.]
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/pbafact9.html
Let me add that "Late term" doesn't make an abortion more (or less) wrong than any other abortion. "Restrictions" on abortion don't make logical sense to me. Killing is killing, murder is murder. It's not rocket science to determine the difference.
A person is a person regardless of his age and location. If the mother's life is threatened of course she is justified in ending her pregnancy, but the child should not be intentionally killed under any circumstance.
This phrase catches my attention:
I don't understand her logic here. She killed her child before he was born, so she would not have to grieve after he was born ??? Doesn't compute.
Gotta give it up for the death scancs. They know how to do the semantical doesy doe to perfection. Abortion still births a child. They just happen to be dead.

reply from: Shenanigans

Well, for one, you shouldn't say people who support or have or do LTA should die - that's just, well, its just asking for an arse kicking. Plus, its not very pro-life of you.
Second, the reality is yes, there will be some defects that are incompatible with life, but life is a terminal illness, we're all going to pop our clogs one day, and even if death is assured, no one has the right to hurry the process. Sub-consciously, she wasn't having the abortion to save the child discomfort, she was doing it to make herself feel liek she had some power over the situation, and to spare herself the pain of the situation.

reply from: 4choice4all

Or to spare her young child the pain of losing a sibling and knowing it...and save her the pain of explaining to everyone that comments on her obvious pregnancy that this will be a dead baby very soon....and the drawn out daily sorrow of the fact. How dare she try to ease her pain or the pain of her family.

reply from: lukesmom

Hi, my name is Sue and my youngest very much wanted son was diagnosed with a fatal anomaly called Anencephaly when I was 16 weeks pregnant. The pain of being told your child is going to die is the worst hell imaginable. No one can even begin to know that pain unless they have had a "diagnosis day". The pain and grief numbs your mind and then you are told you have to make this "choice". Your baby is going to die. Period. No hope. But you are told YOU have to decide WHEN your baby will die. An impossible decision NO ONE should have to make. I carried my son to term. I don't know who told your friend her life was at risk. Unless there were mitagating circumstances, pregnancy with a dying child doesn't have anymore risk than a pregnancy with a healthy child.
I also have unconditional love for my child. That is why I refused to have him subjected to the pain of having a needle stuck into his heart and injected with a med to stop his heart. It is too bad your friend consented to kill her child and felt she died twice. She didn't need to die twice but that was her choice and, yes, she had a choice. I died once on diagnosis day. Luke's birthday was a peaceful, spiritual day. Was it sorrowful, yes but I did not grieve killing my son.
No one HAS to kill their child because of a poor or fatal prenatal diagnosis. There are many of us who make the choice not to and I have not met one single mom who has regreted allowing her child to die naturally. Your friend had a choice, a hard, hellish choice but a choice none the less. She chose when and how her child would die. I feel her pain but cannot condone the choice she made. In fact I rather pity her. Those of us who carry to term get to meet our children and love them unconditionally. We have gentle, peaceful memories. She has the memory of how she chose to kill her dying child. I feel sorry for her and so should we all. I have been part of a group trying to educate doctors and nurses and families that there IS another choice besides abortion and it is a wonderful choice and not as difficult and painful as you all may think.
At this time there is NOTHING you can do to help her but the usual freind things like listening although it sounds like she wants you to convert to her way of thinking instead of agreeing to disagree. I will give you a few sites to look at and my story link is in my signature.
God bless, Sue, Luke's mom
http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/
http://www.benotafraid.net/

reply from: lukesmom

I have spoken to several. Some where not "told" they could carry to term and only abortion was mentioned to them. On our diagnosis day the only written info I was given was about "termination". My doctor even said if it were him... I have talked to moms whose drs have refused to continue seeing them if they continued their pregnancy. Then there are the doctors who only know about and therefore tell their pts those lovely mutant pictures spinny is so fond of. So, yes, sometimes physicians "lie" through their own ignorance and in the mistaken belief they are sparing the parents additional grief.

reply from: lukesmom

My kids all went through the pain of losing their sib. Death is a part of life. The older ones now know of the "choice" we had to make and are understandably horrified someone would want us to kill their brother. They love him and are proud of him. After he was born and died, they took his picture to their grade school to share just like all the other kids do when they have a newborn sib. What none of you understand is that carrying to term is not a "daily sorrow" and is actually not a horror. I felt as much joy and peace as I did sorrow. It is funny how moms don't understand this until they actually carry to term. Those of us who have ctt share a wonder none of you will ever be able to understand unfortunantly for you.

reply from: carolemarie

How terrible for your friend! I can't imagine how devastating that was.....
at this point, I agree 100% with Faithman.....

reply from: 4choice4all

What was right for your kids and your family doesn't translate to what is right for every family. You keep forgetting to frame your story as your personal experience and not a universal truth. For you it wasn't a daily sorrow...for others, it might be. And I don't believe you have the right to tell any woman how to grieve or how to mourn or how to heal or how to deal.
I loved nursing my children..loved it. I didnt' nurse my first but I did my next two. It was an added dimension to motherhood that I'm glad I experienced and I wish every mother would have that experience. It was beautiful...a beautiful gift and an added depth to our bonding. BUT...I recognize that for some women it is horrible and painful and frustrating and they hate every second of nursing...so they bottle feed. That doesn't mean they don't bond...it doesn't mean it's not best for their family situation. And although I wish all would try it...I recognize that I only speak from my personal experience and that has very little bearing on any other woman's life experience. I'm not so vain as to think my way is the only way.

reply from: Shenanigans

So how did she deal with the child who passed from SIDs, did she just tell her other kid "oh, that kid in teh photo? Oh, they ate too many broccolli stems and grew up so fast they moved away and then while they were away they found a doorway into the land of fairies and leprechauns and now they can't return here, but they're now the king of the Sprites!!
And what's she gonna do when the sibling finds out about an abortion?
You under estimate teh ability of children to accept death - they tend to handle it better then adults. Just talk to most children with terminal diganosis.
As you choicers keep reminding us, what business is it of theirs? They're going to notice swollen belly oneday and then no swollen belly? Having to explain she aborted late term would probably be more embarrassing then giving birth to a child who passed soon after.
And how did she go about the SIDs explanation?
Also, you underestimate people's willingness to be kind and understanding as opposed to being tactless about a child who has a terminal illness.
So... what you're saying is killing someone is justified to prevent the contiunance of pain of those around the dying?
Therefore, by your logic, its justified to kill someone with cancer to save those around the cancer patient of suffering with the witnessing of said terminal illness progression.

reply from: lukesmom

#1. I do not share Luke's story as a "universal truth" but as a truth of what can be done adn a very viable "choice" that sometimes is not given to parents.
#2. Education is the key to helping moms deal with this "choice" when it comes to poor or fatal prenatal diagnosis. Too often moms are not given accurate information but instead a doctors skewed version. When I was faced with this "choice" there was NO info about ctt. Believe me, I asked. No woman can make a truely informed choice for herself, her baby and her family unless she is presented with ALL the facts, not just some of them. So, after Luke's birth and death, I worked with many other moms to help ensure moms are educated on BOTH her choices. Just so happens I have never "terminated" so can only present the ctt aspect. Sorry if you see that as my "universal truth" instead of sharing Luke to help other women make their choice and to actually give emotional support and helpful tips to help another family through what we went through alone. Possibly I should just escort them into an abortion clinic? I am not going to attack or condemn any women facing this, God knows she has enough pain to deal with as it is. I will, though, give her the first hand info of what it was like to ctt and to bury my child.
#3. Your comparing the death of a child to nursing or not nursing your living children is unspeakable. You deal with the death of a child and burying a part of your heart, come talk, until then, you know nothing.
#4. You made a blanket statement about kids dealing with the death of a sib. They have to deal with that death whether it be through termination or natural death. Who do you think you are saving grief here? Your way is NOT the only way either and again, you have no experience in this just supposition.

reply from: 4choice4all

A....the child she lost to SIDS was born before her living child was born..she can explain that in time..when the child is more mature...same with the termination of this pregnancy. Again...what her child can and can not handle right now is best left to the parents to decide...not strangers on a board somewhere.
It's not their business..and her concern shouldn't be with them...but with herself...and what she's willing to endure.
Again...I don't feel it's killing "someone"...and I respect a woman's right to make that decision as it pertains to HER life, HER body, HER family.
I have no problem with euthanasia or assisted suicide.

reply from: Shenanigans

So, she has no photos of her SIDs child anywhere? No old toys or cribs or clothes? Her child is gonna ask about the child before its "more mature".
Of course, telling the child that she had its sibling slaughtered for her own emotional stability, justifying it with this "oh, its so horribly deformed" eugenics minded BS will probably scare the hell out of said chld "Oh no, if I get sick, or bruise my face, mummy might kill me".
Now you're saying its justified to kill another based on what she can endure? What if her living child gets cancer or brained by a truck? Will she kill them because she can't endure a peg feed?
Yes, we are all aware of your selection process around which humans may and may not be allowed to continue their existence.
Most people who support the legalised slaughter of the unborn tend to extend their bloodlust to other humans of what you precieve as a lesser standard of existance.
It really is all about the kililng with you, isn't it? Do you get some kind of orgasmic high knowing you in all your wealth of knowledge can dispatch a human life, or support its destruction?

reply from: 4choice4all

You always dance around the well publicized notion that as a PROCHOICE individual I do not regard a fetus as a child. When you recognize that you will stop asking stupid questions about whether we think it's ok to murder born children...which we are clear on, we do not. So no...she can't kill her kid if it gets cancer....yada yada. And of course, you can't compare ending a pregnancy of a child incompatible with life to a bruised face. Maybe we should wait until you are more mature to continue this conversation?
For me, and most prochoice individuals...it's all about the choice...and trusting women to make the right choice for themselves....and preventing others from taking choice away.

reply from: Shenanigans

and:
These points are relatable and completely relevant.
You are determining the worth of someone's life based on semantics! When you do this you end up creating petty distinctions that can be used to ignore facts you have no wish to entertain.
Its very easy for someone to throw around these silly distinctions. I mean, really, think about it, the only reason you don't support the right to life of the human uterine entity is based on a word. Not on science. Not on medicine. Not on psychology. Not on facts. But on a word. You even ignore the historical truth of Hebrew semantics that after multiple translations have been worded as something else (that whole two men fighting, one knocks a pregnant lady thing).
Words change meanings all the time., just look at "gay"!
Your whole argument is based on a word.
You may think its about a "woman's body" and her "right to choose her little reproductive destinty" but at its core, you base your mess of an argument on a word. If it wasn't for that word, you couldn't harp on about a woman's body. You need that word.
That word is flawed.
This is where having an argument based on a word causes problem. You prove the argument to be false and unable to stand up to its logical conclusion.
If the human uterine entity is not a child, and you determine that based on a word and not science, then you can forgo science and apply that word to born children.
Birth is not a process that determines the right to life. Life begins at conception. You have said you have issues or dont' support LTA for friviolous reasons, but your argument, based on a word, DEMANDS that you MUST support LTA. Would you lead a 9 month pregnant woman across to an abortion clinic if she told you she jsut up one mornign and decided she didn't want her baby. Her finanical situation is the same, there is not foetal abnormality, she wasn't raped, her life is not endanger, she is not mentally unstable, she is not under duress, she just decides to have a 9 month abortion.
Your word argument demands you support her right to choose to kill her viable, healthy human uterine entity.
Your argument is based on a word. The concept of choice - based on a word.
And that word has no standing in reality, it is flawed in its meaning and its application. The argument of killing born children being immoral because they are born is moot, because it is based on the word.
You cannot logically use a word that farts in the face of science and knowledge to determine a purpose of thought or argument.
It further proves the stupidity of the word argument. "Choice" is implying a plural, meaning you have multiple things. Pro-Choice is only about one thing. When you say you are pro-choice we know that to mean you are supporting abortion. Choice = abortion.
Pro-Choice is about Pro-choice to kill unborn children.
An argument based on a word which is based on lies, and ignores science, reason and logic.

reply from: Cecilia

Hi julie. my question is, do you still think this is true: Whoever thinks late term abortion is ok, should die.
sort of changes things when it's brought close to home like this.

reply from: 4choice4all

The location and level of development are not "semantics". They are realities that you refuse to recognize. I get that you won't agree...but find it hard to believe you won't recognize simple facts if your purpose is truly to debate.(which is what you are doing when you directly engage in questioning) Again, if the abortion debate relied on science, medicine, theology or philosophy....according to you the debate would be over since they would all be on your side..because your side insists that it has the "truth" and the "only right answers". The REALITY is that churches don't universally agree with you, the medically community is not in full agreement with you, philosophers are not in agreement iwth you and scientists are not in agreement with you. Maybe that's because you DON'T have the only right answer.
It's not about a word....and to insist it is, is to ensure your ongoing ignorance about the debate...not that I believe you want a legitimate well thought out debate on the issue.

reply from: lukesmom

Maybe a puppy or a kitten or what do you think the fetus becomes magically at birth? Ask any 2 yr old what is in mommy's pregnant belly and they will reply "a baby". How is it they are more truthful than you?
Yada, Yada, yada. Meaningless words and a lot of wasted hot air.
You say you are christian but yet, you kill and throw away a child He created in His own image. You don't trust Him but chose to presume to take His place and destroy what He has made. You have set yourself in God's place, beware false christians.

reply from: lukesmom

Proof of those assurtions please. I would like to see accurate medical info and facts about your statement about "churches". I find your post hillarious as it is very evident you "insist" you have the "truth" and the "only right answers". I have found you to be very inflexable and judgemental as a proabort fanatic. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! LOL!

reply from: 4choice4all

Well hell..then let a 2 year old make a major life decision for a woman...that makes sense...since they can mutter "baby".
Why don't you trust that because God has allowed abortions to be performed at a million a year that perhaps it IS Her plan and perhaps you are interfering with Her will. Perhaps God allows for free will for a reason and you play God when to try to thwart a woman's free will because you believe you have "the truth" that is above another christian's truth. Perhaps God looks into our hearts and finds those that are filled with hate towards those that are prochoice to be more sorrowful than a prochoice person that believes they act in love.

reply from: lukesmom

Geez, what a confiluted way of thinking! I have heard of people changing God's words to fit what they want but you have taken it to a new level. The fact you equate love and the killing of unborn human beings is rather chilling and telling about your personality. I rather think Scott Roeder killed Tiller in the name of love also. You too are two peas in a pod.

reply from: 4choice4all

Many churches would disagree with you, you know. Has it ever even entered your head that perhaps you don't know 100% what God would think? If not, that's frightening. That's no different than any other religious fanatic.

reply from: lukesmom

Evidently you haven't heard of the "12 Commandments" the very basics of christianity. How about commandment #6 Thou shall not kill? I wouldn't be suprised if you rationalized that in your mind to accomidate the killing of unborn children of God.
No one is so blind as she who will not see. Pity. You seem like an assentually nice person. Too bad you have been so blinded to the truth given to us.

reply from: galen

_______________________________
personally 4 and i was 1 of those in my second pregnancy...
I had the flu and a high fever... my Ob told me that the child would probably be deformed... and i should terminate... when i abrupted at 22 weeks they said the same thing. needless to say I did not abort and there is nothing wrong w/ my son... he was full term and perfect.

reply from: 4choice4all

Obviously, you refuse to "hear" and only wish to distort to provide yourself with more reason to hate. Where is God in your agenda?
Stop for a minute with the standard responses and distortions. Do you honestly believe that christian churches that support choice fail to mention the commandments? fail to discuss Thou shalt not kill? Do you believe groups like Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice or Faith Aloud have not read the bible? Do you believe our pastors did not go to Seminary? Or that the seminaries they attended didn't teach the bible?
You KNOW they did and do but came to a different conclusion. Does that frighten you so much that you can't acknowledge it? That perhaps one CAN be christian and CAN love and serve God while being prochoice? Because if you admit that...then you have to admit that your belief is just that...a belief...not a moral absolute. So instead of being conflicted by that or praying on that you refuse to acknowledge that and there in is the wallowing in ignorance. I acknowledge why you believe how you do. I acknowledge your convictions and that they come from a good place. And I acknowledge that it leads you to a different, yet no less deeply held conviction. I acknowledge that it is possible that one of us is right and the other could be wrong. I acknowledge that God's love and mercy is beyond human comprehension and I make no pronounced stand that my convictions are the only ones that are true to God. That's why I am free to love my neighbor. That belief in God frees me to choose love over hate in this debate.
If your religious convictions paint you into a corner where you have to condemn, judge, insult, harass or speak ill of your neighbor...and mine allows me to love in spite of differences ....whose convictions fall more in line with the essence of God?

reply from: galen

_________________
You and what other churches? Anton Lavey's??

reply from: galen

____________________________-
most people realise when they are twisting theory and theology to make themselves feel better about something they know is wrong... you should try it.

reply from: 4choice4all

Hurry up Galen...deflect! Slander! Use rhetoric! insult! hate! hurry...before someone thinks about it in response! hurry....before someone tries to be insightful or engage in debate! hurry....you are so desperate to keep dialogue from unfolding on this board! Just say it...."Sue, don't talk to her..she's the devil, she's the devil." Quick, someone might treat me, a bloodsoaked proabort prodeath scanc, like an actual human being....and we know, once I'm human it's harder to demean me. So quick Galen....divert, divert, divert.

reply from: lukesmom

____________________________-
most people realise when they are twisting theory and theology to make themselves feel better about something they know is wrong... you should try it.
Thanks Mary for saying exactly what I was saying. She is really working hard to delude herself and twist christianity to her own version.

reply from: 4choice4all

Ah...so everyone that disagrees with you is delusional? How loving of you. Does that include the Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims of the world too?

reply from: galen

so too all crusaders in old times...
now she's ranting.. wonder if froth is coming out her long nose yet?

reply from: lukesmom

Quite obvious you don't know much about Galen. She puts you to shame when it comes to kindness, and helping women and their families. Galen hate? LOL! You really need to don't know her very well. Like I said, she puts you to shame.

reply from: galen

___________________
not the ones that actually listen to the tennents and theology of thier beliefs...
every one you have mentioned says abortion is wrong..

reply from: 4choice4all

First....Galen's actions are obvious to everyone that is willing to acknowledge them. Whenever the two sides start to actually talk....the insults begin...diversion tactics. Because so many on this board insist that IF you talk to a prochoice person...you are not truly prolife. and that is truly sad.
Your knowledge of the tenets of most faiths is limited. I absolutely adhere to mine...without question.

reply from: galen

when did pointing out a falacy become and insult?
You my dear do not know any other tenents except your own , otherwise you would not paint them in the same stripe as yourself. Just because people of a particular faith have abortions does NOT mean thier religion condones them...

reply from: galen

ANd you should know that if i agree w/ someone then i tell them so.. pro choice or prolife..so don't get your knickers out of whack over this... i just don't agree with you.

reply from: 4choice4all

When did anything that contradicts your beliefs become fallacy?
Tell me, what do Hindus say about abortion? And Jews? Methodists? Muslims?

reply from: galen

none of them endorse it except to save the life of a mother in EARLY pregnancy, after viability it is not something condoned... you after viability need to try and savce both the child and the mother.
BTW so does christianity.

reply from: ProInformed

Baby Saved by Fetal Heart Surgery
By Liz Townsend
For the first time in Canada, a baby survived fetal surgery to correct a narrowed heart valve and is now thriving. Océane McKenzie, born at six pounds, one ounce one month after the surgery, is expected to return home to Gatineau, Quebec, soon, according to the Ottawa Citizen.
"I think it opens up all sorts of opportunities for the future ... it's something we can offer to other babies," Dr. Greg Ryan, chief of the fetal medicine unit at Mount Sinai Hospital, told Canadian Press (CP). "I think the important thing is getting the message out to the referring physicians that this is something that's now available in Canada."
Océane's parents, Vicki and Ian McKenzie, discovered that their unborn baby girl had critical aortic stenosis, a narrowing of the left ventricle's main outlet valve, at 30 weeks into the pregnancy, the Ottawa Citizen reported. If not treated, the baby could have died of heart failure or the condition would have developed into hypoplastic left heart syndrome, with a 10-year survival rate of only 65%, according to CP.
Although the procedure had not yet been successful in Canada, doctors at the Hospital for Sick Children and Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto believed that the McKenzies' baby was a good candidate for the surgery. "It can only be offered to a few babies in utero who are detected at the correct stage and when their aorta hasn't yet narrowed too much," Dr. Edgar Jaeggi, head of the fetal cardiac program at the Hospital for Sick Children, told CP. "This baby came to us at just the right time."
The operation took place just three days after the diagnosis, on March 19. The doctors inserted a needle into Vicki McKenzie's womb and then into the baby's heart. A tiny balloon catheter was placed into the aorta, where it would widen the valve, according to the Toronto Star.
Océane survived the surgery and was born one month later on April 15. She has since undergone two more operations to further widen the valve, and may need an aorta transplant when she is older, the Ottawa Citizen reported. But her parents, along with two older brothers, are thrilled she is doing well and can come home.
"Finally after two months, we can say we're a lot more relaxed and confident that she is going to be home and live a normal life," Vicki McKenzie told CP. "Modern science, modern medicine is amazing. And we're so happy it was able to give us a chance to be a family of five."

reply from: lukesmom

http://www.benotafraid.net/story.asp?id=124

http://www.benotafraid.net/story.asp?id=14

http://www.benotafraid.net/story.asp?id=131

http://www.benotafraid.net/story.asp?id=81

Not very convenient to believe true internet stories of misdiagnosis, esp when accompanied by pictures of normal healthy children.

reply from: galen

here are a few links..
http://www.crescentlife.com/family%20matters/islam_and_abortion.htm

http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Abortion_in_Jewish_Law.asp
http://www.fnsa.org/fall98/murti1.html

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bullitt/bfaq.html#abortion

reply from: lukesmom

Why don't you people do your own research?

reply from: ProInformed

jharmsen - READ the following story!
http://www.benotafraid.net/story.asp?id=124

This is just one of the examples of a mother being subjected to pro-abort pressures with dire diagnoses that weren't even true.
If that mother had been convinced to abort her baby boy she would believe, and would be telling others, that she 'had to abort' for medical reasons, that her baby would have died anyway of severe defects, BUT that would not be true.

reply from: ProInformed

I agree. Also...did her story move you to think that perhaps your previous view was narrow and skewed? Or do you still believe that everyone that seeks a late term abortion should die? If it's the former...reach out in love and mend your friendship. If its the later, God help you.
4choice4all - on a scale of 1-10 how well-informed do you think you are about abortion and related facts?
We have chanting choicists arriving at this site all the time - mouthing the myths they've been told by abortion industry lobby groups... before taking any time to learn the facts.
Name three of the late-term abortionists:
Name one of the women who died from a supposedly 'safe' saline abortion in the U.S. after Roe v Wade, and AFTER Japanese doctors had warned U.S. doctors that they had stopped using the saline abortion method in Japan because it was too dangerous for the mother:
Who ran six regional abortion clinics for abortionist Tommy Tucker, who taught her to perform abortions herself without formal medical training?
In the only large-scale study of pregnant rape victims ever conducted, what percent chose not to abort?
Who said:
"I was trained by a professional marketing director in how to sell abortions over the telephone. He took every one of our receptionists, nurses, and anyone else who would deal with people over the phone through an extensive training period. The object was, when the girl called, to hook the sale so that she wouldn't get an abortion somewhere else, or adopt out her baby, or change her mind. We were doing it for the money." ?
Who said:
"I'll be quite frank:
most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range ...
In my particular case, probably 20% [of this procedure] are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective." ?
What is the opinion of abortionist Warren Hern, considered THE EXPERT on abortions, who literally wrote the textbook used to teach abortionists, about RU-486?
What did the letters in NARAL stand for before Roe v Wade;
what do the letters stand for now?
Technically, at what point of human develoment is the term 'zygote' no longer accurate and honest?
At a National Abortion Federation Risk Management Seminar, how many abortionists admitted that their preferred/usual method for dealing with it when
they accidently pull bowel (extract part of a patient's bowel through a perforation in her uterus), is to stuff the bowel back through the perforation, administer medications to make the uterus contract and control bleeding, monitor the woman more carefully in recovery, and if she seemed okay, send her home none the wiser?
Originally posted by: 4choice4all
I would say an 8 1/2. I won't participate in your litmus test for prochoice individuals. I have nothing to prove to you. Besides...it's moronic. We are on the internet...anyone could google the answers they didn't know in 10 minutes or less. It's juvenile.
Yup - anyone who actually is pro-informed instead of carefully and cowardly protecting themselves from learning anything about abortion besides what the abortion industry and biased media and biased government schools told them COULD learn the truth online, couldn't they?
So why don't you prove to us that you're as well-informed as you say you are, eh?
Answer the questions or admit you don't know and don't care enough to learn.
Edited: 06/02/2009 at 02:45 PM by ProInformed

reply from: 4choice4all

I have. The Dali Lama says it's a case by case decision. Orthodox Jews tend to be prolife(although my Orthodox friend and her church regularly host prochoice speakers) and Reformed Jews tend to be prochoice. Muslims have different beliefs based the soul and when the fetus becomes a person. In Christianity there are prochoice denominations. It's far from universally accepted.

reply from: lukesmom

Here's another:
http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/Stories/Misdiagnosis_sister.htm

reply from: faithman

_________________
You and what other churches? Anton Lavey's??
...snicker....

reply from: galen

no the dalia lamma says that you endanger your karma by killing ANYTHING.. none of the reform Jews say that abortion is ok after the 1st trimester except for tay Sachs cases, and the sects of christianity that say its OK are considered just that sects, or cult followings.. none are endorsed by those they offshoot from.
Personally i am wary of anyone who twists the words of thier prophets to meet thier own needs and desires, espeially when it flies in the face of all other basic tennents of thier faith.
the golden rule and thou shall not kill are pretty basic..even a 2 year old can follow them.
http://www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=44914992-3048-741E-6589750633158125

reply from: 4choice4all

You are wrong. The dalai lama said it's case by case. "I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance." quoted in a NYT column
The reform Jews absolutely are prochoice. "he Reform perspective on abortion can be described as follows: Abortion is an extremely difficult choice faced by a woman. In all circumstances, it should be her decision whether or not to terminate a pregnancy, backed up by those whom she trusts (physician, therapist, partner, etc.). This decision should not be taken lightly (abortion should never be used for birth control purposes) and can have life-long ramifications. However, any decision should be left up to the woman within whose body the fetus is growing." from the reformed Judaism website
Maybe if your religious beliefs are so simple a 2 yo can get it.....you have attempted to get to the meat of the matter. I'm wary of anyone that claims to know the will of God absolutely.

reply from: galen

____________________________
By your own quote the reform church says abortion should not be usede for birth controll... and in thier own writings they say that it has long term remifications... not exactly saying its OK...
I do not profess to know God .. neither do you.. so by your own words the logical conclusion is that you Too could be wrong....
Why not look to Occam's razor...When multiple competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities.
in other words.. when you have more of the major religions saying that a thing is true... ie abortion/ killing is wrong, then the logical conclusion is that abortion/ killing is wrong.

reply from: galen

or try this one
1 Corinthians 13
The Supremacy of Love
1If I speak in the languages of humans and angels but have no love, I have become a reverberating gong or a clashing cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can understand all secrets and every form of knowledge, and if I have absolute faith so as to move mountains but have no love, I am nothing. 3Even if I give away everything that I have and sacrifice myself,[a] but have no love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is always patient;13
love is always kind;
love is never envious
or arrogant with pride.
Nor is she conceited,
5 and she is never rude;
she never thinks just of herself
or ever get annoyed.
She never is resentful;
6 is never glad with sin,
but always glad to side with truth,
whene'er the truth should win.
7 She bears up under everything,
believes the best in all,
there is no limit to her hope,
and she will never fall.
8Love never fails. Now if there are prophecies, they will be done away with. If there are languages, they will cease. If there is knowledge, it will be done away with. 9For what we know is incomplete and what we prophesy is incomplete. 10But when what is complete[c] comes, then what is incomplete will be done away with.
11When I was a child, I spoke like a child, thought like a child, and reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up my childish ways. 12Now we see only an indistinct image in a mirror, but then we will be face to face. Now what I know is incomplete, but then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known.
13Right now three things remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love.

Now how is it loving to kill a viable child just to be able to live your life as you wish
Mother Thereasa said:
"America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father's role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts -- a child -- as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters"
And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners. Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign." (Mother Theresa -- "Notable and Quotable," Wall Street Journal, 2/25/94, p. A14)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? How do we persuade a woman not to have an abortion? As always, we must persuade her with love, and we remind ourselves that love means to be willing to give until it hurts. Jesus gave even his life to love us. So the mother who is thinking of abortion, should be helped to love - that is, to give until it hurts her plans, or her free time, to respect the life of her child. The father of that child, whoever he is, must also give until it hurts. By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems. And by abortion, the father is told that he does not have to take any responsibility at all for the child he has brought into the world. That father is likely to put other women into the same trouble. So abortion just leads to more abortion. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching the people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child. I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted, and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child, and be loved by the child. From our children's home in Calcutta alone, we have saved over 3,000 children from abortions. These children have brought such love and joy to their adopting parents, and have grown up so full of love and joy!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 1997 - National Prayer Breakfast in Washington attended by the President and the First Lady. "What is taking place in America," she said, "is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Any country that accepts abortion, is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what it wants."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."

reply from: lukesmom

As Buddhism is based on the concept of Ahimsa, the nonviolence and respect toward all sentient life within and without the human species is key to the religion.
The current Dalai Lama of Tibetan Buddhism, Tenzin Gyatso, has referred to abortion as a sin against "non-violence to all sentient beings". However, he has also stated that abortion might be permissible in specific, limited circumstances, "Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances.
For Hindus, abortion is a great sin and a crime. The sin of abortion is one of the worst sin for Hindus. It is one of the six kinds of murder described in Hindu culture. Moreover, abortion thwarts a soul in its progress towards God, like any other act of violence.
http://living.oneindia.in/kamasutra/spheres-of-life/indian-religions-abortion-teachings.html

As for the Dalai Lama comment in the NYT, you may have wanted to read his whole statement and not just one line.
Q: How do you feel, then, about Pope John Paul II's continued opposition
to birth control?
A: That's his religious principle. He is acting from a certain principle
-- especially when he speaks about the need to respect the rights of
fetuses. Actually, I feel very touched that the Pope has taken a stand on
that.
Q: Can you also understand the needs of a woman who might not be able to
raise a child?
A: When I was in Lithuania a few years ago, I visited a nursery and I was
told, "All these children are unwanted." So I think it is better that that
situation be stopped right from the beginning -- birth control. Of course,
abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative,
generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child
will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the
parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion
should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance
http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/tib/nytimes.htm

reply from: galen

this is the quote on reform jews and abortion...
Abortion
The Reform Movement has had a long history of liberalism on many social and family matters. Reform feels that the pattern of tradition, until the most recent generation, has demonstrated a liberal approach to abortion and has definitely permitted it in case of any danger to the life of the mother. That danger may be physical or psychological. When this occurs at any time during the pregnancy, Reform Judaism would not hesitate to permit an abortion. This would also include cases of incest and rape if the mother wishes to have an abortion.
Twentieth century medicine has brought a greater understanding of the fetus, and it is now possible to discover major problems in the fetus quite early in the pregnancy. Some genetic defects can be discovered shortly after conception and more research will make such techniques widely available. It is, of course, equally true that modern medicine has presented ways of keeping babies with very serious problems alive, frequently in a vegetative state, which brings great misery to the family involved. Such problems, as those caused by Tay Sachs and other degenerative or permanent conditions which seriously endanger the life of the child and potentially the mental health of the mother, are indications for permitting an abortion.
Reform Judaism agrees with the traditional authorities that abortions should be approached cautiously throughout the life of the fetus. Most authorities would be least hesitant during the first forty days of the fetus' life (Yeb. 69b; Nid. 30b; M. Ker. 1.1; Shulhan Arukah Hoshen Mishpat 210.2; Solomon Skola, Bet Shelomo, Hoshen Mishpat 132; Joseph Trani, Responsa Maharit 1.99, Noam 9 pp 213ff, etc.). Even the strict Rabbi Unterman permits non-Jews to perform abortions within the forty day periods (Rabbi Unterman, op. cit., pp 8ff).
From forty days until twenty-seven weeks, the fetus possesses some status, but its future remains doubtful (goses biydei adam; San. 78a; Nid 44b and commentaries) as we are not sure of this viability. Reform Judaism must, therefore, be more certain of the grounds for abortion, but would still permit it.
It is clear from all of this that the traditional authorities would be most lenient with abortions within the first forty days. After that time, there is a difference of opinion. Those who are within the broadest range of permissibility permit abortion at any time before birth, if there is serious danger to the health of the mother or child. Reform Judaism does not encourage abortion, nor favor it for trivial reasons, or sanction it "on demand."

reply from: galen

HMMMM
she wanted debate....

reply from: 4choice4all

The reform jews are about choice though. There is not a consensus amongst religious people that abortion is wrong or that a fetus is equal to a born person. And yes..I've said over and over I could be wrong...which is why I'm open to dialogue...real dialogue, not hate and rhetoric. More of the major religions....where do you see consensus? I see absolutely none. I see a million abortions in america that cross religious lines. I don't need to look to alternative methods of determining my belief about abortion...I've looked to the one that matters...my God. I trust my discernment process and if that process was faulty...I will look to a merciful and just God that knows my heart and my soul and how my convictions were formed only in a way that I felt honored my faith.
Mother Theresa is not my God or my minister...I believe her convictions were strong and built on love...but that doesn't mean I believe she had the only and the "right' answers.
Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy....smiling at a woman that is being harassed and making her feel like a valid human being when others tell her she's a fornicating whore isn't mercy?
Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God. discernment from a pure heart....
Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God. Do you make peace when you kill doctors? do you make peace when you inject rhetoric and vitriol where dialogue is blooming?

reply from: galen

Niether I nor Sue have done any of the things you seem to bve accusing us of... Hate? yelling at women? where when?
I used to run a shelter for battered women, and i still own the property and contribute to it as do my husband and children. i taught nursing and prenatal health and neonatology. I never went to a clinic to protest... i did on several occasions take out women who were brought in by abusive boyfriends or husbands. I have not threatened or insulted anyone there...no did i do so to you... I have never advocated violence... TO ASNYONE.. so why do you sit here on this board and say i do?
You are a confused woman... i wonder if you have ever been there for the aftermath when a woman is forced/ coerced by her SO or a clinic worker and then becomes suicidal after her AB was preformed?

reply from: galen

You can twist beatitudes all you like... but love kindness and mercy must be extended to everyone...that includes those who can not speak for themselves.

reply from: ProInformed

"I have seen hundreds of patients in my office who have had abortions and were just lied to by the abortion counselor. Namely 'This is less painful than having a tooth removed. It is not a baby.' Afterwards, the woman sees Life magazine and breaks down and goes into a major depression."
--Psychologist Vincent Rue quoted in "Abortion Inc" David Kupelian and Jo Ann Gasper, New Dimensions, October 1991 p 16

reply from: galen

___________________
Wheer have i done anything like this?
i do not EVER advocate violence of any kind... i in fact fight agaist it on this very board any chance i get...
Before you go accusing people with generalities you might do a bit of research first.
you may be an escort for women... but would you take a bullet for one?

reply from: ProInformed

misdiagnosis stories:
http://prenatalpartnersforlife.org/Stories/MisdiagnosedStoriesIndex.htm

It is important to realize that if these babies had been aborted their mothers would believe the abortion was 'needed' and (somehow -magically) saved their baby from suffering, when the truth was they would have been allowing their healthy baby to be killed... until the mothers eventually learned the truth...
and then the same choicists who pretended they cared about those mothers would target them with hostility if they didn't keep quiet.

reply from: 4choice4all

Rhetoric and vitriol? I'm a satanist, I distort religion for self serving reasons, I'm delusional , ranting, foaming at the nose, false christian, proabort fanatic and the best....no different than Scott Roeder. And that's just in this thread.
When you post things that do not talk about abortion but insinuate that it supports your prolife stance...that's fine. When I post something that imo supports my actions, I'm twisting. Now why would that double standard exist? is it because you believe you are absolutely right and my religious beliefs are absolutely wrong? Because neither bible passage is about abortion...but we read and interpret them to support our convictions.
Obviously I would take a bullet to do the right thing....I still escort.

reply from: lukesmom

Galen! You killed a doctor! When? Give us the scoop 4choice, you seem to have all the answers although they have been twisted quite a bit.

reply from: galen

_________________________
You really are delierious... no i did not call you a satanist... i asked what religion other than your supported abortion the way you do...
You do seem a bit frothy... that is not an insult but an observation...
everything i put out there directly pertains to abortion...And so far your posts do not eem to support your actions, rather they contradict them... you escort women into an abortion mill...you don't ask them why they are doing this procedure... you have no idea if they are just flippant about it or what. Your own religion says that abortion should not be used as birth controll and that the descision should not be made lightly... why then do you support it? Do you think that all the women you escort fall into the 1% of abortions that are medically necessary? If you want an honest debate thwen get honest with yourself about what happens at the mills... and get honest with yourself about what Tiller was doing. having women deliver on toilets is NEVER standard medical practice.. neither is having patients waiting in motels to dialate ...no one but Tiller EVER did such a thing.
For the record i never give absolutes on anything religious, but i do back up what i believe with things if find irrefutable... if you can poke a hole in them you can go right ahead... try. But don't put ideas in y mouth when they are coming from your own delusions....

de·lu·sion [ di l??'n ] (plural de·lu·sions)
noun

Definition:

1. false belief: a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence, especially as a symptom of a psychiatric condition

2. mistaken notion: a false or mistaken belief or idea about something

[15th century. < Latin delusion-< past participle of deludere (see delude)]

de·lu·sion·al adjective

reply from: galen

Galen! You killed a doctor! When? Give us the scoop 4choice, you seem to have all the answers although they have been twisted quite a bit.
_______________________
yeah i must have nonviolently pacified him to death??

reply from: 4choice4all

You asked about my church and asked if it was satanic. Of course I know it's a joke....but I'm commenting on how the dialogue gets lost in underhanded slams.
No...it does not directly point to abortion...it's your interpretation. You post Corinthians...that's not about abortion. The bible is quite silent about abortion actually. So you interpret things and that leads you to a prolife stance. Great. I interpret them differently...and so do many denominations and individuals. What you find irrefutable doesn't translate to universal religious truth...put Galen religious truth.

reply from: lukesmom

Hate to tell you but you are ranting and some of what you are saying sounds really twisted. You can take any basic belief and twist it to whatever you want, doesn't make it the same though. At least be an honest. You say you are christian and believe in God and Jesus' teachings yet you escort women in to kill one of God's creations for their own convenience. Christians believe humans where made in His image, so essentially you are killing Him. Christians are also taught to have trust and faith in God and let God be God but instead you have placed yourself on His throne and taken control of and are assisting in the distruction of another human life. That is commonly known as playing God. I don't know God's mind or God's way but "playing God" is a big no-no in christianity. Are we being "hateful" in pointing out these christian truths to you? No, I sure would hate to see you regreting your earthly actions in the afterlife. But, as you say, God has given us choices and you are making yours and the mothers your are escorting are making theirs and may God have mercy on all of you. Like Galen, I don't usually argue religion because I respect others choices of religious belief as long as there is no violence involved. The way you have twisted your religion to fit your lifestyle had to be commented on though. You accuse us of hate (quite untrue btw) but yet you kill human life. To me that is hateful, maybe not to you. In that case you are more chilling than I originally thought. That is not an insult but instead an observation.

reply from: galen

love and what it means IS universal...
you can not love and destroy at the same time.
I don't see how you can honstly spin it any other way...
thou shall not kill is pretty clear too.
and corinthians is pretty clear that love conquers all evils... abortion is evil , murder is evil.. if you can't see how it pertains i'm sorry... that is your own personal problem.
I did not ask if YOUR church was satanic...
the qote is here:
Originally posted by: 4choice4all
Many churches would disagree with you, you know. Has it ever even entered your head that perhaps you don't know 100% what God would think? If not, that's frightening. That's no different than any other religious fanatic.
_________________
You and what other churches? Anton Lavey's??
********************************************
I asked what other religions you thought sanctioned all abortions( wich is what we were talking about) and then added the anton lavey comment.. ( his group does sanction all abortionwich is what we were talking about)
after all Satanism IS a sacnctioned religion in this country.
It is not my fault if you misinterpreted a simple question and deluded yourself that you were being personally attacked...

reply from: Faramir

Are you saying an escort kills babies? That was my question to churchmouse, but if you care to answer, that would be fine.
If it were not for the escort there would be no abortion?
And could you explain how a finite human can kill an infinite god?

reply from: galen

I believe an escort is culpable to the abortion.. not as much as the docs and nurses ewtc.. but still part of the cog in the abortion mill buisness.. and yes i believe that many women are egged on by the escorts.. and many would turn away if they were not there...

reply from: churchmouse

No it's a monkey...of course it's not human. For you who are pro-choice it's not a child until you take it home from the hospital. One second before its born its nothing, and after it takes its first breath its WHOLLA, A PERSON A BABY.
Even little kids know it's a baby. How many fetus showers have you gone to? Did you ever ask a female friend who was pregnant how her fetus was doing? LOL
If anyone is immature and inhumane its you.
Yes killing is a choice for you. Third term abortion is a choice. Is rape a choice too? We all should have choice......even if it hurts someone else. In this case the unborn. Ripping it apart, sucking its brains out is ok.
Do you think God would think rape was bad? Do you think God would think that a person should have a choice to rape or not to rape? Christ never said rape was bad did He? Do you advocate rape as a choice? Its hurts someone but then abortion does too and you condone that.
WHERE IS GOD IN YOUR AGENDA?
Yes, I do not believe they follow the Word. They preach a luke warm gospel and they ignore what God says about sin. I think groups like RCRC are anti-christ groups. You can go to seminary but still not get it. Its head knowledge not heart knowledge. God said sex outside marriage is sin. God said laying with someone of the same sex is wrong. God said adultery is wrong. God makes plain what sin is and many churches don't stand on this. They want to change what the scripture says as not to offend people who are sinning.
It's not hard to see and understand what Christ said. He said He was the only way to the Father. Its a slam dunk. It's easy. He is not "a way" He is "the" way. So how could some church take from His statement that there are multiple ways to make it to heaven.
No it is contrary to what scripture says. God knew us while we were in the womb. He knew us, He formed us. If you are a Christian you know that children are Gods gift to us. What right do we have to kill them? You cant serve two masters. You are either with God or against Him. I believe there are moral absolutes and God tells me what they are. His Word never changes even if the culture or society does. Sin is sin, the same as it was in the Garden.
Christ came for the sinner. He came and while on earth talked about hell more than he did about heaven. He talked about what would happen to the unsaved for a specific reason. God is love. But God can show wrath. Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

Rom 1:18 "For God's anger is being revealed from Heaven against all impiety and against the iniquity of men who through iniquity suppress the truth. God is angry."
Zeph 2:3 (NIV) "Seek the Lord, all you humble of the land, you who do what he commands. Seek righteousness, seek humility; perhaps you will be sheltered on the day of the Lord's anger."
Zeph 1:14-15,18 (NIV) "The great day of the Lord is near--near and coming quickly. Listen! The cry on the day of the Lord will be bitter... That day will be a day of wrath, a day of distress and anguish... In the fire of his jealousy the whole world will be consumed, for he will make a sudden end of all who live in the earth."
John 3:36 (NIV) "Whoever puts his faith in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see that life, for God's wrath remains on him."
But it's not my convictions I stand on, I stand on Gods. How can you be painted into a corner if you have God on your side, if you are doing what He commands. We can't judge hearts but we can judge actions. I do not judge your heart, its your actions that I judge. And I believe they are not godly. You have professed to be a Christian therefore I have the right to judge your actions according to the Word.
I do not hate you, I hate and despise your actions. I am praying that your heart changes and that you can understand what people on this site are trying to tell you.
You are right. She does put her to shame.
Do you believe the bible? Let get specific.
What do you think of these verses.
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart." (Jeremiah 1:5)
Now was God talking about a child that had been born or one still in the womb? And who does God say here is the creator? I think He said "I formed." So if He formed, then He is the creator, the owner. Do we have the right to kill that which God created?
"For you created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mothers womb...Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be." Psalms 139;13-16
Who is "YOU"? Is you God? God created, God knit together, right? Again God is the creator. Who is "YOUR EYES"? We can't see an unformed body but God can, can't He?
"Your hands shaped me and made me" Did you not clothe me with skin and flesh and knit me together with bones and sinews.?" "You gave me life." Job 10:8-12
So who made us? The woman? No she did not. Her body was the oven. God created. WHO GIVES LIFE?
Exodus 21:22-23
If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined....but if there is serious injury you are to take life for life."
Take life for a life...........the one who took it has a life, the unborn childs life was taken. If God did not feel the unborn was a person and not precious in His sight, why punish anyone?
1 Corinthians 6:19-20
" Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.
So I ask you......isn't your body a temple of the Holy Spirit? Does every unborn child in the womb have a body? You can not view the unborn childs body as something different than the bodies we have? They have their own heads, arms, hearts, circulatory systems, veins, fingerprints, eyelids.
Their bodies might be little, but they are bodies and they have been created by God. If you're a Christian then how dare you say they can be dismembered alive.
Jeremiah 1:4-5
4 Now the word of the LORD came to me saying, 5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations."
Luke 1:15
"For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb.
John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb.
So here he was in the womb.......and filled with the Holy Spirit. Wow. You are helping kill babies that are filled with the Holy Spirit.
I do not expect answers from you because you couldn't possibly go up against these to condone what you do. They show that what you do is sin and against everything God stands for. You dishonor Christ and your action are sin. The fact that you would say this speaks volumes. "The bible is quite silent about abortion actually."
I doubt you have ever read the Word based on this comment.
They are anti-christ.

reply from: sander

Sue, darling Luke's mom,
You can speak to this tragic situation like few can. I wouldn't even begin to try and guess what it was like for you or for this other woman, but I can see the difference in the two.
You made the wiser choice, of that I have no doubt.
I hope the author of this thread takes your words to heart, they're words of life and comfort.

reply from: 4choice4all

Where does corinthians say abortion is evil? Again...you are speaking with clear conviction and I feel that...but that doesn't mean that you hold universal truths that other religions and other religious people are void of. I don't believe I'm twisting anything....just as i'm sure you don't believe that you purposefully skew your biblical interpretations to meet a prolife answer. You do not respect a persons religion if, when they disagree with you, you tell them that they skewed religious interpretation for self serving reasons. That's not respect...that's condescension. (I respect your right to have the wrong answers) People of faith disagree with you on abortion and they do so based on their faith. I have no problem with you saying you believe I'm wrong, as I have said I believe you to be wrong. I do have a problem with people saying that I am not being honest about the discernment process or about how deep my faith runs. And when you imply I'm running a proabort agenda or am being self serving...that's what you are saying.
Oh..so comparing my christian church to a satanic church is better? nice. Niebuhr and Tillich...right up there with satanists?

reply from: 4choice4all

Methodists are the antichrist? UCC members are the anti christ? The Episcopal church is the antichrist? The Evangelical Lutherans are the antichrist?
I have always said I don't believe in a literal biblical interpretation.
We have escorts at the clinic for 3 hours, 1 day a week. Business is the same if we are there or not...so I disagree that we increase business at all. Of the patients that arrive in those 3 hours, I have direct contact with barely more than half...if half. We only escort the ones that park off premise. And of the ones I walk with I might have words with 10%..if I'm lucky. Don't you think if we were responsible for helping business that we would actually be HIRED by the mill...that they would pay someone to be there all the time to increase the revenue? I find no truth in your statements about escorts egging women on.

reply from: sander

2 Timothy 3:7
Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
It is entirely possible for someone to read the Bible cover to cover, study day and night, sit at the feet of all kinds of so called bible scholars,
"and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth".
Proverbs 14:12
There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
Proverbs 16:25
There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
When God says something, twice, we better pay attention.

reply from: Faramir

But sometimes people are in transition and are searching for what is right. Don't cast someone into hell before they have a chance to find a better way.
If someone is walking in the light they've been given, and are not willfully ignorant, then they are not culpable for doing error if they believe it to be right.
Certainly you would not suggest they do something that "seemeth to be wrong" instead?

reply from: Faramir

This is bad news for ME. Looks like I have to behave myself 20% more than I thought I had to.

reply from: Faramir

Churchmouse, are pro-contraception churches also "anti-christ"?
I would say they are, but must cut them some slack for having fallen into error possibly through no fault of their own.

reply from: Faramir

The bible alone was never intended to be the fullness of God's revelation to man.

reply from: faithman

That is exactly right. Any church that says it is perfectly fine to destroy the image of the pre-born Christ is anti-christ. No pro-death scum are christian.

reply from: Yuuki

I can't believe faithman is saying something nice. He's actually advocating being compasionate to a post-abortive woman, and not only that, but a late-term post-abortive woman! You should see the filth he normally posts about such women. He wants them to die, too.
Anyway... firstly here's my opinion on the matter. I don't think a pregnancy should be artificially shortened in a manner that purposely kills the child. If your friend's life had been in danger it would be a different situation entirely. Your friend denied this child a chance to live. It probably wouldn't have lived long, that's true. It may even have died during delivery. But it's wrong to kill people. She wanted to avoid the pain of losing a child after birth? Why is it easier to kill the child on purpose before birth? Does having control over when the child dies make it easier to handle? Is it not as much a "baby" before it's born so it's easier to know it's dead? I can understand feeling powerless in a situation like that, but killing the baby to gain "control" of the situation isn't right.
Your friend needs to know you still care for her. You disagree with her abortion simply because you believe every child deserves a chance at life.

reply from: faithman

That is because you are a dumb a$$ who smears others with general statements, and thinks we all do the same. I have said from the git go that I take things on an individual bases. Not all the post abortive come to this forum with the same arrogance, pride, and self promoted agenda. Some post abortive women do not fight personhood for the womb child, actually feel regret for killing their children, and have translated that regret into sound pro-life action and advocacy. They understand that this is a womb baby issue, not a womans issue. they don't hide behide religious slopy agopy to justify the protection of baby killers over the babies the killers kill. They don't come to this forum telling false stories to garner sympathy, without reguard to the danger said story posed for CPC's all accross north Texas. Nor have they exihibited behavior that would lead young girls into dangerous behavior, like saying dressing like a street walker is just fine. NOPER!! Some post abortive women have a true pro-life voice, of deep grief, regret, repentance, and a desire to help spare others from a life long struggle over what they have done. Some post abortive women fight with all their strength to promote the personhood of the preborn womb child, and thus honor the memory of the life they took. God draws close to the broken hearted, and resists the proud. It is my great honor to know such women, and do all I can to serve them with my resources and prayers. But I give no quarter to any scum bag scanc enemy of the little ones we stand for. You don't want an enemy, don't present yourself as one!!!!

reply from: ProInformed

Martin Haskell late-term abortionist
Source: National Legal Center for the Medically Dependent & Disabled Issues in Law & Medicine, Partial-birth abortion: the final frontier of abortion jurisprudence: 6-22-1998
Quote: " I'll be quite frank:
most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range ...
In my particular case, probably 20% [of this procedure] are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective"
AND it is VERY IMPORTANT to realize that the parents who allow their babies to be killed for "genetic reasons" usually have no idea that it is legal for the doctor to exaggerate or even flat out lie to them about how supopsedly seriously ill their baby is, in order to convince them to abort.
And why would he do that?
To protect himself from possible 'wrongful life' or malpractice lawsuit IF the baby is born with any medical problems that he might get blamed for or he didn't advise them to abort for.

reply from: sander

It's always so staggering to hear these awful truths about the death mills and their executioners.
People like haskell would make hitler blush.

reply from: faithman

This is the punk who invented parcial birth abortion. A lying sack of pro-death dung.

reply from: Banned Member

This is bad news for ME. Looks like I have to behave myself 20% more than I thought I had to.
LMFAO!!! I thought I was the only one who caught this!!!

reply from: Yuuki

That is because you are a dumb a$$ who smears others with general statements, and thinks we all do the same.
You DO. YOu specifically DO. ALL THE TIME. All you EVER call women on here is "pro death scancs" if they even so much as THINK that women who abort aren't horrific, evil murderers.
Carole sure as hell doesn't have arrogance. Do you know she has purposely humbled herself on here just so YOU would stop verbally absuing her and stalking her into her real life? You don't even know 1/100th of the truth about anyone on here, yet you claim you can judge.
So you hate her because you don't like how she dresses? What a pig you are.
You're an a$$ who deserves to be in jail for the hate you spread. You are not Christian; you are as hateful as Hilter.

reply from: galen

*************************
First of all the escorts themselves have testified about it in congress and elsewhere.
in response to your other religious groups.... no one called them satanists and here is how they feel about abortion
Abortion
Main article: Christianity and abortion#Methodist_Church
The United Methodist Church upholds the sanctity of unborn human life and is reluctant to affirm abortion as an acceptable practice, except when the life of the mother is threatened. Further, the UMC condemns the use of late-term or partial birth abortion, except if the life of the mother is in jeopardy.[44] In addition, it is committed to "assist the ministry of crisis pregnancy centers and pregnancy resource centers that compassionately help women find feasible alternatives to abortion;"[45] however, the Church recognizes the right of the mother to choose after proper consideration of all options with medical, pastoral and other counsel.[44]
evangelical lutherans:
III. The Church as a Community Supportive of Life
Because we believe that God is the creator of life, the number of induced abortions is a source of deep concern to this church. We mourn the loss of life that God has created.[A] The strong Christian presumption is to preserve and protect life. Abortion ought to be an option only of last resort. Therefore, as a church we seek to reduce the need to turn to abortion as the answer to unintended pregnancies.
We also deplore the circumstances that lead a woman to consider abortion as the best option available to her. We are moved particularly by the anguish of women who face unwanted pregnancies alone. The panic and isolation of such pregnancies, even in the best of circumstances, can be traumatic. Poverty, lack of supportive relationships, immaturity, oppressive social realities, sexism, and racism can intensify her sense of powerlessness. The prospect of having and caring for a child can seem overwhelming.
We confess our sin as a community of faith.[C] We often have fallen short in respecting God's gift of life and in providing conditions more conducive for bringing new life into the world.
episcopal church:
Abortion
As late as 1958, the Episcopal Church held a strong pro-life position, stating, "Abortion and infanticide are to be condemned." In 1967, the 62nd General Convention of the Episcopal Church supported abortion law "reform," to permit the "termination of pregnancy" for reasons of life, rape, incest, fetal deformity, or physical or mental health of the mother. In 1982, the 66th General Convention condemned the use of abortion as a means of gender selection and non-serious abnormalities.
By 1988, the 69th General Convention had developed a position that stated, "All human life is sacred. Hence it is sacred from its inception until death." The statement goes on to call for church programs to assist women with problem pregnancies and to emphasize the seriousness of the abortion decision. In 1994, the 71st General Convention expressed "unequivocal opposition to any ... action ... that (would) abridge the right of a woman to reach an informed decision about the termination of her pregnancy, or that would limit the access of a woman to a safe means of acting upon her decision." In 1997, at the 72nd General Convention, the delegates approved a resolution that did not condemn partial-birth abortions but expressed grave concerns about the procedure, "except in extreme situtions.
and John Brown from the UCC wrote this
THE STRUGGLE FOR LIFE WITHIN
THE UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST
By John Brown, Jr.
I find it hard to believe that a UCC pastor attended the March for Life!" This recent comment by a staffer of an evangelical family ministry is perhaps not untypical of many people today who, if they know anything of the United Church of Christ (UCC), consider it hopelessly pro-choice on life issues. While, given our history, this conclusion is hardly surprising, pro-lifers are making inroads.
Though only constituted as a denomination in 1957, the UCChas, in fact, been consistently in favor of abortion since the early 1970s. Even before that, a number of UCC clergy participated in the Clergy Consultation Service, founded by a UCC pastor as a nationwide illegal abortion referral system.
The United Church Board for Homeland Ministries voted in 1970 to support a "woman's right to choose the legal option of abortion." In 1971, the General Synod of the UCC, the national representative body of the denomination, considered a Proposal for Action called "Freedom of Choice Concerning Abortion." This proposal supported a woman's right to choose abortion in the early months of pregnancy, and called upon local congregations to work for the repeal of abortion laws. It passed overwhelmingly.
In the early 1970s the United Church Board for Homeland Ministries joined a number of other church organizations in support of the Supreme Court cases which led to the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. In 1973 the Homeland Ministries also became a founding member of the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights, a Washington-based lobbying group that supports abortion on the basis, it says, of religious freedom.
Subsequent synods have continued to support the right to abortion. Though euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide have not yet been given synod approval, they have been discussed in that forum, and there are many leaders and pastors within the church who are in support.
These actions are ironic when viewed in light of the theological and social action history of the UCC and the four theological traditions which compose it. These four streams, Evangelical and Reformed, Congregational and Christian, have exerted a major influence on the social and political life of this country.
For example, there is the impact of Congregational-Puritan congregations and covenants in New England on the American political system, the founding of the American Missionary Society and its support for the modern missionary movement, the support given to the abolition of slavery and the founding of hundreds of schools for black Americans, and the considerable resources and support given to the modern civil rights movement.
The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, editor of First Things and a participant in the civil rights movement, has asked how it is that, considering their profound concern for the human rights of African-Americans and the poor, the leaders of that movement (which included many pastors and leaders of the UCC and other mainline churches) ended up opposing the human rights of the unborn.
The answer is too complex to attempt to answer fully here, but several issues can be discussed which help us appreciate why pro- lifers continue to have difficulty in promoting the sanctity of human life within the United Church of Christ.
One is the theological stance of the leadership and educational institutions of the denomination. The UCC "claims as its own the faith of the historic Church" and all that this means in terms of the authority of Christ, the Bible, and the work of the Holy Spirit. In practice, however, the Bible and the creeds have been increasingly interpreted from a liberal perspective, which is to say, from a modern cultural perspective. This has diminished greatly their authority, and has often led to a selective use of Scripture based not so much on the truth of the passage as its applicability to a particular social cause.
A second factor, closely related to the first, has been what some call the "feminization of theology." This attempt to view theology and the Bible in the light of women's concerns has been exploited by pro-abortion forces to increase support for abortion within the UCC.
The principle of local autonomy is the third factor. This highly valued principle means that local congregations own their own property, and are encouraged to set their own agendas and standards theologically, educationally, and financially. Churches which oppose UCC actions, for whatever reason, can by congregational vote leave the denomination. Hundreds of congregations have done so in the last 30 years. Over 25% of UCC membership has been lost in this time period. Many of those who have left were supporters of pro-life issues.
A fourth is the struggle pro-life pastors face. Such pastors know that they will get no support from conference or national leaders. Not surprisingly, there is no seminary, denominational board, or social ministry that is unequivocally pro-life.
Moreover, because many congregations are in need of spiritual renewal, it often happens that there is relatively little support for pro-life concerns, at least in the initial stages of renewal. The pastors who are concerned for encouraging renewal often face the dilemma of tackling social issues such as abortion knowing that this may be upsetting to members of the congregation, and thereby possibly undermining efforts to bring about a growth in congregational spirituality.
Despite these factors, concern for life issues and other theological and spiritual matters has continued to grow.
In 1977 two organizations were formed to work for theological and spiritual renewal within the United Church of Christ. Focus Renewal Ministries has emphasized individual and congregational renewal. The other, Biblical Witness Fellowship (BWF), has taken a more confrontational role with the UCC on a variety of social and political matters, and has also promoted a greater concern for missions.
In 1985, at an annual convention of the Biblical Witness Fellowship, a number of concerned pro-lifers sought to place more emphasis on the life issues, particularly abortion. At that time, however, not all BWF supporters and board members were pro- life. It was decided therefore that a new organization might provide the best means of working on pro-life concerns.
The organization founded in response to this initiative is now called Friends for Life (FFL). In its 13-year history FFL has attempted to influence the denomination in a variety of ways.
It began by establishing a means of communication - - producing a newsletter and building a mailing list. Another ongoing effort has been directed toward making a pro-life witness at the general synods through book tables, newsletters, pro-life banquets, pronouncements, workshops, and personal contacts. Encouraging similar activities at conference meetings has also been attempted. A book of essays, Affirming Life, was written and published in 1991.
In 1987 FFL became a member of the National Pro-Life Religious Council (NPRC), a coalition of denominational and religiously oriented groups that speaks out on pro-life issues and supports pro-life ministries.
Acting on an idea presented at an NPRC meeting, Friends for Life, in conjunction with a group in the Penn Southeast Conference of the UCC, began work on a local ecumenical pro-life venture to help women. A group of 10 congregations--UCC, Methodist, Catholic, and Evangelical--have covenanted together to provide support for women facing a crisis pregnancy who choose to bear their children.
Each church has pledged to provide at least one service, whether housing, food, or counseling centers. Hopefully, other local communities of churches will establish similar programs.
At the present moment another direction is being considered. For a number of reasons, FFL's board of directors is considering working more closely with BWF. Since 1985 BWF has become strongly pro-life while continuing to give strong support to missions and spiritual renewal within the denomination.
Moreover, BWF has a budget and membership far larger than FFL at its peak.
The Witness, BWF's feisty news-letter, reaches every UCC congregation and instrumentality, and would enable the pro-life message/witness to be heard throughout the denomination in ways not possible for FFL in earlier times. BWF, on the other hand, would benefit from the contacts and relationships FFL has built up over the years, and would enable it to speak more clearly on the life issues.
Struggle Only Begun
The struggle for life within the United Church of Christ, given the theological and sociological difficulties we face, is necessarily a multi-faceted one. There is a growing consensus that spiritual renewal, if it is to be biblical, must face the issues of abortion, euthanasia, and genetic engineering.
The members of our churches will all face these issues at one time or another. On the other hand it is understood that the life issues cannot be dealt with without worship, fellowship, prayer, and study.
The ongoing effort to bring change on the life issues within the United Church of Christ is somewhat akin to that of the pro-life movement to bring about change within our nation. Though there have been some victories, the UCC and the United States as a whole continue to promote a "culture of death."
It is increasingly clear that our efforts within the UCC must be integrally related to the efforts being made by other religious groups, as well as those committed to political change. The issues we face are global issues, far beyond the resources of any one pro-life denomination or pro-life group.
Speaking as a Christian, I believe that God may well be using these troubling issues as one means of drawing the various groups committed to the historic Christian faith into a substantial and cohesive unity. Despite the considerable differences among the various Christian traditions, there remains enormous common ground on the fundamental truths of faith and life.
Together they could better witness to the truth of the faith, and more effectively contribute to a growing "culture of life," wherein every human being, young or old, male or female, disabled or able-bodied, born or unborn, would be respected and cherished.
*********************just because your own small sect belives that abortion is OK does not mean that the majority of your church dose nor the majority of any of the major religions, please do not confuse having an abortion preformed with beliving that it is the correct thing, people alos rape murder and steal and still admit that they knew it was wrong to be doing so.

reply from: galen

thanks CP...
i do think that the greatest disservice one can do is to allow yourself to be deluded by your own convictions of ego. Sometimes its best to step back and take a new look at ourselves and what we belive every so often.

reply from: 4choice4all

You obviously limited your examination of abortion and the christian church today. One man's opinion doe not mean there is no consensus. There are prolifers in all religions and denominations just as there are prochoicers..including some in the catholic church.
It's not a small sect...none of those statements say "ban abortion" they talk about it being a weighted decision. And if those churches believed that it was an equal human life....not unlike a 2 yo child...how could they make the statement that it is best left to the woman and her advisers?
Cp...I agree with you 100%. The only way to rid society of abortion is to rid the world of the need...presumed or otherwise.

reply from: faithman

We don't demonize anyone. The pro death devils do a great job of that on their own.

reply from: galen

_____________________
Nope i've studdied most of the the world's religions.. theology happened to be a hobby of mine,especially after my diagnosis... None of them says its OK to have an AB for birth controll, or just because you want to finish school, etc... yes its a weighty descision... just because you CAN do something does not mean you SHOULD do it though.
I have always said if you do away with unwanted pregnancy you will do away with the need for abortion.

reply from: 4choice4all

So then why so shocked that some denominations and religions are prochoice?
Galen...forgive me if this is redundant but I'm still new enough that I have a hard time sorting everyone out...are you opposed to contraception?

reply from: galen

$ choice you seem to be confusing the 1% of necessay procedures with ALL the women you have escorted...

reply from: galen

I am Catholic and abide by my own religion's stance on BC,
I am also a nurse and if a patient wished to use something other than NFP i will discuss the options and help them make an informed choice based on thier health.
I also taught abstinance to my own 2 children.

reply from: 4choice4all

You seem to be dancing around the fact that there are prochoice religious groups.
If you are counseling a post abortive woman, do you first determine if she's in the necessary 1%? If she isn't do you render her unworthy of your compassion? If not, why should my efforts be any different...since my intention, as an escort, is to merely offer compassion and comfort when trying to live with a difficult decision.

reply from: galen

___________________________________
So far there are only 2 major religions that are truely prochoice... Wicca... who says you also must apprciate that you are taking a life.
and Satanism who says you should look after you own desires first and formost...
everyone else seems to think it should be avoided in all but the most dire of circumstances.

reply from: 4choice4all

Thank you for clarifying.

reply from: galen

____________________
i justy named the 2 that are truely prochoice... i dance around no one.
No woman who is truely in medical need has ever not been treated, that i know of. True medical need is define by, get the baby out NOW!.. like in the next 10 minutes or mom will die...
It is not your baby might have downs ( but we can't be sure) why not go to that nice doctor in Kansas in a few weeks and see if he'll fix the problem for you.

reply from: 4choice4all

how does being a founding member of Religious coalition for reproductive choice make you "not prochoice"? How does saying you believe it should be legal and a woman's choice make you "not prochoice". That's what prochoice means....leaving it to the woman to decide. You are being obtuse.
You don't get to decide where compassion begins and ends. Tell me, do you NOT offer counseling to post abortive women because they had an elective abortion? Is compassion and mercy for the afflicted? For our neighbor? Why is a woman making the choice to abort not afflicted or our neighbor, and therefore not worthy of compassion or mercy?

reply from: galen

why do you assume we don't offer counseling to every woman who comes in our door regardless of circumstance...?
BTW the religious coalition for choice is NOT a religion, but a group within a religion... kind of like Opus Dei in the Catholic church is an organisation withing the RCC... they do not speak for anyone but themselves... they are not a religious authority.

reply from: galen

I offer compassion and mercy to everyone i meet,
born or unborn deserve our compassion and mercy, as do every living creature on this planet.

reply from: 4choice4all

Are you a vegetarian Galen?
I offer compassion and mercy to women facing an unwanted pregnancy....with no disclaimers.

reply from: galen

i am vegan.
i offered no disclaimers.. compassion for everyone present.

reply from: 4choice4all

Well...you condemn escorts for walking a woman through a crowd to the door....something they consider an act of compassion and mercy. And all because you don't agree withthe choice she's making. So she doesn't deserve that mercy?

reply from: galen

the diffrence between you and me as i see it now , is that you do not open your mind to the possibility of someone else being present with the woman who wants to abort. My position holds that both make it out of the pregnancy alive. We offer these women education , food , shelter, funds to move, counseling, protection , and the ability to walk out of our shelter with the ability to care for thier child/ children in a reasonable lifestyle, safety and calm. If they want to adopt out we provide those services too, we have had women who were prostitutes, women who were lesbians, women who had 5 kids, women who were drug users, women who were beaten, raped , sold ... you name it we've had it, we have even had a woman who had a conjoine pregnancy she wanted to bring to term, hose husband kicked her out of the home because she was producing a monster... they were muslim.
We turn away no one. we try to help and heal everyone who come in our doors, without reservation or judgement.

reply from: Faramir

I was a vegan too for a short time, but I don't see it as some kind of moral position, and certainly as a Catholic you shouldn't either, since animals have been delivered to us by God for our use. You can choose to not use them, and personally, I would like to be a vegan again some day myself, but I could not say it that I have a greater compassion because of my refusal to to kill a chicken.

reply from: galen

_________________________
I say that if you participate in death then you are responsible for that death , just as if you were participating in a robbery that resulted in murder.
You are actually more liable in my mind than a guard in a prison who walks a condemned murderer to his leathal injection, because the prisoner had a jury trial, the child did not even get that , though both are being executed.

reply from: galen

I was a vegan too for a short time, but I don't see it as some kind of moral position, and certainly as a Catholic you shouldn't either, since animals have been delivered to us by God for our use. You can choose to not use them, and personally, I would like to be a vegan again some day myself, but I could not say it that I have a greater compassion because of my refusal to to kill a chicken.
________________________________-
I was asked if i was a vegetarian, not if it made me more compassionate... quit stiring the pot Fara....

reply from: Faramir

_________________________
I say that if you participate in death then you are responsible for that death , just as if you were participating in a robbery that resulted in murder.
You are actually more liable in my mind than a guard in a prison who walks a condemned murderer to his leathal injection, because the prisoner had a jury trial, the child did not even get that , though both are being executed.
You're saying escorts are baby killers too?
The woman willed herself to be at the clinic. The doctor destroyed the embryo or fetus. And the escort who walked with her because of people screaming "whore" and "murderer"--people who were NOT reaching out with compassion and who caused the need for escorts--and who was trying to help this frightened woman across the parking lot is also a "killer"?
I would rather that an escort be a sidewalk counselor and be on the prolife side, but it's hard for me to see them as so culpable as you do.

reply from: Faramir

I was a vegan too for a short time, but I don't see it as some kind of moral position, and certainly as a Catholic you shouldn't either, since animals have been delivered to us by God for our use. You can choose to not use them, and personally, I would like to be a vegan again some day myself, but I could not say it that I have a greater compassion because of my refusal to to kill a chicken.
________________________________-
I was asked if i was a vegetarian, not if it made me more compassionate... quit stiring the pot Fara....
You included it regarding "compassion." It was not "pot stirring" but an observation. And I am not disrespectful of your screen name, so return the favor please, and stop your underhanded unpacificistic-like digs and insults, and maybe you can now at least admit and apologize for accusing the newb you've been having a long discussion with as being me.

reply from: galen

______________________________________
Just to clarify... i would even shelter YOU if you needed our services( i hope you NEVER do) .. just as i would shelter the woman you were escorting. I would also try to speak to her about her other options for her pregnancy and why she felt she needed this particular procedure.. make sure she understood she would not be thrown out on the street if she suddenly came to us no longer pregnant and that she had other choices to live her life and still be able to live with herself and her descision later on in life.
The same would be offerd to you if you so desired at our centre...

reply from: galen

I was a vegan too for a short time, but I don't see it as some kind of moral position, and certainly as a Catholic you shouldn't either, since animals have been delivered to us by God for our use. You can choose to not use them, and personally, I would like to be a vegan again some day myself, but I could not say it that I have a greater compassion because of my refusal to to kill a chicken.
________________________________-
I was asked if i was a vegetarian, not if it made me more compassionate... quit stiring the pot Fara....
You included it regarding "compassion." It was not "pot stirring" but an observation. And I am not disrespectful of your screen name, so return the favor please, and stop your underhanded unpacificistic-like digs and insults.
______________________________________-
What digs and insults? if you don't like the shortened version fine... but don't take it personally i do it to almost everyone.
As to the compassion i think i separated it very well... spaced it out if you like in order to denote 2 diffrent answers... sorry if that was lost on you...

reply from: galen

i still think she could be you F...
but as you like... i think your bored and are just trying to start a fight...

reply from: Banned Member

Wicca isn't Pro-life, or Pro-choice, Wicca isn't an organized religion. I have many Wiccan friends, some are Pro-choice, some are Pro-life. The only really tenant of Wicca is 'Do as you will, 'er it harm none'.

reply from: galen

i do find it interesting that she leaves as You pop up...

reply from: galen

Wicca isn't Pro-life, or Pro-choice, Wicca isn't an organized religion. I have many Wiccan friends, some are Pro-choice, some are Pro-life. The only really tenant of Wicca is 'Do as you will, 'er it harm none'.
_______________________
I never called it organised... i said major... and Wicca respects life , its the harm no one that becomes a sticking point with some.
It is however a recognised religion, who have a large part of its participants calling themselves prochoice, and a fair number of those people have written about this subject.

reply from: yoda

Maybe you'd rather we call them "Doctor's little assistants" and give them little gold stars?
They open the door for the customers, so they are just as culpable as the women and men who come there for abortions, and the butchers who perform them.

reply from: faithman

Maybe you'd rather we call them "Doctor's little assistants" and give them little gold stars?
They open the door for the customers, so they are just as culpable as the women and men who come there for abortions, and the butchers who perform them.
Maybe we should start calling them baby killing conspirators. Would that be more PC?

reply from: galen

if they know about the abortion Yes....
if not no.
I won't turn away a woman from our shelter... but i won't pay for her to have an abortion, or drive her to the clinic.

reply from: 4choice4all

How is a post abortive counselor helping a woman live with her decision not a participant? We walk them to their car when the procedure is over...just the same.

reply from: galen

A post abortive counselor from a clinic may not have the woman's best interest at heart... she is employed by someone doing the procedure...
And IMHO if she works for them she is also culpable in the death of that child and the misery the woman may now face at the death....everyone connected to the mills are culpable because they enable the abortion to take place..
When you try to talk someone OUT of a procedure there is a diffrence, but i have yet to meet a worker in a clinic who tried to do that.

reply from: CDC700

You would receive better care having a tooth extracted than you would going to kill your baby, and rightfully so.

reply from: CDC700

Do you not see the irony in your statement? If abortion is an acceptable "choice" why would they need a counselor to help them "live with her decision"?

reply from: faithman

AAAAAAWWWW.... What a compassionant little baby killing conspirtor scanc you are.

reply from: Banned Member

I had to cut that post short....I was about to say that that is where a lot of Wiccans tend to disagree. It all goes back to how you view the fetus. Some see it as harm, others don't. But you can't make a general, sweeping concept about Wicca. There is no Dogma. Even if a person writes about it, all they are doing is giving you their beliefs, not telling you this is how you are to believe too.

reply from: yoda

Ah, so some Wiccans think that killing the "fetus" does not "harm" it, right?

reply from: churchmouse

How sweet 4choice4all.......such a wonderful touch after someones killed a child. Do you also give them gift certificates.....two for the price of one? Or "refer someone to us and we will send you movie tickets'? How about helping them put their seat belt on, do you do that too?
Or do you refer them to a shrink so that when they realize the consequences of their actions they can get help? But then there is nothing wrong with abortion is there?
I can see ya at your kids school on career day. My mom the abortion escort. Now thats a way to make friends.
You must get such satisfaction from your work.
Oh galen I luv ya. I agree......she is culpable.

reply from: 4choice4all

It's not a job....it's a passion......"passing out barf bags because I know you will all need them"...............
seriously, I volunteer because I feel called to it. And it gives me as much satisfaction as anything else I volunteer for....be it school activities or community work. I also don't hide it. Anyone that knows me knows about my escorting.
Once in church, during a time when I was desperate to conceive another child, we heard about Paul and going to Troas instead of the desired Bithynia. It touched me and I realized that perhaps God was giving me an opportunity for more children...but I was ignoring it because I was focused on getting pregnant. 9 months later we were licensed foster parents and 9 1/2 months later I was expecting. Foster parenting was one of the best things that happened to me.
After my third child we didn't renew our foster care license. My son presents many challenges and I knew that I needed to be able to focus on them. I was saddened. That was my calling....after all, God presented it as my Troas. Why is God taking it from me? Sitting in church one day after moving to a new area and not really feeling connected to the community yet...we had a guest speaker. She discussed the morality of abortion from a person of faith's pov. She talked about escorting....and serving women. Compared it to washing of the feet. I was an escort a few weeks later.
My faith tells me that "God is still speaking"...and I believe that. I am open to hearing that voice.

reply from: faithman

Yepper, the god of this world [satan], not the GOD of the universe. your "church" is the temple of devils, and guilty of the blood of the innocent. Tell me how you can say you love Christ, thensay He has led you to be involved in the distruction of His preborn image? How does that work? Where does Jesus say to slaughter the innocent if they inconvniance you? You are a deluded fool, and a perverter of truth. But deep down you already knew that.

reply from: 4choice4all

Is it possible that God allows free will and allows us to find different paths so we have opportunity to love our neighbor as ourselves and practice the greatest commandment of all? How hard is it to love your neighbor if he/she looks, acts, thinks and believes just as you do? How hard is it when they stand in the face of all you believe?

reply from: faithman

I am not the one you have to worry about. John 3:36, psalm 5:4-5. the love of God is found thru the shed blood of Christ, not the shed blood of womb children. you need to repent of this before you close your eyes for the last time. The blood of the womb children you helped murder cries out against you before God's thrown. How can you say you love Christ, then be involved in destroying his pre-born image? the 2 are incompatible.

reply from: churchmouse

God does allow free will and you are excersizing it. You are not acting in love I dont care what you think. You are acting ungodly. I have no idea what Bible you are reading but it cant be the Christian one.
Could you site some scriptures where God says to kill the unborn in the womb? Where God hates children. I gave you scriptures about what God says about the life in the womb. You have not addressed them. Why?
I am commanded to love my neighbor but I can denounce and stand up against evil actions he might be doing.
And your actions are evil. Like faithman said you need to repent and ask God to change your heart.

reply from: Faramir

Anyone can love someone who believes exactly as they do and who presents no challenge.
But it's hard to love someone who goes against it all, but those people are no less our neighbor, and we are no less obligated to extend love to them.
In my humble opinion, and I don't mean this as an insult or to be condescending, you're supporting something that's wrong, but your heart seems to be in the right place, and I believe you sincerely believe you are doing the right thing, though I must also add I believe you're misguided as far as abortion is concerned.
You seem to be a searching soul, so I have little doubt you will one day be where you should be. Meanwhile, I am implored as a christian to have love for you as a neighbor to tell you in kindess I believe you are on the wrong side, but I also need to give you space to see that for yourself and I do not believe at all that hitting someone over the head with a bible is real love or does much good.

reply from: nancyu

More thoughts on this:
If she thought of an unborn child as a person, she wouldn't use her own unfortunate circumstance to justify ALL other abortions.
It's like someone who killed in self defense, insisting that murder be legalized for everyone, because someone, someday, might have a really good reason, a need even, to murder. And of course we can just trust everyone to use sound judgment. We know that anyone would agonize over such a decision.
I could go on and on regarding her "heartfelt" post. I think she is a big phony who is trying to make YOU feel guilty, when she is the one who should be feeling guilty for intentionally killing her OWN child.
(Yup she's trying to send you on a guilt trip alright. Typical pro abort tactic.)
Her reason for aborting was to avoid inconvenience. If she had waited until after the child was born she would have been expected to "grieve" and make funeral arrangements, so much drudgery. She saved herself from all that by aborting. Then the child could be conveniently disposed of as so much "medical waste"

reply from: Faramir

I wouldn't use that word, but I can understand why you did.

reply from: lukesmom

Maybe a little bit of the kind of "neighborly love" you show to unwanted unborn humans would fix your desenters.
How much love do you show the pediphile next door or the rapist down the street. Maybe we should let all the convicted murderers out of prison as a show of our "neighborly love". God allows free will and choices but He has commanded "Thou shall not Kill" as the 6th of the 10, yes, 10 commandments. My bad.

reply from: galen

___________________________________
What about the people of your Faith that say abortion is wrong, that taking a human life is wrong? Do you listen to them also? or do you turn a deaf ear thier way?

reply from: Teresa18

You may have expressed yourself a little harshly, but late term abortion is very harsh on the child whose life is ended by it. She said her daughter was diagnosed with a disease fatal outside the womb called Trisomy 18. She did not say that there was any risk to her physical health, and even so an early delivery could have been pursued.
While this was a heartbreaking situation, abortion was not the answer. Would she kill her born child diagnosed with a fatal disease in order to help her and her family through the grieving process? My guess would be no. The child is a person whether born or unborn with the right to life. She did not have the right to take that life prematurely. She was going to lose a child either way, except in one instance the child would die from natural causes and the other the child would be killed. It sounds like she made this decision based on her own feelings to spare herself and her family the grief as opposed to doing what was best for her daughter. Because she couldn't see her little girl, she didn't feel as connected to her as she would have once she would have seen her. If she were to have seen her, the loss would have been more difficult. Sometimes things in life are difficult, but that doesn't mean she should have taken the easier way out. She should have placed the fate of her child in God's hands. Afterall, God gave her little girl life, and God alone had the right to take that life away.
I know she is your friend, and you have to be careful to be sympathetic, but I think you should tell her the truth of what she did was wrong.

reply from: Teresa18

I agree completely, as you can see in my above post.

reply from: CDC700

She killed her baby for convenience. Bottom line.

reply from: Faramir

I don't think she did that.
This woman was in a horrible situation, and thought she was doing the right thing, and is obviously devasted by the loss.
It's hard to believe so many would be so anxious to kick someone when they are down like that.

reply from: nancyu

That is because you are a dumb a$$ who smears others with general statements, and thinks we all do the same.
You DO. YOu specifically DO. ALL THE TIME. All you EVER call women on here is "pro death scancs" if they even so much as THINK that women who abort aren't horrific, evil murderers.
Carole sure as hell doesn't have arrogance. Do you know she has purposely humbled herself on here just so YOU would stop verbally absuing her and stalking her into her real life? You don't even know 1/100th of the truth about anyone on here, yet you claim you can judge.
So you hate her because you don't like how she dresses? What a pig you are.
You're an a$$ who deserves to be in jail for the hate you spread. You are not Christian; you are as hateful as Hilter.
Who is Hilter? ( scancy elitists should know how to spell)

reply from: nancyu

No need if carolemarie is there with her tea and chocolate.

reply from: Yuuki

Thanks. I just mentioned to 4choice this little piece of misinterpretation of yours.

reply from: faithman

No need if carolemarie is there with her tea and chocolate.
Mercy without justice is always cruel to the innocent. Just ask the womb child.....

reply from: Faramir

Thanks. I just mentioned to 4choice this little piece of misinterpretation of yours.
She's a pro at distorting the truth if it helps her to demean someone else.
What a talent to be proud of.

reply from: faithman

Thanks. I just mentioned to 4choice this little piece of misinterpretation of yours.
She's a pro at distorting the truth if it helps her to demean someone else.
What a talent to be proud of.
Mercy without justice is always cruel to the innocent. Just ask the womb child.....

reply from: nancyu

Thanks. I just mentioned to 4choice this little piece of misinterpretation of yours.
She's a pro at distorting the truth if it helps her to demean someone else.
What a talent to be proud of.
Mercy without justice is always cruel to the innocent. Just ask the womb child.....
I didn't misinterpret or distort anything. She gives tea and chocolate to a woman who has just finished killing her own child. That's perverse. That's is about as disrespectful toward the life of a human being as one can be. Not only disrespectful to a child, but to the mother as well.
Imagine going to an abortionist with the frame of mind that you are just going to remove "some cells" But afterwards the enormity of what you have just done begins to dawn on you. You have just killed your own child.
Is tea and chocolate going to console you? Now, I'm not talking about pro aborts here. I'm talking about young women who may have been pressured, I'm talking about someone who was ignorant before the abortion but isn't after. How is the offer of tea and chocolate going to make you feel?
What will you think of the tea and chocolate ten years from now, when you're still grieving the loss of a child who should be here? I'll tell you what I would think of it. I would be angry and insulted to have anyone imply that I would forget the act of killing my own child by being given tea and chocolate.
I know this wouldn't be the reaction of every post abortive woman, just those with a functioning conscience. To the others I'm sure they love the tea and chocolate, and will be looking forward to their next visit.

reply from: 4choice4all

That's called being merciful and loving...what's perverse is you demonizing someone for it.
There is a story of the FBI interrogating an operative of Saddam Hussein. They came in the first day and he screamed Americans were infidels..blah blah hate blah.
The next day they offered him sweets and tea and he told them everything.
The joke was that diabetics would make terrible suspects because they would cave easily when presented with treats.
The reality is that people soften when you treat them like humans deserving of love and respect.
Guess Nancyu would like to see post abortive women waterboarded until they repent?

reply from: Faramir

Man if it would be me, I couldn't wait to get knocked up again so I could abort again and get some more goodies.
Skip the tea--just Hershy Bars please.
Why, if someone gave me Tea and Chocolates AND a Bible AND tracts to help postabortive women AND assurances there would be help when needed AND hope and prayers I would not abort again...I just might get the idea I was not the worthless piece of crap I thought I was, and I just might be touched by such kindness and compassion.
But OBVIOUSLY I deserve to be treated like dirt and obviously you should make me feel like I'm not good enough to come out of my world and enter yours, so please...no love or compassion...I deserve your hatred and scorn. I realize you need to do that to show your concern for "the babies."

reply from: CDC700

Man if it would be me, I couldn't wait to get knocked up again so I could abort again and get some more goodies.
Skip the tea--just Hershy Bars please.
Why, if someone gave me Tea and Chocolates AND a Bible AND tracts to help postabortive women AND assurances there would be help when needed AND hope and prayers I would not abort again...I just might get the idea I was not the worthless piece of crap I thought I was, and I just might be touched by such kindness and compassion.
But OBVIOUSLY I deserve to be treated like dirt and obviously you should make me feel like I'm not good enough to come out of my world and enter yours, so please...no love or compassion...I deserve your hatred and scorn. I realize you need to do that to show your concern for "the babies."
You really are insane. Driven! but insane......

reply from: Faramir

Perhaps, but quite likeable when you get to know me.

reply from: CDC700

Perhaps, but quite likeable when you get to know me.
Most people are likable in one way or another. And in all fairness, anyone with strong opinions will be considered insane by someone who may not agree with them.

reply from: Cecilia

did the original poster ever come back? I didn't see it if she did. I was wondering if she still thinks her friend should die.

reply from: CDC700

Thanks. I just mentioned to 4choice this little piece of misinterpretation of yours.
She's a pro at distorting the truth if it helps her to demean someone else.
What a talent to be proud of.
Mercy without justice is always cruel to the innocent. Just ask the womb child.....
I didn't misinterpret or distort anything. She gives tea and chocolate to a woman who has just finished killing her own child. That's perverse. That's is about as disrespectful toward the life of a human being as one can be. Not only disrespectful to a child, but to the mother as well.
Imagine going to an abortionist with the frame of mind that you are just going to remove "some cells" But afterwards the enormity of what you have just done begins to dawn on you. You have just killed your own child.
Is tea and chocolate going to console you? Now, I'm not talking about pro aborts here. I'm talking about young women who may have been pressured, I'm talking about someone who was ignorant before the abortion but isn't after. How is the offer of tea and chocolate going to make you feel?
What will you think of the tea and chocolate ten years from now, when you're still grieving the loss of a child who should be here? I'll tell you what I would think of it. I would be angry and insulted to have anyone imply that I would forget the act of killing my own child by being given tea and chocolate.
I know this wouldn't be the reaction of every post abortive woman, just those with a functioning conscience. To the others I'm sure they love the tea and chocolate, and will be looking forward to their next visit.
How dare she show love and try to reach a woman who has done such a horrible thing....She should probably throw rocks at them instead in order to be "walking in the light" and obeying the commandment to love her neighbor as herself. God probably really meant that you should love your neighbor unless they have an abortion...
Then she obviously would love herself for having an abortion. That's following the second commandment correct?

reply from: Faramir

Perhaps, but quite likeable when you get to know me.
Most people are likable in one way or another. And in all fairness, anyone with strong opinions will be considered insane by someone who may not agree with them.
Since you're new, you don't know the ENTIRE situation about the "tea and chocolates" and nancyu has been intentionally deceitful about it.
Her favorite target did indeed give out bags of items, which included tea and a mug and sometimes chocolate, if weater permitted, to women who left the clinic after an abortion, but what nancyu has failed (on purpose) to also share is that:
Included in that bag were:
Tracts about seeking postabortive counselling
A Bible
Information about places to contact if they need some kind of help or counseling
The second most important and most egregious and deliberate omission by nancyu has been, and please think about this, because it puts it all in perspective, and clearly demonstrates NO approval of an abortion:
THE SAME WOMEN WERE GREETED BEFORE GOING INTO THE CLINIC AND BEGGED TO NOT ABORT, by this same woman!
So on the way in, she saw a woman beg her to not abort, and on the way out, she saw the same woman offer her a bag of items. Do you see at all the possibility that sometimes a kind act like that just might open their hearts and minds to reading the information given, which is intended to help heal, but also intended TO PREVENT ANOTHER ABORTION, and just might have, in some cases, a better effect than calling them a scanc, or ignoring them all together.
Lastly, and most importantly of all, this same woman was successful hundreds of times in helping to prevent women from aborting.
So if you're a fair-minded person, and you seem to be, would you judge this woman by "tea and chocolates," which is a crock, and a vicious distortion, or the overall person who saves babies, and does what she thinks is best to help the postabortive women to heal and to prevent her from aborting again?
Another thing to consider is that this woman has been mercilessly bullied, often about mistakes of her past that she has shared for the benefit of others, by those who claim to be Chritians and who have the nerve to hide behind scriptures when they throw their rocks, but that she doesn't respond in kind. She's been forgiving and humble in the face of it all, and for that she's earned my admiration and respect, and I can only hope that one day I could have the same kind of humility.
What's "funny" is that she's probably saved more babies than anyone here, yet she gets kicked to the curb ten times a day in gratitude for that, by fellow prolifers of all people.
That doesn't mean I agree with everything she says, but I do look at the overall picture, and it's obvious she has a good heart and is coming from a good place, and doesn't deserve what she gets here.

reply from: ProInformed

Here's a fact that the chanting choicists don't want women to find out:
"Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal illness such as cancer or leukemia, and if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save life."
Alan Guttmacher, M.D.
That means when women are told they have to abort for medical reason they are being lied to.
They are being told they 'need' to abort so that the doctor is safer from lawsuit.
They are told they 'need' to abort becuase it's less work and more profit for the doctor than to care for her and her baby.
They are told they 'need' to abort because it can then be used politically as a supposed example of a medically necessary abortion, of a case when pro-lifers supposedly defend the life of the baby over the life of the mother (a lie).
They are being told to abort for reasons having nothing to do with protecting the rights or life of the mother.

reply from: 4choice4all

Being told you have to abort is not the same as being told you CAN abort or even that you SHOULD abort. No one HAS to abort...that's what CHOICE is about.

reply from: Cecilia

i couldn't find that quote anywhere but prolife sites, and they list time as 1967 or 1987, who knows?
I think you are deep in conspiracy theory. i also dont understand how its more profit/less work to abort a dangerous pregnancy than to continue.
i think you work very hard to make sure you are 'free' from blame from your own abortion. its time you recognized your choice. i take responsbility for my choice; it is a good thing. i hope same for you one day.

reply from: Rosalie

My friend refers to her cats as "babies". So I suppose that means cats = babies, right?
Parents refer to their grown-up kids as babies. It is an often-used term of affection.
There is nothing from with the words zygote, embryo or fetus, they're correct terms. Get over it already.
You must be really sick. How is making a private, medical decision in any way like being abused and having your own body against your will in the most horrible and inexcusable manner?
But wait, having your own body used against your will, where have we heard that before? Oh I know, from the so-called 'pro-lifers' when they want to force women to continue pregnancy they don't want to continue.

reply from: faithman

My friend refers to her cats as "babies". So I suppose that means cats = babies, right?
Parents refer to their grown-up kids as babies. It is an often-used term of affection.
There is nothing from with the words zygote, embryo or fetus, they're correct terms. Get over it already.
You must be really sick. How is making a private, medical decision in any way like being abused and having your own body against your will in the most horrible and inexcusable manner?
But wait, having your own body used against your will, where have we heard that before? Oh I know, from the so-called 'pro-lifers' when they want to force women to continue pregnancy they don't want to continue.
Now we know why you don't use the word baby for the womb child. You have no affection for the little lives you want to kill. But we already knew you were an affectionless blood thirsty death scanc.

reply from: Rosalie

Your reading comprehension sucks. Shocker.

reply from: Yuuki

Your reading comprehension sucks. Shocker.
Yeah, that's why half of my replies to him lately have been the acronym LTR.

reply from: 4choice4all

I was wondering what was up with that Yuuki! lol

reply from: Yuuki

Yep! Stands for Learn To Read.

reply from: faithman

Your reading comprehension sucks. Shocker.
Your affection comprehension is non existant. No shocker there in the least.

reply from: yoda

Cecilia, does electively killing an innocent human being constitute an act of "control" over that person?

reply from: galen

My friend refers to her cats as "babies". So I suppose that means cats = babies, right?
Parents refer to their grown-up kids as babies. It is an often-used term of affection.
There is nothing from with the words zygote, embryo or fetus, they're correct terms. Get over it already.
You must be really sick. How is making a private, medical decision in any way like being abused and having your own body against your will in the most horrible and inexcusable manner?
But wait, having your own body used against your will, where have we heard that before? Oh I know, from the so-called 'pro-lifers' when they want to force women to continue pregnancy they don't want to continue.
Literally everyone is "forced" to do things (or not do things) against their will to the same extant as prohibiting abortion would "force" women to "continue pregnancy they don't want to continue." Once more, this is just a dishonest euphemism for forbidding them to kill their offspring." I am forbidden to kill my wife or kids, so I guess I am being "forced" to allow them to live...I see that as a good thing, since no one should ever be allowed to harm others regardless of their wishes.
You sound like a spoiled child when you whine about not being allowed to do whatever you please, even when what you desire involves harming others. Women are the only class of person that is currently allowed to kill their offspring, so let's don't pretend that not allowing them to do so would constitute oppression of women. Allowing abortion is essentially the most extreme form of oppression against unborn human beings, so your argument is basically that not allowing you to oppress others = oppressing you. Nothing could be more ridiculous.
_____________________
great response CP..

reply from: ProInformed

Your friend probably has no idea how lucky she was to not be killed along with her baby;
if she had died becuase of her abortion the same choicist who pretend concern for her now would be either ignoring her tragedy or making fun of her for trusting their 'safe & legal' lie.
http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2009/06/anniversary-one-of-dozen.html

reply from: Rosalie

Of course you are forbidden to kill your own kids. There's no reason you should have the right to kill them because they are not living inside of you, they are not directly physically connected to you for a longer period of time and they do not affect your health and life by their presence in your own body.
That is and always will be the difference between fetuses and born kids. I know you're a big fan of ignoring that but I feel I need to inform you that it won't change anything. The facts are still there, even if you ignore them.
The right to make decisions that directly affect my health and life means I'm spoiled? All right, in that case I'm spoiled and I'm damn proud of it. Maybe you don't give a*****what happens to you and if you'll be around and healthy enough to enjoy your kids but I do. Sorry that your life is so miserable that you consider your health, life and the well-being of your family to be secondary to a fetus. That's heinous and unacceptable to me.
Your reading comprehension sucks. Shocker.
Your affection comprehension is non existant. No shocker there in the least.
Don't use big words if you don't know what they mean.
Or you know what? Keep doing that. It's so much fun, just like all of your other fanatical bull*****.

reply from: nancyu

I've already said that I don't have any objection to these things. These things are wonderful:
Tracts about seeking postabortive counselling
A Bible
Information about places to contact if they need some kind of help or counseling
But the tea, mugs and chocolate is the part I find offensive.
Deeply offensive.

reply from: faithman

Of course you are forbidden to kill your own kids. There's no reason you should have the right to kill them because they are not living inside of you, they are not directly physically connected to you for a longer period of time and they do not affect your health and life by their presence in your own body.
That is and always will be the difference between fetuses and born kids. I know you're a big fan of ignoring that but I feel I need to inform you that it won't change anything. The facts are still there, even if you ignore them.
The right to make decisions that directly affect my health and life means I'm spoiled? All right, in that case I'm spoiled and I'm damn proud of it. Maybe you don't give a*****what happens to you and if you'll be around and healthy enough to enjoy your kids but I do. Sorry that your life is so miserable that you consider your health, life and the well-being of your family to be secondary to a fetus. That's heinous and unacceptable to me.
Your reading comprehension sucks. Shocker.
Your affection comprehension is non existant. No shocker there in the least.
Don't use big words if you don't know what they mean.
Or you know what? Keep doing that. It's so much fun, just like all of your other fanatical bull*****.
What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.

reply from: carolemarie

Then I suggest you don't get an abortion at a clinic I am at.....because I intend to continue to be kind to people

reply from: Faramir

Also, the same women were approached and implored to not abort
If you put everything in context, OBVIOUSLY no approval was shown for abortion, but that's what you imply when you nitpick and take this one item out of context. At best, it's a gesture of kindenss that could help build a bridge. At worst, it's an error of kindess that harms no one. Hopefully you realize that it's a lot cheaper to buy a tea bag and a hershey bar than to have an abortion, so I don't really think you could make an arugment that it's an incentive to have another abortion.
It's foolish to be so "deeply offended." You're looking a gift horse in the mouth.
Be thankful for the work this imperfect person does in a an imperfect way. She DOES what we talk about. She actually saves babies.

reply from: Cecilia

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .

reply from: CDC700

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
uhhhh, what the hell did you just say?

reply from: nancyu

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
uhhhh, what the hell did you just say?
Seriously Cecilia, I'm not trying to be mean. Are you alright?

reply from: Cecilia

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
uhhhh, what the hell did you just say?
Seriously Cecilia, I'm not trying to be mean. Are you alright?
i don't understand the confusion. ? what can i clarify?

reply from: nancyu

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
uhhhh, what the hell did you just say?
Seriously Cecilia, I'm not trying to be mean. Are you alright?
i don't understand the confusion. ? what can i clarify?
Your grammar is usually clearer then what you have written here, so I was a little worried that maybe you weren't well.
I would like to tell you that I have more respect for you than some of the so called "pro lifers" on this forum. Because at least you will admit and actually seem to understand that unborn children are persons. That is most important from where I stand. I also admire you for admitting that abortion is discriminatory.
If a woman wants to argue that she has a right to kill a person for whatever reason, at least she is coming from a place of honesty. So that's that. I'm giving credit where it's due.
It seems our only disagreement now is whether anyone has the right to intentionally kill innocent human beings. It's not that I don't understand the desire to do so at times (believe me...I do understand) But I don't believe anyone as the "right" to do so, and I suuure don't believe it should ever be "legal" to do so.

reply from: Cecilia

One glass of wine is all it takes, ha.
There can be no compromise. so which is the 'best' choice?
allowing others to make their own decisions and live with themselves, or making others do what you think is best for them?
I think about what someone said recently what would you want your daughter to do? i have a niece, and I would rather she was able to seek out legal abortion than an illegal one, if she felt she could not speak with her parents about her pregnancy. making abortion illegal will not make the desire for it disappear.
i think, that it is safer to keep abortion legal, and allow others to make their own decisions.

reply from: nancyu

One glass of wine is all it takes, ha.
There can be no compromise. so which is the 'best' choice?
allowing others to make their own decisions and live with themselves, or making others do what you think is best for them?
I think about what someone said recently what would you want your daughter to do? i have a niece, and I would rather she was able to seek out legal abortion than an illegal one, if she felt she could not speak with her parents about her pregnancy. making abortion illegal will not make the desire for it disappear.
i think, that it is safer to keep abortion legal, and allow others to make their own decisions.
I thought it would be best to help to defend the defenseless, but if you must have things your way, your sense of fair play should demand that you offer us the same "right to choose" when it comes to offing pro aborts.
cheers!

reply from: 4choice4all

Tea, mugs and chocolate are the front line of defense in the war on the unborn. We are taught that in Evil 101. Women will do ANYTHING for tea,chocolate and cute mugs with flowers and sweet sayings. We are weak...weak!!!!

reply from: nancyu

I have a daughter (quite a few neices, too) and, no, I don't think she (or they) would ever have a "desire" to kill her own children. Even if she did, (she wouldn't) I wouldn't express my love and respect for her by helping her to "seek out" a "legal" (it's not) abortion. I would express my love and respect for her by doing everything within my power to stop her from doing so.
(And don't you worry Cecilia, I'll keep the same attitude when killing pro aborts is legalized. )

reply from: yoda

Easy question to answer. Allow ALL "others" to make their own decisions, especially about life and death! Now, you do realize that means you have to stop supporting the killing of unborn babies, right?
So, you don't believe in controlling the life and death of others, right?

reply from: 4choice4all

I have two daughters and a niece. I talk openly about my volunteer work and my beliefs on the abortion issue. I would hope if any one of them or their friends were faced with an unwanted pregnancy they would come to me for help. Abortion would always be presented as an option...depending on the child and situation, it could be presented as the best option.

reply from: sander

Naturally, your baby murdering instincts would be operating full tilt.
Was this suppose to come as some big surprise, you idiot.

reply from: 4choice4all

It's called dialogue...you can look it up.

reply from: ProInformed

But choice is NOT being lied to and being told you supposedly have to abort for medical reasons.
Choice is also not being told you have to abort or else you're going to be murdered.
But you chanting choicist sheeple don't care about that do you?
You're willing to look the other way when those pro-abort anti-choice lies and coercion are used, aren't you?
The so-called 'pro-choice' groups and citizens are really just pro-abortion - not really 'pro-choice'. And you're fooling fewer and fewer people with your lie of being 'pro-choice' and 'pro-woman'.
You're about as 'pro-woman/pro-choice' as Hitler was pro-Jew.

reply from: ProInformed

This thread and this thread:
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6657&STARTPAGE=5&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear&#lastunread

are just two of the threads the Roe-bot trolls want us to stop posting in because they think "nobody cares about" these topics and thses threads annoy the "legitimate posters".

reply from: BossMomma

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
And suppose a woman suddenly becomes overwhelmed by her newborn and her choice is to smoother it with a pillow? The newborn is little more than a full term fetus, the only difference is location. Why should the woman have to suffer the up all night with Colic, the every two hour feedings, the frequent diaper changes when a few minutes of forcible pressure with a pillow would make it "all better." Death of a child is not the answer to pregnancy inconvenience any more than it is to the inconveniences of parenthood. You know it is a baby being killed, why is it murder 1 hour out of the womb and a choice an hour prior to birth?

reply from: BossMomma

Well...when it's that time of the month herbal tea and chocolate is my savior..every other time it's Jesus lol

reply from: Banned Member

If my daughter was 15-18 & got pregnant & she told me she wanted to have the baby, I would respect her, but I would do my best to convince her the best thing for her & the baby would be adoption. Naturally if she chose abortion, I would support her there as well.
If my daughter was under 15 & got pregnant, I think abortion would be the best option. I wouldn't force her to have one, but I would let her know that I felt it would be the best & why.

reply from: Yuuki

Why would it be the best for her to kill her child?

reply from: Cecilia

since you are being absurd although for a moment i actually thought to have sincere conversing with you, then my response to this is hey, you can abort any prochoice baby you want.

reply from: Cecilia

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
And suppose a woman suddenly becomes overwhelmed by her newborn and her choice is to smoother it with a pillow? The newborn is little more than a full term fetus, the only difference is location. Why should the woman have to suffer the up all night with Colic, the every two hour feedings, the frequent diaper changes when a few minutes of forcible pressure with a pillow would make it "all better." Death of a child is not the answer to pregnancy inconvenience any more than it is to the inconveniences of parenthood. You know it is a baby being killed, why is it murder 1 hour out of the womb and a choice an hour prior to birth?
Do you know about safe haven laws?
and i don't think women should ever HAVE to take care of a baby for that matter. like you say, women trapped do kill their born children, when someone else could have taken them.
what kind of miserable life would someone have if their parent were forced to take care of them. i know it happens every day women feel trapped by their children. a misterable existence. so no, i don't think a woman should have to be a mother -that is the whole point of prochoice isn't it?
A pregnancy is not an inconvenience it is a pregnancy for chrissakes. the same people who talk about how 'holy' a pregnancy is, or how wonderful or how it is a gift from god, minimize it at the same time by saying it's an 'inconvenience'. [an inconvenient gift from god! ha.]
an hour before birth, right. i'm sure alot of women in labor are having abortions.
what about the time most abortions take place? that fetus is not even fully formed and it has no bearing or impact on your life, why do you care? why is that murder? it's not worth it, i just cant be convinced that a six week fetus is relevant to this way. callous or whatever, i am not taken to soupy emotions, but more realism.

reply from: yoda

Even when there is no one else available to take care of her baby? She should just be able to walk away and let it die? My, how loving of you!
Nor do I..... but when she's pregnant.... she IS a mother. After an abortion, she's the mother of a DEAD CHILD.
There you go using that legal word again...... it's a LEGAL KILLING, not murder.
And it's the same person at 7 weeks that it is at 70 years of age..... you're just killing it before it even has a chance at making it's way in the world.
Yes, that IS callous..... because it disregards the most basic principle of fairness and justice...... we don't electively kill the innocent.
And it really doesn't matter how it "relates" to YOU.... abortion is actually about MORE THAN YOU..... the whole world is not ABOUT YOU......
BTW, do you consider the elective killing of an innocent human being to be an act of control over that person's life?

reply from: lukesmom

You can present whatever "choices" to your family you want but leave the friends out. I would not want anyone other than ME dialoging about this with MY daughter. Better to let the parents know and deal with their daughter.

reply from: 4choice4all

Sorry...any girl that comes to me for help will get the same advice. If they want to help their children, they need to build that relationship so she goes to them. If they fail to do so and she's at my door, I will help.

reply from: CDC700

You are a scary B i tch! Your post is almost taunting that if anyone lets you get a hold of their daughter, you will do your best to walk them through your death house doors. I sure hope you change your ways lady.

reply from: faithman

You are a scary B i tch! Your post is almost taunting that if anyone lets you get a hold of their daughter, you will do your best to walk them through your death house doors. I sure hope you change your ways lady.
Yepper... to hell with the womb child, it's all about killer scanc, and making shure killer scancism has a "bright" future. No development pictures here folks, just move along.

reply from: 4choice4all

Any woman that wants to continue a pregnancy should certainly learn of fetal development. I don't understand the point if a woman wants to end the pregnancy...she surely knows she's not aborting a kitten. The fact is, she's aware she's aborting a developing human and she doesn't care...and that is what makes you go foaming at the mouth. Her priorities in life, her moral code, her goals matter more to her than your rhetoric, your ideology and your twisted morality...and any potential life she's carrying. So keep on with your development pictures....delude yourselves into believing she thinks she's aborting a gerbil...that's gotten you real far.
Any young girl with an unexpected pregnancy that comes to me will be informed of ALL of her options. I have a 7th grade daughter and already her friends know that Grace can talk to her mom about "stuff" and her mom will answer questions. Her best friend started her period last year and she wanted to go swimming and asked her mom about tampons. Her mother told her she "couldn't" because she was a virgin and wouldn't say another word. So Grace sat down and asked "mom, why can't you us a tampon if you are a virgin?" We talked about why someone would suggest that and then talked about tampons and their function and how to properly use them and why some women prefer them and some don't and the risks and other forms of female products and let her know that I keep a supply of all types in the hall closet. Anyway...if any parent is worried about someone else talking to their child, their greatest tool is creating an environment where their child trusts them and comes to them.

reply from: yoda

Oh geez... here we go again..... now unborn babies are not actually "alive", they are just "potentially alive". Just when I thought I'd heard every possible proabort psychotic raving.....

reply from: 4choice4all

No..they are alive..I've always said that.

reply from: CDC700

If a parent worries about someone imposing their beliefs on a 12 year old. That makes them a PARENT. If your daughters friends parents chose to leave it at that, it's their business. Keep your nose out of it. I'm sure YOU wouldn't like it if another parent sat down in front of your kids and taught them the truth about abortion and what it does to the unborn. The greatest tool of a child molester is creating an environment where the child trusts them and goes to them. A child needs to respect their parents to be open for communication, you can't force respect. You earn it, even with your children.

reply from: yoda

So how then do you make the claim that they are just a "potential life" if they are already alive?
Do they die and come back to life at birth, or what?

reply from: 4choice4all

I'm not imposing...I'm sharing. And I don't nose into it...I answer truthfully when questioned. If my daughter goes to another adult and asks about abortion...I would expect them to answer honestly according to their convictions. The rub is that I'm open and honest with my daughter and we have a strong relationship...so she would naturally come to me if she had questions about what they said. It's a parents job to earn their child's respect and to form that relationship. If not, the child might look to another adult. And actually, my neighbor has 6 children and some of them are the same ages as mine. They play together daily...they stay the night with each other...go to the same schools...our families interact daily. She's a conservative fundamentalist christian...very prolife, very republican. We had to have a come to Jesus moment during the election. She was saying things about Obama in front of my kids...and a few had them in tears. So we talked and agreed that we should watch what we say in front of them...but if directly asked be honest about our thoughts. She said she didn't feel comfortable denying her thoughts on homosexuality if directly questioned by ANYONE..child included. I informed her that if directly questioned...I would also feel compelled to answer honestly. So we had to find common ground. And in the process...it opens up a lot of dialogue with our own children about our beliefs. Having your children exposed to differing views is not a bad thing.
Yoda...alive an a life are different.

reply from: Banned Member

Because at 10 or 11 or 12 on up to fifteen, she is a child herself. Children should not be having children. I knew a girl who had a baby when she was 11, & gave it up for adoption. It's hard to imagine the kind of emotional damage that does to a child, not to mention the physical dangers of giving birth at such a young age.

reply from: 4choice4all

how about Tiller's infamous abortion on the 9yo pregnant by her father? IMO, more proof that Tiller was a hero.

reply from: yoda

Are they?
Okay, how can you have a life if you are not alive?
And if you are alive, how can you not have a life?
Which dead people have "lives"?

reply from: yoda

AND children should not be KILLING children.

reply from: yoda

Not at all. More proof that Tiller helped pedophiles to cover up their crimes.

reply from: 4choice4all

silly...that's what abortion doctors are for!

reply from: 4choice4all

obviously, because I support euthanasia, life is about more than a heartbeat and brain stem.

reply from: yoda

I assume you mean that abortion doctors have as one of their duties the covering up of the rape of children?
Yes, that seems to be the case.

reply from: yoda

You don't make any effort to make sense, do you?
You want to see both old people and unborn people killed, and you think that makes your "daffynition" of life of more importance?

reply from: 4choice4all

I support euthanasia at any age.
You don't need a fetus to prosecute child molestation...but you knew that, you just rely on red herrings because all sensible debate escapes you.

reply from: yoda

No, but they sure make good evidence if you do have them, don't they?
Or have you not ever heard of DNA? Do you need a definition?

reply from: 4choice4all

You can get dna from a fetus....besides that 9yo's molestation wasn't covered up, so again red herring

reply from: yoda

Yes, you can get DNA from a "fetus", and from any other human source. But not if that "fetus" has been incinerated, which is how Tiller got rid of them. They say the stench was horrific.
Abortion mills operate a pedophile protection racket all across the country. Do you take advantage of it?
http://www.childpredators.com/

reply from: 4choice4all

No...prolifers insist that abortion mills protect pedophiles...there's a difference. And saying something over and over doesn't create truth.
What....can't get the nazi title to stick so you move on to pedophile?

reply from: carolemarie

there is a duty to report to the child abuse agencies any knowledge of sexual activity with a minor....
if the abortion clnics would report as they are required, that problem would be over. And yes, a DNA sample can be taken after the procedure is done.
So to convict, we don't need the girl to give birth. But you have to report underage sexual abuse. Any person under the age of consent is considered to be a victiim of sexual abuse and rape. Dr.'s teacher and others who work with children are considered mandatory reporters and are required do it to protect the child.
There is no excuse for not doing it.

reply from: yoda

And this link proves it: http://www.childpredators.com/

I haven't used the "nazi title" as you call it, why did you think of that?
But there are indeed pedophiles out there who use abortion as a way to get rid of the evidence, and to keep their victims "ready for more".
Check the link.

reply from: sander

And this link proves it: http://www.childpredators.com/
">http://www.childpredators.com/
I haven't used the "nazi title" as you call it, why did you think of that?
But there are indeed pedophiles out there who use abortion as a way to get rid of the evidence, and to keep their victims "ready for more".
Check the link.
But, Yoda if she checks the link then she might have to own up to her own degenerate thinking, or at least have it exposed.
Not that this vile creature would ever admit to any such thing....that requires courage. It takes no courage to kill babies and support those that do.

reply from: nancyu

since you are being absurd although for a moment i actually thought to have sincere conversing with you, then my response to this is hey, you can abort any prochoice baby you want.
I was being sincere. And I didn't say "pro choice babies" I said "pro aborts"

reply from: 4choice4all

And secondary to a fetus sums up the prochoice side. Stalemate.

reply from: 4choice4all

The crux is what constitutes a human "being".

reply from: yoda

Unborn babies are quite small and uncoordinated, and their aim sucks. They don't put up much of a fight, I understand.

reply from: yoda

It is? Great, let's look into that little "word game", shall we?
Does THIS help to clear up the confusion for you?
Information Please: http://www.infoplease.com/ipd/A0481706.html / hu'man be'ing 1. any individual of the genus Homo, esp. a member of the species
MSN Encarta Dictionary http://dictionary.msn.com/ hu·man be·ing (plural hu·man be·ings) noun 1. member of the human species: a member of the species to which men and women belong. Latin name Homo sapiens
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000. http://www.bartleby.com/61/79/H0317900.html %20human human being: NOUN: human
Meriam-Webster Online http://www.m-w.com
Main Entry: human being Function: noun : HUMAN
OH WAIT...... what was I thinking? You frown on my quoting of actual dictionaries that don't agree with your baby killing philosophy, don't you?

reply from: faithman

The kind people who have given us this free forum, have poured their very lives, and treasure into a powerful documentary called MAAFA 21. I believe the cost is going to be $20. Please seriously consider buying a copy, as well as sending what you can for copies to others. Life talk had several clips from it, and from just what I saw, It will be one of the most powerful projects in pro-life history. Do what you can. We owe MC3 so much, and could never hope to repay his kindness and suport for IAAP. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE consider this request, and do what you can for this project.

reply from: yoda

From what little I've seen, it will shake some people up. And I haven't seen the whole thing yet.
I think prolifers ought to buy it just because it's going to help the babies, no matter how we feel about Mark and LDI. Of course, it's rather strange for people to hang around here who don't like Mark and/or LDI. But some people are strange.

reply from: sander

From what little I've seen, it will shake some people up. And I haven't seen the whole thing yet.
I think prolifers ought to buy it just because it's going to help the babies, no matter how we feel about Mark and LDI. Of course, it's rather strange for people to hang around here who don't like Mark and/or LDI. But some people are strange.
You got that right and the rest of your post too.
I will not only consider purchasing a copy, I will purchase one.
It has taken all these years to finally turn the corner in the polls.
It's men like Mark who have been on the front lines and has been relentless in countering the lies and word twisting that has help contribute to those numbers.
The abortion industry has so many hidden filthy lies and the more they are exposed the better, God knows they've had the help of the mainstream media and the all important and powerful government to help hide those lies.
Those of us who love life and love and want to protect the defensless babies must keep up the good fight.

reply from: nancyu

Good for you 4choice...it think it's true what they say -- confession is good for the soul.

reply from: nancyu

Easy question to answer. Allow ALL "others" to make their own decisions, especially about life and death! Now, you do realize that means you have to stop supporting the killing of unborn babies, right?
So, you don't believe in controlling the life and death of others, right?
Killing unborn children is a form of "birth control". (says so right in the name)

reply from: nancyu

Not proaborts -- that's for sure!

reply from: yoda

I think Cecilia would disagree with you, if she wasn't ignoring this point totally.

reply from: faithman

The kind people who have given us this free forum, have poured their very lives, and treasure into a powerful documentary called MAAFA 21. I believe the cost is going to be $20. Please seriously consider buying a copy, as well as sending what you can for copies to others. Life talk had several clips from it, and from just what I saw, It will be one of the most powerful projects in pro-life history. Do what you can. We owe MC3 so much, and could never hope to repay his kindness and suport for IAAP. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE consider this request, and do what you can for this project.

reply from: Rosalie

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
And suppose a woman suddenly becomes overwhelmed by her newborn and her choice is to smoother it with a pillow? The newborn is little more than a full term fetus, the only difference is location. Why should the woman have to suffer the up all night with Colic, the every two hour feedings, the frequent diaper changes when a few minutes of forcible pressure with a pillow would make it "all better." Death of a child is not the answer to pregnancy inconvenience any more than it is to the inconveniences of parenthood. You know it is a baby being killed, why is it murder 1 hour out of the womb and a choice an hour prior to birth?
I suppose there is no help for you if you think woman is JUST A LOCATION.
That's so sad.

reply from: Rosalie

I have a daughter (quite a few neices, too) and, no, I don't think she (or they) would ever have a "desire" to kill her own children. Even if she did, (she wouldn't) I wouldn't express my love and respect for her by helping her to "seek out" a "legal" (it's not) abortion. I would express my love and respect for her by doing everything within my power to stop her from doing so.
(And don't you worry Cecilia, I'll keep the same attitude when killing pro aborts is legalized. )
I have met some young women who sought help because they didn't get it at home. Of course they didn't, there was no hope for them. Their parents were fundamentalist anti-choicers. These girls could never go to them even with the fact that they have a boyfriend, let alone if they got accidentally pregnant. They couldn't because they knew they'd either be thrown out or forced to give birth against their will (so many of them mentioned even being afraid of getting physically and psychologically abused).
These girls were afraidof their so-called parents. They had nowhere to turn to. They said they couldn't trust their parents. They kept saying that they'd never come to their parents because these people would have absolutely no problem locking them up at home to prevent them from making their legal choice.
These girls were also brought up to be pro-life but when it was happening to them, they weren't so sure about the convictions that were hammered into their heads. And even those who wanted to continue their pregnancies came to us for help because they were scared of their 'pro-life' parents.
Some came for an advice, some came for recommendations, some for contacts. All of them came for what they were lacking at home: unconditional love, understanding, non-judgmental attitude.
Some of them continued their pregnancies, some of them did not. Some ended up on the streets for being brave and telling their 'loving' parents. That's how anti-choice parents show they love when their children do something they disagree with.
My children will always know that she is unconditionally loved. They will know they can come to me and their father with everything and that no matter what, they won't be alone and they will never be forced to make such an important choice against their will. They will always have our full support.
That's how both I and my husband were raised and that's the only way we want to raise our children. I have always trusted my parents, I could go to my mom with anything at all and even if I was nervous about what she'll say, I knew that she'd never leave me alone and that she'd never physically or mentally force me to make a choice SHE would like me to make.
But that's someone who's clearly incapable of unconditional love and thinks death threats are funny cannot understand.

reply from: CDC700

this makes sense to me in every resepect except when it comes to what is inside my body.
the only reason i would be against abortion is that i find it discriminatory.
that prolife position makes sense to me, despite my belief that a fetus is really of no consequnce in the world, which is know is harsh but to me makes sense. i weigh out discimination of the fetus and forcing a woman to gestate and i cannot in clear conscience say "you must gestate and bring to birth that baby!" to women i do not never know. i can in clear conscious say "make up your own mind about what you want to do". i hope every woman who choose abortion is fine with their decision; the last thing i want to hear is a woman who regrets it; how terrible for her; i wish she had made the other choice for herself.
i know women regret their abortions i have met them myself. .
And suppose a woman suddenly becomes overwhelmed by her newborn and her choice is to smoother it with a pillow? The newborn is little more than a full term fetus, the only difference is location. Why should the woman have to suffer the up all night with Colic, the every two hour feedings, the frequent diaper changes when a few minutes of forcible pressure with a pillow would make it "all better." Death of a child is not the answer to pregnancy inconvenience any more than it is to the inconveniences of parenthood. You know it is a baby being killed, why is it murder 1 hour out of the womb and a choice an hour prior to birth?
I suppose there is no help for you if you think woman is JUST A LOCATION.
That's so sad.
Do you comprehend the English language? She said "the only difference is location." How that becomes "A woman is just a location" is beyond comprehension.

reply from: Rosalie

Because 'location' in this case is the woman's uterus. It's the woman's body. And it's so much more than just location. That's obviously beyond YOUR comprehension.

reply from: Faramir

It still boggles my mind that the number one target-of the "less charitible" (to use the most charitible expression I can think of) prolifers here is not a "pro abort," but a successful pro-life advocate who has helped prevent hundreds of abortions!

reply from: yoda

Extreme examples of twisted thinking.......

reply from: yoda

Thank goodness we have Weenie to remind us every day about how mean we are to carole, and the proaborts to remind him if he misses a day. I just wish they would supply handkerchiefs and violin music......

reply from: Rosalie

Extreme examples of twisted thinking.......
So you too don't understand that the location you speak of is actually a living woman's uterus.
It doesn't even surprise me anymore.

reply from: Faramir

Thank goodness we have Weenie to remind us every day about how mean we are to carole, and the proaborts to remind him if he misses a day. I just wish they would supply handkerchiefs and violin music......
Concernedparent did this time. I just agreed with him.
It SHOULD boggle my mind that prolifers would undermine and discredit the work of a successful pro-life advocate.

reply from: yoda

......... spend FOUR TIMES as much effort defending the views of another poster as defending unborn babies??
Is that what you meant to say?

reply from: Yuuki

Extreme examples of twisted thinking.......
So you too don't understand that the location you speak of is actually a living woman's uterus.
It doesn't even surprise me anymore.
Yes, the womb, the cradle of youth. The warm safe place we live out our first nine months of life. NOT a butchery. NOT a slaughterhouse.


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