Yes I would like my tax money to go to helping those that need it. Yes we need more special ed schools and facilities. I would rather pay for those services than to take a life. I teach a very special little girl who has many problems, who is not perfect but who is a joy to have in this world. She has so much love to offer and everyone in contact with her feels the love and the children around her are learning compassion, caring and more. I hate to think of a world where it is common place to abort such a child because she is not pefect and because she costs more to educate and take care of.
The day that people stop admitting that every abortion is a child killed is the day we come closer to selective designer babies. I do not lobby for making all abortions illegal, but I will never sit back and quietly listen to people pretend that they are killing for the good of the child or to save money taking care of unwanted children.
posted on January 25, 2001 05:16:01 PM
inside, I see you ignored my question. So I'll say it again:
What if a woman's life is at risk and giving birth to that baby will kill her. Does SHE not have the right to her own life? Or is it ok in the pro-lifer's book for the mother to die and have the baby raised without her than to have the baby aborted to save her life.
The question posed is do you think it's ok to kill the mother?
posted on January 25, 2001 05:27:48 PM
As I said, I would never lobby to make illegal all abortions. I think if a woman's life is in mortal danger she should be allowed to have an abortion. You are still killing a child, but you are saving another life. In such a case one is going to die no matter what.
Not every point in this issue is black and white. There are no absolutes except for those so radical that they can see only what they want to see. That is why you get idiots bombing clinics and countries like China. Hopefully open discussion will keep most in the middle.
Now let me ask you. Do you approve of partial-birth abortions? You know the ones where they pull the child out except for the head and then they suck his brains out.
posted on January 25, 2001 05:59:07 PMinside...Frankly, my concern is more geared to third-world countries, which go through terrible famines, caused either by drought or by POLITICAL conditions, prohibiting planes to deliver help. That causes the death of MILLIONS of infants, toddlers and children, and their parents.
Don't these people deserve to eat enough, to be able to care for theor children? Are these poor women nothing more than breeding cattle?
We are not talking about populating "shrub's" ranch here..We are talking about HUMAN BEINGS, starving or living under conditions that none of us on this board would want to be subjected to, and all that because of OVER Population.
In my eyes, this administration is
committing GENOCIDE...Nothing will ever convince me otherwise. And wait till it hits home, and young girls start having botched abortions and die of infections. Let's turn back the clock to the good ol'days.."Boys will be boys"...This country is very sheltered, so, very idealistic. Are you aware of the terrible fertility experiments forced upon females in concentration camps during WW2, and that monstruous babies were produced, just for the sake of experimentation, to then be fed to the ovens? Is THAT OK? How far are you willing to carry the "lack" of women's rightsto support the Pro-Life movement?
********
Gosh Shosh!
posted on January 25, 2001 06:06:31 PM
Isn't comparing Bush to Nazi fertility experiments just a bit of a stretch? Also, if you want to bring the holacoust into it I think the pro-lifer's could make just as good or better comparison.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:16:10 PM
inside, fair question. No I do not personally approve of the late stage abortion that you spoke of. But, then again, I don't know the individual circumstances.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:29:04 PMinside - my grief over what takes place in China is for everyone involved - the children abandoned and for the women forced to abort a child she wants. No one should be forced or coerced to abort a pregnancy anymore than anyone should be forced or coerced into continuing one.
I'll say it again - I am not pro-abortion. But I do believe it is a personal decision, and one the government should have no say over. Once a child in the womb is viable to survive outside the womb - at that point, I start having a real problem with abortion. But the mass of cells that exists during the first trimester - I cannot call that a child. Believe me - when I miscarried at 11 weeks a few years ago - that was a child in my heart and my mind, but not in the reality of what came out of my body. My heart said it was a girl - my mind named her - but there was no way of knowing for certain.
I'm not un-sympathetic to your view at all. I just don't understand why so many on the Right to Life side think that the decision to abort a pregnancy is made lightly! I don't doubt there are those who think it's no big deal, (much like some find it no big deal to beat and abuse a child until they die at 2 or 3 years old), but I believe the majority of us know it's a big deal, and a major decision that will change who we are forever. Once a woman finds herself pregnant, no matter what choice she makes she is changed forever.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:36:19 PM
I've also worked in the third world. Think things are bad here? A friend of mine who grew up in the Bed-Stuy area of New York came to Caracas and her mouth dropped open. She couldn't believe how bad the slums were. There are dead street kids turning up in parts of Latin America, alledgedly killed by police. Is Shrub still giving money to Guatemala and Brazil? Of course.
King Hypocrite!!!!!
posted on January 25, 2001 06:54:26 PMeyeguy...You are right. I apologize.
You see, the message I am receiving is that Pro-Life would allow, no, demand, ANY PREGNANCY to continue, no matter what the circumstances...And I just cannot buy that.
snow....Yes, we don't have to travel too far to find the horrors. I remember crying my eyes out while watching a special news edition about an area in the South...cannot remember if it was Alabama or Tennessee or where...called "Sugar Ditch"...Over-population is a great disaster. The extreme poverty, the squalor, the lack of anything even fundamental, including doctors, running water, ELECTRICITY, the loss of hope, while just across the road were multi-hundred thousand dollar homes for very priviledged white families.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:57:52 PM
maddienicks,
When I first saw the ultra sound of our child, there was only a small blob there. But in the center of that blob beat a heart. It was a baby. Maybe not formed not viable outside the womb but it was our baby. It wasn't a tumor but a human life.
I will never be able to accept that it is not a child being aborted.
posted on January 25, 2001 07:01:46 PM
There's an area in deep South Texas that we call the colonias. Scumbag developers sold the homes, but didn't put in water, sewers, or any power access which they were supposed to. They declared bankruptcy, and fled.
In the best of all possible worlds, without poverty, disease
and with people who want their children, your stand on abortion
would be more acceptable.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. As snowyegret has described,
the situation in which these poor, sick and unwanted children have
to live is horrific. Not being born is better. And if you believe
that these unborn children are alive at conception, then death is
better than life.
I understand how you are thinking though. It's a tough problem.
Death is better than life? I suppose some in their wisdom can make that choice for others, I could not. Given that, would those poor, sick, and unwanted people already alive be better off dead. Would it not be merciful to kill them so they would not suffer? No we would not do that because it would be wrong. It would be murder.
posted on January 25, 2001 08:27:01 PM
Inside,
Of course, I don't believe in murder.
I don't believe that abortion is murder.
I think that you misunderstood what I was
trying to say.
posted on January 25, 2001 08:40:38 PM
Going afield to say that for all anyone knows, death may very well be better than life. Isn't every Christian banking on their belief that it is?
Further than that, isn't every anti-abortion premise condemning to a virtual life in Hell on earth those who would otherwise be painfully weeded out by the process of natural selection, as is done by all other creatures of God's creation? Birds remove flawed eggs or chicks from the nest intuitively, many mammal refuse to sustain abberant offspring, again by instinct.
Man has the ability to reason, and with that the need for inbred instinctual behaviors is lessened.
Can it then be so very farfetched to believe that in God's wisdom, the process of the elimination of irregular or unwanted offspring is provided to take the place of the less than reasoned process of the more restrictively enhanced lesser creations?
If it is not so farfetched to think that abortion is, in fact, God's will for us, arent't all anti-abortionists denying their expounded faith? Or have they simply made the error, in spite of God's clear warning, of following false prophets?
If the possibility of God's higher wisdom in these earthly things can be acknowledged then how can anyone place trust in any political movement to make those decisions for us all?
posted on January 25, 2001 08:51:25 PM
Here's what is over the line in the link that krs provided:
quote: he announced that he would bar federal aid to international family planning groups which provide abortion counseling or work for abortion rights in foreign countries.
Notice that he is not only cutting off groups that work for abortion rights, but also those who provide abortion COUNSELING. He is against women seeking COUNSELING???
Can anyone justify federal funding being cut off that is intended to provide counseling for women in crisis? Counseling which might very well help them decide on an alternative? That is not only hypocrisy, it is very arrogant.
Dubya is trying to play God when it's hard enough for him to play human.
posted on January 25, 2001 09:04:55 PM
It's more than that, even. Those providing groups are to have all funding denied if they do those activities, EVEN IF they use no U.S. federal funds to do them.
Yes, I know children just as you speak of and you do wonderful work and I am sure the child is a joy. She is so lucky and one of the few.
Helen stated my feelings. "In a Perfect World et." Pretty much says it all.
Late trimesters? If you ask me that I would say no but I to would have to know the circumstances.
The children you speak of in the Special Olympics? I'd say those are the lucky ones compared to the ones we don't see and "lucky" is not a good word.
Then I think about a relative that wanted a baby very much. I'm sorry but this was not a baby that was delivered. That child would have had to have so many surgeries and still not have developed past infancy. That mother made a decision to pull that plug rather than to subject her to that. Thank goodness she didn't have to deal with some "do gooder group" that went to court to fight it as some have had to. This woman will go childless since she won't go through that again. Some would think this was an easy decision. NOT, and she is still childless and plans to stay that way by choice.
posted on January 25, 2001 09:45:24 PM
krs, that is OUTRAGEOUS!
I can only imagine being in that predicament and turning to someone to help me only to be turned away because it the government doesn't allow emotional counseling and help in figuring out choices at a very confusing fork in the road.
Imagine having nobody to talk to, nobody to ask advice from...because Bush won't allow it...what will this lead to next? I shudder to think.
posted on January 26, 2001 05:35:25 AMshar makes an interesting point - what of infants on life support and no hope of a "life" outside of the hospital and the machines?
inside - you are seeing in my posts (and others) only what you want to see. You are missing where many (including myself!) have agreed with you that abortion is a sad and terrible thing. So I will do my best to sit on my hands and not waste anymore time with this particular brick wall with you.
I'll be gone all day today, so that will help me keep my big mouth shut for a while.
posted on January 26, 2001 08:05:02 AM"If the possibility of God's higher wisdom in these earthly things can be acknowledged then how can anyone place trust in any political movement to make those decisions for us all?"
posted on January 26, 2001 12:30:39 PM
Krs, my question above refers to this post
that you made......................................................................................
"Going afield to say that for all anyone knows, death may very well be better than life. Isn't every Christian banking on their belief that it is?
Further than that, isn't every anti-abortion premise condemning to a virtual life in Hell on earth those who would otherwise be painfully weeded out by the process of natural selection, as is done by all other creatures of God's creation? Birds remove flawed eggs or chicks from the nest intuitively, many mammal refuse to sustain abberant offspring, again by instinct.
Man has the ability to reason, and with that the need for inbred instinctual behaviors is lessened.
Can it then be so very farfetched to believe that in God's wisdom, the process of the elimination of irregular or unwanted offspring is provided to take the place of the less than reasoned process of the more restrictively enhanced lesser creations?
If it is not so farfetched to think that abortion is, in fact, God's will for us, arent't all anti-abortionists denying their expounded faith? Or have they simply made the error, in spite of God's clear warning, of following false prophets?
If the possibility of God's higher wisdom in these earthly things can be acknowledged then how can anyone place trust in any political movement to make those decisions for us all?"....................................................................................
Could you possibly refrase the quote above
without the religious references in a sort
of minimalist fashion so that even "I" can
understand it?
posted on January 26, 2001 12:54:06 PM
What I don't understand is, with all the people that have chosen "Pro-Life", why aren't you rallying to take care of these thousands+ of "unwanted" children. You"re
so concerned with the birth of children...what about the next 80 years?? Hasn't anyone heard that there's a population explosion and our earth is having problems because of too many people???
Although abortion isn't the answer, it's the only option for some people.
As a person, I would fight to the end for my freedom....having my own choice in life is my only freedom....what business is it of anyone's to take that away from me???
[ edited by kraftdinner on Jan 26, 2001 12:56 PM ]
I'm not sure what it is that you are having difficulty with as to me the post goes to the basis of the anti-abortionist position. There is a reliance on Christian beliefs that supposedly justify this now political stance.
It is not enough that a person make her (and his) choice in the matter, the anti-abortionist would have his (or her)beliefs imposed on all.
So then what are those beliefs, really? are they truly the will of the subject of their worship, or was the order of things preestablished by that subject of worship prior to their ability to bring it as a national issue? If it was, and who really knows, then what perhaps faulty interpretation of His will has the political substance to alter the plan?
You first post copied that about Christianity offering a better life in the hereafter, wherever. It is the root of almost all belief systems, so I don't think that you didn't understand it.
posted on January 26, 2001 01:32:36 PM
I AM whizzing through, and leaving again, and thought that with all of those questions there must have been more asked than that. LOL!
