[QUOTE=JimSox5]
Last year, it was, I believe, the local conservative club here at my school filled our mall (commons, whatever you might call it) with white, wooden crosses. The number (don’t remember the number off-hand) was supposed to be the number of abortions over eight hours or, as they said, the number of babies that were killed while you slept. Disingenuity aside, it was an effective demonstration for their views. What got me, though, was a local woman who came onto campus for the display and mourned very publicly over every cross because of her regrets over her abortion a quarter century ago. I wouldn’t be one bit surprised if the woman was hired by the club to mourn and try to give their display more weight.
I’ll admit that my stances on abortion don’t make a lot of sense. I’m morally against abortion, because it seems like the kids ought to have a chance, but I also believe in the “ball of cells” theory (that’s what every biology class I ever took taught me). I also think that abortion should certainly be legal, if nothing else because I believe that if it is outlawed, it will only be forced into trailers in the woods with coathangers and the like. I don’t think anybody wants to see that.
So, to close this rambling post (maybe because I’m posting from a bio class), damn this woman. As the YouTube video pointed out, she and her ilk obviously have not thought out what they advocate. I’m sure she was very happy to have her abortion done in a clinic rather than in Uncle Jimbo’s trailer, poking around with a rusty hanger.
[/QUOTE]
A local church did that. Strangely enough, it was one we attended once when I was a kid.
I was sorely tempted to start a display of coathangers right across the street, just to be vulgar.
[QUOTE=Annie-Xmas]
I read Randy Alcorn’s “Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments.” He states that medical tests could be wrong (he “knows” a couple who were told their baby had a genetic abnormality and was born normal), that even severally abnormal pre-born babies have every right to be born, and that holding them, bonding with them, and grieving for their natural death is healthy for the parents, and they deserve to be born and given up for adoption instead of being aborted.
Alcorn is so hardcore pro-life that when a health care provider won a $8,000,000 judgement against him, he suddenly managed to have no income to pay the lawsuit.
[/QUOTE]
What about ectopic pregnancy (did I spell that right?) and/or danger to the mother’s life?
[QUOTE=John Mace]
Here’s the thing-- **Diogenes **insists that the term “child” only be used post-birth. So, he won’t allow someone to say they lost a child if there is a miscarriage or if the fetus is stillborn. But of course no one in this thread is argueing that a miscarriage is exactly like losing a child. It’s all about winning the abortion debate with semantics.
[/QUOTE]
I agree that it is a semantics debate, as so many abortion arguments are. My guess is that Diogenes doesn’t want to admit (even to himself…not trying to imply that he’s lying here) that a man can feel something for a miscarried or aborted pregnancy, because he believes that would be giving some weight to anti-abortion arguments. I actually remember he was pitted once a couple of years ago for saying the same things he is saying here. He wasn’t pitted for the sentiment, exactly, but because he had the insensitivity to say it to a guy whose wife just had a miscarriage. I didn’t participate in the thread because I was out of town, but I read it later, and I actually agreed with him to a certain extent. I do think it’s quite natural to not be as upset about a miscarriage than about a born child dying, but I don’t reach the same conclusions as to what it means in regards to abortion. The fact is, having personal experience with an entity, whether it be fetus, baby, child…even a dog…is going to affect how upset we would get if something happened to it. I have had miscarriages at 8 weeks or so, and I can attest that it is in no way as upsetting as it would be if God forbid anything happened to one of my kids who had the good luck to make it to term. In the same way, if a neighbor’s child died, I would be far more upset than if I heard of a child dying who I had never met before. Heck, I was more upset by the Northern Illinois murders than the Virginia Tech murders, even though far more people died at Virginia Tech. Why? Because Northern is much more familiar to me…I had friends who went there, and I have friends now whose children go there. It’s the familiarity and the emotional connection that causes the grief. Hard to work up that kind of attachment to a pregnancy you might have only known about for a couple of days. Heck, Diogenes could find out he had another kid somewhere he never knew about…if that child died, I wouldn’t expect him to feel the same loss as if one of the kids he nurtured died. But what he would feel is a disappointment that he never got to know the child…and THAT is what miscarriage feels like. I am lucky never to have experienced a loss further along in a pregnancy, but I am quite sure that the level of distress would increase the farther along the pregnancy was…that is, the more “real” the baby/fetus seems.
What Diogenes doesn’t realize is that whether or not there is a feeling of loss when there is a miscarriage or abortion happens is irrelevant to the pro-life view. In the pro-life view, you can’t judge the worth of someone based on whether or not there is someone else who cares about their existence or would mourn their loss. If that were true, then a homeless guy under a bridge has no inherent worth, and I doubt that Diogenes would agree with that.
Some dude trying to play the grieving parent because some chick aborted his embryo, though. That’s just lame. He was never a parent. He never had a child.
[/QUOTE]
As others noted very early on, lamenting or regretting an abortion is often just an ‘I wonder what could have been?’ feeling. Of course guys are going to feel this, almost as much if not as much as women.
Not to get this even more off track, but The Nation has an article on ‘Post-Abortion Syndrome’ in men. Mostly obvious stuff, a few interesting bits, and lots and lots of quoted douchebags.
As for the OP, pro-lifers having abortions seems pretty much in line with my observations. Some are young dumb teenagers out to save the planet and getting pregnant is a major reality check. Others are the usual ‘It’s wrong, but my case was different!’ It takes a very special lady to remain pro-life afterwards (though that, too, is quite common, apparently. PPers care to check in?).
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena]
I actually remember he was pitted once a couple of years ago for saying the same things he is saying here. He wasn’t pitted for the sentiment, exactly, but because he had the insensitivity to say it to a guy whose wife just had a miscarriage. I didn’t participate in the thread because I was out of town, but I read it later, and I actually agreed with him to a certain extent.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
What about ectopic pregnancy (did I spell that right?)
[/QUOTE]
You did. Ectopic pregnancies eventually result in the death of the embryo anyway. I seem to recall a rather long, nasty thread here about a year back, about the Catholic church, ectopic pregnancies, and South American hospitals which stood by and refused to perform a salpingectomy because it would be “murder.”
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Both of the other two times, I had to actually hold the baby in my arms before it actually sank in. before delivery, it was always just “pregnant wife.” I use the language of “baby” with my wife and we speak in overly anthropomorphized terms about “how the baby’s doing in there,” “I think the baby wants chocolate,” that kind of thing, but I never really, truly feel it as a baby until after it’s born.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the response. What about the excitement and anticipation of the older sibs, though? I don’t have any clear idea how old they are (therefore what level of awareness they’re likely to be capable of), but having been an expectant big brother more than a couple of times in my life, I’m pretty sure that atmosphere is going to manifest sooner or later.
You’re not expecting to let them experience that without Daddy sharing it, are you?
Dio’s input made me think of a situation in my family.
My relative and his fiancee intended to try for children as soon as possible after their wedding. Having heard that it can take 12 months to become pregnant after going off the pill, the fiancee decided to stop taking the pill 12 months before the wedding but didn’t switch to an alternative form of contraception - and she fell pregnant right away. Relative was thrilled because he’d always wanted children, and although the timing wasn’t what they’d intended, he was ecstatic about impending parenthood. Fiancee, on the other hand, was very unhappy about it. She told him she’d decided to abort the fetus, and that it was his fault because he wasn’t a good enough provider. She said she’d have kept the baby if he earned more money, but he didn’t so she felt they couldn’t afford it and she was terminating the pregnancy. Relative was quite upset by this, but the choice was hers because it was her body, and although he tried to pursuade her not to terminate, he ultimately accepted that it wasn’t up to him. However, it had a significant impact on his feelings for her, and was instrumental in his decision to break up with her some months later.
Perhaps he had a lucky escape from fiancee, and it was better that this happened before their marriage rather than after… there’s a lot about that couple and that situation that was wrong. But I don’t think my relative could be blamed for feeling some grief about the termination of a pregnancy that he would have chosen to carry to term had their genders been reversed even if all the other factors had stayed the same. Granted, to the best of my knowledge he doesn’t mark the potential “birthday” on the calendar and mourn it each year, but I do believe the termination continues to have an emotional impact on him.
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
Whoa-when was that?
[/QUOTE]
Oh, like I said, a couple of years ago, maybe. I’m not inclined to dig up the thread…I only mention it because he said basically the same things in it, so it shows consistency of thought on his part. IIRC, he admitted at the time that he might have been more diplomatic with the grieving dad.
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena]
Oh, like I said, a couple of years ago, maybe. I’m not inclined to dig up the thread…I only mention it because he said basically the same things in it, so it shows consistency of thought on his part. IIRC, he admitted at the time that he might have been more diplomatic with the grieving dad.
[/QUOTE]
Ah, I think I vaguely remember it. Okay. Just curious.
Back on topic. McCorvey doesn’t seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer. She’s “no longer a lesbian”? Unless perhaps she’s bisexual, I don’t think she’s all there.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Because who gives a fuck how the man feels? Nothing happened to him. He “lost” nothing. Why is he “lamenting” a decision someone else made about her own body? What kind of a douchebag goes around grieving someone else’s bloodclot. What a pear shaped loser.
[/QUOTE]
Your attitude is truly bewildering. When my wife left me I felt bad and lamented her decision even though I lost no genetic material. What does a woman’s “bloodclot” have to do with having an emotional response to that situation?
[QUOTE=Maureen]
Bolding mine. So, really, it’s that she’s “hiding” her “mistake” (mistake being having sex that leads to a pregnancy), When really, she should be punished for her first mistake by being forced to look at her pregnancy and the way it changes her body as encouragement to never do it again. So much for the “every child is a blessing” routine.
[/quote]
I was responding to a specific point made by missbunny. She criticized “religious” women who get pregnant and then say they won’t abort because doing so would be against their religion. She then said, (paraphrasing), “so is adultery/fornication”. Which, I agree, is true. missbunny seemed to be implying (and I hope she’ll forgive me if I’m misinterpreting her) that the woman is some sort of hypocrite for saying she isn’t going to break one commandment when she’s already broken another. Should the woman say, “Well, I’m already screwed (no pun intended) - I may as well go for broke”? How about a teenager saying, “Well, I’ve already broken the law by getting drunk at my age. Might as well get in my car and drive, and finish the job.”
In any case, I wasn’t talking about punishing anybody (my first paragraph about lying to your parents to cover up some disobedience was just for illustration purposes.) What I was saying was basically “two (or three) wrongs don’t make a right”. In Christianity, the first step in making amends for doing wrong is admitting that you did wrong. The second step is accepting whatever consequences come of it. In the case of an unmarried Christian woman committing fornication and getting pregnant, this means going through with the pregnancy, and deciding whether to keep the baby or put it up for adoption. There is a difference between “consequences” and “punishment”, which brings me to the third step: asking forgiveness. Being forgiven does away with the punishment, but not the consequences.
Biblical commandments are not limited to the famous “Ten Commandments”. Those are just the starting point. Liars are censured elsewhere in the Bible.
It’s not any different. It’s simply delaying the consequences (which, in the absence of a pregnancy, will be different consequences). I can’t say what those consequences will be. Perhaps an STD instead. Perhaps nothing more than guilt and shame. Perhaps constant, ever-increasing worry about getting caught.
I addressed this in my first post: the male is just as responsible as the female. He will ultimately have to deal with consequences, though not necessarily the identical consequences.
Keep in mind that missbunny was specifically addressing something a Christian woman might do and say; likewise, my response was specifically addressing what a Christian woman should do in that situation (and, indirectly, what a Christian man should do). I’m not addressing non-Christians at all. Biblical commandments are for Christians to follow, not non-Christians. In this sense, I’m in agreement with what C.S. Lewis wrote in Mere Christianity. He was addressing the question of divorce, but the principle is the same:
That said, let me state for the record that I am opposed to abortion on Biblical grounds, but believe that the Church should not try to enforce those Biblical grounds on those who don’t believe the Bible. It’s not our job as Christians to force a change in the laws of the State. That doesn’t mean we should remain silent on the issue; it means that we should work to help change people, not the laws. When enough people have changed their beliefs, and follow those beliefs, the laws will take care of themselves (and in fact will become irrelevant).
[QUOTE=Phase42]
That said, let me state for the record that I am opposed to abortion on Biblical grounds, but believe that the Church should not try to enforce those Biblical grounds on those who don’t believe the Bible. It’s not our job as Christians to force a change in the laws of the State. That doesn’t mean we should remain silent on the issue; it means that we should work to help change people, not the laws. When enough people have changed their beliefs, and follow those beliefs, the laws will take care of themselves (and in fact will become irrelevant).
[/QUOTE]
I think you’d find we’re closer together on this point than you may think, with the caveat that people don’t change their belief structure easily or willingly.
We have an education department that we’d very much like to expand. It’s unfortunate that people don’t want their tax money to go to “abortion clincs” in the form of state Medicaid, yet they refuse to acknowledge that education is the best way to ensure it doesn’t get to that point. Abstinence only programs have been shown definitively to be ineffective, but we stubbornly stick to teaching them to our children. Increased education based on facts, not scaring our kids, and keeping abortion safe and legal will help it become a smaller statistic.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I’m still not seeing it. Maybe I’m just dense. Someone’s going to have to help me out here.
If this helps. I would say that no matter how late my wife miscarried, I would still never feel like I’d lost an actual child. I might feel disappointed that a child never materialized out of the pregnancy, but I wouldn’t feel like anyone had died.
[/QUOTE]
Look, I agree with you that marking off birthdays for fetuses is a bit ridiculous. As someone else pointed out, that person could probably use some grief counselling to channel grief into more useful (for lack of a better word) pursuits. But the issue I have with what you’re saying (and what it seems like other people are focusing on as well) is that you’re dictating how people should feel about something.
You said in the post that I quote here that you’d be “disappointed that a child never materialized.” What if I took up the position that you shouldn’t feel disappointed? I just don’t see how you can get down on someone for feeling hurt by the loss of a fetus when you said you’d be disappointed by the same. Even though your hypothetical disappointment would be brought about by a miscarriage, maybe the man in question wanted a baby to materialize as well.
So why do you get to feel disappointed and the other person not get to feel hurt (even though, just to reiterate, he may be taking his pain to a somewhat abnormal place with marking off birthdays)?
[QUOTE=Maureen]
Also…wasn’t CS Lewis an atheist?
[/QUOTE]
No, re-converted Christian ( born into the church, lapsed - rejoined, appropriate for this thread, no?), according to Wiki
The Narnia Chronicles are strong Christian allegory and The Screwtape Letters are an entertaining look at Christianity from a demon’s point of view. There’s a full bibliography in the link. And even this jaded agnostic finds him worth reading.
[QUOTE=Maureen]
We have an education department that we’d very much like to expand. It’s unfortunate that people don’t want their tax money to go to “abortion clincs” in the form of state Medicaid, yet they refuse to acknowledge that education is the best way to ensure it doesn’t get to that point. Abstinence only programs have been shown definitively to be ineffective, but we stubbornly stick to teaching them to our children. Increased education based on facts, not scaring our kids, and keeping abortion safe and legal will help it become a smaller statistic.
[/QUOTE]
I’m in full agreement with you on this. I’ve never understood my fellow Christians who don’t believe in public sex education.
I also find it highly amusing that the pro-choice lobby and the pro-gun lobby, each of which caters to a constituency that typically opposes the other, make virtually identical (and equally sound) arguments in this regard.
[QUOTE=Phase42]
I was responding to a specific point made by missbunny. She criticized “religious” women who get pregnant and then say they won’t abort because doing so would be against their religion. She then said, (paraphrasing), “so is adultery/fornication”. Which, I agree, is true. missbunny seemed to be implying (and I hope she’ll forgive me if I’m misinterpreting her) that the woman is some sort of hypocrite for saying she isn’t going to break one commandment when she’s already broken another. Should the woman say, “Well, I’m already screwed (no pun intended) - I may as well go for broke”? How about a teenager saying, “Well, I’ve already broken the law by getting drunk at my age. Might as well get in my car and drive, and finish the job.”
[/QUOTE]
Oh no, I didn’t mean that they–woman who did commit one sin (fornication or adultery) should have an abortion because otherwise they’re hypocrites, being that they’ve already broken one commandment and might as well break them all. I meant they shouldn’t be telling other women that what those other women choose to do or might choose to do is a sin.
This is different from a woman–any woman, religious or not–having an abortion and later telling other women they regret having done it.
For the last time, I never tried to tell anybody else how they should feel. I was just expressing my OWN eye-rolling response to people who are basically being drama queens.
Also, that other thread from the past was a case where somebody (probably a troll since he had never posted before and never posted again) started a thread with the title “My Baby Died,” and then it turned to be a story about a false pregnancy, not even a real miscarriage – there was no fetus at all. I intitially posted in that thread that I thought the title was misleading, then realized what was going to happen (God forbid anybody ever call a sympathy troll on their bullshit around here) so, to avoid hijaking the original thread, I asked the self-righteous brigade to bring their pitchforks to the Pit and apologized in the original thread just in case “saddad” was a real person (which I doubt). The usual inquistition ensued in the pit thread with the usual hysterical indignation, distortions of what was actually said (including the same false accusation that I was trying to tell other people how to feel) and opportunistic pot shots from people who just don’t like the pittee in general.
In any case, that prior incident was about a (fairly mildly expressed) irritation at a misleading and (IMO) emotionally manipulative thread title. It was ill advised to post it, but I wasn’t wrong.
