11-Year-Old Unable to have Abortion in Chile Because of Jesus

If there were ever a situation in which both conservatives and liberals could agree that abortion is the right choice, it is this one.

11-year-old Belén is pregnant after being continually raped by her stepfather. Due to her young age, both she and the fetus’ life are at risk. However, abortion is not legal in her native county of Chile, where Catholic and conservative forces dominate.

There are only five countries in the world that do not, under any circumstances, allow abortion, and Chile is one of them. While abortion used to be legal in this country, abortion became a relic of the past under the rule of dictator Augusto Pinochet in 1973, an oversight that has yet to be corrected under their new government.

As of this morning, Belén released a statement that she will carry her pregnancy to term and raise her child, a decision that the conservative President adamantly supported.

Think about it. An eleven-year-old girl who is the victim of incest rape has to now become a mother because she has no other options. Because she’s so young, a pregnancy is putting both herself and her child at risk. But even if she decided to keep the baby willingly, others in her position shouldn’t be forced into the decision. They should be able to make these decisions for themselves.

(image via Shutterstock)

About Lauren Lane

Lauren Lane is the co-founder of Skepticon, the Midwest's largest skeptic student-run conference and remains a lead organizer today. She has not one, but TWO fancy art degrees and is not afraid to use them.

  • Jim Washburn

    … both SHE and the fetus are at risk.

  • Rip Van Winkle

    For the sake of correctness, there is no incest going on here since it was her STEPfather that raped her. He is not related to her.

    Otherwise, shit still sucks. I hope she doesn’t die.

    • http://www.devidreams.com/ Devi Taylor

      In some cultures, it’s still considered incest because of their close affinity despite the fact that they don’t share DNA. I’m not sure Chile is one of those countries/cultures though. As her stepfather, he’s supposed to represent a parental figure to her, so I would call it incest for that reason alone.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest

      • Rip Van Winkle

        Yeah but the very first sentence of your article points out exactly what incest actually is regardless of cultural interpretation. It’s sexual intercourse between two genetically related people. The step-father is in the family by marriage, not blood, so he would be no different than a run-of-the-mill rapist. It’s not incest what he did. It’s just heinous.

        • http://www.devidreams.com/ Devi Taylor

          Did you continue reading past the first sentence? It also says:

          The term may apply to sexual intercourse between people in a consangueous relationship (“blood relations”), or related by affinity, such as members of the same household, step relatives, those related by adoption or marriage, or members of the same clan or lineage.

          I agree, though, that what he did was pretty rancid and I hope justice is served somehow, somewhere in the girl’s life.

    • Chani

      Actually, incest can be by any member of the family, including step.

      • Rip Van Winkle

        Actually, no. Incest is between genetically related people.

        • Alice

          http://definitions.uslegal.com/i/incest/

          “Laws vary by state, but generally, a person commits incest if he marries or engages in sexual intercourse with a person he knows to be, either legitimately or illegitimately:

          His ancestor or descendant by blood or adoption; or
          His brother or sister of the whole or half-blood or by adoption; or
          His stepchild or stepparent, while the marriage creating the relationship exists; or
          His aunt, uncle, nephew or niece of the whole or half-blood.

          In some states incest also includes copulation or cohabitation between first cousins, but the majority of jurisdictions permit marriage between such cousins.”

          That is America though. I can’t find anything on Chilean law.

        • Ibis3

          Actually, we’re all genetically related.

          Incest is a cultural concept, not a biological one. Different cultures define incest differently.

          • Nelson

            This is stupid.

            Animals avoid incest all the time.

        • threenorns

          wrong. from a legal point of view, incest is family members, whether or not they’re related by blood. this is why step-siblings cannot marry each other – even though they’re not blood related, they were still raised in a sibling relationship.

  • littlewarriorfox

    She is eleven she cannot “choose” anything of this magnitude with anything even vaguely approaching “informed” choice…

    • Bobert

      Even an eleven year old can “choose” if they want their life at risk or not. She’s probably being force fed her words.

      • Miss_Beara

        She thinks it is going to be like taking care of a doll. She was probably force fed that thought as well.

    • Nathan Browett

      you can’t be serious?

  • Andi

    This enrages me. Is there any way she can be smuggled out of the country and taken to one that will let her end the pregnancy?

    • flyb

      I’m wondering if she left her country to have an abortion in a nearby country where it was legal, could she (or anyone helping her) be prosecuted in her own country when she went back?

      • threenorns

        yep.

      • LostInUnderland

        If she got out of the country, why the hell would anyone send her back? Why even take her out of the country unless you are going to give her a chance to see that there is another kind of life where people will love and protect her?

  • Miss_Beara

    How is an 11 year old suppose to raise a child?

    EDIT:

    President Piñera commended the child, known only as Belén, for her “wisdom and depth [after] she said that, despite the pain the man who raped her caused, she would love and support her baby.”

    An 11 year old does not have wisdom or depth when it comes to raising a child. She has no way to support her child.

    ile’s child protection agency also appealed for Belén’s mother to be kept away from the child, after she told local media that the sexual relationship was consensual.

    I don’t even… and this is the environment the child will give birth. Her own mother can’t even be a mother to her, how can an 11 year old raise and support a baby?

    Child psychologists have criticised Piñera and said that Belén, who compared her baby to “a doll”

    Oy vey…

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/condemnation-as-chile-president-sebastin-piera-praises-rape-victim-aged-11-for-keeping-baby-8701197.html

    • Godless

      “How is an 11 year old suppose to raise a child?”
      Maybe by giving it up for adoption?

      • Bob

        but that isn’t raising a child.

        • Tom

          It’s giving the child a chance

          • Jimbo

            Yes, because children in social services in chile have a chance. The child will be raped in social services home, or at home. Either which way the child will be abused, hello another convicted felon.

            • Doug Von Truth

              How do you know they will become a convicted felon? sounds like you’re using a few too many stereotypes there.

              • Macarena

                You should do a little research before. Jimbo may be talking from stereotypes, but this actually happens and happens now. If you can read spanish, you should check this out http://ciperchile.cl/2013/07/04/ninos-protegidos-por-el-estado-los-estremecedores-informes-que-el-poder-judicial-mantiene-ocultos/
                Recap? There ir a huge investigation about chilean social services and their homes for children in danger. Children were raped and abused IN those homes, in one city there was even a prostitution network. Authorities knew about it and did nothing until this information was published.

                I wouldn’t trust in that child being properly raised in there.

              • Maximilian

                Few too many stereotypes? Ever heard of neuroscience and psychology? When people are raised and experience certain traumas in life [especially as a child (not to say it will ALWAYS end the same)] majority of the time turn out a certain way because of it. That is not just a stereotype byyyy the way. Its a fact of the human brain.

          • GG

            Typical. Religeous nuts aren’t pro life, theyre just pro birth. Thats not giving the child a chance. The baby will be born and this story will be forgotten about, while everyone else goes on about their merry life. Meanwhile this childs suffering is just beggining. Probably being raised in an orphanage. Probably also deformed if the father is in fact the grandfather. What a great life.

            • Lizo

              He’s the stepfather and is of no blood relation.

            • Thomas

              So you’re suggesting that because the child will face hardship in life it should be aborted? And I’m pretty sure it says step-father, that mean’s different DNA.

              • posixoddity

                Sometimes the most moral result can only be achieved by immoral actions. By aborting the child, it will not be given a chance to live, but it will also not be forced into a life of poverty and suffering, which is arguably worse than a quick death before birth.

              • Cassidy

                Why should the OTHER child who is essentially still a baby herself EVER have to go through this at her age? She’s still an innocent little girl, good grief, think of her for a second and forget about your pro-life stance. This is so unjust and unfair. This is a situation where abortion should be considered. And before you through religion in my face and the unborn baby’s chance at life I’ll have you know that I am a born and raised christian, but this 11 year old girl should NOT have to go through having a baby after suffering being raped. Give your head a shake.

                • Cassidy

                  Sorry, Thomas, was meant for the original post.

                • Angelo

                  So your logic is to kill one child so another child won’t suffer. How does that make any sense? It’s not a “stance” I’m concerned about, it’s a child.

                • C.L. Honeycutt

                  Embryos aren’t children. They aren’t even close.

                • Linda Sue Hogan Andrews

                  This embryo – baby has a heartbeat at 21 days after conception.

                • Diane Perry

                  Fetal heartbeat is irrelevant. The possibility of fetal pain is irrelevant. The only thing that IS relevant is that the owner of that uterus finds it currently non-consensually occupied. The owner of the uterus has every right to remove said occupant. you may have an opinion when your OWN uterus is involved. When it’s not your body, fuck off.

                • GreyWorm

                  And your logic is to let them both die?

                • Jeremy Schoenberger

                  Yeah, because sentencing them both to death makes a lot more sense. Or I guess the life growing inside the 11 year old is more valuable than she is? Quit fooling yourself, your political stance, ancient religious values, and flawed courses of logic are what bring you to your twisted conclusions, not a true sense of caring beyond your own selfish behaviors.

                • jdm8

                  How about killing one so they both don’t die? If life of the mother isn’t a concern, then that tells us that the mother’s sole purpose in life is just to be an incubator.

                • pagansister

                  Amen, Cassidy. this child should not have to go thru this “experience”. Unfortunately she is not so innocent anymore—as that stopped when her step-father started raping her.

            • shellsandbells

              “continually raped by her stepfather” your ignorance damns us all; try using your brain before opening your mouth. You are the reason pro-choice supporters are not heard around the world as a deafening cry for justace and human rights! If you want to be heard try listening first.

          • Maximilian

            It’s not giving a child a chance. It is the exact opposite. It is taking away the life of a child you dogmatic asshole. You would let an 11 year old living girl die to give a fetus that might not make it a “chance”? You are disgusting and you need to rethink your list of morals

      • Jake M. Gad

        You do realize how likely both mother and child are to die during childbirth, when the mother is 11, right?

    • Wunderlust

      Hopefully she will have a boy and the cycle of incestuous rape will be broken. That is the only silver lining I can see.

      • D

        A boy does not end the cycle…might even make it worse. She probably now thinks the parent child relationship is supposed to be sexual…

    • Guest

      There are two child victims here. Isn’t there the tiniest bit of hope that both can be saved?? :’(

  • Jonas Green

    A comment on this story : http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-krauss-pope-miracle-sainthood-20130708,0,2706349.story#tugs_story_display

    points to another “miracle” re: a weeping statue of Mary-Mother of Jesus, a Christian woman cooments: “Why wouldn’t the Virgin Mother weep over the state of the world?” — would that be for pedophilia among the priests, cases like this one, or the horror that women have health care, and Gays can marry ?

  • DougI

    The Catholic Church had no problem with Pinochet’s reign of terror, and it looks like they have no problem with his policies continuing under Pinera. If she dies giving birth then the anti-choicers will praise her as a martyr. In their view it’s better for a woman to die (or in this case a child) then to have an abortion. Sick people.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/08/wikileaks-vatican-pinochet_n_3038072.html

    • rjl

      I’m anti-abortion but if this is a case for abortion. No child should ever have to endure this.

      • SphericalBunny

        “No child should ever have to endure this.”

        Nah, let’s reserve that ‘bitches ain’t shit’ bile for the adults. I’m sure you think that makes you sound like a nicer person.

        • rjl

          What the hell are you talking about? Are you trying to imply that I wouldn’t support an adult victim of rape? Based on defending a child? The article wasn’t about an adult that got raped but a child. So, save your self-righteous rage for someone else.

          • Henley

            Sorry, but abortion should be available to every female victim of rape, not just children.

            • randomfactor

              “Sorry, but abortion should be available to every female ”

              You could stop there.

            • rjl

              You think? Like, duh!!!

            • rjl

              I apologize, Henley. My last comment directed to you was unfair and childish. You are correct, abortion should be available to every female victim of rape.

              • marilove

                Then stop with the “anti-abortion” crap. You seem to say you’re pro-choice, but your words seem to indicate otherwise. “I am pro-choice, but I’m going to place judgement on every single abortion (that isn’t mine)”.

                • rjl

                  I wasn’t addressing you marilove. However, I have the same right as you to express my opinion. That’s the beauty of being an American.

          • SphericalBunny

            You need to learn to communicate better. If you meant you approve of abortion in the case of rape, and didn’t mean to imply only for children, or that women are children, you should actually say so.

            Also, I save my self-righteous rage for people who do not consider women of any age as people with the right to bodily autonomy. I save it for anyone who thinks that women should be forced to continue a pregnancy against their will, no matter the circumstances. I save it for people who think pregnancy is a punishment that any woman who has consensual sex should have to endure because consequences, bitch. Seems I used it entirely appropriately against an anti-choicer then. You might want to take your manufactured outrage to someone who gives a fuck about the confusion between ‘she wrongfully thinks I don’t support rape victims!’ and ‘she rightfully thinks I don’t support women as full people unless I personally judge the bitches as worthy of my empathy!’

            • Nathan Browett

              *slow clap*

            • rjl

              Clap. Clap. Outstanding performance. However, this little play here is based on YOUR assumptions that are in turn based on YOUR experience with someone else. So, you decide to manipulate and twist my meaning and words to justify an attack on a logic that is based on stereotypes and hatred. That’s just really sad.

              • SphericalBunny

                rjl, “I’m anti-abortion”

                My response is based on your words.

                Again, learn to communicate. If what you mean is that you believe that women should have full bodily autonomy at all times, should always have the choice to never be forced into continuing a pregnancy they don’t want, and don’t think that consensual sex means women should automatically have to risk enduring an unwanted pregnancy, say so. Then you can apologise for getting all shitty with me because you can’t use language correctly.

                If however you mean you are against abortion except in the case of rape, because it’s the one time you can stir yourself to have empathy for the actual woman involved, you’d do better to make an actual argument rather than some petty whine about how I’m so mean and so hateful because you should be able to reduce women to perambulating incubators without criticism.

                • rjl

                  Your arrogance isn’t clever. You made an ignorant assumption about me and my personality based only on the fact that I stated that I’m against abortion and continue to make ignorant assumptions lined with insults because your arrogance and hatred blinds you to the fact that you are in the wrong. The whole “whining” bit is melodramatic.

                • SphericalBunny

                  So, no clarification, no argument, just blind assertion and empty bluster. Is that it? ‘Whiner’ is looking increasingly accurate…

                • rjl

                  Sweetie, if it helps your self-esteem……..

                • SphericalBunny

                  …and having skirted the implications of their own words, and daringly avoided having to skirmish with logic and reason, brave sir rjl dropped an ad hom and bravely ran away…

                • rjl

                  You made accusations. Accusations are not arguments. No matter what I say, you will find a way to twist and demean anything I state, which you have already proven that you do quite well. This isn’t about logical debate but your need to release anger on a scapegoat. Bring up ad hom all you want but truth is the moment you insulted me is when you gave me the upper hand. Now, if you want to start over and bring up a debate without accusations, insults or stereotypes, then by all means, go ahead.

                • SphericalBunny

                  “…but truth is the moment you insulted me is when you gave me the upper hand.”

                  Well then I guess you gave me the upper hand right from the get go by insulting me and my entire gender by claiming to be anti-abortion and that it took rape for you to see a case for women being allowed a choice over their own damn bodies. You have since doubled down on the insults with your reply to Carmelita;

                  “It doesn’t mean that I will ever support a healthy woman that aborts a healthy child during the latter stages of pregnancy.”

                  This doesn’t happen. Seriously, what are you suggesting? That women are so ditzy, so fluffy-minded, that they generally don’t notice, gosh, they’re suddenly 8 months pregnant? And then deciding that they need an abortion rather than a C-section? Or that on a whim, they might just change their little minds about the foetus they previously planned to birth, and have been carrying and nurturing for months on end? Late term abortions happen because of either medical necessity, or because the woman involved has not been able to get treatment previously because anti-abortionists do not believe she should be allowed (or can be trusted) to make a choice, which leads to disturbing delays in access. Which also leads me to this;

                  “It doesn’t mean that I would rather see women have access to abortions during the first trimesters for elective, non-medical needed…”

                  The anti-abortionists that agree with you have been steadily restricting access, and thus are likely to push up the average time scale, which in turn makes abortion a more serious and risky procedure. If a woman does not want to remain pregnant, abortion is a medical need. Pregnancy is more debilitating and risky than abortion. Forcing women to remain pregnant against their will can cause physical, as well as emotional and mental devastation. Rape is the forcible sexual use of a woman’s body against her will. Forced pregnancy is the forcible internal use of a woman’s body, against her will, that lasts for 9 months and ends in the bodily trauma of either birth or an operation.

                  “Again, mom comes and has the right to make her own decisions in regard to her medical condition that will affect the outcome of her health and safety.”

                  Pregnancy is a medical condition. Every woman should have the right to make her own decision, because it directly affects her health and safety. Every woman should get to decide if they even want to be ‘mom’.

                  “I believe that both men and women need to take this seriously and assume sexual responsibility. It doesn’t mean that I judge any woman that has had an abortion or that I automatically make assumptions that it’s a woman’s fault for being in this position.”

                  So, my three ‘arrogant’ assumptions were all correct then; you believe there are times when women should not be entitled to full bodily autonomy (only “…some abortions are needed”, meaning some are therefore not), should not always have the choice to never be forced into continuing a pregnancy they don’t want (‘non-medical’ as a conditional on 1st trimester abortions), and think that consensual sex means women should automatically have to risk enduring an unwanted pregnancy (‘sexual responsibility’). Further, you do judge women who seek abortions because you obviously believe some are done on pure whim, and with the ‘sexual responsibility’ line – without clarifying considering whether abortion or continuing a pregnancy is a part of that responsibility – you do imply that you consider a woman in a position of unwanted pregnancy is at fault.

                  Now, if you want to actually address anything this time, go ahead. Just can the shit about ignorance, arrogance and hatred when thus far, I have accurately portrayed your position. It’s not my fault that your contempt towards women can be summarised in language you don’t approve of.

                • rjl

                  “Well then I guess you gave me the upper hand right from the get go by insulting me and my entire gender by claiming to be anti-abortion and that it took rape for you to see a case for women being allowed a choice over their own damn bodies”
                  Yeah, I have a vagina and have given birth to six children and had to terminate two devastating pregnancies due to missed abortion. The last one was so devastating that it caused permanent damage to where I will require an IUD until I reach menopause due to TWO failed sterilization procedures that were needed to stop the chronic bleeding caused by a septic pregnancy that took SIX MONTHS to correctly diagnose. If by chance I do get pregnant, which is still a remote possibility for me, I would have NO CHOICE but to have an abortion because a pregnancy would cause a life-threatening situation for me. I have also for the first time revealed today to another friend that still suffers guilt from an abortion and is being unjustly judged by extreme pro-lifers that I personally paid for two abortions for two different desperate friends during their early pregnancy (due to an “oops” situation and the male partners were dick heads that cared nothing for them and both already had children and didn’t need an additional financial burden or to suffer shame from their family). I didn’t agree with abortion then either but I still discussed other options without JUDGING them and supported them emotionally after they had the abortions. So, no it didn’t take reading about a rape of a child to acknowledge that abortions are sometimes needed. These are your first two ignorant presumptions addressed in this new argument. I’m not done yet……..

                • SphericalBunny

                  I’m sorry that happened to you, and I’m sorry that you would have no choice over any potential future pregnancies. Could you clarify this phrase? “…due to missed abortion.” I don’t understand what you’re saying.

                  You readily admit you don’t want to see women get 1st trimester abortions for reasons you personally don’t like, but claim you helped 2 friends get abortions you disagreed with. Are you trying to say that you personally disagree with abortion; i.e. you wouldn’t have one yourself through choice, but think it’s a private medical decision for other women, and that they should have that choice freely? If so, yes you are communicating badly; that is not an anti-abortion position, it is actually pro-choice.

                • rjl

                  You are the most obstinate female that has ever crossed my path. Here you are trying to twist my words again. I supported my friends, not the abortion. I helped them because I loved them, because I can put people ahead of my beliefs. Something that you have difficulty understanding because it really seems like you are too much of a cynic to see the good in people. That some people, even if they are morally opposed to abortion, even if they consider abortion to be evil can still put their FRIENDS first.

                • marilove

                  “female”. Oh.

                • rjl

                  It’s not like it’s a shameful thing to be female, or are you just disappointed because I didn’t resort to the degrading name-calling tactics that apparently, you love to indulge in?

                • rjl

                  Missed abortions is a condition when the embryo or fetus dies and the body doesn’t expel the embryo or fetus. Not all abortions are medical, some are natural and when the body doesn’t naturally abort the baby then medical intervention is required to remove the embryo and/or fetus. I already addressed the second portion of your statement.

                • marilove

                  Why the hell do YOU get a right to judge what is an appropriate choice for someone that is not you?! The best part is that you are clearly laying HUGE judgements not only on people you have never met but on people that only exist in your head. That is really, really a sign of someone who is so self-centered, that they can’t see through their own biases and prejudices.

                • rjl

                  People in my head? Okay. Well, St. Marilove, since you are the embodiment of perfection, maybe you can show me the path of enlightenment.

                • rjl

                  “This doesn’t happen. Seriously, what are you suggesting? That women are so ditzy, so fluffy-minded, that they generally don’t notice, gosh, they’re suddenly 8 months pregnant? And then deciding that they need an abortion rather than a C-section? Or that on a whim, they might just change their little minds about the foetus they previously planned to birth, and have been carrying and nurturing for months on end? Late term abortions happen because of either medical necessity, or because the woman involved has not been able to get treatment previously because anti-abortionists do not believe she should be allowed (or can be trusted) to make a choice, which leads to disturbing delays in access”
                  No, it means that I don’t support late term abortions unless medically needed. Maybe part of the reason that it doesn’t happened as an elective procedure for women and fetuses that are already healthy, is because it’s already banned?
                  If it only happens for medical purposes anyway then why seek to remove bans against late term abortions?
                  However, anti-abortionists that have prevented women from seeking abortions during the early stages of a woman’s pregnancy should be jailed and/or sued. I realize that your opinion differs from mine but I still respect your opinion, even though you don’t respect mine.

                • SphericalBunny

                  “No, it means that I don’t support late term abortions unless medically needed.”

                  Well, congrats, it doesn’t happen and this is an irrelevant strawman.

                  “Maybe part of the reason that it doesn’t happened as an elective procedure for women and fetuses that are already healthy, is because it’s already banned?”

                  No, it’s because women are generally not so vacuous that they’ll carry a pregnancy nearly to term then abort on a whim. You’re calling women mentally incompetent as a gender. Stop it. Do you know what the termination of a healthy pregnancy after 7 months is called? Birth.

                • rjl

                  http://judiciary.house.gov/legacy/22235.htm

                  During the 1990′s, Dr. Haskell stated in an interview for Dayton News that eighty percent of the partial birth abortions that he performed were due to non-medical, elective reasons.

                • rjl

                  Dr. Haskell, later gave testimony during a judiciary hearing. The link is provided.

                • rjl

                  “The anti-abortionists that agree with you have been steadily restricting access, and thus are likely to push up the average time scale, which in turn makes abortion a more serious and risky procedure”.

                  I literally just found out today that these atrocities were happening against women. I concur with this statement.

                  ” Pregnancy is more debilitating and risky than abortion. Forcing women to remain pregnant against their will can cause physical, as well as emotional and mental devastation. Rape is the forcible sexual use of a woman’s body against her will”.
                  Valid point. However, for the first part, the opposite has been true in my personal experience. This doesn’t negate another woman’s personal experience. Just saying that this is based on my own experience.

                  “Forced pregnancy is the forcible internal use of a woman’s body, against her will, that lasts for 9 months and ends in the bodily trauma of either birth or an operation”.

                  Any delivery forced or wanted can be either with our without complications. Late term abortions doesn’t negate these risks, either.

                • Spherical|Bunny

                  “I literally just found out today that these atrocities were happening against women. I concur with this statement.”

                  I am starting to suspect that you actually do not know what the term ‘anti-abortion’ means. Perhaps this is a lesson in knowing what terminology means before deciding to accept the label.

                  “…the opposite has been true in my personal experience.”

                  I’m not talking about personal experience, I’m talking about facts and data.

                  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22270271

                  ‘Legal induced abortion is markedly safer than childbirth. The risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion. Similarly, the overall morbidity associated with childbirth exceeds that with abortion.’

                • rjl

                  Hell, let’s just sterilize every women on the planet, to include little girls and infants so none of them will ever risk their lives again by giving birth (I’m being sarcastic and need to clarify before you try to twist another one of my statements again). The later an abortion is performed then the more dangerous it is for the woman. My personal experience is a fact, whether you like it or not and whether it fits into your pretty little agenda or not. Just because my case wasn’t included in the statistics that you are so fond of promoting doesn’t mean that there aren’t cases where the abortion wasn’t safe. Statistics, do change and are based on the most but not all reliable information they had at the time. Statistics can also be manipulated and used to support a certain agenda, like the statistics taken from prisons that demonstrated that the majority of inmates came from female single parent households and then used as a weapon against singe mothers.

                • rjl

                  “anti” (meaning against); abortion (termination of a pregnancy). Would inserting “elective” in the middle of these two words help you?

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  From this statement, I think you don’t understand how statistics work.

                  Your personal experience is an anecdote. It may be an outlier. It is, however, included in any comprehensive list of statistics of mortality and morbidity. The risk of death from safe, legal abortion in the US is 0.6/100,000 for all abortions, including late-term ones. The risk of death from pregnancy and labor is ~15-22/100,000. Even if you die from abortion, that just means you lost the lottery. The odds were still in your favor to live. Of course some abortions are risky or dangerous- the thing is, most of those pregnancies were also risky or dangerous. A late-term abortion for a hydrocephalic fetus is quite risky, but birthing it is riskier, which is why they get aborted.

                  Of course statistics can get misused. The statistics are, themselves, supposed to be neutral. It is humans who interpret what they mean and what to change if they show us something we don’t like. You seem to know a bit about childbirth- statistics show us that every day after 40 weeks increases the risk of stillbirth but has no benefit in development of a fetus. There will still be some women who give birth after 43 weeks to live, healthy babies, but we try to induce at 41 weeks anyways because the increasing risk means that if we don’t, some babies will die that don’t have to. A woman induced at 41 weeks will never know if her baby would have died or not without the induction; all we can do is calculate probabilities over populations, which may or may not hold true for individual circumstances.

                • rjl

                  Feminerd, I really appreciate that you took the time to clarify this point. Thank you.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  You’re welcome.

                • rjl

                  “Pregnancy is a medical condition. Every woman should have the right to make her own decision, because it directly affects her health and safety. Every woman should get to decide if they even want to be ‘mom’”.

                  Pregnancy is a natural female condition. It’s the reason why women were once venerated as goddesses. There are also risks with eating and drinking too but I don’t think that they should be considered medical conditions. Smart ass comments aside, don’t you think that when pregnancies are treated as a medical condition that it asserts control over a woman’s body? Maybe this was part of the reason why a woman was forced to have a C-section in a hospital when she had the right to give vaginal birth at home? While most women require assistance when giving birth, why does it have to be a medical professional that is required to supervise the delivery?

                  “So, my three ‘arrogant’ assumptions were all correct then; you believe there are times when women should not be entitled to full bodily autonomy (only “…some abortions are needed”, meaning some are therefore not),….”

                  Some abortions are not needed. Some abortions are the result of fear from cruel judgments from others. Some abortions are the result of an abusive partner that will threaten the safety or life of the pregnant woman if she decides to have the baby. Some abortions are not because a woman doesn’t want the baby but because women are demonized for having the nerve to be a single parent, are demonized for being pregnant while having a career or going to school or for being poor. I’m genuinely surprised that so many miss this point. It’s either have the baby and risk the baby being put up for adoption or going to dad (because of the stigma that single women can’t be good parents and somehow the child will become a danger to society if allowed to live with a single mom) or abort a child that she wants. One hell of a freaking choice. Or do you just support only women that just don’t want to be mothers and have abortions for neither of the reasons stated above? Unfair conjecture? Well, you did open the door for unfair conjectures.

                  “……and think that consensual sex means women should automatically have to risk enduring an unwanted pregnancy (‘sexual responsibility’). Further, you do judge women who seek abortions because you obviously believe some are done on pure whim, and with the ‘sexual responsibility’ line – without clarifying considering whether abortion or continuing a pregnancy is a part of that responsibility – you do imply that you consider a woman in a position of unwanted pregnancy is at fault”.

                  Another assumption based on not only because I’m against abortions but because you also wrongly assumed that I was male. Sexual responsibility consists of using contraception and the realization that “hey, she might get pregnant if we have sex” or “hey, if I have sex, I might get pregnant” and if pregnancy is not something that either want then FREAKING USE BIRTH CONTROL. WHAT’S SO HARD ABOUT USING A CONDOM? I realize that there are anomalies, I realize that some women might not even realize that they are pregnant and I realize that contraception isn’t foolproof but it doesn’t mean that we can’t assume responsibility. You also made another false assumption that I believe it’s the woman’s fault if she gets pregnant. Not all women can tolerate birth control and some both men and women are allergic to condoms. There are also situations where a pregnancy is forced by a sexual partner on a woman that couldn’t tolerate birth control that was available during that time period and trapped in a religious belief that a wife doesn’t have the right to say no to sex with her spouse. Even though it was an abusive relationship, even though she didn’t want to bring additional innocent children to that relationship but couldn’t bring herself to abortion because she believed in life and eventually had all children taken away because she had the nerve to leave an abusive spouse. You want to be the shining light of women’s rights and portray yourself as speaking on behalf of all women but you most certainly don’t speak for me. You didn’t even know me but because I stated that I was against abortion you automatically assumed that I consider women that sought abortions to be irresponsible bitches and that it took a child being raped to even consider that abortions might be justified. So, yes, you made one accusation and assumption after another and still couldn’t admit that you were wrong because like so many extremists on the pro-life side, it seems that you are only able to see things as either black or white and not gray. I believe that women have rights to their own body and should respect their bodies. I believe that a woman has a right to have a child without fear of forced adoption or being financially devastated or discriminated against by employers, schools, family members and society. I believe that victims of rape shouldn’t be forced to carry pregnancies and that elective abortions should only be in the first stages of pregnancy. I believe that abortion is a necessary evil to prevent women from going back to coat hanger abortions but it still doesn’t negate the fact that unless the abortion is needed for medical reasons or in cases of rape, that I still believe abortion to be evil. That doesn’t make me a monster, irrational or illogical. It makes me a person with an oppositional opinion and an opinion that you believe that I have no right to. However, rest assured that I’m not some passive little bitch that subjects herself to male domination. I’m a woman that fights for what she believes in. Don’t let your contempt for males blind you to anything else.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Why does it have to be a medical professional who helps with delivery? Um, well, because things can medically go very wrong. There can be hemorrhages so severe a woman can bleed out in 10 minutes; literally lose all the blood in her body. I’ve heard of one where the woman required 14 units of blood before OBs brought it under control- the average human body contains 10 units of blood. Babies can get stuck, or come out breech, or not breathe on their own, or aspirate meconium. Women need c-sections sometimes, and damned if I’d let a non-medical person cut me open. Pregnancies are treated as a medical condition because in those rare instances where things go wrong, they go spectacularly wrong. As one woman put it, birth is like flying a plane. 99% of the time a trained monkey can do it. When things go bad, though, you don’t have enough time to replace the monkey. Natural childbirth is so dangerous that it was considered equal to dying in battle for both Spartan (they got names on tombstones) and Norse women (they went to Valhalla).

                  Women have a right to vaginal birth at home like everyone has a right to home-treat a broken leg. You can do it, but it’s a really stupid plan. Women who want to homebirth need to be fully informed of the immense additional risk they take on for themselves and their babies. Homebirth should never be undertaken under a whole hell of a lot of risk conditions- only low risk, singleton, multip women who haven’t had a prior c-section are viable candidates for homebirth, and even then there’s higher risk for both mother and baby than at a hospital.

                  Most women use birth control, if not perfectly. A condom failure, skipped pill, or misread temperature does not mean a woman should be forced to continue a pregnancy she doesn’t want to. Abortion is taking responsibility for one’s actions- one had sex, one got pregnant, one doesn’t want to bring an unwanted child into the world, so one makes sure it doesn’t happen. No one, not a single person, is advocating all women in that situation get abortions. All I advocate is letting women make that choice for themselves, without shame or judgment, and not throw obstacles in their way. It’s really not too much to ask, and you seem to be in agreement with me on that. Pro-lifers don’t think women should abort, even early in a pregnancy. They’re all for banning late-term abortions even if the life and/or health of the mother is at stake (see Texas’s new 20 week law). They do slut-shame women and call them murderers and call babies natural consequences of sex that should punish women. So claim that pro-choice label. Wear it proudly. It means you, too, see women as people.

                • rjl

                  Feminerd, you just totally rock.

                • SphericalBunny

                  Right, last comment for the night.

                  “Pregnancy is a natural female condition.”

                  Look up ‘the naturalistic fallacy’. Here’s a clue; sterility is also a natural female condition. Did you think anyone was claiming that pregnancy was supernatural?

                  “…don’t you think that when pregnancies are treated as a medical condition that it asserts control over a woman’s body?”

                  I think people will always try to coerce, control and manipulate women and their bodies. However, you could always try and look up the estimated difference in mortality from pregnancy + childbirth from when it was considered no big deal to being treated as a medical condition.

                  “…why does it have to be a medical professional that is required to supervise the delivery?”

                  Not required; advised. Saves on dead women.

                  “Some abortions are not needed.”

                  Any time a woman wants an abortion, an abortion is needed. You may not like the reasons, in an ideal world with ideal circumstances the woman may not choose an abortion, but in this reality every abortion requested by choice is needed.

                  “Some abortions are the result of an abusive partner that will threaten the safety or life of the pregnant woman if she decides to have the baby.”

                  That’s not a choice, that’s coercion under threat. Comes under the heading of ‘anti-choice’. Also illegal.

                  “Another assumption based on not only because I’m against abortions but because you also wrongly assumed that I was male.”

                  Nope. The only time I’ve indicated gender was when I parodied a famous Monty Python quote, which I would’ve used even if I was positive you were female. In the previous sentence I used the word ‘their’ rather than his or her to avoid the issue.

                  Sexual responsibility also consists of realising that contraception sometimes fails, and that if the woman has an unwanted pregnancy that abortion is an option.

                  “You also made another false assumption that I believe it’s the woman’s fault if she gets pregnant.”

                  Nope. I said you implied it. Which you did.

                  “You want to be the shining light of women’s rights and portray yourself as speaking on behalf of all women but you most certainly don’t speak for me.”

                  The only light is the one coming out of your self-righteous arse. The thing is, as a pro-choice advocate, I would stand up for your right to opt out of having bodily autonomy if you so pleased; it’s the anti-choicers who want to impose decisions on women regardless of their will.

                  “So, yes, you made one accusation and assumption after another and still couldn’t admit that you were wrong…”

                  No, I made several statements, which you have been unable to argue against, and in fact supplied me with enough evidence to justify said statements as accurate.

                  “…because like so many extremists on the pro-life side, it seems that you are only able to see things as either black or white and not gray.”

                  Yes. My right to bodily autonomy and choice is not up for debate, nor should it be for any other woman. You meanwhile, have taken the position of women are not always fully persons with the right to control their own bodies, and the arrogant mentality that supposes you get to judge whether another person’s abortion meets your standards for ‘moral’ or ‘evil’.

                  “It makes me a person with an oppositional opinion and an opinion that you believe that I have no right to.”

                  No, it means you have an opinion that I believe I have every right to criticise. Loudly. Voraciously. Repeatedly.

                  “Don’t let your contempt for males blind you to anything else.”

                  Wait – lolwut?!

                • rjl

                  1. I’m borderline agnostic. Get it straight.
                  2. You specifically stated “my gender” among other statements. Nice try, though.
                  3. “Arse”? “Criticise”? Well that explains your pompous arrogance.
                  4. Yes, and be sure that I will “loudly”, “voraciously” and “repeatedly” be opposed when dear England decides to move from having a philosophical debate about “post-birth abortions” to actually putting it out there as an option for women. If England does though, it wouldn’t surprise me. It’s not like people aren’t being murdered everyday from the screw-ups of the British “divide and conquer” policies that has lead to the present turmoil of the middle east and Asia. Why would a newborn infant matter to you?
                  5. “Wait-lolwut?!”. Exactly, know you know how I feel when someone makes an ignorant assumption. That last part was written specifically to see if you would catch that. I’m rather impressed that you did. Just like statement number three and four.
                  6. It’s okay, I understand. Must be from all of the liquor.

                • SphericalBunny

                  1. Never mentioned your belief status, don’t care. You read as badly as you write.

                  2. Yes, I’m female. It’s my gender. You have extremely poor language skills.

                  3. Oh, you’re a racist. Not a huge shocker.

                  4. Thinking is obviously another thing, along with empathy, logic, comprehension and communication that you find immensely challenging. You do realise you’ve completely lost the plot here, don’t you?

                  5. My assumptions were from experience of dealing with shits like you. You have since demonstrated me to be correct. That would be the opposite of ignorance. Using the equivalence of ‘it was a joke’ after the fact shows you to be as disingenuous as you are judgemental and racist. Also, I caught it, because unlike you, I can do reading for comprehension.

                  6. Well, if you were dragging-your-face-on-the-floor drunk when you wrote all of your comments, it would explain a few things. I suggest you not comment when drunk in the future because it makes you appear as a massively judgemental idiot with shit communication skills, and issues with empathy, sexism, racism, amongst others.

                • Thundal Archsys

                  Female is a sex, woman is a gender. I support the bulk of what you’ve said, but you should be articulate if you can help it (not sure if you know the difference… many don’t… just trying to be helpful).

                • rjl

                  No, sweetie. You straight up tried to mock me when you stated, what was it again? That no one said that pregnancy was a supernatural occurance? A seemingly innocent smart ass remark unless one looks into the context that a lot of people who are pro-life are religious, along with comments that were made on this very post that were attacks against religions. So, the remark was pure baiting tactics and you damn well know it.

                • rjl

                  Your arrogance just keeps leading you to make more assumptions. Did you forget that a lot of Americans have ancestors that came from England? Eldridge is my maiden name and I have ancestors that came from England (as well as Ireland, France, Holland and Africa). You could have countered that it was Americans that basically created and trained Al-Qaida. It’s the truth and not in the least bit racist. Or did your judgment slip because you noticed the scarf on my daughter’s head from a religion that she no longer practices? Either way, unless you assert “It’s my opinion that you are racist” then you commit slander. Were your feelings hurt? Good. It seems as if you are quite fond of making judgments, backpedalling when proven wrong and search for another way to twist words and misconstrue meanings just for the sake of building your self-esteem but get angry when someone makes a counter judgment against you. I’m a shit? I’m an idiot? Well, I could engage in the same childish name calling that you are so fond of in your attempt to obtain power by dehumanizing another human being but I won’t take that route (a testimony of your own lack of empathy for anyone that has a different point of view). Instead, I will remind you that you have no power over me and engaging in such childishness will not give that power. At the end of they day, I’m the one that helps provide for my family. You don’t pay my mortgage, my utilities, healthcare or clothing. So, your opinion of me doesn’t matter. Like my Cuban stepmother taught me, I wipe my “arse” with the negative opinions that others have of me.

                • Thundal Archsys

                  “Pregnancy is a natural female condition.”

                  Sorry, the implication of this statement are… pretty damn heavy by themselves. Death and poisoning are also natural conditions. Hyperbole aside, for most women, pregnancy is a negative feature, and should be treated as such.

                  ” that I still believe abortion to be evil.”

                  It’s demonstrably superior to the alternative in many cases where it’s desired. Woman wants it for BC? How good is she possibly going to be as a parent, when less than eight percent of women are qualified to be fit mothers to begin with? Stats aren’t looking good there, are they? Husband of the mother is making threats: She’s either going to be a single parent if he leaves, or her *and* the child are at risk because of her choice of partner… so two huge negatives that say she shouldn’t have it?

                  Sorry, either you’re someone who thinks that life has inherent worth (irrational) or you’re someone who thinks that lacking abortions, the average human will have superior QOL (which doesn’t lead from the premises, thus you’re illogical). If you have a reason outside of these that I missed, please inform me, lest your assertion that you’re neither “a monster, irrational, [n]or illogical” doesn’t much fit.

                • rjl

                  Be polite and I might engage you in a discussion. I don’t bow to the demands of anyone.

                • Thundal Archsys

                  I was polite, though I’ve no further reason to be. I’ve shown to be factually and logically incorrect; Your refusal to accept it nor even attempt to argue it is dismissive and rude.

                  You’re a fucking idiot who obviously has no study of ECE/ECD, general parenting, statistics, or legal grounds. Go fuck yourself, ‘tard, if you’re unwilling to learn from your superiors.

                • Star Seed

                  It took two months for you to think of a reply?

                • rjl

                  You came up with all this because you were told to be polite? Hey, whatever works for your ego.

                • Co1onel

                  “You need to learn to communicate better”

                  Seems like you’re the one that needs a lesson in communication, throwing flames out at random people to make yourself feel better.

                • rjl

                  Sigh. I made a comment in support of a child. I communicated that I supported abortion for this child who was a victim of rape, which is what the article addressed. The article wasn’t about how all rape victims should be allowed to have an abortion. If the article had been about how all rape victims should be allowed to have abortions, I would have supported that too. However, that wasn’t the issue. The issue is that I’m against abortion and when I conveyed as such then I was attacked and accused of judging women as bitches, was mistaken for a male that hated women among other baseless assumptions. These assumptions were made because I stated I was anti-abortion. It wasn’t as if I was asked what I meant before certain assumptions were made about me. It wasn’t as if I was asked why I felt a certain way. I didn’t realize that I should have written a book to clarify exactly how I meant and my position on abortion. This really could have been discussed in a calm, rational manner without making assumptions or judgments. I didn’t throw out the flames. Little Ms. Bunny did that. That doesn’t matter though, does it? You would rather hate and accuse than reason or even make an attempt to at least understand an oppositional point of view.

              • Funk Derp

                “I’m anti-abortion but if this is a case for abortion.”

                you make no sense, you cant be anti abortion but ok with abortion in cases, this is called “pro choice”.

            • Tom

              Wow way to rage, all he basically said was “I’m pro-life, but no child should ever have to endure this.” You act like it’s so easy to be pro-choice, as if it’s the only reasonable stance. Does it really make sense to kill an unborn child with its whole life ahead of it to preserve an older life? Which life is more valuable (if any)? Should you get full autonomy of your body even when it is housing another living being (I don’t even have full autonomy of my own, can’t put certain substances in it, but I digress)? Do you get to terminate it because “Hey, it’s growing inside me, so it’s my right (what about the child’s right to life).”? Abortion is very twisted. I’m pro-choice personally, but it has got to be an extremely difficult decision in most cases. Your immaturity shows when you attack reasonable people who have done little to offend anyone, but rather have a different viewpoint from your own. I know it’s the Internet, but let’s breathe for a minute before posting hate.

              • Jess

                Pro-choice is the only reasonable stance. Why does it make sense to continue to overpopulate and destroy this earth that’s not just a home to us, but billions of other creatures? To save one, potential human life? Do you know how many humans are already alive!? It’s completely non-sensical. Yes, you have full autonomy of your body since the ‘being’ inside of you is not actually alive, the only reason it is developing is because of your own body. The child is not a child, thus has no right to life. Even children who are born have very few rights. It’s not twisted at all, it’s the most logical course of action if you can think outside of your own mundane life for a second.

                • rjl

                  1.The earth has enough resources to take care of every one’s need but not every one’s greed. That was the first thing I learned in Anthropology.
                  2. Yes, an unborn child is alive. It’s not like my body pushed nutrients into a lump of tissues that merely resembled a human and then once born, it was jolted with electricity like some kind of Frankenstein monster and came to life. Something that isn’t alive doesn’t require energy to survive. Something that isn’t alive isn’t going to derive this energy that it needs to survive from nutrients. I could go on but that really doesn’t matter, people are going to believe whatever justifies a certain political point.
                  3. If a woman decides to terminate a pregnancy- fine but don’t lie and say that an unborn child isn’t alive.

                • rjl

                  Next, debate-personhood.

                • slimofq

                  “2. Yes, an unborn child is alive. It’s not like my body pushed nutrients into a lump of tissues that merely resembled a human and then once born, it was jolted with electricity like some kind of Frankenstein monster and came to life. Something that isn’t alive doesn’t require energy to survive. Something that isn’t alive isn’t going to derive this energy that it needs to survive from nutrients. I could go on but that really doesn’t matter, people are going to believe whatever justifies a certain political point. ”

                  Apparently I need to go back to school and study biology. I was certain that people and their organs were formed by the functional grouping together of multiple tissues. Also, I had the understanding that the Epithelial tissues facilitated the absorption of nutrients.

                  Furthermore, with your infinite wisdom, could you be so kind as to define “alive” for me, please? o.O

                  –”just someone who stumbled upon this thread and decided to poke at yet another example of… wait.. I’ve already lost interest”

                • rjl

                  Aren’t tissues composed of cells? In fact doesn’t life start at the cellular level? Bear with me because I know that this might sound loony and crazy, but the first structure of life begins with cells. Mind boggling, isn’t it? Guess what? A living organism can actually be a singular cell or composed of many cells. Cells also have these thingamabobs that are called organelles. The organelle that processes energy for cells is referred to as, I don’t know, the mitochondrion? Which might be useful for the cell for metabolism. Then maybe, just maybe, the cell through metabolism builds and transports proteins and proteins just might be the building block of life. I also wonder where the source for this energy comes from? Nutrients? Please, Mr. or Ms. I took a biology course, let me know.

                • slimofq

                  Obviously you didn’t take the time to read what I typed. So I’ll just ignore whatever this is in an effort to keep from falling out of my chair o.O

                • rjl

                  Sure, nice way to try to save face.

                • slimofq

                  No, just still waiting for you too a) answer the question b) say something about what I actually said … and not just regurgitate other information that wasn’t being discussed all while trying to sound like you read it off a snapple top.

                • rjl

                  slimofq, let’s just stop the madness. If you have really taken a biology course, then there is no need to break it down Barney style for you. Information from a Snapple cap? Really? Come on now. Don’t you have something a little more clever than that? I really expected something from you where I could at least say something like “touché”.

                • slimofq

                  err, I only asked 1 question. it was for you to define “alive” .. seems rather relevant beings we’re discussing what makes something “alive” and weather or not killing said something is actually killing; hence what do you consider “alive” I sited your “tissue” reference only as a reference and I made my sarcastic statement also to point out the many flaws in said reference from your posting. I really don’t see why it took me spelling this all out and 3 extra responses but here goes another wall of text and maybe this “more blunt” approach will have different results.

                • rjl

                  I do think that we are both very much aware that I did answer your question. I’m getting the perception that you are baiting me to go into specifics of defining life, of which include the ability to reproduce. However, infants aren’t able to reproduce but I seriously doubt anyone in their right mind would consider them dead. With that exception, embryos and fetuses have organization of cellular based structures (i.e. cells-tissues-organs). Surprisingly, the cells of an embryo and fetus actually have the ability to obtain energy sources to metabolize (of course through nutrients provided by mom) and yes, they are able to grow. Moving away from the dry aspects of this definition of what it means to be alive (I seriously hope that this doesn’t spiral down to patients that are clinically brain dead but are alive because of life support) I will provide you with a blunt example that is a reply to another poster (though NOT personally directed toward you):

                  “Use all the name calling that you wish, it still doesn’t change the fact that a fetus or embryo is alive. I have had both a fetus and later an embryo that died and the embryonic death lead to a septic infection because the death wasn’t caught in time. If it wasn’t alive in the first place, it couldn’t have died. If it couldn’t have died then I wouldn’t have ended up with a septic pregnancy. If I hadn’t have ended up with a septic pregnancy, I wouldn’t have had additional complications from that septic pregnancy that led to multiple surgeries and eventually a bitter loss of career in the military. When you suffer through a similar event, when you go to the bathroom and blood spurts out of you onto the floors and walls (that you later have to clean and are too numb to even weep over that loss of life) and later when the blood comes out as clots that are the size of oranges that is a result from a miscarriage. A miscarriage that led to a lot of blood loss but failed to expel the dead embryo, then come back and have this discussion with me”.
                  If you have another definition or even disagree with me, that’s fine and I’m willing to listen and maybe even learn something new. As long as you show respect toward me, I will show respect toward you.

              • rjl

                I’m a she, lol!!!. You rock, Tom.

                • Maximilian

                  Tom and rjl I read all of your comments and your ignorance amazing me. I am ignorant as well that’s what makes it even more amazing. You are an opinionated scum bags who means well. Unfortunately though your way of thinking kinda fucks you. A fetus has no personality no fully developed brain or organs yet, and is NOT “alive”. is You have no logic just a twisted moral sense of what is right and wrong. Hey, news flash, it is fucked up and immoral the way you feel about these situations no matter how you put it. There is no just and correct side to arguments like this, either way its wrong, it is just was is most logical. That is where your ignorance shines brightest.

                • rjl

                  Use all the name calling that you wish, it still doesn’t change the fact that a fetus or embryo is alive. I have had both a fetus and later an embryo that died and the embryonic death lead to a septic infection because the death wasn’t caught in time. If it wasn’t alive in the first place, it couldn’t have died. If it couldn’t have died then I wouldn’t have ended up with a septic pregnancy. If I hadn’t have ended up with a septic pregnancy, I wouldn’t have had additional complications from that septic pregnancy that led to multiple surgeries and eventually a bitter loss of career in the military. When you suffer through a similar event, when you go to the bathroom and blood spurts out of you onto the floors and walls (that you later have to clean and are too numb to even weep over that loss of life) and later when the blood comes out as clots that are the size of oranges that is a result from a miscarriage. A miscarriage that led to a lot of blood loss but failed to expel the dead embryo, then come back and have this discussion with me.

                • slimofq

                  Okay, so when I get a virus and I get antibiotics that fight said virus and then that virus is “killed” am I killing another life? I mean, Embryo, virus… potato… potato…..

                • rjl

                  How very disappointing. You don’t use antibiotics to fight a viral infection. You use antibiotics to fight a bacterial infection. Maybe you do need to go back to a biology class.

                • slimofq

                  Focusing again on a part of the comment and not the point of the comment. Does it still not make sense to you or are you unable to see the correlation.

                • rjl

                  slim, if you didn’t even know that antibiotics are used to treat bacteria as opposed to viruses, I seriously doubt that you have understood anything else I had to say; just stop. Feminerd has already made an excellent, respectful counterargument based on pure facts. I highly recommend you find a pen and paper and start taking notes from her.

                • slimofq

                  stop for a second from thinking that i’m somehow attacking you or even following other aspects of this thread. I had a specific question which when answered would allow me to make a specific point which in no way has as of yet been an attack of you or your beliefs but rather a line of finding some sort of common footing so as to continue a line of discussion. as it seems the discussion I was hoping for is beyond your grasp I will bow out and not continue feeding the troll like retardation. good day

                • rjl

                  slim, I answered your question to the best of my ability. I even asked you to add your insight and stated that I would be willing to listen to you. You replied with a statement that was not based on facts and filled with sarcasm. This is not indicative of someone that was searching for common footing. It’s also difficult to feel that I’m not being attacked when you keep adding insults to your replies. However, I respect your opinion and your choice to bow out and bid you good day.

                • rjl

                  I didn’t accuse you of attacking me. Though, I will admit that I did miss your point. You want to compare an embryo to a virus or strain of bacteria? I personally don’t see it as a valid debate, though my intent isn’t to demean you or your beliefs.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Tapeworms are alive, too. I do not argue that blastocysts/zygotes/embryos/fetuses are not alive; they clearly are. They are, however, biological parasites. I see no moral reason one can’t remove an unwanted parasite from one’s body. A wanted parasite, of course, is another story altogether. No one else should remove a parasite from someone’s body without hir permission.

                  It always comes back down to choice, you see. A fetus is alive and it could turn into a person. It might even already be a person. My question is, why does that matter if I don’t want to be a walking life support system? You aren’t obligated to do so much as donate blood to a born person; why are women supposedly obligated to do whole-body donations to fetuses?

                • rjl

                  Geez, Feminerd, you couldn’t have waited until later to post this comment? I have family coming over. Again, you are correct. However, this new round of arguments stemmed from a comment that stated fetuses aren’t alive. I counter- argued that the were alive. Then it turned into South Park like name calling and circled around again. I always hated that particular argument that refused to acknowledge that an embryo isn’t alive. They seem to forget that there are some women that want to keep their babies but due to certain circumstances, end up losing the baby. That loss can be devastating and one wouldn’t (or shouldn’t ) try to comfort her by saying “Get over it, the baby wasn’t alive in the first place”. Not that anyone here stated or implied this last portion. Just making a point.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Fair. I also agree that arguing an embryo isn’t alive is pretty silly- if viruses are alive (an arguable proposition, I know), embryos definitely are alive. I just think that embryos being alive doesn’t necessarily have meaning for the abortion debate.

              • rjl

                Thank you, Tom. I was going to answer some of these other replies but after your unbiased summarization, there really is no need.

              • Diane Perry

                It IS easy to be pro choice. It IS the only reasonable stance. This is because the decision whether and when to become a mother is deeply personal.

                Yes, it DOES make sense to “kill an unborn child” as you put it, although that quote couldn’t be further from the truth.

                The MOTHER’s life will ALWAYS be more ‘valuable’ because she is a person and a fetus is not and it should never be conflated as such.

                Yes, FULL autonomy is expected. You can put whatever you want into your body – there just might be consequences for it due to meddlesome governments.

                You Conscripted Gestation folks are the twisted ones. How DARE you even think you have any business speculating on how someone else should lead her life?

                You claim to be pro choice, but you obviously are not given your rhetoric.

            • AJCalvarese

              Who is calling pregnancy a punishment? Well, besides you of course.

          • Carmelita Spats

            You support a woman who has been raped by ALLOWING her to make decisions about HER body. If this is the case, then welcome to PRO-CHOICE land. If you legally obligate a woman who has been raped to undergo a pregnancy and a C-section, then if I ever need a kidney, I’m coming for yours. Make sure you keep that self-righteous kidney healthy for me.

            • rjl

              No, it means that I neither adhere to extremists on either side. It means that I can be reasonable that some abortions are needed to save the mental, emotional and physical health of the woman or child that is pregnant. I think that you have combined different cases of a woman forced to endure a pregnancy and that of a woman that was forced to have a C-section when she wanted to deliver her baby vaginally. Or maybe that of a cancer patient that had a dangerous delivery forced on her that ended up with both mom and baby dying. I don’t support any of these situations. Again, mom comes and has the right to make her own decisions in regard to her medical condition that will affect the outcome of her health and safety. It doesn’t mean that I will ever support a healthy woman that aborts a healthy child during the latter stages of pregnancy. It doesn’t mean that I would rather see women have access to abortions during the first trimesters for elective, non-medical needed (again, rape which causes emotional and mental devastation to the victim and is pregnant justifies a medical needed abortion) as opposed to going back to the dark ages of coat hangers. I would never want women subjected to that again. However, I still believe that an unborn child is a life. I believe that both men and women need to take this seriously and assume sexual responsibility. It doesn’t mean that I judge any woman that has had an abortion or that I automatically make assumptions that it’s a woman’s fault for being in this position. Though, just because I don’t agree with abortion doesn’t mean that it justifies making ignorant assumptions about me. The last time I checked, this wasn’t an article about any of the aforementioned cases. This wasn’t about all rape victims. This was about a child that was disgustingly sexually abused and then encouraged to go through with a condition that is life threatening for her physically, emotionally and mentally. You already knew that though and the only reason you went on a rant was because I said I was against abortion.

          • Nathan Browett

            cool, didn’t realize there were different degrees of rape, good story

            • rjl

              I didn’t realize that there were different degrees of rape, either? What’s your point?

              • Funk Derp

                just stop mate, stop spewing your hatred on here, show a little respect for rape victims.

                • rjl

                  It’s difficult to be a woman and not be a victim of rape in some form or the other or personally knowing someone that has been a victim of rape. In fact, I know of no such woman that hasn’t been raped or molested in one form or another (which is why, as a mother, I’m extremely protective of my children). I made a sarcastic reply in response to a sarcastic statement directed toward me.

      • Carmelita Spats

        ROFLMAO!!! You are “anti-abortion” but, but, but…Welcome to pro-choice land.

        • islandbrewer

          Why is the word “choice” so hard for some people to understand?

          • Billy Bob

            It makes it easier to demonize people when you paint them as child killing monsters.

            • rjl

              Again, another stereotype that makes people feel justified to counter any opinion different than your own without logic or reason.

              • thebigJ_A

                Again, another reply that didn’t counter any of the arguments made.

                • rjl

                  Arguments or accusations? There is a difference.

          • rjl

            Except neither side is really about choice.

            • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

              The pro-choice position is literally that every woman has the right to control her body and choose whether and when to be pregnant and give birth.

              How is that not about choice?

              • rjl

                Very good point, Feminerd. From what I have read, a good majority of women only have abortions because they can’t financially afford to have another child, not because a child is necessarily unwanted. Right wing passes measures that ensures women either depend on a male spouse or give the baby up for adoption. However, I have seen very few pro-choice advocates (though there are some) argue that it’s the financial issue for a woman that needs to change. Having an abortion just because of poverty (this also includes employment or educational risks) isn’t really a choice.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  I haven’t found that at all about pro-choice activists. Every single one I have met (and I’ve met a few but by no means all of them) strongly supports mandatory paid parental leave, subsidized daycare, breastfeeding/pumping accommodation at workplaces, sick days for self or dependents, laws banning discrimination at work based on pregnancy, and strengthening the social safety network, including WIC, SNAP, TANF, Head Start, and other programs.

                  We all know poverty is a key issue preventing a truly free choice, and we all think women should never feel compelled to abort due to finances. It’s a sad reality, though, so we fight to be sure women have access to abortions as well as fighting for additional poverty alleviation. However, we also know that poverty alleviation will never stop the need for abortion- it will reduce the number, but it’s not a magic bullet to end them all, and poverty alleviation has other activists working on it. Specifically pro-choice activists attack one end of the problem while knowing that it is multifaceted and trusting others to carry the weight on poverty while they focus on rights.

                • rjl

                  That’s really refreshing to know. Seriously. It doesn’t really seem like people care about each other anymore and we’ve been infected with hate.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  I think you may be on the wrong ends of the Internet and politics, then. While I’m extremely disgusted with Republicans and the Tea Party for their lack of empathy, piss-poor logic, and lack of reality-seeing goggles, I don’t hate them. I hate that their policies, I hate that they hurt people (did you hear they passed a national farm bill in the US House but no food stamps bill, decoupling legislation that’s been linked for decades with the specific goal of fucking over poor people?), but I don’t hate the people. “It doesn’t really seem like people care about each other anymore” is a symptom of one, and only one, side of US politics. Check out the Democrats or even better, the progressive/liberal activists who aren’t thrilled about their best political option being a center-right party instead of an extreme-right party.

                • rjl

                  I wish I could say the same but I despise the GOP. I despise what I consider their predatory methods that play on the fears of fundamentalist Christians that are convinced the world is now going to end because they believe that the son of Satan is now the president of the United States. They use these fears to get elected and pass or attempt to pass a few measures to placate these voters and turn around to quietly pass laws in order to enslave the American people to corporations while lining their pockets (tax-free) with the money from the lobbyists of these corporations. The Republican Party was once noble but now they rape the constitution more by ensuring liberties for only a certain group of Americans instead of fighting for all. Whew! Glad I got that off my chest but probably risked pissing a lot of people off but this is based on personal opinion and not meant to offend.

                • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

                  Meh, most of us feel the same way about the GOP as you do. I certainly do! Well except that they were once noble- so long as you count “once” as “before LBJ gave the GOP all the racist Southern whites in 1964″, I guess it’s technically correct, but 50 years is an eternity in American politics. It might as well be never.

                  That was my point, by the way. The hatred and lack of empathy in politics are primarily on the GOP side. The Democrats are far from perfect, but they do try to govern and do what’s best for the people of this country as a whole.

                • rjl

                  I joined the Modern Whig Party due to extremists from both sides. There are some Liberals that are brilliant and credible but I have seen too many on sites for political issues spew just as much hatred as the misguided folks that support the GOP. However, I do subscribe to progressive web sites. I’m all about helping the poor, a big fan of solving environmental issues and fighting for women rights.

        • rjl

          Yes, something you had to post about twice. It’s okay, I don’t need to be popular or have people on my side to support my opinions.

      • Olive Markus

        You can not simultaneously be “anti-abortion” and believe this child deserves an abortion. That’s called giving her a Choice, which would make you Pro-Choice. Sorry for the devastating news.

        • rjl

          If it makes you happier and feel intellectually superior, then by all means, believe as you wish…………

          • Olive Markus

            You said it yourself. You think she should have been given a choice. CHOICE. See the word there? That is you being Pro-Choice. I know it hurts at first, but you’ll get used to it.

            • rjl

              LoL.Ok, you win. I think others would disagree with you, since I oppose elective late term abortions.

              • Funk Derp

                see the problem is that pro-life is a clear position, no abortion whasoever, while on the other hand pro-choice regroup everyone that wants abortion legal in all and any case or only in some cases, if you are not against 100% abortion, you are pro-choice, pro choice is a scale of grey, pro life is pure black.

                welcome to reality, the only extreme position here is pro-life.

                • rjl

                  I honestly don’t know how to reply to that except to say thank you.

              • Olive Markus

                Elective late term abortions are already illegal, so no problem there. If abortion is easy to access, legal and safe, there would never be a need or desire for a late term elective abortion. Even now, they usually only occur in extreme health circumstances. The ONLY other barrier preventing all late term abortions is that there are too many roadblocks put up for women to get them as early as possible. That is the unfortunate reason the hideous Gosnell even existed – to take advantage of the poorest and most marginalized women who couldn’t receive access to early and safe abortions. Provide cheap access, and nothing like that should ever happen again.

                • rjl

                  That is one hundred percent correct and I completely agree with you. I do hate abortion. I would be lying if I said the opposite and I do consider an unborn child to be a life. However, mom comes first. I would rather see abortion remain legal than for a woman or child risk their life on unsafe abortions. I was once staunchly pro-choice until the late term abortion procedure came into practice and was relieved that it was banned except to save mom’s life (of which, like you said wouldn’t be needed if a woman had been allowed to get an abortion in the first place).

          • Lizo

            I think everyone in this forum is getting very, VERY caught up on nomenclature. Rjl claims to be anti-abortion, but. Which I do agree, leans more toward the pro-choice realm; however, you see these small hypocrisies across the board each and every day. Catholics who abort/use birth control/divorce, and Christians who have sex before marriage (amongst an infinite amount of other things). You see people who claim to be conservative but they support abortion. People get caught up in words, but I don’t really think all of this matters. Honestly, this conversation has become so far skewed from the original topic, I can barely remember what the article was about.

            • rjl

              It does seems like the sickening plight of a little girl was forgotten in an argument that specifically had little to do with her. In reality, it would have been better to stand in unison to support an innocent victim then to get caught up in adult politics (of which I share the blame).

      • Nathan Browett

        you’re anti abortion, you should be on the side of the idiots. GTFO

        • rjl

          Sorry, Nathan, I see a lot of idiots on both sides. It’s a free country, I will comment where I see fit.

          • Anon

            Go screw a horse.

            • rjl

              Ewwww…..please don’t share your sexual preferences.

      • marilove

        When does one stop being a child and become an adult and suddenly should then “endure this”? 14? 15? 16? 17? 18? If this girl was 16 or 17, I wonder if your tune would change.

        • rjl

          Sigh. Was the article about an adult rape victim that wasn’t allowed an abortion? No. The article was about an ELEVEN year old child. Can we change our focus back to her?

      • posixoddity

        Abortions are often traumatising for the mother, and generally a messy ordeal, and more efforts should be put in removing the issue of unplanned pregnancies at their roots, rather than relying on a very last minute fix. Abortion however, is quite necessary to keep crime down, as the people aborting the children are doing so (generally speaking) because of an inability to raise the child. If they were denied access to abortion, many children would be born into homes that are unable to support them, leading to a higher crime rate, and a generally shittier situation for everyone.

        • rjl

          Yes, you are quite correct.

    • Shadoe17

      “The Catholic Church had no problem with Pinochet’s reign of terror,” The Catholic church backed Hitler in his rise to power and in his reign, why would this be any different?

      • DougI

        They are progressing. Maybe in a mere 100 years they’ll apologize for doing nothing as Pinochet slaughtered thousands.

      • Guest

        That is 100% false. The Church opposed Hitler even before the War (see, for example, the papal encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge). The Church is responsible for saving the lives of more Jews from the Holocaust than all other groups combined. History does not lie.

        • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

          Actually, the Japanese probably saved more Jews than any other group combined. When Hitler revoked all Jewish people’s passports, the Japanese ambassador decided to continue to recognize them and, since Germany was an ally, allowed Jews passage to Japanese-occupied China for the duration of the war. The Japanese never really got the whole religious zealotry/anti-Semitism thing.

          There were also the trains of Jewish children sent to England for asylum over the course of the war, or Schindler and his list which saved several hundred people at a minimum. The RCC? Not a major contributor to the effort to save lives. They mostly stood around with their head up their ass doing nothing.

          • Thundal Archsys

            Yup, especially considering that publicly denouncing Hitler (who, as mentioned, was using religious bullshit as a control and propaganda method) could’ve drastically weakened the structure of Hitler’s command…

        • http://TheSouthernConservative.com/ CM Phillips

          Hitler was not religious. He was a follower of Nietzsche who hated religion. Hitler did use religion as a tool to accomplish his goals. The Vatican helped him get confiscated art out of Germany.

          • Shadoe17

            He was raised and educated in a religious school and professed his religious beliefs openly. You really need to read up on history and not just make up whatever makes you feel better.

            • posixoddity

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler
              Yes and no. He was religious at one point, but later did not speak very highly of Christianity, and even went so far as to (possibly) form plans to remove Christianity altogether from his area of influence.

            • http://TheSouthernConservative.com/ CM Phillips

              I guess he forgot about the “thou shall not kill” part. He was an ardent follower of Nietzsche and Darwin. He even had Nietzsche’s daughter visit him on occasion.

              http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/133p/133p04papers/MKalishNietzNazi046.htm

              Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), a fervent philosopher who was anti-democracy, anti-Christianity, anti-Judaism, anti-socialist and self-acclaimed Anti-Christ, expressed his belief in a master race and the coming of a superman in many of his works. In his unique aphoristic style, Nietzsche wrote in The Genealogy of Morals (III 14):

              “The sick are the great danger of man, not the evil, not the ‘beasts of prey.’ They who are from the outset botched, oppressed, broken those are they, the weakest are they, who most undermine the life beneath the feet of man, who instill the most dangerous venom and skepticism into our trust in life, in man, in ourselves…Here teem the worms of revenge and vindictiveness; here the air reeks of things secret and unmentionable; here is ever spun the net of the most malignant conspiracy – the conspiracy of the sufferers against the sound and the victorious; here is the sight of the victorious hated.”

              Read Nietzsche – understand Hitler.

        • Shadoe17

          Pope Pious gave Hitler his blessings and was inspirational in the belief that Jews should be eliminated for what the did to Jesus. The letters, in the popes own handwriting, still exist. Even the Vatican has acknowledge this to be true and apologized to the Jews for their involvement.

        • Diane Perry

          Sure..and that’s why I’ve seen so many photos of Hitler with a Pope. catholics don’t give a flying fuck about other faiths. Actually, not even their own faithful – witness the decades of child raping they’ve done. History lies ALL THE TIME. This is because biased people write the books.

      • http://TheSouthernConservative.com/ CM Phillips

        Did atheist oppose Pinochet or Hitler or fellow atheist Stalin?

        • Shadoe17

          What does that matter? If they didn’t, would that make the Catholic Churches actions in these matter justified?

          • http://TheSouthernConservative.com/ CM Phillips

            I thought you were implying some moral superiority for atheists – I guess not.

    • Mackinz

      If she dies, she’ll be praised as a martyr by the people who killed her?

      No, it will be the pro-choice people who will continue to point out just how many women’s lives have been cut short because of illegal abortion.

      • DougI

        Of course, pro-choicers use facts, antis don’t.

        • Mackinz

          Don’t tell that to the antis… They’ll just ignore it like always and go forward with their god-dictated “morality”.

  • opsarchangel22

    TAM 2013 – APOSTASY – ULTIMATE SIN

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ErqizZ7IvA
    …,.,.,

    • sk3ptik0n

      wtf?

    • http://springygoddess.blogspot.com/ Astreja

      Dennis, go to bed. It’s past midnight in Montreal.

  • Carol

    This is truly a very sad and unfortunate situation. I am Chilean by birth but live in Canada and this makes me feel very ashamed of my country. My mother was 16 when she became pregnant for the first time by my father and her own mother took her to get an abortion and I am referring to the 60′s. It was illegal back then but as far as I am concerned this little girl could go and get an abortion if she really wanted to but I have a feeling this is become nothing but a media scandal. Both the president and her family are getting attention from it and as far as I am concerned nobody is really thinking about this young girl at all. An abortion could also prove to be dangerous and cause her to have serious problems. Regardless this is one of the worst things I have ever read about my country. I am devastated by this situation.

    • Itsrealfunnythat

      Abortions are really only dangerous when done in back alleys with rusty materials… But still the poor girl. Im sure this idiot leader doesnt reflect the average person in Chile.

    • threenorns

      tell me: how is an 11yr old child going to find out how to get an abortion, seeing as her parents are okay with her having the baby?

      it’s not like she can head on over to the corner store and say “hey – know any back-alley abortionists in the area?”

  • LIONESS

    these RELIGOUS folks fail to realize that babies are NOT miraculous conception, somebody had to phuck(*ph makes the “f” sound) and in this case a child was raped and now the PEOPLE want her and her family to have to deal with it because they think god SAID so…that’s terrible….

    • MsC

      What’s sickening is that the girl’s mother is just fine with all of this. Her husband raped her daughter. Her daughter is now risking her life to gestate and deliver something she looks on as a doll. They’ll live as one big, happy, child-raping-is-OK Catholic family.

  • Hitch’s Apprentice

    What happened to the ‘Rapist’? Would the church have a problem with Castration???

    • Hitch’s Apprentice

      Sorry for even asking…. the Church Loves rape, especially the rape of children, they can’t fight back!

    • Stev84

      They have castrated gay boys in the Netherlands. But I’m sure that was a special case because of The Gay.

  • Hitch’s Apprentice

    Call me when the Carnage is over………….

  • BrandonUB

    If there were ever a situation in which both conservatives and liberals could agree that abortion is the right choice, it is this one.

    As near as I can tell, many conservatives do not agree on this, particularly the Catholic kind. Some babble about “intrinsic evil”, wherein forcing pregnancy on a raped eleven year old girl is not “evil”, but killing an embryo is.

  • rufus_t

    “… that she will carry the her pregnancy to term and raise her child.”

    Assuming that she survives, and the pregnancy goes to term and produces a viable child.

  • Itsrealfunnythat

    Lets kill this little girl to prove how much we love our religion. This is part of gods plan to… punish little girls for tempting men with their feminine wiles. The best part is how the girls mother knew and blames the girl….

  • Alexander

    You make it sound as if she (or her family) was desperate looking for abortion, but was denied, which seems not to be the case. Not trying to say that this law is any good, but I find the impression left by the post a bit misleading.
    It seems to me, that there is not really a good solution to this situation. Even if they would allow abortion, what would it change, since she says she wants to give birth? Even though she is obviously brainwashed, but it is not like we can force her do the abortion.

  • pagansister

    Unbelievably stupid! The child is 11—-I just hope she doesn’t die having this child. The step-father should be castrated—then shot!

  • Carol

    Like I said in my previous comment I have a feeling the girl’s family is using this opportunity to get publicity and probably some money.

  • Ryan Hite

    And the media is all saying that she “supports” raising the child and having the baby. Part brainwashing, part media blackout. Ask her how she REALLY feels.

  • Lee

    I love to kill that rapist!!!

  • Lelco

    @Miss_Beara:disqus, dont you know, the power of god will guide her!

  • Wel

    Religion, not even once.

  • tttulio

    Wasn’t religion invented to subjugate women?

  • ThisWorld

    I hate religion with a passion

  • sinistercrafty

    No 11-year old girl should go through pregnancy…if you speak of choices, this girl never had any to begin with.
    This poor girl has been raped by her stepfather and instead of getting the real help she needs, she is abused by a system that is more concerned for the non-living (not yet-living) than it is about the living…this is an 11 year-old girl we are talking about.

    She is a child.

    Not a point to be proven. Pro-life or not, let’s think about anyone in our family that is her age that has been violated and sentenced..yes SENTENCED to full term pregnancy.

    She may not survive a pregnancy she never wanted to begin with.

  • Rhonda F Black

    Jesus didn’t decide this. Humans did!

    • Omega

      A religion supposedly founded by a mythological motherfucker is one of the reasons for this pro-life bullshit.

    • RobMcCune

      If only Jesus would tell the Christians that.

  • someguy1990

    Keep debating on facts or theories that won’t actually help the little girl… in the end there is little we can do… it’s best to just do right now what you will do eventually… stop caring.

  • veronica
  • Desirae

    This is so sad. And for the mother to say it was consensual? How is such a thing consensual for an 11 yr old and her stepfather!

  • Omega

    Pro-lifers and their constant stupidity (face palm)…

  • blah blah

    Everyone is butthurt, an 11 year old can’t take care of a child, there is no need to worry, the baby will not be able to survive child birth, nor will she be able to survive child birth, so it’s not as if she’ll have to take care of a baby silly people.

  • RandyMarshCT

    They should explain to her that it is Jesus’ fault this happened. If he didn’t want it to happen, he would have stopped it. It’s all part of your pathetic fairytale.

  • M_Stu

    Hmm..after all of these comments about abortion vs. no abortion, choice vs. no choice, is there any update on the step-father? Did he go to jail? Will he be required to pay child support? Etc., etc..

    • M_stu

      Why aren’t we all as up in arms about the step-father’s role in this and demanding justice? Demanding that he be financially responsible? Demanding that at the very least the 11 year old be removed from that home for her own ongoing safety?

  • Mr M

    all life has value and everyone deserves the chance to live. how can we say the child will suffer. none of us can predict the future. I don’t think its correct to end the life of the child off of speculation.
    I think everyone knows abortion isn’t a good thing but maybe sees it as a lesser of evils. for pro-choice people how can we work together to create better options for young mothers and their children? Killing them can be the end all answer?

  • Derploop

    This is just another symptom of the larger problem: patriarchal societies. These societies are fueled by religious beliefs that put women second or even third. It’s the main cause of children deaths, mostly girls (sex-selection), and abuse, murder and violence against women.
    It’s nice to see these controversial issues showing up on mainstream media, but this has been happening for 100s of years. And it’s good to start the conversation. Women are the backbone of every society and allowing this to happen is very backwards.

    I am pro-choice because to many women and girls die from patriarchal culture and religion.
    Take the wool off your eyes please and keep talking about this.

  • Atheism is just a religion

    So… what part does Jesus has to do with this? After all he died 2000 years ago. Why do you blame Jesus?

    If the stepfather was an atheist, can I say 11 year old got pregnant because of atheism?

    • Anon

      Shove a bible up your ass.

    • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

      The rape is not because of Christianity. The fact than an 11-year-old can’t get an abortion to end a pregnancy that began with a rape and could literally tear her apart, that’s Christianity.

      Reading comprehension is your friend.

  • Omega

    See pro-lifers, crap like this happens when you outlaw abortion.

  • Thomas

    OR A child in Chile will be given life because of Jesus. I’m not a particularly religious person but this is a one-sided view of the issue. I agree an 11-year old isn’t physically or emotionally prepared to raise a child and the burden will fall heavy on whoever is responsible for the 11-yr old because they will need to be the primary caregiver of both. Or there is also this great process called “adoption”, you should read about it Lauren Lane. That step-father is a monster. I hope the 11-yr doesn’t encounter any medical complications from giving birth at such a young age.

  • redonkulous

    So what is the punishment on the stepfather?

    • pagansister

      Probably nothing—

  • shojobakunyu

    Remember this gem:

    ► Brazil’s president attacks Vatican for condemning nine-year-old rape
    victim’s abortion.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/brazil/4968239/Brazils-president-attacks-Vatican-for-condemning-nine-year-old-rape-victims-abortion.html

    Brazil’s president has criticised the Roman Catholic Church for excommunicating doctors who performed an abortion on a nine-year-old girl who was raped by her stepfather and was expecting twins.

  • pagansister

    This really is a horrible example of “children having children”—-the extreme version of that.

  • reality

    Stepfather continuously and incestuously raping an 11yr old? Mother claims it was consensual? Yep – they are an atheist family.

    • posixoddity

      That username :D

  • http://obbop.wordpress.com/ obbop

    The cultures to the south of the USA are unable to create a country akin to the USA but many millions of them sneak into the USA to help themselves to what they can grab… legally by competing for jobs with working-poor and unemployed USA citizens and too many who commit various crimes that cost USA taxpayers billions of dollars yearly.

    And that dreamed of “assimilation”?

    It isn’t happening, folks.

    The cultures to the south are implanted here and growing quickly.

    Enjoy your “new improved” USA as the barbarians from the south become the majority in the not-too-distant future…. assisted by the ruling elites who will profit ftom the masses of citizen’s losses.

    • RobMcCune

      Chile is about as far south as you can go. There are less than 130,000 Chileans in the US, most are here legally.

      But hey, who cares about the well being of a raped child when you can hate on them Mexicans. YEEHAW! ‘MERKA!

  • Angelo

    Here’s another headline

    Infant killed because his grandfather raped his mother.

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      Embryos and blastocysts aren’t infants. Please become educated about the issue.

      • CARMEL350

        You are the uneducated one, read biology 101, or any fetology, enbryology, geneology text, find out the truth before you embarrass yourself any further!

        • C.L. Honeycutt

          What an incredibly stupid thing you said there. Jesus wept.

  • wardmatt1

    For those that want an answer from the bible consider the following scripture
    Ex. 21:22, 23: “In case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a pregnant woman and her children do come out but no fatal accident occurs, he is to have damages imposed upon him without fail according to what the owner of the woman may lay upon him; and he must give it through the justices. But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul.” (Some translations make it appear that in this law to Israel the crucial matter was what happened to the mother, not to the fetus. The original Hebrew text, however, refers to a fatal accident to either mother or child.)
    Seems very clear to me what god thinks of abortion.

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      Yep. Causing a miscarriage against the will of the “owner” (the husband) results in a fine. The implication is of course that intentionally losing a pregnancy is okay, since you can’t fine yourself.

  • Christopher

    Lauren:

    It’s poor journalism like yours, which leads to most educated people to have a poor opinion on journalism/journalist in general.

    Lousy copy paste, with very little investigation.

    Your article is wrong on so many levels (both medical and legal) that it’s disgusting, and even more is the fact that you perpetuate a chain of ignorance on the subject.

  • Forbern

    This is dreadfull! She should be allowed abortion, and her step father should get life in a hard labour camp after castration. This child could die, as her body isnt mature enough to deliver a child.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X