Quoting Quiverfull: The World Aborts the Imperfect?

Quoting Quiverfull: The World Aborts the Imperfect? November 3, 2013

by Anna Higgins from the Family Research Council blog – Chasing Perfection

Perfection is a ghost. Many of us pursue it all our lives in our own strength, only to find it unattainable. We keep our faults hidden and run from those who are less than our image of “perfection.” This attitude can be deadly.

Most of us are woefully ignorant of the fact that the “imperfect” — children with disabilities — are targeted for elimination prior to birth. Over 90% of preborn children diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted. This staggering statistic reveals that as a society, we have done little to protect the most innocent among us. We have neglected to take a stand for those with no voice and neglected to teach our children that people with differences are just as valuable as anyone else and deserve protection and respect.

It is heart-wrenching to think that abortion, coupled with the negative attitude towards persons with disabilities, has robbed countless parents, brothers, sisters, grandparents and other family members of the joys and challenges of raising and loving a person with Down Syndrome. In our pursuit of perfection, we cast aside parts of ourselves and others that we deem substandard. In so doing, we unknowingly discard life’s most valuable treasures. It is most often in our weaknesses that true grace is revealed.

Comments open below

 

QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders and ask our readers: What do you think? Agree? Disagree? This is the place to state your opinion. Please, let’s keep it respectful – but at the same time, we encourage readers to examine the ideas of Quiverfull honestly and thoughtfully.

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment‘ by Janet Heimlich

Quivering Daughters‘ by Hillary McFarland

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement‘ by Kathryn Joyce

 


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • persephone

    It is sad, but I understand why a woman would choose to abort a fetus with a disability. Besides the possible lack of support, monetary costs, and time demands, what happens to these children when the parents die? What if no one is willing or able to take on the responsibility?

    The first time I really was confronted with this was as a teenager. I was living in a small town, big enough that you didn’t personally know everyone, but small enough that you knew most people by face. There was a family, a couple who were probably in their early sixties and their son, a severely disabled young man. The son could walk, but bent over, usually holding onto a shopping cart, or being supported by a parent on each side. He was nearly blind. He could not talk. I felt sorry for and respectful of his parents for handling this burden with such grace. But thinking about their ages, one day it suddenly struck me: what would happen to their son when they reached a point where they were physically limited by age or illness; even more upsetting was realizing that when they died, their son would probably end up in an institution, something the parents had worked all this decades to avoid. And my heart broke for them.

    I knew then that if I were to find out that I was carrying a fetus with a disability that I would be in my own hell, because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in abortion.

  • Nea

    Nice to know he’s more equipped than the actual parents to judge if they’re up to the challenges of raising a disabled child.

    Also… if having a disabled child is such a good thing and shows you’re up to “life’s most valuable treasures” why is the canard that vaccination causes austism so scary? Downs means “joy and challenge” but autism doesn’t?

  • Jennifer

    You do realize that by the time they know there will be Down’s Syndrome, the pregnancy’s generally advanced enough that the baby IS in fact a baby and has organs?

  • Jennifer

    Because it’s still a very hard thing for a child to live with, and killing an unborn child is not the same as feeling sorrow that they will have to live with a disability.

  • Jennifer

    Jehovah’s Witnesses are very waywards in Biblical application, nor should a group’s theology shape your own. But perhaps you could give the child up for adoption, instead of ending its life.

  • Trollface McGee

    And did you ever hear that children with disabilities are far less likely to be adopted than “normal” children? Oh and pregnancy? No big. So easy to risk your life and health and then give your child away to someone you don’t know. Not to mention all the systemic problems that occur in the modern adoption industry.
    And yes. We.Know.It’s.A.Baby. Women aren’t stupid. We know what a pregnancy is.

  • Trollface McGee

    It’s almost to the point in some communities where a child’s disabilities are fetishised, especially when it comes to DS – where the parent gets to play the “look at me, how I’ve martyred myself to raise this child.” At the same time there’s little regard for the well-being or future of the child.
    Bringing a child into the world with a disability is hard and parents need to be realistic about their own abilities and about the child’s quality of life,

  • Trollface McGee

    So, it’s better to bring a child into the world with a disability that will cause them a lifetime of pain, because – suffering, pain? No big deal. Very compassionate.

  • Saraquill

    Are you a person with a disability, or spend significant time with any? You make us sound like an abstract idea wrapped in soft fuzzies.

    Instead of feeling sad for us, allow us to lead full productive lives.

  • persephone

    I haven’t been a Witness for 30 years.

    Most disabled children are never adopted, but spend their lives warehoused.

    As to theology, Christianity as 32,000 known sects, not counting all the home churches and cults that are flying under the radar, so theology is just the current flavor’s whim.

  • Baby_Raptor

    Whose killing children? A fetus is not a child, nor is it a life. Words have meanings; please respect this.

    And think of the implications of what you’re suggesting. You’re suggesting that the parents go through a painful adoption, possibly long and drawn out depending on how things go. Then the child ends up in an institution for most of it’s life, as most disabled kids are never adopted. Maybe the kid gets lucky and gets put in a well-funded home, or maybe they end up a ward of the state, and thus in a constantly under-funded and under-employed place.

    Or the woman could have an abortion. The parents would be spared a lot of suffering, the fetus would never have to suffer at all, and everyone wins.

  • Baby_Raptor

    There is no such thing as an “unborn baby.” By the very definition of the word, a baby has undergone delivery. Before birth, it is a fetus. Continually insisting that it’s a baby is a factually incorrect heart-string pull.

    And what does the fact that there are organs there have to do with anything? Is the existence of organs now more “proof” that a fetus is a life to some people?

  • Baby_Raptor

    Thinking about anyone but the ~baybee~ is utterly selfish! No good parent does that! /sarcasm

  • Jennifer

    Pregnancy is risking your life? No Trollface, most of the time it’s not, and if you know it’s already a baby, that means you’d be knowingly killing a child. Just so we’re clear.

    And Raptor, your comment is incredibly unknowledgeable. You desperately need to read more about this, as I’m hoping that this is more a sign of being uninformed than seriously dismissing the death of a baby. Yeah, organs, as in, a tiny human, with organs that get damaged and sometimes torn apart.

  • Jennifer

    You’re right, better to kill it painfully in the womb than give it a chance at life. You sound painfully ignorant of the thousands of children with Down’s Syndrome and autism who live very happy lives with parents who love them.

  • Jennifer

    “the fetus would never have to suffer at all”
    You’ve clearly never read a single word about late-term abortion or how happy so many children with Down Syndrome can be, how loved, positive and intelligent. So can children with autism, which has numerous levels. You have no remote idea how much pain a woman goes through in a partial birth that involves piercing the skull and destroying the brain, or injecting the baby with a saline so it burns internally to death, or delivering a baby not that far developed and just tearing it up; yes, literally. That “fetus” suffers unbelievably and the mother feels it more often than not. Calling the process of adoption torture, even comparing it, is utter nonsense. You desperately need to read more of this matter and the facts involved.

  • Jennifer

    Plenty of parents think of themselves too, but that doesn’t generally mean to the point of killing the kid.

  • Mary

    This is a hard issue and the discussion here is off to a poor start. Saying “it’s not a baby” because the medical term is “fetus” is just begging the question, if what you mean is that “babies” have moral standing and “fetuses” don’t. That is not a medically established fact; it’s not even a medical question. It’s an ethical question. Medically there is no distinct moment at which what begins as a single cell suddenly becomes a human being entitled to full human dignity — there is a slow developmental process which continues beyond birth — and “birth” occurs at different points during that developmental process, sometimes at 26 weeks, and sometimes at 42 weeks or more.

    The question of what rights a partially developed human being has does also, I believe, depend on more than just the question “is it a person or not?” Animals have some moral rights, albeit not as many as humans. It is unethical to torture or kill an animal for no reason, and it is a hard ethical problem to decide what constitutes sufficient reason. Similarly, humans don’t have a right to life at all costs. If the only way to save the life of one person is to kill another (perhaps to harvest their organs), it is not murder to let the first person die. Similarly, if the only way to save the life of one person is to injure or harm another (perhaps to harvest a kidney or bone marrow that they can live without, but only after a painful procedure and with compromised health for some time) and the second person does not consent, it is not murder to decline to subject the second person to an involuntary organ donation.

    This last is probably the closest analogy to what it means to require a woman to continue a pregnancy and go through labor and birth against her will, and there are reasons to find that unethical even if you admit the personhood of the baby/fetus who is dependent upon the use of her organs (temporarily) and her undergoing painful medical procedures of delivery.

    It is, to me, equally ridiculous to insist that a baby/fetus, especially after 16 weeks or so, has no moral rights, as it is to insist that the baby/fetus has moral rights which completely trump the mother’s rights no matter how much pain and risk and cost she is facing. But I see both of those arguments being made here.

    Why can’t we acknowledge that this is a gray area, and even more so with the question of disability involved, and who is to provide the lifetime of care which will be required? Especially in the US where there is such a weak social safety net? To have a general rule about such cases, in either direction, seems impossible to me. The ethical decision must be case-by-case. The law has a tough time handling “case by case” of course… But the conversation should be about how to codify the ethical complexities in the law, not both sides pretending that there are no ethical complexities.

  • Andi GreyScale

    Not everyone wants to go through pregnancy or childbirth; which can be fatal, by the way. Abortion is safer.

  • Andi GreyScale

    Around 20 weeks; doesn’t make it a person and it still needs continued permission to reside in a persons body. Most kids with disabilities are never adopted.

  • Trollface McGee

    Right, because pregnancy has no risks, no complications, no potential for death – pregnancy doesn’t correlate with job losses, domestic violence.. yep, pregnancy you just sit there for 9 months and then voilà! baby!
    And of course adoption doesn’t have any emotional consequences. You won’t spend a lifetime worrying that your flesh and blood may be in an abusive environment or housed in an institution. Your caseworker definitely won’t call you a dirty slut for wanting that open adoption you were promised but find out you aren’t legally entitled to because of the way the contract was drawn up. Your child won’t be raised by people who read the Pearls’ books and believe in beating them into submission no matter what disability they may have.
    Yeah, perfect answer to everything, if you ignore reality.

  • Trollface McGee

    And even if you think about the born baby and the pain and suffering (and potential early death) it will go through due to it’s disabilities – still selfish.

  • Jennifer

    You speak of ignoring reality? You are aware people can look deeply into adoptive parents and receive updates? Which group has shown to suffer more, those who went through abortions or those who gave their kids a shot at life? If you’re reading any articles about reality, you’ll know the answer. Aborted kids have NO CHANCE.

  • Jennifer

    So it’s less selfish to kill it then. That’s complete and utter nonsense. How is it selfish to bring a child into life inspite of the complications it could cause you? Most of the reasons you’ve given have ONLY to do with inconvenience to the mother, not the child, so gee, how is it selfish to bear the difficulties of giving birth to the child and giving them a chance? You can’t twist that around to selfishness, which you apparently ignore has anything to do with abortion and the decision to END the baby’s life.

  • Jennifer

    Well gee, if the baby could ask for permission to continue keeping its own BODY whole, I’m sure it would. Maybe you can organize some system demanding tax dollars to scientifically enable a fetus to sign a document of permission granted. But where’s the permission slip for the baby to sign allowing its body to be invaded by instruments?

  • Jennifer

    Mary, if only there were more people with viable signs of sanity like you.

  • Jennifer

    Abortion, safer. Wow.

  • Jennifer

    As a matter of fact, Sara, I do have some autism, Aspergers and OCD that’s been crippling.
    You seriously come here where people are advocating to let parents kill those like us before we’re even born, and you’re telling ME I treat you like an asbtract idea?
    I’ve got news for you btw: It’s not for me to “let” you do anything, you choose to have a full life on your own, as I try everyday. However, others here support the idea that your mother would have had the right to not “let” you live.
    Are you still of the opinion that people like Saraquill, Trollface, should not be allowed to live because giving them a chance at life would be “selfish”? By voting up her comment, are you recognizing that she proved you wrong?

  • Jennifer

    You’re right Trollface. Saraquill, whose comment testifying she had a full life you gave a positive vote, should NEVER have been allowed to be born! How selfish of her parents.

  • Jennifer

    Typically, being stabbed in the skull and having its brain destroyed, or being removed and torn apart if it’s too small to have its brain destroyed, hurts a hell of a lot; that’s excruciating suffering. More often than not, the mothers ALSO feel pain for the rest of their lives for having such a brutal procedure done, as well as feel pain DURING it. So your “no mess or fuss” idea is actually gorily messy.

  • Nea

    What do organs have to do with it? How many good organs equal personhood no matter how deformed the others are? Because a fetus or baby can have a perfect brain and die of a malformed heart. Or have a perfect heart but never develop a brain. Or have a perfect heart and developing brain… and smother of malformed lungs. You may not want women to decide to abort something just because it has organs, but nature itself is going to be quick to kill something with bad organs.

  • Independent Thinker

    While we are on the topic of ignoring reality here are some facts about adoption. First of all there is no universal set of adoption standards in the world and as you may well know international adoption has become increasing popular in the United States. With every state in America having a separate set of laws regard adoption and every country in the world having different laws we can not ensure the safety of children in the adoption process. Being cleared is practically meaningless when their is no clear pathway to ensure the safety of the child. Second, 500,000 kids in the United States are without placement. Black males statistically are the least likely to receive permanent placement. Once a child hits elementary school age the likelihood of permanent placement is extremely low. For those in the foster care system 40 percent will become homeless within 18 months of leaving the system. Only 1-5 percent will graduate college. 51 percent will become unemployed within the first 4 years of transitioning out of the foster care system. Finally, 70 percent of prison inmates report being in the foster care system at some point in their childhood. I won’t even get into substance abuse because I will practically be typing all day. Of course their are two easy ways to deal with this problem that many churches shun. The first and most obvious in sex education and birth control. The second is to expand the pool of adoptive parents to include gay couples and possibly even financially stable single moms to handle some of the half million children already in placement. One more thing before I forget about it. When a child is being cared for by a foster parent if the child is on psychiatric medications the state pays the foster parent more to care for the child. Yes, the state creates an incentive to put young children on very dangerous medications which is extremely scary. There are some children that need them but there are many that don’t. As tragic as it is these children are living lives that resemble the movie 8 Mile far more often than looking like an episode of 7th Heaven.

  • Independent Thinker

    I suspect you are not a mother yourself. It would be incredibly selfish to inflict a traumatic situation on the children you already have and that is something many mothers understand. Part of being a mom is making decisions in the best interest of your child and not always choosing what makes you feel warm and fuzzy on the inside. Being a mother is a constant struggle and there is no magical formula that leads to the perfect family. If a woman can’t choose how to manage her personal health who makes those decisions for her? A judge? Her husband? Her parents? If abortions are reserved for life and death situations who decides when to say yes and when to say no? Are those people elected or appointed? What experience and education do those people have to make medical decisions?

  • Trollface McGee

    Yeah, complications like death and permanent injury…
    And you don’t think it’s selfish to bring a child into the world that you know will suffer and die an early death so you can prove how “pro-life” you are.

  • Trollface McGee

    You’re aware that adoption agencies purposely structure open adoptions/and updates on kids to be voluntary and non-enforceable – because it’s an easier sell to the mother and adopting parents – because adoption agencies, unlike the evil CPS workers, don’t have to abide by the best interest of the child standard and can instead go by the interest of the highest paying customer standard.

  • Trollface McGee

    And you are painfully ignorant that there are disabilities that cause death, sometimes slow and painful – including DS which often includes heart complications as part of the syndrome.
    You seem to think that people who are pro-choice want to kill, kill, kill. You are ignorant. You have no idea what a woman has to consider when making the choice to carry a pregnancy to term. Will she survive it? Will she come out of it in a state where she is able to raise this new child? What about her other children? Will they be able to afford a child that may require constant care for the rest of her or his life? What if she has a drug problem or has mental issues or has had her other children taken away for abuse?
    Many families raise happy kids with disabilities, they do so because they have choice, not in spite of it.

  • Jennifer

    I’m also aware that the kind of people who run places like PP care less about women and children than you, and likely I, could have ever imagined. Women have been constantly lied to about how much it hurts, whether it’ll hurt the baby, and the formation of the baby. Trollface, I do care about women, and any system having problems, but I’m talking about giving these kids a chance. We’re describing late-term stuff here, horrible things that are done to these babies. I used to be more pro-choice, which I actually still am regarding removing a zygote. But they’re not zygotes for long.

  • Jennifer

    IT, are you a mother then? Could you choose something that could scar you for life and kill your own child? Better to kill one child than bring difficulties on the other? I didn’t know a child’s right to live was dependent on whether their lives would make their sibling’s harder. And it’s still asinine to call this selfish of the mother; you think she gives birth to this complicated child for fun then? Are you honestly telling me this? And you know what, your comments and any others calling the mother selfish don’t have a hint of pro-choice about them; you’re clearly saying what her choice should be, and judging her as selfish if she doesn’t do it. Sounds like feminist mantra of, “Women should have more choice..except to be a homemaker!”

    Once again, adoption, and don’t tell me that’s impossible; every system has complications, but we’re talking about letting a child live here; this is not merely a “do we raise a kid or not” issue, it already IS a life or death issue. And speaking of which, if it’s a case like that for mothers, they’re already perfectly allowed to decide whether they want to put their lives at stake; that’s a separate issue.

  • Jennifer

    You are very ignorant if you think abortion at the term discussed here is not an nasty, horrible process on a living being. Once again, where’s this life and death stuff coming from? We’re talking about aborting a kid BECAUSE of disabilities, not dangers, drug use or money issues, which btw are an often red herring in the matter (the money issues). You’re speaking of disabled kids like they’d be a plague on the family. If a woman has drug problems and had her kids taken away, why not give this baby a chance and give them away too? The baby shouldn’t suffer for her terrible choices.

    The bottom line here, for me both now and when I was pro-abortion, and for you, is really, is this a child? Do we consider it a child and at what stage? Bc if it was born, nobody would give a damn what the mother’s condition was, they would be AGAINST her killing a baby, especially in a horrific way.

  • Jennifer

    Yes IT, I do know about the often terrible foster care system and the low college graduation, which btw when compared to horrible death falls into the category of “I don’t give a damn” for me. All these are valid reasons for a mother, who didn’t end a pregnancy during the zygote stage, taking a metal instrument to her new child and stabbing its skull to destroy the brain. Or injecting it with burning saline. Oh whoops, except that the baby’s still on the inside for all these things, so does that not make it a child? Let me ask you something: let’s say that a drug addict who decided she’d never get better took her baby and gave it a shot, or a drink, that would put it to permanent sleep. Is that murder? You’d probably say yes. I mean damn the foster care system’s problems or adopting difficulties, that was a baby!! But that newborn would die far more painlessly than an unborn killed in partial birth by brain stabbing, saline injection, or an earlier abortion which would require a baby to be born and then torn up, literally. I’ve seen the pictures and read the stories, IT; that, and not emotions, changed my mind forever (I already was against partial birth, but had no idea how soon a real human is formed and what happens in earlier abortions). We’re not talking about removing a zygote by instrument or pill, we’re talking about killing something with limbs, a heart, a nervous system that will feel everything, and done by a system that could.care. less. half the time or more about women or babies. You’re aware of the law that now forbids doctors from letting children who survive the abortion live? What is that, if not murder?

  • Jennifer

    And what guarantee do you have that such a child would die an early death? Is it seriously better to kill it, painfully, than give it a chance? It’ll die anyway, I mean maybe, so I should kill it now? Do you have any idea how often doctors are WRONG about the level of difficulty a child will have? I’ve lost count of the times I’ve heard of doctors being wrong and know personally one couple who thought their child would be basically doomed; no physical power, no bowel control, no proper intelligence; if you don’t think I care about that, you’re wrong. But this was years ago, and that kid is alive and has some problems walking; that’s it. Yeah, that’s absolutely all that’s wrong with him. Aborting him was never even an option for his parents.

  • Nea

    Please cite your sources for these assertions.

  • Jennifer

    Thank you for asking, Nea. Numerous doctors, nurses and patients have testified to the horrors that go on. But if you’re unaware, like I was, I’ll happily oblige. Here is one: http://www.amazon.com/Hand-God-Journey-Abortion-Changed/dp/0895264633/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1383621829&sr=1-2&keywords=abortion+doctor

    Here is a link to an article with a picture of a dead baby’s parts:
    http://www.generationcedar.com/main/2011/04/abortion-kills-people-not-tissue-warning-graphic.html

    I know there are numerous others. But the main book that changed my life with its shocking sources and numerous accounts was “The Marketing of Evil.” All you need is one of the chapters, the one on abortion.

  • Nea

    We are saying only the woman involved chooses. You are telling her that she MUST give birth or that we are saying she MUST abort. There’s no “must” about being pro-CHOICE.

    By the way, I know for a fact that my mother’s pregnancy with me made her very ill. I know for a fact that she chose to continue the pregnancy of her own free will. That she had a CHOICE and chose to continue means far more to me than any cold comfort I’d derive from knowing she only endured because she was forced to by outside authority.

  • Jennifer

    Actually Nea, many on your side do indeed pressure the woman to have an abortion; even here there have been several statements that she’d be “selfishly” pro-life if she brought a disabled child to term. Yes, if it’s a baby with a functioning body and a feeling nervous system, it’s a child and most people believe you MUST not kill a child. And what outside authority are you referring to? If your mother really wanted to, she could have found a way to terminate you in the womb; women have been doing that for centuries, the only difference now is that they can do it safely, even with doctors more aware of the human status of their child than they are. How many mothers do you think look at their disabled children and think, “I really should have aborted you”?

  • Independent Thinker

    I noticed you totally avoided the topic of who should decide what a woman does with her body?

  • Jennifer

    I already said she’s the one who decides, if it’s life or death for her; obviously no one can or should decide whether she lives or dies. And you know what? No one should have that right over her child either.

  • Independent Thinker

    So you realize the foster care system is broken yet at the same time have no problem adding more kids into an already broken system?

  • Jennifer

    Then let nature take care of it. Something with normal organs is far more likely to survive in the womb.

  • Jennifer

    When the alternative is killing them, you mean? Do you know how corrupt the abortion business is, what it does to women and children? How about the numerous options BESIDES foster care?

  • KarenH

    It’s simply untrue that the people who work at Planned Parenthood and places like it don’t care about women. When I went to PP for my second and third pregnancies (both by the same man, and both while on increasingly higher doses of the BCP), they were kind, caring, thorough in their discussions of ALL the alternatives, not just abortion.

    They didn’t treat me like an idiot, nor did they jump up and down with joy when I chose abortion (both times). And in the first case, my planned abortion, they ended up helping me through (both medically and through counseling) when the pregnancy ended spontaneously a couple days before my appointment. In fact, it was precisely because of how they cared for me (in every sense of the term ‘care’) that time that I went to them 7 years later.

  • KarenH

    Yes. it is. That you dislike that reality doesn’t make it “wow”.

  • KarenH

    My abortion was not even remotely as painful as childbirth was. It was even less painful than my miscarriage was.

    I’m not saying it was Happy Fun Time, but physically, it was about as traumatic as a really heavy period.

  • KarenH

    Are you NOW going to claim that women are aborting children because of autism? Since when can autism be diagnosed pre-birth?

    Your posts are becoming less and less credible as their tone becomes more and more shrill and the invective in them becomes more pronounced.

  • KarenH

    Because, particularly in Down’s Syndrome, which you’ve been waving about like the Anti-Abortion Standard Bearer, these types of birth defects become more common as the parents become older–which makes it highly likely that the family already has one or more children to raise and support.

    Taking on the massive financial and physical tasks of raising a child with birth defects and developmental delays–particularly those which will require surgeries (in the plural) for the child, puts a massive economical burden on a family which already has a financial and emotional obligation to actual, living breathing children.

    It is less selfish to say, “We don’t have the resources, mentally, physically and financially to take on this burden, nor to place it on our existing children in the long term when they have to take on the care of this child after we are no longer able to care for them or we die.”

    It’s very easy for you to claim that parents who abort in such circumstances are selfish, lazy worthless folk who can’t be bothered. But until you have to look an existing child in the eyes and tell them, “this child I’m carrying, you will be responsible for the rest of your natural life.” you have no business condemning others for refusing to do that to their own actual, live children.

  • Jennifer

    Nice that you had a good experience. I wonder how far along you were in those pregnancies. However the accounts I’ve heard have included women being restrained during abortions, feeling terrible pain, lied to, and of course there’s the fact that PP now loves even pandering to children and would prefer to teach them about sex outside of their parents’ control.

  • Jennifer

    Are you aware that abortion is unnatural and pregnancy isn’t? That one can prevent breast cancer and the other can wreck a woman’s body with its unnatural and grotesque methods? The entire idea of lauding abortion like it’s a natural thing that protects women from something they’re designed to do is ludicrous.

  • Jennifer

    Maybe you went to some particularly good clinic. Because one physician described a woman, in the middle of the process, crying, “Oh God, it hurts..I didn’t know it would hurt..”

  • Jennifer

    I don’t give a damn whether it’s autism or Down Syndrome or what, we’ve been discussing disabilities. And if you think some of the other arguments here are credible, I’d have a hard time taking you seriously. Or might conclude you just wish to justify your own choices. Most people do tend to get shrill when they face utter senselessness in arguments. I have at least two liberal friends far more pro-choice than I am, and neither one can fathom the horrors of partial birth; they don’t give a flip about emotion-ladden, irrational arguments for them. When I told one of them about the different people I’ve heard saying that babies need permission to stay in the womb (but the parents don’t need their permission to kill them), judging mothers who CHOOSE to put their babies’ lives above their own as selfish, calling adoption more traumatic than abortion, justifying killing a child because of the possibility of a hard life, claiming that there’s no such thing as an unborn baby and no suffering for either person in abortion, she said she was horrified at how stupid such people made their whole side look.

  • Jennifer

    “particularly in Down’s Syndrome, which you’ve been waving about like the Anti-Abortion Standard Bearer”

    That’s because it’s what was mentioned in the original article, Karen.

    “It is less selfish to say, “We don’t have the resources, mentally, physically and financially to take on this burden, nor to place it on our existing children in the long term when they have to take on the care of this child after we are no longer able to care for them or we die.”

    LESS selfish to end a living, breathing child’s life than to try one of the numerous other options because unborn babe deserves equal value as the other children? You guys certainly have your own banners to wave, and finances and emotional inconvenience for the rest of the family are right up there, all of which are alleged, while the death of the child is 100% certain. I marvel at how easy you think it is to dismiss such living children as burdens just not worth the trouble.

    “But until you have to look an existing child in the eyes and tell them, “this child I’m carrying, you will be responsible for the rest of your natural life.””

    How about you try this instead: go to a family trying to support such a child, one faced with difficulties financially and certainly some emotionally, look into the eyes of one of the siblings of the struggling child and say, “I know you’re suffering, and I want you to know I think Mommy and Daddy were very selfish to have this baby when they could have ended his life before he was born; then Johnny would be in heaven, and you’d never have to have a mentally challenged brother or look after him. Wouldn’t that have been nice?”

  • Trollface McGee

    Thank you. You show exactly how much compassion for real, living, breathing people the anti-choice movement has. Let women die (oh, no big, doesn’t happen that often). Foetus feeling pain = bad, child feeling pain = no big. The fact that you refer to money issues with having a child as a “red herring” is very indicative of the fact that you stop thinking about the child as soon as the umbilical cord has been cut.

    PP, on the other hand, has always treated me and people I know with respect and compassion. I know many families that have relied on PP not just for BC and reproductive health but also for prenatal help and they weren’t lied to or insulted as is common with CPCs.
    I suppose you’ll come back with “oh I’m ignorant and I don’t know what I’m talking about.” Fact is, I do. You, on the other hand, don’t provide any sources or facts and just want to bleat about teh baybeez and how we’re horrible people who want to kill all the unborn baybeez, so I don’t see a need for me to respond any further.

  • Saraquill

    I stand by what I said about you phrasing us as a warm fuzzy abstraction. It does us no good. Working to improve education, social services and other things is far more productive.

  • Saraquill

    Please don’t insult my family. It does this conversation no favors.

  • KarenH

    Abortion is completely natural. Every pregnancy that terminates without a birth is an abortion, even miscarriage. As many as 7 in 10 fertilized eggs never even implant. Naturally. WHOOPS!!!! there goes another abortion! And a sizable number of implantations spontaneously abort–it’s why many fertility clinics call the 2nd trimester ‘the safety zone” because the odds of spontaneous abortion drop significantly.

    Perhaps you’d be better served by arguing your point from a position of fact,rather than rumor.

  • KarenH

    I’m not trying to sell anything. Unlike you. I support a woman’s right to carry a child full term or as far as she can manage and bring about a live birth, just like I support a woman’s right NOT to carry a child full term.

    These decisions aren’t up to me. Or you. They belong with the woman and her chosen caregivers.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    There are not numerous options besides Foster Care. And Foster Care is not all bad as people make it. You only hear about the awful ones. If there is failure it is the parents of the children being born exposed to drugs to drug addict parents who then drag the child through a life of hell before losing custody of the courts. Many of these kids end up having deep seated emotional problems or mental health issues that there is just not government funding to resolve for each child.

    I hate abortion but you know what I hate even more? People having no freedom to make their own decisions and the kids being raised as the result of these parents chemical dependencies. Even with the best therapeutic foster case sometimes it’s like trying to put a bandaid on a corpse.

    Fundamentalists piss me off because they only see things in black and white terms when the world is too complex for a one size fits all approach.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Are you aware that the D&C procedure that is used in abortion is also used for other things, such as stopping hemorrhaging during heavy periods and to keep the bleeding from other uterine troubles under control? It is a necessary procedure to have available in the US without it being used for birth control.

    And no, not everyone has ‘easy’ natural pregnancies, for some it comes with a real risk of death. Again, you’re simplifying and blaming over a complex problem

  • KarenH

    The unborn don’t breathe. Hence it is impossible for them to be a living breathing child.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Generation Cedar is not a reliable ‘source’. It is a blog that is the personal options of one woman, I need to see facts and figures from legitimate sources, such as medical studies or government gathered statistics

  • Jennifer

    Thank you for this informative post, Suzanne. No, I didn’t imagine the entire foster care system could be broken; seemed like a dramatic news stunt to me. The other options I referred to would be adoption, raising the child themselves, letting a relative raise them, giving them to an orphanage. I don’t see things in black and white, not when it comes to motives. But again, whether the abortion itself is wrong depends on the length of pregnancy. An infant is an infant.

  • Jennifer

    Right, as opposed to the compassion the “pro-choice” people have. Here’s the difference: I think killing an unborn is worse than letting a born child suffer difficulties, one is a life or death situation. Those on your side on the other hand place the difficulty a born child would feel above an unborn so highly, the unborn is disposable in your eyes. Your words that I said at any point “let women die” are flat-out wrong; I went out of my way to clarify that I care about women and the choice in a dangerous pregnancy lies with the mother. I despise PP because of what it stands for, what it was built on, and the accounts I’ve heard; you’re blatantly incorrect in your assertions that I don’t know what I speak of, nor have you cited any sources yourself. The fact is, you CANNOT provide any source to a scientific document saying that a four-month child can’t feel, or God forbid later than that. What compassion have you shown here for unborn children who actually feel pain? Not a single damned bit; you just claim they’re not human, not living, and then rake me out for not showing compassion for the women, which again is bs. Pro-choice women like the ones I’ve seen lately care more about justifying their choices than facts about the children they dismiss, so it would indeed be useless for us to talk any further.

  • Jennifer

    I’m aware the problem is very complex, Suzanne, but you said yourself you hate abortion, which you do because it’s a very nasty procedure. It’s not used to stop hemorrhaging, it’s used to kill someone and invade a mother’s uterus.

  • Jennifer

    Facts? Like the facts used here claiming foster systems are just so horrible it’s better to die than go there, PP is totally benevolent, and even though a baby has organs it’s…just not human. Perhaps you’d be better served by sticking with the facts about abortion. And the facts are, sorry, a metal instrument is not the same as what the body does naturally.

  • Jennifer

    That doesn’t make the PHOTOGRAPH not real, Suzanne, and the post gave a link to a separate news source.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    I had a D&C without being pregnant, oh about twice a year to stop excessive bleeding for at least ten years as part of the problems with my reproductive system. I put off having a total hysterectomy, which I needed, till the bleeding just about killed me, so don’t tell me no one does that procedure for abortion only. It’s a life saver for some.

    It doesn’t hurt, I never felt a one of those procedures, that’s just a lie that the Pro Life side tells as part of their entire fear tactics package to get women from thinking for themselves. Anesthesia is a wonderful thing. Freedom is even better.

  • Jennifer

    I’m not trying to sell anything either. Karen, for eleven years I was one of the most pro-choice people you could imagine; I’d fight tooth and nail, and once on the Generation Cedar blog I took on about ten different women or more for a solid week, arguing. But I have always, always been against partial birth; so has every single person I know, liberal or not. Then I found out more about these abortions, the ones that don’t just involve removing a fertilized egg, and I was hit about a hundred times over. See, I’m still pro-choice, when it comes to removing a FERTILIZED EGG. The bar of separation for me was always when it becomes a baby, when it goes from zygote with a DNA code to tiny human with a beating heart. Most abortions take place long, long after that heart first appears and starts beating; this is what I didn’t know. And when I found this out, and what some earlier abortions (that are not partial birth but kill a smaller version of the baby) entail, the brutal tearing of a child’s body, I was punched repeatedly throughout my being; I couldn’t believe it. The queston should always, always be, is this a baby? Because if it was born, no one would care how traumatized the mother was, how poor, if she killed that baby she’d be arrested for crime. So, is it a child? In the later term abortions I’ve been talking about, it always is, and this is what people here have been defending.

  • Jennifer

    Yes they do, they receive oxygen and nutrients in the womb from their mother’s cord.

  • Jennifer

    You don’t get sarcasm, Saraquill?

  • Jennifer

    Fuzzy abstraction, my foot. Because I know they have the very real possibility of living the full, productive life you asked me to let you have? I’m trying to let others like you have that life by not advocating killing them before they’re born. If you presume what I think about people with disabilities, like the ones that have helped make my life a good deal harder, you’re guilty of the dismissal you accuse me of and not even bothering to read my comments accurately.

  • Jennifer

    No Suzanne, the pain is not a myth; I’m talking about REAL people who have testified that it is painful. I’m not discounting your own experience, I’m saying you can’t discount that of others. I didn’t know they used the same instruments to hold and remove a kid to stop hemorrhaging, but I spoke confusingly; I meant to say in this case we’re not talking about hemorrhaging, but removing a child. I was confused when I read that it could hurt, I’d always assumed they did use Anesthesia.

  • Nea

    You are obviously unaware of the many, many abuse cases where parents do actually tell their children to their faces that they were unwanted and should never have been born. One of the reasons why I am a pro-choice activist is because of the people who have told me directly that they wish they had been aborted rather than live through the abuse.

  • Nea

    I can cite emotional, non scientific books and websites for the pro-choice side too. Can you cite a third party neutral source with scientific backup for your position? For your assertions? Without that, all I see is emotional bias being presented as fact… despite those “facts” contradicting the experiences of myself and those I know, which is unpersuasive to say the least.

  • Jennifer

    The book I cited was by a doctor, Nea, that’s about as scientific as you can get, and the photograph was very real. I’d suggest you try the second book I mentioned because the chapter on abortion is loaded mainly with accounts from people who have experienced it, and worse, the nasty truth of how developed these babies are. You do know about the new law, I presume, that forbids doctors from saving a baby if it survives the abortion? How is this not murder? It would be lovely if zygotes stayed zygotes for the first two months, and if all women had the experience you had, but they haven’t; I wonder if you’ve also heard of the woman locked in a clinic bathroom after delivering her baby live; the lock-in was no doubt accidental, but the ignoring of her cries wasn’t.

  • Jennifer

    Of course I know of such abuse cases, though I was referring to loving parents who didn’t wish to abort due to disability. Have you said to the abused ones, “I agree, you’d be better off dead”?

  • Jennifer

    Hey all, since my opinion of abortion, the women, the unborn and the morals have appeared to be confused here, I just wanted to offer an opportunity to read my review critiquing Francine Rivers’ wonderfully written, but flawed book “The Atonement Child.” That, and the comments and responses left on my review from both me and others should offer some clarification. Scroll up when you get there, bc the link takes you to the first comment someone left me.

    http://www.amazon.com/review/R382H1RMTA42MW/ref=cm_aya_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=084230052X#wasThisHelpful

  • Catherine

    It really is a shame that we don’t have the social safety net to help families of disabled children.

  • Catherine

    Well, considering my stepfather attempted to teach me about sex via the hands-on method…yeah, I prefer PP’s approach which included “no, you don’t have to be treated like that, here are some resources for you and your siblings”.

  • KarenH

    that’s not breathing. Breathing involves oxygen exchange through the lungs. the mother’s cord is not the fetus’ independent lungs.

  • KarenH

    Indeed. Not the least of which would be a single payer healthcare system so that when a woman faces a pregnancy with a child who will have significant medical issues, possibly even before birth, she doesn’t have to make such a Sophie’s choice.

  • Catherine

    Agreed! I don’t know how the U.S. can be as powerful as it is and yet still leave so many people impoverished.

  • KarenH

    I can’t find your claim to ever have been pro-choice as a credible one. If you were, it’s a shame that you were so completely uneducated as to be taken in by the lies and misrepresentations of the pro-lifers you now parrot.

    when you come here and make claims such as fetuses can breathe in the womb, it’s clear you’re simply unqualified to speak credibly on the issue. Regardless of which side you’re claiming this week.

  • Jennifer

    That’s how a child breathes, which is why it can suffocate if the mother dies. Even if it didn’t breathe, it has growing lungs and functioning organs.

  • Jennifer

    Maybe it’s time we focus more on our own.

  • Jennifer

    I’m incredibly sorry you went through that. I’m sure you know most parents are not child abusers, nor should they have to worry about their children being taught about birth control without their knowledge. What resources did they give you?

  • Jennifer

    You just don’t want to believe those are living babies, do you? Not that I blame you, I don’t either.

    “the pro-lifers you now parrot”

    You mean the doctors, nurses, and women who experienced the same thing you did, with far worse and tragic consequences? I didn’t know only you and those happy with abortion were allowed to be believed. You can be sure I always knew the difference between a zygote and a late-term abortion; I was never, once, ok with the latter, while it appears you always have been. The only thing I was incorrect about was when the heart starts beating and how horrible some earlier abortions are (gee, I wonder where I got the idea there’s nothing to an unborn at two months?) Ignorance is generally the reason I hope people supporting partial birth have, unless they’re unbelievably cold-blooded.

  • Jennifer

    So you don’t think this new healthcare system would help?

  • Nea

    This Common Secret is a pro choice book by a doctor. Imnotsorry.net is a website about women who are relieved over their abortions. I told you I could go toe to toe on the other side with equally emotional arguments. And if you really changed your mind over a single photograph, I hope you checked it in Snopes, because the forced birth folks are known for using miscarriage photos and calling them abortions, or faking them outright. You can fake even photographs, you know. Look up spectral photos, fairy photos, or the guy in the backpack on top do the tower as a plane comes in.

    Without citing a third party neutral scientific study or fact, no one is going to be swayed by your rhetoric. We’ve heard it all before and know it not to match our experiences and those of the women we know.

  • Nightshade

    Unnatural? So is living in a heated, air-conditioned house rather than a cave, and wearing synthetic fabrics instead of animal skins, taking aspirin rather than chewing on a hunk of willow bark. How about computers? Last time I checked that kind of Apple tree didn’t exist in nature. And the breast cancer thing? Check this: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/breastcancer/moreinformation/is-abortion-linked-to-breast-cancer That’s the American Cancer Society, who should know something about it, quoting sources like the US National Cancer Institute and The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Their conclusion? ‘ At this time, the scientific evidence does not support the notion that
    abortion of any kind raises the risk of breast cancer or any other type
    of cancer.’

    I’m not saying that abortion is a good thing, I’m in a renewed information-gathering phase now that everything I’ve believed for most of my life is in question, and have to make up my mind again based on the best information I can get. However, misinformation isn’t helpful to anyone except those who know what they know and don’t want to be confused by any pesky facts getting in the way.

  • KarenH

    No. Children breathe with their lungs. Fetuses do not breathe. They obtain oxygen through the umbilical cord, but thatis not breathing. Never has been. Never will be.

  • Jennifer

    Yes, it is breathing. Fish suffocate on dry land, because they breathe through water; unborns breathe through the cord and have lain gasping on doctors’ tables (for which there’s now a law saying doctors can’t help them if they’re lying there like that after an abortion).

  • Jennifer

    There’s a big difference between making accomodations, as humans have been doing for centuries to make life easier, and medically disrupting a pregnancy in a nasty, sometimes horrific method that, in later term pregnancy, invades a child’s body to kill it. This comparison is not in the least valid to me. I agree with your ideas about information, which is why I changed my mind about this whole issue; emotional whining from people claiming there’s a baby at the moment of conception never got more from me than an eye-roll, and it still doesn’t (did you know Geoffrey Botkin took it several steps further and made some melodramatic article wailing about potential babies not even in the womb-the children he claimed could never be because of birth control? The non-existant classmates he’d have had as a kid that never got a chance at existence? I’m all choked up). I knew the difference between a zygote and a baby, but I was wrong about when there are functioning and feeling organs, and what some earlier abortions entail. Only those horrible accounts from doctors, stating medical issues, changed my mind about the process of some types of abortion and when the mass of cells stopped being such.

  • Jennifer

    I have heard of a similar man who takes unbelievable joy in life with non-developed arms and legs; he can even swim. I and many others are glad he’s alive and I pray (and will vote) for a good healthcare system. We do indeed need to help our own countrymen, and certainly family members.

  • Jennifer

    There are plenty of other accounts I could give about people who changed their mind in the business, Nea, and I hope what they reveal about what happens to late-term children would bring you as close to vomiting as it did me. And no, not just one photograph did it. I saw photos of mangled babies sent by pro-lifers arguing with me before, and I dismissed them as victims of late-term abortion, which I was against anyway; you on the other hand are telling me you’re ok with that horrific procedure.

    You do realize WHY such people change their minds? It wasn’t because of the “rhetoric” that purely emotional people give. Why do you think I changed my mind, after more than a decade of the type of rhetoric you give about women’s rights, financial troubles, what if she’s not ready, etc? I’ve heard all the stuff about women regretting or being relieved too; I just figured “Well, some women can’t do it, they’re emotional and maternal or it just wasn’t right.” Doctors don’t change their minds based on parades of tearful folks outside their clinics claiming life starts at conception; they do it based on what they see. I’m aware there are obviously still hundreds of docs who have no problem with it. My rhetoric as you call it is based on medical facts and experiences from those in the room; haven’t you said you know what happens to late-term children in your words? Do you ignore the nastiness of the procedure because some people do it without regret and that’s enough proof for you that somehow those infants are not children?

  • Jennifer

    Well what can I say, I’ve always wanted to be a former hot-headed pro-choicer. But you could always refer to one of my friends or relatives to confirm my old position.

  • Jennifer

    As a matter of fact, looking back over the Kelly Crawford article I mentioned where I argued with women posters for a week, I still have most of the feelings I did then regarding the earliest abortions. I’ve seen all sides of both arguments, not to mention being in the cross-zone between liberal and conservative ideas, which I promise you can be a stony road. Here is one comment from that conservative blog in which I expressed this to another “Jen” who predictably showed concern for my soul.

    “I never spoke of GOD making mistakes and being unjust, Jen; I spoke of man doing these things in His Name. God does not define the second life begins in the Bible, so we look for other areas to find His answers, and they are everywhere, including science. I am not a Calvinist, but it would interest me if you were, since this would most likely dictate that you believe EVERY occurance is His will, including abortions, would it not? I think God designed nature to work often on its own, which would explain birth deformities, retardation, and pregnancies from rape. On the contrary: I am quite aware of His role in science and everything else. The fact that it clashes with your own is no need for a despairing tone when you speak to me, which I find rather amusing; I suppose I’m used to it. I’ve ample reason for all my convictions, and I’m used to everyone questioning them, from my use of nakedness in art and films above the PG rating to my beliefs on abortion, birth control, and homosexuality. Trust me dear sister, I’ve had EVERYONE throw doubts at me, from patriarchals challenging my egalitarian beliefs to pro homo-marriage liberals who call me simply awful for not believing in homosexual marriage. And all these criticisms carry a note of despair, frusteration, anger or doubt concerning my position as a Christian or a loving human being:

    “Jennifer, think of what you DO when you watch films with nudity! Do you have any idea what this does to men??”

    “Jennifer, you are promoting HATE when you speak against homosexual rights to marriage! You are not normal, sister.”

    “Jennifer, people have had only male pastors for CENTURIES! Therefore it’s the ONLY right way! And who are you to disagree with older women anyway??”

    “Look miss, wives have to obey their husbands; you have a SERIOUS problem with GOD, not man, if you disagree. I’ll pray for you, less you burn in hell for committing a sin equal to witchcraft!”

    “Jennifer, you’re so hateful! Wanting abortion for a raped woman? She was preordained to be raped since before the beginning of time! How dare you question this?”

    “Dear Jennifer, women shouldn’t be missionaries or go to college; the Bible says so, not me! Sure Elisabeth Elliot did both these things, but even the wisest get it wrong sometimes.”

    “Jennifer, partial birth is not murder! What’s wrong with you? You’re just being emotional when you describe the process of cutting and emptying a baby’s brain!”

    “Geez, why can’t you see that bra-burning was an artistic expression of FREEDOM? I think you want the old days of patriarchy back!”

    “Hey b*tch, porn is just adult entertainement and YOU are a close-minded idiot to oppose it.”

    Get the picture? I’m used to it, and finally learned to sharpen my beliefs all the more so. I used to absorb doubt, and being a person of anxiety disorders, Aspergers and OCD, trust me, I go over matters ad nauseum. Finally, my skin is toughening. Thanks so much for your prayers, Jen, and do not despair for me.”

  • gimpi1

    So would the authors of this piece be in favor of a more generous social safety-net to make taking care of the disabled more tenable?

    I took care of my disabled parents, my mother wheel-chair bound with damage from Polio and Rheumatoid Arthritis, and my father who suffered traumatic brain-damage in an industrial accident, until their deaths. Without Social Security disability and medicare, it would have been impossible. With such things as caregiver-respite care, SNAP and a good transit system, it becomes manageable. That’s why I always question those that “advocate” for the disabled, but want to cut the lifelines that make their family’s lives bearable.

  • Madame

    I agree with most of what you have written here, Independent Thinker, but when we are talking about a fetus that has been diagnosed with Down’s Syndrome, what to do is not the woman’s decision alone. Her health is not the issue here. This is not like the decision to end an ectopic pregnancy. I do believe the unborn baby’s father shares the burden of responsibility for unborn as well as born children. Of course, this only applies to responsible fathers who are there for their children and wife, pulling their weight as they should.

  • Madame

    I believe both parents should decide what to do together. I’m not in favor of abortion in most cases, and I hope I would have the courage to bring a child diagnosed with Down’s syndrome into the world. But the idea is terrifying.

  • Jennifer

    Btw, I didn’t say that abortion helps cause cancer; I said pregnancy helps prevent it.

  • Jennifer

    Exactly.

  • Independent Thinker

    I am not pro-abortion but I am pro-choice. I do not believe a bureaucrat or elected official should make decisions about what is best for my body and my marriage. In the case of Down’s Syndrome the likelihood of the disorder being present increases with maternal age. I actually do think that mother’s are being selfish to ignore the risk associated with having children well into their mid to late forties. If it were my body I would definitely discuss this issue with my husband before making the ultimate decision. Also, knowing myself pretty well it is unlikely Down’s Syndrome would be a reason for me personally to choose abortion. I am currently in my mid-thirties and have decided not to grow my family any larger. I understand the risk of birth defects spikes after 35 and continues to increase with age. I am a huge birth control advocate. I was raised in the Assemblies of God church in the deep south with a heavy homeschooling presence. I can pretty safely say more people in my church homeschooled than went to public school. Although I was not familiar with the term quiverful I now realize most of our congregation was. It was a family integrated church with Sunday school taking place before and after services. My sunday school teacher years later actually did confirm to me she was quiverful. With that said I knew girls in their late teens were having sex from my church without birth control and without being married. I personally drove several girls to Planned Parenthood without the knowledge of those in the church for me birth control is the best solution. I saw one too many shotgun weddings that ended in abuse and neglect and felt a personal duty to be part of the solution. I hate abortion but I also hate women who ignore the risks associated with pregnancy and motherhood, a politician mandating what I do with my lady parts, and women who are exploited by of a lack of proper sexual education.

  • Jennifer

    Amen Madame. But DS children actually usually do a lot better than children with other disabilities. Even I, however, might decide adoption’s better for the baby too. And you’re right, this is all totally different from ectopic pregnancies. One among many factors is that, in the latter, the baby’s doomed in just about every case I’ve ever heard or read about, so sacrificing the mother’s life would do no good even if she WANTED to. Another factor is that, because of this, doctors generally just have to induce labor, and thus let nature take its course; it’s nothing like the horrors of partial birth. A friend of mine, a nurse did this, and wrote a prime response to the Vision Forum’s ugly and ignorant condemnation of women who chose to do this. But like so many on the severe opposite side, some people on LAF were not interested in the truth either, and refused to publish my link to her article and refutation of the VF’s nasty post on the matter.

  • Jennifer

    If PP is the only option for girls having careless sex and not being educated on just about anything (thus exacerbating their stupid actions), that’s just damned terrifying. This is why I do support bc and after-morning pills if bc fails to be there somehow, and why I hate most abortions that take place; I don’t see how anyone can condemn after-morning pills or condone late abortions! Or any type that ends a tiny child’s life. And this middle ground, when coming into contact with extremists from either side, becomes either lonely or infuriating.

    I just love how strangers from both sides tell me simultaneously how cold-hearted and unnatural a woman I am, the libs for “hating women” and the conservatives for “hating babies”! One of these days, I fear I’ll curse someone out.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    That is seriously one of the most ridiculous ideas I’ve ever read on this site. Please go take some basic biology lessons at your local community college. Fish suffocate on dry land because they have GILLS not lungs and gills can only extract oxygen from water, not air.

    Fetuses, on the other hand, receive already extracted from the air by the MOTHERS lungs oxygen via the umbilical cord. That is neither breathing or oxygen exchange via gills. Unborn do not have gills, the cord is not like a scuba mask and hose to the oxygen tank. Unborns do not breath, the breathing mechanism that all humans have does not start until moments after birth.

  • Madame

    I am absolutely for responsible parenting and contraception.

    I am also against the government meddling in such intimate affairs. It actually goes against responsible parenting!

    I think I understand this last part:

    “I hate abortion but I also hate women who ignore the risks associated
    with pregnancy and motherhood, a politician mandating what I do with my
    lady parts, and women who are exploited by of a lack of proper sexual
    education.”

    But, do you really hate the women?

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    From the American Medical Association website – “Babies do not actually breathe in the womb—at least, not in the usual
    sense. Fetal lungs are not fully functional, and are not even able to
    fully expand, until after birth. During the later stages of gestation,
    the fetus may “practice” breathing by inhaling and exhaling amniotic
    fluid. The fetal lungs do not process the amniotic fluid, the way fully
    formed lungs process air, but experts believe this “breathing” is
    important to fetal lung development. The fetus gets all of its oxygen
    and nutrients through the placenta and umbilical cord—a process called
    fetal circulation.”

  • Independent Thinker

    Sorry, emotional topic but no I don’t hate the women. I hate the fact that women ignore the risks of associated with pregnancy and motherhood. For example a mother who has had severe postpartum psychosis ignoring the warnings of her OBGYN and psychiatrist attempting another pregnancy when she has four children already. I hate the fact that she is putting the health of her unborn child at risk and her current family. I don’t hate the person I hate the choice and the impact on her family. I should have paid more attention to how I worded the last part. I also should have expanded upon the fact that a proper sexual education would included information on birth defects and how advanced maternal age has a directly impacts the chances of having a child with a birth defect.

  • Independent Thinker

    In the scientific community there is still a bit of a debate on is autism present at birth or does the condition surface during the child’s development. We haven’t figured that out yet so being able to tell in womb if autism is present is certainly impossible.

  • Jennifer

    I never said fish have LUNGS, Suzanne, I said they BREATHE, which they do. Please try to speak to me in a respectful tone, especially before you assume I know nothing of biology. And you just confirmed my main point here: fetuses receive air. Actually that’s my subpoint: my main one is that they have functioning organs which suffer and feel pain if you pierce or tear them apart.

    “not in the usual
    sense. Fetal lungs are not fully functional, and are not even able to
    fully expand, until after birth. During the later stages of gestation,
    the fetus may “practice” breathing by inhaling and exhaling amniotic
    fluid. The fetal lungs do not process the amniotic fluid, the way fully
    formed lungs process air, but experts believe this “breathing” is
    important to fetal lung development. The fetus gets all of its oxygen
    and nutrients through the placenta and umbilical cord—a process called
    fetal circulation.””

    Thank you for illustrating this all the more fully.

  • Jennifer

    I agree with your statements here totally, IT. Women and mothers have responsibility. I don’t judge women with big families, I think they’re blessed, but I admit even as a Christian I felt very impatient with Michelle Duggar’s dismissal of doctor’s advice.

  • Jennifer

    I don’t see where that article shows that conservatives would somehow dislike a viable care system. It’s revealing all right, proving that Christians who claim the Bible says life begins at conception are incorrect and that many used the issue as a platform, just like so many rad libs try to use any inequality women face as such. I appreciate its honesty about the motives of the early conservatives moving into this matter. It’d be nice if more could forget about politics and focus on facts, science and circumstances.

  • Lauren Borrero

    I think it’s sad too. People act like children with disabilities are inconvienent. Not all but some.

  • Catherine

    Information on support groups for victims of abuse.

    I would have no objection to my child receiving information about birth control. I fail to see how ANYONE would find this objectionable.

    My experience has been that those who yell the most loudly about kids receiving “improper knowledge” (ie birth control, or even elementary talks about good and bad touching) are the most likely to be the ones whose kids need it. Had I been sheltered as many QF and not aware that PP was a valuable resource instead of just a baby-killing factory, I might not have known where to look. Even worse, I might have thought that what I was subjected to was normal.

  • Catherine

    Some clinics have to charge extra for anesthesia (depends on the state), which some women cannot afford and thus choose to go without.

  • Catherine

    I would be!

    Hell, I’m pro-life but I think it’s ridiculous to claim to be pro-life and then cut every single support system that makes it possible to sustain that life. Buncha damn hypocrites.

  • Jennifer

    Oh Lord, that explains it. Thanks for the info Catherine.

  • Jennifer

    Because PP sometimes panders to young children Catherine, and parents often see some of the marketing as open doors for sexual acitivities without marriage or emotional protection.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Jennifer – please keep to the ideas and not continue to pick on individual posters. As the site admin I’d hate to have to stop allowing your comments through.

  • Jennifer

    I don’t want to pick on anyone Suzanne, and even after trying to explain my past experiences, I’ve had ugliness thrown in my own face and my own honesty questioned. I wish to abide by site regulations, so if you could contact me and give me some specifics of what post(s) particularly you find offensive I’d appreciate it. Thanks.

  • Catherine

    Do you have proof of the “pandering”, other than just the mere fact that they exist?

  • Jennifer

    They have lollipops with their logo on it for kids, and a documentary described how they often speak to kids without their parents present.

  • Jennifer

    A lot of conservatives hate public school for reasons that have nothing to do with racism, but by what so many are now teaching kids. Not to mention the shootings; that has nothing to do with politics, of course, but talk about becoming graveyards for children; I’ve lost count of the recent stories now! If we’re discussing racism, you may also want to look into the despicable founder of Planned Parenthood incidentally. I can’t speak for all conservatives, but I’m pretty sure Beck is against this new healthcare because..well, the disastrous outcomes thus far have been even beyond what those like him predicted.

    “They’re just like dead babies. They’re on the inside of the
    womb. And these wombs of women who have been on the birth control pill effectively have become graveyards for lots and lots of little babies”

    Oh GEEZ Swanson, get yourself a hanky and join the equally ignorant Doug Phillips as he condemns ending ectopic pregnancies, and the hysteria-ridden Geoff Botkin, as he mourns over the non-existent children birth control prevented. Lord, these WOMEN with beards (or in Swanson’s case, smooth-skinned nerd face. I’m done being nasty now).

  • gimpi1

    Glad to hear it, Catherine! I respect consistency. Now, a follow-up if you can; do you find your stance common among your pro-life friends?

    I have to say, in my experience, that is not the norm, but my experience could be skewed. Because of my background, I tend to be a bit sensitive to issues of disability and societal support.

    People who have this “saintly martyr” image of the disabled and their caregivers seem to want to see families like mine suffer. They appear to believe denying governmental support makes the disabled and their caregivers more “independent”… as if that was on your mind when you’re desperate and struggling with a burden they can’t understand. I have had “pro-life” supporters tell me that people like my parents, “simply shouldn’t be here.” They won’t suggest killing them, nothing like that, but they should somehow just vanish, so they won’t require “evil’ social services. As to private charity for long term disability, it’s all but worthless. The need is too great, and lasts too long. Perhaps that’s why I find your consistency refreshing.

    Well, I’ve ran pretty far afield, here. I’m off my hobby horse.

  • Jennifer

    Ugh, what awful people! I’m so sorry you went through that.

  • Jennifer

    I’m not fond of Mary Pride either, but I agree some of the PS educational expectations are wayward (the main thing being the FCAT). I think a better example of the weirdo stuff patrios say about education can be found in one of the Sproul’s books; the man praised this little girl about seven at the youngest who would fix her siblings breakfast, get them dressed, their teeth brushed..and couldn’t read. Wow, an illiterate maid already. And hey..I knew Doug Phillips was weird. But not even I had a full grasp until I came across some articles linked to one here last night that described his views of “female education”, his handling of two of his wife’s childbirths and a few other things I had no idea about. Lolly, I hope you’re not of the belief that anything conservatives do is based on racism, and I’m afraid conservatives can’t be blamed for the blatant problems this new system has. Sanger wasn’t just racist btw, she wanted abortion clinics near black neighborhoods to lower their population; if we’re going to pay attention to the racism of conservs in anything like pro-life (which you didn’t dismiss based on it being a time when everyone was racist), we’ll have to do the same for the opposite side. This country does need to find a balance between keeping people dependent on government and helping the truly needy, not to mention knowing the difference between people who do one or the other. Thanks for the link to the pro-choice site btw; I was somewhat leery, and have heard from multiple sources that birth control can increase the risk of cancer (though I’d wager it depends on the type and trust my own doctor, even though I dumped the horrid stuff months ago), but the behavior described in that article was extremely reprehensible.

  • Jennifer

    So basically, conservatives just hate everything and anything less advantaged or not white? If that’s your position, that’s such an incredibly sweeping brush, I’d be amazed if you expected people to be “fair-minded” about different liberals in turn. The fact is that many blacks are doing worse than they used to be and a great deal of this is because their families suffer and fathers are absent; you may wish to visit the “Blacksphere” website, where conservative blacks show that not all of them appreciate being kept on welfare or encouraged to even try it; one man speaking on the matter called the aggressively growing welfare system the new plantation. Have you seen the film Precious? It’s a surprisingly honest film about the low expectations some black kids of this generation are expected to hang onto; many public schools now, adding to the problem, are allowing under-educated kids to pass through grades with several of the qualifications remaining unmet.

    “Show me one Planned Parenthood leader, doctor, nurse, employee or volunteer, or even article on their website, today or even in the last 50 years, that says, or even hints, that they believe that PP should be placed in black neighborhoods to control the black population.”

    If they did, do you think they’d be stupid enough to say so in public? And if one member of it did, others would be sweeping it under the rug, including most of the media. As for the insurance matter, even if the conservatives didn’t do enough to help improve it, THEY are not the authors or creators of it; those who are prefer to be exempt, claim the president said some things he never actually said, and the system itself is being complained about now by more liberal news sources. In short, it’s bleeding through the ears, and those who only wish to see fault with one side will always sidestep around one’s blatant mistake and blame the other instead for not fixing it. It’s stuff like that that makes me strongly consider becoming an independent voter.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    The problem with racism and some fundamentalists, such as Mary Pride and Nancy Campbell is that they’ve both spoken out on Facebook recently about outbreeding ‘foreigners’ with non-Christian religions being one of the big motivating factors in their decisions to support Quiverfull. Do it because you love children or you really believe you’re supposed to be fruitful and multiply but don’t do it just to make more white Christians to take over the world.

  • Jennifer

    I’d say it’s very unlikely white anybodies are taking over the world, but I fully believe the VF is largely racist, or at least has some of the most powerful members in racism. Remember the fiasco with the Epstein family who the VF booted out? There was evidence of racism on both sides, but both denied it; yet nobody cared at all about denying bad sexism against women. And do you know what a defender of the VF said as a refute against the charge of racism? “Please, they have black members working in the group!” Ahh, so a company isn’t racist if it has blacks working for it. *cough* plantation owners *cough*

  • Jennifer

    “Well, it’s the conservatives who keep trying to find people
    who are more and more and more conservative, they’re the ones who throw out the moderates. I’m just following along.”

    I’d say the opposite is occuring too.

    “It’s more like they see people falling into a hierarchy, much like they say men should lead, women should follow. Everyone should know where they belong, and some people just shouldn’t be able to participate in the system the same way others do, because it’s God’s natural order.”

    Yes, some people are like that; some try to put Jesus in an order under God the Father.

    “Yes they are so much worse off now than say before the civil rights movement”

    Before? No, but even shortly after? The crime rate is far higher now, with more welfare, than it was in the 50s when they still faced more dangerous racism than they do now. And why? A great deal of it again traces to intact families.

    “now NCLB is continuing to bleed the public school system and spend money on companies that write tests and distribute tests and collect, grade and report on tests”

    The public school system is probably fractured more now than ever before, yet people insist on continually shoving kids with barely passable skills along instead of teaching them properly, usually in the name of “equality”. No surprise at all people are abandoning it in favor of homeschool.

    “Except …. when Bush passed Medicare Part D that the dems fought bitterly against.”

    Rather like so many have fought bitterly against this healthcare. As for Bush, people predicted eventually he’d be blamed for this HC mess, and looks like they were right..

    “a carbon copy of the ACA was implemented by Mitt Romney in Massachusetts and deemed a success”

    What works for a small group of people, rather like socialism, hasn’t appeared to be working for much larger areas like our entire country. Some have been assisted by it, others are being crippled by it, and the fact that other presidents have screwed up before doesn’t make Obama’s avalanche of a plan any more viable or himself any more successful, in a country that’s now further in debt than it’s ever been before.

    In the meantime, I ask that we return to the issue of this article, while we’re ahead. It’d probably be easier on both our blood pressures.

  • Jennifer

    Homeschooling is not at all new, numerous kids were primarily taught by their parents or tutors at home historically and yes, there’s been a resurgence now that’s practiced by Christians of all colors and for often painfully obvious reasons that have nothing to do with racism.

  • Nea

    I’d say it’s very unlikely white anybodies are taking over the world

    Tell it to the British Empire.

  • Saraquill

    You broke a rule of the blog, and harmed your credibility by personally attacking those who are politely disagreeing with you. Calling it sarcasm comes across as a paper thin excuse to be hateful.

  • Jennifer

    Politely disagreeing? I’ve been accused of not being compassionate, educated or fair-minded and this is what you imagine to be polite? Both my tone and that of others here has fluctuated between irritated and calm which is unsurprising considering the different issues, and I’ve tried more than once to explain my position calmly and why I feel this way. Your willing misreading of my intentions, tone and entire purpose here just harms your credibility with me. If anyone’s a victim of my words, you’ve made yourself thus.

  • Jennifer

    Well, I am unfamiliar with this branch. Anyone who chose homeschooling in order to snub the idea of associating their children with black children would be in a minority so small as to be beneath my radar.

  • Jennifer

    You mean the socialistic country that was almost covering the globe way back when? And now becoming filled with Muslims, like France, Holland and China. Wow, how things have changed.

  • Jennifer

    Saraquill, as I write this my first response to you is in moderation and probably won’t be posted until the early hours when I’m still asleep, so I’ll apologize in advance for the harshness of it. I never intended to insult you, and in fact since I suffer from some struggles myself, I don’t consider you a fragile class of victim I need to step around. I am still completely in the dark as to how you think I insulted you and people like you by advocating for giving them a chance at life, and even more amazed at your definition of the majority of posts here to me as polite. Being between a lot of liberal and conservative ideas, I’m used to some rudeness or verbal abuse/mistrust, but calling the majority of disagreements with me polite is just silly; I don’t really care what strangers say to me esp if they support something that’s been proven to be very heinous to me, but I get more annoyed when my words are misconstrued with no clear reason in sight. I’ll try to explain this once more: my comment about your parents being selfish in having you was sarcastic because my WHOLE point has been that parents giving life to a disabled child are brave and selfless and should be treated as such. Do you understand this now? I said this after someone said it wouldn’t even be compassionate for a mother to bring such a child to term, something I have a hard time reading. If you were offended on the topic, I’d find it very surprising that I’m the sole person you’d be offended by.

  • Jennifer

    “Then there’s the non religious conservatives, because “we know they’re not all like that”, but since they all go by the same name, we have to address every single variance, faction and branch and individual”

    I speak of radical conservatives, narrow-minded ones, smart ones, traditional ones, as well as radical liberals, moral liberals, political liberals or sexual liberals. Actually yes, it can be frustrating; sometimes it’s too bad they don’t all have labels, as much as my liberal aunt hates them.

    “Then there’s Mary Pride, an influential leader who is appalled at the requirement that public schools educate all children. Also, there are their loud vocalizations of persecution of Christians. But the real tell are statements like “look at what your tax dollars are going to”.”

    Your question of what else is going on is very valid. I doubt that tax question’s racist; the concern of many, from the more ridiculous like Phillips to the more sensible, is tax dollars going to things like abortion clinics, birth control on demand (for those by all appearances capable of buying it themselves), accommodating illegal immigrants, etc. Even going to government schools, one friend told me, since she doesn’t believe in them. However, it is a shame people like the one you quoted speak as though the entire world outside their small nook consists of evil. I watched a good documentary by the Christian Gunn brothers about their concern for public schools, and while the homeschoolers’ claims about public school seem outlandish, and some of them are, things HAVE gotten progressively worse; I’ve gotten downright terrified of all the shooting stories I’ve heard in just the last year and a half, and there are very active attempts to curttail Christianity in place of sometimes ridiculous “progressive” ideas, while the number of kids raised as Christian leaving the church after years in public school is a rising statistic. I still share my own story of absolutely loving school, cherishing the memories of my freely run, Christian-filled public schools with my most conservative friends and I hope if I have kids I’ll be able to find schools like them. But I’m starting to doubt it more and more. And inspite of these problems, I can already say I agree about some “homers” tearing down public schools and more, a good deal of their workers, to what seems like an obnoxious degree; while most of their concerns are valid, the practice of those like Doug Phillips to tear down anything not of his own group is part and parcel of their controlling doctrine and attempts to win more dollars for themselves. You see it every time: “Public schools are corrupt, check out OUR (costly) resources for homeschooling!” “The American Girl company supports Planned Parenthood and cannot be trusted; look at OUR Beautiful Girlhood collection of lovely dolls and books!” “Beth Moore is simply not the best role model for women with her constant travels away from home..check out OUR books by Nancy Campbell, Mary Pride and of course the bestselling Passionate Housewives desperate for God”.. The list goes on.

    Thank you for your clarifications, Lolly, you’ve made a lot of good points and it’s an interesting read.

    “The timing is interesting though, between the article about
    the Bob Jones University lawsuit released just a couple of days ago, plus Suzanne’s comment about Mary and Nancy’s latest revelations on Facebook.”
    I’m sorry, I have a bad headache, but did you already cover this in your post(s)? If not, please, do tell. If so, I’ll wait till my brain recovers and scroll up some.

  • Jennifer

    Thank you a lot, Lolly! I am feeling better 🙂 and it has been an interesting discussion for me too, and thank you for the link and other info. I’ve found that places like the Vision Forum use a lot of their anti-causes to turn around into business for themselves; Doug Phillips even offered a link to one of his OWN DVDs about nature in the middle of a rant against James Cameron and his “un-Christian” Avatar (“The Galapegos Islands, NOW in Blu-ray!”). It gets pretty shameless sometimes, but a common pattern of cults and sects (which I’ve been reading books about escape from lately) is to tell their followers that what the outside world offers is inferior to their own brand of beliefs and whatever THEY have to give.

    I’m sorry your own experience in school was bleh, which some of my very conservative friends remind me is true for many others, but very glad your kids enjoy it 🙂 I’ll have to revisit my elementary school very soon.

  • Catherine

    What is the name of this documentary?

  • Catherine

    I, um, don’t actually have any friends who are pro-life. Most are very vehemently pro-choice but still share my beliefs regarding the need for a better support system.

  • Jennifer

    The Monstrous Regiment, I believe, by the Gunn brothers. I don’t agree with all of it at all, but other than a few clips where a few of the women share their own traditional views of women’s places, the interviews and research cover extremely important and relevant issues.

  • Catherine

    Yes, I’m sure it’s TOTALLY non-biased and presents only the facts. /sarcasm

  • Jennifer

    I was answering your question, there’s no need for you to be snarky towards me. I may not care for some of the views of the people they interviewed, but that’s one thing they have in common with me; the Gunn brothers often interview people on the other side of the issue, people they disagree with, and they did so here and in both their other films, including a Planned Parenthood current worker and a woman who used to be in the abortion business.

    Edit: Actually, I’m sorry, I gave you the title of the wrong documentary. The one called “The Monstrous Regiment” DOES feature the segment where they talk about PP speaking to kids as well as interviews with a worker there and a former employee in the abortion business. The one mentioning the lollipops, though, is a totally separate film about their concerns with government education, called “Indoctrination” which has nothing at all to do with the topic of women.

    I’ve hated the Vision Forum and places like that for years now, and spent a great deal of the time searching for the truth in the Bible and the practices in history, contrary to many things they believe but especially the matters of women’s “places”. But not everyone who’s ever associated themselves with the VF are corrupt or unreliable, and I’ve become pretty adept at sifting out anything valuable Christian writers or filmmakers have to offer; the Gunn brothers may be more “radical” than me in some issues, but they are excellent at research and offering commentary from people on the opposite side as well, and they are genuine Christians.

  • Lucreza Borgia

    You do realize that the fetus is killed with an injection straight to the heart before any of these other procedures happen, right?

  • Lucreza Borgia

    If the woman is sedated, how does the fetus feel pain? They don’t do late-term abortions on unsedated women. That’s not even touching on the fact that an injection into the heart to stop it is done first before the fetus is removed.

  • Lucreza Borgia

    My job is as a personal care worker to adults with developmental and mental disabilities. Life for many of them is not pretty once they get old enough to be technical adults. Out of the 8 clients I work with, only 2 have real contact with their family and even that contact is extremely sporadic. Do they have lives? Somewhat, but as they age and get older, they become more and more isolated with only staff as their bond and, in this field, staff revolves in and out faster than the retail industry. Once the parent’s die, typically they have no family to help them. They don’t get out into the community much because budgets for such programs are tight. Unless they can work, but then sometimes they make too much money to qualify for benefits that would enable them to go do the things they really want to do.

  • Jennifer

    I know if that’s the case, it hasn’t always been the only method, and find killing a fetus that way horrible too.

  • Jennifer

    They’ve done some pretty horrible things before where the child and mother felt pain, like saline abortions.

  • Jennifer

    Thank God they have some options.