They’re Asking Too Much.
— Posted by Christina (March 12, 2008 at 8:10 pm)
Once again, election year is upon us, already! Once again, we’re eagerly watching the presidential candidates and giving our favor to one or another. And once again, this year’s election will be very important to the future of our country.
What are the thoughts of us young people as we watch the presidential candidates in their efforts to win the presidency?
Many young people are looking for a person truly fit to lead America, a person in whom they can put their trust for a secure and happy future, a person who will value each and every one of them who are America’s future. I too am looking for such a person to be our next president.
Two Senators who are currently hoping for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, have often promised wonderful things to America and to her young people: education for every child, an end to the war in Iraq, a better economy, preservation of America’s energy, and the list goes on. So shouldn’t they have the support of us young people?
It would seem that they should by how they talk, but if you look at their Senate voting records, you would see that they in fact MUST NOT have your vote!
Why? What horrific reality about the way they voted in the Senate makes them so completely undeserving of your vote?
This is it: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton support abortion, the #1 KILLER of our generation! How can we trust them?!
At this point, if you’re a young person, aren’t you feeling personally very insulted? Just think, Obama and Clinton have said that they would not be at all concerned if you would have been killed when you were a little baby!
When you needed their support the most. When you needed protection and a voice the most. When you needed them to stand up for your inalienable rights the most, because you were defenseless.
If that is the best that they could give you, as your representatives, when you needed their protection and support so much, when you needed their representation the most, how are they qualified to be your leader now? How much will they care about you now? Did they ever care about you in the first place?
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are asking for the votes of all of us young people, us who they said could be killed, and it would not matter to them. They want us to support them now and trust their leadership and judgement after having failed us as much as they could in their positions.
Aren’t they asking a little too much out of us?
We’re used to people expecting a lot out of us, expecting great things from us, having high hopes for us. But since when can someone expect us to trust him/her after they’ve placed no value on our lives? That’s way too far.
Obama and Clinton are loading our TV’s, newspapers, and internet with their promises of a bright future for America, with their messages about how precious we young people are and how they will help us so much. Why do they bother to tell us how much they care about us when they support abortion, the #1 killer of our generation?
All the unborn children who are right now in their mothers’ wombs will one day be young people like each of us, a bright future for America and the world. Let’s stand up for their lives.
Next time Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton asks for your vote, ask them how you can trust them when they place no value on your life. They themselves have said that they would have been completely unconcerned if your life would have been unjustly and violently taken when you were an innocent, defenseless baby with an inalienable right to life.
God bless.
This entry is filed under Abortion, Law & Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Miss March says:
Many very good points Christina! For those of us who are under 35 years of age, the campaigns of pro-abortion politicians just doesn’t make sense. They want are vote now, but what they support could have taken our lives, and a vote for them, away.
Thanks for the great article! God bless!
In the Love of Christ,
Jo March
Comment posted March 13th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Gianna says:
So true Christina!
If Obama and Hillary can’t protect the life of a little innocent baby, how are they supposed to protect you?
As you said, they didn’t protect us in the womb, how are they going to protect us now?
Obama says he stands for “change,” but he supports 35 years of legal abortion and 50 million dead babies, how is that “change”?
We must support our pro-life candidates and encourage others to do this same!
Comment posted March 13th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
sensiblethoughts says:
NO, YOU are wrong. The biggest killers are these war mongers who just want you to have more soldiers for endless wars. You have them, rear them, educate them, then let them send them off to their deaths in NEEDLESS WARS!
Comment posted March 14th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Elizabeth says:
Sensiblethoughts,
The last time *I* checked….the army is VOLUNTEER…if you don’t want to go off in “needless” wars, DON’T SIGN UP!
Comment posted March 15th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Quinn says:
Wow, sensiblethoughts! Could you be any more mindless!?
The number of US troops who have died in the Middle East over the last 6 years or so is less than 7,000 people.
In the USA we murder over 3,000 babies every day on average.
Anti-war folks don’t care about human life or hold it sacred or “respect” human life. If they did they would be using their time and energy to bring an end to the senseless slaughter of 3,000+ babies each day in the USA.
Comment posted March 17th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Quinn says:
I remember back in 2003 Eric Scheidler saying that if we didn’t vote for Bush that we would be throwing our vote away and helping a Democrat become president.
I am curious whether Eric still has this belief with McCain running for president. Is not voting for McCain really throwing your vote away?
Comment posted March 17th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Greg says:
Elizabeth, if only it were that easy. The military is volunteer, sure, but sometimes joining the military is the only option to make it anywhere in life. The military offers a career, community service, full college tuition, a source of income. To some that consider themselves socially and economically disadvantaged, joining the military IS the only way to make it.
Your argument is no excuse for an unjustifiable war.
Quinn, did you know that some of the biggest opponents to the War in Iraq were John Paul II and Benedict XVI?
I, along with many others who believe in a consistent life ethic, won’t submit to your stereotype - that we have to sacrifice some innocent lives in an attempt to save other innocent lives.
Comment posted March 19th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Quinn says:
Well, Greg, the so-called consistent ethic of life is itself inconsistent with God’s revealed word when it comes to justice and defending the innocent - which sometimes requires the execution of convicted capital criminals or engaging in war to protect and defend the innocent (which is who our troops are defending in Iraq with greater success each month thanks to the surge).
Whenever I hear someone use the term “consisten ethic of life” or “consistent life ethic” that tells me that they are almost certainly biblically illiterate. And it also tells me that they probably claim the OPPOSITE of what God claims about the death penalty. Namely, that the death penalty which God told the world to use for punishing murderers, upholds the fact that God created man in His image.
Genesis 9:6 “Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in THE IMAGE OF GOD He made man.
Instead of a “consistent ethic of life” you should have a “consistent ethic of justice” because bringing about justice is more important to God then having everyone die from natural causes. If it weren’t so then God would never have told us that the only just punishment is to execute (deprive of life) criminals convicted of murder, rape, kidnapping and adultery. And yes, its the only just punishment for those crimes. God does not give “options” to give other punishments to bring about justice (as Catholic priests claim all the time without providing evidence and contrary to God saying “he shall surely be put to death”). You have to execute them in order to bring about justice. Imprisonment doesn’t bring about justice.
Bringing about justice will bring about a greater respect for life according to God’s design.
FYI - The US criminal justice system is extremely unjust and is in no way as good as or better than God’s criminal justice system.
ALSO there is much New Testament support for the daeth penalty from Jesus Christ, Paul and others. They do not hold to a “consisten ethic of life” and neither does God. Read the proof here http://www.theologyonline.com/DEATH.HTML
Comment posted March 19th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Greg says:
Quinn, first of all, who said anything about God??
This is the problem with too many in the pro-life movement. You assume God and the Bible and Christianity are good starting points when debating for the pro-life cause in the public square.
What if I just so happen to be a pro-life atheist? Am I any less of a pro-lifer than you because of it?
It’s absurd to believe that one must understand the Bible in order to be pro-life. I don’t know where you gathered that I was a Christian - unless you think that argument is suppose to work with everyone. (btw, I had mentioned the popes being against the war merely to cite that there are adamant pro-lifers who flat-out opposed the U.S. invasion into Iraq)
Secondly, the way you speak about the war in Iraq lends me to believe you only obtain your information from Fox News and other conservative sources. I agree with you that war is sometimes necessary to protect or defend, but that is not what is happening in Iraq. Not to mention the fact that the U.S. did not place all of their options on the table when they decided it was a good idea to just invade and bomb.
Comment posted March 20th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Greg says:
btw, I am Christian, but I don’t use my Catholic beliefs to forward the pro-life cause as much as I use my God-given recognition of natural law.
Comment posted March 20th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Christina says:
Greg,
Pope John Paul II did not expressly oppose the Iraq War. Many people believe that he did because the words he used were misinterpreted by the media for their news articles.
This is in reality what happened:
When asked by President Bush for his opinion on whether or not the U.S. should go to war, Pope John Paul II said that war should be only a last resort and should be avoided if at all possible. He recognized, however, that he was not in the position of President Bush and therefore did not know all that Bush knew about the situation. He expressly left the ultimate decision of the war up to President Bush. His advice to the President equaled this: If you go to war, be sure that it is a just war and is the last resort for the U.S. against unjust aggresssion. This shows that the Pope only opposed the Iraq War if it was going to be an unjust war. If it was going to be a just war, he would not oppose it but would uphold the right of the U.S. to go to war. Since the Pope was not President and thus did not know as much as Bush did on the matter of war with Iraq, he could not say whether or not the Iraq War is unjust, and therefore did not oppose or support it. He could only give his best guidance to the President.
Another proof that Pope John Paul II did not know whether the Iraq War was unjust or not is this: He did not forbid Catholic soldiers to fight in this war.
God bless.
Comment posted March 20th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Miss March says:
Quinn,
Though I do agree with you on just punishment, I do think there is a problem with the death penalty in our country, though it might not be expressly contrary to the Bible. The main problem is our courts are (often) not always right and many innocent men have died because of this.
When our country perfects justice than we can punish criminals as God intended. But until we can render as just a decision as God, I think we should leave punishment up to Him.
Finally, though there is much in the Bible about just punishment, and even the death penalty, there is also many stories of the MERCY of God. Take the account of the women caught in adultery. Though in another place (as you quoted) God said those caught in adultery should be killed, Jesus forgave the woman saying, “Whichever of you is without sin may cast the first stone.” I think that is what it comes down to, the balance of justice and mercy of which Our Lord Jesus Christ is the perfect example.
Christina:
Interesting comment. My dad often brings up the fact that Pope John Paul II was opposed to the war whenever we get into a politics debate (which more often than not turns toward the war). I’ll have to show him what Pope John Paul II actually said. =)
God bless you all on this Holy Thursday!
Comment posted March 20th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Miss March says:
One more thing I thought of, though slightly off topic:
Isn’t it ironic that around the world the USA is trying to fight terroism, when we are doing a better job of killing Americans than terrorists? 3,000 Americans killed each day…in the name of “choice.” Just something to think about…
Blessed Triduum and Joyous Easter to you all! May Christ, who conquered death conquer the culture of death in our world today!!
Comment posted March 20th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Mike says:
I personally believe if we don’t stop abortion in our country, then the wars will never end abroad. Why would God intervene to prevent wars from occuring when America will not stop the war of Abortion at home?
As far as the election, I can’t support either Obama, Clinton or McCain. Obama voted to kill babies who are born by voting against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Therefore, Obama’s not only avid Pro-Abortion but also Pro-Infanticide.
Clinton’s known as being avid Pro-Abortion.
McCain stated he would never overturn Roe v Wade and supports killing human embryo’s.
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02/marykay_the_vid.html
Therefore I cannot support or vote for any of these candidate.
By the way, I am a few years over 35, Pro-Life, Against Capital Punishment in America and Against the War in Iraq. I realize abortion is by far the most important issue of our day!
Mike
Comment posted March 20th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Greg says:
Christina, I can see how your argument would make sense if in fact Iraq could be proven to be a just war, but if it in fact is, then why has there been no official statement saying so? You could say it is because the pope did not know what Pres. Bush perhaps knows, but can this still be an excuse? We could go through an entire unjust war without any Church interference on that excuse.
I would have agreed with you during the beginning of the war, but as we see in hindsight, there were no WMD’s in Iraq, and thus no reason to immediately invade. We did not use war as a final resort. This is not a media warp of facts, it is common knowledge. Since we did not use it as a last resort, how is it not an unjust war?
Comment posted March 21st, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Christina says:
Greg,
I personally have not formed an opinion as to whether or not the War in Iraq is unjust. I feel like I do not have enough info on the war to make a good decision about it.
I have often been inclined to think that perhaps the war wasn’t the best thing, but I still refuse to make a definite decision because if the media is decieving us as they did during the Vietnam War, I do not want to be a victim of their deception. The media horribly decieved Americans during the Vietnam War, making that just war seem unjust.
Comment posted March 21st, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Christina says:
Mike,
Yep, you’re right that Obama supports infanticide. Sick! But when I visited McCain’s website, I read there that he supports the overturn of Roe v. Wade and does not believe in killing human embryos for stem cells.
Now, if it turns out that all the presidential candidates this year are in favor of abortion, it’s very true that none of us should feel that we have to vote for one of them. But at the same time, it’s a good idea to still vote, but vote for the candidate who will do the least damage in office. You can look at this kind of voting in the following way: You aren’t voting for that candidate because you support his views; you’re voting for him because you’re trying to keep the worse guy out of office. Fr. Frank Pavone has some wonderfully insightful reflections on this subject, and these can be read here: http://www.priestsforlife.org/elections/votingstatement.htm.
And also here: http://www.priestsforlife.org/elections/imperfectcand.htm
I hope this is helpful, and God bless.
Comment posted March 21st, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Mike says:
Christina,
McCain may now be saying he is for overturning Roe v Wade and against killing human embryo’s right now but I think he is doing this just to get Pro-Life votes. Once he’s in office he will no longer be Pro-Life. I do not really believe him.
In fact, if you check out the video link I posted in post #15, you will actually hear McCain state he would never overturn Roe v Wade and he’s for killing human embryo’s. McCain claims he’s Pro-Life but he has a worse voting record than Pro-Abortion supporter Al Gore on Pro-Life issues. This should tell us something.
Also, I don’t believe in voting for the “lessor of two evils” candidate. Voting for the “lessor of two evils” is still a vote for evil!
There may still be a 100% Pro-Life candidate running for President. If not, you can still write in a vote and concentrate more on the other seats.
Mike
Comment posted March 22nd, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Christina says:
Mike,
Thank you for giving this info on McCain. I will definitely look furthur into what he really stands for.
You’re very right in that McCain’s voting is an important key to what he really believes. It is through such voting that we know that Obama supports infanticide.
Human Life International’s website may have info on which candidates are pro-life. However, they may also not say anything about this until the Rebublican and Democratic parties choose their candidates.
On the side, do you know if Ron Paul is pro-life? One time he said something suspicious about the fact that he, being a doctor, delivered 4000 babies and therefore believes in choices. Was he trying to say that he believes in abortion?
God bless.
Comment posted March 23rd, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Kendra says:
Everyone is all angry saying that no one is speaking for the unborn child, well who’s speaking for the girl who doesn’t want to be pregnant? Who’s speaking up for the girl who was raped and doesn’t want to walk around with the evidence of it for nine months? Who’s speaking for the girl who could die from carrying a baby to term? You’re all talking about something that isn’t even in existance yet and you’re forgetting all about the other key person in the situation. That’s what is very disturbing to me.
Comment posted March 24th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Miss March says:
Kendra,
Once a baby is conceived, even if it is unwanted, even if it is through rape, that baby is a person and is existant. The important thing to understand, is pro-lifers care for the baby AND the woman. We want to help a woman in a difficult pregnancy. But we also want that baby to live, for it did nothing wrong! It does not deserve to die!
Those that are pro-abortion, however really do not care for the woman. They do not tell her that when having an abortion she will have side affects that will affect her for the rest of her life! These side affects include increased risk of breast cancer, an increased risk of being infertile later, and most importantly the guilt that she will have from killing her innocent child. In essence, the pro-life movement helps the woman and child, and the pro-abortion movement hurts the woman and kills the child.
God bless you!
In the Love of Christ,
Jo March
Comment posted March 24th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Kendra says:
Jo March,
Actually, you’re very incorrect in assuming that doctor’s who perform abortions don’t explain the side effects. I can’t speak for every Planned Parenthood or abortion clinic in the nation, but I know that in my city those two places are the only clinics that lay out all of the options. A First Choice Clinic or another place sponsored by a church or religious organization forces every patient to have an ultra-sound and listen the fetal heartbeat, obviously in an attempt to make the woman severely attached (ironic if they want adoption to be an option), even if that treatment is not desired.
The Planned Parenthood, in my experience, does NOT perform abortions; they discuss all of the options with the mother, abortion actually being the last thing they bring up as something to look in to. The abortion clinic, the only one in my state mind you, requires therapy before and after hand and gives very detailed descriptions of the risks and side effects of the procedure.
I think it’s very ignorant and awful to assume that all they care about is money when in fact; they are a doctor caring for a patient. I would never say that all pro-life advocates care about is judging and condemning people, basically that they pretend to be the voice of “God” or that they are above others, because I don’t believe that. It seems like you have it in your head that abortion clinics are these dirty, horrible places that perform unsafe procedures and hope for the woman to be deformed or hurt from what happens there, which is not only ridiculously melodramatic, it’s untrue.
Comment posted March 25th, 2008 at 8:01 am
John says:
Kendra said: “It seems like you have it in your head that abortion clinics are these dirty, horrible places that perform unsafe procedures and hope for the woman to be deformed or hurt from what happens there, which is not only ridiculously melodramatic, it’s untrue.”
Kendra,
I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that any of us have the idea that we believe abortions clinics “hope for the woman to be deformed or hurt from” abortion.
But as for the idea that many abortion clinics are kind of sketchy, there are plenty of examples of that.
See here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
And that’s just for starters.
If you want more, check out Christina Dunigan’s incomparably comprehensive and thoroughly documented Real Choice blog.
Comment posted March 25th, 2008 at 8:31 am
John says:
Kendra said: “Everyone is all angry saying that no one is speaking for the unborn child, well who’s speaking for the girl who doesn’t want to be pregnant?”
Kendra,
The idea that we must be forced to choose between advocating for either a mother or her child is foreign to us.
I’m sure we can agree that no woman wants to have an abortion. How, then, can an unwanted abortion be a solution to an unwanted pregnancy?
When we sidewalk counsel outside abortion clinics, we warn women about the dangers abortion poses to them personally. I would encourage you to check out our documentary on sidewalk counseling, No Greater Joy (which you can watch here), parts of which were filmed outside of some abortion clinics in Chicago, and which includes interviews with several mothers who had planned to have abortions but then decided to choose life for their babies instead after talking with sidewalk counselors.
I’d also suggest you check out the Feminists for Life website, which includes ample resources explaining why abortion is always harmful to women.
I’d especially recommend their Q & A Series, Pro-Woman Answers to Pro-Choice Questions.
Comment posted March 25th, 2008 at 8:57 am
ldawg says:
Christina
“I have often been inclined to think that perhaps the war wasn’t the best thing, but I still refuse to make a definite decision because if the media is decieving us as they did during the Vietnam War, I do not want to be a victim of their deception. The media horribly decieved Americans during the Vietnam War, making that just war seem unjust.”
Could you qualify this statement? I am confused as to what the media’s role in this deception was? I feel as though Vietnam from a historical perspective was a grave mistake.
Kendra, I think all of the young women who write on here are very well-intentioned, smart girls. I think in many ways they believe what they are saying and in fact will for the rest of their lives. Please operate with the understanding however that most of these girls have been educated in very conservative oftentimes religiously fervent households (literally, they are home-schooled) and obviously at their young ages have not had the life experience to understand these complex choices many of their older sisters face. All we can do is rest in the knowledge that there is other young women out there, that stand up for their right to educate themselves and to exercise their own choices about personal morality. I feel very comfortable knowing that these girls have access to the internet, which is a vast resource for education. I am reminded of the movie Jesus Camp continually, and it breaks my soul into pieces. Do not fault them, in fact cherish them for being passionate and seeking outlets for their passions. It is just my hope that girls like Miss March and Christina, never stop challenging themselves, never stop questioning, and never stop thinking.
Comment posted April 1st, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Elizabeth says:
Ldawg,
I find it amusing that you think women are only easily-influenced when they choose to oppose abortion. They are only rational and educated when they support what you think is right. I was not home-schooled, and really, my religious views have very little to do with my abortion views. I have examined both sides of the issue, and am aware that facing an unplanned pregnancy is a totally fearful situation. I’ve been in the situation. I do not, however, find ANYTHING wrong with empowering and supporting a woman to be a mother, even when the circumstances are challenging for her. I believe in telling her she “can” do it and helping her to in any way that I can. I don’t believe empowerment has to come at the expense of her unborn child.
Comment posted April 1st, 2008 at 10:38 pm
John says:
Ldawg said: “I am reminded of the movie Jesus Camp continually, and it breaks my soul into pieces. Do not fault them, in fact cherish them for being passionate and seeking outlets for their passions. It is just my hope that girls like Miss March and Christina, never stop challenging themselves, never stop questioning, and never stop thinking.”
Gosh, I too hope that Miss March, Christina, et al. never stop challenging themselves, never stop questioning, and never stop thinking.
For that matter, I hope that I never stop challenging myself, never stop questioning, and never stop thinking.
And, furthermore, I hope that you too, Ldawg, never stop challenging yourself, never stop questioning, and never stop thinking.
As for Jesus Camp, I haven’t seen it myself, but one Catholic guy I know fairly well and whose judgment on this sort of thing I’m inclined to trust has seen it; he says it’s probably a fairly accurate portrayal of a subset within a subset within a subset of the broader homeschooling community.
You might be surprised to know that there are a myriad of different pedagogies advocated and practiced by the millions of homeschoolers in our country, many of which are — for lack of a better term — rather “non-traditional”. Consider, for example, unschooling.
Comment posted April 2nd, 2008 at 8:36 am
ldawg says:
John,
Perhaps it is a subset of a subset of a subset. But perhaps it is not.
Perhaps it is a far broader movement.
I’m sure there are plenty of legit reasons to homeschool your children, but I think there are also plenty of reasons not to.
For instance, I think exposure to one teacher is extremely dangerous. I come from a family of teachers and have benefited greatly from having school at a public high school and a private Catholic university. The diversity of opinion and teaching styles has taught me a great deal about life as a social being but also as a student. My mother is plenty bright, and could probably teach me a great deal at home, I dare say it, maybe even more on some subjects, but my mother is not an expert in all subjects, nor does she contain all of the insights that my various teachers have given me. There is something very strong and positive to learning in an atmosphere with other students as well. I learned just as much from my peers as I did from my teachers.
Ultimately it’s a parent’s choice however. I am a strong believer in that. However, it doesn’t mean I ultimately as a citizen approve. http://www.flhef.org/pdf/2001033.pdf
According to the document linked above 38% of students homeschooled are homeschooled due to “religious reasons”. This religion could be Christian, Islamic, Wiccan, Judaism, or some other smaller religion, I disagree with raising one’s children this way and smothering his or her with their beliefs. It’s somewhat sick and arrogant to think that your children should become vessels to perpetuate your beliefs. We should have children not to perpetuate ourselves, but because we believe in the values intrinsic to life. Those values are self-discovery, experimentation, growth, challenge, and moral grappling. Yes I do believe children have even a unique ability even over adults to do this grappling on their own. I fear that the young women on this board have been bombarded since their birth with religious language, religious instruction, and programmed morals. I have no problem with their ideas, nor with Elizabeth’s if she thinks she rationally arrived there on her own. I am merely raising a flag that too often, in all walks of life not just religious, we see smothering parents. It could be parents like Lindsay Lohan’s that put their daughter on a stage for their own egos, parents that drive their public school students to overwork themselves to get high-grades, it’s the parents that don’t want their children to achieve for fear their kids may perform better than them, and like I said it’s these religious zealot parents that believe having children is a great way to perpetuate their own values. It’s sick and if I personally could end it, I would. This is not to say of course children should not be brought up in religious backgrounds, certainly not. I’m just saying that children should not be absolutely smothered with religious zeal to the point where it’s insane.
The unschooling thing seems interesting. However at 12 for instance, I was pulled a million directions, and I’m glad I was pulled. If I did what I wanted at 12 and continued to pursue it, I’d be in meteorology. If I did what I wanted at 13, I’d be making plays. If I did what I wanted at 14, I’d be a sports broadcaster. I had exposure to different people and experiences in public school, and I don’t think I should have had total control over what I learned. How was I to know what I should learn if I did not know what was out there? I’m all for unconventional education techniques and there’s no one-size-fits-all approach to education, but I’m all for giving our public schools the resources to meet the needs of every child.
Comment posted April 2nd, 2008 at 1:16 pm
ldawg says:
Elizabeth,
Is it wrong to guess that you think women who choose abortion have been pulled by some exterior force and it’s really not their decision? Girls, either way, what are we doing to ourselves? Isn’t it terrible that both side thinks the other is incapable of rationally coming to a decision? What does this say about our belief in womens’ ability to think rationally?
Comment posted April 2nd, 2008 at 1:20 pm
John says:
Ldawg said: “I’m just saying that children should not be absolutely smothered with religious zeal to the point where it’s insane.”
Holy straw man, Batman! That’s quite possibly the most inane thing I’ve heard all day.
To co-opt a catchphrase oft used by the “pro-choice” movement: Who decides (what constitutes “religious zeal to the point where it’s insane”)?
Comment posted April 2nd, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Elizabeth says:
Ldawg,
Having faced an unplanned pregnancy myself, I can almost exactly say what goes on in the brain of someone facing this sort of situation. It is scary, and often times, for very young girls, it is almost a “fight or flight” response. You either deal with it or you run away. And it may not even necessarily be that you want to run away from the baby. You want to run away from the situation of having to: tell the father of the baby, tell your parents, wonder how you’re going to be a mother and provide for a baby, and maybe continue on with school,etc. It is not at all an unreasonable thing to believe that a young girl feels overwhelmed with all these thoughts and thinks of the quickest way to get rid of all these thoughts….i.e. abortion. It does not mean that she is irrational or can not think for herself. It means she is scared and vulnerable. Often times, a little reassurance that she CAN do this and that there IS help out there is enough to help with the anxiety. I have always thought that saying, “can” is more empowering than telling a woman she “can’t” do something, don’t you? So instead of telling someone they “can’t” possibly be a mother because of a variety of reasons, what about telling her she “can?”
Comment posted April 2nd, 2008 at 11:19 pm
ldawg says:
I guess it goes by the Supreme Court standard of pornography… you know it when you see it.
Comment posted April 8th, 2008 at 5:55 pm