This Common Secret
OK, time for a serious post - I know that nobody really likes the serious post, but this one’s important, so quit moaning and read on.
Last week, A’Hottie wrote a post in response to an anti-choice message she received on her blog. In the post she mentioned, and quoted from, a book that she had just read, “This Common Secret: My Journey as an Abortion Doctor” by Susan Wicklund. Aside from being an amazing post from AH, it came at a time when I had just finished a book that I had struggled through, and a book that was my umpteenth piece of fiction I had read in a row. I was in need of some non-fiction, and so I jumped on Amazon to order “This Common Secret”.
The book arrived just as I was starting a week of work in DC - a week where I would be taking the train to and from the nation’s capital each day - the perfect set-up to dive into a new book. Now, I knew ’something’ about the politics of abortion and women’s reproductive rights before I met AH, and I knew a LOT more about it after being lucky enough to call her a friend in those first few months. She is very passionate about this field, but I think she does worry that it can consume too much of her conversation with friends, and she doesn’t want to force it on people 24/7. When we have discussed the subject, I’ve aways had the feeling that she was holding something back, and despite the frustration that was obvious as she talked, there was always ’something else’. A hidden something that I didn’t understand.
The hidden something that I didn’t understand, corresponds to the politics of reproductive rights, and the depth and anger of the anti-choice movement that I hadn’t quite grasped actually existed. Reading Susan Wicklund’s accounts of her life as an abortion doctor, and as a true figure-head in protecting a woman’s right to choose, opened my eyes in a way no book has ever done. Half of the book had me in tears - I’d like to say that I was unashamedly crying on the train, but that would be a lie. I struggled with an immense feeling of guilt, not only that I didn’t realize the extent of what was happening to women in this country, this supposed ‘advanced’ country of ours, to women who just want to exercise their right to choice, their right to choose the path their life will take, their legal right to all of this; not only that, but I also felt an overwhelming feeling of guilt about my own life - a life where I sit comfortably on a train or plane or in a car, heading to work as I have done since I was out of school. I don’t run the risk of being shot by someone who doesn’t think I should be doing my job. I don’t have to wear a disguise just to get to work. My family isn’t under constant threat because of my job. But those who are working to protect this basic, legal right of all women face these threats on a daily basis. They lose any sort of a normal lifestyle, constantly worrying about their safety, the safety of their families, the safety of the women who they are working to protect.
Susan Wicklund’s story on one hand makes me respect her, and people like her so much - and not just respect, but an admiration that simply leaves me breathless. But on the other hand, it makes me sick to my stomach that there should even be a need for such a harrowing story. It makes me appalled by this “human” race, and the people who hide behind God or their own ignorance to cast such hatred over their fellow neighbors, trying to force their own beliefs on every other person, and when their ignorance won’t change an opinion, using sickening methods to get their point across, even to the extreme of murder. It is a disgraceful state of this country, and even more disgraceful that the majority of this is swept under the carpet by most of the media.
And finally, it made me feel guilty that I didn’t fully appreciate everything about AH that I really should. Now, I’ve always admired her for her beliefs, and her passion to educate other people about women’s reproductive rights, but unless you fully understand the nature of what is going on in this world, you don’t fully understand everything that AH is doing, and everything that she wants to do with the rest of her life. I have always told her that she will make a difference in this field, and I push her very hard when it comes to talking about career paths and decisions, but after reading this book, it makes me want to ease off a little. I don’t want her to have a life like this - a life where she will be hated, threatened, and abused just for wanting to educate women, and show them that they have a choice about their future - that they have rights. But then that’s AH - she is passionate and unwavering about her core beliefs, and that is the very reason why she will make a difference. And now I understand a little more about that ‘hidden something’ that I always feel she holds back, and you know what, I understand why; this stuff will make you cry, without a doubt, and I can see that isn’t something you want to be doing to your friends on a weekly basis. Thanks for opening my eyes to this, AH.
I implore you all to read Susan Wicklund’s book - you will not regret it, and it will open your eyes as to the state of the country that we live in. I also implore you to show AH the support she deserves on her blog. And finally, I implore you to do whatever you can to help women who have to fight through these horrors just to exercise their legal rights.
Buy Susan’s book at Amazon here
Educate yourself:
Offer help:
Thanks Eddie. Talk about making a person cry! *sniffle*
But at the end of the abortion, the baby is still dead. *That* is what makes me cry — not the women who choose to get pregnant.
And here’s a few websites so you can educate yourself:
realchoice.blogspot.com
abortionfacts.com
abort73.com
Well, Kathy, obviously I’m going to disagree with you on the whole “baby” vs “tissue”, and I will just assume that you understand that nobody actually “chooses” to get pregnant, so I’m assuming that you’re referring to the fact that we should be ‘abstinent or make babies’, again a point that I would vehemently disagree with. And I’m sure that you’re smart enough to understand that contraception is not 100% successful, and that a large number of women who visit an abortion clinic did everything to prevent that pregnancy. And I’m sure that you are also aware that a large number of men women are so poorly educated that they don’t understand how to use contraception correctly. And I’m sure that you are also blindly ignoring the thousands of women who are raped, victims of incest, or whose lives are at risk if they go through with the pregnancy.
I visited the websites you listed, and it is the same anti-choice rhetoric that you see everywhere. I mean, the abortionfacts.com website even has the gall to suggest that if abortion was made illegal there would not be an increase in dangerous, illegal abortions, attempting to use Poland as an example. That is a horrifically shocking thing to say. Please tell me that you don’t believe that sort of ‘propoganda’?
Kathy, do me a favour - read the book, even if just to get a perspective from someone ‘on the other side’ - I think it might open your eyes to a few things.
When women have sex, they are choosing the act that causes pregnancy. You may not like it, but that’s the way life works, so you’ve got an argument with God or Mother Nature or whatever you want to say. If you don’t like to deal with the consequences of your actions, then at least be truthful about that. I’m sure that a large number of women who have abortions attempted everything EXCEPT HAVING SEX as a method of not getting pregnant. Every contraceptive or birth control can fail. As to the other points — rape, incest and maternal mortality — I will direct you to my blog (katsyfga.wordpress.com) where you can read my posts categorized under “abortion” where I deal with this more fully. The fact is that only an extremely small percentage of abortions are due to rape, incest, or to save the woman’s life. What of the other some 99% of abortions, done simply because a baby isn’t convenient but having sex is? Grow up. Accept responsibility for your actions — don’t kill a baby because you screwed up.
What is the difference between “tissue” and “baby” anyway?
As far as Poland goes — do you have any evidence that this website is lying when they state the statistics? But fwiw, I’m sure that initially there would be an increase in illegal abortions, if abortion were made illegal (except for rape, incest, life of the mother) — at least for a short time. As we become accustomed to life without easy-access abortion, using abortion as birth control will stop. Look, some people will always do illegal things; but most people will be law-abiding citizens. It’s also important to notice that two influential forces were listed as major contributing factors to Poland’s low abortion rate — the Catholic Church and doctors both discouraged abortion. If you think that doctors have no influence over a woman, you’re fooling yourself. I’m a childbirth educator and a “birth junkie” — I read birth stories and pregnancy-related stuff all the time, and I can’t tell you how many stories I’ve read (as well as different studies that have been published) that show the profound influence that a doctor has over his patients. In half a minute I can think of half a dozen women that I personally know who altered their desires for birth — some of them even “choosing” an unnecessary C-section — simply because their doctors suggested it. If women are supported in choosing either to keep their babies or give them up for adoption, then the “market” for abortion will go away.
Oh, and I discuss abortion a little bit on my other blog: womantowomancbe.wordpress.com.
OK, eddie said I was “it” for this one, but I am being a dutiful little law student and finishing my finals so I can only reply briefly.
1) I *love* the attitude that children should be “consequences” of “irresponsible” sex. Love it. I mean, why should every child be wanted and loved? To hell with that, let’s punish people with them! Huzzah! Let’s make both the parent and child regret that they were ever born! What a pleasant society that will be!!!
2) I read child birth books too. And books about human rights. And I work with pregnant women and not pregnant women and women from all walks of life. You know what I take from that? I TRUST WOMEN to make the best choices for themselves and their families. When you allow women to have control over their own reproductive health and choices, society benefits and families are healthier.
3) Please show me the women who use abortion “as birth control.” That phrase is tossed around like candy and I see NO evidence that points to women who do that. You know why? Abortions are expensive and a pain in the ass to obtain, even though legal and safe. So let’s stop using that phrase without evidence, mmkay?
4) There is a scientific and medical difference between zygotes, embryos, fetuses, and born babies. There is no hard science out there that definitively states the EXACT moment of personhood - not from any non-biased, non-partisan medical sources. Maybe your BELIEF is that a zygote is a baby that you should cry for, but it does not make it a truth for everyone in the world.
5) If you actually read the book as Eddie and I have suggested, you will see that Dr. Wicklund is one of the best examples of a compassionate physician in the world, one who talks through every option with every patient and indeed TURNS AWAY women who are unsure of what they want to do and ENCOURAGES women to think about EVERY option. There are good doctors and bad ones and some in between so let’s not act as though every doctor makes or should make every decision for their patients.
Back to writing my papers. Eddie, next one is to you.
Anonymous,
I didn’t say that children “should be consequences of irresponsible sex”; I said that sex causes pregnancy — there are no pregnancies without sex (except for test-tube babies, etc.). This is not an argument — it’s a fact of life. You drive drunk long enough, you’ll end up in a car wreck; you have sex often enough, you’ll end up pregnant / getting a woman pregnant.
As far as “abortion as birth control” — this was mostly in response to the above statement that “a large number of women who visit an abortion clinic did everything to prevent that pregnancy”. I can only assume that these women are using abortion as the final way to avoid giving birth, since contraceptives and other forms of birth control didn’t work, or they were too stupid or ignorant to use them properly or at all. (Basically, I’m just repeating what he said, but using a different tone.)
So maybe you can tell me what women are doing who are using abortion to prevent birth, if not as the ultimate birth control? I understand that abortions are expensive and a pain the uterus to obtain, but that doesn’t change the end result — a baby is not born. Fwiw, the wikipedia definition of “birth control” includes abortion. But why do women get abortions, if not to prevent birth? Please show me women who get abortions that don’t do so to “control birth,” mmkay?
My question was, what is the difference between “tissue” and “baby”? You see, when an egg and sperm meet, a new human being is created — that’s a genetic fact, and is not assailable by anyone. It’s human, and again, that’s not assailable by anyone. It’s alive, which is not assailable by anyone. What is the difference between “tissue” and “baby”?
I stand by my statement that doctors have a profound influence on people’s decisions. I didn’t say that they always make the decisions, and I **definitely** don’t think that they *should* make the decisions; but many times they do, and always they have a profound influence.
And as far as your statement, “When you allow women to have control over their own reproductive health and choices, society benefits and families are healthier,” would you mind backing up that statement with a little evidence? Since abortion on demand became legal, society has gone to hell in a hand-basket, and families are extremely dysfunctional — the divorce rate is 50% for 1st-time marriages, and even higher for repeat marriages. STDs are on the rise — some 25% of all American teenagers now have an STD. 1/5 of all pregnancies end in abortion. And post-abortive women are at greater risk for mental illness.
But I really have no desire to read about a compassionate physician who dismembers babies alive in the womb. Read a pregnancy website about the development of babies — quite fascinating stuff! By the 6th week post-conception (8th week of pregnancy, as calculated by modern doctors), “Everything that is present in an adult human is now present in the small embryo,” according to the American Pregnancy Association website. Obviously, it’s not fully developed — the fingers and toes are still webbed, for instance; but by the end of the first trimester, all of the major organs have been formed, which is why women are urged to avoid many (legal) drugs in the first trimester — after that, the risk of birth defects from drugs goes down.
So tell me, what is the difference between “tissue” and “baby”?
Nice work quoting wikipedia - where all serious science clearly resides.
Here’s the bottom line, because we can go on in circles forever about “human-ness” of a cluster of cells (you know what else is a “live human” by definition? Any cluster of human cells. Go figure. Oh how I weep for all cells I lose. An embryo is not automatically a baby from the moment of conception in part because more often than not it sloughs off and never has a *chance* at being a “beautiful, unique snowflake” - if you want to get back to me about post-implantation, then I’ll be more inclined to be on the same track) - legislators are not any better situated to “decide” things for women and families than the “overly persuasive” doctors of whom you speak. You know who makes the best decisions for women? THE WOMEN.
* Society going to hell in a handbasket can be linked to about a million different factors. Correlation does not imply causation. Seriously. Why have STD rates gone up? Gee, it couldn’t have anything to do with teaching abstinence-only education and never showing teens how to properly use a condom, a tool PROVEN to reduce the transmission of STDs, could it? No, it is clearly all those damn abortionists.
* If you have sex often enough you will get pregnant? It’s inevitable? Oh dear god!! Eeek! I wonder if I am at “often enough” levels yet?!? If you have sex while responsibly using your chosen methods of contraception, pregnancy is avoidable. Fact.
* “Post-abortive women are at higher risk for mental illness” - yet another “fact” that falls victim to the correlation-causation problem we were discussing. Were those women in any way shape or form anxious, depressed, etc. before having an abortion? Like say, stressed and depressed about an unwanted pregnancy? Were their friends and family judgmental asshats who offered no support? Oh, you didn’t ask? We just drew the conclusions after their abortions without any other information??? Well done. Put that study on wikipedia along with the breast cancer myth!
* Look at the differences between nations that allow women to use contraception and indeed abortion versus the ones that restrict it highly. You will start to see a trend in levels of economic development, the status of women, education, etc. Seriously. Western Europe versus Africa is one simple example. And no I am not saying Africa is somehow inferior or that the culture there is not richly developed - my point is one of how society fares as a whole.
Shocking that Eddie and I will educate ourselves about the spectrum of beliefs and choices out there and you won’t read a simple book that presents the story of a compassionate doctor. If you had read it you would learn that she never “dismembers babies alive in the womb.” But whatever, I’m not surprised at blinders anymore.
Really? What’s the difference between tissue and baby? For simplicity’s sake, I’ll say sentience and leave it at that.
Wow, Kathy, just wow! OK, here we go:
1) Nope, you did not say that children “should be consequences of irresponsible sex”, but that is what you are implying with your statement. And your drink drive analogy was perfect - you drink drive for long enough, you end up in a car wreck; and if you drive sober for long enough, you also end up in a car wreck. Do we treat those car wrecks the same?
2) Abortion “as the ultimate birth control”. Ugh, sickening. In these instances you are quoting, abortion is a last resort to prevent an unwanted child from entering this world, which, as you quoted, “has gone to hell in a hand-basket”. So you think it’s a good idea that the child should be brought into this world, being raised by the “dysfunctional families” you talk of? And at the same time you’re not implying that they are consequences of bad decisions. Right.
3) Decision making - doctor’s shouldn’t make the decisions, the women shouldn’t make the decisions. So who should? Oh, right - you! Preaching down your godly abstinence values on everyone around, because of course, you are the one who knows what is best for every woman on this planet.
4) Back to your ridiculous quote that “Since abortion on demand became legal, society has gone to hell in a hand-basket”. Um, so you’re a big fan of correlation implying causation, huh? The divorce rate, in your statistics, has sky-rocketed since legalized abortion, therefore legalized abortion caused it. Oblivious to anything else in the world that also might have caused it. Heck, I was born around the same time, maybe it’s my fault that the divorce rate is so high. And even if it was somehow correlated, which would be incredible, but I’m prepared to believe that possibility for a second, maybe it’s a good thing. The only thing that has changed is that people don’t feel bound to each other because they have a child, and stay together for the child, ruining all 3 lives for the next 20 years. People often get married for the wrong reason, especially when religion and abstinence are thrown into the mix. In your ‘perfect world’, couples probably don’t live together until they get married, and certainly won’t have had sex. Once married, along comes the sex, along comes baby, and then they realize that they actually can’t stand living with one another. But thank god for the baby - something to prevent their divorce, and they can miserably stay together and raise their child in a miserable family. And you call that a better world? I’m glad we don’t live in that world. So glad.
Well, A’Hottie has already posted her response now, so I guess I can re-cap my last two points succinctly as she has covered them already: what is the difference between “tissue” and “baby”? Why don’t you just look it up on Wikipedia, source of all your science. Or ask a “modern doctor”, whatever the heck that means.
I’d like to touch on the comment “I can only assume that these women are using abortion as the final way to avoid giving birth, since contraceptives and other forms of birth control didn’t work, or they were too stupid or ignorant to use them properly or at all. (Basically, I’m just repeating what he said, but using a different tone.)”
Too ignorant or stupid?
If you spent even one afternoon in a Planned Parenthood or similar clinic you might realize that the phrase “too ignorant or stupid” is one of the most ignorant things YOU have ever said. Many women who find themselves pregnant don’t realize how it happened. Certainly a good perecentage of them know that it was the sexual act that caused the pregancy but they in fact used birth control or contraceptive devices and don’t understand why it didn’t work. Even more shocking is the young women who don’t even realize the sexual act they engaged in caused the pregnancy. But lets take it one step further before we determine that they are “ignorant” or “stupid” or “immoral.”
As it turns out (if you spoke to these women yourself) many of these women were raised in broken homes and in poor school systems. In a childhood that is all about surviving, parents (if they even come from a dual parent home) certainly arn’t teaching them about contraception, and in a school that is simply a babysitter, they arn’t learning anything about it there either. And now you, someone who is educated and understands how easy it is to get pregnant (and conversely, when done properly, how easy it can be to prevent it) has determined that becuase these women are “too ignorant and stupid” to know how their immoral acts are simply the consequences of the action, that they should gestate & deliver a baby that will likley grow up in similar circumstances?
If you want to prevent abortion- not make it illegal but simply lower the number of women who seek abortions in the United States- you could stop engaging in the war of the words on blogs and instead devote your time and efforts to EDUCATION. And I’m going to assume that you are probably anti-Planned Parenthood but as the nation’s largest FREE CLINIC that exists to help EDUCATE womena and provide AFFORDABLE HEALTH SERVICES including annual exams, cancer screenings, and reproductive counseling I’m going to go ahead and say that they, unlike you, are trying to help the problem.
And? Just so we are clear, you might be surprised to learn that many women who seek abortions are not “immoral sex starved young whores” but in fact poor married women who do not have the financial resources to have a child (or even pay for prenatal health care)and who don’t understand how contraception properly works.
I am very glad you wrote this post, Eddie. I am going to go out and buy Susan’s book today.
@ Anon — no, a unique life is begun at conception; whether or not it implants is another story. As long as nothing is done to artificially interfere with implantation, then if the baby develops or not is out of our control. If, however, something is done to interfere with that implantation, then that is abortifacient, imho.
As far as abstinence-only education, back about 100 years ago, when that’s all that kids were taught the STD rate was exceedingly low, as was the unwed pregnancy rate, the abortion rate, and the divorce rate. It was when schools decided to take over sex education from parents that it got screwed up. Abstinent people just don’t get STDs, nor do they get pregnant. It just doesn’t happen.
As far as avoiding pregnancy with contraceptives — you say one thing, and eddie says another. Y’all can argue about whether or not pregnancy is avoidable if you use contraceptives, or if they sometimes fail.
As far as the abortion-mental illness link, you need to do some research on it. There are published studies in psychiatric and medical journals in which they studied women who had abortions vs women who carried unintended pregnancies to term. One of these studies was conducted by a pro-abortion doctor who was determined to prove that abortion did not cause mental illness; but the result was the opposite of what he wanted. Even after controlling for every known factor, post-abortive women had higher rates of mental illness.
As far as the differences between Western Europe and Africa — as you previously said, “correlation does not imply causation.” Also, as far as the “society going to hell in hand-basket” — you were the one that implied that abortion helps society; I’m merely asking for some proof of that. If abortion can be beneficial to society (with the “incontrovertible evidence” given that Western Europe and Africa are different), I’m asking for some benefit to society that has happened since abortion became legal. When I look at 1950s America vs. America of today, I see a lot of societal degeneration. You were the one that said that abortion improves society. Prove it.
As far as sentience — you need to do some research on fetal development.
@ eddie — I’m saying that sex causes pregnancy — what’s so difficult to understand about that?? Don’t want to get somebody pregnant or to get pregnant? Don’t have sex. If you do, be prepared to live with the consequences. Grow up.
Abortion *is* the “ultimate” (or “final”) method of birth control. There is no arguing with that. It is the final method used by 1.2 million women in the U.S. to keep birth from happening. Regardless of how they got pregnant, these women use abortion to keep from giving birth. It is birth control. End of story.
I think that murdering an unborn child is worse than letting him live. Absolutely, I do.
Yes, when babies are conceived at a time when they are not wanted, that is evidence that their parents made some really bad decisions. But to abort is to make an even worse one. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
As to point 4 — I was merely responding to AH who said that abortion is beneficial for society. She was the one who originally implied causation. You’ll have to take that one up with her.
You might want to do some research into this before you just spout off — do some research into children of divorce, and staying together for the sake of the children. I know that sometimes it is better for the children if their parents aren’t married, but it’s rare. As far as living together prior to marriage — statistics show that 80-100% of couples who shack up get divorced; whereas couples who are virgins when they get married have a 5% or less divorce rate.
Wikipedia is not my source of all knowledge, but it can be convenient at times. You said you disagreed with me about “baby vs. tissue” so I was just wanting to know what exactly is the difference to you.
@ Daisy — “ignorant” means “lacking knowledge or information.” If women truly don’t know how they got pregnant, they are ignorant. That’s not pejorative; just a statement.
Kathy:
People who determine that their values are the end-all-beat-all and then push them on other people sicken me. I have my own personal views for how I want conduct MY life and how I want to raise MY children if and when I have them. I also realize that I am only one tiny miniscule part of the population and that MY values and MY God are not necessarily other people’s. To condem others for their views, or lack thereof, on areas of morality is a waste of time. You will never succeed in uniting by casting stones on others. In fact, if you read (real history books based on fact not Wikipedia) the history of some of the most pious times in world history you might be astounded by the number of affairs, births out of wedlock and similar “immoral” acts.
And finally, on your point that frustrates me the most you say “I know that sometimes it is better for the children if their parents aren’t married, but it’s rare. ”
Please tell me where you got that golden nugget of information. Define “rare” and please, tell me, is it worth it to that child that grows up knowing only anger and hostility, who believes that relationships arn’t worth trying for because they simply don’t work.
You also said “Yes, when babies are conceived at a time when they are not wanted, that is evidence that their parents made some really bad decisions.” Define bad decisions. If a woman is raped then did she make a bad decision? Should we force her to carry that pregnancy? Does it make a difference if her rapist jumped out and attacked her from behind the bushes or if she was slipped a drug in her drink one night? Or if she told a man “no” and he continued anyway, against her will? To say that the result is due to “parents made bad decisions” is simply you making a blanket, judgmental statement with little or no knowledge to back it up.
Kathy,
I can go get my statistics and figures and distract myself from my finals for hours on end to combat your statistics and figures. We both have numbers out there supporting our thoughts, feelings, ideologies, beliefs, whatever. So rather than engaging in that - again it isn’t for lack of information rather than lack of time, for today anyway - I will cut to the chase and lay out for you my absolute bottom line.
I could no more decide what is best for your life and your moral framework and your family than you could for mine. We might each believe firmly that we are right and have the moral high ground and are absolutely great people without either one of us being infallibly correct. I have no qualms with my belief system as I am sure you do not about yours. So the last question I ask myself is simply, who should decide the best course for her own life? Outside of mainstream religion, outside of political manuverings, the gamesmanship we use to control individuals, outside of a constitutional/legal rights-based framework, outside of any other group’s self-interested motives - and I believe that individual women make those choices best. While I may not agree with the choices they make, they are not for me to decide because I am not them. I disagree vehemently with many perfectly legal life choices, but I recognize that I do not have to choose them.
What is a problem for me is having someone else decide that they know what is best for me, my sexuality, my life. As educated as you or anyone else might be, you simply cannot know what is best for me. And that is why I am and will always be pro-education and pro-choice. I believe that the best thing you can do for a person is equip her with information and life skills and then let her make her own decisions. Imposing a moral framework and belief system on someone is patronizing and ultimately denies that person humanity.
Deciding when or whether to have children is not and should not be a community decision. You speak of embracing consequences, and I think that people can make these decisions for themselves and embrace the consequences, whatever they might be. I absolutely reject the notion that I must embrace some sort of “moral” framework created by people who know nothing, and care nothing, about my life to be a good or productive person. It is not for me (or ANYONE else) to judge the actions and life choices of others, but for me to make myself the best person I can be.
And THAT is what it means to me to be pro-choice.
Kathy, you are seriously messed up in the head-division. Thankfully though, you have finally stated that the baby does live as a consequence, “If you do, be prepared to live with the consequences” - good for you, you must love sitting on your moral high horse
You spout “statistics” that obviously come from the wacky world you live in, I’m sorry, but 80-100% of marriages where the couple “shack up” end up in divorce. My god, Kathy, just re-read that - you’re quoting something that says 100% of marriages would end in divorce - that means no marriage has ever worked when the couple lived together before getting married. Surely you know how stupid that sounds?
Ugh, my god, there’s so much insanity you’re spouting here. You know what, I really don’t have the time for this anymore. You’re the sort of person who is so desperate to cling onto a belief system that you will regurgitate insane statistics, allow the world to be full of consequence-babies, not give a DAMN about a woman’s or child’s quality of life, as long as it falls in line with your fanatical viewpoint, and desperately try to force these values onto others. It is pointless wasting the time to answer you anymore.
Oh, and how do I know you’re this sort of person? If, as you state on your blog, you really believe every single word of the bible, to it’s most literal sense of every word, down to Noah’s ark and all of those lovely animals, then there surely is no way back for you.
And you were even “in awe” of the couple who refused an abortion when they discovered that their baby was diagnosed pre-natally with a lethal birth defect. So risking the life of the mother, she gave birth to a child who died the same day. You are in awe at risking the life of a woman, for what? To save a life? Obviously not. You are in awe because it meets your opinion of how life should be, and how you want to force others to be.
You live your life how you want to, don’t force others to share those opinions. Nobody is forcing you to have an abortion - be little miss abstinence as long as your heart desires, but stop trying to force that crap on others. Some would call it quite judgmental - wait, you’re a religious woman, surely you wouldn’t judge others.
Enjoy your abstinent life - long may it continue, for the sake of us all.
Oh, and crawling back through the madness, thanks “wouldn’t you like to know” (and, of course, I do know!), and please let us know what you think of the book once you’ve read it.
@ Daisy — we as a society constantly decide morality — what makes it wrong to steal, murder, rape, drive drunk, etc.? Surely not the Bible or any other religious standard, because that would be *gasp* forcing morality on someone. So then we’re left with a movable standard, which is then no standard at all. Ok. So let’s say you’re right — why is abortion a question for each person to decide for herself, but murdering a pregnant woman to steal her baby is not? Why should abortion be limited merely to pregnancy? Why not allow parents the right to kill their children up to 3 months of age? or 3 years of age? or 18 years of age — they’re still legally completely responsible for them until they’re 18! They have to feed and clothe and house them until then — what’s the big difference between that and a woman feeding and housing her unborn infant for 9 months? Where to draw the line?
@ Anon — people are individuals, but there are still broad guidelines that work. You may chafe at moral restraints and societal boundaries, but you are playing with fire. You will disbelieve me, and I can’t make you believe me. But I will point out that you are judging “the actions and life choices of others” — namely me — while you are standing on *your* moral high-horse, aghast that I would have the audacity at pointing to the error of your way.
@ eddie — I’m not really understanding you — pregnancy is a consequence of sex — I’ve never denied that. You’re the one that seems to have a problem understanding cause and effect. You’re the one who wants abortion so that when sex causes pregnancies, babies are not born as the consequence. Here’s a link that summarizes the things I was saying about divorce. In further looking at this, I realized I remembered the stat wrong — cohabiting couples are 80-100% more likely to get divorced than couples who do not shack up.
I do care about women’s and children’s quality of life. But you don’t care about children’s *life*! How dare you preach at me as if I’m some sort of monster because I don’t want children to be murdered in the womb?
Abortion is not risk-free — just check out realchoice.blogspot.com for all the women who have died from abortions — legal and illegal. Do you even know how many women in the U.S. die giving birth? Do you know how many women die from abortions? The overall MMR is officially 13/100,000, which includes abortion-related deaths, assuming they are counted, which they ought to be but are more likely to be covered up. The actual childbirth-related death rate is probably closer to 20/100,000, based on studies that have matched women’s death certificates with their health records; the risk is higher with a C-section, lowest with an uncomplicated vaginal birth. Although our stats suck compared to Western Europe, giving birth is hardly a risky endeavor. Most deaths occur in women with underlying health issues, which may be exacerbated by pregnancy or birth, (such as obesity, diabetes, hypertension); although there are accidental deaths such as hospital-acquired infections and severed blood vessels in surgery.
I’m not forcing you to share my opinions. I would persuade you if possible, but opinions cannot be forced. I point out facts and statistics, which you will disbelieve though they are true. I can’t force you to go the way I choose, but I can tell you what the statistics say. Whether you listen to reason is up to you.
Oh, and btw, I’m hardly abstinent — I keep my husband quite happy. :-) Your last line almost makes me want to have another baby. Maybe I’ll call him Eddie.
OK, I think this thread has reached exhaustion point. It is clear that there is very little use in trying to reason with you, and as A’Hottie pointed out, statistics can be thrown on both sides of the court, and you will believe whatever suits your means - that’s life I guess. We obviously disagree on key points, such as a woman’s right to choose, and what constitutes human life during a pregnancy, and minds will not be changed on this blog, so this will not move in any positive direction.
But I do sincerely hope that you, your husband, and future little Eddie have an enjoyable life.
Good. I liked it better when our threads were contained to educated people discussing vegetables.
Like, vegetable abortions? Wait, what???
Ohhhhh, you mean “stop being serious, Eddie, and let’s have some fun with the nest post”?
Wicklund’s book, though not particularly well-written, tells an important story. Far too misunderstood are the stories of the people involved in the abortion controversy, specifically, the women who choose abortion, the men who participate in that choice or are excluded by women from it, the workers who provide the abortion, and the counselors and physicians who advise patients for, against, or (not nearly as often as they should) objectively one way or the other. The pro-choice and pro-life crowds have been whipped into a frenzy by national movements and exaggerated senses of the impact on women’s rights or unborn children’s rights. And that’s fine — that’s politics, that’s public discourse and protest, good things in a free society. But in the rush to characterize the other side as evil woman-haters or baby-killers, the actual people who deal with this very difficult personal medical decision on a daily basis are lost, and that is sad.
I would urge everyone to step back and think about that a little, because by and large the rhetoric has made it very difficult for people to be counseled and treated appropriately and with their interests, not some broader political agenda, at the center.
I favor legal abortion, but the rhetoric of branding pro-life people as “anti-choice” and railing on them as happens in this blog and those linked to it is counterproductive and diminishes the debate. By and large, their opinion is a deeply-held and worthwhile one, rooted in a moral sense. Not your moral sense or mine, but one that should not be discarded as evil and anti-woman. You are treating them exactly as you don’t want to be treated in being accused of a pro-murder agenda. If that’s the only debate we can have, it will forever be a useless one that demeans its participants on both sides.