The wonder of life, no matter how short
We’ll get to politics soon enough today. But let’s start Monday morning with a perspective-setting story sent in by reader Lorraine. 9News profiles a couple that rejected abortion when told that their unborn son had Potter’s Syndrome–a rare, fatal condition upon birth:
Doctors explained that amniotic fluid is critical for lungs to develop. The condition that the Harris’ son had is called Potter’s Syndrome. It is extremely rare and extremely serious.
“The doctor told us that the babies usually die of respiratory failure after they are born,” said Gina. The doctor explained that as long as the baby was inside Gina’s womb he’d be able to grow and thrive. Gina could provide everything her son needed. The question was: Could their son live on his own?
…”The doctor said that the majority of women with the diagnosis like this would terminate the pregnancy,” said Rob. “And as he started to say that Gina said, ‘No.’ She just stopped him.”
…Her husband added, “We decided we were going to enjoy our time with our son even if he is in Gina’s womb and we can’t see him yet, he’s still alive and he’s still kicking.” They named him David and cherished each moment as he grew. They focused on living in the present and not focusing on the uncertainty of the future.
Eight months together. A story of love. The lesson:
David Paul Harris was delivered at 3:25 in the morning, but passed away.
Seeing their son and holding him, the Harrises say they felt peace about all they had gone through.
“We held him and like any mom and dad we examined his features,” said Rob. “We were amazed to see how dark and thick his hair was.”
“I remember how soft his skin felt,” said Gina. “He was perfectly formed. I remember how soft his skin felt, those little things that even a picture cannot ever capture, so I made sure I remembered those things.”
They had six hours with their son.
“I found some comfort in the fact that he went from safe in my womb to God’s arms,” said Gina.
The Harrises say their faith has given them the strength and perspective they have needed to get through this time.
“We have a choice. We can be bitter or we can choose to appreciate what were given,” Gina said. “To actually carry a baby and be a mother is the greatest gift that anyone could have. I am confident that one day we will see David again and we’ll get to know our son in heaven.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Abortion
Gates of Vienna
» The Two Sides of America Observe July 4thJihad Watch
» What we should be fighting for this July 4Gates of Vienna
» Schoolboys Punished for Refusing to Pray to Allahprotein wisdom
» Obama’s European Fans [Dan Collins]Redstate
» What Did You Do on Independence Day?TigerHawk
» RubeWatch: The Pivot!Stop The ACLU
» Jesse Helms aka ‘Senator No’, Dies at 86
Bless them, a great quote from truly great strenght.
A beautiful illustration of one worldview…the correct one, IMHO.
Another great lesson to always choose life because where there is life there is always hope. Even though this couple lost their son they still feel blessed this is true faith. May God continue to be with this couple and grant them peace and happiness.
Thanks for sharing, Michelle. A woman in our church was given a diagnosis of spinal bifida while pregnant with her daughter about 12 years ago. They told her that her daughter would never walk at best. She had the child anyway, everything was fine and Tyra has always been a thriving, active kid, as normal as can be.
Kudos to the Harris’s for leaving it all in God’s hands and taking what he has provided for them. I’ve heard it said that being Christian doesn’t mean we have less trouble just that we have opportunities to demonstrate our faith by how we handle our trouble.
Important lesson on life to start the week. Thanks, Michelle.
AMEN! May God bless and keep them.
Does anyone have extra Kleenex?
God bless them
This story is disturbing. A loving couple brought into the world, deliberately, a person whose entire life experience was gasping for breath and dying of respiratory failure. If ever there was an argument for abortion, this is it.
The parents may have been at ease and peaceful, but the child was in excruciating, needless, and pointless pain.
lgm # 9
Who are you to determine what length or condition of the Human experience qualifies as exceptible to be allowed!!!!!!!!!!!
That was a really disgusting comment! Even I, normally cold hearted, was moved by this story.
lgm, if the baby had been aborted, given the stage of development of 20 weeks, it most likely would have been a saline abortion.
Where amniotic fluid would be is filled with a saline solution, which basically pickles the child alive in brine. It brings on contractions and a stillborn baby is born.
Let’s see, six hours in the loving arms of one’s parents, with all medical comfort available…
or being pickled alive alone in the dark.
Excruciating? You choose.
#9 Some of us were taught -as you were- that that is not a life (or not a perfect “life”) and we have a “right” to destroy it. Having studied the medical and scientific aspects of a baby’s growth in the womb-I can tell you that we were mis-informed.
Remember-Doctors are still practicing-they don’t know everything.
FOR LIFE!
lgm, you cannot be female.
What a dumb comment.
The baby felt nothing. They have no memory.
Abortion due to not having the perfect speciman? Only GOD judges when and where……..not liberals.
To the Parents of David Paul:
It took God’s Great Strength to Love so deeply for a brief moment. I cannot imagine. I carry your sadness in my Heart also. David Paul is an Angel baby @ the manger, in the Company of the Holy Family & the Animals….because everybody knows that Babies love other Babies. Amen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-zDH_ekIUg
#9 On December 17th, 2007 at 9:31 am, lgm said:
“This story is disturbing. A loving couple brought into the world, deliberately, a person whose entire life experience was gasping for breath and dying of respiratory failure. If ever there was an argument for abortion, this is it.
The parents may have been at ease and peaceful, but the child was in excruciating, needless, and pointless pain.”
And in this corner…:
One could not have asked for a clearer, starker illustration of the 180 degrees-opposite worldview than this, if one had commissioned a research study of it.
A peek into the worldview of the secular progressives, and into what their ‘druthers will be, if they ever get to impose their worldview completely on the rest of us.
I see IGM is on track, que the Earth nuts on the bloggs in 5,4,……
In my opinion, theres nothing wrong with whats going on here. They wanted to see there child if just once, thats love not insanity, and children are a GIFT. They are all that matters for humanity, they are us. Corrupt people in fields that shall not be named are why we have this “over population” problem. Poor planing and common greed.
In my opinion abortion should only be allowed when life endangerment is faced by the mother, incest, and cases of Rape. Its not a woman’s, or Goverments right to be able to choose who lives and dies for selective population that amounts to Genocide.
Can you say partial birth abortions? You know, where the abortionist grabs the baby’s legs with forceps and is pulled through the birth canal. The abortionist delivers the baby’s entire body, except for the head. The abortionsit jams scissors into the baby’s skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole. the scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child’s brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.
So, lgm, spare us your self-infatuated, aggrieved position about the “perceived” pain this baby may have gone through. It doesn’t fit your M.O. and frankly, it was done is poor taste.
A wonderful story but Mrs. Harris is right, when something is not “right” with a pregnancy the doctors really push you to terminate even after you tell them that is not an option.
LGM, you would kill my daughter wouldn’t you? She has DS and I’ve been told many times by liberal scum such as yourself that she would have been better off not having been born. The world is better off for people like the Harris family. I hope to God you never have a child with a defect, besides the defect of liberalism that you suffer under. Perhaps they will see what a horrilbe fool their father is.
“in poor taste.”
Should be “horrible” not the other way.
Gayle, et. al. click on his name and you can see the wonder of lgm.
But here’s the rub #17/TK-421….
There is no way to ask the HUMAN BEING on the receiving end of this death sentence if they would like a chance to fulfill God’s Will for them.
The beauty of the Truth is that it is still The Truth even if you don’t believe it. ‘God held each & everyone of us in the Palm of His Hand @ the beginning of Time, naming each one of us.’
I disagree with LGM’s attitude here. I respect and understand the decision some families make to abort a fetus that will live for only 8 months in excruciating pain. But I also respect the decision some families make to carry these fetuses to term.
When people start talking about fetuses that “should” be aborted…that’s a dangerous road that undermines the value of choice.
I’m glad the Harris’s are happy with their decision.
@22, if you meant by abortions I can approve of, well incest normally ends up in horrific mental and physical aliments. Rape, not many mothers may want the child, or even try to kill it themselves why in the womb. So studies say.
And in the case of life endangerment I’m not saying mandatory, not mandatory on any of them, just what might be acceptable. That’s optional, if one wishes to give up a life for another so be it. But that is not a choice to force on anyone. Children are a gift as I said, and if one is to kill one it had best be for a damn good reasson. Not Choice, not for their figures, or a govermental policy.
while* not why, need an edit button I miss the little things.
Obviously this is a painful situation. Gina (the mother) had a difficult decision to make. I am not going to say that she made the wrong choice.
I will say that the other choice made sense. Assuming facts others have claimed, if the abortion would have been at 20 weeks and the death by asphyxiation at 38 weeks, maybe 20 weeks could be better. Higher brain functions are either far less developed or non-existent at the earlier time.
If you think the choice is obvious, you need to think some more.
lgm, you are completely missing the point here. The baby was expected to die very shortly after birth, therefore the parents basically had the choice of ending it all while it was in the womb or just after birth - either way the baby would *not* have led a long and painful life, so why not let the parents get acquainted (even if only briefly) with their newborn child?
It’s not obvious and I would be sympathetic if they chose to abort instead. But the choice was made to carry to term and I don’t think anyone should criticize it.
TK-421 #24
What a mother decides to do about an un-imaginable pregnancy situation is between her & God. I will never cast the first judgmental ’stone’ on this issue….it is only, sometimes I wonder how, as a true follower of the Messiah, the life of the unborn child is to be considered. It is not the fault of the Child who was conceived by rape, that they LIVE….&, there is adoption. As concerns the life of the mother…..perhaps to consider ….one Life will be taken by the Will of God & the other killed. Look…I understand that this is not a simple issue…only ,I continue to frame it w/in the contexts of real Faith…otherwise, why practice.
lgm #26 “I will say that the other choice made sense.”
only to YOU!!! & may you reap what you sow.
Thanks for sharing this edifying story.
How about you remove yourself from the seat of judgement.
Two loving parents decided to bring forth the life of this child and have him leave as God intended it.
You think they should have made the decision sooner, why I am not sure. Especially, since partial birth abortions isn’t a problem for ya.
#26 lgm said:
Think first.
I can’t imgaine how heartbreaking it is to hold your child and let him slip away.
“Choice” is a convenient euphamism that turns people into something rather than someone.
It is not “humane” to abort a child, even if that child faces a short life. It is not “humane” to deny someone food and water so they die. Funny how we hear about the need for “humane” treatment of convicted criminals on death row, but not for the most defensless and innocent in our society.
Life is a gift. Period.
“….something rather than someone.”
good call EnglishQueen01
lgm, you are one sick cookie. Words cannot express my contempt for your comments.
The child came into the world loved and left the world loved. God bless the parents and keep them in their time of grief.
lgm
I’m going out on a limb here and say you have probably not witnessed the miracle of birth, I’m sure your views would be much different if you had. If I am wrong, your heart must be as cold as stone to be able to believe that the better choice would be to abort the baby before the parents could hold him in their arms and go to the Lord knowing he was loved and cherished.
Very well said englishqueen.
In the end it was a simple choice of letting God be God. There was a reason and a purpose and they found it, even if they can’t quite explain it. It is called faith and it is not based on reason or science. It is what makes us who we are. My deepest Thanks Gena and Rob!
Dear Terry S.,
You are a Martyr in Heaven…I cried when you died….the Holy Father, JPII, left the day after you did….on the Feast of Mercy…did your death break his Heart???!
PRAY FOR US….esp. those who think that LIFE is simply a micro-biological phenomenom. go here:
* http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
& then tell me there isn’t a GOD!
To me the key info in this story is that David was 20 weeks old when his condition was discovered. Whether or not you believe that life begins at conception, preemies as early as 21-22 weeks have survived. No one can argue that David was a “collection of cells.”
Rob and Gina gave their son the best life they possibly could. They gave him the wonderful gift of making his life have meaning, but more importantly, he died knowing he was wanted and loved.
Especially at this time of year, that’s a lesson we can all take from this.
Thanks, Michelle.
http://gallery.euroweb.hu/html/m/master/francke/becket.html
“…..more importantly, he died knowing he was wanted and loved.“#40
you bet….Thanks, Michelle…you ROK!!!
LGM is a selfish, horrible person who takes the easy route out. Liberals have no tolerance for those with whom they disagree and those who don’t abort the less than perfect amongst us. LGM you have no heart and no soul and it’s a shame you were blessed with children that you can rear and indoctrinate with your hatred of the less than perfect amongst us and question the sanity of people who chose to bring their beautiful son into the world if only for a short time. You’re a sicko buddy and I hope that one day you’re purged of your hatred of those who don’t meet up with your agrandized expectations.
as opposed to being FLUSHED down a Toilet!!!! w/ NO NAME!
LGM,
Your position on this is disgusting. You should be ashamed.
Jim C
Doctors have been wrong so very many times- if the baby had been hale and healthy at birth, would we even see this story? Would we hear about a young couple who decided to trust G-d, not a doctor, and who, being told to kill thier unborn child due to a possible birth defect, let a healthy child live who would have otherwise never been born? Probably not. Conceived in love, born to loving parents and released in love to his heavenly father- he had a good life, though a short one.
so what!!? exactly is the criteria for being allowed to be born & dwell on this good earth…..o mighty lgm !??…..will YOU be in charge to decide??? Do you fit your own criteria???
Will you flush your inconvenient ‘offspring’down the john???
As the WHO would say: “..who the FK are you!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgWQ1erBnMo&feature=related
JoAnn
You are so right, a close family member of mine was advised by doctors to abort her baby, due to the the many and large fibrous tumors she had in her uterus. The rationale was that the baby would not be carried to term anyway, and it was better to abort than suffer a miscarriage. Thankfully, the night before the procedure, her and her husband decided it was not their right to ‘play God’, and we had the pleasure of waving a fine young 18 year old off to college this past fall.
Why is a life concieved through love more valuable than a life concieved through rape or incest or even one that endangers the mother’s life?
Every life is precious in the eyes of God, and judgement is for him and him alone.
Parents in these situations have a painful decision as to abort or carry to term, and they will be judged for those decisions.
lgm did what he is good at,stirring the s*#t pot
In cases of rape, I’ve often wondered the same thing, Walter.
When there’s a medical issue, however, I don’t think there’s any way to make a judgement except on a case by case basis. There’s just no way to know beforehand all the possible circumstances or outcomes.
I tend to be pretty hard line on things, but that’s one I’d have to leave up to those who’d have to live (or die) with their decision.
With regards to the abortion-as-medically-necessary issue:
This isn’t 1807. It’s 2007. There are countless medical procedures that could be used to treat an illness of the mother or the child (including in-uetero surgery) without resorting to abortion. If the medical procedure is so overwhelming or severe it causes the child to die, it is not an abortion. Direct abortion is rarely necessary to “save the life of the mother” - especially when that reasoning is used in PBA (when the child is seconds from birth, anyway).
With regards to rape, to say it’s abortion is the solution is like throwing gas on the fire. A woman who is raped has already undergone severe physical, mental, and emotional trauma. Add to that the physical, mental, and emotional trauma of abortion and you’re making a bad situation worse.
Yes, I understand how carrying the child of a rapist can be upsetting, and that it may be a “reminder” of that horrific event. But aborting that child because his father is a criminal is like taking the child of a convicted murderer and killing him because seeing that child might remind the victim’s family of the murder. The wrong person is being punished.
And before anyone jumps at me, I made the decision a long time ago that if I ever ended up in that situation, I’d keep the child and my husband has agreed we’d raise him/her as our own because it’s the right thing to do.
With all due respect, that’s nothing but speculation. There is simply no comparison between the trauma of rape and the “trauma” of making the decision to terminate a pregnancy. Some may see abortion as traumatic. Others have no regrets.
Your worst-case-scenario to not abort a pregnancy caused by rape/incest is well and good, but it’s not something that should have to apply to other victims. And I think outlawing abortion in that scenario (which you don’t quite advocate but seem to at least sympathize with - please correct me if I’m putting words in your mouth and/or am totally off base) is incredibly extreme. So extreme that even the most outspoken anti-abortion advocates and lawmakers won’t dare suggest it.
To force something like that on a rape victim is just unconsciable to me.
This broke me up. Thank you for saying it so well.
Someone I know very well almost didn’t make it - three times. Mother used an IUD, but still got pregnant. When she got pregnant, she momentarily considered abortion. Then the child almost died of meningitis at age of two. Three times. What a trooper.
You are a little off base on that, Rusty. While I am pro-life, those exceptions mentioned are not ones I would outlaw.
That does not mean, however, I can’t question the reasoning behind them both and try to rationally argue that there is an alternative choice that may be made.
I would never say to a woman that she *has* to die because of Life Threatening Condition A, but I would also encourage her to explore ALL options and make abortion a last resort. We all know what wonderful things medical technology can do.
Likewise, I would work with a rape victim to explore the alternatives - like adoption rather than abortion - for the reasons I mention above.
I will never understand why abortion is considered a secular sacrament when the alternatives are so much better for everyone in the end - even those who you claim have “no regrets” over their abortion.
Call it a chink in the otherwise cold, pragmatic armor around my heart, but as of this posting, I’ve been a father for exactly 1 week, 21 hours, and 35 minutes. I held my son when he was born, and I damn near wept. This story brought those memories right back to the front of my mind.
I’ll never understand how someone can hold something as innocent as a newborn infant, and for even an instant think that abortion is ok.
Exactly, Archon. Of all the problems and evil things in the world, the unborn and young children are the least of our problems.
coldfront said (#46):
Obviously, the mother (or the parents together) decide.
I think you should think about the child. He was doomed to spend his entire life suffocating. If the baby were an adult, he might want a DNR order (do not resuscitate). Hospitals use these so that people don’t spend their last hours or days or months on this earth in pointless pain. If the patient is incompetent (too young or mentally infirm), relatives must decide.
Amen Archon
Amen englishqueen01
The problem is how much we have lost sight of…Las Simples Cosas.
He couldn’t breathe, but there were no indications he was in pain…unlike abortion, where he - at 20 weeks, when the condition was diagnosed - would have been exposed to excruciating pain via abortion. Often, the “injection” given to kill an unborn child before it is removed from the womb (piece by piece) is the same one anti-death penalty proponents claim is “inhumane”.
And the argument of a DNR order is a straw man. A DNR order is not the same thing as euthanasia or abortion. It is an order to let someone die without extraordinary efforts - which is EXACTLY what these parents did. They made the decision.
So what about cases where the mother and father aren’t married, but the father wants to raise the child after he/she is born? I’m just curious to see if your reasoning is consistent.
Dear lgm, my Master is a crucified master. He taught me how to love & how to suffer w/ dignity. This is not something to be debated.
Only this, you cannot know w/any certainty, what was accomplished in God’s eyes by the love & suffering of this family. Neither can you appreciate the extraordinary strength & courage it takes to watch someone you love suffer. These parents choose to allow their son his life.
He didn’t spend his entire life suffocating, he died in his mother’s tender arms, having accomplished his own precious & short life.
It was good that this child was given to these loving parents instead of the one or two trolls here. He may have experienced pain, but he experienced love too. He would have only had pain in the alternate scenario, and his parents’ capacity for love would have never grown to encompass his life.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRsJlAJvOSM
Coldfront, cool with the Christian stuff. It detracts from the debate since, well, we can’t debate your religious beliefs. They are what they are and that’s great but “because God said so” isn’t something that anyone can disagree with.
But I’m with you on the birth and subsequent death of this child. I’m glad the parents made a decision that they were happy with. That’s what’s most important to me.
Mother’s body, mother’s choice. It’s unfortunate if it gets to that, but a respectful man would respect the choice to abort or carry to term.
But you asked LGM, not me. But I imagine his response would be similar to mine.
Here is what I am not understanding. Liberals like lgm & Rusty think we should eliminate the death penalty because about 150 people out of the many capital offenders in this country’s history have been found to be not guilty while on death row, so just in case, a doctor should not be allowed to kill people who murder others and are a threat to society.
On the other hand they think that a child SHOULD be killed by a doctor if the doctor thinks that the child might be disabled or have a fatal condition. There are also numerous cases of moral people refusing to kill children suspected of being less than perfect and then ending up delivering a perfectly healthy human being.
Unlike the position of opposing abortion but supporting the death penalty which on the surface could be perceived as hypocritical but can easily be explained by the concept of the innocence of a child and the free choice of an adult who chooses to destroy the lives of others and is an ongoing threat to society, this position of anti-death penalty and pro-infanticide is obscene and morally indefensible.
Mother’s body, mother’s choice. It’s unfortunate if it gets to that, but a respectful man would respect the choice to abort or carry to term.
That is absolute bull. That child is *not* a product of just the mother. That child has a father and that father has rights, too. Or does that only apply when it comes to giving the mother child support?
The choice to be respectful - on both ends - comes BEFORE hopping in the sack. Not after.
Your position is neither respectful nor sensitive, but the position of a man eager to find a way out of parental responsibility.
If you can find where I said that I will give you all the money in my savings account. I said the exact opposite.
THE EXACT OPPOSITE!
So, don’t get all worked up in a lather for what you think you think instead of what you know you know.
Well, it works both ways. If the mother decides against abortion and the man wants the abortion, then that “man eager to find a way out of parental responsibility” is out of luck.
I wish I lived in the same perfect world as you. But I’m grounded in the unfortunate reality that it doesn’t always work like that. And when push comes to shove, it’s the mother’s decision. It’s her body.
That’s such a cop-out. Look at this ultrasound photo. That is clearly a developing person. A person.
Not a clump of cells, but an individual with a body, a soul, and a life. If people don’t have the right to life, what right do we ultimately have? None.
So why does the “mother’s body” trump the body of the child?
I don’t live in a perfect world. I live in the real world. In the real world, there are consequence’s for one’s actions.
Sex causes pregnancy. It’s a fact. Anyone having sex is well aware of that fact.
You - and people like you - attempt to create a “perfect world” where there is no responsibility, no consequences for one’s actions.
That’s because BOTH the mother and the father are responsible for that child that THEY created. The mother should be held equally accountable for the child, and that means giving the child a chance at life. Otherwise, you run into sticky situations like this. Abortion only causes more problems.
Adoption is always an option. A woman who does not want a child doesn’t even have to hold him/her or look at the baby - have it put up for adoption. And they ask every pregnant woman if adoption is something they’re considering. I was asked about four times on various forms I filled out prior to my son’s arrival. It really isn’t that difficult.
As a woman, I find your position neither noble or admirable. I find it disturbing that you have no problem with a woman undergoing a severe, potentially deadly, unnatural medical procedure - thereby absolving you of parental responsibility - and cruelly categorizing that as the “choice” of the woman.
LGM
I cant describe what I feel when I read your posts. Why is it that you liberals think that abortion is the only answer if the baby will be born with a defect or some condition? Obviously your mother chose to give birth, why are these two loving parents looked down upon by you?
Abortion is mostly about convienience IMO. A child might alter your lifestyle so lets kill it like a common pest. Throw it in the garbage, as long as I can go out this weekend.
You said this was a strong argument for abortion, what about women who have been advised to get abortions and their children have been born healthy? What about that?
Ok. Where do you draw the line? Conception? A month? Because it’s not a person when it’s the size of a dime and can’t breathe on its own since it doesn’t have lungs. A person becomes a person when it can remain viable outside of the womb. That’s - and this is being charitable - a good five months in.
You know what’s deadlier than abortion? Childbirth!
As for the adoption angle, yeah, I wish more people took that option seriously. But that’s a huge time, emotional, and physical commitment. And if someone in their first or second trimester doesn’t want to make that sacrifice, they shouldn’t have to.
I don’t know what part of the country you call home, but you may enjoy the movie Juno. It’s only out on 40 screens across the country, but it’s a pretty great film. And it treats adoption and family responsibility very seriously (while not condemning abortion either). It may not be your cup of tea, but I imagine adoption proponents will be ecstatic with the film.
Yes. Life begins at conception. Your “life begins when they can live outside the womb” position is all well and good - especially since it gives rise to folks like Peter Singer, who think children (up to age 1) aren’t really human and should be killed at any time.
It also gives rise to partial-birth abortion - where in children who are perfectly healthy, and - in your words - could live outside the womb, are killed moments before birth. Some of these children were killed for reasons as specious as the mother wanted to play sports or worried she wouldn’t be able to go to rock concerts.
That goes far beyond the typical liberal argument of keeping abortion “safe, legal, and rare” and in cases “for the life of the mother” and rape and incest, doesn’t it?
And abortion isn’t? You act as if going down to Planned Parenthood is no different from going to the hair salon. Given Planned Parenthood’s shady legal behavior, and the countless resources created to counsel post-abortive women (and men), plus the very real problems women have after abortion (trouble conceiving, trouble carrying a “wanted” pregnancy to term, etc.) - there are risks.
As I said above, the time to be “pro-choice” comes before the child is conceived. Not after.
Maybe the woman should have thought about the possible “sacrifice” when she was putting out.
So you think Plan B, birth control (pills, the ring, the patch), and IUDs should all be outlawed? Because if you believe abortion should be illegal because it takes a life and “life begins at conception,” then your logical position is incredibly extreme. That only leaves condoms, calendars, and coitus interruptus. And those forms of birth control are unreliable.
Of course, that leaves the most reliable birth control: abstinence. Which is a pipe dream. Sexuality is a very important part of humanity and, frankly, is a civil right. People are going to have sex and people should have sex as responsibly as possible. But your position on birth control makes responsible sex impossible.
The physical problems you describe are incredibly rare and are more common in childbirth than abortions.
And of course abortion is a tough choice that isn’t right for many. Which is why they have a choice. Families like the Harrises can choose to carry to term and that decision is right for them. Good! But it’s not right for everyone. Some families aren’t ready.
Dilation and extraction abortions are extremely rare. Horrifying anecdotes aside, it is used primarily to preserve the woman’s health. And, no, the fetuses terminated in these abortions are not viable.
EQ, I respect your position greatly. It just doesn’t make for good law. What’s right for you isn’t right for most others.
Finally, sunandsteel, shut the Heck up. The adults are trying to talk.
#68 On December 18th, 2007 at 10:42 am, Rusty said:
“Because it’s not a person when it’s the size of a dime and can’t breathe on its own since it doesn’t have lungs. A person becomes a person when it can remain viable outside of the womb.”
So many statements upon which to comment, so little time…*sigh*….
Here is but one example, albeit a good, illustrative (there’s that word again!) one, of the many with which we have been provided, of the arrogance of a certain worldview.
Nothing more needs to be added.
Does ANYONE actually believe we are not involved in a deeply serious culture war?
Example # 1 gazillion of, “If you have to explain it to someone, they’ll never understand.”
Ohh, the adults, lol. Good comeback. How am I not being an adult by implying that if a woman doesnt want to be bothered by a child that she should not procreate? Or are you just another liberal who says crap like that cause you dont have a good explanation.
Because your language betrays you. EQ and I were haveing a serious and respectful argument and you have the audacity to talk about women “putting out.” As if it’s only her fault. Men can be expected to have sex, but a woman who does the same should be ashamed. If you wanted to say “people who have sex must be prepared for the consequences,” you would have said that. But instead you used language meant to annoy that blamed only women.
Maybe I used crass language and a hint of sarcasm which I should have noted better. However my point remains, women and men alike that dont want the burden of children should think about engaging in an act whose function is to reproduce.
I am ok with birth control, pills, IUD’s and all that. What disturbs me is abortion as birth control. I have been around a few girls who have done that because they were fooling around or they didnt want to be a mom yet. And I have been around guys who didnt want to be a father to the child they helped create.
Rusty:
I believe there are health concerns with the use of the Pill and other chemical contraception (links to breast cancer, blood clots, etc).
And I still believe life begins at conception. So, from that perspective, I do not use chemical contraception…and while it is a teaching of the Catholic church, I know many people – both of other denominations and not particularly religious – who use Natural Family Planning (NFP) for reasons both religious and health related (including the environmental impact of birth control hormones on water and water-dwelling species).
However, while I find it personally objectionable, not every instance of contraception causes an abortion and most prevent ovulation to begin with. So to outlaw all contraception would be – to use your words – “extreme”.
I don’t disagree that sexuality is an important part of human nature.
However, sexuality without respect for the dignity of the person and life turns what should be an act of love into a mechanical performance. As I’ve argued above, it turns people from someone into something - from the man and the woman down to the child they create.
Women are designed, by nature, to have children. It may not seem fair to some who look at men and think they can have all the “free” sex they want, but women and men aren’t cut from the same cloth. That’s why I fight for the father’s right and hold both the mother and father equally responsible for their child.
Men and women aren’t the same. Never were. Never will be. They are to be treated with respect and dignity, but the inherent biological, mental, emotional, and physical differences between the sexes cannot be whitewashed through feminism or political correctness.
I have to disagree with your statistics on PBA. While I don’t have the time to find the links here, much of the testimony by nurses who assisted with such procedures strongly contradicts the notion that the children are “not viable” moments before birth. And - as I mentioned above - some of the reasons for PBAs were as frivolous as the woman wanting to play sports or go to rock concerts…hardly life threatening problems, Rusty.
Even in instances where PBA *might* be used to save the mother’s life, why can’t the child be delivered? I refuse to go into the details of PBA here, but it would seem logical that it’s faster, safer, and morally sound to deliver the child rather than do what PBA does.
I don’t have statistics here, and while in some instances childbirth is risky, abortion *does* cause harm and I would venture a guess that a vast majority of women who give birth don’t regret that decision (whether they kept or gave up the child for adoption) as much as women who’ve had an abortion. Project Rachel is one of the groups that help post-abortive women and men - some of their stories, and their regrets, are deeply profound.
Beyond that, many of the women who’ve had abortions felt coerced or were strong-armed into doing so, or were led to do so by an older adult - especially men sexually involved with underage girls. Look at the case against Planned Parenthood for violation of laws requiring notification of abuse of a minor. That behavior is not about “choice” or “women’s health” – that’s about helping criminals and abusers hide evidence of their crimes.
Add to that the fact that many pro-choice proponents rabidly fight against informed choice (like letting women view ultrasounds, and access to alternative help) simply because many women then *choose* not to have an abortion, and it makes me question their motives. I’ve also come across rather rabid pro-choice folks who openly criticize and mock women and men who mourn abortions they’ve regretted.
I believe abortion laws should be a states’ right issue and that Roe v. Wade, on a federal level, must be overturned. It too is “bad law” and this is an issue that should be decided by the people and votes, not a wily interpretation of the Constitution and the “right to privacy”.
Ultimately, you’re right in saying the issue of abortion can’t be legislated out of existence. I understand that, and I don’t think it would happen if abortion were a states’ right issue. Abortion needs to fade away through a conversion of heart and mind. Which can be done through many things – including open and honest discussion of the issues and allowing women access to ultrasounds and information on crisis pregnancy centers and other forms of aid.
I appreciate that you’re being respectful throughout this debate.
coldfront said (#60):
sunandsteel said (#67):
He was born without functioning lungs. This is more than a “defect”. He was doomed to die within minutes never having taken a breath. I am not saying the mother made the wrong decision. But you have to have eyes shut very tight not to see two sides to this question.
I see two sides to this. I also see someone who, to me, is looking at the parents in a very condescending manner. I take your post as saying “Well, if they had just aborted then everything would have been just fine with the world”, and it tears you up that they would choose the opposite.
This may surprise you EQ, but I agree with you regarding Roe v. Wade being a highly questionable decision. It’s kind of liberal orthodoxy that it’s this great landmark decision, but, as written, it’s pretty hard to defend.
I think we can find common ground in your personal decision to avoid chemical birth control on moral grounds while still thinking it should be legal. I’m the same way regarding abortion. Some people are far too cavalier about it and that saddens me. Anyone who gets a D&X (or, ugh, “PBA”) to go to a rock concert is acting selfishly.
Then again, you probably hear “I’m pro-choice but anti-abortion” so much that that loses its significance.
Abortion should not be just another form of birth control. But I have to weigh that with the pragmatic concerns of America today. And I don’t think women should be forced to bear children if what’s inside of them is scientifically not human.
BTW, this was fun and enlightening. I love these chats, EQ.
We do have some common ground, Rusty. I won’t deny it.
What do you think are “pragmatic concerns”?
I have to disagree on the last part, however (that probably doesn’t surprise you
). An embryo - even in its earliest stages of development - is distinctly human. It does not have chicken DNA or gorilla DNA, but human DNA. So that child is human, even if it’s not developed.
These are nice chats. It’s nice to be able to rationally debate a heated topic without being called a troglodyte, or some of the other hysterical pejoratives I’ve had hurled at me.
We may not agree on everything, but you are respectful and I appreciate that.
This story brings back memories of my youngest brother, who was born with a fatal birth defect, only back then we had no idea until he was born. The irony is that my parents had contemplated abortion (not enough money, too many mouths) but my mother couldn’t go through with it.
When my brother was born, my mom got to hold him in her arms for a few minutes. Later, she told me that, IN SPITE of the way things ended, she was still glad she hadn’t had the abortion, because she’d at least had him for the nine months he grew inside her and the few minutes she got to told him.
LGM, people like you make me sick. Never presume to tell anyone what is best for them. Regardless of how things turned out in the end, the Harris family did not feel that was best for them and ultimately, theirs is the only opinion that counts.