The suicide of Emma Beck and Silence No More
My column this week reflects on the death of young British artist Emma Beck and her unborn twins.
***
The suicide of Emma Beck and Silence No More
Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate
She didn’t have to die. And neither did her unborn children. Over the weekend, London newspapers reported on the 2007 suicide of 30-year-old Emma Beck, a young British artist who hanged herself after the abortion of her twin babies. Perhaps the retelling of her suffering can prevent more needless deaths.
The agony and loneliness in Emma Beck’s suicide note resonate across the pond, across racial and class lines, across generations. She was distraught over a breakup with her boyfriend, who didn’t want the children. She was suffering intense grief from her decision to end the lives inside her. And so she ended her own.
“I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mum,” Beck wrote. “I told everyone I didn’t want to do it, even at the hospital. I was frightened, now it is too late. I died when my babies died. I want to be with my babies — they need me, no one else does.”
Beck’s family blames the medical establishment. The judicial system, as is so often the case, has become a coping mechanism. A British court recently held a hearing on Beck’s suicide. Beck’s mother revealed that her daughter “was not given the opportunity to see a counselor.”
When a professional “counselor” can’t be found, isn’t that what mothers are for?
But it’s not just jaded abortion providers and medical assistants, AWOL counselors and MIA parents who need to look in the mirror. We have tolerated a culture of callousness and nurtured an entitlement to convenience for decades. Feminists shush women with post-abortion regrets. Population control zealots and Planned Parenthood drum it into the heads of young women around the world: “The fewer, the merrier” and “Why carry more burdens?” their T-shirts and bumper stickers proclaim.
Last fall, in Emma Beck’s homeland, the British press went gaga over an environmental nitwit who had an abortion and got her tubes tied to “protect the planet.” She told the London Daily Mail: “Every person who is born uses more food, more water, more land, more fossil fuels, more trees and produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, and adds to the problem of over-population.”
That came on the heels of a British think tank report on how children are bad for the environment. Said John Guillebaud, emeritus professor of family planning at University College London: “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”
And who gets premium op-ed space in America’s newspaper of record to talk about abortion? Idiots like University of Iowa adjunct assistant writing professor Brian Goedde, who shared his festive thoughts surrounding the New Year’s Eve before his girlfriend’s abortion in an essay a few months ago in The New York Times. “The abortion is scheduled for two days from now, and we’re holing up,” he reminisced. “We do the dishes brush our teeth, climb into bed and have unprotected sex. ‘I’m not going to get more pregnant,’ Emily says. I’ve never felt pleasure more guiltily.”
What you rarely hear are the voices telling you that such self-indulgence is wrong. What you rarely read are the stories of untold women (and men) around the world who know the vaunted choice they made was wrong and need help. What you rarely see are the studies showing that with abortion come lifelong costs and consequences — high levels of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, grief, ostracism, guilt and, in at least one study in Finland, higher suicide rates.
Delivering that message here in the United States are preventive groups like the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (nifla.org), which donates ultrasound equipment and training to open up a “window to the womb” for women in crisis pregnancies, and post-abortion healing organizations like Silent No More (silentnomoreawareness.org). To combat abortion glorifiers, the Silent No More Awareness campaign makes the public aware that abortion is emotionally, physically and spiritually harmful to women and others; reaches out to women who are hurting from an abortion and lets them know help is available; and invites women to join us in speaking the truth about abortion’s negative consequences.
What Emma Beck most needed to hear is the message abortion pushers most desperately want to drown out: You are not alone.
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
- Life of the Party
- Emma Beck RIP (age 31) | BitsBlog
- Triple tragedy — Misinformed consent « Nunoftheabove
- Perverse, and boasting about it : Brigitte Pellerin Online
- Liberty Pundit
- Triple tragedy — Misinformed consent | NunoftheAbove
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Abortion
Big Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump Scandal
Doug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Green Room
» Times Slimes Obamic ClimesBig Government
» Why Isn’t Anyone Really Investigating ACORN?Big Government
» ACORN Scandal, Part 2: The Evidentiary PhaseMudville Gazette
» War costs money (2)
Not the same thing – she didn’t say she was MADE to feel guilty. She felt ashamed of herself – you have yet to show where someone said Ms. Beck, or any other woman, should feel guilty for having an abortion. Good luck with that.
Because she said she was insulted. That in and of itself warrants an apology.
No – but it means you should think before you write.
JW2:
Uncle.
I know that anything I say will be taken personally, so i will say nothing more to you other than this:
I understand that my views offend you. I also understand that you are annoyed with me because I don’t feel what you would consider an acceptable level of compassion for someone that went through something you did.
That said, YOU didn’t kill yourself. Emma did. If the fact that I am callous offends you then please stop reading what I write.
i’m not necessarily pro-life, but that NYT article is absolutely vile.
Unacceptable. I came on this site and for the first since I had my abortion 8 years ago (with the exception of telling my husband) I shared the most painful experience of my life. Your disingenuous lack of apology will not fly with me and I refuse to accept that because I don’t like what you have to say I should stop reading this thread. It seems to me that the insulter should be the one to alter his participation, not the “insultee.”
I’m going to Rachel’s Vineyard this weekend. Sometimes it takes over 30 years to seek healing. God, help me forgive myself. Bless poor Emma and her babies.
English:
I doubt anyone here that holds that sentiment would use those exact words. If people think it’s nothing to feel guilty about then why do some poeple want it to be illegal?
HAH! “YOU offend me!! Apologize!!” Where have we heard THAT before?
Alright. I’m done.
Amen, JW2.
Know that I am 110% in your corner on this (not that you need it, mind you). zeroangel has done more to reinforce the arguments of all here than Michelle’s column.
Being “callous” apparently is an excuse for not having manners or civility.
And if you ever want to talk to someone else, please e-mail me. I hope that’s not too forward or offensive, but I can lend a sympathetic and supportive ear if you need it.
JW2
zeroangel is not capable of understanding where you are coming from.
I want to personally thank you for being so brave as to share your story here. Thank you for putting a human face on such a horrible epidemic. The so-called choice being offered by Planned Parenthood and the like is really no choice at all. I respect you for being so vulnerable and I am so sorry it has opened you up to the cruelty inflicted here. I cannot apologize on behalf of zeroangel, but I can offer you my sympathy.
Are you dizzy from all the spin, yet? Our argument – highlighted by the case of Emma Beck – is that it’s harmful to women and children, and the by-product of an ideology that cares naught for “women’s health” and only about gaining political points.
Again, no one has said women should feel shameful or guilty.
This:
is evidence you don’t have a leg to stand on on that point. If nothing else, you should have realized by now most of the people here have no problem bluntly speaking their minds. When they think someone should feel guilty or ashamed about something – they say it.
You yourself acknowledged it was personal, and just because you are a self-labeled “callous” person it does not absolve you of the responsibility to apologies when you genuinely insult and hurt someone.
JW2,
Thank you for sharing your story. We tend to think we are alone in this big cruel world. Just know that the gang here supports you.
May God bless and keep you.
englishqueen01, JuniperLimb, 30 pcs of silver and (most) everyone here:
Thank you so much, from the bottom of my heart, for all your kind words and support. This is such a wonderful community and I am honored to be in the same corner as the great, well-spoken conservatives that I find here. Hopefully the open reception that I found upon telling my story here can help me to heal and perhaps use my experience to help others.
“If the fact that I am callous offends you then please stop reading what I write.”
Zero, you are a jerk. Why don’t you just leave it alone and stop making offensive posts. You are offending just about everyone and your repeated posts are just bullying.
I am amazed that you still have a wife given the mindset that you have put on display here. Don’t you have anything better to do than repeatedly harangue a troubled woman who killed herslef out of grief and the sincere posters here who are trying to share w/compassion.
Please do everyone here a favor & refrain from engaging in such hurtful posting.
“Prochoice” about what choice?
What that PC term means when de-euphamized is “pro-abortion” – just as “pro-life” means “anti-aborton”.
To be “pro-choice”, by definition, means you do think it’s OK to encourage abortion because at least one person along the way has to enable and facilitate the deed.
Gee, I posted my comment before reading all the Zeroangel comments. Now I regret it.
i disagree with that and i think that’s unfair. i consider myself “pro-choice” because i believe women should have a choice to get an abortion safely (i oppose all gov’t funding). i would, however, never get an abortion. i would also encourage my child to not have an abortion. i don’t believe in encouraging women to abort children. if you must know, the thought repulses me.
however, not everyone is me. and we can not save everyone. while this is a moral issue to you, it’s not to someone else. and while we can argue all day about that being the heart of the issue, the reality is that women still get pregnant when they are unwilling to raise the child.
JW2 – we got your back.
That’;s exactly what I pointed out. bloghooligan. To be “pro-choice”, by definition, means to be “pro-abortion”.
uhangtight~
I’ve seen the same things in regard to the connection between having a pregnancy end prematurely (either by miscarriage or abortion) and increased risk of breast cancer. The explanation is that the body doesn’t have anything to do with all those hormones connected to the pregnancy – with a pregnancy ending in a live birth, the body naturally deals with the hormones because the pregnancy cycle has completed, and those hormones go to producing milk for your baby. If you do as God intended when he created the female form, you breast feed your child until they are old enough to be weaned, and through that process, your body is able to slowly cut back on the hormones as the need for milk production decreases.
Wish I had the time to find the links to support this. And those who say this has been “proven false”, I question THEIR agenda, as well. This whole connection is why, if I were to give to breast cancer research, I WILL NOT NEVER donate to the Susan G. Komen Foundation – they have too many connections to Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood gives the Komen Foundation a new crop of women who need breast cancer research…
While I am no longer going to address those that think I am callous, a jerk, that are amazed my wife loves me, and those that are projecting thier own feelings onto me. The following cannot stand uncontested:
This is not true. I am against prohibtion, that does not mean I am pro-drinking and encourage others to drink. I am also against laws that say I cannot smoke, doesn’t mean I encourage others to smoke. Being against legislation to forbid all forms of abortion does NOT mean I encourage people to abort children.
purplepeep: and i’m sure you wouldn’t regard your position as extreme, at all.
An afterthought:
I reread what you wrote and I may have misunderstood. Yes, I see, I am pro-at-least-one-person-no-less-than-facilitating-abortion.
So, in that sense I am pro-abortion.
What position, bloghooligan? All I noted was the fact that when one says they are “pro-choice” it means they find abortion to be an acceptable outcome. By definition that makes the persons’ view “pro-abortion”.
does that logic follow to other things such as since i support war, then i accept that death and suffering caused by it acceptable? or because i believe in raising the speed limit, that i’m perfectly ok with the death caused by those that speed?
you’re extreme, and usually extremist don’t consider themselves extreme.
I can clarify it better for you with 2 questions, bloghooligan:
1)Was is the outcome of a woman going to a “clinic” to have her pregnancy “terminated”? (unless someone helps change her mind)
2)Is that outcome acceptable?
you’re asking me the wrong questions.
the question you should ask me is:
1) do you believe in a police state to stop women from having abortions.
no.
i shouldn’t have to care about why the woman is going to the clinic. why do you and what are you willing to do to stop it? pass a law? that works so well with cocaine and crack, right?
i’m not an anarchist, but for you to fully support your belief, you have to believe in nothing less than sharia law to reach your abortionless nirvana. i don’t support abortion, but i support less the infrastructure you’d need to erase it from existence. and unlike drugs, i do not find abortion a threat to public – i find unwanted children the state can not control to be more of a threat.
so, as you’re so willing to ascribe to me that i’m pro-abortion, i will ascribe to you that you’re pro-totalitarianism.
but to answer your questions:
1) yes.
2) no.
It would seem you’re have a tough enough time with just the 2 simple ones I’ve already posed, bloghooligan.
I don’t ask them as gotcha questions, but to clarify the point that to be “pro-choice” one must be “pro-abortion”. That’s not aimed at you, it’s just an observation of what the term means by necessity.
You tried a diversion tactic with war & car accidents. But that didn’t fly since we’re not speaking of accidental, unintended, collateral damage but rather the very specific taking of innocent human life.
That logic would require the laws against robbery and rape be repealed because laws don’t prevent people from raping and robbing.
I think you’ll find not as many people are as terrified of “unwanted” children.
Didn’t say that, bloghooligan; my statement was simply that, by definition, to be “pro-choice” entails being “pro-abortion”. Apparently you self-identified with that observation.
Thank you – but my 1st question was a typo: it should have asked “What is the outcome of the womans’ action?”
cjean,
We are here for you. I personally will be praying for your healing.
I had to leave as my stomach was turning because of where the thread went. I am glad I came back if just to say:
Yahweh bless you.
cjean: Don’t regret it. Please know that I am here for you, as are many others. zeroangel does not speak for us and is flat-out wrong.
The difference between abortion and he death penalty, war, and other laws is that an unborn child has broken no laws, violated no international treaties. He was created by his mother and father who should, living in America, know that sex can lead to pregnancy. And abortion proponents punish the baby for daring to exist.
Even sex with birth control leads to pregnancy. And those “consenting adults” we hear so much about should be aware of the potential outcomes of their decision to have sex – whether in a relationship or a one-night stand.
Which is why – as much as it pains me to say this – abortion will not go away until we change hearts and minds. Until we show people that the euphemisms pro-abortion persons use, and the underhanded, dishonest tactics abortion clinics and the more rabid abortion supporters use are harming women we won’t end abortion.
It is an unnecessary evil.
Yet the bright spot in all of this is that more and more young people are becoming pro-life. So there is hope. There is always hope and there is always
It’s time for me to call it a day.
For cjean, JW2 and all the other women out there who’ve opened their hearts on this thread: I applaud you. I support you in your healing. I love you. And I pray for you. Do not let insensitive comments or ignorant commenters like some of the ones here dissuade you from sharing your stories. And my inbox is always open.
The women who have survived abortions are in my daily prayers.
I have two very dear friends who chose to have abortions — each for very different reasons. Their stories are their own, but the results are remarkably similar: a lifetime of regrets.
My sister and my brother were both adopted by my parents. I can’t imagine my life without them…and I am so grateful for the selflessness of their “bioparents” when they made the decision to bring them into the world.
I don’t ask them as gotcha questions, but to clarify the point that to be “pro-choice” one must be “pro-abortion”. That’s not aimed at you, it’s just an observation of what the term means by necessity. and after that didn’t yield the results you wanted Thank you – but my 1st question was a typo: it should have asked “What is the outcome of the womans’ action?”
but you never ask gotcha questions. besides, the answers i gave to your questions contradicts the conclusion that being “”pro-choice” is by definition being “pro-abortion”" it’s still a ridiculous claim by a zealot.
That logic would require the laws against robbery and rape be repealed because laws don’t prevent people from raping and robbing.
And that comparison requires that you ignore cultural context that rape and robbery are considered by a society to be if not immoral, unbeneficial to society. Most people support abortion rights even if they don’t support abortion itsself. Your dire need to paint all people who don’t support a gov’t stalking women to stop them from having abortion as “pro-abortion” is why pro-lifers are seen as zealots. You, just as the left you, do not have the capacity to, or absolutely refuse to distiguish, those points.
I think you’ll find not as many people are as terrified of “unwanted” children.
Then I don’t know where you live because the results of non-family planning are apparent in almost every facet of society. Maybe for the sake of this argument, it’s more convenient to ignore that. However, they do grow up and have children of their own.
Didn’t say that, bloghooligan; my statement was simply that, by definition, to be “pro-choice” entails being “pro-abortion”. Apparently you self-identified with that observation.
oh, you didn’t say i was pro-abortion…you just said i was pro-abortion. and so i say again, by definition to be pro-life means being pro-totalitarian.
So the solution to that is to kill the baby?
Here’s an alternative: teach people sex isn’t a “right” and that they’re supposed to be responsible for any life their sex creates.
There’s this great thing called “adoption”. How about putting all the tax dollars wasted on Planned Parenthood into a program to help families adopt (an expensive endeavor?) I guarantee you that if more families had financial assistance in adopting, they would. There is no such thing as an “unwanted child.” That child is wanted somewhere.
Had I the means, I would adopt as many children as I could. They are gifts and delights.
It’s silly to say, “Gee, well, people aren’t ‘family planning’ so the solution is murder.”
I’m sorry, but as this thread shows, there is not a “pro-choice” person who doesn’t see abortion as the preferable “choice”.
The New York Times articles I mention, the ones lamenting the fact there isn’t enough abortion in movies, is further proof.
Actually, one need not look any further than the hysteria that erupts when abortion rates drop (and currently they’re at their lowest since the 1970s). It’s always feminists and abortion supporters who alarmingly cry, “Not enough women are ‘choosing’ abortion! Something must be done to get more of them into Planned Parenthood!”
Then they turn around and cry they want to keep abortion “safe, legal, and rare.” Guess what, 1.3 million abortions annually isn’t “rare”.
If you insist that abortion must be an option, then with the following conditions:
1. No abortion after the first trimester. A national ban on Partial-Birth Abortion.
2. Mandatory pre-abortion counseling that includes a thorough ultrasound and honest information on fetal development.
3. Additional counseling for a woman who expresses any doubt prior to having an abortion. This includes providing her with information regarding crisis pregnancy centers and religious groups who would help her.
4. Parental notification laws and compliance with laws requiring health care providers report instances of potential child abuse (since Planned Parenthood is so big on covering for potential abusers).
Those are all reasonable expectations, giving women a fully informed choice and protecting girls from abusers.
But watch pro-abortion folk freak out about them. Why? Because, to them, there is no choice more preferable than abortion.
They fear a fully informed choice (especially ultrasounds) because most women decide to keep the baby (somewhere in the range of 75%) or have the baby and put him up for adoption. To that end, back in 1989 they were already getting hysterical over ultrasound/sonogram technology:
No one can honestly argue that “pro-choice” folks are cool with a woman who repeatedly chooses to have children. Women who do are “detrimental to the cause of feminism”, “set back women’s equality”, blah, blah, blah…
Until I see pro-abortion persons show the same degree of compassion and concern for women (especially women who have abortions and regret them) and stop attacking/demonizing women who choose to have children, I won’t mis-label them as “pro-choice”…because that’s not what they are.
Gotta love that mentality.
Recently, didn’t Michelle Obama or Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton say America would be judged by how we treated the “lowest” in our society, by how we cared for the most defenseless?
A nation that wants to be compassionate, but ends the life of 1.3 million of its citizens each year cannot make progress in claiming to care for the “disadvantaged” when the most defenseless are not protected.
Pro-life is not pro-totalitarian.
A woman who is pregnant does not have two heads, two hearts, four arms. An unborn child is a separate and unique individual.
…and yet a person who says this will claim that they do not fit in the totalitarian category – and they are still breathing (pro.their.life).
EQ – luv ya but you are wasting your fingertips reasoning with a person who would come up with such a statement.
Great posts though!
Sorry, wrong quote.
Truth
That’s the misconception held by many that to be pro-life you want to remove a woman’s freedom to choose… This couldn’t be farther from the truth. What pro-lifers want is to shield women from making a decision that will negatively affect them for the rest of their lives. Englishqueen enumerated in her post #133 exactly what pro-lifers want for women when they make the decision to have an abortion and I don’t think it is to much to ask. Especially, if their cause is such a noble one it should be able to stand up against the scrutiny. We expect integrity, honesty, etc… from most other industries why should Planned Parenthood and NARAL be treated any differently? If they aren’t running an honest business they should be shutdown, no? Lives are hanging in the balance…
I came back for another look and I am encouraged by your comments On-my-soap-box and Enqlish Queen. Thank you. I am looking forward to this weekend with trembling and prayer.
To anyone who may still check this thread – I just want to thank all who were so kind to me and give you a little good news.
Sharing my story here was not only cathartic (so to speak) but it helped me bring this up again with my husband.
I had told him of my abortion before, but it’s not an easy thing to talk about. I asked him to read this thread last night to give him more insight into my past. So, I was able to use this to share with him.
Additionally, it started us talking and he told me something that he never had before. He said that when I first told him about this (when we were dating) my story and my pain and my conviction were what really made him start paying attention to the world and started leading him on the path toward conservatism and (more importantly) Christianity.
His words to me were “I’m sorry you had to go through something so horrible so God could get to me.”
So thank you for this wonderful opportunity.
JW2,
God bless and thank you for sharing, again.
“And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.”
cjean & JW2,
It is not every day we get to give encouraging words. Some days we fight with trolls. Some days we show our ire for the crap or Rep’s dish us. Some days we show our frustrations over a system that has betrayed us. Some days we need to shower off because of the “stuff” people say that do more harm than good.
I for one am sarcastic and use humor (or attempt to) to keep things light.
Be encouraged. YAHWEH loves you. Not for your faults but because of your dependence on HIM for forgiveness. He is gracious to give to those who ask.
I am a father of 5 and Grand-dude of one new Grandson who is the light of my life.
When you give yourself a child you do more than become a mommy. You create a daddy, brothers, sisters, grandmothers, grandfathers, aunts, uncles…
You do a world of good – trust me.
Be at peace – you are loved.
Chris
cjean – My husband and I will praying for you!
This
and this
are why I’m pro-life.
I am only doing what I believe is right. I am touched that my words have helped you, cjean and JW2…
I second EQ’s comments. God bless you PP, cjean and jw2.
i see. so to be pro-choice means to be pro-abortion, but to be pro-life doesn’t mean pro-totalitarian? wow. i said this in the context of the previous poster’s comment to me. but take it out of context if that helps your case. pro-choice is to pro-abortion as pro-life is to totalitarianism. or restated having choice is to being PRO-abortion as being against choice is to being PRO-life. i bet you don’t see the irony.
you’re arguing with me from the wrong premise. i stated in my first post that i find abortion reprehensible. that i’d never get one and would dissuade others from doing so. that being said, i believe that abortion should be legal.
i’m all for constraints on abortion. i’m not for it being illegal. but since i’m for abortion being legal, that must mean i want women to kill their babies…right, or that i’m OK with them being killed. pro-lifers are just as rabid and uncompromising.
and you stated that we must protect the most innocent in our society. that’s only true to the point that protecting them hurts the rest of society. and i don’t mean to state the obvious, but a fetus is not in society yet. that’s what we’re debating.
to me this is a sinking ship argument. do you work to save the 2 men below deck to the detriment of the 1000 that absolutely can be saved or do you risk the all 1002 lives trying to save the 2. we have a myriad of problems on the deck, and i consider this issue below the deck. you would never find me out with a picket sign for either side.
the reality is that we can not save everyone. and i’d argue with you that it’s more important to save the ones here than to save the ones not here in hopes that they’re the one that cures AIDS.
Nope. Repeat that as necessary until it sinks in.
As I said in my post – time and again, when it’s proposed that we keep abortion “safe, legal and rare” by providing women with pre-abortion counseling, alternatives, and information, it’s decried by abortion supporters as being “emotional manipulation.”
Not the same thing. Less than 7% of abortions are done in cases of rape/incest or to save the life of the mother. That means 93% of abortions are for “social reasons” and it’s being used as an alternative to birth control; an out for irresponsible men and the women they coerce into having abortions. A way for feminists (an ironic moniker) to make women more “female” (by denying what makes us inherently women…)
No one here opposes saving a mother’s life, which is the situation you allude to. But that doesn’t gel with a majority of the excuses for abortion.
Okay. So anyone under the age of 18 isn’t “in society” – they cannot vote, they do not pay taxes, they are not adults. So, by your line of thinking even the born child, who is reliant on someone for care is “not in society” and expendable.
You don’t think for a second the shifting defintion of when life begins has led to the cases of child abuse and neglect? It’s being ingrained in our culture that life doesn’t matter, that it’s all about what’s “convenient” for the mother and father, and that you don’t have to be responsible for the choices you make.
The Culture of Death mentality is damaging much more than a “woman’s right to choose.”
Dear any and all pro-abortionists,
Isn’t life a choice?
As I said in my post – time and again, when it’s proposed that we keep abortion “safe, legal and rare” by providing women with pre-abortion counseling, alternatives, and information, it’s decried by abortion supporters as being “emotional manipulation.”
ok? so what does that to do with what i said? this has nothing to do with the context of what you’re taking issue with, so this is a nonpoint in our discourse.
Not the same thing. Less than 7% of abortions are done in cases of rape/incest or to save the life of the mother. That means 93% of abortions are for “social reasons” and it’s being used as an alternative to birth control; an out for irresponsible men and the women they coerce into having abortions. A way for feminists (an ironic moniker) to make women more “female” (by denying what makes us inherently women…)
No one here opposes saving a mother’s life, which is the situation you allude to. But that doesn’t gel with a majority of the excuses for abortion.
you’re so much on your pro-life tear, that you’re arguing talking points with me, whereas i’m not.
what does the breakdown of abortions have to do with the number of abortions performed as a % of society? 1,500,00 per year out of 300,000,000. that’s a small portion of society assuming that those 1.5 are not having multiple abortions in a year.
as for alternative birth control, you’re correct. i’ll concede…once again you’re arguing as if you’re arging with someone who doesn’t find abortion repulsive.
and i didn’t allude to that situation at all. in fact, i don’t know where you got that.
Okay. So anyone under the age of 18 isn’t “in society” – they cannot vote, they do not pay taxes, they are not adults. So, by your line of thinking even the born child, who is reliant on someone for care is “not in society” and expendable.
this point is so asinine it’s hard to come up with a response. so….do 17 year olds live in a womb unable to care for themselves in your part of the country? i didn’t say dependents. this isn’t about who pays taxes and if it were, why stop at <18?. if that were the case, we could nuke ghettos around the country. so, let’s please try to be serious.
You don’t think for a second the shifting defintion of when life begins has led to the cases of child abuse and neglect? It’s being ingrained in our culture that life doesn’t matter, that it’s all about what’s “convenient” for the mother and father, and that you don’t have to be responsible for the choices you make.
The Culture of Death mentality is damaging much more than a “woman’s right to choose.”
i absolutely believe that our society is shifting towards one of convenience…somehow making abortion illegal will stop that? the premise that making abortion illegal will force people to be more responsible is sinfully illogical.
do i believe that shifting the definition of where life begins leads to abuse? can’t say that i do, but i do believe the problem is a shift of personal responsibility over the last 30 years.
Protecting who hurts the rest of society? wow, Wow, WOW! Who makes the call – you? Judges? Who would you protect US from? Children who might be born HIV positive? Diseased? Why stop there? Kill everyone who has AIDS, the poor, people with cancer now – today. Oh, wait, they have taken a breath so, they are exempt no matter the drain on society. How far do we go?
There are a lot of things “society” needs protection from, unborn children is not one of them.
Protecting who hurts the rest of society? wow, Wow, WOW! Who makes the call – you? Judges? Who would you protect US from? Children who might be born HIV positive? Diseased? Why stop there? Kill everyone who has AIDS, the poor, people with cancer now – today. Oh, wait, they have taken a breath so, they are exempt no matter the drain on society. How far do we go?
There are a lot of things “society” needs protection from, unborn children is not one of them.
uh, what? who said anyone needed protecting from unborn children? it’s the unborn who need the protecting right? isn’t that what this discussion is about?!
mean, way to take a point and distort it.
Care to clarify? I see that I am not the only person to pounce on it.
I think we have an issue with:
Now, who was being mean?
i have no idea what you’re talking about. no one else has claimed that i’ve stated we need protection from the unborn.
being mean? WTF are you talking about?
cjean,
I pray that the retreat goes well. I’ve heard wonderful things about it.
Blessings for the weekend!
terri
Wow, amid the wrestling there are some awesome nuggets of love and hope. To JW2, terri, EQ, On-my-soap-box, PP and all other well wishers, God bless you and thanks.
Prayers up for Zero & bloghooligan – no offense intended.
Thanks Michelle for the forum you provide and for this exchange of ideas. Truth will prevail.
cjean
cjean:
Your gesture is kind, and no offense is taken. I understand that you passionately believe you are right and that I am wrong.
Consider though, I passionately believe I am right. I believe that human life DOES NOT begin the early stages of pregnancy (though I am NOT OK with late term abortions, partial-birth abortions, etc. since I think human life of a kind COULD be said to begin in later stages).
So, due to that belief, I don’t think anyone that has an early stage abortion has ANYTHING to be ashamed about (other then maybe not having the foresight to consider birth control thus sparing them a potentially dangerous operation).
Further, I have a hard time reconciling the train of thought that says abortion = murder, but if you committed this form of murder its OK and we forgive you.
The way I see it, if a person has a hard time coming to terms with having had an abortion it is because of their OWN beliefs. There is such a thing as a woman that has had an abortion and did not suffer years of guilt over it. That is not to say it was something they took lightly, and it is not to say it is something they do constantly. They simply did not see a fetus as a human life. I realize that many people might (and have) said, “zeroangel doesn’t know what he is talking about! No woman he ever loved had to go through this!” Those people are wrong. Furthermore I sincerely think that if the worst thing that ever happened to a person in their whole life was they had to go through an abortion, then they have led a very fortunate life indeed and I envy them.
On top of all these beliefs, I am also an atheist. I do not believe in God, so while I understand the good intent and the unselfish desire to want my soul to be saved, it’s a bit like me telling you, “By the grace of Lord Zeus I hope you come to understand that human life along begins when Apollo breathes the soul into a fetus during the 222 day of a pregnancy.” I AM NOT trying to belittle your religion with that statement (just as I wasn’t trying to belittle anyone else in prior posts with similar anecdotes), just trying to explain my point of view.
Finally, due to all these things, when I read about this woman, my first thought was, “Holy Cow! What an incredibly emotionally unstable woman! What? MM is blaming the abortion industry for her death?” Might she have been saved if she were given all the choices? Was she duped into believing abortion is OK? Maybe. Its far more likely that well-meaning people that shared the same belief as I do simply screwed up.
We can go on and on about how the “abortionists” WANT to force everyone to believe the way they do and how they “trick” unsuspecting woman into believing abortion is OK. Then I can turn tables and talk about if one follows the abortion = murder train of thought to its logical conclusion, those that kill abortion doctors could be said to be justified on some level.
The preceding paragraph is exactly why this thing will not get resolved anytime soon. The issue hits at the heart of religious and philosophical beliefs, beliefs people get VERY excited about. Thus, people that consider themselves rational, thinking beings are demonized by one end of the spectrum or the other (depending on the stance they take) and serious debate is impossible.
Anyways- if I did believe in God I might pray for you. Instead I’ll just “hope” that you someday come to the realization that you don’t have to feel like you ended a “life” because you didn’t.
To all of those hurting people who have been touched, abused, deceived, or used by abortion I would like to tell you there is hope. Hope for a peaceful life, free of the shame and guilt brought on by abortion. Freedom from self loathing and condemnation. Freedom from self imposed isolation and self destruction.
God’s mercy is from everlasting to everlasting and is renewed daily. We all need mercy. We all desperately need to be free from our troubling past.
Your hope lies wtihin the Word of God starting with Acts 2:38-39.
I pray you find the peace that passeth all understanding.
Zeroangel,
The simplicity of the matter is once life is created, the spark of life begins and does not naturally end unless aborted, killed by someone. No one but the mother controls that happening.
I have had a child and felt the struggle of life within me. I did choose to kill a child and in over 30 years I have not come to ‘peace’ with it. Not any peace that could be found of my own accord. I believe God will meet me in my desire to come to terms with this over the coming weekend.
I think you are naive to think that one or another’s ‘beliefs’ are truth or could be truth because they believe it fervently. Truth is truth and it is a sharp, double edged sword.
No one has offered forgiveness for murder to myself or to others sharing their grief over this choice. God, through his Son forgives. As an atheist I understand you will not understand this. It is a distinction with great meaning.
I have hoped for many decades now that our society will wake up to what is happening. There is a callousness in our country, in the hearts and minds of so many. Our nation suffers the loss of the little ones, the mental anguish to the mothers and unintended consequences in the cheapening of all human life.
My friend, ZA, you have an honest passion about you. I hope (and pray) you might find what you seek (even if you don’t know that you seek it).
Thank you Larry Sharp for your words. Your post should have been the proper end to this thread. I hope I didn’t detract from it.
cjean:
Thank you for the reply. It is good to have a civil discussion on this topic.
I understand how you feel about the spark of life. I also understand how it seems simple to you. To me, it is a simple idea that there is nothing special about the point at which a sperm cell joins with an egg cell and begins to replicate DNA. In later stages, when a fetus develops a level of consciousness, then they could be said to be a form of life.
I’m sure you’ve heard this saying: “God helps those who help themselves.” You don’t need God to come to terms with your past.
I think I might have given you the wrong impression. I don’t believe this at all. In fact I believe quite the opposite. I believe that truth is truth and can be discovered through hypothesis, research, and experiment.
But where does that leave Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Shinto’s, and Atheists? I think Jesus was a great man that many people can learn from, but I do not think it’s fair to say Jesus is the one path to salvation. Many decent people the world over would disagree. What is even more tragic is this disagreement can be divisive, even dangerous.
I do not disagree, but the United States is still a shining beacon of hope in an otherwise dismal world. If you think human life is being cheapened in the USA, look to certain places in Africa and the Mid East. The outright horror is indescribable. Things that are done to fellow human beings in some parts of the world makes the abortion debate seem trite and petty.
Thank you. I have though. I mentioned earlier I was Christian for many years. The fact is, I was raised Christian. In my quest for knowledge in early adulthood, I researched and read many different religious books from many different religions. For a time I converted to another religion, I then later discovered the idea of atheism, then became an atheist (though at that time I had less understanding of the philosophy behind it). Sometime after that, I “rediscovered” my faith in the form of a transcendent “God” (which jived nicely with my original atheist views) and once again began calling myself Christian.
Only very recently have I come to terms with the idea that a transcendent “God” is a meaningless logical convention and just a way for me to refuse to admit to myself what I truly believe. Since that point I feel like a tremendous weight has been lifted off of me. I have found that in admitting to myself what I truly think and not bowing to social and cultural conventions I feel much better. So, what I am saying is, I HAVE found what I seek, and I truly do wish for you to have a similar revelation at some point in the future. As much as you desire that I accept the forgiveness and love of Jesus Christ, I desire that you accept and understand that THIS LIFE is all we have, so we better not screw it up! What that might mean for you is, stop beating yourself up, but only you can make that choice.
Good luck my friend. Look WITHIN for strength, not without. It IS there.
I sooo feel for Emmas family. I’m a little ticked at her parents for not being there for her, as the article makes it sound like. It’s not the counsellor’s job… Well, OK, it IS, but… But they’re only a backup system (in my opinion) for in case there is no one else available for her. Like her parents, relatives, friends. People who know her best and can help her deal with these things. I know a few women who have had abortions, as well as women who planned on it, but were talked out of it. I can tell you, the ones that were talked out of it are FAR happier now than the ones who went through with it.
But there was something else in this article that just got me hopping angry. A child is ‘bad for the environment?’ So, what they’re saying is that, with fewer people, the environment is far better off? Well, OK…. If that’s the case, then if there weren’t ANY people around, the environment would be just dandy, right? Hence why “The fewer, the merrier” t-shirts are being produced? Right? Is that what you British ‘think tank’ oxymoronics are saying?
Fine, then, to all you tree-hugging, have-an-abortion-to-save-the-world-touting, fewer-people-to-help-the-environment-spouting, Mother-Earth-loving, nazi environmentalists! If fewer people in the world will save it, I have a gun you can borrow. You go first. I’ll make sure we bury you under the tree of your choice, so that your sorry carcass can be its fertilizer.
Children are only a “burden” if we MAKE them a burden. If we CONSIDER them a burden. *I* don’t. My wife and I went through hell to adopt the two that we have now, dealing with trying to heal the abuses heaped upon these innocent kids, dealing with bio parents who–by all rights–are lucky to be breathing, dealing with a foster care system that is far harder on us (as foster parents) than they are on bio-parents. And I would GLADLY walk through that again and again and again to give another child a chance in this life.
One of my children has severe fetal alcohol syndrome. The other one–at two years of age–was a meth addict. But that doesn’t matter to me. I see them as gifts from God who just need to be given the chance–no, given the LOVE–to grow and succeed in this world to the best of their abilities. It’s not always easy. It’s not always fun. But I thank God every day for them. EVERY. DAY.
And if some freak out there wants to try to tell me that it would be “better for the world” if they weren’t in it? Then Buddy, I have news for you. The world would be a far better place without you–or others like you–in it.
I, on the other hand, have far better and far more important things to do. Like saving your children from the likes of you.
(Jeez – what will that ‘think tank’ come up with next? That old people should be euthenized by the time they’re 65, so that we can keep the air cleaner from their toxic breath? Their Cadillac exhaust? Their greenhouse gases? Oh, wait. They can’t do that. Euthenasia is MURDER.)
Though I doubt anyone is reading anymore, I do want to add one last item.
Through the miracle of modern science many couples that could not produce children in the past are now able to, thanks to in vitro fertilisation.
I don’t think this could be said to be a bad thing at all. However, during IVF, some of the fertilized zygotes (the ones deemed less apt to grow into a life) are discarded in favor of implanting the best ones.
So, because of that, those of you that believe life begins upon fertilization must insist that IVF as it is performed currently is murder.
I cannot accept this. Can you?