Got laughed out of the classroom during an abortion debate

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Sinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Ben_Sinner

Guest
So today in our Critical Thinking class we had a debate on Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice…

I was on the Pro-Life side…

One of the arguments the Pro-Choice side used was “it’s okay to do it if the mother will die giving birth to the child”…

So I brought up the point of “well if a mother and a child were thrown out of an airplane and only given one parachute (which could only handle 1 person’s weight) then a mother would give the parachute to her child in a second and sacrafice her life for the baby to live…so why is it such a dilemma when a mother can either abort the baby to save her life or die while conceiving the child?”

The whole class laughed at me and the teacher wouldn’t even let me finish because she said that was a horrible analogy and the whole class just started mocking me and acting like I was an idiot…some fellow catholics in the class joined in the mockery too…

Was I being rational with my example?

I’m kind of offended and annoyed right now and had to bite my tongue hard in order not to do something I was going to regret later during this.
 
Not all mothers would. I think that you saying that woman shouldn’t be able to choose if she lives or dies based on what you think most women would do is what caused the laughter.

If I were a single mom I would give the newborn the parachute. If I have a husband and other children, I wouldn’t. They would need me, and I think that it would be harder for them to lose their wife/mother than a newborn infant.
 
There was nothing wrong with your example. So many people have closed their hearts on the abortion issue that soon we will all face very real persecutions in the future for defending such topics.

Your teacher’s actions were inexcusable. I taught college Rhetoric I and II for five years. You should report her to the department chair. *Seriously. *
 
BlueEyedLady said:
Not all mothers would. I think that you saying that woman shouldn’t be able to choose if she lives or dies based on what you think most women would do is what caused the laughter.

I do believe the overwhelming majority would do that…But the reason they laughed was because they said this was not a good analogy to the woman allowing herself to die for the baby to live instead of killing the baby just to save her own life. There was no confusion on why they were laughing.
Click to expand...
 
Regardless the catholic church does allow doctors to do whatever it takes to save the mother even if that would indirectly cause an abortion. They just can’t intentionally kill it.
 
Ben_Sinner said:
So today in our Critical Thinking class we had a debate on Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice…

I was on the Pro-Life side…

One of the arguments the Pro-Choice side used was “it’s okay to do it if the mother will die giving birth to the child”…

So I brought up the point of “well if a mother and a child were thrown out of an airplane and only given one parachute (which could only handle 1 person’s weight) then a mother would give the parachute to her child in a second and sacrafice her life for the baby to live…so why is it such a dilemma when a mother can either abort the baby to save her life or die while conceiving the child?”

The whole class laughed at me and the teacher wouldn’t even let me finish because she said that was a horrible analogy and the whole class just started mocking me and acting like I was an idiot…some fellow catholics in the class joined in the mockery too…

Was I being rational with my example?

I’m kind of offended and annoyed right now and had to bite my tongue hard in order not to do something I was going to regret later during this.
Click to expand...
Ben, I’m sorry this happened to you and I’m glad you were able to maintain a higher level of maturity than your teacher and your classmates in that situation.

I think you meant giving birth instead of conceiving when you posted on here, so I will say that in this time in history, when babies can be born at 22 weeks of pregnancy and survive, it’s hard for them to think that a mom must die when she can be induced and deliver her child early. That way she can begin treatment and her baby still live. Most high school students lack even rudimentary understanding of human anatomy and certainly are clueless about fetal development and the advances made in the care of premature babies. Its quite rare that a woman actually needs an abortion to live, since modern medical science can generally stave off things until the baby is at a viable age for an early delivery and then mom can get treatment.

I really don’t have any suggestions for you to address your teacher with, other than researching the percentages that for cases where a women will die if she doesn’t have an abortion immediately, instead of waiting till around 25 weeks of pregnancy for an early birth, and then perhaps asking your teacher for another chance to present the info you have gathered.
 
Ben, I feel for you man, I’ve had the WHOLE class against me when the talk turned to pro life issues. It wasnt even a class where the debate should have happened, it was buiness class!! :mad::mad::mad:
 
Thank you for sharing this. It is a powerful witness. I’m choked up.
 
I personally don’t see anything funny about your example; it actually makes sense to me. But the problem is, we’re living in a very selfish world and we have a “twisted” sense of compassion. We think it’s compassionate to abort a child to save the mother. We think it’s compassionate to starve a person to death if they are going to die from something else in a short time anyway. So they won’t “suffer”. Suffering is one way God’s shows His love for us…it is allowed b/c it is necessary for our salvation. The world in general (and even many Catholics) don’t understand this. Remember Jesus said “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake; theirs in the kingdom of Heaven.” God bless you, young man.
 
OP,

St. Gianna Molla is a modern (20th century) woman who chose to protect her child rather than accept treatment for uterine cancer. She was a medical doctor and fully aware of the consequences of each of her options. She died from the cancer days after the birth of her child.
BlueEyedLady said:
If I were a single mom I would give the newborn the parachute. If I have a husband and other children, I wouldn’t. They would need me, and I think that it would be harder for them to lose their wife/mother than a newborn infant.
Click to expand...
Also note that St. Gianna had a husband and other children. She apparently regarded him as capable of caring for himself and their children.

Her choice was not required. Anyone in that situation is allowed to treat the cancer and allow for the possibility that the child dies while she lives. However, the fact that she made such a choice is heroic. That is one reason why she is a saint.
 
Dr John Crown, an eminent oncologist has said, ‘I don’t think I ever had a case where abortion was necessary to save mom’

Most cases where the mother’s life is claimed to be in danger if she carries on with pregnancy she can be treated without an abortion taking place, but unfortunately on many occasions where the mother can be treated, doctors recommend abortion

Study has shown pregnant women can have chemotherapy and it will not cause complications

There are cases in the medical literature of abdominal ectopic pregnancies that have survived and yet abortions are done for ectopic pregnancy

It is difficult to ascertain if there truly is any illness that put the woman’s health so at risk that continuing pregnancy would kill her if she continued with pregnancy. There are also many things which people consider threats to a pregnant woman’s life but are not really life threatening if treated properly. Threats like preeclampsia which can be treated with early delivery or bed rest; eclamplsia has similar treatment as preeclampsia but may require c section; placenta previa can be life threatening but with proper medical management both mother and unborn child can be protected; placental abruption can be treated; a pregnant woman with cancer can be treated with chemotherapy while the baby tolerates

See the facts on abortion for mother’s health
 
Ben_Sinner said:
So today in our Critical Thinking class we had a debate on Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice…

I was on the Pro-Life side…

One of the arguments the Pro-Choice side used was “it’s okay to do it if the mother will die giving birth to the child”…

So I brought up the point of “well if a mother and a child were thrown out of an airplane and only given one parachute (which could only handle 1 person’s weight) then a mother would give the parachute to her child in a second and sacrafice her life for the baby to live…so why is it such a dilemma when a mother can either abort the baby to save her life or die while conceiving the child?”

The whole class laughed at me and the teacher wouldn’t even let me finish because she said that was a horrible analogy and the whole class just started mocking me and acting like I was an idiot…some fellow Catholics in the class joined in the mockery too…

Was I being rational with my example?

I’m kind of offended and annoyed right now and had to bite my tongue hard in order not to do something I was going to regret later during this.
Click to expand...
I’m assuming the you said “while giving birth to the child” and not “while conceiving the child” but the treatment you endured was unspeakably rude, in any case. Your listeners sound like the type that would throw a child out of a perfectly sound airplane for crying too much during a six-hour flight, and had I been you, I would’ve been sorely tempted to say so.

You were wise to have held your tongue. If you are asked about it, you can say that your favorite critical thinker once said that a wise man does not throw pearls before swine, and on that advice, you’re done with the discussion, except to say that they ought to look up the name of an Italian pediatrician, Gianna Beretta Molla. In 1962, because of a fibroma discovered during her first trimester, St. Gianna (canonized in 2004) was given the options of abortion (forbidden by the Church), a hysterectomy which would have resulted in the death of her unborn child as an unintended side effect (which would have been permissible according to Catholic teaching), and removal of the fibroma only. As a physician, she fully understood her options and prognosis. She refused to have a hysterectomy, opting for a less-invasive procedure in order to give her child a chance to live. Her child, Gianna Emanuela, survived birth, but the mother died a week later.

“If you must choose between me and the baby, no hesitation; choose – and I demand it – the baby. Save her!” --St. Gianna Beretta Molla, physician and mother

Your example was rational, although perhaps a little more than ethics require. When an airplane is crashing, no one in the plane has more of a claim on the available parachutes than anyone else. Having said that, most parents will either opt to save their child or else will try to save both their child and themselves by sharing a parachute and accepting the extra danger of failure. That is the way parents are.
 
I should also ad that one of the reasons they might have laughed was because maybe I didn’t make myself clear the first time when I compared the 2 situations…I think the people thought I was just comparing the plane situation to abortion in general (not just the one dies-one lives scenario)…but it should have been implied that was what I meant since I was the counter argument to someone who used the “its okay if it saves the mother”

I tried to explain it better the second time but my teacher rudely interrupted me as I was trying to be more clear and made me look like an idiot to the rest of the class…

…and it’s funny that one of her lessons she always teaches is “don’t interupt, let the people finish their argument” blah blah blah
 
Ben_Sinner said:
So today in our Critical Thinking class we had a debate on Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice…

I was on the Pro-Life side…

One of the arguments the Pro-Choice side used was “it’s okay to do it if the mother will die giving birth to the child”…

So I brought up the point of “well if a mother and a child were thrown out of an airplane and only given one parachute (which could only handle 1 person’s weight) then a mother would give the parachute to her child in a second and sacrafice her life for the baby to live…so why is it such a dilemma when a mother can either abort the baby to save her life or die while conceiving the child?”

The whole class laughed at me and the teacher wouldn’t even let me finish because she said that was a horrible analogy and the whole class just started mocking me and acting like I was an idiot…some fellow catholics in the class joined in the mockery too…

Was I being rational with my example?

I’m kind of offended and annoyed right now and had to bite my tongue hard in order not to do something I was going to regret later during this.
Click to expand...
Maybe they thought the child was in the womb and therefore it would be impossible for the mom to give the parachute of the child anyway. I must admit, I had to read through your statement a couple of times to get what you are trying to say. At first I thought you mean the mother was pregnant and would give the parachute to the child in the womb. That is indeed a horrible metaphor. But upon re-reading, you weren’t alluding that. Maybe they all thought the same. I guess they also need to add “critical listening” to the class 😉
 
Ben_Sinner said:
I should also ad that one of the reasons they might have laughed was because maybe I didn’t make myself clear the first time when I compared the 2 situations…I think the people thought I was just comparing the plane situation to abortion in general (not just the one dies-one lives scenario)…but it should have been implied that was what I meant since I was the counter argument to someone who used the “its okay if it saves the mother”

I tried to explain it better the second time but my teacher rudely interrupted me as I was trying to be more clear and made me look like an idiot to the rest of the class…

…and it’s funny that one of her lessons she always teaches is “don’t interupt, let the people finish their argument” blah blah blah
Click to expand...
It sounds like she a bad? good? case of ‘don’t do what I do, do as I do as I say ism’. :eek::cool:
 
Matthew 5:11 - *Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. *.

When you stand before God on your judgement day, those who laughed you out of a room will not be there. Only you and God - and you can look at God and tell Him that you defended the least of His brethern (the unborn).
 
Ben_Sinner said:
I tried to explain it better the second time but my teacher rudely interrupted me as I was trying to be more clear and made me look like an idiot to the rest of the class…

…and it’s funny that one of her lessons she always teaches is “don’t interupt, let the people finish their argument” blah blah blah
Click to expand...
I don’t think it out of place to tell the instructor privately that that you had put a certain amount of trust in her as the instructor and moderator of the discussion to maintain a neutral attitude, not to mention to demand an attitude of respect for all involved from all involved, that you felt that instead her choices clearly put her on one side of the debate and singled you, her adversary, out for denigration in front of the group, and that consequently you the trust you ought to have been able to place in her professionalism was sorely betrayed. Then ask what she has to say in her own defense.
 
EasterJoy said:
I don’t think it out of place to tell the instructor privately that that you had put a certain amount of trust in her as the instructor and moderator of the discussion to maintain a neutral attitude, not to mention to demand an attitude of respect for all involved from all involved, that you felt that instead her choices clearly put her on one side of the debate and singled you, her adversary, out for denigration in front of the group, and that consequently you the trust you ought to have been able to place in her professionalism was sorely betrayed. Then ask what she has to say in her own defense.
Click to expand...
Second the motion - she is there to teach a class - not to see her students get out of hand in their display of opinion (in the case of your classmates - BTW: great handling of the situation emotion-wise on your part. I totally would have fallen aprt. 😊 )

Is this a higschool or college course?
 
When I was in college I used to have a prof that would call on me by name on occasion just to get the class in a spirited debate when I’d give an answer at odds with the class, and he knew I would. So I mostly understand where you are coming from.

The deeper issue is one of tolerance of divergent views. The class and instructor were, despite their own opinions of themselves, highly intolerant and frankly sound like they were bullying too.

You were expected to collapse and say they were right. You didn’t they got mad.

Blessed are you when men shall revile you and say all manner against you falsely for my sake, great is your reward in heaven… And until they drag you outside the city and leave you for dead you still haven’t quite measured up to what the pagans did to St. Paul.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top