People, by not speaking up, we are giving assent

  • Thread starter Thread starter InspiritCarol
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I certainly see what you are saying. Oops; didn’t mean to sound judgmental. Yikes.

Still, do you not agree that silence begs assumptions?

Further, does it not stand to reason that those assumptions would be derived from the seeming popular consensus?

When we are bombarded with pro-Abortion, “pro-Choice” advocacy at every turn, are we really being fair to our friends who do assume we are lock-step with what has been presented as the “smart”, “caring” solution? Just asking – not answering here for you. For me and for many others I am sure the answer is a very solid “no”.

BTW: I absolutely loathe those “Change your status if you love Jesus” type trends.

It’s absolutely up to you as to whether you are being convicted or not. Might I offer my services as support in such debates? If not me, you can see from other threads that there are more than a few individuals who can help.

Hey, thanks for pointing out my error.
I used to have a radio show on a progressive radio station on which I used to advocate the pro-life position. My co-host was pro-abortion, as were the vast majority of callers. I don’t know that I changed any minds, but I was able to dispense with false characterizations of the pro-life position (e.g. women who sleep around deserve what they get). Once the straw-men are out of the way, the pro-abortion position becomes much more difficult to defend.

Hang in there!
 

Some few of us have the blessing of having experienced carrying a life inside our bodies…[rest of post deleted to meet space requirements]
You should become a spokeswoman for the pro-life movement.

My wife would say that the mindlessness of sperm is also characteristic of the producers of same.
 
Not all, but some portion of men, if “brought into the light” would likely, from at least personal pride, claim fatherhood and, despite the changes it brings, act more adult-like.

You know, a lot of this problem just comes from men and women wanting to have temporary sexual pleasure and no consequences. Our system’s pretty screwed up: our culture promotes responsibility-free sex. Abortion’s the broom to sweep up inadvertent messes.

But I think some percentage of men would step up to the plate, take a breath and do the right thing. . . if an abortion decision required male consent.
 
That’s fine, but not everybody is called to witness in this manner. I don’t think it’s fair to say that by not engaging in direct debate that we are guilty in some manner of support.

That being said, go get 'em!
We may not all be called to witness in such a manner (i.e. engaging in direct debate), but our silence can take on other forms as well. We are all (without exception) called to “speak up” in many different ways (even if just by our actions), so when the OP said our “silence” gives assent, I don’t think she necessarily meant we should be out on the street corners shouting to the passers-by, but living our lives as witnesses to the truth. Our silence can occur in places like the voting booth. For example, choosing a pro-abortion candidate over a pro-life candidate is our silent acceptance of the culture of death. We all have the obligation to “speak up” even if it’s without words.
 
Not all, but some portion of men, if “brought into the light” would likely, from at least personal pride, claim fatherhood and, despite the changes it brings, act more adult-like.

You know, a lot of this problem just comes from men and women wanting to have temporary sexual pleasure and no consequences. Our system’s pretty screwed up: our culture promotes responsibility-free sex. Abortion’s the broom to sweep up inadvertent messes.

But I think some percentage of men would step up to the plate, take a breath and do the right thing. . . if an abortion decision required male consent.
I’m actually going farther with my assumptions, Captain. Perhaps I haven’t made myself clear. 🙂 What I mean is that the realization of consequences (discomfort, finances, and in general Having To Face The Music) often encourages people to alter their behavior before those consequences take effect. IOW, don’t be sexual to begin with. You’re playing with fire if you are. If you’re not sexually active, there will be no decision regarding an abortion, period.

Yes, you’re right about…
men and women wanting to have temporary sexual pleasure and no consequences
…but at the moment, only women face the legal and practical consequences, not men. When men start suffering legally and practically, the behavior of at least a crtiical mass of them, will change. My point was, it’s astounding in a supposedly “equal rights” society that women themselves are not demanding equal accountability. There’s nothing 21st-century about that, in terms of “femininist-consciousness.” It’s merely ultimate male sexual permission. That is exactly what it is. It is not ultimate female sexual permission, if she alone is bearing the consequences of that behavior.
 
Oh, don’t forget paternity suits. Those have been popular for some time now.

And of course your observation about preventive behavior makes good sense.
 
Good for you, I guess the one thing I would have to say is be prepared for a major negative reaction. When I finally crossed that threshhold a while ago I ended up having a long argument with my sister about how people are perceiving me. Ugh, how sad… Honestly I have only a few friends (that I am aware of) so pro-choice, and they rarely (though occationally) comment on what I say.

More often than not, the comments that I do get are from those still so misguided they believe it’s important to leave abortion as an unspoken about issue. You don’t say anything in public or you’ll be considered a “waco”. I’d rather be a “waco” personally rather than give my silent consent though.
 
Oh, don’t forget paternity suits. Those have been popular for some time now.

And of course your observation about preventive behavior makes good sense.
I think I brought up paternity suits in a similar discussion on CAF recently. 🙂
But the underpinnings of all of this is that the assumptions about “privacy” need to end. The cost of privacy, at the moment, benefits the male at the expense of the female. If women want “reproductive rights” to be truly “progressive” and “equal,” privacy needs to be abandoned.

(1) The male has to be held accountable: he’s identified. Trying to escape identification becomes a federal offense, because conception affects society, no matter what the outcome. (Seriously, some countries treat conception as a matter of national responsibility.)

(2) Once identified, elective abortion for post-conception purpose is forbidden without dual consent of both parties.

(3) If abortion is not chosen, the male pays equally for every dime of uncovered maternity care, and for the same length of child support (age 18, age 21, etc.) that she is accountable for. Dead-beat-Dadism becomes a federal offense as well, earning penitentiary time, not to mention the seizing of assets. Money talks.

(I know some objectors will say, “Oh, that will just encourage the man to approve an abortion.” Not necessarily. There are plenty of pro-birth males out there; they just want the mother to raise and pay for the child, that’s all, including if that’s a son, which is really shameful. There are married men whose mistresses have abortions, and the men are allowed privacy and their wives never learn about it, while the mistress “pays.” Yet some of those men have insisted they never would have approved of an abortion under any circumstance.)

The silly, lame little “adjustments” suggested to Roe-v-Wade are not going to make a significant difference in behavior. You need to get tough if you want behavior to change. If people cannot envision significant, let alone, permanent hurt, they don’t change.

There are other legislative possibilities as well, for those possessing imagination and courage. The key is that unlimited access to abortion has been presented as a national mandate. So any limiting legislation similary has to override state-enabling access, and be federally enforceable.
 
I’m actually going farther with my assumptions, Captain. Perhaps I haven’t made myself clear. 🙂 What I mean is that the realization of consequences (discomfort, finances, and in general Having To Face The Music) often encourages people to alter their behavior before those consequences take effect. IOW, don’t be sexual to begin with. You’re playing with fire if you are. If you’re not sexually active, there will be no decision regarding an abortion, period.

Yes, you’re right about…

…but at the moment, only women face the legal and practical consequences, not men. When men start suffering legally and practically, the behavior of at least a crtiical mass of them, will change. My point was, it’s astounding in a supposedly “equal rights” society that women themselves are not demanding equal accountability. There’s nothing 21st-century about that, in terms of “femininist-consciousness.” It’s merely ultimate male sexual permission. That is exactly what it is. It is not ultimate female sexual permission, if she alone is bearing the consequences of that behavior.
Except in cases of rape, don’t educated women know what will happen if she gets pregnant by accident and the guy is just a boyfriend? We have been conditioned to believe it’s her choice alone because it’s her body. But her body required another body to become pregnant.

Each woman who does this should know the risk, and too many men have been taught that they bear no responsibility afterward. This is simply wrong.

Peace,
Ed
 
Except in cases of rape, don’t educated women know what will happen if she gets pregnant by accident and the guy is just a boyfriend? We have been conditioned to believe it’s her choice alone because it’s her body. But her body required another body to become pregnant.

Each woman who does this should know the risk, and too many men have been taught that they bear no responsibility afterward. This is simply wrong.
What exactly are you saying? That men – “educated” or not – don’t know the Facts of Life? And that if a stupid man has sex with an educated woman, it’s strictly her responsibility to face the consequences, and not him?
🤷
I don’t think you understand what I’m saying here. I’m saying that the Catholic Church holds that legislation should reflect The Truth. Well, it is The Truth that even men with brain cells inferior to women they’re mating with, do indeed share equally in reproduction outcomes. So regulation should reflect that Objective Truth, despite whatever kinds of Both Ways some women want about it, which as I’ve explained many times now, is biologically false, and for the good of society should be pragmatically invalidated.

I think you’ve completely missed my point. My point is that to continue with the current (unbiological) assumptions is to confirm the status quo when it comes to abortion statistics. If people want change, radical steps need to be taken, because otherwise what you will get is what you have now: comfortable codependency. I’m trying to introduce the discomfort that challenges unscientific assumptions about reproduction. She can’t just reproduce by herself – a point I made at the beginning of this thread. And I’m suggesting that a public unwilling to challenge those assumptions will have great difficulty making progress on the abortion front.

Smart Catholic women would actually make this a centerpiece of a true feminism. Until now the only approach has been one of passivity with regard to conception and its aftermath.

I don’t see how 21st century American women can raise a legitimate argument that somehow the man “shouldn’t” bear equal responsiblity for sexual behavior. It doesn’t fly. It’s the way that is communicated that needs to be artful and assertive.
 
That’s fine, but not everybody is called to witness in this manner. I don’t think it’s fair to say that by not engaging in direct debate that we are guilty in some manner of support.

That being said, go get 'em!
I agree that everyone is called to witness in a different manner. However, we are still called to witness, which means that if the opportunity arises where life is in need to defense you are called to defend it.
 
Elizabeth502 - my friend had an abortion in October and never even bothered to tell the guy - that she is still dating and sleeping with - that she was pregnant or that she aborted his baby. This guy has 3 other children by 3 other women because he is Pro-Life and refused to allow them to have abortions. He has since walked away from these women and his children. He is a registered “Dead beat dad” with the state of Maryland.

My friend and I have not spoken since. She knows that I am Pro-Life and that at the very least I feel he had the right to know. I feel that if she was not willing to have this man’s child then she has no business being in a relationship with him.

She knows that I will be here for her once he is gone, but that until she gets rid of him, I can no longer be a part of her life. He is abusive, violent, unemployed - and has been for over a year. He refuses to work because then all of his ex’s will garnish his wages for past child support. I looked him up on the public record system at the courthouse and the number of charges against him was staggering. This is a man I can not in good conscience allow to be in any part of my life.

That being said - I agree with you. This is their child too, and I feel that they should have a say in whether the child can be aborted. If they are willing to step up and raise the child, I do not think that the woman should be allowed to abort that child.
That seems darkly humorous…maybe there’s a better term: “this guy” seems to think that “pro-life” means breed with as many as you can to make babies. Sheesh.
We may not all be called to witness in such a manner (i.e. engaging in direct debate), but our silence can take on other forms as well. We are all (without exception) called to “speak up” in many different ways (even if just by our actions), so when the OP said our “silence” gives assent, I don’t think she necessarily meant we should be out on the street corners shouting to the passers-by, but living our lives as witnesses to the truth. Our silence can occur in places like the voting booth. For example, choosing a pro-abortion candidate over a pro-life candidate is our silent acceptance of the culture of death. We all have the obligation to “speak up” even if it’s without words.
Absolutely. If that’s what the OP meant, I agree entirely! 👍
I agree that everyone is called to witness in a different manner. However, we are still called to witness, which means that if the opportunity arises where life is in need to defense you are called to defend it.
How far does that extend, I wonder. My supposition is that most everyone has had, does have or will have an opportunity to participate in a sidewalk prayer vigil at some time in their lives. Does that count as an opportunity that we all are called to participate in?
 
Yes, we should all speak out against it, otherwise we lend ourselves to a false consensus and appearance of unanimity, which makes it all the scarier for others to speak out against it.

Now I don’t mean to say it should be our topic of choice 24/7, but it should be known about us. There are good ways and bad ways to go about it, but it is better to be known as pro-life and anti-abortion than to be reckoned as someone who doesn’t care about the innocent life being lost everyday.

Pax Christi,
Tim
 
Yes, we should all speak out against it, otherwise we lend ourselves to a false consensus and appearance of unanimity, which makes it all the scarier for others to speak out against it.

Now I don’t mean to say it should be our topic of choice 24/7, but it should be known about us. There are good ways and bad ways to go about it, but it is better to be known as pro-life and anti-abortion than to be reckoned as someone who doesn’t care about the innocent life being lost everyday.

Pax Christi,
Tim
Well said, thank you.

I’ll post the conclusion of my thread in the next few posts. I wasn’t going to because I felt they might seem self-aggrandizing. They are not meant to be, so feel free to skip over them.

I got a response from a rabidly “pro-Choice” young man; and a fence sitter. So I’ll throw in those directly.

To your point, Tim, I am deeply saddened and surprised by the pro-Life friends of mine that did not “like” the link I posted. I had a couple people “like” it that I did not expect; but ones I would have thought certainly would support such a posting ducked and covered.

Silence IS implied consent.
 
TomCarolsCousin:
All I got to say is if you don’t believe in abortion then don’t have one. Peoples business is thier business and not my business… Abortions don’t hurt me so I don’t care because I’m not going to get one and niether is any girl I knock up and I’m sure that the majority of abortions are people who are not in a situation that someone who has a good job and a nice house and a decent education can relate to…
[My Reply]
Ah TomCarolsCousin, such a trooper. Way to go; standing up for the cause. I appreciate your desire for justice and your willingness to put yourself on the line to fight for “what’s right”. The second part of my response will speak more directly to what you are so aptly saying. (Please be momentarily patient). -Love ya!
TomCarolsCousin:
love yah too… I just have been to three Planned Parenthood events this last month so I’ve been brainwashed by the homosexual agenda and thier baby killer allies such as feminists, pinko commie socialists, and all of those hate America First liberals who want to take all the money I make and give it to wellfare mothers… Thank you Glenn Beck for allowing me to see the light from your boodk “The Christmas Sweater”… You gotta love an ultra conservative Mormon convert from Catholicsim that believes that global warming is a hoax and that it’s the end of the world because Mitt Romney isn’t president."
ShellyAquaintance:
“Lol You must not have been at the rallys my cousins like to go… Im not sure if I am proud (in a demented child of a cop sorta way) or embarassed by their long records of arrest for violent protests at LoveJoy in Portland all in the name of God. Im pretty sure her rosary wasn’t used much sadly. I am gonna be honest… I am split on this topic. While it never has been or would be a choice I would ever make on SO many levels I also have taken a friend in to have the precounceling done. (I was curious after hearing all the stories. How she did it was beyond me, in Ohio they do ultra sound, make you watch a video of the procedure etc than wait… 48 hours?.. I am not sure of other states laws.) I can say first hand in that case it is a falacy to think that she had no clue what she was doing… she did fully and I never felt they were presuring her EVER AT ALL in fact quite the opsite! I know federal law requires certian things, all I can say from that experience in that state that any woman there who claims she was pressured from the clinic is looking for an out to alliviate her own guilt. It was graphic and scaring in and of itself just to watch the video! (btw, I was anti abortion for myself prior to this no matter but it drove the point home.) Oh… yes there were hurtled insults, it was a pathetic display of Christianity if I ever saw one. THAT being said, my delemia comes into this… its gonna happen no matter what. The mid centry in this country should prove that, a LOT of women died having it done illigally and in a way that is not controlled and even more henious and pressureful than anything Planned Parenthood could dish up in todays world. So who’s life is worth more? The mother or the child? Also we have the issue of our foster systems etc. Drug babies are rampant and seen in a way never before thanks to the devistating effects of meth, etc… and there is as whole sector of our society that no one wants to talk about or help that is strained to the gills trying to do anything even remotely suitable for these children… is that a life or fair to that child? Im sick to death of crackhead mothers to be honest, I’m sick to death of getting calls in the middle of the night from my friends who deal with these high risk foster kids asking what I have for a 4 year old little girl because she has nothing except the excrimint that is covering her body. Im just putting that out there, not as an excuse but as kind of other side from someone who is anti-abortionist with a twist. Im also frustrated with the anitabortionists screaming “save the babies” but where are they to take care of these children? Adoption in America is HARD, I have LOT of friends who have done it and given up going off to other countries. So in order to stop abortions we have to fix the infrastructure… Im not seeing to many people step up to do that. So we are in a quandry. THAN add into that our healthcare in the first place… this is just a downward spiral that leads us into 1001 different topics that would just make this worse but are relivant. lol”
[My Reply]
Wow, ShellyAquaintance. That IS quite a dish you served up. Good stuff too. Thanks. Lemme pull together this bit I’m working on, then I have to look up a couple things you brought up 'cause I didn’t grow up around here … “LoveJoy”? lol So look for a decent response by tomorrow evening. Thanks for bringing good points to the table.
ShellyAquaintance:
wrote: “Lovejoy is the abortion clinic downtown portland, 23rd and lovejoy is the addy. I am not sure if that is the actual name its just what its always been called… heck it may not even be there still I have been gone for a few years myself! LOL”
 
[My Reply]
Dr. Jones, as promised, I will now explore the main thrust of your argument. That is the notion that we are not omniscient and can neither predict nor comprehend the horrors that some young women face that would cause them to end the life that is growing inside them. Fair, enough. I fully concede my lack of omniscience (something I find increasingly easier to do each day of my life). Unfortunately that does not give the matter at hand closure enough to allow us to walk away shrugging our shoulders and shaking our heads sadly. Here’s why.

We all know women who have had abortions. Most times we know them to be good women and, if we get the chance to know them, even the excuses they give seem like good ones at the time; for example, if this child lives, another child might die. This was the case with a friend of mine shortly after our high school days whom I even drove to get an abortion (an automatic excommunicatable offence on my part, I now know). Her case was deadly serious on two levels: she was in an abusive marriage to a horrible monster she didn’t love; she was taking the pill without his knowledge because she knew that if she had a child with him he’d have a hold over her the rest of her life. But it’s more complicated than that, isn’t life always so? She already had a two-year-old girl whom she had conceived with another man but whom she let her current husband think was his. Now, to the mother, this little girl looked nothing like the father, and the woman thought that if she let this child inside her come to term, the difference would be obvious once the baby started to mature leading the father to a potentially homicidal rage. Having seen this man’s rages, I can still believe this was very possible. My friend’s plan was to get the abortion, leave the man, and then tell him that the little girl wasn’t his, end of story. Not exactly. My friend and I drifted apart not long after the abortion but she tracked me down some ten years later. With a last name like “Doernhoff” no detective is necessary for speedy location. Apparently her life had frozen: she was still with Mr. Abuser but she was really going to leave him this time. I was at an extraordinarily bad place in my life (just before the two year homeless stint); and so unable to help her. I never heard from her again.
My point? Life is always very messy and made more so by people with uncanny abilities to exacerbate the situation. There are no guarantees and certainly no absolutes.

Following are two positives that our litigation system had up until Roe-v-Wade.
  1. The Supreme Court did not create laws out of thin air, it upheld or denied the cases brought before them and then passed laws based on those already in place. Laws are made by the people, for the people in smaller communities that, if effective grow to larger state laws; but they always came from our needs that we dictated and imposed on ourselves. The job of the Supreme Court was to decide if those laws were copacetic or not. In the case of Roe-v-Wade, that all went out the window. In an hours long closed room session, Justice Harry Blackmum created a completely new law regarding women’s abortion rights and dictated it to us as a king from a throne what is required to be considered a human being with rights.
    Justice White. one of the two dissenting Justices wrote regarding this:
    I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court’s judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.
Why does no-one, except for a few lawyers (one of whom shared this with me), see the precedent that was set here?
  1. Laws are worded to keep the majority in mind with litigation being the recourse for the marginalized. There are always exceptions to everything, except the rule about exceptions; right? Homicide is against the law, but there are still people that find the need to commit it every day. That’s why we have courts of law and juries. Even completely destitute people can obtain lawyers. When we start making laws with the exceptions in mind; that is, when our system’s foundation is the lowest common denominator; well we have no foundation whatsoever and therein is why Roe-v-Wade is so wrong.
 
[My reply cont.]

There are 2 other strange things to consider in Roe-v-Wade that are not brought to the populace’s attention.
  1. An aspect of the decision that attracted comparatively little attention was the Court’s disposition of the issues of standing and mootness. Under the traditional interpretation of these rules, Jane Roe’s appeal was “moot” because she had already given birth to her child and thus would not be affected by the ruling; she also lacked “standing” to assert the rights of other pregnant women. As she did not present an “actual case or controversy” (a grievance and a demand for relief), any opinion issued by the Supreme Court would constitute an advisory opinion, a practice in which the Court traditionally did not engage. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade).
  2. Norma L. McCorvey has become an avid pro-Life advocate. She tried to withdraw the case before its conclusion because she had had her baby and saw the grievous error she had been under, but by then the case had gone too far and she found it had a life of its own.
Worse than everything spoken of before, is the overwhelming lie that abortion is for the betterment of women; that if one is anti-abortion, one is anti-woman. We are sold a bill of goods as young ladies that in order to prove that we have control of our bodies, we must be allowed to renege on that promise to new life that we made, often unwittingly, and kill it before it has a chance to leave our body. I admit that the knowledge of life within is intangible and completely subjective; but there are disturbing statistics regarding the overall health of our bodies that we are not told; at least not by places like Planned Parenthood that now makes a billion dollars a year (you read that right) with abortions accounting for over a third of their income, with then, most of the rest coming from our tax dollars and private donations. (nrlc.org/news/2009/NRL05/PPAnnualReport.html) (lifenews.com/2008/03/28/nat-3822/). The conflict of interest is immediate and obvious, but for some unknown reason, flags are not being raised.

Following are some of the tangibles regarding the overall detriment to women.
It has been show that women who have abortions have a dramatically increased risk for contracting breast cancer.
“In 1986, government scientists wrote a letter to the British journal Lancet and acknowledged that abortion is a cause of breast cancer. They wrote, ‘Induced abortion before first term pregnancy increases the risk of breast cancer.’ (Lancet, 2/22/86, p. 436)
“As of 2006, eight medical organizations recognize that abortion raises a woman’s risk for breast cancer, independently of the risk of delaying the birth of a first child (a secondary effect that all experts already acknowledge). An additional medical organization, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, issued a statement in 2003 calling on doctors to inform patients about a ‘highly plausible’ relationship between abortion and breast cancer. General counsel for that medical group wrote an article for its journal warning doctors that three women (two Americans, one Australian) successfully sued their abortion providers for neglecting to disclose the risks of breast cancer and emotional harm, although none of the women had developed the disease.” (abortionbreastcancer.com/).

So, when we’re talking about breast cancer prevention, how come so very few say: don’t get an abortion? The same referenced site above makes the following plausible suggestion.

“Telling women their abortions are related to increased breast cancer risk is clearly not good for cancer fundraising businesses, the abortion industry and the pharmaceutical industry. Medical groups whose doctors do not perform abortions or refer women for abortions will be among the first to recognize that abortion raises a woman’s breast cancer risk.”

Coupled with demonstrable risk for contracting breast cancer is the fact that a significant number of women have become infertile due to their abortions (I have met two personally). They are haunted by the knowledge that they killed the only child they ever would have had.
 
[My reply cont.]
It’s always a good idea to look at the sites of the organizations that have a vested opinion opposing one’s supposition. In this case one particular pro-Abortion site I reviewed, after listing all the reasons how post-abortion infertility just isn’t possible in this day and age waaaaaay at the bottom after it’s conclusion and wrap-up adds this as a “by-the-way”.
Code:
                       *                *            *           *           *
Possible methods by which abortions can cause infertility:
A Registered Nurse, Camilla Cracchiolo describes the main abortion complications that could cause infertility:
90% of abortions are done in the first trimester. However, a late abortion frequently requires a material called laminaria to dilate the cervix. This makes the passage large enough to allow a suction tube to be inserted. The laminaria could weaken the cervix and conceivably cause infertility.
If the physician scrapes too hard, the lower lining of the uterus can be removed. This is extremely rare.
An untreated infection can scar the uterus and cause later fertility problems. The infection rate for first trimester abortions is less than 1%. Most women monitor their body temperature after an abortion to detect if an infection has occurred. Early detection should prevent any problems.
A woman who already have gonorrhea or chlamydia are very likely to suffer pelvic inflammatory disease which causes infertility. They are particularly susceptible to damage from PID after an abortion. This can be avoided by obtaining a STD test before the abortion.
The suction tube can perforate both the uterus and a large blood vessel or intestine. If the latter happens, then surgery may be required. The surgery can cause infertility. Perforation of the uterus is also quite rare. 2
It would seem that if the physician is competent, and the woman monitors her body temperature after the procedure, that the chances of an abortion causing later infertility is quite remote.
* * * * *

Okay, remote? Maybe, maybe not. The disturbing part is that there’s no hard data because no abortion provider is really trying to get the numbers to give us the truth. Again, can you say “conflict of interest” boys and girls?

The following site has the best general information regarding risks that, regardless of how remote (and considering I know two women personally who speak of this problem despite being in a tiny community I expect “remote” is not so small a quantity as we would like to think), still deserve to be considered and shared with young women period. suite101.com/content/the-dangers-of-abortion-a75227

Now, we’re bombarded with the “fact” that “lots” of women died in botched illegal abortions before Roe-v-Wade. What is completely missed is that there were plenty of ways to get legal abortions. It was simply state controlled. Also there was and is a little procedure called a D&C. It’s performed by a doctor and holds very little risk for the mother. I had to get one after my 3rd baby died inside me and I wouldn’t stop hemorrhaging. The question is begged, but unanswerable: how many is “lots”? The incorrigible part of this is we are left in the dark about how many women have died through botched abortions since Roe-v-Wade. I think we can safely say “whole lots”. Overwhelmingly clear is the lack of data that is being provided by the abortion industry.

Less tangible but still traceable are the disturbing rate of occurrence of depression and suicide among other serious psychological issues more fully reported on at the site(afterabortion.org/1999/abortion-complications/). Bear in mind, these are just the women who seek help.
* * * * *
Women who have undergone post-abortion counseling report over 100 major reactions to abortion. Among the most frequently reported are: depression, loss of self-esteem, self-destructive behavior, sleep disorders, memory loss, sexual dysfunction, chronic problems with relationships, dramatic personality changes, anxiety attacks, guilt and remorse, difficulty grieving, increased tendency toward violence, chronic crying, difficulty concentrating, flashbacks, loss of interest in previously enjoyed activities and people, and difficulty bonding with later children.23,24

Among the most worrisome of these reactions is the increase of self-destructive behavior among aborted women. In a survey of over 100 women who had suffered from post-abortion trauma, fully 80 percent expressed feelings of “self-hatred.” In the same study, 49 percent reported drug abuse and 39 percent began to use or increased their use of alcohol. Approximately 14 percent described themselves as having become “addicted” or “alcoholic” after their abortions. In addition, 60 percent reported suicidal ideation, with 28 percent actually attempting suicide, of which half attempted suicide two or more times.24
  1. Reardon, Aborted Women-Silent No More, (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1987).
  2. Reardon,”Criteria for the Identification of High Risk Abortion Patients: Analysis of An In-Depth Survey of 100 Aborted Women”, Presented at the 1987 Paper Session of the Association for Interdisciplinary Research, Denver
    * * * * *
 
[My reply concl.]
Harder to grasp because it’s not encapsulable but reality nonetheless involves the responsibility of men pre-Roe-v-Wade as opposed to their responsibility post Roe-v-Wade. It is my understanding, from people who lived through that time, and please correct me if I’m wrong, that before abortion on demand was available, when the unthinkable happened and a young girl got pregnant, the father was expected to step up to the plate; to take responsibility on some level. That’s not to say that always happened; but still the expectation was there. Now, however, it is all too common for the sperm donor to claim it’s not his problem because the woman can just get an abortion and be done with it. Or worse, parents can coerce the reluctant woman into making a mistake she’ll regret the rest of her life as can be seen at the following (abortionfacts.com/reardon/testimonies/nancy_anders.asp).

Keeping the above in mind when a young, unmarried man comes forward as being pro-Abortion, I have to feel that for most (not all, TomCarolsCousin, I know you’re a nice guy with a good heart), the primary objective is to make sure they can have consequence free sex on demand. They may have all the respect in the world for women; they need women to satisfy their lusts, but how much respect is given to a woman by them. Can they really respect the actual woman putting her so in harm’s way? I’m not making this up; I’ve spoken with men who admitted that sex was their primary motivator for women’s rights.

Completely intangible but more important than everything that went before speaks to that which I tried to describe from my experience with my first pregnancy and child. There are no words in any language sufficient to describe the ___________ one gains with a child born from hardship. I think it would be a similar feeling if one jumped from the ridge of the Grand Canyon without a parachute fell all the way to the bottom and not only lived, but discovered they were now two people. Yah… that might come close. And I’m sorry, but there is no way to tell that person mid-plunge that everything’s going to be okay in a convincing manner. Alas, that’s where faith comes in – faith in God, faith in ourselves, faith in science, faith in our social groups – in the end there MUST be faith on some level.

The heinous disservice we are doing to our poor youth is that we are sending them to places with vested interests in having them get abortions and we are telling these youth to have faith in THEM. How sick and twisted is that? Doubt me? Look at the statistics again; heck, look at their own literature as I have done a small portion of in my previous post. It is staggering to me that so many of us that considered ourselves “intellectuals” have been lead down this primrose path for so long.

So, where does all this leave us?

We are completely torn apart as a society; but in the worst way possible: through lies and half-truths.

We are a society unmade: “checks and balances” were thrown out the window; law was dictated in an authoritarian manner; rather than actually help women in their time of need, we have thrown them to the wolves and tisked softly as 50,000,000+ babies were slaughtered in ways to heinous to describe on television and thrown out with the garbage.
We have turned from God; many would call this a good thing, but those are the same ones that need to stop mindlessly accepting the pap that they are spoon-fed by the media, but find out about the world for themselves. Brother, it’s a WHOLE lot bigger than the nutshell they’ve encased us in.

SOOOOooo.

That’s my two cents. As I said, I have done my research with an open mind expecting one thing but finding the opposite and, as is so often the case, it’s all now so very clear to me… subjectively. Yes, I don’t expect to convince most of my “friends” of what I am speaking, but I do hope that maybe a crack of light can creep into their strongholds and they can perceive that maybe there is some little thing out there they hadn’t considered before. Even if they don’t, I still love them and I still do understand that their heart is in the right place; they really do want what’s best overall.

What say you, Dr. Jones? Too long? It’s not easy writing to one’s old college English prof. especially without the luxury of time for a proper review; but I know if I tried to do that, I’d never

Again, thanks for affording me the opportunity to, not only do so, but to organize my thoughts on paper as well.

Love, Carol
 
Jane in a PM:
Subject: Planned Parenthood debate
Okay, even though I still despise most of what the GOP is doing in the House, I have to hand it to you on one point. My husband and I went to the Planned Parenthood official website to see how the abortion option is presented there. The site does seem to do much to minimize and discredit many different reasons for not having an abortion. I realize that many who will visit this site are very young and naive about the realities of abortion. My husband is more ‘pro-choice’ than I am but he also thought there was much ‘steering’ toward the abortion choice and I think Planned Parenthood lost some credibility with him after what he saw.
I guess this just goes to show that there is a lot to be learned from being willing to talk with those whose opinions are different.
Have a great day!
Johnny said:
“Hi Carol, Lest the fray wither and fizzle with too much deep academia this does beg the questions for Christians. Have you forgotten the Ten Commandments? Specifically Thou Shalt Not Kill . Or did it say unless it is someone elses baby . Come on. And for the Catholics is not the Pope infallible. His position is that the sanctity of life begins at conception. Very clear and specific. I heard so much about a womans right to choose when I was growing up I believed it. It was a lie. A life MUST be forfeited to live the lie.”

[My Reply]

Johnny,
That’s funny, similar thoughts were going through my head just now.

After mulling it over a bit, I decided that ~95% of my friends completely shut down at the mention of God; Christians and Atheists alike. So, alas, I have deviated from my heart in order to conform to societal norms and expectations… But, since you open the door, I will gladly go there.

Unfortunately I think a better question for Christians is if they even KNOW the 10 Commandments. Seriously, I’ve seen many good church-going people respond in shock when you tell them what the first commandment is (even if you use the shortened Protestant version). Remember, in his discourses after the resurrection, Jesus insists that he can only be understood in the context of the “Law and the Prophets”; this is what we today unfortunately call the “Old Testament”. “Old” has such negative connotations associated with it. It is a word in and of itself that stops people cold from cracking the book open. I mean, not only is it some tome of dusty religious rubrics, but it’s an OLD book from an old religion. It’s so sad to me that most of us are unaware of the true gems to be found in that “old” book. I mean really cool stuff.

By the time people get to the third commandment (by Catholic and Jewish reckoning-Protestants prefer to break the first commandment into two and combine the last two into one-thereby equating women with chattel which is in and of itself a whole other can of worms), (anyway 3rd commandment) to “keep holy the Sabbath”, well then you’ve lost another 80% of the people you might still have had because, well, church-going statistics are staggeringly slim. Honor your Father and mother? ~hsss~ - just lost a few more. So waaaay down at the 5th commandment (6th –if Protestant), “Thou Shalt Not Kill” can be swept under a rug along with the first ones; especially if “everyone” says we are too stupid to understand the complexities of the matter at hand.

Unfortunately, most “Catholics” are what’s now termed “secular” Catholics (the stat I saw said 80%- I’d say more like 95%). Secular Catholics incorporate secular ideas into their faith and really have no clue what it means to be a true Catholic. In fact, I prefer to hang out with the local Baptists because they have a better intuitive understanding of Catholicism then most Catholics I have known in my life. Bottom line, VERY few Catholics have the remotest clue what the Pope has said about anything, and even fewer of them care. Ah well…

You hit the nail on the head: “right to choose” was beaten into us throughout our youth. As I’ve tried to point out, the right to choose life is not remotely on a level playing field with the right to choose genocide. Only the most bigoted person in the world would shrug their shoulders that the statistic that black women are THREE times more likely to kill their babies and say “that’s just how they are”. No, I’m sorry, it’s not. I’ve heard testimonies from young black women about “abortion vans” that came every Friday to their high-schools to take girls to the abortion mills for their procedure. Does anyone really think they are getting proper post-procedural care in these matters?
I’m sorry I’m spewing out so many words, but honestly, this is something I have really done my homework on. I’m actually leaving out a LOT. The atrocities seem endless…

“Right to Choose” is a myth. We don’t have a “right to choose” anything in this country. [edit note – I should have said “in our lives” – it’s not like any other country offers a better deal] We don’t have a “right to choose” to go to school (which last for 9 month stints, I might point out); we don’t have a “right to choose” to pay taxes; we don’t have a “right to choose” to go whatever speed we want to go; and thanks to the new healthcare bill, we don’t have a “right to choose” whether we want to pay to have healthcare or not (another hot topic I know), but it’s true. Fathers, parents, grandparents, don’t have a “right to choose” if their baby’s life gets taken. I know a grandmother that is broken and weeps every day because 12 years ago her granddaughter got an abortion. She says she only wishes she had had the chance to help her granddaughter, she would have given everything she had if she had only known. The secrecy and silence hurt everyone.

For the sake of those who want to be as all-inclusive as possible, it is absolutely 100% safe to say that the “Creator of the Universe and all that is within it” IS pro-life. I tremble at the thought of him changing his mind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top