News-Record.com

First, let me say that abortion of any kind is an unfortunate and sad alternative to giving birth to an unwanted child and should never be taken lightly. I personally don’t agree with the very small percent of partial birth abortions, however, I realize that, as a man, I could never understand what it is like for a women who is forced to make such a choice. Likewise, I could never understand what it would be like for a woman who by law is given no choice.

I agree with the writer that it’s advisable (but should not be mandatory) that women should be counseled on the “serious emotional and physical risks” of abortion, that is of course, as long as they are counseled on the emotional risks to a mother of raising an unwanted child or giving it up for adoption, not to mention the emotional scarring of a child who is unloved, often without a father, or sentenced to a life of poverty. Also, they must be counseled on the physical risks of childbirth, especially when pro-life advocates have no interest in the life or health of the mother.

People like the letter writer who argue that the women responsible for the “40 million-plus babies under legal abortion” should be counseled about “adoption alternatives” are living in Fantasy Land. There is no conceivable way all of these babies would be adopted. The ultimate result would be the widespread establishment of orphanages like those that existed in the early part of the 20th century and before. Some in the pro-life movement have even advocated this alternative, where kids grow up warehoused, deprived, and unloved. Read about the orphanages during those earlier times and judge for yourself. A fair solution would be for each of the pro-life advocates to pledge to adopt any child whose mother chooses to carry to full term rather than abortion. This should solve the problem. What, you don’t want the child? Well, you argue that doesn’t matter.

I encourage everyone to read the “Counterpoint” from wife and mother B. J. Weatherby in the paper this morning. She makes many good points.

this country has turned trashy enough without the added problem of millions of unloved children roaming the streets.

but i still believe birth control is too readily available to have sympathy on those who choose abortion.

funny how this option makes many doctors and clinics wealthy. if the medical field was losing money on it, i'd be willing to bet it wouldn't be so readily available.

bottom line: allow abortion but but charge the couple a fine for having it. this might just get a coat slapped on mr. happy if you hit it where it hurts...

LastVOR, good comments! I concur.

Shalom

"A fair solution would be for each of the pro-life advocates to pledge to adopt any child whose mother chooses to carry to full term rather than abortion."

An even more fair solution would be for a couple to use birth control before they hop in the sack. With so many "choices" available in birth control I can't understand why there are so many abortions.

"An even more fair solution would be for a couple to use birth control before they hop in the sack. With so many 'choices' available in birth control I can't understand why there are so many abortions."

I agree. Many, not all, who have unwanted children probably didn't practice birth control. However, most of these are probably teenagers. Many of the people who want to abolish abortion are also the same people who want to limit access to birth control and want to teach abstinance to the exclusion of safe sex (admirable but hardly practical).

Bucky,

I like your idea. How about this one. Any man who knowingly fathers an aborted child should be made temporarily impotent for 3 years. Not sure if there is a procedure for that but with less guys walking around with a hardon for everything that moves, I imagine the abortion rate would plummet.

I can tell you who should use birth control, buckyreeds and Dan. Men. First off, a condom is much, much cheaper than any form of birth control available to women. Secondly, a condom will help prevent diseases transmitted by sexual intercourse. Thirdly, prevention of unwanted children is as much the responsibility of a man as it is a woman's. And lastly, a condom does not have the same negative effect on a man as birth control does on a woman. Men do not run the risk of blood clots, strokes, weight gain or death from wearing a condom. Women do by using birth control.

Legislate that one fellers!

Excellent post, LastVOR.

HYPOCRISY! Dan, you are hilarious. Your beloved Catholic Church goes into third world countries teaching that birth control is "unholy", then abandons the multitudes of children who cannot be cared for. Why do you hog tie the schools by insisting on teaching abstinence ONLY when now you say there are....let me get your quote back for you:

"With so many 'choices' available in birth control I can't understand why there are so many abortions."

So how are you going to square your polar opposites, Dan? Do you now support teaching birth control options, or are you going to remain intransigent in that like you are on abortion?

How about the 40 year old mother of three who uses birth control that fails? Do you step in and INSTRUCT her on what to do?

Who's playing God now?

"Many of the people who want to abolish abortion are also the same people who want to limit access to birth control and want to teach abstinance to the exclusion of safe sex (admirable but hardly practical)."

What the HELL is wrong with abstinence?!

It WORKS, doesn't it? And WHY ISN'T it "practical"? Just because you may not have the self-discipline to keep your pants zipped doesn't mean that others should be expected to lack self-control.

Or are we all expected to run around and get laid with anything that moves?

There is no such thing as "safe sex". Sex always has a risk of something: conceiving a child, becoming infected with a disease... Sex isn't *supposed* to be "safe" at all. It's because it carries such extraordinary risks, that it SHOULD make us stop and consider whether it's something we should engage in.

The power of sexual procreation between two people is more than all the destructive power of every atomic bomb ever built by man. Do *you* think the Fat Man would have been rendered less potent by simply stretching a condom over it?

As Stanley Hauerwas noted in one of his books, those who play with sex are literally playing with death: with their own and with that of the human race.

CK,

While I think it is admirable to think teaching abstinence is a viable option to the problem of abortion, I think it is totally impractical to attribute much success to it. Being a woman, a mother of three sons, the grandmother of five grandsons and one granddaughter does not make me an expert on human sexual behavior but it does give me some insight.

As a good parent I think it is important to teach abstinence IN ADDITION TO ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Sure, I want my grandchildren to wait for marriage to have sex and I know my children teach abstinence. However, I hope they are smart enough to know that may not be the only information they need.

Making reality based decisions does not mean you are a heathen headed straight to hell. It simply means you realize you cannot have total control over those you love but still want to protect them to the best of your ability.

"HYPOCRISY! Dan, you are hilarious. Your beloved Catholic Church goes into third world countries teaching that birth control is "unholy", then abandons the multitudes of children who cannot be cared for. Why do you hog tie the schools by insisting on teaching abstinence ONLY when now you say there are..."

Easy answer Demon Deacon, I disagree with the Catholic Church on birth control. I agree with the Catholic Church on it's stance with abortion.

FYI Yvonne, I have used condoms. That is one form of birth control but there are many others.

I wonder if 40 million abortions would have resulted in 40 million births had abortion been illegal.

My guess is that if getting pregnant wasn't allowed to be swept under the carpet by abortion, but instead there were deeper consequences for those involved, would unwanted pregnancies drop?

How do you propose to legislate morality, character and responsibility, Nit? By forcing a woman to have an unwanted child or punish her for getting pregnant? In a perfect world there would be no need for an abortion cause everyone would be moral, responsible and have character. Unfortunately that will never be the case.

So are we going to pass laws that invade people's bedrooms and what's inside a woman's body? Sounds much like a dictatorship, not a democracy.

"My guess is that if getting pregnant wasn't allowed to be swept under the carpet by abortion, but instead there were deeper consequences for those involved, would unwanted pregnancies drop?"

Weeping Jesus! Nit, what exactly are you advocating here?? Stoning? Caning? Are you going home to home looking for babies?

"Swept under the carpet by abortion.."
What exactly is THAT uninformed statement supposed to mean? You either think women just sit around and all of a suddden decide, "Hey, I'm gonna have an abortion" or you're one of those (who'll never admit it here) who immediately shifts to talking about black people having babies out of wedlock---Reagan's made up welfare queens etc. Well Mister, it is not such a black and white issue. ONLY if you tell me that you do not believe in abortion under ANY circumstance can I buy your argument. When you start making exceptions, they are YOUR exceptions, NOT mine or others! So jump down off your high horse and TRY to put a little reasoning into your thinking.

You are probably too young to remember Pre-Roe when only the Rich and influential could jet offshore to get their daughters and wives an abortion. If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one.

All, well most, of you have made excellent points both for and against this highly controversial matter. It seems as though it comes down to an opinion on whether or not a fetus is alive. I personally believe that it is and therefore abortion (except in cases such as rape and when the mother's health is in danger) should be illegal. However I know other people who think that until a fetus becomes a independent being apart from its mother then it is not alive. Unless I am mistaken doctors have not come to a consensus about this matter. However the issue I have with the abortion process is that the male has no say in the fate of his child. I understand that the baby is in the mother's womb and that puts her at a higher risk then the male. But as far as the DNA of the child goes it is as much his and it is hers. If a father is ready and willing to raise a child why should his voice not be heard?

John,

Abortion decisions, like end of life decisions, are extremely personal and should involve only those who are either asked or are a part of the situation. As the one who impregnated a woman, you should be able to offer an opinion and then have that opinion considered. And my guess would be, if the woman you impregnated was more than a casual sex partner, she would listen and respect your input.

If, however, she was just an acquaintance that you had sex with and she did not want to be pregnant, why would you want to force her to have a child for you?

Perhaps you did not mean for your post to be taken in the way I received it. But I just don't hear of committed couples having the conflict you speak of regarding the abortion issue.

Yvonne,
You are right on....especially on end of life issues and abortion. This is for the parties involved, not Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, or "Dan". I can pretty much gurantee that our dear Dan would not appreciate me telling his wife NOT to have a procedure because I was opposed to it. And the Pro Birth folks have "exceptions" like rape and incest, or health of the mother---that makes their arguments about life quite shallow indeed. Hypocrites, the lot of them.

TLC,

I don't believe in abortion under ANY circumstance. Now you can buy my argument.

If John believes a fetus is a living being, why should it be legal to kill it just because the mother has been raped. Does one crime deserve another?

What do you think the percentages are of abortions that are the result of rape or the health of the mother?

What I meant by swept under the carpet is quite plain, really. If men and women did not have the option of abortion and could only realize on pre-conception birth control, they'd think a heck of a lot harder about engaging in situations that make a baby.

In most cases, the 'choice' involves whether or not to have unprotected sex. After that, I don't believe the choice is whether or not to raise your child or give them up for adoption.

Would it be tough on parents who became pregnant? Yep. However, I'd rather see parents be embarrassed by their own actions than a child be murdered through no fault of their own.

"Sounds much like a dictatorship, not a democracy"

If Roe v Wade would have been left up to the majority of the people (i.e. democracy), abortion would have never been legalized in the first place.

"I can pretty much gurantee that our dear Dan would not appreciate me telling his wife NOT to have a procedure because I was opposed to it."

Typical whitewash: infanticide is a called "a procedure". Take a look at the results of said "procedure" demon deacon.

WARNING: this link has very graphic, disturbing photos.

http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosassorted/index2.htm#thumbnails

The point, or issue, is not what you as an individual believe but what individual rights are. Why does your right, as a man, trump a woman's right? Why do you assume your right to your belief system should be forced on anyone else period, woman or man? Are you a higher power, smarter or wiser than the women that you want to impose your will on?

Abortion is a power struggle, a control issue. Men have been in control of women and women's issues for generations. And they are not wanting that control to end. But, imho, it is long past the time for men to accept women as equals and treat them as such.

"Why do you assume your right to your belief system should be forced on anyone else period, woman or man?"

I guess with that logic we should legalize murder of people who are born since there may be some folks who think murder is ok.

It's called laws Yvonne. Murder of a born person is wrong, it is illegal, and most would agree with that law. Some of us think murder of an unborn person is the same as a born person. If the babies in those pictures are not people then please tell me what they are.

Dan,

Simply because YOU believe abortion is legalized murder, we all should make laws to support YOUR belief? How totally arrogant. With your logic, only your belief and the belief of those who think like you should matter and be law. The rest of us, who believe differently, are irrelevant.

I'm not going to get into a debate with you about the right or wrong of abortion, Dan. Not because I don't have an opinion but because it would be fruitless to follow that strawman. What you don't get is, IT DOESN'T MATTER legally what we believe is right or wrong for ourselves. What is important and does matter is that you don't have the right to force your belief system on anyone else. What is important is that your right does not trample on the rights of others.

Your comparison of the unborn and the out-of-the-uterus child is hardly worth acknowledging. It is as different as night and day.

Yvonne,

It is not simply me who believes abortion is legalized murder, so spare me the arrogance bit. Tis you who are being quite arrogant in dismissing the beliefs of others who disagree with you.

"With your logic, only your belief and the belief of those who think like you should matter and be law. The rest of us, who believe differently, are irrelevant."

The exact same thing could be said of pro-abortion advocates.

"What is important is that your right does not trample on the rights of others."

I'm not talking about my rights. I am born. I'm talking about the rights of unborn children.

Pro-abortion advocates use terms like "procedure" and say the baby is just a "glob of cells".

"Your comparison of the unborn and the out-of-the-uterus child is hardly worth acknowledging. It is as different as night and day."

Those pictures I linked prove otherwise. Grotesque as they are, they are worth looking at. You see heads, hands, limbs, genetalia, and other parts of human beings, not just a glob of cells.

I was shaking after looking at those photos.

Anyone who can agree with pulling a baby out of the womb, inserting a vacumn into his or her head and sucking his/her brains out, well it leaves me speechless.

Dan,

The day you are speechless will be the day you draw your last breath. You know it's so! :)

I have said before I cannot believe in late term abortions, except for the health of the mother or severe fetal abnormality. However, this does not mean I want to tell another woman she does not have the right to make her own decision about something so personal. That is the point I've been trying to make, Dan. Just because I would not have an abortion is not cause to enact laws to prevent someone else from exercising their right to make their own choices about what's inside their bodies.

That is the difference in me and you. You want to impose your beliefs on everyone and have them pass laws according to those beliefs. I just want to let others decide for themselves what is best for them.

BTW, aren't you one of the ones always yelling about government interference into personal lives?

Yvonne, we have been down this road before a few times and not much has changed.

As for govt. interference with our personal lives. I don't want the govt. deciding what kind of toilet I can buy (already law), what kind of light bulbs I can buy (will be law if we follow Canada and Australia), or whether I can allow smoking or not if I'm a bar owner.

However, I have no problem with the govt. making murder illegal. Ditto with rape, bank robbery, drunk driving, selling cocaine to kids and many other crimes.

Therein lies the difference. You think abortion is a woman's choice, I think it is murder and murder should be illegal including for the unborn. I doubt we will ever agree on the subject, but I do respect you as always.

"Abstinence Only" education is a crock!

Teach Morals at Home

Teach Safety at School

Folks like Dan are the hypocrites of the pro life movement that makes the message ring hollow. They are really only
PRO BIRTH, as they oppose "government handouts", "WIC" programs etc. They would outlaw abortion except in cases of health of the mother, incest or rape---meaning THEY can have THEIR exceptions, but that's because they know better than you do, what you should be doing. Yes, they not only have their opinions, but they want YOU to abide by them. For that I say, I can ONLY respect a "pro lifer" who would support outlawing abortion in ANY instance. At least they are not hypocrites.

As for those men who find this to be such an issue for "them", I find it quite chauvinistic and another way to control women--much like the Catholic Church does. Yes, the Catholic Church will not allow women in the clergy and they oppose birth control---can you say C-O-N-T-R-O-L???? Yes, and some men just love it when they can be a part of something that actually keeps women down, overtly, in the 21st century.

The Catholic Church refuses to let Sen. Claire Macaskill address her daughter's commencement from High School, because Mcaskill supports stem cell research and is pro choice. They have that right, as it is a Catholic School. But what they don't realize is that the public sees it for what it really is---control.

So Dan, if your wife or daughter is raped and becomes pregnant, are YOU going to insist that the baby be carried to term and kept? Are you REALLY pro life, or just PRO BIRTH for everyone else?

Kind of a personal thing, don't ya think?

Here ya go demon deacon: let me know if you approve of this:

http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosassorted/index2.htm#thumbnails

Go ahead and look, dismembered babies shouldn't bother you as crass as you are.

Oh BTW, go ahead and enlarge aborted baby #29, the head and one arm are dismembered. I'm sure that's just a "procedure" for you demon deacon. Just a glob of cells.

That's so 21st century as you mention. When was the last time your wife did the same? After all you approve of such barbaric actions.

Dan,
Do you actually KNOW the size of a first trimester fetus? Obviously, you do not, but your Catholic Priests have really got you wound up--your link reminds me of Randall Terry's Operation Rescue, where they enlarge ALL the pictures or just misrepresent the age, for shock and awe!

So how goes it, Dan? Would you insist your wife or daughter carry the fetus to term, if raped???? Are you just another hypocrite wanting to tell others what to do? What's your answer Dan? Kinda personal, isn't it?

My wife is on birth control and my daughter is four, so I don't see either of them carrying babies anytime soon.

The rape/incest argument is a strawman Demon Deacon. Please tell me what percentage of abortions are due to both.

Do you actually see dead human beings in those pictures or just globs of cells? Tell me Demon Deacon, do you think a baby with it's head and arm severed from it's body is a good thing?

That's great. "Against abortion? Don't have one". That's like, "Don't believe in shooting babykilling abortionists, then don't shoot one."
SAY THIS PRAYER: Dear Jesus, I am a sinner and am headed to eternal hell because of my sins. I believe you died on the cross to take away my sins and to take me to heaven. Jesus, I ask you now to come into my heart and take away my sins and give me eternal life.