From BBC News,
A flash mob to highlight fetal alcohol problems has taken place in Aberdeen city centre.
The event at the Trinity Centre was part of a UK-wide “Pregnant Pause” flash mob.
The National Organisation on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (NOFAS-UK) stunt took place at 09:09 – on 9 September – to mark the nine months of pregnancy.
Participants placed a balloon up their tops and then froze for exactly nine minutes, before moving off.
On November 8, Mississippi voters will decide when personhood begins.
(CNN) — Voters in Mississippi will be given a chance to decide whether life begins at conception, a controversial abortion-related ballot initiative that the state’s highest court has refused to block.
The Mississippi Supreme Court late Thursday allowed Measure 26, also known as the Personhood Amendment, to appear on the state ballot November 8. The decision was a rejection of a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and abortion-rights groups.
The 7-2 ruling said those groups had not met the legal burden required to restrict the right of citizens to amend the state constitution. […]
The measure would amend the constitution to extend “personhood” to the unborn, likely rendering abortions illegal in the state if upheld.
From CBC News,
The Wetaskiwin, Alta., woman convicted of infanticide for killing her newborn son, was given a three-year suspended sentence Friday by an Edmonton Court of Queen’s Bench judge.
Katrina Effert was 19 on April 13, 2005, when she secretly gave birth in her parents’ home, strangled the baby boy with her underwear and threw the body over a fence into a neighbour’s yard.
She silently wept as Justice Joanne Veit outlined the reasons for the suspended sentence. Effert will have to abide by conditions for the next three years but she won’t spend time behind bars for strangling her newborn son. […]
“Naturally, Canadians are grieved by an infant’s death, especially at the hands of the infant’s mother, but Canadians also grieve for the mother.”
From a pro-choice perspective, it seems it all comes down to intent.
Pro-choicers are in favor of abortion rights—but when a mother-to-be selectively aborts just one of her two fetuses, even pro-choicers get uncomfortable. […]
In Slate, William Saletan attempts to unravel the reasons behind the discomfort.
At least two pro-lifewriters have expressed befuddlement: If you are OK with abortion, why aren’t you OK with selective reduction? “After all, a reduction is an abortion,” Saletan writes. But it all comes down to the “bifurcated mindset [that] permeates pro-choice thinking. Embryos fertilized for procreation are embryos; embryos cloned for research are ‘activated eggs.’ A fetus you want is a baby; a fetus you don’t want is a pregnancy.” With a reduction, you can no longer have that distinction, because both a wanted and an unwanted fetus exist in the same pregnancy. And someday, the wanted fetus will be walking around outside your body, “a living reminder of what you exterminated.”
And sometimes, I’m sure, a fetus can one day be a pregnancy and the next day be a baby, all during the same pregnancy depending on the mother’s state of mind. So does the number of fetuses matter, or is it the perspective that needs changing?
You learn something new every day, don’t you.
Steve Jobs, the man behind your iPad, iPhone, iEverything–was put up for adoption as a baby.
I find this interesting. Unwanted babies can become criminals, but they can also become geniuses. As pro-lifers we understand we can’t sanitize the world. We also understand that every life (criminal or genius) has a purpose and a plan.
It is never fair or compassionate to imply or outright state, as pro-choicers so often do, that it would be better if someone were never born. Everyone is wanted by someone.
I think Jennifer linked to this story/study in one of her posts, but I do believe it deserves a post all of its own.
“Abortion is tied to a sharp decline in mental health,” reads the headline. This has been covered up and made into a political issue in the United States, but as time goes on, and particularly outside North America, more studies make it plainly evident that this is true.
…to politicians who oppose abortion. Nadine Dorries has been rocking the boat with an abortion amendment bill, which would give women a longer period of time to reconsider having an abortion. Reasonable enough. But during a recent session of Questions to the Prime Minister you’d have thought she was the unpopular girl on a school ground instead of an MP.
Nadine – one of those politicians who needs no surname – had a big day, though not necessarily a good day.
[…]
At PMQs Mrs Dorries rose in the eye of the tempest and told Mr Cameron to stand up to Nick Clegg.
Mrs Dorries: ‘The Lib Dems make up 8.7 per cent of this Parliament and yet they seem to be influencing our free-school policy, health and many issues including immigration and abortion.’
At this moment she was engulfed by heckling. Mr Speaker imposed order. Mrs Dorries, continuing: ‘Does the Prime Minister think it is about time he told the Deputy Prime Minister who is the boss?’
This won tremendous noise. The PM, who had Mr Clegg beside him, was at a loss. He started: ‘I know that the Hon. Lady is extremely frustrated …’ Laughter. Loud, lusty, leery, male laughter. ‘Frustrated’! What a word!
Mr Cameron meant that Mrs Dorries was politically frustrated that he had not supported her amendment, but he did not complete the sentence.
‘Frustrated’! Ha ha ha! Mr Cameron: ‘Perhaps I should start again.’ More mirth. Mr Cameron: ‘I’m going to give up on this one!’ And with that he sat down and gave Mr Clegg a blokeish push on the shoulder. How the House loved it.
_______________________
Andrea shakes her head: Honestly. It’s like Cameron and Clegg are 14 years old. But that might be doing a disservice to 14 year olds.
Recently, the pro-life community in Canada has been upset by the discovery that up to 17 weeks of leave are granted to women after an abortion. Now, one’s initial reaction might be that this is crazy. What on earth does a woman need 17 weeks for if there is no baby?
But this is where we in the pro-life community know better.
We know, for example, that abortion not only mars the life of an unborn child but that of the woman as well. Abortion causes physical and emotional damage, and this requires recovery.
Almost 10% of mental health problems are directly linked to abortion. Women with a history of abortion experience an 81% increase in the risk of mental health problems compared to women who had not had an abortion. The study also reveals that, post-abortion, the increased risk for anxiety disorders was 34%; for depression, 37%; for alcohol abuse, 110%; for marijuana abuse, 220%, and for suicidal behaviour, 155%.
We also know that coming to terms with abortion is a grieving process.
So, while it may seem ludicrous on the surface, I think this policy might actually give us room for hope and growth. I’m aware not everyone will agree with me (you can call me a nutty optimist), but we do agree that abortion isn’t “no big deal” and admitting the horrific act of abortion requires a recovery time acknowledges this.
Nearly half of all abortions are preformed on women whom have already had abortions. If used correctly, if counseling is offered by us, if we can help acknowledge the loss and the pain, 17 weeks might just be long enough to break the cycle.
__________________
Andrea adds: I’m afraid I would put you in the nutty optimist camp. First of all, I’m not sure that women who have had abortions are even aware of this “loophole.” Secondly, while it is certainly true that women experience a decline in mental health after abortion, offering state-funded benefits to recover from this merely solidifies the idea that no matter what your choice is, no matter how terrible, we’ll help you out. There ought to be repercussions somewhere on the road–otherwise we are nurturing women into making bad choices. This is what state funds do, my opinion would be entirely different if private sources of charity were kicking in 17 weeks of help. At this point in Canada one of the best things pro-lifers can hope for is that the state stops funding what is a lifestyle choice. This means defunding the abortion procedure itself, and certainly not funding benefits afterwards.
___________________
Jenn adds: I was thinking that as well, that women aren’t aware of this leave time, and that if they are they still wouldn’t take it. Taking 17 weeks off work means an explanation on the woman’s part (to family, friends, co-workers who will ask), something she probably doesn’t want to do. The women I know who have had abortions usually want to return back to their “normal life” straight away to avoid thinking too much about it.
An interesting read from the National Post that concludes,
Pregnancy is not a medical infirmity. It is a natural state. Abortion is not a medical “treatment”; it is a service. Women seeking abortions of healthy fetuses out of convenience or sexism — that is, women who are not seeking relief from authentic psychological or physical suffering — are not “patients.” They are clients.
Clients have wishes; they do not have inalienable rights. When the wishes of clients run counter to society’s health, or other people’s natural rights — and by “people” I include unborn babies who were viable before their skulls were surgically crushed — then regulation of the practice is not only admissible, it is desirable, and nobody should have to fear censure from powerful special interest groups for saying so.
After my longest ever hiatus in three years of blogging, I am back. I was on holiday. In the past, I was really quite uptight about not breaking the commandment that one day shalt not pass without a post going up. However, this vacation, once I started avoiding the blog I found I…couldn’t stop. People have emailed me items and asked “Have you seen this??” (for which I am always grateful). No, is the short answer because I successfully disengaged from just about all media/news. I really have no sweet clue what is going on in the world just now, which is really not something someone in my position should admit. Don’t tell.
Anyhoo, I return with this short item revealing (again) how the federal government pays maternity benefits to women after their abortion. Just one of those items that reminds us all why holidays on regular intervals are important. (Otherwise, you’d go totally crazy.)