Brian Lilley reports here about 40 Days for Life, a “protest” that involves praying outside abortion clinics.
Just yesterday I learned that if there is any presence of pro-lifers outside an abortion clinic, it decreases the number of abortions. This is something we all want–or should, anyway, and so I’m grateful not just for the people who do 40 Days for Life, but for those who report about it, too.
I read this story first thing this morning. I thought: “Should I post this so people know?” and decided not to. Too sick.
A little later, my 18 year old daughter talked to me about her job, which she loves. She serves at a deli counter. She talked about crazy customers, rude and aggressive. Then she told me about the ignorant comments from some of the men. For example, when referring to how much Kolbassa he wanted, a guy said “the size of my penis”. She also mentioned that the girls would NOT call out number 69. They would wait for the guy in the department to call it out.
Our daughters are in this culture. But I have serious concerns for our sons too. So I posted this. So you know.
We are undergoing some site maintenance that will be impacting the general look, feel, and functionality of the website. Thanks for your patience! This should only take a few days.
Andrea adds: It may be taking more than a few days as we iron things out over here. If you recently heard me speak and I said I would respond to the emails you sent me at this site, which I always do, please be advised that I can momentarily not access those emails… and you may choose to resend in a week or two! (Apologies, and thank you!) Also, if something doesn’t work for you, please send us an email with a brief description of the problem.
Read more here.
During two of my son’s naps today, I read some academic pro-choice philosophy.
I came across some discussion by professors Laurie Shrage and Elizabeth Brake on “forced fatherhood.” They are addressing the pro-choice tension where mothers are free to abort their children, but if children are born, fathers are not free to walk away from the children. They are forced to pay child support. These men are often referred to as “desperate.”
Quote from professor Laurie Shrage’s New York Times’ piece:
Women’s rights advocates have long struggled for motherhood to be a voluntary condition, and not one imposed by nature or culture. In places where women and girls have access to affordable and safe contraception and abortion services, and where there are programs to assist mothers in distress find foster or adoptive parents, voluntary motherhood is basically a reality. In many states, infant safe haven laws allow a birth mother to walk away from her newborn baby if she leaves it unharmed at a designated facility.
If a man accidentally conceives a child with a woman, and does not want to raise the child with her, what are his choices? Surprisingly, he has few options in the United States. He can urge her to seek an abortion, but ultimately that decision is hers to make. Should she decide to continue the pregnancy and raise the child, and should she or our government attempt to establish him as the legal father, he can be stuck with years of child support payments.
Let’s keep in mind that this tends to be the same crowd that pushes sex education on younger and younger kids, arguably with age inappropriate materials.
It seems that Sex Ed 101 teaches where babies come from. Babies are conceived via sex. Sex = babies.
[Tweet “Babie are conceived via sex. Sex = babies.”]
If that’s the case and if most people in North America are aware of this fact, how in the world can a man “accidentally” conceive a child?
This can only happen in an abortion-promoting culture where we attempt to separate sex from pro-creation. We all know that no contraception is 100% effective. But what is pretty darn effective is abortion.
And this is what leads to an inconceivable quote like this one:
In consenting to sex, neither a man nor a woman gives consent to become a parent, just as in consenting to any activity, one does not consent to yield to all the accidental outcomes that might flow from that activity.
Therefore sex no longer leads to babies, or unwanted babies in any case, therefore men and women can become “accidentally” pregnant, bear no responsibility and the child in the womb is killed or, if he/she lives, may have to do without a “desperate” parent who opted out.
The rabbit hole goes down further, but my son is hungry. Off I go.
This article is from January 2014. How civilized:
As horrifying as the killing of newborns seems to modern people, in ancient Rome, babies weren’t considered fully human upon birth, Mays said. Instead, they gained humanity over time, first with their naming a few days after birth, and later when they cut teeth and could eat solid food.
Whereas today, they are considered fully human after birth, but not before. Moving target, these “progressive” ideas.
This article is not about abortion. It’s about India, and why her booms have been busts. But this part interests:
The dystopic details don’t end there. The use of new technology to abort fetuses selectively has led to a rapidly declining female-to-male birth ratio, with a nationwide average of 914 girls per 1,000 boys in 2011, as opposed to 940 to 950 girls in European countries—and with Gujarat, its development such a shining exemplar in the Modi campaign, boasting an average of 891 girls in 2011, among the lowest such numbers in India. At the same time, India—and especially in states like Gujarat—is a growing provider of rent-a-womb services for wealthy European and North American couples.
Of course, this is the result of an abhorrent bias/hatred against women. Were abortion not available, infanticide through exposure like in First Century Rome would likely be the means to rid our world of women. But abortion access facilitates these deaths. I don’t think you can get away from that fact without jamming your head pretty deep in the sand.
Seriously, I’m asking. I am certainly pro-life. I acknowledge that, and I see things through that lense, that worldview.
But can anyone, pro-choice or pro-life watch this girl recite her poem and not feel a sinking sense of pain?
That is what I felt.
She spent way too much time describing how she would have taken her little girl to the museum to see dinosaur bones, she would have put stars on her ceiling, she would have measured her height. She would have… She would have, but her little girl is dead. She wraps it up by saying “This is my body.” But we have just been very thoroughly reminded that the dead body was not her own. It was separate, and it is gone.
Abortion: pro-life, pro-choice. It is not a success story.
Just came across this quote while doing some research. Thoughts?
When arguing for their own equality, feminists condemn the unethical use of power by which men have usurped the rights of women. The price of men’s privilege, they conclude, has been paid by women, and the price is too high. Feminists believe that rights must be ranked; no one can demand for himself the right to deprive another of a more important right. Decency requires that men make some sacrifices to prevent greater sacrifices being unjustly imposed upon women.
This is a reasonable position, but pro-abortion feminists sabotage their own case by hypocritically refusing to grant the unborn the same rights that they demand for themselves. They resent the discrimination practiced against a whole class of humans because they happen to be female, yet they themselves discriminate against a whole class of humans because they happen to be very young. They deplore that the value of the woman has been determined by whether some man wants her, yet insist that the value of an unborn child is determined by whether some woman wants him. They resent that women have been “owned” by their fathers or husbands, yet claim that the unborn are owned by their mothers. They believe that sexual freedom cannot include a man’s right to rape a woman, yet proclaim that it does include a woman’s right to kill her unborn children. They lament men’s reluctance to recognize the personhood of the women, yet steadfastly refused acknowledge the personhood of the unborn.
-Rosemary Bottcher, Feminism: Bewitched by Abortion
…But deciding what a woman must think–now that is totally kosher.
Really ridiculous for Justin Trudeau to tweet this, that the days “when old men get to decide what a woman does with her body are long gone.” Apparently the days of dictating thought are here to stay?
I hope people realize what is happening here, and it has nothing to do with abortion in particular. Freedom of thought is at stake. For this great freedom, my parents left their home and came to this country. Not so someone could tell them what we must believe in order to be “progressive.”