Then why not work to eliminate poverty?
Why not work to make all methods of birth control available for everyone, regardless of whether they can afford it?
Why not work to eliminate the many forms of abuse, rape, and incest that often leads to abortion?
Why not remember that sometimes medical or the aforementioned abuse reasons and some individual situations for which we cannot guess, can warrant abortion?
And Why oh why, do you anti-women's rights groups insist on treating the fetus as all-important and then stop caring about it and support policies that will make it much harder for it to survive once its born? Such as reduction in funding for poor parents, the insistence on death penalty, utter disdain for the children being killed, orphaned, or desperately injured in Iraq?
2006-11-14
16:20:13
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Teddy Bear -- This does NOT qualify as a red-herring. All of these issues pertain to the perception of life as seen through the eyes of pro-lifer's and all of them are there in hopes of helping pro-lifers make the connections between causes, things they can do besides hold signs in front of clinics, and realize that the already born children are no less important then the ones still in the womb.
ALL subjects pertain to the issue.
Red Herring yourself!
2006-11-14
17:22:27 ·
update #1
Jamie -- I have never been pregnant, and I'm saving myself for my husband. And you assume I've had an abortion why?
You rant like you think I'm an abortion apologist, I'm not. I am a "keep abortion legal but rare" supporter.
And pro-lifers on the whole seem to want to see abortion completley abolished with no medical or recourse for rape or otherwise intolerable situations. And THAT is why I said, "anti women's rights" because frankly, when a woman has been raped (and it can't always be neatly proven) she has the RIGHT to choose whether or not she will carry that baby. And anyone who says otherwise is directly interfering with her basic human rights!
Ab
2006-11-14
17:30:29 ·
update #2
Don't confuse them with the facts. Those who profess to be pro life are quite confusing indeed. They oppose all sorts of programs that are pro life, but most oddly ones that provide prenatal care for poor women. To say you are pro life and then deny care to women who are about to have a baby sounds really anti life to me. Nearly 50% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, a really sad loss of developed life. Much of this could be prevented with successful prenatal care and it is denied by those very anti abortion pro life advocates you speak of. So, their political position of being anti poor women causes these poor women to be denied the care that would prevent miscarriages. It would seem that if they were really pro life they would support any program that would save life rather than deny the care that would save it. Sounds pretty hypocritical to me.
2006-11-14 16:36:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by michaelsan 6
·
3⤊
4⤋
You must not personally know many pro-lifers, because all of the ones I know ARE involved in helping the poor and many, including myself, are completely opposed to the war in Iraq. Killing innocent human beings is always wrong, whether in an unjust war or in the womb or by the use of abortifacient contraceptives such as the Pill.
Who runs the majority of shelters, soup kitchens, and food pantries in America? Conservative Christians, of course. Who has been shown to give a greater portion of their income to charitable causes than liberals? Again, conservative Christians. Who provides free maternity and baby supplies and financial, medical, legal, and housing assistance to pregnant mothers and mothers with already born children? Well, gee, it's conservative Christians again!
Try getting free maternity and baby supplies at Planned Parenthood, and try again at a crisis pregnancy center, and then you will see who is really there to help. It's also worth noting that ALL of the services at crisis pregnancies centers are completely free of charge, while Planned Parenthood makes millions of dollars every year by exploiting the fears of pregnant women. If you doubt this, take a look at PP's latest financial statement. They claim to be nonprofit, but they somehow manage to have a huge "surplus" of money every year.
I personally know pro-lifers who pulled out their wallets and checkbooks to help support women who changed their mind at abortion mills. (Of course, in these cases, the abortion facility refused to refund the women's $200 deposit. They must really care, right?) I also know pro-life Christians who have adopted multiple children from Africa and sibling groups in America.
Even the pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute reports that only 1% of the 1.3 million abortions committed every year are a result of rape or incest. Rape is a horrible crime, but it's not as horrible as killing an innocent child conceived by rape. Do you think those children are less worthy than the rest of us to live?
Compassion need not have limits. It's sad that you seem to have lost yours for the most innocent and defenseless among us.
2006-11-15 04:52:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
To respond to the last question....KISS MY BU** I adopted a child that was not aborted!!!!!!!!!!!! He has a good life and we love him fiercely!!!!!! He is slightly mentally handicapped and has many mental and physical problems, regardless, everyone loves him!!!
There are SO MANY groups out here that are ready to help and so many homes willing to take the kids. We adopted after having ( giving birth to) 3 kids.
YOU are poorly advised if you think all people who are against abortion (murdering of babies in the womb) are also against funding for poor parents. We DO have a total disdain for children being killed ----especially abortion---we give homes to the orphans and my child is handicapped. I saw so many married couples - not so sure if you want to call them "anti-women's right's groups" so willing to adopt.
WHO THE HE** DECIDED THAT SOMEONE WHO HATES TO SEE BABIES MURDERED SHOULD BE LABLED "ANTI-WOMAN" ANYWAY????? It is not about the Woman..it is about the precious life she carries within her that has somehow become not so precious .... but an "inconvenience". You made the decision whether to bring a life into existence or not when you spread your legs..........just being open and truthful here.
2006-11-14 16:45:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by jamocha 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Just a thought here. I swear I see the pros and cons of legalized abortion, and to me they seem pretty equal, at least from a spiritual vs. practical sense (respectively). Anyways, I find one thing ironic about the bulk of the campaign to keep abortions legal: the term "Pro Choice". In, what, 90, 95% (more??) of pregnancies, isn't a choice made before getting pregnant? Shouldn't it be "Pro Choices"?
2006-11-14 16:36:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by randyken 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
yeah, dont have one your self. different than that, there rather isnt the rest you're able to do. If somebody asks you on your opinion on whether or no longer you think of they could get an abortion, you are able to tell them approximately your evaluations and attempt and communicate them out of it, yet you cant stress them and/or make the determination for them. edit: yeah, you are able to vote for the professional-existence politicians in case you prefer to, yet those professional-existence expenses are actually not any distinctive than a individual forcing their professional-existence determination on you and finding out for you. that's what those expenses are.
2016-10-22 02:56:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You hit the nail right on the head! I have never thought about the reduction of programs to support babies once they are born. Maybe if birth control was more affordable, kids were taught about safe sex more than abstinence, etc. abortion would be a much smaller problem!
2006-11-14 16:28:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by country_girl 6
·
3⤊
4⤋
You mention some worthwhile causes. However, killing unborn babies is not a worthwhile cause. God has given all of us the freewill to do as we please. As far as I know He has never physically prevented a woman from killing her own baby whether born or unborn. While He allows people to do things that are against His will, there will be consequences to pay for the actions we decide to take.
In general moral people think it should be LEGALLY wrong to kill unborn babies, partially born babies and born babies. It is called civilization.
2006-11-14 16:38:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by Figure it out! 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
As Whoopie Goldberg said (as the character Fontaine):
"Abortion?!? I have the answer to abortion - shoot your d!ck! Take that tired piece of meat down to the ASPCA and have it put to sleep!"
And BRAVA!!! to you, sister!
2006-11-14 18:00:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Praise Singer 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Preach it sister! I don't understand how people and organizations can spend so much time, energy and money against abortion, yet, ignore the causes underlying the need for abortion. And if life is the ultimate issue, why is it that some of these same "pro-life" proponents are for the death penalty??
2006-11-14 16:24:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by keri gee 6
·
4⤊
5⤋
I guess the thumbs down are indicators that I should elaborate.
People believe they can control what other people do because it's "What Jesus would do." Anti-abortion activists seem to be the voice of god, him/herself.
However, people seem to forget the separation of church and state.
2006-11-14 16:24:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋