The Comments are Truly Frightening

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/new-jersey-nurses-charge-religious-discrimination-over-hospital-abortion-policy/2011/11/15/gIQAydgm2N_story.html

just after my post this morning about how eye-opening the comment section on the 180 Movie is, this article came across my newsfeed. The comments are extraordinarily cruel.

These nurses should not have to participate in the killing of a baby, "You just have to catch the baby's head. Don't worry, it's already dead." are you kidding me? Putting any human being through this is so unbelievably cruel I can't hardly believe it! And the comment section attacking these brave nurses just has me in a total state of shock!

Don't Like Abortion, Don't Have One, Problem Solved

If you want to see the debate on abortion in full tilt, head over to Youtube and check  out the comments on the 180 Movie http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=7y2KsU_dhwI


It's actually quite eye opening. Abortion is not usually something discussed in polite company, and even if it is, people are cautious about expressing their views. In the comment section of the 180 Movie, under the cover of anonymity, people are free to express their true views.

It's hard to read sometimes. The willful ignorance of the facts that abortion is the killing of an innocent  human being is one thing, however, the acceptance of it even after the fact is acknowledged is quite another. I find it actually quite frightening.


I wonder about the people engaging in this discussion. They are probably quite normal, like the people I know. Maybe I work with some of them, maybe they're my neighbors, maybe they go to Church with me. 


How can it be that these perfectly normal people have come to the point where they  can knowingly, accept and in some cases promote the killing of a human being in their mother's womb? This is the part that I cannot quite grasp, and the comment section of the 180 Movie doesn't quite explain it to me. 


The comment "Don't Like Abortion, Don't Have One, Problem Solved" appeared today, presumably by someone defending abortion. How far can we take that in a morality discussion? Does society really have no say in the matter of human life and death and the protection of the innocents? This attitude of you don't get to tell me what to do is quite absurd if you take it to the murder of a birthed person, or the molestation of a child, or the robbing of a bank. "Don't like robbing a bank, don't rob one, problem solved." In other words, don't push your morality on me, even if my morality has a victim. 


I do agree with the statement in a larger context. Until we change the hearts and minds of women seeking abortions, we cannot end abortion. So, to that degree we must keep on speaking out, educating and offering viable options. We must help the mother's facing a crisis pregnancy, so that more people "Don't Like Abortion". Problem Solved.

The 3 Deadliest Words in the World: It's A Girl

It's All Relative

There is no moral high ground any more. Anyone who tries to take a moral high ground and actually say there is clearly a right and a wrong is vilified and painted as a prudish Puritan trying to set the clock back 100 years.

Without the clear and accepted right or wrong, we have the "I would never tell anyone what they should do" culture that is becoming more and more extreme. And quite frankly, the way it is playing out, people are getting hurt. A lot of people are getting hurt. And the people who are doing the hurting are justified by a society and a culture who says, "you have to decide for yourself what is right for you."

Well, as I said in an earlier post, I'm all for self-determination. But, when our desires and choices effect the lives and well-being of other human beings, doesn't our society need to stand up for the vulnerable and the victims?

In this past weeks news we see the tale of two colleges playing out. Penn State with it's child molestation scandal and the controversy of "Sex Week at Yale". If you don't know about Sex Week at Yale, freshman are given the opportunity to attend workshops on oral sex, porn stars promote their industry and masturbation contests are held. No one seems to dare to suggest there may be a connection between promoting sexual deviancy on the one hand, and the harm that comes from someone taking that deviancy to the extreme on the other hand.

It just seems a little absurd to me that in an anything goes culture, that anyone would be surprised about Sandusky's misconduct or dare I say appalled. And yet we are appalled, because we KNOW that children were hurt. So anything doesn't go, but who gets to draw the line?

Here's the parallel to abortion: In September, a Tennessee woman gave birth to twins and immediately killed them:  http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/15/national/main20106760.shtml

Why are we surprised and appalled by this when literally the day before, she could have had an abortion at a late term abortion clinic and it would have (in some states) been legal and ok. And we're not appalled by that. Really, what difference does a day make? And who drew that line?

That's the question that moral relativism leaves us with. Where to draw the line for you is different from mine, so how do we decide which one is right?  In the meantime, children are literally being raped and killed.

Is this "Pro-Choice"?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2061878/Assist-abortions-fired-Ultimatum-given-12-pro-life-nurses-hospital.html

Only England will report this travesty and violation of Federal and State Law, USA Today reports on "Migraines" apparently, choice is only for those on the side of killing.

The Arrangement of "Things"

In China or India, if a woman is pregnant with a girl baby, she is likely to abort and try again for a boy. With pre-natal birth defects test, a woman can decide that the child's life is not worth living (by her standard) or will be too inconvenient, or too expensive.

It seems that we have the ability to "arrange" our families in just the way we want, "arrange" our children in just the way we want. And for what? For our idea of "quality of life"? I submit as a fellow human being that life happens more than it is arranged. The more we try and arrange and modify the natural world to suit us, the more we will realize the futility of our efforts. For to be human means to experience: pain, joy, hardships,  success, love, sorrow, fulfillment and loss. No one gets to escape their own humanity. No amount of "arrangement" of our situation will help us to outrun what it means to be human.

Our "arrangement" of things begins to push aside another human being for our own convenience, meaning, that human being will not improve the quality of my life, so I will kill him or her. Or, the idea that it is noble to say, I predict the future of this human being will be too difficult, so "mercifully" I will kill him or her. The weakest among us then, is defenseless in the assault upon their very life, and are eliminated from our midst, and the rest of us walk by the abortion clinics thinking "they are better off". Better off dead than trying to live a life that is too hard or too inconvenient by our "clairvoyant ability" to predict the future for them and for ourselves.

Now if we expand the "arrangement" of our families to the "arrangement" of our societies or states, then you have this very poignant comparison, take 33 minutes and watch this video:

Down Syndrome - Eugenics

I read this article this morning written by Dr. Brian Skotko, see his impressive credentials below:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2011-11-14/blood-test-down-syndrome/51202078/1


The article seemed to be pointing potential parents of Down Syndrome babies to seeing the value in all human life. He cites examples of citizens with Down Syndrome (including his own sister) living meaningful lives, or I would say rather, makes the case that we should deem them worthy by our standards.


And then he says something that just floored me:
"Yet, as a physician, I am not in the business of telling expectant couples what pregnancy decisions they should be making when their fetus has Down syndrome. That is their decision."


This statement from a Doctor with these credentials rocked me to my core. If our Doctors think that killing a patient with a health issue, is a way of resolving the health issue, then we have some big problems in health care in our country. 


This Doctor seems open to eugenics, which is "selective breeding". Where do we take this slippery slope to next, if a Doctor who specializes in Down Syndrome is "ok" with the termination of the life of a human being with Down Syndrome in the womb? Who is next to be deemed "unworthy" of life because they do not meet our personal definition of a life worth living?


So this is the crux of the abortion debate, who gets to decide if another persons life is worthy of living?


By the way, the test can detect Down Syndrome at 10 weeks, the baby in my profile picture is 9 weeks. Also, I read an un-related post by a 16 year-old girl who was encouraged to abort, I thought she said something pretty profound and I think it applies here: "An abortion doesn't make you 'un-pregnant' it makes you the mother of a dead baby."


Brian Skotko is a physician in the Down Syndrome Program at Children's Hospital Boston. He serves on the board of directors of the National Down Syndrome Society and the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress.

Jane Roe #15,938,000

In 1973, the Supreme Court decision in the famous Roe v. Wade case opened the doors to abortion on demand in the United States. Since that time an average of 1.2 million babies have been aborted every single year in our country. My baby was one of this number in 1984. In my estimation, my baby was number 15,938,000 - hence my pen name.

Also in the larger number of almost 50,000,000 babies aborted up to now is a siblings child, and my grandchild. Those are the ones I know of, I'm sure there are more and it breaks my heart.

The interesting story of the real Jane Roe, Norma McCorvey can be found here: http://roenomore.org/
It seems that Norma was duped by two young lawyers who needed a pregnant woman to be the face of their suit and advance their pro-abortion agenda. Norma worked in an abortion clinic for years after Roe v. Wade, but has since become "100% Pro-Life". I'm happy that her heart has turned and I pray that others who lead women down this path of death and destruction will also turn their heart towards protecting life and protecting women from this tragedy.

Destroying Human Life: An Economic Policy

It is tempting I guess for some to make the assumption that every child from an unplanned pregnancy will end up on state welfare. And maybe it's tempting to believe that there isn't enough for all of us anyway. I have had a co-worker say to me in regards to abortion "you can't have it both ways" meaning, the fact that I am pro-life contradicts his assumption that I am "anti-welfare".

But I don't believe that the case is that every child from an unplanned pregnancy will end up on state welfare. Nearly the first child born to every extended member of my family that I know of were unplanned, and yet not one of us has ever been on welfare.

It's also curious to me that it seems that so many American couples looking to adopt are going overseas to China and Russia to adopt. Why is that? Is it that there are not enough babies here to adopt? Certainly a couple who can afford to adopt can keep an adopted child off the welfare dole.

How about looking at this another way? How about making the assumption that a child is not just a sponge sucking the resources out of a community, but instead an investment in the future of a community. If we look at this from a strictly economic view, children born in 1988 are just now entering the age (assuming college, etc) of working and paying taxes. At a rate of 1.2 million babies aborted per year since 1973, we are missing 18,000,000 tax payers right now! That's a lot of dough!

Children born since 1993 - 2006 do need community resources, they are called teachers. But, since we're missing more than 14,000,000 students right now, we are missing jobs for 50,000 teachers.

I'm no economist, there are far more schooled and intelligent people than I. But just a little googling can refute that destroying human life, at any stage is a sound economic policy. Not to mention the moral implications. I believe there is room enough for all of us. I believe we are selling ourselves terribly short by killing off our future.

Here's an article from someone far more schooled than me, and he has documentation to back up his facts. Check it out, keep and open mind. Give life a chance, for all of our sakes.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/obamas_abortion_socialism.html

I am the Grandmother of an aborted Baby

I started this blog in September 2011 shortly after my son confessed to me that his girlfriend aborted their baby back in 2009. He kept it from me all that time because he knew how badly it would hurt me and he wanted to protect me. I believe that he just couldn't stand the grief alone anymore, and so he finally told me. "It's really messed me up." I know son, I know how it can mess you up.

I cried, a lot. Not just for my Grandchild, but for my son and his (now ex) girlfriend. A life time of pain and regret will follow them, along with the wondering, what would he be like if he were here today.

I never felt anger at either of them, just absolute and profound sadness. I also felt responsibility that not speaking out more strongly to prevent this from happening to the next generation. And I feel regret that I was not given the opportunity to love and support both my son and his girlfriend, but I understand that. I did not give the opportunity to my parents either, more regret.

I read this blog this morning, it touched me. I really respect this woman Kelly Clinger and I think she is very brave. Now I see where she gets it from and I am inspired:

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/07/abortion-through-a-grandmothers-eyes-forgiveness-healing/

The Way - Emilio Estevez, Martin Sheen

There are far better movie reviewers than I, so I will leave a full review of the movie to the experts at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1441912/

What I want to write about is a single scene in the movie in which Sarah, the angry, cynical fellow pilgrim, confesses to Tom (Martin Sheen), the source of her angst.

The scene is set in which Tom drops something and when both he and Sarah reach for it, a tussle starts and Sarah hauls back and violently punches Tom. It was shocking and confusing.

But later Sarah explains she was in a bad marriage, with an abusive husband. She was pregnant with a baby girl, and she terminated so her husband wouldn't have two of them to beat up. "Sometimes I hear my baby cry, which is funny since she never got to take her first breath." The scene was heart wrenching.

But the most amazing thing was Tom's response: "I'm sorry about your baby." I was stunned! That is something that is just never ever said to a post abortive woman.

We don't normally get sympathy for our loss, because of our "choice". Many of us abort our children out of fear, ignorance of alternatives and yes, as in my case, complete selfishness. But what we don't get is much empathy for our regret. To me this is a scene I've longed to have play out in real life. Acknowledgement and sorrow of who was truly lost to me and maybe, just maybe if you can....a little empathy for my sorrow and regret.

The movie was great, and I highly recommend it. Beautiful scenery, complex relationships and pilgrims trying to find their way through a world that is difficult for most of us pilgrims.

All Souls

I believe that when we enter and leave the world, at that moment be must be as close to God as possible while we are here. I believe that because of my experience.

It is so easy for children to believe in God. I have heard young children make very profound statements of faith that have simply blown me away!

Something happens to us the longer we are here. Cynicism and worldly logic creeps in and slowly pulls us away from what we know to be true. I have seen this happen with my living children. Once believing and knowing God in their heart of hearts, now as young adults who have been bumped and bruised by the world, God seems like a far off fantasy, a distant childhood imaginary friend.

I feel like I have spent a significant portion of my adult life trying to find God for myself. The most obvious times when God was present, was when my children were in my womb. Unfortunately, I didn't know or recognize Him with the first one, and so I killed Him.

The Church calls them the Holy Innocents. They experience a violent death long before they have had a chance to enter the world and be pulled away from God. The world rejects them and sends them directly back to God, carrying a message to Him that we reject Him too.

I often wonder what heaven is like with all of those Holy Innocents there. There are no tears in heaven, maybe because it is filled with souls like these who are pure and fully aware of the presence of God. And since they never left His awareness, never really separated from Him, they must be very close to Him. I have been praying for my little ones lost, but maybe I should be asking them to pray for me...

Oh Holy Innocents, close to God, rejected by the world, pray for me and for all of us, they we may join you in purity of soul, heart and mind. Amen.