Abortion. Let’s talk about it.

I am stranded somewhere between being pro-choice and pro-life. This is a tenuous position to be in, but there I am.

I had two unplanned pregnancies that ended in the light of my life and the breath in my prayers being born. The first pregnancy showed my husband being laid off from his job a little bit in, us having to scramble to find somewhere to live and some way to support ourselves. I won’t go into extreme detail as this is not a personal blog, but suffice it to say that we were strapped for cash, living hand to mouth, and bad off. Very bad off. The second pregnancy we were still in a transitory position when it came to housing. The husband was again without consistent work. Things were still hand to mouth (and still are). So when I see a statistic that says that over 90% of women who had abortions ascribed failure to provide for a child/pay for a pregnancy as their primary reason to abort, I sympathize.

It is terrifying to bring a child into this world, even more so when one asks “where is my next meal coming from” and “how much are diapers again?” Now add into that the physical and emotional rigors of childbearing, instability in intimate relationships- and what do you have? A cocktail for disaster. Any time I am asked I will be frank about the physical symptoms of pregnancy, the strain it puts on the father of the child as well as the mother, the fact that labor and delivery while not the end of the world are not easy. There is an insurmountable psychological impact to pregnancy and childbirth that MUST be observed.

That is why any time I hear someone say, “why can’t the woman just put the baby up for adoption” I cringe. Not to mention that women who are not Caucasian will have a harder time getting parents for their child, and women who have done drugs or drank alcohol before they were aware they were pregnant will also have a harder time finding a family for their child. Ask a poor black woman with no intimate family to afford her who innocently drank alcohol a few times before realizing she was pregnant to just “have the baby and give it up.” Have it? With whom footing the bills? And to whom shall she give it? The overburdened foster system? What if the baby has permanent defects from the alcohol? She’s got no way to know.

When I found out I was pregnant with my son my first thought was, “dear God just undo this.” I was in no emotional or economic shape to give birth to and take care of a child. I had no way to know if we’d have insurance to pay for my care, and we were still in the process of paying off our uninsured delivery of our first child. Have another baby? In my state? With the state of jobs in our area? With no home to live in? With no money to buy healthy food to eat?

There was no way that I would abort. I knew from the second I suspected a pregnancy that I loved this child- but part of the reason I DIDN’T want my child was my love for him. I didn’t want him brought into the kind of life we were struggling through.

And that is why I am pro-choice. Because unless YOU, YOU YOURSELF are willing to take a woman’s child into your own home and raise it yourself, you’ve no right to make that decision for her. Is the unborn child a real life, imbued with soul and breath? That is another thing to be argued about. But consider embryos that implant into a woman’s fallopian tubes. Those are aborted without a second thought, because there is no hope of them being viable. If the woman carries them past the first trimester she will die of internal bleeding. What about the amount of miscarriages that happen? Were all of those sacred life? And if so, why would God allow a God-fearing couple who desperately wants that child to endure such pain?

These are questions we MUST ask ourselves if we enter into the abortion debate. But the greatest question of all we must ask is whom shall we love? The unborn, or the struggling mother? Whom must we embrace? The unreachable, or she who stands outside our door? Whom must we pray for in whispers and moans? Those who are with Father God, or those who must remain on this planet, within our reach?

Ask yourself that. And ask yourself if you were with her, at her side, holding her hand, wiping her tears, and she simply could not bear the thought of bringing her child into this world of pain and distress- would you still judge?

Or would you land with me, somewhere in the gray land between choice and life, choosing to embrace the life that we can see and touch and bear with.

79 thoughts on “Abortion. Let’s talk about it.

  1. Actually, Lindsey, if you would take your situation to any one of thousands of centers for troubled pregnancies, you would receive all that you need. These centers are run by Catholics and other Christians. American is a land of plenty–very, very plenty. There is never a need to abort a child. Quite the opposite, there is a moral obligation to do the research to find the resources that are there in abundance and save the life of your own flesh and blood.

  2. I often find myself stranded in the same position. Not a popular one in Christian circles. Do I mourn for the babies who will never see life? Yes. Do I also mourn for the mothers who find themselves in that place where they must make the choice? Absolutely. I have never been there. I cannot say what choices I would make out of fear, shame, or desperation. I would like to think that I would choose life, but I simply can’t say. Am I pro-life? Yes. But I’m also pro-compassion and pro-understanding. And that makes it hard for me to make someone else’s choice for them.

  3. Fr. J.: My mother works at such a center, so I am aware of their existence. But while they do give clothing, food and compassion away freely, not all of them are licensed or equipped to give away free medical care, and I’ve yet to see a single one where a mother could deliver her child for free. And seeing as my first delivery cost me over three thousand and the second, even with insurance, was a thousand. Would you be willing to give a woman three thousand dollars to have her baby? Pay her doctor fees?

    I knew a sixteen year old girl who got pregnant, her parents threatened to kick her out. Would you take her in? Now, don’t respond “there are places she could go.” Yes, there are. But if it means leaving her home state, her friends, her entire life, ca you so easily ask her to sacrifice everything?

    graceunbound: thank you, truly.

  4. The moral obligation outweighs everything else. It’s murder. This is not to bash. Abortion is found in one of my blogs, Society Under Seige

    Joe

  5. Situational Christianity is nothing new. Most people who say they are Christians do so because they are not Jewish, Muslim, mom and/or dad brought them to a Christian church, etc. Christianith for them has nothing to do with a true relationship with the Savior.

    And yes I will make that judgement or inspect that fruit and I am aware that I will be judged by the same measure.

    Having said that:

    ABORTION (Killing, Life, Murder)

    What does God say about life in the womb?

    BIBLE READING: Jeremiah 1:1-5

    KEY BIBLE VERSE: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations. (Jeremiah 1:5, niv)

    Persons have worth even before they are born. God knew you, as he knew Jeremiah, long before you were born or even conceived. He knew you, thought about you, and planned for you. When you feel discouraged or inadequate, remember that God has always thought of you as valuable and has had a purpose in mind for you.

    BIBLE READING: Psalm 139:1-24

    KEY BIBLE VERSE: For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. (Psalm 139:13-14, niv)

    God is at work in a person’s life even while in the womb. God’s character goes into the creation of every person. When you feel worthless or even begin to hate yourself, remember that God’s Spirit is ready and willing to work within you. God thinks of you constantly (Psalm 139:1-4). We should have as much respect for ourselves as our Maker has for us.

    What is behind the practice of abortion today?

    BIBLE READING: 2 Chronicles 28:1-8

    KEY BIBLE VERSE: Ahaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. Unlike David his father, he did not do what was right in the eyes of the Lord. (2 Chronicles 28:1, niv)

    Abortion is a sin against God. Imagine the monstrous evil of a religion that offers young children as sacrifices. God allowed Judah to suffer heavy casualties in response to Ahaz’s evil practices. Even today the practice hasn’t abated. The sacrifice of children to the harsh gods of convenience, economy, and whim continues in sterile medical facilities in numbers that would astound even the wicked Ahaz. If we are to allow children to come to Christ (Matthew 19:14), we must first allow them to come into the world.
    Quickverse 11.0.1

    THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS; ANTE – NICENE FATHERS VOL 7 CH

    III. The Prohibition of Conjuring, Murder of Infants, Perjury, and False Witness.

    Thou shalt not use magic.6VII-1g-6 Thou shalt not use witchcraft; for He says, “Ye shall not suffer a witch to live.” (Ex. 22:18) Thou shall not slay thy child by causing abortion, nor kill that which is begotten; for “everything that is shaped, and has received a soul from God, if it be slain, shall be avenged, as being unjustly destroyed.” (Ex. 21:23, LXX.) “Thou shalt not covet the things that belong to thy neighbour, as his wife, or his servant, or his ox, or his field.” “Thou shalt not forswear thyself; for it is said, “Thou shalt not swear at all.” (Matt. 5:34) But if that cannot be avoided, thou shalt swear truly; for “every one that swears by Him shall be commended.” (Ps. 63:11) “Thou shalt not bear false witness;” for “he that falsely accuses the needy provokes to anger Him that made him.” (Prov. 14:31)
    Quickverse 11.0.1

    GOD NEVER HAS NOR WILL HE CHANGE IT IS MAN WHO IS SO FLUID!

    Problem is in this “fallen world” we have our focus on the problems. The pregnant sixteen year old. The woman who has no health care, etc. When one focuses on the problem instead of the solution that’s where it begins.

    Now, you can’t expect years or even decades of sewing crab grass and thistle to suddenly yeald wheat and corn. Sin has consequences. I think if a woman is a member of a healthy local church and she finds herself in a situation where she is in need of some of the things you mentioned it is more likely than not that by “some miracle” she will get it.

    I don’t mind being cold in the least. If a woman leads a life in such a way that she finds herself with a baby unable to care for it, take the baby and give it to someone who will care for it properly. We have two right now and I will be seventy two when the youngest graduates high school.

  6. I don’t get who you say are the needy? The people who are the “goats” or the unborn?

    Have you ever heard the saying “If He can get it to you can He get it through you?” I try to live my life that way. I don’t have any toys…at all and my “personal” vehicle is my work van.

    Hope that helps.

  7. Where is the compassion in this?

    “I don’t mind being cold in the least. If a woman leads a life in such a way that she finds herself with a baby unable to care for it, take the baby and give it to someone who will care for it properly. We have two right now and I will be seventy two when the youngest graduates high school.”

    We are NOT called to “cold” ad pass judgment in this way. We ARE called to be Christlike and act in love.

  8. Lindsey, I too find myself in the position that I could never have an abortion but I can understand why that choice may be made.

    But there is an entire population that hasn’t been discussed. What about the women who are pregnant as a result of rape, molestation, or incest? I knew of a 14 year old girl who was impregnated by her father.

    She was in no way old enough to deal with all of the issues that surrounded her pregnancy, but she also knew enough about genetics to worry that the child would be deformed in some way. She had been raped by her father since she was 9 years old. She had no choice in the matter and it was not sin on her part that left her with child.

    I also know a girl that was drugged and gang raped at a party, yes she was 17 at the time and maybe there are those who would say she was at fault for being at the party. But in my mind she was not to blame for what they did to her. But two months to the day after she was raped she found out she was pregnant. She was so terrified that her parents would not believe her that she told no one until a week after the attack. So there was no morning after pill or rape kit collected.

    I can not for the life of me judge these girls for the decisions they made. And I know if abortions were outlawed, women and girls would find less safe and down right dangerous ways of ending pregnancies.

  9. e2tc; you see that’s where we have our differences. You want to be the proverbial enabler. I don’t. The woman must demonstrate a willingness for change. She must walk out some hard things first. Love your baby you say? Then do what is BEST for your baby. Not good or okay but BEST. What is BEST for a baby in that situation? To be with an irrisponsible woman or (even) in Foster Care? I vote Foster Care.

    And to be Christ-like. Christ said let the children come unto Me. If you mess with the kids it is better for you to have a millstone tied around your neck and thrown into the ocean (paraphrase).

    Christ-like: go and sin no more…after you take one more hit off your pipe.

    Here’s where the compassion comes in. The woman ends up saying to herself “wow I am realy screwing my life up. I had better start doing some things differently.”
    She turns her life around gets her kid back marries the prince and lives happily ever after.

    But this won’t happen if you give her a bag of groveries and hold her hand and tell her everything will be okay.

    We have been living this for two years now with two young kids who’s parents won’t stop doing drugs and beating each other up…. but they love their kids. Just not more than the drugs and violant behavior.

  10. i think we need to agree to disagree, though i will say that i’m NOT talking about “enabling,” nor about broken systems (like foster care).

  11. I also hear you re. the situation you’re talking about – especially because you stepped in and are doing something.

    But so many others need help… and not all are addicts, alcoholics, etc. Some are just outright overwhelmed, y’know?

  12. Abortion, what a big topic.

    I am pro-choice. Personally (unless I was raped) I don’t feel that I could get an abortion. But the way I see this is my own opinion and I believe that everyone is entitled to the right to make their own decision (thus being pro-choice).

    It would be such a traumatic thing to get an abortion…I could not imagine it. I feel pity for everyone involved in such an act.

  13. Ok, I’ll just argue for the pro-choice side, seeing as you need to know all sides to make a judgement.

    Firstly, Bible verses. Jer 1:5 and Psalm 139 do not specify when a person begins. They mention ‘knitting’ or ‘forming’ a person in the womb, which could either mean conception is the ‘forming’, or development over the next few months is the ‘forming’ process. This forming process needs to be completed before there is a person worthy of a right to life, and so neither of these verses can tell us if abortion is wrong (or up to what stage it is wrong).

    The questions on life that is spontaneously aborted is a good one. Some scientists have estimated that around 90-60% of fertilised eggs do not implant, and are passed out during menstruation as if nothing happened at all. Therefore, for every child born, about 3-10 abortions occur. How can we justify having unprotected sex at all, if the human body ‘likes’ to abort so much?

    My personal view is based on the embryo (or foetus) not being persons like you or I. I see nothing possessed by the embryo that makes it any more worthy of life than another of our cells, such as brain cells or cancer cells, or an animal, like a worm or a cat. It is consciousness – specifically self-awareness – that I view as being essential to personhood. Therefore, because I do not see any ‘human life’ for which I can be ‘pro’, my position defaults to be ‘pro’ the decisions made by the fully conscious human being who is pregnant.

  14. M54 I said in my post very clearly that whether or not an embryo is divine life is another discussion entirely. I, myself, am morally against abortion. But my personal morality in this case is overwhelmed by the sympathy and compassion I feel for women who find themselves pregnant in less than ideal situations.

    When I was pregnant with my daughter I was mentoring a seventeen year old girl who was also pregnant. Her first thought was panic. She didn’t know if she should abort. What I told her was this, “I’m scared, too. I don’t know how I’ll take care of this baby, how I’ll provide, where we’ll be living, what our life would look like. But what I do know is that I’d rather die than give this child up. Whoever he or she is, she is special, his or her life means something, God loves this baby. So I have to, too.”

    And now that I have my daughter, should I find myself in the same position of counseling a young girl, I will tell her that
    I questioned myself and God a lot during my pregnancy. I was terrified most of the time. But my daughter is the light of my life now. I would rather die than be without her. Every day that she is in this world is a miracle, every moment I see her and witness her reality is nothing short of a gift from God, and being her mother is the best thing I’ve ever done.

    Imagine the difference between saying that, and saying Bible verses that hold no personal meaning to a non-Christian, or invoking a morality that they themselves don’t feel.

    And as for situational Christianity, of whom were you speaking? I pray to God it wasn’t me, because I love God with all my heart, soul and mind. I have devoted my life at enormous personal cost to living and doing what I feel he requires from me, and without Jesus I know (with no question WHATSOEVER) that I would be dead.

    e2tc: thank you

    wvhillcountry I think it’s harder if you have a uterus, you know? Men don’t understand the physical and psychological cost as well as women, which is why I think that you often see women like you and I who question, and men [can] take such cold and hard views.

    Joshua: thanks for pointing out the other side of the coin.

  15. I don’t mean to give what sounds like a conservative cop-out, but abortion (at any stage of pregnancy) is murder. PERIOD. All other arguments are out the window.
    Emotional and physical stress put on the family, although they may be extremely inconvenient, simply must be dealt with and can be appropriately dealt with if the mother and father and family take responsibility to seek out the right options.
    If the argument that the child would not have the most ideal environment in which to be raised were a valid argument, then it could be inferred that almost every child in many 3rd world countries should have been aborted.
    I haven’t even mentioned religious reasons for being pro-life, and I won’t. I don’t expect non-Christians to assume a Christian world view, BUT I do expect everyone to obey the law, and murder is illegal.

  16. Your post is very thought provoking. Despite your trying circumstances I am glad you chose life.

    I am pro-life, however I do believe that if we are to tell a woman to keep her pregnancy we should at least TRY to help her out. Too often the pro-life movement is only concerned with having women keep their pregnancies and not helping them out beyond that. My point is, our focus needs to be on helping the woman out the best way we can. Yes, we should encourage her to choose life but we should also find a way to help her provide for that life whether it be financial assistance to help her throughout the pregnancy or medical assistance.

    If the pro-life movement can be geared toward helping women in need I truly believe we can significantly reduce the incidence of abortion.

  17. In response to some of your original questions/points —
    1) why is it that I MYSELF must accept the responsibility of taking a woman’s child and raising it myself, before I “make that decision for her”? Suppose a woman found herself suddenly a single mom and homeless, struggling to feed herself and her 3 kids. Do I have to take those children into my home before I can say that it’s wrong for her to murder them, because it has become too difficult for her to feed, clothe, and house them? You see a difference because the baby has not yet been born; I see no so difference.
    2) why can’t we love both the unborn and the struggling mother?
    3) ectopic pregnancies — this is the one case in which I consider abortion to be okay, and that is because the unborn baby cannot survive either way, but if he or she continues to live, the mother will die. It is the same reasoning you see on submarines that spring a leak — they will seal off the affected area, even though it condemns men to drowning, in order to save the life of all of the men on the sub. The men who drown are not of inferior worth than those who live; but they just were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
    4) You asked why would God allow a God-fearing couple to go through the pain of miscarrying a “sacred life.” Why does God allow any pain? Why did God allow you to go through your husband’s job loss, and no housing? Why would God allow babies to be born with lethal birth defects? Why does God allow death by SIDS? Why does God allow kids to get cancer? There is a lot of pain in this world that God allows; the pain of miscarriage is only one small portion of that, and it does not negate the sanctity of human life.

    @ Joshua — I will point out the numerous verse that say that this woman or that woman “conceived and bore a son.” We know that at the moment of conception, an entirely new and unique human being (genetically speaking) has been created, with all of the genetic material it will ever have. You boldly make a blanket statement that the forming process needs to be complete before the person has a right to life. I would like some Scriptural basis for your statement. From what I can tell, God gives life, and anyone who takes an innocent human life is a murderer. From the moment of conception, there is a new, living human being, genetically speaking, so to take that life is murder. Further on the fertilized eggs that do not implant, I would like to look at the studies that form the basis of these statistics. I suspect that they are taken from looking at women who have in vitro fertilization done, in which fertilized eggs are implanted in her uterus. It doesn’t surprise me that a woman who has infertility issues would have a high rate of non-implantation. Still, even if the theoretical figures are correct — does the fact that many people die by accident or ill health or old age condone murder? Just because many fertilized eggs naturally do not implant does not justify their deliberate destruction. Your definition of “self-awareness = human life” is a very slippery slope. What if someone sustained a brain injury and lost this “self-awareness”? Are they no longer human? What of people born with severe mental disabilities — should you legally and morally be allowed to go kill them, simply because they don’t fit your definition of human?

    And finally (@ Lindsey, again), God sustained you through your less-than-ideal situation, and He can do the same for these other women, without their having to resort to abortion to make it through. Your daughter is the light of your life, yet putting yourself in this “gray area” between pro-life and pro-abortion puts yourself in the position of allowing women to kill their babies who could just as much become the lights of their lives. Yes, babies are hard work, pregnancy may be difficult, and labor may not be fun, but that doesn’t override the moral issue.

    I have also done quite a bit of research into the negative effects of abortion, including future fertility problems, post-traumatic stress disorder, sexual problems, higher rates of suicide and mental disorders, and guilt. I have a uterus, and have been pregnant and given birth twice. I doubt that my view is any less cold or hard than any man’s. 🙂

    You speak very eloquently of the joys of motherhood — it’s quite beautiful! — which confuses me as to why you find yourself in a gray area of whether or not women should continue to have abortions which ultimately deny themselves their portion of this joy.

  18. Pingback: Heroes? « Bottoms Up!

  19. Wow — I wish I had more time to comment. Let me just say two quick things.

    (1) You can’s treat the choice to abort and the status of the life in the womb as a “real life” or not as two separate things. The same approach could otherwise be used to argue favorably about a host of horrible things — some murders, thefts, etc. — about which there is no debate (or at least much less).

    (2) All the arguments in the post help us to have sympathy for the person making the choice, but they do not mean that it is not a sinful choice. There are many situations in which we may sympathize with someone facing difficult circumstances — as we would want sympathy, ourselves — but it doesn’t make the choices equally right. Arguing right and wrong in this way only leads us to the conclusion described in Proverbs 14:12 & Proverbs 16:25 — and for the reasons described there, as well.

  20. I admire your rationality in coming to your position. It may seem that we have a lot to offer in the U.S., but I know too many adopted kids (peers of mine) who went through hell, often becoming violent toward others and themselves. Only the mother can decide to bring on such possibilities by keeping the pregnancy then giving the baby up. There are no guarantees.

    The other obvious issue is that it’s futile to impose our beliefs on others when no harm is being done to any viable creature. An embryo is not a viable life without the life of the mother. If you think abortion is not right, don’t have one, but do not judge others and pass laws blocking their beliefs. If abortion were to be illegal, women would simply take more dangerous measures, putting their own lives at much higher risk.

    One can rarely change the minds of others, and it is immoral, or minimally, not our place, to try.

  21. “unless YOU, YOU YOURSELF are willing to take a woman’s child into your own home and raise it yourself, you’ve no right to make that decision for her.”

    Unless I am willing to pay the bills of a thief, I have no right to make the decision of not stealing for him?

  22. I don’t have time to reply to every comment individually, so I apologize for that. To everyone who made supportive comments, thank you.

    As a response to the “it’s murder, period” comments… I don’t know what to say. I miscarried my first pregnancy (prior to having my daughter) and even though the embryo may have never been viable, I still felt like I had lost something precious. But the feeling that it is sacred life, that comes from my heart and my morality and my trust and faith in God. For other people who do not share that belief and struggle through what seems like insurmountable odds I simply cannot make the same requirements as I would of myself. And for people who would argue “but society makes that choice when it comes to murder and theft”- well, it is clear who is being protected. Whether or not you and I like it, the debate over at which point a fetus becomes sentient life and therefore worthy of protection is ongoing. Some cultures believe that the soul comes with breath, and thus a fetus that has not breathed has no soul. How shall we convince them? As much as it grieves me, the Bible makes no argument that an unbeliever will appreciate. So what am I to do?

    I feel for these women. In the depths of my heart, I feel for them, and my soul grieves for them. I simply cannot force myself to judge them. I bring they and myself before God in supplication. If it is naiveness on my part, I blame my youth and impetuousness. Perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps, in time, Jesus will lead me to feel differently.

    Until then, I continue to sympathize, and I am stranded between two poles.

    And as for the question as to why I would say, “unless you yourself would take her in you cannot make this decision for her.” I stand by it. How much does a human life cost? What price would you pay to keep that child alive? How much does it matter to you? Would you pay the three thousand for the child to be born? Give up nine months of your own life to care for the mother? I ask this with no timidity on my own part because I have been there, and I have offered to care for mother and child, and were I given the opportunity I would again. Because in my mind, there is nothing more sacred than the choice to give of yourself to preserve someone else. When we do that, we are like Christ.

    So how much? How much does it really matter? How much do you truly believe? How cold are your hearts?

  23. Perhaps on another day we can address the fathers who never get a say in their child being born or aborted.

    My paster and his wife miscarried. She got pg again and was hopeful only to find out through medical tests that the baby had died. They went back to the church and stood on God’s Word of Life. The little girl’s middle name is Rhema.

  24. M54, I am glad we agree on pro-life despite your anti-Catholicism.

    Lindsey, I cannot say what pregnancy counseling centers do for young mothers in other places, but here in Indiana, there are real efforts made to save every child possible, including providing housing for pregnant mothers and finding ways to get their medical bills paid. This includes asking for direct donations from area churches. I also know that the Archdiocese of New York has promised to remove all barriers possible to mothers having their children. Cardinal OConnor even founded the Sisters of Life to provide all manner of the means necessary.

    For societies that value life, a way can always be found.

    As for the proverbial 13 year old who will be thown out of her parents home–well, let’s just wake up are realize we are not in the 1950’s anymore. Family support their pregnant teens now like never before. Public high schools have day cares. There ARE means, there ARE ways.

    And then there is adoption. Adopting couples generally pay expenses.

    In life, one is never truly forced to do the wrong thing. One always choses the wrong thing, even if a gun is held to your head.

  25. You took the words right out of my mouth. I don’t think I could have said it better. I had to make my choice, never wanting to but I had to think about my situation, and what I would be putting child into. At the same time I don’t think women should use abortion like birth control pill, so if I was to get pregnant again I would have my child, i couldn’t bear to go threw “it” again. And my boyfriend is still hurt til this day over the decision I made. I hope one day he can forgive me and understand that I only wanted for us to truly be a comfortable family that didn’t have to bring there child in the world struggling. There is already so much going on around us. I just could do it right now. I also didn’t want to make the same mistake I made in the past by not being married. I think it’s very important to the childs well being. So all I can do from now on is make better decisions and pray!

  26. @ Kathy,

    Amen!

    @ Lindsey,

    “Because unless YOU, YOU YOURSELF are willing to take a woman’s child into your own home and raise it yourself, you’ve no right to make that decision for her. Is the unborn child a real life, imbued with soul and breath? That is another thing to be argued about.”

    It is THE thing to be talked about. If abortion is murder, then nothing else matters. The desperate condition of the mother cannot justify murder (if abortion is murder). Therefore, we cannot separate these questions. Whether or not a human fetus is a human being worthy of legal protections like all other human beings is THE question that must be answered in this debate.

    “But the greatest question of all we must ask is whom shall we love? The unborn, or the struggling mother?”

    I think Kathy alluded to this already, but I believe they call this a false dilemma.

    God Bless

  27. Why is it that most all of the commenters are flat-out ignoring the points Lindsey is trying to make??

    Sorry, everyone, but this is all about putting yourselves in another person’s shoes.

    As for me, I do believe that life is life from the moment of conception, but… I cannot, in all good conscience, sit here and just tell a whole lot of desperate people what to do with their lives, and the lives of their unborn children. Unless, that is, I’m prepared to actually help those people, and their infants.

    I’ll also go on record with this: that the labels “pro-choice” and “pro-life” are divisive by default, and that people on both sides of the question tend to NOT listen to each other. If we actually talked and listened, I have a feeling that we might all find FAR more common ground than any of us have ever dreamed possible.

  28. let me also say that I don’t agree with the whole notion of slapping the label of “murderer” on someone who has had an abortion, or is contemplating having one.

    It’s very unkind and cheap way to treat people, and has not one (I believe) iota of the love and compassion of our Lord Jesus Christ in it.

    What if *you* were the one facing these dilemmas?

  29. M54: Yet another discussion- yet another discussion.

    Fr.J: I myself live in Indiana and can attest to how great the pregnancy crisis centers are- right down to getting that 17 year old girl I spoke of previously in contact with a doctor who cared for her for a quarter of his normal fee. And this seventeen year old girl is not fictitious- she is a real girl, whose parents refused to support her, who refused to acknowledge the child as their daughter, and very nearly kicked her out of their home. No, this is not the 1930’s, but there are still very old school fundamentalists that would disavow a child over their sins. I can also bear witness to the local church’s outstanding efforts on behalf of myself (who didn’t have to buy a single diaper or article of clothing for the first six months of my daughter’s life) and that girl, as well (who had two people, myself one of them, offer to adopt her child so she could be absolutely certain of the care it received). I’m not saying that the church is somehow failing- but look at the number of abortions performed each year, over ninety percent of them because of women who simply feel they can’t provide.

    When I think about it, my stomach feels cold. We, as Christians, are given what seems like an unsurmountable challenge. And be assured that simply outlawing abortion would not do away with it’s existence, as it has gone on throughout all of history and would undoubtedly continue in back rooms. There are Indian reservations who threaten to use their sovereignty to open clinics. Then what do we do?

    Take care of the women. That’s what we do. We do our job as Christians. We stop holding picket signs, we hold out our hands, we take care of them. We embrace them.

    All of this divisiveness and cold judgmentalism could kill our faith.

  30. Lindsay, I got thrilled by your post and by all the comments it generated. I am exactly in the same place as you, between pro-choice and pro-life and it seems that there is no place for this position in our society.
    I need to say that I am nor Christian nor American (I am Brazilian and I do have my religious beliefs), but the discussion of this dilemma seems to be the same everywhere.

    What makes me astonished is the amount of mobilization that a pregnant woman can get for her to keep her baby and not abort. In the best scenario she can get a house, medical bills paid and food to eat. But what is the difference between a pregnant girl and a poor girl struggling by herself on the streets?? Why we hear that a girl/woman in any instance she should “kill” her baby but we don’t hear that that woman/girl in any instance should be living in the poor and abandoned conditions that she is living? Why not help the girls and women BEFORE they are faced with a no expected (and no desired) pregnancy? It would involve education (I mean, real EDUCATION), empowering of the women, creation of more opportunities. It is more likely that someone that has at least basic conditions to take care of a baby will have it then someone that have no options.

    And, I totally agree that we cannot impose our point of view and our personal believes to rule someone else’s life. I would never abort, but I do know people that made this choice, for the most different reasons, and I do respect them. It is their lives and it is their choices.

    Back in my country it is usual to see poor people having 4, 5 children, and it not makes me any happier to think that at least they did not abort. Some mothers “rent” their babies for beggars. After they are old enough to walk on their own (somewhere around 2 years) they can go and beg by themselves. Around 8 years old these children are not children anymore, all their innocence is gone and they are struggling for survival.
    AND the situation does not seem to be different in the US, where over 1 million homeless children are reported to live.

    Moreover, the situation of the foster care system does not bring any light to the future of this “lucky” born children. Cases of physical, sexual and emotional abuses are FAR from uncommon. The system does not prepare this children for their adulthood and bam! when they are 18 they are out in the world with no consistent education, homeless and unemployed. Just 3% of foster care raised children graduate in college, but more than 25% of them are in jail within two years after leave the system.

    I think it is just easy to say that we are pro-life and not thing about the implications of it. It sounds right to say it and look good in our group of friends that have the same believes. But I think it is an important time to think about the consequences of it, that are paid for each one of us.

    I would prefer to see healthier human beings forming healthier families with strong emotional bonds than to see less abortions.

    Rich blessings,

  31. It always saddens me when people will offer every excuse (and sometimes contrive an excuse) to justify extinguishing the life of their living, growing unborn child.

    We shudder at the accounts of the barbaric practices of ancient civilizations when they sacrificed their children to imaginary gods (see Molech for example) but we celebrate the very same practice in our “civilized” society when we sacrifice our children to the god of “convenience.”

    I offer three links for your perusal to examine both sides of the issue, not just the one-sided sterilized version presented by our media outlets. An informed public is a better public.

    http://defendingcontending.com/category/abortion/
    http://www.reformationnation.com/id36.html
    http://www.reformationnation.com/id6.html

    Respectfully,
    – The Pilgrim

  32. 01drop, excellent points.

    I think it’s easy for those of us who were born and raised here to ignore the poor and their children, because they aren’t nearly as visible in the US. (Unless, of course, you look for them… or you are one of them.)

    On another, related topic, it makes me very angry to see women and girls being held solely responsible for the lives of their children, because they didn’t create that child all by themselves… If men were held to account for their actions – and made responsible for the support of the children they’ve fathered – there would (I think) be far fewer women contemplating such a difficult choice…

  33. “It always saddens me when people will offer every excuse (and sometimes contrive an excuse) …”

    I think the point of the post is that we *take responsibility for consequences* – it’s not about making excuses.

    Or maybe we’re reading two entirely different blog entries? Seriously, I’m not sure if you’re seeing that Lindsey’s post is not an apologia for abortion… [sigh]

  34. I believe Hilary Clinton put it best by saying…

    “I have met thousands & thousands of pro-choice men & women. I have never met anyone who is pro-abortion. Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. Being pro-choice is trusting the individual to make the right decision for herself & her family, & not entrusting that decision to anyone wearing the authority of government in any regard.”

  35. Hi Lindsey,

    I found you on the WordPress front page, so congratulations!

    That said, thank you for this post. I once heard a quote that was something like, “A woman doesn’t decide to have an abortion the way she decides to buy a new pair of shoes. A woman decides to have an abortion the way an animal caught in a trap will gnaw its own leg off to survive.”

    Several years ago I had an abortion. Not a medically induced one, but an abortion, nonetheless. Not a week goes by that I don’t wonder about that child. And yet – if I were that age, in that situation again – I would do the same thing again.

    So thank you for your compassion, which is more Christ-like than any judgments can ever be. May He keep you in his everlasting care.

  36. Lindsey I am with you on this one, everything has been said. A friend of mine was forced to make such a decision, they are not in any financial position to bring about another child, they are battling as it is to give their other 2 children enough food on the table. The decision broke their hearts but their children have food to eat and clothes to wear – hard decisions in life but ultimately they are decisions and the choice is always there. This is a personal choice that should not be brought about by external pressure because it is not them but you that will have the emotional side to deal with. Once again great post and interesting discussion 🙂

  37. Kathy, the verses that say that “conceived and bore a son.” Do not prove that a person begins at conception. The conceived part could be a separate event, and not related to the child. Just like “she ate and paid the bill” does not imply that she ate the bill.

    It is not true that at conception, “an entirely new and unique human being (genetically speaking) has been created”. The DNA of the sperm and the DNA of the egg are still seperate after conception (in two ‘pronuclei), and only come together after the first cell division. And I don’t see how sperm DNA outside the egg moving inside has any relevance at all – at what distance does life begin, then?

    My statement that “the forming process needs to be complete before the person has a right to life” is not based on (nor contradicted by) any Biblical teaching.

    Now, at conception there is not only the potential for one human life, but many. If a person begins at conception, and not after, then identical twins must only be a single person – as it only takes a single conception to form two (or even three) humans. The potential exists to turn any (nucleated and diploid) human cell into human being. If a person begins at conception, and not after, then embryos created by therapeutic cloning must not be persons – as no conception (sperm-egg union) occurs in cloning.

    On the fertilized eggs that do not implant, those stats come from an article called “Conception to ongoing pregnancy: the ‘black box’ of early pregnancy loss” by Macklon, Geraedts and Fauser, published in volume 8 of the scientific journal Human Reproduction Update (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12206468?dopt=Abstract) It was measuring natural conception, not those conceived through assisted reproduction.

    My point from that was the fact that we still allow people to have unprotected sex, even if only in a marriage, means that we are not respecting ‘human life’ as considered by many here. To minimise embryo loss, surely abstaining from all sexual activity is the only outcome – until we can find a technique with far greater success rates.

    If someone did sustain a brain injury were unable to think at all, then I do think they have certainly lost their personhood – to kill them, painlessly, would not be wrong. And, we can at least be certain that human embryos cannot think, because their brain function does not start until about 20 weeks gestation – well after most abortions occur.

    All in all, the idea of human life beginning at conception is full of contradictions, and leads to absurd consequences (like unprotected sex being a likely murder). Far more reasonable approaches involve characteristics like consciousness, self-awareness or the capacity to value oneself. It is these characteristics that separate you and I from all other lifeforms – it is these that define when something that is ‘human’ and ‘life’ becomes ‘human life’ in the special sense that deserves the right to life.

  38. Again, no time to respond to individual comments as at some point this morning I need to shower and get the kids ready for church. SanityFound and Joshua, a special thanks. Joshua has just said much of what I intended to, so everyone read his comment carefully.

    As I said in my post, at what point an egg becomes sacred life is another discussion entirely– in this post I was merely discussing my empathy for and understanding of those women who do choose abortions because of desperate and what appears to be insurmountable circumstances. It really, truly grieves me to see all of these comments focusing on the embryo and not the woman- not because I am coldhearted and don’t believe that babies deserve our love, but simply because these women, these women who have to make such a grievous choice, are here among us, within our reach, and we can do things now to care for them. What about the women who have already aborted? Our cold stance, our repetition that “abortion is murder” builds a wall between us and them and makes it harder to reach out and minister to them. What we need to be doing is bringing them into the fold and giving them life and heart lessons that could abolish the need for another child to die should they conceive again.

    And for the argument that they conceive because of sin and irresponsibility… I conceived three times. All of them while married. Two of them while actively using birth control and not wishing for a pregnancy. What sin is being visited on me? The sin of loving my husband and being open to him? Is the birth control pill and a diaphragm not sufficient avoidance? Some of these women are good, responsible women- as SanityFound pointed out they may be loving and responsible parents who are truly trying to make what is best out of meager circumstances.

    Let’s stop talking about the embryo and talk about the women. What are we, as Christians, to do with them? How do we approach them? How do we care for them? What would Christ do for them were he here? Would he picket an abortion clinic?

  39. @Joshua — I found the study that you had the link for the abstract on and read about half of it (can’t spend too much time on it this morning — gotta get my family ready for church) — and found it quite interesting. It doesn’t change my views on abortion, however. Let’s say that a distinctly new human does begin at conception, and 70% naturally die before birth — that still does not justify the deliberate taking of that life at any point before or after birth. Life is a gift from God, and the taking of an innocent life is murder. The Bible couldn’t be clearer. Nor does the high rate of natural death (whether pre-birth or post-birth — everybody dies eventually, you know) justify unnatural death (murder). The point of not allowing abortions is not to “minimize embryo loss” but rather to minimize the deliberate taking of the life of the unborn. I cannot allow that taking the life of a mentally incompetent person is anything but murder. It’s also a slippery slope — today the mentally incompetent, tomorrow those with a low IQ, the next day those with a medium IQ. The day after that — Hitler. I can’t go there.

    @ e2tc — you touch on an extremely important point — that of personal responsibility. As Fr. J put it, “In life, one is never truly forced to do the wrong thing.” We are all tempted to sin — the Bible makes that plain — but we are never forced to sin — God always makes a way of escape (1 Cor. 10:13). It amazes me that no matter how many times on this earth Jesus was put between a rock and a hard place, He always had a way out (much of the time it was philosophical questions — pay taxes or not).

    Much of this discussion is focused on the women and girls who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant. Much of it is focused on “government” and “society” and what “we” or “they” should do. What is rarely talked about is personal responsibility. Yes, as Christians we are to love others (always an action). Yet that doesn’t negate personal responsibility. (The Bible touches on this, too, with “bear one another’s burdens” and “every man must bear his own burden.”)

    What needs to change in this argument is not for the government or society to change something for somebody (although that may help temporarily, and may help a particular person — along the lines of “give a man a fish and you’ll feed him for a day”) — what needs to change is “teach a man *how* to fish, and you’ll feed him for a lifetime.”

    So, what to do — well, we could go back to old-fashioned morality, such as is talked about in the Bible. That would solve a lot of problems (yes, people would still sin, but when fewer of their peers are having sex, fewer girls will succumb to pressure to have sex). Let’s face it, very few abortions are done because of rape or incest or the life of the mother. Most abortions are done because a baby would be inconvenient — whether the mother is married or not. We have an epidemic of unwed motherhood, which is due to an epidemic of unwed sex. Rates of divorce and STDs have skyrocketed, along with abortion rates (1/5 U.S. pregnancies end in an abortion clinic). But personal responsibility can take care of a lot of that. I teach my children the right way to go; you teach your children the right way to go. I take care of my children, you take care of your children. We also help those who are in desperate situations. Not only do we “give them a fish” but we “teach them how to fish.”

    We as a society have fallen a long way from our parents’ and our grandparents’ society. In the old days, if a girl got pregnant out of wedlock, she was shunned and typically went to live in a home for unwed mothers, and her baby was given up for adoption. While I don’t say that this was the best way to deal with the situation, peer pressure kept unwed sex very low. Now, unwed sex and unwed pregnancy is glorified nearly everywhere you look. (Brangelina, anyone?)

    An excellent blog I’ve found is What Women Never Hear. It talks about interpersonal relationships, society, raising children, etc. It’s basically from a Christian standpoint, although the author rarely mentions the Bible or religion.

    I’m not saying, “Let’s stop giving these women a fish” but what I am saying is “Let’s teach them how to fish” — and the men too. I sympathize with women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant. However, in our country, there is government assistance available to those who truly can’t afford to take care of their families. While I don’t say that’s best, it’s certainly preferable to abortion. As Fr. J also pointed out, adoptive couples generally pay for all expenses associated with pregnancy.

    I don’t think that most girls and women begin a sexual encounter with the thought, “if I get pregnant from this, I’ll just have an abortion”; but if abortion were illegal, I daresay that there would be a thought in the back of their minds, “If I get pregnant, I can’t have an abortion,” and that would stop some of them from having sex. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

    Yes, there will always be failures of contraception and birth control; but “the Lord will provide.”

  40. Okay, I’ve decided I have a meaningful bit to contribute to this discussion. For those who proclaim that abortion is murder I ask this: Do you believe that war in which soldiers kill each other on a battlefield through the usual means is morally acceptable in any circumstances? Or is that murder with no exceptions as well?

  41. Kathy, if abortion is the deliberate taking of an unborn life, isn’t sex also deliberately creating an embryo that will, in all liklihood, die? How then can procreation be justified?

    Also, it is not a slope at all between those who are brain dead and those who have a functional brain. There is a clear boundary – if you can think, to the degree that you can understand that you exist (i.e. self-awareness), then your life is most probably highly valuable to yourself and taking it away would be most wrong. Even those with low IQ are able to comprehend that they exist – it only takes a mental age of 18 months to do that.

  42. Kathy, your comment was very well thought out but I take issue with one thing you said. Your escalation argument about how abortion leads to killing the mentally deficient which leads to killing off who you don’t like. This is a stance I’ve heard about many things, from legalizing drugs to gay marriage, and it’s my favorite argument to hear because it’s oh so easy to argue against because it’s simply not rooted in logic. Allow me to demonstrate the exact opposite of your point.

    Say we do outlaw abortion because a fetus is life and god dictates that life is sacred and therefore abortion is against god’s plan. Sure I can buy that, but from there we could say that HIV is a disease that’s been created by god and he in his ultimate wisdom has not seen fit to give us a cure so is it against god’s plan to treat this disease, or any disease for that matter? So from there what other medical procedures and treatments are against god’s plan? Should we pray for god’s guidance on what medicine should be practiced?

    Absurd right? The idea that abortion leads to outlawing most medical procedures is ludicrous of course, but the same argument that allowing abortion leads to a Hitler-like regime where we’re killing off everyone we don’t like isn’t equally ridiculous.

    The fact is that in America there is a law that dictates the separation of church and state, and the state chose to turn to science and medicine to dictate what law should be passed regarding this particular medical procedure. Science and medicine said a fetus was not sentient, and was therefore part of the mother and thus the mother could choose what might be done with her own body. They did not command any religious groups to change their doctrines about the issue, or say children under the age of whatever were not allowed to carry a child to term, they simply said women could have access to a safer way to manage their own bodies than stabbing themselves with coat hangers or having their boyfriend kick them in the stomach.

  43. On the subject of a fetus’s mental capacity and thus the ability to kill anyone of a diminished mental capacity- I can see why this argument is made.

    A few questions. If an embryo is aborted before it develops a brain stem and has any registrable brain function- is it still murder? And thus, if the law was amended to say that only pregnancies up until a certain week or day marker can be aborted, would that be more acceptable?

    And speaking of who we may and may not kill, the law already allows for people with no brain activity who would die without life support to be removed from life support and therefore to die, but this is not considered murder under the law.

    I realize some people find this abhorrent… but a line has already been drawn that says that brain death means dead… and thus, logic would follow that without a brain, there is no human life.

    Note: I said logic will follow. I didn’t say, “I say this.”

  44. Imagine for a moment if you had made the mistake of going to the wrong person for help with your pregnancies. Imagine if your mom, or your husband, or your friend, or your counselor, gave you a lecture about “being reasonable” and “being realistic” and “being responsible”, and you ended up, as so many of my friends have, on the abortion table. Imagine your life without your kids, with just the memory that when you were scared and felt so desperate and alone, you made a horrible, irreversible choice.

    That is life for far too many women.

    I understand the pressures that can drive a woman to abortion. That’s why I’m prolife. Not because I value the fetus over the mother, but because I understand that for the vast majority of women, they don’t see the baby as an enemy to be conquered or a problem to be eliminated. But they very often get sucked into something they don’t want, because they are frightened and don’t see another way out.

    I don’t want women to end up feeling abandoned or trapped into a nightmare they can’t see an escape from. I’m prolife precisely because I’m pro-woman.

  45. graceunbound, where is the compassion in abandoning weeping women to acts of horror and despair and desperation? Isn’t the real compassion in helping women avoid abortions?

    Does this woman sound like somebody who was given real compassion:

    It’s 5:20 A.M. …. It’s here… the 8th anniversary of my first child’s death.

    Even though I realize that time is linear and nothing bad is happening right here and now (unless you count heartache), I can’t help but relive it. January 30th rolls around and sweeps the cobbwebs from my mind’s dusty corners. Images fly at me like bats.

    Peering through time, I stand a ghost at my yesteryear bedside. I see myself sleeping only hours away from the horror of the rest of my life as a grieving mother. I see my precious child floating securely, possibly resting, possibly exercising, but completely safe, warm, and unaware of the fate that awaited him/her later in the day.

    ….

    I remember the pregnancy test and the mourning as I realized this was the last time my child’s life would register in mine. I didn’t want to do it. “It’s OK,” the nurse reasoned, “You can always have another baby later.”

    “BUT I WANT THIS ONE!”

    I remember…
    The counseling. And how the counseling was not counseling. And how there was no 11th hour salvation for us.

    I remember…

    The Room.

    The absorbant pad. My fixation with it and inability to remove my clothing for staring at it and catching a glimpse of the future, of our blood draining into it, soaking it as our love became garbage, medical waste.

    ….

    I can feel myself crying even now, pleading with the abortionist that I didn’t want to kill my baby but didn’t know what else to do because of my illness. He sent my husband in. I remember…

    ….

    That’s when I hear it… the cart. Squeaky wheels. Yes, the doctor is in. “I don’t want to do it! I don’t want to kill my baby. But I don’t know what else to do!”

    “OK then,” says the good doctor, “Are you ready?”

    I say nothing. That’s it. It’s over. I’m gone. I hand him my arm. The end.

    I wake up in the middle of it. I’m shaking. He is pulling something out of me. Pieces of something. Something awfully tenacious. He tugs and tugs. I heave back and forth as we are mangled. I pass out again.

    I wake up. Someone is crying. Someone is bleeding. It’s me. It’s me. I see the nurse yanking me up. She is not nice anymore. She is yelling at me to be quiet. I stand in crimson-soaked socks, all that is left of my child splashing to the white tile floor. I look. I see. I faint.

    I am manhandled, injected. Someone shoves a pad in my underwear and pulls me into a chair. I am fed. I eat for the first time in ages. I am still drugged. The tea is good. The cheese crackers are good. I fill my stomach but find that it is empty. Something is missing. Something electric and wonderful. Something small and perfect. Something precious. Someone being knit together wholly wired for loving me. My child is gone. Death for physical respite. It was not worth it.

    ….

    Through the grey veil, I see my husband falling into hotel sheets and disappearing. I am at his side thinking of our child in pieces back at the abortion facility. I see him/her twisted at the bottom of the bell jar. I want him/her warm and safe and back with me. I’m so empty. There’s no life in me. I look for a way out of the window. I’m done. There is none. I crawl into a porcelain corner and cry until I fade away forever.

    ….

    I try everything to cope. To survive. I have other children. But it’s not like it’s supposed to be. Every happy thing is tinged with sadness.

    Eventually I start a blog. I talk about my child, my loss. I expose the royal scam. A few people even care.

    Days go by. Months go by. Anniversaries come and go. When they arrive again I try not to think of it, but I can’t not.

    Curiously, I focus on the moment when the cruel lance first touched the amniotic sac. That split milisecond just before the end of all things. That shallow short breath that divides the space between life and death, happiness and horror. I see a delicate, precious orb and a sharp threatening instrument puncturing it. It’s too late now.

    Liquid spills out onto the pad. Diamonds flow into an oversized sanitary napkin. Diamonds… and rubies.

    There is no turning back. This is the rest of my life. This is what one human life will buy.

    Another anniversary. Another one. Another one. Another one…

    If abandoning women to that is compassion, I want no part of it.

  46. goldensilver: It would be such a traumatic thing to get an abortion…I could not imagine it. I feel pity for everyone involved in such an act.

    Ought not this compassion move you to want to fight against the way our society abandons women?

    It’s such a cop-out for a community to congratulate itself for being compassionate when they’re only making life easier for everybody else in the woman’s life, at great cost to her.

    How many women are sitting in abortion clinic waiting rooms, crying, saying “I have no choice!”? Far too many. But we’ve let the abortion lobby (funded largely by population-control fanatics) frame it as women versus their unborn children, as if mothers and babies are naturally enemies!

    How did we ever let it come to this? Where abandoning despairing women is considered enlightened and compassionate?

  47. Christina: It is obvious from that woman’s words that this was not her own choice, she was forced into it by her doctors and possibly her spouse. That is obviously wrong.

    But is that every abortion? Every woman? No. And while outlawing abortion may spare some women the grief that one went through, it may put thousands more into equally grievous places.

    The church should be with women like her, encouraging them to not make decisions that go against their heart and aspirations. But the church should also be with the women who don’t know who will pay the bills and how they will be clothed in the morning, reminding them that God will cloth them with beauty like the lilies.

    Even if their fear drives them to abortions. Especially then.

  48. Lindsey, But my personal morality in this case is overwhelmed by the sympathy and compassion I feel for women who find themselves pregnant in less than ideal situations.

    Exactly. Which is why I’m prolife. It’s inexcusable to abandon women the congratulate ourselves on our “compassion”.

    Mother and their babies are not natural enemies, and it’s a crime and a sin that we’ve allowed the abortion lobby to promote the lie that women actually want abortions.

    A few do. Let them go to a great amount of trouble to arrange their wanted abortions. Let’s stop acting as if making abortion readily available is doing ordinary, hurting women a favor.

  49. Lindsey, I’m having trouble understanding your last comment. Can you rephrase it, please? It sounds as if you’re saying that if a woman is poor or frightened, the church should spout platitudes at her as they … do what? Leave her to the tender mercies of the neighborhood abortionist?

    The church should be leading the communities in seeing to it that all women know they have someplace to turn.

    And part of that is exposing the lie that abortion is doing desperate women some sort of favor.

  50. militarywifey, somebody did a study a while back and found that over 80% of prolife resources — money, time, and material — went to providing services to at-risk women. Only about 20% is devoted to activism.

    Where does this perception come from, that the prolifers aren’t doing anything for the women? From the abortion lobby — which then tries to shut down the very pregnancy centers that are doing the work that they claim the prolifers don’t do!

  51. I’m not saying that in the least. Saying that women should be allowed to make a choice is a completely different thing than saying they should get abortions. And I firmly believe that if every woman were being properly cared for and emotionally and spiritually supported, abortions would be practically nonexistent.

  52. Nicole, If abortion were to be illegal, women would simply take more dangerous measures, putting their own lives at much higher risk.

    Actually, the abortion rate skyrockets with legalization. The best estimates I’ve seen is that it increases by a factor of ten. Why subject ten times as many women to the nightmare of an abortion, just to slave the consciences or suit the convenience of the 10% who actually WANT abortions?

    As for the safety factor, 90% of pre-legalization abortions were done by doctors. About 8% were done by nurses, midwives, dentists, veterinarians, or other people with some sort of medical training. Of the remaining 2% done by people with no formal medical training, many of them were like the Jane syndicate in Chicago, that had doctors who trained them, provided equipment and medications, and provided aftercare. The stereotypical “coathanger abortion” was seen primarily among women with mental health issues, already prone to self-mutilative behaviors. Legalization wouldn’t do much to change that.

    I know of three doctors — Jesse Ketchum, Milan Vuitch, and Benjamin Munson — who had clean records as “back-alley butchers”. No dead patients. But after legalization took away the threat of prison, they got sloppy. Each went on to kill TWO “safe and legal” abortion patients. Ketchum managed to kill two in just four months, doing hysterotomy abortions (major surgery) in his freaking office. Carole Schaner and Margaret Smith would have been much safer in Ketchum’s criminal practice back in Michigan than they ended up being in his safe and legal New York practice.

  53. Lindsey, are you familiar with “Sophie’s Choice”?

    Would you say that the Nazi guard was a nice guy for giving Sophie a choice?

    How is telling a woman, “You can choose: Your safety or your baby’s life. Your future or your baby’s life. Your toddler’s well-being or your baby’s life. Your relationship or your baby’s life.”

    Giving a woman the “choice” like that is not kindness. It’s a copout. Women deserve a whole heck of a lot better than being offered an abortion when they’re desperate, frightened, or alone!

  54. So Christina, how do you propose that these situations be remedied? (I’m asking an honest question here, not being sarcastic.)

    Just saying that something is wrong, and that no woman should ever have to make such a choice – well, it isn’t enough.

    The only way there can ever be “enough” is if there are people who willingly come alongside women who are in dire straits – to help.

    I also have to wonder what might happen if the men who got all of these women pregnant had to pay – out of their pockets, out of their reputations (as being expected to own up to their paternity) – what might happen to both the rate of unwanted/unplanned pregnancies – and abortions.

    I see no value whatsoever in putting all of the load onto the women.

  55. @ Tony,

    I believe there are times that the killing of humans is justifiable. There are crimes which should carry the death penalty, soldiers should also be able to defend their country, and people should be able to defend themselves, their homes, and other innocent people, if they’re at risk from others.

    Also, the “escalation” argument is not invalid. Why is it that abortion advocates fight tooth and nail against every restriction on abortion (whether it’s parental consent/notification, crossing state lines, notifying authorities about statutory rape in the case of a minor having an abortion, legal time that abortion can happen [24 weeks, viability, 40 weeks?], partial-birth abortion, etc.), and even laws that make it a crime to kill a wanted unborn baby? It’s because they know that these laws will chip away at the foundation for abortion, and incrementally the laws will restrict abortion until it becomes virtually or actually illegal once again.

    Here’s a slightly different take — an article on euthanasia, in which the author shows how doctors in the Netherlands (her country) have gone from treating patients to killing them, many times without their consent. Quite chilling. Note also that Hitler didn’t start his extermination when he came into power, nor did he immediately round up all the Jews (and quite a few other types of people — about 6 millions Jews and quite possibly that many non-Jews as well) and send them to gas chambers. No, it was incremental. He started small. First it was children with developmental or mental disabilities; and Jews were first concentrated into ghettos — death camps came later. Tony said that it only takes a mental age of 18 months to be self-aware. So, then, are babies less than 18 months of age *not* self-aware, and therefore *not* sentient? If they’re too immature to understand that they exist, then is it wrong to kill them? See – that is the type of slippery slope I’m talking about. Today, you say that it’s not wrong to kill a fetus because he’s too immature to know about self-existence, or he’s not “sentient” — but using that argument, with Tony’s info that babies less than 18 months are equally undeveloped means that it’s not wrong to kill babies up to 18 months. What’s the next step?

    You may also be interested in reading the South Dakota Task Force Report on Abortion, which talks in part about the scientific and medical advances that have been made in the fields related to the topic of abortion (genetics, embryology, etc.), and how these improvements have essentially rendered obsolete the reasonings of the Supreme Court Justices at the time they made the Roe v. Wade decision.

    @ Joshua — you said, “if abortion is the deliberate taking of an unborn life, isn’t sex also deliberately creating an embryo that will, in all likelihood, die? How then can procreation be justified?” We are *all* going to die — it’s just a matter of when. Let’s say that life begins not at conception or at some point before birth, but at birth — wouldn’t birth, then, be the deliberate action that creates a living human that will absolutely die? You’re going to die; I’m going to die; everybody reading this blog is going to die. How, then, can birth be justified, since everyone who is born is going to die? But there is a difference between the unfortunate natural demise of someone and unnatural death (murder or not). Someone is equally dead, but one was deliberate and the other was not (either due to accident, old age, disease, etc.).

    @ e2tc. — you touch on a very valid point — what would happen if men’s reputations and pocketbooks suffered as a result of knocking up these women? That used to be the case — ever hear of “shotgun weddings”? While women have always and will always bear the brunt of this (simply because they are the only ones who can get pregnant), societal pressures are not what they once were — for men or for women. But the changing factor must be us women — simply because we are the only ones who can get pregnant, and because men will do what is necessary in order to get sex. They will. Women used to set marriage as the standard for sex. It can be that way again — but not because some government says so, but if women make it so. According to 1995 statistics on abortion, about 4/5 of all abortions were performed in unmarried women. If sex happened only within marriage, the abortion rate would automatically drop by at least 80%.

  56. The truth is that abortion is murder. It is wrong. It is a heinous crime against humanity. It is an unparallelled evil committed on the most innocent and vulnerable among us. How can one look at someone so lovely as an infant and order his/her execution.

    And the fact is that there are countless people out there willing to cover all the costs and remove all the barriers to bringing the child to term. They are called adoptive parents. There is absolutely nothing else to know.

  57. In the article on euthanasia I mentioned above was a reference to an editorial written in 1970 that contrasted the traditional Western humanitarian ethic of life being precious and valuable and all life being equal, to the new utilitarian ethic of relative rather than absolute value of human life. The doctor seems to be endorsing the second view (in his final paragraph he says that doctors need to examine this view and “prepare to apply it”). What is interesting to me is his discussion of abortion, in which he says this:

    “In defiance of the long held Western ethic of intrinsic and equal value for every human life regardless of its stage, condition or status, abortion is becoming accepted by society as moral, right and even necessary. It is worth noting that this shift in public attitude has affected the churches, the laws and public policy rather than the reverse. Since the old ethic has not yet been fully displaced it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing, which continues to be socially abhorrent. The result has been a curious avoidance of the scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intra- or extra-uterine until death. The very considerable semantic gymnastics which are required to rationalize abortion as anything but taking a human life would be ludicrous if they were not often put forth under socially impeccable auspices. It is suggested that this schizophrenic sort of subterfuge is necessary because while a new ethic is being accepted the old one has not yet been rejected.”

    Note that this was written pre-Roe. But here we are today, wondering whether the life of the baby is really life, and if so, if the life of the baby supersedes the mother’s right not to have the baby. It is precisely what the doctor outlined in the above article. And it makes me sick.

  58. Actually Kathy, I believe I was the one who said self-awareness wasn’t present until 18 months, not Tony. I didn’t say it, but yes that would mean that the painless death of infants under 18 months would not be wrong. I don’t think we can assume infanticide to be wrong without a reason. And I can’t come up with a reason that makes sense.

    Thus, unlike many other pro-choice people who draw a line at viability – when the foetus is no longer dependent on the mother’s body – I draw the line much later, when it actually makes more sense.

    It is not a slippery slope beyond infanticide. Perhaps it could be argued that there is a slope from abortion to infanticide, but I can’t see that slope extending much beyond that point. There is almost no logical reason for the justification of murdering people who don’t want to die (except, maybe in strict utilitarianism, to save the life of many others).

  59. Kathy, I’m older than many of the commenters here (at least, I think I am!) and grew up in an era – not all that long ago, really – where people “had” to get married (a lot!), and where unmarried, pregnant girls were sent to ” ‘homes’ for unwed mothers.” (Can’t imagine that any of those places were what you or I would consider “homey,” though!)

    And you know, none of this stuff worked very well.

    I think the key is personal responsibility – and I’m honestly pained to see that you appear to be advocating a pretty low view of *all* males of the species:

    “…and because men will do what is necessary in order to get sex. They will.”

    I don’t think women were the arbiters of marriage in the past, and – past or present – getting married in order to have “legal” sex seems like a horrible basis for a longterm relationship with a spouse.

    So maybe we drop the “men are all animals” (my words, of course, not yours) stance and actually help young guys to learn to make choices. They’re capable, and they’re every single bit as responsible for what women are for what they do – in every action, of any kind, in this life.

    (How weird is it that this is leading me inexorably back to that comparison that I hate – you know, the “Men are like microwaves; women are like crockpots” thing? ;))

  60. @ Joshua,

    “I don’t think we can assume infanticide to be wrong without a reason. And I can’t come up with a reason that makes sense.” — That’s just sick!! It’s murder — how’s that for “a reason that makes sense”?

    @ everyone else — all right, folks, you see exactly what I and a lot of other people are talking about — this guy is actually saying that murdering *born* children up until the age of 18 makes sense. Life has no value any more, except for what the majority of society places on it. *You* have no value unless *I* decide you have value. — does that bother you? It sure bothers the heck out of me!! And he doesn’t see that allowing infanticide would open the door to anything else. It’s just stunning. Once the door is opened for legal murder of the born, the way it already is on the unborn, then no one is protected. First to go will be the infants, then the elderly and the mentally or physically disabled. He says “there is almost no logical reason for the justification of murdering people who don’t want to die” — how about so that you or I as individuals, or “society” as a whole isn’t “burdened” with their care. Or, how about so that people of “inferior genetics” (however that is defined) don’t “contaminate” the rest of us — wasn’t that Hitler’s reason for murdering Jews, blacks, and those with genetic disorders or differences such as Down Syndrome, dwarfism, etc.? Or, how about because “resources are limited” on this planet, and I don’t want to feed you any more? — There are all sorts of excuses available in the “utilitarian” view of life holding only relative value.

    @ e2tc — I’m not saying that shotgun weddings and homes for unwed mothers worked “well”, but peer pressure (and expectations of parents/society) sure kept the rate of unwed mothers, STDs, and abortions down.

    I was speaking of men in general, and I stand by my statement. If women put out before marriage, then men have one less reason to get married and to stay committed to one woman — if they can get sex from women in general without a commitment, then why would they give up their freedom in order to be bound to one woman? Why would they even take the time to learn about and think about and care about just one woman? Look at society today — women are being sexually exploited at every turn — not just movies, but music, sexually suggestive clothing (even for girls as young as 7), etc. I agree that men and boys are just as responsible for their actions as women and girls, but the fact is that our society is encouraging them to view women and girls merely as sex objects. And encouraging women and girls to be merely sex objects. Then when they end up pregnant and alone (because there was no commitment prior to sex), they advocate abortion; or when they end up alone and not pregnant (because they became emotionally attached to the guy they had sex with, but the guy was not committed to her), then they get bitter. These are generalizations, but it pains me to see how society is acting — without morals and without much *sense* any more!

    I’m not saying that sex should be the basis for a marriage. Rather, that sex is a horrible basis for a relationship, and that is exactly what most people are doing these days — sex and not commitment is the basis of marriage. I’m saying that there must be other things that are the basis of marriage, but guys have to learn what these things are prior to marriage — and sex gets in the way of this learning.

    I encourage you (and everyone else) to read What Women Never Hear for more explanations on this theme. It’s not my blog, but I find myself in general agreement with what he says.

  61. Kathy: I find your gross generalizations of men to be, well, gross. Do you think that men are incapable of desiring commitment? That they might marry not for sex but for companionship, togetherness, and family? My husband married me not to have sex with me but for proximity and partnership, of which sex was just a garnish.

    Why not teach girls not that sex is bad because you could get pregnant or sex is bad because your boyfriend will $%^& you and leave you and if you want to get married you’ve got to hold out but instead teach them that sex is GOOD when it is shared as a consummation of togetherness which only comes in marriage. Teach them not to fear sex but to respect it’s power. When sex ceases to become about recreation, pleasure, or empowerment and instead becomes about unity, spirituality, hope and conviction it becomes that much more important to preserve yourself. I will teach my children to preserve themselves not because of fear but because of desire, desire to achieve that which is the best and most beautiful.

  62. Lindsey,

    Oh, I will teach my children that sex is good when it is shared in marriage — I agree with what you’ve said about that. I will also teach them that sex is bad outside of marriage for the many downsides that it holds — more than just what you’ve mentioned. I also agree that men that are raised properly will be like your husband and my husband; I just don’t see much of that going on these days in the younger crowd. And that deeply concerns me.

  63. Kathy, in my view murder is wrong because it kills somebody who didn’t want to die. As far as I can tell, the only thing wrong with death is doing it when you don’t want to.

    Infants, fetuses, embryos, brain-dead people – all don’t care one way or the other whether they live or die. So I can’t see any reason why killing them would be intrinsically wrong (could still be wrong if the parents or loved ones value that person, and don’t want them to die).

  64. Joshua: The problem with your argument, in that a child of younger than 18 months does not demonstrate self-awareness and thus doesn’t have personhood and thus it is not murder is that at what point would one practically draw the line? Some children may demonstrate self-awareness much earlier than then. By what does one measure self-awareness? By language? Because children can communicate in many ways before they have words. In fact, children will spontaneously smile and attempt to win attention as young as three months- are they not people then? The personality and knowledge of a child starts developing almost as soon as they leave the womb. Even in the first few months of a child’s life they are demonstrating things like if they are easily pleased, reassured by physical touch or hearing your voice, and on, and on. So at what point does the formation of their personhood turn into they themselves being an individual? I would contest that while a child younger than eighteen months can’t demonstrate their knowledge without words, as they have no language, they are self-aware far before then. There is simply no way to measure that fact.

    And then, of course, there is the argument that their parents and relatives have a vested interest in their survival, and they are given a name and issued a social security number and entered into civil society, and thus society has a vested interest in their survival.

    And as for murder simply being the killing of someone who doesn’t want to die… if a suicidal person is walking down the street, someone attacks them and stabs them from behind, is that person guilty of murder? (If they did not realize the person whom they were killing was suicidal?) I would contest that murder is the willful and meaningless taking of life. Thus killings in a war are not murder, as they have higher meaning, and the accidental causing of a death (legally manslaughter) is not the same as murder. Before someone points out the obvious flaw in my argument (what if the murderer feels there is inherent meaning) I will also point out that it is not the individual but society that decides.

  65. Kathy, do you really see most (or all) younger people as being selfish, etc.? I know a lot of younger people (younger than me, at least ;-)) who are so emphatically NOT like the people in the sweeping statement you made above. (Of both sexes, and all sexual orientations.)

    To be honest, the way you’re talking about younger men and women – but men especially (re. sex) comes across as both disrespectful and demeaning. It’s a very negative approach to people and the issues they deal with, and I think the “kids” will suss that out right away and… tune it out, and maybe you with it.

    I realize that your intentions are good, but I feel as if it might be very helpful to you and others if you take some time to rethink your wording and presentation.

  66. Self-awareness has been demonstrated in children and animals (apes, elephants) by the use of the mirror test (and its variants). I believe the most commonly used version involves a child watching a live video recording of themselves, and the tester placing a toy behind the child in such a way that they can only see it on the video screen. If they turn around, it means they have inferred that the person on the screen is them – confirming that they have a concept of ‘self’.

    Putting a mark on their head and watching their reaction in the mirror (do they reach out to touch the mark on the ‘person in the mirror’, or do they touch that mark on their own body?) is how it is usually done in animals.

  67. @ e2tc — I will keep what you say in mind.

    @ Joshua — I think you are profoundly wrong when you say that infants, fetuses, and embryos don’t care whether they live or die. Have you never read of small children who “overcame seemingly insurmountable odds” simply by virtue of (for lack of a better term) “a will to live”? I can think of many stories of infants who were born premature of whom that was said. If you try to smother a newborn, the baby will struggle to breathe. He may not have coordinated movements, and may not know exactly what is keeping him from breathing, but he will do his best to continue to live. That’s just the power of life.

    I refuse to watch the video of an abortion entitled “silent scream” but I’ve read about it — read that the baby tries his best to get away from the suction device that is tearing him limb from limb. He may not demonstrate “self-awareness” by the mirror test, but he is most definitely aware that something is happening to himself — something painful and dreadful, and he is trying to get away from that thing and continue to live.

    When I was pregnant with my first son, we couldn’t get his heartbeat until I was 15 weeks along (after trying at 9 weeks and 13 weeks), and then just enough to verify that he was still alive. The next appt (at 19 weeks) was a few seconds longer, but still not enough to count his heart-rate. It wasn’t until the *next* appt (at 23 weeks) that we were able to hear his heartbeat long enough to count. I am absolutely convinced that he heard or felt the ultrasound waves from the Doppler and was moving away from it, because he didn’t like it or it scared him or whatever. To me, that confirms that he had a concept of “self.”

    Now, as far as what you said about the self-awareness mirror test — your last line is very telling — “confirming that they have a concept of ‘self.'” That test may confirm that these creatures have a concept of self, but that does not demonstrate that prior to “passing” this test that they do not have a concept of self. (A negative is very hard to prove.) It may just demonstrate that they have developed a concept of how mirrors work, which is not a suitable criteria for allowing them to be killed.

    In my view, murder is wrong because it takes an innocent human life. There is intrinsic value in it. Murder also takes the life of someone who does not want to die (although as Lindsey so well pointed out, it is still murder to kill a person contemplating suicide).

    You also said, “in my view murder is wrong because it kills somebody who didn’t want to die. As far as I can tell, the only thing wrong with death is doing it when you don’t want to.” You are by this implying that fetuses want to die. That is blatantly false. You may qualify it by saying, “they don’t care whether they live or die” but (first) these are two different statements and (secondly) I would posit that infants, fetuses, and embryos do care whether they live or die — they want to live! There are times when people “don’t care whether they live or die” (I’ve noticed that many times when a person is grieving the loss of a child or some other person very close to them, or perhaps going through a difficult time in their lives, financially for instance) — does that mean that it’s not murder to kill them, since they “don’t care”?

    As far as brain-dead people go, I’m still thinking about that, and it will be the subject of a future blog post of mine. If you go to my blog, somewhere on there I have a link to a story of a man who was declared brain-dead, but he woke up before they disconnected him from life-support. He remembers hearing his doctors declare him brain-dead! His cousins who were nurses actually saved his life, because they didn’t think he appeared to be truly brain-dead, and they proved it by touching him with a knife and getting reflex movement. There are also stories of people who have woken up from comas after many years, after most people gave up hope for them.

    Taking this view to the extreme, I could say that any time a person is in a coma, or is knocked unconscious, or even merely goes to sleep, that he is in a state where “he doesn’t care” whether he lives or dies. He certainly couldn’t pass the self-awareness mirror test! Will you start to sleep with one eye open?

  68. There have been stories of dogs that had such a ‘will to live’ that they survived some ideal. But the fact of the matter is that they have the ability to endure pain, but they do not actually realise that they will die.

    The struggle of an neonate (and a foetus) is purely reflexive or instinctive, like that of a mouse caught in a mousetrap. They can feel pain (and to cause such pain is wrong). It is not indicative of a concern for their own mortality.

    The mirror test is not the only test. Video screens, or being able to recognise one’s own shadow, also test positive at the same time as the mirror test. When something tested in a number of ways gets the same result, we can conclude it is finding something, and not a problem with a method.

    I do not believe in any intrinsic value to human life. Value is subjective, and the only subject capable of truly placing a valuing my life is me.

    Now, again somebody who has the ability to place a value on their life, but isn’t doing so, should not be killed until they express that they wish to die. When somebody has an ability, it is right to treat them as if they have that ability. Infants and embryos and foetuses do not yet have that ability, only the potential for it. As such, it is not wrong to treat them as if they do not have the ability to value themselves (like flies, or mice).

    As such, you can’t say that a person who is knocked unconscious or asleep could be killed. Though their state has changed, their ability to value themselves is still present, just not being used. We do not have to consistently think about our own mortality in order to deserve protection, just as we do not have to consistently speak English to be considered an ‘English-speaker’. We just need the ability (not the potential to acquire that ability).

  69. Joshua,

    All I can say is that I hope that your view never becomes pervasive in our society — and especially as you apply it. You say that the only one who can truly place a value on your life is you; I say the same thing about all living, functioning, unique human life. Who are you to determine the value placed on that life? You don’t allow others to place a value on your life, yet you do the same to others. I believe that they do place value on their own lives — just not in a way that you recognize.

    The only good thing I can hope from this discussion is that other people will see the logical progression from pre-born murder to full-blown infanticide, and maybe rethink their position on “a woman’s right to choose.” There is no logical reason why a woman should have the right to kill her baby before its born but not after. You’ve stated it better than I — I just hope that people will be so disgusted by your position (as I am) that they will realize that infanticide is infanticide, whether it occurs before or after birth.

  70. Kathy, I believe my last comment (addressed to you) sounded awfully harsh – at least it, looks that way to me, as cold words on the page.

    I can be a bit too blunt for my own good – and everyone else’s – at times, and wish I’d worded things in a more gracious way.

    My sincerest apologies to you. I think we’re far closer in beliefs and ideas than it might seem, based on what I’ve said to you here.

  71. This is not debatable in the eyes of God. It is the murder of the innocent –children.

    Children are the most precious things of this world, and NOTHING is more important. Yes, that is in the Bible. You should read it sometime.

    I find it sad how so many people have been (falsely) lead (by the Deceiver and the one who lies) to believe that the Word is up to perspective or interpretation.

    Praying and being nice to people (as righteous as it is) does not get you into Heaven. Do you know that? In order to get to Heaven, you must put your complete and entire trust in Jesus Christ, Lord and God. That is the ONLY path. It says so in the Bible. Don’t believe me? Again, read it some time.

    I am getting upset with so many people in Bible study groups falsely preaching the Word. If you do not believe in it 100% what good does it do to believe in it at all?

  72. Brent: I’m not discussing this with you as I don’t believe such a discussion would yield more than frustration and hurt feelings on both our parts.

  73. e2tc,

    I wasn’t offended — I was being sincere. I will keep what you have to say in mind — I certainly don’t want to turn people off of what I have to say by the way I say it. 🙂

    Kathy

  74. Kathy,

    Thanks for letting me know – I really appreciate it!

    Text-only communication is a huge challenge for me personally, because… so much of what we say isn’t just in the words we say, it’s in tone of voice, facial expressions, gestures. And we cannot see or hear any of that in text-only communication.

    Glad to know we’re OK, as things have gotten a bit wild here this evening! 😉

    [Big hugs to Lindsey; just hang in there and turn on the comment moderation settings! :)]

  75. “In the binary economy all individuals have a proper income. Apart from the usual opportunities offered by labour work, all individuals have an independent income arising from capital ownership (paying out its full return). Mothers with children are therefore able to bring up their own children without financial pressure.”
    http://binaryeconomics.net/income/

Leave a comment