Thursday, April 13, 2006
Still waiting for an answer
I'm still wondering why pro-lifers would be against aborting a child unable to survive outside the womb. Here's the original post with a picture of an anencephalic baby.
Who benefits when a baby with a life-span of hours is carried to term?
// posted by Erik @ 4/13/2006 10:17:00 PM
permalink
| email post: 
Post a Comment
Comments:
I will tell you what, against my better judgment to relay this story, because I now believe you have a heart of stone, Erik, I will tell it anyway. Then I am totally through with you.
I heard from a friend whose sister just had a miscarriage at 17 weeks. She is devastated, the whole extended family is hurting for her. The parents chose to have their baby cremated and had a ceremony. This was their CHILD, not a bunch of cells.
As a mother myself, I know the anticipation an expecting mother has for their child. I know the love that begins even before the child is born. WHEN A CHILD IS WANTED, there is love, no matter what ailments the child may have in utero that is known or unknown to the doctors and/the parents. It's called unconditional love, and it is a beautiful thing.
Now, when tragedy strikes and an unborn child that can never survive for long after birth, a mother and father, and maybe siblings or grandparents may wish to hold this child during those hours and have their chance to say good-bye. A mother can comfort, a father can show love, a baby can be baptized if the parents wish before death occurs.
These are some very good reasons not to abort babies, even if they have no brain.
And let me take this chance to go on record as saying the disrespect for life that people like you, Erik, is a tragedy in itself. When people chose to exploit corpses, such as you have at your blog, I think it is nothing short of disgraceful. I have always been against the "pro-life" people who want to display aborted body parts to further the anti-abortion agenda. This bothers me as well. I like to focus on the celebration and beauty of human life. To me, THAT is the meaning of being pro-life. I want to work towards solutions for promoting LIFE in our world, not trying to justify death.
Good bye.
I heard from a friend whose sister just had a miscarriage at 17 weeks. She is devastated, the whole extended family is hurting for her. The parents chose to have their baby cremated and had a ceremony. This was their CHILD, not a bunch of cells.
As a mother myself, I know the anticipation an expecting mother has for their child. I know the love that begins even before the child is born. WHEN A CHILD IS WANTED, there is love, no matter what ailments the child may have in utero that is known or unknown to the doctors and/the parents. It's called unconditional love, and it is a beautiful thing.
Now, when tragedy strikes and an unborn child that can never survive for long after birth, a mother and father, and maybe siblings or grandparents may wish to hold this child during those hours and have their chance to say good-bye. A mother can comfort, a father can show love, a baby can be baptized if the parents wish before death occurs.
These are some very good reasons not to abort babies, even if they have no brain.
And let me take this chance to go on record as saying the disrespect for life that people like you, Erik, is a tragedy in itself. When people chose to exploit corpses, such as you have at your blog, I think it is nothing short of disgraceful. I have always been against the "pro-life" people who want to display aborted body parts to further the anti-abortion agenda. This bothers me as well. I like to focus on the celebration and beauty of human life. To me, THAT is the meaning of being pro-life. I want to work towards solutions for promoting LIFE in our world, not trying to justify death.
Good bye.
Beth -
"These are some very good reasons not to abort babies, even if they have no brain ...
"a mother and father, and maybe siblings or grandparents may wish to hold this child during those hours and have their chance to say good-bye."
Sure maybe you'd like to hug a mutant baby, but what if that's not important to anyone?
"A mother can comfort, a father can show love, a baby can be baptized if the parents wish before death occurs"
What if they don't want to?
It seems like you're explaining why you may want to carry a baby that can't survive outside the womb.
My question is sort of the inverse: Why do you think should it should be illegal not to carry an ill-fated fetus to term?
"These are some very good reasons not to abort babies, even if they have no brain ...
"a mother and father, and maybe siblings or grandparents may wish to hold this child during those hours and have their chance to say good-bye."
Sure maybe you'd like to hug a mutant baby, but what if that's not important to anyone?
"A mother can comfort, a father can show love, a baby can be baptized if the parents wish before death occurs"
What if they don't want to?
It seems like you're explaining why you may want to carry a baby that can't survive outside the womb.
My question is sort of the inverse: Why do you think should it should be illegal not to carry an ill-fated fetus to term?
I get so sick of people who talk like Beth, as if the entire world depended on a strict "pro-life" morality. I'll tell you precisely what your culture of death is doing right now, Beth--they are killing unborn children in Iraq, Afghanistan, and allowing unborn children to die in Central Africa. If you believe for one minute that your "crusade" against abortionist is going to exonerate the same people who are spreading death and destruction around the globe, then you better start making some really difficult choices.
No one is saying that you can't make a stance against abortion, but your feelings do nothing more than mask a terrible hypocrisy that is now infecting the Religious Wrong.
No one is saying that you can't make a stance against abortion, but your feelings do nothing more than mask a terrible hypocrisy that is now infecting the Religious Wrong.
I'm sorry to hear you've chosen to leave this blog, Beth. You have generally been the lone voice of dissent -- which I admire even though I've often disagreed with your side of the debate. Without you, the comments here will mostly just be people agreeing with each other -- not much of a discussion.
If you are still reading this, Beth, it strikes me that you and Gerik are not only disagreeing on the correct stance (or content), you're also attacking the issue with completly different tools (or form): you, Beth, are approaching this from personal experience and are relating a narrative, while Gerik is approaching this as an esoteric theory (I know that I'm oversimplying both of your statements, but I think that the jist of what I'm saying is correct). This makes it twice as hard to come up with any consesus. You should both check out this article (http://www.newyorker.com/critics/books/articles/060410crbo_books) which describes this in more detail, using an apt metaphor of a doomed marriage wherein a wife relates with stories while a husband retreats...
Anyhow, I hope you'll change your mind and keep posting here, Beth.
If you are still reading this, Beth, it strikes me that you and Gerik are not only disagreeing on the correct stance (or content), you're also attacking the issue with completly different tools (or form): you, Beth, are approaching this from personal experience and are relating a narrative, while Gerik is approaching this as an esoteric theory (I know that I'm oversimplying both of your statements, but I think that the jist of what I'm saying is correct). This makes it twice as hard to come up with any consesus. You should both check out this article (http://www.newyorker.com/critics/books/articles/060410crbo_books) which describes this in more detail, using an apt metaphor of a doomed marriage wherein a wife relates with stories while a husband retreats...
Anyhow, I hope you'll change your mind and keep posting here, Beth.
Post a Comment
