Why GOP Mama is Pro-Life
I want to be clear, first and foremost, I am a Christian. My politics are always, always, secondary. With that being said, it is an easy assumption that I am Pro-Life.However, I also want to be clear that my way to argue my point on the abortion issue is not to point to God, or my religion, because, let's face it, there are an awful lot of people that have different faith than I do and I can't very well expect them to believe the same way.
I also want to say that I thoroughly believe in our constitution and I trust that our founding fathers knew what they were doing when they came together to write the words that have been the basis for our laws for so many years. However, I do believe there are areas in the constitution where it is necessary to amend the laws, and abortion falls under that (in my eyes).
Our founding fathers wrote our constitution back in 1787. As stated by Mis Lib R. Tea, the 14th Amendment states that all citizens born have the rights to...etc. And, looking at this in the strictest form, she is correct. Of course, if the constitution is not amended to include a fetus as a living being, they, in fact, have not been born and therefore have no rights.
However, there is something HUGE that is being overlooked. Our founding fathers did not have the technology that we have today, nor did their medical science come anywhere close. We can not choose to use some of the advances we have made in science for some laws when it suits us and ignore the facts that science has brought to light in other instances.
The fact is, life begins when cells divide. It is very easily seen under a microscope and a heartbeat can be seen via ultrasound as early as 6 weeks gestation. That is how far along I was with my twins when I was able to see both of them, their hearts beating, on a screen in front of me. Granted, I could not feel them moving, but in 4 1/2 short weeks later, I was able to feel them...I am not sure what it is, whether it be political, or something possibly more sinister, but I find it difficult to understand the argument that the cells of a baby forming aren't recognized by our government as a "live being" and yet, those same politicians and Americans can recognize that a contagious virus that is being spread among the population is considered "alive". Are those cells not the same size, if not smaller, than a fetus at 6 weeks gestation?
Further more, I have real difficulty understanding how some in the political world are so at ease destroying the lives of innocent, unborn babies, yet at the same time, won't allow forests in California to be burned because specific spiders have their natural habitat there. Are they kidding me? A spider! But not a future human being. Actual laws have been passed to protect these spiders, but we can't pass laws to protect the unborn?!?
I have to say that this is a topic I take very personally. I am an adoptive mother. I am a former foster parent. I am the mother to 9 children, 5 of whom are handicapped. And, I am a sister to an adopted child who was a failed abortion. This.is.personal.
I get sickened by mothers who put their lives before those of their children and I have been witness to it WAY more than you would think. The idea of anyone, even a dying mother, choosing to abort a child, to save their own life makes me want to vomit. Why not just deliver the baby and give it a chance at life? Would that be so wrong? Even if it's not 23 weeks, allow it the chance at life, rather than giving that poor baby the brutal death of an abortion.
Honestly, look at it this way, if someone wasn't stepping in and ACTUALLY causing the death of the fetus, it would become a human being. THAT is murder.
Am I being judgemental? Yes.
Is it wrong? Absolutely.
If I am to be a good Christian, I am supposed to forgive.
I am supposed to not judge.
However, I'm not perfect and I do judge.
And, ultimately, I don't make that final judgement.
But, I'd like to think that I did all I could, in this life, to give a voice to those not heard...
Every science has for its basis a system of principles as fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles; he can only discover them. ~ Thomas Paine
September 20, 2009 at 11:40 PM
To say that the founding fathers did not understand that a fetus was alive is misleading. Even in ancient historical documents, including but not limited to The Bible, people said that fetuses/children/babies were "living in their mother's wombs". No one's argument, in colonial or modern days, is that a fetus is not alive...but as I've mentioned before just because something is alive doesn't mean it has the rights of person hood.
If you want to amend the Constitution to reflect your personal beliefs, why then should you criticize the people who want to save the spiders? They BELIEVE that is really really important. In fact, why should you complain about anyone making any law so long as it's based on something they REALLY REALLY believe in? What about people who believe that guns are responsible for the deaths of millions of people a year....they want to ban guns to save lives! Why shouldn't they be allowed to do so if you want to be allowed to make abortions illegal for the same reason?
You may choose to continue a pregnancy at the forfeit of your own life, but you have no right to demand that another woman do the same. No one can be legally required to place their children's lives above their own in an emergency situation...for instance, if your house is on fire you are under no legal obligation to rescue your children before exiting the building. If your body is "a house on fire", why should a woman be required to save her unborn child's life above her own?
Also to be thought of-you say deliver the baby and give it a chance at life...what if it is only 12 weeks? Why should a mother have to go through labor to deliver a baby that does not have the physical maturity to survive? Don't you think that would be a huge emotional burden to the women who-let's not forget-is already dying?
Cont....
September 20, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Preventing a fetus from becoming a person in the eyes of the law is not murder, as I've said before it is impossible to murder under the law unless the dead IS a person. Not "will be" a person...or, more correctly, MIGHT be a person in the eyes of the law (just because someone is pregnant does not mean they will carry to full term even under natural circumstances).
Another thing you might want to think about-if abortions were illegal, exactly what would happen to women who miscarry? There would have to be some kind of enforcement to ensure that women who miscarried did not actually have an abortion-you would, through legislation making abortion illegal-be subjecting miscarrying women to ruthless government physical examinations. The Uterus Police-making sure that no one has an abortion by invading the privacy of every gestating woman on the planet.
I think we can both agree the government doesn't have any business inside our bodies.
Lastly, you say you give a voice to those who are not heard...what about other people who are not heard-like women whose partners have threatened to kill them if they get pregnant? Children who are raped by family members and want to have an abortion so that they aren't forced to give birth to their sibling? And on, and on, and on...
Have you ever listened to someone who has had an abortion? Not talked to, or at, but just listened to them and what they have to say? Most of these women are not aborting for fun. They're not aborting as a method of birth control-not that those people don't exist, but they are far from the majority. These women-some, barely girls-had abortions for reasons that would tear any feeling person's heart out. They don't need your judgment, and imprisoning them for having their abortions would have just compounded the terrible situations they were already in.
They need LOVE.
They need HELP.
They need someone to meet THEIR NEEDS, have compassion FOR THEM, tend to THEIR broken souls.
If you're worried about people who are hurting, don't look toward those children who are with God now-look with love on their mothers who are suffering.
And, I can tell you from experience, if you do that-love and serve these women and girls without judgment-it is the best way to save an unborn child. The law can do nothing that Godly Love cannot do better.
September 21, 2009 at 7:59 AM
I don't even know how to respond because I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall. Much as I assume you feel you are doing.
I would then have to interject that if our founding fathers didn't consider a fetus a human being or alive, then they were wrong. You compare killing a cow to killing a fetus and say that neither is considered murder. Why then do we not eat people? Perhaps because EVEN the founding fathers held human beings in a higher reguard then cattle. We eat eggs, but we don't eat human fetuses. Why not? Do we not disreguard both as less worthy then we are?
The problem with your argument is that we DO consider human life in higher reguard, until it comes to selfish mothers.
I have talked to people who have had abortions and you know what, I just don't care. It's the same as when mothers that use drugs throughout their pregnancies, give birth to drug addicted children and then get charged for abuse. They didn't abuse that child AFTER it was born. It was done in utero. IN UTERO.
Explain this one to me, why is it considered a higher crime when a pregnant woman is murdered then when a "regular old woman" is killed?
If the term "born" is so important in your logic, what about babies delivered via c-section? Should we hunt them down and kill them or should they not be considered human beings because they weren't technically "born"? If a man murders a pregnant woman and cuts her baby out to keep it and it survives, is it worthy of life?
You ask why the spiders shouldn't have the same rights? Well, although in God's eyes ALL creatures are considered equal, in our eyes, they are not and sadly, for some reason, some tend to place more value on the life of a spider then they do on the life of a baby.
You can argue with this one with me until you tear your hair out, I will never see the side you are seeing as correct. I would much prefer you just base it all on the "don't touch my body" argument. That makes more sense to me (although I still think it's dispictable)
ps As for the people who aren't heard that you named, you are basically advocating cowering in abuse, rather than women standing up for themselves? I don't wish harm on anyone, and certainly find it horrible that any women or children would have to endure abuse of any kind, but those are the reasons we have law. (you're basically saying to allow abortion instead of using the protections of society.) Nope. Don't buy it.
September 21, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Ms Lib R Tea- You asked if I ever knew anyone to have an abortion. I have known more than a few. One had an abortion because she accidentally got pregnant as a college student and couldn't deal with the shame associated with unwed pregnancy in the 60s. She still cries about and regrets her decision to this day. Is shame a valid reason to kill a baby?
Another person I know has had over 10 abortions (this is not an exaggeration) and does use it as a form of birth control. Those people are definitely out there. Brushing aside their existance to help your arguement is nothing short of denial.
Another person had two abortions because she didn't want more children. Adoption wasn't an option because she didn't want to know someone else was raising her biological children. Is this a good reason to kill a child? Ask her now and you will see the pain and regret in her eyes.
Another girl had a late term abortion to get back at her boyfriend for breaking up with her. Revenge killings are acceptable? I think not.
Finally, I know another girl who got pregnant unknowingly and then her boyfiend of 5 years broke up with her. She was too hurt by her ex to tell him about the pregnancy so she ended it. I suggested adoption and she said she couldn't deal with knowing her child was being raised by someone else so she killed it.
These are people who have abortions. It isn't just people who get raped. As a matter of fact rape accounts for a much smaller proportion of abortions than those done by women who just don't want to have a baby. All of the people I have known (and there are more than I have listed) have done it for selfish reasons. They have commited murder without consequence and you think they deserve compassion? There is a reason so many have broken souls. They know they did something horrible and selfish and they regret it.
September 21, 2009 at 5:32 PM
GOPmama-As I said before everyone modern and historical understands that a fetus is a live. That is not the argument. They all understood/understand that a fetus is human, that is not the argument either. The argument here is that you cannot give rights to a person until they are born. This is based on
(a)Granting a fetus rights would entail granting them EXTRA rights over everyone else on the planet (the right to live off another person's body, which no one else has) and at the same time is taking AWAY from the rights of the mother. The law does not have the power to do either of these things.
and
(b)You cannot legislate your morals onto other people. No matter what kind of good place you are coming from, the first amendment forbids restricting the free exercise of people's beliefs. You believe a fetus is a person, I believe a fetus is a person-you and I are free to continue our pregnancies to term without interference from the government for "population control" reasons. IN THAT SAME TOKEN people have the right to believe that a fetus is not a person (since person hood in utero cannot be measured by science) and the resulting right to terminate their pregnancy.
It is obvious that you don't care about the mothers-but why is their life not important to you? You say you are pro life, but you are coming across as simply "pro fetus".
It is not a higher crime to kill a pregnant woman in the eyes of the law-only in the court of public opinion.
I didn't ask why spiders don't have the same rights, I asked how you can tear anyone down for basing their legislation on their beliefs when you are trying do exactly the same thing. For the record, you did not answer that question.
Lastly, I am not advocating that women live in abuse. I am advocating that a woman who lives in abuse should be able to take any route that she feels is necessary to protect her safety. Something you seem unconcerned about.
I challenge you-give me ONE legally sound objection to abortion that has nothing to do with religion. If you can give it to me I will change sides right now.
September 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM
Sh.tthatmymouthsays-I can give anecdotes about women who have abortions for unselfish reasons as well-BECAUSE of the fact that I am pro life, even the mother's life, I have actually spent time voluntarily assisting women who are recovering from abortions.
The problem is, that it is not up to you or I to determine why they are having an abortion and whether or not a woman's cause is "worthy". We do not have that right-legally (as I have already discussed) or, in my eyes, even morally. It is between them and God what they do, and it is only my job as a follower of Christ to love them with the compassion that my Savior would.
Did Jesus berate the prostitute? Did he scorn her, or shun her? Protest her? Publicly embarrass her? Try to turn the law on her? Of course not.
What did Jesus do or say about abortion? NOTHING. [And yes, it did exist and has been regularly practiced since 1550 BC in cultures all over the world.]
But He did say "love your neighbor as yourself". He did say to tend to the needs of those less fortunate. He taught us that serving the least of people is serving Him. He taught us to Judge Not.
Why worry about the what the law says? I have seen the hearts of women turned against abortion by jut a little support and a kind ear....would you rather do it that way? Isn't that more Christ like?
Either way, that's all we have the power to do, so I think we should focus on doing it well.
September 22, 2009 at 7:26 AM
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. "
Thomas Jefferson
September 22, 2009 at 8:18 PM
All I will say is we need to stop calling these women "mothers". A mother would not kill her child.
You said I sound pro-fetus and not pro-life... I guess I am.
If we know it is a life that is being destroyed, here is my suggestion that will LEGALLY remedy this... ALL women who have an abortion are put to death. That way, we aren't saying the "mother's" life is worth more than the fetus.
Does that sound fair? I'm guessing no. Not to mention, dispictable on so many levels.
Why then are we able to see how wrong it would be to kill these women,but yet it's ok to kill their babies...
September 22, 2009 at 10:28 PM
Texas Gurl-Your comment posted to this post was personally slanderous. I encourage you to remove the name calling and re-post your opinion.
September 22, 2009 at 10:37 PM
Leslie-That quote is out of context. It comes from Jefferson's retirement speech in 1809, in which he is expressing disdain for war, and the glorification of "war trophies".
September 22, 2009 at 10:41 PM
GOPmama-So she's not the mother...then why does she have to carry the fetus? Would you prefer to call her the fetus's flesh sack?
And, in answer to your question, because that woman has rights (to a fair trial, to be tried based on the law at the time of her action, for one)and the fetus does NOT.
Where is your legal argument for giving a fetus rights? Give me ONE argument for it, and I will switch sides right this very moment.
September 22, 2009 at 11:35 PM
AnonyB.tch-Your comment posted to this post was personally slanderous, and as such did not pass comment moderation. I encourage you to remove the name calling and re-post your opinion.
September 23, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Hows this-its my body and its my choice. A fetus is just a fetus. It can't feel or think and it doesn't even know it exists-but I know I exist and I know that my body is my own and anyone who tries to get in my body and tell me what to do is *REDACTED*
It's just impossible to play nice when people are tyring to F*K with my body because "god told them to".
September 23, 2009 at 7:55 AM
There is no way I can argue my point as legal if you can't see that a fetus is a human being and not a leach on it's mother's body.
Oh, and I would gladly call them "mothers" if they actually sustained the life of the child. However, if they treat the fetus as a leach, the only thing they can be called is a "host"/
As for AnoyB.tch... it's people like you that give the pro-Choice argument a bad name. If people that argued Pro-Choice weren't continually rude, perhaps I'd be able to see them as something more-so.
You can argue a point without using bad language and name calling. And we can all have a discussion while still continuing to respect that we all think differently.
I have resigned myself to the fact that abortion will more than likely be legal my entire lifetime, although I do think it should be a state to state choice.
All this is here is a debate and 3 people saying what they believe. Try to respect that.
Sadly, if you want to go out and have 12 abortions this year, there is nothing I can do but pray.
September 23, 2009 at 10:33 AM
I have not doubted that a fetus is alive, or that it is a human. I even personally believe that it is a baby. Still, the fact remains that in order to make our argument we would first have to make others believe what we believe-which is against the law and the end result would still be a violation of a woman's right to autonomy. There is not ONE Constitutionally viable way to outlaw abortion.
I know, I've looked.
September 23, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Also, to be fair, pro choicers are often just as rude and offensive. I have already had to moderate a pro life comment which was personally slanderous.
I allowed AnonyB.tch's comment because she removed any actually slanderous content and edited her own profanity, but it is still clear that she takes this debate personally-and she is of course entitled to her own opinion however heated so long as she is willing to keep a basic level of civility.
September 28, 2009 at 9:24 AM
Ms Lib R. Tea- You say "He did say "love your neighbor as yourself". He did say to tend to the needs of those less fortunate. He taught us that serving the least of people is serving Him. He taught us to Judge Not."
My question is this who is less fortunate then those that are killed simply because they are not wanted by the very people that choose to make them? How is speaking up for those that can not speak for themselves not doing exactly what you said we should be doing?
September 30, 2009 at 10:01 PM
Because you have complete disregard for another person (the woman) when you do it.
Love everyone does not just apply to people you like or consider innocent. Anyone can love their brother, but we are expected to "love our enemies".
October 1, 2009 at 6:23 AM
Ms Lib R. Tea- If that is the case then you have complete disregard for the fetus and are not practicing what you yourself preach. That's not the case though because I don't have complete disregard for the mother, I just think the isn't more important and there for should not have more rights then the fetus that she choose to create. Therefor I speak up for those that can not speak for themselves and are being done wrong because of it (the fetus).
October 1, 2009 at 6:47 AM
Also, as for the second part of your comment. I'm not just loving the people I like or consider innocent. That's why I am against abortion, is becuase I don't just love the mother's life, I love the life of the fetus as well. That's also why I said that the womans life should be considered as well. I place the life of the mother and that of the fetus on the same level. That is not just loving who I like or consider innocent, that is loving everyone.
October 2, 2009 at 12:42 AM
TexasGurl-I don't disregard fetuses-I have kept all of mine, and I believe that fetuses who are aborted go to heavan so I think that they are more than fine and certainly in much better shape than the woman who was carrying it.
You can't place the life of the mother and the fetus at the same level. It is impossible. At some point, someone has to have superior rights. Does the mother have the right to her body or does the fetus have the right to live irregardless of the mother? They share one body so there is no way for them to be equal in the eyes of the law...and the law clearly states that the woman, having already been born and it being her body and all, has the SOLE right to her body and all of it's organs.
October 2, 2009 at 6:58 AM
Mis Lib R. Tea-I kept my mother as well :) Like I said, you don't disregard fetuses and I don't disregard mothers. It's not YOUR place to decide if someone is better off in heavan or not.
You CAN place the life of the mother and the fetus on the same level. All you have to do is quit giving the mother more rights simply because she was born first. In no other situation does being born first give you the right to kill another human.