.
Feedback

Blog: Is This Group Pro-Life or Anti-Child?

Abortion is not the issue. Children are the issue.

There are a few things that make my blood boil faster than a conduction cook top can ready a pot for a bag of rice. The top of the list is anything involving harm to a child. Yeah, I know, controversial stuff there.

However, my anything list also includes those issues that one would not necessarily see as a child endangerment, neglect or abuse issue, such as abortion.

This Friday, the Pro-Life Action League will be in Joliet, Shorewood and Plainfield at busy intersections. They call these campaigns “Face the Truth Tours” and stage them all around the country. They are proud to say this will be the seventh year they are holding this event in the area, and are calling for more volunteers to help hold up signs for passing motorists to view.

I believe it was the first year they were out and about locally that I encountered them and their incredibly graphic and as large as six foot tall signs depicting pictures of aborted fetuses. I was infuriated, as I had my child in the car with me, who got a better view of the signs as I was distracted by the task of driving.

This year, the Patch has published their itinerary, so parents who have in the past complained about their children being exposed to these disturbing images can avoid the intersections and roads where they will be set up. However, the group's website states it doesn’t believe there is any real harm done to a child who may see these images.

Really? I find that answer both appalling and hypocritical.There are ratings for what images children can be exposed to in movies and video games, ratings religious groups are quick to say do not go nearly far enough. This group is also religiously based and this whistle stop tour of the area will include a luncheon at a local Catholic church.

These are among the first people to object to what they consider pornography and graphic violence being allowed to be seen by children. Yet, when it suits their purposes, not only are graphic and disturbing images acceptable, they consider it a potential teachable moment. Their website even claims that exposing children to these graphic and disturbing images may help them by sparing them the grave harm of involvement in a future abortion.

I am not a supporter of abortion as a contraceptive. I find it unspeakably sad, and I feel bad for women who even have to think of it as an option. I also accept the fact and happen to agree that it is a woman’s right, spiritually, morally and legally. Having been raised as a Catholic and a Christian, most of the values I hold in life were formed in that crucible of faith and religious dogma. I guess I hold some parts of my religious upbringing more sacred than others who ostensibly share my faith. I am referring to what I see as the most basic tenets of all, the concepts of free will and to love another as you would love yourself.

It is because of these beliefs that I am sickened by the idea of forcing anyone’s religion on others, especially when those basic values are violated and twisted to further an agenda.It is a woman's right to do what she wills with her body and her soul; it is our duty as Catholics and Christians to allow her that right just as we allow ourselves that right.

What I find equally offensive is this group and others like it calling themselves “Pro-Life”. They say they are defending the rights of the unborn. I say they do this at the expense of the already born, whether that be a child or a woman. They are only for life if they can control that life according to their religiously based definition.

They say human life begins at conception, yet that definition can only be supported with faith based arguments. Even a rudimentary understanding of the process by which a sperm and an egg become a human being recognizes the fact that there are stages of development. It is not until very late in pregnancy that the brain develops enough to be capable of human consciousness.

It is scientific fact that the human brain consists of three primary parts that develop at different stages, and until that third stage is achieved, human thought, emotion and intelligence are simply not possible. They respond this scientific analysis doesn’t address the human soul. I agree, but I also say the mere existence of the soul is a matter of faith and religion.

I will never agree to take away a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body, at least not legally. However, my disgust and fight against these groups may soften when there are no more children who are hungry, homeless, unwanted, abused or neglected; when orphanages and the foster-care system become an anomaly; when there are no more children starving for love, care, a safe place to sleep and regular meals. Then I will be willing to address those who carelessly become pregnant and think of abortion as just another birth control method.

Even then, I still won’t support the idea that all abortion is wrong. I will also never support the idea that someone, anyone, but particularly the government, has the right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. As a woman, I find this the most insulting and degrading idea around today. Limiting a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body is to ignore her humanity and reduce her to the status of a brood mare.

The debate on abortion itself is actually secondary in my objection to this and other groups. My first and primary objection is simply a matter of priorities.

In their zeal to overturn the law of the land legalizing a woman’s right to choose, they ignore, side-step and downplay the cost their agenda exacts on the unwanted children who are already here. Just within the Catholic church, how many programs that directly help and support children are underfunded or simply cancelled due to lack of funding? How many schools have been closed? How many outreach services no longer function due to tightening of the fiscal belt?

It has never been done to my knowledge, but I’d like to see an accounting of the untold millions of dollars spent on what these groups call the rights of the unborn. I simply can’t wrap my head around the idea that these people of faith don’t see how that money would care for and change the future of the millions of unwanted children already in this world. If nothing else, I would think they would see how devoting their time, talent and treasure to these, the least of their brethren is exactly what Jesus said we are all to do.

This is the truth I’d like to see these people face.

Christine July 12, 2012 at 05:09 pm
Roy, my beliefs are not religious in nature regarding this issue. Read the thread. And people can do whatever they wish. They are responsible for it in every way, not me.
Logansdad July 12, 2012 at 05:26 pm
"And people can do whatever they wish. They are responsible for it in every way, not me."
Yes that is a woman's right and what the law says they can do. If those against abortion think it abortion is wrong, then feel free to ask the mother to carry the baby to term and raise that child as their own. If they do not want to do that, then they have no say on what should be done to the unborn child. If you don't like abortion, then don't have one.
Christine July 12, 2012 at 05:57 pm
Logansdad, that also means I don't want to pay for others' abortions or their contraception. At its core, this turn of the conversation is about money. You want to do whatever you want and you want to make me pay (monetarily) for it. No thanks.
Logansdad July 12, 2012 at 06:02 pm
Christine, you don't want to pay for contraception to keep a woman from getting pregnant, but you'd rather have the state and the taxpayers pay for a child living in state custody for 18 years because you don't want the mother to have an abortion. Yep that makes a lot of sense monetarily.
Denise Williams July 12, 2012 at 08:10 pm
Roy, you are misdirecting your comments to me, when I think you mean to direct them to Christine. And for the record, yes, I have read the Koran, at least the English translation as well as much of the Talmud and several of the Veydas.
Denise Williams July 12, 2012 at 08:20 pm
Christine, I understand both your question and your analogy. The first is self-deluded, and the second is offensive. You keep saying your opinion is not faith-based. Because you don't attribute it to a particular religion or belief system, does not mean it is not faith-based. It is an opinion based on what you believe to be true. That is the definition of a faith based opinion.
Second, the point you miss is that every other major religion on the planet believes differently. That matters to us, here in this country because we are a pluralistic society and every one of those religions has adherents living here subject to our laws.
Denise Williams July 12, 2012 at 08:26 pm
Roy, just to clarify...I find the above analogy of Christianity and Islam offensive because I do understand both, as they are written and as they are practiced and often twisted. We are actually in agreement.
Agie Lefler July 12, 2012 at 09:02 pm
I am exhausted from this very all over the place conversation, making attacks on religion, attacks on kids..living or not yet born...it's no wonder the whole worlds in a terrible mess. Everyone comes off educated but slams something else either directly or indirectly. I will stop following this topic because it's just a lot of angry chatter and from the guys more than even the women and it pertains to us more than it even does the men. Godless or Believer we women are the ones who take up the cross when we have a child out of wedlock and are approached with the idea of abortion as an answer. Whether it was God moving me at an early age or some other scientific thought in my head I "chose" to have my daughter. Loved every minute of it . Ups and downs and believe me there were plenty of downs and pitfalls but I never felt she was a burden. I did it alone out of love for life. Out of love for her. Out of respect as I thought it should be in MY life. She is now a grown woman with two kids of her own working 60 hours a week as an EMT and a Patient Sitter at yet another hospital, so no one needs to tell me there isn't a reason for everything that happens. I see what our purpose in life is. To live it, be of assistance to others . Not judge one another. Help, teach, learn. I don't let people of different opinions bother me because although I am not always right I know I might learn something from them.
Agie Lefler July 12, 2012 at 09:03 pm
Even if that is that I do not ever wish to think as they do. Ever wish to feel as hopeless as they are. I can handle science and God. I welcome both in my life. I feel comforted by that thought and many would agree to the same. Many, notice I am not throwing out such concrete figures as the "majority" this or that. I never buy those type of statements. There too general and how does one go about knowing for sure what a man says is what he means or truly believes in his/her heart. It is by our actions that this condition might someday be resolved. I'm done being a part of this discussion , it's taking too much of my precious time listening to a few who would take this topic and turn it into a God Bashing moment. I'll say a prayer for those few but I can't promise it'll be a very long one. Peace Out Good People.
justme July 12, 2012 at 09:41 pm
Denise, thanks for that synopsis of what other faiths believe regarding abortions. It still doesn't change my thoughts and you wrongly assume my views are based solely on faith. My views are based on seeing the very pictures that disgust you, seeing video of an ultrasound taken during an abortion. Of the fact the baby has its own DNA, that there is evidence the baby feels and thinks even inside the womb. But I am curious, according to the Talmud - when does "ensoulment" occur?
justme July 12, 2012 at 09:50 pm
Science is ever evolving. The ability to DNA testing and see inside a mothers womb has only been perfected within the last 20 - 30 years. It is on those two that I base my thoughts on what human life is. History has been, in fact, wrong - no? Is it really outside of the realm of possibilities that you could be wrong? That views of the world written years ago, could be wrong? So to your point, the money spent on the protection of the not yet born is not wasted and is just as important as the money spent on protection of the born. And what of the billions spent on abortions every year? Couldn't that money be used to take care of the born? But you don't seem upset about that, why? Also, if the pictures bother you so much, I think you need to ask yourself why. Is it because you have to face the reality that is abortion, the reality it is the ending of a life and you can neither stomach it, nor know how to explain it to your children?
justme July 12, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Denise - you are wrong on at least one major religion:
HINDUISM Vasu Murti and Mary Krane Derr write in the Fall 1998 issue of the Journal of Feminism and Non-Violence Studies that "Hinduism teaches that abortion, like any other act of violence, thwarts a soul in its progress toward God. Hindu scriptures and tradition have from the earliest of times condemned the practice of abortion, except when the life of the mother is in danger. Hinduism teaches that the fetus is a living, conscious person needing and deserving protection. Hindu scriptures refer to abortion as garha-batta (womb killing) and bhroona hathya (killing the undeveloped soul)."
justme July 12, 2012 at 10:02 pm
ISLAM Islam prohibits abortion except when the mother's life is in danger. Muslims consider a fertilized ovum that is attached to the womb a living being that has the potential of reaching its full formation. A developed fetus is considered a human life and is subject to the laws of inheritance to the extent that if the mother is sentenced to capital punishment, her life should be preserved because she is carrying another human life
justme July 12, 2012 at 10:03 pm
BUDDHISM Under the first of the five Buddhist precepts--to refrain from taking life, from insects on up the evolutionary ladder--abortion is proscribed. Life is deemed to begin as soon as consciousness arises, and fetuses are seen as having consciousness. The Buddha's rules for his community of monks also forbade anyone from recommending abortion. Some practitioners of Japanese Zen who have had a miscarriage or abortion honor or make an offering to the deity Jizo, the god of lost travelers and children. It is believed that Jizo will steward the child until it is reborn in another incarnation.
justme July 12, 2012 at 10:03 pm
BAHA'I According to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is, "Baha'is believe the soul becomes associated with the body at conception, and the deliberate taking of human life is generally not permitted. Baha'i writings clearly state that abortion merely to prevent the birth of an unwanted child is forbidden. Baha'i institutions do not legislate on the issue of abortion, and it is left to the individuals concerned to decide the best course of action."
justme July 12, 2012 at 10:05 pm
JUDAISM According to Rabbi Raymond A. Zwerin and Rabbi Richard J. Shapiro, writing for the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, traditional Jewish law teaches that "the fetus is not considered a full human being, and has no individual rights, but rather, according to many sources, is a part of a woman's body. And just as any person may not voluntarily do harm to his or her body, a woman may not voluntarily abort a fetus. However, just as a portion of the body may be sacrificed to save a person's life, an abortion may be performed for the woman's overall well-being, and an existing life takes precedence over a potential life, if there must be a choice between them."
justme July 12, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Denise - I found all of the above synopsis of other religions views on abortion on this site: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1442381/posts
It seems most of them hold the view the "fetus" is a life aside from the mother and most condem the practice of abortion except when to do so will save the mother's life. So it seems a majority of religions don't think I am wrong.and I am not trying to deny anyone anything. I am simply saying I don't think its okay to take another life just because you decide you can't afford or don't want a baby.
justme July 12, 2012 at 10:12 pm
@Logansdad. Again, the parents need to take responsibility. To end a life is not taking responsibility.
Denise Williams July 13, 2012 at 12:09 am
Justme, if you hold that all abortion is wrong, then the source you cite does indeed say you are wrong; all you have quoted say 'fetus' and or make the distinction of when the mother's life is in danger. Again, my statement that Christianity is the only major world religion to prohibit ALL abortions is correct. The source you found is good, but just like in Christianity, all religions have differences in practice, tradition and thought and those are not the only nor are they the complete positions on this issue. We would have to drill down far beyond the scope of this discussion for that.
You are absolutely right and within your rights to feel, believe and think as you do. Just as those who disagree with you are in their rights. I appreciate your comments, and your taking the time to intelligently defend your position, as I appreciate the time and effort of everyone who has shared their thoughts in this thread. People's minds probably won't be changed, but hopefully they will at least think about this important, polarizing issue. True change in society can only come with public, honest and vigorous debate.
Denise Williams July 13, 2012 at 12:13 am
Justme-all correct, but incomplete. Abortion is an evil to be allowed as the lesser of two evils when the mother's life is at stake.
Logansdad July 13, 2012 at 12:44 pm
"Again, the parents need to take responsibility. To end a life is not taking responsibility."
Taking responsibility is easier said than done. You continue to believe that is so easy to keep the baby after it is born. Sometimes taking responsibility means giving the baby up for adoption. When one has to make that decision, someone else still must care for it and sometimes it is the taxpayer. Sometimes taking responsibility does mean having the abortion. Again that is the decision the mother has to make. It is her decision and one that she will live with forever.
justme July 13, 2012 at 01:09 pm
Denise. I appreciate your comments as well. And for the record - I never said all abortions are wrong, just that all of them are terminating a life. Which, it seems, most major religions agree with and most don't condone the practice. (but many say there could be time when they are warrented) What I object to, when it comes to abortions, are the abortions of "convenience". As I have stated before, I strongly feel that the choice happens before a baby is concieved (unless that choice is taken away, for example through rape or another violent act) and once a woman and man make the choice to have sex, they need to be prepared for all of the consequences which includes a possibility of getting pregnant. If they are not mature enough to handle that truth, then they probably aren't mature enough to have sex. I believe if you don't want to get pregnant and you want to have sex there are still pleanty of ways to prevent pregancy. But if a mother's life is in danger, if she was raped - then I think it should be her choice. But that doesn't change the fact, it is a life she is terminating. As you stated, at that point it's the lessor of two evils. Also, I am 100% against any abortion that happens in the later half of the second and into the third trimester. By that time, it is a baby, it is a life and those abortions should be outlawed.
Again, thank you for sparking a debate. I am glad to live in a country where we both have the right to express our beliefs.
justme July 13, 2012 at 01:36 pm
Logansdad - I don't think taking care of a baby is easy, when did I say that? Taking responsibility for your own actions isn't always easy - but it is necessary. Homework isn't easy, but we make our kids do it because they need to take responsibility for themsleves. Same with chores, or respecting authority - or do you let your children run amuck never facing the consequences of their own actions? Killing a child you don't think you can take care of is not taking responsibility. Raising the baby, even though its hard is, giving it up to a family who can take care of the baby - is, killing it - not so much. Pregnancies don't happen by accident, they don't happen from sitting on a toliet - they are 100% because a couple engaged in sexual intercourse. And they had the choice to use protection or not. If the condom breaks they have the choice to use the morning after pill to prevent pregnancy. The woman could be taking birth control pills. There are many ways to stop an unwanted pregancy without resorting to killing someone.
Logansdad July 13, 2012 at 01:50 pm
"Killing a child you don't think you can take care of is not taking responsibility."
A fetus is not a child. A developing mass that is a couple of weeks old is not a child. No one is killing a child. "Pregnancies don't happen by accident...they are 100% because a couple engaged in sexual intercourse." Some pregancies do happen by accident as birth control is not 100% effective. Some pregancies occur because of rape. "There are many ways to stop an unwanted pregancy without resorting to killing someone." Oh really? "If the condom breaks they have the choice to use the morning after pill to prevent pregnancy." I can't believe you said that. You are advocating for life, but you think the morning after pill is ok. Doesn't the morning after pill accomplish the same thing as having an abortion at 2-3 weeks? I thought you also said you felt life began at conception, if you are taking the morning after pill, hasn't conception already occured?
justme July 13, 2012 at 02:24 pm
I do believe a human life is a life from the moment of conception & implantation into the womb. From that point it is a life. And the morning after pill prevents the implantation, hence why it has to be taken "the morning after" not 2-3 weeks after. And yes, pregnancies can be 100% avoided. For example, don't have sex. If you do, be prepared to handle the consequences. Period. And killing for the sake of your convenience is not handling the consequences, its running away from them.
Logansdad July 13, 2012 at 02:44 pm
The morning after pill prevents implantation which happens at 3 weeks. So how is taking the morning after pill any different than having an abortion at 3 weeks?
You are at the exact same stage in the development process and both methods accomplish the exact same thing. How can you say one is bad and the other is not?
justme July 13, 2012 at 03:21 pm
@Logansdad - will you please get educated! The morning after pill is effective 5 days after unprotected sex. NOT 3 WEEKS. And it IS NOT AN ABORTION. It stops the mothers ovaries from releasing an egg. To read more about it go here:
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/emergency-contraception-morning-after-pill-4363.asp And this pill is available over the counter. So yes, there are ways to stop a pregancy before it turns into a life.
Logansdad July 13, 2012 at 03:33 pm
I am sorry but you fail to understand how the morning after pill works. Yes it is taken after sex to prevent pregnancy. It works by stoping implentation. You even said this.
Fertilizaion occurs by week 2. Implantation occurs by week 3. That information is taken from http://www.babycenter.com/fetal-development-week-by-week. So if taking a pill stops implentation which occurs in week three, what is the difference if a women has an abortion during week 2-3. I also find it ironic that you use a refernce from Planned Parenthood as support. Planned Parenthood - the same place place pregnant women go to when seeking information about abortion. And the morning after pill is not always effective in stopping unwanted pregnancies either.
justme July 18, 2012 at 07:50 pm
@ Logansdad. I also said I was incorrect about the way the morning after pill works. Please read the link I provided to see how it truly works - it stops the egg from being released.
My point is, there are many ways to stop a pregnancy before it happens. That is where the choice and responsibility lies. After that, it is terminating a life - no matter small or insignificant anyone thinks that life is.
Logansdad July 18, 2012 at 08:03 pm
"That is where the choice and responsibility lies."
Those should be left up to the woman. There are times where it is more responsible to prevent life. Speaking of which. There is no difference is preventing life by taking a pill to prevent a pregancy right after sex and having a proceedure at 2-3 weeks along. The morning after pill is not always effective and there are disagreements about how the pill works: "Based on the belief that a fertilized egg is a person, some religious groups and conservative politicians say disrupting a fertilized egg’s ability to attach to the uterus is abortion, “the moral equivalent of homicide,” " You believe it works at form of contraception in order to conform to your beliefs about abortion. That is fine. If at 2-3 weeks, the morning after pill does the same thing that an abortion accomplishes, why is one right and the other wrong? Both women are taking responsibility to prevent a pregancy.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Plainfield Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
SouthSide June 18, 2013 at 04:19 pm
Poor Turtle. I'm doing my part by sharing this poster. Best wishes, and prayers...
Ashley June 18, 2013 at 10:11 pm
Thank you!
The 12U Raiders has great week at Cooperstown, New York.
Nicki Anderson June 17, 2013 at 10:26 pm
What a fantastic week we had! We are very proud of you boys! You played great! The Anderson's
Mike Keniley June 17, 2013 at 12:18 pm
I am just wondering how long this suspense filled soap opera will continue? Bottom line: HurtadoRead More knew his buddy needed a job...so; he and his majority board members made a mockery of local government due process and gave Mr. Peck a job, even though Hurtado voted with the past board to unanimously select an Exec…who is still under a contract. And then decided there was a need to pay a board secretary (who jumped out of the frying pan…smart move) and then appointed someone without pay. And of course there is a need to have a paid political hack to help publicly spin the board’s craziness via press releases.
AlaskaDreaming June 17, 2013 at 12:22 pm
I hate to ask the obvious of Mr. Peck (not that I expect him to answer anyway), but why is thisRead More announcement coming from the Executive Director rather than our newly appointed Director of Communications?
Bad News Bears June 18, 2013 at 02:53 pm
Mr. Peck, please answer 2 questions for me: 1. If you are cutting $800K but AdministrativeRead More Salaries are up over $118K, where are the cuts coming from. I have always been a patron of the Park District and want to know which of my programs your skimming off to pay yourself and Mr. Booth. 2. "Our staff deserves a lot of credit for this budget,” Peck said, “as their efforts to hold the line wherever possible have led to our success on behalf of District residents." Is reducing hours of employees the way you reward your staff now? I'm very upset that you honestly thought that cutting loyal employees hours instead of offering benefits was a good idea. I have a better one, cut the hours of Mr. Booth who has an unnecessary job and use his pay and salaries to offset the 4 loyal part-time workers. I will not hold my breath for your answers since answering questions to the people who pay your salary isn't on your to do list
Kelly Alexander June 13, 2013 at 05:29 pm
I just listed a teak patio set. I would not like to separate but you could use the teak chairs forRead More additional seating on a front porch or patio....I had 2 of the chairs on my front porch. asking $250 for the set. Call if interested 815-405-6416
Michele Kost June 18, 2013 at 11:27 am
I have an extra square table. It is a glass top, more rectangle than square, hole in the center forRead More an umbrella. I had spray painted it dark brown to cover rust since it is older and could use a touch up again but otherwise table is in good condition. I bought a new set myself last year but kept this table to use for garage sales. For $25 it is yours! Michele at michelev333@aol.com :)