Yesterday, to escape this blasted heat, I went into Washington, D.C. to catch an exhibit of Norman Rockwell paintings that had been donated by Stephen Speilberg and George Lucas. It was nice just taking my time walking around, examining every amazing detail in Rockwell’s works.
At one point I came across a piece entitled “Free Speech.” The piece focuses on one man, standing in the middle of a crowd. The caption next to the painting said this was a man who disagreed with the crowd on some issue, but his opponents were listening to him intently, respecting his right to say what was on his mind even though they ultimately would not support him. I was almost brought to tears.
Today, of course, that person would have been shouted down, totally discounted as some nut ball by his opponents. That’s just where we are as a society these days. We just don’t listen anymore. Worse, when someone tries to suggest something contrary to our beliefs, we try to silence him with harsh words, with guffaws, with rolling eyes, as if this person could never say anything that was remotely of some benefit.
Of course, we see this kind of behavior all the time in the abortion debate. Indeed, the harsh back and forth is probably more pronounced when discussing the abortion issue than any other issue. We are so locked into our beliefs, the battle lines are drawn oh-so-clearly and you cannot cross them lest you be accused of ceding some valuable territory to the opposition. Just watch an abortion debate on television. You know exactly what I mean. It’s a constant screaming match. “Abortion is murder!” “A woman has the right to control her body!” And on and on and on.
No one is communicating. They’re just yelling over each other. Actually, years ago I stopped watching these “debates.”
I’m pro-choice, I’ve worked for pro-choice organizations for years. But, much to the chagrin of many of my colleagues, years ago I started reaching out to pro-life people in an attempt to try to get inside their head, to learn more about them and, hopefully, to allow them to learn more about me . I actually started engaging the other side after I learned that a number of the abortion clinics that I represented engaged in the same discussions with their local anti-abortion activists.
At the same time, I challenged my pro-choice colleagues to address the tougher questions about abortion. When I visited the clinics, I talked to the women and it became clear to me that they were not there to make a statement about their constitutional rights or to promote some feminist ideology. They were there because they were in a difficult situation and they needed help. They also had to deal with something that pro-choice organizations would rather not address – they were carrying a baby that they didn’t want. I soon discovered that the bottom line was that abortion is all so complicated.
So, amidst the screaming and yelling, the women continue to seek abortion services. I think that anti-abortion folks owe these women more respect and the pro-choice activists should not try to reduce this issue to a simple bumper sticker. Both sides should listen more to the other side with the goal of having a civil debate about abortion – kinda like that group in the Normal Rockwell painting.


July 15, 2010 at 9:20 pm
“Did my tax dollars go to pay for that, too?”
(Aside: A very, very revealing statement about you, Susan.)
If nothing else, government should be– and should always be– about quality of life, and unless quality of life is measured, NOBODY has any idea how good their government is. Texas, as I pointed out, has the world’s 12th largest economy. It quite simply is richer and more productive than most countries in the world. Yet Texas is not a pricey state to live in, because it doesn’t spend that much on government services. It does spend a lot on buildiings and highways, but when it comes down to government people dealing with the needs of the citizens, in 2002 it spent $2,462 per resident, compared to my state’s $4,645. (By the way, my state ranked about 49th worldwide, if I remember correctly.)
So you can live cheaply in Texas, but what do you get? Pretty much you get crap.
Would you rather live in a state which ranks #1 in terms of childhood immunizations? That would mean you live in a state where the government pays doctors to go the distance in seeing no child is overlooked. That’s my state. Or would you rather live in a state which ranks 48th, in large part because back when Bush was governor, they used the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) money not to immunize kids (or do anything else for their well-being) but to balance the state budget.
You want to live in a state where for all its wealth, its rates of children born into poverty and children born to children is three times that of my state? You want Texas!
In other words, if you’re a dreamer, if you have plans for your family and hopes for your children to do at least as well as if not better than you’ve done, you want to know about the quality of life in your city, school district, state, and country– because otherwise you’re just flying blind. I have a feeling you want to do better than that.
I created the unofficial state motto of Mississippi, because Texas is so terrible for the average American family. Mississippi is hardly any worse, but at least it has the excuse that it is the poorest state in the country. Texas doesn’t have that.
LikeLike
July 20, 2010 at 9:24 pm
Government’s job is not to provide a certain quality of life for it’s citizens. Government’s role is to maintain law and order so its’ citizens can determine their own quality of life and work to attain it. I don’t want the government to decide for me what quality of life I should have.
That does not mean I do not think poor children should not have healthcare or an education. What it does mean is that I do not think government should provide for every need for all its’ citizens.
We are taxed for a lot of stupid and unneccessary things—things that waste our tax dollars on intangible studies that don’t do anything but tell us your state is #1. Taxes that have not educated one child nor paid for one immunization in your state or mine.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 6:24 am
Well, government’s job, Susan, is to manage among the competing interests of all its citizens, and obviously you have a set of interests different from mine. To make America work, we have to accommodate one another’s crochets. I don’t believe in bailing out banksters, and you don’t believe in school lunch programs, and government is elected to sort the difference out and keep both of us not totally happy but reasonably so.
You really have no idea how your “keep government out of our lives” attitude allows the top 5% to literally make out like bandits. In my town, factory sweepers in the machine tool industry STARTED in the 70’s at $113,000 a year (in 2009 dollars). When Wall Street destroyed the town’s manufacturing base, those jobs vanished– off to Taiwan and China for $7 an hour. Today, the average household income for the bottom 85% is $25,000. If I did not know about liveable wage, I would have no idea how badly Goldman Sachs, et al., has hurt us. I am one of the richest people in town, and I don’t even make the average American household wage.
You are probably getting screwed over in a lot of ways you don’t know about, but that’s not what this blog is for. You might want to check in at Sadly No, LOLFed, or Paul Krugman’s blog to start seeing a bigger picture.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 7:50 am
Charles, you do make a lot of sense when you get off the baby-killing topic (and Freud).
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 10:04 am
That’s because you don’t find it threatening. Because it does not implicitly or explicitly touch upon your underlying fear, you can afford to treat the above information objectively.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 12:56 pm
So, Susan, do you think our government should not be supporting our parklands or should we just sell of Yosemite to the developers? Isn’t that a quality of life issue?
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 1:18 pm
Better to stay on topic here, Pat– What I’d like Susan to do is respond to my question to her about what agency prohibits her as a “non-professional” from offering contraception advice at her crisis pregnancy clinic.
I’d hate to see her duck out from under that the way that “Nancy,” the ” unemployed ‘pro-life’ adoptive mother of four,” did when I asked her how, as someone who volunteered at hospitals as well, was able to support a family of five on an income of less than the livable rate of $65,000 a year. I ahve a feeling Susan is more authentic than “Nancy” was.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 2:34 pm
I don’t want to “duck out” from your question, cg. I just assumed you already knew the answer–which you probably do.
I am not a medical professional and therefore do not give medical advice. Advising women on the type of contraceptive they should use falls under medical advice.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 2:09 pm
Wow, I think we are chasing rabbits here.
I did not say I was against school lunch programs or maintaining our national parks. What I did mean by my comment was that our government wastes so much of our tax dollars on unneccessary expenditures–like studies ranking quality of life by states. And what for–so another government program can be started? Do you really believe government is the answer to every need and want in this country?
Quality of life is a relative term. What may be quality of life to one person may not be to another. I am not referring to basic necessities of life, but those things that are more important in some areas of the country than they are others. Public transportation is a good example. In an urban area, it really might be a necessity, but in rural area not so much.
Our government cannot possibly continue to fund every need and want of its citizens. There simply is not enough money to do that. This not a right or left problem, or a liberal or conservative problem, or a Republican or Democrat problem or even Wall Street’s problem. It is an American problem. And until the American people begin to realize that we are all responsible for the huge debt we have incurred and begin to trim our budget ruthlessly we will be at the mercy of those who hold the note on our debts.
By expecting government to come to our rescue everytime we decided we “needed” something, we have produced a generation of people who feel entitled to government funding of their “quality of life.”
For example, we had a woman who was wanting birth control. When we told her we did not dispense birth control and she would have to go to her dr. or the clinic run by our hospital district, she became irrate. She couldn’t afford to go to the dr. or clinic and she couldn’t afford to have another baby. When I suggested she might want to consider not engaging in sexual intercourse if she could not afford those things, she became even more irrate. Finally she stomped out of here after telling me, “well I guess I will just get pregnant again!” Excuse me? That is my fault? I don’t think so! Many people today believe they are entitled to sex without consequences. They should be able to have sex anytime, anywhere, with anyone and not have to be responsible for the outcome. That entitlement mentality is what I am against.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 2:16 pm
Wow! That’s quite the story Susan! How did you feel about not being able to offer her birth control?
For that matter, has anyone ever been unable to help you gain access to contraception for yourself or a family member?
If so, how did you feel about that situation? If not, how do you think you’d feel if they weren’t able to help you?
There were quite a few times I was a powerless parent myself, and I was pretty PO’d about it.
And could you tell me what authority keeps your crisis pregnancy center from cousneling about contraception?
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 2:26 pm
See, Susana’s response up there in #2 is top notch. And Charles, now that we’re back on the mutual masturbation/child killing topic (that’s contraception/abortion for the unknowing), forwards his usual muddle.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 3:16 pm
I think you are missing the point of the example. This woman was not married, had just had a baby that was paid for by Medicaid, did not want to do anything for herself so she would not be in the same situation in another 9 months. She can be PO’d all she wants, but it is not my responsibility (or the government’s) to provide her with free birth control so she can have sex.
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 3:22 pm
Susan, there are lots of people who have all the sex they want without using birth control. We’re called men. We often are more than willing to get it by force or guile.
Don’t you as a professional think she ought to be protected at least against force and guile by having access to birth control? And if so, then wouldn’t you cut her some slack about engaging in mutually agreed-to sex with contraception?
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 10:41 pm
“…there are lots of people who have all the sex they want with out using birth control. We’re called men. We often are more than willing to get it by force or guile.” Really? That is a very, very revealing statement about you, Charles.
And who do you want protected by that free birth control? “We men?” So “we men” don’t have to be responsible when a woman gets pregnant. How convenient for “we men.”
And just how does free birth control protect a woman from a rapist or a jerk who will say anything to get sex?
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 5:33 am
Susan, you don’t know the half of it! If every woman in America were a young buck for only a year, male contraception would become mandatory. I could horrify you for hours with stories of my attempts to get women into the back seat. Good thing I’ve aged out. And I wasn’t then and wouldn’t now be outside the norm. So, you won’t cut slack for women who get steamrollered by guys like me?
Apropos of which, Susan Brownmiller in “Men, Women and Rape” prefaced it with, ‘I’ve never been raped, but I’ve been shortchanged.” I preferred to think of myself as a shortchanger…..
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 6:23 am
Nothing enabled shortchanger Charles more than legal abortion. Charles know that, just as Brownmiller knows it. As a matter of fact, most of the killers’ helpers, the majority of whom are men, know it. That’s why they support it. Legal abortion is highway robbery, and men are the robbers.
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 9:38 am
Fun, was it!
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 7:51 am
Sorry that I’ve had a lot more fun than you have had, John. But it does seem logical that with more contraception there would be fewer abortions. And there never has been any woman out there raising my child without my full participation
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 9:38 am
I mean, fun, was it~
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Ssorry that you didn’t find it enjoyable, John; (nudge, nudge; wink, wink.)
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 8:31 am
Men like you never “age out.” Thankfully not all men are like you.
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 9:10 am
Susan, trust me on this: I’ve aged out. Sure, I’m going to Hell for my misspent first half century, but now instead of looking at women’s breasts, I now talk to them. Which has only gotten me some weird looks.
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 11:59 am
You don’t have to go to Hell. Forgiveness for your sin is available to you–that is what Christ went to the cross for.
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 12:52 pm
Thank youl; I’m already settled in that department.
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Charles, where are you looking when you talk to those women?
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 1:58 pm
I am looking at the parties to which I am talking, of course. Why do you ask?
LikeLike
July 23, 2010 at 2:03 pm
I hope you are not settling for Hell.
LikeLike
July 23, 2010 at 3:09 pm
Susan, see my response at #6
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 3:17 pm
Susan, from #2: So, then you are permitted to tell them of the various types of contraception that are available, even though you cannot recommend a specific type? And if you could do so, is there some authority that denies you permission to do that? If you are allowed to it so, is it part of your protocol?
And– do you feel comfortable expressing to us how you would feel if you were in that patient’s place as far as not having access to contraception through the clinic of her choice?
LikeLike
July 21, 2010 at 11:38 pm
Read my reply at #1.
Access to contraception is not the issue–it is accessible. What is at issue, is the personal responsibility of a woman and her partner to fund their own lifestyle choice. It should not be the government’s responsibility to provide her with free birth control.
Government has been dispensing free birth control for decades now and we are still doing over a million abortions every year in this country.
I don’t think it’s working.
LikeLike
July 23, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Susan, either way we (you) are going to pay. If we dont pay for birth control, then we’ll wind up paying for more welfare benefits, etc. Interestingly, the govt does pay for viagra, which totally sucks…
Also, keep in mind that the number of abortions has been decreasing for years.
LikeLike
July 23, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Well, we are paying for both birth control and welfare benefits as well as abortion now.
I think the viagra thing sucks as well!
From 1.6 million abortion a year to around 1 million is a decrease–but it is still a million lives every year lost to abortion.
Do you think that decline will continue with the new healthcare legislation set to provide coverage for abortions?
LikeLike
July 24, 2010 at 3:19 pm
The new healthcare bill does not provide for abortion coverage, Susan. And, if you are skeptical about Obama’s Executive Order, go back about two months and read my blog on that issue. It ain’t ever gonna happen.
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 5:27 am
Susan, are you saying then that it is clinic protocol not to discuss contraception with clients, or are you stating your personal viewpoint?
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 8:32 am
I agree with our pregnancy center’s mission and committment to care or I would not work here.
LikeLike
July 23, 2010 at 1:29 pm
This is what I dont get: why not talk about birth control? If you wanna stop abortion, birth control is one very effective way of doing it versus hoping everyone out there will abstain….
LikeLike
July 23, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Pat, It is not that we never discuss birth control–we do. We don’t provide it.
We ask if they are using any form of b.c. then ask specifically what type, the last time they took their pills, had a shot of depo, etc. We explain if they don’t use it like it is prescribed it probably won’t work. We ask if they used condoms. B.C. has a failure rate even if it is used consistently and correctly every time.
I am for stopping abortion, but not at the expense of women relying on b.c. that isn’t 100% effective in preventing pregnancy and is virtually useless in stopping the spread of most STDs. Women are the biggest losers in our culture’s sex without restraint. We pay the highest price by our damaged fertility, stds, out of wedlock pregnancies, abortion and our damaged mental & emotional health.
From where I sit, I don’t see that b.c. has been very effective in stopping abortion.
LikeLike
July 24, 2010 at 10:50 am
Susan, how can you say that you dont see how bc has stopped abortion? Yes, sometimes it doesn’t work but most of the time it does. So, millions and millions of women have been using bc and have not gotten pregnant. If they had, they may have had an abortion. How can you not extrapolate from that that bc has stopped a lot of abortions?
LikeLike
July 24, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Susan’s right here, Pat. When even Catholics finally started using contraception, after WWII, the roof fell in. Here’s how it want — Protestants embraced contraception at the Lambeth Conference, 1930; Catholics embraced it, 1950; and baby killing was legalized, 1970. Killing followed contraception as midnight follows the setting sun.
LikeLike
July 24, 2010 at 3:20 pm
Are you saying, John, that when people started using contraception, the abortion rates started going up?
LikeLike
July 22, 2010 at 9:24 am
Okay, then; I understand that it is your clinic’s protocol not to discuss birth control, period. If I am mistaken about that, please let me know.
About government studying “quality of life” issues, I thought you might want to know about the states’ annual Youth Risky Behavior Survey (YRBS). My state’s just came out for 2009.
Because people are horrified by kids getting killed on bicycles, in drunk-driver crashes, adultsn getting busted for marijuana or killing while in stage 4 of cocaine dependency, they would like the government to help them protect their kids. Since there’s not enough money to do everything for everybody, the feds and the states try determine where they should spend the little that’s available– to get an idea of how little is available, you should watch the movie, “Supersize me,” in which the producer lives on nothing but MacDonald’s food for a month– and comes close to killing himself.
Anyway, what has my state found out about its kids? Should it concentrate on 13-year-olds who want to start smoking or the ones who feel like killing themselves? The study determined that our kid suicide rate is only about half the national average, but under-13 experimentation with smoking is about 1% higher– and a lot more kids try smoking than try killing themselves. So the state knows not to pour half a million into suicide prevention and only ten bucks into smoking prevention. Your state does the same survey, and you might want to check it out– what’s happening in the eighth grade now is what will be in the twelfth grade in four more years, and you’d probably be upset to find out how many kids of any age ride with drunken drivers. It’s scary in this state…
LikeLike
July 23, 2010 at 3:16 pm
“I hope you aren’t settling for Hell.”
Another theme in aborticentrism– the use of fear. Coupled with guilt, a pair of effective tools to shame women into bearing a child nobody else will be expected to care for.
There have been others which are also deserving of study– A) The need to know the gender of one who posts on this blog– is that knowledge important to most aborticentrics (part of the role that male chauvinism plays in its warfare on women)? B) The obsession with sexual behavior. The dumping on women for anticipated future sexual behavior, the need to punish them with pregnancy, at no matter what cost to the resulting child…. There is a whole corpus of literature on the connection between sex and death, and I wonder if this also isn’t a thread in the aborticentric thought patterns.
However, I don’t think that this is an adequate forum for exploring these themes. Such exploration would more properly belond in the field of psychology or the halls of academia.
LikeLike
July 28, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Charles,
You are the one that said you were “going to Hell for misspent actions,” not me. I merely stated the truth…there is forgiveness available for everyone. You do not have to settle for Hell, you could choose eternal life in Heaven, but it is your choice.
LikeLike
July 28, 2010 at 5:36 pm
Irony, Susan. It’s irony.
LikeLike
July 29, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Irony? How so?
LikeLike
July 24, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Yes, that’s what I’m saying. When people started using contraception, the abortion rates started going up.
LikeLike
July 25, 2010 at 6:42 pm
YOu forgot child abuse, John!!! When abortion became legal, child abuse started skyrocketing, too! Make sure Sonia gets fed that fallacious bit of post hoc, ergo propter hoc logic as well.
LikeLike
July 25, 2010 at 6:39 pm
Wow, finger on the pulse, John! Could you be a lot more specific about the history of abortion and the history of contraception?
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 4:50 am
I’m assigning you to that job, Charles. But no cheating.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 5:30 am
Well, John, it”s understandable given the amount of energy you spend combating your fear of your own slide into oblivion that you would not have the oomph left to supply the confirming data behind your claim– which is so out of context as to be barely more than a lie in support of your emotional needs.
The interesting thing is that were I to supply the information it would not prevent you from making the same claim tomorrow, and I would again have to supply the same information. So, that’s why I’m putting this ball back in your hands. Prove to us that you have the emotional strength to deal with something other than your own crippling fear of oblivion.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 6:11 am
“crippling fear of oblivion” — that’s your problem, Charles. I can remember going through the same thing when I was nine years old, but I got over it. I can remember lying in bed close to terror stricken knowing that this body would one day be still in death. Now I can barely imagine my state of mind then. Age sure has its comforts.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 7:28 am
It shows that you’ve so effectively repressed that fear that you no longer recognize its efffect on you. At the same time, because you have not accepted the finality of your own death, you have to fight to keep it repressed– and engaging in what you consider to be “pro-life” work is an attempt to cope with it. Notice how you fight against death of fetuses, but have no time, energy or money to spend on actual children.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 8:11 am
Fetuses are actual children, Charles, and you know it. Otherwise, you’d still be calling them humanoids.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 11:46 am
I call a fetus a baby when the pregnant woman calls it a baby. Until such time as I hear otherwise, it’s a humanoid life form, and I use fetus and humanoid life form interchangeably. Remember that the next time I say “fetus.”
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 12:33 pm
I knew if I kept poking you, you’d get all screwed up.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 8:12 am
I think you hit it on the head, CG. My impression is that John really has nothing else to live for at this time, so what keeps him alive is his regular trips to the houses and the clinics (and, perhaps, commenting on this blog). How sad that John does not use his remaining years to really accomplish something (he knows he is not stopping any abortions). Maybe you could start painting, John!
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 10:30 am
You’re wrong here, Pat. I was 35 years old when I began doing this. Also, I have a wife, five children, and fifteen grandchildren. I would live for any single one of them. (Sure I like commenting here, but that doesn’t compare to my love for Faybalina, Cait, Sam, Eli, Mary Mo, Margie, et al.)
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 5:00 pm
So, John, if one of your grandchildren came to you and said she was pregnant and she was a minor, what would you tell her???
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 5:54 pm
I’d tell her, do what you think best, except for one thing. Don’t kill the child.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 5:51 pm
He’d probably say, as my father did, “No [great-] grandchild of mine is going to be aborted or raised by strangers!”
Not to say he was going to cherish them; his grandkids avoided him almost as much as his kids did. One seven-year-old, sick of his bullying, said, “Grandpa, if you keep acting like that, I’m not going to visit anymore.” He was working through a lot of his own childhood issues by dumping them on the next generation, the same way Dunkle is working off his issues by dumping on pregnant women and those who support them…
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 11:42 am
But he won’t die for any of them. The idea of sacrifice is pretty much alien to the aborticentric. He has to conserve the scant energy left over from repressing the specter of Death, so any “sacrifice” he makes has to be entirely on his own terms.
LikeLike
July 26, 2010 at 12:34 pm
I’d die for any of them.
LikeLike