Angelita and Ricardo took their place in one of the last pews in the back of the church. As always, the predominantly Spanish parishioners at the Good Sheppard Catholic Church have filled the building to the rafters. Ever since the arrival of a new, dynamic priest named Father Guerrero, attendance has skyrocketed.
Today’s sermon was entitled “The Horrors of Abortion.” For the next 20 minutes, Father Guerrero told the rapt audience how thousands of babies each day were being torn “limb by limb” from the mother’s womb, how the mothers would ultimately come to regret their heinous act and how God would be watching them commit this serious sin. This particular church had always been on the cusp of anti- abortion activity, organizing buses to protest at the local “abortion mill.” Two years ago, they erected a “Memorial to the Unborn” at the church’s entrance, a reminder to everyone entering God’s house that millions of babies had been aborted under his very eye. Father Guerrero was asked to come to this church because of his zealous anti-abortion activism over the years. He fit right in.
Meanwhile, as the good father went on, Angelita kept rubbing her stomach. She was nine weeks pregnant and in two days she was going to have an abortion.
When the young couple had learned that Angelita was pregnant, at first they rejoiced. Ricardo, perhaps playing that “machismo” card, could barely contain himself. He couldn’t wait to tell his compadres at the construction site that he was going to be a father – preferably the father of a young, strapping boy. Angelita, who was 19 at the time, was also excited at first but then quickly turned anxious. After she finished high school, she had taken a year off to work at a local fast food restaurant to save money to attend the local community college where she hoped to study nursing. Suddenly, she saw how her life was about to change.
A week or two later, after thinking a lot more about her and Ricardo’s future, she began to think about abortion. She could not imagine raising a child at her age, giving up her dreams of being a nurse and the possibility of Ricardo having to get a second job to cover their new expenses. But when she prayed to her God, she could only feel discomfort. As a lifelong Catholic, she had been trained that just the slightest thought of abortion was abhorrent, that if she ever had one she would clearly spend eternity in hell. Of course, she could not even think about going to her former priest, the one who had given her communion, had presided over her father’s funeral and had advised her on some many other personal issues. And the new one was out of the question. Meanwhile, she couldn’t talk to her friends or her family, as they were Catholic as well. It was just she and Ricardo.
Within a few weeks, Ricardo’s enthusiasm about being a Dad had worn off as well as he started to anticipate his new responsibilities. So, when Angelita – in tears – raised the possibility of abortion with him, he was more amenable than she thought he would be. After a few agonizing days, they agreed to schedule an abortion.
And now, sitting in her house of worship that had been a source of comfort for so many years, she could only feel like an outcast. When she walked by the statute in the front of the church, she became nauseous. As she listened to her priest talk to HER about HER abortion, she could not make eye contact and it took all of her resolve to not burst out crying.
She and Ricardo needed help, not condemnation. But in her desperate time of need, her church offered her no refuge.
Related Articles
- SD bill ‘license to kill’ abortion providers? (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- More Anti-Abortion Crazy from South Dakota [Dispatches from the Culture Wars] (scienceblogs.com)
- “South Dakota Lawmaker Defends Bill” and related posts (bobcesca.com)





February 25, 2011 at 1:52 pm
Pat,
how do you draw the these moron lunatics to this blog in droves?
A christian names themselves hell!
Christians are so dumb.
LikeLike
February 27, 2011 at 2:27 pm
Well, my cousin Vinny….we advertise….
LikeLike
April 9, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Christians are really dumb, especially the ones that want to take away women’s rights!
LikeLike
February 25, 2011 at 1:54 pm
God the Father
God in Christianity
God the Father in Western art
God in Islam
God in Judaism
God in the Baha’i Faith
God in Hinduism
God (male deity)
And people insist in religion!!! PLEASE…
LikeLike
February 26, 2011 at 4:53 am
Good-bye Abortion.ws. For me you have now gone the way of The Abortioneers and thenotsodailyherald, two other pro-killing sites that also used to post my demurrals, but then stopped. I knew it would be only a matter of time. Killers and you, their helpers, can bear the truth for only so long, and the quasi-prolifers like Rog who’ve recently joined us can bear it for an even shorter period.
You probably won’t believe this but I will miss you guys.b You defended your positions forthrightly, and that makes you one in ten million.
John Dunkle, the enemy.
LikeLike
February 26, 2011 at 11:16 am
Maybe there is a God!!
LikeLike
February 26, 2011 at 11:20 am
You are laughable, because you cannot put a sentance together to support your own wacky notions you write another incoherent blab.
You are going byebye like a little girl who did not get her away, outsmarted, outwitted, by people more intelligent than you at every single corner.
You have the freedom of expression, that you try to hush on others as you scream at them when they go get their Pap smears.
You are a complete jerk off loser. I’m personally tired of reading your nutty rants, everyone else is more intelligent to you. I am glad this platform will not be abused by a nut like yourself anymore.
LikeLike
February 26, 2011 at 11:15 am
Good riddance, you have always been a nuisance, I figured you for a quitter anyway.
I have to laugh as your whole life has been devoted to harming your cause.
LikeLike
February 27, 2011 at 2:29 pm
First of all, John’s message was shortened for some reason. I saw the original. Second, I regret John’s leaving but I dont blame him. Some of the pro-choicers on this page are so friggin obnoxious that you almost had me feeling sorry for John. At least he was willing to try to answer the sometimes ridiculous questions that were being posed. It was just one after the other, no time to think or breathe….I want a dialogue here, folks, not bomb throwing and I certainly dont want the same comments…
LikeLike
February 27, 2011 at 7:17 pm
Pat,
I’d like to throw out a few suggestions for a topic, if you are so inclined to oblige:
Adoption: Who is it really helping?
Does abortion hurt or help women?
What rights do pregnant women have in the U.S. (women who want to be pregnant)? Or a corollary to this question is this: At what point does the interest of the state supercede to interest of the pregnant woman?
How close is this nation to living like those in Margaret Atwood’s dystopia “The Handmaiden’s Tale”?
I get that you’re seeking more substantive dialogue and I thank you for the past few articles that you’ve shared. So I thought as long as dialogue is on the table, I’d suggest some additional paths to travel.
One last note, I do not share your sentiments about John Dunkle, especially because I know how he behaves toward women at clinics and toward directors/doctors (as you know). However, yesterday he made an unspeakable error that involved female clients and that totally freaked them out to the point that they felt compelled to call the police. I’m personally out of patience with the old man.
LikeLike
February 28, 2011 at 1:09 am
I agree with TNSDH.
That guy Dunkle, never made good commentary, he never answered questions, and his outside activities make him a wild animal.
I am curious what heinous thing he did today.
LikeLike
February 28, 2011 at 1:14 am
Who would want to keep that nut case around. Their are a lot more intelligent people to discuss with here. He actually alienated other pro lifers. If you want real discussion why tallk to the 1%, we should want to talk to the moderates.
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 10:22 am
Great ideas, Kate! Thanks… I hear what you are saying about dunkle but, honestly and no offense, what are we gonna talk about? I can opine and you and CG and Sonia can comment. Is that it? Is anyone reading this stuff that I spend so much time on? I know….I’m a whiny baby…..
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 5:09 pm
Not sure if you’re part of any secure abortion-affliliated listserves or not but there’s been some great, in depth conversations going on. The depth is likely because the listserve is private so there is a sense that we can discuss openly about the impact of the current political climate and where researchers and providers should turn their attention next. Of course, some of the more well known are also featured in Washington Post columns and elsewhere.
Anyway, not sure what to say about your audience, Pat. I know that my approach to blogging vacillates between short-one liners to something that I have researched and written much more carefully. But I write because I use my blog as an open journal for observations and reflections and for sharing relevant links.
LikeLike
February 28, 2011 at 6:50 am
Abortion is wrong, especially from the Christian perspective.
LikeLike
February 28, 2011 at 6:51 am
Why?
LikeLike
February 28, 2011 at 9:18 pm
Will is right. Abortion is wrong.
It is obvious.
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Abortion is wrong for you? Fine. But abortion is a perfectly acceptable response to an unwanted pregnancy for others. It’s like the ACN handout says, “in real life, things are not black and white” Women deserve better than being told that what they do is wrong especially when they must make a really complex decision to terminate a pregnancy.
LikeLike
April 9, 2012 at 11:08 am
I so totally AGREE! And many of these people who claim that abortion is wrong, go and get them too! I mean, who the hell really wants to have a thing growing inside them that they absolutely do NOT WANT?(horrible LABOR afterwards!) I never wanted to be pregnant…EVER! But, every womyn/grrl has the right to not be pregnant if that is her CHOICE!
LikeLike
April 14, 2012 at 3:09 pm
Chose not to get pregnant in the first place then, instead of chosing to kill a baby. It is so scary reading this site to realise how many twisted women (and men) there are out there who potentially someday might have children, God forbid!
LikeLike
April 14, 2012 at 4:12 pm
Many people use birth control and get pregnant.
Many people want to be pregnant and must use IVF, embryos are always lost.
Many people 1-3% have tubal pregnancies . . .
There are literally thousands of disorders like Complete Anencephally.
You don’t seem to have an understanding of the reality of Abortion.
Or do you have a crystal Ball so you know the needs of the women in every circumstance? That would be a very extra ordinary claim!
LikeLike
April 14, 2012 at 4:16 pm
Julie are you an Avatar for John Dunkle, you write like him.
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 6:17 am
In the end The Rights of A Baby’s life, inside the womb will be protected. Of this, I have no doubt.
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 10:24 am
Wrong, Mr Bruce. Even in the unlikely event that you can make abortion illegal again, you ain’t gonna protect those little babies. They will be aborted legal or not…
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 4:50 pm
The old aphorism that where there is a will, there is a way applied to women and pregnancy. If they don’t want to be pregnant, they will figure out a way to end it. With the advent of the Internet, easily administered suction AB equipment and medications, early abortions, even if illegal, will be/are currently, available. Of course, there’s always the return of the Jane Group. Many of them are still kicking around and many younger would-be-Janes are standing in the wait.
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Let us see what happens after the next elections.
I said the Rights will be protected. I did not say people will not break the law.
I am certain they will in fact.
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 9:39 pm
Mr. Bruce, you said “In the end The Rights of A Baby’s life, inside the womb will be protected. Of this, I have no doubt. Of this, I have no doubt.”
You said NOTHING about the law and RIGHTs certainly figure into law. Further, your statement is meaningless if women do not view the contents of the womb as a baby, as protected products of conception, or if the POC are viewed as having rights.
As far as elections, are you thinking elections are based on single issues when reality is a multi-colored, technicolored world? Does complexity and nuance mean anything to you?
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 10:18 pm
Hi,
You ask a lot of questions, I’ll do my best to reply with brevity.
To preface, I do not believe you know where I stand on Abortion, so I do not understand the underlying animosity.
Answers:
1) Implicit in discussing rights in the context of this thread, even Pat understood I was discussing Rights by governance.
2) The statement is not meaningless. How is my belief that Laws will protect the unborn will eventually be passed and agreeing that it won’t stop abortion meaningless.
You agree women will still get abortions. I’m befuddled by the meaningless part.
3) I do not believe elections are based on a single issue. That is an absurd question. Most sane people realize other things matter, like the economy, obviously. I am certain you know that already as well.
4) Yes, complexity and nuance mean a lot to me.
I believe I answered your questions.
I have a question,
It’s easier.
Should the law allow a women to chose abortion at 42 weeks, while the woman is in active labor?
LikeLike
March 1, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Dude I know you weren’t asking me . . .
But, no way!
That would be crazy!
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 7:59 am
I support fully women’s rights. But not a chance. No abortions during labor!
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 8:26 am
That’s a really good question, Bruce. My answer is of course not, but honestly I need to think about the reasons. If she is in labor and they discover something horrible with the baby, should they be allowed to abort? Hmmm. Of course, practically speaking it wouldn’t happen but I see where you’re going with this…I’ll get back to ya!
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 5:02 am
Bruce asked ***Should the law allow a women to chose abortion at 42 weeks, while the woman is in active labor?***
The absurdity of this question leads me to believe you have a story about this very scenario. Do you?
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 7:56 am
Well (Do you have a shorter name?) TheNotSoDailyHerald,
1) I did my best at answering your questions that were posed in a difficult fashion.
2) so then I ask you a simple yes or no question, and you respond by a critique on the question, and a question, and
3) The lack of courtesy of an answer.
4) May I have a definitive answer to my question, regardless how absurd you think it may be? In fact, that’s why I prefaced it was so easy to answer. I do not know you. For all I know you are insane. I doubt it. But I have read some insane comments on this blog.
Regards
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 8:27 am
I’m still thinking, Bruce…
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 11:51 am
OK,
Sonia agreed that it should not be legal to do an abortion under those circumstances.
Why can’t you Pat, or Thenotsodaily herald just give the simple short answer?
Most people would find this immediately easy to answer. It is not a riddle.
LikeLike
March 4, 2011 at 2:44 pm
Bruce, as I said earlier I was “thinking about it.” Contrary to others, I actually to think about things. An abortion at 42 weeks as she is in labor? If the baby has not been delivered yet and if the woman’s life would be endangered or she would have serious health consequences, my answer is yes. Of course, at that point no one would actually do the abortion if the woman asked. But it’s a slippery slope if I said “no” because that baby is still a “fetus” before delivery and the laws are clear. Great question!!!
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 11:18 am
I have seeing some absurd things in this blog from time to time…
Sometimes i have a good laugh out of the things i read… sometimes i just ignore… but with all due respect Bruce, to abort a baby at 42 weeks when the mother is in labor? This is outrageous, grotesk, absurd and whatever word we can use to this situation.
First of all, with all the technology we have now in days, if this baby, (YES, BABY, because at 42 weeks it is a baby already) i refuse to believe that any doctor in this world would do such a thing.
Second, if any doctor do that; i would be the first to point my finger at him to call him and the mother a murderer!
Third, i hope this was just a scenario you came up… Because just the thought of it makes me nervous and there is nothing that can be used as an excuse for this act.
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 11:54 am
Why all the drama?
Why the critique again of a question?
Why such a long answer. Your agreement to outlaw such a thing could have been stated with much more brevity.
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 1:44 pm
And what’s with your uber sensitivity to brevity, to drama and to what you interpret as “underlying animosity” ?
Oh, and the name, for brevity’s sake is Kate.
LikeLike
March 4, 2011 at 12:04 pm
Hi Kate,
Thank you.
Seriously though, are You and Pat going to answer my question? You ask me more questions, without answering my one.
I am not an answering machine. I am willing to discuss things in a Socratic fashion.
Or is this not a site where discussion occurs equitably?
LikeLike
March 4, 2011 at 2:45 pm
In case you missed it, Bruce, I answered above.
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 2:38 pm
Oh well, it was my answer and i entitle myself to write whatever i want to!
LOL
🙂
It wasn’t drama…
LikeLike
March 2, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Bruce you are ridiculous specially after this stupid question.
LikeLike
March 4, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Although such a circumstance would probably never come up in real life, it’s a legitimate question. Bruce is merely trying to determine how far we “pro-choicers” would go. If you say “no” to the question, then why not say “no” to an abortion at 37 weeks, or 34, or earlier?
LikeLike
March 4, 2011 at 5:00 pm
Pat,
thank you.
You are very intelligent.
I was surprised that TheNotSoDailyHerald was unwilling to answer the very simple question, as a point of discussion.
They just seemed full of inferences that were inaccurate, they do not know even where I stand on the issue.
It merely is a thought question, as you quickly realized. No tricks or riddles.
We all have our limits, it is a gradient. Only the fanatics are absolutely polarized on either side, in my humble opinion.
From there we can explore common ground.
Then we can solve the problems and leave the terrorists out of the discussion.
LikeLike
March 6, 2011 at 1:29 pm
Thanks, Bruce. I think we all get into our little corners of the issue and are afraid to wander away from the flock. God forbid someone in one of the camps should question something! I’ve been pissing off pro-choicers for years because I feel like we’ve run away form a number of difficult issues (like the one you posed). If we only talked more honestly amongst ourselves, we could at least have a conversation versus dueling bumper stickers.
LikeLike
March 6, 2011 at 2:34 pm
I agree. I would not be OK with the Abortion proposed, but it is interesting to explore how people think by “walking down the gradient,” as I think Bruce was trying to say.
LikeLike
March 21, 2011 at 8:47 pm
I can imagine how scared Angelita was to raise a child at age 19. Why is the only choice to kill the child? Why did she not give the child the gift of adoption by loving parents? 2 million loving couples want to adopt babies in the US every year and only 20,000 can. Why is it so hard to find a baby to adopt? Where are all the children? Read the story of Dr. Tony Levatino. He said he and his wife were trying to adopt a baby at the same time he was performing abortions and throwing 9 or 10 babies away each week and he thought if only I could have one of these babies to love and raise. 1.2 million babies are aborted each year. If all of those were adopted there would sitll be 800,000 parents seeking to adopt babies. EVERY CHILD IS A WANTED CHILD!!! There is even a group of 18,000 parents waiting to adopt babies with down syndrome and other deformities! Please reccomend ADOPTION to your friends who are not ready to be parents. It could have been just the encouragement Angelita needed.
LikeLike
March 22, 2011 at 7:19 am
HEather,
Is Abortion a choice ever in your opinion?
LikeLike
March 26, 2011 at 7:40 pm
No.
LikeLike
March 22, 2011 at 11:10 am
Heather, can you take a moment and really think about what it would be like to carry a child for nine months, only to give it to some other couple that you may or may not know? Can you imagine every year, on that baby’s birthday, thinking about that child? Of course, some women also think about the day they aborted years later. The way I look at is it who are we, sitting in the comfort of our living room, to tell women in that situation what they should do??
LikeLike
March 26, 2011 at 7:41 pm
I do not care.
People should be punished for their sins.
LikeLike
April 9, 2012 at 11:27 am
Oh PUHLEASE Heather! I’m so glad I can laugh at your view that abortion is some ‘sin’ you think should be punished! No, not laughing at YOU but at your view. You can also laugh at mine if you wish, it’s cool. I am a spiritual person who has her own walk with God not subject to discussion! Abortion is just fine for me if I wanted one and God would still LOVE me just fine as I don’t believe in a judgmental God! So you and those like you can gnash your TEETH as I continue to enjoy God’s sweet LOVE even tho’ I have had an ABORTION!
Have a nice day. 🙂
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 8:58 am
Oh am I glad I’m back. Otherwise I would have missed things like Kate’s #26.
The “unspeakable error” she mentions should be “errors” becasue I do it all the time: I call across the parking lot with megaphone to a pregnant woman, “The natural way is to carry the baby to term. It’s unnatural to cut her out of your body. If you do the unnatural, nature will strike back, and I’m not just talking about breast cancer.” I continue in a similar vein till she enters the little auschwitz.
At that point I switch persona and shout, “Mom, don’t let him pull off my arms and legs! Mom, help me, help!”
Doug has been recording that for several months (even though I told him he was going to get me in trouble). For some reason that day they called the cops. At least five cars arrived and maybe ten cops. Doug played his recording for them. Then one approached me, said nothing, and took down the information on my driver’s license. I haven’t heard anything since.
Kate, Rog, LDM, Courtney, et al., keep me in your prayers.
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 10:26 am
You know, John, I will forever defend your right to scream “Mommy, dont let them pull my legs off!” But that is so incredibly mean spirited and I suspect that “argument” has never changed anyone’s mind. All you did was make an already upset/sad woman even more upset. Why do I think you are better than that???
LikeLike
March 24, 2011 at 10:38 am
Pat, it is only incredibly meran spirited if you don’t believe that that’s what the little boy or girl would say if she could. As a matter of fact, she would do more than that if she could.
LikeLike
April 14, 2012 at 4:18 pm
Dunkle you have a new Friend above (if it is not you already, Julie Tweed).
LikeLike
March 26, 2011 at 12:09 pm
I went to the Allentown Women’s Center both today and yesterday to find Kate and hoping she’d talk to me. No luck. But she did let Jimmy go today — by himself! I can vouch for him, though, Kate. He really behaved himself. No f words.
LikeLike
March 26, 2011 at 7:50 pm
I agree with John Dunkle.
He is the legitimate voice of reason in the pro life movement.
Not the other fake Pro Life organizations.
Help me John, I do not know them all.
Not you people that think that killing a doctor that performs abortion is wrong, like Mary!
Mary is not even a pro Life voice of reason as she stated she believed abortion was OK sometimes. That makes her not pro life!
It is never OK to kill the baby.
Birth control should be outlawed, no one should have sex except to procreate. God is clear on this issue.
Every baby, no matter how sick should be birthed and born, as the good lord will always provide.
John should bother women as much as he needs to to stop them from murdering their children.
LikeLike
March 27, 2011 at 4:53 am
I would never say that these women murder their children, Heather. Certainhly not legally, right? And morally who knows other than God?
The little boy or girl being carried into the mill where for about ten minutes she will be tortured to death is murdered, sure. But who’s responhsible?
Is it Chuckles who’s turned a bad relationhship with his father into pro-death advocacy?
Is it I who could easily block the mill door till the cops carted me away?
Is it Mary, the most eloquent pro-life voice around, simply because she’s not doing enough to stop the tortures and deaths?
Is it Pat, the best of the pro-deathers in so many ways, simply because she or he is pro-death?
LikeLike
March 27, 2011 at 5:47 am
Or is it you, Heather, for pretending to agree with me?
LikeLike
April 2, 2011 at 7:48 pm
John,
I asked you about mothers that buy abortifacients and choose to perform their own abortion.
No doctors involved.
This happens a lot.
Why don’t the JHers and PLers want to murder these mothers, like they want to murder Doctors?
LikeLike
April 3, 2011 at 5:45 am
We never want to murder anybody; we want to save innocent people marked for destruction. How would killing the mother save the baby? If it were illegal to kill the baby, and we learned of someone who planned to anyway, incarceration would suffice. In this day and age, though, our hands are almost tied.
LikeLike
April 9, 2012 at 3:07 pm
This guy is a retard!
LikeLike
April 9, 2012 at 3:08 pm
No, he gives Retards a bad name!
LikeLike
April 2, 2011 at 6:19 pm
I apologize, Heather. I just reread “I agree with John Dunkle. I don’t see pretense there now.
LikeLike