Abortion.com FaceBook Page
The other day I was on a Facebook page called “Abortion.Com.” Abortion.com is a website that lists hundreds of clinics across the country that offer abortions and other reproductive health services. On the Facebook page, the administrator had posted an article about certain forms of birth control and, as usual, a number of readers took a moment to comment on the issue.
Never shy about chiming in, I started to type that the use of birth control “can prevent many abortions over the years.” But then I thought about that for a second, stopped typing and erased my entry. Something did not feel right about what I had started to say and I realized that that kind of comment would only contribute to the current abortion stigma that is so harmful to many women.
Abortion
I’ve written before about how the abortion stigma makes women feel “dirty,” how they cannot talk to their friends or family about their situation, including perhaps the man who is involved. So many women will travel hundreds of miles to get an abortion, even though there may be a clinic right in their neighborhood – just so they won’t be seen. The stigma affects those who work in abortion clinics, to the point where they might not tell anyone where they work. The stigma follows the doctors, sometimes with fatal results. Even pro-choice organizations unwillingly contribute to the stigma by avoiding the use of the “A” word.
The fact is, however, that birth control prevents not just abortions. It prevents an unwanted and/or unintended pregnancy. And that’s what we should be focusing on when we advocate the use of birth control.
Abortion
A woman facing an unwanted pregnancy has three options: abort, give birth or give birth with the intent to put it up for adoption. But, guess what? All three options are not perfect! Think about it. Adoption sounds so warm and fuzzy but do you think it’s easy for a woman to carry a baby for nine months and then give it to some stranger? Even if the adoption is open, the mother will spend the rest of her life watching her child from afar. From the child’s point of view, when they learn they have been adopted, it can be a very difficult revelation for them. Meanwhile, giving birth to an unwanted child and keeping it is often not the best choice either. Not every child, especially an unwanted one, is a “blessing,” as the pro-lifers like to suggest. Sure you can hope that things work out for the best, but when a child is brought into the world under less than welcome circumstances, things often go wrong down the road.
I hate to quote bumper stickers but in this case it’s true: “Every Child, a Wanted Child.”
So, when we talk about the effects of birth control, we should not just focus on how it will reduce the number of abortions. I mean, that’s a good thing, but when you just focus on that one result it contributes to that negative image. Remember, we’re reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies.
I’m glad I stopped myself from posting that original comment on Facebook!
Related articles
- Abortions may not hurt mental health (mumbailaity.wordpress.com)
- Can you show me a sample outline on why abortion should be legal (wiki.answers.com)
- Nancy Keenan: Mitt Romney’s $10,000 Question on Choice (huffingtonpost.com)
- Study: Abortion Does Not Increase Risk Of Mental Illness (thinkprogress.org)
- Newt Gingrich Signs Personhood Pledge (lezgetreal.com)
- Abortion is not a mental health issue | Deborah Orr (guardian.co.uk)
- Abortion stigma brings real harm: researcher (cbc.ca)
Abortion - Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information 
December 25, 2011 at 1:25 pm
Why let off the pressure on the so-called “pro-lifers?” They hate abortion, hold their nose to the grindstone of favoring the Morning After pill, the implant, the IUD, the patch. They wriggle magnificently when skewered on their own illogic….
LikeLike
December 28, 2011 at 9:45 am
I am not “letting off the pressure” on the antis, Charles just because I wrote this one blog. I can multi-task!!
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 10:38 pm
I definitely agree we shouldn’t let off the pressure. I frequent Abortion.com on Facebook and share/post much of the materials and links they make available. So-called Pro-lifers, whom I rightly call Forced Birth Advocates often show up to complain, spam and ‘preach’. Time and again the administrators have asked Forced Birth Advocates if they believe in sex education and birth control, — only to have the Forced Birthers, who mostly come to spam the page, disappear, or respond with non-sequiturs.
The very few that have answered honestly have admitted that they are completely against sex education and birth control. Most of the time they admit it is a feature of their religious beliefs.
I have no problem with pointing out their illogical stances to them.
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 10:40 pm
Sorry about my poor grammar and coma usage. Can’t edit, dammit. 🙂
LikeLike
January 20, 2013 at 1:43 pm
I hate commas,,,,,,,,
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 10:47 pm
Good for you, Anne!
LikeLike
December 26, 2011 at 12:53 pm
I agree, it is really hard to take any pro lifer seriously that wants to rid the opportunity for people to use Birth Control. Pure ProLifer Insanity.
LikeLike
December 28, 2011 at 9:47 am
You know, Evan, sometimes I think that most pro-lifers actually deep down support birth control but they may find it hard to admit. I mean, c’mon, that is a pretty neandrathal-ian way of looking at things. And I’ll betcha that, because most of them are very conservative, they’re probably thinking birth control is a good thing for those “poor people”…What do ya think?
LikeLike
December 28, 2011 at 5:52 pm
I would like to agree with you.
But I can only follow their actions and not speculate on their interior feelings.
When pro lifers actually are working to legislate against birth control, and support these personhood agendas, and when the GOP are signing Personhood pledges – That is what really I have to work off of.
LikeLike
December 28, 2011 at 8:22 pm
Pat, most so-callled “pro-lifers” are very repressed people– and that means that they are extremely uncomfortable about sex, because it is far too uninhibited for their mindset. Ipso facto, they cannot countenance any form of birth control except abstinence, because all of them except that one allow one not to be inhibited. Why do you think they have larger families than the “pro-choicers?” Because they are against birth control, and because they then have no Plan B when their libido overrides their superego…
LikeLike
December 29, 2011 at 1:13 pm
I think you are right, Charles, about pro-lifers being repressed when it comes to sex. That, versus us pro-choice trapeze artists….
LikeLike
December 31, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Responsible makes more sense every comment I read by Him/Her.
LikeLike
December 26, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Which is a tipoff, Evan, about how they are not at all concerned about human life; it they were, they’d be in favor of reducing the number of abortions by strongly– very strongly– favoring birth control. Instead, they WANT there to be abortion so that they can be AGAINST it.
It’s a convenient target for them, nothing more. If abortion didn’t exist, they’d have to find a substitute.
LikeLike
December 26, 2011 at 2:50 pm
You make a lot of good sense.
LikeLike
December 26, 2011 at 7:41 pm
Thank you, Evan.
I find it quite surprising that people don’t look at what motivates the so-called “pro-lifers.” Their actions are so out of synch with their statements. They do not adopt at a greater rate than the “pro-choice” population; their illegitimacy rate is higher; they don’t advocate for higher taxes for education, child care, prenatal care, universal health care; they are not known for being anti-war or even pacifist. It’s all and only about abortion.
Abortion is like the pseudo-religious equivalent of Hustler magazine.
And they can’t get away with it in other cultures. Fifty percent of pregnancies in Japan end in abortion, and nobody gets their knickers in a twist about it. Only in America do we have this streak of crusading Puritanism that gets a pass from a non-critical public.
LikeLike
December 28, 2011 at 9:48 am
As I said above, I think they are quietly for birth control for certain parts of the populace. Do you think they like seeing all of those illegal immigrants having babies???
LikeLike
December 28, 2011 at 5:58 pm
I think, Pat, your point is essentially made by the Mississippi personhood endeavor that failed. Some portion of that population finally “got” what the repercussions of the stupid Personhood legislation will do to a society.
I cannot know, i’m only guessing.
Still, in this context, I find it hard to believe the GOP candidates seem to be signing on to Personhood pledges like crazy.
What do you think Pat?
Plus, this Ron Paul guy, is actually Left of Obama on Foreign Policy. He clearly is not a crazy person. But, this batch of GOPs seems so pathetic to me, not that I would vote for any of them in the general election.
LikeLike
December 31, 2011 at 3:09 pm
I don’t think I answered your question (i’m not sure it was intended for me).
I agree Pat that there is probably some weird sub conscience stuff going on in these ProLifers minds regarding the comment you made.
This country was built on immigrants, to the detriment of the native population sadly. And immigrant’s kids have turned out to be some of the most industrious, effective, clear minded thinkers, promoters of liberty, that the world has seen to this date.
So I still favor not regulating in any fashion by legislation control over a persons reproduction.
Whether the USA is a blip on the screen of history, only history will tell. It has only been a few hundred years. I’m hoping America “the experiment” will endure. Especially in regards to immigration and being a secular melting pot for diverse belief systems and tolerance to those you do not infringe on the rights of others.
LikeLike
December 29, 2011 at 1:15 pm
I can’t agree with you, Charles that pro-lifers are “not at all concerned about human life.” I know you got your aborticentrism theory and all, but I know a lot of pro-lifers who do put their money where their mouth is when it comes to the quality of life of those in need. Sure, they dont go as far as you’d like but….
LikeLike
December 29, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Look, Pat: ANYBODY who thinks someone else ought to give birth has a moral responsibility for the upbringing of that specific child. No matter how generous, empathetic, kindly, well-meaning, virtuous, beneficent, magnanimous, spiritual,loving, wholesome, and saintly they seem to appear, they are DELIBERATELY failing to care for a human life which they insisted upon. There is no lower circle in any Hell than the one they inhabit.
LikeLike
December 31, 2011 at 3:18 pm
I love how responsible articulates the thought (especially the last sentence!).
Anyway, I think that these are incredibly complex issues – even though I find myself agreeing and being persuaded by Responsible’s comments.
By complex, one part of complex I mean something very specific. There is so much more but right now I’ll stick to this one confounder.
When we reduce comments on the gigantic complicated issue of Abortion we lose information and detail. It is the nature of linguistics. There pragmatically is no alternative. I think (I’m not educated in linguistics one iota – so no bad mouthing me for the sake go my own vanity!) comments then because of the necessary loss of much detail tend to trend toward sounding like more very dichotomous statements – by the very nature and essence of communication. The commenter has a much richer vision in their mind, but it cannot be fully communicated. Sort of like the TV sound bite deal. So comments, sadly, turn into these Good vs Evil, or Absolute Right vs Wrong, and we really do not mean it to be that way.
The nature of a blog forum, and comment communication just has that side effect. And that side effect feeds on itself in a self looped feedback yet forward propagating manner.
Did I make any sense to anyone? I did my best. If I do not make sense that may support my concept of linguistics and comments! 🙂
LikeLike
December 31, 2011 at 3:25 pm
If anyone thinks I am orbiting Reality in any way with this comment above – do they have answers to the dilemma of debate and discussion?
I sort of see this dilemma as a reason to just default to, as many of you have said, Just Trust Women. Default to personal liberty. Our ability to control our own bodies (short of the severest form of psychiatric illness) is paramount in the equation of happiness and even the vision of the framers of our Rule of Law, so many years ago when they could not even have begun to predict what the future held. So they crafted law that was flexible to deal with concepts that they would never know. At the same time, by the Bill of Rights, try and do their best to stick to basic premises of the Human condition that appeared, and still do to me at least, do be a fabric that binds and enhances society, if not hijacked by people like the one’s that support personhood amendments.
LikeLike
January 1, 2012 at 1:40 pm
Wait until you’re a grad student, Evan; you’ll get your fill of commentary elaborated to a degree incomprehensible to a post-literate society! Back in the day when moveable type became common, writers and publishers loved maximizing exegesis! The 5% of the English public who were literate thrilled to exercise a power denied the vast majority, and for lack of mind-numbing distractions like radio and TV, many in the lower classes yearned for an opportunity to read and write as well.
At least in this venue, your insights get out. Inelegantly, perhaps, but if well expressed, well understood.
LikeLike
December 30, 2011 at 7:53 am
hmmmmm…..so if a protestor in front of a clinic has a conversation with a woman going in for an abortion, a mutually agreeable conversation, and that woman ultimately decides to not have the abortion…..are you saying the protestor is responsible for the upkeep of that baby?
LikeLike
December 30, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Absolutely! The protestor presumes by his presence there to care more for the fetus than he judges the woman does. By walking away from the resulting birth of a child, the protestor destroys whatever credibility he thought he had– and puts his immortal soul at risk for eternal damnation.
There is no halfway position in caring for a child you want born– you either take on the whole responsibility for the next eighteen years or you back off during the pregnancy and let the woman be in charge.
LikeLike
December 31, 2011 at 3:28 pm
I agree.
I would not legislate it – Although that may actually be the practical answer to the problem of conserving human liberty in THAT limited scenario.
These pro lifers, if taken for there word (And that is very hard to do), should be expending much more effort taking care of the already present multitudes of children in immense poverty here in the US, and across the world. As how could they even begin to consider a child here in the USA more important than a child in Bhutan?
LikeLike
January 1, 2012 at 1:41 pm
But even though they say they care, Evan, they can’t. It doesn’t matter where the unwanted child comes from, they don’t want it to be their responsibility.
LikeLike
January 1, 2012 at 3:26 pm
Sadly you prove yourself right, definitively by the massive InAction of ProLifers every day.
LikeLike
January 1, 2012 at 4:34 pm
Evan: How the heck do you know that all pro-lifers are not engaging in any “action” every day?? This is the problem in this country, we tend to generalize. I totally disagree with them but I suspect (I am not saying I know) that many pro-lifers actually do some good things to make people’s lives better.
LikeLike
January 1, 2012 at 4:41 pm
by Massive,
I meant that the size of the ProLife group on average does not reflect what they are doing.
I cannot comment on any specific individuals as you accurately state.
LikeLike
January 1, 2012 at 4:32 pm
I dunno, it sounds a little extreme, Charles. I mean, if a woman who is thinking about an abortion willingly talks to the protestor or a Cpc “counselor” and on her own free will, after listening to the arguments, decides to have the baby, the cpc counselor should be responsible for bringing up that baby?
LikeLike
January 1, 2012 at 8:46 pm
Absolutely. The “counselor” otherwise is doing no more than bending the woman to his/her will. It is only by caring for the child for the next eighteen years that the “counselor” proves he/she truly cares for human life and not merely about it.
As you well know, Pat, such “counseling is riddled with lies and half-truths, with appeals to the emotions rather than with support for a parenting project. It’s one thing to tell a woman, “You will be at increased risk for breast cancer and an eternity in Hell.” It’s quite another to say, “Here’s a $260,000 trust fund which will be paid out to you weekly in $277 installments for the next 18 years if you carry this pregnancy to term.” That would be an appeal to reason, but for obvious reasons, they don’t make it.
LikeLike
February 26, 2012 at 4:33 pm
There is no justification for abortion.
If an adult was shot and killed by someone.
It is called murder but if a child is aborted it’s called a women’s rights.
How sad that you people actually think that we are the insane ones.
At least we don’t slaughter millions of unborn babies a year.
When standing before God at the judgement thrown what will be your position I wonder.
Will you look Him in the eye and say it was a your right as a woman to kill your child.
The very child He lovingly knit together in your body.
Life truly does begin at conception.
If this were the killing of unborn puppies everyone would be up in arms shouting animal cruelty.
Where are the people shouting murder when a child is ripped from his mother;s womb.
Murder!shame on you all!
LikeLike
February 26, 2012 at 6:04 pm
In how many ways does this manifest aborticentrism? Let us count:
1. Fantasizes that the fetus is a child.
2. Fantasizes about the evil of that child being murdered, thereby creating a target to hate– in this case, the woman.
3. Conjures up horror piled upon horror– millions of murders
4. Fantasizes about punishment to match the fantasized horror.
5. Fantasizes about the evil murderess squirming under God’s baleful gaze.
6. Plays good cop, fantasizes about Ted Bundy and Jason Komisarovsky being little unborn angels, lovingly knit together in mummies’ bodies.
7. Focuses on baseline belief, destruction of which will destroy her personally.
8. Tosses in extra condemnation at no extra charge, castigating a soulless society that protects puppies only.
9. Penultimately portrays herself as the sole heroine in this affair of the straw demon: “Where are the people shouting murder. . .” No one stands with her; she is alone, undaunted, courageous, but unappreciated by a cold and indifferent world.
10. Final venting of anger which should be directed at what is bothering her, but is more safely directed at a target which cannot possibly hurt her.
Ten! Not bad! Not Olympic grade, but getting there….
LikeLike
October 9, 2013 at 8:33 pm
Abortion Shame – Maybe I Had an Abortion, Maybe I Didn’t
LikeLike
October 10, 2013 at 7:59 am
Abortion shame: Ted Bundy’s mom: “Maybe I should have had an abortion; maybe I shouldn’t have.”
Parents of his three to five dozen victims: “Ask us.”
LikeLike