I think most folks who regularly read my blog will agree that I try to not be too doctrinaire in my thinking about this controversial issue. I try hard to see both sides, much to the chagrin of some of my colleagues in the pro-choice movement. As the Director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, I regularly met with pro-life leaders in an effort to create an educational dialogue. Whether or not I succeeded is a question mark, but I felt good about what I was doing.
So, now, I’m gonna step out of character for a moment. I’ve got to get something off my mind. Something recently crossed my desk that has totally disgusted me. It’s something perpetuated by some I know/knew in the pro-life movement, someone that I thought at least had a sliver of humanity in her.
Somewhere during the course of her day a short while ago, Ms. Janet Morena of Priests for Life found out that a woman from ENGLAND was 30 weeks pregnant and had travelled to the United States to abort her pregnancy. It seems that a local pro-lifer in Albuquerque, New Mexico – who clearly has nothing else to do – somehow found out that this woman was there seeking an abortion. Imagine that for a minute – some guy hanging out near the clinic sniffing around looking for a vulnerable woman who had just taken the extraordinary step of flying all the way here for such a sad occasion. This pro-lifer even found out, so he says, that she was being pressured by her “radically pro-abortion father.” Meanwhile, the woman’s mother, who opposed the abortion, was seeking help and that’s when Janet became involved.
Like a good, loving Christian, Janet issued an urgent please to pro-lifers in her network:
“Urgent prayer needed! A 20-year-old woman from Great Britain is on her way to New Mexico to abort her baby. She is 30 weeks pregnant. Her mother in Great Britain and her uncle in Spain have reached out to Priests for Life for our help and prayer. She is in Atlanta now, aware that she and her father will be prosecuted when they return home, because it is illegal in the UK to go to another country for an abortion. She is going to pay $12,000 to kill this almost full-term baby at Southwestern Women’s Options in Albuquerque on Tuesday. Please pray for Emily and her baby.”
If they had the money, I have no doubt that PFL would have bought a full page ad in the New York Times. If they had the name of the woman, they would have plastered the name of the woman all over the place in an effort to “help” her.
I have no idea what the situation was with the pregnancy. But if she were, in fact, 30 weeks pregnant, either her life was in danger or there was some kind of fetal abnormality. Of course, some in Janet’s movement no doubt assumed that she was having the abortion because she couldn’t fit into her prom dress. They would never put themselves in her shoes and think about the incredibly difficult situation the woman was in and how excruciating the decision must have been. No, the pro-lifers just had to try to intervene in this most private of moments.
But there’s another chapter to this story.
I recently learned that the woman had had her abortion – and my first reaction was a silent cheer. “We won!” I thought for a sick moment. I was suddenly part of the war again. I ultimately came to my senses but…
Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.
Abortion - Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information 
January 15, 2015 at 7:05 pm
You can;t get emotional about this, Pat. Emotions cripple.
LikeLike
January 15, 2015 at 9:01 pm
Can’t help it, Johnny.
LikeLike
January 15, 2015 at 10:11 pm
It is a war, Pat. A war against a dysfunctional twelve-step program which calls itself “pro-life.” You cannot treat a sociopath like a normal human being and expect change for the better.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 4:54 am
That’s the way I’ve been treating you, Chuck! And I’ve seen some improvement.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 9:37 am
The above response comes from the man who doesn’t know how to defend his infant daughter from sexual predation or 5 dozen young women from the next Ted Bundy.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 2:06 pm
But then you regress.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 2:24 pm
Except, Charles, I do not believe that most pro-lifers are sociopaths. Sure they’ve got their element of kooks, just like we do. But in my years in the movement I’ve found that most of them will at least sit down and have a very civil conversation about the issue. Like every movement, the ones that get the attention at the nutballs.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 8:00 am
I really appreciated your post here Pat. Private decisions are private. Not the business of anyone else and, in this instance, I was reminded of the number of times a pro-life protester brought his/her/their daughter to the clinic I directed. I always knew they had made a decision of abortion based on specific circumstances (age, medical condition, and so on). As much as I cringed at their hypocrisy, I respected the decision. They knew that I, nor anyone on staff, would ever violate their privacy.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 2:05 pm
I’ve heard of this stuff before, Kimmie, and LDM below, and I suppose it has happened. I heard of a deathscort turning into a prolife activist, too. But I’ll bet the chance of either happening is about the same as winning the lottery. Making a big thing out of it just distracts.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 2:27 pm
Kimmie, you should write your next blog on this issue. Sure, it didn’t happen all of the time but it was always interesting to me to see how many times it did happen. Not to mention all of those women who now “regret” their five abortions. It was good for them then, but now – now they are getting the attention they’ve always wanted.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 2:58 pm
John – it happened, it happens on a regular basis. I understand that you might think that by stating a truth like that, it is “making a big thing out of it” – I am not and do not think others, like Lorraine, ever have. We understand abortion as an option to some pregnancies. As Pat stated in his reply, it was not daily, but I can assure you it was much more common than you might care to acknowledge. To this day, all these years later, I am reluctant to provide some of the real specific experiences with those particular patients and their families for fear that in fact I could inadvertently provide just enough identifying information that their privacy would be compromised. Relax about it John…self-interest can absolutely throw any human off from their core beliefs and those on your side are certainly no different albeit the pro-choice side wishes they would learn from their experience of need and, I am guessing, your side would prefer that they not make the choice of abortion in any circumstance.
How is your son John?
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 8:15 pm
He’s hanging in there. Either the meds or the radiology has alleviated the excruciating pain. We love him to death.
LikeLike
January 18, 2015 at 7:59 pm
Keep on pumping those babies into the world, Mr. Dunkle, and don’t worry about what happens to them. What’s good enough for your kid is good enough for them.
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 6:06 am
Is this nasty or just stupid.
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 2:54 pm
Entirely uncalled for, Charles. Talk about disgusting…..
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 5:19 pm
I”m being as nice to him as he is to every woman going in to a clinic.
The so-called “pro-lifers” count on everybody else being civil to them, and they do not reciprocate. They construct a “win-win” situation for themselves.
If this makes him see his actions as his victims see them, then I will have done him a good deed. I do not apologize. That’s the way it is with tough love.
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 7:49 am
Maybe it gives you an idea of what it feels like when women don’t appreciate the way you deal with their times of grief and overwhelming responsibility. How does it feel?
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 8:21 am
Good, just stupid.
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 1:26 pm
How does that make you feel, having women regard you as stupid?
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 5:22 pm
Is he thinking it over, or has he shut it out of his mind?
The rest is silence…..
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 10:06 am
Kimmie Farrell…..I have been in your position several times over the 20 years I was the Director of the clinic here! Not only did they bring their daughters in the themselves also came in for an abortion….on a day that the protestor’s were not there…an were right out there the next protest day…in all their glory!! We always treated them with respect and would never have violated their privacy!!
However, I am NOT surprised that Janet Morena jumped at the chance to publicize something like this….that’s what they do!!…Look for some way to sensationalize this most difficult decision…. without any thought or regard as to what they are doing to the very “real” woman making this difficult medical decision!! I am sure Pat that we probably don’t know the whole story…my guess is that it NEVER was the “woman’s Mother” that contacted PFL (knowing she could be arrested when she returns home!) it was probably one of England’.s “NUTS” that contacted them…perhaps just saying they were the woman’s mother….We know they LIE!! They called me and said my daughter had been in a terrible auto accident and was in the emergency room!! (she wasn’t!!) So yes THEY LIE!!
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 11:37 am
Sociopathic behavior.
It’s a war.
LikeLike
January 17, 2015 at 6:13 am
I recall when PFL posted a really smarmy article immediately following Robin Williams’ suicide. PFL was quick to blame guilt and shame from an abortion his girlfriend had in his early years that lead to his depression and subsequent suicide. To lie is a habit of the pro life movement. But to stoop so low in an attempt to steal the limelight, to grovel for attention, is one of their more obvious, yet egregious, behaviors.
LikeLike
January 17, 2015 at 8:40 am
They need to be in the center of the limelight. Being there reinforces their attempt to believe that they are heroes.
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 2:56 pm
Wow, Kate, I didn’t know they did that. That’s not just despicable, but it’s also incredibly stupid.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 3:59 pm
Calling in some false reports to some of these pro-life organizations might be fun.
LikeLike
January 16, 2015 at 8:16 pm
Sounds interesting, KVT. Like what?
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 2:56 pm
Yeah, KVT, what do ya mean? Let’s not stoop to their level, however.
LikeLike
January 18, 2015 at 6:09 pm
My sister and I had just registered for college. We were extremely excited because she was to be a junior and I was starting my freshman year, having graduated from high school one year early as I was eager to pursue school and a career. On the way home, we stopped at a free clinic so I could take a test to find out whether or not I was pregnant. The test was positive! My sister and I both remember two individuals keeping me in a room for at least an hour (without my sister, I was only 17 years old) and my exiting the room crying. The entire time I was alone with them they were URGING me to abort my child, stating it would “ruin my life and future.” Never did they offer the opposing view. I felt intimidated and humiliated, as if they thought I could not possibly make that decision on my own. Although I knew that it was a defining moment and that my life would not be the same after my decision to forgo college and keep my baby, NOT ONCE have I regretted that decision. I do know, however, that had I made the decision to abort my baby because of my own self-absorbed agenda, that being to pursue my goals and a career, the emotional and spiritual result would have been devastating and never ending. My feeling was always that if I was so concerned about those issues that I should have remained abstinent or done more to prevent a pregnancy. That was 41 years ago. I now have 3 sons and 5 grandchildren. The blessings they have brought to my life, as well as their father’s life, has been immense. I have never once looked back and wished that I had aborted my child. I have listened to other women who had abortions at a young age as the result of pressure from a relative or clinic personnel and have cried with them as they expressed the grief, regret and self-shame they have felt as a result of their decision to abort. No one ever told them about the devastating emotional pain they would experience. Although the women I know now have other children, they have never forgotten that little soul they aborted. The pain is timeless. As a convert to Catholicism, I am well aware of Janet Moreno and the Priests for Life organization. They are so impassioned because they KNOW the eternal consequences, they know the possible impact that child might have had on this world and the life of those around them, and the huge impediment women who have had abortions face as they attempt to live a normal life with the knowledge that they have “killed” their child. The pro-life people that I know are not at all like you describe. The women who were in the room that day 41 years ago trying to persuade me to abort my son fit the description you have outlined. Instead, pro-life supporters are compassionate, forgiving and generous in both heart and emotional support. Very many of them were forced to make that decision years ago and chose abortion, only to live with regret and shame that is totally unescapable. Men too have been affected by the horror of abortion, having been convinced that it was the woman’s “right to choose” rather than the father having any right to voice his wishes. Abortion is such a heated and controversial issue because it is counterintuitive. Rationalization has always been a coping mechanism and I can see that with this issue. Only the stark realization of what it is, what it will do, and the long term ramifications of such a decision accompanied by the plea for forgiveness can begin to heal the most tragic of assaults to any woman. So… if we who are PRO-LIFE are persistent, insistent, and unshakeable in our resolve, it is because we know, or have witnessed, the ravages of abortion to the lives of those involved. The results are eternal…
LikeLike
January 18, 2015 at 7:56 pm
So, Ms. Dalton, of all those you want “rescued,” how many did you adopt?
Of the 160 so-called “pro-life” demonstrators in my town, only two families had adopted. One of them adopted one and the other, with an income close to $350,000, adopted five. And nobody else did. In fact, when I approached the seven churches backing the demonstrations, not one agreed to help me recruit 160 of their congregants to donate (as I was doing at the time) 8% of their gross annual income and 600 hours of their unpaid personal time to work one-on-one with children whose parents either couldn’t or wouldn’t care for them.
Their attitude is typical of the movement, which looks very much like a dysfunctional twelve-step program. If they were truly concerned about human life rather than their feelings about abortion, they would be offering a quarter of a million dollars to a pregnant woman to ensure the resulting child would have the financial resources required to make it through the first 18 years of life. That’s why none of them have joined my organization, RESPONSIBLE Right to Life, which requires them to raise to age 18 every “unborn human” they want to “rescue.” Maybe you can explain to me why they won’t.
My mother, pregnant for 99 months, quit the local so-called “pro-life” movement when she found they wouldn’t so much as cross the street to ask the counter-demonstrators what motivated them. Instead, her fellow demonstrators turned on her for doing that. I can assure you that I know of 160 so-called “pro-lifers” in my town whose experience and outlook is not very similar to yours, and they will most assuredly not adopt any more children than you have.
LikeLike
January 23, 2015 at 9:13 pm
Charles –
If what you have said reflects the truth of your contribution to the pro-life movement, in more ways than vocal support, than you deserve praise and I wish that you would be emulated.
There are organizations that will help these young women to bring a child to term, as well as provide them lodging, emotional and physical support, all of them sponsored by a variety of churches. The best thing we can do is to get this information to these women so they know that they have this option available to them.
Although I have not “adopted” any of these children, I have sponsored at least 6-8 Haitian children from the beginning of their schooling through graduation to insure they have an education, in addition to providing a daily meal, which was usually the only meal they would have in a day.
My husband and I also provided funds for a young lady we met in San Pedro to return to high school after she had been forced to leave due to her mother being ill requiring her to care for the younger children in the family.The cost of returning to school was prohibitive for her as the fees required to do so were much like attending a community college in the U.S.. We paid for her education for four years and she is now married and a mother to two young children. My husband and I were privileged to be able to help this young lady.
My mother-in-law, who is 89 and totally bedridden for 5 years, has lived with us for 6 years, is dependent on us for every bodily function of her daily activities. She has to be changed, fed, bathed, and tended to multiple times everyday. Would that be included in your “adoption” paradigm? Have you provided that kind of day-to-day care lately to assist someone from having to be admitted to a nursing home?
I consider myself “pro-life” in all areas of my life and I pray that my life experience will reveal that I valued life at any interval. I think all life has value and each human being deserves to live their life without fear of having to justify their existence or measure their contribution to society in order to survive. Unfortunately, the unborn cannot speak for themselves, so we are the only voice that they have and, having been faced with the dilemma that women contemplating abortion no doubt are experiencing, I think I can give a unique point of view of “coming out on the other side” of what had been a life altering event, and share the peace that accompanies the decision to keep your child.
I would hope that rather than wage an attack on someone like myself in the future, making false assumptions about what kind of commitment that I have made and comparing it to your own actions, that you would inform the reader about what might be available to them to assist with the pro-life cause. Thank you for your ongoing contribution to unwanted children, both in time and money. Your presence in their lives will be everlasting.
LikeLike
January 24, 2015 at 5:45 pm
Ms Dalton, I was a single parent supporting my child on my own for 14 years at minimum wage much of the time. I spent over a quarter century working with families who were even worse off than mine was. You should never, ever, ever trust that any child you demand be born will be given adequate supplementary nurture by all those agencies you think are out there. While I appreciate what you have done as described, the watermark for the true pro-lifer is a commitment to sacrifice if necessary his/her time, talents, skills, other priorities and wealth to the proper nurture of a child.
If you look at the behaviors of so-called “pro-lifers” you will see immediately that they in general are far below even your level of care for people not of their family, church or social circle.
Had you been in a position to be a true pro-lifer with the infant Ted Bundy, you would have prevented from three to five dozen murders. But who has time to do that? Not the so-called “pro-lifers.”
You can be proud of what you’ve done, but when all you do is persuade somebody else to make you feel better by not having an abortion, you’re not helping people like my son or the next Ted Bundy.
LikeLike
January 18, 2015 at 8:00 pm
I will transfer this to my newsletter, skyp1.blogspot.com
LikeLike
January 18, 2015 at 8:03 pm
Shoot, Chuckles got in ahead of me with his nonsense. Anyway,my response refers to Karen, above.
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 3:01 pm
Thanks for sharing, Karen. First of all, I am so sorry and rather disgusted that someone at that clinic tried to pressure you into aborting. What was the name of the clinic? Oh, I know, you can’t tell me. As for your decision, I’m glad it all worked out. What bothers me, however, is that you project what happened to you and assume that all women will react the same way. I can tell you for a fact that I know a number of women who had abortions, including one family member, who has never regretted her decision. NEVER. But I guess you and Janet just know “the truth,” huh? In a way, you’re being so dogmatic and so sure that you are right is almost like that clinic that supposedly tried to make you have that abortion. You both have agendas.
LikeLike
January 23, 2015 at 9:29 pm
Pat –
Despite your literary vitriol, I want to remind you that I was just sharing my own experience. There was no need for me to embellish it, exaggerate it, or enhance it to appease the “agenda” that you are insisting that I possess. After 40 years, of course I have no idea what the name of the clinic is, having only lived in Dayton, Ohio for about two years during this period of my life. It was the one and only time that I had ever visited the clinic and the experience was so repulsive that I would not have ventured there again, except perhaps to protest what was going on inside.
Furthermore, you state that you know several women, including a family member, who have had abortions and have never regretted their decisions. I don’t know if this is news to you Pat, but I think you’re probably the last person that any of these people would reach out to if they found themselves a life of regret or sorrow due to making that decision at a vulnerable time of their life. You don’t appear to be very tolerant of anyone that doesn’t support the right to abortion.
I am not insisting that I know another woman’s reaction to the news that she is pregnant and faced with making a decision, I just point you to the fact that statistics show that unless a woman makes the decision to have an abortion immediately upon diagnosis of a pregnancy at a clinic, there is a 70% chance she will not return for an abortion. THAT tells me that with reflection and consideration, most women will make a decision for life. That comes from a woman’s heart. I think that speaks volumes for the debate. It also explains why the clinic workers would be so adamant about persuading me to proceed with an abortion. They also have quotas, you know. I’m just so blessed not to have been one of them!
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 12:43 pm
Karen,
Memories are always being negotiated, fought over and shaped by the memories of others. The research on memory shows that remembering is a fundamentally social process, one that sometimes wrongly incorporate information that has been provided by other people into our own memories. We often feel pressure to fall in line with the memories of family, friends and colleagues including church folks.
LikeLike
January 19, 2015 at 3:02 pm
Thanks, Kate, for being much more diplomatic and kind than me.
LikeLike
January 20, 2015 at 9:17 am
Diplomatic? Kind? Kate? And to think that some people don’t believe in miracles.
LikeLike
January 23, 2015 at 8:31 pm
Kate,
I won’t dispute the research regarding memories, but I assure you that the event was probably the most significant of my life, having resulted in a totally different course for my life than previously planned, as well as telling my father, which was the most difficult conversation I had ever had with him. He was my sole parent and I admired him greatly and remember feeling very ashamed for having disappointed him. The memory is still quite vivid. As stated in my previous post, however, I knew what was the best decision for me and I have never regretted that decision, however I do know that having an abortion would have haunted me for the rest of my life.
LikeLike
January 21, 2015 at 11:12 am
Pope said, just a few days ago,
Each person seeks how to do that responsible parenthood. “God gives you methods to be responsible,” He continued, “Some think that — excuse the word — that in order to be good Catholics we have to be like rabbits. No.”
That sounds like he is OK with leaving pre-conception birth control to the individual. Even though he said church approved birth control is what he means, we all know (and he is smart enough to also know) that people who use only those methods are called “parents.”
LikeLike
January 21, 2015 at 1:22 pm
Yeah, David, but that’s what he means. Another term for “pre-conception birth control” — mutual masturbation. Look it up.
LikeLike
January 23, 2015 at 8:21 pm
Please be advised that Pope Francis revised that statement about people having several children and stated that large families were to be admired and that he didn’t intend to derogate them in any way. Regarding “birth control” there is always abstinence to consider when you’re not, as you say, parents. Old fashioned idea but one that seems to be coming back into vogue.
LikeLike
January 24, 2015 at 1:24 pm
Yup, Church teachings, sometimes disregarded, always come back into vogue. They are the word of God. They fit with how he made us. Satan twists us this way and that, but in the end he loses.
LikeLike
January 24, 2015 at 5:00 pm
Portions of the prayer to St. Michael describes it best, I think: “Protect us from the wickedness and snares of the Devil” and “cast into Hell Satan and all the evil spirits prowling about the world seeking the destruction of souls.”
And yes, we do know the ending and who wins!!
LikeLike
January 22, 2015 at 1:56 pm
“that’s what he means”. Yep, leave pre-conception birth control up to the individual.
BTW, your reference to mutual masterbastion is irrelevant. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with mm. If consenting adults (man/woman; man/man, woman/woman or multiple combinations thereof) want to mm in private, who are any of the rest of us to judge? Oh, I forgot, judging other is what you do, rather than leaving it up to your God as your Pope prefers.
LikeLike
January 22, 2015 at 3:35 pm
David, one of the steps in the dysfunctional twelve-step program that is the so-called “pro-life” movement is #4: “Show myself that I am powerful.”
Attempting to instill guilt is one of their techniques. Since Christians in general can be fairly easily shamed by imputations of sexuality (read the book, “Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven to see its Stoic roots), “mutual masturbation” is for them a legitimate tool of shaming.
Whether it works or not is largely irrelevant; what is important is that by attempting to shame, they give themselves an opportunity to self-affirm their potency.
This is in contrast of course to their actual status in society. Generally they are poorer and less educated than other Americans.
A good counter to the “mutual masturbation” allegation is humor. Woody Allen said, “Masturbation means having sex with someone I love.” They must not love themselves very much…
LikeLike
January 22, 2015 at 10:37 pm
And, Chuck, I’ll bet you think that when Woody had that couple fumbling around while encased in large rubbers, he was promoting condoms. Am I right?
But to get back to David — I don’t judge others, D! Word meanings judge them. Masturbation means sexually abusing by hand. Mutual masturbation means abusing each other. Now look up the meaning of the word “abuse.”
LikeLike
January 23, 2015 at 3:30 pm
You got BOTH of those definitions wrong, Mr. Dunkle. But I will admit I didn’t check the Douay-Reims dictionary, where I am sure I would have found your version…
Have you ever heard a Woody Allen joke you thought was funny?
LikeLike
January 24, 2015 at 5:50 am
Didn’t he just create funny situations? I don’t remember him ever telling a joke.
LikeLike
January 24, 2015 at 5:35 pm
Hmm, maybe an inability to understand or appreciate Woody Allen’s humor is another sign of a so-called “pro-lifer.”
LikeLike
January 24, 2015 at 6:50 pm
Geeze, Chuck, does every response have to be an ad hom?
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 8:42 am
That wasn’t ad hominem in the least, Mr. Dunkle.
Given that you have been exposed to a lot of Woody Allen humor in the last six decades and sincerely believe that he only wrote humorous scripts and not jokes (which is incorrect, because that’s how he started his career and got onto the writing staff of the Steve Allen show) and that you have freely stated so,it is not an attack on your character to speculate whether an ethnic-specific humorlessness might be ingrained in the psychopathy of the so-called “pro-lifer.”
It’s not a character defect to not understand humor.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 9:44 am
Guess he wrote jokes for others but I don’t ever remember him telling one himself. Do you?
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 10:00 am
“You got BOTH of those definitions wrong, Mr. Dunkle. But I will admit I didn’t check the Douay-Reims dictionary, where I am sure I would have found your version…”
Chuck’s right here! Google “masturbation.” All sweetness and light. Nothing about the etymology of the word. Nothing about how it makes you go blind. Nothing about how it weakens you physically, morally, and mentally. Nothing about how within marriage it leads to divorce. Nothing bad about it at all — except for that damned etymology.
However, suppose the Germans had won WW II. And they now instead of us had controlled the media for the past forty years. What do you think Google would now say about “Jew,” and “Holocaust,” and “eugenics,” and “Nazi”?
Live in the present, die in the present.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 11:00 am
I’ve been waiting for 58 years to go blind and it hasn’t happened yet. How long do I have to keep on doing this?
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 12:47 pm
You’re blind now, Chuck! You don’t see that it is wrong to help kill an innocent person.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 5:00 pm
Oh? Give me a direct quote from the dictionary for the definition of “person.”
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 5:06 pm
Silly. “A person’s a person no matter how small.” Dr. Seuss said it (but he didn’t mean it).
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 6:07 pm
Dictionary. D.I.C.T.I.O.N.A.R.Y.
I can believe you were a teacher in a Catholic institution.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 8:57 am
Karen Dalton says: “Portions of the prayer to St. Michael describes it best, I think: “Protect us from the wickedness and snares of the Devil” and “cast into Hell Satan and all the evil spirits prowling about the world seeking the destruction of souls.”
“And yes, we do know the ending and who wins!!”
Two points about this: First, this is a central meme of the so-called “pro-lifer” playbook: The fight against Satan. Unlike real heroes who struggle against opponents which can thwart or destroy them (car fire, polio, CIA torturers, etc.) the so-called “pro-lifer” chooses as his adversary the most intangible and most psychologically plastic villain– one which can safely be endowed with the quintessence of maleficence, to be portrayed as the villain worthy of the so-called “pro-lifer’s” combat. This helps when somebody is trying to make himself look like a hero, and the notion of a final victory is a strong stimulus to remain true to a dysfunctional twelve-step program.
Second, if Ms. Dalton took a couple of years of courses and did a year of field work in family dysfunction, she would see for herself that it is not Satan roaming about the world destroying souls but family dynamics: People who are parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, sisters, brothers and cousins struggle to get by in life but are never given the resources and guidance to do it well.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 7:09 pm
Pat – I’ve noticed a pattern where you attack the pro-lifer instead of responding on the merits of the issues you’re defending. I believe that would be called diversion.
LikeLike
January 26, 2015 at 4:49 am
That’s Chuckles, KD, not Pat. Yup and diversion’s the word all right. Just take a look below.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 8:30 pm
Ms. Dalton, the basic fact is that the so-called “pro-lifers” have for decades framed the debate in terms which only favor them and not human life. The so-called pro-lifers have always argued from the angle of the care ABOUT human life– is it human or is it not?
However, the basic issue is the care FOR human life: what does it take to make a life human? The so-called “pro-lifers” have rarely acted in conformity with their stated beliefs: They do not adopt at a higher rate than the general population; they do not advocate for massive tax increases for better education, better housing, safer neighborhoods and so forth for children; and they do not commit themselves to expend whatever it takes of their own time, money, priorities and talents to nurture the child they insisted come into this world. You, I will say, are a rare exception to this, but unfortunately your example is not going to inspire those others to do more than use your good deeds as an excuse for their irresponsibility.
I am sorry that you are horrified by abortion, but I would hope that you are at least as horrified by what people like Ted Bundy do– and his mother relied on one of the resources you mentioned previously, living in and delivering him in a home for unwed mothers. The psychopathic upbringing of Ted Bundy could have been diverted– but no “pro-lifer” was there. Instead, the so-called “pro-lifers” simply say, “So, you think he should have been ABORTED?” They focus not on life, but on death, while claiming to be pro-life.
When persons focus on death and not on nurture; when they refuse to sacrifice their energy, their time and their money on the child they wanted born, and when they refuse to accept their responsibility for the proper nurture of that child, then they are only caring ABOUT life, about appearances and not for human life.
Ted Bundy didn’t have to kill three to five dozen people– but those who insisted he be born never bothered to care for him afterward. This is an attitude that condemns the so-called “pro-life” movement. You’re better than that.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 1:53 pm
Masterbation causes blindness???? JD, I’ve heard that’s what the nuns use to teach, but if you really still believe that, then you need to do some research. Start with a serious discussion with your own sons and adult grandsons (if you have any). Your daughters and adult granddaughters could add their own insights, too, since masterbation is not something only males do. Hmmm, but I don’t know if female masterbation was taught to cause blindness. Oh, by the way, JD, have you ever carefully read the first few pages of A Voyage to Lilliput in Gulliver’s Travels? Were you even allowed to read it?
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 5:03 pm
I think I have, but just as soon as I have time, I’ll reread it and get back to you.
LikeLike
January 25, 2015 at 5:20 pm
How wonderful is Kindle. I just read the short introduction and about 5% of Chapter 1. Maybe I haven’t read it carefully enough but don’t see anything remarkable there about our topics.
LikeLike
January 26, 2015 at 12:47 pm
I subscribe to a listserve that addresses reproductive health issues. Today we received the following from Sara Hutchinson Ratcliffe, Domestic Program Director, Catholics for Choice, about the current issue of Conscience magazine.
“As the news media and political winds continue to debate the Pope’s influence and effect on modern society and US politics, Catholics for Choice leads the way in asking the tough questions about the “new” direction and how the majority of the faithful in our church need to tell the truth about what is still missing from the rhetoric of the hierarchy. See a new, exciting resource, hot off the presses…
The institutional Catholic church has always had an difficult relationship with women. This issue of Conscience magazine, Francis’ Blind Spot, looks at the papacy of Pope Francis and delves in to the historical and contemporary reality for women in the church. It asks the hard questions about how things can change.
Francis’ Blind Spot builds from a historical perspective into what’s happening in the church today, so that we can shine a light on how women are actually treated. Authors like historian David Myers ground us in historical facts. Miriam Duignan lines up Francis’ own words on women to illustrate how he regards them as second class citizens. Barbara Hussey and Patricia Ferrado tell their incredible story of standing up to the hierarchy, and offer recommendations to Francis for bringing real equality for women in the church. We are extremely excited to share this fresh analysis of Pope Francis and his blind spot on women.”
I urge you all to read the current issue of Conscience.
LikeLike
January 26, 2015 at 2:48 pm
How ridiculous is this! Jews, Muslims, Protestants, modernists — every schismatic group except the Orthodox — accuse the Church of worshiping a woman, Jesus Christ’s mother.
And now Sara Hutchinson Ratcliffe, David Myers, Miriam Duignan, Barbara Hussey, Kate Ranieri, Patricia Ferrado and other wanna-be-somebodies accuse her of degrading women? Ridiculousness, thy name is anti-Catholic.
LikeLike
January 26, 2015 at 2:44 pm
JD, how could you miss Mr. James Bates evolving to Master Bates? I thought for sure the “my good Master Bates dying in two years” was where you got one of your ideas.
LikeLike
January 26, 2015 at 2:50 pm
Holy smokes, David, that’s great. I’m going back to read it a third time.
LikeLike
January 26, 2015 at 10:39 pm
I’ve been following FB comments from clinic staff and escorts across the country. They’ve posted some of the most bizarre images that the so-called “pro-lifers” use. It’s quite evident that these folks fetishize images of mutilated fetuses. One guy dressed in surgical scrubs (posing as a doctor?), dismembered baby dolls, slathered them in red paint and posted a sign about killing babies. Two women violated copyright laws to reproduce the cover of Monica Miller’s book in their larger-than-life poster. Of course, there are the usual death scenes linking the holocaust and slavery.(We’re supposed to ignore these folks own racist, anti-Semitic ideology?).
They worship images of dead fetuses like they worship images of their dead heroes like Jesus and his mother. These images, incorporated into their psyche and their propaganda, lead them to bizarre behaviors. Their obsession with dead bodies is a unique phenomenon to the anti abortion movement, generally, and to Catholics, specifically. Whether creating imagery about the sacred heart of a dead man, Jesus, or smearing the smutty porn of fetal bodies, death is their organizing metaphor. Death informs their rhetoric and their demeanor. There is nothing life-affirming about their behavior. They are suffocated by their own deadly delusions.
Charles has posted on this site many times about the pathology of this so-called pro life industry. Recently, he wrote, “They focus not on life, but on death, while claiming to be pro-life.” I’d really have to agree.
.
LikeLike
January 27, 2015 at 1:20 am
Freud pointed out that we often handle our strongest emotions, the ones that most threaten our ability to function, by venting them on a safe target.
One of the commonest situations is dealing with the fear and anger of life in an abusive household. Since it would be extremely destabilizing to openly fear and hate the parents and siblings upon whom one depends for food, clothing, shelter and the basics of socialization, it is far safer to fear and hate a substitute target, such as the government or one’s school– both of which have characteristics of a family and therefore satisfy one’s need to vent against parental control and sibling behaviors.
When we are born, we think of ourselves as the center of the universe. Each child, however, learns for himself that not only is that not so, but also that he is going to die, and it is terrible knowledge indeed. As professor Ernest Becker pointed out in “Denial of Death,” we humans, the only ones cognizant of our mortality, live each day knowing we are going to die, in effect being like a gazelle imminently under attack by lions. Were we to have to deal with that knowledge every minute, we would be as paralyzed as that gazelle, unable to do anything else. So we repress it.
But to repress it means that we then spend a huge amount of our psychic energy fighting to keep it out of mind, which also drains us. So, we devise fables which reassure us it’s not going to really happen– religion, for example, will let us reassure ourselves that we are or can be immortal. Thus comforted, we go about our business.
However, if faith or philosophy is weak, a dysfunctional approach might be used, one which provides visible or tangible support to the notion of one’s immortality. The dysfunctionality can be observed in the dissonance between what the actor says and what he/she does.
The so-called “pro-life” movement is such a one. It can be seen that it is not concerned about real children, even though it claims to care for human life. Rather than adopt by the tens and hundreds of thousands, its members engage in an allegorical battle against Death– their own death. Abortion represents Death, the fetus represents themselves, and they are the God they can’t quite bring themselves to trust as the authentic protector.
If they had stronger religious faith, they would not have to be opposed to abortion.
As it is, adoption rates alone prove that they need to be against abortion so visibly and so forcefully that they do not have energy left to actually care for children.
LikeLike
January 27, 2015 at 5:55 am
Yo, Chuck, you and Kate above, you’re getting close. Nonsense attracts, utter nonsense attracts utterly Someone less devious than I might say you deserve each other.
LikeLike
January 27, 2015 at 7:27 am
I’m sure both of us are willing to raise to adulthood every “unborn human” we want “rescued.”
That’s the RESPONSIBLE Right to Life attitude. Ted Bundy would have been a different adult on my watch. Too bad you’re not one of us.
LikeLike