- Woman is concerned about how having a baby could change her life. 76
- Woman can't afford baby now. 68
- Woman has problems with relationship or wants to avoid single parenthood 51
- Woman is unready for responsibility. 31
- Woman doesn't want others to know she has had sex or is pregnant 31
- Woman is not mature enough, or is too young to have a child 30
- Woman has all the children she wanted, or has all grown-up children 26
- Husband or partner wants woman to have abortion 23
- Baby has possible health problem 13
- Woman has health problem 7
- Woman's parents want her to have abortion 7
- Woman was victim of rape or incest 1
- Other 6
The above, a survey from the Alan Guttmacher Institute a very pro-abortion organization, gives you an idea of what the vast majority of women have abortions for. The first eight, all fall into the category of birth control for convenience, and it is clearly seen that the overwhelming majority of those abortions were not related to the health of the baby or the woman. Moreover, of those who were concerned about the possible health problems, only 8 percent told them that the baby had a health defect or was abnormal. The rest were worried because they had taken drugs or alcohol before they had realized that they were pregnant, but did not seek a medical confirmation from a physician about any health problem with the baby. Of the 53% who were worried about their health, they said a doctor had told them that their condition would be worsened by being pregnant. Of course, naturally, because a man in the business of whole-sale slaughter is going to do everything they can to persuade a woman to murder her baby regardless that the baby is healthy and of the fact that they're committing murder.
We certainly have a disconnect in our society that would make us want to persuade women to murder in the face of an All-Seeing, All-Knowing, All-Powerful, All-Present Living Creator--The God of All Creation.
What are your opinions on the thirteen reasons for abortion...
--Jeremiah--
The element missing from this survey is the key "control question" of whether or not the woman responding to the survey had adequate access to family planning information, including effective contraception techniques.
ReplyDeleteI would suggest that including this information in the survey data might yield some very informative results which might well contradict your position that it's all "abortion-on-demand." It might just show that the issue is more "abortion-on-ignorance-of-alternatives."
If the goal is to ensure that every child born into this world is loved, welcomed and cared for, then education on birth control must be a part of the picture, or the dilemma of children growing up in poverty and under poor care will only increase.
The element missing from this survey is the key "control question" of whether or not the woman responding to the survey had adequate access to family planning information, including effective contraception techniques.
ReplyDeleteSusie,
I generally agree with you to a degree, however, I'll explain.
Given that the overwhelming majority of these women were surveyed by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, they were surveyed for the result and outcome that the AG desired under the guise of "family planning," as most all surveys conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute are directly connected to the organization known as "Planned Parenthood." I don't know if you're familiar with Planned Parenthood's history, but in most cases, women are taken advantage of by receiving information from those of the Planned Parenthood organization that is in 90% of cases, anti-life.
In PP's beginnings, you might remember the woman, and founder of PP by the name of Margaret Sanger. Ms. Sanger is best known for her philosophy of 'eugenics.' Most recognized as adopting methods of birth control for the purpose or goal of selecting out those whom she deemed unfit for life. Her primary goal was the extermination of African-American folks, including also those of the mentally handicapped order. Her control methods have been widely adopted in today's society, its affects are being waged as we speak...STDs and Viral disorders have become a widespread dilemma. Which leads me to the last part of the first part of your first paragraph...
[Effective] contraception, in my view, can only be found through abstinence only. Mostly in regard to moral grounds. How effective abstinence becomes, is a matter of, to what degree it is taught. In today's society, the Liberal agenda which includes most of what Ms. Sanger taught - deviant and unclean lifestyles. This being the case, abstinence in large part is not included in our culture any longer. Some do, but most don't. Why? Well, a lot of the problem is television, and the attitude the entertainment industry portrays toward sex. Our schools have adopted the anything goes lifestyle, through activities such as spring-break in which sex and booze have become a big thing.
If you see what I'm getting at--The consensus of society is becoming more about sex, and overall, already has, and less about life.
To the last part of your statemtnt:
The [goal], is to ensure that every child is given a chance at life, rather than being mercilessly slaughered; and this is taking on the responsibility before sex is even thought about. Young people need to be educated in the lines of...
1. I want to serve the Lord, and seek His guidance for my life.
2. I'm going to wait until marriage before I have sex.
3. I'm going give my baby life.
4. Together, we (husband & wife) can and will nurture our family with the love and care, that only through a relationship with Jesus Christ can bring.
This is the only way America can get back to being blessed, is through serving Our Loving Creator.
--Jeremiah--
I appreciate your civility thus far. Allow me to expand the discussion.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I am entirely aware of Planned Parenthood and how its role in society is viewed from camps of all political stripes. I have no clear sense of your age group, but I can assure you there is no need to “talk down” to me. I am a parent well past the 30-something demographic and find myself only just stopping short of suggesting that you may be trying to “teach your grandmother to suck eggs,” if you know the phrase. So let’s speak on a peer-to-peer level, please.
Sanger was, inevitably, a product of her time, and her philosophies reflected viewpoints which were in their day considered in the mainstream. I think it is disingenuous and somewhat dishonest to suggest that birth control and family planning efforts today have the same goals in mind as Sanger once espoused. The world has changed; family planning has necessarily changed with it.
You suggest that the women surveyed were surveyed in order to achieve a particular result – and of course we all know the famous quotation about “lies, d***ed lies, and statistics” – but you do not present any backup details that support your assertion of selective polling. It reads, instead, that because you discount the source’s validity from the outset, you assume their survey data to be misleading and/or false. Stronger proof of the desire to skew the outcome and the mechanics employed to do so might be helpful.
I am – you may have gathered – more rather than less on the “liberal” end of the spectrum. I do not live a “deviant and unclean” lifestyle, nor do I actively encourage the same, as your response somewhat suggests (a blanket statement that I find rather unfair). But I also have to look at our society through a lens of realism, and that view tells me that you can shout about abstinence as loud and long as you please, through as many megaphones as you please, and there will still be children born unwanted and unloved. In my view that is a sorry state of affairs.
If broader awareness about, access to, and practice of contraception techniques can reduce the number of children who come into this world unwelcomed, then I must applaud that effort, because it enriches and improves society when every child arrives loved and embraced into a family unit. Surely you must agree that it is better, on the whole, to prevent unwanted pregnancies through whatever means possible, than to present any young (or not so young woman), and the father, with the dilemma of abortion?
I have to also take exception to your religious underpinning to the abstinence issue. I understand that you come from an evangelical viewpoint that colors your discourse, and that is fine. But I also think it is possible to educate a child in the point of view that “I will not have a child until I have the personal, emotional and financial stability to support that child to a productive adulthood, because that is the right thing to do” without interjecting religion into the equation.
One other question for you. This has so far all been about the woman. HER reasons for abortion, HER focus on abstinence, HER choices.
Where, may I ask, do you see the woman’s partner in this equation? You speak of the persuasion for a woman to “murder her baby.” Where is the male in this equation? What is his responsibility, his role, his obligation, his culpability? It takes, as they say, TWO to tango.
Again, I appreciate your civil discourse thus far.
I appreciate your civility thus far. Allow me to expand the discussion.
ReplyDelete***********************************
Not a problem. That's the reason I'm here.
First, I am entirely aware of Planned Parenthood and how its role in society is viewed from camps of all political stripes. I have no clear sense of your age group, but I can assure you there is no need to “talk down” to me. I am a parent well past the 30-something demographic and find myself only just stopping short of suggesting that you may be trying to “teach your grandmother to suck eggs,” if you know the phrase. So let’s speak on a peer-to-peer level, please.
**********************************
Please don't take offense, but the fact of the matter is, and I'm firmly of the opinion, that there are many who seek to further their agendas, agendas that might otherwise be considered, 'lies of the first order' well past their days of youth, yet, making them sound more than misinformed, and they are...misinformed. Young or Old, Reason belongs to people of Faith, because Temperance and Moderation are applied from a source which will never let them down. For example, this line alone, sums up the entirety of its message, phrased like this - 'A living organism is much more valuable to the earth and its ecosystems, than a dead organism.'
True? Most definitely! Try to plow your ground with a dead horse as opposed to a living one. I'm sure you'll find the living horse to be of much more value to you, in that tense, anyways. However, [value] is not judged in the order by which it can be used, it is much more than that
The [value] of any such life, is measured at the depth and level of ones heart and soul, and how you relate to life in the Spiritual sense, will ultimately decide the greater impact that your decisions have on a wide-scale, societal basis, or in other words - The big picture. In this area, is where many fail so miserably.
When those of the Atheist crowds can get over their presumptuousness that life can be judged on the basis of "primal urges" then I think we'll see a shifting of the tide. You know, I'm so amazed at how people have adopted this fallacy "primal urges" for their stimulus to end life in its greatest form - The Human Cell built with a spirit, unlike the animals who serve without a spirit. By this time, you must be saying, what in the world are you talking about?? I'll explain briefly - First of all with a question - How can man take example from animals to end life in the womb? That's the part that amazes me, you see, of all the accomplishments man has been blessed with....by God....what is it that drives him to abort, or better termed, Murder? Most animals, with as little intelligence as they have, are smart enough to know that the responsibility to bear and care for their babies is quite simply, their only choice. The two exceptions would be lions in Africa, and Bears in Alaska, in which most all cases it is the male that kills their young...but never the female, she's always ready to take the responsibility to care of her little ones, as it were. Why do male bears and lions do this? Most scientists agree that it is the males urge to mate that drives them kill their babies. I watched a documentary about Timothy Treadwell and the bears he filmed, you might have seen it, a complete nutcase, he was. Ok, on to your next statement...
If broader awareness about, access to, and practice of contraception techniques can reduce the number of children who come into this world unwelcomed, then I must applaud that effort, because it enriches and improves society when every child arrives loved and embraced into a family unit. Surely you must agree that it is better, on the whole, to prevent unwanted pregnancies through whatever means possible, than to present any young (or not so young woman), and the father, with the dilemma of abortion?
I take particular issue with the "constraception techniques, because it is this same type of attitude that has lead to more abortions than any other known philosophy. This is the same thinking we find on the Left side of the spectrum. It is the same philosophy that encourages more sex, rather than reducing it with moderation. The type of education one receives on matters of sex will determine the amount of abortions in the future. "Whatever means possible" is not the key, in that area I must disagree with you, totally, because "Whatever means possible" is a complete fallacy. The fallacies that Ms. Sanger taught need to be burned for the good and soul of our Nation.
You must remember, in my view, in terms of Morality, abstaing from sex until otherwise married is the only way. Now, if a pregnancy occurs, it is only because a man and woman chose to do so. One way or the other, a mutual agreement must be made before intercourse can take place...and it is well before this agreement that restraint must be thought upon, and counted as their options until marriage. Just saying that "accidents happen" is a false statement, or lie, as the case may be. Abortion, in the same manner, is also a decision that must to be made, it is the mothers choice, and it all goes back to how the mother is influenced by her peers. If she's mislead by the Liberal brainwashers, then naturally, she's going to persuaded to murder her child, because the ways of Satan are to take away as much as life as he can while God still allows him to...but Satan's days are numbered, make no mistake about it.
Abortion is never an option.
The Word of God tells us that we should abstain and that's what should be taught, and why it is crucial to the survival of the family unit and a Nation to go to the House of the Lord and see His guidance for their life, and seek counseling in their marriages, and do everything possible to make them work, instead of listening to the world furthering the destruction of precious human life.
'Come unto Me, all ye that labor, and are heavy laden, and I shall give you rest.'
Last, but not least...
One other question for you. This has so far all been about the woman. HER reasons for abortion, HER focus on abstinence, HER choices.
Where, may I ask, do you see the woman’s partner in this equation? You speak of the persuasion for a woman to “murder her baby.” Where is the male in this equation? What is his responsibility, his role, his obligation, his culpability? It takes, as they say, TWO to tango.
It all goes back to how children are taught, if a child is neglected so far as his educational needs at home are concerned, then his influence will come from his peers at school, and the Liberal brainwashing that will lead him into fornication, and a promiscuous lifestyle. Schools across this nation are teaching lifestyles that are an abomination to the flesh of mankind in the sight of the Almighty. America needs to get back to its foundation of 'Truth,' found in God's Word.
So, Susie, if you feel that I'm teaching you to "suck eggs"? LOL! Then I guess my time is in vain. However, the fact still stands.
God still favors a Nation more, that will do His will in making the right choice, and choose life.
Thanks for commenting.
--Jeremiah--
Susie,
ReplyDeleteThere was a word I couldn't remember and just thought of it - [Intrinsic] that's it.
Do you view life, the smallest to the greatest with intrinsic worth?
--Jeremiah--
Sorry, Jeremiah, but I think there are a few things in your last post which must lead me to part ways in this discussion and abandon it as an “agreement to disagree.”
ReplyDeleteFirst was your assertion that “Young or Old, Reason belongs to people of Faith.” I do not believe that Faith is a precondition for Reason, but that Reason is achievable across the spectrum of mankind, with Faith (in whatever creed) as an entirely peripheral issue. Reason is not dependent on religion. The capacity for Reason is inherent in the human condition, provided we have the dedication to cultivate it.
“Most animals, with as little intelligence as they have, are smart enough to know that the responsibility to bear and care for their babies is quite simply, their only choice.” Again, this is not proven in Nature, nor is your assertion that the male rather than the female among the animal kingdom is the one to exterminate the newborn. Many mothers devour their young (look at polar bears in German zoos recently for one example) if they somehow feel the environment is not viable for their survival.
Your viewpoint re: contraception baffles me. You claim that ready access to contraceptive techniques “encourages more sex,” but you do not offer anything that would “reduce [more sex] in moderation,” which is the outcome you proffer as the alternative. What in your viewpoint would “[reduce sex] with moderation”? You go on to say that you believe abstinence is the only choice. How does that “moderately” reduce sexual activity outside of marriage? Is it Either, Or, or Maybe? I can’t parse your response amongst these choices.
Also, you again put the abortion decision squarely on the mother, and on how she may have been “influenced by her peers.” I say again that it Takes Two To Tango, and the Fornicating Father has a lot to answer for in the equation. What is HIS role in putting the woman into that dilemma? Doesn’t HIS responsibility to hold back, trump any choice the woman might be forced into as a result? Who’s looking over HIS shoulder?
You use that word “Liberal” very broadly and you seem to equate it with all kinds of promiscuity. I think that is a stretch. My politics are admittedly Liberal in many ways, but I have raised my child – without a faith-based framework, and very successfully, too, thanks – in a lifestyle that is responsible, practical and not conducive to what you would look upon as “abomination.” So I hope that you will consider moderating your language so as not to demonize those of us who may not share your faith. Believing as you do is not a prerequisite to living a decent, responsible life.
On that point, again, based on your prior commentary, we may have to agree to disagree.
PS – On your “intrinsic” point. Where do you define “intrinsic”? Is the stillborn child of “intrinsic” worth? Is the small cellular mass created at the moment of conception “intrinsic” worth, even though it may turn into the stillborn child above?
I daresay that you define “intrinsic worth” at the instant of fertilization, and that is of course your right. For my part, I am more concerned with the children born into this world. I would prefer to see all their “intrinsic” worth honored and supported.
I daresay that you define “intrinsic worth” at the instant of fertilization, and that is of course your right. For my part, I am more concerned with the children born into this world. I would prefer to see all their “intrinsic” worth honored and supported
ReplyDeleteWhy not, Susie? Why not have mercy on that little child? Why not show the little child that you care?
Or...Do you want to define intrinsic worth down to your won terms, meaning that it's "ok" to murder babies in the womb at a certain point, diminishing the value of other children who could be afforded an opportunity. Every life has intrinsic worth, Susie. No matter how small or great.
Thanks for the discussion, I enjoyed it.
--Jeremiah--
Jeremiah, I take it back - I have to ask you this one further question.
ReplyDeleteI made a statement to which you did not respond, as follows:
My politics are admittedly Liberal in many ways, but I have raised my child – without a faith-based framework, and very successfully, too, thanks – in a lifestyle that is responsible, practical and not conducive to what you would look upon as “abomination.” So I hope that you will consider moderating your language so as not to demonize those of us who may not share your faith. Believing as you do is not a prerequisite to living a decent, responsible life.
I thus have to ask you, in closing: do you really believe that nobody who fails to share your own convictions, faith, viewpoints, etc., can live a moral, responsible, decent and productive life?
I thus have to ask you, in closing: do you really believe that nobody who fails to share your own convictions, faith, viewpoints, etc., can live a moral, responsible, decent and productive life?
ReplyDeleteSusie,
No, people don't have to share my views to live a moral, responsible, decent, and productive life, no. I've failed in many areas of my life...but there's One that I can go to, that I can trust to help keep me from temptation, to give me courage, to give me strength, to give me wisdom, to heal me ... as Matthew 8:16 says ... He Himself took our infirmities And bore our sicknesses.
Where many fail today, is they cut themselves off from the body of Christ, which is their source of hope and strength....We can't go it alone, we have to have support from a source greater than ourselves...
And the only way we can do this, is through the constant renewal of our minds what God instructs us in His Word.
It's also a matter of who we communicate with on a daily basis...if we hang out with people who do sinful things, then we're most likely going to be led into things that are not pleasing to the Lord, and this is especially true for younger age, teenage/young adult people, this can be attributed to how parents raise their children...if parents are devoted to Christ in their lives, then they will have the knowledge to raise their children the way they should go.
When we are apart from those who are our Christian friends, such as in the work place around different people of different people, unmistakably sinners, the world is full of sinners, some living strange, some not so strange, but in some time during our life, we're going to run into people that are going to tempt us in the work place, and it's at that point that we have to remember God's Word to keep us from back-sliding, if we don't, then we're very subject to sin, and that's not a good thing - because God's Word says - For Him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
Apart from the body of Christ, we are hopeless, as a leaf upon the wind, being tossed, thrown, and shoved about, the way the world (Satan) does to people, and Satan laughs because he's got them blinded to the realities of their situation, in essence, their living behind a veil of smoke, quite simply... living a lie.
That's why we must keep asking for God's direction, that we can avoid the world's situation.
People can live good, moral lives. But friend, morals alone won't save the Soul...Jesus considered worldly morals evil...and He done it in one verse...If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him! ... in this next verse is where Jesus made it absolutely clear...Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
You see ... we are bound by law, but it's not the law that will save us, it's the blood of Jesus Christ, and Faith that He can sustain us, and keep us from the worldly things, because this world is temporal, it's not going to last. The Bible says, 'Faith without works is dead.' What that's saying is that 'Faith without obedience to what God's Word says is of no value to ones' soul.
People who think they can go through life without a worry or care, and go on cursing, backbiting, slander and teaching false works, such as immoral behavior are going to be in for a big diappointment....All because they chose to disobey.
So, no, people don't have to share my convictions to get through life, but unless they rest on the Word of Almighty God then the degeneration in society will only get worse, and it will, the Bible says so, but one thing I know, I have the victory over Satan, because Jesus loves me so.
--Jeremiah--
Well, Jeremiah, I'm sorry that you feel so disconnected from the rest of humanity that you have to rely on "Pie In The Sky" for your moral compass. You are missing out on the company, society and support of a great many decent people as a result.
ReplyDeleteI can't help but feel that the Christ you claim to follow would NOT want to apply a litmus test of faith to those with whom he interacted, but would be more welcoming and tolerant of many different paths toward belief and of many different walks of life.
I would earnestly ask that you examine your conscience and consider whether you are not limiting yourself. Perhaps you could yourself be more Christ-like by interacting more productively with those whose viewpoints differ from yours, rather than setting up this site as an "echo chamber" where only "Christian Conservatives" are universally welcomed and dissenting points of view are excised.
You seem very afraid of those who are what you brand as "different," yet is this not the place in which you can potentially, through the effort to understand and then to communicate, do the most good?
I can't help but think that Jesus would love you even more if you truly followed his precepts and reached out in earnest - and not from some sort of self-imposed pedestal - to others, with sincerity and compassion rather than the self-righteousness and arrogance I read between your lines.
Take a hard look at yourself. Do you REALLY like what you see?
Susie,
ReplyDeleteSure!
I've given you the Word, now it's up to the Holy Spirit to deal with you.
If the Holy Spirit doesn't speak to you, then I feel sorry for you ... let's just hope that's not the case.
--Jeremiah--
But I choose not to follow the word I've been given FROM YOU - ego, much? - but instead to listen to my own inner voice, which I trust is inspired as much by the Divine as your own "consecrated" one is.
ReplyDeleteRemember, Jeremiah, that Jesus also preached "humility," and a dose of the same could well do us all some good...including yourself.
Reflect before you preach.