BLOG: Abortion Is A Dirty Word

Bryan Dubois
Sep 16, 2010

The mere mention of the word is controversial - even though supporting the right to abortion is a tenet of the modern day Democratic party.

Debate any abortion supporter and they'll object to your use of the phrase 'pro-abortion' to describe their position. They'll claim that using the phrase in unfair and inaccurate because nobody wants abortions.  Nobody likes abortion.  The existence of such a grisly, barbaric act exists to the dismay of all, you see.  Democrats simply believe that a woman should have the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion.

So if you oppose abortion, don't bother demonizing those who don't.  All people recognize the inhuman nature of terminating a child's life because of the inconvenience the child may introduce into the parent's life.  Yes, the majority of abortions in this country fall under this category.

So don't bother.  You couldn't possibly demonize a concept that most people feel uncomfortable talking about already.  What you should do is continue pointing out the reality of abortion.  Abortion can only exist if supporters don't have to face the reality of abortion. 

For example:  How many supporters of abortion would be willing to describe to you - during a debate - the detailed procedure of a D & X abortion?  (aka dilation & extraction, partial-birth abortion).  If any of them even know the details of the procedure, I'd bet money that they'd decline to explain it to you. 

Common sense says, I'm not going to explain the procedure because I'd sound like a monster for supporting it.  Can we just describe it as a 'medical procedure?'

Opposers should concede that the act is a "medical procedure" by responding with a poster of an aborted child with the Hippocratic oath posted beneath it.

"...never do harm to anyone."

Let common sense do the arguing.

You might as well agree with them that abortion is wrong and that nobody likes it - and then simply point out that on such a divisive issue there are two groups of people: 

Those who disagree with abortion because it's inhuman and wrong, and those who disagree with abortion because it's inhuman and wrong - but are quite willing to tolerate it.

***

Kinda related:

What's in a name?

The makers of high fructose corn syrup have abandoned the idea of doing a name-saving campaign. 

Once a word has become so reviled, you can't even mention it without turning people off.

Comments

Raoul Duke

I'm all for better birth control, and providing it to the lowest income people, along with education, for free. Because actually, I think that even worse than killing an unwanted baby, is allowing a person to come into this world unwanted. And I include adoption in that, because someday you will realize that your real parents didn't want you. Being an unwanted child is the most devestating feeling anyone could ever have.

Kottage Kat

Hope that the statement was not based on personal experience. I was adopted at 5 yrs. old, my bio mother fought valiantly to keep me, and due to circumstances beyond her control she was unable to do so. My adoptive parents always told me that she did not put me up for adoption because she did not want me. I was so blessed to be twice loved. I cannot speak for all adopted children, just know that in my case it was never a question of being unwanted.

stormy

I don't like to debate abortion, since I have a better chance of becoming Pope than I do of changing anyone's mind, but there have been things posted on here that are screaming for rebuttal.

Is abortion murder?  As legally defined, the answer is no.  However, if the Supreme Court got it wrong, and human life starts at conception, then morally speaking, it IS murder.  I'm not referring to Christian morals, but to CIVILIZED morals.

Meowmix argues that men have no right to a role in deciding this issue.  By that logic, people who don't own real estate should not vote on school levies that will raise property taxes, and people without income shouldn't vote at all, lest they improperly have an impact on working people's taxes.  Sorry, meow, but that's not how a republic works.

Pundit states that humanity starts at viability.  That is your opinion; don't state it as a fact.  Logically, human life must have a starting point that is not arbitrary, and not dependent on outside factors like technology.  My uncle was a pediatrician; many of the "preemies" that he couldn't save in 1960 would be easily saved today.  Were they less human because the technology to save them didn't exist yet?

Brutus claims that outlawing abortion would make this nation a theocracy.  Rubbish.  If a fetus, embryo or zygote is a human being, then purposely killing it is wrong, regardless of whether God exists or not.  Civilized people do not kill people, and that is that.

The "theocracy" argument is just one example of how those who call themselves pro-choice try to marginalize the pro-life movement.  We are not all Christian fundamentalists.  I am a modern-day deist.  For those who are unfamiliar with it, deism is not a religion but a belief, based on reason, in the existence of a supreme being who does not interfere in our everyday lives, and who doesn't require any ritualized worship or prayer.  Many of the Founding Fathers were deists.

While the pro-life movement is mostly Christian, many of its members are not fundamentalists.  Its ranks include many Roman Catholics, members of the Eastern Orthodox Church and "mainstream" Protestant denominations, and probably some Jews, Muslims and seculars like me.  Are we all equally active and vocal?  Of course not, but it doesn't mean we don't exist.

Likewise, where is it written that all pro-lifers must be politically conservative on all or most issues?  I don't know Ms. Chimera (state prez of Dems for Life).  For all that you and I know, she may be liberal on other issues like social spending, etc.  Yet one commentator went so far as to label her not a "true" Dem, because she isn't active enough in the party.  Funny; I thought a registered Dem was a Dem.  Is it REALLY because she isn't active enough, or because she refuses to CONFORM with every last item on the party's agenda?  So you have to drink ALL of the Kool-Aid to be in the club?  Interesting.

Well, this has been fun, but I have work to do, and football to watch later, so I'm signing off in a moment.  Maybe I'll check back in later, to see how many have attacked me as a "right wingnut."  Funny;  6079 Smith would call me a lib; I guess it's all a matter of perspective.  And one more thing; I haven't attacked anyone, just their arguments, but I'm betting that the opposition won't have any qualms about taking the low road.  Bye, y'all.

brutus smith

 stormy says, "Civilized people do not kill people, and that is that." What about WWII, Iraq, Afghanistan? And the term "Pro-life is an oxymoron. They are pro-birth, because after they are born, they vote (Repub) to make their lives miserable.

And just because you declare your self something, modern day Deist, doesn't mean you are. Just like some of the right wingnuts saying they are Independents. No, they are the far right wing of the Republican party. 

And the thing about Ms. Chimera is that she is a one issue person, just like a lot of others on here. 

You say the Supreme Court got it wrong. That's your OPINION, which is not based on fact.

Lucius

So you would rather have the baby killed than worry about what to do with it once it is born? That seems like a rather cold statement Mr. Smith.

brutus smith

 So rather than address the issue of not supporting them once they are born, you choose to attack me. Typical right wing nut Repub.

Cross

Very nice post, Stormy. Unfortunately abortion is a tough discussion to have, even without political operatives chiming in with their talking points. It's easy to see who has an opinion and who is interjecting politics here,

Unfortunately the comments section is like USA Network. Characters are welcome, however outlandish and false they may be. :)

meowmix

Stormy--yawn.  Your post was way too long.  Had to wipe the drool off my chin when I fell asleep reading it.

Short point of the matter is this--I don't agree with aborting a fetus past 16 weeks unless results prove that child is severely handicapped.  I'm not so high and mighty that to admit that if I had to raise a child with special needs I would go bonkers.

To put the responsibility solely on a woman for her reproductive habits is nonsense.  I was lucky in my younger years to have not gotten knocked up by some sweet talkin guy when I was "in heat" and damn the torpedo's full steam ahead.  Stupid yes, but anyone out there who can proclaim they've never had sex and got lucky are a dime a dozen.

I've never had a abortion, never will have the need for one.  But, damn it, it want it there for my daughter and her daughters---safely.

 

meowmix

By the by Brian--you are insistant upon answers to your questions regarding late term abortions from several posters. 

Please answer my question.   How many children have you adopted or fostered.    If the answer is none.  Then why not?

Pundit

 "Passive Aggressive Posting" an Infotainment Blog Post.

Brought to You By Pundit

This personality disorder originates in childhood: a child who feels that he is inferior to his peers will make a provocation in an attempt to get the attention of the popular kids. It may take the form of repeatedly mocking a tougher kid and then when he responds with force the PAPer asking through sobs, "why are you hitting me?". 

When it comes to blog posting, PAP often begins with taking the ideas or work of another author and slightly tweaking it or combining someone else's work with yet another person's opinions. If this draws a response that logically refutes the PAPer's position then he or she switches to a related positions that appear to be the same, but always change the subject. If this apples to oranges tactic is pointed out and the position again shown to be weak the PAPer suffer switches to ad hominen attacks. If the PAPer is then responded to in kind, then we see the final step, the PAPer will ask something along the lines of, "why you so obsessed with me?". This gives the PAPer a feeling of superiority, as if people are communicating with him without any prompting, when in fact he initiated the entire exchange. Further, it allows the PAPer to feel that the exchange matters more to the other person involved, when in fact the only kind of attention the PAPer can get is negative attention gained through the original provocation. In short, it is all the PAPer has: petty aggression and delusional victimhood. 

brutus smith

 ROFLMAO Pundit.

stormy

Brutus, Brutus, Brutus.  You knew that I would be gone for hours.  I disclosed that I had work to do and football to watch.  You had ample time to write a more cool-headed, logical response, but you went off half-cocked.  Tsk, tsk.

You take issue with my statement that civilized people don't kill each other, and bring up the subject of war.  OK, you got me there; it was a poor choice of words on my part, so I'll rephrase:  civilized people don't MURDER each other.  Killing in the service of one's country is a soldier's duty; it isn't murder.  So much for comparing abortion to war.  Maybe when the unborn start shooting at the post-born, the comparison will have some relevance.

And I did not write that the Supreme Court got it wrong.  I wrote "IF they got it wrong...."

For the record, I DO believe that they got it wrong, and that human life begins at conception.  I freely admit that this is my OPINION; I never claimed that it was a fact.  It is, however, based on reason.  YOUR opinion appears to be based upon ideology, and a desire to reach the "right" conclusion.

Logically, human life should have a starting point that is uniform, regardless of whether the nearest medical care is a state-of-the-art hospital or a witch-doctor's hut.  Viability is not uniform; conception is.  At the moment of conception, a new, living entity is formed, with its own unique genetic pattern, separate and distinct from the mother.  Though contained within her, it is not a part of her.  That is the basis of my belief.  Yes, it is a belief; I don't know for a fact that a zygote is a human being, but I prefer to err on the side of caution.  Until someone can give me a starting point that is more logical, my opinion will not change.

It is true that calling myself a deist doesn't make me one.  Holding deist beliefs DOES make me one.  Gets your knickers in a twist that not all pro-lifers are fundamentalist Christians, doesn't it?  Well, it's a fact, so get used to it.

Likewise, not everyone who disagrees with you is a right-wing republican.  I've been a D, and an R, but I have serious disagreements with both parties (albeit on different issues), and so I am NEITHER.  I've been an Indy for several years.  Don't believe me?  Hell, I don't care.  As your old nemesis used to say in the cartoons, I yam what I yam.  What you think I am is unimportant.

And meow, I doubt that you would've criticized the length of my post if it had been pro-choice.  If you couldn't get through it without falling asleep, you must take years to finish a book.

Bryan Dubois

First off:  Hussein,  I still own you.   Did you have a nice weekend hitting refresh every few hours?

Stormy,   enjoyed your two posts today.  You don't see fair much around here, so it was a refreshing read. 

Meow,  you asked how many kids I've adopted.  The answer is zero.  My wife and I have five children.  I can guarantee that if we had problems conceiving, we'd be looking to adopt though.  I hope that you don't believe our decision to raise our own kids precludes me from sharing my opinion on the issue of abortion.  After all, we've decided - on four different occassions - not to have abortions.   We believe it's a travesty that the US Supreme Court decided to legalize abortion.  (Chung,  abortion is the killing of an unborn child.  If you'd like to call it 'legalized murder' that's fine - because that's what abortion is.)

Regarding word choice:

Abortion defenders like to use the phrase "pro-choice."  The reason being who would be against the idea of 'choice'?

Anti-abortion activists like to call themselves "pro-life."  The reason being who would be against the idea of life?

Abortion defenders call unborn babies "fetuses."  

Abortion opposers call them "babies."

One side tries to hide/twist/mislead the public.  The other side tries to show the truth.  Who do you believe has the best interest of society at heart?

Loved this statement by stormy:

Can any abortion supporters here rebut this idea?

Cross

Raoul Duke

A rigid view of morality seems to be based solely on the fear of retribution from God. Otherwise, you would be constantly questioning your beliefs, allowing you to change your mind, which is a prerequisite to learning and growth. Try asking yourself, “why do I believe what I believe…”

Bryan Dubois

Jimmy,

Do you believe in God?

Raoul Duke

At some point, we have to realize that our planet is itself alive, and that it in fact supports our “precious” human life that we think is so much more important than anything else. Yet human life is just one part of the Universe, no more or less special than any other part. While caught up in this irresolvable argument over abortion, we go on thoughtlessly damaging our host, the living planet Earth. We can kill a million human beings in a variety of ways, yet replenish the supply virtually with no effort. But if we kill our host, all hope for humanity is lost.

Bryan Dubois

That's a pretty depressing outlook.

Why promote social responsibility at all then?   If mother earth is more important than man, and man's existence is inconsequential, who cares what happens?  Why don't we promote nihilism?

Why don't you commit suicide if your life isn't important?  (I'm being completely serious here.)  Why don't you kill your neighbors if they have something you want? 

Don't say it's because we're "civilized" without explaining where society's need for order comes from, because our need for societal order comes from somewhere.

Any idea where it comes from?

And yes, I'd say your creator believes in you.  After all, He created you.

Raoul Duke

The question is, does God believe in me.

Raoul Duke

Bryan, you are a good example of why these comments are just a waste of time. How you reached those conclusions from my post is beyond me.

 

Raoul Duke

Either you're not very smart, or it's in your job description to comment in a way that gets people back here, thus increasing the internet advertising revenue. Either way, I guess I can see now why the SR has never hired ME.

Bryan Dubois

Jimmy,   Okay, let me ask my questions in another way:

At some point, we have to realize that our planet is itself alive, and that it in fact supports our “precious” human life...

You don't believe life is precious?   You just placed the word in quotes.  Why? 

...that we think is so much more important than anything else.   Yet human life is just one part of the Universe, no more or less special than any other part.

So I guess I'll have to guess what you mean by this:  You believe that balancing our care for mother earth is just as important as caring for human beings?  That we're in some kind of eco balancing act with all that is around us and that we need to be "one" with the universe in order to survive?  Is that it?

While caught up in this irresolvable argument over abortion, we go on thoughtlessly damaging our host, the living planet Earth. We can kill a million human beings in a variety of ways, yet replenish the supply virtually with no effort. But if we kill our host, all hope for humanity is lost.

Okay, so you're saying that our energy must be spent on conserving the earth.  Don't worry about human beings because we're like a virus that just replenishes over and over.  Earth is our host - and if we're truly worried about survival...

Is that what you're trying to say?

Mime Bloggling's picture
Mime Bloggling

 Atheist…  A True Story


By Professor John Powell, Loyola University, Chicago

Some twelve years ago, I stood watching my university students file into the classroom for our first session in the Theology of Faith. That was the first day I first saw Tommy. My eyes and my mind both blinked. He was combing his long flaxen hair, which hung six inches below his shoulders.

It was the first time I had ever seen a boy with hair that long. I guess it was just coming into fashion then. I know in my mind it isn’t what’s on your head but what’s in it that counts; but on that day I was unprepared and my emotions flipped. I immediately filed Tommy under “S” for strange—very strange.

Tommy turned out to be the atheist in residence in my Theology of Faith course. He constantly objected to, smirked at or whined about the possibility of an unconditionally loving Father/God. We lived with each other in relative peace for one semester, although I admit he was for me at times a serious pain in the back pew.

When he came up at the end of the course to turn in his final exam, he asked in a slightly cynical tone, “Do you think I’ll ever find God?”

I decided instantly on a little shock therapy. “No!” I said very emphatically.

“Oh,” he responded, “I thought that was the product you were pushing.” I let him get five steps from the classroom door and then called out, “Tommy! I don’t think you’ll ever find Him, but I am absolutely certain that He will find you!” He shrugged a little and left my class and my life.

I felt slightly disappointed at the thought that he had missed my clever line, “He will find you!” At least I thought it was clever.

Later I heard that Tommy had graduated and I was duly grateful. Then a sad report. I heard Tommy had terminal cancer. Before I could search him out, he came to see me.

When he walked into my office, his body was very badly wasted, and the long hair had fallen out as a result of chemotherapy. But his eyes were bright and his voice firm for the first time, I believe. “Tommy, I’ve thought about you so often. I hear you are sick,” I blurted out.

“Oh, yes, very sick. I have cancer in both lungs. It’s a matter of weeks.”

“Can you talk about it, Tom?” I asked.

“Sure, what would you like to know?” “What’s it like to be twenty-four and dying?”

“Well, it could be worse” he replied.

“Like what?”

“Well, like being fifty and having no values or ideals, like being fifty and thinking that booze, seducing women and making money are the real ‘biggies’ in life.”

I began to look through my mental file cabinet under “S” where I had filed Tommy as strange. (It seems as though everybody I try to reject by classification, God sends back into my life to educate me.)

“But what I really came to see you about,” Tom said, “is something you said to me on the last day of class.” (He remembered!) He continued, “I asked you if you thought I would ever find God and you said, ‘No!’ which surprised me. Then you said, ‘But He will find you.’ I thought about that a lot, even though my search for God was hardly intense at that time.” (My clever line. He thought about that a lot!)

“But when the doctors removed a lump from my groin and told me it was malignant, that’s when I got serious about locating God. When the malignancy spread into vital organs, I really began banging bloody fists against the bronze doors of heaven. But God did not come out. In fact, nothing happened. Did you ever try anything for a long time with great effort and with no success? You get psychologically glutted, fed up with trying. Then you quit. Well, one day I woke up, and instead of throwing a few more futile appeals over that high brick wall to a God who may or may not be there, I just quit. I decided I didn’t really care about God, about an after life, or anything like that. I decided to spend what time I had left doing something more profitable.

I thought about you and your class and remembered something else you said: ‘The essential sadness is to go through life without loving. But it would be almost equally sad to go through life and leave this world without ever telling those you loved that you had loved them.’ So, I began with the hardest one, my Dad. He was reading the newspaper at the time when I approached him. ‘Dad. “Yes, what?” he asked without lowering the newspaper. ‘Dad, I would like to talk with you.’ “Well, talk.” ‘I mean it’s really important.’ The newspaper came down three slow inches. “What is it?” ‘Dad, I love you. I just wanted you to know that.’

Tom smiled at me and said it with obvious satisfaction, as though he felt a warm and secret joy flowing inside.

“The newspaper fluttered to the floor. Then my father did two things I could never remember him ever doing before. He cried and he hugged me. We talked all night, even though he had to go to work the next morning. It felt so good to be close to my father, to see his tears, to feel his hug, to hear him say that he loved me.

It was easier with my mother and little brother. They cried with me and we hugged each other and started saying real nice things to each other. We shared things we had been keeping secret for so many years. I was only sorry about one thing; that I waited so long. Here I was, just beginning to open up to the people I had actually been close to.

Then, one day I turned around and God was there. He didn’t come to me when I pleaded with Him. I guess I was like an animal trainer holding out a hoop, ‘C’mon, jump through. C’mon, I’ll give you three days, three weeks.’

Apparently God does things in his own way and at his own hour. But the important thing is that he was there. He found me. You were right. He found me even after I stopped looking for him.”

“Tommy,” I practically gasped, “I think you are saying something very important and much more universal than you realize. To me, at least, you are saying the surest way to find God is not to make him a private possession, a problem solver, or an instant consolation in time of need, but rather by opening to love. You know, the Apostle John said that. He said, ‘God is love, and anyone who lives in love is living with God and God is living in him.’ Tom, could I ask you a favor? You know, when I had you in class you were a real pain. But (laughingly) you can make it up to me now. Would you come to my Theology of Faith course and tell them what you have just told me? If I told them the same thing it wouldn’t be half as effective as if you were to tell them.”

“Ooh, I was ready for you, but I don’t know if I’m ready for your class.”

“Tom, think about it. If and when you are ready, give me a call.”

In a few days Tom called, said he was ready for the class, that he wanted to do that for God and for me. So we scheduled a date. However, he never made it. He had another appointment, far more important than the one with me and my class. Of course, his life was not really ended by his death, only changed. He made the great step from faith into vision. He found a life far more beautiful than the eye of man has ever seen or the ear of man has ever heard or the mind of man has ever imagined.

Before he died, we talked one last time. “I’m not going to make it to your class,” he said.

“I know, Tom.”

“Will you tell them for me? Will you tell the whole world for me?”

“I will, Tom. I’ll tell them. I’ll do my very best.”

So, to all of you who have been kind enough to read this simple statement about love, thank you. And to you, Tommy, somewhere in the sunlit, verdant hills of heaven, I told them, Tommy, as best I could.


Bryan Dubois

Mime,   great story.

This part right here...

is pretty awesome.

I believe that all good comes from God.  I respect Stormy's deist worldview, but I think God is active in our lives, and not just an uninterested creator.

brutus smith

 mime, why do a majority of Repubs go through life being greedy, profits at any cost mentality, have hate and disdain for poor unfortunate people, but when confronted with imminent death, they all of a sudden want to repent and find God?

Bryan Dubois

Is Mime any more qualified to answer that question than Brutus is qualified to explain why the majority of Democrats don't believe in God?

Is either question fair?

 

Chung Lee

Gee, Chung Lee wonder why the Jews and Muslims in the Democratic Party are not Christians? Funny that it is pointed out that a minority of Democrats claim to be Christian, but it appears that Democrats prefer to live by actions and not words.  Chung Lee seems to remember where Jesus healed people and Republicans only want to heal people if they can pay.  Anybody who reads the Bible will find that Capitalism as we have it now is not supported by the teachings of Christ.  Chung Lee remember some story about a camel and a needle.   Apparently this was a self declaration.  It is easy to claim one thing but actions speak louder than words.

brutus smith

 bryan, since you felt the need to jump in, where did you get your info on that?

Raoul Duke

Bryan: It ok to question your own belief in God.

Pages