The Way it Was (Pre-Roe v Wade)

[PaulS1950]

There are more reasons for The ideals or lack of morality in todays young adults than the discussion can go into but back to the topic of the real world before Roe v Wade:
There were abortions - many of them. Before medical practice there was the old woman who lived alone that knew which herbs to mix and how to administer them to cause a miscarriage. She was then replaced by medical doctors who had less knoledge but were the accepted "experts in the field. After many years the medical field found ways to cause the miscarriages that they were trying to prevent. An abortion does not require that the uterine wall be scraped unless it has gone beyond a certain point. Before that time it can be performed with a flushing of the uterine cavity a solution of chemicals that can be found in every household. The flush does not injure (permanently damage) the uterus but denies the ability of the zygot to survive. Beyond that point the fetus can only be aborted by mechanical intervention. Fast forward to the modern age (after WW II). The rich could get an abortion that was safe and properly performed either through their own doctor illegally or by going to a place where it was legal. The middle class and poor were less able to make choices due only to their financial position. They could go away to have the baby out of their neighbors eyes and adopt it out which was quite common (there are "unwed" mother homes all over the USA that have been closed now) or there was the "Dr." that some knew and the fact that he wasn't really a doctor didn't matter because he was very good at what he did. If you were less connected there wasn't even that choice. There was a guy (or woman) who would do the scraping for less money but there was nothing about him that anyone knew. Raising a "bastard" child was even less of a choice. The stigma would follow not only the mother but the child into adulthood. Just before the case was brought to the attention of the supreme court there was a year of finding women, of all ages and ethnicity, lying in alleys bleeding to death or with infections so severe that they were life threatening. Thousands of women were killed by the "back alley butchers" for a few dollars each. This was the reality of the time before Roe v Wade.
Wives, sisters, daughter and friends dying or horribly mutilated because they were too ashamed to admit that they had gotten pregnant.
If abortion were banned those slaughters would return - even though it may be more acceptable today to have sex out of wedlock and maybe a bit more acceptable to have a child out of wedlock the "abortionist" would return by "popular demand". The rich could still get abortions outside the country but the rest would have to find another way.
Birth control is great... for those who can use it and it is 99.9% effective as long as it is used properly. Condomes should be used in any casual "hook-up" if for no other reason than to prevent STDs. The problem with condoms is that some people don't like them - mostly men but women too - because they reduce sensation. There is also the "unplanned" sexual encounter where the passion (lust) of the moment over-rides good judgement. This even happens in on-going relationships.
In a perfect world, with perfect people, under perfect circumstances there would be no need for alternatives to lasting, heathy, relationships that bring happy children into loving homes but we don't live in a perfect world and we aren't all perfect people (those of us who are detest those who think they are ) and the circumstances that we put ourselves in are rarely perfect. What we have to deal with are that the morals we have (or hope we have) cannot and should not be forced upon those with different moral attitudes. We have laws in place to prevent the taking of recognizable human life. In the grey areas (the beginnings of a human life) we have to make our own moral decisions. It MUST be a personal choice however abhorant it may be to those of us with different moral standards. No one but the woman in the situation knows what her abilities and circumstances might be, so the decision has to be left in her hands. We don't force doctors to perform the procedures but we allow those, whose morals allow them to perform the medical procedure, the freedom to help women under the limitations of the law. In most religions there is a tenant that precludes us from judging the moral decisions of others and some believe that leaves us the right to judge people by their actions - it does not. We simply have neither the understanding nor the compassion of G_d.
Treasure your own morals and make your decisions whithin that structure and in good conscience. Allow others to do the same. Trust that if punishment is due, it will be given by the supreme Judge. when you are free of all transgressions, only then can you say that others are not.
This entire argument is one of faith. No matter what evidence is produced the faith of the individual will not be swayed. Faith neither requires proof nor is it affected by proof. Allowing people to be who they are is sometimes the only path.

 

[Delia]

There are more reasons for The ideals or lack of morality in todays young adults than the discussion can go into but back to the topic of the real world before Roe v Wade:

There were abortions - many of them. Before medical practice there was the old woman who lived alone that knew which herbs to mix and how to administer them to cause a miscarriage. She was then replaced by medical doctors who had less knowledge but were the accepted "experts in the field. After many years the medical field found ways to cause the miscarriages that they were trying to prevent. An abortion does not require that the uterine wall be scraped unless it has gone beyond a certain point. Before that time it can be performed with a flushing of the uterine cavity a solution of chemicals that can be found in every household. The flush does not injure (permanently damage) the uterus but denies the ability of the zygot to survive. Beyond that point the fetus can only be aborted by mechanical intervention. Fast forward to the modern age (after WW II). The rich could get an abortion that was safe and properly performed either through their own doctor illegally or by going to a place where it was legal. The middle class and poor were less able to make choices due only to their financial position. They could go away to have the baby out of their neighbors eyes and adopt it out which was quite common (there are "unwed" mother homes all over the USA that have been closed now) or there was the "Dr." that some knew and the fact that he wasn't really a doctor didn't matter because he was very good at what he did. If you were less connected there wasn't even that choice. There was a guy (or woman) who would do the scraping for less money but there was nothing about him that anyone knew. Raising a "bastard" child was even less of a choice. The stigma would follow not only the mother but the child into adulthood. Just before the case was brought to the attention of the supreme court there was a year of finding women, of all ages and ethnicity, lying in alleys bleeding to death or with infections so severe that they were life threatening. Thousands of women were killed by the "back alley butchers" for a few dollars each. This was the reality of the time before Roe v Wade.

Wives, sisters, daughter and friends dying or horribly mutilated because they were too ashamed to admit that they had gotten pregnant.

If abortion were banned those slaughters would return - even though it may be more acceptable today to have sex out of wedlock and maybe a bit more acceptable to have a child out of wedlock the "abortionist" would return by "popular demand". The rich could still get abortions outside the country but the rest would have to find another way.

Birth control is great... for those who can use it and it is 99.9% effective as long as it is used properly. Condomes should be used in any casual "hook-up" if for no other reason than to prevent STDs. The problem with condoms is that some people don't like them - mostly men but women too - because they reduce sensation. There is also the "unplanned" sexual encounter where the passion (lust) of the moment over-rides good judgement. This even happens in on-going relationships.

In a perfect world, with perfect people, under perfect circumstances there would be no need for alternatives to lasting, heathy, relationships that bring happy children into loving homes but we don't live in a perfect world and we aren't all perfect people (those of us who are detest those who think they are ) and the circumstances that we put ourselves in are rarely perfect. What we have to deal with are that the morals we have (or hope we have) cannot and should not be forced upon those with different moral attitudes. We have laws in place to prevent the taking of recognizable human life. In the grey areas (the beginnings of a human life) we have to make our own moral decisions. It MUST be a personal choice however abhorant it may be to those of us with different moral standards. No one but the woman in the situation knows what her abilities and circumstances might be, so the decision has to be left in her hands. We don't force doctors to perform the procedures but we allow those, whose morals allow them to perform the medical procedure, the freedom to help women under the limitations of the law. In most religions there is a tenant that precludes us from judging the moral decisions of others and some believe that leaves us the right to judge people by their actions - it does not. We simply have neither the understanding nor the compassion of G_d.

Treasure your own morals and make your decisions whithin that structure and in good conscience. Allow others to do the same. Trust that if punishment is due, it will be given by the supreme Judge. when you are free of all transgressions, only then can you say that others are not.

This entire argument is one of faith. No matter what evidence is produced the faith of the individual will not be swayed. Faith neither requires proof nor is it affected by proof. Allowing people to be who they are is sometimes the only path.

Sorry, my eyes rebelled. It's a good post - I just added a double-space for paragraphs.

 

[Foxfyre]

Pretending that a different culture never existed, pointing to 'irrisistible passion' or failure of contraceptives, or preferring no contraceptives, or that illegal abortions happened in the past, or that people value life any less now than what was once the norm--all can be supported by one's personal experience or anecdotal evidence or justify immorality on the basis that everybody didn't have a perfect marriage, or any other argument you want to make . . . .

. . . .All that does not change the fact that 54+ million babies have been aborted since Roe v Wade and continue to be aborted at a steady average of 1.2 million babies every single year.

Anybody who wants to make an argument that we were anywhere close to that sorry and depressing figure prior to Roe v Wade go for it. But you'll have to look far and wide for any evidence to back it up.

We currently live in an infanticide culture and if you think that is okay, well that's what you think.

I will still pray for and argue for a return to a strong sense of value for human life and a time when women are not judged on how much the guys want to get into her pants, but is judged on her character and self respect. And our young girls were taught and appreciated that concept that was reinforced at home, at school, by their peers, in the media, and the American culture in general.

 

[PaulS1950]

Pretending that a different culture never existed, pointing to 'irrisistible passion' or failure of contraceptives, or preferring no contraceptives, or that illegal abortions happened in the past, or that people value life any less now than what was once the norm--all can be supported by one's personal experience or anecdotal evidence or justify immorality on the basis that everybody didn't have a perfect marriage, or any other argument you want to make . . . .

. . . .All that does not change the fact that 54+ million babies have been aborted since Roe v Wade and continue to be aborted at a steady average of 1.2 million babies every single year.

Anybody who wants to make an argument that we were anywhere close to that sorry and depressing figure prior to Roe v Wade go for it. But you'll have to look far and wide for any evidence to back it up.

We currently live in an infanticide culture and if you think that is okay, well that's what you think.

I will still pray for and argue for a return to a strong sense of value for human life and a time when women are not judged on how much the guys want to get into her pants, but is judged on her character and self respect. And our young girls were taught and appreciated that concept that was reinforced at home, at school, by their peers, in the media, and the American culture in general.

I will pray with you for a strong sense of value and a return to a morality that I feel is correct but I will also continue to say that only the woman involved can make a moral decision for herself.

I raised my children to respect themselves and authority and the four of them turned out very well. It was they who learned what they did from my instructions - I just supported them along the way. That is all parents can do is to show the difference between right and wrong and support the good decisions their children make while correcting them when they choose unwisely. I was deeply involved with my children - even after a divorce and we are very close. My children honor me for the way they turned out and all I can say is "I am proud of what they have done with their lives."

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Abortion "should be" a personal issue, not a legal issue at all.

But I digress...

Someone posted that only male DNA should be taken at birth. That seems a little bit segregationist in our great and diverse salad bowl. Why would a rational policy exclude women? My understanding is that women have value as well.

 

[Foxfyre]

Pretending that a different culture never existed, pointing to 'irrisistible passion' or failure of contraceptives, or preferring no contraceptives, or that illegal abortions happened in the past, or that people value life any less now than what was once the norm--all can be supported by one's personal experience or anecdotal evidence or justify immorality on the basis that everybody didn't have a perfect marriage, or any other argument you want to make . . . .

. . . .All that does not change the fact that 54+ million babies have been aborted since Roe v Wade and continue to be aborted at a steady average of 1.2 million babies every single year.

Anybody who wants to make an argument that we were anywhere close to that sorry and depressing figure prior to Roe v Wade go for it. But you'll have to look far and wide for any evidence to back it up.

We currently live in an infanticide culture and if you think that is okay, well that's what you think.

I will still pray for and argue for a return to a strong sense of value for human life and a time when women are not judged on how much the guys want to get into her pants, but is judged on her character and self respect. And our young girls were taught and appreciated that concept that was reinforced at home, at school, by their peers, in the media, and the American culture in general.

I will pray with you for a strong sense of value and a return to a morality that I feel is correct but I will also continue to say that only the woman involved can make a moral decision for herself.

I raised my children to respect themselves and authority and the four of them turned out very well. It was they who learned what they did from my instructions - I just supported them along the way. That is all parents can do is to show the difference between right and wrong and support the good decisions their children make while correcting them when they choose unwisely. I was deeply involved with my children - even after a divorce and we are very close. My children honor me for the way they turned out and all I can say is "I am proud of what they have done with their lives."

All of us have to make our own choices. A society with shared values and reverence for life, respect, dignity, and a positive sense of self worth makes it much easier to make the best choices, however.

A society that thinks 54+ million aborted babies is okay will not be a society that encourages anybody to make the best choices.

But I notice that some of those arguing that those 54+ million aborted babies are a good thing are now resorting to personally insulting those who don't. That's a pretty good indication they're out of ammo.

So I declare this debate a win for the pro life crowd.

 

[PaulS1950]

I declare you unsuited to make such a declaration. There have not been 54 million babies aborted there have been 54 million pregnancies artificially aborted.
What you still fail to see is that, whether we like it or not, the definition of when human life begins has not and is likely never to be agreed upon. Hence I would suggest that the debate is still awash in controversy.

 

[Foxfyre]

I declare you unsuited to make such a declaration. There have not been 54 million babies aborted there have been 54 million pregnancies artificially aborted.
What you still fail to see is that, whether we like it or not, the definition of when human life begins has not and is likely never to be agreed upon. Hence I would suggest that the debate is still awash in controversy.

I submit that I made an excellent case that an abortion ends a human life. We call a very young human a baby. Trust me, having gone through pregnancies, those were babies I was bringing to full term. And the one I lost, was no less a human life.

Nobody on the more unlimited pro choice side has been willing to even address, much less discuss, the point that there is no stage of human life from conception and the fertilized egg attaching itself to the uterine wall that is any less critical or important to a human life. than any other You simply cannot realistically separate the zygote, the embryo, and the fetus from the process and still arrive with a full term living, breathing baby. And if you want 'viability' to be the standard for who deserves to live and who doesn't, that newborn baby is no more viable without complete and total care from another human than he or she was when still developing in the womb.

But evenso, as an old debate judge, any debater who can't make his case without insulting his/her opponent, automatically loses the debate. Passion simply isn't a sufficient argument.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

There is no case, let alone an "excellent" case that abortion ends a human life. Life begins with the first breath. End of that story.

The real story here is religious zealots attempting to inflict a particular persuasion's beliefs on others. Hilariously even the Bible doesn't back them, and of course the Constitution is silent on the issue, so all of the mumbo jumbo is made up.

Next.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no case, let alone an "excellent" case that abortion ends a human life. Life begins with the first breath. End of that story.

The real story here is religious zealots attempting to inflict a particular persuasion's beliefs on others. Hilariously even the Bible doesn't back them, and of course the Constitution is silent on the issue, so all of the mumbo jumbo is made up.

Next.

Sorry, but that baby in my womb was very much the same person he or she was an hour later when he or she was officially born. And every component of that baby was present in the fertilized egg that attached itself to the uterine wall. You cannot point to any stage of the entire process that was not part of a human life or necessary to it.

If you want to make this a diatribe against religious zealots, I suggest you find a different thread. I don't believe anybody who is seriously debating the topic on this thread has made religion in any form the basis for defending the unborn. I know I haven't.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Abortion "should be" a personal issue, not a legal issue at all.

But I digress...

Someone posted that only male DNA should be taken at birth. That seems a little bit segregationist in our great and diverse salad bowl. Why would a rational policy exclude women? My understanding is that women have value as well.

Agreed.

Nor should it be a political issue.

Unfortunately it is.

Unfortunately there are lawmakers who for whatever reason, either an ignorance of, or contempt for, privacy rights jurisprudence, attempt to enact restrictive abortion measures offensive to the Constitution.

And sadly many lawmakers pursue such legislation fully aware that the proposed law is un-Constitutional, seeking to provoke a court challenge only to realize some perceived political advantage.

In theory, and ideally, this should rarely, if ever, become a legal matter, where it’s incumbent upon lawmakers to seek legislation only in good faith, and propose laws that comport with the Founding Document.

 

[Dragonlady]

All of us have to make our own choices. A society with shared values and reverence for life, respect, dignity, and a positive sense of self worth makes it much easier to make the best choices, however.

How can the US be a society of "shared values" when it is ethnically and religiously diverse, and in general, people are required to take individual responsibility? Your idea that we must get back to these shared values assumes that Americans EVER shared these values. They don't and they never did. There were always various religions, races, and ethnic backgrounds with different traditions and values, right from the beginning.

A society that thinks 54+ million aborted babies is okay will not be a society that encourages anybody to make the best choices.

As has been pointed out, in countries with abortion on demand, birth control and sex education for teenagers with no opting out, has substantially fewer abortions than the US. As long as you continue to put roadblocks in the way of teenagers behaving responsibly and preach abstinence only, you will continue to see these high numbers.

Unless you are prepared to provide real financial support for pregnant women, including medical care, it will continue to be necessary for poor women to abort children they cannot afford to give birth to or raise. Abortion is cheaper than childbirth.

Conservative policies and practices are responsible for the high abortion rate in the US. Social democracies with government funded health care and strong social safety nets, are aborting fetuses in far fewer numbers than American women are.

As long as conservatives oppose the notion of a social democracy, you're going to have to live with the idea that women will continue to abort fetuses in large numbers. You can have abortion or you can have a strong social safety net which encourages women to carry their babies to term, but you cannot have both. As long as women cannot financially afford to have and raise babies, whether married or single, abortion numbers will be high.

So I declare this debate a win for the pro life crowd.

Delusional. You have demonstrated a distinct hatred of women. You want to punish women for having sex and making what YOU consider to be poor choices. And you want their children to suffer for it with the stigma of being unwanted. That's not pro-life, that's anti-women. Misogny, pure and simple.

 

[PaulS1950]

I declare you unsuited to make such a declaration. There have not been 54 million babies aborted there have been 54 million pregnancies artificially aborted.
What you still fail to see is that, whether we like it or not, the definition of when human life begins has not and is likely never to be agreed upon. Hence I would suggest that the debate is still awash in controversy.

I submit that I made an excellent case that an abortion ends a human life. We call a very young human a baby. Trust me, having gone through pregnancies, those were babies I was bringing to full term. And the one I lost, was no less a human life.

Nobody on the more unlimited pro choice side has been willing to even address, much less discuss, the point that there is no stage of human life from conception and the fertilized egg attaching itself to the uterine wall that is any less critical or important to a human life. than any other You simply cannot realistically separate the zygote, the embryo, and the fetus from the process and still arrive with a full term living, breathing baby. And if you want 'viability' to be the standard for who deserves to live and who doesn't, that newborn baby is no more viable without complete and total care from another human than he or she was when still developing in the womb.

But evenso, as an old debate judge, any debater who can't make his case without insulting his/her opponent, automatically loses the debate. Passion simply isn't a sufficient argument.

You did make an excellent case that abortion ends a pregnancy but you have not proven or offered anything, other than your opinion, that a human life is extinguished. You have made it abundantly clear that you believe life begins at conception and whether I agree or not it is just a matter of faith until you can prove when the "breath of G_d" enters that life.

I am sorry about your loss of a child - that is a tramatic event to live through. You must have felt an enormous loss. Were you able to have a funeral? Sincerely, I empathize with your loss. My daughter shared your experience but was unable to bury the remains. It has left us all .... a bit wanting for the closure that is "normal".

 

[Dragonlady]

Those of us who suffer miscarriages never forget the loss. I was fortunate when I miscarried because I was able to get pregnant again right and was about 6 months pregnant with my daughter, at the time the child I lost would have been born. I still have the first ultra sound picture of the little zygot.

 

[Foxfyre]

I declare you unsuited to make such a declaration. There have not been 54 million babies aborted there have been 54 million pregnancies artificially aborted.
What you still fail to see is that, whether we like it or not, the definition of when human life begins has not and is likely never to be agreed upon. Hence I would suggest that the debate is still awash in controversy.

I submit that I made an excellent case that an abortion ends a human life. We call a very young human a baby. Trust me, having gone through pregnancies, those were babies I was bringing to full term. And the one I lost, was no less a human life.

Nobody on the more unlimited pro choice side has been willing to even address, much less discuss, the point that there is no stage of human life from conception and the fertilized egg attaching itself to the uterine wall that is any less critical or important to a human life. than any other You simply cannot realistically separate the zygote, the embryo, and the fetus from the process and still arrive with a full term living, breathing baby. And if you want 'viability' to be the standard for who deserves to live and who doesn't, that newborn baby is no more viable without complete and total care from another human than he or she was when still developing in the womb.

But evenso, as an old debate judge, any debater who can't make his case without insulting his/her opponent, automatically loses the debate. Passion simply isn't a sufficient argument.

You did make an excellent case that abortion ends a pregnancy but you have not proven or offered anything, other than your opinion, that a human life is extinguished. You have made it abundantly clear that you believe life begins at conception and whether I agree or not it is just a matter of faith until you can prove when the "breath of G_d" enters that life.

I am sorry about your loss of a child - that is a tramatic event to live through. You must have felt an enormous loss. Were you able to have a funeral? Sincerely, I empathize with your loss. My daughter shared your experience but was unable to bury the remains. It has left us all .... a bit wanting for the closure that is "normal".

Thank you. I was not far along when I miscarried, but I had no doubt that it was a human life that was ended and I did feel a profound sense of loss. My living children were not planned, and were definitely inconvenient at the time they were conceived, but they were welcomed with much love and are remarkable people and I can't imagine a world without them in it.

It is not a matter of faith that infants have surved outside the womb with a fairly good survival rate at six months. A German premie born in November, 2010, survived at 21 weeks, 5 days. For the math challenged, that would be just under five months in the womb. She went home four months later as a healthy seven pounder with an excellent prognosis to live a perfectly normal life. If you have ever spent any time in a hospital with the preemies, you can see how hard they fight for life.

By eight weeks the baby has a brain and a heartbeat and can respond to pleasure and pain.

So for me, that life in the womb is a human life and no human lives without going through that process.

And the fact that we aren't privy to know when God breathes life into any person is not a good argument for me to approve aborting 54+ million babies since Roe v Wade. I just can't understand how anybody would see that as a good thing.

 

[Dragonlady]

Thank you. I was not far along when I miscarried, but I had no doubt that it was a human life that was ended and I did feel a profound sense of loss. My living children were not planned, and were definitely inconvenient at the time they were conceived, but they were welcomed with much love and are remarkable people and I can't imagine a world without them in it.

Our personal experiences are quite similar. I experienced two miscarriages, one pregnancy was planned, the other was not. My loss and my grief were the same for both. My son was conceived at the worst possible time, my marriage was hanging by a thread, and ended before his second birthday. There was no question as to whether or not I would have this baby and being a Canadian, that choice was mine to make.

It is not a matter of faith that infants have surved outside the womb with a fairly good survival rate at six months. A German premie born in November, 2010, survived at 21 weeks, 5 days. For the math challenged, that would be just under five months in the womb. She went home four months later as a healthy seven pounder with an excellent prognosis to live a perfectly normal life. If you have ever spent any time in a hospital with the preemies, you can see how hard they fight for life.

This is a rare outcome. What is more common is the children are left with physical or mental disabilities which require a lifelong care and treatment. In the US, parents often abandon such children to the state in the hopes they are able to provide for the needs of the child, which the parents can't, and the parents are saddled with the debt of the child's medical expenses. Hardly a good start for anyone.

By eight weeks the baby has a brain and a heartbeat and can respond to pleasure and pain.

So for me, that life in the womb is a human life and no human lives without going through that process.

And the fact that we aren't privy to know when God breathes life into any person is not a good argument for me to approve aborting 54+ million babies since Roe v Wade. I just can't understand how anybody would see that as a good thing.

I believe all of this as well and as a result, I have never had an abortion, nor would I ever had had an abortion. For me, this is my choice. I am personally opposed to abortion, so I never had one. My oldest daughter became pregnant at age 16. She doesn't believe in abortion either, so I have a grandson who is one year older than my youngest daughter.

My youngest daughter is 23, and she doesn't believe in abortion either so she is very careful about birth control.

This is how the women in my family honour OUR beliefs. But we don't try to impose them on others or try to prevent people from doing what they believe is right. I don't have the right to tell others how to live their lives or what they should believe, and neither do you.

 

[PaulS1950]

I have a grandson that was born at 29 weeks. He was born the size of a "Ken" doll and had a tough time. Now he is grown to adolescence and is unstoppable. He was born after my daughter's miscarriage. His birth almost killed them both but her faith was strong - stronger than mine.

Now you all know a part of me that I rarely show to others. It is faith that tells you that a child is alive in you. On the other side of this is that legal abortion apply mostly to the first trimester - 12 weeks not a viable life outside the womb. That is not meant to try to justify anything - just a fact. Even with that it still remains a personal choice for each woman - her faith - her choice - her life. No one else could tell you what to believe - you can't either. I admire your stand and even agree but I don't believe I have the right to make a decision for others.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have a grandson that was born at 29 weeks. He was born the size of a "Ken" doll and had a tough time. Now he is grown to adolescence and is unstoppable. He was born after my daughter's miscarriage. His birth almost killed them both but her faith was strong - stronger than mine.

Now you all know a part of me that I rarely show to others. It is faith that tells you that a child is alive in you. On the other side of this is that legal abortion apply mostly to the first trimester - 12 weeks not a viable life outside the womb. That is not meant to try to justify anything - just a fact. Even with that it still remains a personal choice for each woman - her faith - her choice - her life. No one else could tell you what to believe - you can't either. I admire your stand and even agree but I don't believe I have the right to make a decision for others.

Nor do I have a right to make a decision for others. But I have every right to mourn the death of 54+ million babies since Roe v Wade. I have every right to try to change hearts and minds to see those as human beings and not just clumps of cells. I have every right to speak on behalf of the most helpless among us who cannot yet speak for themselves.

 

[PaulS1950]

I wish you strength, courage and above all love in your crusade.
I have only love and courage left and I seek the peace of G_d now. I will not try to change the minds of others on matters of faith - that crusade is over for me. I am no longer that warrior.
So, all I can do is wish you the peace that is His alone to give and hope for a better tomorrow.
blessings,
Paul

 

[Dragonlady]

Nor do I have a right to make a decision for others. But I have every right to mourn the death of 54+ million babies since Roe v Wade. I have every right to try to change hearts and minds to see those as human beings and not just clumps of cells. I have every right to speak on behalf of the most helpless among us who cannot yet speak for themselves.

In other words, you insist upon your right to inflict your views on others and try to intervene in decisions that are none of your business. Because you're right and we're not.