Responses - Defending Life / Rebuttals / Advocacy / Dating / Adoption

Editorial: Choice and The Value of Life

I write to address the need for equal dignity and respect for women in our society. I also speak as a feminist – a Pro-Life Feminist — because I believe that women and children do not  have to be adversaries. The means of abortion does not justify the end that we are all striving to reach. Abortion has certainly not solved our problems of world hunger, teenage pregnancy, crime, or welfare.

Abortion has, however, degraded the value of human life. As Albert Schweitzer, the great physician-humanitarian, noted, “If a man loses reverence for any part of life, he will lose reverence for all life”.

Every time we destroy a human life, at any stage, we lower the value of humanity itself, bringing us ever closer to nuclear war. 
 

If human life is not important, then international leaders will not hesitate to start wars. We have certainly seen this happen in recent history. The development of poison gases which kill the people but keep the buildings intact is a chilling example of how little human life is now valued by some.

We live in a throw-away society – throw-away plates, cups, pens, cameras – and our mentality has become such that, whatever we don’t want, whatever is a burden, whatever causes us pain, should be eliminated.

I am a member of the national organization Feminists for Life of America, which was founded in 1972, when several Pro-Life feminists were ousted from N.O.W. (National Organization of Women) at the introduction of the pro-abortion platform. However, even our feminist foremothers of the 1800’s and early 1900’s were totally opposed to abortion, calling it a method men used to control women.

We hear a great deal about “choice”. We can choose between types of cereal; we can choose whether to work or stay at home; but the vast majority of American women do NOT want the choice to take innocent human life. If any weight can be given to polls, they consistently show that the majority of women are opposed to abortion.

Of course, Pro-Life feminists are definitely “pro-choice”: we believe that women have a choice in the bedroom to say “NO” if they are not prepared to handle a possible conception. If women are equal to men and capable of making our own decisions, then we should be able to tell men when we don’t want to have sex. Women should not feel pressured into having sex. Let’s communicate with men and work out our differences. Let’s pick on somebody our own size, not on tiny, innocent babies.

Pro-abortion feminists say that they want equal rights for women. Yet, they promoted the untimely death of about 600,000 U.S. women in 1998 – preborn women – half the number of babies aborted in that year (CDC). We know they are women by their genitalia, clearly visible on the human fetus by 11 weeks after fertilization.

If Pro-Abortion Feminists (let’s call them “PAFs“) are so concerned about women’s rights, let them show concern for the rights of preborn women!

Why do these PAFs consider the violent Chinese one-child policy “reasonable” when most Chinese women abort or leave to die female babies? Why are these PAFs staying silent when abortionists are arrested for sexually molesting women before and after their abortions?

Why are these PAFs staying silent in the light of the sex predation cover-up by abortion centers? The secular media has tried to stiffle this news; but there is sufficient evidence to show that 91% of the abortion centers contacted are willing to cover up abortions from statutory rape, thus allowing young girls to remain in dangerous predatory relationships with older men.

Why do these PAFs continue to stiffle the medical knowledge that abortion, especially of the first pregnancy, can lead to dramatic increased risks of breast cancer?

Why is it that the Playboy Foundation, known as the promoter of the sexual exploitation of women, has financially supported the abortion industry in the USA? If abortion really helped women and provided them with dignity and respect, do you think Playboy would support it?

We certainly know from the newest techniques of 4-D ultrasound sonography and from embryoscopy – that the lines about a “blob of tissue”, “a zygote”, “a growth” are simply archaic! A medical training video released in 1989 by an abortionist describes the technique of embryoscopy, which basically takes videos of babies in utero. In this video, a 9.4 week-old preborn boy actually holds his fully-formed hand in front of his face to block the light of the camera. Blobs don’t do that! The medical technology is advancing so rapidly that the argument that life in the womb is not human ranks right in there with believing the earth is flat and that the sun revolves around the earth!

So what is it that pro-abortion feminists REALLY want?

It appears that most hard-line PAFs seek to be equal to men by being like men. How do women become like men? In their minds, by betraying the very essence of their womanhood — by being able to become unpregnant at will. Just as men have walked away from family responsibilities for decades (and been referred to as “deadbeat dads”), now our society has made it easy for women to be irresponsible “deadbeat moms” as well.

But WHY have women chosen to emulate the bad qualities of men?

Why haven’t the PAFs:

  • worked to promote better day-care facilities,
  • flexible hours,
  • more child care support and severe punishment for fathers who fail to pay,
  • tax breaks for moms who prefer not to work outside the home,
  • better low income housing,
  • loans for single moms trying to get an education and raise their children,
  • better maternity leave benefits,
  • and the teaching of male students – starting in elementary school – to be responsible for their actions and to have self-control and respect for others?

And if pro-abortion feminists are really so concerned about poor women who can’t afford abortions, why don’t they pay for the abortions themselves? Instead of pushing the government to use the tax dollars of the majority of Americans who do NOT support abortion, let them pay for these abortions themselves, with all the funding they use to politically promote federal funding.

Why don’t PAFs want women to have informed consent regarding abortion?

For any other type of surgery, detailed descriptions of possible complications and all pertinent information must be given. However, in 1986, the male-dominated Supreme Court ruled in Thornburgh v. ACOG that the states cannot require accurate, non-judgmental information to be given to women considering abortion; in other words, women don’t deserve to have all the facts necessary to make good decisions.

In other words, “Let’s give women their rights; but let’s not boggle their little minds with information that might confuse them. They can’t make good decisions anyway”.

What an insult!  Why did PAFs support this?

Why don’t they want women to know what their preborn child looks like?

Why don’t they want women to know the possible physical and emotional complications that abortion could inflict?

How can a person be “pro-choice” when she is NOT given the facts on both sides to MAKE a choice? In order to make a choice, there must be alternatives.

Women are just as intelligent as men and can make good decisions just as well as any man IF we’re given ALL the facts! As women, we deserve the opportunity to make our own decisions with all the facts. We deserve our right to think things through for ourselves, not to be led (or misled) by the nose where males want us to go for their own irresponsible fun & pleasure.

If we, as women, ever hope to achieve places of high ranking on a more regular basis, we must be regarded as competent and capable of responding intelligently during cr
is
is situations.

The PAFs have, however, painted women as insecure wimps unable to “say no” by overpowering males, and unable to make cool, rational decisions in times of crisis. Women are pictured as hysterical maniacs ready to fall to pieces if they can’t get an easy way out of a tough situation, namely, and unplanned pregnancy.

Pro-Abortion Feminists can’t have it both ways: if men are truly bullies for treating physically weaker women as their possession to use when they choose, then how are women any different when they claim possession of their physically weaker preborn babies to destroy when they choose?

I recently talked with two women touched by our abortion culture: one resisted and one fell for the lies. The first woman told me that 8 years ago, at 36, she found herself pregnant with her 4th child. She was determined to have an abortion and called the abortion center. The receptionist was laughing as she picked up the phone and kept laughing. She told the receptionist that this was not a laughing matter and hung up. She then called a friend and decided to keep her preborn child. Now, he is the joy of her life and she told me, “I shudder when I think how close I came to killing my little boy.”

Another women called to ask for a counseling referral after her abortion. I don’t know the details of when or why she had the abortion; but her voice was filled with pain and hurt and she wanted someone to tell her it was OK to grieve for the child she will never hold…

Terry Scholssberg, another Pro-Life feminist, has stated, “what we choose reflects our values, what we acknowledge as right or wrong, good or bad…abortion is a choice to kill a baby. We’ve never agreed to make doing harm to another human being a matter of personal choice. In fact, the very purpose of good government is to protect the innocent.”

As humans, we ALL have the freedom of choice; that’s what distinguishes us from lower animals. With every freedom, there is attached a responsibility for our actions. We are ALL accountable if we choose to kill…

(c) 2004, Alabama Physicians For Life, Inc., Sue Turner, APFLI Director