But hey, way to show some compassion yourself! This author chose to discuss an incredibly difficult situation and her incredibly painful decision, and you ridiculed her for having had to make a choice you yourself probably never have. And even if you had, YOU AREN’T HER. You can’t speak to her situation, you can’t know how she suffered, you clearly don’t understand that her choice was influenced by her love, not only for the child she thought she’d raise, but for the family she had, and you apparently have all the empathy of a rock.

Humans don’t play the cards that they’re dealt. We make medical advances that allow survivability far beyond anything nature grants. One side of that is that we can intervene and improve the chances of a pregnancy resulting in a healthy baby. But the flip side is, we know far earlier when something has gone disastrously wrong, and what the outcome is likely to be. To look at someone facing that situation and bash her for making the best choice she could for herself, her family, and yes, her unborn child-who-wouldn’t-be, is obscene. She didn’t discard an inconvenience, she acted as a mother should.

What a shame there is no prenatal test for a simple sense of compassion. I suspect there’d be fewer pro-life extremists, demanding that women accept their punishment for having had sex, having blighted ova, having health issues, or dealing with economic issues that make rearing a child the poorer choice. But thanks for demonstrating that one doesn’t have to be religious to still be a nut.

You lost me there, as Satan isn’t real, and “satanists” don’t actually worship any such being. They actually just enjoy carnal pleasures.

Thank you for sharing this information.

Perhaps the answer is in education, and less in regulation. Don't you think that women would make better choices if they understood 1.) the fetus in them is alive, 2.) the details of the procedure, and 3.) that there are alternate options?

I'm very happy to know that you have taken a step in this direction. Perhaps you should get your paper published? You could start by putting it out on the internet as a download-able .pdf. You could post it here. I would be happy to read it.

I'm feeling a sense of transformation. There is much more gray in this matter than I realized…and, as you point out, some very black and white patches as well.

The only abortion “restriction” we currently have is the ban on partial birth abortion, and the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which states an infant must be regarded as a person under the law, viable or not. The 1975 law in Illinois, where the bills were brought, had been weakened considerably in 1993 by a consent decree signed by Roland Burris, and it only covered infants deemed “viable” by the person aborting them. Since viability is open to interpretation, we have the problem of some premature infants getting medical treatment and living to healthy childhoods at an age younger than others are legaly aborted.

These laws only restrict the way in which an abortion is performed, but do not limit the right to an abortion at any point in pregnancy. Currently, there is an abortion clinic in Florida (EPOC) that advertises same day pill abortions 3 to 24 weeks and you can visit their website. Read their mission statement. They inject the fetus with heart stopping drugs before inducing a still birth. The partial birth abortion is a barbaric act never necessary for the life or health of the mother and can in fact be dangerous to her.

The other laws consist of various state laws on parental consent for minors, informed consent, (in Texas we have to read a pamphlet on fetal development before an abortion) conscience clauses for health care workers who do not want to participate in abortion, and I believe Medicaid will not pay for elective abortion.

Those are the laws “restricting” abortion. No law can restrict the right to abortion at any point in gestation, because of the Supreme Court ruling that required the health exception after viability. Many people are not aware of this and assume abortion is regulated.

I have just completed a paper on the subject; I think it is fairly informative and interesting. Obama states there is no argument against abortion except a religious argument but this is simply not true. The best argument is one of civil rights, and that is the case I make in my paper. I wrote it for friends and family because there is a lack of knowledge, and lack of effective debate and this issue is vitally important.

You are correct about many issues not being black and white, but on the issue of civil rights there is no gray area, and this was displayed perfectly during our history leading up to the civil war. There are no exceptions to “all men are created equal.” Once you make these exceptions, all human value is opened up to arbitrary judgment. That is not a religious argument, it is an argument of common sense.

I will mail you my paper if you would like me to. I really appreciate you writing to me; hardly anyone is willing to really discuss this issue without anger. I would value your feedback.

Thanks,

Mary Garmon

Fort Worth, Texas