ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The Truth About Abortions

Updated on May 25, 2020
James A Watkins profile image

James A. Watkins is an entrepreneur, musician, and a writer with four non-fiction books and hundreds of magazine articles read by millions.

The Truth About Abortion

The first time I ever heard the word "abortion" I was eighteen years old. That was in 1973, the year the Supreme Court of the United States declared abortion not only legal; but a "fundamental right" of women according to the Constitution.

For 184 years the best legal minds in America had studied that same Constitution, and somehow no one ever saw anything about abortion in there. It was deemed an issue for the People to decide through their elected representatives before the ruling by the Supreme Court in 1973.

The Court couldn't find abortion in the Constitution either, but claimed they saw it in the penumbras and emanations of the document—that's clouds and gasses.

When I first heard about the Supreme Court decision, I had to ask: "What is abortion?" When I was informed, I was aghast. I come from a large family and had been around plenty of pregnant women in my day. They would invite me to "feel the baby kick" and talk about how "the baby is moving around a lot these days." Even the newly pregnant would say, "I'm going to have a baby!" with genuine excitement. I couldn't imagine any mother would kill her own baby. Kill them they did—55 million and counting.

MOTHER AND BABY
MOTHER AND BABY

How Abortions Were Sold With Propaganda

As with the other evils that have befallen mankind, this one has at its roots some whopping lies. We know all about these lies now because the man responsible for making them up—and for killing 75,000 babies himself as an abortion doctor—has repented for his crimes against humanity and come forward with the truth.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson was the co-founder of the group credited with legalizing abortion, NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League). This group began a propaganda campaign in 1969, and in only four years overturned the state laws against abortion that had been duly legislated.

Dr. Nathanson tells how he and his friends did it: "We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal, enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60 percent of Americans were in favor of permissive abortions. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority.

"We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual number was approaching 100,000, but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1 million. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public.

"The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000."

About 440 women died per year during normal childbirth in hospitals, so the dangers of illegal abortions had to be blown out of proportion to sway public opinion.

Nathanson continues: "Another myth we fed the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1,500 percent since legalization."

WHO LOVES YOU BABY?!
WHO LOVES YOU BABY?!

Dr Bernard Nathanson

One key ingredient to this propaganda was —as it always is with propaganda—to change the words used in the abortion debate. The basic idea was to change a crime into a "right." This is why Nathanson made up the term pro-choice to replace abortion rights; medical procedure to replace the word abortion itself; as well as the slogans "It's my body" and "Reproductive Rights." This is to allow people to mentally avoid thinking about dead babies by the tens of millions, and to focus instead on choice and rights and who decides. Nathanson says, "I remember laughing when we made those slogans up."

New technologies were developed in the 1970s, including the real-time ultrasound, which caused Dr. Nathanson to have a profound change of heart. I'll let him explain: "As a result of all this new technology—looking at this baby, examining it, investigating it, watching its metabolic functions, watching it urinate, swallow, move and sleep, watching it dream, which you could see by its rapid eye movements via ultrasound, treating it, operating on it—I finally came to the conviction that this was my patient. This was a person! I was a physician, pledged to save my patients' lives, not to destroy them."

Dr. Nathanson later made two incredible films that documented actual abortion procedures, The Silent Scream and Eclipse of Reason. The latter film shows a third trimester abortion as the living baby is torn apart in the womb piece by piece by surgical instruments (you have be physically strong to do this). The baby stops fighting for its life after its brain is sucked out and its head crushed. Then the parts are put together like a puzzle on a table to make sure they didn't leave any of the baby's body inside the mother.

A NEW BORN BABY
A NEW BORN BABY

Abortion Prodecures

Some babies are killed by a saline solution. This is a violent death, as the baby kicks and fights because he is being burned to death. Sometimes they are born alive and left to slowly die in a cold steel tub. Perfectly formed, beautiful little babies. One prominent abortion doctor quit after he began to feel like a paid assassin—a hit man.

Why would a sane people allow babies to be tortured and murdered in cold blood? Pro-Abortionists took a page out of Nazi Germany's playbook to obtain acceptance. Just as the Jews were dehumanized to the German citizenry; unborn babies were dehumanized to the American public. And therefore disposable. Pro-Abortion advocates are in deep denial.

The Supreme Court bears much of the blame for this "American Holocaust." By legalizing abortion they made it acceptable and moral to the public. Societal approval reduced or eliminated the psychic cost of terminating the unborn. To accept abortion you must accept that only if a woman wants the baby does he or she then suddenly have any value.

MOTHER LOVES HER BABY; DADDY LOVES HER TOO
MOTHER LOVES HER BABY; DADDY LOVES HER TOO

Partial Birth Abortion

Partial-birth abortion involves a baby being killed while three quarters of its body is dangling outside the womb. It is killed by crushing its skull and removing its brain while still alive, and in unspeakable pain. One federal judge, after listening to days of testimony by medical experts, described this procedure thus: "the court finds that the testimony at trial and before Congress establishes that [partial-birth abortion] is a gruesome, brutal, barbaric, and uncivilized medical procedure."

Abortion doctors were asked by the judge if they ever considered administering anesthesia to the baby. He noted that "Some of the plaintiffs' experts testified that fetal pain does not concern them, and that they do not convey to their patients that their fetuses may undergo severe pain."

So the pain of the baby registered no concern; it did not matter; there is no empathy for the baby; the baby does not count. I find this interesting when we consider that Social Liberals do care about pain inflicted on animals, and even vandalism to inanimate objects, but not about horrific pain inflicted on purpose, with malice and forethought, onto human babies marked for liquidation.

MOMMIES AND DADDIES AROUND THE WORLD LOVE THEIR BABIES
MOMMIES AND DADDIES AROUND THE WORLD LOVE THEIR BABIES

The Party of Death

The Democratic Party is the party of death. For decades they refused to allow candidates to run for office under their banner who were Pro-Life. This was not always so. In 1987, Al Gore wrote that abortion is "the taking of human life."

In 1971, Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy said this:

"It is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized—the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old. On the question of the individual's freedom of choice there are easily available birth control methods and information which women may employ to prevent or postpone pregnancy. . . When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough . . . to fulfill its responsibilities to its children from the very moment of conception."

IN MOST OF HUMAN HISTORY, BABIES WERE CONSIDERED A GREAT BLESSING (NOT A CURSE)
IN MOST OF HUMAN HISTORY, BABIES WERE CONSIDERED A GREAT BLESSING (NOT A CURSE)

The Catholic Church Is Pro Life

The position of the Roman Catholic Church regarding abortion is: "Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. . . Since the First Century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and is unchangeable. . . Abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law. . . Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes." St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas both condemned abortion.

For this stance, the Catholic Church has come under constant attack from an outfit that named itself "Catholics for a Free Choice," founded by one Frances Kissling. This organization has spent tens of millions of dollars on propaganda that claims Catholics support abortion. But there are no Catholics in the organization. This is typical of leftist propagandists. They do not believe in truth and therefore feel no compunction to be truthful.

Catholics for Free Choice is supported by Hugh Hefner, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and other Atheistic foundations. Kissling stated: "I spent 20 years looking for a government to overthrow without being thrown in jail—I finally found one in the Catholic Church."

This subversive organization sends out pamphlets—that appear to be from a legitimate Catholic affiliate—to Catholic teenagers that declare abortion is not a sin, nor does it require Confession, the direct opposite of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

ULTRASOUND PHOTOGRAPH OF A BABY IN THE WOMB
ULTRASOUND PHOTOGRAPH OF A BABY IN THE WOMB

Why Not Infanticide?

Robert George wrote: "At no point in its development was the human being that now is an adult a different substance, being or thing than he or she is currently." A human being is a human being from conception to death.

Not all Pro-Abortion people disagree with this assessment. Princeton professor Peter Singer argues for infanticide stating: "It must be admitted that these arguments [for abortion] apply to a newborn baby as much as to the fetus. . . If we can put aside the emotionally moving but strictly irrelevant aspects of the killing of a baby, we can see that the grounds for not killing persons do not apply to newborn infants."

Singer also thinks children should be bred to kill them in order to harvest their body parts. That is where this train is going.

A BABY BORN FIVE MONTHS AFTER CONCEPTION; FOUR MONTHS BEFORE DUE DATE; AND IT IS STILL ALIVE TODAY
A BABY BORN FIVE MONTHS AFTER CONCEPTION; FOUR MONTHS BEFORE DUE DATE; AND IT IS STILL ALIVE TODAY

Pro Life

Women who seek abortions change their minds two thirds of the time if they first view an ultrasound of their baby. This is why Pro-Abortionists have tried to block every attempt by state lawmakers to have women who seek pregnancy counseling to be required to see the ultrasound images. After all, women who do not seek abortions often tack the ultrasound photo of their children on their refrigerators and show them to all their friends. It is obvious that they consider the image to be that of their child.

As Dr. Nathanson observed: "There is no longer any serious doubt in my mind that human life exists within the womb from the very onset of pregnancy . . . human life of a special order is being taken in the process of abortion. . . Abortion must be seen as an interruption of a process which would otherwise have produced a citizen of the world."

Women who have had an abortion commit suicide six times more often than women who have never purposefully killed one of their babies. Abortion is not a solution to life's problems. Abortion is not worthy of our approval. Abortion hurts women. It does not free them; in many cases it enslaves them emotionally for life.

I have known a number of women who've told me that every year they light a candle, say a prayer, or spend the day in solitude because this was the due date of the child they aborted. Many times they named the child and they say to me, "This would have been Bobby's birthday."

Let's face it folks: the vast majority of abortions are merely the killing of babies for the convenience of the mother. It is practiced as an escape from a prime responsibility of life: the consequences of one's own actions.

THIS IS ABOUT HOW ALL OF YOU VIEWING THIS PICTURE LOOKED 12 WEEKS AFTER YOUR PARENTS HAD NORMAL SEXUAL RELATIONS
THIS IS ABOUT HOW ALL OF YOU VIEWING THIS PICTURE LOOKED 12 WEEKS AFTER YOUR PARENTS HAD NORMAL SEXUAL RELATIONS

The Politics of Abortion and the Marketing of Evil

I used many resources to assemble this Hub, including magazine articles from First Things and Touchstone. The primary book I used is The Politics of Abortion by Anne Hendershott. Another book I used extensively is The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian. Here is what that book has to say about the unborn:

"A human baby, from the moment of its conception—and as the delicate and ethereal fabric grows with its tiny, perfectly formed fingers and toes, little heartbeats, little lips, little ears, shrouded peacefully in its mother's womb—is undoubtedly the crowning glory of creation. . . . It is indisputable that even in utero children have a nervous system and feel real pain. Their nerves and pain receptors don't suddenly switch on the moment they exit their mother's womb. They feel the abortionist's scalpel, forceps, suction devices, skull crushers, and other torture implements used in the various abortion procedures."

16 WEEKS AFTER YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER CREATED THE ONE-OF-A-KIND PERSON THAT IS YOU, THIS IS HOW YOU LOOKED
16 WEEKS AFTER YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER CREATED THE ONE-OF-A-KIND PERSON THAT IS YOU, THIS IS HOW YOU LOOKED

Abortion Facts

There can be no denying that abortion is killing. Try as you like, but what is inside a pregnant woman is most definitely alive; after an abortion it is dead. To say that this is nobody's business except the pregnant woman is to deny that historically to deliberately kill an individual has never been a matter of moral indifference.

It cannot be plausibly denied that what is killed is human. Non-human fetuses do not magically become human at the moment of birth. Abortion is the killing of a human being with unique DNA—a person with 23 chromosomes each from its father's sperm and its mother's egg. From conception to birth, to teenager, to adult to old age, it is not a series of different individuals replacing each other. It is not potential life but life with potential.

Some try to tell me that it is only a human person when it can survive on its own. How old is a child when it can truly survive on its own, 12?

Some try to tell me that abortion prevents children from being born who are illegitimate, or will only have a life of poverty and child abuse. But since abortion was legalized, the rates of illegitimacy, child poverty, and child abuse have increased dramatically, not fallen.

Some try to tell me that abortion is only used in cases where the mother is traumatized. But 43 percent of abortions are performed on women who have had at least one before.

A 1987 survey by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute shows why women choose abortion. The number one response, given by 76 percent of the women is: I am concerned about how having a baby could change my life.

Less than 1 percent said they were a victim of rape or incest; less than 1 percent said the fetus could have health problems. In other words, the baby represents a potential social problem for its mother.

FEETS DON'T FAIL ME NOW!
FEETS DON'T FAIL ME NOW!

Unwanted Pregnancy

With the exception of rape, there is no such thing as an "unwanted pregnancy." There are women who wish they weren't pregnant; and men who wish their women weren't pregnant. But all pregnancies are the result of intentional actions that have found their natural, logical result.

Contraception does not change the nature of this action. In fact, it makes the actors more aware that what they are doing makes babies in accordance with the natural functions of sexual organs. The problem is not that the body has failed but that the body has succeeded.

I HATE TO BE THE ONE TO BREAK THE NEWS TO SOME OF YOU; BUT THIS IS NOT A BOWEL MOVEMENT; THIS IS NOT PART OF THE WOMAN'S BODY LIKE A KIDNEY; THIS IS A LIVING BEING DEPENDING UPON ITS MOTHER TO PROTECT IT
I HATE TO BE THE ONE TO BREAK THE NEWS TO SOME OF YOU; BUT THIS IS NOT A BOWEL MOVEMENT; THIS IS NOT PART OF THE WOMAN'S BODY LIKE A KIDNEY; THIS IS A LIVING BEING DEPENDING UPON ITS MOTHER TO PROTECT IT

The Law of Unintended Consequences: Abortion Empowers Men

The right to kill their babies is hailed by feminists as a great empowerment of women. Those empowered are actually men. Only after the right of all women to have as many abortions as they wish, for any or no reason at all, became the law of the land, could men separate sex from fatherhood.

Even a radical feminist such as Catherine MacKinnon recognizes this: "Abortion facilitates women's heterosexual availability. In other words, under conditions of gender inequality [abortion] does not liberate women; it frees male sexual aggression. The availability of abortion removes the one remaining legitimized reason that women have had besides the headache. . . . right to privacy looks like an injury got up as a gift . . . virtually every ounce of control that women won [from legalized abortion] has gone directly into the hands of men."

Many men are in favor of legalized abortion for the simple reason that they don't want to use condoms, which unquestionably diminishes sexual pleasure for men. This puts the postmodern woman in a trick box. If she tells her boyfriend she is Pro-Life, he may leave her for a woman who is Pro-Death, particularly if he is only interested in gratification and has no serious intentions with the woman. A Pro-Life woman is at a distinct disadvantage in the sexual marketplace. If she goes without the condom to compete with Pro-Death girls, she may get pregnant by a man who doesn't love her.

Abortion rights have directly led to the rampant promiscuity we see in America today. Since there is this way out from the natural consequences of hooking up with multitudes of near strangers, sex is expected of unmarried women as never before in human history.

Abortion rights have led directly to the explosion of sexually transmitted diseases among Americans. In the 2003 study "The Effect of Abortion Legalization on Sexual Behavior" its authors noted:

"Unwanted pregnancy represents a major cost of sexual activity. When abortion was legalized in a number of states in 1969 and 1970 (and nationally in 1973), this cost was reduced. We predict that abortion legalization generated incentives leading to an increase in sexual activity, accompanied by an increase in sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Using Centers for Disease Control data on the incidence of gonorrhea and syphilis by state, we test the hypothesis that abortion legalization led to an increase in sexually transmitted diseases. We find that gonorrhea and syphilis incidences are significantly and positively correlated with abortion legalization. Further, we find a divergence in STD rates among early legalizing states and late legalizing states starting in 1970 and a subsequent convergence after the Roe v. Wade decision, indicating that the relation between STDs and abortion is causal. Abortion legalization accounts for about one‐fourth of the average disease incidence."

Before abortion was legalized it was understood that if a man got a woman pregnant, he was obligated to marry her. Men feel no such obligation today. No wonder the Playboy Foundation has long been such a heavy financial contributor to the abortion cause.

Children have always been a natural consequence of sexual intercourse, even when contraception was available (since it fails quite often). Abortion changes everything. Now some men insist that it is a woman's "fault" if she allows an inconvenient person to be born—when she could have opted to kill it instead.

A LIVING BABY ONLY FIVE MONTHS AFTER CONCEPTION GRABS HIS DOCTOR'S HAND ( I POINT OUT "LIVING" BECAUSE HUBPAGES HAS BANNED PICTURES OF BABIES "LEGALLY" KILLED)
A LIVING BABY ONLY FIVE MONTHS AFTER CONCEPTION GRABS HIS DOCTOR'S HAND ( I POINT OUT "LIVING" BECAUSE HUBPAGES HAS BANNED PICTURES OF BABIES "LEGALLY" KILLED)

The American Holocaust

Eighty percent of these killings have been perpetrated by unmarried women. 4 out of 10 conceptions result in an abortion today. I find it interesting that the fathers of these babies—their natural heirs to carry on their genes and bloodline through the centuries—have no say in their extermination. In other words, if a child is killed it is none of a man's business—but if a child is born it becomes the man's business for another eighteen years in the form of child support.

Every medical manual states that the unborn child is a separate patient of the doctor. A baby is not a part of its mother; it is not an organ like a liver or a lung; it is to be protected inside of its mother during its period of gestation, but it is never a functioning part of a woman's body.

Abortion is the most common "medical procedure" in the United States today. Yet it is the only medical procedure not shown to the public on television. Photographs of what aborted babies look like are met with fierce wrath from Pro-Abortion people.

One of the most common reasons for an abortion is that the mother and father broke up recently. Ostensibly, abortion is committed for the health of the mother—but this can mean she would be depressed if she couldn't go to the bar as often with her friends while pregnant or after the child is born.

Even the old main line churches adopted official pro-choice positions after they stopped believing in the central tenets of their own religion (they are dying out as a result).

The war over abortion rages on. 52 percent of the American public are now pro-life—the highest number in decades. 41 percent believe abortion is a right of every woman. No issue has so divided America since slavery.

The Pro-Abortion side is so radical that they insist children have the right to undergo an abortion not only without the permission of their parents—but without their knowledge. Not only is serious psychological damage done to the mothers of aborted babies, but also to those in the abortion industry, and the forgotten victims of abortion—the fathers of the dead babies.

The 2004 Unborn Victims of Violence Act passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by President Bush, makes a child in the womb an additional victim of more than 60 crimes if it is injured or killed at any stage of development. The Pro-Death crowd fought furiously against this act since the only exception is abortion. Obviously, this means that the baby's humanity is only denied when its mother doesn't want it.

In his speech after winning the Nobel Prize in 1986, Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel said:

"I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented."


Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment
    • itakins profile image

      itakins 

      8 years ago from Irl

      James-

      Just trawling around for old times sake!

      With regard to @kenja-comment 10 days ago,I am genuinely interested to know why he believes the life of a child in utero is somehow 'less sanctified' by virtue of it being 3 rather than 5 months ,and also,why he believes this is also the case with a child in utero who has a disability.How has he come to his conclusions?

      Thanks-

    • prairieprincess profile image

      Sharilee Swaity 

      8 years ago from Canada

      James, thanks for writing this. When I think of what actually is, it makes me feel so sick and disgusted. We, as a society, have lost sight of our most important asset, our children, and have chosen to live for money and convenience. It was interesting, but revolting, to hear how the media manipulators deliberately set out to deceive the public through clever use of words. I did not know that they actually admitted that, but I am not surprised. When trying to debate the abortion issue with those who support it, it is difficult because they are so brainwashed.

      Thank you, James, for writing such an intensive article on such a heartbreaking subject. Take care.

    • no body profile image

      Robert E Smith 

      8 years ago from Rochester, New York

      Jim, thank you again. I always see the work and care you put into your writing. I think of this article this way: When you get to heaven and after you see your Lord face to face, you will see a long line of people that know you cared about them and how they were murdered. They love you now as I do my brother. I am going to share this on my Facebook timeline. bob.

    • Kenja profile image

      Ken Taub 

      8 years ago from Long Island, NY

      I grew up in a permissive, experimental time in two progressive states (NY & CA).

      We sometimes like to think otherwise, but we are all products of our upbringing; which includes our parents, our extended family, our culture, our geography, our religion, and the times we were born into (someone who was a teen in California in the 1970s is very likely to have a different worldview than someone born on a farm in Kansas in the 1940s, right?).

      In my case, I was surrounded by pro-choice, women's rights, easy and expected contraception, and individual choice ("Our Bodies, Our Selves" etc.).

      Now, I have come to live a number of decades in a number of places, and have become a parent. And while I will always be pro-choice in the cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother (or if prenatal tests show the child is severely deformed or brain damaged; you can disagree, which is fine)...

      I now have come to agree that an abortion of choice (as opposed to necessity) after the the first 3 or 4 months is willful murder of a child. I came to this realization for several reasons: first, children have been known to survive and thrive being born as early as 5 months (20-24 weeks).

      Also, if a man shot and killed a pregnant woman, one who was 7 , 8 or 9 months pregnant, and the charge was double homicide, I would, as a jury member, say Yea to double homicide. The termination of a healthy 8 month old fetus is murder -- we are surely not talking about a 10 day old clump of cells of a certain "potential" here.

      If I were King there would be no abortions of healthy babies after 4 months; and I would force the Pro Life portion of society to set up a vast and effective adoption ring (I would also insist the Pro Life crowd put as much energy and attention to the safety, education, health and well-being of a 3 or 13 year old child as they do with 3 month old fetuses). But I'm not King (thankfully).

      So... thank you James. We may not agree on every single detail, but you paint a deep, historic, reasoned and heartfelt portrait of life in the womb, the sanctity of it, and waking up to the Who that resides in a woman's belly at 5 or 7 or 9 months, before his or her birth. Ken

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      8 years ago from Chicago

      Nyamache— I certainly agree with you: "Abortion is cruelty." And I am with you wholeheartedly that "The unborn children should be given a chance to live." AMEN.

      You wrote something really deep: "When a mother aborts she thinks that she will not be burdened by child rearing problems but she later on finds out that she is not in peace with her mind. She regrets and feels guilty for killing the child something that hinders her happiness forever."

      Yes. That is right. I know mothers who have the day the baby was due to be born etched into their minds and when that day rolls around each year it is spent in tears and profound grief. The Devil whispered in their ear that's it was nothing; the baby would dampen your fun; it will hamper your lifestyle; it's not a baby just a clump of tissue; it will be better off dead.

      Thank you very much for posting such extraordinary comments. I must come over soon and see what you have been writing. I appreciate the visit.

    • Nyamache profile image

      Joshua Nyamache 

      8 years ago from Kenya

      Abortion is cruelty. It is murder and those who are doing abortion do not even consider the pain the unborn baby undergoes. The unborn children should be given a chance to live. We are alive because our parents did not choose a bad choice of doing abortion but gave us the right to live. Human life including of fetus should be respected. I very much agree with statement "Abortion is not a solution to life's problems." People should not go for abortion thinking that their problems will end. Problems will always be there be it financial ones. What matters is how we solve them without creating more problems. When a mother aborts she thinks that she will not be burdened by child rearing problems but she later on finds out that she is not in peace with her mind. She regrets and feels guilty for killing the child something that hinders her happiness forever.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      8 years ago from Chicago

      Au Fait— On to Part One of your comments. And, I apologize for my tone yesterday. Some things you wrote in Part Two seriously offended me. I see that in Part One we do agree about some substantive issues.

      I will come over to read your Hub "How Often Do Women Think About Sex.”

      I understand that you believe social pathologies result from what you call "poverty" and "people who are poor." You see, I believe the opposite is true. I believe that the actions each person takes every day as they live their lives—the choices that they make themselves—largely determine their fate. I see far too much evidence that contradicts the liberal idea that "society" makes us who we are and every fault is not a fault but a natural reaction to "oppression." Such concepts are used to excuse all bad behavior as the fault of some irresistible external force.

      And the word "poor" is used ridiculously in America. You want to see what poor really is, look at the one million people who live on the streets of Calcutta in cardboard boxes looking for a rat to eat.

      The following are facts about persons in America defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

      • Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

      • Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

      • Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

      • The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

      • Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.

      • Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

      • Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

      • Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

      That is hardly what would qualify as "poor" in the world or even in the recent past in our own country. What it truly means is that some people are "poorer" than others. Relative to others, some are poor. This results in the great sibling sins of envy and covetousness. It results from thinking it is "unfair" that some have more than others. This is the great progressive bugaboo that makes their thinking latent communism.

      You are into psychology I see from your profile page. I am sure you are aware of the great psychology experiment that found that when asked: "Would you be HAPPY making $50,000 per year if all your neighbors made $25,000?" Almost every person answered Yes! But when asked "Would you be happy making $50,000 a year if all your neighbors made $100,000?" The answer is usually No! So it is not what you have it is what other people have. And from this comes the idiotic laundry list of group grievances and newly dreamed up "rights." A right to a cell phone, a right to transportation, a right to a community swimming pool, et al. Essentially, it is a "right" to what "some other people have."

      You write: "I do not want to see us go back to the bad old days when women often killed themselves in their effort to abort their unwanted pregnancies."

      How many women died from illegal abortions in 1972? How many died in childbirth?

      You say that "I do not believe it is for me to tell other people how to live their lives."

      So you are against seat belt laws, helmet laws, smoking laws, drug laws, etc etc etc. You are a Libertarian then? Or do you only not want to tell people not to kill their babies?

      You write: "I guarantee if men could carry and give birth to a baby they would have horrific fits if any woman told them they had to follow through, like it or not."

      But I have already shown you statistical evidence that this is NOT what is happening. Only half of one percent of women get abortions because a man wants them to.

      You claim: "70% of men across this country DO NOT PAY their Court Ordered CHILD SUPPORT."

      And that is a lie. 39% do not.

      http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-240.pdf

      And let me ask you, since you believe a man should have no say as to whether his children are killed in the womb. Then why should men be ordered at the barrel of a gun to pay child support at all? If a man has no say in the death of his baby why on earth should a woman be allowed to have it and make him pay for it for 18 years? He had no say in it being born?

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      8 years ago from Chicago

      Au Fait— OK. Part Two of your comments.

      You wrote: "We all know that some people whose affiliation I won’t mention here don’t really object to babies dying from hunger or lack of medical care or shelter"

      Really? There are people who don't care about babies? Please tell me who that might be. I'll tell you who doesn't care about babies—the women who have murdered them! And those who approve of the murder of innocent, defenseless human beings.

      Who "never fails to fight tooth and nail to keep from having to help poor single mothers with anything?"

      Having ANTHING!? I thought women wanted to be single to be INDEPENDENT? Anybody who can't survive without a government teet is not independent, they are DEPENDENT. But maybe not smart enough to know the difference. These women have just replaced their husbands with the government. The State is their husband and the daddy of their children now. Do you ever wonder how the human race survived for thousands of years without government checks? Maybe people did not used to be so infantile.

      Don't tell me I don't care about babies. You don't know me. Don't pretend you do. I have four babies of my own. I love babies. It is you who want to murder them in their sleep and then brag about how much you care about them. That is sickening.

      How many children starve in America? The Christian Church has been providing charity for orphans, widows, and the poor for two thousand years, all over the world. What have you done except snivel?

      Nobody should be living off the government. Private charity should be taking care of the poor. If the State did not confiscate half of every penny earned in this country there would be plenty of money to do it with. Do you know of anybody who starved to death in America in the 1950s BEFORE we had all these programs? The poverty rate was 15% in 1965 when these programs got rolling and after confiscated TRILLIONS of dollars from the people who earned it the poverty rate is still 15%! Does that not turn a light bulb on in your head?

      I've got an idea for you: maybe people should not have sex unless they are willing to shoulder the responsibility for the natural outcome of sex—reproduction. Then they would be mature human beings, not little ignorant babies. And people would do that by and large if people like you didn't tell, them "It's OK. You can just kill your baby." And "If you want to let it live then other people can work to support you and the baby for the next twenty years while you watch television."

      How about if I just sit on my ass for forty years and YOU work to support me? You're not a scrooge are you?! You're not stingy, are you? Can I just retire right now and live off of your wages? Why not?

      Anybody in America can get medical care. At a place called a hospital. It is illegal for them not to provide medical care to all people. And I am not "sneering" at anybody. I am talking about murder here. Should you be able to murder your one year old baby if you lose your job?

      You keep saying "half the people only care about their own money" and I'll tell you who they are: people of YOUR affiliation. Conservatives and Christians give far more money to charity, adopt far more children, give more blood, and volunteer far more of their time for charity work than people of your ilk, people of the Party of Death. You see, Conservatives WANT to give of THEIR OWN time and money for the poor. People like you want to give OTHER PEOPLE'S time and money to the poor. You don't even see the difference do you?

      You wrote: " Before abortions were legal a lot of women died because self-righteous people like you judged them for being less perfect"

      Oh yea? So tell me, how many women died? Because I have the facts and I'll bet one testicle that you are just spouting off the communist party line and don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

      I am not the least bit self-righteous. To be against murder you must be self-righteous?

      Why don't we just tell all Americans that NONE of them have to work anymore? And give them all government checks of $100,000 a year each. Would you like that? And for each kid another $100,000. Would that work for you?

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      8 years ago from Chicago

      Au Fait— Thank you for the correspondence. Let's see . . . I will tackle 'part three' first since it was posted first.

      If you want to live off of other people, you have to learn to work the system. I have one sister (out of seven siblings, the others work) and one cousin who are experts at it. Both went on "disability" in their 30s. There is nothing wrong with them that anyone could not complain about. You can be allergic to alarm clocks, or have a 'phobia' about being around other people, or have one leg shorter than the other. They get section 8 housing benefits, food stamps, their kids get free lunches at school, free childbirth, absolute free health care, free dentures, free dental work, free glasses, utility subsidies, free cell phones, they get CHIP and TANF, free public school, college free entirely or partially, and they get something called an "Earned Credit Income" which is apparently a tax 'refund' even though you didn't pay any taxes. They get more food from churches along with free clothes and other assistance. Add it all up. They live like it costs about $30,000 a year to live for a working person but the only work they do is working the welfare system. Folks in the game learn all the angles. It has become an art form. Seriously. One will call others and say, "Free shoes at so and so this month!" Word gets around.

      Now I ask them why they do it. They don't like to work. Besides, look at all the other people doing it. I ask them where that money comes from. Do they understand that every working person in America pays about $10,000 a year on average that is taken from them and given to someone else? 'Entitlements' or 'transfer payments' are $1.5 trillion so with 140 million working stiffs that is over ten grand apiece confiscated to support strangers. They don't get it. What they say is "The government has plenty of money! And if they don't they can just print more!"

      They do not understand that wealth does not exist on its own—it has to be created. They were never taught this in school.

      I don't know where you got the wacky idea that I "love war" or "spew garbage and bilge" or am "so misinformed" as "all my friends must be too." Are you claiming that YOU are more educated, informed, and intelligent than I am? That seems to be the thrust of your argument. :D

    • Au fait profile image

      C E Clark 

      8 years ago from North Texas

      Part 1

      I am aware of the sexual revolution of the 60s, and I am also aware of my classmates at the university I attended recently. Today’s college women aren’t ashamed of being pregnant, or of their friends knowing they’re pregnant, but they are ashamed of having to explain to their parents, grandparents, and aunts and uncles that they are pregnant and not planning to marry. That is why they go and get abortions without telling their parents.

      You’re correct in that many (but not all) young college women do use the reasoning that a pregnancy is inconvenient. Whether or not that is the real reason because women especially worry about fitting in and what is called social desirability. Women tend to say what is expected of them, true or not. Read my hub on “How Often Do Women Think About Sex.”

      However, not all young women attend college. Many come from poverty, and strict homes where out of marriage pregnancies are still frowned upon. We have an awful lot of poor people in this country and poor often equals limited education. Their values have not changed like the values and attitudes of the better- educated kids from middle class homes who are attending college.

      One of my coworkers told me just the other day that his girlfriend was bugging him to marry her because she is pregnant with his baby. The days of ‘having to get married’ because a woman is pregnant would seem to be gone for the better off young people, but lots of people who live in poverty and who have not had the benefit of our modern enlightened attitudes still believe the old fashioned way. Their parents and grandparents absolutely believe the old fashioned way, and that is who will shame them when they discover they are pregnant and not married, or not getting married.

      Anyone who assumes anything about anything is usually wrong. That is the way assumptions work. They are at least as bad and hurtful and WRONG as stereotyping people. They are usually based on flimsy information at best. There are always exceptions to every rule. There is only one rule that you can say absolutely always applies to every living person, and that rule is that everyone will die at some point. Even taxes are not certain, but death is. So the one assumption you can make correctly is that everyone is going to die. All other assumptions are opinion based and subjective. More than 90% likely to be WRONG.

      Not all young women dress like harlots. I work for our local school district, and I visit several schools in the district daily. Our middle and high schools have approximately 8,000 students and perhaps half are female. I can tell you that very few of the girls dress provocatively. There is a strict dress code and it is enforced. It’s unfair and unreasonable to label all young girls the same when they are not. Regardless of how they dress, their getting pregnant is not likely to be cheered by their parents and grandparents. In a situation that includes unwanted pregnancy, family and family attitudes matter.

      For some reason certain people always want to paint everyone with the same brush, and it is always a dirty brush. If these people see a young person who is, in their opinion, dressing improperly or behaving improperly, suddenly it is all young people who are acting or dressing like uncivilized humans, not just the one or the few they observed. Try not to imagine that all 11-year-old girls are proudly giving blowjobs. I know they are not. Very few things in this world are 100%. Only death for a certainty.

      I am a feminist. I do not like abortion at all, but I do not believe it is for me to tell other people how to live their lives. They must deal with their own problems in their own way just as I must. I would not want abortion made illegal because I do not want to see us go back to the bad old days when women often killed themselves in their effort to abort their unwanted pregnancies.

      Men have no rights IMO where a woman’s body is concerned. If a man is concerned with his unborn child, why does he leave it with a person he can’t trust to take good care of it? Do not put your unborn child where its life may be in danger if you really care about it. Perhaps Plan B might be a better choice if indeed you really care about your unborn child. Need I explain Plan B??

      Both men and women should be responsible about birth control and both men and women should be responsible about sex. Birth control doesn’t always work, usually because it is not used correctly. Whatever the reason, if you value your sperm that may fertilize an egg, do not put it where it will be in danger.

      In the case of a fetus, possession is in fact 100% of the law. Do not leave your fetus where it is not wanted and thus endanger its life. Do not hand over possession of your fetus to a woman you cannot trust to take care of it as you would like. Comprendé? Use the head with a brain for a change.

      I guarantee if men could carry and give birth to a baby they would have horrific fits if any woman told them they had to follow through, like it or not.

      70% of men across this country DO NOT PAY their Court Ordered CHILD SUPPORT. Believe me paying child support is a snap compared to carrying a baby and giving birth to it, yet thousands of men choose not to pay it. The majority of men choose to let their children suffer in poverty – is that because they care so much about their children? If men care so much about their unborn children, why don’t they take care of them and support them after they are born?

      Do not make excuses for men not paying their child support. There are no acceptable excuses for not doing your best to support your own children. Mothers often go without to make sure their children have what they need. My own mother always did and we were dirt poor when I was growing up. Where is the sacrifice from the father’s?

      No man should have any rights to any woman’s body for any purpose, period. Forcing someone to have your baby is just plain barbaric.

      Men need to learn personal responsibility and control. A man invented the zipper but men do not seem to be able to raise the zipper up and keep it in that position when there is a desirable sex object in the vicinity.

      When are men going to start taking responsibility for their own actions? If the woman they’re using isn’t herself using birth control, then why do men insist on having sex? Why don’t men take the initiative in making certain birth control is being used and used correctly?

      If you find a woman who won’t cooperate in using birth control correctly, like I said, there’s always Plan B. Plan B will guarantee no pregnancy and no abortion. Learn to control yourselves. Women are expected to control themselves and crucified when they don’t. Why should men get a free ride on this issue? – no pun intended.

      Stop blaming women for not making everything easy for you. If you want a woman who will take care of every sexual detail for you so that all you have to do is use, enjoy, and discard, get a professional, a pro.

    • Au fait profile image

      C E Clark 

      8 years ago from North Texas

      Part 2

      When people have babies they can’t afford they are shamed by plenty of disapproving people for so doing. We all know that some people whose affiliation I won’t mention here don’t really object to babies dying from hunger or lack of medical care or shelter, because they never fail to fight tooth and nail to keep from having to help poor single mothers with anything. These people, like yourself, insist babies should be born and NEVER killed BEFORE they are born, but once that baby arrives, they don’t care what happens to it so long as it doesn’t cost them so much as a half penny in their lifetimes.

      The people I’m talking about have no objection to paying billions of dollars to kill people and break their stuff (WAR), but when it comes to helping a poor woman support her kids because she didn’t get an abortion, they scream bloody murder. However, since the children have already been born, let them starve and die if doing otherwise will cost these Scrooges a single penny.

      First you people whine because of abortions, and then you whine because women who can’t afford their babies need public assistance. You people are never happy! There’s no pleasing you. On top of everything else you’re whining because a woman isn’t using birth control for YOUR convenience! Get your own birth control! Take a little responsibility for yourself. Do your duty to support the babies your decisions to ignore birth control create. Women may not use birth control, but if YOU know she isn’t using birth control or suspect it, it’s on you too.

      Even if a woman is on the pill she may not have taken it correctly. If she took even one pill late or forgot to take it at all during that cycle, you’re screwed until the end of the NEXT cycle. Again, no pun intended. Instead of taking her word for it that she has taken her BC pills correctly, take responsibility for yourself and use another method to make sure. Or abstain, as you are fond of advising other people to do – Yup, Plan B to the rescue.

      Keep in mind that condoms fail 14% of the time on average. That means 14 people out of 100 will become pregnant and/or get a disease. Do I have to say Plan B again?? Need I remind you still AGAIN that if you put your unborn baby where it isn’t safe you have no right to complain if it is aborted?

      Do the smart thing and be careful about who you leave your unborn babies with if you really care what happens to them. Don’t only look out for your unborn babies, but keep your other ‘valuables’ safe from disease while you’re at it. Men need to start being sexually responsible for themselves.

      How would I feel if someone killed my baby and I had nothing to say about it? I would never leave my unborn or already born child in an unsafe place. My daughter never had a babysitter even once for 2 seconds AFTER she was born. Did someone FORCE you to leave your unborn child in a dangerous place? How exactly did s/he do that?

      YOU had the choice of whether to leave your unborn child in that dangerous place or to go to Plan B. Sounds like you made a bad decision.

      Yes, according to some stingy people it is shameful when someone asks for assistance to feed their child or to give it necessary medical care.

      You say today it is more honorable to abort a child one can’t afford and you sneer at women who choose to do that, but it is STILL honorable in the minds of people like you to bring babies into the world and then starve the them to death rather than shamefully ask for help to buy food or medical care once it has been born! I think it is more shameful not to ask for help and to expect a baby to suffer because it was born into a world where at least half of the people only care about their own money.

      I do not think it is honorable to kill anyone. I like to be consistent. I don’t want to kill abortion doctors, women who have abortions, or anyone convicted of crimes because I am not the one who gave them life and I do not think it is for me to take their life. Neither do I like abortions. Before abortions were legal a lot of women died because self-righteous people like you judged them for being less perfect than they believed themselves to be. You seem to be of the same mind.

      Yes, men used women for sexual purposes, criticized those same women for giving them what they wanted, and then shunned them because they never gave a damn about the women in the first place. They were just cheap booty calls. And you call yourself better? Somehow more moral??

      Times really haven’t changed so much have they? Give a man what he wants and then get called a w- - - - and criticized for getting rid of his unwanted baby which he even denies is his because he doesn’t want to take care of it!

      Since certain people never object to paying for wars, they love the death penalty, and they have no objection to children (or anyone else) dying of hunger or lack of medical care once they are born, I can’t help but come to the conclusion that these people have a fetish for death when it’s somebody else’s.

      I never said it was impossible for ‘the young’ to remain celibate. Try not to be so creative with you accusations. I did say it is unlikely, and unreasonable to expect young people to abstain from sex for very long in today’s world. Some may abstain, but most will not. We should be dealing with reality, not wishful thinking, shouldn’t we? Dealing with reality usually gets better results. Dealing with wishful thinking usually gets nothing.

      If 65% of brides in 1965 (the Sexy 60s) reported being virgins I would not call them supermen/women but super liars. You need to read my hub on “How Often Do Women Think About Sex,” and learn about social desirability. Women especially, care what other people think of them, and some of them will lie about how much they eat, and how much they think about or engage in sex, because it may be more than society thinks is seemly.

    • Au fait profile image

      C E Clark 

      8 years ago from North Texas

      Part 3

      The average American can draw $30,000 a year without lifting a finger these days? Wow! Have you informed the thousands of homeless people in this country about that? Frankly, I’d like to know how that works myself since I’m looking at living in my car pretty soon if things don’t improve. Why don’t you just forward the instructions and tell me where to pick up an application for that?

      I know a lot of poor people and not one of them is making that much money. Not one. That’s why they’re poor. In fact, I am a person living in poverty right now, and I can’t make that much even with a college education. Are you talking in riddles by chance? They don’t have to lift a finger but maybe they do have to lift something else? What’s the catch? Maybe I’m not average. Maybe that’s the catch. If I were average I could make $30,000 a year doing nothing, right?

      You are grossly misinformed about public assistance programs in the U.S. That is a major problem with those people who love war and hate abortion. Their mouths seem to go on autopilot and spew garbage and bilge that is so misinformed and downright wrong it boggles the mind. Honestly, sometimes when I hear people like you talk I wonder who ties your shoes for you and who punches out the numbers on your phone for you. Fortunately for most of you, your friends are usually just as uninformed as you are, so you miss out on all the eye rolls and sarcastic remarks you would get amongst educated, informed people.

      Back to abortion -- first you force the woman to have the baby and then you kill the baby yourself because you’re too cheap to help support it with your tax dollars when neither of its parents are able to do so – which was the reason for her wanting to abort in the first place. Where’s your shame?

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      8 years ago from Chicago

      Au Fait— Thank you very much for taking the time to read my article and post such an extensive, thoughtful, and insightful commentary.

      I have considered your views carefully and I must say honestly that had they been written in 1965 they would make perfect sense. People did stop short of having premarital and extramarital sex before the Sexual Revolution because of shame. I wrote more about the Sexual Revolution, its causes and its results, in another Hub. Here is a link to it:

      https://hubpages.com/relationships/Sexual-Revoluti...

      In fact, shame has been a powerful motivator used by all societies all over the world from time immemorial to conform to community standards that have been set up by the wise to ensure the survival of the entire community. I do not know your age but the young today have NO shame about hardly anything. They dress like little harlots by age 12 and the girls are handing out blow jobs left and right in Junior High—and they do NOT feel any shame about it: They are PROUD of it.

      I am going to quote some statistics for you that can be found here:

      http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab...

      These statistics show that SHAME is given by females as the reason for having an abortion—they don't want people to find out they were pregnant—in half of one percent of the cases. Just as many say "I would have to move." Eight times as many say "A baby would interfere with my career." 25% of all girls studied simply said "I'm not ready to have a baby yet." 6% of all who killed their own babies said "I want to finish college first." 3% said "I don't want the baby of THIS particular man."

      I also find it very interesting that only one half of one percent say "My husband or boyfriend wants me to abort." I say that because feminists groups often harp on this as a HUGE reason women abort but the truth is the vast majority of men do not want their offspring snuffed out. But they have NO say in the matter. Which seems a bit twisted to me. Imagine if someone said "I am going to kill your child and you have nothing to say about it!"

      Feminist groups also love to harp on rape and incest. 3 out of 1000 women do cite rape as a reason to abort; and 3 out of 10000 say incest. But 98% of abortions are simply out of inconvenience. 37% of those admit they used no contraception. Gee, the sexual act has as its very purpose and function the repopulating of the human race. Getting pregnant in American society is almost looked at as a failure of my body to do what I wanted it to. But it is not. Any pregnancy is a success—a success of the normal natural human sexuality. 20% say they used contraception but it failed. Of course it fails.

      If it is true as you suggest that there is more shame in having a baby than killing your baby then I must say all hope is lost for our nation.

      You and others say it is impossible for the young to remain celibate but what are our young, a whole new species of human being? 77 percent of females were virgins when they got married in 1965. What were they, superhuman?

      As far as the death penalty goes, I too find that an interesting angle. Why is it that the same people who think it is honorable to kill 55 million unborn Americans think it is shameful to kill a mass murderer?

      There is plenty of help for the underprivileged. The average American can draw $30,000 a year now while not lifting a finger to anything productive in the world.

      But back to the stats for another minute. The physical health of the mother is only named in 1 out of 1000 abortions, and a deformed baby twice that often. The sex of the baby is named in America 1 out of 10000 times. No shame there. 6 percent say "I have enough kids already." 12% say "I'm want to wait until I am married and have a husband to help financially and physically." 16% say "I don't want my life to change." 30% say "It is too expensive." Think about that. My parents and ALL of my aunts and uncles and my grandparents on both sides did not have a pot to piss in when they started having babies. If they had used the "I don't have enough money" excuse the human race would be extinct by now. And that was BEFORE any welfare was in place and BEFORE it became honorable to live of off other people. There was real shame back in those days: shame in not making your own way in the world.

      32% say "I am too young. I want to wait until I am older." I am glad my 17-year-old mother didn't feel that way or I wouldn't be here. Doctors say the most common reasons are that the mothers are "immature" or "just don't want the responsibility of caring for a child." 69% in fact say they just do not want a baby "RIGHT NOW." It is an inconvenient time.

      I very much appreciate the dialogue and your point of view. Thanks again for engaging on this topic.

    • Au fait profile image

      C E Clark 

      8 years ago from North Texas

      I believe abortion is caused by society. Lots of young girls and women get abortions because they can't face society as a single pregnant woman. Young girls especially fear facing their parents with the news that they will be grandparents. Parents are angry and feel shamed, and in turn shame their daughters. Men all but never feel the shame of an unwanted pregnancy. Men all but never share the shame.

      While we do not want to encourage our young girls and women with no means to support a baby to get pregnant, could we not think of a way so that they would feel there were other options besides abortion? Adoption is lovely, but one must feel the shame of being pregnant and unwed for several months before that can happen, and several months afterward, and people never forget.

      Some people will try to shame you until you die, mainly because they're perfect and have never made a mistake in their entire lives. Not everyone can be perfect. Think how dull this world would be if everyone was perfect. Think of all the men who would have to get married just to have sex?

      Is there no way we can take the shame out of unwanted pregnancies and therefore lower the abortion rate? I became pregnant when unmarried and I was not a young girl. Several people suggested abortion to me, but I myself never even considered abortion and it wouldn't have crossed my mind had it not been suggested by other people. Both I and my daughter's father wanted our baby even if we weren't married and didn't plan to get married at that time. We did eventually marry when our child was 5 and a half years old.

      There are lots of reasons for abortion, but most people seem to use abortion to avoid shame. The people who suggested it to me did so in hopes I would do it to avoid my shaming their families. I never spoke to them again, and my daughter has never met them and never will because they wanted her dead before she had a chance to live. Why would she want to know such people?

      We will never get rid of experimental sex among teens or sex among singles, but could we at least get rid of the shame that goes with unwed, unplanned pregnancy?

      I'm the sort of person who has and will stand up for what I think is right and if you don't agree, well . . . maybe you know the answer. That is why I didn't let people who worried about shame persuade me to kill my baby. Anyone who didn't like it could put their thoughts, their innuendos, and their suggestions where the sun doesn't shine.

      Not everyone has my strength to stand up to the busybodies in this world. I refused the shame. I think the shame belongs to those people who through their narrow mindedness promote abortion as a way to avoid that shame.

      Even if they do not verbally suggest abortion, the way they look at someone, the way they sneer, the way they gossip, all these things promote abortion to young girls who don't have my ability to stand up to people who need standing up to.

      I do not like abortion either, but I would like to know why so many people who think abortion is wrong are not willing to help unwed mothers to support their babies and why these same people favor the death penalty. If life is truly sacred, then everyone's life is sacred. Be consistent with your views on life.

      Get rid of the shame and be willing to help the underprivileged so that they won't feel they must abort because that's all they can afford. Or because they don't want their baby growing up in poverty like they may have had to do. Find the reasons for abortions and then find solutions. Start by getting rid of the shame.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      mours sshields— You are quite welcome, Marcia Ours. Thank you for reading my article. I appreciate your kind comments and I agree with you. Welcome to the HubPages Community! I look forward to reading some of your writings.

    • profile image

      mours sshields 

      9 years ago from Elwood, Indiana

      Thank-you for such a thought-provoking article! What a tradgedy and shame abortion is! I know God truly hates it!

      Marcia Ours

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      CJ Sledgehammer— You are welcome.

      As you keenly observed, "One out of every four pregnancies in America ends in an abortion. Statistically speaking, this makes a woman's womb the most dangerous place in the world to be."

      These are such shameful facts. That is vomitous.

      Thanks again, brother, for sharing your discernment with us.

    • profile image

      CJ Sledgehammer 

      9 years ago

      Brother, James:

      Thank you for your kind words and know that they are mutual.

      One out of every four pregnancies in America ends in an abortion. Statistically speaking, this makes a woman's womb the most dangerous place in the world to be.

      Who would have ever thought that so many of America's women would willingly remodel their womb into a tomb?!

      May God have mercy on the United States for this treachery!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      C J Sledgehammer— Thank you for taking the time to read this article. I very much appreciate your thoughtful and insightful comments. Once again, I welcome your learned voice to the HubPages Community.

      I am grateful for your compliments, especially the calling of this piece of a work a "Masterpiece."

      You write, "It is a matter of abject irresponsibility leading to a heinous crime. This is humanity at its worst - it just doesn't get any more debased than this!!!"

      I surely agree with you. Pro-Death people just don't get it. The first President Bush told me once that he was in a motorcade, while in office, and a really hideously ugly woman rushed his car with a big sign that read, "STAY OUT OF MY WOMB!" He said, "She needn't have worried about that."

      You write, "50,000,000 American babies have been murdered by their mothers in the past 39 years. America's women have killed more people than all wars combined over the past 200 years. . . . They've murdered more humans than Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao (combined)."

      This is a stain on the American Soul my friend. The American Holocaust. The Indians nor the Negro Slaves were ever treated as are the helpless babies of America in the very place designed to protect them from harm: the womb of their mothers.

      You write, "Since the powers-that-be believe women are unable to control their temperament any more than they can control their licentiousness, they just make their crimes legal."

      Ouch! You have a keen eye for the Truth. And the Truth hurts.

      Then you go for the coup de grace: "Satan tempted Eve in the garden with a pretty fruit, promising her happiness. He then tempted her again with the promise of happiness if she killed her offspring. In both cases man idly stood by and watched as woman took instruction from Satan and brought death to humanity."

      Oh man. You get it. I am blessed to meet you brother.

      James

    • profile image

      CJ Sledgehammer 

      9 years ago

      James, what a powerful and thought-provoking masterpiece!

      You said, "Let's face it folks: the vast majority of abortions are merely the killing of babies for the convenience of the mother. It is practiced as an escape from a prime responsibility of life: the consequences of one's own actions."

      --------------

      That is, indeed, the case! It is a matter of abject irresponsibility leading to a heinous crime. This is humanity at its worst - it just doesn't get any more debase than this!!!

      50,000,000 American babies have been murdered by their mothers in the past 39 years. America's women have killed more people than all wars combined over the past 200 years. America's women have killed more people than the Roman Catholic church during the 200 years of the Grand Inquisition. They've murdered more humans than Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao (combined). These men were seen as beasts, so how is it that these murderous women escape scrutiny?

      You then stated, "I am for what should truly be called Pro-Choice: every woman (unless she is raped) has the choice to keep her legs crossed. Once she opens them, she should bear the natural results of copulation, which is reproduction of the human species.

      ------------

      Damn stright, my friend! But, society thinks women are just physically mature children that cannot think for themselves or make prudent decisions. Because the establishment thinks women are mental and moral midgets, they allow them certain offenses and priviledges that would land a man behind bars for eons.

      Abortions are legal because the powers-that-be believe women should not be held liable for their actions because they are just grown up children who are emotionally and psychogically under-developed. So, prosecuting a woman is like prosecuting a 14-year old child.

      Since the powers-that-be believe women are unable to control their temperament any more than they can control their licentiousness, they just make their crimes legal.

      Please also consider how many of these so-called "lawmakers" are wealthy and powerful men who probably have had many illicit affairs during their lifetime. What better way to avoid 18 years of expensive child support payments and college expenses than to sweep their sin under the carpet by legalizing the murder of innocence.

      Satan tempted Eve in the garden with a pretty fruit, promising her happiness. He then tempted her again with the promise of happiness if she killed her offspring. In both cases, man idly stood by and watched as woman took instruction from Satan and brought death to humanity.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      techygran— Thank you!! Thank you very much! :-)

    • techygran profile image

      Cynthia Zirkwitz 

      9 years ago from Vancouver Island, Canada

      great hub James!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Onusonus— I see that you did write a Hub about this topic recently. I have made a note to myself to come over ASAP and read it. And I noticed your newer Hub about the Treblinka Death Camp too.

      Thank you for reading this article. I appreciate your gracious compliments.

    • profile image

      Onusonus 

      9 years ago

      Interesting to me James, I recently wrote a hub on the same subject. You touched on the dehumanization aspect of abortions which is comparable to what the Nazis did. I came to the same conclusion after writing about the Treblinka death camp. I swear I didn't steal your idea! Honest!

      Good hub as always.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      SanXuary— I appreciate this visitation from you. Welcome to the HubPages Community. I look forward to reading some of your articles soon.

      You wrote: "The problem is that easy solutions to complex problems allows us to deny the real problems in our society. Building lives and families is no longer our goal but selfishness is the new agenda. We throw people away everyday even when we are alive but always finish by judging only ourselves."

      Brilliant!! I totally agree with your analysis. Well said! Thank you very much for your extraordinary remarks.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      WillStarr— All of your comments here are outstanding. Thank you very much for joining in the conversation. I agree with you wholeheartedly, my friend.

      James :D

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      iRob— You wrote: "I am saying the issue deals with rights"

      Where do rights come from?

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      iRob— You write: "My tonsils are living. But would getting a tonsillectomy, thereby killing them, be unethical? Just like an unborn baby my tonsils have a full set of human DNA and are composed of living matter. However, my tonsils, like an unborn baby, cannot live on their own."

      But unborn babies can live on their about halfway through pregnancy these days. What if "science" came up with a way for them to live outside their mother at one month after conception? What would you say then?

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      iRob— You wrote: "It is for all purposes part of the mother and thus subject to the choices of the mother."

      No sir, it is not ever "part of the mother" even according to the sole guide you hold dear: Science! Science says that the unborn child is a separate being, a separate medical patient even from its mother. A liver, lung, or kidney is rightfully part of the mother. The baby is in the mother for protection—but is not a part of her.

      You wrote: "Thus, religion answers far fewer of mankind's questions than secular scientific principles."

      That is completely erroneous. How about these questions: "Why am I me? Why am I alive? Where did the universe come from? What happens when I die? What is the meaning of life? Does my life have a purpose? Who is God?"

      These are the most important questions human beings ask and science cannot answer any of them.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      iRob— You wrote: "Science, constantly brings us closer to fuller understanding of our place in the universe, while religion leaves us stagnant in the dark world of our primitive past."

      That is not true. There is no division between religion and science unless you, or someone like you, puts it there.

      Rene Descartes, the "Father of Modern Philosophy," revolutionized mathematics and invented analytical geometry. He invented a system of coordinates that is still in use today for graphs, charts, and computer graphics. It was Descartes who stated that the physical world was made up of invisible particles in motion. He believed that all knowledge could be unified through mathematics. Things should be subject to human analysis—"breaking down" in Greek. But Descartes also warned us that science and numbers are NOT the only truth; and the senses are limited. There are also revelation, intuition, impulse—the mind and the heart. Wisdom lies in knowing the place and limits of all these.

      Francis Bacon was the hero of early scientists, whom they called "the master of those who know." He is also known as "The Father of the Scientific Method." Bacon wrote: "They that deny a God destroy man's nobility; for certainly man is of kin to the beasts in his body; and, if he be not of kin to God by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature"

      The devout Christian William Harvey discovered blood circulation and his fellow Christian Brother, Robert Boyle, is the "Father of Modern Chemistry." Boyle promoted the idea that the natural world was a world of order, which became the basis for the empirical method of scientific inquiry. He was the first man to demonstrate that substances are made of atoms, and pioneered the use of the vacuum to study gases. Boyle believed that God allowed man a window into his perfection through science. The ultimate goal of science was to know and worship God.

      John Ray, who merely invented the definition of the word "species," wrote: "The wisdom of God is manifested in His creation." Robert Hooke coined the term "cell" to describe the basic unit of life. He derived the term from the cells in which monks lived. Hooke wrote that his life's ambition was to "Inquire into God's work" because he felt "destined by God to explore and study His creation." Anton van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) is called the "Father of Microbiology." He said that his discoveries "were proof of the wonder of God's creation."

      Blaise Pascal originated the theory of probability, and in physics he discovered the foundation of modern hydraulics: Pascal's Law. He also explained how air pressure works and invented the first mechanical calculating machine. Pascal warned against trying to explain everything through scientific formulae. Love, beauty, poetry, and even good government are indefinable by science, he wrote. Science cannot explain spontaneous conduct, sympathy, friendship, or the love that fills this world. According to Pascal, the details of human existence are too numerous and fugitive to sort out through reason alone. Technology and useful inventions benefit everyone, but they also convince the shallow of mind that science has a monopoly on truth, which Pascal thought would be a grave error for the human race.

      Blaise Pascal warned against scientism: the fallacious belief that science must, and will someday, explain all forms of human experience and settle every issue. His most famous book was named posthumously: Pensees, which means "thoughts." The title Pascal had given this book was: A Defense of the Christian Religion. It is one of the most eloquent masterpieces ever written. Pensees is a study of the human soul, for the express purpose of understanding man's need for God. It is a collection of his personal thoughts about human suffering and of faith in God.

      Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) is known as the first popular hero of modern science. He explained how the universe operates by logical mechanical laws. Newton invented calculus, designed the reflecting telescope, and explained how the moon creates the earthly tides. He discovered that all colors were components of white; that light moves in particles; and that colors result from the variation in frequency of these light particles.

      Sir Isaac Newton taught us that the motion of all things could be explained because God had given man a rational mind capable of understanding—gradually—the rational, orderly universe God had made. Newton saw God as the master creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation. He wrote: "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."

      On the gravestone of Sir Isaac Newton it says: "Diligent, sagacious and faithful, in his expositions of nature, antiquity and the holy Scriptures, he vindicated by his philosophy the majesty of God mighty and good, and expressed the simplicity of the Gospel in his manners."

      None of these men, all of whom made incredible scientific discoveries, would agree with you that the Christian Faith left them or us "in the dark and primitive past." On the contrary, they gave God the glory for revealing himself to them, and so to us, through their scientific inquiries, which they only made in the first place because they believed in a God who created them and everything, in an orderly universe that could be understood through revelation and reason.

      To read more, follow one of the links below:

      https://discover.hubpages.com/education/Sir-Isaac-...

      https://discover.hubpages.com/education/Brief-Biog...

      https://discover.hubpages.com/education/Royal-Soci...

      https://owlcation.com/humanities/Science-in-the-17...

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      iRob— Thank you for coming back, Robert. I appreciate your very good rejoinders. Your points are well taken.

      You wrote: 'If however you mean do I think all worldviews should be considered equally in the realms of law, government, and education, then no I am not "tolerant".'

      But all worldviews ARE considered in the realms of law and government. All of the Founding Fathers of the United States firmly believed in God and all but three were devout Christians.

      Your worldview colors how you feel about everything, including life and death. So does mine. A Secular worldview is no more valid than a Christian worldview.

      Your world view may be that there is no God, there is no purpose or meaning to life, people are accidental animals, there is no objective truth, everything is merely a social construct, morality is relative, rights come from the State.

      A Christian worldview is that God exists, that He created the world, that human beings are created in His image, that life has meaning and purpose, that there is objective truth, that moral laws are similar to the laws of physics (they are real, actions have reactions [or consequences]), and our rights come from our Creator.

      In my opinion, the Christian worldview is truly vastly more valid than a Secular worldview because the Christian worldview is closer to ultimate Truth. However, I know you disagree and there is no need to argue that point. But surely a Christian worldview is at least an equal way of looking at the world to that of a staunch secularist. No one leaves their worldview outside when they make up their minds about anything, including politics, culture, society, et al.

      You write: "Our breakthroughs in medicine, agriculture, industry, psychology, and other domains of human existence are not owed to a god, but rather to the natural curiosity, persistence, and scientific methods of mankind."

      That is not true at all. Where do you think the Scientific Revolution came from? It came from the Christian Faith.

      Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion were discovered by a devout Christian who said he was motivated to study science by his belief that God had created the world according to an intelligible plan that is accessible through the natural light God granted human beings: the power to reason.

      Johann Kepler wrote: "I believe Divine Providence intervened so that by chance I obtained what I could never obtain by my own efforts. I believe this all the more because I have constantly prayed to God that I might succeed."

      Marin Mersenne, the "Father of Acoustics," wrote that his scientific research had the express purpose to discover "the clearer knowledge of the works of God."

      Marcello Malpighi, the founder of microscopic anatomy;

      Giovanni Borelli, the "Father of Biomechanics;" Cornelius Drebbel invented the first navigable submarine, the mercury thermometer, the thermostat, the air-conditioner, and a perpetual-motion machine.

      Santorio founded the modern science of metabolism, and invented the first machine to measure the pulse, as well as the first medical thermometer. ALL of these men were devout Christians and credited God with revealing to them the discoveries they shared with the world.

      Natural curiousity, as you call it, has existed everywhere at all times, but only from men with a solid Christian worldview did the Scientific Revolution come—and that is no accident.

    • profile image

      SanXuary 

      9 years ago

      There are always exceptions in extreme cases. Unfortunately, we all know that the number one choice is convenience. Rather then accept the choices we made before the situation happened we claim the choice should be made afterwards. A lot of drunk drivers and people in car accidents wish they had a choice afterwards as well. Many of our choices are being made for us based on bad information. The number of birth defects can be watched on late night television, as every law firm begs for you to call them for a law suit on half the manufactured drugs made in America over the past 40 years. The problem is that easy solutions to complex problems allows us to deny the real problems in our society. Building lives and families is no longer our goal but selfishness is the new agenda. We throw people away everyday even when we are alive but always finish by judging only ourselves.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "Why are the sperm and ova without rights but once they merge suddenly have the same rights as you or me?"

      Because separately, they are merely parts, but when united, they form a new and unique human being. I think you know this.

      "A born baby should have rights because it can live independently (if healthy) and possesses the central nervous system capable of the consciousness that makes human beings human."

      And there you go again, claiming exclusive rights to define terms.

      Suppose a newborn is handicapped, and never meets your requirements of independence. Should the mother have the right to have it killed?

      "I am merely saying that abortion (specifically first and second trimester which are by far most common) is not inherently unethical."

      Whose ethics? My wife is a labor and delivery RN, and i happen to know quite a few OB/GYN's. None of them will participate in an abortion other than to save the life of the mother, a situation that most never face.

      Abortionists are typically the dregs of OB/GYN pool.

    • profile image

      iRob 

      9 years ago

      I am asking you what is the source of this value. Why are the sperm and ova without rights but once they merge suddenly have the same rights as you or me? A born baby should have rights because it can live independently (if healthy) and possesses the central nervous system capable of the consciousness that makes human beings human. An embryo or fetus doesn't meet these qualities. I am not saying that abortion is necessarily the best option in every case. Of course not. I am merely saying that abortion (specifically first and second trimester which are by far most common) is not inherently unethical. If it is, please explain why. There is much disagreement when the value of human life is established and what gives life that value, despite the alleged "universally recognized relative value of human life". For example some cultures say the value comes at conception. Others say when it is born. A few say it's when the fetus starts moving. There are even systems that say it is when the woman and man intend on having a child!

      Regards,

      Robert Teutsch

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      'I would be interested in hearing your argument and why you "assign the same value to all human life".'

      My mistake. I meant to say that I "assign the same value to all STAGES OF human life", a sentiment not shared by abortion supporters, including the absurd proposition that a full term baby on one side of the birth canal does not have the same right to life as a full term baby on the other side of the birth canal.

      Whether you equate the value of a cockroach life to a human life is a distraction and irrelevant to the abortion question.

      The relative value of human life is almost universally recognized worldwide and protected by law almost everywhere. Only the most backward of nations do not participate in that belief. You may argue otherwise, but that's your privilege.

    • profile image

      iRob 

      9 years ago

      I stand by my "tonsil argument". I haven't read all your comments to this hub so I don't whether your argument is secular or not. You actually haven't made an argument to me but rather have just been quoting me and asking me questions which I've happily answered. I would be interested in hearing your argument and why you "assign the same value to all human life".

      I also wonder, are you strictly against all wars and capital punishment? Also, what makes human life more valuable than non-human life?

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "I say we need to assign the values outside of religious beliefs."

      My arguments are strictly secular, as was your now abandoned 'tonsil' argument.

      I assign the same value to all human life, and I reject the abortionist's claim that only they can make that determination. I support natural life and natural death, and oppose the notion that some life is less valuable because it is somehow not convenient.

    • profile image

      iRob 

      9 years ago

      No. I say we need to assign the values outside of religious beliefs. I am saying the issue deals with rights, not with whether something is alive or not. I would also ask, are you saying the cessation of any life is inevitably unethical since life has an innate value to it?

      Regards,

      Robert

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "Life only has value to the degree we prescribe value to it."

      And you claim the exclusive right to assign that value, equating an unborn to having no more value than your tonsils?

      I'm beginning to see the problem here.

    • profile image

      iRob 

      9 years ago

      Life only has value to the degree we prescribe value to it. However, I do believe that life is a pretty amazing thing granted just how rare and complex it is. The issue really doesn't deal with the value of life though. My tonsils are living. But would getting a tonsillectomy, thereby killing them, be unethical. Just like an unborn baby my tonsils have a full set of human DNA and are composed of living matter. However, my tonsils, like an unborn baby, cannot live on there on and do not have "human rights" because they lack the consciousness, emotions, intelligence, preferences, and other qualities that make human beings human.

      Regards,

      Robert

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "Pain is the only thing that I can think of that could possibly make a first or second term abortion unethical, which is why I argued that scientists are fairly certain that abortions are humane."

      Then life itself has no value in your opinion?

    • profile image

      iRob 

      9 years ago

      First of all, thank you for taking the time to read my response and consider my viewpoints.

      In response to "Are you not for "Tolerance" of all worldviews?"-- it depends. If by tolerance you mean do I believe people have the right to believe or not believe in whatever they wish, I would have to say that I am for tolerance. If however you mean do I think all worldviews should be considered equally in the realms of law, government, and education, then no I am not "tolerant". Sure, people have every right to believe abortion is wrong because of their personal religious beliefs, but I don't think religious beliefs should be used as justification to change current laws or establish new ones such as Roe v. Wade. A secular worldview based on evidence provided by the scientific method is needed to provide "The Truth About Abortions".

      "Does science explain all that there is to know about humanity and life and the universe in which we find ourselves?" No. It does however explain what we do know about the universe, and that knowledge is growing every day. Our breakthroughs in medicine, agriculture, industry, psychology, and other domains of human existence are not owed to a god, but rather to the natural curiosity, persistence, and scientific methods of mankind. Thus, religion answers far fewer of mankind's questions than secular scientific principles. Religion's response to all of but the most rudimentary of questions is a "god of the gaps" response or is verifiably wrong. If something can't be explained it is ignored after a comment such as "God works in mysterious ways" or "it is the will of God" (which actually doesn't mean much). Science, constantly brings us closer to fuller understanding of our place in the universe, while religion leaves us stagnant in the dark world of our primitive past.

      Secular arguments, at least good ones, rely on scientific evidence and thus can be taken seriously.

      A born human baby should have the rights we grant every human being. An embryo/fetus, especially before the third trimester, which notably can't live on it's own, lacks development to the point that it shouldn't be given rights of its own. It is for all purposes part of the mother and thus subject to the choices of the mother. So do I equate a born human baby with "livestock"? Nope. But I do not think the abortion of a embryo/fetus is unethical. Things such as smoking harm others, people with rights, and thus can be understandably prohibited.

      Pain is the only thing that I can think of that could possibly make a first or second term abortion unethical, which is why I argued that scientists are fairly certain that abortions are humane.

      Regards,

      Robert

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      iRob— Thank you very much for taking the time to read my article. I appreciate your excellent comments.

      I understand your point of view that abortion should only be discussed from your worldview—a secular worldview. However, I must wonder why the secular (humanist or atheist) must be automatically considered to be a superior worldview, or the only worldview acceptable to you. Are you not for "Tolerance" of all worldviews?

      You say that "Religion, having no credibility due to its lack of scientific evidence" but I counter what scientific evidence is there for secularism? And I must ask you: Do you mean that Science explains all that there is to know about humanity and life and the universe in which we find ourselves?

      If "Arguments involving the "sacredness" of a fetus's life, or God's abhorrence of abortion can't be taken seriously," what does Secularism offer that demands I must take it seriously?

      I fully understand your opinion as you expressed by stating: "I believe it would be unethical to remove a woman's reproductive decision making, especially in cases of rape or endangerment to health."

      If that is truly your only beef say so.

      I see that your objection is "the government dictating reproductive decisions for women," but do you also protest the government dictating that you should wear a helmet on a motorbike, and wear a seatbelt while driving, and not smoke cigarettes in public?

      You granted us insight to your mind when you said "I doubt people care as much about the pain they cause the vermin they exterminate or the livestock killed for our meat-loving nation."

      So you do equate a human baby with "livestock?"

      Robert Teutsch, I did follow the link you provided in your followup comment where some doctors dispute the pain and suffering an unborn child feels as it is killed. So I must ask you, is it all about pain?

      James A Watkins

    • profile image

      iRob 

      9 years ago

      In case someone disagrees with the whole pain thing...

      http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/294/8/947.short

      I thought this peer reviewed journal article may shed some light on the issue.

      Regards,

      Robert Teutsch

    • profile image

      iRob 

      9 years ago

      Firstly, I believe that the ethics of abortion should be discussed secularly. While secular points of opposition towards abortion have been made, I have also noticed how great of an impetus religion is in the formation of peoples' opinions. Religion, having no credibility due to its lack of scientific evidence, offers little to the argument. Additionally, separation of church and state demands that any legal decision be made independently of religious values. Arguments involving the "sacredness" of a fetus's life, or God's abhorrence of abortion can't be taken seriously.

      Another argument that is invalid is that abortions are unethical because they terminate the 'potential' of an important and wonderful life. The fetus could also develop into a horrible person-- a murder, rapist, etc. Thus discussing the 'potential' of an unborn fetus is of little value.

      It is no doubt that women may face anxiety when choosing an abortion, and for some individuals abortion is not the optimal decision. However, I believe it would be unethical to remove a woman's reproductive decision making, especially in cases of rape or endangerment to health. The argument isn't really pro-life vs. pro-death, but rather the government dictating reproductive decisions for women vs. women deciding what is the the optimal choice for themselves.

      Most abortions occur during the first trimester when pain and suffering is relatively minimal. I doubt people care as much about the pain they cause the vermin they exterminate or the livestock killed for our meat-loving nation. Additionally, the most common modern government-approved abortion methods cause little, if any pain at all.

      I think it's perfectly natural for the average person to be against abortion. Humans are hard wired, by evolution, to love their babies so that genes can be carried on. However, biological urges to protect unborn babies, or the irrational religious arguments that some use, should not be used to take away a woman's right to choose.

      Regards,

      Robert

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      WillStarr— Thank you, my friend. We are on the same page.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      And I hope you're right!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      WillStarr— I do not think God has removed his blessings from America yet. I base this on our continued prosperity—relative to the rest of the planet—and the fact that the Christian Faith is still very strong in America if waning. And on my continued readings of the Old Testament, which show me that God's forebearance is incredible compared to human forebearance.

      But that day may not be far off, brother.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "It is surely possible that God will remove his blessings from this nation because of our collective sin and the public rejection of Him—both of which are growing wilder day by day."

      He may have already done that, with our national embrace of abortion and sexual perversions.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Lone Ranger— You are welcome, L.R. Thank you for the gracious compliment.

      I had not heard that distressing news about SIDS. I appreciate the enlightenment on that.

      "twisted sisters" LOL

      It is surely possible that God will remove his blessings from this nation because of our collective sin and the public rejection of Him—both of which are growing wilder day by day.

      I enjoyed your excellent comments.

      JAW

    • profile image

      Lone Ranger 

      9 years ago

      Powerful Hub, James, Thank you!!!

      It just seems women have been getting away with murder for quite some time now and it doesn't look like the trend is losing steam.

      In fact, the American Medical Association and FBI have stated that at least 33% of all SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) cases are actually post-birth abortions performed by the mother within the baby's first 6 months after delivery.

      I really think America needs to do something with our resident twisted sisters before the entire country is punished for their wretched crimes.

      Best wishes - L.R.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      thesingernurse— Welcome to the HubPages Community! I look forward to reading your Hubs, which I will do soon.

      Thank you for taking the time to read my article. I sincerely appreciate your thoughtful and insightful response. There is no person I admire more than a person who dedicates their life to the nursing profession.

      I totally agree with your comments. God Bless You!

    • thesingernurse profile image

      Tina Siuagan 

      9 years ago from Rizal, Philippines

      In some situations, abortions are performed in cases of medical emergencies like to 'save the life of the woman' (though I have to review some previous published manuscripts which discusses such matter.) Most of the time, abortions are done in lieu of an irresponsible and selfish act. And it pains me to think that it is viewed as a contraceptive method. Contraception is used to prevent a pregnancy. As for my personal and honest opinion, no matter what justification they tell about abortion, it's still one of the gruesome forms of KILLING.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      graceomalley--- I hear what you are saying, my dear friend. It seems today that the only way not to be accused of being a hypocrite is to have no standards whatsoever. That way there is nothing you can fail to live up to.

      But, of course, that was never the true meaning of standards anyway. Having standards cannot make a person perfect. It can only make them a person who sees and recognizes the truth and does their best to strive towards best behaviors (best practices but personal).

      Abortions are deeply troubling to me also, Grace. I love women and I do not think there could be too many of them. I would say women are more important than men to the health of a society–unless they are vicious.

      Thank you for your outstanding remarks. I enjoyed reading your thoughtful insights.

      Merry Christmas!

    • graceomalley profile image

      graceomalley 

      9 years ago

      I find it ironic that China has this problem with aborting girls. They came up with the concept of yin and yang, the balance of male and female forces keeping life on track.

      I hear many critisize "Christian" people groups for doing things that are clearly not Christian. (Spanish Inquisition, ect.) Sometimes people think this invalidates Christianity itself. I don't understand this - I don't think that the Chinese people chosing to abort so many girls they threaten the next generation invalidates the concept of yin and yang. I personally think yin/yang is a valuable way to see the world, it tells you someone different from you makes just as valuable a contribution, and i personally think it is a good symbol of how the genders can remain true to themselves while working together. I feel it would make no sense to toss out yin/yang, or hate on it, because the Chinese did not in this case live up to it. I wish people would not do this to Christians. When people tell me I should not follow Jesus because of the Crusades - I find it incomprehensible.

      Sorry this is a little off topic, James. The abortion of girls all over the world is deeply troubling. Women have a vulnerability men don't have, and many societies devalue them. But the female is just as important to the health of the society as the male, and those societies who victimize them suffer. I personally think that this is why men have a 'protection' drive towards women - they sense that women are just as important to the survival of society as men, but more vulnerable.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      VeronicaFarkas— I am surely glad that I made you proud with my work here—and got you fired up! Thank you ever much for the lovely laudations!

      God Bless You for working at those pregnancy centers. I bet you have touched many lives.

      I love that you said "common sense and having a pulse and a heart myself would tell me that abortion is wrong."

      Amen!

      I appreciate your affirmation and encouragement. I will come over to see what you've been writing ASAP. And you are most welcome.

      Merry Christmas!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      cathylynn99— It is great to hear from an actual Medical Doctor on this topic. Thank you for taking the time to read my article and I appreciate your response.

      I have heard of the problem you wrote to me about. In India and in China females are aborted by the millions just because they are female. I have heard rumors that this goes on in America in a small way—so far—not because of dowries but because "we wanted a boy."

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      thelyricwriter— Thank you very much for taking the time to read this article. I sincerely appreciate your compliments. And I truly empathize with the vehemence and zeal with which you expressed your feelings about this subject. I share those feelings with you. I do believe that this situation will change one day. And I believe that this will be looked back on with shame and disgust by generations somewhere in the future. Thanks again.

    • VeronicaFarkas profile image

      Veronica Roberts 

      9 years ago from Ohio, USA

      Wonderfully written, so engaging; heart-wrenching and tear-jerking. You definitely did your research, and the passion is your writing is inspirational.

      I am beyond proud of you for creating and publishing this hub.

      I have volunteered at a few different pregnant centers, and have done my fair share of research and papers on abortion, petitions and pickets outside of abortion clinics, and so on.

      Even if I had not been raised Catholic and had this issue brought to my attention at an early age, common sense and having a pulse and a heart myself would tell me that abortion is wrong. I do not understand how some can turn their heads to it's destruction.

      I'm attempting to keep this brief, but this subject definitely brings out a fire in me and -as from reading some of the comments- many others.

      Again, I applaud and commend you for having written this, and done so publicly. Thank you.

    • cathylynn99 profile image

      cathylynn99 

      9 years ago from northeastern US

      here's something to get up in arms about. people in india are aborting fetuses because they are female to the tune of 40 million so far. a female is considered a liability because parents have to pay a dowry to marry her off. the richer a family is, the more likely they'll abort. young indian men can not find mates because so many females have not been allowed to be born. some are murdered after birth.

    • thelyricwriter profile image

      Richard Ricky Hale 

      9 years ago from West Virginia

      James, powerful presentation and article. Just hearing how these babies are killed sends fire through my veins. I swear, I would choke a *****. It just pisses me off so bad. Nothing is justified by an abortion. Thousands of couples are looking for a baby as we speak. Birth is a miracle, it really is. This is murder and anyone that supports it is just as guilty. This is such a well informed article James. It is hard to believe that America condones this, but then again, the greed is seen. This is just another example.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      WillStarr— I always enjoy reading your outstanding comments. And these here on this page are no exception. Thank you for them. Well done!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      tlpoague— You are quite welcome. You piqued my interest by your reference to the Hub by Linda Martin. I have made a note to myself to go over and read it soon.

      I appreciate your excellent remarks. Thank you very much for taking the time to read this article. I am grateful for your laudations in regard to my work here.

      Hey, I see your mother is now on HubPages! God Bless You Both!

      :)

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      sharewhatuknow— I am honored that you would post my Hub on your FaceBook page—not once but twice! Thank you ever much for that. You have made my day! :D

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      rls8994— You are most welcome. I am glad you like my articles. Thank you for saying so.

      :-)

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 

      9 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "In it she talked about how women are losing control of their bodies..."

      But are they? Women control sex (as all men know), so the decision to have sex is theirs alone, and a man absolutely MUST heed that decision, or go to jail for rape.

      A woman is always in complete control of her body, but it's the body of another living human being that is killed by abortion. Does a woman also have control over the body and life of her child?

    • tlpoague profile image

      Tammy 

      9 years ago from USA

      What a terrific hub. I went to school with a couple of girls that had abortions. I don't know if it was the decision of their parents or themselves, but in the end, they had problems later on when they had other children. Reading your hub reminded me of one that I read by Linda Martin. In it she talked about how women are losing control of their bodies (charges were being held against them,) and choices they are making (whether to have or not to have the baby,) because of the controvery with abortion. It too was a terrific read. This is a subject that will stir feelings, but needs to be adressed. Thank you for taking the time to address this delicate subject.

    • sharewhatuknow profile image

      sharewhatuknow 

      9 years ago from Western Washington

      Your welcome James! Really astounding hub. I put your hub on my Facebook profile for several days. I then deleted it because not one of my friends commented on it, liked or disliked it. That really dissed me !! And my friends on Facebook are people I know. You know what, I am going to post it again !!

    • rls8994 profile image

      rls8994 

      9 years ago from Mississippi

      Thank you James :) I always feel more informed when I read your articles.

      Sadly you are right, my friend is among many women that have regret over their abortion.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      sharewhatuknow— I sincerely appreciate your comments. You give sound advice. Thank you for this visitation.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Talisker— Welcome to the HubPages Community!

      Thank you very much for taking the time to stop by and check out my article. I appreciate your thoughtful and insightful remarks. I didn't mean to be shocking. :-)

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      rls8994— It is always a pleasure to hear from you. Thank you for the gracious accolades. I am well pleased that you came by to visit.

      I am sorry to hear about the experiences of your friend. I am afraid she is in the same boat with millions of other women.

      James

    • sharewhatuknow profile image

      sharewhatuknow 

      9 years ago from Western Washington

      Women please, if you are going to be sexually active, and you will, please take birth control. As James states, you can't rely on some men, they don't want to use condoms. Don't rely on the man for this, it's YOUR BODY after all. Then PROTECT IT !!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      graceomalley— The quote from Naomi Wolf you provided is extraordinary! Wow! There is a powerful punch packed in that one paragraph. Thank you so much for putting it in your comments.

      Your own remarks are also outstanding here. Yes, sex and babies have been separated in the Post-Modern West for the first time in human history. And the avalanche of social pathologies I see around me—and the pandemic of sexually transmitted diseases—are the result of this newly found so-called "freedom."

      I surely appreciate the link from your Hub. I will come over ASAP to read your work on this subject. Thanks again for posting such profound comments here. Great stuff.

    • Talisker profile image

      Honor Meci 

      9 years ago from UK

      A controversial hub indeed! I know of a number of women who cannot conceive and they are so miserable because of it. It is a dreadful thing that there are women who use abortion as a form of birth control, however I do think there can be circumstances in which abortion can be an option (such as rape)

      An informative and shocking hub.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      itakins— Thank you for taking the time to read my piece and for your gracious accolades. It is great to hear from you again. It has been a long time since you have published a new Hub. I am glad you are still with us at least.

      I know you treasure life with that large family of yours. I treasure you and love your comments here. :-)

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      PDXKaraokeGuy— I am well pleased to meet a fellow musician! I look forward to reading some of your Hubs ASAP.

      Thank you for voicing your appreciation of my article and for the kind compliments. I agree with your comments. And you are quite welcome.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Levertis Steele— Thank you for your trio of comments a couple weeks ago. I have been away from HubPages about that length of time and now have set about catching up.

      The link you provided is awesome! I hope everyone reads it to get a grip on the scale of this calamity.

      I am grateful that you also shared that wonderful story of choosing LIFE.

      It is always a distinct pleasure to read your comments. Well done!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Liasis1— Thank you for telling us about that documentary. I see that is has been running on the Discovery Channel and you had the title right: "Life Before Birth." I will surely try to catch it soon.

      I agree with your husband that conception truly is a miracle. I am afraid it says a lot about our society and culture that this miracle is treated as nothing more than an inconvenience to be flushed down the toilet.

      I sincerely appreciate your wonderful description of the program, Cynthia. Thanks again for participating in this conversation. Your comments have been priceless.

      James

    • rls8994 profile image

      rls8994 

      9 years ago from Mississippi

      James you have done an amazing job with this article. A friend of mine had an abortion many years ago and regrets it to this day. It has affected her in many ways. You have covered this subject well with a lot of good information. Great job! :)

    • graceomalley profile image

      graceomalley 

      9 years ago

      I hope HP won't flag this for quotation - I am making a point. Naomi Wolf, who i admire as an intellectual and a writer, though i part company with her on some issues, wrote this in 1993:

      "But almost all the abortions I knew of resulted from careless contraception. In some cases, the men didn't ask, didn't wait, didn't bother to produce a condom. In others, the women didn't want to offer a less than ideal sexual moment. In still others, both the men and the women were grazing the edge of destiny almost for the sake of the ride, flirting a little with the idea of parenthood, or forcing a psycho-drama in the relationship ('See? It matters. I matter. This-matters.')."

      Ms. Wolf is in favor of legalized abortion, thoough as she writes here in her 1993 book Fire With Fire, she abhors abortion itself, thinks people need to be much, much more responsible with contraception, and states clearly that although sexually active, she never wants to have an abortion herself. (This book was published in 1993, Ms. Wolf is now married and a mother of two.)

      But think about what she said above. People who have no intention of caring for a baby 'flirt' with pregnancy, knowing there is an out. If what she said is accurate, and I have no reason to think it is not, people even allow themselves to get pregnant, then abort, to make a point to a sexual partner. This really does raise using the kids as pawns in mom and dad's power struggles to a new and grotesque level.

      I thought so much about this issue of sexuality & its place in our lives that I wrote my own hub about it, titled "The Power of Sexuality," and added a link to this one. Sex and parenthood are part of the same drive, but our society keeps wanting to separate them.

    • itakins profile image

      itakins 

      9 years ago from Irl

      Well done James -such a well (and courageously) written article .If only more people would make their abhorrence of this brutal treatment of babies known !Most of the comments are so reassuring .....this needs to be shared far and wide.

      Good on you !

    • PDXKaraokeGuy profile image

      Justin W Price 

      9 years ago from Juneau, Alaska

      Thank you for this important and insightful article. I grew up in a staunchly conservative and pro life household and, while I've l've grown much more socially liberal in my thirties, abortion is an issue where I staunchly favor restricting the freedom of the individual, because I believe it to be infanticide.

      great hub. Thanks!

    • Levertis Steele profile image

      Levertis Steele 

      9 years ago from Southern Clime

      Michael Graves:

      You said, "When we kill an unborn chicken, it's called an omelet, and it's considered yummy. I smell elitist hypocrisy in this distinction... something which doesn't surprise me, when considering my own species."

      Jesus cooked and ate fish with His disciples, distinguished clean and unclean animals, allowed animal sacrifices, and blessed many with flocks and herds. Vegans and vegetarians oppose meat eating, but some wear leather and fur. They are reported to be healthier than meat eaters, though.

      My friend's doctor advised her to get an abortion after he discovered toxemia. She prayed and decided against it. That baby is a medical doctor today, and the mother survived! I am not saying that another person who chooses to abort in such a case is wrong. In severe cases like this, who is to judge others' decisions?

    • Levertis Steele profile image

      Levertis Steele 

      9 years ago from Southern Clime

      Suddenly Hitler seems like a saint in comparison . . . .

    • Levertis Steele profile image

      Levertis Steele 

      9 years ago from Southern Clime

      This makes me speechless. I wonder what the death row inmates would think of this:

      http://911babies.com/news.php?action=fullnews&...

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      sharewhatuknow— I appreciate both of your comments. Thank you for the laudations! It make a man feel good to see his work appreciated. :)

      That is a GREAT story you shared with us about your close female relative. God Bless You for being there for her and especially for giving such sound and GOOD advice.

      I must admit that you came on strong with this:

      "Butchering an unborn child like a pig is a choice alright. A very ignorant, heinous and inexcusable one!"

      Bully for you! I agree with you completely. Well said!

      As for your second comment, I agree with you there too. That is a tough, tough spot to be in.

      Thanks again for sharing your wise and discerning thoughts with us.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      akune— WOW! You said plainly what needed to be said, and I thank you profusely for it.

      I really appreciate you adding your voice to this thread. God Bless You!

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Levertis Steele— You wrote: "Many loving couples are adopting parentless, special-needs children every day. It is better to give birth and give the unwanted baby up for a chance of it getting a loving family and home."

      Amen! I agree with you 100 percent.

      And as you said perfectly well:

      '"I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb" (Jer. 1:5). Awesomely heavy! The Heavenly Father said this: "I knew you BEFORE I FORMED you . . . ." Also, a father is equally important as the mother in the life of a child.'

      We are on the same page. I am well pleased that we are in agreeance.

      Thank you for your outstanding comments. I appreciate this visitation from you here on this Hub.

    • profile image

      Liasis1 

      9 years ago from Nashville

      My husband and I watched an awesome (and I don't mean that in the trite way people abuse this word) tv show this evening which I think is a must-see, for, well, everyone.

      The show is a part of the "Curiosity" series on the Science channel, I believe the title was "Life Before Birth". (my brain sometimes stalls out and refuses to work for me).

      The show focuses on the conception and development of a baby (in utero), then follows three women through their pregnancies. I believe some of the footage was actually shot by placing a micro-camera into the womb(s) of a/some pregnant woman/ women, like those photos in LIFE magazine decades ago.

      There's no way anyone can watch this show and not believe life begins at conception. My husband turned to me at one point and said "conception really is such a miracle"

      There were sonogram (I just can't remember the common term!) images of unborn babies reacting to the sounds being transmitted via headphones placed over the moms' bellies - one expressed quite a dislike to hip-hop music! Her tiny mouth twisted into a little moué of distaste and she turned her head away from the source of the sound.

      These shows are rerun a few times a week, so if y'all have cable I really recommend checking this one out. Sometimes they're aired over-night; we DVR just about everything we watch now. Both of us cried as these women gave birth and saw their beautiful babies for the first time.

      Cynthia

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Michael Graves— As you say, my friend: "all life is sacred ... when we cannot avoid taking it, we do so with the reverence, thoughtfulness and penance that an act of such gravity merits."

      I somberly agree with you. Yes, indeed. I think I might swear off meat. I wrote about that feeling in a previous Hub. You might want to read it:

      https://hubpages.com/food/Should-People-Eat-Animal...

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      adrienne2— You are quite welcome. Thank you for visiting and commenting. It is a pleasure to "see" you again.

    • sharewhatuknow profile image

      sharewhatuknow 

      9 years ago from Western Washington

      And as a final thought, I do feel for any parent that discovers that their unborn child will be born with severe birth defects and that if the child survives after being born, the quality of life would be very low.

      If I had ever been presented with that scenario, I honestly don't know which way I would have gone.

    • sharewhatuknow profile image

      sharewhatuknow 

      9 years ago from Western Washington

      Hi James, an excellent and exquisitely written hub !

      I have a close female relative who is expecting her second child late this month. This child will be given up for adoption, and a couple that wants her baby is ready to take the child after he is born.

      She became impregnated by a man that made her believe he was madly in love with her, and told her that he was "fixed," so there was no need to use a condom or any other type of birth control. My relative fell for this garbage and became pregnant. He then left her a few weeks later and went back to his wife.

      I talked to her at great length and told her to please not have an abortion, that is was not the child's fault what happened between her and this piece of shit who had played her.

      She decided to go through with the pregnancy and during her 2nd trimester, had no problem finding a couple who will adopt her son. She will also have a tubal ligation once she has given birth. Though she is in her early 20's, she is very adamant that she does not want to have anymore children.

      I wish more women would actually use more than one choice in their "pro-choice" attitude when it comes to an unwanted pregnancy. They can always give the child up to the custody of the state, or, adopt out the baby.

      Butchering an unborn child like a pig is a choice alright. A very ignorant, heinous and inexcusable one!

      In the future, I am going to do my best to try to find this male relative, and/or the adoptive parents, so that I may somehow be able to make contact with him when he is old enough, or his adoptive parents don't have a problem with that.

    • akune profile image

      akune 

      9 years ago from Surrey, England, United Kingdom

      Selfishness, reasoning, emotions, sympathy, hidden agendas, spiritual wickedness, victims of abortion on different sides of the act, high-level manipulations, desires for solutions and various levels of power all come on this stage. Those who know what is going on beyond this physical realm can see the puppets' strings being pulled. Ignorance is darkness.

    • Levertis Steele profile image

      Levertis Steele 

      9 years ago from Southern Clime

      "I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb" (Jer. 1:5). Awesomely heavy! The Heavenly Father said this: "I knew you BEFORE I FORMED you . . . ." Also, a father is equally important as the mother in the life of a child. The defense rests. Cased closed.

      Birth control pills not only suppresses ovulation, but also prepares the uterus to reject a fertilized egg in case ovulation took place. So, the pill provides a second plan. That attracts attention.

      Abstinence is legal.

      It is true that only the experienced knows what life is like with a severely retarded baby. I have seen some parents struggle to cope with such a child, but I have also seen parents exercise God-given patience and love that warrants a testimony. Many loving couples are adopting parentless, special-needs children every day. It is better to give birth and give the unwanted baby up for a chance of it getting a loving family and home.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Liasis1— Welcome back. I am sad to hear about the bleeding but as you say, at least those awful migraines are gone.

      Thank you for your extraordinary comments. You wrote:

      "I can say, from my own experience and those of the women I know who've had abortions, it was a very painful experience (both physically & psychologically) and the pain lingers on for decades."

      I appreciate you sharing that with us. I am also moved by the story you shared about the "woman had been a difficult customer for years, was rude to my co-workers & no one liked to take her calls. . . . She'd been carrying this secret for all those years and never told anyone before."

      Wow! Amazing testimony.

      As you noted "in many cases the abortion can be as bad, or even worse, for the father"

      I happen to know that in some cases this is true. And yet feminists are not shy about preaching that until a child is born it is none of the father's business. What a callous view of fatherhood. Little wonder why so many American young men now avoid the responsibility of fatherhood. What are they? Just an ATM machine?

      No need to apologize. Your thoughts were presently quite cogently. I enjoyed reading your words. Well done!

    • Michael Graves profile image

      Michael Graves 

      9 years ago

      Regarding Professor Singer's arguments, I am not sure that I can agree. I think that fetuses and newborns ARE persons... but I am not sure that I believe that makes the lives of an animal less important than their lives (and this statement comes from a die-hard carnivore). I think that, to some extent, all life is sacred (if you believe in such a concept), and that it should never be LIGHTLY taken... but that, when we cannot avoid taking it, we do so with the reverence, thoughtfulness and penance that an act of such gravity merits.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      andromida— You are most welcome. I surely agree with your point of view as expressed in your fine remarks. Thank you much for visiting and commenting.

    • James A Watkins profile imageAUTHOR

      James A Watkins 

      9 years ago from Chicago

      Michael Graves— Thank you very much for reading this article. I appreciate your thoughtful and insightful remarks. Welcome again to the Hub Pages Community.

      You wrote: "I firmly believe that in situations (rare as they are) such as ectopic pregnancy, where allowing a pregnancy to progress will invariably kill both mother and child, an abortion should be administered, for the simple reason that one death is better than two"

      I certainly agree with you wholeheartedly.

      You also wrote: "My second problem with it is the concept that somehow, HUMAN life is sacred. But only human life. When we kill an unborn baby, it's called an abortion, and it's considered murder. When we kill an unborn chicken, it's called an omelet, and it's considered yummy. I smell elitist hypocrisy in this distinction"

      Human beings are spiritual beings who inhabit physical bodies. Animals are, well, animals. I think there is a distinction to be made.

      However, there are those who agree with you. Princeton professor Peter Singer wrote:

      "Human babies are not born self-aware, or capable of grasping that they exist over time. They are not persons”; therefore, “the life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee.”

      Professor Singer added: "Put simply, dogs, cats, and dolphins are persons, while fetuses, newborns, and some victims of Alzheimer’s disease are not"

      I agree with most of the rest of your comments, in particular the part about anesthesia for the unborn about to be killed. I appreciate your recognition of my "courage." :)

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)