Posted on 04/16/2013 3:30:35 AM PDT by markomalley
I love abortion. I don’t accept it. I don’t view it as a necessary evil. I embrace it. I donate to abortion funds. I write about how important it is to make sure that every woman has access to safe, legal abortion services. I have bumper stickers and buttons and t-shirts proclaiming my support for reproductive freedom. I love abortion.
And I bristle every time a fellow activist uses a trendy catch-phrase or rallying cry meant to placate pro-lifers. The first of these, “Make abortion safe, legal, and rare!” has been used for decades as a call for abortion rights.
Safe and legal are concepts I fully support, but rare is something I cannot abide. I understand the theoretical mindset: it is better for a woman to prevent an unwanted pregnancy than to bear the physical and financial burden of an abortion. While my own abortion involved very little pain and a minimal financial expense, one which my ex-boyfriend was willing to share with me, even I can admit that using condoms or the pill is preferable to eight weeks of nausea and weight gain. Contraception is a valuable tool.
However, there is no need to suggest that abortion be rare. To say so implies a value judgement, promoting the idea that abortion is somehow distasteful or immoral and should be avoided. Even with affordable, accessible birth control, there will be user errors, condoms that break, moments of spontaneity. The best contraceptive access in the world won’t change the fact that we are merely human and imperfect in our routines.
(Excerpt) Read more at rhrealitycheck.org ...
So why not encourage sterilization among the sexually promiscuous? Then they can fornicate all they want and no one else has to pay for it, either in cash or by the taking of an innocent life.
You are more than welcome my FRiend! :)
Pro-abortion is one thing but anti-adoption? Why would anyone be anti-adoption? And does her opposition to such extend to gay and lesbian couples?
Some day God will hand her essay back to her; I doubt she will like the comments or her final grade.
She revels in killing early stage humans but is appalled by seeing them live to be adopted into loving homes. The mind boggles at such evil.
The baby slated for killing in the Roe v Wade case lived. The courts move slowly and the Supreme Court decision authorizing the baby’s execution came only after she was born and immediately put up for adoption: one that got away. When I last heard of this lucky survivor—about 10 years ago—she was herself the mother of a little girl. There are two people who would disagree with the cold, murderous author of this piece.
Unmitigated evil.
What we should encourage is repentance for promiscuity, atonement and healing.
They often center on the pain experienced by a woman who is separated for life from her child, and some adoptees' persistent feeling of "displacement" and their longing to find their genetic parents, especially their birthmother.
These are realities. They deserve some attention.
But murder cannot be "better." That is madness.
Supremacists ideology at play.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.