Skip to comments.What a Difference a Moment Makes
Posted on 05/09/2011 11:22:41 AM PDT by Reformed Pastor
The newsletter of the United Methodists' General Board of Church and Society is out today with, among other things, a column protesting the practice of shackling women prisoners in childbirth. Heather Rice, a blogger with the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good and Associate Director of Policy for the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, writes:
Forty states in America do not have a prohibition against shackling women prisoners during childbirth.Now, I happen to agree with her. I can't conceive of any reason why, if a woman is properly guarded in the delivery room, there should be any reason for shackles. This sounds to me like one of those "we have to treat men and women equally" things that refuses to take the differences between the sexes seriously. But here's the things that really gets me: look who it is that's trumpeting this article.
This is a shameful practice that strips away the dignity from the sacred moment of welcoming a new life into the world and increases danger to the health and well-being of both the child and mother. My own state, Virginia, is one of them.
In our Christian faith, the sanctity of human life is established in Genesis 1:27: "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him." In particular, the newborn child bears within himself the divine image, the image of the Christ child. Imagine Joseph frantically preparing a stable for pregnant Mary as the humble welcoming place for a new life. The human story behind Christs birth demonstrates that every mother and every child should experience a degree of dignity in the moment of birth....
In my own state, Virginia, legislation that would have prohibited the egregious practice of shackling women prisoners during childbirth was considered this year. I testified in support of the bill at the initial subcommittee hearing in my capacity as Associate Director of Policy at NRCAT. For me this was not just a professional issue, but as an evangelical, a deeply held personal one as well.
The bill passed unanimously in the subcommittee. Unfortunately, rather than choosing to protect the sacredness of birth and safeguarding infants, the full committee defeated the bill. The chairwoman did agree to write a letter to the Va. Dept. of Corrections recommending they look further into the issue.
I pray they do the right thing.
As evangelicals, we should not tolerate a situation that forces women to welcome their children into the world in chains.
The GBCS is a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Rights, and one of the most vociferous proponents of partial birth abortion. That being the case, the idea that the agency would reprint an article taking a public policy position based on the sanctity of life is the height of absurdity. "The human story behind Christs birth demonstrates that every mother and every child should experience a degree of dignity in the moment of birth," but apparently not in the moment just before birth. Church and Society leaders are against shackling women during childbirth, but are perfectly happy for women to see doctors in order to have those same children ripped apart in the womb moments before childbirth would take place.
By the time she hits “transition,” a woman in labor is not going anywhere.
1. Where on God’s earth are women shackled while birthing a child?
2. Do ten states have laws explicitly banning such shackling?
Everybody's an expert on other people's business.
Define "properly guarded". Who decides whether this includes handcuffs? Ignorant and sanctimonious "Christian" busybodies, or those professionals who have a certain amount of guarding to do and a given amount of resources with which to do it, and who must take responsibility (and face risk to their own lives) when something goes wrong?
“The newsletter of the United Methodists’ General Board of Church and Society is out today”
You should have stopped right there. ( Just Kidding)
Five years ago, the UMC chose the image of a dandelion - a weed, aka a tare (Matthew 13:25-40) - to represent their message. It's still apropos today.
I see that you're an EPC pastor. Welcome to Free Republic!
Since May 9, 2011
I would like to see some input from prison guards - is there a history of women in labor getting violent or escaping? If so, then shackles are apparently necessary, or at least, should be used on a case by case basis.
I’m also quite sure that there are 40 states that don’t have laws preventing full body cavity searches for mothers about to give birth.
Or how come 40 states don’t have laws preventing the use of biting restraints
The reason is because the states have either not found the time or interest or necessity.
Is this really a big issue for you? Of all of the issues which could be addressed by your denimination, this is the biggie?
Western society is full of evil, lying collectivists who call themselves “Christians” but who are in fact seeking the destruction of Western Civilization.
The National Religious Campaign Against Torture is an clear example of such evildoers.
Our new FRiend smells like a commie rat to me. Perhaps he would like to tell us all what he thinks about Jim Wallis?
The tyranny of the extrouterine over the introuterine.
Outlawing shackles on all pregnant prisoners means they are unavailable to use on criminally insane and violent pregnant prisoners when they might actually be needed.
I’m thinking this should be left up to the guards and medical personnel on a case by case basis.
Have you ever seen a woman in labor, close to giving birth? The idea that she would be dangerous to anyone, especially an armed guard (without which I can’t imagine a prisoner being allowed to be transported to a hospital, much less accompanied to a prison infirmary), is ludicrous.
For a while. Other folks have occasionally posted my blog articles here, so I thought I’d start doing so myself.
This has nothing to do with my denomination. The point, though, that a good number of the commenters seem to have missed, is that this post isn’t about the question of shackling women, about which I’d never really thought that much before seeing this (the opinion I expressed of the practice in the post is only a tentative one that could be changed with evidence that it is indeed necessary). The point of the post is about the hypocrisy of the GBCS, which is worried about the “dignity” of birth, but has no problem with partial birth abortion.
I have no use for Jim Wallis, which, if you’d gone to the blog from which this post comes and looked around for about 30 seconds, you’d know. Of course, first you’d have to learn to read—I expressed no support for the NRCAT, but was only commenting on one item from one of their employees, and in any case was not aiming at agreeing with her (though for the moment I do) so much as flaying the GBCS for its hypocrisy in wailing about the “dignity” of childbirth while supporting partial birth abortion.
Perhaps before you start throwing around epitets, you should have a clue about the person you’re insulting.
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.