Wednesday, February 27, 2008

A Woman's Right to Choose

This is one of the most heartbreaking things that I have ever read. Michelle Malkin covered it very well today.

The issue of side effects, particularly of the emotional kind, of abortion is one generally ignored by the main stream media. This poor girl was a victim of a crass and callous system that puts its own agenda ahead of the rights of women and children. Yes, I said ahead of the rights of women. This girl went to the hospital terrified and told them that she didn't want to kill her babies and yet the doctor went ahead with the procedure, offering her no more counseling than a phone number.

Understand that I believe whole-heartedly in a woman's right to choose. She has every right to choose whether or not she has a child and that right reaches all the way through to conception. Women today have the obvious option of not engaging in activities that could result in pregnancy. They also have pills and devices easily accessible to control the family size. Personally, I am choosing not to have another child at this time and so therefore I take a pill every day. I know that there are those that would tell me that my choice is wrong, and I respect their feelings in the matter. I am a happily married working mom and so abstinence is not really a viable option for me. I'm not ready to take the more permanent step of sterilization at this point in my life. Since I do work full-time outside of my home, I do not feel it would be fair to my son to divide my already limited time with him. I'm also not one of those women for whom motherhood is a defining characteristic. I love my son, but I've never really been much of a kid person. I deeply respect the women with large families, but I do not believe that is what I was designed to do. That being said, I also believe that God is far more powerful than my birth control. If it is in His will that I have another child, then I will. I would not ever, ever terminate a precious life that God had entrusted to me.

What really gets me here is that the so-called 'pro-choice' movement isn't offering a choice at all. Rather, they try to convince women who are already at their wits end that the child growing inside them is nothing more than a ball of cells to be removed. They are selling death to a woman looking for answers, but it's alright because they package it like its nothing more than a tonsillectomy. Emma's story is not unique, but these are the things liberals don't want you to know. It doesn't look good for their 'caring' image. It doesn't help their agenda. If people think and feel they do not make good sheep.

The fact is that they don't care. The human life has no value. And these people want to manage your health care. No, I would not like fries with that thank you very much.

So please, left loonies, go sterilize yourselves to save the environment. Hmm, who was the last person to use sterilization and population control to advance their agenda? Oh that's right! It was Hitler. Funny, he was pro-gun control and anti-Jew too. Sounds like he was a far better embodiment of leftist ideals than JFK ever even thought about being.


thud said...

An enjoyable well considered post.

Ladyshambles said...

Indeed, a very well considered and thought provoking post.

I am all for live and let live and do not judge, on the whole. But I cannot abide pro-choice coercion, particularly when it's disguised as hand-wring, bleeding-hearts liberalism. Makes my blood boil.

Pro-choice should mean a variety of options with no pressure, just support and information every step of the way. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

instinct said...

Nicely said. As for JFK, if you actually look at what he did, he was a conservative.

"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country"

Doesn't sound like anything you would hear Hillary say