She needs a home, just as much as a newborn does.

Abortion from a 7-year-old’s perspective

Washington, DC (LifeNews) A few weeks ago, my parents and my 7-year-old sister came to hear me speak during a pro-life rally in our area. Though my little sister may not understand the details about abortion, she knows that abortion kills a baby in its mommy’s belly.

But during the rally, my sister heard something that she had never thought about before – abortion centers.

As her innocent mind processed the thought, she looked up and asked my mom, “Is that where they kill the babies?”

adoption15“Yes,” my mom answered.

“Do they kill children there, too?” my sister asked.

“No,” my mom replied. “Just babies in their mom’s bellies.”

“But they don’t kill children?” my sister asked again.

“No, it’s against the law to kill children,” my mom said.

My sister’s question came from a logical conclusion. If babies aren’t protected then children must not be either, because there is no significant difference between a baby and a child that would justify killing one and not the other.

It didn’t make sense to her why some people are protected and valued in our society and others aren’t. Human life can’t both be valuable and not valuable. It either is or it isn’t. That abortion’s legal told her that human life isn’t protected – and those who can’t defend themselves are the most vulnerable. So, a child like herself could be killed, too.

Should there be a line that determines when humans have value? Some say it’s at viability, others say when there’s a heartbeat, and others say at birth. Some even argue that the ability to reason should be the dividing line, which would making killing infants ok, too.

These lines we draw are so arbitrary, meaningless. My 7-year-old sister gets that. Human beings are valuable because we are human beings. And it’s as plain and simple as that.

Reprinted with permission from LifeNews.com.

  • Ingrid Heimark

    It says alot that even a child can understand what the pro-aborts here at AN don’t understand, a baby in the womb is a human being the same as a born child

  • LoveTheLeast8

    Children have great understanding about the important things.

  • mrswright

    from the mouths of babes

  • Ron

    Science and technology (improved ultrasounds, etc.) has gotten us to the point where there is really no one who doesn’t “understand” than an unborn child is a human being. Rather, pro-aborts have just made the decision that it is ok to kill a human being at a certain age for their own convenience. It is that simple. I challenge you to find anyone who really thinks having an abortion is the procedural equivalent of trimming ones toenails. Such a person does not exist (if they ever did). Pro-aborts know exactly what they are doing.

  • christine

    I think it is horrific that children are exposed to this. The little girl asked that question because she is afraid she may be killed. She must have some nightmares. This stuff is not digestible by little minds and is just too scary. Why would you even tell little ones about abortion?? Sorry- I don’t like children carrying protest signs either. I have no idea how I would explain gay situations to a child, Our society is in crisis, degenerate and decadent.

    • John Flaherty

      She expressed puzzlement about the fact that unborn children can be killed, but not born children. Yes, it’s horrific. I also think it quite horrific that we, as grown adults, should be forced to deal with this, but the pro-aborts haven’t quit.
      As for kids carrying protest signs, it seems to me this young girl demonstrates quite well that children below the “age of sexuality” can understand killing other children.
      Seems to me they have as much right to speak as anyone.

    • Marauder

      …what about “gay situations”? As Peter Smith-Kingsley says in “The Talented Mr. Ripley,” “Interesting non-sequitur.”

  • christine

    P.S. See the latest discussion of ‘after birth abortion’- that is killing children when you choose you don’t want them anymore. If you can do it in the first nine months- why not later? Choice- no?

  • Proteios

    Cute story. Im saddened by the fact that your conversation will ultimately become:
    “do they kill children there too?”
    “yes”
    Read the news from belgium and canada. Coming soon to a state near you. Euthanasia for all ages.
    Eugenics.

  • Steve Kellmeyer

    This is a joke, right?
    Look, I’m as pro-life as they come, in my youth I was arrested twice for blockading abortion clinics. But what possible relevance does a 7-year old’s opinion have?

    This is an adult world, and adults make policies. Children don’t. Adults who bring children’s opinions into the conversation in order to justify their adult policies are being ridiculous. Either you can justify what you want to do in an adult fashion or you can’t. Either way, what a 7-year old has to say on the matter is not particularly relevant.

    To argue against something because it doesn’t make sense to a 7-year old is to set the bar a whole lot lower than adults should tolerate. There are many, many good reasons to oppose abortion. Your 7-year old’s opinion is not one of them.

    • John Flaherty

      Frankly, Mr. Kellmeyer, this posting smacks of grave contempt for the ideas a 7-year-old child might offer. While most ideas from children may be insignificant regarding adult policy questions.. actually, that itself is a SERIOUS misnomer. Yes, whether abortion will be legal or not is a “policy question” in the sense of whether law allows abortions or not. However, there’s a serious MORAL question at the root of it.
      ..And the 7-year-old asked a very pertinent moral question:
      If law allows us to kill a child in the womb, why does it not allow us to kill a child after birth?

      In this case, the little girl asked a pertinent question. ..One that we adults shamefully answer very poorly all too often.

      • Steve Kellmeyer

        That’s right, John. As an adult, I don’t value my 7-year old’s opinion on anything beyond ice cream flavors. I don’t consult him or her about mortgage payments, investment opportunities or medical treatment. I have pretty complete contempt for a 7-year old’s knowledge and experience in these matters.

        Furthermore, if I have to go to a 7-year old to find out how to judge a moral issue, I am in a world of hurt. Abortion is evil. Any adult can recognize that. Some refuse to publicly acknowledge it, but they know it all the same. These cutesy articles are click-bait for the choir, but that’s about it.

        • John Flaherty

          I don’t consider this a cutesy article, Mr. Kellmeyer. I think it sad that you can’t see how a 7-year-old can understand serious matters.

          • Steve Kellmeyer

            I was appalled that Jimmy Carter tried to base his nuclear deterrent strategy on his 9-year old’s understanding of current affairs. I am appalled anytime an adult brings forward a child’s understanding in order to justify an adult decision.

            Doing this tells me that the adult doesn’t have a good reason, just an emotional appeal. It turns the whole discussion into Romper Room. Do you honestly think any pro-abort would be convinced by this article? Really?

            I know a lot of pro-aborts. Every one of them would sneer at this. Do you really think they want to hear the opinions of the people they kill? This is click-bait for pro-lifers, and that’s all it is.

          • John Flaherty

            For all that I agree that pro-aborts will not be persuaded by this, I counter that pro-aborts have not been persuaded by even well-reasoned argument.
            Most of the time, they’re based on some form of emotional idea of someone being oppressed somehow.
            Seems to me this particular appeal to emotion might actually jar someone just enough to make them think twice. That would accomplish a good deal.

        • Kathryn A. O’Keefe

          And yet the point being raised in the article is that the notion that life should be protected at all stages is obvious even to a seven year old, and that if life is not protected in all stages, then there is no reason to protect it in any other stage, either.

        • Marauder

          Not on anything beyond ice cream flavors? You should at the very least value your child’s opinion when it comes to him or her self, because if the kid is telling you s/he’s going to throw up or feels sad or needs help with math homework and your attitude is, “Screw your opinion, I don’t give a damn,” I feel sorry for your kid. It’s one thing to recognize that your child doesn’t have an informed opinion about something and therefore not put much stock in it, but “pretty complete contempt” isn’t just a dismissive attitude, it’s a hostile attitude. Why is ANYTHING about your own small child capable of inspiring “pretty complete contempt” in you?

          Kids don’t have the capacity to understand mortgage payments or investment options, but they have the capacity to feel compassion for other people – in fact, they end up sociopathic if they don’t develop compassion and empathy for other people by the time they reach a certain age.

          • Steve Kellmeyer

            Marauder, this article isn’t a news story, it’s a tear-jerk click-bait piece. It’s crap masquerading as news.

          • Marauder

            So why don’t you just ignore it?

          • Steve Kellmeyer

            If you don’t like abortion, don’t have one, is that it?

            Just ignore stupidity when you see it? Walk away?

          • Marauder

            Articles you find frivolous deserve the same consideration as killing someone? You must be one busy man.

          • Steve Kellmeyer

            I like being credible. I like it when people on my side of an issue are credible. I don’t like it when they aren’t. This article is not credible – it’s stupid.

    • Andrew J. Corrales

      The ultimate test of what’s right and what’s wrong is trying to explain the act in question to someone too young and innocent and naïve to understand, in simple understandable terms, without disturbing the child.

  • Steve Kellmeyer

    Let’s get the facts on Planned Parenthood correct in EVERY respect: Planned Parenthood claims to perform dozens of actions. The single line-item “abortion”, being one of those actions, makes up 3% of the list.

    However, in terms of REVENUE GENERATED, abortion comprises 37% of Planned Parenthood’s budget. Planned Parenthood violates the law: it does NOT report statutory rape.

    As for the relative safety of childbirth and abortion, comparing childbirth to abortion is apples-and-oranges. If you want to compare safety, you have to compare an abortion at, say, 12 weeks to the safety of simply being pregnant at 12 weeks. It is ALWAYS safer to be pregnant at any stage of the process than it is to be pregnant and have an abortion.

    Abortion is, in fact, so dangerous, and the danger curve it introduces rises so steeply that by the 12th week, it is actually safer to carry to nine months term than it is to be 12 weeks pregnant and have an abortion.

  • John Flaherty

    Ah, yes. Please don’t bother you with the facts of life because, well, you can’t possibly be required to admit that many “unwanted pregnancies” come about because people insist on behaving promiscuously.

    (For what it’s worth, no pregnancy is ever truly “unwanted”: Our Father in heaven DOES want these souls.)

  • Sam Armes

    What we’re forgetting here is that the mother is a human being too. Someone who already has a life set up and already has things to be ruined. Wanting to save that future person at the compete expense of the mother’s life devalues *her* as a person more than anything else if she does not want it. Somewhere along the way we’ve decided that a woman’s womb is collective property and that if she happens to get pregnant-no matter what the situation and no matter how for she is to be a mother–that she is now nothing but breeding stock tasked to raise someone not even brought into the world yet. I am not pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. Because a woman should be able to choose her own path in life, not have a government decide it for her.

    • Kathryn A. O’Keefe

      A person can choose their own life, up until the point where their choices would endanger another person if allowed to continue or be enacted. Since the fetus did not choose, nor had any choice in the matter of its creation, it should not be killed because it is inconvenient, or unwanted.

    • John Flaherty

      You are, in fact, pro-abortion, sir, not pro choice.
      If you had a pro-choice view truly, you would advocate for a woman’s right to refuse sexual contact with a man when she does not wish to become a mother.
      If women wish to insist that the government shouldn’t be so invasive, they might be well advised to explain why they insist that government must be so insistent about promoting promiscuity and “safe” sex.

    • Thorien

      “Complete expense”? No. Ever heard of an exception for the life of the mother?

    • anne leace

      *clears throat* Every mother has the choice of giving her child up for adoption or the foster care system, where that child will be cared for by people who want them. Considering the massive amount of out-of-country adoptions in this country, this option is still completely viable to every mother who does not wish to care for the child. Aside from the inconveniences of pregnancy, which most companies are decent about understanding, the mother is not burdened. Even if the person is, say, a college student, they can do this and then move on with their lives as though nothing had happened. Sure, their reputation is ruined, but no more so than if they had an abortion. Hiding it in this day is nigh impossible either way.

      And, oh, this does happened. Ask my mother. She had me, gave me away at birth, and went on with her life. I was adopted merely a month later.

      She is not forced to raise me or even check up on me- which she has never done.

  • John Flaherty

    You think this an enlightened opinion? Sounds more like the typical attitude from a right to die coalition. People have recovered from “death warrant” diseases in spite of professional medical opinions.
    I find it incredible that anyone would consider a child to be competent to make a decision about wishing to die.

  • vonvervengarten

    Like a happy, healthy, life-loving child with Down syndrome? A child with no other affliction than taking longer to learn things and having slanted eyes. Get with the program, if you want to defend eugenics, go all in with the truth.

  • Faithkuz

    What I’ve noticed about the practice of euthanasia is that it starts with a promise to adhere to strict rules than departs from them…. (I saw an article on this but have not been able to relocate it now)

  • Guest

    With all due respect Mr. Stafford and Esther,

    Life beginning at conception is based Catholic teachings, not science, and last I checked, Mary’s conception was not only immaculate, but consented to and she had an emotionally stable, healthy, safe, wanted, pregnancy. Also, kindly refrain from unintentionally insulting others who disagree with you, as you risk breaking the commandments of “Love thy neighbor as you love thyself” and “Judge not lest ye be judged.”

    Sincerely,

    Guest

    • christine

      Uhh- no. It IS science. Hard science. Proven beyond dispute. That is the beginning, origin, conception of a new life, that wasn’t there before, that is human. Not monkey, giraffe etc. This is also (but certainly not only) Catholic teaching which is based on natural law.

      • Guest

        Sorry, but I for one will never see a fertilized human egg as alive anymore than I would call a fertilized chicken egg alive. Regardless of my beliefs on when life begins, it’s clear to me that no matter what arguments I and others who are not Pro-life make, the policy on this site remains, as Mr. Bumpy would say, “I am right and you are wrong, I’m going to sing the opposite song,” so I’ll stick to my beliefs in supporting choice and reproductive justice, you and everyone can else can stick to their respective beliefs, and we can call it even.

        Peace, respect, and tolerance,

        Guest

        • Andrew J. Corrales

          Peace, respect, and tolerance, except apparently to the innocent unborn, that we can have killed if they’re inconvenient to either irresponsible women, abusive young men, or sex slave traffickers.

          If you don’t think an unborn child is alive, then read a science book.

          Your beliefs amount to relativism, which means you don’t truly respect our beliefs, which amount to moral absolutism. If you say that moral absolutism is wrong, then you don’t truly believe in relativism.

          Oh, while I’m at it, yes, fertilized chicken eggs are also alive. It’s the unfertilized ones that make it into our food. Haven’t you seen any episodes of the Magic School Bus?

          • Guest

            Au contraire, mes amis, it is you are unintentionally, but inconceivably, being a bully and intolerant of a person politely voicing their respective opinion, and I pity you. Lastly, I do respect your beliefs which is why I will not bother to argue with you or anyone else nor impose my beliefs on anyone anymore since we are all stubborn people : – ).
            May you know peace, love, have a great life, hang out with friends, and have a good night.

          • Andrew J. Corrales

            Bully? Name one thing I said that amounts to bullying that I intended as such.

            Intolerant? I provided my opinion in response to yours. Do you suppose that all people who disagree with you and post rebuttals to your arguments intolerant? If so, I’d think you were projecting. If not, cool your hoofs, I’m a proponent for a cause you just argued against. As such arguing back for me is standard operating procedure. What, precisely, did I do to merit your pity? I receive daily food and clothes from the world and daily grace from God. I got everything I need.

            Also, the Magic School Bus reference was serious. One of the episodes of that show is about chicken eggs.

    • Marauder

      When does science say life begins, then?

      The Immaculate Conception is the Catholic doctrine that the Virgin Mary was created without original sin. Although most people think it refers to Mary getting pregnant as a virgin, it doesn’t. I also don’t think the Bible tells us very much about what Mary’s pregnancy was like, but it does tell us that it almost broke up her relationship with Joseph and that she ended up having to give birth to Jesus in a barn. So no, it doesn’t appear it was completely smooth sailing.

      • Guest

        Sorry, but I for one will never see a fertilized egg as alive and regardless of when I believe life begins, it’s become clear to me, that no matter what arguments I make, pretty much the only response I and others who are not Pro-life will get from this site is, as Mr. Bumpy would say, “I am right and you are wrong, I’m going to sing the opposite song,” so I’ll continue to stick to my beliefs in choice and reproductive justice, you and everyone else can stick to their own respective beliefs, and we’ll call it even.

        Peace, tolerance, and respect,

        Guest

        • Marauder

          So you can argue vehemently that something isn’t alive, but you can’t say with any kind of scientific certainty when it IS alive? It doesn’t matter when any of us “believes” life begins. It matters when life actually does begin, as demonstrated though science.

      • Andrew Patton

        No, but then again, neither was her life with Jesus. Soon after His birth, they had to flee to Egypt to hide from Herod. At age 12, Jesus stayed behind in the Temple without telling His mother, and she was terrified when she realized He wasn’t with the caravan back to Nazareth and searched for Him for three days before finding Him in the Temple. She watched Him being crucified while the crowds mocked and spat on Him, and she suffered as though a sword had pierced her heart, just as was prophesied at His circumcision. A life of holiness in this sinful world brings many sorrows and trials, but these sorrows and trials are nothing compared to the glory of Heaven.

    • MamaBear

      Actually, life beginning at conception is not just Catholic, it is Christian. Psalm 139:13 says, God “knit me together in my mother’s womb.” In fact, take time to read verses 13 through 16.
      The same Bible you quoted, also says “thou shalt not kill.” The same chapter (Matthew 7) you quoted about judging also tells us to beware of false teachers and wolves and that we will be able to tell who is false by the “fruit they produce,” that is are their deeds in agreement with God’s Holy Word.
      Immaculate is a Catholic term, but even a Protestant like me knows it has nothing to do with consent. It refers to the Catholic teaching that Mary was free of original sin from the time she was conceived.
      As to Mary’s pregnancy with Jesus, I really do not think almost losing your fiancé until an angel intervenes, being at risk of being stoned for adultery (betrothal was as binding as marriage), making a journey from Galilee to Bethlehem while 9 months pregnant on a donkey, and then giving birth in a stable, qualifies as being a healthy safe pregnancy.

  • Marauder

    Your friend was in a very difficult situation, and her parents let her down. I’m so sorry for your loss. There was no reason why ANYONE had to die – not your friend, and not the baby, either.

    Some people aren’t cut out to be parents. Other people make great parents but can’t have their own kids. Once again, nobody needs to die in these situations.

  • Ingrid Heimark

    You spent most of the post writing about the 3% abortions that are the hard cases, using it as an excuse for the legalization of abortion for the 97% that are about not wanting to raise a child or give the child up for adotion, as you yourself said. This is not NEEDING abortion, it is CHOOSING abortion because they don’t WANT to continue the pregnancy. We see through your arguments very easily. Using the hard cases to justify the senseless killing of millions. You should actually be ashamed of yourself, and the lies you spread about CPCs are despicable, who use their time and money for free, the CPCs or the abortion clinics?

  • Ingrid Heimark

    I think it is very sad that your firend chose to end her life, as suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem, and a fatal one. But I have to remind you that the suicide rate after abortion is way higher than after birth, and that should be taken into consideration. Not having abortion reduces suicide. And I know the tragedy of suicide, I don’t wish it upon anyone. That is also ONE of the reasons I oppose abortion, it kills a woman’s wish to live and makes her more voulnerable to depression and suicide

  • Andrew Patton

    You did the right thing by talking about her talk of suicide. Your parents did the right thing by bringing that to the attention of her parents. Her parents did the wrong thing by refusing to get her treatment.

  • Andrew Patton

    One abortion is one too many. “A little yeast leavens the whole dough.”

  • Andrew Patton

    We have it on video at this very site.

  • Joshua Cummings

    I’m pretty sure there are times where abortion is understandable. Like say if a woman/girl is raped, and becomes pregnant by the rapist. Is it not right for her to want the baby removed ’cause of trauma? It’s not like she tried to get pregnant. JS, you need to understand some situations before you judge. Also, if a woman is having sex for pleasure without using protection, and she doesn’t want to get pregnant, she is stupid. If she becomes pregnant, she should be forced to have the baby, and take care of the child. Same for the ignorant father! Good learning experience. A lot of our youth need to mature a bit.

  • Andrew J. Corrales

    Is adoption considered an option? As far as I can see, there are always better options than having your son or daughter poisoned, dismembered, and ripped out. If one doesn’t want to be pregnant in the first place, abstinence and contraception are also options better than abortion.