Medical student confronts abortion, becomes pro-life

Abortion becomes very real when it is seen instead of viewed as an abstract moral and political debate.

Some time ago, I was sent this testimony from a medical student who preferred not to leave a name. He had just witnessed an abortion as part of his training. Deeply troubled, he wanted to tell someone. He was haunted by what he had seen.

The student starts out by saying that he was firmly in the pro-choice camp before witnessing the abortion:

To begin, I must say that until yesterday, Friday, July 2, 2004, I was strongly pro-choice. I am a pre-medical student, and being very scientific, I understood that the mass of cells that forms the fetal body is not often capable of survival before 24 weeks in the womb. I am also somewhat liberal, and I believed that every woman should have the right to choose what she did with her body and one that could potentially be growing inside of her.

The student had heard the pro-choice movement’s slogans. He took them at face value, believing that the unborn baby was “a mass of cells” and not an individual human being. He felt that a woman “had the right to control her body” and did not sympathize with the tiny baby inside her. He did not believe in the child’s humanity or right to life.

Then he took the opportunity to see an abortion performed. Because of his pro-choice beliefs, he did not expect to be disturbed by anything he would see:

This summer, I was accepted into a pre-medical program in NYC in which we are allowed to shadow doctors and see all sorts of medical procedures. When given the opportunity to see an abortion, I did not hesitate to accept the offer. It was something new, edgy, and exciting that I had never seen.

He then describes exactly what he witnessed in the operating room:

When I entered the operating room, it felt like any other I had ever been in. On the table in front of me, I saw a woman, legs up as if delivering a child although she was asleep. Next to her was a tray of instruments for the abortion and a vacuum machine for suctioning the fetal tissues from the uterus. The doctors put on their gowns and masks and the procedure began. The cervix was held open with a crude metal instrument and a large transparent tube was stuck inside of the woman. Within a matter of seconds, the machine’s motor was engaged and blood, tissue, and tiny organs were pulled out of their environment into a filter. A minute later, the vacuum choked to a halt. The tube was removed, and stuck to the end was a small body and a head attached haphazardly to it, what was formed of the neck snapped. The ribs had formed with a thin skin covering them, the eyes had formed, and the inner organs had begun to function. The tiny heart of the fetus, obviously a little boy, had just stopped — forever. The vacuum filter was opened, and the tiny arms and legs that had been torn off of the fetus were accounted for. The fingers and toes had the beginnings of their nails on them. The doctors, proud of their work, reassembled the body to show me. Tears welled up in my eyes as they removed the baby boy from the table and shoved his body into a container for disposal.

Since this abortion was done by suction, the baby must have been less than 13 to 14 weeks, but still far enough along that his humanity was evident.

Abortions in the second trimester are usually done through dilation and evacuation, a procedure in which forceps are used to tear apart the baby, rather than through suction.

The student was haunted by what he saw:

I have not been able to think of anything since yesterday at 10:30 besides what that baby boy might have been. I don’t think that people realize what an abortion actually is until they see it happen. I have been tortured by these images – so real and so vivid – for two days now…and I was just a spectator.

Never again will I be pro-choice, and never again will I support the murder of any human being, no matter their stage in life.

Unlike the vast majority of abortions, this baby was mourned. Someone felt sadness and horror at his death. Thousands of babies like him are suctioned out of their mothers’ wombs every day. They are rejected by their mothers and regarded as medical waste by their killers. Society allows these babies to die silently, with no recognition or acknowledgment of their humanity. This little baby boy will never have a name. He will never take a breath of air, never pet a dog, never watch a sunset, never ride a bike… He will never experience all the things that you and I take for granted. But this baby, perhaps, did not die entirely in vain – his tragic death revealed the truth to this young man. And those of you who are reading this article now know about this baby’s death.

Perhaps the story of this unfortunate child can motivate you to become more active in the pro-life movement. There are many things you can do, even from your computer. Share this article on Facebook. Sign on to a mailing list of a pro-life group. Donate money to a pro-life organization or a crisis pregnancy center – every little bit helps. Consider going to a clinic and trying to talk to the women entering it – with respect and kindness. Vote pro-life. Talk to your loved ones about abortion – share this or other pro-life articles with them. Be patient and understanding, be kind, be respectful, but most of all, be active – do something.

  • truthinaction

    Sarah Terzo should give the boy a name. After all, the mother has no right to complain if she does. The mother disposed of this boy.

    • Wendee Bauer

      She was no “mother.”

    • KatieDancer

      The author of the article should name the fetus? That’s odd.

      • sarah5775

        A child deserves a name.

        • MamaBear

          He has a name, known only to God, but he has a name.

        • marybridget

          Why is it odd Katie? Every person has a name–and the latin meaning of “fetus” is Offspring–like a real baby; not a dog in the pound. Yes Sarah5775 the baby deserves a name.

        • Gene

          His name is Robert Paulson.

        • Gene

          His name is Robert Paulson.

          • grovercleveland

            Good ol’ Bob, ready to die for the cause…

  • Ashley

    Abortions are wrong..they should not be allowed..your killing a innocent child..if u choose to have sex then use protection if u dnt want to get pregnant

    • Del

      Over half of all abortions are performed on women who were using “protection.”

      This is the big secret of the abortion industry: CONTRACEPTION DOESN’T WORK. It fails often; everyone knows someone close who has encountered a contraception failure. And so a woman has sex when she don’t want children (falsely assuming that she is “safe”), and when she gets pregnant, the abortionist has a sale.

      This is why Planned Parenthood — the largest player of the abortion industry — is so generous in handing out tax-payer funded contraception. It feeds their abortion business.

      • Bdeforest

        Some abortion clinics want contraceptives to fail so they can stay in business. Women and men should be more educated about “Protection”. If on an antibiotic, contraceptive may not protect them any more. How many women are told this??? If a man doesn’t want to support a baby, then he should keep his pants zipped or use a condom or else get a vasectomy. There isn’t any excuse for a man to father more than 2 children if he isn’t married and taking care of them. He is just being IRRESPONSIBLE!

        • Del

          Condoms are notorious for their unreliability. And even vasectomies heal themselves — my cousin was a surprise after my uncle’s vasectomy healed, about a decade after the surgery.

          So please — don’t say “or use of condom or else get a vasectomy.” Those are just excuses for men who want to use women.

          If a man isn’t ready to love a woman and care for the child they make, he should not have sex with her. Nor she with him.

          • Abby

            “f a man isn’t ready to love a woman and care for the child they make, he should not have sex with her. Nor she with him”… This statement is a little ridiculous because not everyone wants children.

          • Deanna Fugett

            Not ridiculous at all. If you dont’ want children then you shouldn’t be having sex, period! Ever. And you shouldn’t be having sex outside of marriage either. And if you do decide to get married then God calls us to at least attempt to have families. Every child is a blessing…every-single-one.

          • Abby

            It is ridiculous. Not everyone wants children and there is nothing wrong with remaining child free. Sex had other purposes besides reproduction. It is a way for a man and woman who are in love to connect and strengthen their bond. Not everyone believes in God and by saying god wants everyone to have family’s you are reminding me of why I don’t believe. If he really did exist wouldn’t he want people to be happy, even if that means being child free. For example, my sister is extremely religious and has decided to not have kids. Are you honestly going to tell me you think she is disobeying god?

          • Bored to Hell

            Blasphemy! Allahu will smite you!

            Oops wrong religion.

            That religion “believes” it is ok to have sex with children, just as this one “believes” abortions and being gay are wrong.

            Guess the fact of having a child outwieghs that fact that the mother won’t be able to raise it properly. Too bad that child will most likely fail and suffer because “religion” dictates so.

            Bunch physcos..

          • sarah5775

            Actually, the writer of this article is an atheist. Not all Christians are pro-life and not all pro-lifers are Christian

          • PrincessJasmine4

            Yes, but, most pro aborts have nothing if you take away religion.
            Perhaps we should let this person have their delusions.

          • DianaG2

            I don’t know of any religion that believes it’s wrong to be gay.

          • sarah5775

            Then you’ve ever met a fundamentalist Christian

          • DianaG2

            They don’t believe it’s wrong to BE gay.

          • sarah5775

            No? then why do they force their children into ex-gay ministries to try and get them to change their sexual orientation, ignoring the fact that study after study have shown that its impossible to “decide” not to be gay? Do you know that teens and some adults have become so desperate to change from gay to straight, thinking god could not possibly love them as they are, that when they can’t change they commit suicide or mutilate themselves? the emotional turmoil these people are forced into after being brainwashed by fundamentalist parents and churches is staggering. Mothers disown their children and churches kick out gay and lesbian members (I have several friends who were ‘asked” to leave their churches after they came out. All in the name of your “God.”

          • DianaG2

            How would I know why somebody does something?

            Of course, those things are horrible. What makes you think I would condone something like that?

          • sarah5775

            I didn’t say you would. I just said that there are Christians who think being gay is wrong.

          • DianaG2

            Well, they are certainly not really Christian, then, are they? I’ve never heard of such a thing, and I don’t know anybody like that.

            It’s disgusting.

            I’m somewhat inclined to disbelieve you because I don’t know anybody who would say or think something like that. Where do they live? On some other planet?

          • sarah5775

            I live in America. I am part of the LGBT community. I know a lot of gay and lesbian people and I know at least three who were kicked out by their churches- told to get rid of their partners or leave. I know of several whose parents will not speak to them at all and who basically disowned them. Did you know that 40% of homeless teenagers are lesbian/gay and most were kicked out of their homes by their parents? They did a study. I know someone who was kicked out of a Salvation Army shelter because he was gay. I have talked to people who have been involved in those ex gay ministries I speak of. I know one who was given “Reparative therapy” where they did electroshock to his genitals. If you hang around lesbian and gay people, you hear all the horror stories. I don’ t know how many of your friends are gay or lesbian, but I bet if you asked them, they can tell similar stories.

          • sarah5775

            http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/07/12/515641/study-40-percent-of-homeless-youth-are-lgbt-family-rejection-is-leading-cause/

            This is the study. According to one group that works with these teens: Of all the agencies’ LGBT homeless clients, 68 percent have experienced family rejection and more than half (54 percent) experienced abuse in their family

          • DianaG2

            Excuse me. You have gone to a DIFFERENT topic. You misunderstood or misinterpreted or went to some paranoid extreme about what I said.

            I SAID I NEVER HEARD OF A CHRISTIAN WHO THOUGHT BEING GAY WAS BAD. THEN I SAID THEY’RE NOT CHRISTIAN IF THEY THINK THAT OR SAY THAT. THEN I SAID I DON’T KNOW OF ANY SO-CALLED CHRISTIANS WHO WOULD SAY OR THINK A THING LIKE THAT.

            In fact, I was raised by gay people, and I was born in the year 1948.

            Therefore, perhaps I might know a little more about homophobic violence and hatred than most.

            Please leave me alone, ok?

            Thanks.

          • sarah5775

            Fine. But you seriously need help in writing coherently.

          • DianaG2

            Ridiculous!

            My parents were gay, and I hang around with many lesbian and gay people. (???)

          • sarah5775

            I’m not lying to you, diana. Are you saying your parents are gay? I don’t understand your question marks. But I assure you that I am telling the truth. I WISH I made this stuff up. Did you look at the link to the REPUTABLE study I sent you? I’m GLAD the gay people you know haven’t experienced these things, but I KNOW they still go on.

          • DianaG2

            Well, the question marks in parentheses were saying: “What makes you think I DON’T hang around with gay people? Why would THAT be a shocker? I’m pro-life, therefore I must also be homophobic?”

          • sarah5775

            I didn’t say you were homophobic. (though I’ve run into many pro-life people who were) I am sorry if it came across that way. I am not accusing YOU of anything…I”m just saying that there ARE people who are like that. I am really glad the people you know haven’t experienced this kind of thing. THough I think its quite possible if you sat them down and asked them “were you ever discriminated or treated badly because of your sexual orientation by people claiming to be Christians” they would have stories to tell, and would definitely know of times when it happened to others. My friend Neil was a member in good standing of his church. His pastor was a friend and helped him move when he went to his new apartment.When he told the pastor, his friend, that he was gay, the pastor told him to leave and never speak to him again. It made him very sad. I know these things happen, far more often than most people think. There are people out there who are Christian (at least in their own definition) who treat gay people very badly. I personally have lost friends when I came out. Oh, they didnt’ say that it was because of my sexual orientation, but they stopped returning my calls and completely stepped out of my life. At the time I came out most of my friends were not strong fundamentalist christians, so I didn’t get a lot of angry comments, but I have felt the effects of homophobia myself in many ways. I have had PLENTY of people on the internet tell me I am going to hell for being gay and or an atheist or both.

          • DianaG2

            In the Roman Catholic Church, we call that the sin of Despair. It’s one of the Seven Deadlies.

            But, it’s also combined with the sin of Presumption.

            Another of the Seven Deadlies.

            Nobody knows where anybody goes. It’s only for G-d to say or know that. For reasons that nobody could ever know about.

            Our only job in this life is to live each day trying our best to do the right thing. If any “Christian” (especially a Catholic one — although the Works are actually from Hebrew Scripture {AKA the Old Testament} which applies to all Christians) has a doubt about what the right thing is she or he can look at the Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy. It’s all right there.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            I thought the 7 deadly sins were as follows:
            Pride
            Avarice
            Envy
            Anger
            Lust
            Gluttony
            Sloth

            Presumption and despair are sins against the holy ghost.
            In the catholic church.

          • DianaG2

            You are quite right.

            My bad. Thanks.

            (Please don’t tell Sr., ok?)

          • PrincessJasmine4

            When will people figure out that abortion has NOTHING to do with religion?

          • MarcusFenix

            I believe that it’s in the same queue for news release with one like “Pigs Fly, with film at 11!”

          • Damien Johnson

            Exactly. I do believe in the bible, and the bible says killing is wrong-but even then, it doesn’t change that abortion is wrong regardless of belief or nonbelief.

          • DianaG2

            Yes, I agree. You don’t have to be religious to see what a bad idea abortion is.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            yes, but for most pro aborts, if you take away the religion argument, they have nothing.

            How horrible of us to deprive them of the only argument they have. :-)

          • DianaG2

            LOL, yes, we’re a mean group. First, we don’t want to kill babies.

            Now this.

            Where will it end. Oh, where will it end?

          • DianaG2

            “able to raise it properly”???

            What on earth might THAT mean? Just an excuse to kill.

            No, “religion” dictates no such thing.

            Babies were born long, long, long, very very very long before there was any “religion” at all.

            Like yourself, for example. You were born.

          • thinkaboutit

            You’re right, there’s nothing wrong with remaining child free…unless it means killing the child. You’re right that sex has other purposes, but sex is still the only way new people are created (all test tubes aside) and whenever anyone engages in it, they should fully expect that a pregnancy may result….if they’re “surprised,” then they’re pretty ignorant.
            And, please quit blaming God because you disagree with what people say about Him…honestly, that’s pretty lame. Would you use the same logic if you got a ticket for running a red light? “I’m sorry officer; someone told me traffic tickets have fines, which would decrease my personal happiness, so I’ve decided to believe you won’t write me one.”

          • Abby

            I didn’t blame your god for anything. I just think if he does exists he probably doesn’t care if someone wants to be child free.

          • DianaG2

            He only cares about things that you think are important, right?

          • Abby

            I didn’t blame your god for anything. I just think if he does exists he probably doesn’t care if someone wants to be child free.

          • Abby

            I didn’t blame your god for anything. I just think if he does exists he probably doesn’t care if someone wants to be child free.

          • Del

            So you imagine that God is some aloof, far-off being of no particular purpose.

            Truth is, God has revealed Himself to us. He is a father, who loves and cares for each one of us as His own child.

            Also — He made us, and He knows better than we do what will make us happy. He did not make us to be “child-free.”

            I just read an essay by Chesterton on the slavery of avoiding children. Nothing in the universe is more free and alive than a human child, and one has to wonder — what sort of addiction or slavery would cause a married person to refuse children? Is it money? Or leisure? Movies, restaurants, and motor toys? Working for someone else?

            imagine if your parents had chosen any of those things over having the child that is you? Would they have been much happier for never knowing you?

            This is the happiness that you are cheating yourself out of. If you knew God, He would tell you so Himself.

            A life with no children is worse than a life with no friends. Yet you don’t see anyone boasting about her “friend-free lifestyle,” do you?

          • Abby

            I have never had a desire to have children. I have known exactly what I want to do with my life since I was little and having kids has never been part of it. It isn’t any of the things you listed. It is just the simple fact of I don’t want kids.

            There is no happiness I am cheating myself out of by not having kids. I am happy in my life and if I did have a kid I wold be very unhappy. Google 100 reasons not to have kids and that mostly sums up how I feel about having kids.

            There is nothing wrong with a life with no children. I don’t care if you or another woman wants to have 15 babies, so why do you feel you need to tell me I am wasting my life by not having babies.

          • thinkaboutit

            Maybe not now, but someday you may be old and widowed, and your friends may all be busy with their children or grandchildren, and you may be all alone. Children are the families we carry into the future with us :) Who will be there to love you when you are old if not your children?

          • Abby

            Having children does not guarantee that we will have any one to love us when we are old. I go to see my grandfather at the nursing home every Friday and I usually spend a little time talking to his roommate. His roommate has been there for over two years and none of his kids have come to see him once. It is very heartbreaking to see how much it effects him. I know his case is not unique and that happens to many older people.
            I think it would be better for me to live my life in a way I am happy instead of worrying about what may or may not happen in 40 or 50 years.

          • DianaG2

            It sounds like you’re talking about convenience, not true happiness.

          • Abby

            Not really. I am truly happy in my life and it has nothing to do with how convent my life is.

          • DianaG2

            My bad. You win.

          • marybridget

            Well, that’s good. It will give you time to focus on your education or should i say ‘egumacashun’…phonetic spelling for the improper word. Could be useful to you.

          • DianaG2

            How much it AFFECTS him.

          • DianaG2

            Children ARE the future.

          • Caddy’s Mom, Molly

            I really appreciate that Abby is owning the fact that if you don’t want children please don’t have them unless you are going to give them to a good family that doesn’t have wants children. Unfortunately unless God made you incapable of having children the only way most people will avoid having a baby while still engaging in sex ( sex is absolutely made for husband and wife to bond ) but so many rely on birth control pills that many times without you knowing it you will still conceive and as a result of the pill that baby can die because the lining on the wall now is too thin. But at least she isn’t being irresponsible by having children that she doesn’t want…so many abused children mentally and physically.

            I hope I said that all okay..I’m in a hurry but wanted Abby to know I appreciate your thoughts and God does love you so much I hope you grow to know and love Him too!

          • DianaG2

            ???

          • foreman

            If you do not want children, you absolutely should not have any. You are not wasting your life; it’s what you want. Leave the mothering to others who cherish the opportunity.

          • DianaG2

            Why not Google “100 Reasons Not to Have an Abortion”?

          • Abby

            I could also google 100 reasons not to have kids or 100 reaons to have an abortion. It all depends what you want out of life.

          • sarah5775

            It is very arrogant to tell a person what “God” would say to them. You are not God. You dont know.

          • Del

            Our God is a real person who has revealed Himself to us. I am just passing along the message. As Jesus said, “You shall know the Truth, and the Truth will set you free.”

            But we killed Jesus. It is a weird paradox of human nature: We often hate the one who brings the good news.

            Anyhow, whether you call it “God” or “evolution” or “human nature,” we can see the natural purpose of love and sex and marriage: It is to make children. This leads us to be very happy.

            And we can see the problem with mind-drugs and contraception-drugs: These give us an intense pleasure that is only pretending to be real. Meanwhile, they ruin our health and our lives. Most of the time, it is too late before we figure it out.

          • DianaG2

            . . . . unlike you

          • marybridget

            God TOLD us what we need to know. You are arrogant to dismissively suggest otherwise…

          • thinkaboutit

            You’re right, and He made a guaranteed way to remain child free…abstain from sex. :)

          • Abby

            I won’t feel different about my own children. I do not want children and I am old enough to say with confidence that I am not going to change my mind. Thankfully I am in a relationship where we both feel the same way about children.

          • foreman

            Those who do not want children should not have them. I applaud your convictions. Please just make sure you have tubes tied and vasectomy.

          • Ben Oas

            I’ve been married for 3 years and am SO excited to be a father, but I got married young and I’m in no hurry. I’ll enjoy a nice 5 years of marriage with no one but my wife, and still have kids before I’m thirty :)

          • Del

            GK Chesterton said, “Normal and real birth control is called self control.”

            http://incandescentink.blogspot.com/2011/04/gk-chesterton-on-birth-control.html

            What do you think about self-control? This concept served humanity well for centuries. Have you heard it mentioned lately?

            And whether you call it “God” or “evolution” or “human nature” that formed us — contraception is a new an unnatural thing that is opposed to how we are made. (Not all that “new” — Humanity has known [and largely condemned] contraception since before 1000 BC.)

            Contraception is a source of great unhappiness — Adultery, epidemic divorce, impoverished single-moms, wage-slavery and the under-payment of women, teen-aged pregnancies, abortion, Bro-Choicers and other “acceptable” versions of sexual abuse, breast cancer, pornography, publicly advertised prostitution over the internet — the list goes on and on. These are the things that contraception have brought to our culture in the last generation.

          • Abby

            Self-control is not an option for married people are you telling me you seriously think married people should never have sex unless they want children. contraception is a great thing it allows people in relationships to have sex and be responsible without the fear of an unwanted pregnancy

          • Abby

            Self-control is not an option for married people are you telling me you seriously think married people should never have sex unless they want children. contraception is a great thing it allows people in relationships to have sex and be responsible without the fear of an unwanted pregnancy

          • Mom of 4

            It is too an option. I’m married, and my husband and I practice self-control when we can’t afford to have another baby at the moment. Why do you think that getting married means you lose the ability to control yourself??

          • Abby

            I personally never want children so self control is not a long term option for me. Lack of sex can destroy relationships and I think it is not realistic to expect people to abstain from sex until they are ready for a baby.

          • MarcusFenix

            Self control doesn’t mean you have to go months without…if your partner can’t go a few days without getting any, then that’s just generally sad.

          • Abby

            but when you never want kids wouldn’t it be more than a few days

          • MarcusFenix

            Self control doesn’t equal a lack of sex…it’s rather silly to equate those two items together. Not having sex while you’re ovulating doesn’t require extreme Kung-Fu master levels of self control. Having a hysterectomy or vasectomy doesn’t require years of meditative exercises to bring about focus. Both do require a little determination and some self control, but…we’re not talking Herculean efforts here.

          • MarcusFenix

            Unless, you do as my last post noted, which you apparently didn’t bother to read. Here, I’ll just list them out for you, so you don’t have to drill down too deep or think too hard.

            1. Don’t have sex while you’re ovulating. I know that takes a minute to know when you do, but…it’s not hard to figure out and keep up with unless using a calendar or day planner is just too much to handle.

            2. Use appropriate protection. Self-explanatory.

            3. Get a vasectomy or hysterectomy, whichever is appropriate for the person. Again, self explanatory.

            1 and 3 are pretty much no brainers. 2 still has the risk of failure, but is a good precaution. Doing 2 of the 3 would have a massively high success rate. All 3..well, that’s pretty solid.

          • Abby

            I always try to avoid sex when I think I may be ovulating but sperm can live for up to five days my unpredictable cycles make that difficult. I have an iud so I do use appropriate protection. As far as the hysterectomy that’s not going to happen.

          • MarcusFenix

            Fair enough. If you’re on the pill and using condoms as well, that’s a pretty solid defense. Can’t find fault there as much.

            I’ll bite on the last bit…why isn’t that an option? You have clearly stated multiple times on the thread you don’t ever want children. I would think that a hysterectomy would be a natural step.

          • Abby

            I’m not going to have a hysterectomy because for one its very expensive to do especially without insurance. Another is the side effects of that can be pretty severe. Now I am all for getting my tubes tied which I plan to do in a few years . I do all the things you mentioned except hormonal birth control. When I tried it I had a bad reaction and had to stop. I think though with my 2 for sure methods and my third that at least hopefully helps. I should be safe l.

          • Midwester

            IUD’s induce abortion.

          • Abby

            IUDs don’t cause abortions give me a break

          • Midwester

            On the contrary, they do. Do your homework. They render the lining of the uterus incapable of implantation in many cases. This means that the living embryo is not implanted but swept from the uterus. In other cases, when a pregnancy actually occurs, there have been cases of the baby having grown around the IUD so that it becomes embedded in the body. You obviously haven’t studied this or done much research on contraception or abortion side effects. By the way, in case you didn’t know, the IUD was first used to prevent conception in camels…

          • Abby

            Your point? I consider that preventing pregnancy which is what I want to so I don’t have to end up having an abortion.
            Also the cases of a baby growing around an IUD are beyond low and something conservatives proably exagerrate.
            I also don’t really care what it was first used for I just care that it works for me now.

          • Midwester

            Abby, I would be remiss if I did not tell you that what you are doing and your position on these issues is gravely sinful. I hope you someday see the truth and repent of your beliefs and behaviors before you have to suffer the consequences of damnation. An IUD induces abortion since it prevents implantation of an already fertilized ovum – in other words, a fully conceived human being. You are deceiving yourself and others. Time to wake up.

          • Abby

            An IUD prevents pregnancy which is my goal in birth control. You are actually the one who needs to wake up, because you are trying to convince people to live by your morality and your beliefs.
            I don’t consider abortion to be wrong and I especially do not consider something that prevents a pregnancy to be wrong.
            I guess you are against all birth control?

          • sarah5775

            Condoms prevent pregnancy. They keep the sperm from the egg. An IUD kills an embryo, which has already begun growing and dividing, but which can’t implant on the uterine wall. There IS a difference

          • Midwester

            Actually, the best prevention of pregnancy is to not have sex. Outside of marriage all sexual expression is gravely sinful. That said, there is no point in continuing this discussion since we are so diametrically opposed in beliefs. I wish you well, but I think that if you persist in this behavior and these beliefs that things will end badly for you.

          • DianaG2

            Number 1 seems to be about the old “rhythm” method. Cervical mucous is much more accurate than calendars and day planners.

            NFP is based on cervical mucus, not the old rhythm method.

          • MarcusFenix

            That’s fair…however one wants to calculate the time frame works just fine to ensure it’s accurate, but not having sex while ovulating, per my #1, stands. :)

            Did you get your Disqus set up properly with no problems like you wanted it and it’s working well?

          • DianaG2

            You know what? Yes, your advice worked fine, but I got nothing at all from DisQus for a long time, so I wanted to check on you guys and say hey, and all, but the only way to find you (plural) was to re-activate my notifications, so I’ve done that now.

            Not sure what to do next??

            Is there some way to just find you guys on the net, without getting stuff in my Inbox? I tried just looking on Live Action.

            Saw no comments at all.

          • MarcusFenix

            Sadly, that’s how it works with the program. There’s no real filter options besides the Digest delivery, no filters for specific people or posters, and so on. Could use a bit of an overhaul, and hopefully it will be added at some point.

            Outside of notifications, you would have to log into a site and check your Disqus (at the top of the comments section) manually to see if you received any response. Unfortunately, there’s really no other way, because of the limitations of Disqus itself.

            I shot you a message about contact, in case you needed to use that since Disqus wasn’t acting the way you wanted. Feel free to use that anytime. The address is under my Disqus profile info, if you need it.

          • DianaG2

            Oh, thanks, Marcus. Where did u send it? Here, on the — what is this called? “Message Board”? —

          • MarcusFenix

            It was in one of the replies to you, but my email address (it’s not my personal address, but I check it for things from here) can also be found under my Disqus info.

            Yes, technically these are just message boards that are provided as a third party addition to websites, rather than the actual site owners having to rely on previously encoded messaging systems (akin to things like the standard posting ability on WordPress accounts, for example) or from having to create their own.

          • DianaG2

            Thanks, Marcus. Not sure I understand all that, but . . . I can probably figure out what to do?

          • MarcusFenix

            Well, skipping the technical stuff… :)

            If you want to see a user’s info (provided that it’s not private, they’re a guest, or other such issue), you can click on the person’s name (such as mine), and it will pop up a window. If the person does not have their profile set to “Private”, it will show you a list of their postings, who they are following or have following them, the number of posts and likes that the person has received.

            Sometimes, like if you click on mine, you’ll see a little blurb (such as mine with “see my email”). If you hold your mouse over it, it’ll auto-scroll down to show the address. You can also perform other actions, such as choosing to follow the person, as well as go to the Google Plus, Facebook, or Twitter pages (if they have them on). It’s pretty user friendly.

          • DianaG2

            H m m m . . . Thanks, Marcus. I just looked you up. Somehow I assumed I’d been following you. But, now I really am. You’re just not here as frequently as some others. (Yes, you know who you are :-)

            I also found some very interesting posts you wrote. I have not yet gone to the other things yet. I’m doing that now, or soon.

            Kind of fun. Thanks.

          • MarcusFenix

            Lately, I’ve had a few things on my plate, and my significant other and I are prepping to move closer to DC in the next few weeks, so we’ve been handling things for that. Also had some family issue to attend do and we’ve been traveling, but…i still check regularly and post when needed. :)

            Feel free to comment as you like on anything I’ve written, good or bad…I’m not shy.

          • Basset_Hound

            Are you the same “Mom of 4” that posts on National Review?

          • DianaG2

            She probably DOES think that, Mom.

          • Basset_Hound

            “Self-control is not an option for married people”

            REALLY???
            What happens if your spouse is seriously ill or injured? What happens if you have to be separated for an extended length of time because of a job, or because one of you travels frequently? Do you think the part of the wedding vow which mentions “forsaking all others and keeping only unto you” is irrelevant?

          • DianaG2

            You posted this five times.

          • Abby

            Self-control is not an option for married people are you telling me you seriously think married people should never have sex unless they want children. contraception is a great thing it allows people in relationships to have sex and be responsible without the fear of an unwanted pregnancy

          • PrincessJasmine4
          • DianaG2

            Yes, this is amazing!

            Sheesh! I don’t even know what to think anymore.

          • DianaG2

            Yeah, great stuff, huh? (NOT!)

            I love Chesterton!!

          • Basset_Hound

            If she becomes pregnant despite precautions, and takes the life of the child to protect her status, then, yes she is.

          • Tweet

            The argument isn’t really (rather shouldn’t be) about religious beliefs. You are totally right about the fact that everyone doesn’t believe in God. The matter is that abortion is a bit harsh in the methods that it is done. I am not pro choice…I am pro life however, we do not know why this woman decided to get an abortion. Sometimes abortion is justifiable (i.e rape, incest, or health issues of the carrying mother).
            On another note, God does want us to be happy. Look at it this way, our parents want us to be happy, but they want us to be happy in a good way but what if doing drugs or other “crazy things” makes us happy? Our parents wouldn’t want us to find our happiness this way. It is the same way to God. No one is telling you that she is disobeying God, because she isn’t if she is extremely religious.

          • DianaG2

            Well, killing someone could make me “happy” but God says I can’t kill that person, so obviously God does not exist, because I can’t be happy while that person is still alive.

            :-)

          • Meg

            Absolutely not. God doesn’t call everyone to have families, he doesn’t even call everyone to be married. He definitely calls certain people to get married but not have kids. His plans differ from person to person so not having kids is in no way a sin.

          • DianaG2

            As long as you don’t have sex or get pregnant.

          • Midwester

            Abby, disbelieving in God doesn’t negate the fact that God exists. The very fact that you have within you a sense of fairness, of what is right and wrong, points to the law that God has written in our hearts. Please reconsider your position. God’s existence is totally independent of our feelings or beliefs. If a congenitally blind person were asked to describe the sun, that person would be unable to do so. They might even disbelieve the sun exists. But their inability to see the sun would not mean that the sun did not exist. Similarly, people, like yourself, have a blindness when it comes to God. Perhaps you are like the person who shuts their eyes and, due to the fact that they cannot see the sun, they convince themselves it doesn’t exist. I challenge you to seriously ask God to reveal Himself to you. Then, once He has, ask God to show you the truth about human sexuality.

          • brisonc3

            from a purely biological, zoological, warm-blooded mammalistic level, the sexual attraction between male and female is for the purpose of reproduction. The fact there is a side effect of closeness and pleasure in the act itself is a plus, but it is not the reason for sexual attraction, reproduction and nature directing it for that purpose does indicate intercourse is for reproduction.

            Now humans can always resist natural, animalistic tendencies(although apparently encouraging homosexual humans to do that is now seen an a secular heresy and even now a crime in California and New Jersey) and put for effort to have sex for reasons other than pro-creation, but remember mother nature is always looking to overcome obstacles to keep her from doing what she wants to do. That is the essence of evolutionary theory. Nature evolves organisms to overcome obstacles in their path to survive.

            This is why there are many “contraceptive failures” which really is not a failure at all, but mother nature succeeding in overcoming the obstacle put in her way.

          • Abby

            Well maybe mother nature should use better judgement and not have contraceptive failures with a woman who really does not want kids.

          • James

            She just has to be willing not to abort a child if she should “accidentally” have one.

          • Abby

            That’s not an acceptable answer. A woman should be able to have sex (preferably with protection) without the fear of an unwanted pregnancy. Pregnancy can have devastating effects on a woman’s health and life and having sex should not be a contract that she will stay pregnant.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            “Pregnancy can have devastating effects on a woman’s health and life and having sex should not be a contract that she will stay pregnant.”

            You mean like this poor unfortunate woman? She found herself with an unplanned pregnancy as well..
            poor thing! I’m so sad for her.. I bet you will be too after you read this heart breaking story of a woman who had a parasite invade her womb

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2517436/My-unborn-baby-saved-life-Mother-didnt-know-expecting-discovers-pregnancy-hormones-destroyed-cancerous-tumour.html

          • Abby

            Her case is defiantly not normal. A lot of the time the pregnancy hormones can cause some bad side effects.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            Oh right.. like this! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130428230427.htm
            and this: (you’ll have to scroll down a bit for this one) http://chestofbooks.com/health/natural-cure/The-Hygienic-System-Orthotrophy/Mother-Child-Symbiosis.html#.Up_87KWu0dt

            of course.. you win!

            and of course, the news you’ve been waiting for has come to fruition… I know you’re going to love this newest study out of china.. it absolutely proves you are on the right side of the argument.
            Enjoy dear..

            http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10552-013-0325-7

          • DianaG2

            No wonder they’re defiant :-)

          • DianaG2

            Love this story.

          • DianaG2

            :-)

          • DianaG2

            Would that be the same sister who died in childbirth?

          • Abby

            No I had two sisters. (one only has the same dad- the one who never wants kids)

          • TheTNridgerunner

            My wife and I do not want children. Now if I understand you correctly, you are saying that we should not have sex? Ever? Period? Hmm, guess we have been living in sin for the past six years of our marriage. Thanks for clearing that up.

          • Del

            Yes. I am sorry to tell you, but what you realize is true.

            Contraception is a sin. Every Christian used to know this, until 1930 and the Lambeth Conference. Since then, only the Catholic Church continues to teach this truth clearly and boldly.

            There are plenty of websites that will explain this fully for you. And please, for love of your wife and concern for her wellness, look up NFP (“Natural Family Planning”).

          • TheTNridgerunner

            We do not use contraception. My wife is sterile. It works out in our favor since we do not want children. This being the case, we know full well that what we are doing is not going to produce a child. I was commenting on the above post about not having sex ever if you do not want children. Since we cannot have children are we still sinning by having sex?

          • PrincessJasmine4

            Not according to most monotheistic religions

          • marybridget

            non-monotheistic practices calling themselves religion are self-serving and brutally sinful.

          • DianaG2

            No, of course not. It’s not something that you deliberately caused.

            Did you decide you didn’t want children before or after you found out you were sterile?? It doesn’t change my answer. Just wondering.

          • TheTNridgerunner

            I personally never wanted children. She wanted them before she found out that she couldn’t have them. Now she is of the opinion that there are plenty of people in the world already.

          • marybridget

            How sad she is; and ‘YOU PERSONALLY’ sad as well.

          • Shay

            “We do not use contraception. My wife is sterile. It works out in our favor since we do not want children.”
            Fertillity is never impossible (just ask the twins im carrying now what “sterile” means)

          • Gene

            Just because you were once “sterile” but am now suddenly “fertile” does not mean that the same applies to everyone.

          • marybridget

            No. we wanted children and were unable to have them because of me. Under Catholic only law, sterility must be natural. If your wife had her tubes tied or any other non-essential surgery to prevent conception, there is no sin. God has a reason for everything. But we live in a childish world of “i want what i want because i want it…” That is a sin.

          • DianaG2

            Mary, I think you meant to say, “If your wife had her tubes tied or any other non-essential surgerY to prevent conception, IT IS A SIN.”

            Typo ??

          • Bee

            So…can you tell me in the Bible where it says “Contraception is a sin”? Cause I’ve read the Bible and I must have overlooked that.

          • sarah5775

            It doesn’t. It doesn’t condemn it anywhere in the bible. The closest thing is Oman spilling his seed, and most scholars believe that was not actually about contraception but about disloyalty to his brother’s wife. The reason the Catholic church and Christians used to be against contraception (or still are) is because of the ancient belief that the spirit of the baby is in the semen, when they didnt’ know about the sperm and the egg, it was believed (in ancient times) That a tiny baby traveled from the man to the woman. Therefore, contraception prevented this baby from taking root, ie. killing. That is why you see contracpetion and abortion linked in medieval and ancient church literature. This is also why the Catholic church waged a centuries long war on masturbation. Now we know the the truth about biology, but the Catholic chuch hasn’t caught up yet. That is where the anti-birth control teaching originated- in a misunderstanding of biology

          • PrincessJasmine4

            That’s not what I learned in Catholic school
            Catholics are opposed to birth control because in Genesis god says “be fruitful and multiply”
            So to a catholic,contraception would be in direct violation of that specific commandment
            The homonucleus concept doesn’t really show up till 16 century alchemy and I believe it was coined by a Protestant….think his name was Paraclesus…..but I could be wrong

            The war waged on masturbation has to do with purity in thought word and deed. Not the homonucleus theory.
            It’s covered under the 6th commandment
            Remember, Catholics are not Bible only Christians
            They also have their “Tradition” which interprets the Bible
            Here’s a better look at the Catholic view on contraception
            http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UvoBPVsjdog&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUvoBPVsjdog

          • DianaG2

            Wow, awesome video!! Thanks. I subscribed to this channel. It’s amazing.

            Just one thing, though (not important, really): I think the teaching is not necessarily that the soul is received at conception, but that we don’t know when the soul is received. Same result, though.

          • sarah5775

            PJ, it is true you don’t learn that in catholic school, but at the time the church took a stong stand on contraception, (in the early years, the church did not put a lot of emphasis on it) the “baby is in the seminal fluid) was a common belief. Obviously, the church doesn’t STILL believe that, but that was one of the origins of the doctrine, that is one of reasons why the church adopted that stand in the past, and the church doesn’t change their doctrines easily. Religious institutions often lag behind science. People don’t like to change their deeply held religious beliefs. The church came up with other reasons to oppose contraception, or, more likely, emphasized the other reasons it did. But the theory of life in the sperm was part of the reason this teaching became so prominent in the RCC

          • PrincessJasmine4

            hmmmm…. .I didn’t even realize that.
            ah well..
            doesn’t matter anyway, does it? :-)
            I’d like to do more research on it though

          • DianaG2

            There was never any such doctrine or dogma. That’s ridiculous.

          • sarah5775

            There absolutely was Diana. For many generations, this is what popular wisdom believed, and it influenced the teachings of many Western religions. Study history a little more thoroughly. . I learned about it in college, and I’ve read on my own about it too You can still go to art galleries and see paintings of people making love with a little tiny baby above them, moving from one partner to the other. I’ve seen pictures of some of these paintings. They date from around the time that the Christian church began focusing on birth control and masturbation.It was definitely something that the educated world believed for a very long time

          • sarah5775

            I’m not sure there were Christian writings that explicitly say that this is why the church began emphasizing the sins of this nature, but that was the common wisdom for much of the Middle Ages and later. This is why women alone were always blamed for infertility when couples couldn’t procreate – they were assumed to be barren as in the baby couldn’t implant in their wombs – men where never blamed when they couldn’t have children

          • sarah5775

            Admittedly, the evidence that the RCC started emphasizing the sin of “spilling seed” and “birth control” because of this common folk belief is Isn’t ironclad, but its one theory and the correlation is one that I remember being discussed in one of my history of religion classes. THe fact that people did used to believe that the baby existed intact in the sperm is pretty well documented itself

          • Daniel P. Durham

            Huh? What does masturbation have to do with “thou shalt not murder”?

          • PrincessJasmine4

            Absolutely nothing

          • Daniel P. Durham

            Sorry, I forgot Catholics and Protestants count the Commandments differently.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            Oh man!
            I’ve been so removed from that stuff for so long I forgot about that too Doh!

          • Good explanation,Sarah!!

          • Del

            Look at it this way: Pick any character in the Bible…. And Patriarch, or wife, or anyone with a name. If you told that person that you wanted to have infertile sex and intentionally want to avoid having children, what would that biblical person’s reaction be?

            They’d all be shocked, or laugh at you. You will not find permission to use contraception anywhere in the Bible — that’s for certain.

            The early Christians condemned contraception, abortion and infanticide in the Didache — a 1st century document that was written during the lifetime of the Apostles and widely spread among Christian communities. It is called “The Teaching of the Apostles,” and it was included in many early canons of Scripture. The only reason that the Catholic bishops set it aside in the 4th century (when the books of the Bible were settled) was because they did not know which Apostle might have written it.

          • sarah5775

            First of all, society was very different in biblical times. So many infants died that people wanted to have many children. In those societies people WANTED large families. Having many children was practical for those who worked on farms or in manual labor (as many of the early patriarchs did) because they could help. Having sons to carry on the family name was very important. Society is different now. Also, why should nonchristians care what people in the bible thought? Do you care what Muhammed thought about eating pork?

          • There is nothing sinful about preventing an unwanted pregnancy.Responsible adults have a right to decide whether or not to have children and to space their pregnancies.The Catholic church should stay out of peoples bedrooms.I am a Pro-life Liberal and support birth control and sex education.NFP doesn’t work for everyone and shouldn’t be crammed down peoples throats.

          • sarah5775

            I agree completely

          • Susie

            But if through the grace of God your wife conceives nonetheless, would you abort that child or would you suck it up and have (and love!) your child? That’s the difference. If you’re only response would be to abort that child then, indeed, you and your wife should not be having sex. If you’re willing to have the child even though you don’t “want” it, then knock yourselves out.

          • Shay

            or if you not gonna love your child at least have the decencay to give the child to someone who will

          • marybridget

            As a Catholic, that is the CUTTING EDGE issue of stopping the killing of children. WHY it is the cutting edge is beyond me—and i am a life long Catholic…

          • DianaG2

            Very good answer, TNridgerunner!

          • foreman

            Please get tubes tied and vasectomy. Problem solved.

          • marybridget

            Problem is not solved. You suffer a hellish degree of selfishness.

          • marybridget

            Sounds like you are the child your wife never had.

          • brisonc3

            no, it means you then take steps to make sure the possibility of conception is zero. Your wife could have her uterus or her ovaries removed or you could have your testicles removed. This would guarantee you will never conceive. If that is your goal. You can also “stack” your contraception methods(her on the pill with a female condom and you using a condom with a spermicide).

            If you use any method that doesn’t guarantee 100% effectiveness then understand that you still have a 1 or 2% possibility of pregnancy and live with that understanding and accept any child that still results from your sexual activity. That is what mature adults do.

            If you are 100% against pregnancy then take 100% steps to prevent it. Anything short of that is not “taking responsiblity” or being a responisble adult and doesn’t give the right to an abortion as backup contraception.

            There is your answer. Abortion is no excuse because “we tried to avoid pregnancy”. Trying or Planning is not succeeding. Intentions of not having children mean nothing unless you take the appropriate steps to avoid conception 100%

          • brisonc3

            If you are 100% against having children, ever ever, than you need to take the actions to make sure this is the case. That means either neutralize your or your spouses reproduction organs or remove them or never engage in the activity or action(intercourse) that results in conception. THAT is your responsibility so do it.

            Don’t complain about or make excuses about it or say, “that just isn’t fair”. Remember that you are the one demanding pregnancy-free intercourse for life. So stop complaining about how difficult it is to do that and do what you have to to make that a reality, even if it’s uncomfortable to you.

            THAT is what being a mature adult is who has a right to make choices is. Abortion has not place in this situation if you do all YOU have to do to make yourself and your woman sterile. DO IT, no excuses or complaints.

          • Non-Believer

            But god isn’t real, so your argument is invalid. If you don’t have tangible evidence of this beings existence then move along.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            This isn’t about anyone’s god
            This is about abortion which has nothing to do with god or religion.

          • MarcusFenix

            This would be a case of argumentum ad ignorantiam
            You’re welcome.

          • DianaG2

            Yes, please do.

          • Ingrid Heimark

            People should be able to choose not to have children, but not by killing

          • Nadya

            They may not ideally “want” children (in other words, maybe they’re not “planning” to have a child for whatever reason), but the majority of responsible, NORMAL adults in a committed relationships will nonetheless have and love any child that might be conceived as a result of their procreation–thus, in the end, they are indeed “ready” to care for a child they make, even if that child is not “planned” or “wanted”. If they’re not ready to do that (or to put their child up for adoption), they SHOULD NOT be having sex. Abortion SHOULD NOT be an option.

          • Abby

            Abortion is an option for pro choice women and it will continue to be as long as it is legal. You are right that most adults want children but there are plenty normal adults who don’t want them and they should be able to make that choice without bring told they are living in sin for not having them.

          • DianaG2

            Any mom who aborts her baby will have much bigger problems than what she’s “told.”

          • Abby

            Really. Such as?

          • DianaG2

            Ask a woman who has had an abortion.

            silentnomoreawareness.org

          • Abby

            I’d ask myself but since nothing bad has happened I wouldn’t get an answer.

          • DianaG2

            So, why are you reading this pro-life article?

          • faith3003

            If someone doesnt want children then maybe adoption is a good choice. there are plenty of people out there that would love to have a baby and cannot have children. its better to give up for adoption instead of killing a baby.

          • James

            I think that’s Del’s point. Not everyone wants children, and since it is more or less impossible to insure that sex will not produce a pregnancy, then those people should not have sex. Sex is a privilege and, like any other privilege, comes with responsibility.

        • Chester

          My friend and his girlfriend became pregnant while she was on birth control and an antibiotic. She wasn’t told that it would make the birth control ineffective. I’m happy to say that they kept their baby and since married and have two kids together. I also had a friend whose mother claims she conceived all her kids while on birth control. When the pill was first introduced to the public, the amount of hormone was higher than it is now. The levels have been reduced, to lessen the side effects of it, thus making it less effective. This is especially if you don’t take it at the same time every day. But even if you’re super careful, take it at the same time every day, it can still fail!

        • thinkaboutit

          and it’s not irresponsible for a man to have two children if unmarried? Insanity!

      • Caerus

        Contraception is certainly not 100% effective, but if people use it correctly, it is highly effective. I remember once when I was a freshman in college, there was a woman in my Ethics class (most ironically named class ever, by the way, all it was was a platform for the hard-core liberal “teacher” to spout her beliefs). She claimed to have gotten pregnant NINE times on birth control pills. Like with most people who claim to have gotten pregnant that way, they misused contraception, intentionally or not.

        • Del

          Abby Johnson became pregnant three times, in spite of contraception. And she was the Director of Planned Parenthood in Bryan/College Station at the time, teaching other women how to use it properly! She was not using it incorrectly.

          Contraception is erratic. For some women, it is under-effective. For other women, it is over-effective — and she have difficulty conceiving a child when wants to. Not to mention the greatly increased risk of breast cancer, blood clots, and stroke. In some women, the Pill also reduces her libido and ability to enjoy sex.

          The REAL EDUCATION about birth control is that is it NOT as safe and NOT as effective and NOT as harmless as current politics says it is.

          There’s a lot of money and a lot of power behind our addiction to birth control. Just like Big Tobacco used to dominate politics…. in decades to come, our culture will reject the dangerous hormones just like we did cigarettes. Birth control and abortion will be recognized as an abuse of women, just like slavery is now seen as an abuse African-Americans.

          • DianaG2

            Absolutely!

        • DianaG2

          So, she has nine kids? How is that misusing birth control?

          Or are you saying she had nine abortions?

      • Blue

        If contraception doesn’t work this world would be MUCH more overpopulated than it already is. And families would have more than six kids. You sound ridiculous.

        • Del

          The world is not overpopulated.

          • DianaG2

            I agree. It’s kind of the opposite.

          • B3averhaus1n

            Please go to a slum in India or the Kibera in Nairobi and tell me that.

          • Rebekah

            You can’t look at a particular section of the world and say it is indicative of the whole world. That is a part to whole fallacy. Just because one part of the world is overpopulated does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that the whole world is overpopulated. To put things in perspective, if the population of the entire world was housed in Russia, every person would have about 26,000 square feet of living space, with the rest of the world’s landmass available to feed, clothe, and supply them. If the population of the world was housed in Texas, every person would have 1050 square feet of living space. (Assuming that the world population is 6,900,000,000 persons.) If you don’t believe me, calculate it for yourself. Texas is about 260,000 square miles in area and Russia is 6.5 million square miles in area. (I rounded down in both cases)

          • PrincessJasmine4

            That’s awesome! Mind if I borrow this from you? :-)

          • Rebekah

            Sure. Just do the math before you post it anywhere. I double checked myself on it, but better safe than sorry.

          • DianaG2

            Maybe those places are crowded. That doesn’t speak for the rest of the world.

      • DianaG2

        What is the appropriate answer to “anti-lifers” who say (as one moronic journalist wrote recently in my town), “The only way to decrease abortion is to make contraception more freely and widely available.”

        • PrincessJasmine4

          Well chances are your journalist is also an environmentalist
          http://m.livescience.com/20532-birth-control-water-pollution.html

          • DianaG2

            Oh, dear. Good one, Princess!! Thanks so much for this.

            I might even send this article to the paper where that journalist writes? If you don’t mind?

            Bless your heart, kiddo.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            of course!!
            I like this article bc as far as I can tell it’s not from any religious website, so it’s not like anyone can claim “religious fanaticism”

          • DianaG2

            Yes, good one.

            It’s a simple fact. Can’t be denied.

        • PrincessJasmine4

          also, free contraception hasn’t stopped Canada and the UK from having some of the highest abortions rates ever

          • B3averhaus1n

            Not really sure where you are getting your statistics. Western Europe has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world. On top of that the UK rates have actually been dropping in the last few years. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23267842
            The abortion rate in Canada has also been on my nice decline as well. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/parenting/canadas-teen-birth-and-abortion-rate-drops-by-369-per-cent/article571685/

          • PrincessJasmine4

            The good ladies over at Jezebel were a great help for a start.

            http://jezebel.com/5987292/abortions-increase-among-married-women-in-their-30s

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10173977/Record-high-number-of-abortions-which-are-repeats.html

            http://www.nursingtimes.net/nursing-practice/clinical-zones/public-health/england-and-wales-abortion-rates-continue-to-rise/5045507.article

            and sorry.. i meant Scotland, not Canada… (by the way you only provided an article about teen pregnancies for both the UK and Canada)

            theses are repeat abortions… you’d think they’d learn to use birth control after the first time, right?

            http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22691282

            In Canada, there is an increase in still births due to the increase in termination

            http://www.cmaj.ca/content/early/2013/04/08/cmaj.121372.full.pdf

          • B3averhaus1n

            If you look at the official government statistics I have provided below, you will see that abortion rates in England/Wales are at their lowest in 16 years. If you would have actually read the article I linked to instead of just the headline you would see that “For women aged 15-44 the abortion rate was down 5.4% … the lowest since 1997”. That was the first sentence of the article BTW! Not only has England/Wales decreased its abortion rates, those rates are much lower than the rest of the world to begin with. To say it has its “highest rates ever” is totally false. Its also interesting how when you are called out on a very blatant falsehood (that the Canadian abortion rate is at its highest ever) you say you confused Canada with Scotland. Its not like those countries are on two totally different continents or anything.

            (Im confused why you posted 8 separate links that show only that repeat abortions/abortions amongst married women in their 30’s have increased. That does nothing to validate your original, and completely false, claim)

            https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/211790/2012_Abortion_Statistics.pdf

          • PrincessJasmine4

            The total number of abortions was 185,122, 2.5% less than in 2011 (189,931) and 5.2% more than in 2002 (175,932).
            Interesting that it fluctuates so much in a country where contraception is free and sex education is stressed.

            I posted an article about repeat abortions among teens and then an article about repeat abortions among married women. Among teens it was a real problem in the UK a few years ago despite the fact that contraceptives are free and sex ed is stressed.

            Pardon me for not having an eidetic… are you saying that it’s not possible for someone to confuse numbers and countries?

          • B3averhaus1n

            Again, the abortion rate in England/Wales is at its lowest in 16 years. This proves your original point wrong. And personally I find it kinda hard to confuse countries on different continents.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            What was the actual rate 16 years ago?
            Is it a significant decrease?
            Why did it take 16 years to get to a lower rate in a land where contraception is free?

            And could the numbers of 2012 be at all effected by such programs as these that perhaps went completely undetected and unreported?

          • DianaG2

            Thanks, Princess. Is there a website that says that?

            I mean, other than what this journalist would classify as “pro-life propaganda?”

      • Jesse

        The false accusation that contraception does not work is one of the worst lies that I have heard recently. If this is true, then why is it that only 5% of all unintended pregnancies in the US are among women who correctly use birth control? The other 95% are among women who either incorrectly or inconsistently use it, or don’t use it at all. Furthermore, nobody is benefitting from these abortions. Many of the unintended pregnancies in the US are among uninsured or underinsured women, meaning that their abortion (or childbirth) is either unpaid or coming out of public funds. This is not a moneymaking strategy for anybody.

        http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html

        • Del

          You know someone who has encountered a contraceptive failure. Everyone knows somebody who was using contraception and got pregnant.

          My uncle’s vasectomy healed itself. Abby Johnson got pregnant three times while on a Planned Parenthood program… for two of those occasions, she was working at Planned Parenthood and teaching other women how to use it properly.

          Planned Parenthood (Guttmacher) tells us that half of women seeking abortions were using contraception.

          And Planned Parenthood is a billion-dollar-per-year corporation. Just over one third of their income is derived from the 300,000 abortions they sell each year. That’s 11% of the women they see each year. They don’t do any abortions for free. It’s cash or credit.

          • Jesse

            First of all, I don’t know anybody who has been consistently and reliably using contraception and has ended up having an unintended pregnancy. The reason for that is that it is pretty rare. And guess what? A lot of women lie when asked if they correctly use contraception. Or think they are using it correctly when they aren’t. And unfortunately that is their own fault for being uneducated consumers of the product.

            Secondly, I don’t know much about Abby Johnson. I do, however, know that she herself has had two abortions. I don’t have information on what kind of contraceptives she was using when she worked at Planned Parenthood or if she was actually using them correctly.

            Thirdly, the statistic that half of women seeking abortions were using contraception really is useless. It doesn’t tell me if these methods of contraception were being used effectively. It also doesn’t tell me what the methods were. Were they using condoms or birth control pills, with typical use failure rates of 18% and 9%, respectively? Or were they using long-acting reversible contraceptives, such as implanon or an IUD, with failure rates of less than 1%? Furthermore, not all unintended pregnancies end in abortion. Not even close. This statistic tells me more about the fact that perhaps the types of women who seek out contraceptives are more likely to get an abortion, and nothing more. Mistaking correlation for causation is one of the worst possible mistakes anybody can make when looking at statistics.

            Finally, Planned Parenthood actually has a revenue of approximately $200 million per year, and is not the billion dollar per year corporation that you are making it out to be. Clinic revenue accounts for $2 million of that. That’s 1%. Of patient care provided by PP clinics, only 3% of that is abortion services. So your figure of “1/3 of their income” is wildly off base. The VAST majority of their money ($190 million) comes from grants and donations. Planned Parenthood also has a big source of funding in governmental funds, though that money legally cannot be used to provide abortions. You are also shamefully naive if you think that all of the women seeking services at Planned Parenthood are paying for it. Unfortunately, that’s just not how the medical community works these days. Many healthcare bills remain unpaid entirely or never are fully paid.

            Rather than making up statistics and false stories, maybe you could benefit from reading some empirical data. Just because you have an account of a couple of friends or relatives who experienced contraceptive failure doesn’t mean that that’s the truth for the whole world.

      • jessie

        I was using birth control pills when I got pregnant with both of my daughters. I took my pills at the same time every day (I had an alarm) and did not miss a day. Needless to say I do not use birth control pills anymore because they obviously don’t work for me. I do believe that some form of contraceptive is better than none at all when a woman is not ready for the responsibility of taking care of another human being.

      • Gene

        And of course I’m assuming you got the data to prove your theory, correct? Mind posting a link or a report as to where you’re getting this information?

        • Del

          I don’t have a link. But this was reported by Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s own polling and research facility. (I assume you are referring about the fraction of abortions that are sold to women who were using contraception).

    • Bdeforest

      I agree!!

    • Jenn

      rather…don’t have sex at all until you are ready…

      • Liz

        Jenn: and in the moment temptation arises, do we eat a slice of cake we decided we wouldn’t eat beforehand, because it looks so good? If we do not set marriage as the absolute time that we are ready, our bodies are weak and will change our mind for us.

        • Rebekah

          Really? I’m 21 and a virgin.

        • Rebekah

          Really? I’m 21 and a virgin.

          • Damien Johnson

            23! Virgin high five.

          • Rebekah

            Right back at you! Keep up the good work.

          • Damien Johnson

            Well it’s pretty easy since there’s not a lot available to choose from around here (by which I mean most girls here are taken or already have kids), but thanks anyway! :)

          • Rebekah

            I know what you mean. Oh well, I can wait. I’d much rather be married 10 years fewer to the right guy than 10 years longer to the wrong one.

          • Damien Johnson

            That’s a sentiment I can definitely co-sign-except it’s women for me but you know what I mean.

          • Rebekah

            Thanks for sharing that story. It brings up a good point. I’ve heard of a lot of people that wish they would have waited to have sex. However, I’ve never heard anyone who waited to have sex until they were married say that they’ve regretted that choice.

          • Damien Johnson

            Thanks, and same here.

          • DianaG2

            So very true.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            you guys are awesome! congrats
            I was a virgin for a very long time too
            Now I’m totally hyper sexual :-)

          • Damien Johnson

            Haha all of that held-back sexuality is coming out for your husband only as it should be-just like how I’ll be with my future wife if I get lucky and find a good one :)

          • DianaG2

            Yes, absolutely, Damien. Good luck and blessings.

          • Damien Johnson

            Blessings to you too :)

          • DianaG2

            Thank you, sir. Very kind of you.

            I think there is a very very very special lady waiting for you? I know there is.

            Not just an ordinary, run of the mill lady. That’s why it takes longer to find each other.

            :-)

          • DianaG2

            LOL. Making up for lost time :-)

          • PrincessJasmine4

            you have no idea!
            I was a virgin till 22 :-)

          • DianaG2

            I think that’s wonderful, Princess. You are lucky, and smart. So happy for you and dear hubby!!

            Unfortunately, some of us were forced to become “hyper-sexualized” in childhood, which led to some very messed up nonsense in our lives. Just a lot of suffering, without relief.

            So happy for you guys, and wish all folks could share in your blessing. The world would be such a great place!!

          • PrincessJasmine4

            Thanks, I admit, I’m pretty lucky.
            He wasn’t the only person I ever had sex with though
            I was engaged 6 times :-)

          • DianaG2

            LOL :-) — well, either way. Just waiting until you’re actually mature is a great idea.

            He’s your hubby now. That’s all I meant. :-) You guys have lots of fun, so that’s a great deal ;-)

          • PrincessJasmine4

            :-)

          • DianaG2

            I think it’s great! So glad for you guys, and your families. I wish there were more like you.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            ah.. thank you so much for your kind words

          • Virgin>Whore

            I remained virgin by choice until 25 when I was wed to my smokin’ hot wife (also virgin). It’s possible, but everyone just assumes you have to be ugly or unpopular to remain virgin. I was very popular and athletic. I had many moments of near disaster, but stayed the course even though I felt like a jackass for leaving my dorm room with a beautiful brunette naked in my bed because she wanted to get down & dirty and I knew she wouldn’t take no for an answer…so I bailed.

            In the end, I’m so glad I chose not to because I was able to give my wife the purest part of myself. It’s akin to purchasing something used and dirty for someone you love. I wanted to give her the best so I made a concerted effort early on to save sex for after marriage.

        • Del

          Sex is not a necessity — we don’t “need” sex in the same way that we need food, water, oxygen, and shelter.

          The decision to remain chaste is identical to the decision to remain faithful to a spouse. It is a decision to resist the temptation of illicit sex.

          This is easy to do, if a young man or woman avoids becoming addicted to sex as a teen-ager or college-age.

          Sadly, our culture does not support this. Instead, the culture pushes contraception and encourages promiscuity. (“Just be safe.”) As a result, young people are unable to fully commit themselves faithfully to a spouse, and eventually there is an adulterous affair and divorce.

          There is a biochemical reason for this, involving oxytocin, the “bonding hormone.” And it is no surprise that all of the world’s major religions teach chastity before marriage and fidelity within marriage.

          But the modern world is insane. We poison our food with chemicals, our minds with drugs, and our fertility with hormones. Yet we cannot figure out why we are so unhappy, when we are the wealthiest generation in human history.

          This cultural insanity is the reason why ObamaCare wants us to have more contraception and abortion.

    • Gene

      Right. Next time I talk to a rape victim, I’ll be sure to pass on your little gem of wisdom.

  • rose.r

    Great article! But the person who witnessed the abortion was not a medical student, but a premed; the title is slightly misleading.

    • givemeabreak

      does it really matter – really…………..

      • rose

        I firmly believe that an article should be edited especially when it comes from a credible source such as Live Action. There is nothing offensive in what I said, in fact, I said it very respectfully…and NO it does NOT take away from the message of the story but it might take away from the credibility of the source– which is something we as prolifers do not want. Consistency and accuracy is very important in journalism which is why editing is crucial:)

    • Toosdai

      Why was that neccesary to point out? Really? Does that effect the message of this article AT ALL? Smh.

    • WA. Viewer

      Who Cares you jack ass, what his title was…

      • B3averhaus1n

        You’re right! Who cares about accuracy!

        • FocusyouMightMissThePoint

          Who cares when the facts remain valid? Nothing has changed, would it make it different if the person who witnessed the abortion was a neurosurgeon or a janitor? The title of the person does not matter, what is important is their account of what they witnessed, you people get hung up on the tiniest of details that you miss the point.

    • unixfool

      That’s a serious case of OCD that you’ve got.

  • Bridget

    I couldn’t finish reading what he saw. I imagined what he saw, and it was gruesome, even if it wasn’t real.

  • Jenn

    MY GOD…MY GOD….

  • Wendee Bauer

    This article left me tears. May God have mercy on us ALL for this outright murder of the innocent. Humankind has allowed this to happen. May God forgive us.

    • DianaG2

      But —- I can’t help wondering WHY this young man was the only one affected?? Why not the others as well?

      It worries me.

      • Daniel P. Durham

        1. It’s possible that he was the only student to witness this particular abortion. Everyone else might well have been a coarsened abortionist.
        2. If there were others there, how do we know they weren’t affected? The only reason we know this man was moved was that he came to LiveAction to share his story. Others might have been affected but not felt inclined to share just yet.

  • Corinne Kelley

    beautifully written.

  • Basset_Hound

    I feel for the unborn baby boy in this story the same way I feel about the three year old girl described in this link from one of our local news stations. Both were unique human beings and their deaths were tragic. Both deserved love and comfort, not cruelty and brutality.

    http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/23669952/mom-gets-35-years-in-potty-training-death-case

    • DianaG2

      Yes, I agree, BH. Pray without ceasing.

  • Mike

    Just for the record. “Medical Student” and Pre-Medical student are very different. Participating in abortions is not a part of the medical curriculum for physicians. I’m not sure what kind of program this is…

    • sarah5775

      actually, it is. It’s mandatory in a few schools and an elective in most others. Many of them offer training apprenticeships at local clinics. In the 1990s. Medical Students for Choice began trying to get more schools to offer abortion training.

      • DianaG2

        Now there’s also Medical Students for Life, right? Thank heavens.

      • brisonc3

        they are for choice only to end the life of a fetus. If a choice was made that effected the life of the medical student; they would demand they be protected from any “choice” being exercised that would effect them in a negative way(like denying them a medical license or being selective as to which humans are their patients and which are not.

        In the past in the field of medicine a slave could be denied treatment for an injury because his owner didn’t give permission. Would the “pro choice medical students” of today just follow that law or would then defy it saying “our profession as physicians requires I treat all human beings who have a medical problem so I am going to treat this man, my patient, regardless of what his owner desires. He can believe this man is only his property; my calling as a physician is greater than his prejudice”

        So the excuse of “abortions are legal” could be answered in the same way. Yes, abortions are legal, but fetuses are living members of the human species and thus are patients to be treated, not to be terminated because his/her owner doesn’t wish to share the world with “unplanned” offspring. My calling as a physician requires I treat all human patients, not just those termed “planned” or “wanted” by another.

        • DianaG2

          Elegant and eloquent.

          Thanks.

  • MiMimarie

    why don’t we call him Baby Boy Terzo? he deserves a name,

    • sarah5775

      How about “Nathan Terzo” after the late pro-life activist Bernard Nathanson? Then he has a name like any baby that is wanted and loved.

      • Basset_Hound

        Excellent choice.

      • Nathan Terzo is a wonderful name!

  • Compassion4All

    Yeah, that baby will never ride a bike or pet a dog. Or drive drunk and kill people, abuse an animal or his wife, or any of the terrible things humans do every day. He will never be a burden on this planet. I am against suffering, human or animal, and wish contraception would eradicate abortion, but the fewer humans the better.

    • sarah5775

      Wow, spoken like a true sociopath.

      • PrincessJasmine4

        She must be a member of the Church of Euthanasia :-)

        • DianaG2

          So many people are joining nowadays.

          • PrincessJasmine4

            No kidding…
            DG2, I wouldn’t bother with this Abby chick… she sounds suspiciously like Someone45 who used to troll around here… there’s just no getting thru to some people.

          • DianaG2

            That’s true. I never noticed that.

            Thanks for the tip, kiddo :-)

    • DianaG2

      She or he will never laugh, or help someone who is having a difficult time, or hold a stuffed teddy bear, or listen to a bedtime story, or bring joy to anyone, or find a cure for cancer, or discover a new star, or bake a cake, or watch a movie, or listen to beautiful music, or make beautiful music, or create beautiful art work or hear a cat meow, or pet a dog, or watch the birds outside or smell a flower, or go Trick or Treat.

      Yes, I see what you mean. That would be so much better. The universe is so much better off.

    • MarcusFenix

      I read this, and immediately though of the suicide booths on Futurama.

      After you, then.

      • sarah5775

        Futurama is a great show

        • Basset_Hound

          Do you know if they’ve made any new ones? I miss them terribly.

      • DianaG2

        LOL

  • Bobbette Davis

    Powerful witness to truth!!!

  • Candice Rae

    Some people have to see it to believe, others are fortunate to just understand without having a horrific scene forever burned on the brain. Some choose to be blind to the facts and justify evil done to others.

    • CaptainMurphy

      Are you talking about the evil done to kids who are forced to have kids?

  • marybridget

    re: abortion. The gates of Hell will not prevail against the Holy Catholic Church. Never before has so much evil infiltrated so many structures of power. The Church is infallible on two issues: Faith and Morals. Abortion falls under the immorality of killing human life by abortion, be it at conception or choking a live birth failed aborted baby to death. Each is murder. Thank you SARAH TERZO for your post—i have reposted it to be seen around the world. love, maureen

    • sarah5775

      Thank you

  • JustAGuest

    Honestly I’m pro choice although this article does disturb me and I would never want to witness an abortion personally. Who are you to say or dictate what I do or don’t do with my body. But what I think is ridiculous is all these religious bible thumpers throwing their religion and beliefs in everyone’s face just because someone chose to be childless. How disgusting to tell someone that God isn’t happy with their choices, oh I’m sorry did He tell you that personally? I want children but that is always MY choice. I apologize not everyone can be a Duggar and pop out 19 children until one has a disability. If this is what religion is than I’m truly disappointed. I do believe in a higher power and I do pray on occasion but I don’t believe God thinks badly of those who choose not to have children. I personally think God is more understanding than that but hey what do I know right?!

    • YouDon’tKnowJack

      Yeah, what do you know? Judging by your statements not a whole lot. Maybe get some real world experience and come back when you aren’t 17 and think you rule the world. When you have a child (maybe some day, though you don’t deserve such joy) you might stop to imagine this child being ripped from your body and killed for absolutely no reason except that he/she inconvenienced you.

    • brisonc3

      and who are you or any government official to tell a business owner who he/she can hire or fire and for what reasons? It is their business and a private matter between the business owner and his/her God. It is not the government’s business to tell a business owner what to do with his/her business. If you don’t like what that business owner does then don’t buy what they produce. (just like the pro-choice argument made “If you are against abortions than don’t have them).

  • Bruno

    I didn’t enjoy this article! It does not sound like the medical student even knew what he/she was talking about. When he writes”The cervix was held open with a crude metal instrument” I feel like a sense of cruelty and barbarianism is being indirectly conveyed to the reader. I am glad that the story allows the medical student to take the opportunity to witness that event.

    Like killing an enemy, many humans struggle to accept events that they are prone to being empathetic to, and can be seen as PTSD in those of our race who have defended their beliefs. PTSD is a real symptom of mental stress. Like our nation needs strong-minded soldiers who can compartmentalize when peoples’ lives are in danger, so does it need doctor who when the life of the mother is in danger, not only physically, but mentally, will act for her well being.

    Potential energy does not exist. There is potential energy in a donut but that doesn’t mean I am going to eat it in order to get that energy. There are more efficient ways for me to get that energy, such as grains and vegetables. Life too has its levels of potential. A fetus is potential life–it may grow to become anything, it can cause havoc, or it can cause bountiful good.

    However, weighed in respect to the life energy of the mother, the fetus cannot and will not compare because potential is not real, instead it is an imaginary force, and can only manifest when it begins to interact with the world. Because a fetus cannot interact with the world, it does not move the energy in it through its own accord, instead it relys on the mother to do it. The mother does. If the mother is unhealthy, her energy is depleted, and she affects her environment around her accordingly. Therefore, in the span of humanity, and our race, the energy of the mother outweighs the energy of the fetus.

    In addition, many people believe that a fetus is endowed with a soul at conception. For those of us who have adopted an atheist and or naturalist form of thinking,it is not easy to define life, and it is surely not easy to come to an agreement on questions like: should the life of the fetus outweigh the life of the mother, or visa versa? Especially in situations of life and death.

    I like to define life as the compilation of cognitive experiences being recorded in the chemical and electrical environment of the brain. Therefore, the fetus is not alive until it begins to form cognitive perceptions of the world around it–when it begins to think.

    So, although I am pro-choice, I also believe that there is a point in the development of the fetus where it converts from a a bundle of cells, into an organism who is experiencing what it is to be alive—the point where it is no longer being built, but turned on; because, after all, we are only biological machines.

    • BrunoisPotentiallyaMoron.

      “potential energy in a doughnut vs ‘more efficient grains and vegetables'”

      Are you seriously comparing an unborn child to a doughnut and vegetables? What the Hell is wrong with you?

      It’s not about “efficient potential” it’s the fact that there exists potential at all. This child will develop into a human baby if left to continue on it’s normal path.

      How about we make a law that anyone who posts online under the name “Bruno” should be executed immediately because he has the “potential” to say something stupid which would be of no benefit to anyone on the board. Taking it a step further let’s execute anyone that is pro-choice since they are attacking all of our future pro-life voters since these children should inevitably grow up to be pro-life advocates since they were saved from a fate of death.

      Or how about you use your very own logic: You should go jump off a bridge today and shouldn’t exist because you have the potential to be yourself tomorrow and since you don’t really exist tomorrow then you must not truly exist. Thus you have no real existence except for the potential to continue existing tomorrow and therefore you can be killed today for your stupid comments.

      You sir, are a jacka$$. Just because a baby is not in your presence living and breathing before your very eyes does not nullify the fact that it exists and that there is a true heartbeat or a functioning brain and pain receptors. Why don’t we call your brain a fetus as it is extremely underdeveloped and just give you an abortion of this sick infection that you have growing inside of your head? It may kill the patient, but it will do our world a much greater good.

      • Bruno

        Thank you for commenting; it is always a pleasure to hear the opinions of others. However, if all you got from my comment is that I compared a fetus to a doughnut, then you didn’t read my comment seriously. I actually compared a doughnut to potential energy. Likewise, why did you put quotes over your reference phrase? I didn’t say those words, and its very misleading to other readers, and in a way, you’re actually hurting your case. If you are able to give me an intelligible rebuttal, then I would respect your more for it. Until then, have a good day.

        PS. When one writes a comment, its always best to write it down, and revise it–breaking down every sentence and asking ones self, “does this make sense”?…when you do this, your writing will change immensely from arrogant, confused, and unfocused to something that relays a meaningful message.

        • brisonc3

          Bruno, on a blog or feedback section not all of that is required as long as the gist is understood.

        • DianaG2

          BPM made a very good case. No arrogance, confusion or lack of focus at all.

          Quite the opposite.

      • DianaG2

        ROFLMAOOOOOOOO!!!

        I’m getting a tummy ache from laughing. Tears rolling. I can’t even breathe, I’m laughing so hard.

    • DianaG2

      “Like killing an enemy, many humans struggle to accept events that they are prone to being empathetic to . . .’

      “Prone to being empathetic to” —– an unborn little boy or girl still inside her or his mom?

      Um, yes —- Watch out for that!

  • brisonc3

    “not everyone wants children”

    True, and there are white supremecists that don’t want to live next door to a black person and there are men that don’t want to work in a workplace with women or work under a female boss and there are married couples that only want to give birth to a son and not a daughter.

    So do we capitulate to such desires and say, “oh, I understand. You shouldn’t have to share a world with those you don’t like and we will do everything possible to make sure you don’t have to share this world with anyone you don’t like”?

    No, in fact we say the opposite. We say “this world has human beings of a great variety and if you want to live in it then you have to accept others that aren’t like yourself” That includes “unplanned” and those branded as “unwanted”, but remember in there are white supremacists that would claim non-whites are “unwanted” and there are male chauvinists who would say women are “unwanted” and the world is a better place without them. Let’s not leave out the gay bashers that wish not to share the world with those claiming to be gay and only want to date and marry the same gender. This is intolerance and as a nation and under our laws we have rejected intolerance as to actions although each is allowed to believe as he/she wishes; each cannot act on that belief in a way that keeps other human beings from being recognized under the law and being protected by the law. That would include those branded as “unplanned” and “unwanted”

    As to “not wanting to have children”, that is fine as long as you take all the steps needed to avoid conception 100%, not having abortion as a backup. This means one or both of you have to have your reproductive organs neutralized and use a barrier method on top of that just to catch any straggler sperm and semen from reaching a released ovum.

    If you are against pregnancy 100% than this is what you have to do.
    Don’t want to do that? Then you aren’t really 100% against having children. You have a 100% desire, but don’t want to do what is 100% necessary.

    So you need to change your expectations.

  • Heather

    I am in tears reading this. As a social worker, I fight each day to do my part in protecting our youth from any abuse. It eats me up to think of how many innocent lives are taken in the most violent way each and every day. I have yet to meet a mother that didn’t regret or morn the loss of their child they choose to kill. I pray this practice will on day become no more.

  • sarah5775

    Thank you sweetie. :-)

    • Welcome.I have learned so much from all of your posts!

  • Ingrid Heimark

    I just have one question, maybe not quite to this article, but don’t know where to put it. The film Heres the Blood, who filmed it? Because that person must have either done an abortion knowing it is killing, or how is it filmed? Anyone know? The film is indeed heartbreaking, it just seems weird someone does this and knows they kill and share it….

  • michelle

    This is ridiculous, it’s a woman’s body it always has been always will be we have the right to choose what’s happening to ourselves….I’m probably abortion and I know that this is not how they do them any more…. You put the freedom of speech out there and this is what you come up with I’d be devastated if it was a child that had been born and had been killed that’s incompressible too much for the brain to take in but not for a woman to have her own rights would you rather she grew to dispise that child and give it a shit life all because someone guilty her was probably some God lover with a wicked out there is a man in the sky kinda view

  • GEIxBattleRifle

    Not a good reason to turn pro life. Sorry