NationStates Jolt Archive

i recognize that this is a touchy subject and that, no matter how tactful i try to be, this'll likely degenerate into a flame war in less than 20 posts, but i'm genuinely curious about something about the pro-life movement in general, so i just thought i'd ask.

it appears to me, that whenever i'm discussing child poverty with people, either online or in person, it's never the strong "pro-lifers" in the crowd who are passionate about alleviating it. and whenever i'm talking about improving health care (for children as much as anyone else) or education funding (which benefits children in a pretty obvious, direct way) the pro life contingent stays pretty silent. i have no idea why this would be the case, or even if it is, perhaps i've just had atypical experiences.

...so my question, i suppose, is this. Pro-life people: Have you done anything to help or protect children who've already been born lately? if so, what? if you tell me you've done something that, to you, makes a difference in the lives of children other than your own/your families/your friends, i'll take you at your word. but if you look within yourself and find that you have not, what is it exactly about children that stops being special? because it saddens me that so much of the discourse on tv/in newspapers/amongst folks online is dedicated to protecting the unborn, while living children are largely ignored.

Well Im a person that changed from pro-choice to pro-life. However I am still in the thought that abortion it some certain cases should be legal. As far as unwanted children. I think that the adoption process should not cost as much as it does. I know of one couple that it cost them over 10k for one child. Now thats just dumb. This needs to be brought down in cost. More children would be adopted if it was streamlined and cheaper.

The child healthcare issue. If one is poor in my state of Washington. There is child care available from the state. So that in my opinion is a moot point in the state im in. There is no excuse for not having your child covered under healthcare.

The one thing I have done personally. I donate a small portion of money every month to a facility that helps to train young mothers for skills to improve there lifestyles for themselves and there families. Im generally in the group of a hand up not a hand out. Anyway thats my opinion on the matter.

I think it's a foolish question to pose to begin with. Just because you're not out there running a soup kitchen for disadvantaged children dosen't mean you should be denied the right to campaign for pro-life movements.

Personally I think people are too "black & white" over the whole issue, especially when it comes down to embryos and things. Some cases abortion is acceptable, some not.

It's not a foolish question, Unified Japan--it's an issue that has been brought up before, even by people who are members of activist pro-life movements. There needs to be a realization that pro-life is not the same as pro-birth. There's more to it than that, and so the author of the thread is perfectly within bounds of reasonable discourse to ask if pro-lifers are walking the walk on this issue.

I'm not what I would call a Pro-Lifer or an Abortionist, but from what I am reading I can only conclude that this is an asinine attempt to transfer respect for life from those against destroying it, to abortionists. I'm sorry but there is no way a sane individual is going to buy some nonsense like killing unborn children is a compasionate, caring and thoughtful thing to do. I don't care what the moonbat talking point times says. This just is not going to fly outside your own cell.

i recognize that this is a touchy subject and that, no matter how tactful i try to be, this'll likely degenerate into a flame war in less than 20 posts, but i'm genuinely curious about something about the pro-life movement in general, so i just thought i'd ask.

it appears to me, that whenever i'm discussing child poverty with people, either online or in person, it's never the strong "pro-lifers" in the crowd who are passionate about alleviating it. and whenever i'm talking about improving health care (for children as much as anyone else) or education funding (which benefits children in a pretty obvious, direct way) the pro life contingent stays pretty silent. i have no idea why this would be the case, or even if it is, perhaps i've just had atypical experiences.

...so my question, i suppose, is this. Pro-life people: Have you done anything to help or protect children who've already been born lately? if so, what? if you tell me you've done something that, to you, makes a difference in the lives of children other than your own/your families/your friends, i'll take you at your word. but if you look within yourself and find that you have not, what is it exactly about children that stops being special? because it saddens me that so much of the discourse on tv/in newspapers/amongst folks online is dedicated to protecting the unborn, while living children are largely ignored.

no matter how hard life is for children, ask yourself this:

are they better off with a chance at life.. or with no chance, having been aborted?

which is the lesser of two evils:
To be born poor and disadvantaged, or to be dead?

which is the lesser of two evils:
To be born poor and disadvantaged, or to be dead?
In many cases, death. Some things are worse than death. Much, much worse.

which is the lesser of two evils:
To be born poor and disadvantaged, or to be dead?

Try asking that of thousands of children who commit suicide.

i recognize that this is a touchy subject and that, no matter how tactful i try to be, this'll likely degenerate into a flame war in less than 20 posts, but i'm genuinely curious about something about the pro-life movement in general, so i just thought i'd ask.

it appears to me, that whenever i'm discussing child poverty with people, either online or in person, it's never the strong "pro-lifers" in the crowd who are passionate about alleviating it. and whenever i'm talking about improving health care (for children as much as anyone else) or education funding (which benefits children in a pretty obvious, direct way) the pro life contingent stays pretty silent. i have no idea why this would be the case, or even if it is, perhaps i've just had atypical experiences.

...so my question, i suppose, is this. Pro-life people: Have you done anything to help or protect children who've already been born lately? if so, what? if you tell me you've done something that, to you, makes a difference in the lives of children other than your own/your families/your friends, i'll take you at your word. but if you look within yourself and find that you have not, what is it exactly about children that stops being special? because it saddens me that so much of the discourse on tv/in newspapers/amongst folks online is dedicated to protecting the unborn, while living children are largely ignored.



I've volunteered and given to charity, so yes I have done something :)

Obviously this will just end up being an Abortion debate but the original question is flawed - do people who don't do any charity work benefitting humans want murders to increase?

Try asking that of thousands of children who commit suicide.



Leave that choice up to the individual. For the "thousands" who've committed suicide, millions more are happy to be alive.

There needs to be a realization that pro-life is not the same as pro-birth
I would LOVE for you to explain the difference

Leave that choice up to the individual. For the "thousands" who've committed suicide, millions more are happy to be alive.
And how many of them just don't have the guts to kill themselves? How many of them don't have the resources? How many of them attempt, but fail? For every person who kills themselves, there's several more that want to.

Also, the people who get abortions are the ones whose kids would not be happy. You're making a bad argument.

i can't speak for the entire pro-life movement. However, i personally take part in regular community service, which includes orphanages and underprivledged children in public schools. Many times, the prolife movement is silent on these issues becuase the prochoice movement doesn't attack that area. The sensitive issues remain the unborn becuase they are being ed, whereas the already born have passed through that phase. that doesn't mean that the unborn is much more valuable; the unborn is just in greater danger at the moment. The liberal camp doesn't ask questions upon why the prolife isn't doing anything about the already born, so there is no response against them. Also, prolife is simply about the abortion issue, not the poverty issues. I am sure that there are people or groups or organizations that deal with these issues with the same perspective of those in the prolife movement.

I certainly don't think abortion should be used as a form of birth control, but I also think that it's a woman's (and the father's) right to choose. That said, I don't think any government has a right to comment on this issue or decide what is legal or not. They can set medical standards as all hospitals have and whatnot... As long as we have the right to create life through artificial means (IV, fertility, etc...) who says we can;t have an abortion as well? You can either play god or not, make up your minds.

As for the pro-life issue with not protecting children's rights, as George Carlin said (paraphrased) in regards to pro-lifers and more generally republicans:

"If you're unborn, you're okay; if you're born, you're screwed... That is until you reach military age!"

Ihatevacations']I would LOVE for you to explain the difference
Sure thing--It's all well and good to argue that babies ought not be aborted, but what are you going to do to help care for that child once it's out of the womb? If you're going to have the government mandate that every pregnant woman carry her fetus to term and give birth, then your government damn well better be ready to take care of those kids. You can't just say that once the kids are out of the womb, that's it, our responsibility is done, or you're simply pro-birth, not pro-life.

Being pro-life, to me, means that as a society we're going to make sure that kids are well-fed and well-educated and have health care. In short, they're going to have every possible opportunity to make it to adulthood successfully. That's what being pro-life means.

Most pro-life groups, however, don't look at that side of the equation. They argue that their responsibility ends at the end of the birth canal. Well sorry, but if you're going to tell every woman what she can and can't do as far as reproduction is concerned, then you're going to have to be responsible for the outcome, and that means you better be ready to expand social programs out the wazoo, and you better be ready to adopt a shitload of kids.

And how many of them just don't have the guts to kill themselves? How many of them don't have the resources? How many of them attempt, but fail? For every person who kills themselves, there's several more that want to.

Also, the people who get abortions are the ones whose kids would not be happy. You're making a bad argument.



If someone truly wants to die, they will find a way to do so....

If someone truly wants to die, they will find a way to do so....
Not always, kid. Not always. I don't think you understand how difficult it is to kill yourself.

I would like to point out the intelligence of the creator for this thread. This is an issue I have been trying to address for a long while, but I have each time been silenced by the anti-abortion crowd stating that I am "evil and misguided".

Most "pro-life" people support war, capital punishment, and often do nothing to really help starving children and families. They also think the mother should have the child so she may "suffer the consequences" of "adultery". Many also think that pacifists are "wimps". Quite a bit of hypocrisy there.

Don't call yourself pro-life, when you are really just pro-fetus.

Assholes.

And how many of them just don't have the guts to kill themselves? How many of them don't have the resources? How many of them attempt, but fail? For every person who kills themselves, there's several more that want to.

Also, the people who get abortions are the ones whose kids would not be happy. You're making a bad argument.

What planet are you on? It doesn't take guts to kill yourself. It takes guts to face the hand you are delt, and the courage to overcome the obstacles you face.
Since when does it take money to kill yourself?

"How many attempt but fail?" The answer to this is simple. Every single one that didn't really want to in the first place.

Your last is simply silly. If they wanted to, they would have.

Not always, kid. Not always. I don't think you understand how difficult it is to kill yourself.

Bullshit. I have delt with literally dozens of them either before, during or after and it is one of the simplest things in the world if you really want to die. It's only hard for those that don't.

I would like to point out the intelligence of the creator for this thread. This is an issue I have been trying to address for a long while, but I have each time been silenced by the anti-abortion crowd stating that I am "evil and misguided".

Most "pro-life" people support war, capital punishment, and often do nothing to really help starving children and families. They also think the mother should have the child so she may "suffer the consequences" of "adultery". Many also think that pacifists are "wimps". Quite a bit of hypocrisy there.

Don't call yourself pro-life, when you are really just pro-fetus.

Assholes.

Maybe because they feel since you have so little respect for them you would make such blatently false claims and slander them without so much as an ounce of evidence or reason to do so, you don't deserve their respect or consideration in kind?
They don't generally think pacifists are wimps. They think pacifists are cowards that lack the ability, will, or intestinal fortitude to make decisions that affect the general population in times of National Emergencies. It is a perfectly valid argument considering capitulation, appeasement, and ignoring the situation are not valid options for those of different mindsets.

Liverbreath']Maybe because they feel since you have so little respect for them you would make such blatently false claims and slander them without so much as an ounce of evidence or reason to do so, you don't deserve their respect or consideration in kind?
They don't generally think pacifists are wimps. They think pacifists are cowards that lack the ability, will, or intestinal fortitude to make decisions that affect the general population in times of National Emergencies. It is a perfectly valid argument considering capitulation, appeasement, and ignoring the situation are not valid options for those of different mindsets.

Pacifist = Coward? Shall we get you a thesaurus? Just think for a moment that after 9/11 the entire country, in one voice, said:

"We refuse to stoop to your level, we will become a stronger nation by turning our backs on the violence you use to terrorize us. We are a peaceful nation..."

Because you know, attacking them has really stopped them attacking us...

What's today terror alert level? Creamsicle pudding? Mommies hide your kiddes because the Islamic militants are coming?

Right on Gebirdsland... Assholes, indeed!

Liverbreath']"How many attempt but fail?" The answer to this is simple. Every single one that didn't really want to in the first place.

Your last is simply silly. If they wanted to, they would have.

You're lucky that you've never known anyone who wanted to kill themselves. And you are damn lucky that my husband hasn't seen this because he would flame you into oblivion. His sister attempted suicide when she was younger, and trust me, she meant it. It was a weird twist of fate that kept her alive, nothing more. Is she happy to have failed? Hm, maybe, I don't honestly know, but at the time she was at a complete loss for another way out of her situation and she intended to die.

Don't talk about things you don't understand.

As for the topic of this thread, I've had the same experience with anti-abortionists. I never met a truely compassionate one. It's hard to tell on these forums, some people are mere trolls, some are sincere but crumble under the weight of the pro-choice voice. So I refer only to people I actually know.

And to those who've said on this thread that giving to charity isn't the measure of pro-lifeness... well what is? You get wound up over the abortion issue and then in another thread you get all pro-war passionate. To me that is hypocricy, either you are truely pro-life and are passionate enough about other people to actually help those less fortunate than yourself, or you are just having a rant about something totally divorced from your own experience and genuinely don't see the link between giving birth and living.

To me the abortion issue has to be linked to living. It's all very well to say "every child should have a chance at life" but you can't then ignore the realities of that life.

If someone truly wants to die, they will find a way to do so....

I tried twice and failed, thank you.
In the meantime, I went through hell and back, only to be sent back to hell again. I'm an adult know and I'm still suffering because of what happened to me in my childhood, and I was lucky compared to others.
So, no, if a person is not ready/capable/willing/able to raise a child, abort the bloody thing. Don't force it into life to make it suffer for years on end.

I'm 15, and a pro lifer, I can't think of anything off the top of my head that I do to protect children (younger than me) other than just living nicely in general, but my Nanna (also pro life) has adopted or fostered many children with disabilities aswell as sponsoring children who don't live in Australia...

Liverbreath']What planet are you on? It doesn't take guts to kill yourself. It takes guts to face the hand you are delt, and the courage to overcome the obstacles you face.
Since when does it take money to kill yourself?

"How many attempt but fail?" The answer to this is simple. Every single one that didn't really want to in the first place.

Your last is simply silly. If they wanted to, they would have.

As someone who has been suicidal, this is offensive, foolish, and just plain wrong. Don't you dare call me a coward. I've dealt with more shit than you're ever likely to. Don't you dare tell me I didn't really want to die. Trust me, I did, and I would have, too, if not for a fluke of fate.

You don't know everything, you can't read minds, and you are most definitely not entitled to speak for me.

As someone who rarely logs into the forums, except once in a blue moon because a topic title caught his eye, I will likely not remember/read any responses. No offense intended. :)

I take a look at things from a different angle then a lot of people. I'm pro life, I will say that. I believe abortion is wrong. Period.

However...

The 18th Amendment has proven that if you ban something, it's going to happen anyway, albiet on a black market.

You can probably see where I'm going with this.

I dont like it. I hate the concept, hate that it happens. But if someone is damn well going to do it, it doesent matter if the court says they can or not, they'll either do it themselves or have someone else do it. And they're going to hurt themselves severely in doing so.

So in this sense, I dont condone prohibiting abortion. Make no mistake - I loathe it. But I dont want to read about a woman having her insides ripped up in some alleyway by an amature with a coathanger and a switchblade.

For some people it makes more sense to donate their time, for others, their money. For example, if I make $100 per hour, it makes more sense for me to donate $100 to a soup kitchen that can hire someone at $12/hour all day than to volunteer an hour there myself. For this reason, I generally don't personally participate in the ground work for helping kids. However, we (my wife and I) give about 11% of our net income to various charities. One of the charities with which we participate is designed to provide immunization, nutritional supplementation, clothing, and education for sponsored kids. We have committed to sponsoring until adulthood a 5-year old girl in the Philippines who's family makes $68 per month. The organization is at www.christianchildrensfund.org .

I would also like to turn the question around and ask any pro-abortion folks what they've done to help women in circumstances that allegedly drive them to aborting their unborn baby. In the alternative, if your concern is that the kid would allegedly otherwise have to be raised in an unhealthy environment and would have all sorts of problems, what have you done to help kids who are actually currently suffering from those circumstances?

I'm also wondering if anyone on either side who is passionate about their viewpoint, but does NOT help their cause in any other way would like to explain why you make that decision.

Pro-choice politically, but I think abortion is a very stupid and evil thing to do unless the mother's life is in personal danger.
And, no, I don't do much to help the children who were not aborted. This issue is, IMO, about the defense of rights, not me sacrificing my time and blood so others may benefit.

Pro-choice politically, but I think abortion is a very stupid and evil thing to do unless the mother's life is in personal danger.
And, no, I don't do much to help the children who were not aborted. This issue is, IMO, about the defense of rights, not me sacrificing my time and blood so others may benefit.

It sounds like you're saying that you're concerned about people's rights, but not their welfare? Awesome. :)

Ihatevacations']I would LOVE for you to explain the difference


I'm Pro-life.

I think what he was trying to say is that Pro-lifers are often against many social welfare programs?

I'm Pro-life.

I think what he was trying to say is that Pro-lifers are often against many social welfare programs? *Raises hand* I'm not! I feel it necessary if you're going to ban it.

Sure thing--It's all well and good to argue that babies ought not be aborted, but what are you going to do to help care for that child once it's out of the womb? If you're going to have the government mandate that every pregnant woman carry her fetus to term and give birth, then your government damn well better be ready to take care of those kids. You can't just say that once the kids are out of the womb, that's it, our responsibility is done, or you're simply pro-birth, not pro-life.

Being pro-life, to me, means that as a society we're going to make sure that kids are well-fed and well-educated and have health care. In short, they're going to have every possible opportunity to make it to adulthood successfully. That's what being pro-life means.

Most pro-life groups, however, don't look at that side of the equation. They argue that their responsibility ends at the end of the birth canal. Well sorry, but if you're going to tell every woman what she can and can't do as far as reproduction is concerned, then you're going to have to be responsible for the outcome, and that means you better be ready to expand social programs out the wazoo, and you better be ready to adopt a shitload of kids. Hear, hear!

Life is for life, not just for pregnancy.

*Raises hand* I'm not! I feel it necessary if you're going to ban it.

Me too.

I wouldn't ban it in the case of rape or risk to the mother and I support a safety net.

That's only fair.

But these people who have unprotected sex, or decide being pregnant right now just isn't convenient make want to vomit.

no matter how hard life is for children, ask yourself this:

are they better off with a chance at life.. or with no chance, having been aborted?

which is the lesser of two evils:
To be born poor and disadvantaged, or to be dead?
Funny how you so passionately preach economic freedom, but you would even deny women the right to their own bodies.

*flame!*

Not always, kid. Not always. I don't think you understand how difficult it is to kill yourself.
Dude, give it up. No one is going o believe that the majority of kids are suicidal.

Dude, give it up. No one is going o believe that the majority of kids are suicidal.

I've been close to it. A lot of peeople I know have been similarly depressed. If I had decided to kill myself I would have done it and properly too, none of this wrist-slashing business.

I was raised in a loving family as a child who was intended. Think what it would be like if you were not an intended child, raised in a bad family.

I was raised in a loving family as a child who was intended. Think what it would be like if you were not an intended child, raised in a bad family.

That still beats the alternative.

For some people it makes more sense to donate their time, for others, their money. For example, if I make $100 per hour, it makes more sense for me to donate $100 to a soup kitchen that can hire someone at $12/hour all day than to volunteer an hour there myself. For this reason, I generally don't personally participate in the ground work for helping kids. However, we (my wife and I) give about 11% of our net income to various charities. One of the charities with which we participate is designed to provide immunization, nutritional supplementation, clothing, and education for sponsored kids. We have committed to sponsoring until adulthood a 5-year old girl in the Philippines who's family makes $68 per month. The organization is at www.christianchildrensfund.org .

I would also like to turn the question around and ask any pro-abortion folks what they've done to help women in circumstances that allegedly drive them to aborting their unborn baby. In the alternative, if your concern is that the kid would allegedly otherwise have to be raised in an unhealthy environment and would have all sorts of problems, what have you done to help kids who are actually currently suffering from those circumstances?

I'm also wondering if anyone on either side who is passionate about their viewpoint, but does NOT help their cause in any other way would like to explain why you make that decision.

I'm glad to see someone with real compassion. My wife and I do just as you do, and have also supported children through Christian Children's Fund. I give a lot of time to our pet causes, too.

A good measure of caring is sacrifice relative to income and time. I think this forum is where the talkers hang out, not the doers. Though I have met some fine, caring people in here.

:p It sounds like you're saying that you're concerned about people's rights, but not their welfare? Awesome. :)
Yea, my child, for I am Awesomeness incarnate. :p

i recognize that this is a touchy subject and that, no matter how tactful i try to be, this'll likely degenerate into a flame war in less than 20 posts, but i'm genuinely curious about something about the pro-life movement in general, so i just thought i'd ask.

it appears to me, that whenever i'm discussing child poverty with people, either online or in person, it's never the strong "pro-lifers" in the crowd who are passionate about alleviating it. and whenever i'm talking about improving health care (for children as much as anyone else) or education funding (which benefits children in a pretty obvious, direct way) the pro life contingent stays pretty silent. i have no idea why this would be the case, or even if it is, perhaps i've just had atypical experiences.

...so my question, i suppose, is this. Pro-life people: Have you done anything to help or protect children who've already been born lately? if so, what? if you tell me you've done something that, to you, makes a difference in the lives of children other than your own/your families/your friends, i'll take you at your word. but if you look within yourself and find that you have not, what is it exactly about children that stops being special? because it saddens me that so much of the discourse on tv/in newspapers/amongst folks online is dedicated to protecting the unborn, while living children are largely ignored.
I'm fairly pro-life, but not unreasonably, rabidly so. And I just wanted to make the point that if I was discussing something like child poverty with someone, then my views on abortion probably wouldn't get raised... so how can you say stuff like "the pro-life contingent stays pretty silent"? How do you know that a lot of people fighting to alleviate child suffering AREN'T pro-life? Just 'cos they're not standing up and shouting that they are, doesn't mean that they're not, if you follow my argument.

Furthermore, I was brought up in a fairly privileged family, and I've attempted suicide a few times. The point being, depression can and does strike everywhere. Being born into a disadvantaged family doesn't automatically mean being unhappy. Some of the happiest people I've ever met came from families where they were unwanted, or materially disadvantaged families. People are more than their circumstances.

And to answer your question: yes, I do plan to adopt when I'm older, and I also believe that more funding should be put into education programs to help women/girls against accidental pregnancy. I'm in a Peer Counselling scheme, where I talk to younger people about their problems and try to support them through it. And as I'm 16, I don't think that there's much more I can really do.

Dude, give it up. No one is going o believe that the majority of kids are suicidal.
Did I say majority? No. So stop using strawmen.

I believe killing something that hasn't had a chance to live yet is like nuking a third world country in poverty.

The children put up for adoption, tis sad, but a better alternate. They are taken care of the state, and hopefully they find a good home.

The children in the impoverished area isn't the greatest concern of the moment (for me). There are others starving in the region. I have a plan to try to save them, but it would take a while.

Basically we could turn them all into agrarian societies, and they can hope to industrialize after serveral decades so they have food.