Please see my latest post with Pro Life Unity:
http://www.prolifeunity.com/index.php/news_group/article/abortions_in_the_military1/
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Obama and the International Abortion Business
Please see my latest post over at Pro Life Unity, regarding the Obama Administration's latest international abortion promotion:
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
The Negative Effects of Modern Feminism on the Family
Per the request of the co-founder of The Conservative Comeback, I have written an essay addressing the topic above. Please enjoy and offer your comments! Also, consider joining The Conservative Comeback as an official member. You can visit the website at www.conservativecomebackusa.org
The Negative Effects of Modern Feminism on the Family
By Malori D. Fuchs, National Member Communications Director, The Conservative Comeback
Claire J.M. Halbur, Editor
First of all, what is feminism? According to my iMac dictionary, it is: “the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.” However, this definition just scratches the surface of what is a very complicated issue with a long history.
The “Woman’s Suffrage” movement, and its primary founder, Susan B. Anthony, had a noble aim and achieved much to give women their proper political and social respect. What many don’t know is that these early feminists were actually very pro-life and pro-motherhood.[1]
But as time progressed, feminism became more extreme and more angry, especially with the “Women’s Liberation” movement of the 1960’s and 1970’s. Women of this movement have the mindset of Margaret Sanger, who was the founder of Planned Parenthood. They believe, among other things, that sexual activity outside of marriage is fine, and even should be encouraged as a means of “liberation”. They hold that unlimited access to abortion and artificial birth control is a fundamental “right” and that women should be identical to men in every way.
Don’t get me wrong: I am completely in favor of treating all human beings with equal respect, no matter our gender, race, or color. I believe that it is right for a woman to vote, to be involved in politics, to hold positions of authority in the workplace, to choose her own husband, to be paid the same as a man doing the same job, etc. These are just common sense rules that must be met for justice to be upheld.
Although feminism began with noble goals, in its modern form, it is a dangerous and negative mindset. In reality, it scorns womanhood by implying that as a woman, I’m not good enough – I must become like a man in order to be equal to him. What a lie! The truth is that man and woman have equal dignity, but different design. Modern feminists have the attitude that they can be everything a man is, which is physiologically and biologically impossible. In pursuing things that men have characteristically done, they have gone too far and utterly shunned their innate qualities. They view the traditional woman as inferior to man, and the role of a stay-at-home mother as inferior. When a woman no longer understands herself and her unique role, the breakdown of the family results.
In marriage, husband and wife are partners in a sacred covenant, to help each other be everything God is calling them to be. Man is made to be the protector and leader, and woman to be the bearer and nurturer of life[2]. These innate qualities complement each other so perfectly. Working together, husband and wife create a stable and loving environment. However, if one partner rejects his or her natural role, the marriage will begin to fall apart.
Thanks to the lies and confusions of modern feminism, women have been undermining our inherent role. Since the sexual revolution, many have clung to the ideals of Margaret Sanger, who advocated promiscuity, contraception, and abortion-on-demand. By accepting this anti-life mentality and lifestyle, a woman literally severs that special bond with her child. Consequently, if the man and woman are married, she weakens her relationship with her husband by deliberately killing a life that they created together.
Although the suppression of fertility through artificial contraception and the legalization of abortion are often touted as “victories” for women, in reality, they oppress women physically and emotionally. Studies have shown that both contraception and abortion significantly increase a women’s risk of breast cancer[3]. Over 60% of women who have had abortions experience post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and even thoughts of suicide.[4] In addition, some artificial contraceptives, such as “The Pill,” which contains estrogen and progestin, can cause micro-abortions. While the main objective of women on “The Pill” is to avoid pregnancy altogether, to truth is that a sexually active woman taking this will have one micro-abortion each year, if not more. This is because “The Pill” does not just suppress ovulation; it also makes the lining of the uterus hostile to an embryo and prevents implantation. When this happens, the tiny baby dies because he or she is unable to obtain vital nutrients.[5]
As abortion and artificial contraception became more prevalent, promiscuity became more common and accepted because a woman did not have to be responsible with her actions. However, abortion and contraception also made it more convenient for men to use women in non-committal relationships. The gift of sexuality has been cheapened, leaving many people in unfulfilling and temporary relationships. Today, nearly half of American teenagers have lost their virginity by the age of 17.[6] Because contraception does not protect against Sexually Transmitted Diseases, each year 3 million teens are infected.[7] Young women are particularly vulnerable to STDs.[8] The contraception mentality naturally leads to an abortion mentality. If “the problem” cannot be prevented, then the next easiest action is to “do away” with the tiny life that has just been created. It is the proverbial frog-in-the-boiling-water.
In addition, women began shunning marriage because it included promises to be faithful, personal responsibility, and obedience to their husbands. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2005, unmarried households became the majority of all U.S. households.[9] Over 50% of couples marrying today have lived together first. And in the U.S. today, nearly half of all marriages end in divorce.[10] Many studies show a very real correlation between these statistics.[11] Also, the use of artificial contraception has helped in pushing couples apart because it is objectifying and selfish. Using contraception says to one’s spouse, “I give you everything about myself, except my fertility.” The love is not life-giving.[12] In contrast, couples using Natural Family Planning have only a 5% divorce rate.[13]
Even after they marry, many of today’s women put their careers above children, or put off having a family for several years. They view marriage only as something pleasurable and not first for pro-creation. They see children as expensive bothers and don’t desire more than one or two, at most.
Immodesty has also played a major part of modern feminism. When women became more promiscuous, they had to be outwardly alluring. Skirts became shorter, shirts became tighter and low-cut, and female clothing in general lost its feminine mystique. The female body is exploited and objectified, exposed for all to see and for men to lust after. By immodesty, women invite men to show disrespect towards them, even within marriage – husbands then view their wives as mere pleasure objects, instead of as partners and helpmates.
The negative agenda of modern feminism harms not only the family, but the education system, the workplace, the government, the education system, the world of sports, and the military.[14]
This does not mean I believe that women need to quit their outside-the-home jobs, political offices, or college learning. I myself have obtained a college degree, am working a full-time job, and becoming increasingly involved with politics. There is nothing wrong with this, as long as modern women are not neglecting their marriages, postponing pregnancy for illegitimate reasons, or neglecting their children and the high call of motherhood. Sometimes it is necessary, especially in these hard economic times, for the mother to work outside the home, and I don’t begrudge them that at all. However, there is plenty of evidence showing the benefits of stay-at-home moms for their children – whenever possible, this is the better option.[15]
Pope John Paul II wrote extensively on the invaluable role of women in the family and in society. He also coined the term “New Feminism” to invite women to a more complete and authentic embracing of our identity. In his Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, the Holy Father wrote: "In transforming culture so that it supports life, women occupy a place in thought and action which is unique and decisive. It depends on them to promote a ‘new feminism’ which rejects the temptation of imitating models of ‘male domination,’ in order to acknowledge and affirm the true genius of women in every aspect of the life of society, and overcome all discrimination, violence and exploitation."[16]
Today more than ever, we need to reclaim our womanly dignity and authenticity. As human beings, we are equal to men. But as ladies, we do have different and beautiful qualities that we must embrace. As noted before, we have extraordinary power to affect men by our attitude and dress. We can either build up or tear down our families, depending on how we manage our God-given role.
We influence society strongly. Wise leaders and teachers have always known this, and it’s time for us to take heed! I close with a quote by the ancient Philosopher Confucius: “Where the woman is faithful, no evil can befall. The woman is the root and the man is the tree. The tree grows only as high as the root is strong.”
[1] http://www2.focusonthefamily.com/focusmagazine/sohl/A000000164.cfm
[2] Explained in-depth in John Paul II’s Theology of the Body
[3] www.abortionbreastcancer.com
http://breastcancer.about.com/b/2010/01/08/abortion-birth-control-pills.htm
[4] http://www.afterabortion.org
[5] http://onemoresoul.com/contraception/risks-consequences/what-a-woman-should-know-about-birth-control.html
[6] http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/yrbs/pdf/yrbs07_us_overview.pdf
[7] http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS06B01
[8] http://www.chastity.com/chastity-qa/stds/infections/i-have-heard-teenage-girls-are-h
[9] http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-15-unmarried-households_x.htm
[10] http://marriage.about.com/od/cohabitation/qt/cohabfacts.htm
[11] http://www.divorcereform.org/cor.html#anchor2348930
[12] http://www.chastity.com/chastity-qa/birth-control/natural-family-planning-nfp/why-do
[13] http://onemoresoul.com/contraception/risks-consequences/what-a-woman-should-know-about-birth-control.html
[14] Detailed in the book Women Who Make the World Worse by Kate O’Beirne
[15] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8278742.stm
[16] http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html
Monday, April 5, 2010
Stand for Life
Many thanks to Monte Harms over at Stand for Life, for featuring my writing this morning! Please check out his site, he has LOTS of great resources!
Friday, March 12, 2010
Pro-Life and I Mean It!
By Luke C. Gabello, Co-Founder of The Conservative Comeback
Malori Fuchs, Editor
When I am asked my position on abortion, I reply, “I am pro-life.” That was a sufficient answer until recently. It is now common to hear, “No, you are anti-choice.” Really? Many pro-choice supporters go even further by rationalizing being pro-choice as separate from being pro-abortion. The argument is phrased something similar to, “No, I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice. I am not saying I am in favor of abortion, I am saying that I believe it is up to the woman to decide whether or not to have an abortion.” This argument is much more clever and far more dangerous.
The problem with being “pro-choice” is that it is still “pro-abortion” wrapped in intellectual drivel. One cannot simply support abortion as a choice without co-conspiring to support the legalized means required to kill an innocent child. Pro-choice proponents argue that choice in this matter is a basic freedom and a right. Examine some of our true freedoms and rights and the fallacy of the “pro-choice” position is exposed. The Conservative Comeback is a big proponent of freedom: freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the freedom to bear arms for self defense. We are not, however, in favor of the right for the government to impose a religion on all citizens, for libel and slander, or for using firearms to commit crimes. There are legitimate and illegitimate uses of our rights as defined in the Constitution of the United States. The fundamental problem illustrated is that no right is allowed to infringe on the right of another. To do so jeopardizes all of our rights and freedoms.
The pro-choice position garners support from an extremely flawed constitutional interpretation: the supposed belief that there is “a right to privacy.” The word “privacy” does not even exist in the Constitution of the United States. The word “privilege” and “deprived” appear most frequently in the Constitution of the United States when searching for “priv”. Neither the word “privilege” nor “deprived” suppose privacy in any sense that would advocate murder. It again goes back to the fundamentally flawed thinking that an unborn child is not a human. This is the justification by which most individuals hold their pro-choice beliefs. Therefore, I argue that an unborn human being is blatantly deprived of their natural choice to live in favor of a supposed right to privacy.
A unique human being is created at the moment of conception. The moment of conception to the moment birth is an inseparable part of the human experience. Here is the evidence for all the naysayers: one cannot bypass conception and suddenly become a human. If we as a nation believe it is wrong to harm the innocent, then abortion on all levels must cease immediately. As President Ronald Reagan so eloquently stated, “Abortion is advocated only by persons who have themselves been born.”
Malori Fuchs, Editor
When I am asked my position on abortion, I reply, “I am pro-life.” That was a sufficient answer until recently. It is now common to hear, “No, you are anti-choice.” Really? Many pro-choice supporters go even further by rationalizing being pro-choice as separate from being pro-abortion. The argument is phrased something similar to, “No, I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice. I am not saying I am in favor of abortion, I am saying that I believe it is up to the woman to decide whether or not to have an abortion.” This argument is much more clever and far more dangerous.
The problem with being “pro-choice” is that it is still “pro-abortion” wrapped in intellectual drivel. One cannot simply support abortion as a choice without co-conspiring to support the legalized means required to kill an innocent child. Pro-choice proponents argue that choice in this matter is a basic freedom and a right. Examine some of our true freedoms and rights and the fallacy of the “pro-choice” position is exposed. The Conservative Comeback is a big proponent of freedom: freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the freedom to bear arms for self defense. We are not, however, in favor of the right for the government to impose a religion on all citizens, for libel and slander, or for using firearms to commit crimes. There are legitimate and illegitimate uses of our rights as defined in the Constitution of the United States. The fundamental problem illustrated is that no right is allowed to infringe on the right of another. To do so jeopardizes all of our rights and freedoms.
The pro-choice position garners support from an extremely flawed constitutional interpretation: the supposed belief that there is “a right to privacy.” The word “privacy” does not even exist in the Constitution of the United States. The word “privilege” and “deprived” appear most frequently in the Constitution of the United States when searching for “priv”. Neither the word “privilege” nor “deprived” suppose privacy in any sense that would advocate murder. It again goes back to the fundamentally flawed thinking that an unborn child is not a human. This is the justification by which most individuals hold their pro-choice beliefs. Therefore, I argue that an unborn human being is blatantly deprived of their natural choice to live in favor of a supposed right to privacy.
A unique human being is created at the moment of conception. The moment of conception to the moment birth is an inseparable part of the human experience. Here is the evidence for all the naysayers: one cannot bypass conception and suddenly become a human. If we as a nation believe it is wrong to harm the innocent, then abortion on all levels must cease immediately. As President Ronald Reagan so eloquently stated, “Abortion is advocated only by persons who have themselves been born.”
Resolution Against Planned Parenthood
Please see my latest post at Pro Life Unity, which is about the resolution against Planned Parenthood that I proposed and passed at our precinct convention. On Saturday, I will be arguing for the resolution to make it to the senatorial district convention level.
Friday, March 5, 2010
"Kill the Bill, Not the Babies"
Please read my latest column at Pro Life Unity, regarding the inclusion of abortion funding in H.R. 3590 (Senate health care bill):
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
You never know when you might be called...
..to stand up for your beliefs. Today at work, I actually had a few encounters where I could share my faith and moral beliefs. The first one made the biggest impression on me.
Background on my job first: I'm the administrative assistant for a children's music school, so in addition to performing my secretarial duties, I also get to talk to parents and their children.
I was talking to a certain dad who has talked to me about my political views before. I guess I had mentioned to him that I was thinking about taking some "for fun" college classes, and he asked if I was, now that it's a new semester. I said, no I'm not (it costs money!), and so he asked me which classes I wanted to take. I replied "Government and public speaking."
"Oh, so you might run for public office?"
"Haha, no, I don't think so, I don't think I could do that. I am helping with some political campaigns in my area, though...calling people and stuff."
He then went on to ask, "So who do you support in the governor's race: Perry or Kay Bailey?"
I told him that I'm supporting Rick Perry, and then he asked why.
"Well, my big thing is that Perry is more pro-life than Kay. She has done some pro-life things, but she's not as solid as Perry. I trust his record more."
That explanation naturally led to a discussion about abortion. "So," he said, "how can you justify being against abortion...I mean, it's a religious conviction." (I think he's someone that I would label as "moderate.")
"No, not totally," I answered. "It partly is religious, but there's also scientific fact."
"Yeah, but the egg and the sperm [separately]...they aren't life."
"Yes, true. But if you look in any embryology text book, it will tell you that life begins at fertilization. I actually did that once...I got an embryology text book from the Johns Hopkins medical library, and there it was!"
"Okay, yes, it's potential life."
"No, it IS a life, because everything is there. All it needs is nourishment, development, and growth. But it's totally there."
"Hmm....I never thought of it that way....that everything is already there."
The fact that a light bulb turned on in this man's head is thrilling for me! "I never thought of it that way." How awesome! He actually understood! Whether he'll totally embrace it is another matter, but at least it made him think and understand the issue in a new way.
So that's a cool thing that happened today! I just hope that I don't get in trouble for talking about my political and pro-life views at work. Let's just say that there was an issue with my pro-life views even before I was officially hired...but hey, at least I haven't gotten called out for having the sticker "Abortion kills babies and wounds women" on my car! If it does get around that I'm supposedly"proselytizing", I can honestly say that I didn't start the subject...he asked, and I've gotta stand up and defend my beliefs. You never know when a seed might be planted or a heart touched!
Background on my job first: I'm the administrative assistant for a children's music school, so in addition to performing my secretarial duties, I also get to talk to parents and their children.
I was talking to a certain dad who has talked to me about my political views before. I guess I had mentioned to him that I was thinking about taking some "for fun" college classes, and he asked if I was, now that it's a new semester. I said, no I'm not (it costs money!), and so he asked me which classes I wanted to take. I replied "Government and public speaking."
"Oh, so you might run for public office?"
"Haha, no, I don't think so, I don't think I could do that. I am helping with some political campaigns in my area, though...calling people and stuff."
He then went on to ask, "So who do you support in the governor's race: Perry or Kay Bailey?"
I told him that I'm supporting Rick Perry, and then he asked why.
"Well, my big thing is that Perry is more pro-life than Kay. She has done some pro-life things, but she's not as solid as Perry. I trust his record more."
That explanation naturally led to a discussion about abortion. "So," he said, "how can you justify being against abortion...I mean, it's a religious conviction." (I think he's someone that I would label as "moderate.")
"No, not totally," I answered. "It partly is religious, but there's also scientific fact."
"Yeah, but the egg and the sperm [separately]...they aren't life."
"Yes, true. But if you look in any embryology text book, it will tell you that life begins at fertilization. I actually did that once...I got an embryology text book from the Johns Hopkins medical library, and there it was!"
"Okay, yes, it's potential life."
"No, it IS a life, because everything is there. All it needs is nourishment, development, and growth. But it's totally there."
"Hmm....I never thought of it that way....that everything is already there."
The fact that a light bulb turned on in this man's head is thrilling for me! "I never thought of it that way." How awesome! He actually understood! Whether he'll totally embrace it is another matter, but at least it made him think and understand the issue in a new way.
So that's a cool thing that happened today! I just hope that I don't get in trouble for talking about my political and pro-life views at work. Let's just say that there was an issue with my pro-life views even before I was officially hired...but hey, at least I haven't gotten called out for having the sticker "Abortion kills babies and wounds women" on my car! If it does get around that I'm supposedly"proselytizing", I can honestly say that I didn't start the subject...he asked, and I've gotta stand up and defend my beliefs. You never know when a seed might be planted or a heart touched!
Friday, October 2, 2009
My personal experience - 40 Days for Life
It is one thing to say you are pro-life...but it's another thing to actually ACT like you are pro-life.
The second thing is definitely harder, and although I am passionately pro-life, there are times when I really don't feel like putting my faith into action. I am usually a little active, such as writing pro-life letters to the editor, keeping myself updated on pro-life news, etc. What I mean by putting one's faith into action is actually putting oneself into the community and onto the front lines.
40 Days for Life began last Wednesdays, September 23rd in over 200 cities in 45 states, 5 Canadian provinces, and the country of Denmark...that's a total of 212 different locations, compared to 177 last fall. Last year, I wanted to participate but was unable to make it to the actual location, since I was at school in Baltimore and did not have a way to get to the vigil site. My contribution was to write a pro-life post on my other blog (http://cecilia-rose.blogspot.com) and to give up all desserts (oh chocolate...) for the 40 days. It definitely was spiritually fulfilling.
This year, I am back in Texas with my own car, so transportation is not an issue. So on Wednesday, September 30th, I headed to the Dallas 40 Days for Life vigil site. I got off work at 7 p.m. and headed there immediately after. In an effort to learn how to read directions, I didn't use my OnStar and instead used directions printed off from Google Maps. I made it to downtown Dallas fine (coming south on Central Expressway to Woodall Rogers), but when I was trying to get onto Harry Hines Blvd., I missed the street and accidentally got on the Dallas Tollway! I had no choice but to follow it until I found an exit, and then I wasn't sure how to turn around. At that point, I could've said, "Well, I tried but I'm lost now. I'm just gonna go home. The effort was good enough."
I finally connected to OnStar and after again missing the correct street, I finally made it to Robinson's Abortion Clinic. It was pretty much dark outside and about 7:40 p.m. I saw a small group of people standing on the sidewalk, holding signs, and it took me a couple minutes to turn around and figure out where to park.
The people were from St. Anthony's parish in Wylie, and they were very kind and welcoming. I signed in and signed the Pledge of Peace. Of course, Robinson's was closed and no abortions were happening at almost 8 p.m., but it is important to have round-the-clock vigil at these places of death and morbidity. I began praying a rosary and could feel how powerful our prayers there were. A few more people arrived, and we all prayed the Glorious Mysteries of the rosary. Then we prayed the Divine Mercy Chaplet and the "emergency prayer" that I think Fr. Corapi recommends in emergencies (10 Memorares, with the last one offered in thanksgiving I think).
I was there for a little over an hour, and I'm so glad I went. That first visit was like the ice breaker for me. I soon decided that I would visit again today (Friday evening). It's kind of like the Nike saying: "Just Do It." Once you step out, it's harder to recede into your shell.
This weekend will be very pro-life here in north Texas. In addition to 40 Days, my family and I are participating in the Hike for Life in McKinney on Saturday morning. (Anyone like to donate? Go to my personal webpage to make a monetary donation: http://hikeforlifetexas.kintera.org/faf/r.asp?t=4&i=318025&u=318025-273477450)
Then on Sunday, which is Respect Life Sunday in the Catholic Church, the Life Chain will be taking place all across the country. Life Chain is basically where pro-lifers of all faiths gather at a prominent place (road side, intersection) and hold peaceful pro-life signs and pray. Visit www.lifechain.net for more info.
My advice for all who haven't participated in 40 Days for Life (or any frontline pro-life work): just get out there and do it! It may be helpful to promise with a friend or family member something like, "We're going to pray at the abortion clinic for one hour a week" or whatever you feel called to do. Then fulfill that promise and I bet that you will go beyond that!
Let's pray and work to end abortion!
Sunday, April 12, 2009
A Response to a Pro-Choice Mindset
This past week I became involved in a Facebook discussion over a link I posted. For your reference, here it is:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09040610.html
The title is "Obama Administration Call 'With Both Sides' to Reduce Abortions Compared to Hitler's Peace Conference."
Basically, as pro-lifers know, President Obama's claim to wanting to "reduce abortions" is merely rhetoric. Actions speak louder than words, and what he has done as president so far has definitely confirmed a pro-abortion mindset.
My first question for Obama is: why merely reduce abortion? Can't we work to eliminate it altogether? He is using the government to put an end to other crises, namely the economic downfall. Why can't he put that much effort into putting an end to abortion? Another thing that puzzles me is the fact that, while Obama says he wants to reduce abortions, as president he has overturned the Mexico City policy, appointed rabidly pro-abortion representatives in his administration, and has allowed tax-payer funded embryonic stem cell research (plus other things before he became president). This is why I said "actions speak louder than words," much louder than a "peace-making" phone call.
My discussion opponent mentioned that she personally feels that birth control doesn't promote promiscuity...but what do the facts say? (And from some research I've done, the book she mentioned - "Legends, Lies and Cherished Myths of American History - probably isn't the most reliable source!) I agree that extramarital sex is not just a recent phenomenon. It's also totally true that before the 20th century, it was taboo to casually talk about it....but that's how it should be! Unfortunately, sex is not seen anymore as something that should remain within marriage, and thus is has been lowered to merely a pleasure that can be separated from its primary purpose: pro-creation. No one can deny that premarital/extramarital sex is promoted by what is on TV, in books, magazines, movies, advertisements, etc. It is not held as something sacred anymore.
Here is where contraception comes in: you can have sex and not worry about the consequences of it! Thus, people can get contraceptives and not be responsible for their actions. And therefore, it would make sense that extramarital sex is more rampant these days because people don't have to be as responsible for their actions, making promiscuity more common.
Do you know how and why the promotion of birth control came about? The founder of the Birth Control League (which later became Planned Parenthood), Margaret Sanger, began the movement, and she was a eugenicist. She believed in weeding out the "less desirable" humans, who were much of the time among the poor and the minorities. As quoted from "A Plan for Peace," Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 106, she advocated "A stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring." This shows her racist and eugenic mindset, which many people don't know about or choose to ignore.
Another issue with the Pill, in particular, is that it doesn't just prevent fertilization from happening: it can act as an abortifacient if the egg becomes fertilized. In other words, the Pill causes abortions. In addition, if you're not open to even conceiving a child, then what happens if you accidentally get pregnant? If you have this kind of mentality, it makes it that much easier to have an abortion to "get rid of the problem." Even within marriage, becoming pregnant is often seen as a negative side effect of sex, rather than the natural outcome; and so couples turn to birth control. Contraceptives rip marriages apart. We can see this in the rising rate of divorce as contraceptives have become more and more promoted in our culture.
To address her qualms about the government promoting abstinence-only education: First of all, no one can deny the fact that abstinence works! It's the only 100% guaranteed way that you won't get pregnant or get STD's. Using birth control and condoms still put you at risk. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 54% of women who have abortions have been using a contraceptive, as compared to the 8% of women who have abortions but have NEVER used a contraceptive.
The problem with "comprehensive" sex ed is that abstinence is downplayed and contraceptives are promoted. No one can deny that contraceptives are widely promoted in schools, the media, by doctors, etc. Not knowing how to use them shouldn't be the issue. The issue is the anti-life mentality and the moral degeneration of our culture, and that will not be solved by handing out the Pill. It will only be solved by restoring the Christian heritage of America and instilling better morals in our children, which includes abstinence-only education. Natural Family Planning is an excellent method for married couples who want to work within God's will for their family size. It strengthens marriages, is 99% effective, and there is a lower divorce rate among couples who use it. Visit www.ccli.org for more information.
In conclusion, if people had more self-control and would remain abstinent when they don't want to become pregnant, there would be less abortions. Birth control makes people feel like they have control over their own lives, when really God is in control, and He is the one that gives and takes away...including life. He's the one who decides when to give life and when to take it away. It's none of our business to mess around with that. All we have to do is work within His Will. If you don't have a Christian faith, this will probably be hard or impossible to grasp. But I can assure you that if more people had this mindset, the world and our country would be a much, much better place.
Speaking of new life, Happy Easter! He is Risen, the One who gives us life! :)
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09040610.html
The title is "Obama Administration Call 'With Both Sides' to Reduce Abortions Compared to Hitler's Peace Conference."
Basically, as pro-lifers know, President Obama's claim to wanting to "reduce abortions" is merely rhetoric. Actions speak louder than words, and what he has done as president so far has definitely confirmed a pro-abortion mindset.
My first question for Obama is: why merely reduce abortion? Can't we work to eliminate it altogether? He is using the government to put an end to other crises, namely the economic downfall. Why can't he put that much effort into putting an end to abortion? Another thing that puzzles me is the fact that, while Obama says he wants to reduce abortions, as president he has overturned the Mexico City policy, appointed rabidly pro-abortion representatives in his administration, and has allowed tax-payer funded embryonic stem cell research (plus other things before he became president). This is why I said "actions speak louder than words," much louder than a "peace-making" phone call.
My discussion opponent mentioned that she personally feels that birth control doesn't promote promiscuity...but what do the facts say? (And from some research I've done, the book she mentioned - "Legends, Lies and Cherished Myths of American History - probably isn't the most reliable source!) I agree that extramarital sex is not just a recent phenomenon. It's also totally true that before the 20th century, it was taboo to casually talk about it....but that's how it should be! Unfortunately, sex is not seen anymore as something that should remain within marriage, and thus is has been lowered to merely a pleasure that can be separated from its primary purpose: pro-creation. No one can deny that premarital/extramarital sex is promoted by what is on TV, in books, magazines, movies, advertisements, etc. It is not held as something sacred anymore.
Here is where contraception comes in: you can have sex and not worry about the consequences of it! Thus, people can get contraceptives and not be responsible for their actions. And therefore, it would make sense that extramarital sex is more rampant these days because people don't have to be as responsible for their actions, making promiscuity more common.
Do you know how and why the promotion of birth control came about? The founder of the Birth Control League (which later became Planned Parenthood), Margaret Sanger, began the movement, and she was a eugenicist. She believed in weeding out the "less desirable" humans, who were much of the time among the poor and the minorities. As quoted from "A Plan for Peace," Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 106, she advocated "A stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring." This shows her racist and eugenic mindset, which many people don't know about or choose to ignore.
Another issue with the Pill, in particular, is that it doesn't just prevent fertilization from happening: it can act as an abortifacient if the egg becomes fertilized. In other words, the Pill causes abortions. In addition, if you're not open to even conceiving a child, then what happens if you accidentally get pregnant? If you have this kind of mentality, it makes it that much easier to have an abortion to "get rid of the problem." Even within marriage, becoming pregnant is often seen as a negative side effect of sex, rather than the natural outcome; and so couples turn to birth control. Contraceptives rip marriages apart. We can see this in the rising rate of divorce as contraceptives have become more and more promoted in our culture.
To address her qualms about the government promoting abstinence-only education: First of all, no one can deny the fact that abstinence works! It's the only 100% guaranteed way that you won't get pregnant or get STD's. Using birth control and condoms still put you at risk. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 54% of women who have abortions have been using a contraceptive, as compared to the 8% of women who have abortions but have NEVER used a contraceptive.
The problem with "comprehensive" sex ed is that abstinence is downplayed and contraceptives are promoted. No one can deny that contraceptives are widely promoted in schools, the media, by doctors, etc. Not knowing how to use them shouldn't be the issue. The issue is the anti-life mentality and the moral degeneration of our culture, and that will not be solved by handing out the Pill. It will only be solved by restoring the Christian heritage of America and instilling better morals in our children, which includes abstinence-only education. Natural Family Planning is an excellent method for married couples who want to work within God's will for their family size. It strengthens marriages, is 99% effective, and there is a lower divorce rate among couples who use it. Visit www.ccli.org for more information.
In conclusion, if people had more self-control and would remain abstinent when they don't want to become pregnant, there would be less abortions. Birth control makes people feel like they have control over their own lives, when really God is in control, and He is the one that gives and takes away...including life. He's the one who decides when to give life and when to take it away. It's none of our business to mess around with that. All we have to do is work within His Will. If you don't have a Christian faith, this will probably be hard or impossible to grasp. But I can assure you that if more people had this mindset, the world and our country would be a much, much better place.
Speaking of new life, Happy Easter! He is Risen, the One who gives us life! :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
