Tag Archives: Pro-Life

News

Do pro-lifers care about people who are already born?

8 Comments

From Ruth Blog – a post to answer the objection that pro-lifers don’t care about babies after they are born.

Here’s the challenge:

One of the most frequently repeated truisms of the abortion debate is that pro-lifers really don’t care about life. As much as they talk about protecting the unborn, we are told, pro-lifers do nothing to support mothers and infants who are already in the world. Liberal writers such as Matthew Yglesias are given to observing that pro-lifers believe that “life begins at conception and ends at birth.” At Commonweal, David Gibson, a journalist who frequently covers the abortion debate, asks how much pro-lifers do for mothers: “I just want to know what realistic steps they are proposing or backing. I’m not sure I’d expect to hear anything from pro-life groups now since there’s really been nothing for years.”

And an excerpt from the response:

In the United States there are some 2,300 affiliates of the three largest pregnancy resource center umbrella groups, Heartbeat International, CareNet, and the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA). Over 1.9 million American women take advantage of these services each year. Many stay at one of the 350 residential facilities for women and children operated by pro-life groups. In New York City alone, there are twenty-two centers serving 12,000 women a year. These centers provide services including pre-natal care, STI testing, STI treatment, ultrasound, childbirth classes, labor coaching, midwife services, lactation consultation, nutrition consulting, social work, abstinence education, parenting classes, material assistance, and post-abortion counseling.

[…]The Catholic Church–perhaps the single most influential pro-life institution in the United States–makes the largest financial, institutional and personnel commitments to charitable causes of any private source in the United States. These include AIDS ministry, health care, education, housing services, and care for the elderly, disabled, and immigrants. In 2004 alone, 562 Catholic hospitals treated over 85 million patients; Catholic elementary and high schools educated over 2 million students; Catholic colleges educated nearly 800,000 students; Catholic Charities served over eight-and-a-half million different individuals. In 2007, the Catholic Campaign for Human Development awarded nine million dollars in grants to reduce poverty. And in 2009, the Catholic Legal Immigration Network spent nearly five million dollars in services for impoverished immigrants.

The Catholic Church is far from the only pro-life religious group that assists the needy. At the Manhattan Bible Church, a pro-life church in New York since 1973, Pastor Bill Devlin and his congregation run a soup kitchen that has served over a million people and a K-8 school that has educated 90,000 needy students. Pastor Devlin and other church families have adopted scores of babies, and taken in scores of pregnant women, including some who were both drug-addicted and HIV positive. The church runs a one-hundred-and-fifty bed residential drug rehabilitation center and a prison ministry at Rikers Island. All told, the church runs some forty ministries, and all without a government dime.

[….]If pro-life Americans provide so many (often free) services to the poor and vulnerable–work easily discovered by any researcher or journalist with an Internet connection–why are they sometimes accused of caring only for life inside the womb? Quite possibly, it is the conviction of abortion advocates that “caring for the born” translates first and always into advocacy for government programs and funds. In other words, abortion advocates appear to conflate charitable works and civil society with government action. The pro-life movement does not. Rather, it takes up the work of assisting women and children and families, one fundraiser and hotline and billboard at a time.

People think that abortion providers do a lot for women’s health, but Planned Parenthood doesn’t provide mammograms.

You may be interested in this post by Neil Simpson, who volunteers at a crisis pregnancy center.

Excerpt:

The “Pro-lifers don’t care about kids after they are born” line is one of my favorite arguments to rebut.  I teach people how to do it in pro-life training sessions in a two-step approach.  The tone of the conversation is important.  These arguments are powerful and quite effective if they are laid out in a calm, reasoned approach.  You probably won’t convert the rabid pro-choicers, but most of the middle-grounders will get the point.

First, show that pointing out a moral wrong does not obligate you to take responsibility for the situation.

If your neighbor is beating his wife, you call the police.  The police don’t say, “Hey, buddy, unless you are willing to marry her yourself then we aren’t going to stop him from beating her.”  You can use child or animal abuse as examples as well.  Most people get the point pretty quickly.

Or ask the pro-choicer what they would do if the government decided to reduce the number of homeless people by killing them.  Could he protest that without having to house and feed them all himself?

[…]Second, explain that while we aren’t morally obligated to help after the babies are born to be able to speak out against abortion, Christians do many things with their time and money anyway – orphanages, Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs), food pantries, etc.

When I’m teaching CPC volunteers I remind them of all that they and the center do: Pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, food, clothes, diapers, life skill training, parenting training, post-abortion counseling and more – all for free!  And, of course, we share the Gospel with the clients if they are interested (Saving lives now and for eternity!).

The workers are mostly volunteers and the leaders make below-market wages because they believe in the cause.  Most centers receive no government funding, so all the money comes from donations.  There are far more Crisis Pregnancy Centers than there are abortion clinics.

On a completely different topic, I posted an article by Helen Alvare a while back. She is one of the authors of this article. There was a pretty good dispute with a single mother who disagreed her comments to that article.

Related posts

News

Republican governors in Florida and Texas to sign ultrasound bills

1 Comment
Unborn baby scheming about ultrasound legislation
Unborn baby scheming about ultrasound legislation

Republicans in the Texas House and Senate have voted in favor of a bill requiring an ultrasound before every abortion. Republican Governor Rick Perry will sign the ultrasound bill.

Excerpt:

A bill that allows women a chance to see an ultrasound of their unborn baby before an abortion is now headed to Governor Rick Perry, who plans to sign the pro-life measure into law.

After the Texas Senate signed off on the legislation, the state House, on a 94-41 vote, voted to concur on the Senate changes to HB 15, the sonogram bill. Now the state will become the latest to give women the kind of information about the development of their unborn child the normally don’t receive at abortion clinics — information that may prompt many to choose abortion alternatives.

The Senate passed the bill on second reading on a 21-10 vote and all hostile, pro-abortion amendments by Sens. Wendy Davis, Jose Rodriguez, and Leticia Van de Putte were defeated.

[…]For women who reside in counties with more than 60,000 people (more than 92% of women seeking abortions), the sonogram must be performed at least 24 hours before the abortion, and the consultation must be given in person. For women who reside in smaller counties or more than 100 miles from an abortion provider (less than 8% of women seeking abortions), the sonogram may be performed at least two hours before the abortion and the 24-hour private consultation may be done by phone.

[…]When used in pregnancy centers, ultrasounds convince more than 80 percent of women considering an abortion to keep their baby or consider adoption.

Republicans in the Florida legislature sent an ultrasound bill to Republican governor Rick Scott, but they also send a parental consent bill.

Excerpt:

Florida senators on Thursday voted to send two pro-life bills to the state governor, including a bill that would mandate that women be given an opportunity to view an ultrasound and hear a description of their unborn child before having the child killed through an abortion.

The ultrasound bill (HB 1127) passed easily, 24-15. Its passage was a significant victory for pro-life advocates in the state, given that a similar bill was vetoed last year by then-Gov. Charlie Crist.

However, with pro-life Governor Rick Scott now in office, there is little chance of the bill meeting a similar fate this time around.

The state senate also passed on Thursday a bill (HB 1247) that would tighten up the state’s parental consent law, making it more difficult for minors to get a judicial bypass to avoid having to tell their parents. That bill passed 26-12.

“You can’t give a child an aspirin in school without permission. You can’t do any kind of medication, but we can secretly take the child off and have an abortion?” said Sen. Steve Oelrich, R-Gainesville, according to the Associated Press. “We should support it with all our hearts and souls if parental responsibility means anything to us.”

Since the election of Gov. Scott, as well as strong pro-life Republican majorities in both the House and the Senate in last November’s election, the state of Florida has drawn attention for the sheer volume of pro-life legislation that is making its way through the legislature.

Late last month Florida legislators had passed a number of other pro-life bills, including a constitutional amendment that would ban public funding for abortion and prevent the state courts from interpreting a right to privacy to include abortion.

Abortion is all about making money – it’s a business. The more regulations you can introduce to reduce the profit margin, the fewer abortionists will want to get into the business. That will raise the prices of abortions and send a signal to abortion consumers about the costly outcomes of careless sex. As a society, we care about whether people are responsible with sex – they should be ready to deal with any children that are produced because children are people too. Why should society have people engaging in recreational activities that can kill another person and then lower the costs of their taking that risk? It makes no sense. Unborn babies are people too, and we don’t make it easier for people to be reckless about sex and put the lives of other people at risk. We don’t make it easier for people to engage in recreational activities that can get other people killed.

Parental consent laws are also proven to reduce the number of abortions. Ideally, you want young people to understand the facts about contraception failure rates and to know that their parents will be involved in the abortion decision. It’s better for young people to understand the normal outcomes of sex (babies) before they decide to do it, so that children will only come along when adults have decided that they are prepared to accommodate them. The natural outcome of sex is a baby, and people should understand that society is serious about protecting babies and giving them what they need.

News

Heroic Christian woman sacrifices her life to save her unborn child

5 Comments
Jessica Council
Jessica Council

From Life Site News. (H/T Mary)

Excerpt:

In August of last year Jessica Council – a beautiful, 30-year-old mother of one – noticed that she had a sore throat. At around the same time, she also began to suspect that she was pregnant.

When after two weeks the sore throat had not gone away, Jessica decided to have it checked out. Her doctor told her that it was probably a thyroid goiter, and ultimately nothing to be too concerned about. Just to be sure, however, he had a test done, which he said confirmed his initial suspicions. Everything would be ok, he said.

But everything was not ok. The doctor had misread the test.

Around November 15th, Jessica began having trouble breathing. On November 21st she landed in the emergency room. Then, on November 22nd, her throat closed up so tightly that she could not breathe, at which point doctors managed to insert a tube down her throat, and put her on a ventilator.

The following day, November 23rd, Jessica was informed that she had cancer. By then, she also knew for certain that she was with child.

Thus began a journey that would put the faith and pro-life convictions of Jessica and her husband, Clint, to the ultimate test.

[…]Clint describes his wife’s reaction to the news of the cancer in her throat as “a mixture of fear and surprise.” As for himself, he says he felt “just every emotion you can think of … except for joy. I was a basket case.”

But, of course, Jessica wasn’t the only one threatened by the cancer: she was pregnant, and any treatments she underwent would almost certainly harm, and possibly even kill her unborn child.

On November 25th, the hospital’s OB/GYN offered the couple an abortion. Clint says Jessica never hesitated. “That was never an option,” he said. “That is black and white.”

Read the whole thing for the rest of the story. I think this about as heroic as a person can be.

UPDATE: Wes also sent me this story of a 9-year old boy who saved his 2-year old sister’s life… using CPR!