What Do They Mean By “Choice”?

What do Pro-choicers mean by “choice” anyway?

Actually I’m not sure I can call them that anymore. Planned Parenthood is distancing itself from the word “choice”. Personally I think its fitting that they stop using that word, since they aren’t about “choice” at all. I prefer to call them Pro-abortion.

So anyway; what do they mean by choice?

If you dare to mention carrying the child to term, They screech that you are for “forced birth”.

If you dare mention adoption, they start ranting and raving about “all the poor orphans”. One pro-choice woman had the gall to describe women who wanted to adopt a baby as “selfish”.

So what they truly mean by choice is the choice to abort. I’ve been dealing with pro-aborts for over a year now, here on the blog and on facebook. I have yet to find one that would support the choice to parent or the choice to put the child up for adoption. NOT ONE thought that either of those plans was a good idea.

So yes, it’s a real good idea for Planned Parenthood to distance itself from the word “choice”. It shows they are admitting that “choice” is not what they are about at all.

Until next time friends, God Bless.

 

Advertisements

12 comments

  1. meagen · January 22, 2013

    I am pro choice. Allow me to express what “choice” means to myself.

    I respect a woman’s right to choose; I do not qualify what said choice should be. If carrying the pregnancy to term and keeping the child is her choice, fantastic. If opting for adoption is her choice, fantastic. If abortion is her choice, well, I don’t consider that “fantastic”, but it is her choice nontheless.

    I cannot know the circumstances that drive each woman’s decision in this process. I believe that women should give considerable thought and deliberation, as well as soul searching, of all options before committing to any one avenue of action. I am sure that we can agree that it certainly is not an issue to be handled lightly.

    Moreso, my karmaic duty is to be supportive of the women in my life-mother, sister, friends- and to provide emotional support during such a crisis. I cannot control the choice/action they may take, but I am utterly responsible for the manner in which I choose to treat them after-the-fact.

  2. eMatters · January 22, 2013

    Good points. I used to say “pro-choice” to be charitable to them, even though they would call me “anti-abortion” instead of “pro-life.” (Why yes, I am anti-abortion! I think everyone should oppose killing innocent but unwanted human beings).

    But now I just call them pro-abortion. Why? Because the Democrats’ platform is specifically pro-taxpayer-funded abortions. If you force pro-lifers to pay for abortions then you aren’t pro-choice, you are pro-abortion. If you think one of the problems in society is that there aren’t enough abortions and we must pay for more with taxes, then you are pro-abortion.

    “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.”

  3. eMatters · January 22, 2013

    ” I am sure that we can agree that it certainly is not an issue to be handled lightly.”

    But why? Abortion either kills innocent but unwanted human beings or it doesn’t. If is does (and that’s why all the embryology texts say) then no amount of soul-searching, etc. is relevant. Would you care how much reflection a mother had before killing her toddlers?

    “Moreso, my karmaic duty is to be supportive of the women in my life-mother, sister, friends- and to provide emotional support during such a crisis. I cannot control the choice/action they may take, but I am utterly responsible for the manner in which I choose to treat them after-the-fact.”

    What about your duty to the unborn human being?

    • meagen · January 23, 2013

      Thank you for your civil, thought provoking response. : )

      I simply am of the opinion that abortion, or lack thereof, is not a straight forward “white” or “black” issue. I have witnessed the “gray”, so to speak. Unfair, unfortunate circumstances that befall good people. My sister was diagnosed with cervical cancer. Her cancer was found during the routine pap performed at the beginning of each pregnancy. Second and third opinions were the same devastating news: your cancer is aggressive, the increased estrogen and progesterone levels during pregnancy will unequivocally catalyze the malignancy, you cannot receive treatment while pregnant, in our best professional opinion if you carry the pregnancy your malignancy will probably not be curable, we cannot gaurantee that you will carry to term with a reproductive cancer, etc.

      As a mother of three already, do you think soul searching was not required as she struggled to make a decision. Struggle is an understatement.

      My duty was to my sister. Suporting her as she made a decision that, either way, changed everything.

      She was called vile names by protestors at the clinic as she entered, openly sobbing. “You should feel guilty, baby murderering whore”, one yelled at her. “You have no idea”, she whispered.

      We have no idea the circumstances.

      • Jennifer King · January 23, 2013

        Your sister was misinformed. Cancer is treatable during pregnancy.

        http://www.cancer.org/cancer/news/news/cancer-can-be-treated-during-pregnancy

        From the Article:
        “In looking at gynecological cancers, these researchers conclude that pregnancy should be preserved in patients with cervical or ovarian cancer whenever feasible. Using chemotherapy after the first trimester does not seem to harm the baby, and can help increase the chances of a healthy baby by allowing the pregnancy to continue closer to full term.”

      • meagen · January 23, 2013

        Thank you for the reputable article.

        Fortunately, my sister was not misinformed. As the article mentioned, this literature recognizes that chemotherapy may not be as harmful to a developing fetus during the second and third trimesters, yet it is still not without risks. The article also iterates the importance of seeking expert counsel.

        The literature for various chemotherapeutic agents describing the pharmacokinetics of each categorizes the drugs as pregnancy category “x”. Through various chemical and metabolic actions, chemo agents recognize the rapid growing mutated cells of malignancy and then inhibits such growth and replication. Despite advances in cancer treatment, chemo agents cannot differentiate the rapid multiplication of carcinoma from the rapid cellular activity of a developing embryo/fetus. It is in this same manner that the bone marrow of one receiving chemo is inadvertently suppressed. Most chemo agents in the first trimester will result in fetal demise.

        Irregardless of the above, due to my sister’s individual cancer-cell type, staging, and degree of involvemement of surrounding tissue and organs- chemo was not the only treatment modality she required. Radiation therapy via the use of “seeding” was the life saver of her plan of care. Insertable, highly radioactive “seeds” of various isotopes that are inserted in the vagina, left for “x” amount of time, removed when no longer radioactive, replaced and repeated as denoted by her radiation oncologist.

        The physicians that so compassionately cared for her had “no dog in the race”; no reason to arbitrarily encourage abortion. They provided her with data and the courses of treatment they could provide, with expected outcomes based upon medical research and probability, for any possible route she chose to pursue. Unfortunately, the prognosis for her in the event that she delayed treatment where profoundly poor.

        No, she was not misled or misinformed. As a critical care R.N. myself with upwards of 10 years experience, who at the time was no exception pro-life, I helped assure that all options for treatment were reviewed in exhaustive manner.

        The thought of losing her changed my views on abortion. Seeing the heartache she underwent changed my views on women who seek abortion.

      • meagen · January 23, 2013

        I would note the following from the article as well.

        What’s most important is having a team of experts who are experienced in dealing with the many different aspects of cancer during pregnancy. This team can help make sure the mother is fully aware of her options, including their possible risks and benefits, so that she can make an informed decision about treatment.

        This article does not pronounce that all cancers are curable, much less treatable, while pregnant. It simply outlines the ongoing study of the impact of chemotherapeutic agents, which accounts for 1/3 of the “gold standard” of care (surgery, radiation, chemotherapy) for oncologic intervention, on fetuses during the last two trimesters.

  4. eMatters · January 24, 2013

    Meagan, I hope you reconsider. 99% of the abortions do not fall into the category you described for your sister. They kill innocent but unwanted human beings — humans who have the exact same value as your sister.

    • meagen · January 25, 2013

      Ematters, I make it a point to arm myself with reputable data and statistics regarding social, civil, political, economic, etc. issues. Only upon doing so, and considering said data in conjunction with personal/moral convictions, can one make an informed stance. I am aware that abortions performed due to maternal health dangers represent a staggeringly miniscule percentage. When I was required to “put my money where my mouth was”, I concluded this: No, I do not consider a non-sentient, utterly non-viable cluster of 7week gestation embryonic cells to inherently harbor the same value as my sister, my mother, my son, my daughter. This is the fundamental root of our disagreeance.

      • eMatters · January 25, 2013

        Yes, it is the fundamental root and a common pro-abortion response. You don’t personally know the unborn human beings, so you don’t mind if they are killed. But using your logic you would value the lives of people you know well over people you don’t know well. That’s fine, we’d all do that. But that isn’t the question. The question is whether it should be legal to kill unwanted human beings just because some people value them less than others. Seems like even adherent of the false worldview of “karma” would think that was bad.

        Sentience isn’t what makes human valuable. Neither does their size or viability. It is their humanity that does it, their intrinsic value.

      • meagen · January 28, 2013

        It is at this point that I digress from further debate. This exchange, though civil, has begun to develope a condescending flavor.

        I am not wrong or lacking of morality because my opinions differ from yours. I also do not believe you to be wrong or lacking of empathy or compassion because your views are not sympatico with my own.

        My opinion that non-viable embryonic cell proliferation does not harbor the same inherent value as individuals present in the “here and now” does not a pro-abort make. I have verbalized nothing that advocates abortion. I thought I had made perfectly clear that I would much rather see preventitive measures to unwanted pregnancy and adoption as alternatives to abortion. Yet it seems that from your perspective, the fact that I am pro choice unequivocally summates that I would prefer women exercise abortion simply because they can. In my case, that could not be further from the truth.

        I have simply learned to offer love and support, to refrain from casting judgement, to extend compassion-even to those who’s actions I might not agree, understand, or condone. Karma, the golden rule, living a Christ-like life; call it what you will. The principle of these tenets are ubiquitous and hardly false…love.

        I choose to continue to offer love, even to those “despicable” post abortive women. Never will I offer an apology for such.

        Blessed be, ladies.

  5. eMatters · January 29, 2013

    “non-viable embryonic cell proliferation does not harbor the same inherent value as individuals present in the “here and now” ”

    That is quite a mouthful of terms to de-humanize the unborn. I have another name for what you described: Human being.

    “I choose to continue to offer love, even to those “despicable” post abortive women. Never will I offer an apology for such.”

    That is a malicious straw-man argument. One of the best things crisis pregnancy centers do is to offer post-abortion trauma counseling to women — for free! Try getting that at Planned Parenthood. We are always gentle and loving with post-abortive women.

    I am glad you love post-abortive women. I just wish you cared about pre-abortive babies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s