I have been pro-life all my life, but I guess I only started plugging into the pro-life community sometime in 2007. About seven months after we lost John Blaise, in June of 2011, an email from Priests for Life included this short article on miscarriage from Fr. Frank Pavone. As…
The Dynamics of Volition
Click the image above for 7 minutes well-spent.
(Big Ugly post coming soon. Promise.)
The Big Ugly.
When a girl is a Mraz-loving, artsy-fartsy, tree-hugging, feminist who writes poetry, chances are she’ll be in the minority of her peers when it comes to her pro-life leanings.
In this society of politically correct niceties, the pro-life activist is labeled “narrow-minded” at best, and all too often considered a bigot. It’s “bad form” to even suggest you don’t support “a woman’s right to choose.” No wonder the issue of abortion is one so many people tiptoe around and avoid confronting: akin to religion and politics, the abortion debate has grown into the sore spot where both of those sensitive topics meet. Where the ruling of Roe v. Wade was intended to settle an issue, it has created a bloody divide instead.
I have not really delved into this issue myself for the simple fact that I was considering my audience. Which is exactly why I should have brought it up sooner.
This election has been making me physically ill. I have been useless at work lately, getting my work done, but not as efficiently as I should. I have been preoccupied to the point of exhaustion. I have been having nightmares about not getting to vote, about showing up late, or not being registered. I have awoken feeling as though I had spent hours crying.
Do you really know what a partial birth or late term abortion is or how one is performed?
“But,” some assert, “Obama supports restrictions on late term abortions and only really supports the procedure when the mother’s health is endangered.” The Partial Birth Abortion Ban affords the senator and fellow pro-abortion fans such a loophole, one that allows partial birth abortions to continue under the guise of “protecting the mother’s life.”
For the record, The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 states:
Hundreds of ob-gyns and fetal/maternal specialists, along with former Surgeon General Koop have come forward to unequivocally state that “partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary to protect a mother’s health or her future fertility.” In fact, the procedure can significantly threaten a mother’s health or ability to carry future children to term. The American Medical Association has said the procedure is “not good medicine” and is “not medically indicated” in any situation.
… so why is the loophole necessary if not to abuse it?
Do you know what infanticide is?
My second child was born premature. The span of 50 minutes from when my doctor confirmed that I was “going to have this baby today” to when I actually delivered was among the most frightening experiences of my life. We were fortunate that he was not dangerously early. But still, his lungs were underdeveloped, so he was swept away as soon as he was delivered, taken to be teathered to a ventilator, IV, feeding tube, heart monitor…
But because he was wanted, he survived.
Without the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, a premature baby who is marked for abortion but survives is not afforded any right* to medical care for the simple fact that the child was unwanted by the birth mother. (*Due to the language of Roe v. Wade, we apparently can’t just say “a baby is a baby — care for it.”)
The Born Alive Infant Protection Act prevents the disposal of such children.
I am aware that abortion is not the only issue at stake this election. Nor is it the only life-affirming issue to up for consideration: the war, poverty issues, and health care fall under the same umbrella. However, I believe the issue of Life is the most important issue.
To consider a child to be less than human simply because he or she is not wanted by his or her birth mother, to me, that is evil.
Let’s put it this way: if you witnessed a mother walk up to a train track and lay her newborn down on it and walk away, would you rescue the child? Or would you leave the child to die because that’s what the mother wanted? Isn’t that question absurd?! You don’t even have to be smarter than a 5th grader to know it would be wrong to leave the child to die.
But that’s exactly what that man is choosing.
And as far as I can see, any person who cannot make such an obviously straightforward moral choice ought not be handling any other matter facing our nation.
I expect I’m down to only one reader from now on. But maybe I can sleep tonight for a change.
I refuse to choose.
As most of my friends will tell you, I am often indecisive. I prefer not to rock the boat and am usually pretty relaxed and comfortable with just going with the flow. I mean, really, what difference does it make in the grand scheme of things if we have Mexican or Italian for dinner. Really.
I have been known to procrastinate through indecision. I have probably made far more decisions through inaction than action. I’m not proud of that, but that’s a fault of mine that I’ll admit to as well.
But being indecisive is far different than refusing to choose.
Lately, particularly with the election year at hand, this has been weighing heavily on my heart and mind. I had a short conversation with my sister about it recently, and I mentioned it in comments on some other blogs. My issue is this: Why is it a conflict of interests to be in favor of “less government” and humane treatment of animals? Why is it against someone else’s first amendment rights if I express mine by wearing a crucifix on a chain to a public school? Why should I have to choose between being “green” or pro-life?
As I’ve gone into a little bit before, I am Catholic and try to live my life with a Christian worldview. So, that’s where I am coming from, though I have no doubt that this will apply to other worldviews as well.
I try to live by the adage that one should leave things as good as or better than he or she found them. (Granted, the state of my housekeeping rarely reflects that, but I’m working on it.) One way that I’ve been acting on that is by, frankly, doing some of my coworkers’ recycling. It’s kinda gross, but if I see someone’s tossed a pop can in the trash (and it’s still exposed — I’m not dumpster diving yet), I’ll pick it out & toss it in the recycling bin. When we had catering in last week, rather than throwing out all of the “disposable” containers & platters, I brought them home to rinse & freecycle. I’m starting a compost pile at the treeline of our property. And I am really trying to cut down my extended shower time.
… does that make me a tree-hugging hippie? Not really.
In addition to being a traditional employee, I am also a business owner. As such I believe capitalism, in general, is a good thing. Likewise, I disagree that having the government put its fingers in every orifice of our lives is a good thing. For example, I do not thing it’s a good idea to socialize health care. I think that idea about a centralized medical database is something UGLY waiting to happen. (Have you ever been to the DMV? What makes anyone think that any other government run facility will run more smoothly?)
… does that make me corporate America? Hardly.
To carry on the previous example, I believe we need some kind of health care reform. I also believe businesses, big and small, need to take more responsibility for their actions. From simply recycling paper to using less by going “paperless” to using less energy, less water, to encouraging telecommuting when appropriate, etc. Meanwhile, there’s the corporate social responsibilities. Some industries are addressing concerns on their own, without obligation to government; take for instance the diamond industry’s Kimberly Process. The Fair Trade movement, such as with Global Exchange, is addressing this — slowly true, but without the government telling them to. I guess what I’m saying here is that I think we all have an obligation as consumers to express to companies that it’s important to us that they act responsibly. And then put our money where our mouths are.
… I’m working on that.
I don’t agree with the war in Iraq. But I think we have a responsibility to our troops, of course, not to be irresponsible about pulling out. Also, I think we have a responsibility to the citizens there, that we don’t leave them high and dry now that we’ve “given” them democracy a representational government.
…does that mean I’m pro-war? pro-big-military? … or pro-peace?
I’ve seen those bumper stickers that say “Who Would Jesus Bomb?” They make me angry, as if it’s that simple. Do those same people sporting that bumper sticker think we should have just let Hitler run his course? Of course, that’s the extreme, but still, it’s frustrating. And I’m rambling.
I have been doing more of that in this post than I had intended, and it’s gotten kinda long, but I’m still not quite ready to call it quits…
Because I still haven’t gotten into my pro-life feminism (at least not in this post), carnivorously humane treatment of animals, or patriotism for a wonderful nation that needs a lot of work.
But it’s past my bedtime & I have work to do yet, so I’ll shut up for now while hoping that someday there’ll be a presidential candidate I’ll feel truly comfortable voting for.
PS – This is the article that got me riled up earlier today. And this (below) is the video that gave me chills.