"No-choice", "pro-choice", etc.
Greg, Nancy, and James Todd todds@pa.net
Sat, 21 Mar 1998 08:02:39 -0500 (00890506959, 199803211302.IAA25633@emh1.pa.net)
>Ralph Nielsen wrote:
>>
>> >LARRY
>> >>>> In a recent court case, a Judge sentenced a woman to prison for 'child
>> >endangerment' for smoking crack cocaine while she was pregnant. Even though
>> >no harm came to the baby. Clearly this Judge has an agenda and is
>> >attempting to set a precedence to establish a fetus as having certain
>> >rights.
>> >> This is unfortunate since I believe that this could eventually lead to
>> >regulating all of a woman's activities during pregnancy. How about
>> >disregarding a doctor's advice about bed-rest, you miscarry and then what?
>> >Prison? How about whether you choose to use prenatal vitamins? What about
>> >> deciding to exercise or not? Perhaps overweight, out of shape women
>> >shouldn't be allowed to have babies. Can't risk it. Where will this end?
>> >With government mandated parenting classes? Fail and they take your baby?
>> >>
>> >> I was discussing this issue with a Christian the other day that actually
>> >advocated taking the babies away from and anyone under 18 and putting them
>> >up for adoption. What kind of society is that?
>> >>
>> RALPH
>> I find it hard to believe that taking cocaine or other drugs does not
harm a fetus. So wouldn't it be more merciful to order the woman to abort
the damaged fetus rather than give birth to a deformed and diseased baby
whose life will probably be miserable?
>>
> Oh, I know. Misery is a Xian virtue.
>
>DAVE G.
>Ralph, Of course aborting the damaged baby would be the only merciful
>thing to do. I believe people who knowingly bring deformed and retarded
>(those so retarded they can never care for themselves)children do so out
>of selfishness, religious bull@*&% and ignorance, not compassion. Those
>that do so and then dump the child on the State to care for are even
>worse. Now we (tax payers) must pay to keep these monstrosities alive.
>And what kind of a loving and merciful God would allow this deformed and
>or retarded child to survive gestation?
>
>
NANCY
I was once at a Tupperware party during which the topic of severely retarded
children came up. One of the ladies had a friend who has a child who was
severely and profoundly retarded. She made one of the most ludicrous
statements I have ever heard, one that often spews from the mouths of
xtians, fundy and non-fundy alike. She said that God doesn't give burdens to
people who can't handle them.
I just had to speak up and explain some of the implications of this
statement. First of all, she was saying that God purposely creates severely
deformed and retarded babies, many of whom suffer a great deal in their
short or not-so-short lives. Secondly, she was saying that God purposely
causes these unfortunate children to be born into good families. If a person
wants to avoid being "blessed" by God with a severely defective child, she
had best be a weak and emotionally unstable person because only those who
are strong will be so "blessed." I told her if the God she believed in
purposely caused severely deformed and retarded children to be born, then he
was, at best, cruel and sadistic. If he caused such children to be born only
to mothers who were strong enough to handle caring for such a child, then it
doesn't pay to be a strong person because God will then "reward" you with
heartbreak.
Thirdly, I pointed out to her that if God blesses only those who can handle
the burden of a severely deformed or retarded child, why are so many
mentally and physically disabled children abused and abandoned, placed in
foster care or institutions (which are themselves often abusive). I pointed
out that even mildly retarded children are often abused and mistreated. At
this point, she admitted that her statement was nothing more than a
religious platitude and a ridiculous one at that. She said she had never
before thought about the implications of this oft-uttered phrase and that
she would now think twice before she ever used it again. She must not have
been either a fundy or a RC because she didn't respond with the standard
"God works in mysterious ways and we can't possibly understand his purpose"
baloney.
Nancy Todd
todds@pa.net