She said She'd "Try to Explain" Someday
My disgust for this woman is a little hard to contain. My hope is that when her daughter grows up, she might have a more forgiving spirit than I would.Imagine, for a moment, attempting to kill your child through an abortion. Then imagine that the doctors made a "mistake," and the child survived the procedure. I can image these things. But what I can't imagine is a mother who sues the hospital that performed the abortion for damages, speaks to a national news source about the burden that is now on her life, and claims that she'll try to explain it to her child someday.
For all you pro-choice people who shout about how pro-lifers don't care about life after birth (a claim that is absurd at best), how is this action not callous towards the life of her 4 year old child? Mommy, why did you try to kill me? How will she explain her actions without inflicting emotional/psychological trauma on her child? And the added fact that this girl was a twin - Mommy, why did you kill my sister? In the end, this woman will have to try and explain why she at one time wanted this precious little person dead. And she will furthermore have to explain why she thought the child was so unbearable of a burden that she initiated a court case to collect damages.
I wonder if she takes Jayde (the child) with her to court so that she can hear the lawyers argue about just how much of a burden she is today, tomorrow and for the rest of her life.
posted by Becky @ 9:20 PM
4 Comments:
Becky,
I just want to say, as someone who is nominally pro-choice, that I, too, find that incredibly disturbing. What I really don't understand is, if she really didn't want the child, why did she not give her up for adoption? Was this not possible? The girl was born healthy, so I cannot imagine why that wasn't an option. It seems to me that if you don't want the financial burden of raising a child, that would be the best option. In addition to being callous toward the child, this seems really greedy.
(I say nominally pro-choice mostly because I think outlawing it would cause a whole other host of problems. But I really consider myself pro-life because I support programs trying to reduce/eliminate abortion (I just choose not to direct my resources toward the legal fight), and I oppose the death penalty.)
As for people thinking that pro-lifers don't care about life after birth, this definitely doesn't apply to lots of pro-lifers (you included). But sometimes you will meet a person who wants to outlaw abortion because of their concern for life, but then they don't support any programs - food stamps, health care, education etc. - to help that child after birth. I realize that there is a difference between believing abortion is morally wrong and believing that the proper structure of government doesn't involve large spending on those programs. But at some point, if it's a moral imperative that the child be born, then it should also be a moral imperative to make sure the child doesn't die at age 6 because he couldn't get proper healthcare. Or there are people who are vehemently anti-abortion and vehemently pro-death penalty at the same time. (I'm talking about Texas-level zeal, not the limited use that the Church leaves open as a possibility.) These types of things just strike some people as being cognitively dissonant. I want to be clear that I'm not saying that someone who is anti-abortion has to support any specific government programs for me to take them seriously. What I am saying is that I tend to take them more seriously if in addition to outlawing abortion, they want to do something to improve the lives of poor children.
I think it's pretty clear from stuff that you've done (i.e., relief trip to Mississippi) that your concern is for the dignity of life, not just the dignity of the unborn. So even if I disagree with you on a lot of things, I respect you for that.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
But sometimes you will meet a person who wants to outlaw abortion because of their concern for life, but then they don't support any programs - food stamps, health care, education etc. - to help that child after birth..
I agree that it can be hypocritical to show more compassion for a human based on age, but that is a separate issue of the heart which is also sinful.
The (actions or opinions)sins of others do not make another sin more or less evil or justify its implementation ( I think you alluded to this). Factoring in the hypocrisy of others can alter our objectivity based on facts to one of subjectivity and emotions.
If someone is against slavery, but do nothing to ensure equal rights, is the evil behind slavery altered in anyway? Does it justify the "rights" of those who want to have the choice of having slaves?
I hope I didn't come across as being judgemental. Based on your comment, you come across as a campassionate person who has a sincere concern for your fellow man(woman). Abortion is either right or wrong, and the choice to oppose or support abortion based, even in part, on the actions/inaction of others have a very emotional component to a decision making process. Emotions change, truth is eternal. The sin of one can never justify the sin of another. Things become clearer when we can begin to separate the sins from the sinners.
I agree with your view on responsibilty for caring for our children and opposition to the death penalty.
Yeah, 9 or 10 would be just about right to tell your daughter you had a law suit because some doc's messed up her abortion, that would make any kid feel loved. While your at it why don't you tell her everything else about yourself, afterall, why does she ever have to know that you made a mistake you regret, unless you still regret her survival.
Post a Comment
<< Home