For me - their empathy (a gift from God) MUST go somewhere, kinda like that ‘nature abhors a vacuum’ rule.  But, in that they have had their natural empathy (towards people be it babies, handicapped, etc.) brainwashed out of them, it is excessively directed towards animals.  Their hearts are restless, empty but they would never admit it or blame the world of Jezebel in which they live. 

I thought the same thing when I saw articles about the elderly of Japan where one child was culturally expected/demanded place so much emphasis on life-like dolls. They aren’t allowed to have the pets we do (which do give some love back) so they cling to them.  Both are tragic.

Another great editorial, Jennifer!  Every time I see the ASPCA commercials on TV, I get annoyed.  I find it interesting that they can show these animals—malnourished, neglected, crippled—and move people to donate to the cause.  Yet, the same level of support is not there for our pro-life attempts.  I guess it is just easy (for them) to swallow helping a puppy or kitten, but facing the reality of terminating a unborn child is too tough.  Saving the latter requires much more responsibility, which I feel is key to your question.  We are so quick to look within and find a way to make our lives easier, instead of finding a way to act responsibly about our decisions and the outcome of those decisions.

In addition to your thoughts, which I agree with, I would also say we take it another step.  They reconcile with the “unborn baby is human” statement by saying that it might be human, but it’s not a person yet.  Since it’s not a person, it’s okay to “remove” it because it has no real value yet.  It has no real potential and certainly isn’t more valuable than the woman who has the ability to pursue dreams at this point in her life that a baby would “interfere” with.

I once had a discussion with someone who made such a claim, that the woman was more inherently valuable than her unborn child.  I asked him which was more tragic - a woman getting shot and killed or a pregnant woman getting shot and killed?  I think in our guts we know that losing a woman and her unborn child is far more tragic than losing a single life (though that is tragic too), but at an intellectual level we try to justify it away so that we can live life as we choose.  As Mother Teresa says, what a poverty that we value life so little when we can’t see it with our own eyes.

If it had been a baby that had been delivered that was left in that dumpster, it would have made headlines around the nation.

“ANY premature, violent or unexpected death is tragic. It’s less “tragic” for a chronically ill 90 year old to die because it’s the natural order of things, but to start having hierarchies of tragedy—to imply that one life is worth more than another, or that two lives lost is worse than one, is to also say that one life lost is fine, as long as it’s not an unborn baby.”

That’s not what I was attempting to imply at all - hence the extra qualifying (though that is tragic).  At a gut level, we know that losing an unborn child is just as tragic as losing its mother.  We know that two lives were lost, not just one.  No matter how we try to justify it at an intellectual level, we know that the unborn are lives that matter, just like the life of its mother is a life that matters.

You are correct, all life is equally valuable, and in our hearts we know that.

Nora, what are you saying?

Yes! It is inheritly more tragic that a pregnant woman lose her life than a woman who is not pregnant! That little baby has yet to breathe fresh air! What a tragegy! I have been in discussions where people likened the Iraq war with abortion - those two are deeply different. For one, the soldier in the war lived to be 18! What a blessing that was. Baptized, even!

As to your “consequences” comment - aren’t you assuming that all consequences are bad? What about the consequences of daily mass? The consequences of getting married? Maybe you’re getting caught up in semantics?

In every discussion there are two parties: one talks while the other one listens. All of the responsibility cannot be placed on the talker; the listener also bears some responsibilities. That said, I agree that sometimes Pro-Lifers go too far (lying and whatnot).

Your columns are always very thoughtful Jennifer.
I find myself thinking along these lines quite often. A friend who is really a kind of pro-choice evangelical is also a PETA activist. “Choice ” is really at the center of her belief system. So it’s very difficult to get through to her that there is another person’s life at stake who gets no choice because she has no voice.

The pro-choice women in my life ( and I used to be pro-choice) really fail to see the unborn as human beings. That’s the first hurdle.
But the other factor are the issues of Liberation and Equality. Femininism with a Capital F! It seems they really feel victimized by their femininity because without abortion they believe they are at the mercy of rapists and cruel men.

My own change of heart has come around slowly by reading essays like yours and at sites like Femininist’s For Life.

The issue of consequences is also interesting to ponder. In days gone by the pregnant girl was sent away…now she is offered a “choice”. But I do wonder when choice becomes obligation. And then there is the issue of coercion…

@Nora: No, two deaths are twice as tragic as one death, and a million deaths are a million times as tragic as one death. Period.
Otherwise, the Holocaust is no more tragic than if Hitler has only killed one Jew.

It is much “safer” and less threatening to be in favor of animal rights, animals not suffering, animals being cherished as members of the family (some TV shows are now calling animal owners “Mommy” and Daddy”) than to be branded or called pro life. Just as “social justice” issues are much more P.C. than being pro life, which is often equated with being crazy. That “craziness” however is just what drove Mother Mary, St. John, and a few others to the foot of the Cross and to remain there until Jesus’ body was taken down, and then accompany it to the tomb. My mother always reminded me that “there was a minority at the foot of the Cross” when I objected to being a witness for something good.
I don’t know where Nora lives, but in my part of the country, since 1973, when I first got involved in the abortion debate, everyone with whom I have worked or prayed, have NOT exhibited the negativity that she has encountered. I pray she makes the acquaintance of some well balanced pro life people.

Nora,
You say, “Words matter.  Tone matters.”  True, and now I have to confess that I don’t even know what you’ve been trying to argue here.  Your thoughts all over the place—scattershot—and very amped-up/intense.  Relax, step back from the keyboard.  Write with patience, charity and the knowledge that God is sovereign and try it again.  Peace.

A bumper sticker from about twenty years ago:
“Be a hero; Save a Whale.’
“Save a Baby; Go to Jail.”
The more things change, . . .
TeaPot562

The words “tragic” and tragedy” are flying around here with more heat than light.  Let’s remember that as the truism goes, there is only one tragedy at the end of the day—the failure to become a saint, to be conformed to Christ.  With that in mind, the untimely, accidental or illness-related death of a young person might only be a tragedy in our “worldly” eyes, but not in the kingdom of God.  Conversely, the intentional killing of an innocent (abortion, genocide) is always a tragedy—both through our worldly eyes and in the kingdom of God (unless /until the murderer repents and makes reparation).  In other words, obstinate sin is the only real tragedy.

Nora,
A sure sign that a person needs to “back away from the keyboard” because the defense of the kingdom of God does not depend on her/his internet postings is when they write a post that includes a whole bunch of ‘’@‘s”.  Your last post, @Scott, @Katy, @rosaryfixer.

I’m off to hike, pray and sing chant in the mountains, suggest you do something similar.  Peace.

“It tells women that they can simply choose to have sex without it impacting them in any significant way.”

This sentence struck me.  UGH.  Who in their right mind doesn’t want sex to impact them in a significant way?  How could something so exalted and so idolized also be so insignificant?  UGH!

Nora,

Why do you want to avoid the notion of some things being more tragic than others? To me, that’s like trying to avoid the question of how much God loves us. I think when you say that a pregnant woman’s life is the same as someone who isn’t, you are in essence devaluing the hope and miracle that comes with pregnancy. Likewise with the unborn life and the 20-something soldier. Those two do not equate due to the hope that is inherit in the life that did not get to live.

For the record, though, I must yield to Scott’s argument regarding the “worldly” view of what constitutes “good” or not. I think it’s the book of Wisdom that states that God does not necessarily view a long life as something good. And there’s a young saint that I can’t remember, who prayed as a child “God, I pray that I die before I can offend you”. She died at 12 or 13 or something. I remember that shocked me. Ugh! I babble!

A bumper sticker from the 1990s:
“Be a hero, Save a whale;
“Save a Baby, Go to Jail.”
The more things change, . . .
TeaPot562

When I was a pro-choice teenager volunteering at an animal shelter, I was horrified to learn that when pregnant pets were found, the shelter vets “aborted” the offspring. I was about to burst into tears at the thought of little puppies & kittens being aborted. I remember at the time, thinking—wait there’s something wrong with me, worrying about “pet abortions” but not, like, HUMAN ones?

I didn’t actually become pro-life until a few years later, but I like to think that was the Holy Spirt smacking me upside the head as a clueless teen.

When the football player was arrestd on dog fighting charges I had a number of friends send petitions to express their outrage at his conduct…I advised them that when they started sending petitions on their outrage on abortion, which they are against, then I’ll start worrying about saving dogs….....let’s get our priorities straight!!!!

Michael

Here’s the hierarchy as I see it.

1. Born babies
2. Born animals
3. Unborn babies
4. Unborn animals

In that order.

Yes, losing an unborn baby is still a loss, and anyone who says differently is wrong. But there is a clear distinction between born and unborn, in my opinion. (And between humans and animals.)

I had quite a wake up call a few years ago.  I belonged to a women’s discussion board; we exchanged ideas about cosmetics, family, entertainment, everything.  It was predominantly a left-leaning crowd.  There were very few anti-abortion or outwardly religious members, but I came to genuinely like many of the women.  Eventually the board became a bit too randy for me; the women started discussing things like adultery, sex toys, and Wicca.  The last straw for me was when a young professional woman, in all seriousness and sincerity, proposed that a dog owner who accidentally became pregnant should have an abortion because her dog was a danger to small children.  When challenged by a FEW understandably shocked discussion board members, she stated emphatically and calmly that the dog took precedence over the unborn child because the dog was a “sentient being” and the mother’s unborn child was not.  A few hours after that, I erased my account and never went back.  I truly felt a demonic presence pervading the entire enterprise, but the wake up call came not from that, nor from the individual woman’s comments, but from those who agreed with and supported what I felt was an unthinkable and egregiously evil notion.

I actually have to agree with Nora on certain points she’s mentioned.
The little one that’s busy growing inside of me, though unplanned, will never ever be referred with the negative connotation of a consequence. I may say well babies are a consequence of having sex, as in cause and effect, but never as in “God is punishing me!” *thunder rumble*
And as many sidewalk counselors and pro-life volunteers will tell you, there are always a couple(perhaps well meaning or not so well meaning) pro-lifers out there that just have a skewed, negative way of presenting their points. I guess we all just have a challenge of making sure that God’s love prevails and not the negativity that they may be put forth.

I also have no problem with telling my husband every once in awhile that he’s my cross to bear, he’s done the same. We have our differences and marriage like any other vocation is difficult. We’ve learned to embrace our crosses, especially once we discovered the strength and growth they’ve given us as an individual and couple! :)

...glad, YOU AND OTHERS, can make that distinction, but that reasoning is at the root of the problem!!!!!!! At CONCEPTION, a human baby has a SOUL, NOT after it’s born….animals NEVER get this “DIVINE GIFT”........even parrots or tortoises that live to be over 100 years old!!!!!!!!! I’m not saying any cruelty to creatures of God is right, but comparing a human life to an animal’s, at any stage of existence, is ludicrous….in my humble opinion!!!

Michael

Hi Jen! You asked:

“How can a group of people have so much compassion for an animal, and yet so little compassion for the thousands of unborn children who face worse deaths than that puppy each day?”

Well, I think it’s due to a couple of reasons.  One thing I think is behind the disconnect - at least in talking about it - is that the abortion issue, for so many, is an immediate divisive factor.  It can easily derail any other conversation, can automatically turn on people’s defense mechanisms, and start a domino effect of many loud (and usually NOT compassionate) voices just talking over each other.  It’s easier for people to focus on what they’re mostly sure others will agree with them on, so if they talk about how inhumane it is to kill a dog (and most people think it too is inhumane, regardless of their other stances on life issues), maybe they’d rather talk about that than how inhumane they feel it is when women have abortions.

But I also think it’s a matter of education and the knowledge that a human life begins at conception.  All pro-lifers know and understand that, and they get it.  But there are a lot of folks about there determined to distort or to cloud up that knowledge with a bunch of nonsense to get women to see it differently - and once you introduce doubt, it makes it that much harder to prove the point.

And - this is going to sound AWFUL, but I really don’t mean it that way, but it’s kind of like using a credit card.  It has consequences, right? But when you use a credit card, you don’t feel like it’s “real money.”  You don’t feel the hit your bank account is taking, because it’s not taking one (yet).  And so the impact of what you’re spending it on doesn’t register on the same level as if you were spending cash, or your debit card, or whatever.  So when these women become pregnant - who aren’t as informed or who are unsure about when life begins - then maybe they see it in the same way, as not a “real baby.”  Because then they have to deal with the fallout, and it’s a big fallout.  A blessing, too, but we have to be real - not every woman considers their children a blessing, no matter how much we might want them to.

I wish things were different, obviously.

Good article, as always!

Nora,

You deliberately pick stupid animals and use an example of something that would never happen in real life, telling me “I have to choose”? THAT’S how you respond? That isn’t helpful, especially for an issue as nuanced as this one. Of course I am in favor of saving all life, but unfortunately that isn’t how the world works.

I too feel sorry for unwanted dogs and cats, but a few years ago (after reading some publications) I began to sense that some of these people were being hypocrites.  I don’t believe that many of them are pro-life, and I began to think.

Which is more valuable, a cat, a dog, or a baby?  One of the articles “jumped on the Pope” for not condemning bull fights.  I think those are cruel too, but not a word on protecting babies from abortionists.

I agree with your column.  I think that in some ways people are valuing animals above humans!  Now, I love dogs, have one of my own and have “lost” several dogs.  It is a heartbreak but I’ve never buried them in the back yard and realized that no matter how smart they are, they are lower than us humans. 

Although I hope these animals somehow are in heaven, I grieve for the little babies that are murdered, some born alive.  So now, instead of supporting ASPCA (who probably gets enough donations) I try to support pro-life organizations.

Once upon a time, pagans valued animals more than humans.  There was infanticide in Roman times, and I wonder now with PETA and some others if they are really worshipping animals.

I’ve yet to hear a “Peta” representative say anything about the slaughter of babies, only about the slaughter of animals.

Good column!  Thanks for your insight.

I was raised in a pro-choice household as a child, but I had been praying for years for a little brother or a little sister. My pro-life moment came as a 10 year old. My mom was pregnant, and we were on welfare. I was so excited to learn that my prayer was finally going to be answered. My older sister told me we couldn’t afford another mouth to feed. She said Mom would probably get an abortion, and if Mom didn’t, that she was going to flush the child in the toilet after it was born.  I immediately found myself defending my unborn little brother or sister with every ounce of 10-year-old outrage I could muster.

My understanding about things before this incident was that abortion was something that was necessary because there were just too many people on the Earth and those who were already here would starve if all these extra people were born. That thinking made the unborn child an enemy, and as such the killing was justified in order to protect my own life. Animals got my sympathy because animals weren’t competing with me for food or housing. They had their own food and could sleep outside if necessary.  I think this is the heart of why abortion advocates can turn a stone heart toward the unborn but empathize with the animals. The unborn, in their eyes, are the enemy - robbing them of their futures, their livelihoods, and their rights to pursue happiness.  Correct that thinking, and you will once again connect them to their ability to empathize.

From Steve Taylor’s “Bad Rap”

You save the whales
You save the seals
You save whatever’s cute and squeals
But you kill “that thing” that’s in the womb
Would not want no baby boom

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2atH5HjV3M

This is timely, as I’ve just been involved in a Facebook discussion (civil and reasonably illuminating, not a flame war) sparked by that abortion bill in Georgia.  One of the participants was firmly claiming her right to ‘have all the sex she damn well pleases’ and have any resulting baby ‘scraped out of [her] like the parasite it is.’  I did my best not to rise to the bait, and we discussed things like adults, but I felt physically ill at the thought that someone thinks that way.  I’m a member of a liberal Protestant denomination, but I hold rather Catholic views on the sanctity of life and find it so comforting to come here and be reminded that there are still people who believe like I do.  It’s hard to see some of my peers (31, female) have a worldview that boils down to 1. if it feels good, do it, and 2. nothing matters but my own comfort, pleasure, “happiness,” and “freedom.”

Oh, and I applaud you, Jennifer, for having the guts to read Jezebel—I can’t stomach it.  I can barely read Slate.

I have always struggled with this. It seems that more and more people call their pets their “kids” and look down on people who have more than 2 (maybe 3) kids. Coming from a family of six children I have always been offended by the advertisements on TV, encourgaging people to adopt a pet or at least send money to save animals from harm. What about the humans? I do think this value (or lack of values) comes from the fact that in today’s society there is a push to value what’s easy to value. If we value human life we have to deal with the consequences…and accepting human life and the fact that the sex and the creation of life go hang in hand isn’t something society likes to dwell on. So, it’s easier to like puppies…which is really pathetic and devalues our humanity in so many ways. I’m currently married and do not have any children, but strightly practice NFP because of not being ready to have children yet due to a number of reasons. NFP has only taught me to value the sanctity of each human life more…but NFP does take effort. I think until we, as a society, stop looking for the easy way out…people will continue to value animals as if they were people and see unborn babies are the enemy.
Thank you Jennifer for addressing this critical issue! Your writing is truly a blessing to many!

Nora,
I think you may be missing a subtlety to Jennifer’s article. Each time she used the term “consequences” it was framed in the viewpoint of the secular world. She carefully referred to unborn life as “human” when presenting the opposite view. I think she was pointing out exactly what you’re pointing out-that framing the results of sex in terms of “consequences” leads to a disconnect. I don’t actually think you have a bone to pick with her as much as you seem to think you do.

Also, as someone who had a baby outside of wedlock, I think you should be aware that there are very real consequences to that that are entirely separate from the blessing of the wonderful new life. I’m with you up to a certain point. I too despise the attitude, espoused by our own President, that girls are “punished with babies.” But we cannot deny that when sex is taken out of it’s proper context, the result, even though that result is often a wondrous little soul, has consequences for the parents and for the child, however much the child is an innocent. My relationship with my husband was literally hell for many years. We had to suffer all manner of trials because of what we had done, including good friends calling our daughter a “!@#$%” underneath their breaths and sometimes to our faces and on one horrible occasion, to her face. There are real consequences that shouldn’t be overlooked.

As far as the “crosses to bear” issue…I would never refer to my husband or children as crosses I must bear. And yet motherhood and wifehood are crosses to bear. In bearing them, I have to walk the floor at night with an infant. I have to go on little sleep, spend my days up to my elbows in dirty diapers and filthy laundry, learn to be patient, and die to self again, again, and again. So yes, they are blessings that I am profoundly grateful for. This vocation is one I would never turn my back on. Yet it is a cross to bear, as much as everyone’s vocation is.

Jennifer, to answer your question, I agree with Rachel M. People (especially women) are naturally compassionate, and when that compassion is divorced from it’s logical recipient (babies and children) it lands on the next cutest and cuddliest thing-animals.

I find it really interesting that Planned Parenthood and pro-choice organizations are primarily staffed with women, who should logically be the first to protect unborn life. I’ve found the same thing with PETA-most of the activists I’ve encountered have been women. There’s a whole post for you, Jennifer!

@ Nora—maybe its been said, but she is okay using the word consequence.

con·se·quence (kns-kwns, -kwns)
n.
1. Something that logically or naturally follows from an action or condition. See Synonyms at effect.
2. The relation of a result to its cause.
3. A logical conclusion or inference.

There’s no negative implied. Where does that idea stem from? I didn’t feel there was any negative association in that post at all.

@Jaimie
I hope your hierarchy was a joke. right? I’m just going to assume that. I don’t care how much you love your dog, but human life is always far superior. You have never suffered a miscarriage I am just guessing?

done with my 2 cents… well I’d like to add
@ Scott W—dang way to rub in your beautiful hike. Hope it was lovely though!

Directly next to the “Babies R Us” is an equally as large “PetSmart”  just too creepy

But Nora, not everyone is in the circumstances you are.  In some way, husbands can be (loving) crosses.  My husband is in ill health and I can’t tell you how many times he’s been in the hospital, or the times I’ve had to nurse him.

It just depends on your definition of a cross I guess.  It can be a sacrifice when you lose sleep, have to cultivate patience, and focus your life on remembering the things you used to be able to do as a couple, and now try to comfort and reassure him that you don’t mind not being able to go out much.  I try to focus on the positive rather than the negative.

I do have a grown daughter though, and she was never a cross, even when she was a bratty teenager.  When I was pregnant with her, we were poor, and no insurance but God took care of us.  I know for sure if I had aborted her (although times were tough) I would have lost something special.  She has grown up to be an independent beautiful person.  No grandchildren though, but I know if anything would happen to her husband she has a good paying job and career and could support herself.

That to me is the best thing that can happen.  We don’t owe our children, we are only temporary “guardians” of them.

Reading these comments has me wondering how people can have so much compassion for babies, and none for adults. It seems that the prisoner, homeless person and the woman who chooses to get the abortion wouldn’t be missed at all by the extreme pro-life crowd.

to Nora!  I had a mother like that, so I know what that is.  If your husband is ill, and is on a lot of medication, his disposition changes.  Of course I love him, and I always remind him it could be just as well me and probably will someday.

To Young Mom:

There are lots of us who are pro-life and compassionate toward the homeless, etc.  We have helped a homeless individual financially and in other ways for three years.  Now unfortunately, he went back on drugs and is in prison, and my husband visits him when he is feeling well.  He’s the only visitor that comes. I always prefer to give to homeless folks and others who have had a hard time.  And when this individual gets out of prison, we’re again prepared to help him as much as we can.  And, I should add, that this is not a religious thing either, he’s not of our faith but the poor sure can teach you a lot about compassion and how happy they are with so little.

So don’t be so quick to judge.

rosemarie- not judging, just saying how it can sound reading all these comments. I consider myself prolife. Obviously I have no idea what all of you are doing in everyday life, no one reading this article does. But the comments on most pro-life articles I read are enough to make anyone hesitate to be counted in with that crowd.

Young Mom,
I agree. I think that in the face of something as horrible as abortion, it’s easy for us to get riled up and go for each others throats when we really should be remembering that we are fighting for these children out of compassion and love for everyone involved. Not hatred against the perpetrators, and especially not hatred against each other.

Thanks for the reminder. We probably all needed to hear it.

Young Mom,

This article was about puppies and babies. I’m not sure that it is fair to critize that no one is also including Homeless, prisoners and the poor in the comments.

I have actually wondered why there is so much insistence in certain circles on the “necessity” of experimentation on human embryos when no one would dare suggest the same sort of studies being done on bonobo or chimpanzee embryos. (Can you imagine the outrage?)

I’m 56 and have wondered this for years.  I’ve seen married couples postpone having children or not having children at all, but then raise a dog or cat and treat it like a human being, talking to it, spending tons of money on it and then talk about having a baby “someday”.  Some people just don’t want to grow up.  If they want to go on a cruise it’s easier to board a pet then skip the cruise and stay home with the kids.  It comes down to pure selfishness, but at the same time there is a need to raise, nurture, love another living thing.

Could it be abortion shows our selfish side? When my kids asked me if they could have a puppy I at first said no because I thought of all the work it would cause me. When my 16 year old got pregnant my first thought may have been how hard her having the child would be for me. My wife saw both events as potential blessings. And it turns out, they were. My point is, if the parent, or boyfriend, or husband wants that child, the expectant mom will most likely want the child as well.

Brandy,
I was struck by your comment.  I pray in front of an abortion facility and I have referred to a mother’s unborn baby as her child’s brother or sister. It is another person to love them and to for them to love. It is especially heartbreaking when they drive in with a child in the car. May I ask what happened with the sibling you prayed for?  Yours is a very touching story.

I am not too sympathetic or empathetic with people who think that their feelings take precedence over a human life! A fetus is a human life created by God, not the parents!

The parents have no right to destroy what God has created. If you think God is not upset when you destroy someone He created I am very sorry for you. I would worry more about offending God rather than those who “Choose” to offend God.

@Claire:

That sibling was born in June the following year.  She brought incredible healing to a family that had been almost torn apart by five years of sexual, mental, and physical abuse at the hands of my stepfather. She was God’s answer not only to my own prayers, but to those of my mother, the sister who wanted to get rid of her, my brother, a sister I wouldn’t even meet until many years later and the children of that sister, the stepfather who abused us, and so many other people whose lives she has touched in a thousand ways for the better. She is the reason I know for a fact that God allows children to be conceived in answers to the prayers of the past, the present, and the future.

Sadly, my mother had aborted three of my siblings before allowing this one to be born. She regrets that decision deeply now, and has been through Rachel’s Vineyard a number of times trying to heal.  She speaks out about it, prays in front of abortion clinics, and tries to prevent other young women from making her same mistake.

Thank you for sharing that, Brandy.  That is beautiful.  May I share it with others?  God Bless you and your mother.

@Claire: You are most welcome to use my story.

Thanks, Brandy.

@Young Mom: I’m not sure how you can equate a compassion for the unborn with having no compassion for the young woman who carries that unborn life, or the homeless person, or those who are in prison. I think you misunderstand. I’m pro-life because I value ALL life. Christ’s love is big enough for all of these.  However, right now, the young woman, the prisoner, and the homeless are all protected by law. The unborn child isn’t. They have no one to advocate for them unless we do. Hence the reason we are discussing the puzzle of why the pro-abortion side favors the life of pets over the life of the unborn. It is important to grasp this if we are to ever be able to extend protection to the unborn and stop the practice of abortion.

@Nora: I think that when you hear someone refer to caring for a child or a spouse as a cross to bear, you think of it as a negative sign. Catholics, though, look at the cross and see a plus (+) sign. This is why we speak so frequently of the cross.  You see it as a symbol of death. We see it as a symbol of the ultimate self-sacrificial love one human being can give to another. That’s why you find crucifixes everywhere in our churches, our homes, and on our persons. We’re not being morbid. We are reminding ourselves of Christ’s love for us and His call to us to love one another with that same spirit of self-sacrifice.  Thank you, though, for the important reminder that not everyone we talk to speaks Catholic.

Nora,

At first reading the comments on the board I felt that perhaps too many people were reading too much into your comments and needlessly berating them. I saw a lot of great points in your argument. Although, your last comment has now left me doubting.

“Thank you, however, for showing this Catholic that prolifers are really just fetus-fetishists and think other human beings are burdens and crosses and sources of suffering.”

I’m sorry you find Pro-lifers so disgusting and feel we are all fetishists, but I do have to disagree with that statement.

Hmm I see what you mean. Yes the rhetoric can sometimes seem to create a chasm between people. But I do think the differences in rhetoric is needed. If a person, after prayerful consideration, chooses their words and talks to the woman, considering the abortion, then they do have the power to be the right words that person needs to hear. (I agree that there are many times (many, many times) when we just don’t say the right things, we let our passions take the best of us, and ultimately put our foot in our mouths. But I still have faith! :D)
Just as many would be appalled by the rhetoric of a human cross, you’d be surprised how many would react with pride, honor, and love at being able to say, “Yes this person/situation/event is my cross.” Different rhetoric for different people. This sort of wording really does not phase my husband and I, and I really wouldn’t group ourselves within the generation that heard preached “fire and brimstone” and “pain is the only way to get to heaven”.

Hahaha, your wording made me laugh a little (but in a good way). Well I can only speak for our case and as for my husband and I, yes this human cross got a say in whether she was called this term or not. If I ever called my children this I would prefer to not do it until they were older and only after I knew they were comfortable with the term. If God permits, and I reach a good old age, I will not mind being called an old, little human cross by my adult children. :P
I can see though where the hurt would come from the person being called that, especially if the term was used with desperation, loathing, or hatred. So yes…I would hope the human cross in all scenarios gets a say, it’s good to remember since that the person has their own dignity/respect to take into account.

@Nora: Wow. I wasn’t trying to be snippy or smug with my comment, and I certainly apologize if I seemed that way. I was sincere when I thanked you for reminding us all that just because we see something one way doesn’t mean that others share our understanding or speak our same language. I couldn’t tell from your comments that you were Catholic, so I thought perhaps that you really didn’t understand and I was trying to be helpful. I must have touched quite a nerve to have inspired such a response from you. Again, I must thank you for a very important reminder on how easy it is for our statements to be misinterpreted by others.  I could protest your judgment of me and assure you that I don’t think I’m holier than anyone else, but there is probably some truth in the statement, anyway, so it would be pointless.

I KNOW that I have been a cross for my mother, my husband, and even my son to bear at times. To deny this would be to deny the sacrifices they made in loving me when I was not being lovable. Maybe you’ve never experienced a child so angry with you that the only thing they can do when you’re around them is to spew venom in your direction. I was that kid, and my mother bore it all, continued to try to reach me, and kept praying for me through it all.  I’m here today because she picked up that cross and she carried it willingly out of love for me.  Maybe you’ve never had a spouse who blamed you for every bad thing that happened, who failed to notice your virtues but was quick to notice your vices, who couldn’t feel a spark of attraction for you and who couldn’t stay faithful to you for longer than 5 minutes. I’ve been that spouse. My husband bore that cross for many years, loving me through it all, and saving me because he was willing to love me when I wasn’t lovable. Maybe you’ve never had a mother who worked you into the schedule whenever she wasn’t too busy doing something else and who was so emotionally unavailable so that you reached a point in your life where you couldn’t stand the pain you were in any longer and wanted to take your life. I’ve been that mother. My son bore that cross for me, and thankfully God used His cross to open my eyes to what I was doing before my son managed to take his own life. Our family is healing, and these things are in the past, but rest assured that the scars from the carrying of those crosses are still evident if you look closely enough.

Had Jennifer actually been a PETA supporter, she would know that the group’s actual purpose is not to save and nurture companion animals without homes, but that no animal should be under human control, and unwanted pets are better off dead so there is no chance that they’ll suffer (but no chance that they’ll find a happy adoptive home, either.) Sort of the same view that pro-lifers like to pretend that Planned Parenthood supporters have toward humans.

In the news business, animal abuse and neglect stories draw more reader comments and offers of help than stories of child abuse and neglect.

Brandy,

Your story touched me deeply.  It reaffirms my belief in our Great God’s Mercy and how He NEVER gave up on you and gave you opportunity after opportunity to allow yourself to be loved AND it sounds like HE blessed your life with some amazing people. 

There is nothing we can do that could ever keep God from always initiating that invitation to the fullness of a new life in Him.  We just have to respond.  Praise God you responded.

God Bless you,

Nora, you say: “@Katy—so if I abort one baby, no biggie, but if I abort five, whoa—tragedy!!..??”

Don’t put words in my mouth please. I did not say that at all. I don’t understand your hostility here but don’t twist my words so dishonestly. What I said was more along the lines of: Abort one baby, tragedy. Abort five babies, five times the tragedy.
You are wrong about many things and you seem very hostile, but that’s your misfortune. Just don’t twist my words.

Interesting how the discussion in the early comments got so sidetracked by the mathematics of tragedy. What an inconsequential distraction.

Honestly, I’ve wondered the same thing. I have friends who are staunch vegans because of their compassion for all animals. They won’t even eat honey. Though we never discussed abortion, based on their liberal politics, I had little doubt that they were pro-choice. And I wondered how that worked in their minds.

Of course, I never knew anyone who tried to force others to be vegans. Encourage, yes; evangelize for the vegan gospel, yes; but proselytize, no; force on others, definitely not. Perhaps that’s how they justify being pro-choice in their minds… but the presence of political action for animal “rights” combined with the absence of political action for unborn rights gives lie to that.

Anyway… my hypothesis is that it comes down to two things, even in the absence of propaganda campaigns Jen singled out: cuteness and immediacy. In terms of cuteness, well, puppies are really, really appealing. The unborn are mostly quite a bit less cute. In even the most astonishing pictures, young fetuses look strange, even alien; embryos look more like a fish or a tadpole than a human. I think that may be one reason why pictures of fetal hands clutching doctors’ fingers during intrauterine surgery are so popular: it’s a very appealing image of a being with an image problem (literally).

To back up my argument that cuteness is a factor, I bring up the fact that for most people, animal “rights” only seem to be a concern for the cute animals. While the most serious animal-rights activists want rights given to the whole animal kingdom, the average person—perhaps the average visitor to Jezebel—cares about the puppies, horsies, kittens, duckies, and well-bred lily-white lab rats a lot more than they care about snail darters, garter snakes, scorpions, and dirt-colored sewer rats. When image is the issue, the unborn definitely have a disadvantage.

And as for immediacy, the unborn are mostly invisible, except as variations of the female figure. You only ever see them in a medical sort of context, when they’re associated with blood and gory things. It’s easy to make them into a sort of hypothetical “other.” Sick puppies, on the other hand, are hard to ignore. They’re right there in front of you, with sad eyes and cute droopy ears. Immediacy is another obstacle to concern for the unborn.

How to make abortions illegal overnight? Start performing them on animals!

I think we’ve got a comeback for the animal-rights people that will hit them right in their compassion. If we didn’t abort a million-plus children every year, there’d be a million more children to care for the pets that are now being euthanized because there aren’t enough families to take care of them! Think of it.

aha sem nasel tole <a >Šivanje oblek</a>

aha sem nasel tole <a >Šiviljska popravila</a>

aha sem nasel tole <a >Šivanje za otroke</a>

aha sem nasel tole <a >Obleke za nosecnice</a>

aha sem nasel tole <a >Izdelava oblacil</a>

aha sem nasel tole <a >Porocne obleke po meri</a>

aha sem nasel tole <a >Šivanje zaves</a>