The journey from there to here

We've all seen the sitcom scenario. Junior trashes the family car then tries to hide the damage from the cheap auto repair. But try as he might he cannot hide the damage and the car is irrevocably scarred, even worse than it was when Junior ran it into the utility pole. Junior now faces consequences FAR worse than he would have faced had he simply faced up to the music.

LW wrote a wonderful heart rending article that tells this story from a woman's perspective. One who has been there. One who KNOWS. You can read about it here (https://forums.joeuser.com/?forumid=17&aid=156393#1245882).

Of course, the fallout was predictable. Poster after poster decrying how horrible it was to "punish" a woman for getting pregnant.

Well, despite what you've heard, most abortions are elective and performed for reasons of "convenience". Women trying to evade the consequences of (NOT Punishment for) their actions.

Now here's where I don the flameproof suit: I believe very firmly that any parent who sees a child as a "punishment" for having sex is unfit to be a parent. Any parent who believes their children to be a burden, a sentence, should be relieved of the burden of having them in the first place (that is, in the idyllic world where we ride unicorns and eat ice cream beside the Big Rock Candy Mountain). There is, of course, no conscionable way to legislate this, and thus people who hold such hateful, spiteful views of children and childhood will be able to keep procreating as they should, but it is a pity that such children need to be raised in homes where their parents view them as a burden rather than a blessing.

We won't even touch the issue of welfare for the children who are born here, and I don't want that tangent on this article. That is a tangential issue and I am stating right now the promise to delete the comments of anyone who tries to detour it in that direction. You want to discuss that? Here's a primer:

  • Go to the JoeUser main page
  • Click "Create New Article"
  • Spew garbage to your heart's content

Now, back on track. Like junior, parents who relieve themselves of the "burden" of children will find themselves with irreperable, irrevocable damage that no amount of antidepressants will erase. The kind of nightmares that oddly don't appear in Planned Parenthood or NARAL flyers. And people who counsel these parents to rid themselves of the burden are nothing short of deplorable; they will not have to face the consequences for those who follow their lousy advice.


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 28, 2007
I do not think children are a punishment for having sex. I love kids and think they are pretty awesome.

I think being forced to carry a pregnancy to term that is unplanned and unwanted is a punishment. There is a difference. If you think that parents who think their children are a burden should not be able to parent, then you should support those people in terminating their pregnancy and not becoming parents.
on Jun 28, 2007
I think being forced to carry a pregnancy to term that is unplanned and unwanted is a punishment.


No, it is a CONSEQUENCE, not a punishment.

If you think that parents who think their children are a burden should not be able to parent, then you should support those people in terminating their pregnancy and not becoming parents.


I support adoption. It speaks VOLUMES to the character of a woman who would rather kill a child than give it up!
on Jun 28, 2007

There is a difference. If you think that parents who think their children are a burden should not be able to parent, then you should support those people in terminating their pregnancy and not becoming parents.

But then that kind of goes against the title of this article.  As the Punishment is meted out to the innocent, not the guilty.

on Jun 28, 2007
If I go out and eat fast food for a month, is fast food punishing me for it by making me fat? I don't think so. Neither is that baby a punishment for having sex. Having to carry around the weight for nine months, in either case, is not a punishment. It's just what happens because of previous action.
on Jun 28, 2007
It speaks VOLUMES to the character of a woman who would rather kill a child than give it up!


I don't equate not going through with a pregnancy and killing a child. Not at all.
on Jun 28, 2007
I don't equate not going through with a pregnancy and killing a child. Not at all.


No, of course. If you don't CALL it murder, it doesn't sound so bad!

Spin's a wunnerful thing, innit?
on Jun 28, 2007
"If you don't CALL it murder, it doesn't sound so bad!"

Waiting for them to start calling it early intervention.

The sad thing is, I can make an argument that having an abortion can permanently scar a woman, but I can't make an argument that having sex outside of marriage will permanently affect you, too, even though I know this to be true as well.
on Jun 29, 2007
I don't care how the Abortion crowd wants to spin it, to ME it's MURDER plain and simple, notice that the new wave of murder charges when someone kills a pregnant woman is TWO murder charges, how come that happens if the Child is "just some kind of glob of cells"? or "Not yet human"?
on Jun 29, 2007

notice that the new wave of murder charges when someone kills a pregnant woman is TWO murder charges, how come that happens if the Child is "just some kind of glob of cells"? or "Not yet human"?

And NARAL and PP are fighting that tooth and nail.  You should have seen them howl over Connor Peterson!

on Jun 29, 2007

Reply By: Dr GuyPosted: Friday, June 29, 2007
notice that the new wave of murder charges when someone kills a pregnant woman is TWO murder charges, how come that happens if the Child is "just some kind of glob of cells"? or "Not yet human"?

And NARAL and PP are fighting that tooth and nail. You should have seen them howl over Connor Peterson!

this latest one where the cop killed his pregnant wife just last week or two, he is being charged with TWO murders

on Jun 29, 2007
I've read most of the comments on LW thread and here. For those of you who don't know, I should start by saying I am very pro-choice. I believe that the decision is between a woman and her God -- and it is a decision that I hope never to be in the situation to have to make. All that said, I echo Senator McCaskill's comments that abortions should be safe, legal and rare. And I would add that they should occur as early in the pregancy as possible.

With all my biases and prejudices out there -- I'd like to comment on the double murder issue. In my mind, and obviously not in everyone's, there is a clear difference between having an abortion early in the pregnancy and having someone else choose to terminate the pregancy after 8 and a half months by murdering the mother. In both the Ohio case and the Conner Peterson case, the babies could have (dare I say, easily) survived outside of the womb on their own. At 4, 6, 8 weeks, the fetus can not. And that is where the distinction comes in for me. However, I will concede that if you believe that life starts at conception, this distinction can not be made.

And I think that is what it comes down to: when you think the soul enters the body -- and I think this is something that folks will always debate.
on Jun 29, 2007
Shades,

Your comments are appreciated. Like I told NickyG we can dance around on this issue forever and never get anywhere. What gets me, though, is referring to a child as a "punishment", or a "burden", or referring to abortion as "not going through with a pregnancy". You want to be prochoice? Fine. But don't treat abortion as anything OTHER than a conscious decision to terminate a biological process. And don't refer to children as being burdens or punishments.

This terminology pisses me off to the nth degree. As the father of 6 children, and having experienced the prejudice that accompanies it, I can tell you there are a lot of judgemental prigs who look down on us for our six "punishments", while we see each and every one of our children as gifts from God that we deeply cherish.

You are proof, shades, that the abortion debate can be waged without resorting to inflammatory language, and while I will accept intelligent debate, I won't accept deliberate provocation. It cheapens us to resort to such tactics.
on Jun 30, 2007
I think there isn't much difference between the woman who chooses to abort a baby for no other reason than her own convenience and a "deadbeat dad".  Niether are man or woman enough to live up to their responsiblities, nor do either care about who has to pay the consequences for their selfishness.
on Jun 30, 2007
This terminology pisses me off to the nth degree. As the father of 6 children, and having experienced the prejudice that accompanies it, I can tell you there are a lot of judgemental prigs who look down on us for our six "punishments", while we see each and every one of our children as gifts from God that we deeply cherish.


I understand your point, while also firmly believing that it is wrong to "force" a woman to have a baby. That said, I can't ever imagine being so callous as looking down on a parent for choosing to have children. Children are a lot of work -- but good and rewarding work, not punishments.

And in many late-term abortions, the same would apply. Yet it's still perfectly legal.


While I don't know the precise moment when I think that a fetus turns into a child, if the fetus can survive outside the womb on its own I don't think abortion should be legal. Ideally abortion should be limited to the first trimester and very early second trimester. I would not oppose a law with this limitation (as long as it did not change early term abortions).

All that aside, Meg, have I told you lately that I love you?

Not enough, I tell you! But that probably has something to do with me never being around. I have a sticky note on my computer to send you an email with my address but I never seem to have time when I am at work and at home I don't have access. Right now I am "borrowing" a wireless connection from an internet benefactor in my building but usually they are all secure so I can't. I need to look into getting internet, but don't want to install a landline phone (which I won't use) and I have DirecTV rather than cable...ugh!

Sorry for the hijack, Gid.


on Jun 30, 2007
Not enough, I tell you! But that probably has something to do with me never being around. I have a sticky note on my computer to send you an email with my address but I never seem to have time when I am at work and at home I don't have access. Right now I am "borrowing" a wireless connection from an internet benefactor in my building but usually they are all secure so I can't. I need to look into getting internet, but don't want to install a landline phone (which I won't use) and I have DirecTV rather than cable...ugh!


You should have other options. Have you looked into wireless Internet? And I don't know about DirecTV, but Dish Network has Internet service...I would be surprised if DirecTV doesn't.

No problem with the hijack, shades. Any time!
2 Pages1 2