BJean

Thanks, C'sM. If the anti-choice people would spend as much energy and time on saving the world's children, we wouldn't have to worry about them at all. Wouldn't that be something?

It's like you're saying there's this big boogie man - President Obama - and he's on this huge quest to do everything in secret to turn this country into a socialist republic. It's friggin' hilarious! You want to observe secrecy? Just try to open up the Bush administration to scrutiny. President Obama has been the most open president we've had in a long time. For you to accuse him of being secretive is amazing. And you all have been saying from day one that the Democrats want socialized medicine. That argument wouldn't fly because it is so incredibly stupid and wrong that you all got embarrassed and shut up about it - finally. Now once again you're trying to say that the President has a secret plan to give us socialized medicine. I have a sneaking suspicion that you don't even know what socialism really is. If you did you wouldn't use the term in nearly every argument you make, because read my lips (to quote a Bush) it just doesn't make any sense.

patty your thinking is skewed. No wonder you keep coming up with "analogies" that just don't work. It's like you want to make something support your argument so whether it makes sense or not is immaterial to you. You just use it anyway.

Nope because I'd probably have to click on the box and I don't trust any anti-choice person to post something that won't be grim and bloody. And I don't need a lesson in human anatomy and physiology or reproduction. All this argument over when a fertilized egg becomes a viable human being is totally beside the point. The government really should never be in control of women and their reproductive organs. That's what I believe because I know it is right. I have no doubt that women will make whatever decision they must make. They make the decision because it is their body and they have physical control over it. They and they alone know what the repercussions will be if they allow a fertilized egg to grow in their womb. The government and you and I have no way of knowing. We cannot know each and every complication that a woman may have to deal with. We have no way of knowing the mental health of a woman who has been raped or whose birth control has failed. So how can the government or we make such an all-important decision for every woman? Bringing babies into the world is far too important for the government to set itself up as the arbiter of every case of pregnancy. And it is just as wrong for you or I to do it. Besides, it is virtually impossible and arguing for it is like blowing in the wind.

Amen. That's exactly what I read in her story.

Well there are stories in the Bible of the sacrifice of animals. And there are stories of all creatures being made by God. There are stories of war being acceptable and then we had Hitler, who was supposedly a Christian. If you had been a German living under his dictatorship at that time, perhaps you would have believed that Hitler was being guided by God when he tried to exterminate Jews. Some Muslims believe that we Americans are infidels who should be destroyed. They're guided, they believe, by Allah, to do all they can to get rid of us. These are the reasons I am so against wars. I don't believe we should be killing each other. I believe that we should be able to live and let live. We need to learn how to live together in one global "villiage". But as long as there are people who can justify war and killing in the name of their God, how can we negotiate peace? I believe our President understands this and that is why he works for diplomatic resolutions and why he is tolerant of other world leaders even when he does not agree with their politics. Many of us who are older went through a time in politics when that was an accepted and desired goal for any president. Many of us are puzzled about the aggressive and warlike posture that many Americans take. Dick Cheney and others have made people think that war and domination is a good thing. It is not a good thing.

Hummingbird, the tough part of it was that the husband had to make the choice at all. I thought the doctors should have just done all they could to save the life of the mother because I thought her life was something that was a sure thing. Even if they tried to save the babies, there were no guarantees for them - so many things would have had to happen for them to be born alive and healthy. Their odds weren't good. The girl, on the other hand, should have had every opportunity that the medical profession could have given her, for a long, healthy life. Not that I wouldn't have wanted to save the babies, if possible. But having to make that choice, I can't imagine giving her a death sentence in favor of 2 tiny little unknowns. Which is what happened. And the babies weren't able to be saved after all. It was a huge bungled, emotional mess that culminated in the loss of a beautiful young woman who deserved to live. It's one of the primary reasons that I do not want the government intervening in people's lives, insisting that women absolutely do not have a choice. I agree that is should not have been considered an abortion (and that term was never used), but it was, in effect, the decision that he had to face.

You're smart for having a living will and discussing your wishes with your husband.

Thank you C'sM. Needless to say I've never gotten over it. I still want to cry when I think about her. I don't wish him ill will, and I know he must have endured a lot of pain over the entire thing. But I have never understood how he was able to fall in love and remarry and start another family so quickly after her death. It has made me consider abortion and God's will in a different way than some people do. And I can tell you that no situation is simple. Women who use abortion as birth control (are there really such women?) are plainly stupid and need help in their lives. But women who have complications that require them to make a decision, however painful, to terminate a pregnancy, should not be judged by others.

Oh yeah, makes sense, patty. Down with any changes to our health care system because it is so grand having the profit-making, greed-driven insurance companies making all my medical decisions for me.

Jesus would not have judged someone and turned them away without food just because the person had another problem than just hunger. It has been written that Christ said, judge not lest ye be judged. It seems very hypocritical to say you try to follow the Bible and yet in a very real, everyday situation, you have set yourself up to be that woman's judge and jury. I know this has been discussed to what sounded like a conclusion but I continue to think of it and be shocked by it.

And jessress, I will share a gut wrenching decision that my former brother-in-law had to make when he was newly married and in his mid-twenties. He was a minister and evangalist and actively involved in the Southern Baptist convention. He and his stunningly beautiful wife had graduated top of their class in college. He went to seminary she sang like an angel. Their life together had the promise of much love, beauty and service to the church. She became pregnant with twins. They were estatic. Their extended family of the large congregation where they worshipped, was thrilled for them. Then she very quickly became sick with a mysterious illness that was confounding to her ob/gyn. He hospitalized her. Specialists were called in on the case and the doctors quickly concluded that the only way to save her was to take the babies, because it was the pregnancy that was threatening her life. She was so sick she was in alternate states of unconscious and delerium. They asked her dear sweet husband to make the decision to terminate the pregnancy to save his wife. Or alternatively, they said, they could induce a coma, put her on life support and try to just keep her alive long enough to allow the twins to become viable. What a horrendous decision he was faced with. He decided that they should do all they could to save the babies. So she was quickly intubated, put on life support and the team of medical staff gave up trying to save her life, only the babies. Within a week, they were all three dead. Gone was the beautiful young wife. Gone was the promise of 2 children. Gone were his dreams of a life with his lover and friend because death parted them. Did it have to happen that way? No. He could have chosen to save his wife and try again for babies (which is what the doctors recommended). But he felt that it was God's will that the babies be saved. He thought that God was telling him to save the babies no matter what. For her parents though, it was the worst decision he could have made. They begged him to allow the doctors to try to save her. They didn't have the opportunity for more children. Their daughter was their only child and the light of their life. Even many of the church members felt that he had made the wrong decision. But of course there was support for him from other members of the congregation and the minister himself completely supported him and comforted him. The memories and pain were difficult for him and so he chose to move to another state to get away from the constant reminders in our close-knit town. Within a couple of years, he was remarried, appointed as an assistant pastor of a church and continued his work as a summertime traveling evangelist. He and his new wife eventually had 3 children. His life was good. Personally I don't know how he lives with himself. Oh yes I do... he convinced himself it was God's plan for his first wife to fall ill and die with her unborn fetuses. It was God's plan and he was merely doing what God told him to do when he chose to put her in a coma and on life support to try to save the babies. It was a nightmare 30 years ago and continues to be a nightmare for those of us who loved that beautiful, dark-haired, fabulously talented young woman.

jessress: I loved your posts. Thank you so much for bringing another set of beliefs, life experiences and viewpoint to these discussions!! You are, I think, a very typical young woman who has to dig very deep to fully understand and come to grips with the reality of whether or not a woman has the right to choose or if the government should choose for her. Your husband, on the other hand, did not have the benefit of all the discussion here or the chance to do the soul searching that you did before answering the question. If he did, his answer might be different - MIGHT be. If he were a woman his answer MIGHT be different too. But whether or not he may ever change his mind on the subject (as in the extreme circumstance where he had to choose between you and a baby), his viewpoint and beliefs are his and he has every right to believe whatever he believes. But thank goodness he is not in the position to make that decision for each and every woman who is faced with the horrible delimma. What a horrendous responsibility that would be, right? Well if the government were making the decision for women, it wouldn't be one person, who had to face the consequences of his decision as in the case of your husband. It would be a relatively anonymous, faceless entity doing it with no remorse or compassion or regret if the decision turned out to be a seriously bad one. Btw, I know what you're saying about generalizations regarding what kind of individuals make up both political parties. I definitely am guilty of cheering when someone says good things about the people of my party and cheering when they say bad things about the opposition party. But you are so right. There are good people and bad people in both parties. To say that one party is more Christian or of higher moral standards is not 100% true and it undoubtedly serves little purpose for someone to state that it is true. By the same token, not every Democrat has the best interests of America at heart. Generalizations always get us into trouble. In both discussions about women's right to choose as well as putting labels individuals in political parties. I loved your posts. Thank you very much.

C'sM: "This is because they are unable to engage in meaningful, intelligent, fact-based discussions. Maybe they don't want to do that because they don't have the facts on their side." That's exactly right. They can't argue the merits because they'll lose and they know it. The Republicans are experts at lying and exaggerating and distorting the truth. And that's what we're supposed to be impressed with because they SAY they are Christians? Talk is cheap and by gosh actions always speak louder than words.

So your preacher only speaks of Biblical things, never political or social problems within the community? Because I'm wondering if he/she is aware that you don't feel that someone who is a smoker but in need of food, should be given food food because sof her smoking habit. Because if she has cigarettes, she could afford food if she wanted it and doesn't deserve hand outs, eth?

Making abortion illegal didn't work for us. It didn't keep women who needed an abortion from getting one. It made them law-breakers as it did the compassionate doctors who helped the women. And it made back street abortions a fact of life. The butchers who did them were able to take advantage of desperate women and often either maim or kill them.

Just as abortion is legal and should be,( as far as you're concerned)why not make drugs legal then? Duh! Because they shouldn't be!!! Just like abortion shouldn't be. patty: "Just because someone might use drugs in the back alley illegally (like they might have an abortion in the back alley illegally) doean't mean we should make them legal so that those who think of doing that won't get hurt." Bad reasoning. Having people do their drugs in a back alley really isn't why we make them illegal. It has to do with the indirect effect it has on society. And we make them illegal even though the direct result of someone doing illegal drugs is a virtually victimless crime. And although there are many negative ways that society is affected by people doing illegal drugs, it has been proven over a long period of time that making drugs illegal isn't working for us. We need to solve the problem of people doing illegal drugs instead of being so closed minded to alternative ways to keep people from doing them. If legalizing drugs, thereby creating a more straight forward way of dealing with the problem (including having control of the drugs), is a reasonable alternative, then we should do it.

I've sat through the sermons of countless preachers and priests and never once have adamantly agreed with everything they said. The fact that you do sure seems to indicate something about how brainwashed you are or how easily you are influenced by your preacher.

Btw, bt, you're pretty much a neighbor. I'm in NRH.

Burrr! Why'd she have to do that?? My pool motor hasn't stopped running in two days and I keep thinking if this 20 degree weather doesn't move on out, the thing will burn up. Geez! Texas weren't made for no Canadian cold blasts!

Why all the mystery and suspense?

Uh I'm afraid she's right patty. That wasn't an analogy. At least not as I understand the word. Maybe your interpretation of the dictionary is different from ours. There's always that chance I guess. We don't often agree on meanings and interpretations, eh?

Sure have missed you too. And I appreciate your posts. What the right wing extremists (read Palin) don't seem to get is that WE are the ones who have changed the environment and WE are the only ones who can fix it. Unless mother nature figures out a way to kill us all off and stop our mindless defiling of the earth that is causing us to edge toward the brink of disaster. They say these things (as ineptly as she did when she tweeted) that are completely and utterly inane and people think she knows what she's talking about. It really is scary to think that Americans so stupid that they not only listen to her but believe her. It's no wonder that people from other countries are incredulous that we have such idiots dominating our news.

Yeah, well what about us poor delicate abused women?

Yeah and Cheney is still talking tripe and why people listen to that greedy bird squawk is beyond me.