Letters to the Editor

Letter: Selfish choice

April 9, 2014

Advertisement

To the editor:

Well, Kansas provided the opportunity for about 7,600 abortions for women from four states in 2012; 1,200 at the newly opened clinic in Wichita. There were no statistics in the March 28 Journal-World article on why the abortions were given, but I believe they were matters of convenience.

The prophet Jeremiah said the following concerning his life: “Now the word of the Lord came to me, saying, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.’” (Jeremiah 1:4-5). How many Jeremiahs are killed because of ignorance or deliberate murder: last count in American; 56-plus million (that’s about 18 percent of our current population).

This national tragedy reminds me of Jesus when he was entering Jerusalem: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! Behold, your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!’” (Luke 13:34-35). It’s not about women’s rights. It’s about life given by God for a purpose and He grieves over our selfish choices with the resultant forsaken homes.

Comments

Larry Sturm 1 year, 2 months ago

If we would teach sex education they it should be taught and provide birth control there would not be so many abortions. Why do they always do everything backwards?

1 year, 2 months ago

Carl, I do agree with what you wrote and the baby belongs to the father as well as the mother, it is a separate being from conception, not a parasite that is using the body of the woman, but both are designed to work in harmony with each other.

It is a good thing to judge to be able to think about something and form a conclusion. If you don't have good judgment you make bad mistakes.

1 year, 2 months ago

Leslie, I can’t really know for sure why you decided to be anti-choice, but I’m fairly sure your reasoning is not the same as that of the writer of this Letter to the Editor. His reasoning is not based on love for not-yet-existing people, nor love for fetuses. His reasonings are based on hate and fear. Fear of a changing world in which men like him have decreasing power and influence, fear of the increasing power of women in our society, and hate for the people who support these changes and who support women’s rights. Many people with similar fears and hatreds think that even murder of doctors is justified to fight a power that women have and that men will never have.

M. Lindeman 1 year, 2 months ago

Leslie, Why must you name call, this why no one should take anything you say seriously. It seems anyone who does not hold the views that you do are either haters, bigiots or raciest.

Greg Cooper 1 year, 2 months ago

Name call? There was no name calling in that comment other than the naming of Carl's attitude of hatred.

1 year, 2 months ago

M., I think you meant to scold me (Kitty), not Leslie. Anyway, you are wrong. Leslie and I don't hold the same view in this case, and yet I do not have reason to think she is a hater or a bigot or a racist. In fact my post clearly states that I do not believe hate or fear to be the reason for her views. I think Leslie is a nice person. I'm guessing, based on her past posts, that her views are instead influenced by her love for her children and/or child relatives, and the horror of the thought that they could have been aborted before even coming into existence.

1 year, 2 months ago

Thank you so much Kitty for your understanding and support. I do not hate anyone and I do not judge anyone, I was just thinking of the old fashioned meaning of the word judgment which mean to make a reasoned decision. I do love babies, all babies, and I see us all as just people, all really of the same family.

If a girl or woman decides to get an abortion, even though I might see it as killing the baby, I would never tell her so to her face, but would try to hear her out and let her speak her true mind to me and know that God does love us both and I would pray that God gives me the kindness, compassion and wisdom to respond to her as she needs and deserves.

I am thankful for the chance to have these discussions on here because they give me a way to really think things though by writing and by reading others point of view.

Leslie Swearingen

Dan Eyler 1 year, 2 months ago

Nice letter Carl. The most disurbing part of the article I read about the baby killing clinic in Wichita was how they bragged about their profits they make from the women who decide to kill their babies. This clinic isn't about solving inconvenient problems for women, it's about killing their babies for profit, nothing more.

Julius Nolan 1 year, 2 months ago

The big problem all you antiabortionist have is simply you insist that it's a baby being aborted. Wrong, it is a fetus until born. Also, why is it the most violet opponents are men, the ones who can never have a baby.

M. Lindeman 1 year, 2 months ago

Julius, Your play on words might help or make you and others feel better. The fact is no matter what you want call it, fetus or baby, its still a life that is being taken period.

John Graham 1 year, 2 months ago

There is a significant difference between a fetus and an infant. Despite your statement, that difference is not one that can be ignored. Whether one is for or against abortion rights, the words fetus and infant (baby) are not interchangeable.

Scott Burkhart 1 year, 2 months ago

FYI, John, you can play semantics all you want to pacify your conscience. It's a life, even in the womb. An abortion ends a life.

John Graham 1 year, 2 months ago

I never said I was for or against. So cool your jets. But there is a significant difference between a fetus and an infant (baby). You are entitled to your opinion on for or against, but semantics does make a real difference in medicine.

Seth Peterson 1 year, 2 months ago

Given the wholesale genocide admitted to by your imaginary friends, they are certainly a poor source to reference when seeking the moral high ground.

Kevin Elliott 1 year, 2 months ago

As a christian i can not imagine a God that will force a woman to breed against her will,. A fetus is not a person. In fact, the book of Numbers God instructs priests to provide abortions to adulterous women.

Chris Golledge 1 year, 2 months ago

There is the implication here that the laws of this country should be based on interpretations of one sect's religious text. I reject such arguments regardless of the conclusion.

Scott Burkhart 1 year, 2 months ago

I find it hilarious, in a pathetic way, that the same people on these threads that call global warming/climate change settled science, insist that a child in the womb that has a heartbeat, neurological activity, and movement is not human deserving of a right to life.

Dan Eyler 1 year, 2 months ago

As many in Kansas defend the destruction of a human fetus also support and defend the Lesser Prairie Chicken and assure not a single egg in a single nest is disturbed. If only those human fetuses had feathers...

1 year, 2 months ago

Baby! A human baby in the womb of the mother that is supposed to love and support it emotionally and lovingly as it grows toward birth. The womb is not soundproof and the baby can hear and sense what is going on outside, and no this is not nonsense but has been proved.

1 year, 2 months ago

Baby! A human baby growing in the womb of the mother who is supposed to be loving it and giving it emotional support as well as what the baby needs physically to grow until ready to be born. Humans do not breed, animals do.

Seth Peterson 1 year, 2 months ago

Context is relevant, you should learn to use it.

1 year, 2 months ago

What is so wrong with using the words baby and womb? When did women become so mentally and emotionally detached from their own children?

Greg Cooper 1 year, 2 months ago

When did you become mentally and emotionally detached from your fellow humans and their individual issues?

Julius Nolan 1 year, 2 months ago

Leslie, one fact, no womb holds a baby, it contains a fetus.

1 year, 2 months ago

No, Julius, a womb does indeed nurture a baby, that is what it evolved to do. It is fascinating to learn how the baby evolves in the womb from conception to birth.

Jack McEnaney 1 year, 2 months ago

My wife is now 16 weeks pregnant. It is our first baby. We got to see the sonogram earlier in the week. The baby has five fingers on each hand, five toes on each little foot, was moving his arms and legs around, moving his head. He has a brain, spinal cord, stomach. We got to listen to his heartbeat. The biggest impression I had though was just how active this little guy is. I can't understand how anyone could see him and think, "eh, kill him. He is just a fetus. Ignore his beating heart and the fact that he is kicking his legs around."

Cille King 1 year, 2 months ago

Throughout history women have had abortions. When it was illegal, it was often a life threatening procedure. Women did not and do not take this lightly. If it again becomes illegal, more women will die in desperation in the attempt to stop an unwanted pregnancy.

James Howlette 1 year, 2 months ago

Jack, that's mostly because it's not something you're facing. Lucky you. Most abortions happen before you can see any fingers or toes at all on a sonogram, but that's beside the point. What if you were told that your wife had cancer and could get chemo and live if she aborted right now or continue the pregnancy and likely die? Some people have been told that. What if you were told that your baby did not look healthy in that sonogram but instead had a horrible genetic condition that would doom it to die before birth or live a very short, very painful life? What would you do? I'm not saying that you should or shouldn't abort in either of those circumstances, and I'm certainly not wishing any of that on you or anyone else. I'm saying that it's a very personal decision a family should make without an intrusive big government interfering.

Jack McEnaney 1 year, 2 months ago

If at any point I am told that my son has a chance to enjoy 60 seconds of life before he dies, I am going to do everything in my power to give him that chance. What has he done so far? The most innocent of anyone on this message board, he deserves a chance to live. We could debate at which "point" this life comes into existence. I would tell you that when we saw him at seven weeks, and could hear his heartbeat, I knew there was life inside. at 16 weeks, there is no doubt. We can already see facial features developing. Right now, at this moment, he is alive at 16 weeks exactly. Were he not my son, no one should have the right to take his life away. The law says that his life could be taken away for the next four weeks. The law is wrong. He deserves to live. So does every other baby at 16 weeks of pregnancy.

Dan Eyler 1 year, 2 months ago

Every day I get to see a sonogram image of those fingers and toes, and that beating heart. Nothing better than watching a sonogram of a baby in the womb sucking their thumbs. It takes a cold hearted person to look and watch a sonogram and suggest it's something but a baby. Yes in technical terms we call it a fetus. But those who use the term fetus somehow find justification in killing the baby and believing they can walk away with a clean conscience. 56 million times. I'm sure those who drive the women to the abortion chamber sitting in the waiting room as the abortionist picks apart the "fetus" limb by limb keeps a clean conscience.

James Howlette 1 year, 2 months ago

So you're saying that the life of your unborn child is more important than the life of your wife. I'm glad you're able to make that choice. Savita Halappanavar didn't get to choose. She was forced to die because her very much wanted pregnancy was doomed and dooming her health, and she lived in a country that did not allow abortions.

Jack McEnaney 1 year, 2 months ago

so are you saying that other than the mother's life being in danger, there is no excuse to take the life of a 16 week pregnancy? also, don't put words in my mouth like that. it's despicable.

James Howlette 1 year, 2 months ago

One irony award for you. You strawman and then complain that you were strawmaned. Brilliant.

I'm not, however, convinced that my interpretation is at all off. First off, I provided you with specific examples of women faced with the choice between their own life and that of the wanted baby they were attempting to gestate. Your response was to reiterate that nobody should be legally able to abort at the gestational age of your son. No mention of exception for life of mother. No mention of doomed pregnancies due to severe abnormalities. In context, it certainly sounds like you value the life of your child more than the life of your wife. Perhaps you two should have a little talk.

Nobody is forcing you to abort. Stop forcing other people to birth.

1 year, 2 months ago

Julius, the womb does indeed nurture a baby as it evolved to do and it is wonderful to watch and know the evolution of the baby in the womb from conception to birth.

John Graham 1 year, 2 months ago

The womb nurtures a fetus not an infant (baby). There is a significant difference between a fetus and an infant (baby).

1 year, 2 months ago

"A pathologist, Professor Grace Callagy, told the inquest the cause of death was septic shock, E. Coli in Savita Halappanavar's bloodstream and a miscarriage."

So, it was several things that led to her death, and she might still have died of complications even if the decision had been made to abort the baby when the heartbeat could no longer be heard. It sounds to me as though mother and child were killed by the same thing. I would hope that the hospital would learn from this and do things differently in future. Anti-abortion though I might be let the doctors be doctors and be aware that they are human and sometimes make mistakes.

"[Dr. Katherine] Astbury also admitted that there were "system failures" in Halappanavar's care. For example, Astbury had not been made aware of blood test abnormalities and an infection, she said."

"...Irish law, which states there has to be a real and substantial risk to the mother's life."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/19/world/europe/ireland-abortion-controversy-inquest/

It sounds to me as though if the doctor had been made aware of all the medical facts, and I am stunned that she was not, the mother would have been properly taken care of.

James Howlette 1 year, 2 months ago

Really, Leslie? It's all ok because she might not have lived even if she were given proper treatment? Seriously? She was having a miscarriage. The pregnancy was doomed. If it had been terminated earlier, her infection had a much stronger chance of being treated. It's really ok to be horrified about the case and realize that maybe big government intrusion in private medical decisions is not the answer.

On top of that, we've got a woman in the good old US of A who had her waters break at 18 weeks and went to a Catholic hospital, the only in her area where her life was put at risk due to the hospital's stance. http://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/catholic-hospitals-religious-rules-led-negligent-care-miscarriage-aclu-says-f2D11674429 She's damned lucky the same thing didn't happen to her when she was sent home all those times.

1 year, 2 months ago

No, Julius, the doctor did not find out about the infection and how serious it was until she was treating her patient for the miscarriage. She testified to that in court. If she had had all of the information she surely would have aggressively treated the infections and her patient would still be alive.

I don't think you can abort a baby that the body is rejecting because it is dead. The baby died in the womb there is no need for it to stay there. Having the body rotting inside the mother is bound to cause huge problems.

With all the medical technology available there is no reason not to have every bit of information on the current status of mother and baby and be able to make appropriate decisions. I wish this mothers life could have been saved though earlier intervention.

James Howlette 1 year, 2 months ago

In your effort to deny the horror of this case, you are missing details. She was told that she was miscarrying and that her baby could not be saved three days before she actually miscarried. Three days! They could have induced labor earlier and saved her life, but because the doomed fetus still had a heartbeat, they were not allowed to abort.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.