This week I'm curious about YOU my readers :D
Select the option that best describes your beliefs.
1. I am pro-life and Christian.
2. I am pro-life and atheist.
3. I am pro-life and agnostic.
4. I am pro-life and Muslim.
5. I am pro-life and adhere to another religion.
6. I am not pro-life.
Vote on the poll to the left! :)
NOTE: Question of the week is lasting for two weeks this time :)
Monday, 18 July 2011
Saturday, 16 July 2011
The Abortion Question
"The abortion debate will not go away. The fundamental issue at stake is not reproductive freedom but the desire to extend human rights to all - even the smallest and most vulnerable human beings among us."
I don't remember where I found it, but this quote is so beautiful and so very true. The fundamental question is not whether a woman should have control over her own body (after all, how many of us have real conscious control over everything that our bodies do anyways?), but whether a growing, unborn baby deserves the basic right to life.
In Canada, each of us, at one point in our lives, did not have a right to be alive. We aren't alive because we are individual humans with intrinsic value and dignity. We are only alive because of a single external factor ... our parents wanted us. Or at the very least, our mothers couldn't bring themselves to kill us.
Look at yourself in the mirror. Look at someone you love dearly. Should they have been killed if their mother had decided it was necessary? Think really hard about that question, before you decide whether or not a single person should have control over the continuation of your loved one's life.
Maybe it would be easier to think about with a concrete example. My best friend's boyfriend is from a country where abortion is outlawed except in certain cases. This man's mother unwillingly gave birth to her son. If abortion-on-demand had been legal, he would be dead now. Should he have died because he wasn't wanted? Take a look at some of the abortion survivor videos in the "Pro-life Media" page. These are people who should be dead, but managed to survive. Would you be able to look them in the face and tell them that they should have been "terminated"?
I know I couldn't.
I don't remember where I found it, but this quote is so beautiful and so very true. The fundamental question is not whether a woman should have control over her own body (after all, how many of us have real conscious control over everything that our bodies do anyways?), but whether a growing, unborn baby deserves the basic right to life.
In Canada, each of us, at one point in our lives, did not have a right to be alive. We aren't alive because we are individual humans with intrinsic value and dignity. We are only alive because of a single external factor ... our parents wanted us. Or at the very least, our mothers couldn't bring themselves to kill us.
Look at yourself in the mirror. Look at someone you love dearly. Should they have been killed if their mother had decided it was necessary? Think really hard about that question, before you decide whether or not a single person should have control over the continuation of your loved one's life.
Maybe it would be easier to think about with a concrete example. My best friend's boyfriend is from a country where abortion is outlawed except in certain cases. This man's mother unwillingly gave birth to her son. If abortion-on-demand had been legal, he would be dead now. Should he have died because he wasn't wanted? Take a look at some of the abortion survivor videos in the "Pro-life Media" page. These are people who should be dead, but managed to survive. Would you be able to look them in the face and tell them that they should have been "terminated"?
I know I couldn't.
Thursday, 14 July 2011
The Dark Knight and Abortion
The Dark Knight. Probably one of my very favourite movies. I have yet to meet someone who doesn't think its one of the greatest things they have ever seen. The Joker is a terrifyingly perfect villain, and besides, who doesn't love Heath Ledger?
But what exactly does the Dark Knight have to do with abortion?
Well, watching that movie, abortion was one of the first things I thought of. I'm referring specifically to the scene with the two boats leaving the city - one boat full of criminals and one boat full of civilians, both so close to death. It is just so perfectly symbolic. I couldn't hope to describe the situation better than the Joker himself:
[over the PA] Tonight you're all gonna be part of a social experiment. Through the magic of diesel fuel and ammonium nitrate, I'm ready right now to blow you all sky high. Anyone attempts to get off their boat, you all die. Each of you has a remote... to blow up the other boat. At midnight, I blow you all up. If, however, one of you presses the button, I'll let that boat live. So, who's it going to be: Harvey Dent's most wanted scumbag collection, or the sweet and innocent civilians? You choose... oh, and you might want to decide quickly, because the people on the other boat might not be so noble.
Of course we all know how this ends (and if you don't know - what the hell is wrong with you? watch the Dark Knight!!!!) - neither boat can bring themselves to blow up the other, even though they know that if they don't blow up the other boat, they will die.
I found this to be wonderfully symbolic of abortion, which pits the mother's life against her child's. If the mother allows her child to live, then the child ruins the mother's life. On the other hand, the child could die, the mother's life would remain intact. The Dark Knight seems to me to be a dramatic representation of the abortion debate - with one key difference. Both parties in the Dark Knight have some measure of control over their fate - after all, they can choose to blow up the other boat (hopefully before the other boat chooses to blow them up). But in an abortion, the baby makes no conscious decision to ruin the mother's life - he or she is simply existing as nature intended them to. The mother has all the control during an abortion decision.
I find it interesting that ultimately neither boat blows up the other, knowing full well that death is imminent (though of course they end up being saved by Batman - but that's an external factor neither party had any knowledge of). Both groups are shown to be remarkably courageous and ultimately GOOD by their willingness to recognize that their own lives are not worth the deaths of those on the other boat.
I like to think that most of us would make that same decision. But with so many women (and men) out there in favour of abortion-on-demand, I sometimes wonder if that would be the case. So many people are willing to end a life to just preserve the status-quo of their own lives. I guess people are just innately selfish when faced with fear of the unknown?
Oh and P.S. SO psyched for The Dark Knight Rising!!! :D
But what exactly does the Dark Knight have to do with abortion?
Well, watching that movie, abortion was one of the first things I thought of. I'm referring specifically to the scene with the two boats leaving the city - one boat full of criminals and one boat full of civilians, both so close to death. It is just so perfectly symbolic. I couldn't hope to describe the situation better than the Joker himself:
[over the PA] Tonight you're all gonna be part of a social experiment. Through the magic of diesel fuel and ammonium nitrate, I'm ready right now to blow you all sky high. Anyone attempts to get off their boat, you all die. Each of you has a remote... to blow up the other boat. At midnight, I blow you all up. If, however, one of you presses the button, I'll let that boat live. So, who's it going to be: Harvey Dent's most wanted scumbag collection, or the sweet and innocent civilians? You choose... oh, and you might want to decide quickly, because the people on the other boat might not be so noble.
Of course we all know how this ends (and if you don't know - what the hell is wrong with you? watch the Dark Knight!!!!) - neither boat can bring themselves to blow up the other, even though they know that if they don't blow up the other boat, they will die.
I found this to be wonderfully symbolic of abortion, which pits the mother's life against her child's. If the mother allows her child to live, then the child ruins the mother's life. On the other hand, the child could die, the mother's life would remain intact. The Dark Knight seems to me to be a dramatic representation of the abortion debate - with one key difference. Both parties in the Dark Knight have some measure of control over their fate - after all, they can choose to blow up the other boat (hopefully before the other boat chooses to blow them up). But in an abortion, the baby makes no conscious decision to ruin the mother's life - he or she is simply existing as nature intended them to. The mother has all the control during an abortion decision.
I find it interesting that ultimately neither boat blows up the other, knowing full well that death is imminent (though of course they end up being saved by Batman - but that's an external factor neither party had any knowledge of). Both groups are shown to be remarkably courageous and ultimately GOOD by their willingness to recognize that their own lives are not worth the deaths of those on the other boat.
I like to think that most of us would make that same decision. But with so many women (and men) out there in favour of abortion-on-demand, I sometimes wonder if that would be the case. So many people are willing to end a life to just preserve the status-quo of their own lives. I guess people are just innately selfish when faced with fear of the unknown?
Oh and P.S. SO psyched for The Dark Knight Rising!!! :D
Wednesday, 13 July 2011
Pro-lifers are rare indeed
During my undergrad, us students had an office to ourselves for studying and working on honours projects. I don't even know how many hours I spent in that windowless, unkept, uncared-for room, struggling to finish assignments and lab reports alongside my fellow students. Spending all that time together meant we learnt quite a bit about each other, even without ever having a face-to-face conversation.
One time, I was studying for a midterm when I happened to overhear a conversation between a couple of guys on the other side of the room. I missed most of it, but I did hear one line that resonated with me:
"Well, I actually know people who are pro-life. No really. There are actually people who are pro-life. Girls even. I know some girls who are pro-life."
This was said in a matter-of-fact way, but the people involved with the conversation looked at the speaker in mild surprise or disbelief. I froze, thinking that this conversation was rather odd considering that they had a valid pro-lifer sitting with them in the room, who was also a girl. But none of them knew that I was pro-life, and apparently they had defaulted to the assumption that I was pro-choice.
How many other people had my fellow students come into contact with who were actually pro-life? From their words, one would think not many, or none at all. But they were having this conversation when they all knew me, and yet they still thought they had never met a pro-lifer, and specifically they thought they had never met a pro-life woman. A couple of the students even went so far to voice the opinion that a girl couldn't be pro-life.
I was surprised and confused by their opinions. Sure, I didn't talk about abortion with many people so I didn't know what most of my friends' views on the subject were - but I still knew several people who were pro-life, and all of these people were women.
So why the disconnect? If these students knew me, and thought I must be pro-choice, then how many other "closet" pro-lifers did they know and mistake for pro-choicers? Obviously there is a problem when a group of people have never met one single pro-lifer. When a group of people actually think that no women are pro-life. How are their views on abortion ever going to change if they never find them challenged by their peers ... in fact, when they believe that everyone in their life thinks the same way they do?
Looking back on the conversation I overheard, I wish I had said something. Even if I had simply said "I am pro-life" and left it at that. Instead I stayed silent, and wondered how they could have never met a pro-lifer ... all the while not realizing that my actions provided an answer to my own question.
I don't believe that pro-lifers are rare. But I do think that active pro-lifers are rare indeed. And that has to change, or no one will ever believe in the pro-life cause. After all, if we aren't even willing to say that we're pro-life, how is anyone ever going to think that we're in the right?
One time, I was studying for a midterm when I happened to overhear a conversation between a couple of guys on the other side of the room. I missed most of it, but I did hear one line that resonated with me:
"Well, I actually know people who are pro-life. No really. There are actually people who are pro-life. Girls even. I know some girls who are pro-life."
This was said in a matter-of-fact way, but the people involved with the conversation looked at the speaker in mild surprise or disbelief. I froze, thinking that this conversation was rather odd considering that they had a valid pro-lifer sitting with them in the room, who was also a girl. But none of them knew that I was pro-life, and apparently they had defaulted to the assumption that I was pro-choice.
How many other people had my fellow students come into contact with who were actually pro-life? From their words, one would think not many, or none at all. But they were having this conversation when they all knew me, and yet they still thought they had never met a pro-lifer, and specifically they thought they had never met a pro-life woman. A couple of the students even went so far to voice the opinion that a girl couldn't be pro-life.
I was surprised and confused by their opinions. Sure, I didn't talk about abortion with many people so I didn't know what most of my friends' views on the subject were - but I still knew several people who were pro-life, and all of these people were women.
So why the disconnect? If these students knew me, and thought I must be pro-choice, then how many other "closet" pro-lifers did they know and mistake for pro-choicers? Obviously there is a problem when a group of people have never met one single pro-lifer. When a group of people actually think that no women are pro-life. How are their views on abortion ever going to change if they never find them challenged by their peers ... in fact, when they believe that everyone in their life thinks the same way they do?
Looking back on the conversation I overheard, I wish I had said something. Even if I had simply said "I am pro-life" and left it at that. Instead I stayed silent, and wondered how they could have never met a pro-lifer ... all the while not realizing that my actions provided an answer to my own question.
I don't believe that pro-lifers are rare. But I do think that active pro-lifers are rare indeed. And that has to change, or no one will ever believe in the pro-life cause. After all, if we aren't even willing to say that we're pro-life, how is anyone ever going to think that we're in the right?
Free Chen Guangcheng
From LifeSiteNews:
"Chen Guangcheng was arrested in 2006 for exposing evidence that 130,000 forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations were performed on women in Linyi County, Shandong Province in a single year. Time Magazine named him one of "2006's Top 100 People Who Shape Our World" and he was given the 2007 Magsaysay award, known as Asia's Nobel Peace Prize."
"Chen Guangcheng was arrested in 2006 for exposing evidence that 130,000 forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations were performed on women in Linyi County, Shandong Province in a single year. Time Magazine named him one of "2006's Top 100 People Who Shape Our World" and he was given the 2007 Magsaysay award, known as Asia's Nobel Peace Prize."
He is currently under house arrest, along with his wife and child, and is in poor health due to repeated beatings and malnutrition. To sign a petition for his release click here, and please spread the word!
Tuesday, 12 July 2011
Number of Abortions Performed by PP Increasing
http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/abortion-at-planned-parenthood-by-the-numbers
How do we encourage this number to go down??
I would say that ultrasound and informed consent laws are a good start. But we should also make people aware of the help available to them. After all, no matter how well you internalize the humanity of your child, if you're scared and simply can't imagine how you could make a baby work, its very easy to convince yourself that abortion is ok. I can't count the number of times I have read this testimony:
"I was pro-life until I got pregnant - now I'm pro-choice because I had to have an abortion."
That's why we need to make sure that help is accessible and practical for pregnant women. No one should ever feel that they have to abort.
Stay tuned for a series of posts on great resources for pregnant women. :)
How do we encourage this number to go down??
I would say that ultrasound and informed consent laws are a good start. But we should also make people aware of the help available to them. After all, no matter how well you internalize the humanity of your child, if you're scared and simply can't imagine how you could make a baby work, its very easy to convince yourself that abortion is ok. I can't count the number of times I have read this testimony:
"I was pro-life until I got pregnant - now I'm pro-choice because I had to have an abortion."
That's why we need to make sure that help is accessible and practical for pregnant women. No one should ever feel that they have to abort.
Stay tuned for a series of posts on great resources for pregnant women. :)
Monday, 11 July 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)