The country station that I listen to just finished their annual fundraising drive to combat child abuse. They've been doing this for about 20 years now. People call in pledges and others call in with their stories. Some are pretty heartbreaking.
Forty years ago, when abortion (excuse me, choice) was legalized in the United States, one of the arguments that we heard rather frequently was that this would reduce child abuse. After all every child should be a wanted child. I haven't heard that argument in a long, long time. I wonder why?
Theoretically every child born in the US since 1973 is a child of choice. Therefore, if you are reading this and you live in the US and you are under 40 years old, you are here because your mother chose to have you. An entire generation has grown up with this knowledge that they are the chosen ones. The wanted ones.
So why is child abuse still such a problem that this radio station is still holding a fundraising drive 20 years later? And why are we still hearing about infants being abused? Young kids? Wasn't abortion supposed to take care of that? Could it be that choice hasn't been extended far enough?
There are children whose mothers wanted them well enough while they were still fetuses only to find out that when they were born they were a great deal more work and trouble than expected. Children are expensive. Especially children who have problems that somehow slip past prenatal diagnosis. A child with a disability can ruin a marriage. A child with a disability can ruin a family. Can ruin a relationship. Can cost jobs or the opportunity to have a job. I know because I was one of those prenatally wanted children. It was only after I got here and my differences became apparent that things changed.
What would have happened if my parents had had the choice to "terminate" me as soon as they discovered I was not the little girl they had expected? Would I have been better off? Would the world have been better off? Would my family have been better off? I don't know because we don't talk about these things. Nobody wants to talk about these things.
What if Calista Springer's parents had had the option to terminate her instead of keeping her home chained to a bed? She was another problem child.
I've put many a pet to sleep and while it isn't pleasant in most cases a shot or two the animal drifts off peacefully. Wouldn't it be more humane to do that to children who have disabilities? Oh, it wouldn't be mandatory and I'm sure that the proper set of euphemisms (excuse me, terms) can be devised to conceal (excuse me, describe) what is going on. Make sure that it is all wrapped up in Choice. Because to be anti-Choice is somehow un-American and anti-woman. We could start out by saying neonate instead of newborn.
Today on the Secular Pro-life website there was a story about a woman who chose to give birth to conjoined twins. She knew ahead of time that these two little girls could never be separated. What struck me about this story was the hate mail she reported getting from perfect strangers who bluntly told her she should have aborted these little girls. I believe it because I've gotten hate mail from people who didn't like my views. There was one woman in particular who was really nasty. Every one in the pro-life community in my area could count on getting a letter from her. We all had stories about "Lois' letters". They just dripped with venom. She made it perfectly clear what she thought of us. It was just too bad that she had to share the same planet with us. I am sure that if she had had her way about things all of us would have been silenced one way or another.
But I think I know why this woman is getting the hate mail. Because her choice to bring disabled daughters into the world affects all of us. It's more strain on the school that they will end up going to. And there are already people who think we spend TOO MUCH on education as it is. I'm not sure what they mean by too much but I can tell you that these people don't look at us and see human beings of worth. They're willing to write off whole categories of people to save a buck. They don't want to invest in us at all.
And these kids that the radio station is so concerned about--some of them have been so horrendously abused that they will need years of therapy and medical care and even then many of them may not ever become "productive citizens". They will require resources. Where is that money going to come from?
I see something very dark and ugly coming over this world. You may laugh at me all you want and call me names. But I am telling you, beware. If you are not in control over your own fate--if you are dependent upon others--if you are (in the US) one of the 47% that Mitt Romney claims that he doesn't care about because you pay no taxes--I am telling you, pay very close attention to what is going on and what is being said and who is saying it and why.
Forty years ago, when abortion (excuse me, choice) was legalized in the United States, one of the arguments that we heard rather frequently was that this would reduce child abuse. After all every child should be a wanted child. I haven't heard that argument in a long, long time. I wonder why?
Theoretically every child born in the US since 1973 is a child of choice. Therefore, if you are reading this and you live in the US and you are under 40 years old, you are here because your mother chose to have you. An entire generation has grown up with this knowledge that they are the chosen ones. The wanted ones.
So why is child abuse still such a problem that this radio station is still holding a fundraising drive 20 years later? And why are we still hearing about infants being abused? Young kids? Wasn't abortion supposed to take care of that? Could it be that choice hasn't been extended far enough?
There are children whose mothers wanted them well enough while they were still fetuses only to find out that when they were born they were a great deal more work and trouble than expected. Children are expensive. Especially children who have problems that somehow slip past prenatal diagnosis. A child with a disability can ruin a marriage. A child with a disability can ruin a family. Can ruin a relationship. Can cost jobs or the opportunity to have a job. I know because I was one of those prenatally wanted children. It was only after I got here and my differences became apparent that things changed.
What would have happened if my parents had had the choice to "terminate" me as soon as they discovered I was not the little girl they had expected? Would I have been better off? Would the world have been better off? Would my family have been better off? I don't know because we don't talk about these things. Nobody wants to talk about these things.
What if Calista Springer's parents had had the option to terminate her instead of keeping her home chained to a bed? She was another problem child.
I've put many a pet to sleep and while it isn't pleasant in most cases a shot or two the animal drifts off peacefully. Wouldn't it be more humane to do that to children who have disabilities? Oh, it wouldn't be mandatory and I'm sure that the proper set of euphemisms (excuse me, terms) can be devised to conceal (excuse me, describe) what is going on. Make sure that it is all wrapped up in Choice. Because to be anti-Choice is somehow un-American and anti-woman. We could start out by saying neonate instead of newborn.
Today on the Secular Pro-life website there was a story about a woman who chose to give birth to conjoined twins. She knew ahead of time that these two little girls could never be separated. What struck me about this story was the hate mail she reported getting from perfect strangers who bluntly told her she should have aborted these little girls. I believe it because I've gotten hate mail from people who didn't like my views. There was one woman in particular who was really nasty. Every one in the pro-life community in my area could count on getting a letter from her. We all had stories about "Lois' letters". They just dripped with venom. She made it perfectly clear what she thought of us. It was just too bad that she had to share the same planet with us. I am sure that if she had had her way about things all of us would have been silenced one way or another.
But I think I know why this woman is getting the hate mail. Because her choice to bring disabled daughters into the world affects all of us. It's more strain on the school that they will end up going to. And there are already people who think we spend TOO MUCH on education as it is. I'm not sure what they mean by too much but I can tell you that these people don't look at us and see human beings of worth. They're willing to write off whole categories of people to save a buck. They don't want to invest in us at all.
And these kids that the radio station is so concerned about--some of them have been so horrendously abused that they will need years of therapy and medical care and even then many of them may not ever become "productive citizens". They will require resources. Where is that money going to come from?
I see something very dark and ugly coming over this world. You may laugh at me all you want and call me names. But I am telling you, beware. If you are not in control over your own fate--if you are dependent upon others--if you are (in the US) one of the 47% that Mitt Romney claims that he doesn't care about because you pay no taxes--I am telling you, pay very close attention to what is going on and what is being said and who is saying it and why.
