Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Chuck Colson :: Townhall.com Columnist
Informed Choice
by Chuck Colson
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



During the thirty-fourth anniversary of Roe v. Wade, you heard a great deal about the victims of abortion. That phrase—for obvious reasons—nearly always referred to the tens of millions of unborn children who have been killed as the result of Roe.

But there is another group of victims whose plight receives much less attention: the women themselves. And the fault for this lack of attention can be laid at the feet of those who claim to be defending their “right to choose.”

A recent example of their plight is a study published in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. In it, researchers from New Zealand explored possible “linkages between unwanted pregnancy, abortion and long-term mental health.”

It is important to point out that David Fergusson, L. John Horwood, and Elizabeth Ridder were not setting out to prove that abortion is bad for women’s health. There’s no evidence, or even a suggestion, that they are partisans in the debates over abortion.

Instead, their goal was to either confirm or disprove previous studies that did find a link between having an abortion and things like “substance abuse, anxiety, hostility, low self-esteem, [and] depression.”

Using data from a longitudinal study of 25-year-olds in the Christchurch, New Zealand, area, they compared three groups of women: those who had never been pregnant, those who had been pregnant but had not had an abortion, and those who had had an abortion.

After controlling for factors such as socio-economic status and home life, they found “significant differences” between those who had had an abortion and those who had not. There were greater instances of depression, drug use, suicidal thoughts, and total mental health problems.

The authors concluded that their results were consistent “with the view that exposure to abortion was associated with increased risks of mental health problems”—the increases as much as 33 and 42 percent.

As I said, the authors were just looking for the facts. They are not partisans in the debate over abortion, but I am. So I will say what they did not: If some behavior or environmental factor increased people’s chances of serious health problems by more than a third, there would be outraged calls for regulation, or at the very minimum, they would demand adequate notice and warnings.

Any behavior but abortion, that is. As the authors of the study pointed out, theirs is but the most recent in a line of peer-reviewed studies that suggest that having an abortion is bad for a woman’s mental health.

Yet, giving that information to pregnant women is seen as an unacceptable infringement on their “right to choose.” It is the glaring exception to the overall trend today toward giving people more information—not less—about health risks.

Pro-abortionists apparently think that uninformed “choice” is the best kind. That makes their claim to be “pro-woman” ring hollow.

All of us ought to want women to know all the risks involved in having an abortion. They should know that there are two victims of what they are considering.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Chuck Colson was the Chief Counsel for Richard Nixon and served time in prison for Watergate-related charges. In 1976, Colson founded Prison Fellowship Ministries, which, in collaboration with churches of all confessions and denominations, has become the world's largest outreach to prisoners, ex-prisoners, crime victims, and their families.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Chuck Colson's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Kath
Do you think that the person who could have raped and murdered you was aborted?

The Myth of Democracy
A Swedish Author Tage Lindbom has written a classic short thesis on Democracy which shows a sort of degeneration in the European mind since the Middle Ages, as 'reason' replaced 'faith'.
the whole notion of the Rights of Man, has eclipsed the responsibilities to a higher authority, namely God and his Law. Now the sacred right to 'do your own thing' has taken pride of place, and our culture is wallowing in sensual self indulgence of all brands. The one criteria seems to be, "if it feels good, do it".
The sad fact behind abortion is that it is no longer called premeditated murder, but rather a 'choice'. Well, by that same way of thinking to run over a pedestrian might proove to be my right to choose getting to work five minutes earlier. Do I not have the right to do what I will with my own Auto, ie Self. 'After all, Auto is another word for self, and the car is a sort of body, is it not?
The one sin in the Old Testament which always brought God's severe judgement upon Israel was the Shedding of innocent blood. I would say that taking a helpless baby with forethought and intention is indeed the same thing.

Have compassion for the second victim
I can first hand testify to the horrible effects of having had an abortion. I had a nervous breakdown in August of 2006. I had an abortion in 1978 at the urging of my husband despite my request to keep our child. I was raised in the Baptist Church, but I was not taught about the sanctity of life in Sunday School because Roe VS Wade had not been passed into law and abortion was just unthinkable for a married couple. I wasn't given to much deep thinking at 21 yrs of age and we were stationed overseas living on an E-4's salary with no family support nearby. I lived in mental pain and anquish for many years until my husband urged me to tell my family. My parents had noticed how angry and bitter I was becoming. Nothing like the person they raised. I am healing through God's grace. Thank you Mr. Colson for bringing attention to this vast problem.

dbz77
Did you ever think that the person who could have cured cancer or the next Mozart have been aborted?

I've counseled women for over 25 years with Post Abortion Syndrome. It is real yet ignored in the medical community. With the advances in technology, we can see the beating heart of a 6-8 week old unborn child. When women can see this, they KNOW it's a child, not a blob of tissue.

Women who had abortions and then had a hard time getting pregnant later in life are the women who are the most depressed and in need of counseling.

Planned Parenthood and other so-called pro choice organizations don't care about women's physical or mental health. Abortion is a multi-million dollar industry.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a racist and pro-Nazi. She wanted abortion made legal in order to reduce the number of African Americans and Hispanics in America. Why isn't this publicized?

I understand why some may want it available in case of rape or incest. But even then, Planned Parenthood never reports rapes. Any child under 18 getting pregnant by someone over 18 is a victim of statutory rape and the men should be reported. But does that happen? No!

And there's the breast cancer/abortion link that NO ONE will discuss. When a woman has a miscarriage, the pituitary gland slows down the production of hormones and it takes the unborn child 2-3 weeks before it is expelled. When a woman has an abortion, it throws her body into hormonal chaos. If a woman has a history of breast cancer, having an abortion increases that risk of getting breast cancer. The England Journal of Medicine and reports from Australia confirm this. But will you hear it in America? Never!

Abortion is never good for a woman. It affects her physically, mentally, spiritually and emotionally. It's time the truth was heard!

Opticontrarian
My point was and will remain that the abortion advocates are LYING through their teeth when they say that contraception is not effective, so we need abortion. We don't need abortion if people would take responsibility for their sexual behavior. It is only because people careless that we have unintended pregnancies and people would be less likely to be careless if they didn't think they had a way out of the consequence of carelessness.

Your arguments are disingenuous. Obviously there is only a 100 percent effectiveness, but the point is that people don't avail themselves of effective means of contraception and often don't avail themselves of ANY contraception because they know they don't have to.

We all have choices about conceiving children. We should make them before we have sex, not after we've created a life.

Arranger Guy
Thank you for reminding us about the other half of the abortion decision: the men. Too often, you're forgotten in the whole discussion. It is a travesty that you have no legal right whatsoever to any part in a decision that is life or death to the little one you helped create, however that may have come about. You're not alone in your pain but we all wish the knowledge of how this hurts men were more "out there". It wouldn't change the minds of those who were already convinced otherwise, but like the breast cancer link, it won't be publicly discussed simply because it isn't politically correct to do so.

I've never had an abortion, but as a fellow sinner I can say I understand perfectly where you're at. Being a Christian is humbling precisely because we are aware of our personal sin in a way no unbeliever can possibly grasp. It's always before us, and Satan is all too ready to keep it there. But thanks be to God for our salvation in Christ, for He took all upon Himself and nailed it to the Cross, never to be thought of again.

May you take comfort in Psalm 103.11,12 ff: "For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is His love for those who fear Him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us. As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear Him, for He knows how we are formed, He remembers that we are dust.

We're all lifting you to the Father.

Ben Haggai
Appreciate your sentiments regarding the 40 million tragic deaths which are facilitated by that particular law. However, I think you need pull in your horns a little.

BH: "God forgive you, America, because your comeuppance is coming very soon. And you will deserve every bit of it."

If I may say, this was a pretty stupid thing to say. First, "America" is NOT responsible for anything. America is a PLACE. Full of people. Who are YOU to judge THEM? It includes thousands of individuals - AMERICANS - who have done FAR more to protect the unborn than you will ever do. Dont let your hatred for what you think is "America" blind you.

What was the last thing YOU did to help protect life in the womb? How much of your LIFE have you devoted to that purpose?

Just read JennyO's post previous to this. SHE gave FAR more - as only ONE American - than you or I could give in a LIFEtime - by a decision she made when she was only a teen.

JennyO...
My hero! And excellent response to dbz77's idiotic point.

dbz77
haha - it's ok to kill rapists and murderers in the womb, but not abortionists because killing in the womb is legal.

Ben Haggai
Have you ever asked yourself how many rapists and murderers were killed by abortion?

Random thoughts
At 15 I was preganant back in the 60s. Stepfather spoke to the doctor about "taking care of it" and a horrible chill went through my body as I became as possessive of the life within me as Smeagol with The Ring. Sure didn't want to be pregnant or keep the baby, but whatever they were discussing was WRONG and no one had to tell me that. Think it's called maternal instinct. I've never been able to understand a woman's ability to "choose" abortion. The little baby girl was adopted and I've never had a moment's regret because I knew I did the right thing. All pregnancies terminate. CHOOSE LIFE.

Roe v Wade
This was one of the most dreadful decisions ever made by the Supreme Court of the USA: it establlished a clear hunting day for unborm children. Over 40 million plus children have so far been aborted. I ask: were they really worthless beings? How many poets were killed? How many novel writers were killed? How many scientists were killed, who could have made tremendous contributions to the world? How many clean and decent law abiding citizens were simply killed, because of this decision? One will never know, will one? All arguments in favor of the kind of mass killing are pure hogwash. What about the millions of people the Nazi killed? Is there any difference between the 6 million the Nazi killed, and the 40 plus millions you have so far managed to kill. God forgive you, America, because your comeuppance is coming very soon. And you will deserve every bit of it.

How about men troubled.....
by past abortions? I was involved with 2 over 30 years ago. I have had big struggles regarding it all my life. As a "studied" Christian, I do believe I am "forgiven", but also believe we suffer (in this life) for the consequences of our actions, etc. and actually, I am glad (if you will). Glad to know that God demonstrates grace and justice.

The Flash
Read the poster talking about the woman who had to publish her name and details of conception in the paper just to be able to put her kid up for adoption. Fortunately for her, this was a one-night stand with a guy who apparently was not crazy.

What if instead of a one-night stand, the father was a man she barely escaped by the skin of her teeth? Now the poster's family and the woman would be fighting some unmedicated bipolar meth dealer for custody for the next ten years.

Oh boy, what a way to make adoption easier than abortion!

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Far too often, it takes a flagrant amount of abuse and neglect before courts will finally get the idea that one of the gene donors shouldn't be anywhere near the kid. In the meantime, you can forget adoption, and you can forget the woman being able to raise the child.

Grumpy
Because you so CLEARLY misunderstood where I was coming from, I "capitalize" for EMPHASIS - not for "shouting"...

Nor am I particularly "offended." Appreciate your apology though.

JimmyJoe
If you choose to be offended, well, I'm sorry about that: it wasn't what I intended.

If I might make a non-judgemental, non-attacking observation about "tone," however, I'd suggest that you might want to do a bit less SHOUTING.

"Informed"?
The problem with these studies is that they are most often done by Psychologists and other Pseudo (err, i mean Social) Scientists. Who, when handed a software package like SPSS, think they are gurus of mathematics. Which, although it can be amusing, is often very detrimental.

Case in point. Correlation says nothing about cause! In fact it says nothing much about HOW the items are correlated. Does A cause B? Or B cause A? Or is there some other factor C that causes both A and B? Or is the method of collecting data naturally skewed to the results produced?

That last point is of particular concern in Political Polling with multiple choice answers (Do you agree with the President's Serge of 20,000 additional troops? No! It should have been 120,000 --- but THAT was not a choice; Only Yes or No).

Now i bring this up, because one poster stated that The Pill is 97% effective, and a Condom is 77% effective (that is, 23% failure rate in the lab). And then draws the conclusion that using both The Pill and a Condom would therefore be 174% effective! 174% effective? A neat trick. But sorry, that can't be.

If The Pill has a 97% success rate. Then when used with a Condom 97% of the time the Condom isn't going to be doing anything useful (because The Pill already did it's job). So the Condom will only be ABLE to effect those 3% that would have failed. So of those 3% failures, there is a 77% chance the Condom will catch the error, and only 23% chance that the 3% will suffer an additional totally failure. Therefore using both The Pill and a Condom will have a success rate of only 99.3%, with a 0.7% chance of failure.

But going back to that bogus 174% effectiveness theory. What that would mean, if only it were true, is that if my girlfriend used The Pill and I used a Condom there is a 74% chance that very time we have sex we would be preventing someone else's otherwise unwanted pregnancy. A win, win, win situation. What fun!

Grumpy
Unfortunately, you did. As for the "tone" of my original post, there was nothing to suggest a "judgemental" attitude. In fact, quite the OPPOSITE. See my post to gratefulheart, which you "conveniently"(??) ignored....

JimmyJoe
I did not "judge" you nor did I make a "personal attack," I made an observation about the tone of your original post. Chill out.


AliveInHim
Heh. I'm 42, and have just completed a college degree. I normally dont share details of my life, but the coincidence was a little strong. No big thing. And. I was in college in my early 20s and have achieved FAR better grades as an "adult" returning to college!



And finally, Grumpy....
Grumpy: "Because you sound more judgemental than supportive."

I dont know where this personal attack is coming from.

But I AM "judgemental" in one sense. Regarding the act of abortion in itSELF. Not for ANY of the reasons stated, can it be justified in my view. Weigh the LIFE or DEATH of the child in the womb against ANY of the issues outlined above, and by COMPARISON, they are nothing MORE than "INconveniences."

In the context of what I said, I made it CLEAR that I was using the word "convenient" in its "BROADEST possible sense." Why is that confusing to you?

And in ONE other sense, I am NOT "supportive" at all. I would NEVER, under ANY circumstances, support a girl's decision to abort her child. I would be doing HER no favors, because she might possibly never get over it; nor would I be doing the child any favors; SHE would be killed.

Final question for you to ponder. Who are YOU to JUDGE me?

Grumpy
I'm going to stand up for JimmyJoe. Maybe I'm missing something in your post, in which case I will graciously stand corrected, but if you'd read his post a bit more carefully, you'd have got the point that almost all abortions are absolutely performed for convenience's sake. Financial reasons are right up there, but you'd be surprised at how many are also done because of what the neighbors will think. He's not being judgmental, he's stating an established fact.

In the initial panic over an untimely pregnancy, especially out of wedlock, who really stops to think that the financial cost is one that is incurred over the life of that child until he's 18? Beyond that, it's parental choice. And-think of this-how much does it cost to keep *you* going, if money is the heart of the matter? Someone obviously took the time and money to raise you, as well. Sure, the *potential* price tag of raising a child is scary. But nobody does it overnight, yet here we all are, whether or not we had new toys at Christmas or had to make do with second-hand clothing. Point is, the help is there for the taking. Yes, God provides for even the sparrows-but note well He doesn't throw the worm into the nest.

As for the argument of handicap, you've got to be kidding. The one woman I know (mentioned in an earlier post) who had the two abortions she never regretted aborted precisely because of the childrens' handicaps. Convenience? Yes-she said as much in telling her story; *she* did not want to be burdened.

College? I'm 47 and have just begun college. Raised two, have two more at home who don't need my constant supervision, so why not be 47 and expanding my horizons while doing the laundry instead of just 47 and doing the laundry? I'd never gone beyond high school, obviously, but you'd have to be a moron to think that youth is the only time for college. Sometimes it isn't. Convenient? Well, probably not according to some but then life is about doing what is in front of you, regardless of convenience. I never lost the dream, though-it just took waiting for the right time. Besides which, I'm old enough and stable enough that I'm not worried about the leftist propaganda I'm sure I'll eventually be subject to. ;) But for now I've got to get off the soapbox and get dinner on the table.

Grumpy
Grumpy: "Socially difficult because people who DONT MATTER MIGHT be 'judgemental'? Convenience."

I'm afraid, Grumpy, that you failed to take the CONTEXT of what I was saying here into account. I was responding to a post in which a reference was made to the "so-called Godly people... willing to condemn" which did NOT specify a relationship such as YOU imputed. But YES. The "so-called Godly people... willing to condemn" do NOT matter. Particularly if their views could lead to the death of a child.

Grumpy: "People like prospective employers, clergy, parents, in-laws if you marry the guy? They "don't matter?" Excuse me, that should be they "DON'T MATTER"?"

As I say, YOU brought in this list, NOT me. And you are telling me now that prospective employers will hold having a child against a prospective employee? I think you are living in the middle ages. Clergy and parents? For clergy in general it isnt an issue. And if it is for a PARTICULAR clergyman, then he isnt a man of God. Drop him He DOESNT MATTER.

Parents? If they love their daughter, they WILL support her in a life-AFFIRMING way. After all, she is carrying their GRANDCHILD in her. You might check the post above by "gratefulheart."

As for prospective "parents-in-law", I would NEVER advocate a girl marrying the biological father of her child, unLESS there was a stable relationship between them to begin with, and they would have chosen that for themselves regardless of the new life for which they are responsible.

Grumpy
I will quote you word-for-word, (My capitals)then make short comment, and comment further in my next post.

Grumpy: "Providing for a child when you're an 18 year old high school kid with a part time burger flipping job" IS "pretty inconvenient, yeah."

Grumpy: "Interrupt a college education or career path? Convenience." Leaving school or a job isn't just inconvient: it will change the whole course of your life and the lives of any future children."

... which IS "inconvenient."

Grumpy: "Being crippled or retarded" IS "inconvenient?"

Yes it is. So far, Grumpy, you and I share the exact SAME sentiments.

JimmyJoe
Are you counting yourself as one of the ten? Because you sound more judgemental than supportive.

"Financially difficult to provide for a child? Convenience." Providing for a child when you're an 18 year old high school kid with a part time burger-flipping job is pretty inconvenient, yeah. What's the total cost just to deliver the baby, anyway?

"Socially difficult because people who DONT MATTER MIGHT be 'judgemental'? Convenience." People like prospective employers, clergy, parents, in-laws if you marry the guy? They "don't matter?" Excuse me, that should be they "DON'T MATTER"?

"Interrupt a college education or career path? Convenience." Leaving school or a job isn't just inconvient: it will change the whole course of your life and the lives of any future children.

"Child might be handicapped in some way? Convenience." Oh, my God. Being crippled or retarded is inconvientent?


Lon and Others
For those of you who chose to be conversational and less inflamatory, thank you!

I have been struck by the absence of any mention of the well documented health effects of abortion. There have been approximately 30 studies that have demonstrated a causal link between abortion and breast cancer. The causal link from what I understand is much stronger in the second trimester -- after the development of the breasts starts. And some studies have observed that the same cancer risk comes with miscarriage in the second trimester.

And the complement of this causal link is also very interesting. The breast cancer risk among women who bring a child to term before they are 18 is practically zero.

Please note that England requires that women be informed of the causal link with breast cancer.

If anyone has any supporting links I would appreciate them.

Thanks

Women already have choices
And, they don't need to include abortion. There is a whole toolkit of contraception available to both sexes if they choose to prevent pregnancy. Planned Parenthood and the other "pro-choicers" want you to believe that these choices aren't effective, but used properly, the right ones are highly effective. You can't trust condoms alone (23 percent failure rate in the laboratory), but they can be used with other barrier and chemical methods to bolster their effectiveness. The pill is 97 percent effective, if used properly (and that is always the deciding factor in these things), but combine the Pill with a condom and you've got 170 percent effectiveness.

The problem is that people know they have the option of abortion, so they don't think they need to bother with contraception. As a born-again Christian surrounded by people who do not consider abortion an option, I've seen very few unintended pregnancies, all married couples who trusted condoms and now are parents. We can virtually eliminate unintended pregnancy if people would accept responsibility for their sex drives -- practice abstinence before marriage and use effective contraception when they do have sex. We could start with an honest discussion of what is effective contraception.

As long as abortion is out there on the table, we're going to have unintended (what I regard as careless) pregnancies.

heatseeker
I am inclined to agree with "AliveInHim" regarding the absence of the "judgementalism" in Church. I often hear about "those awfully judgemental Christians" but have never actually seen it either. (Which doesnt mean of course it doesnt exist!) I think most Christians DO recognise the weakness of the flesh, are are generally caring people anyway.

But so what if there ARE a few of these "judgemental types"? They can only be in a tiny minority, and who today would give their views the slightest importance? I also disagree with you that the attitudes of a few judgemental Christians was enough to strengthen the demand for abortion. I cannot imagine it makes much difference.

I note also you object to the word "convenience." Well, the reality is that in the broadest sense, this is in fact the motivational factor in the majority of cases.

Financially difficult to provide for a child? Convenience.
Socially difficult because people who DONT MATTER MIGHT be "judgemental"?
Convenience.
Interrupt a college education or career path? Convenience.
Child might be handicapped in some way? Convenience.

I dont wish to be too hard on you, but I DO believe for EVERY "judgemental" Christian you will find TEN who will be supportive and welcoming.

A sin is a sin
You don't have to be religious to know these words are true.

"However we may pity the mother whose health and even life is imperiled by her performance of her natural duty, there yet remains no sufficient reason for condoning the direct murder of the innocent." ~ Pius XI 1931

How much more so is it true for those engaged in recreational sex without any concideration beyond their pleasure of the moment. Does God make exceptions for character flaws, or the fact that one never developed into a human being?

evaluating studies
With studies reported in newspapers one has very little information to go on to evaluate them. In general it seems that the thing to look for is whether the study, or the person reporting it, recognizes the most clearly relevant factors. As was noted by a few people above, this one does not seem to.

In creating ones comparison groups the point is to create groups that are otherwise the same so that the factor being isolated can be shown to be responsible. But in this case one is comparing a group of women all of whom are dealing with unwanted pregnancies, with one group of women all of whom have never dealt with unwanted pregnancies, and a third group which may contain some members who have, but hopefully mostly have wanted pregnancies. But unwanted pregnancies are not random occurrances. What one wants to compare are women who had unwanted pregnancies who chose to abort and women who had unwanted pregnancies who chose not to. (Even this is not an ideal comparison because the choice to abort is not itself a random one, but at least it is a lot closer than the groupings above).

It is possible that the authors of the study recognize this, but they apparently did not answer it in the kind of forthright way that would make Colson see its significance. So while the study might be better than Colson presents it, there is reason to be wary.

gratefulheart
What you wrote was a superb piece, and I celebrate your daughter's courage. It's (relatively!) easy to be brave when applauded for being brave, but requires courage of a different - and I would say of a much higher nature - to do what is right when doing so brings its own humiliation.

Yes, if she had chosen to abort, no one would have even known she was pregnant. I do believe, though, that acting in a way which demands heroic courage MAKES us great. As the saying goes, the coward dies many times, but the courageous only once.

There may well be posters out there who might say that she shouldnt have gotten pregnant in the first place. Easy to say. Are THEY all virgins - or were they until THEY got married? Then the only difference is that they got lucky.

Grateful heart
Your grandson's birthmother must be one heck of a gal! Congratulations-she is lucky to have had your family there to step in and give her baby a warm loving home.

Another poster wrote of how church-going girls fear the reactions of their congregations. This is just my own observation, but I must say I've never seen that kind of judgmentalism occur in our church-and we have over five hundred members, as well as our share of single mothers. Further, their infants are usually baptized very shortly after birth, as the mothers themselves wish to do all within their power to see they are raised as consistently with Christian teaching as possible. We, along with many other churches in our area, also support the local crisis pregnancy outreach center. I note that not one "liberal" organization or local chapter thereof contributes so much as one dime, let alone a Sam's Club package of diapers.

The Legal/Social Choice Our Laws Impose
The birth mother of our grandchild chose to give birth and offer him for adoption.

Because she made that choice, she was required to publish for months in the city's paper, her name and the circumstances of the baby's conception--a humiliating public process designed to allow the father (an anonymous one night stand)the opportunity to claim paternity and stop the adoption if he chose. The adoption agency acknowledged that though this process is legally required, no man has ever come forward as a result.

If she had chosen to abort, no law would require her to publish her indiscretion to give the sperm donor a chance to consider whether he wanted to be a father.

If she had chosen to abort, no such process would have been required--no one would even know she was ever pregnant. She would perhaps have her own demons to deal with, but privately. And our sweet little boy would have been killed.


In both these cases, the law frames the child as a possession that can be chosen or discarded, before birth, by the possessing owner, and after birth, by a co-owner with a secondary claim.

Because abortion's legality by judicial fiat promotes this view of the child as possession before birth, then the child can still be seen as a possession after birth, with the system privileging the right of the possessor to choose, and discarding all rights of that small person to life and protection.

I'm just glad that our grandbaby's birth mother was so brave to endure that legal ordeal.

By the way, our local church community is FULL of families actively making room for yet more adopted children in their homes--and working to support the ongoing needs of women in crisis pregnancies.

abortion destroys us all, Chuck
I have just written an article that I've entitled, "Lesson on Radicalism. . . A Walk Alongside of My Democratic Friend". The premise of the article points out that we may be doing more, internally, that fuels the hatred of radical ideology than we realize. A finger has been pointed at Republicans as the cause of this hatred, but, I spell out a different side of this debate. I state within this article that "Republicans have bled dearly over wounds brought about by carelessness of Democratic causes".

go here and click on Heart 2 Heart:
http://www.geocities.com/thechristianheartbeat/welcome.html

My article summary: We've closed our eyes when politics hides behind causes that contribute to, not only a moral decline, but, a national decline. Radicalism has no justification, but, we're not guiltless when we allow the promotion of what are now political stances that speak to our own decline and destruction.

go here and click on Heart 2 Heart:
http://www.geocities.com/thechristianheartbeat/welcome.html

My writing is very intense. I try to warn those who become my reading audience. It should not be taken lightly, not even the casual glance. If you read what I write, I ask that my audience prepares itself for something very intense.



Author biography: Dawn Dale is the founder of The Christian Heartbeat located at:

http://www.geocities.com/thechristianheartbeat/welcome.html

Dawn has degrees and experience in counseling and psychology. She is the author of "Dawn's early Light", and has created the up-and-coming Heart 2 Heart blog located at The Christian Heartbeat. Keep checking in at The Christian Heartbeat for more of Dawn's writing and to share some of your own writing, prayer concerns, and personal struggles at Heart 2 Heart with The Christian Heartbeat Counsel Connection. This group is made up of committed Christians who seek to use their writing talents to minister to a hurting and searching world.

Thank you
Thank you, Mr. Colson, for voicing the truth. Women have abortions for a variety of reasons, although plenty of people who seem to have very little firsthand experience believe that most women do it just because it's convenient. That's a really convenient way to consider this great evil in our society if you've never had an unwanted pregnancy.

Whether you like it or not, plenty of women seek abortions because they fear the reactions of their families and communities. Church-going girls know how tounges will wag and people will look at them in judgement and condemnation. Their parents will be embarrassed and their family name tarnished. All because everyone now knows for sure that they had SEX OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE. The fact that the Bible declares all children to be a blessing flies out the window in the face of premarital sex. It may seem like just a convenient way for these women to not have to face the consequenses of their actions, but remember the consequenses that they choose to face instead, so often without the support or compassion of anyone close to them.

Please don't think that I'm trying to excuse their actions or rationalize their decisions. Abortion and premarital sex are both wrong. But what have these women sacrificed in their souls in their efforts to prevent all the results mentioned above?

How would our culture be different today if years ago fathers and mothers and churches had rejected the sin of premarital sex but embraced the products of it? What if we had actually believed the scriptures and celebrated all life, regardless of how it began?

I can only imagine how the drive to legalize abortion would have had much less steam and would have seemed much less necessary if so many young women hadn't had to face these so-called Godly people who were so willing to condemn them for a sin, which in God's eyes is no different than the condemnation they so readily heaped out.

So thank you, Mr. Colson, for being a compassionate Christian who recognizes that sin affects both its victim as well its perpetrator.

Sekhmet:
"Some serious restrictions on unmarried fathers and their custody rights." Custody rights?, how about child support. Why should taxpayers reward bad behaviour by supporting the women and letting the man off scott free?

One more upsetting part of your comment:" I personally know of at least two women who got abortions because they didn't trust the family services and court system to keep the psycho man who fathered the baby away from the woman or the baby."

Why is it OK to kill the victim here? And why is someone having sex with a psycho man? If it isn't rape or incest, its just stupidity.

Militia Christi
I think you're thinking in the right direction: Make it an easier option to stay pregnant for women who find themselves pregnant out of wedlock.

I think that one thing that will have to happen isn't going to make the guys very happy: Some serious restrictions on unmarried fathers and their custody rights. I personally know of at least two women who got abortions because they didn't trust the family services and court system to keep the psycho man who fathered the baby away from the woman or the baby.

What women need is better choices.
I think we need to focus money and attention on creating facilities that can help women through pregnancy, (financially and emotionally). We need to make pregnancy the easier choice for women, so they are encouraged to do what they know they ought to do. It would still be best if abortion was not legal. But we would still need to address the underlying reasons why women have them in the first place. And the number one reason I see is immediate convenience. If we can make pregnancy more convenient for women, I think many would not have abortions. People know it's wrong to have an abortion. They just don't think they have any other choice. If they have choices that allow them to be pregnant that are more convenient, we could make the whole debate obsolete. And put Planned Parenthood out of buisness. At the very least, this idea could be a good start.

Heather
thanks for your honesty. Been there, done that with miscarriage. I know the panicky feeling of "oh, no, another baby!" but right on the heels of that was a feeling of complete helplessness in the face of a process I couldn't stop if I had to. That weekend was emotional he11-and I had done nothing to initiate the death. It was about three months before I could regain equilibrium. Only one of all the women I know who have had abortions never regretted it,I guess some people just have a different mental makeup.

Still, I can't understand why those who assert their "support" for "womens' rights" don't seem to think those same women have the capacity to handle the rather obvious biological truth about the little one inside them. Of course, we realize that the Left thinks we're stupid anyway, and more knowledge would only confuse us, so...best to protect us from what our eyes can plainly see.

Sober, relaxed, happy people
if they do become pregnant premaritally, are either likely to have the support of the baby's father and decide, "Oh well, we were getting married anyway, this just makes it sooner." (which BTW is what happened to me). They could figure their chances of having a healthy, adoptable baby are good and put the kid up for adoption, and in any case are not likely to have as the sperm donor a complete and utter psycho who would try to drag her through the courts for years and years if she gives birth.

Drug-addicts have reason to worry if the baby would be healthy and adoptable. People who are anxious, depressed, and have low self-esteem are both very irresponsible during pregnancy (again, they have reason to worry that the baby won't be healthy), and likely to have as the sperm donor the kind of guys who would try to mess with an adoption or her raising the baby. It can take Family Services *YEARS* and probably a very flagrant instance of abuse or neglect before they figure out that there is a very good reason one parent doesn't want the other anywhere *NEAR* the kid.

Informed Choice...
... is precisely what the Left does not want on abortion, because nearly all women, when given the WHOLE story about preborn babies, choose to give birth. In the Left's view of things, the only valid choice is abortion.

Abortion = Equality?
Equal "rights" for women requires that they have unrestricted rights to abortions. Why? Because when men and women have sex, only women get pregnant. Since that is not "equal" abortion insures that the outcome (not pregnant) eventually will win out.

Of course, it begs the question of equal protection under the law because women can have abortions, while men can't (or at least they are not allowed to have a say in whether their offspring which they helped sire, are allowed to be born or not.) However, once their seed has been born, they are responsible for 18 years of child support!

You cannot have true equality in the workplace if you are pregnant, and are on restricted duty for three months, then take a leave of absence for 3 months, and then expect to come back and not lose seniority, or have their sales accounts not taken over by someone who didn't get pregnant.

The only way for women to be "equal" is to be granted unequal rights that men cannot have" Sounds pretty screwed up to me.

HVY
HV: "Are we arguing for argument's sake?"

No. Beuwolfe's point about who is likely to find themselves in a position where they "required" the services of an abortion provider is valid. And even "controlling" for all these factors doesnt necessarily mean that low self-esteem etc to begin with are not contributory factors.

My point was that if they had "low self esteem" etc beforehand - they were bound to have those same difficulties multiplied a thousand fold afterwards.

I know second hand
I know many girls who have had abortions. Yes they had some issues as we all do, but they came out of the "procedure" with marked differences than before. Before they were generally happy and capable of happiness. Afterwards they seemed really sad, alot. They also got pregnant very soon afterwards (within a year). Most of them told me that despite feeling like they had to have the abortions the guilt and pain that they felt afterwards led them to allow themselves to get pregnant again.

I can also relate personally. I have a two year old and became pregnant when he was @ 1 1/2 years old. I was scared because I knew that my husband really did not want another one at the time and I did not think I was ready either. Well I had a miscarriage. It was selfish because I felt like maybe that was a good thing, especially when I found out that it could have been a blighted ovum (the egg may not have had the "material" to develop into a baby). I was kind of happy. Then it hit me. I lost a baby. Even if it was a blighted ovum. What could he/she have become if it were not a blighted ovum? I became depressed, started drinking (even though I am not really a drinker at all). I got pregnant two months later. Even though I was not "planning" the pregnancy I sure was not being cautious to not get pregnant. I was relieved. Almost like I had a third chance. I consider myself as having three children although only one(I am still pregnant with the second, I'm due anyday now) is born. I felt a weight was lifted off of me when I thanked God for the second life (no matter how short) and when even my doctor prayed for the lost baby. It gave me peace. I can only imagine if I'd made the decision to end the pregnancy how difficult it would have been.

BEOWULFE AND JIMMYJOE
Are we arguing for argument's sake?

Who is to say that these scientist didn't factor in mental stability. As a matter of fact, in the article, Colson mentions that the scientist did just that when they "controll(ed) for factors such as socio-economic status and home life."

JimmyJoe
agreed. I wonder how many women get bamboozled by abortion-lovers and then regret it months, years later.

Beowulfe, GunnyG and Sekhmet
Beowulfe: Fair point. However, in dealing with cause-and-effect, there can be little doubt that it's a cycle. What cannot be doubted is that in crossing the line and aborting, that is a line that can never be UNcrossed. There is a certain finality to it, and the reality of what ACTUALLY took place cannot be easily escaped.

GunnyG: Well, the article was primarily about the women who have abortions, and the effects on them. Personally, I have no doubt about the effects, and by then of course it is too late to undo anything. So it is difficult to exercise anything BUT compassion for the women involved when they took what they may have thought was an "easy way" out. As for the advocates of abortion - male/female - I just have no time for them.

Sekhmet: Well, everyone isnt "sober relaxed happy... with high self esteem"!! And those who arent are often the LEAST to blame, particularly when they are young - in that a great deal of this depends on one's upbringing. But getting pregnant under "bad circumstances" really is a minor thing by comparison to aborting that pregnancy.

Beowulfe
I have to agree. Substance abuse, anxiety, hostility, low self-esteem, and depression I will wager pre-date the pregnancies, much less the abortions.

Sober, relaxed, happy people with high self-esteem may be less likely to get pregnant under bad circumstances in the first place.

JimmyJoe
And it kills me to hear feminazis b*tching that men are running around getting over on women but WHO ENABLED them? The feminazis demanding abortion rights (like any man who do them!)

The problem with these studies...
Personally, I am against abortion except in the most grave cases, but there is a significant problem with studies like these, and that is the problem of cause and effect.

So it has been observed that women who have abortions also have higher tendancies toward substance abuse, anxiety, hostility, low self-esteem, and depression. The question that is left unanswered, though, is whether women who already experience substance abuse, anxiety, hostility, low self-esteem, and depression tend to choose abortion at a higher rate (i.e. substance abuse, anxiety, hostility, low self-esteem, and depression causes higher rates of abortion) or whether abortion causes higher rates of substance abuse, anxiety, hostility, low self-esteem, and depression.

Such a study that has been presented here points to a link between substance abuse, anxiety, hostility, low self-esteem, and depression and abortion, but it does not indicate what causes what.

Hardly Surprising
However it is dressed up, the "freedom of choice" refers to the freedom to take the life from anOTHER within the womb.

I dont think there is any way of killing the child which wouldNT leave mental scars and a guilt which cannot be denied. Regardless of the lingo used to hide the ugly nature of what happens during the "procedure" (hic).

Nice article, Mr Colson. The mothers truly ARE the secondary victims. Often pressurised by parents/boyfriends who get off scott free. As for those who make their money through the shedding of the blood of the innocent....
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.