Archive for the ‘babies’ Category

Death of a Doctor…and an Activist

May 31, 2009

I’ll keep this short and simple.

Dr. George Tiller, a performer of late term abortions, has been murdered.

Jim Pouillon, an anti-abortion activist, has also just been murdered.

To the Pro-choicers: I hope your fight for your so-called “rights” has been worth it. Dr. Tiller’s death is a travesty and the person (or persons) who did this act needs to be punished. But this man, this doctor, performed abortions because you wanted him to. If we as a society had chosen responsibility and compassion for both mothers and babies, instead of denying the value of life and making excuses for our own irresponsibility, his death might have been avoided, as well as the deaths of so many others. We celebrate death so much in our culture as a means of escape and ‘freedom.’  Well death is exactly what we’ve gotten back.

Look to the 1966 film Alfie, and its controversial abortion scene. The point is not whether abortion is right or wrong. It’s that it never would have happened in the first place, had it not been for Alfie’s irresponsible and callous behavior.

And I hope you will not rejoice in Pouillon’s death. You may not have approved of his position, but our society calls for tolerance and decency, even and especially with people we disagree with. Practice what you so ardently preach.

To the Pro-lifers: I consider myself pro-life. Also a Christian. That’s why I am so disapointed at the level of hate that so often pervades the pro life movement. Jesus said to love our enemies, even when it’s the most difficult thing to do. Can we truly call ourselves Christians?

Do not rejoice in Dr. Tiller’s death; it is murder, the same as any abortion. Loving and praying for your enemy is essential to being a truly decent and honorable human being. The party responsible for this man’s death has potentially damaged the movement we have fought so hard to build. People who might have joined with you will now be disgusted, and rightfully so. Do not hate this man’s memory, the party responsible, or anyone you know who might be Pro-Choice. To do so would make you the same as what you hate.

To both of you: Donate to women’s shelters and to adoption agencies that support both mothers and their babies. Support women who are frightened, unprepared or abandoned in their darkest hours by offering them hope, not death. Stop being fooled by political pundits who only care about you as far as you can vote (speaking to both Democrats and Republicans). Don’t give in to the pessimissm of death. Nor the hatred of each other. Give into hope.

The End.

Advertisements

Obama at Notre Dame: A Good Fit?

May 16, 2009

As the nation slowly makes its way beyond the scandals of beauty pageant contestants, we find ourselves now engulfed in an even more tense and controversial situation. Namely, the protests against Notre Dame University for asking President Obama to speak at their graduation ceremony. The reason behind the protests? Notre Dame is a Catholic institution, and in theory dedicated to the preservation of life in all its forms, including unborn children. Obama, however, is Pro-choice and does not share the Church’s strong feelings on the abortion issue. Therefore, several students have risen up in protest against the President’s appearance, which is being called a violation of Catholic values.

I’m of two minds about this issue, and no that’s not a sign of weakness. Rather, it’s a sign that I refuse to give myself over to limited partisanship. The moment you give yourself so completely to an ideology, liberal or conservative, is the day you’ve stopped thinking.

On the one hand, I am disappointed in Obama’s stance on the abortion issue. As a bishop recently put it, people fought for Obama’s right as an African American to be free and equal in our nation. Now that he is in a position of power, Obama turns his back on the most vulnerable of our society. In many ways, he resembles our founding fathers who yearned for independence…but only if slavery was permitted to continue. Having rights for yourself should not mean denying the rights of others.

Everyone was once a fetus (trust me, it’s science 😉 ) and we are all here because someone made the choiceto give us a chance at life. Ironically, so many who have benefited from that choice now fight to take that same chance at life away from others. Obama is an intelligent man, and I hope someday he is able to reconsider his position on this issue. However, I still respect him as a fellow human being and wish him well. Jesus did not reject those who disagreed with him, quite the contrary (more on that later).

I admire the Notre Dame protesters for speaking their mind even when the law and society are against them. Whether you’re liberal or conservative, it’s rarely a good idea to adopt a “my country, right or wrong” attitude. Sometimes your country is wrong and when that happens, you must speak up. Frankly, it has never been popular to be Catholic in America. Celebrities like to think they’re gutsy for ridiculing the Catholic Church, when in reality, it’s probably the safest, most acceptable thing in the world to do. Interestingly, according to the recent Gallup poll, more and more Americans say they are opposed to abortion. I do believe this is due in part to the brave protestors over the years who dared to spread the word and never give up.

No, America is not perfect. Still, one of the reasons we have to be very proud of our little nation is our emphasis on free speech and civil exchange of ideas. At times we take this privilege for granted, forgetting that so many citizens of the world can only dream of such a right. As I said in my entry regarding the Miss California controversy, we ought to be able to have serious discussions and disagreements in a respectful manner in the spirit of camaraderie, without declaring war on each other. This is a lesson both liberals and conservatives continually need to learn.

I admire liberals for preaching the values of free speech and equality. But sadly this often only seems to apply to those who agree with them. The words “liberal” and “partisan” seem like automatic contradictions, yet ironically they are all too frequently seen keeping company.

By the same token, I admire The Catholic Church for its undeniable dedication to charity and education over the years (I went to Catholic school my whole life and was always taught evolution, thank you 😉 ). However, it often has a somewhat “our way or the highway” attitude which makes it comes across as overly authoritarian and needlessly intimidating (two things you can never accuse Jesus of being 😉 ).

You know what, though? I think Notre Dame’s graduates can learn from both President Obama and the Pro-life protesters. And now I’m going to shock all of you. I honestly appreciate Obama’s agreeing to appear at a prodigious Catholic college like Notre Dame, despite knowing he disagreed with many of its policies. He could have just as easily brushed the invitation off. Instead he chose to realize that Catholics are a part of this nation too, and deserve his respect and support as President of the United States. Just as Jesus befriended the dreaded tax collectors, so should Notre Dame welcome those who respectfully disagree. To do otherwise would indeed be a violation of Catholic values. 😉

By the same token, the Pro-life student protesters have shown that we are a nation that prizes free speech, free thinking and the ability to critique our leaders (civilly of course 🙂 ). Ah protestors, as an early ’90s “Cotton – Fabric of Our Lives” commercial once put it, “With steadfast stares, the people cry, brave future…new world…” 😉

Furthermore, these brave souls are standing up for the rights of those who cannot speak for themselves. It’s an American tradition, and not something to be discouraged. As long as they conduct themselves in a civilized manner and not give the naysayers a reason to discredit them. Here I’m reminded of the words of another group of young protestors from the 1992 classic Newsies, “If we get violent, it’s only playing into their hands.” 😉

So in conclusion, I hope and pray President Obama and Notre Dame’s Pro-life protesters can find it in themselves to provide a good example for the graduates of 2009 and for all of our nation. New ideas don’t come from stagnation, they come from exchange. We need it now more than ever.

Shame on you, Christina’s Court…

May 11, 2009

…for displaying a disgusting and quite frankly bewildering lack of priorities and morals.

I admit, I have occasionally found myself watching these court room programs, Judge Judy, The People’s Court, Christina’s Court etc. I suppose you could call it a guilty pleasure (guilty…heh). Because I certainly don’t watch them in order to gain knowledge or support the cause of liberty and justice for all. These programs give so-called “judges” a nice little paycheck to take advantage of vulnerable people, parading and ridiculing them like freaks for all the nation to laugh at. The idea that any of these Mock Trials could win an award is laughable, but somehow it happened. And it says a lot about our society…

Christina’s Court is the paragon of TV virtue that recently took home an Emmy (and they wonder why no one watches these awards shows anymore). Now in recent days, Christina’s Court never fails to remind you of the honor bestowed upon it, as though constantly needing to justify its very existence in our lives.

Why am I being so hard on this particular program? Normally I would just let it go (or change the freakin channel), but today I felt I had to speak out. ‘Judge’ Christina has made it clear time and again that is Pro-Choice. Now she has the right to her opinion, and I’m sure she thinks she’s doing the right thing. However, let’s take a look at what her version of ‘doing the right thing’ has led to.

In today’s trial (heh, I mean episode), the case brought before ‘Judge’ Christina was of a woman who had failed to pay back a friend for helping to pay for her abortion.

Let me repeat this. A woman was pregnant (That is, “having a child developing in the body” (dictionary.com)).  And she made the difficult decision to have an abortion (As in a procedure performed “in order to end a pregnancy (dictionary.com).”  

So wait, if pregnancy is the state of “having a child developing in the body” and abortion is a procedure done “in order to end a pregnancy“, then abortion would essentially be defined as ending the state of having a child in the body. Or, to put it even more compactly, ending the child.Ending”…well that’s a nice euphemism for something else…

In order for Pro-choice activists to correct this issue, they’d have to next advocate to change the definition of “pregnancy.” What a fascinating world we would life in, if being pregnant no longer meant having a child. “Hi, yes I am pregnant, don’t know why, my body just got bigger one day! By the way, my kid was asking me how babies were born…and frankly I’m stuck!”

Anyway, this woman turned to a friend’s boyfriend and asked him to help pay for her abortion. He did so, and now he’s in court because the woman has been slow in paying him back.

Now let me repeat this…A man offered this woman $money$ (As in, “gold, silver, or other metal…issued as a medium of exchange and measure of value” (dictionary.com)). In exchange for his generosity, an abortion took place (as we’ve already deduced, the ‘ending’ of a child).

Now this man is angry, and this woman is on trial. Why? Is it because…

A. They participated in the tragic and difficult decision of ‘ending’ a child?
B. The law states that ‘ending’ a child is a crime.
C. The man wants his money.

If you guessed C, congratulations you have a keen and penetrating understanding of how our materialistic nation and capitalistic government functions. Throughout the trial/episode, it is clear where our priorities are. We hear about $money$. The $money$ that was offered, the $money$ that is owed, the $money$ that should be awarded. What about the tragedy of the woman losing the chance to be a mother? What about the tragedy of a child’s life coming to and ‘end?’  Heh, sorry bub, you’re in the wrong country for that…

And what of our esteemed, Emmy award winning ‘Judge’ Christina? At the very beginning of the trial/episode, the young woman (the one that owes the $money$) explains that normally she is morally against abortion in any form. From ‘Judge’ Christina we hear not a word. No “well that’s your right” or “I have to respect your beliefs.” Nothing, just silence. (Ok, to be fair, shows like this are created in an editing room and you really can’t tell what reactions she might have had. It’s very comforting to know that nothing on this show about the law is real, yes?)

Even when ‘Judge’ Christina does talk, it’s not much better. She proceeds to scold the young woman and make her feel guilty. Not for choosing abortion when she could have chosen adoption. Not for claiming to be against abortion, only to go ahead and do it. No, our illustrious ‘Judge’ makes the young woman feel guilty…for not paying back the $money$.

She offers up such gems as, “Don’t you think it was nice of him to do that for you?” or “Not paying back the money…that’s not a very responsible thing to do.”

……

……

EXCUSE ME? Look, whether you’re Pro-life or Pro-choice, you have to see the insanity here. This young woman claimed to have gotten pregnant “against her will.” She felt uncomfortable telling her parents. After some thinking, she felt she had no other choice but to go ahead with an abortion. Despite being Pro-life, I honestly sympathized with this woman’s plight. Not to mention the child whose life has “ended” so early.  And ‘Judge’ Christina is ranting on about the responsibility of repaying money?

Well, long after the money has been repaid and long after it has been spent again by the “nice” young man, the woman will still have to live with her decision. She said she was interested in starting her “own” family soon (apparently family is something you get to pick and choose at the mall). If she intends to raise her “own” children with the belief that abortion is wrong, she should be prepared for her “own” children to be very confused. Abortion is wrong but let’s not think about the brother or sister you don’t have today. And if you do have an abortion, be sure to pay your benefactor back! 😉

When Pro-choice activists advocated for the rights of women to make their own decisions regarding pregnancy, I doubt this is what they had in mind. For money to become more important than both the woman and the child. But this is what happens when you decided life is expendable. Other things, like money, become more important. What was that definition of money again? Bits of medal “issued as a measure of value.” Well it’s clear just where our values stand. Good job, activists.

Judge’ Christina’s original theme at the start of the show was “She takes the law into her own heart” (it has since been altered since she received her Emmy…heh). I hope she and her heart are very happy…$money$ and all.

Still, I hear her program has recently been cancelled. As a human being, I honestly wish her luck and the best. But I think our society is better off…

Miss California Controversy: Enough!

May 6, 2009

I’ve been very disappointed as of late. No, disappointment doesn’t even begin to cover it. There are no words for the outrage and bitterness I feel. I’m talking about this recent controversy regarding Miss California’s comments on gay marriage, and the aftermath that has sadly ensued.

You know the story by now, if you keep up with such things (if not, consider yourself very fortunate!). At a recent Miss USA Pageant, Miss California was asked by judge Perez Hilton her position regarding gay marriage. Miss California politely but unequivocally made her position clear–she was against gay marriage. Mr. Hilton, looking visibly disappointed and deflated, nevertheless admirably maintained his composure. At the end of the night, another contestant took home the crown. The Miss USA pageant was over, everyone went home, brushed their teeth, petted their dogs and went to bed. End of story.

Well…It should have ended there. I mean, Mr. Hilton’s question was well structured and relevant to the lives of American citizens (though perhaps a trifle out of place at a beauty pageant). Miss California’s answer was diplomatic and considerate to the feelings of all concerned (its motivation perhaps a little confused, but I’ll discuss that later). In every respect, this exchange was everything we should hope for in an intelligent exchange between two citizens of the USA debating a hot button issue. It should have been heralded and celebrated as a shiny example of how two human beings can disagree but still respect each other’s feelings.

It should have been all those things…but because we are fatally flawed human beings, this was not the case. Following the contest, Mr. Hilton chose to further fan the flames by going on his video blog and make disparaging and sexist remarks about Miss California for all the world to see.

In the weeks that followed, other media figures joined the fray, insulting Miss California’s faith, intelligence, even physical appearance. Women’s groups weren’t much help; a so-called “feminist” appearing on FOX News made the amazingly catty comment, “She should get a heart transplant, rather than a breast transplant.” (Rowr!) And as if that wasn’t enough, “racy” photos of Miss California have now mysteriously surfaced and could cost her her crown.

To all these people, frankly you need to go back and reexamine what it means to be liberalIt means you stand up for freedom of speech and equality for all. Not just for the opinions you like, but for all opinions. I can understand why Miss California’s views were offensive to you and your ideals.  And if you honestly feel an opinion is damaging to the equality you hold dear, by all means you speak your mind.  You advocate, you protest, you make your voice heard. That’s what makes you liberal and a vital asset to this country.

But you do not engage in this kind of wanton bullying, hazing and gossip more commonly found in a school playground. You are punishing this young woman, not because she used bigoted or inciteful language (quite the contrary), but simply because you didn’t like her response. It’s wrong…and it’s definitely not liberal. 😉

I consider myself liberal on many issues and I have often engaged people in debate. But no matter how frustrated and annoyed some people make me feel, I always at least try to remain tactful and sensitive, seeing all points of view and using logic to back up my own claims. If I feel like denigrating someone (and let’s face it, we all do sometimes, we’re human), I do it in the privacy of my own home. Not on my Blog, not in a newspaper, not on Television, not anywhere where my emotions could potentially harm the feelings of a fellow human being. That’s not being fake, that’s being an adult.

Now it may surprise you to know that I actually support gay marriage. We make provisions for long-term unmarried heterosexual couples and most importantly their children, and I see no reason why homosexuals shouldn’t get the same consideration. And frankly, while I was impressed with Miss California’s diplomacy, I was not as impressed with her actual answer.

To be specific, I had a problem with this section, “I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman … that’s how I was raised.” Now maybe I’m being nit-picky, but I wish she’s given a more substantial answer rather than “that’s how I was raised.” If she is honestly against gay marriage, it should be because she honestly believes it, not because she was always told to.

A similar issue was addressed recently on the Tyra Banks Show; young people with somewhat racist views using the excuse “I come from a small town, that’s how I was raised.” Ms. Banks wisely pointed out that nowadays, especially with the World Wide Web (emphasis on World), there really is no excuse for ignorance. As you grow into an adult, it is no longer your parents responsibility to choose your opinions for you. You have to learn to make the choices yourself and live with them. Especially when it comes to issue that could harm your fellow human beings and infringe on their rights. Maybe you’ll end up still agreeing with your parents. Maybe not. Either way, it must be you.

Knowing this, it might also surprise you that I consider myself a Christian (and a Catholic at that!). I believe God cares for all of us and that we’re all here for a reason, hetereosexual and homosexual. And while I wish liberals were just as concerned with the rights of unborn children as they are about gay rights, I try to keep the doctrine of loving my enemy close to my heart. Jesus had many enemies, mainly for the crime of speaking his mind. But he never stopped caring about people.

Now religious people don’t have the monopoly on morality. Religious or atheist, we are all capable of being decent people. It’s not religion or atheism that gets in the way of morality. Time and again, it’s our own flawed humanity. Again, I take you back to that stage of the Miss USA Pageant. Both parties involved are not that different. They’re human beings simply trying to find their way through life and trying to do the right thing. In these uncertain times, sometimes it’s hard to know what that is. But perhaps one thing is certain…

As the legendary Captain Kirk once confidently put it, “We’re the same. We share the same history, the same heritage, the same lives. We’re tied together beyond any untying. Man or woman, it makes no difference. We’re human. We couldn’t escape from each other even if we wanted to….the only thing that’s truly yours is the rest of humanity. That’s where your duty lies” (Star Trek, “Who Mourns for Adonis?”).

It’s not too late. Even if these public figures can’t get their acts together, we can learn from their mistakes. We can disagree. We can speak our minds and express our frustration. But we must never forget that we are all part of this world. As someone once said, either we stand together, or together we will fall.

The Abortion Issue: Choice and Compassion

October 22, 2008

A recent episode of the CBS show Dr. Phil focused on men fighting for the right not to become a parent. That is, they demand the right to refuse to support or acknowledge a child they did not plan for, simply because of one night of sex. I personally found this episode disturbing, yet quite interesting, and telling, in many ways.

These men say they have been told by the legal system that they do not have the right to deny their parenthood. If they had sex that resulted in a baby, that’s it, they are a father and they have to take some kind of responsibility. Dr. Phil largely seemed to agree with this, saying it’s important to take responsibility for your actions and accept the consequences, especially when it comes to raising children. There are too many women struggling to raise children alone. And I could not agree more with Dr. Phil (which doesn’t happen everyday! Hehe). 🙂

That’s why I am quite confused. We as a society say men aren’t allowed to stop being fathers, no matter what they may want. Yet at the same time, we say women are permitted to deny their own parenthood, through abortion.

(Before you stop reading in disgust, let me just say that while I am pro-life, I am also a woman, and an Independent, and very much concerned with women’s issues and rights. I think women who have children in our society are not getting enough support or help, and that needs to change. This is still a very sexist society. But this also needs to be said…)

I was disturbed by the reactions of some of the guests on this Dr. Phil episode, their outright refusal to acknowledge a beautiful, innocent, needy child they helped bring into the world (though to be fair, I don’t know there full stories and only have the show to go on). I think both pro-life and pro-choice people would agree with me on this. But was I surprised? No…and none of us really should be.

In my opinion, this is what Roe vs. Wade has led to. In theory, it’s supposed to free a woman from being held down and subjagated in a sexist and unsupportive culture. But sadly, it has instead encouraged women (and now men) to fight against and vehemently deny their responsibilities to their children, in the name of choice. They say, if they don’t want to, they don’t have to. These men on Dr. Phil are only asking for the same rights women now have. The right to abandon a child they created. And no one is asking how the child feels…

Now I’m not saying rights, freedom, choice and personal power aren’t important, they are. But think of it this way. Those things are neutral concepts, neither good nor bad in themselves. Mother Teresa chose to help the needy. Suffragettes chose to fight for a women’s right to vote. Everyday people choose to help, care, share, defend and love. All very good and noble things.

On the other hand, Hitler chose to try and commit genocide. People chose to own slaves during The Civil War. Everyday people choose to steal, kill, hurt, bully and tease. Clearly, freedom and choice can be used to represent either good or bad. Perhaps choice, while important, isn’t quite enough.

Fans of the show Star Trek might recall the pilot episode “Where No Man Has Gone Before” where a crewman named Mitchell is given supernatural powers and becomes virtually god-like. He now has the power to do and choose whatever he wants. His supporter, Dr. Dehner, insists this could be “a wonderful thing…a forerunner for a new and better kind of human being.” With great power could come the ability to make a better, more peacful and more just world. Sounds logical.

But instead, Dehner and Captain Kirk are disturbed and surprised to see Mitchell using his new found abilities to inspire hurt and fear among the people he once called his friends. His fellow human beings are no longer important, no longer worth fighting for. No longer his responsibility.

As Captain Kirk observes, power means nothing…if it lacks compassion (“Above all else, a god needs compassion!”). No matter how powerful Mitchell gets, he is still human, still weak, as we all are. We have compassion and morals in our society in order to stop evil from occuring in the world. But Mitchell now rejects that. He is all-poweful, unstoppable…and he has chosen not to care.

Now, in no way am I comparing pro-choicers with the likes of Mitchell. All I’m saying is this: Just like Dr. Dehner, some people also hoped Roe vs. Wade would bring about a noble, positive change in the world. But as this Dr. Phil episode demonstrates to me, all it as done is give people the choice to avoid compassion.

Our society generally defends the rights of children to be cared for, by both parents. But if we tell adults that children are disposable before birth, how can we expect them to care for children after birth? I’m not sure we can have it both ways…

I know what the pro-choice argument might be. After birth, children are entitled to parental care and legal rights. But before birth, they are not yet human, not yet entitled to rights. What’s my response?

Well #1. It’s an oldie but a goodie. The argument that fetuses aren’t human is disturbingly similar to the argument used to justify slavery. In the play 1776, our founding fathers in the Continental Congress were fighting for independence from the tyranny of England. In the making of their declaration, they chose to uphold slavery, despite Thomas Jefferson’s insistence that slaves “are people who are being treated as property.” Ironic that those who fight for freedom, are often just as eager to fight for oppression of others…when it serves them.

Then again, children have always been third class citizens in our world. After all, they’re not the same as the grown ups who run the world. They aren’t as big as grown ups or as intelligent, they are outside of what we consider human. Let’s face it, as a species we do NOT have a good track record with those who are different. Children are also vulnerable, awkward and helpless. They, by their nature, require grown ups to stop being selfish and take responsibility. In this, we also have a poor track record.

John Lennon, a vocal advocate for women’s liberation in the ’70s, was once said to regret the fact that while women have a certain amount of rights, children seem to have absolutely none. I mean, think about what you see on the news everyday. Crimes committed against children, stories of physical and emotion abuse by parents, laws that fail to protect children. People given the power of life over death through abortion. A civilization is often judged by how it treats its most innocent. In this respect, America has a very long way to go. We cannot honestly claim to be a safe haven for children in our “great and free” nation. In many ways we are still stuck in the dark ages…

Many say the story of Hansel and Gretel is reminiscient of a time in history when parents purposely led their children out into the woods, never to be seen again.

Even the Roman Catholic Church has been guilty of this way of thinking, with their previously held belief in the existence of Limbo. For anyone unfamiliar, the idea is an unbaptized baby is unable to go to Heaven when it dies. But rather than go to Hell, it goes to a halfway point called Limbo. Sounds relatively harmless, even humorous nowadays. And some still look on this concept as a positive, at least the baby doesn’t go to Hell. But the basic principle of Limbo is that an unbaptized baby is unworthy, basically not yet human, and therefore unable to be with God in Heaven. Nevermind the fact that the baby is an innocent and has never harmed anyone (unlike many baptized grown ups). Limbo was just another way of denying children their humanity. And the Catholic Church is better off without it…

In another recent episode, Dr. Phil interviewed a woman who had paniced as a pregnant 16 year old and chosen to kill her baby. She said if she had known there were places to drop off abandoned babies, she would have done that instead. Now, I sympathize with his woman being young and scared, and I know she regrets her decision. And more publicity should be given to baby safe houses. But her ignorance of these safe havens does NOT excuse what she did.

We all have children in our lives, that are not our own, that we are fond of. A friend or relative’s child, a student, a camper, etc. With their innocence and cheerful spirits, these children make our lives a little brighter, a little easier, a little more happy. They are hope for the future as they grow and mature. Now imagine if you could go back in time, and it turns out a parent has made the choice to abort this child. They will never exist to make our day better, never exist to inspire home. Would you really stand by and accept this choice? As Captain Kirk said, above all, we need compassion.

Ironically, John Lennon was also quoted to have said, “But the women will liberate the children…”  With Roe v. Wade…clearly that has not happened…

Now having said that, I do not want to forget the rights of women in this argument. Abortion is often done not out of selfishness, but out of loss of hope. Women are in a very special, yet vulnerable position as the bearer of children in our world. More and more, women are left to raise their children alone. Their parents throw them out, their boyfriends abandon them, their bosses punish them for taking maternity leave. Families are so spread apart, women no longer have a grandmother or sister or aunt to help them out with daily needs. Another recent episode of Dr. Phil featured a woman who felt so inadequate and overwhelmed as a mother, she considered giving her young children away for their benefit. I can’t say I blame some women for being afraid.

That’s why pro-life groups, in my opinion, shouldn’t be wasting their time trying to overturn Roe vs. Wade (it won’t change much) or elect Republicans (who talk the talk but do nothing). We, both pro-life and pro-choice, should make the choice to help women and their babies. Make the choice to give them hope. 🙂

Well Obama is now the President. And while I admire his work to eliminate povery over the years, he has made it quite clear he has no interest in using his activism to lessen the number of abortions in this country. As a Catholic Bishop noted recently, people fought for years for Obama’s right to be president as an African American. But he himself is unwilling to defend the rights of the unborn. In a way, he is inadvertently taking a cue from the founding fathers who fought for freedom, while defending slavery. Obama is a very intelligent man, I hope someday he can give this issue a second thought. Despite everything, I do honestly wish him luck. 🙂

Not that I wanted McCain. The Republican candidates have been all talk and no action on the abortion issue. Not to mention they are largely responsible for the economic crisis we are now in, making it that much more difficult for young mothers.

While we’re on the topic of politics, I feel for all the people affected by Prop 8 in California, prohibiting gay marriage. That isn’t right, especially for couples already married and with children. I don’t blame people for protesting. But if gay marriage is an important issue (and it is), then defending innocent life (born or unborn) should be just as important.

We can’t just rely on our leaders to make things better. All we can do is take responsibilty and consequences for our own actions, and remember to support our fellow human beings, both mothers, fathers and babies alike. 🙂

Also see Sophie’s Dilemma–Don’t Make Them Choose.