Babies...

[amyrouse]

I've been thinking more and more about this lately, especially after a short exchange I had with Marieelissa the other day (this is not an attack, just showing where the thought began), about babies and abortion.  Right now I am sitting on my laptop and my 23 month old daughter is sitting next to me watching her favorite movie (In case you haven't seen it, Up is worth your time ) and I keep thinking about this heated topic.  And, I feel the need to make a statement.

First, before I begin, I want to say that my religion does not see abortion as sinful.  Fetuses are potential life until birth.  Until birth, the ones who are already living, breathing, and getting around outside of the womb take precedence. 

I just wanted to say that I believe babies are wonderful, amazing, and a blessing.  I love my daughter more than I ever believed I could love anyone or anything.  Everything I do is for her benefit (yes, including posting on these forums.  Remember I get $3, but also, by staying up to date on my beliefs and debating skills, I can help her out as she grows.  We hope to homeschool.).  There isn't anything I wouldn't do for her...she is the center of my universe...screw science, I'm a mom, and that is how it works. 

That being said...

People may believe babies are adorable, cute, amazing, blah blah...but...babies are hard work.  Let me repeat: HARD WORK.  Anyone not willing to do that hard work does not need to have a baby.  It is not for me to judge how they became pregnant...my daughter wasn't planned, either.  The difference lies, though, in what I knew once I knew I was pregnant.  I knew that my daughter (yes, I knew she was a girl from the start; call it mother's instinct) was mine and I knew I wanted her more than I ever wanted anything before.  I had had a miscarriage four months prior to getting pregnant with my living child, and after surviving that, I wanted my child so badly that I was willing to go on bedrest (yes, it was threatened) and risk my life (ditto during delivery) to have her. 

On the flip side of that coin...think about the women who become so ill when finding out they are pregnant that they are willing to risk their lives to NOT have that baby.  The women whose lives become so filled with fear...and then those women, when walking into a clinic for a consultation, are bombarded with protesters telling her the right thing to do with her body.  Where I live, there are a total of two clinics in the state.  Those clinics are open two days during the week.  The choice to end a pregnancy has become not only emotionally difficult (since women have been taught our entire lives that we should want to have babies, and we are led to believe that if we don't want them or can't have them, there is something wrong with us) but logistically difficult as well.

When I had my miscarriage, I was on Medicaid (judge me if you wish; I don't care).  While I was pregnant with my daughter, I received a phone call from my doctor's office telling me that Medicaid didn't want to pay for my d&c because "they don't pay for abortions."  I was livid.  Needless to say, I got it worked out and Medicaid did pay for the procedure...but it took me several hours to get the situation straightened out.  There was no good reason for me to have to deal with this.

Other than the oft-cited religious view that abortion is murder, what is the point of doing this to women who are already in turmoil?  And, as for adoption...who takes care of those babies?  Watch The Cider House Rules and tell me that every pregnancy should be carried through until the end.

Come forth, dissenters... 

[shernajwine]

I think it should be prevented at the source. Don't have sex if you don't want a baby. Of course you can use protection but that isn't completely reliable. On the same token...IF EVERYBODY who didn't want a child used protection there would be a lot less "accidents" and therefore Cider House Rules would be an irrelevant comparison. Meaning orphaned children would be significantly less of an issue. There probably wouldn't be enough orphans available for adoption for all the people who have fertility problems (at least within the united states where people are more educated on contraception).

I don't really like arguing this subject because I don't think a child should suffer being brought into the world when the parents didn't want him/her, but I can't reconcile the fact that it is still killing a fetus and I have the view that a fetus is a living person, at whatever developmental stage he/she is at. So, I'm really torn between the inevitable suffering of the child if born and the killing of the child to prevent the suffering. Either way it is very sad to me. 

[amyrouse]

I don't really like arguing this subject because I don't think a child should suffer being brought into the world when the parents didn't want him/her, but I can't reconcile the fact that it is still killing a fetus and I have the view that a fetus is a living person, at whatever developmental stage he/she is at. So, I'm really torn between the inevitable suffering of the child if born and the killing of the child to prevent the suffering. Either way it is very sad to me. 

I can definitely agree that overall it is a very sad topic.

[amyrouse]

Amy---finally a thread where I can say this .... I really like your avatar and little phrase there, it's one of the BEST I've seen!!      Bet you're a GREAT mom!!

Thank you!  I try.

[queenofnines]

Don't have sex if you don't want a baby.

That's a ridiculous, unrealistic expectation and is a message that leads to many teen pregnancies (because it is often taught in place of REAL sex education).  Sex is an important part of most relationships; your coupleship will suffer and may even fail without it.  It also implies that once a couple has had all of the children they plan to have, they're not allowed to have sex any more?! (not all of us can be Duggars, thanks)

The mantra should be: "Don't have sex UNLESS the female is on consistent birth control (like The Pill) AND both male and female are STD-free."

Of course you can use protection but that isn't completely reliable.

Only if the person using it isn't reliable.  Obviously it's still possible to become prego using birth control, but it is extremely rare if the parties involved are responsible about it.  Usually those who claim to have gotten pregnant on birth control did something wrong (like took antibiotics that cancelled out The Pill, there was a tiny hole in the condom, the woman LIED in order to get knocked up...).

[shernajwine]

Only if the person using it isn't reliable.  Obviously it's still possible to become prego using birth control, but it is extremely rare  if the parties involved are responsible about it.  Usually those who claim to have gotten pregnant on birth control did something wrong (like took antibiotics that cancelled out The Pill, there was a tiny hole in the condom, the woman LIED in order to get knocked up...).

Exactly my point. The rarity of the accidental pregnancy would significantly lower the amount of orphaned children, there wouldn't be enough children available for adoption if everyone utilized contraception properly and every time they had sex. Taking away the need for abortion. (except in cases where trying to carry a baby to term puts the mothers life in danger, then of course the mothers decision is based on saving her life)

[queenofnines]

Exactly my point. The rarity of the accidental pregnancy would significantly lower the amount of orphaned children, there wouldn't be enough children available for adoption if everyone utilized contraception properly and every time they had sex. Taking away the need for abortion.

So why did you say "Don't have sex if you don't want a baby"? 

Why not encourage more education on protection instead?

Besides what girl wants to have sex with a guy that doesn't want to marry her?

And what guy wants to marry a woman who doesn't put out?  lol

Not all women are in relationships JUST to get the guy to marry them...

[shernajwine]

So why did you say "Don't have sex if you don't want a baby"?

Well, unlike some I think sex should be enjoyed within marriage. People who are married who have an "accident" are less likely to feel the need to abort. Women who have "accidents" that they feel the need to get rid of, are generally women who are promiscuous or at least are very young and immature and shouldn't be having sex in the first place. (And this is not including rape victims who become pregnant as the sex was not mutual but forced)

Educating about contraception is VERY important but it wouldn't be necessary if people kept their legs closed in the first place. I realize that it's unrealistic to expect people to not have sex (casual, premarital...whatever), living in the moral decay we currently live in, and that's why I continued from that statement to how birth control should be used EVERY TIME.

The following quote was taken from the same post where I said "Don't have sex if you don't want a baby".

IF EVERYBODY who didn't want a child used protection there would be a lot less "accidents" and therefore.................orphaned children would be significantly less of an issue

It seems that you are just trying to pick apart what I said and pounce on an opportunity to blast the moral underpinnings of my comment. Seeing as how abstinence is a Christian taught solution to STD and unwanted pregnancy. It looks like you are rooting around to blast a Christian belief......

[amyrouse]

Besides what girl wants to have sex with a guy that doesn't want to marry her?

Maybe a girl that doesn't want to marry the guy, either.  They do exist.  My husband was supposed to be a one night stand, and he was the one who pushed to get us married.

That is an antiquated idea.  There are still girls that want marriage and family first...but the great thing about living in America is that women have other choices.  Look at Annella...she isn't married and she has a satisfying life.  And believe me, I'd rather have her as a preacher than someone who wouldn't preach love.

[amyrouse]

Only if the person using it isn't reliable.  Obviously it's still possible to become prego using birth control, but it is extremely rare  if the parties involved are responsible about it.  Usually those who claim to have gotten pregnant on birth control did something wrong (like took antibiotics that cancelled out The Pill, there was a tiny hole in the condom, the woman LIED in order to get knocked up...).

Exactly my point. The rarity of the accidental pregnancy would significantly lower the amount of orphaned children, there wouldn't be enough children available for adoption if everyone utilized contraception properly and every time they had sex. Taking away the need for abortion. (except in cases where trying to carry a baby to term puts the mothers life in danger, then of course the mothers decision is based on saving her life)

So, maybe abstinence only education isn't what is best for our children?

[shernajwine]

Only if the person using it isn't reliable.  Obviously it's still possible to become prego using birth control, but it is extremely rare  if the parties involved are responsible about it.  Usually those who claim to have gotten pregnant on birth control did something wrong (like took antibiotics that cancelled out The Pill, there was a tiny hole in the condom, the woman LIED in order to get knocked up...).

Exactly my point. The rarity of the accidental pregnancy would significantly lower the amount of orphaned children, there wouldn't be enough children available for adoption if everyone utilized contraception properly and every time they had sex. Taking away the need for abortion. (except in cases where trying to carry a baby to term puts the mothers life in danger, then of course the mothers decision is based on saving her life)

So, maybe abstinence only education isn't what is best for our children?

I didn't say or even imply that it was. Ideally, abstinence is the sure fire way to prevent these problems. And I don't think that it's impossible to have a satisfying relationship before marriage without sex, and not only do I not think that but I have done it and have seen many people who have done it. So, is abstinence the ridiculous antiquated idea of old fashioned religion? No, I don't think so, but in a society that glamorizes sex and promotes premarital intimacy, it has become a losing battle in general. My own children will be taught the self worth and value of abstaining.

[amyrouse]

I didn't say or even imply that it was. Ideally, abstinence is the sure fire way to prevent these problems. And I don't think that it's impossible to have a satisfying relationship before marriage without sex, and not only do I not think that but I have done it and have seen many people who have done it. So, is abstinence the ridiculous antiquated idea of old fashioned religion? No, I don't think so, but in a society that glamorizes sex and promotes premarital intimacy, it has become a losing battle in general. My own children will be taught the self worth and value of abstaining.

I agree that abstinence has its worth, but I also think that it is unrealistic to teach abstinence only.  I also think it is wrong to imply (not saying you have, just in general) that there is something wrong with having sexual urges and wanting to have sex, because it is very healthy to have those urges.  I don't think there is anything wrong with consensual sex...and I believe it is imperative that we equip our children with the knowledge they need to stay protected...because the majority of them are going to have sex.  Placing a stigma on it only makes it more appealing...and sex is one thing we definitely do not need to make more appealing!   

[AmyTrivitt]

Besides what girl wants to have sex with a guy that doesn't want to marry her?

Umm my personally opinion everyone needs a good lay without strings!! Call me any name you want but everybody has needs and im not one that is found of a vibrator!! Buy a condom, get on the pill, use a female condom.. Look the three's got it here!!

[shernajwine]

Placing a stigma on it only makes it more appealing...and sex is one thing we definitely do not need to make more appealing!

I am in total agreement with that! I want to discuss freely with my children that sex is a GOOD thing! But, I'm not going to promote that it's a good thing when it's done casually. I want them to know it isn't dirty and it's not dirty to think about it or have sexual feelings towards a person. I will also teach them along with that, a little thing called self-control, and the benefits of waiting. I don't expect them to be perfect and it does scare me to death the world they are growing up in and how it portrays sex, but I trust that being open with them about it and loving them no matter how much they mess up, will help them to make better choices. 

[amyrouse]

Placing a stigma on it only makes it more appealing...and sex is one thing we definitely do not need to make more appealing!

I am in total agreement with that! I want to discuss freely with my children that sex is a GOOD thing! But, I'm not going to promote that it's a good thing when it's done casually. I want them to know it isn't dirty and it's not dirty to think about it or have sexual feelings towards a person. I will also teach them along with that, a little thing called self-control, and the benefits of waiting. I don't expect them to be perfect and it does scare me to death the world they are growing up in and how it portrays sex, but I trust that being open with them about it and loving them no matter how much they mess up, will help them to make better choices. 

The only thing I could add to this is teaching them the proper uses of barrier methods of birth control...since condoms are the cheapest method to prevent pregnancy and STI's.  My oldest nephews (one is 21 and the other is 18) both got the condom lecture from me, which consisted of "I can't tell you whether or not to have sex since only you can make that decision, but if you are old enough to have sex, you are old enough to show me you can put this condom on this banana properly. If you're too embarrassed, maybe you should think twice about sex."