Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Dear Planned Parenthood: My miscarriage was nothing like an abortion

Published

on

My miscarriage was nothing like an abortion

I was sitting on the floor of my bedroom with friends playing Monopoly when I felt it. Something wasn’t right. Afraid, but wanting to appear like everything was normal, I maintained my composure. I would wear my best poker face, even if I was only playing a board game.

Politely, I excused myself from the top hat and thimble game pieces and crossed the short distance from my floor to the bathroom across the hall. It was behind the privacy of the closed door that I was first able to confirm what I had already feared — at 17-years-old and six weeks pregnant, I was suffering a miscarriage.

And that’s the first memory that came rushing back to me last week when I read a pro-abortion activist’s opinion piece equating miscarriage with abortion. In the article, she describes her personal experiences with both miscarriage and abortion – calling them “sisters” – asserting that there is no difference between a woman who miscarries and one who deliberately terminates a pregnancy.

As a woman who has endured the heartbreak of a miscarriage, I can’t express how shocked and insulted I was by the absurdity of the comparison. How dare she imply that the loss of a child through an act of nature is similar to a mindful choice to kill a baby in the womb? Most women who have miscarried loved their babies and were prepared to make sacrifices for them. Whether they were planning to raise the child themselves or to utilize adoptive services, both choices would have been an act of selfless love – something an abortion can never be.

I will never forget lying on that table in the dimly lit ultrasound room, a scared 17-year-old girl trying to figure out what was happening inside of her and why. With the glow from the ultrasound monitor illuminating the expression of sorrow on the nurse’s face, she assured me she was looking for my baby. The room was heavy with silence as she searched. I wasn’t sure what I was supposed to be seeing on the screen but everything I needed to know I understood through the avoidance of eye contact, which told me it was over before I’d even heard the sympathetic tones respond that, no, there wasn’t a heartbeat, and sorry, the baby is gone.

Where was my choice?

Women who suffer a miscarriage are without choice, while women who have an abortion have intentionally chosen to end the life of their child.

Intent is everything. When a man dies from a heart attack we treat the situation differently than when a man dies from being stabbed in the heart. And we should treat them differently: one is a natural death, the other a murder. Similarly, a miscarriage is a result of natural causes, beyond the choice or control of the mother, whereas abortion is an act of violence against an innocent human being, resulting in that baby’s death, with the mother’s consent.

I grieved the loss of my child for days, weeks, months – the kind of grief that leaves one bedridden, unshowered, and emotionally shattered. It felt as if all the light in my world had been sucked out. I mourned the loss of a future with my child – a future I would never have surrendered to abortion, but had taken from me by miscarriage.

I had already imagined what he or she would look like, their newborn smell, the baby giggles, first steps and bicycle rides, working on homework together. I wondered whether they would love pineapple on pizza, or think it was yucky.

In my mind, I had already lived a life with this child.

While the future I envisioned may have been mere potential, the child in my womb was not. He or she was real, alive, and already developing all the necessary organs and special little traits that would make that future possible.

My baby’s death was a kind of death for me as well. The anticipation of butterfly kisses and bruised knees was gone, replaced by a gnawing pain and a lingering fear that continued to haunt me in later pregnancies. At each prenatal ultrasound appointment I would always subconsciously hold my breath and brace myself for what the screen might – or might not –  display, before the ultrasound wand was even placed upon my swollen belly.

Abortion propaganda would tell me that I was fortunate to have a miscarriage. A 17-year-old girl has no business becoming a mother, right? She has her whole life ahead of her, college and a career — and let’s not even get into her unhealthy relationship with the child’s father and the financial instability that comes along with working part-time, waiting tables.

Thankfully, I never bought into the disempowering fearmongering found in a Planned Parenthood brochure.

I knew the road to motherhood would not be easy, and I was afraid of becoming a teenage mother. But I also knew that women are strong and resilient, and that women throughout all of history had become mothers in far more dire circumstances than I faced.

There were a lot of scary unknowns ahead of me, but the things I did know, I knew with utter certainty: I knew I could find a way to do it, I knew that I loved my baby, and I knew that there was nothing I wouldn’t sacrifice to spare the life of another human being, especially when that human being was my own child. I was prepared to lay down everything in an act of selfless love that encompasses the beauty and gift of motherhood.

If I’m honest, the pain of losing a child is the lingering kind. I don’t know that it ever fully goes away.

But I don’t think that it’s supposed to.

The loss of human life is tragic, regardless of the surrounding circumstances. This is something we just innately know. We feel it. There’s something ugly, tragic, and wrong about death, and nobody needs that wrongness explained.

Yet abortion advocates like to pretend that the death of an aborted child is a different kind of death. A less important death. Not because the aborted baby is somehow less human than his or her miscarried counterpart, but simply because the mother chose for her child to die.

If nothing else, I am glad to see an abortion advocate admit that, in both cases of miscarriage and abortion, the life of a human being is lost, and the future they might have lived is gone right along with them.

In situations of miscarriage and abortion, we mourn the loss of life. We mourn the absence of a child we never got to know. We mourn those lost “pieces of a future you only experienced in your mind”, as the author so rightly acknowledges — and this is where the similarities between miscarriage and abortion end.

An abortion is a choice, as any pro-abortion advocate will tell you. To choose to have an abortion is to consciously consent to an act of violence against the child in the womb, resulting in that child’s murder. There is no escaping this reality by pretending that it is the same as an accidental death. Just as one who’s been stabbed to death can never truly be labeled a heart attack victim, an aborted baby can never be classified as dead by natural causes.

Miscarriage and abortion are not sisters, they are not even in the same family.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

President Trump on Roe v. Wade

Published

on

President Trump on Roe v Wade

Most of the quotes we post here are longer than 17-words, but when the quote is this truthful, we can keep it short. It’s ironic that our often long-winded President is the source of the quote. He said much more about abortion, but this line is not spoken nearly enough in a society that somehow believes we’re behind the times when it comes to abortion rights.

The fight against abortion must come from the top and the President delivered a strong message today to the March for Life crowd:

“Roe v. Wade has resulted in some of the most permissive abortion laws anywhere in the world.”

Source: Washington Examiner

Trump delivers historic speech to March for Life: ‘We are with you all the way’

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-delivers-historic-speech-to-march-for-life-we-are-with-you-all-the-way/article/2646458President Trump became the first sitting president on Friday to deliver a live address to participants of the largest annual anti-abortion gathering, voicing his support for the pro-life movement and touting what his administration has done to cut back access to abortion.

“l want to thank every person here today and all across our country who works with such big hearts and tireless devotion to make sure parents have what they need to choose life,” the president said via satellite to hundreds of thousands of people gathered on the National Mall for the 45th March for Life.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up?

Published

on

The Real Mitt Romney

Utah is abuzz with rumors and anxiety over the possibility of a Senate run from former governor of Massachusetts and Holladay, Utah’s own (according to his recent Twitter edit), Mitt Romney. Romney has yet to declare candidacy, but according to a poll on Thursday from radio host Rod Arquette, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee’s favorability among Utahns approximates 60%.

His intentions remain a mystery, but should he toss his hat into the ring, Utahns would face a far more compelling question: which Mitt Romney will we see?

That could depend entirely on his audience.

Utah is a strange place politically. The more I participate in local politics, the more I realize that most Utahns care little, if at all, about policy. Their main concern is personality — and I can prove it.

According to Conservative Review’s Liberty Scorecard, Utah’s federal representation boasts the largest spread within the same party: a 71% gap between Senator Mike Lee’s 100% rating and Senator Orrin Hatch’s dismal 29%. As for Utah’s remaining representatives, Chris Stewart comes in 2nd place with a 70% score, followed by Mia Love with 62% and Rob Bishop with 60%. Recently elected Representative John Curtis is too fresh to merit a rating, but his predecessor, Jason Chaffetz, amassed a score of 78%.

In other words, the same electorate is voting overwhelmingly for candidates with wildly differing philosophies. But the common thread is easy to find: niceness.

Utah may be a traditionally red state, but it’s also a caring state. And when the two come into apparent conflict, Utahn’s typically opt for the latter.

Mitt Romney’s image of clean-cut benevolence is deeply ingrained in the Beehive State’s collective psyche, which is why he can garner a comfortable majority in favorability without hinting at any policy whatsoever — besides his obvious disdain for President Trump.

In fact, Romney’s renewed prominence in Utah most notably stems from his 2016 speech at the University of Utah, during which he rightly condemned then-candidate Trump’s character and personal history. Trump’s lifelong moral despotism and his abrasive conduct on the campaign trail were deep causes of concern for stalwart Utahns, who accordingly panned Trump in the primary (13.82%) and reluctantly nudged him to victory in the general election (45.5%).

Now, a week following Trump’s “bleep-hole” comments about Haiti and African countries in favor of places like Norway and South Korea — comments Mia Love has already condemned — Mitt Romney is again perfectly poised to emerge as Trump’s foil.

But unfortunately, his chances in Utah have little to do with policy.

Now that we know our audience, we’re brought back to the initial question: which Mitt Romney will we see? Whether you like Romney as a person but dislike him as a politician, vice versa, both, or neither, his long-standing reputation as a flip-flopper is unarguably well deserved. From abortion and Reagan to guns and taxes, Romney’s history of political metamorphosis is scrutinously documented.

Not coincidentally, his progressive standpoints persisted throughout his governorship and Senate candidacy in left-leaning Massachusetts, while his conservative reformation occurred just in time for his presidential bids.

Of course, it’s possible that Romney was sincere in his numerous changes of heart — one thing people are entitled to is the evolution of their personal beliefs. But as this is politics, one should be very cautious in attributing motive, one way or another.

The problem is that while Romney painted himself as a Democrat Lite for Massachusetts and a red-blooded conservative for the RNC, there’s no telling what persona he might adopt for a Senate race in Utah beyond that of the “nice guy,” and in politics, words like “nice,” “caring,” and “compassionate” often mean social programs.

Ideological shifts aside, Romney is at best a pragmatist, not a constitutionalist, having proven his disregard for natural rights on matters of health care and abortion — Romneycare was as much a violation of rights on a state level as Obamacare is federally, and his “pro-life” position that states should have “the authority to decide whether they want to have abortion or not, state by state” exhibits ignorance of the sole purpose of the federal government: securing our unalienable rights, even in matters of state nullification.

Romney also experienced backlash from conservatives in August 2017 when he publicly defended Antifa, a domestic terrorist organization, following the horrifying neo-Nazi display in Charlottesville.

In short, Mitt Romney is not good for Utah, nor is he good for liberty. At best, he would establish an elevated moral compass in terms of personal lifestyle, but that’s no excuse to squander freedom.

Romney would most likely amount to no more than another Jeff Flake — a well-meaning, moderate, Mormon Senator, a good man with strong values, who blatantly misunderstands the role of government and the cause of individual liberty.

This has nothing to do with objective opposition to Donald Trump. I applauded Romney’s speech at the University of Utah, and I’ve had plenty to say about Trump’s shortcomings over the past two years.

But the cult of personality is just as dangerous in one direction as another, and if Romney has plans to run for office in Utah, he’s found the perfect base to latch onto a “nice guy,” whatever he stands (or falls) for.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Planned Parenthood providing sex-change hormones to children

Published

on

Planned Parenthood providing sex-change hormones to children

Planned Parenthood, the agency that celebrated a banner year in 2017 after murdering over 321,000 unborn babies while pocketing nearly $544 million in taxpayer funds—occasionally making a few extra bucks on the side by selling their body parts—has announced their expansion plans for 2018.

No longer content with simply ending a life before it begins, the so-called women’s healthcare provider will be pursuing a new revenue source—hormone “sex-change” treatment FOR MINORS. And get this . . . it will be paid by taxpayers through Medicaid.

According to Planned Parenthood’s VP of Medical Affairs, Suzie Prabhakaran, “It was time for us to expand the care that we were providing to minors” because gender-confused youth might have difficulty in getting the hormones they seek from “judgmental” doctors.

In most cases, dispensing hormones to patients under 18 to treat so-called gender dysphoria requires a letter from a doctor or therapist, but Planned Parenthood has no such requirement. Company policy simply requires informed consent, which means that once the child acknowledges the risks, treatment is given.

In a story by a Sarasota, Florida TV station, Planned Parenthood reminded those under 18 that they needed a parent’s permission to receive treatment—a worthless disclaimer, considering their track record of fighting parental consent laws when it comes to abortion. And let’s not forget how Planned Parenthood skirted partial-birth laws in order to harvest baby body parts.

According to the American College of Pediatricians, conditioning children to believe that being transgendered is normal is essentially child abuse. Even if you accept the LGBT-radical belief in the fake-science of transgenderism, giving life-altering hormones to children causes serious irreversible side effects.

Real science has proven that abortion stops a beating heart, that most children grow out of gender dysphoria, and giving hormones to otherwise normal children damages them for life. But since when has Planned Parenthood—who advises parents to assume their child is LGBT—ever allowed science to get in the way of making a buck?

As if murdering unborn children wasn’t enough, this development is one more reason why Trump and the GOP must keep their promise to defund Planned Parenthood . . . I’m not holding my breath.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 

David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is nationally syndicated with Salem Radio Network and can be heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.