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

Video: What is a Classical Liberal?

Published

on

By

A short video making the point that the Left is no longer Liberal, having traded individualism for collectivism.

In one of their first animated video shorts, the Rubin Report discusses the vitally important topic of just who is a Classical Liberal.

OUR FIRST ANIMATED VIDEO! What is a Classical Liberal?

Liberalism has been confused with Leftism or progressivism, which is actually has nothing to do with classical Liberalism. Sadly the Left is no longer Liberal at all for it has traded individualism for collectivism.

The Rubin Report
Published on Jul 10, 2018

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

$.02: When is it OK to quit church?

Published

on

Chris Sonsken of South Hills Church and founder Church BOOM penned a piece on Fox News that caught my attention on Twitter. It was a good column. Read the article here. The article addressed a Pew Research finding as to why people change churches. There finding as shown by Sonsken are:

  • Sermon quality
  • Welcoming environment/people
  • Style of worship
  • Location

Sonsken does a great job in arguing that there are biblically sound reasons for leaving a church and finding a new one.

1. It’s OK to leave if God calls us to leave.

2. It’s OK to leave for family and marriage.

3. It’s OK to leave a church if you have moved too far away to conveniently drive to your church.

4.  It’s OK to leave if you cannot follow the church’s leadership.

5.  It’s OK to leave if heresy is being preached.

Sonsken even mentions that unethical practices like abuse are reasons to leave, though not the norm for the majority of church swapping.

The reasons Sonsken gave are no cause for disagreement, and I’m sure his book Quit Church probably better articulates them.

Where I want to add my two sense on the matter is that I disagree with his assessment sermon quality is not a biblical reason for changing churches. The supposition that sermon quality is inherently a result of the person treating church like an object of consumption, as Sonsken suggests is not true. I believe sermon quality is an umbrella term for several reasons for not liking a Sunday message.

Too often people leave a church because of disagreement, not getting their way, or because the sermons are no longer deep enough. Often when we dig into the reason the sermons are not deep enough, it ultimately goes back to the person being offended or not having their faulty theologies endorsed from the pulpit. The same pastor who was previously deep enough becomes shallow once there is an offense. It’s incredibly difficult to hear from God in a sermon when we are offended by the person delivering the sermon.

This is true in many cases. A sin that is personal gets preached on and the offended party leaves. I don’t deny this to be the case. But I believe we should look deeper into the current trends of worship and focus on the mission of the church.

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Matthew 28:18-21 ESV

The church is to preach the gospel, but people accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior is only part of the mission. The Church is tasked with making disciples. The church is meant to teach. Not every follower is at the same level in their spiritual maturity or theological depth. Some churches, larger churches in particular dumb down the bible. In public education, this would be seen as lowering the bar. In church this practice could hold back believers in their growth. Small groups are a way to supplement this, and every church should employ bible study as a means to grow discipleship.

Many churches now are focused on metrics. This can lead to theologically watered down sermons and worship. Why risk offending that person who may leave with a sermon? But if a church is more focused on using a Sunday message to give a motivational speech using an out of context passage, what does it matter if they are doctrinally sound (in their written beliefs)?

There are a lot of heretical churches in America. We have issues like gay marriage to separate the sheep from the goats. But what about the sheep that suck? If a church has the right doctrine but is more focused on metrics than the power of the Holy Spirit, their head is in the wrong place. So it is biblically sound to change churches so that your head to remains in the right place.

That is not treating church like a consumer product. That is treating church like one’s means to grow spiritually, better recognizing the mission of the Great Commission.

That is my $.02 on the matter. I hope I added some meaningful word to this topic.


This post was originally publishd on Startup Christ. Startup Christ is a website for business and theology articles and columns.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Video: So, You Think You’re Tolerant?

Published

on

By

Leftists like to fancy themselves as being tolerant and Liberal, but they fall way short in both qualities.

Leftists will tell you that they are the most tolerant people who have ever lived, they will also scream at you for being a racist, xenophobic troglodyte if you happen to mention that you’re a conservative. They are supposedly ‘Liberal’, being in favour of Liberty while demanding it’s polar opposite – socialism.

Yes, if there is one constant in the universe, its that Leftists cannot be honest about who they truly are. This is what we love about our wonderful opponents on the nation’s socialist Left, for they are nothing like another group that went by the same nomenclature who also screamed at people in the streets with the motto: Common Good Before Individual Good. [Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz]

But let’s not talk about the epithets they project on their enemies, let’s talk about how they get along with everyone who just happens to agree with everything they say. A new PragerU video featuring Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report looked at who is really tolerant. He is a true Liberal that discovered that it is actually the Pro-Liberty Right that is more tolerant, go figure.

Dave Rubin
Jul 9, 2018
Are you tolerant? You probably think so. But who is tolerant in America today? Is it those on the left, or those on the right? In this video, Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report analyzes this question and shares his experience.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.