The times (and hopefully the diapers) they are a-changing
When abortion is no longer hip
The times (and hopefully the diapers) they are a-changing
I almost feel sorry for those who support abortion these days.
It’s become more difficult for them to convince a sophisticated audience, one that is increasingly made up of young people, that they have a coherent message.
It used to be that you could just say “It’s my body, my choice, my future” and the rest of the world would break out into the Hallelujah chorus. Those who struck a discordant note by saying ‘baby’ instead of ‘fetus’ were shouted down.
Not anymore. Now, when you say you are pro-choice, people actually force you to consider what it is you are ‘choosing.’ They might not actually come out and show you pictures of terminated pregnancies (a/k/a aborted fetuses) and they might not tell you that a fertilized embryo contains all of the necessary DNA that defines a separate human being. They might not direct you to the website of CHOP where you can read about life-saving surgeries performed on babies in-utero, and they probably wouldn’t mention Kermit Gosnell and his gruesome crew.
Pro-Lifers have gotten better manners since the old, Operation Rescue days.
Still, any time a woman says that it’s a matter of life and death when abortion rights are restricted, there will now be at least one person in her listening audience who says: whose life, and which death?
It didn’t happen overnight. In those first, heady years after Roe v. Wade was announced, the pro-choice movement (which had no problem calling itself the pro-abortion movement as far back as 1975) was giddy with victory. Feminists had finally achieved their crowning victory: reducing women to the sum total of their ovaries. Of course, that’s not how they saw it. Quite the opposite. The ladies of Now and Naral and Planned Parenthood (more on them later) thought they were freeing us up for better things than ‘just’ motherhood. They taught us all to think in terms of possibilities, of fragile glass ceilings and equality. By disengaging us from what they saw as a biological mandate to reproduce, they convinced us we’d “Come a Long Way (Without) Baby!”
Ironically, though, in trying to move us away from that life-giving function that defined us even as we attempted to reject its centrality to our lives, we became enslaved to a new description of self: the one where women are only valuable to the extent that they can control their ovaries.
Funny, huh? After spending so much time trying to prove that we weren’t just the sum total of our lady parts, the pro-choice movement became fixated on exactly those parts.
If someone tried to limit abortion in any way, shape or form, the Choice Cabal rose up in anger. Spousal notification? Ridiculous, since fathers were an afterthought (except when it came to paying support.) Parental notification? Abusive, since Mom and Dad were less relevant than Judge Judy to a teen in crisis. Stricter licensing laws for clinics? Just another way for the state to put the abortion industry out of business.
And my favorite: don’t ever make a woman wait 24 hours before the procedure since she might actually change her mind and keep the baby. Can’t have that happening.
All of this focus on allowing women to treat their wombs like the gas tank to a hybrid vehicle (fill her up only when absolutely necessary) began to take its toll on the national conscience.
Today, more young people describe themselves as anti-abortion than ever before. While a small majority of Americans still believe abortion should be legal in limited circumstances, Planned Parenthood has seen its popularity plummet, even as it desperately positioned itself to repel that War on Women waged by the evil Pro-Lifers. That’s a good thing, since an organization that was based on the same eugenics theory as the one employed by Jozef Mengele doesn’t deserve accolades.
Of course, there are still going to be those who sense the change in the winds and try desperately to keep the abortion boat afloat. Recently, my good friend Rich Zeoli from Talk Radio WPHT sent me a link to this fellow named Toure who said-out loud, and completely sober-that abortion had ‘saved’ his life. How did taking another life save his own? Well, this Toure fellow was in a relationship with a woman who happened to get pregnant. Daddy-to-be didn’t think he was ready to have a baby, so he and the short-term mama got rid of the nuisance. In not-so-proud Papa’s words, “I thank God and country that when I fell into a bad situation, abortion was there to save me and keep me on a path toward building a strong family I have now.”
He “fell into a bad situation.” That’s an interesting image, and anatomically challenging I’m sure. It’s also clever of him to invoke God even though I’m fairly certain no deity, whether we call him Yaweh, Our Father or Allah would look kindly on murder as birth control.
War on Women. Abortion as a lifesaver. The desperate cries of someone slipping into the quicksand of history.
As I was saying, I almost feel sorry.
You are consistent in your belief and that's fine. I do not like abortion but I still believe a woman has the right to her decision. Let God judge the wisdom of the decision.— lport- What I feel sorry for is a woman who thinks so little of herself and other members of her gender that she would surrender the right, (and the right of all other women), to control her own body to the state, to a religious organization or to anyone else who claims that right.
Abortion is not a good thing. It shouldn't happen. But there is only one person who should make the decision about whether or not it does. And except for her own self, that person is not Christine Flowers.— carl and sons - And just for the record, I think what Toure had to say was pretty stupid and clueless. Though I have to ask, Christine, if you were in a position to save that "child" by adopting it and being responsible for it, would you have?— carl and sons
- Mrs. Flowers- i commend you and this article, not only for your valor in standing up against women and their autonomy, but also for writing a column that nobody on this website- NOBODY- has ever, ever, ever written about before.
no, this is not one of those two-bit sites where, in an effort to have a token conservative voice, the editors allow endless rants by a singular author advocating christian sharia, one who would have men in robes make choices for a woman who obviously isn't smart or responsible enough to make choices for herself.
no, Mrs. Flowers, you are unique in your crusade with this one-of-a-kind column, and i applaud your willingness to take on the elephant in the room (nay, in the womb!) and finally speak up about the unfortunate control women have gained over their bodies in the past 40 years.
brava, brutta christina- brava!!!— thoughtful_critic - Yes times are a changing, and not very positive for the whacked out social conservatives. Gays can now serve openly in the military and women can fight in combat (psst: they already do!). abortion is still legal and we will soon have immigration reform and stricter gun control laws.
The grand plan that Obama created is finally taken shape. Soon, the GOP and the nitwits who support them will be a regional minority party. Thanks for doing your part Chrissy!— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine - not so fast to err. No one has yet proved that abortion is not murder. A woman may have rights over her body, but not to the life that grows within. Instead she has the responsibility to care for the fetus until birth.
As for the Obmama grand plan, Obama has yet to understand the Consitution and the limits therein that are imposed upon the president.
The court has spoken and Watson, the game is afoot. (In both senses.)— Richar Poor - What makes abortion more and more unthinkable is the growing evidence and realization that the developing child is indeed a separate individual with completely different DNA from the mother. We are not talking about a frog or a fish here but a living human being who just happens to be very small and dependent.
Killing a defenseless human being used to be called "murder". Changing the terms to "fetal material" or "issue" or "byproducts" does not change that fact.
Abortion should be available for those medical emergencies when the mother's life is in jeopardy and the loss of the baby is unavoidable. NO one is asking a woman to die along with her baby.
Abortion as birth control should be morally repugnant to everyone.
There has to be a happy medium between abortion on demand and the Gosnell butcher shop.
— Gendres - Carl, what that guy "Toure" said was disgusting. You yourself said that the decision should be the mother's only.....so how did this "daddy" get to call the shots?
You know as well as I do that abortion of unwanted pregnancies is often the man's idea because it would mess up his life....meaning he would have to support that child.
Let's not kid ourselves here.
And what really is disingenuous is to say that those who object to abortion have to be ready to adopt all the unwanted children as if it is everyone else's responsibility to clean up after these irresponsible individuals.
With all the preventive measures available to couples today, there is no excuse for an unwanted pregnancy. But once the pregnancy occurs, the mother is responsible for at least seeing it to term.
There are always childless couples who will take that baby. (American parents even go to China and Russia to adopt...so why not here?)
— Gendres - Gendres, calm down. Did you actually read what I wrote? I think Toure's comments exhibit an amazing degree of self-absorption and lack of thought. They are exactly the opposite of an intelligent defense of legalized abortion. In other words, you and I agree about this one. Toure shows up on tv quite often. He's far from the brightest bulb on the MSNB- tree.
We disagree on the second part. It is easy for the Christine Flowers' of the world to dictate to others while taking no responsibility for the consequences of what they advocate. So you force some woman to have a kid she doesn't want. What happens next? It's understood that Ms. Flowers doesn't give a damn about the woman, but what about the kid? Has she thought that far ahead? I see no evidence of it in anything she writes. It's all nice and cozy to blather on about being pro-life, but life doesn't stop once someone is born.
Yes, preventative measure which your "church" refuses to sanction, a position you've defended.— carl and sons - "But once the pregnancy occurs, the mother is responsible for at least seeing it to term." That is an opinion and I respect it as much, but your opinion should not dictate the decisions of others. If a woman decides to abort her pregnancy, that is on her and her alone. We can quibble all day about it, but in the end the morality of the act lands upon the woman who chooses to make that decision. Lots of passion gets spewed during "debate" about abortion. Very little facts get shared. If you are against abortion, don't have one, and help to educate people about preventing unwanted pregnancies. But as long as abortion is legal (which it always will be btw), then use your judgement to help prevent unwanted pregnancies, not to denigrate those who are making decisions about their own body. A hard line position on this matter. when it really requires an almost a case by case personal consideration (none of us know what any one person's life situations are) reduces your credibility. Perhaps not your passion, but certainly your credibility.
— MrsSimon - Well said. — carl and sons
- Mrs. Simon, thanks for your polite response. I understand that abortion is legal but even under Roe it has its limitations. The decision made years ago with limited scientific understanding, allowed abortions to be performed on human fetuses with enough developed nervous systems to actually feel the suctioning of their bodies into bits and pieces. We would not do to an animal what happens in many abortion clinics today.
I understand that women have desperate situations. And I agree that counseling should begin before there is a pregnancy. I have always been for comprehensive sex education. I think that a morning after pill is perfectly fine. I think that a rape victim should go to an emergency room and after the evidence is collected, have a complete D and C to protect her from disease or any other results.
The problem here is that like the case of Mr. Toure, some people want abortion as a default birth control and at any time during the pregnancy. They would abort a fully formed child sucking its thumb and able to hear the suctioning instrument coming to get it.
I think with better education as to exactly what is unprotected sex as well as abortion.— Gendres - "I think with better education as to exactly what is happening, women will think twice about unprotected sex as well as abortion." < Is what I meant to type.— Gendres
- Mrs. Simon, you go about hiding behind the words, "It is only an opinion." Abortion is the taking of a defenseless life. Prove otherwise. And until you can, don't.— Richar Poor
- Much like some hide behind words like "pro-life" or "baby" or "child" when their dedication to "life" is totally subjective and selective, and the "child" they are talking about would not be recognizable as human or able to live under any circumstances without the mother biologically sustaining it.
There's plenty of semantic juggling to go around.— carl and sons
Email Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com Reach Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com.
