The Lost Children

[Guest The_Chaser]

We lived in the womb we called home.

We kicked, moved, and indulged from our cords of life.

We were eager to join you, hug you, hold you, and love you.

We never saw you face but we felt you all the same.

We felt sick to poison and fell asleep in our cradle of life.We were violently thrust out from the womb we loved. We were inflamed by the chemicals that met us in our resting place. Our deaths were horrifying. The pain was excruciating as the evil tore us apart. The blood of our deaths still linger's in our thoughts. Our bodies were thrown into the trash, to be left as nothing. For we were thought of as nothing. We are the aborted children of Earth, who left this planet too soon. Now we dwell with the Father.

We cried floods of tears, as we watched you from heaven. "Daddy !, Mommy !, did you love us ?". We waited for you to come and hold us your arms. Many of us would never see you again. We could not understand why we were taken so young. Did you want us? What did we do to be taken so young ?

The true Father came to us. He held us in his arms and said "I created you in your mothers womb. I loved you and I will never forsake you. Come to me my child, and rest in my arms." We sat and cried as held us tight. We were loved.

We forgive you for our deaths. If only we could have talked to you. Instead we were destroyed. But since it could not be, we only ask this: that you remember us not as trash to be thrown away, but as your sons and daughters to be. Do not deprive our brothers and sister on Earth of life. Please love them; because they will always love you.

SPEAKER FOR THE DEAD

[Lost in Manitoba]

That was touching...

[Guest Guest_Epiphany]

Ditto. That *was* touching.

[Neal.F.]

What is truly astonishing is that there is such a strong demand for babies among childless couples, that they are willing to pay over $20 000.00 to go to China, India and Romania to adopt! Yet in Canada, 106 000 babies are slaughtered every year in the name of "choice" out of hedonism, for no other reason than they were "inconvenient".

Don't tell me these children are "unwanted" .

[Hugo]

"Inconvenient" is the word, all right.

I know childbirth is painful, but after one's irresponsibility has created a new human being, the least one should expect would be for that mother to bear the child and have it adopted by a family that wants a child and will give one a good home. To kill another human (or order one to be killed) in a terribly painful way, and to have their corpse dismembered or just tossed in the trash or flushed down the toilet, simply because you don't feel like bearing the consequences of your actions, is the height of selfish immorality. It's no wonder that so many women who have abortions wind up with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Of course, Planned Parenthood will tell you none of this.

[djpark121]

I know childbirth is painful, but after one's irresponsibility has created a new human being, the least one should expect would be for that mother to bear the child and have it adopted by a family that wants a child and will give one a good home. To kill another human (or order one to be killed) in a terribly painful way, and to have their corpse dismembered or just tossed in the trash or flushed down the toilet, simply because you don't feel like bearing the consequences of your actions, is the height of selfish immorality.

Hugo, while I agree that the least a mother should do is have the baby and give it to an adopted family, most of you say isn't realistic. Most abortions result from premature adolescents having sex, and thus a baby. Because these mothers cannot grasp having to take care of a baby at such a young way, abortion pops up as the solution. They probably just don't want to have the kid, period. You call it the "height of selfish immorality" but I don't think you're a young teenage woman who has to deal with raising a child in the midst of getting high school or college education. You have to look at the psychological aspects of an issue also. I also think that your conception of what happens to an aborted child is grossly misunderstood. Aborted fetuses are not "tossed down the trash" or "flushed down the toilet". That is an inhumane assumption. Or give me proof that that's actually what happens at say, a medical clinic or hospital where abortions are performed.

[Hugo]

  I don't think you're a young teenage woman who has to deal with raising a child in the midst of getting high school or college education.

No, but my wife was. Thankfully she made the right decision. Our eldest son is now 7 - a thriving, intelligent boy with a great sense of humour who leaves adults in stitches, and not in a landfill somewhere. Sadly, about 200,000 Canadians and 1,600,000 Americans each year are not so lucky.

The problem is that an adolescent girl who gets pregnant is going to make an innocent party pay with his or her life for her mistake. Is that fair? If I live outside my means, is it fair for me to kill and rob you to pay off my debts - your life in exchange for my convenience?

I also think that your conception of what happens to an aborted child is grossly misunderstood. Aborted fetuses are not "tossed down the trash" or "flushed down the toilet".

Yes, actually they are. I've spoken to the receptionist at an abortion clinic who told me that the fetuses are put into a dumpster around the back that smells absolutely appalling - it's full of rotting human flesh.

If you want a concrete example, try the Jacksonville (FL) Womens' Center for Reproductive Health. Director Rev. Marvin Lutz explained that the practice of leaving the remains out in the trash was perfectly legal and approved by the National Abortion Federation and the Florida Abortion Council.

Dr. Jeronimo Dominguez of New York claims that "on any Monday you can see about 30 garbage bags with fetal material in them along the sidewalks of several abortion clinics in New York."

The new abortifacent pill RU-486 will allow a woman to abort her child in the "comfort of her own home" at up to 9 weeks (http://www.abortbypill.com). Here's a description of the fetus at 8 weeks: "The unborn child, called a fetus at this stage, is about half an inch long. The tiny person is protected by the amnionic sac, filled with fluid. Inside, the child swims and moves gracefully. The arms and legs have lengthened, and fingers can be seen. The toes will develop in the next few days. Brain waves can be measured." The child has a beating heart, a blood type of his own from a functioning liver, facial features, and a tongue (http://www.w-cpc.org/fetal1.html). You can see photos there too.

When a mother 9 weeks pregnant takes an RU-486 pill, this is what she'll pass into her toilet bowl. Is it fair to tell women that this is a great option? After all, I'm sure you can imagine the shock and horror a woman would feel after cramping for hours, finally passing something and then seeing a human face staring back at her from the pool of blood in her toilet.

This might sound like hyperbole and hysterics, but this is genocide we are talking about here. The Holocaust pales beside the number of babies killed thus far since 1973.

[djpark121]

If what you say is true about the aborted babies, I find it atrocious. I plan to write to my congressman about that one.

Hugo, I agree with you that it is appalling to abort a baby at 9 weeks of labor. But I guess what I was referring to and I apologize for not doing so earlier, was much much earlier in the labor process. Somewhere along the line, mothers should not be able to abort. I agree with you on that. It's murder. What I was talking about was much much earlier in a baby's stage. When the baby is a mere embryo. Then, depending on a mother's emotional state and present condition, should a mother abort, which she should be allowed to.

Let me bring up another point. Like you mentioned earlier, it is preferable for a baby to be born and adopted to a nice caring family. But once again, think of the psychological implications. Eventualy, the child will discover that he or she was aborted by the real mother. Think of the psychological impact this has. Then, what if not all babies who are born from premature mothers have such opportunities? Would the child really want to live a life of abandonment, despair, and financial instability? I'd think not.

[Hugo]

What I was talking about was much much earlier in a baby's stage. When the baby is a mere embryo.

If you tell me that a fetus e.g. 21 days from conception (and virtually all mothers-to-be still have no idea they are pregnant at that stage) is now a human and cannot be killed, I fail to see any reason why a fetus only 20 days old can be legally killed. The only point at which such a drastic change occurs in the life of a human that his life can be said to have started is at conception. At no other time can you pinpoint anything that gives an indication that the individual is more "alive" than before. Apart from anything else, every pregnancy is different and fetuses, like born children, develop at different rates. What if the child killed at 20 days gestation was actually more advanced than most were at 25?

Then, what if not all babies who are born from premature mothers have such opportunities? Would the child really want to live a life of abandonment, despair, and financial instability?

You think they'd prefer to have been murdered before they were even born?

[djpark121]

Apart from anything else, every pregnancy is different and fetuses, like born children, develop at different rates. What if the child killed at 20 days gestation was actually more advanced than most were at 25?

Then, what if not all babies who are born from premature mothers have such opportunities? Would the child really want to live a life of abandonment, despair, and financial instability?

You think they'd prefer to have been murdered before they were even born?

I wasn't restricting abortion to a specific time limit. I also realize that every pregnancy isn't the same. But of course the doctors would notify the mother of her child's growth progress. They would advise her accordingly, and she would make the right decision accordingly.

As to your last statement, you may be right. The child may not prefer to be murdered even before birth. But at the same time, the child wouldn't realize what kind of life lies ahead. But since the child realizes neither, it is up the mother to decide what's best for the child. Remember, there are a lot of people out there committing suicide for the same reasons such as "abandonment, despair, and financial instability".

[Hugo]

They would advise her accordingly, and she would make the right decision accordingly.

Any semi-decent OBGYN knows that the baby is an independent human being and any "advice" they give should reflect that. That's why the pro-abort argument revolves around lies: it's a clump of cells, it looks like chopped liver, it can't feel pain, etc. On the last item it's interesting to note that in prenatal surgery the fetus is anaesthetised separately - obviously it can feel pain.

But since the child realizes neither, it is up the mother to decide what's best for the child.

Two points.

Firstly, you never, ever give any person the right to decide the life or death of another arbitrarily, even if they are mother and child. That is the height of immorality.

Second, what's "best" for the child is never death, my friend.

Remember, there are a lot of people out there committing suicide for the same reasons such as "abandonment, despair, and financial instability".

But they chose it. To make a valid comparison, you would give an example of someone very lonely and poor who was murdered in a government-sanctioned killing, because somebody had decided that his life was not worth living.

[djpark121]

Firstly, you never, ever give any person the right to decide the life or death of another arbitrarily, even if they are mother and child. That is the height of immorality.

Ever heard of something called Euthanasia? If you don't, research, and tell that to the doctors.

QUOTE 

Remember, there are a lot of people out there committing suicide for the same reasons such as "abandonment, despair, and financial instability". 

But they chose it. To make a valid comparison, you would give an example of someone very lonely and poor who was murdered in a government-sanctioned killing, because somebody had decided that his life was not worth living.

I agree with you. People who commit suicide choose to do it. My point was that in a lot of cases people commit suicide because they're the result of a premature birth. Would you rather endure a living hell, or not at all?

[Hugo]

Ever heard of something called Euthanasia? If you don't, research, and tell that to the doctors.

Yes, I've heard of euthanasia. Have you? Read on and learn.

Did you know that since euthanasia was legalised in Holland, the Dutch authorities discovered that about 60% of doctors admitted having euthanised patients without consent and without notifying the authorities at least once in their careers?

Did you also know that the new law, passed in April 2001 in Holland, changed the legal burden of proof from the doctor, to prove that euthanasia was requested, to the prosecutor to prove that it wasn't?

What that means is, if I am a doctor and you are a patient, unless you have a written legal document or somesuch specifically saying you do not want to be euthanised, I can kill you, and your family has no legal recourse whatsoever.

The problem is so great that 20,000 Hollanders carry "life cards" that specifically request that they not be euthanised, should a doctor try to do so against their will.

Furthermore, the new Dutch law states that consent has to be given, but that no time frame must be stipulated - I could have written a document 20 years ago stating my wish to be euthanised, and have since changed my mind, but legally, that document can still be used to acquit any doctor who euthanises me.

A study in 1990 by P. van der Maas, J. van Delden, and L. Pijenborg revealed that 31% of cases did not give their explicit consent. A follow-up in 1995 showed that figure to still be at an alarming 22.5%.

As you can guess, I do not favour euthanasia either and my original point stands.

My point was that in a lot of cases people commit suicide because they're the result of a premature birth. Would you rather endure a living hell, or not at all?

I'd like to make that choice myself, please!

The fact that so many people in history have survived the worst kinds of abuses and tortures and still gone on to greater things without giving up hope proves that you can never assume anything about a person. You definitely cannot guess that they would rather die and act accordingly. This point is totally indefensible. I think you can see that.

[Neal.F.]

Euthanasia is really a pandopras box....

In Canada, under a socialized medical system. Do you not see how a law, such as itv stands in Holland could not be used to make sure that certain cases do not burden the medical system financially?

I can guarantee you that the same standards would not apply to wealthy or otherwise influential individuals.

In the US, where private insurance holds sway, knowing the nature of the insurance co. beast, you don't think that to reduce payouts, that certain people will be marked for death?

What it really comes down to on both the abortion and eutanasia (and for that matter the homosexual issue) issues is one question: Do we want a culture of life, or a culture of death?

The most fundamental right of all is the right to life. Once a life has begun it must not be left to someone else, whether they wear a white lab coat, hip-hugger pants or a black leather jacket to decide when that life ends.

If the right to life is not extended to all, then it ceases to be a right, and becomes a privelege, which one enjoys entirely at the whim of those more powerful.

Do we want civilzation, or the law of the jungle?

[djpark121]

The most fundamental right of all is the right to life. Once a life has begun it must not be left to someone else, whether they wear a white lab coat, hip-hugger pants or a black leather jacket to decide when that life ends.

If the right to life is not extended to all, then it ceases to be a right, and becomes a privelege, which one enjoys entirely at the whim of those more powerful.

Do we want civilzation, or the law of the jungle?

Neal. I totally agree with you on this. I believe everyone has the right to life. I also agree that when it becomes a privilege, chaos results. You say once life has begun it must not be left to someone else to decide whether it should continue. So I ask another question: in which part of the reproduction cycle does life begin?

[djpark121]

Hugo, I'd like to point out that I speak from an American persective and certainly not Holland's. If every nation could be like America, this world would be an extremely prosperous place. Unfortunately this is not the case, and not every nation out there is like the U.S. Especially with something like Euthanasia.

[Hugo]

Euthanasia is not so much a bad act as a creator of a bad attitude.

Look at it this way. Since abortion was legalised, options for single mothers, mothers in further education, etc. have been very marginalised, much more than you would expect were abortion to have remained illegal. Almost no workplaces or colleges provide creches or childcares, for instance. This is because single, pregnant women feel pressured into abortion instead - it is touted as the responsible choice, while only idiots ruin their lives by having children.

The same situation will also arise with euthanasia. The aged and terminally ill will feel pressure put upon them to die. People will ask how they can put their families through such suffering, how they can burden taxpayers, health insurance or their relatives financially, how they can waste a hospital bed when it could go to someone with a chance, etc. Basically, people will be indignant that some people dare to live, much as people are indignant that some young, single women dare to bear their children instead of killing them.

I have absolutely no wish to live in a society where social pressure is literally fatal to the underprivileged. Everybody has a right to live and to be allowed to live unmolested by those who would kill them.

[lowly_caterpillar]

The same situation will also arise with euthanasia. The aged and terminally ill will feel pressure put upon them to die. People will ask how they can put their families through such suffering, how they can burden taxpayers, health insurance or their relatives financially, how they can waste a hospital bed when it could go to someone with a chance, etc. Basically, people will be indignant that some people dare to live, much as people are indignant that some young, single women dare to bear their children instead of killing them.

That is a total load. If you were on your death bed I highly doubt that you would feel pressured to succumb unnecessarily to imposed death and to assume that everyone is morally weaker than you is a tad arrogant. I do not agree with euthenasia at all but I think you are using some unreasonable examples to support your view.

I would assume that a much more complex thought process takes place in the minds of potential mothers than the one that you describe. "Gee well daycare's a tad pricey these days so I think i'd rather put myself through internal conflict and public shunning, than pay for that" Granted there are probably some potential mothers who are immature and dont think so much when faced with the daunting idea of an actual human being to take care of, but for the majority much more thought goes into the decision of abortion.

Hugo I am curious about your views on the morning after pill.

[lowly_caterpillar]

gaaah...topic slowly dying.....wheeze...nooooo please, show mercy feed me with commentary!

[August1991]

I think social pressure is being applied to kill this thread.

[lowly_caterpillar]

Let's cut off the abortion topic, I just want to know if anyone doesn't agree with the morning after pill.

I think it's a great invention as long as it doesn't lead to incredibly irresponsible sex.

[Big Blue Machine]

God would never throw something at you that you couldn't handle. He isn't the meanest person in the world. Why waste a beautiful baby?

Abortions are the easy way out.

[lowly_caterpillar]

Yeah we get it Big blue youve already covered that one!

[lowly_caterpillar]

Unless your saying that the morning after pill is the equivalent of an abortion, if thats the case please continue, if you have a point that is.

[The Terrible Sweal]

God would never throw something at you that you couldn't handle.

Riiiiiight.

Like in Darfur for example.