gadgetlady

Sorry; I read your comment that you "like" the term child-killing to be sarcasm. Didn't mean to assume something you didn't mean. If you like the term, you should start using it

You yourself have called "it" a child and a baby. Abortion kills that entity. So for those who understand the unborn to be a child, the term "child-killing" isn't so out-of-line. Of course, for those who are in favor of abortion, it's unacceptable rhetoric, but you were reading a pro-life site so it's quite understandable.

Interesting news out of North Dakota today, addressing the "Blackmun hole": North Dakota Personhood Bill Passes, First In US History. | Personhood USA | Pro-Life

Voter registration reached 105% in Indianapolis today: Ogden on Politics: Vote Early & Often? -- 105% of Indianapolis Residents Now Registered to Vote Our system is so stinkin' corrupt.

Wow. I wonder what all of you open-minded people would do if your infant were disabled at 3 months old in a car crash.

There are a lot of bad ones out there. We have some friends who were in marriage counseling for 8 years. On the verge of divorce, my husband and I basically called them over and made them talk to us for 2 hours. They said it was the best counseling session they'd ever had, bar none. We sent them to a friend for ongoing counseling and now they're back together and have a very strong marriage. It's all in who you're talking to.

Not all mothers feel grief, but again not all mothers will share their silent grief. It is nevertheless real and widespread. Here are a few resources. Silent No More Awareness Campaign - Regional Coordinators Forbidden Grief Post Abortion Healing and Help, Post Abortion Stress Syndrome Support Peace After Abortion: Difficult Feelings Quiz: Are you affected by Post Abortion Stress Syndrome?

As well you should be, green. The documentation surrounding the (often silent or hidden) grief that mothers suffer after abortion is overwhelming. I know you haven't struggled at all with your decision, but it is not uncommon for those who have to turn to all sorts of unpleasant things (drugs, alcohol, etc., even leading down the path to suicide). It is a good start that she is expressing her grief to you now. The information I'm posting is from a pro-life group, but the research is nevertheless lengthy and valid: The Character of Post Abortion Syndrome - David C. Reardon.. I'm still waiting to hear back from some organizations about resources specific to Toronto. Most of my sources are US-based so I don't know how successful I'll be. I'll lyk when I know more.

Sorry it took me so long to respond. I was hosting a baby shower today for my friend who adopted the baby who was brought to her through LBT . It was awesome and when she told the story at the shower, everyone had tears in their eyes. To answer your question, green: this particular organization, as I know it, is not an outreach of an organized religious denomination, but I believe the founders are Christian. They do work with churches as well as secular community outreach organizations, therapists, etc. To my knowledge, there are not any specifically atheist post-abortion counseling organizations, but while some groups are an outreach of a particular church (e.g. Rachael's Vineyard is a Catholic group), this one is not. I am confident they would respect anyone's wishes to not be "preached at", because their goal is healing from the grief after an abortion, not religious conversion. As a comparison, Alcoholics Anonymous is believed by many to have its foundation in Christianity, and most people know they invite members to appeal "to a higher power" (there is some dispute about the origins, but this is the general understanding of the organization). Yet despite its roots, many people other than Christians have benefited from AA.

You know, it's unfortunately very common with people on both sides of this issue to fall into an "us vs. them" mentality. I know passions burn strong on both sides, but when a young mother is struggling after an abortion decision, that's not the time to be divisive; it's the time to come together as one human being to another and offer assistance. Most people who work in post-abortion counseling centers are there out of genuine concern, not with some ulterior motive. They're not there to change the world; they're there to pick up the pieces. Whether or not you want your niece to "rely on a higher power" to help get her through this tough time, that is certainly something you -- or preferably she -- can convey to a counselor. A good post-abortion counselor is there, first and foremost, to help their charge get through the trauma. If you talk to that counselor and make it clear to them that you don't want your niece exposed to any religion (and of course assuming your niece agrees), I'm sure that they would adhere to that preference. The goal, however, is not conversion to the pro-life cause or to any particular affiliation; it is to help post-abortive women find peace. Everyone heals in a different way, and I don't think it would be a surprise to anyone that many people who offer counseling and support do so because they've been through an abortion experience themselves and carry a burden in their heart for others who are enduring the same pain.

I'll get you some Toronto-specific locations later on this evening, if I can find them. I've put out a couple of feelers to some groups I know locally. In the interim, there is a program that offers email-based and phone counseling. From http://www.abortionrecoverycounseling.com/: Wow... so maybe you're pregnant, and contemplating your choices of: abortion, adoption or parenting. Or maybe you just had an abortion. Maybe your abortion was decades ago, and the emotions just keep getting harder to deal with. Whatever your situation, we can help, or refer you to someone who can. Email us your circumstance, and we'll get back to you within 12 hours or so. Here's a direct link to our email mentoring program: help@abortionrecoverycounseling.com. Or call us 24/7 at: 949-679-9276. If we're not in the office, please leave a message and we'll get back with you. If it's an emergency, please feel free to call our mobile help line at: 949-378-5149!

Green, I urge you to encourage her to seek post-abortion counseling. Many, many mothers struggle with this grief and guilt for the rest of their lives, and it can be very painful and destructive. I'm racing today and don't have a lot of time, but if you need resources please lmk. If you do need them, please provide me with the city she lives in.

Well sometimes multiples are aborted so I guess it evens out. And every so often, a "safe, legal" abortion kills the mother, too.

I would agree 100% were it not for the fact that in every abortion a baby dies.

I hunted for a while and couldn't find any other information about the closure. Sorry!

I'm still hunting, but I did find this article which was of interest: Erlanger Medical Center/Memorial Hospital/Women's East - Advisory Opinion. As I read it, they were interested in partnering with another hospital in the area that provides obstetrical services. This request was made in 1995, 13 years after they ceased to provide such services. I'll lyk if I find more. Now that I have the year they ceased, it may get easier.

Thank you. I appreciate your apology. I have not ever, not once tried to spin the facts, which is why I always provide sources and/or tell people that if they want more sources all they have to do is ask. People have accused me, here and on other threads, of quoting too much from other sources. So I tried to cull it down because it was wholly inconsequential to my point. First I get jumped on for posting too much, and then I get jumped on for posting too little.

For the record again, I'm truly sorry I've said something that offended you. I was trying in every possible way I knew to help you see the point I was trying to make, but in so doing I'm sorry you took what I said to be a personal attack. I didn't mean it that way and tried to word my posts very carefully so I wasn't being personal.

There's always "more" to a story. But, to me, there's no reason to post useless details and confuse the issue when those details have nothing to do with the point I'm trying to make. There was no earthly reason for me to post the whole article because my post had nothing to do with the details of the story!!!! It had to do with the fact that Ohio had a law in place to prosecute people who kill unborn babies. I don't understand what I can say differently to make you see the difference.

For the record, Susan, I have not been attacking anyone. I've been explaining the same thing over and over again and finally decided to do it in a way that might make more sense (bullet points). If that was taken as an insult, I'm sorry. I didn't see any other way to get my point across, since I'd tried at least three times already.

I never said you personally questioned my credibility. I said "all of you" meaning my credibility has been questioned on here a lot by a variety of people. I was challenged on not posting the whole story, and was accused of spinning something, which was a ridiculous claim because the point I was making didn't need the whole story's details to be made. You agreed with the first poster. When I explained myself, you challenged me again, saying I should have posted the whole story because it wasn't very long, and how could I expect everyone to know the whole story if I didn't post the whole story? I reiterated that the point was not the story; the point was that there was a law on the books about killing the unborn, and you challenged me yet again. I figured you needed the bullet points to get what I was saying, because I had said it several times already. Interestingly, you asked me to read you posts more carefully a few days ago. I would ask the same of you.

I never said you did. I said I have been portrayed that way. There is right and wrong when a human life is in the balance. I never said it did. I was clarifying for you that I believe very strongly in personal freedom, probably more strongly than most people here, but that this issue is not about "choice" because this particular "choice" has at least one victim.

Oh, and as an aside, the charges might range from involuntary manslaughter to aggravated murder. If you drive drunk and kill someone you can get charged for involuntary manslaughter, too, so it doesn't require any particular "evil intent." All it requires is that one person is irresponsible and ends up killing another person (in this case, an unborn baby). "Evil intent" doesn't have to come into play; it can just be plain, "Oops! I killed someone."

OK, I'll say this one last time. I'll do bullet points so you get it. The point of my story was not the circumstances of the story. A few pages ago, someone said that someone could only be held accountable for killing an unborn baby if the baby was viable. I responded saying that at least in California, the mother didn't even need to know she was pregnant for the law to be enforced. I then found another state where the law doesn't require viability for prosecution I posted excerpts of a story on the subject to cite the current Ohio law. Get it? I don't know these people and it didn't matter to me one whit whether anyone knew their whole story or not (if they wanted to know, they could do a google search and find out everything available on the players); in fact, I'm sure the editor of the paper cut some stuff out, too! The specific details of their particular story were not the point. The point was that the law in Ohio provides for prosecution of someone who kills an unborn baby (except when that person is the baby's mother). So no, I don't "expect [you] to know the whole story" and my purpose in posting the story was not that "[you] know the whole story." My purpose was to document, through an outside credible source (since all of you always question my credibility), that this particular scenario was also the law in Ohio.

Is not the mother's wanting the baby to be dead, "evil intent"? After all, that's all a man who kicks his pregnant girlfriend until she miscarries wants. There's a big difference between cutting words out of a story (while providing the reader full notice of what's being done, a way to get the full story, and notation as to where the story was cut) and cutting a baby out of one's body with the intent to kill him or her. I know you don't know me from Adam and I've been portrayed over and over as "anti-choice", but I am very much a libertarian. I believe people should have the right to choose many, many, many things that are not currently legal, so long as their choice impacts their life only. The place I draw the line is when one person's choice interferes with another person's rights or life.