anonemouse

I've hardly ever posted there, but I love reading the entries. It really makes you a lot more appreciative of customer service workers.

That's true, and I try not to. I just happen to see more strings attached to charity than not. Some people and churches give authentically. Many that I've seen don't, though. Again, not saying all churches have strings attached to their giving, but I've run into quite a few. I've just seen so much underhandedness that I'm automatically suspicious of any group that advertises how much they give to charity. To me, charity is personal, and it should remain that way. IMO, you don't talk about politics, sex, or charity in public. It's just one of the no-nos. You don't talk about it, you just do it.

Definitely. I tend to keep my mouth shut around them, because arguing about it is more stress than it's worth. It wouldn't change the fact that their actions are disgusting to me, and I wouldn't be able to convince them that they're wrong. They really are the type of people you just smile and nod at and then go on your way.

An interesting article that goes back to one of the previous discussions: I find the statement that I highlighted to be really ironic. Doesn't she realize that she's defying her God's will by keeping the kid on a respirator? He'd already be dead right now, if it had been left up to "God's intentions".

My aunt and uncle's church would be an example of one that puts conditions on their "charity". They expect people to sacrifce their very personal religious beliefs in order to have a safe place to stay and a meal. It's disgusting, IMO. Charity isn't charity if there are strings attached.

Funny, the way you come across is that you want to be able to say, "I gave more than you, so I'm a better person!" It's not the amount that counts. It's the act of giving. You want recognition for the amount of time and money that you give. You want to be praised for how generous you are. A truly generous person wouldn't care about how much other people give. And, well heck, if you were a truly charitable person that cared more about others than yourself, you'd give way all of "your nearly 200k per year" except just enough for you to live on. Actually, I don't think you ever actually mentioned where you were volunteering, except for the pregnancy couseling centers. If you did, I apologize. If you didn't, well, am I supposed to be a mind-reader? And by the way, how do you know the politics of every single person you've ever volunteered with or who's sent money? Unless you've met every single one of them and were close enough to discuss politics (which most people don't do with anyone they don't know very well), you have no idea what they're politics are. So really, you're just blowing smoke up our asses about "knowing that conservative give more than liberals". I realize this was directed towards BJean, but I wanted to put my two cents in, anyway. I think anyone who has to brag about the amount of money they make and the amount they give away is a snob.

Funny, you also work with primarily conservative charities. Of course there are going to be more conservatives than liberals at a pro-life pregnancy counseling center. Most liberals believe that a woman has a right to choose, so they aren't going to donate their time to a place that doesn't believe that way. If you work at primarily conservative agencies, you are going to see primarily conservatives.

That's what my mom wanted me to do instead of having surgery.

Wha....? My eyes!

Exactly. I think there is a clear difference between "discipline" and "beating". If someone is hitting their three year-old hard enough to leave marks, I'm damn well going to call the police. If people want their business to stay their business, they leave it at home.

I ran across a posting on a blog community that I thought really illustrates my point. Here it is (from http://community.livejournal.com/customers_suck/):

I should correct my above statement. Funny, I have compassion for you because you had an abortion that you regret. I don't have compassion for you because you think you "were scammed".

The fact is, with any law we make, we create it to stop anomolies. Most people don't act in a way that we need to outlaw. Do most people molest their kids? Nope. Do most people go out and dig up graves? No, they don't.

Actually, it doesn't. Knowledge is what helps someone win a debate. Compassion is what people request when they know they can't win. I am happy to give compassion where it is deserves, but I don't think you deserve it. Yes, you got talked into an abortion. But I happen to feel that you, as a legal adult, are 100% responsible. I don't hold the nurse responsible in any way for your abortion. She didn't hold you down while they sucked your fetus out. She just drove you to the clinic. You could have left at any time. You could have refused to sign the consent forms. The moment you walked into that clinic, that abortion became your decision, not the result of any so-called "scam" the nurse was running. I think that you've always been pro-life, but that you had just a few moments where you actually put yourself above that little clump of cells inside you. You've always been told that that little clump should come first, so now you feel guilty, like you've betrayed everything you've ever been taught. You say you've forgiven yourself and that you accept all responsibility, but you haven't. Every single time you tell someone "but the nurse scammed me", you show that you aren't accepting all responsibility. If you had, the nurse would never come into the conversation. You would just talk about how you made a mistake years ago and rushed into an abortion without first considering all the options. That's taking responsibility for your actions. I know you think that the nurse bears some responsibility, but she doesn't. The fact is, if you hadn't been considering abortion in the first place, she never would have been able to convince you to have one. As much as she talked about abortion or tried to trick you (which I doubt), you would not have had an abortion if you were absolutely anti-abortion at that moment. Actually, that is still not answering the question that I asked. Try to keep up, please. This is the part of your statement that I was questioning (in bold): Where did I say that I did not feel that " if a counselling does not include both options it is unethical"? I know where I said that I do feel that way, but you said I flip-flopped. I want to know where exactly you think I flip-flopped. Is that clear enough for you now?

Yeah. Next time you see a person beating their kids, you can look at them and say, "Sorry, kid. I'm not going to turn your sexually abusive dad into the police because this isn't any of my business." Try living with yourself then. I'm not that cavalier. I'm not going to ignore someone getting hurt because you think it's "none of my business".

If the states won't impose restrictions, the national government should. That's one constitutional amendment that I would be behind 100%. Unfortunately, only gay marriage seems to be important when it comes to amendments this days. Like two men marrying each other is more dangerous to the common man than some illiterate yahoo with a gun stuck in the back of his pants. Oh, no! Can't leave marriage up to the states, but guns? Okey-dokey!

How the heck did you somehow imagine that I was talking about you? I'm not fingerpointing. I wasn't talking about anyone here in particular. In fact, I tried to edit my post to say that it was just an observation, but couldn't. How the people around me raise their kids does affect me. Are they little barbarians or little angels? Do they think it's okay to torture animals? Do they think it's okay to throw an all-out temper tantrum in the middle of a movie theater? Do they think it's okay to spit or hit other kids? You get the picture. And I doubt that the courts would think it's okay if I ignored my neighbor beating his kids because, hey, it's not my business.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that people should be allowed to own guns. I just think that there should be strict regulations on it. What exactly would be the need for 10, 20, 100 guns, except in the case of rare gun collectors? One or two guns, I can see. Dozens? Come on. I think every member of a gun-owning household should be required to take safety courses. I think safe storage should be mandatory (whether that is a gun safe or storing the gun with a trigger lock). I think assault weapons should be banned from private ownership. I think there should be a limit on the number of guns that a single person can own. I think all states should make parents responsible when their kids manage to get a hold of one of their guns and injures or kills someone. I think there should be national laws concerning guns, instead of leaving it up to the states.

I can tell you right now that I would rather have an abortion that give a child up for adoption. I don't want to carry what's basically a parasite for 40 weeks. I don't want the social stigma of being pregnant and not having a baby to show off. I don't want to have to take time off of my work as a field biologist because I can't do my job. I don't want a child and I don't want to take the risk of becoming emotionally attached to it. I don't want children. I don't like children. I wouldn't go so far as to say I hate children, but I really, REALLY dislike them. In fact, the more kids my family members have, the less I want to be around my family members.

Where exactly did I say that I didn't say that counselling is "unethical if it did not pose both sides of the argument"? I don't see where I said that. If you are referring to where I said "That is NOT what I said", I was referring to this statement by you: She still didn't scam you, because a scam results from misleading someone. She didn't mislead you. She was very upfront about the fact that she was talking you into abortion. She didn't trick you. I am not defending her actions. I think they were despicable. She was wrong. But the fact is, she DID NOT SCAM YOU. She didn't lie or mislead you. Your failure to fully research what you were doing does not a scam make. Again, I'm not pretending that she was acting in a proper manner, but I'm not going to play the "oh, you poor, poor thing, getting scammed by the big, bad abortionist" game. The fact is, she is not at all to blame for your actions. The way you come across is that you feel guilty and you are trying to deflect on to other people as much of the "blame" for your abortion as possible. If you tell yourself and other people that "she scammed me" or "she manipulated me" or "there were ringers", you don't have to take all the responsibility. The fact is, you made this decision all on your own. You left the clinic and came back. You had to sign consent forms. No one forced you to do this. No one scammed you into it. No one told you that you were consenting to a basic pelvic exam and then aborted your fetus. If "profiting from manipulating the actions of a vulnerable and confused person" is a scam, just about every single business out there is a scam. Weight Watchers is a scam. WLS is a scam. Plastic surgery is a scam. The fact is, business people profit off of other people. It's life.

No, it isn't. It's the act of committing a fraud. You weren't defrauded. That nurse was unprofessional and she was unethical, but she wasn't running a scam. It's fairly obvious to me that as much as you say you are accepting responsibility, you still blame the nurse for you having an abortion. When it is found to be happening, it is stopped. That obviously happened in this case, since the nurse was fired. Not concerning your physician, there isn't. You either keep the baby and require their services, or you don't. Whether you decide to keep your child or have it adopted doesn't concern them. And that's not the responsibility of the doctor's office. That's the woman's responsibility. That is NOT what I said. I said that I thought women should have ALL options presented to them. That includes keeping the child, adopting it out, AND abortion. I don't give a damn whether or not they choose adoption or abortion. I just think they should have that CHOICE. No, I'm not. I'm not currently sexually active and I've never been pregnant. And I have very little tolerance for what I feel is "woe is me" attitudes. I'd be more likely to tell them to "grow the hell up", to be honest, because there isn't any point in crying over spilled milk. What's done is done. You can learn from what you've done or you can cry about it. And rural Kentucky doesn't have many abortion clinics.

No, I'm not. But Funny, you were not scammed! You knew she was taking you to an abortion clinic! What did you expect was going to happen, the doctors getting down on one knee and begging you to make a different decision? I can understand you thinking you were scammed if you thought she was taking you to an OB/GYN to have an ultrasound or something, but you knew she was taking you for an abortion. She did not scam you. There are obviously only two options when it comes to a pregnancy. You either have the baby, or you don't. That's freakin' obvious. No one needed to tell you that. Doctors don't care whether you decide to have the baby and give it up for adoption or have the baby and keep it. It isn't any of their business, it's a personal decision for you to make. Passing blame for your decision off on the nurse, by telling yourself "but she manipulated me into it" is crap. She could have told you anything, but at the end of the day, the decision was 100% up to you and you alone. She had no bearing on it at all.

Yes, it did. But you could have said "stop" at any time. She may have manipulated you into going to the abortion clinic, but she had no impact on you going through with it. And yet you still push responsibility off on that nurse. The fact is, you were an adult. You had the responsibility to educate yourself about the options that were available to you. You didn't, and now you regret the action you took. Is that the fault of the nurse? No. And I am a firm believer in counseling women in all options available to them, whether or not you agree with those options. Who knows, abortion might be the best decision for one of them.

Really? Do you advertise as specifically "pro-life"? Or do you advertise (like most pro-life agencies I've seen) as "pregnancy counseling"? And just like these women supposedly know and acknowledge that they are calling a pro-life counseling service, you knew you were going to an abortion clinic. So I guess you weren't as manipulated as you want to believe.

I have to ask whether you include abortion as a plausible alternative when you counsel women. If not, I don't consider your actions any more ethical than the nurse's. In both cases (if you don't include abortion), you are taking advantage of a woman's emotions and confusion over what the appropriate actions are. To me, demonizing abortion to a newly pregnant, confused girl or woman is just as bad as manipulating her into have the abortion.