Dr. Tiller Murdered Again by NBC’s Law and Order


When the Independent Abortion providers who make up the Abortion Care Network learned that an episode of NBC’s Law and Order was going to be based on the May 31, 2009 assassination  of Dr. George Tiller ( a founding member of our organization), many of us were upset. We felt that no matter how his murder was ‘ripped from the headlines’ it was much too soon and too raw to turn it into a piece of popular culture.

Now that we have seen it we are furious and deeply offended. 


For many of us George Tiller was mentor, teacher, friend—he was known in our circles as ‘St. George’ because he embodied principles of goodness, kindness, respect, and faith–the best in us. He was a man of extraordinary principles and extraordinary generosity. In a field in which courage and dedication in the face of hatred, violence, and terror are almost expected, George stood out. He had been firebombed more than once, mercilessly harassed by legal officials who over and over came up with nothing, and survived a previous assassination attempt in which he was shot. He continued to do his work because women needed him.

So we are more than a little protective of Dr. Tiller’s reputation and honor. NBC concocted a dreadful hybrid that bears no resemblance to this truly amazing doctor. And they concocted a story that bears no resemblance to the true complexity of the issues involved in abortion, let alone late abortion.

NBC cannot hide behind the words, “The following story is fictional and does not depict any actual person or event," when they begin their story by having a doctor murdered in his church. Their disclaimer should have read, “This story purports to be balanced but we are about to insinuate that a doctor who was assassinated was, himself, guilty of homicide, and thus to blame for his own murder.” This is particularly egregious because Dr. George Tiller was the repeated victim of politically motivated investigation and was found innocent of any wrongdoing related to his medical practice. This “fiction” casts doubt on his integrity, and gives the impression that abortion is homicide, and we are furious. 

No one knows the complexity of abortion more than abortion providers.  Independent Abortion providers  provide 80% of abortions in this country—and an even higher percent of late abortions. We sit with women and hold their hands and listen to their stories  and support them as they make the best decisions they can for themselves and their families—imperfect decisions in imperfect situations.

This Law and Order episode was called “Dignity”. It treated us to the heart wrenching testimony of a woman whose values told her that the best way to honor herself and the doomed life she was carrying late in pregnancy was to bring the pregnancy to term and be there as her baby died. What was left out was the equally compelling, equally real, equally heart wrenching  testimony of real women whose values told them that the best way to honor themselves and the doomed life they carried late in pregnancy was to end that life in the care of a compassionate physician and staff—a physician and staff who understand more than the writers of law and Order ever could what it means to want a baby and then lovingly let it go.

The point of choice is that the woman herself gets to define what a death with dignity means to her. She and her family get to honor their own beliefs and values.

There is no balance here. We are shown the character of a woman D.A. who used to believe in Roe v. Wade, but was thrown into confusion by hearing of someone else’s experience. If we know anything it is that one person’s opinion or experience doesn’t tell us much about what we would do in that actual situation. A pro-choice perspective makes room for each woman to come to her own truth. Any other perspective forces someone to compromise their own integrity.

The Abortion Care Network brings the experience and voice of Independent Abortion Providers and the women we serve into the national conversation. This kind of truly fictitious television reveals just how needed that voice is.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

  • katebishop

    Charlotte, I could not agree more. It was a painful exercise in ridicule. Law and Order produced a pro-life commercial, complete with gruesome horror stories of evil abortionists and huge pictures of adorable fetal anomaly babies — remind anyone else of the protesters outside clinics? Aside from the insult of a political argument dressed as entertainment, the show systematically attacked Dr. Tiller’s legacy. Crude, cruel, and heartless. Thanks for calling it out.

  • derekp

    I guess you guys haven’t grown the thick skin pro-lifers have had to develop in regards to Law and Order. I mean they once showed pro-lifers stealing embryos and killing them to show that IVF is wrong. Say What? And BTW, there are abortion facilities where babies have been killed after birth. The point of the episode was that abortion is morally complicated and it’s hard to figure out what the right answer is. Not everyone can stomach your belief that abortion is always appropriate if a woman wants it (I know in the preceding comments you’ll badger me over that characterization, but I bet no one here who is pro-choice will say that any abortions should be illegal. Not one example). Even Frances Kissling, founder of Catholics for Choice has admitted that some abortions are morally complicated. You see, some people still have a working conscience.

  • bj-survivor

    I believe that some abortions can be morally complicated, yet I still do not believe that the decision over what to do about those pregnancies belongs to anyone other than the pregnant women, with the counsel and care of their doctors. The bottom line is that the contents of a woman’s uterus are no one’s business but hers, that her body never ceases to belong solely to her, rather than the state, the sperm donor, or the fetus. Hate to keep having to break this to you, but women’s bodies are not community property. No born person may commandeer another’s body for his own use, even if he needs that person’s body/organs/tissues to maintain life and no unborn person should have this special right, either.

    Horrifying as the story is, the baby wasn’t killed after it was born; it died of prematurity. It was only 21.5 weeks and simply not viable; it would have died within minutes of birth due to immature lungs. Not even the hospital would have attempted to resuscitate a neonate before 23 weeks gestation. What’s murky is what exactly occurred. According to the girl’s testimony, she was waiting for hours for the doctor to arrive, at one point allowed to lie down in a patient’s room, then experienced abdominal pains and had a miscarriage/stillbirth. Then, instead of calling the doctor or 911, Gonzalez, who was apparently unlicensed, disposed of the corpse as if it were medical waste. Gonzales was guilty of practicing medicine without a license, because only registered nurses (under specific circumstances) and medical doctors can declare death. Then she perjured herself by claiming the doctor was at her side aiding in the termination, even though it seems more like it was a spontaneous rather than an induced abortion, and that it was born dead.

    That’s one scary-ass clinic and one that I would never patronize for many reasons, such as its craptastic standard of care and lack of compassion and ethical compass, but it was not guilty of killing a baby after it was born.

  • christinam33

    I believe that some abortions can be morally complicated, yet I still do not believe that the decision over what to do about those pregnancies belongs to anyone other than the pregnant women, with the counsel and care of their doctors. The bottom line is that the contents of a woman’s uterus are no one’s business but hers, that her body never ceases to belong solely to her, rather than the state, the sperm donor, or the fetus. Hate to keep having to break this to you, but women’s bodies are not community property. No born person may commandeer another’s body for his own use, even if he needs that person’s body/organs/tissues to maintain life and no unborn person should have this special right, either.

    This. Over and over and over again.

  • btfm

    I found plenty in the Law and Order episode "Dignity" that supports "choice", as well as plenty that supports life. I thought it was balanced. Why is it that so many liberals preach tolerance and then can’t tolerate it when someone comes along with something they disagree with?Also, noting the "blogroll" to the right of this article, I found NO balance. It’s all liberal, feminist, pro-choice propaganda. Are there NO pro-lifers or conservatives who work in the field of Reproductive Health? I’d also like to know when pro-choicers are going to wake up and realize that there are uncountable scores of women who regret their abortions, even those who suffered rape and incest, and many of whom have permanent emotional, physical and/or psychological problems due to their abortions.It’s a scary, common thread I’ve found in the pro-choice movement that promotes promiscuity and an atheistic viewpoint. I’ve yet to see one pro-choice blogger who mentions God in a positive light. Yet in recent polls more than 50% of the US population considers themselves pro-life. And well over 50% consider themselves God-fearing people. So where do pro-choicers get off ranting and raving about "women’s choice" and not once considering they’re in the minority? Could be it’s just the immaturity of the whole pro-choice movement, and most people don’t even deem said rantings worthy of their time, so they ignore them.I wonder if there’s enough tolerance to even publish my comments….

  • jayn

    1. "I’d also like to know when pro-choicers are going to wake up and
    realize that there are uncountable scores of women who regret their
    abortions, even those who suffered rape and incest, and many of whom
    have permanent emotional, physical and/or psychological problems due to
    their abortions."

     

    There’s a real need for better support structure for women, both those who carry to term and those who abort, certainly.  I feel the pro-life movement isn’t helping the latter group, though–they make it harder for women to speak up about their abortions, meaning it’s harder for them to find the support they need.  Abortion is a semi-taboo subject, and keeping these women silenced isn’t helping anyone, whether they regret their decisions or not.

     

    2. "It’s a scary, common thread I’ve found in the pro-choice movement that promotes promiscuity…"

     

    Huh?

     

    "…and an atheistic viewpoint."

     

    That’s kind of the point.  Regardless of how many women are god-fearing people, we are not a theocracy.  Not to mention, some of us are pro-choice BECAUSE of our faith.  My core values–compassion, tolerance, understanding, respect–I came by by way of religion, and are why I’m pro-choice.  Jesus bade us not to judge others, and I do my best not to.  I understand and respect (or at least try to–sometimes it’s damn hard) the beliefs of pro-lifers, and I don’t hold that against you (much).  However, not everyone shares them, and you cannot expect those who don’t to behave as if they do.  Unfortunately, I rarely seem to see the same respect and tolerance from the other side of the debate.

     

    3. "I’ve yet to see one pro-choice blogger who mentions God in a positive light."

     

    I have a pin somewhere that sums up well my feelings about Christianity–"God, please save me from your followers".   I have no problems with God, just some of the things people do in His name.

  • julie-watkins

    I think abortion should be a matter of Medical Standards, not Laws (the way it is in Canada — Canada doesn’t seem to have these sorts of abortion “clinic” scandals). If reproductive healthcare weren’t marginalized in this country there would be more supervision and less back-alley-type behavior.

    About the moral complexities of abortion; there’s also moral problems with nature’s sexism. Unless giving birth (giving life) is a gift not a moral obligation women are being treated as second class members of their community. Such moral questions as there are should be for the woman to decide (on the advice of her chosen advisers). Those strangers who want to interfere saying there’s a moral problem that justifies their actions aren’t (IMO) being serious about the moral problem of Nature’s sexism. Under the circumstances of human biology, I feel there HAS to be compromise.

  • btfm

    Just because you "feel" the pro-life movement is not doing anything to support women who choose to abort does not make it true.  There are many pro-life organizations that help post-abortive women, as well as pregnant women who are considering abortion.  If you’d like to know more about them I’m sure I could give you some websites, names, etc.

     

    One of your core values is tolerance, which I brought up in my original comment.  Again I pose the question, why do you preach tolerance, but you don’t tolerate it when someone does or says something against your feelings or beliefs?  The writers of Law and Order wrote a script that you don’t want to tolerate.  Why?  Why can you tolerate it when pro-choice propaganda is pushed and exalted right and left with little or no opposition, while pro-life issues are rejected, swept under the rug, or in the case of YouTube and other media outlets, disallowed to freely publish content that portrays facts and violates NO rules of YouTube?

     

    Also, you say Christ says do not judge, but this is taken out of context.  To judge an action is perfectly legitimate, otherwise we wouldn’t have judges and a system or law in our country.  Judging whether a person is ultimately good or bad is different.  If person A hits person B, person A’s violence is objectively judged to be bad, but that doesn’t mean he is a bad person, and it may not even mean he should be punished, as for instance if he hit person B by accident or in self-defense.  If a woman has an abortion, the killing of the baby (yes, baby – a living human being with an immortal soul infused into it at the moment of conception by God) is wrong, but this doesn’t mean the woman is bad or evil.  I do not personally know a single pro-lifer who thinks that the woman is bad, only the evil of the abortion itself.  I also do not know any pro-lifers who are violent, though I imagine there are some out there, as Scott Roeder has proved.  I know many pro-aborts who have been violent towards pro-lifers, threatening them, swerving in their car and nearly hitting, or actually hitting them, and the list goes on.  Does this mean all  pro-aborts are evil?  No.  In the same light, pro-lifers don’t think the abortionist is evil, only his actions.  If we could not judge a person’s actions, then we could not put people in prison, as our country does; we could not award people for their achievements, as many organizations do.  These are judgments, not based on the people, but their actions.

     

    When I mentioned the promotion of promiscuity, I was perhaps a little too ambiguous.  Planned Parenthood and similar organizations promote promiscuity – just take a look at their website for teens.  It’s disgusting.  They promote the use of condoms and contraceptives, which cause young people to think they can get away with more promiscuous behavior, resulting in more, not fewer, unwanted pregnancies (the research has been done), which then profits said organizations because these young uninformed women whose boyfriends don’t want a baby think their only choice is abortion.  I know a woman personally who visited an abortion clinic many years ago (probably close to 15 years ago) and said the atmosphere was cold, unfeeling, and everyone in the waiting room either had their head down and never looked up, or had a look of fear on their face, or were crying.  She left without seeing a nurse because she was scared of just what she saw in the waiting room.  She was married, but was considering getting an abortion (though she found out she wasn’t even pregnant later on) because of her career.  Many other women have shared very similar experiences.  Then there are the videos by Live Action that prove that many Planned Parenthood clinics are breaking the law right and left.  Why does PP get away with this?  They have the money to hire lawyers to help them plea bargain, or worse, the law ignores the evidence.

     

    Pro-lifers can’t tolerate evil actions (i.e. the taking of an innocent life), while pro-choicers can’t tolerate pro-lifers.  And if you really believe in God, how can you believe He would want abortion to occur?  He allows each and every conception for a reason.  Just because you can’t always see the reason doesn’t mean that an innocent life should be snuffed out.  What if your mother had decided to abort you?  Have you ever thought about that?  What if George Tiller’s mother had decided to abort him?  A lot more children would be alive and well, I know that much, but I do not wish he was aborted, nor do I glory in his murder.  I just wish there was no such thing as abortion.

  • jayn

    Dammit, I was halfway through and hit the wrong button…

     

    On the first point, I was talking more about how our culture as a whole has been affected.  ‘Abortion’ is a dirty word, and it is always difficult to deal with something if you feel you can’t even safely talk about it.  This applies to other areas of life as well–talking about something is one way that we as people work through our emotions, and while I know there’s organizations out there to help these women, I wish it was something we could talk about more openly in our culture.

     

    On the second point–I do my best to tolerate pro-life messages, really I do.  I think the overall combativeness of the pro-life movement has hurt it, because pro-choicers develop knee-jerk reactions when they come across these people or messages.  The pro-life ideology has become associtated with harassment, and it’s difficult to enter into a meaningful conversation with someone who is likely, in your experience, to not debate in the same good faith.  The overall ‘We’re right, you’re wrong’ message of the pro-life ideology shuts down the prospect of meaningful conversation.  Frankly, you guys have an uphill battle in that arena, because too often pro-lifers don’t enter into these conversations truly willing to listen to the other side.

     

    As for a fetus being a child with a soul…I know you believe that is the Truth.  However, not everyone does, and to ask people to act in accordance to your belief structure, well, it ain’t gonna fly.  This is a subjective, not objective, truth, and it is just as valid for one person to reject it as it is for another to accept it.

     

    I’m gonna touch on Live Action just a minute, but personally I think some of those workers are well and truly trapped–what the law says they may feel would be harmful to a particular girl, who they’re there to help.  Basically, they’ve got two wrong answers to choose from.

     

    I don’t think God wants abortions to occur.  Hell, I don’t really want them to occur–I’d rather women never found themselves in those situations to begin with.  But the answer to that isn’t in saving the unborn, but in helping women.  Help them to prevent unwanted pregnancies, or help them support their children.  God gave us brains to think with, let’s think of ways to help women live freely (with or without children), rather than focusing on taking away their bodily autonomy.

     

    Finally, if I’d been aborted we wouldn’t be having this conversation, and I wouldn’t be on anti-depressants for the rest of my life.

  • crowepps

    If a woman has an abortion, the killing of the baby (yes, baby – a living human being with an immortal soul infused into it at the moment of conception by God) is wrong, but this doesn’t mean the woman is bad or evil.

    Since the great majority of zygotes don’t make it all the way through the process until birth this would mean that most ‘immortal souls’ would never be born but would be lost during the reproductive process. Do you have any insight into just why God would set things up that way and what it would mean theologically? Obviously a zygote that was lost pre-birth while still innocent would have a MUCH better chance of getting into heaven.

    What if your mother had decided to abort you? Have you ever thought about that?

    I have regretted the fact she did not all my life. It’s amazing how much life-long damage an abusive childhood can create and how much suffering children endure when they have to live with the mentally ill and substance abusers.

    What if George Tiller’s mother had decided to abort him? A lot more children would be alive and well, I know that much, but I do not wish he was aborted, nor do I glory in his murder.

    Your assumption that other doctors would not have provided those patients with abortions and that all those fetuses would have been ‘alive and well’ isn’t justified by the known facts of medically necessary abortion. Not only would most of the fetuses be dead or unwell, but a lot of their mothers would no longer be alive and well either.

  • btfm

    Since the great majority of zygotes don’t make it all the way through the process until birth…

     

    I’m not sure where you get "great majority."  Do you mean because so many babies are killed in their first few days after conception by contraceptive drugs; plus abortions, plus miscarriages?  In that case, I might agree.   If you are speaking of only abortions and miscarriages, how is that a great majority of zygotes?

     

     

    …this would mean that most ‘immortal souls’ would never be born but would be lost during the reproductive process. Do you have any insight into just why God would set things up that way and what it would mean theologically?

     

     

    You may not agree with me, but here is my belief:

    The souls are not "lost."  The soul animates the body.  When the body of a human dies, the soul lives on.  It either has to have eternal life or eternal damnation.  In the case of babies who have never been baptised, the soul, it is believed by early Church Fathers (those who lived shortly after the time of Christ and wrote about the Faith of Christians in early times), most likely goes to "limbo", which can sort of be described as a place just outside hell – not to be compared with the suffering in hell by any means, but not in heaven either, because they have not been baptised.  Christ taught that one must be baptised in order to get to heaven.  My own personal belief is that these souls of innocents might go to heaven after the Final Judgment, but that is not taught anywhere.  Either way, they are not in pain, but nor do they enjoy what is called the "Beatific Vision," that is, seeing God face-to-face.  I cannot delve into the mysteries of God – I trust He knows what He is doing, and I have to just accept it as a mystery of Faith.

     

     

     I have regretted the fact she did not all my life. It’s amazing how much life-long damage an abusive childhood can create and how much suffering children endure when they have to live with the mentally ill and substance abusers.

     

     

     I’m sorry if this was your experience.  I know it must have been terrible, but that is still not a justification for murder.  It’s too bad she did not give you up for adoption to a family who would have been able to raise you in a better situation.  However, you sound as if you are full of despair, and while you may think I’m being unrealistic, or utopian, there is hope.  I’m not talking about just counseling, though that may help, who knows.  God will provide if you seek Him.

     

     

    Your assumption that other doctors would not have provided those patients with abortions and that all those fetuses would have been ‘alive and well’ isn’t justified by the known facts of medically necessary abortion. Not only would most of the fetuses be dead or unwell, but a lot of their mothers would no longer be alive and well either.

     

    Trust me, I know many of the women could have, and even would have, sought abortions elsewhere, but for many others Tiller was their only "choice" due to how late in their pregnancy they were, and the fact that he was close enough (distance-wise) to get to his clinic without too much trouble or financial hardship.  Yes, many of the children would not be alive, but I didn’t say all would be alive.  Some of them would be.  And who knows what wonderful things they might have done for the world.  There are many stories of women who almost chose abortion, but changed their minds and never regret it – many find that being a mother is more enriching than they could ever have imagined, and some have seen their children grow up to do great things, maybe even take care of these mothers in their old age.  A priest I know once said that through the years of visiting people in their deathbeds, he has never once encountered someone who regretted having children, but has many times found those who regretted NOT having children.  There’s a lot to be said for that.  I certainly don’t want to be all alone when I die. 

     

  • ack

    >>Planned Parenthood and similar organizations promote promiscuity – just take a look at their website for teens.  It’s disgusting.  They promote the use of condoms and contraceptives, which cause young people to think they can get away with more promiscuous behavior, resulting in more, not fewer, unwanted pregnancies (the research has been done), which then profits said organizations because these young uninformed women whose boyfriends don’t want a baby think their only choice is abortion.>>>

     

    Cite a scientifically valid, peer reviewed source on this, please. Every study I’ve seen has concluded that promoting the use of contraceptives does not increase sexual activity in teens. (Check out the Guttmacher Institute, for starters.) The ONLY way to reduce the need for abortion is to increase access to contraception and education on how to properly use it. You also seem to be ignoring the fact that plenty of people who use contraception are in committed relationships.

     

    >>What if your mother had decided to abort you?  Have you ever thought about that?>>

     

    I’m grateful that my mother had me after Roe v. Wade, when she had the legal right to decide to continue the pregnancy. I have older siblings, and if she had decided to abort, I’m sure part of the decision would have taken the well-being of the entire family into account. Bottom line: if she had decided to abort, I wouldn’t be here to care one way or another.

  • crowepps

    The evidence at this point from research done into infertility is that more than half of zygotes are lost either because they cannot begin to divide, because their DNA recombination was faulty and they cannot develop correctly, because they fail to implant, because they implant but the placenta cannot establish and they then slough off, because of miscarriage or because of stillbirth. None of the causes include loss by induced abortion.

    RE: damnation, limbo, beautific vision, etc. — first, the idea of ‘limbo’ was thought up by Augustine 400 years late, and Pope Benedict revised the idea in 2007.

    In the document, the commission said such views are now out of date and there were “serious theological and liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptized infants who die will be saved and enjoy the beatific vision.”

    It stressed, however, that “these are reasons for prayerful hope, rather than grounds for sure knowledge.”

    No one can know for certain what becomes of unbaptized babies since Scripture is largely silent on the matter, the report said.
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2007-04-20-popelimbo_N.htm

    Frankly, no one can know for certain that ANY of what you assert is true, because those are matters of your faith. One which most people don’t share. Certainly your assertion that it’s a ‘mystery’ that God isn’t allowed to ‘save’ the babies without a priest giving Him permission to do so seems like incredible arrogance on behalf of the priest. God doesn’t need the approval from a human to allow a soul into “Beatific Vision”.

    I didn’t say all would be alive. Some of them would be. And who knows what wonderful things they might have done for the world.

    This kind of argument is just so dishonest. First, you obviously don’t understand what “medical necessary abortion” entails or the likely state of the fetus involved. Secondly, your assumption that Dr. Tiller was unique in being willing to help patients is unwarranted. Third, who knows what horrible things they might have done in the world?

    It’s too bad she did not give you up for adoption to a family who would have been able to raise you in a better situation. However, you sound as if you are full of despair

    There’s no guarantee that an adoptive family would have been any better. And, no, I’m not “full of despair” but your comment sure does remind me of the kind of victim-blaming my mother specialized in. First you ask a fatuous question about ‘what if your mother had aborted you’ and then when people answer you that would have been fine, you reject that answer, invalidate their experience, diagnose them as ‘sick’ and insist they must need counseling and/or some of your religion.

    A priest I know once said that through the years of visiting people in their deathbeds, he has never once encountered someone who regretted having children, but has many times found those who regretted NOT having children. There’s a lot to be said for that. I certainly don’t want to be all alone when I die.

    Actually, polls show that about 10% of people who do have children regret having them and almost 25% of those who didn’t have children are satisfied with their decision. Of course, maybe they’re not Catholic and so the priest never met them. As to being alone when you die, isn’t the priest going to be there?

  • progo35

    Jayn-

    Oh, NOT anti depressants. NOT THAT. I mean, I’d rather DIE than continue to take ANTIDEPRESSANTS. 

     

    "Well behaved women seldom make history."-Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

  • progo35

    I’m sorry, crowepps, but your comment reflects a general attitude I see in some people who are hard-core pro choice: many people on this website have articualed the psychologically unhealthy assertion that they wish they had been aborted. That is not the kind of attitude that our society should  be based on.  

     

    "Well behaved women seldom make history."-Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

  • bj-survivor

    What if your mother had decided to abort you? Have you ever thought about that?

    Actually, I have thought about this quite a bit. I love my life and I am thankful each and every day that my mother created me, loved me, and cherishes me to this day. I consider my life a gift that my mother gave me. And I was taught that one does not demand a gift. Had she terminated the pregnancy that resulted in me, then I would never have existed. So what? I would rather she aborted what would become me than create me and resent my existence or create me and be unable to provide food, shelter, clothing, a safe environment, and love for me. In my opinion, it is sin to create children one does not want or cannot properly care for (you know, feed, clothe, educate, keep safe, spend time with, love, cherish, etc.).

    I’m not such an egotistical, entitle-minded narcissist that I believe the world would have come to a shuddering halt had I never been born. I would also not exist if my mother had decided to give my father a blow job instead of PIV sex the night of my conception – OMG BAN FELLATIO!!111!! *but not cunnilingus; no potential people have ever been prevented by cunnilingus.* She could also have had a headache and not had sex at all that night and I would not exist – OMG BAN ABSTINENCE!!1111!!! The blastocyst that eventually became me could have failed to implant and I would not exist – OH NOES THE SKY IS FALLING AND THE EARTH IS BEING SUCKED INTO A VORTEX HELP!!11111!! There are any number of things that could have gone wrong and resulted in either spontaneous abortion of the pregnancy that resulted in me or in the demise of both of us. Life is random. Get used to that fact.

  • bj-survivor

    Neither should our society be based on the forced-gestation proponent’s attitude of "I’m such a special little snowflake that the world revolves around me and would come to a shuddering halt were I never to have been born. therefore, women must be forced to create children whether they want to or not, enduring permanent damage to their bodies and risking death whether they want to or not." Your narcissistic, megalomaniacal ideology is truly repugnant.

  • progo35

    Okay, BJ, in this case I am going to fight fire with fire. Now, I don’t regard women who obtain late term abortions (and that is what we are discussing here, not "zygotes," but almost full term fetuses), as narcistic and meglamaniacal, but since your going to peg me as being both these things, I’m gong to turn it around and ask: what about your support of the megalomaniacal position that if the special snowflake of a woman doesn’t get a late term abortion when she finds out that her fetus has down syndrome, she won’t be able to become a lawyer and positively impact those she defends? Now, both positions are crap-I am not being meglomaniacal in worrying about my future and the woman is not being meglamaniacal in worrying over hers, and the woman can still pursue her law degree despite giving birth to a special needs child, and I can still pursue my dreams and goals despite being born out of wedlock, but if you’re going to play with smoke and mirrors in the gutter, two can play at that game.
    "Well behaved women seldom make history."-Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

  • crowepps

    If a person’s life is a burden to them and they are massively unhappy, they not be willing to take active steps to suicide but surely you will at least allow them to regret ever having been born. Now that you’ve made the connection between some people connecting their miserable existence as children to their view that abortion isn’t the worse thing that could happen, perhaps you might like to do something about the children that are PRESENTLY in misery because they are ‘owned’ by dysfunctional, fanatical or bizarre parents?

    So far as I can see, our society is based on patriarchal notions of family privacy that allow incredibly incompetent parents to have and raise children in disastrous circumstances, putting the ‘rights’ of the parents far ahead of those children’s mental and physical health or even their lives. That doesn’t seem “psychologically healthy” either.

  • ehlersdanlosgal

    Genetic Disorder Ehlers-Danlos Gal