Replies

I'd have a lot more respect for pro-lifers if you demonstrated that you cared about babies after they're born.

I'd have a lot more respect for pro-lifers if you demonstrated that you cared about babies after they're born.

Whats that suppose to mean?

You must be advocating social welfare right?

After all it is the governments resposibility to provide us with everything right?

Sorry but before government welfare people had kids and took care of them and we dont need a nanny state, but we do need a state that protects innocent life.

Understanable from someone who has this on their "about" page:

I'm a registered Democrat, I've voted Democrat in every election since I was old enough to vote

I'd say the that actually allowing our babies to be born and raising them is proof enough. How do you know who does or doesn't care about babies after their born? Base arguments on facts, not opinions and maybe you would sound less ignorant.

"I'd have a lot more respect for pro-lifers if you demonstrated that you cared about babies after they're born."

That's an unfair statement. The pro-life people I know work at pro-life centers that assist moms through the pregnancy and beyond. Not to mention the post-abortion services that are offered on a purely volunteer basis. Who are you to say that pro-lifers don't care about children? Do you know something I don't? Maybe our emphasis is on the babies in their mother's womb because so many (4,000 a day) are being killed. Where's the outrage?

For rommy (if this creature is still hanging around post-zot) and anyone else who might read this rot, I will post this, which was originally posted at this thread.

Pro-lifers are far from hypocrites

If you’ve paid any attention to the abortion debate, you’ve heard some variant of an already old chestnut: “Anti-choicers want all these babies born, but they don’t want to adopt them, help the mothers, do social work or pay higher taxes. They’re part of the problem.” That accusation may come from rhetorical expedience or simple ignorance, but those who make it have never met Sherrie Bicksler.

Bicksler is the director of the Freeport Pregnancy Center, in Freeport, Illinois, and caring for disadvantaged mothers and children is her full-time job. The Center’s staff (mostly volunteers) provides assistance, prayer and listening ears to hundreds of clients each year. They have personal contact with between 175 and 200 clients per month, including 35-40 new clients. They offer free and confidential pregnancy tests and can refer a client to other agencies for any need, from education to domestic violence counseling.

The aim is to show God’s love, to be, as Bicksler says, “Jesus with skin on” in the client’s hour of crisis. Donations are accepted “as from God,” she observes, “and He always makes sure it goes to someone who needs it." For example, five times in the last four years she’s seen Center supporters completely equip and furnish the apartments of formerly homeless clients with donated items. She credits the success to the Center’s dedicated prayer team.

Yet this special place isn’t unique. The Center is a member of CareNet, an organization of over 700 pregnancy centers across the United States and Canada. Each is a place where a woman backed into a corner can find kindness and real solutions. It’s not unique in our area, where a Yahoo search on “abortion alternatives” brings up 16 results within 50 miles. Strangely, a search on “Planned Parenthood soup kitchens” returned no results.

Pregnancy centers aren’t the only area pro-lifers impact. I look around my church, and I see mentors, volunteers for NHS and the school district, people who preach in nursing homes and jails. If all the pro-lifers in town gave up on helping “the least of these,” how would it all get done? Pro-lifers also put their parenting where their mouth is and adopt. A member of our county Right to Life Committee wrote, “We are not, by any means, wealthy financially; but the love and joy our adopted child has brought into our life makes us rich indeed. We asked for a special needs child; we found the only special need the child had was the need for a loving family.”

Even if pro-lifers weren’t devoting themselves to making lives better, would they be such hypocrites? If you don’t have to be a civil rights activist to be outraged about a lynching, why would you have to adopt a handicapped child before you could legitimately object to children’s lives being snuffed out? It’s thick irony that the vast majority of pro-choicers are political liberals. For decades, they’ve told us that we need ever more bloated government programs to take care of every need of the downtrodden. Yet when some of us want to put a stop to the killing of small children, they demand to know why we haven’t handled all the problems they said the state would cure.

So why does the myth of the uninvolved pro-lifer exist? Sadly, such wordplay is all that is left for the advocates of abortion. In the age of ultrasound, one can’t really argue that a fetus isn’t a baby. It’s easier to say that your opponents are hypocrites who should shut up, but like so many other pro-abortion arguments, it collapses immediately upon contact with facts.

I won’t pretend supporters of abortion never do anything to help the community. Still, it strikes me that community service is often prescribed as punishment for non-violent criminals. Since abortion is violent, but not technically criminal, perhaps area pro-aborts could throw in a few extra hours each week to atone for the blood this vaunted “right” has cost us. Roll up your sleeves, folks: there are about 4,000 abortions per day, and you’re already 40,000,000 kids behind.