My Voice

This post will probably not get all positive feedback. And ya know what? I'm okay with that.


I started this blog a while ago as a way to be able to express myself and do anything from blabbering on about nothing to getting y'alls advice on situations I find myself in, as well as expressing my personal opinions and beliefs in an appropriate setting.

If nothing else, I've somehow managed to make some good friends along the way. But on top of that amazing plus, my husband is ever-so-grateful to not have to listen to be babble on and on about something he could care less about... which as a woman is half of what I babble on about. (Can I get an "amen"?!)


Anywho - I say all of that to say this: sometime that "blabbering" involves an issue that people aren't as open-minded about. I think I've done a pretty good job (if I do say so myself, that is) at keeping that to a pretty good minimum... but this tends to be a topic that gets people heated. And since it's not quite winter here in these parts, let's keep the heat to a minimum, if we can. Also, please remember that as the blog owner, I reserve the right to delete/deny any comments that are drama-filled. I will NOT delete comments simple for the fact that they hold different opinions. That you can count on. But if things get ugly, or something is blatantly hurtful, then I'll get to clicking.


Now that I've probably scared everyone away, here's what I was prepping you for.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm Pro-Life.


There. I said it. I don't think that's necessarily a secret, seeing as how I've posted on the counselling I do in the local pregnancy clinic, but in case I haven't come right out with it in the past, there it is.

I am Pro-Life in that I believe life begins at the moment of conception. Try as you may, but you'll have a hard time convincing me otherwise. I believe that the instant that an individual full-set of 46 chromosomes appears, with a different set of DNA from that of the mother, I call that life.

I won't start spilling out anything more on that particular topic, really... at least I don't intend to, at this point. But I want to make it clear that I believe life begins as soon as the egg is fertilized by the sperm. So I've said it. There shouldn't be any confusion at this point.


But where it does get confusing is here: There's a political ad running in the DC area (which we happen to be kind've close to, and thus are subject to the ads from time to time) that shows graphic images of aborted fetuses. It's picture after picture of different aborted babies after an abortion. According to several articles on the ads, the candidate that is running the ads is only running to be able to show the ads on television.

You see, there's a law in effect that prevents any network or cable television channel from being able to alter a political ad in any way. I get this. It's to protect the ads from unwarranted editing which would make them appear and/or sound different than the candidate actually intended them to be. And the networks/cable stations are also prohibited from shifting/changing the ad to any air-time other than was was intentionally purchased by the candidate. I get it. This keeps a network/station that is more strongly affiliated with one political party from being able to mess with the ad of a candidate with another political party. It totally makes sense.


But I don't agree with this ad.


I feel that the candidate has "played" the system. And as pro-life as I am, I do NOT think that it's okay to subject children and/or forcing mothers of previous abortions to have to see these images. Granted, you can turn the channel. But you shouldn't have to. This crosses a line in my book.


I will, however, say this. I do believe that these kinds of images should be viewed by those currently in the positions of authority and/or are in law-making positions. Congress. The Senate. Any member in the law-making/law-enforcing divisions of government should be required to so photos of a fetus before, during, and after an abortion procedure has taken place. I feel that they should have to see it to make a truly informed decision. There should be absolutely no bias or prejudice in making these decisions, thus I believe that all of this should be taken in to account when major decisions are being made.


I just feel like there's a better way to do this. I don't believe that ignorance is an excuse. But instead of slapping people in the face with images of dead babies, why not display statistics of the effects of PAS on women who have had abortions, and how common it is for it to lead to suicide. What about exposing the manipulation and lack of care given to these women seeking abortions by organizations such as Plann3d Par3nthood and the like. Why not out them so as to expose their inconsistencies and self-serving "relationship" building techniques with teenagers, when they are only seeking to build future business. Why not stick with the truth about life - when the heart begins beating (fyi: 21 days after conception, on day 35 of pregnancy), and when we form our very own fingerprints, or when we can start blinking our eyes and making facial expressions, or begin to feel pain, (as measured by fetal response to stimulus)... why do we exploit the innocent bodies of dead babies, instead of defending their right to life and encouraging when that life happens?


As a Christian, I have a hard time believe that if Jesus had the technology, he would've shown murderers pictures of dead people and abortion-minded women pictures of their dead babies. I can't imagine that this is what he would've done. Call me crazy. He never once flaunted someone's sin in front of a group of people. He gave grace abundantly and hurt for the sinner. He hurt for the adulterer AND the ones who threw stones at her. He hurt for the men who hung on the cross next to him - BOTH of them.


He hurt for me.


And he loved me.


He still does. My Jesus didn't spit in my face and make me watch the mistakes I made over and over. He didn't make me relive it. He forgave me and brought me peace.


What are we doing? Marching with pictures of dead babies raised high or airing "political ads" with their faces plastered on the screen. What does that accomplish?

It doesn't make people rethink their position on abortion. It doesn't cause people to choose life, rather than abortion. It accomplishes nothing but setting us back. It makes people lash out in anger and consider all pro-lifers to be radical freaks set out to make people uncomfortable.


It makes someone like me - someone that's more sure than anything that life beings at conception - sad to be clumped into the same group as these people.


For anyone that's seen the ad and been hurt or offended by it, I am so sorry. There's nothing I can do to stop them from airing it, and there's no way I can take that back, but I can apologize for it and tell you that not all of those that are pro-life would agree with this.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now back to the topic of my being pro-life... leaving this ad behind.


I'm sure there are quite a few people that would argue that I'm soft or "on the fence", but I assure you that I am not. Let me explain:

Again I'll say - I am 100% pro-life. I don't agree with abortion. When people argue for abortion purely for the sake of rape and incest victims, I'd like to remind them that 1) that only accounts for less than 6% of abortions in the US today, and 2) I'm not talking about this. I don't believe that abortion is right in any circumstance (and statistics have shown that the majority of these victims have claimed their abortion to have felt more like a 2nd death), but that's not what this particular blog is about. And I don't always say that, because I'm never going to succeed in accomplishing anything by starting an argument with someone.


For the time being, I'm talking about the other 94% of abortions.


I keep saying that one of these days I will post the abortion procedure in non-colorful, fact only layman's terms. Many people do not know the actual procedure for several reasons 1) they've never needed to, 2) they've never had one, 3) they've had one but didn't receive any kind of walk-through of the surgical procedure before-hand, or 4) didn't want to know. And maybe that post is long overdue... I'll see if I can work on it sometime soon.

(I assure you, it is not a colorful opinion-filled explanation of the process. It is the simple fact-only version we are permitted to give tot he clients at the pregnancy clinic, where we are not at all allowed to express our personal beliefs on the topic. Therefore, I can't imagine anyone being offended, but I'm sure it's about to happen. There will be a large warning before it begins, so anyone that is squeamish or uninterested will know to skip the post.)


But whatever the case may be, I struggle with one thing. And this may be where some people start disagreeing with me, if they aren't already. I struggle with the fact that I believe abortion is murder. Some of you have rolled your eyes, but let me explain it this way - as I stated before, I believe that life begins at conception. I believe that the minute that the sperm fertilizes the egg, there is life. There is human life. In that instance, 23 chromosomes from the mother, and 23 chromosomes from the father unite to create a 46 chromosomed individual human life. Yes, that life is dependant on another for 9 months, but there is no instance in nature where the life of the baby is not dependant on the assistance and/or nurture of another party (I could easily take a rabbit trail here about how quick people are defend helpless animals, but are quicker still to write off a fetus as a human life... but I'll try to stick to the subject at hand).

So my stance in being pro-life doesn't necessarily, in this case, involve my religious beliefs. I could absoLUTEly involve them to continue to back my opinion, but it doesn't matter. I don't believe that is what should convince people to be pro-life.

And this is where people question my beliefs. But I assure you that I am still 100% a believer in God. I just have to say, that when you start pulling religion into politics, in this country, you walk a very thin line. If we use religion as a foundation for law in a country that no longer recognizes their history of being founded on the principles of God, then we risk them allowing people with other religious beliefs to do the same.

Now don't get me wrong, I wish that this country would turn back to God. I think it would solve problems way easier and faster than anyone could imagine, but the issue of when life begins, though it is absolutely and 100% a God ordained design, can't be based solely on that principle.


When our only way to reason with non-believers is based solely on our interpretation of the Bible, we can't be shocked when they think we're crazy. If we believe something, and someone else doesn't, then they won't be able to see things the same way that we do. And telling them that abortion is wrong because it's a sin doesn't accomplish anything with a person who doesn't believe in the word "sin" to begin with. It'd be like arguing our point in French to someone who only speaks English. It'll only cause them to get angry and frustrated and write us off all the more.


Does that make sense?


And where I am not saying that we should exclude our biblical beliefs in making our decisions or relying on them to help us in choosing who to vote for or which laws should be put in effect, I am saying that it's no way to back a decision to a no longer God-fearing government or world.


So to argue it outside of religious beliefs, if at all possible, I say this: I believe that life begins at conception, when 46 chromosomes appear and a unique set of DNA has been created. And in showing that the heart begins beating before the woman would know she is pregnant, I can't imagine how abortion isn't considered murder, when the definition of death in the medical dictionary is this: the irreversible cessation of all vital functions especially as indicated by permanent stoppage of the heart, respiration, and brain activity. So then, if the heart is already beating, and we can detect the presence of the use brain waves in a fetus as early as 21 days from conception, how then is their death not considered murder?

And furthermore, the Declaration of Independence, the very constitution that this country clings so tightly to, reads that all men are created equal, and are endowed 3 certain unalienable Rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Where then have we lost sight of the right to life. And who gets to decide who is and is not in fact warranted these rights.






Well, I'm eager to hear what you have to say, and I think I've babbled on long enough, on the subject, so I'll leave you with this:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."






Thanks for stopping by, guys. :-)