Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: Slippery Slope
"A five-year review of eighty-one parenting studies published in the 2010 Journal of Marriage and Family, for example, reported that children raised by same-sex parents are ?statistically indistinguishable? from those raised by straight parents in terms of self-esteem, academics, and social adjustment. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the Child Welfare League of America, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Medical Association, and the American Psychological Association all agree that same-sex couples are just as fit to parent as their heterosexual counterparts.
Today?s ?perfect? family is not what it used to be."
http://www.salon.com/2012/09/04/gay_couples_have_happier_kids/
As I said, we don't live in a perfect world. And I am completely in favor of gays adopting.
I know, I'm just trying to show you that in a perfect world, children need loving parents - regardless of gender.
I know it seems like a minor difference since you already support same-sex adoptions, but it's really important to me that false ideas about same-sex relationships don't go unchecked. Whether it be a perfect world, or this world, a parent's gender does not influence their ability to parent what.so.ever.
I completely agree with you. I am not sure what I said to the contrary.
Yes, I know I said it is important for a child to have both parents involved in their life. I guess I am speaking for myself. I was married for 8 years and had two children, for me I think it was very important that both me and my ex-husband be involved in our children's life. That is what I am saying, when a child has both parent (in a divorce situation) my hope would be that both parents would be involved as much as possible.
I think when you said, "I believe it is important to raise a child with a mother and father, even if they are divorced - and I am divorced my the father of my kids. A child should have a male and female influence in their life. There are certain things my daughter can talk more easily to me about and things that my son feels more comfortable talking to his father about."
It made me think you were saying that a mother/father are better for a child than a mother/mother or father/father.
BTW, I really appreciate that you're still discussing this given the circumstances. How's your DH doing?
So wait...you got a divorce before? How does that go with your conservative christian views? Can you just choose which ones you want to follow and which ones you don't?
Yeah it's kinda like Republicans being pro-life unless it is their mistresses who get pregnant.
Walk a mile in my shoes before you judge me. Yes, I went through a divorce. Not ideal and not what I had intended. But things happen and without going into ancient history I divorced.
As a christian it is not what we hope for....but isn't it just the Catholics who think divorce is sinful?
He is doing as well as I expected. He had a little too much to drink and he is sleeping on the couch, or he passed out on the couch.
Anyway I think this will be a blessing in disguise. He has been talking about starting his own company and this gives him the opportunity to do that.
Thanks for asking...I appreciate it.
No...though I think they're the ones that hold it against someone the most.
Coffee, can you help me understand something? And I ask this earnestly without snark.
How can one be supportive of gay rights but then support abortion? I hear about same sex marriage should be a right and a part of the constitutional provision of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. So, why aren't unborn babies thought of in the same way? I have a hard time understanding the rationale.
Well, when I got married the second time my DH and I met with our pastor for premarital counseling. Both he and I wanted to make sure we did not end up divorced again.
The first time I got married I was very young. I spend about 8 years single after my divorce. (I am an old chick, I will be 40 here in about 21 days).
I think getting married for the second time at an older age, I have a more realistic expectation regarding marriage. Somehow my DH just get each other and we work.
I'm not CB, but I'll answer.
Supporting a woman's right to choose is allowing her autonomy over her own body. It is not unlike supporting a gay couple's right to make decisions about their own lives without the government interfering.
The number of women who have abortions for funsies is nil. Most of the time, abortion is not taken lightly by the woman involved.
There are different schools of thought about when "life" begins. I can't speak for CB, but I don't believe it begins at the moment of conception, so having an abortion in the 1st trimester doesn't bother me on a moral level. Further along, when there aren't any medical issues, is more difficult for me to accept, but again, it's not my decision and I can't force my moral beliefs on others.
Having children has made me even more pro-choice because nobody should have to go through a pregnancy if they do not want to.
I'm on an iPad and got out to go to sleep, so I might have to Type up something more detailed in the morning. But I think the crux of it is that banning gay marriage hurts a lot of people, it makes their daily lives harder and sadder for no reason except that someone else stretches the meaning of their religious text to say "we don't like you."
Allowing abortion on the other hand helps people live in better conditions. It avoids a lifetime of hardship due to some stupid mistake (sometimes no mistake at all, just bad luck). And if done early enough, the cost is only a mass of cells that can't feel or know a thing. They don't have happiness to pursue. Hypothetically, I suppose they could - but hypothetically, so could sperm. I think that a late term abortion crosses the line into a point where a fetus can feel and I think that would be wrong. But back to the earlier abortions, I have a hard time thinking that a family should be forced into a lifetime of hardship given what we know about the lack of feeling and thought in early pregnancy.
I can sympathize with your earlier story because I too was unplanned. My mom was a single mother of 2 when she found.out she was pregnant withme and I'm certain abortion crossed her mind, and honestly? If she'd gone that route I would have been none the wiser. I wouldn't have felt any pain. I wouldn't have even existed in the sense that i consider personhood. So it doesn't bother me. I'm glad she didn't, but I wouldn't have been harmed if she did. I would be neutral.
See, having children strengthened my pro life beliefs. And I had two difficult high risk pregnancies. In the 8th month of my first pregnancy I was diagnosed with cancer and with my second pregnancy I had preeclampsia and spent the majority of my pregnancy in bed.
I got pregnant through two forms of birth control.
Abortion was on the table. We obviously decided against it but I will forever be grateful that I had that option open to me legally instead of of the option of an illegal abortion.
Sheesh, I spend one day away from the internet...
-I'm pregnant now, perfectly content to be so, and am still incredibly grateful for my protected right to make my own reproductive decisions. Someone else's decision to get an abortion (or not) doesn't affect my uterus so I won't let my decision to make babies affect theirs.
-Wonders how (approximate paraphrase) 'marriage is between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation' rules out incest through implication. A brother and sister could make babies just fine and are, in fact, a man and a woman. Win! Also, see a long history of (cousinly) incest in Christian European royalty.
-Plenty of children grow up with single parents (or no parents) for a variety of reasons. It's just spiteful when people start talking about a child's right to a mother & father when so many kids already do not have one or both, and a gay couple is willing and eager to adopt. Not to mention the fact that you can adopt as a single parent anyway, which sort of nullifies any standing for that argument.
I'm sorry that you had rough pregnancies and what you did for your children was an amazing thing, I can understand how having children would make you uncomfortable with getting an abortion. But I still don't see how it applies to anyone else. No one is arguing that you should get an abortion, they're arguing that women should be able to choose if they need an abortion.
Of course we don't want to redefine marriage. That's why it's still considered a business transaction in which a father transfers his female property to another man, who probably already has several wives (if he's in a proper biblical marriage, that is) and that man is free to do whatever he pleases with his property, including beating and raping her, and the property doesn't have the option to leave if she's unhappy.
Oh, wait.
CB, thank you for answering my question. It is nice to hear another opinion.
And although I would never have an abortion, if someone would make that choice for herself - that would be her decision to make.
My hope would be that if a woman found herself in the situation of an unplanned pregnancy not only would she consider abortion as an option, but she would also consider adoption. There are sooooo many people (gay, straight, single, married) who very much want a child in their life and are not able to. I heard a saying once, "there are no such thing as unwanted babies, there are just unfound parents". That just stuck with me.
Before people jump on the "don't force me to put a child up for adoption" bandwagon....I certainly am not saying that at all. I simply hope that people would adoption because I have seen first hand what a wonderful thing it can be (and I am sure my parents would agree).
Yes, I understand that and when I spoke of a child having both their mother and father in their life I was referring to my particular situation. As in, when I got divorced I still wanted both me and my ex to be a part of our kid's life because (sorry, I thought I had claified that). Likewise, it is my hope that all kids of divorced parents would have both parents involved in their life. I know it doesn't always happen that way.
And I also said I have no problem with gays adopting. There are so many children who don't have anybody to love them, I would tip my hat to ANY loving parent (gay, straight, single or married) who would welcome a child into their life through adoption.
I'm late to the party here, but the above statement brings up a question that I have. I know we didn't want this to turn into the "Great Abortion Debate of 2012" so I'm sorry in advance for adding to it...but here goes:
If, as you state, life does not begin at conception, and (I'm going to infer from your statement here, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong...) isn't "life" for the First trimester, (I'm inferring from your statement: "having an abortion in the 1st trimester doesn't bother me on a moral level"), what about a woman who has a miscarriage in the first trimester? Should she not mourn the loss of her baby? After all, as another poster put it, "it was just a ball of cells"?
I mean no snark here and am asking a serious question, as I cannot reconcile these thoughts.
Signed,
Someone who suffered 2 early miscarriages, which I mourned greatly.
Pumpkin,
I'm sorry for your losses and I didn't mean to offend you.
To answer your question, I don't know when life begins. I understand that life, at it's most basic form, begins at conception. That's a scientific fact. I just don't think of it is a "life" the way we think of life. It is just a group of cells at that point.
I don't agree that somehow that potential life should trump the life of the woman who is carrying it. A woman should have the right to terminate her pregnancy if it's what she chooses to do.
One of the most haunting images for me is a photo taken in the 1960s. It was of a woman who was a wife and mother who had a back alley abortion and was left to bleed out by the "doctor" who performed it. She is lying there in a pool of her own blood in a filthy, deserted room. The illegalization of abortion would take us right back to that scenario.
I do not want that for my daughters.
If the pro-life group wants to do something constructive, they should advocate for better sex-ed in schools and cheaper birth control options for adults. That will prevent pregnancies so that *abortions are unnecessary in the first place.
ETA: * elective, non-medically necessary
I am horrible at articulating my thoughts, so I apologive if this becomes a rambling mess.
First of all, thank you for your sympathy. I was not offended by your post it just gave me cause to post a thought that has been rattling around in my head for awhile. That is, I feel like those who claim that a pregnancy which is aborted early was not a life, would (IMO rightly) mourn a planned pregnancy which ended without their wishes; indicating (to me) that how the mother feels about a pregnancy determines whether or not it is a "life". Which I can't understand.
I also have to starkly agree with the part of your post that I bolded. I don't think it is fair to determine that one life is more valuable than another, or to use your words, that one life should "trump another". I guess that statement could be construed to imply that I'm saying the baby's life should trump that of the mother, but here is where my aforementioned articulation weakness comes into play. In the case of abortion one life is being ended., not in the other case. (Articulation failure, I know.)
Also, if you agree that life begins at conception, but also believe that " A woman should have the right to terminate her pregnancy if it's what she chooses to do." Do you consider, "A woman should have the right to terminate a life if it's what she chooses to do" to be an equal statement? And if not, what is your distinction between the two?
Also, re: the 1960s abortion: what an awful situation, and I would not want that for my daughter either. However, I think that just as an earlier example of a single person who wanted to legalize infanicide, was called and anecdote, not a argument, I have to apply the same logic to this single example. I don't think it's fair to imply that women would be bleeding out from back alley abortions all over the country if abortion were illegal.
Thank you for keeping this discussion civil (thus far
)
Oh.
Ok.