Here’s one we can’t predict - How will Herseth Sandlin’s position on abortion change?

One can only hope!

I wondered how long that would take.

Elli Schwiesow was merely stating her opinion to you. An opinion does not make one right.

What Tyler? How long introspection would take? Self-examination?

You haven’t had a child of your own yet, have you?

So mothers that currently have children “on the ground” don’t have abortions.

Bullsh*t.

Not even a worthy effort, Pat.

Next.

tgrin: Interesting! Once for ending a childs life always for ending it? People can have a change of heart. Maybe a smiling child will change a heart!

We can only hope!

Why is it pro abortionists get so snippy over the abortion issue?

Is it because they feel guilty?

I never feel bad that I am Pro Life!

Often whether a pro abortion position changes with the first live birth depends on how many abortions the woman has had in the past.

Multiple abortions (using abortion as birth control) does seem to sear a woman’s heart so that even when she does have a child she cannot let herself think about the dead siblings. (or half siblings)

While it is true that the pro abortion position is often a product of youth and inexperience, it is also often a product of intense guilt, especially among men who have put their own pleasure above all else, and women who have allowed themselves to be pressured into something that they did not want and now cannot admit what they have actually done (and that they are a victim too.)

It will be very difficult for Stephanie to change her position because of her political associations and what would be at stake for her in her political career.

So I will bet that she will suppress any hint of allowing herself to think about the terriblness of her child being pulled limb from limb and sucked out of her body in a bloody heap of tiny arms and legs.

And there are plenty of women like my wife who have a child and don’t waver a bit in their dedication to keeping the government’s hands out of their uteri.

Is this serious? This is sexist, demeaning, and follows the same pro-life train of thought that women are nothing but mindless incubators with no rational concept of the choices they make.

My wife and I are expecting a child soon. When I saw our first ultrasound, yes, it was a special moment. But it didn’t change my opinion. What might work well for me may not for another.

I am in no position to oppose a woman’s right to choose.

NEW RULE: IF YOU WANT TO BAN ABORTION YOU MUST ADOPT A BLACK CRACK BABY. It probably won’t happen though. Hell, that’s something Christ would do!

#10
The Black community works very hard to keep Black children out of White homes–even foster homes–so Black Crack Babies–though willingly accepted by many pro-life families– usually go to overcrowded Black foster families that are not really prepared for the struggle.

So it works well for you to let your child live–but may not work well for another to let their’s live. Does the same apply to your mother? It works well for you to let your mother live but might not work well for another to let their’s live? So in that case it would be OK to……….

Hummmm…..I’ll bet you don’t want to think down that line…..

PP, she isn’t pro-choice. She is pro-abortion. She has never advocated adoption programs, etc. It will be interesting to see if she calls the life inside of her a fetus or a human being.

She may choose to call her baby “the contents of her uterus”. That seems to be the terminology of choice for many pro-abortionists.

The point of pro-choice people is that abortion should be a decision between the mother, her family, her doctor, and whomever else the MOTHER wants to consult.

Why would having a baby change Herseth-Sandlin’s perspective on that? Why make a wonderful event for her into such a ridiculous political discussion?

If you insist on believing and/or asserting “pro choice” means “pro abortion”, you will never contribute anything meaningful to the discussion of this issue. Which is to say, you can’t start with a false premise and reach a truthful conclusion.

Okay,

Again cngrats to Stephanieand Max. I hope and pray that she ould change her stance an favorlife instead of death,but she won’t. I can predict that this is wht she will say “While I am Pro-life I do not believe we should prevent others from have abortion as a viable option.” We of course know that means she will continue to be pro-choice. Typical cotradicting democrat statement.

Medical decisions need to be made with the family and health care provider. The same at the beginning as well as at the end of life. The Government should stay out of health care.

Amen # 14. This is a wonderful thing for Stephanie, can we just leave it at that? Whatever horrible things you say about her just means that you don’t know her, if you did you wouldn’t be so mean, she is a wonderful person and she will be terrific mother.

Let’s forget that the “fetus” is a younger version of the child that most Pro-Choicer’s are. Pro-Choice/Pro-Abotrion are immature brats. They run around and act anyway they want, then they get in trouble and want “daddy-government” to bail them out. So let’s justify Murder(murder - is the taking of life for one’s personal desires.) But the only way to justify murder is to make the life worthless. So let’s decide life doesn’t begin until a specified time. AND it works really great when the life can’t testify for itself.

If you don’t feel GUILTY, YOU ain’t human!

#5 Tgrindadams is something else. Every comment from “her” is pure venom. #7 is right on. If you believe in something moral, there is no guilt or need to defend.

#8 Excellent writings. Very powerful and truthful.

If Steph doesn’t even remotely question her pro-abortion beliefs after the birth of her child, then I feel more sorry for her than I do right now. There is no way that this could affect your belief system.

Most women who have abortions are already mothers. Most pro-choice women I know are mothers. The leaders of the two pro-choice organizations in this state have nine kids between them. Doesn’t seem like becoming a mother has any more effect than anything else. Maybe John Thune will take a different route to work tomorrow and suddenly become pro-choice.

Kelsey, When do they start considering their children human? Maybe, when they can help put up the Pro-Choice yard signs?

What will PP write if Herseth-Sandlin has bad luck and has a spontaneous abortion?

Will his god have changed positions on abortion?

Obviously, her views will not change. There is a huge difference in experience between having a wanted pregnancy versus an unwanted one, something which pro-choicers respect and appreciate.

I am fortunate enough to be a parent, and the birth of our child was the most profound experience of my life. We were ready for kids, and are fortunate to be able to provide for our child. We were also very fortunate that our pregnancy was complication free, and that the baby was born completely healthy.

We have friends, however, that have not been so lucky. One of our closest friends - after trying for months to get pregnant - found out that the fetus was developing without a functioning brain. They were, as you can imagine, absolutely devastated. They had to decide whether to carry the baby to term, knowing it would die as soon as the cord was cut, or to end the pregnancy. They decided, after a lot of soul searching, to end the pregnancy. And a few months later they were pregnant again, and this time they were blessed with no complications. The decision they made with their first pregnancy was technically, and legally, an abortion. Under the proposed law, as I read it, it would be a criminal act. But forcing them to carry that fetus to term knowing it would not live would be horrifically cruel. Some may have made that choice, and that’s fine. But it should be their choice. Forcing them to carry the fetus to term would also have meant that their child, who is healthy and doing great, would not have been conceived.

Becoming a parent didn’t cause me to shift my opinion on abortion one bit. I wouldn’t choose it, and we’d figure out a way to make it work if faced with an unplanned pregnancy. But that’s our choice, based upon our values.

Becoming a parent did cause me to realize that not every pregnancy is as problem free as ours. It didn’t cause me to think that I can make the decision for anyone else. And it didn’t change my mind at all that government should make a blanket one-size-fits-all rule and to criminalize abortion.

Yeah, If every situation was like #25’s things would be much simpler wouldn’t they? Because people don’t have abortions to cover anything up. Because that would be wrong!
The difference between #25’s story and Planned Parenthood is #25’s story is thinking about the child.

#23: “Will his god have changed positions on abortion?” What year is this? “His God?” Discounting the whack job muslims, agnostics, card readers, naturalists, satanists, how many gods are there??

#24: “There is a huge difference in experience between having a wanted pregnancy versus an unwanted one, something which pro-choicers respect and appreciate.” Hey, Allison, were you a “wanted” pregnancy or an “unwanted” pregnancy? How you abuse your mother’s decision to have you and use it to discount others who would be like you is repugnant. As these postings indicate, there are multiples of people who would like to adopt. I work with three people who have done just that and have tens of clients who have adopted. God, you people trivialize life to such a meaningless state. We’re not talking about cuts of meat, plants or videos here. Wow.

#25, I don’t think the law, as proposed would prohibit termination of a nonviable child, i.e. would die anyway or would cause material complications to the mother. The law is designed to prevent abortions of convenience, i.e. “Oops, I did it again….”

Leave it to PP and the War College Conservatives to take a complicated issue and make it into “Parents love babies, young single people who support choosing an abortion don’t know any better!”

Why do you think that deciding to have a child (or 2, or 3) has to have any effect on that person’s opinion about the role of government in reproductive health decisons?

Exactly how would the proposed law NOT prohibit that, “Duh”? As I read it, unless the fetus was already dead, that abortion would be illegal.

Ultrasounds aren’t always correct to use as a reason to terminate a pregnancy - is that a surprise? To some it must be.

Example: My wonderful grandson turned one year old this month. Before he was born, his mother had many ultrasounds as they showed the baby (yes, baby!) had only 5% lung development. The parents were fully informed of the gravity of the situation the night before his delivery by C-section, and they were planning the baby’s funeral instead of his birth. HOWEVER, when the baby was born, he came out screaming, and his lungs were completely developed and fully functioning.

If this had been shown early on and the parents had decided on an abortion for this reason, a wonderful life would have been needlessly terminated.

Duh - fetuses are not people. As far as I am concerned, had I been unwanted and aborted, it would have been exactly the same as far as my never reaching a state of conscious self-awareness/existance as it would have been had my parents never met. Your privileging of a mass of cells over a woman is what is truly repugnant here. No woman should be forced to sustain a dependent life form inside of her body, it is her right to separate it from her womb.

That being said, leave my mother out of this. Had she chosen to abort me, that would have been her decision. The decision to bring life into the world is a gift, not an obligation. Protecting a woman’s right to choose does not “abuse” her decision to carry me to full term and raise me, it protects the rights of millions like that to make that choice for themselves, when and if the time is right.

“God, you people trivialize life to such a meaningless state. We’re not talking about cuts of meat, plants or videos here. Wow.”
Ummm, a cut of meat was once life. DUH. I have no idea how plants of videos factor into your argument, that makes absolutely no sense. Your personal comments are immature at best, and you lack any real line of reasoning.

Some of these comments have struck a cord. How many of you consider yourselves to be pro-life but then agree with the State carrying out a death sentence? It is no different then someone being pro-choice but carrying a pregnancy full term.

I am fortunate to be the father of three beautiful children. When we were pregnant we were asked if we wanted certain tests done on the fetus to see if there were any complications. We said no, not because we didn’t want to know, but because we knew it would not change our minds. We had and still have faith that we would be given nothing that we could not handle with Gods help. That is our faith, but is not the faith of every pregnant person/couple. What right do we have to force our faith/views on them?

Fetus is used by the pro abortion crowd. The fetus is not a chicken, when not “terminated” it comes out a Baby. I will go to my grave thinking that “it” is a baby dependent on maternal care and not a fetus.

#25 Anonymous: Thank you for that thoughtful commentary.

#26 Guy: It’s true that most abortions performed today do not include the specific situation described in #25. But I think you’d be surprised how many of them involve extremely complex factors and inspire a huge amount of soul-searching and, yes, even prayer, on the part of the woman and others involved. “Abortions of convience” and “abortion as birth control” are handy terms to suggest that most women who have abortions make the decision flippantly after willful neglect of the prior choices of remaining abstinent or using birth control. In fact, women choose abortion for many and varied reasons. I personally know of two women who faced the exact fetal defect described in #25 and made opposite decisions. One, already a loving mother of three, made the difficult decision to terminate the pregnancy, partly because of concerns she had about her own health. The other, a mother of a toddler, chose to carry the pregnancy to term. She hoped to have at least a few minutes with her baby before its inevitable death, but it died during her labor. She and her family named the child and had a full funeral service, which I hope was healing for them all. I can’t tell you that one woman’s choice was “better” than the others, only that each had deeply personal reasons for making her particular choice. I also can’t tell you what I might do in that situation; it’s one of the very, very few circumstances under which I can imagine myself even *considering* abortion. But because such circumstances exist, I feel I ultimately must support every woman’s right to choose, even in situations in which I feel it’s the wrong decision.

#27 Duh: You need to read the proposed law. Fetal nonviability isn’t mentioned anywhere. Only cases of rape and incest (and even then, only those in which the woman and her doctor have jumped through all the legal and medical hoops to prove the rape or incest), along with direct and immediate threat to the life of the mother, are allowed as exceptions. A woman who chose abortion (or, at least, the doctor who performed the abortion) under the circumstances of #25 would have broken the law. For many people, that’s okay. It’s not okay with me. That’s why, once again, I’ll vote against SD’s proposed law to prohibit abortions.

One thing’s for sure: as Pat says, we can’t possibly predict whether motherhood will have any effect on SHS’s views on abortion. A certain percentage of women do “change sides” during or after pregnancy and childbirth. But they don’t all go one way (pro-choice to pro-life), as Pat seems to believe. And I would guess that a majority don’t change their general opinion at all.

Josie - Thanks for some thoughtful discussion on the other side of the issue from where I stand.

I would never assume that everyone changes their stance, but as has been mentioned earlier, having a child is a major life-altering event; one that could potentially alter our congresswoman’s standpoint on abortion, as well as a plethora of other issues.

#31 Allison. I make perfect sense and your response backed my position up.

Your simplistic references to “mass of cells ” is exactly what I’m talking about when referring to cuts of meat, plants or vidoes. Pro-abortionist attempt to cloud the issue and speak in germane generalities, shunning specificity as to what they refer, i.e. fetus, cells, mass, blob, whatever when you know full well (give even the most debateable scientific evidence) that it is a human being. You equate them as on the same plane. A cow is not a human (unless your a veggie). Then you contradict yourself by referring these same “mass of cells” as a “dependent life form”. If it’s a life form, what is it? #33 got it, it’s a baby, nothing else. The womans choice (alright no discussion on rape et. al) is to take care of her body, i.e. prevent pregnancies on her own, and/or in conjunction with her partner (no, no discussion on contraceptive failure here). If she becomes pregnant, then she has other decisions to make which affects a “dependent life form”.

I’d suggest that you give your mother a jingle and thank her for not having your flippant, selfish attitude.

#32. Your initial comment is ludicrous. “How many of you consider yourselves to be pro-life but then agree with the State carrying out a death sentence? It is no different then someone being pro-choice but carrying a pregnancy full term.”

If you equate a baby with mass murderer, then you’ve officially lost it. Death row scum have earned their right to die by committing crimes and most likely ending another innocent person’s life. The baby did nothing wrong.

What is the more legitimate position, save babies and torch convicted felons of horrible crimes or destroy babies while protesting the rights of the Charles Manson-like convicts? Personally, I’ll take the former. You’ve underlined the ultimate hypocrisy of the left.

#36 Duh: Why not “save babies” AND lock up the most dangerous convicted felons for life without possibility of parole, thus not becoming complicit in their murder by the state?

THAT is a consistent pro-life position that I truly admire, even if I can’t always bring myself to agree with it 100 percent in practice.

first off, I never said “mass of cells”, if you are going to dissect my language, at least make it language that I actually used. I never contradicted myself, I said flat out that it is alive and dependent, but that it is the right of the host human to purge itself of any unwelcome life forms attached. Your refusal to address the realities of contraceptive failure and rapes is ridiculous. Women have abortions for many reasons, all very complex and personal, your unwillingness to address that fact shows only your own prejudice. Abortion is often a last resort for women who are not in a position to raise a child at the current point in their lives, for many reasons. Women have the capacity to make that choice for themselves, and no one has the right to pass judgment on them. No one wants to have to have an abortion, no one likes having abortions, but safe, legal access must always exist. Even if you don’t personally agree with it, it is better than the alternative. Taking away the option to a safe and legal abortion will not automatically mean that everyone who gets pregnant will carry it to full term and realize that she wants a baby, after all. It means alot of desperate women getting back alley abortions and putting themselves at risk, as well as more women abandoning their newborns.

There is nothing flippant or selfish about acknowledging the realities of women’s lives. I told you to stop invoking my mother (who, by the way, shares my politics, not that it is any business of yours).

#38 Allison. Did you not write this: “Your privileging of a mass of cells over a woman is what is truly repugnant here”. Did you not write this or did your alter ego?? Typical Pro-abortionist. Get caught in specifics and get into a tizzy. MASS OF CELLS!

I’m not avoiding any issues relating to rape, contraception. They’ve been beaten to death. However, it’s not the child’s fault that the host was raped or that the host became pregnant. I suppose that if you can call a child a mass of cells or unwelcomed life forms then the woman is now proclaimed to be the “host”.

“Even if you don’t personally agree with it, it is better than the alternative”

Answer: Adoption. Pure and simple.

Has anyone asked what the father thinks of all t his.

Duh,

Oh, abandoning it to someone else is your only solution you offer?

Is Adoption the miracle cure for abortion? Should we legally require women who initially seek abortion into adoption instead?

Would that fill your pro-life heart with joy? S

Patti:

Do you believe in God? Though shall not KILL!

What part of that do you not understand?

Duh,

You conveniently have decided to skirt the issue by mixing apples and oranges. If one life is sacred why not the other? If you are pro-life, then you believe that all life is sacred. While I am not Catholic, I do know many priests and find them to be totally pro-life. They believe that a woman should not be allowed to terminate her pregnancy and that the state should not be allowed to terminate another’s life even if it is listed as a just punishment for crimes committed.

Pro-choice is just that, the freedom to make a choice. Some will choose to terminate the pregnancy and some will choose to carry the baby full term. But they had the ability to make a choice.

You mention that those that are put to death by the state are not innocent, yet, advances in science and investigations into some of the older cases show that there have been mistakes and that innocent people have lost their lives or been sentenced to loose their lives, which is worse? The “innocent life” terminated by the mother or the “innocent life” terminated by the state in the name of justice?

Father of three, you raise good points and it is part of the reason I have become anti-death penalty.

One reason that you don’t mention is mercy. Who among us has never done something for which there is really no rectifying but has not received full appropriate punishment? We were granted mercy. And for which, we should extend it to others.

The person we harmed may not have forgiven us or forgotten it. We might never have asked for forgiveness. But, we were given mercy from punishment.

The act of love and mercy is appropriate in both the death penalty and abortion debate. And, a gift of mercy and love is its own reward.

Pro-Life is giving a chance to those lives who haven’t been born.
Pro-Death Penalty is punishment for taking a life.
It always comes down to giving the INNOCENT a chance to be FREE.

People who see conflict between Pro-Life and Pro-Death Penalty have a Extremely Sophmoric viewpoint.

Patti #40. If the option is either throwing pieces of the baby away in a trash can after extraction or offering the baby to a family who actually wants them, I’ll take adoption, and so would the baby. If the option is the host mother’s guilt after adoption or her thoughts on giving up the hopefully healthy baby to adoption, which option do you suppose she’d take? Adoption. I don’t know about mandating it, but education on these alternatives would probably produce more adoptions.

FOT #42 - Guy #44 said it perfectly and the fact that he had to state this obvious fact is amazing.

Troy #43. You’re a much bigger man than I am, however, somewhat niave? Suppose you came home and found your entire family tortured, then slaughtered? Would you hold these same convictions? My bet is that you’d enter the lottery to see if you could be the one to push the button, flip the switch. I know I would. How about the mercy the murderer gave his victims? The death penalty statutes even address this in that if the convicted either tortured or showed no mercy, he/she becomes death eligible. The life the felon took was sacred, not his, after that act. That person forfeited his/her life. Virtually every religion states just that. Again, if these are your convictions, you’re a bigger man than I.

To #41. No, Patti does not believe in God. She has stated so on many posts. Any argument that includes religion won’t work on her!

the day that you are raped and find yourself pregnant, then you should blog about what you would do. Until then, shut up!

Guy (#44),

You still assume that every person on death row is truly guilty. You have not answered for those that have been proved innocent after spending numerous years on death row. I do not believe in the death penalty for someone that was tried and convicted by a jury because I know that try as hard as we will, we are human and make mistakes. Innocent people will get killed because of it. Now, on the other hand, if as in the last case in South Dakota, the person pleads guilty, and no jury of his or her peers made the conviction or no judge made the conviction, then by all means, use the death penalty.

South Dakota voted on this once and they will come up with the same answer again. At what point is it enough?

Not only that, but can the state of SD afford to spend millions of dollars trying to get this to hold up in court? They can’t even seem to come up with enough money to educate the children we have right now.