Woman Writes, "My Abortion is Everyone's Fault but My Own and My Husband's"

After coming across this article at one of my favorite blogs (Sandmonkey), I actually feel physically ill.

This woman blames the Bush administration for her decision to have an abortion:

I am a 42-year-old happily married mother of two elementary-schoolers. My husband and I both work, and like many couples, we’re starved for time together. One Thursday evening this past March, we managed to snag some rare couple time and, in a sudden rush of passion, I failed to insert my diaphragm.

Boo hoo! Poor two income couple who has no time together! At least she admits it was her failure to insert the diaphragm. Of course, that is the actual source of the “problem” she is about to have…but nevermind reality. Today middle class people expect to be above reality!

The next morning, after getting my kids off to school, I called my ob/gyn to get a prescription for Plan B, the emergency contraceptive pill that can prevent a pregnancy — but only if taken within 72 hours of intercourse. As we’re both in our forties, my husband and I had considered our family complete, and we weren’t planning to have another child, which is why, as a rule, we use contraception […]

The receptionist, however, informed me that my doctor did not prescribe Plan B. No reason given […] The midwifery practice I had used could prescribe it, but not over the phone, and there were no more open appointments for the day […]

But I needed to meet my kids’ school bus and, as I was pretty much out of options — short of soliciting random Virginia doctors out of the phone book — I figured I’d take my chances and hope for the best.

So, she’s gambling on the odds. Yes, they are actually pretty good odds, but she knows that it is possible given the time of the month that she could be pregnant. But she’s BUSY BUSY BUSY!!! Why bother to make some phone calls? She has better things to do. Note that she has a “complete” family–she has the full set. She just can’t be bothered.

I worried because the odds of having a high-risk pregnancy or a baby born with serious health issues rise significantly after age 40. And I thought of the emotional upheavals that an unplanned pregnancy would cause our family. My husband and I are involved in all aspects of our children’s lives, but even so, we feel we don’t get enough time to spend with them as it is.

I felt sick. Although I’ve always been in favor of abortion rights, this was a choice I had hoped never to have to make myself. When I realized the seriousness of my predicament, I became angry. I knew that Plan B, which could have prevented it, was supposed to have been available over the counter by now. But I also remembered hearing that conservative politics have held up its approval.

It amazes me that people who call themselves “pro-choice” refuse to take responsibility for their own choices–what could have “prevented” her predicament would have been to (A) use a diaphragm (or condom, or some other form of birth control) OR (B) not gamble with the unborn life and prevent fertilization or implantation by call planned parenthood immediately after she realized her first mistake.

Apparently, one of the concerns is that ready availability of Plan B could lead teenage girls to have premarital sex. Yet this concern — valid or not — wound up penalizing an over-the-hill married woman for having sex with her husband. Talk about the law of unintended consequences.

Oh, the drama…it is not like the government is fining women for having sex with their husbands…She faced a hard decision because she CHOSE to have sex with her husband without protection. Would she prefer that the government take responsibility for her reproductive decisions and have her sterilized since “her family is complete” and she is on medications that are bad for pregnant women? Then she would be free from any responsibility for her choices, which seems to be what she really wants.

To this day, I don’t know why my doctors wouldn’t prescribe Plan B — whether it was because of moral opposition to contraception or out of fear of political protesters or just because they preferred not to go there.
In any event, they were also partly responsible for why I was stuck that Friday, and why I was ultimately forced to confront the decision to terminate my third pregnancy.

It’s Bush! It’s the FDA! The doctors! The pharmacists! Anyone but me!!!

[…] trying to get information on how to abort a pregnancy in 2006 is an even more Byzantine experience.

On the Internet, most of what I found was political in nature or otherwise unhelpful […]

Not the smartest way to find the information, but I just did a Google search for Virginia Abortion and the second link was a list of Virginia providers.

This woman may be educated, but she ain’t too bright.

Calling doctors, I felt like a pariah when I asked whether they provided termination services. Finally, I decided to check the Planned Parenthood Web site to see whether its clinics performed abortions.

NOW she calls Planned Parenthood. This lawyer is super brilliant. Not to mention she is killing an unborn child…I suppose everyone is supposed to make her feel good about this.

She also goes on to rail against STATE policy–so now it is Bush, the doctors, the pharmicists, AND the state government.

They did, but I learned that if I had the abortion in Virginia, the procedure would take two days because of a mandatory 24-hour waiting period, which requires that you go in first for a day of counseling and then wait a day to think things over before returning to have the abortion. Because of work and the children, I couldn’t afford two days off, so I opted to have the procedure done on a Saturday in downtown D.C. while my husband took the kids to the Smithsonian.

Wow. Again, she can’t be bothered with two appointments to terminate her pregnancy. She’s just too busy! If I get any “message” from this article, it is that this woman and her husband are too busy. One or both of them needs to reduce their workload since they have two young children and a marriage to care for.

It was a decision I am sorry I had to make. It was awful, painful, sickening. But I feel that this administration gave me practically no choice but to have an unwanted abortion because the way it has politicized religion made it well-nigh impossible for me to get emergency contraception that would have prevented the pregnancy in the first place.

She HAD to make it, huh? Because she had decided her family was complete. Because the pregnancy is high risk (not that she actually had any tests done to find out if there were problems). Because she couldn’t be bothered to be responsible for her own choice.

My personal beliefs are that abortion is wrong unless the mother’s life is at risk or the baby will not survive outside of the womb–but since I recognize I came to that from a religious standpoint, it is not something I believe we can legislate.

However, I think we can legislate based on science. The
re are some clear stages here–conception, implantation, viability (although the actual date of viability is constantly changing and up for debate). Certainly a pregnancy should be protected once it is viable. Before that, it is murkier in ethical terms–though morally I personally believe it is crystal clear. It becomes clearer to me now having felt my baby grow inside me.

Now, this woman’s fetus was not yet viable…so while I find her decision morally repugnant, she does have a legal right. However, her refusal to take responsibility for her own decisions is disgusting. She had choices available at various stages but could not be bothered to exercise them.

Be Sociable, Share!

107 comments

  1. Kelly says:

    wow…. you are right. She takes zero responsibility from beginning to end…. I’m surprised she didn’t blame her husband too!

    How dare he not pull out!

  2. Kelly says:

    wow…. you are right. She takes zero responsibility from beginning to end…. I’m surprised she didn’t blame her husband too!

    How dare he not pull out!

  3. Kelly says:

    wow…. you are right. She takes zero responsibility from beginning to end…. I’m surprised she didn’t blame her husband too!

    How dare he not pull out!

  4. Kelly says:

    wow…. you are right. She takes zero responsibility from beginning to end…. I’m surprised she didn’t blame her husband too!

    How dare he not pull out!

  5. Kelly says:

    wow…. you are right. She takes zero responsibility from beginning to end…. I’m surprised she didn’t blame her husband too!

    How dare he not pull out!

  6. Qatar Cat says:

    Yes I agree that this lady is partly to blame for what happened, but this wasn’t the point of the article. I believe that a person should have a right to terminate pregnancy, and it’s not the politicians’, doctors’ or pharmacists’ business what a woman chooses to do with her own body. Moments of passion and recklessness happen to all of us, and again – it’s our own business how we choose to do things we do. If “Plan B” and abortion are legal, they should be made available without hindrance and without involving personal beliefs of every pharmacist. What do you mean a pharmacist or a doctor can refuse prescription on the grounds of beliefs?? This is bizarre.
    A close friend of mine got pregnant and there were some complications with the pregnancy, she developed severe bleeding and the foetus had to be aborted to save her life. Well, the only doctor that was available (she happened to live in Africa at the time) was Irish Catholic, who refused to do it on “religious grounds”! She had nearly bleeded to death before she was taken on a helicopter to another town thanks to her coworkers who managed to reach the embassador.
    Therefore although I agree that the woman in this article shouldn’t go around blaming Joh, Dick and Kerry for her blunder, I still believe that contraception and abortion should be available. In other words, if it goes against your beliefs – fine, don’t do it, good on you, blah blah, congratulations, you have a baby. But please don’t stop others from terminating pregnancy should they need to.

  7. Qatar Cat says:

    Yes I agree that this lady is partly to blame for what happened, but this wasn’t the point of the article. I believe that a person should have a right to terminate pregnancy, and it’s not the politicians’, doctors’ or pharmacists’ business what a woman chooses to do with her own body. Moments of passion and recklessness happen to all of us, and again – it’s our own business how we choose to do things we do. If “Plan B” and abortion are legal, they should be made available without hindrance and without involving personal beliefs of every pharmacist. What do you mean a pharmacist or a doctor can refuse prescription on the grounds of beliefs?? This is bizarre.
    A close friend of mine got pregnant and there were some complications with the pregnancy, she developed severe bleeding and the foetus had to be aborted to save her life. Well, the only doctor that was available (she happened to live in Africa at the time) was Irish Catholic, who refused to do it on “religious grounds”! She had nearly bleeded to death before she was taken on a helicopter to another town thanks to her coworkers who managed to reach the embassador.
    Therefore although I agree that the woman in this article shouldn’t go around blaming Joh, Dick and Kerry for her blunder, I still believe that contraception and abortion should be available. In other words, if it goes against your beliefs – fine, don’t do it, good on you, blah blah, congratulations, you have a baby. But please don’t stop others from terminating pregnancy should they need to.

  8. Qatar Cat says:

    Yes I agree that this lady is partly to blame for what happened, but this wasn’t the point of the article. I believe that a person should have a right to terminate pregnancy, and it’s not the politicians’, doctors’ or pharmacists’ business what a woman chooses to do with her own body. Moments of passion and recklessness happen to all of us, and again – it’s our own business how we choose to do things we do. If “Plan B” and abortion are legal, they should be made available without hindrance and without involving personal beliefs of every pharmacist. What do you mean a pharmacist or a doctor can refuse prescription on the grounds of beliefs?? This is bizarre.
    A close friend of mine got pregnant and there were some complications with the pregnancy, she developed severe bleeding and the foetus had to be aborted to save her life. Well, the only doctor that was available (she happened to live in Africa at the time) was Irish Catholic, who refused to do it on “religious grounds”! She had nearly bleeded to death before she was taken on a helicopter to another town thanks to her coworkers who managed to reach the embassador.
    Therefore although I agree that the woman in this article shouldn’t go around blaming Joh, Dick and Kerry for her blunder, I still believe that contraception and abortion should be available. In other words, if it goes against your beliefs – fine, don’t do it, good on you, blah blah, congratulations, you have a baby. But please don’t stop others from terminating pregnancy should they need to.

  9. Qatar Cat says:

    Yes I agree that this lady is partly to blame for what happened, but this wasn’t the point of the article. I believe that a person should have a right to terminate pregnancy, and it’s not the politicians’, doctors’ or pharmacists’ business what a woman chooses to do with her own body. Moments of passion and recklessness happen to all of us, and again – it’s our own business how we choose to do things we do. If “Plan B” and abortion are legal, they should be made available without hindrance and without involving personal beliefs of every pharmacist. What do you mean a pharmacist or a doctor can refuse prescription on the grounds of beliefs?? This is bizarre.
    A close friend of mine got pregnant and there were some complications with the pregnancy, she developed severe bleeding and the foetus had to be aborted to save her life. Well, the only doctor that was available (she happened to live in Africa at the time) was Irish Catholic, who refused to do it on “religious grounds”! She had nearly bleeded to death before she was taken on a helicopter to another town thanks to her coworkers who managed to reach the embassador.
    Therefore although I agree that the woman in this article shouldn’t go around blaming Joh, Dick and Kerry for her blunder, I still believe that contraception and abortion should be available. In other words, if it goes against your beliefs – fine, don’t do it, good on you, blah blah, congratulations, you have a baby. But please don’t stop others from terminating pregnancy should they need to.

  10. Qatar Cat says:

    Yes I agree that this lady is partly to blame for what happened, but this wasn’t the point of the article. I believe that a person should have a right to terminate pregnancy, and it’s not the politicians’, doctors’ or pharmacists’ business what a woman chooses to do with her own body. Moments of passion and recklessness happen to all of us, and again – it’s our own business how we choose to do things we do. If “Plan B” and abortion are legal, they should be made available without hindrance and without involving personal beliefs of every pharmacist. What do you mean a pharmacist or a doctor can refuse prescription on the grounds of beliefs?? This is bizarre.
    A close friend of mine got pregnant and there were some complications with the pregnancy, she developed severe bleeding and the foetus had to be aborted to save her life. Well, the only doctor that was available (she happened to live in Africa at the time) was Irish Catholic, who refused to do it on “religious grounds”! She had nearly bleeded to death before she was taken on a helicopter to another town thanks to her coworkers who managed to reach the embassador.
    Therefore although I agree that the woman in this article shouldn’t go around blaming Joh, Dick and Kerry for her blunder, I still believe that contraception and abortion should be available. In other words, if it goes against your beliefs – fine, don’t do it, good on you, blah blah, congratulations, you have a baby. But please don’t stop others from terminating pregnancy should they need to.

  11. Herlock says:

    Hey, George W is guilty of so many things, the fact that he gets off easy on this one is an exception, not the rule :)

  12. Herlock says:

    Hey, George W is guilty of so many things, the fact that he gets off easy on this one is an exception, not the rule :)

  13. Herlock says:

    Hey, George W is guilty of so many things, the fact that he gets off easy on this one is an exception, not the rule :)

  14. Herlock says:

    Hey, George W is guilty of so many things, the fact that he gets off easy on this one is an exception, not the rule :)

  15. Herlock says:

    Hey, George W is guilty of so many things, the fact that he gets off easy on this one is an exception, not the rule :)

  16. Andrew Gillinson says:

    Trust the Washington Post ;^).

  17. Andrew Gillinson says:

    Trust the Washington Post ;^).

  18. Andrew Gillinson says:

    Trust the Washington Post ;^).

  19. Andrew Gillinson says:

    Trust the Washington Post ;^).

  20. Andrew Gillinson says:

    Trust the Washington Post ;^).

  21. I don’t know about pharmacists–but doctors take an oath. Not every doctor is forced to offer every procedure. Besides the moral implications in this case that the doctor has taken an oath to first do no harm, some doctors do not offer even non-controversial procedures…because they do not have the equipment, they aren’t cost effective, or they simply do not wish to do so.

    Your CHOICE is to go find another doctor. As I pointed out, she simply could not be bothered to find one that could prescribe Plan B for her–she did have that option.

    I do NOT think that late term abortions should be legal, with exceptions of risks to the mother’s life or if the fetus will not be viable outside of the womb. Once the fetus is viable, it has rights, too.

    Women have a right to do whatever they want with their body–but if the consequence of your decision is a baby, at some point that baby is a living human being (as I said, my faith tells me it is from conception, science tells me it is at least at the point of viability–at least at about 24 weeks).

  22. I don’t know about pharmacists–but doctors take an oath. Not every doctor is forced to offer every procedure. Besides the moral implications in this case that the doctor has taken an oath to first do no harm, some doctors do not offer even non-controversial procedures…because they do not have the equipment, they aren’t cost effective, or they simply do not wish to do so.

    Your CHOICE is to go find another doctor. As I pointed out, she simply could not be bothered to find one that could prescribe Plan B for her–she did have that option.

    I do NOT think that late term abortions should be legal, with exceptions of risks to the mother’s life or if the fetus will not be viable outside of the womb. Once the fetus is viable, it has rights, too.

    Women have a right to do whatever they want with their body–but if the consequence of your decision is a baby, at some point that baby is a living human being (as I said, my faith tells me it is from conception, science tells me it is at least at the point of viability–at least at about 24 weeks).

  23. I don’t know about pharmacists–but doctors take an oath. Not every doctor is forced to offer every procedure. Besides the moral implications in this case that the doctor has taken an oath to first do no harm, some doctors do not offer even non-controversial procedures…because they do not have the equipment, they aren’t cost effective, or they simply do not wish to do so.

    Your CHOICE is to go find another doctor. As I pointed out, she simply could not be bothered to find one that could prescribe Plan B for her–she did have that option.

    I do NOT think that late term abortions should be legal, with exceptions of risks to the mother’s life or if the fetus will not be viable outside of the womb. Once the fetus is viable, it has rights, too.

    Women have a right to do whatever they want with their body–but if the consequence of your decision is a baby, at some point that baby is a living human being (as I said, my faith tells me it is from conception, science tells me it is at least at the point of viability–at least at about 24 weeks).

  24. I don’t know about pharmacists–but doctors take an oath. Not every doctor is forced to offer every procedure. Besides the moral implications in this case that the doctor has taken an oath to first do no harm, some doctors do not offer even non-controversial procedures…because they do not have the equipment, they aren’t cost effective, or they simply do not wish to do so.

    Your CHOICE is to go find another doctor. As I pointed out, she simply could not be bothered to find one that could prescribe Plan B for her–she did have that option.

    I do NOT think that late term abortions should be legal, with exceptions of risks to the mother’s life or if the fetus will not be viable outside of the womb. Once the fetus is viable, it has rights, too.

    Women have a right to do whatever they want with their body–but if the consequence of your decision is a baby, at some point that baby is a living human being (as I said, my faith tells me it is from conception, science tells me it is at least at the point of viability–at least at about 24 weeks).

  25. I don’t know about pharmacists–but doctors take an oath. Not every doctor is forced to offer every procedure. Besides the moral implications in this case that the doctor has taken an oath to first do no harm, some doctors do not offer even non-controversial procedures…because they do not have the equipment, they aren’t cost effective, or they simply do not wish to do so.

    Your CHOICE is to go find another doctor. As I pointed out, she simply could not be bothered to find one that could prescribe Plan B for her–she did have that option.

    I do NOT think that late term abortions should be legal, with exceptions of risks to the mother’s life or if the fetus will not be viable outside of the womb. Once the fetus is viable, it has rights, too.

    Women have a right to do whatever they want with their body–but if the consequence of your decision is a baby, at some point that baby is a living human being (as I said, my faith tells me it is from conception, science tells me it is at least at the point of viability–at least at about 24 weeks).

  26. Uchuck the Tuchuck says:

    I was born on November 22, 1962, the fourth of four children and some six years after the birth of my next oldest brother. Mom did not expect to get pregnant, as their family was already complete (the older brothers are all roughly 18 months apart) but I was either a celebration of moving into the new house they had just completed or a fit of patriotic fervor inspired by John Glenn’s first orbital flight (nine months to the day before my birth).

    Forty-three years later, I am still her favorite son.

  27. Uchuck the Tuchuck says:

    I was born on November 22, 1962, the fourth of four children and some six years after the birth of my next oldest brother. Mom did not expect to get pregnant, as their family was already complete (the older brothers are all roughly 18 months apart) but I was either a celebration of moving into the new house they had just completed or a fit of patriotic fervor inspired by John Glenn’s first orbital flight (nine months to the day before my birth).

    Forty-three years later, I am still her favorite son.

  28. Uchuck the Tuchuck says:

    I was born on November 22, 1962, the fourth of four children and some six years after the birth of my next oldest brother. Mom did not expect to get pregnant, as their family was already complete (the older brothers are all roughly 18 months apart) but I was either a celebration of moving into the new house they had just completed or a fit of patriotic fervor inspired by John Glenn’s first orbital flight (nine months to the day before my birth).

    Forty-three years later, I am still her favorite son.

  29. Uchuck the Tuchuck says:

    I was born on November 22, 1962, the fourth of four children and some six years after the birth of my next oldest brother. Mom did not expect to get pregnant, as their family was already complete (the older brothers are all roughly 18 months apart) but I was either a celebration of moving into the new house they had just completed or a fit of patriotic fervor inspired by John Glenn’s first orbital flight (nine months to the day before my birth).

    Forty-three years later, I am still her favorite son.

  30. Uchuck the Tuchuck says:

    I was born on November 22, 1962, the fourth of four children and some six years after the birth of my next oldest brother. Mom did not expect to get pregnant, as their family was already complete (the older brothers are all roughly 18 months apart) but I was either a celebration of moving into the new house they had just completed or a fit of patriotic fervor inspired by John Glenn’s first orbital flight (nine months to the day before my birth).

    Forty-three years later, I am still her favorite son.

  31. Sam says:

    Sorry, just don’t buy your diatribe. What, exactly, are you trying to defend here? Did you miss the point of her argument entirely?

    Her argument is that she made a choice, and was unable to fulfill it.

    “Taking responsibility for your actions” is in the eye of the beholder, don’t you think? In your eyes, that means, have the baby. In her eyes, it means, do what you think is right.

    Regardless, the point of her story is that she was stymied at every turn in her quest for an abortion. It is TRUE that Plan B is being held up for innocuous reasons not having to do with safety of the drug at all.

    Finally, what are you really mad at her about? The fact that she wants to blame everyone, including the precious president bush? Or the fact that she made her decision and didn’t feel guilty about it?

  32. Sam says:

    Sorry, just don’t buy your diatribe. What, exactly, are you trying to defend here? Did you miss the point of her argument entirely?

    Her argument is that she made a choice, and was unable to fulfill it.

    “Taking responsibility for your actions” is in the eye of the beholder, don’t you think? In your eyes, that means, have the baby. In her eyes, it means, do what you think is right.

    Regardless, the point of her story is that she was stymied at every turn in her quest for an abortion. It is TRUE that Plan B is being held up for innocuous reasons not having to do with safety of the drug at all.

    Finally, what are you really mad at her about? The fact that she wants to blame everyone, including the precious president bush? Or the fact that she made her decision and didn’t feel guilty about it?

  33. Sam says:

    Sorry, just don’t buy your diatribe. What, exactly, are you trying to defend here? Did you miss the point of her argument entirely?

    Her argument is that she made a choice, and was unable to fulfill it.

    “Taking responsibility for your actions” is in the eye of the beholder, don’t you think? In your eyes, that means, have the baby. In her eyes, it means, do what you think is right.

    Regardless, the point of her story is that she was stymied at every turn in her quest for an abortion. It is TRUE that Plan B is being held up for innocuous reasons not having to do with safety of the drug at all.

    Finally, what are you really mad at her about? The fact that she wants to blame everyone, including the precious president bush? Or the fact that she made her decision and didn’t feel guilty about it?

  34. Sam says:

    Sorry, just don’t buy your diatribe. What, exactly, are you trying to defend here? Did you miss the point of her argument entirely?

    Her argument is that she made a choice, and was unable to fulfill it.

    “Taking responsibility for your actions” is in the eye of the beholder, don’t you think? In your eyes, that means, have the baby. In her eyes, it means, do what you think is right.

    Regardless, the point of her story is that she was stymied at every turn in her quest for an abortion. It is TRUE that Plan B is being held up for innocuous reasons not having to do with safety of the drug at all.

    Finally, what are you really mad at her about? The fact that she wants to blame everyone, including the precious president bush? Or the fact that she made her decision and didn’t feel guilty about it?

  35. Sam says:

    Sorry, just don’t buy your diatribe. What, exactly, are you trying to defend here? Did you miss the point of her argument entirely?

    Her argument is that she made a choice, and was unable to fulfill it.

    “Taking responsibility for your actions” is in the eye of the beholder, don’t you think? In your eyes, that means, have the baby. In her eyes, it means, do what you think is right.

    Regardless, the point of her story is that she was stymied at every turn in her quest for an abortion. It is TRUE that Plan B is being held up for innocuous reasons not having to do with safety of the drug at all.

    Finally, what are you really mad at her about? The fact that she wants to blame everyone, including the precious president bush? Or the fact that she made her decision and didn’t feel guilty about it?

  36. Sam–not “mad at her” about either–just saddened that people in the U.S. don’t seem to accept responsibility for their own choices anymore.

    She could have used birth control, but did not.

    She could have used Plan B but it was inconvenient…and so she took a risk.

    Then she proceeds to blame everyone but herself and her husband for those two decisions.

    She could have used her diaphragm, or her husband might have noticed that she wasn’t using her usual birth control and either reminded her or put on a condom.

    Once that mistake was made, she could have received Plan B through various safe sources.

    She is expecting, like many Americans, for everything to be handed to her. When things don’t go as she plans, she lashes out and blames everyone but herself.

  37. Sam–not “mad at her” about either–just saddened that people in the U.S. don’t seem to accept responsibility for their own choices anymore.

    She could have used birth control, but did not.

    She could have used Plan B but it was inconvenient…and so she took a risk.

    Then she proceeds to blame everyone but herself and her husband for those two decisions.

    She could have used her diaphragm, or her husband might have noticed that she wasn’t using her usual birth control and either reminded her or put on a condom.

    Once that mistake was made, she could have received Plan B through various safe sources.

    She is expecting, like many Americans, for everything to be handed to her. When things don’t go as she plans, she lashes out and blames everyone but herself.

  38. Sam–not “mad at her” about either–just saddened that people in the U.S. don’t seem to accept responsibility for their own choices anymore.

    She could have used birth control, but did not.

    She could have used Plan B but it was inconvenient…and so she took a risk.

    Then she proceeds to blame everyone but herself and her husband for those two decisions.

    She could have used her diaphragm, or her husband might have noticed that she wasn’t using her usual birth control and either reminded her or put on a condom.

    Once that mistake was made, she could have received Plan B through various safe sources.

    She is expecting, like many Americans, for everything to be handed to her. When things don’t go as she plans, she lashes out and blames everyone but herself.

  39. Sam–not “mad at her” about either–just saddened that people in the U.S. don’t seem to accept responsibility for their own choices anymore.

    She could have used birth control, but did not.

    She could have used Plan B but it was inconvenient…and so she took a risk.

    Then she proceeds to blame everyone but herself and her husband for those two decisions.

    She could have used her diaphragm, or her husband might have noticed that she wasn’t using her usual birth control and either reminded her or put on a condom.

    Once that mistake was made, she could have received Plan B through various safe sources.

    She is expecting, like many Americans, for everything to be handed to her. When things don’t go as she plans, she lashes out and blames everyone but herself.

  40. Sam–not “mad at her” about either–just saddened that people in the U.S. don’t seem to accept responsibility for their own choices anymore.

    She could have used birth control, but did not.

    She could have used Plan B but it was inconvenient…and so she took a risk.

    Then she proceeds to blame everyone but herself and her husband for those two decisions.

    She could have used her diaphragm, or her husband might have noticed that she wasn’t using her usual birth control and either reminded her or put on a condom.

    Once that mistake was made, she could have received Plan B through various safe sources.

    She is expecting, like many Americans, for everything to be handed to her. When things don’t go as she plans, she lashes out and blames everyone but herself.

  41. For everyone who keeps arguing that she was denied her “first choice” (which apparently is to have unprotected sex and then take emergency contraception)…I would just like to point out that Planned Parenthood in Virginia offers “Plan B” AND is open on Saturdays.

    The author of the article called her doctor (who does not prescribe it–which is the doctor’s choice) and then her Midwife’s office, which prescribes it but had no more appointments that day. After that, she gave up and decided to risk it.

  42. For everyone who keeps arguing that she was denied her “first choice” (which apparently is to have unprotected sex and then take emergency contraception)…I would just like to point out that Planned Parenthood in Virginia offers “Plan B” AND is open on Saturdays.

    The author of the article called her doctor (who does not prescribe it–which is the doctor’s choice) and then her Midwife’s office, which prescribes it but had no more appointments that day. After that, she gave up and decided to risk it.

  43. For everyone who keeps arguing that she was denied her “first choice” (which apparently is to have unprotected sex and then take emergency contraception)…I would just like to point out that Planned Parenthood in Virginia offers “Plan B” AND is open on Saturdays.

    The author of the article called her doctor (who does not prescribe it–which is the doctor’s choice) and then her Midwife’s office, which prescribes it but had no more appointments that day. After that, she gave up and decided to risk it.

  44. For everyone who keeps arguing that she was denied her “first choice” (which apparently is to have unprotected sex and then take emergency contraception)…I would just like to point out that Planned Parenthood in Virginia offers “Plan B” AND is open on Saturdays.

    The author of the article called her doctor (who does not prescribe it–which is the doctor’s choice) and then her Midwife’s office, which prescribes it but had no more appointments that day. After that, she gave up and decided to risk it.

  45. For everyone who keeps arguing that she was denied her “first choice” (which apparently is to have unprotected sex and then take emergency contraception)…I would just like to point out that Planned Parenthood in Virginia offers “Plan B” AND is open on Saturdays.

    The author of the article called her doctor (who does not prescribe it–which is the doctor’s choice) and then her Midwife’s office, which prescribes it but had no more appointments that day. After that, she gave up and decided to risk it.

  46. James M says:

    “my faith tells me it is from conception”

    *blink*

    Can I get off on a tangent here?

    I agree with you entirely about this woman. She’s more interested in using her child as a political tool than in dealing responsibly with him/her.

    I am an anti-abortionist agnostic who grew up Southern Baptist and am now about as religious as the Sandmonkey from whose blog I came here.

    I have always been under the impression that the sole impact of religion on anti-abortionism was the “Thou shalt not kill” Commandment, which obliges the government to protect those under its authority from the use of deadly force, and that the idea that life begins at conception is a biological one. There is a strong argument to be made for that biological position, stronger, I think, than the ‘viability’ argument.

    I agree for nonreligious reasons that the government should protect its people from homicide, of course, as would practically all pro-abortionists. I’m fond of pointing out that the beginning of life is the bone of contention in this issue, and that that is a question purely of biology–I frequently bring that up to refute claims that laws against abortion are an imposition of religion.

    I know that the Bible doesn’t directly say that life begins at conception.

    So I’m curious: How do you reach a conclusion about the beginning of life as a [i]religious[/i] matter?

    I’m not here to argue with you pro or con, I’ve just been blissfully unaware that anyone saw the beginning of life subissue as a matter of faith.

  47. James M says:

    “my faith tells me it is from conception”

    *blink*

    Can I get off on a tangent here?

    I agree with you entirely about this woman. She’s more interested in using her child as a political tool than in dealing responsibly with him/her.

    I am an anti-abortionist agnostic who grew up Southern Baptist and am now about as religious as the Sandmonkey from whose blog I came here.

    I have always been under the impression that the sole impact of religion on anti-abortionism was the “Thou shalt not kill” Commandment, which obliges the government to protect those under its authority from the use of deadly force, and that the idea that life begins at conception is a biological one. There is a strong argument to be made for that biological position, stronger, I think, than the ‘viability’ argument.

    I agree for nonreligious reasons that the government should protect its people from homicide, of course, as would practically all pro-abortionists. I’m fond of pointing out that the beginning of life is the bone of contention in this issue, and that that is a question purely of biology–I frequently bring that up to refute claims that laws against abortion are an imposition of religion.

    I know that the Bible doesn’t directly say that life begins at conception.

    So I’m curious: How do you reach a conclusion about the beginning of life as a [i]religious[/i] matter?

    I’m not here to argue with you pro or con, I’ve just been blissfully unaware that anyone saw the beginning of life subissue as a matter of faith.

  48. James M says:

    “my faith tells me it is from conception”

    *blink*

    Can I get off on a tangent here?

    I agree with you entirely about this woman. She’s more interested in using her child as a political tool than in dealing responsibly with him/her.

    I am an anti-abortionist agnostic who grew up Southern Baptist and am now about as religious as the Sandmonkey from whose blog I came here.

    I have always been under the impression that the sole impact of religion on anti-abortionism was the “Thou shalt not kill” Commandment, which obliges the government to protect those under its authority from the use of deadly force, and that the idea that life begins at conception is a biological one. There is a strong argument to be made for that biological position, stronger, I think, than the ‘viability’ argument.

    I agree for nonreligious reasons that the government should protect its people from homicide, of course, as would practically all pro-abortionists. I’m fond of pointing out that the beginning of life is the bone of contention in this issue, and that that is a question purely of biology–I frequently bring that up to refute claims that laws against abortion are an imposition of religion.

    I know that the Bible doesn’t directly say that life begins at conception.

    So I’m curious: How do you reach a conclusion about the beginning of life as a [i]religious[/i] matter?

    I’m not here to argue with you pro or con, I’ve just been blissfully unaware that anyone saw the beginning of life subissue as a matter of faith.

  49. James M says:

    “my faith tells me it is from conception”

    *blink*

    Can I get off on a tangent here?

    I agree with you entirely about this woman. She’s more interested in using her child as a political tool than in dealing responsibly with him/her.

    I am an anti-abortionist agnostic who grew up Southern Baptist and am now about as religious as the Sandmonkey from whose blog I came here.

    I have always been under the impression that the sole impact of religion on anti-abortionism was the “Thou shalt not kill” Commandment, which obliges the government to protect those under its authority from the use of deadly force, and that the idea that life begins at conception is a biological one. There is a strong argument to be made for that biological position, stronger, I think, than the ‘viability’ argument.

    I agree for nonreligious reasons that the government should protect its people from homicide, of course, as would practically all pro-abortionists. I’m fond of pointing out that the beginning of life is the bone of contention in this issue, and that that is a question purely of biology–I frequently bring that up to refute claims that laws against abortion are an imposition of religion.

    I know that the Bible doesn’t directly say that life begins at conception.

    So I’m curious: How do you reach a conclusion about the beginning of life as a [i]religious[/i] matter?

    I’m not here to argue with you pro or con, I’ve just been blissfully unaware that anyone saw the beginning of life subissue as a matter of faith.

  50. James M says:

    “my faith tells me it is from conception”

    *blink*

    Can I get off on a tangent here?

    I agree with you entirely about this woman. She’s more interested in using her child as a political tool than in dealing responsibly with him/her.

    I am an anti-abortionist agnostic who grew up Southern Baptist and am now about as religious as the Sandmonkey from whose blog I came here.

    I have always been under the impression that the sole impact of religion on anti-abortionism was the “Thou shalt not kill” Commandment, which obliges the government to protect those under its authority from the use of deadly force, and that the idea that life begins at conception is a biological one. There is a strong argument to be made for that biological position, stronger, I think, than the ‘viability’ argument.

    I agree for nonreligious reasons that the government should protect its people from homicide, of course, as would practically all pro-abortionists. I’m fond of pointing out that the beginning of life is the bone of contention in this issue, and that that is a question purely of biology–I frequently bring that up to refute claims that laws against abortion are an imposition of religion.

    I know that the Bible doesn’t directly say that life begins at conception.

    So I’m curious: How do you reach a conclusion about the beginning of life as a [i]religious[/i] matter?

    I’m not here to argue with you pro or con, I’ve just been blissfully unaware that anyone saw the beginning of life subissue as a matter of faith.

  51. James – My faith, as in what I know in my heart…Not theology.

    However, many religious Christians DO find biblical basis for this belief. You’ll have to ask them where…a simple search will no doubt provide that information (You may wish to start here: http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/prolife.html).

    Beyond that, as far as I can tell, there is disagreement among reasonable, intelligent people about when life begins…at conception? implantation? viability? birth?

    Viability is important because, even if we ever get to a point where we all agree that life begins at conception, there is still the issue that we have a unique type of human life–one that cannot survive before week 24 without feeding off the mother.

    What if the mother is going to die? Or the fetus has almost no chance of surviving outside of the womb? Does the mother have more rights than the fetus even though we say we are all created equal? Or do we mean that we are all BORN into equality?

    What if the baby COULD survive if removed from the womb?

    At what point do the baby’s rights legally approach or equal those of the mother?

    Let’s say a woman’s health is at risk…if the fetus were 10 weeks, should she be able to abort it? If it is 26, should she be able to abort it, or should the surgeons attempt to “birth” the fetus?

    Although my faith says these issues are very black and white, there needs to be reason and science in order to be able to argue for legislation. For that reason, I do not believe we have enough science to completely ban abortion in this nation…although in an ideal world, I would like to see no abortions.

  52. James – My faith, as in what I know in my heart…Not theology.

    However, many religious Christians DO find biblical basis for this belief. You’ll have to ask them where…a simple search will no doubt provide that information (You may wish to start here: http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/prolife.html).

    Beyond that, as far as I can tell, there is disagreement among reasonable, intelligent people about when life begins…at conception? implantation? viability? birth?

    Viability is important because, even if we ever get to a point where we all agree that life begins at conception, there is still the issue that we have a unique type of human life–one that cannot survive before week 24 without feeding off the mother.

    What if the mother is going to die? Or the fetus has almost no chance of surviving outside of the womb? Does the mother have more rights than the fetus even though we say we are all created equal? Or do we mean that we are all BORN into equality?

    What if the baby COULD survive if removed from the womb?

    At what point do the baby’s rights legally approach or equal those of the mother?

    Let’s say a woman’s health is at risk…if the fetus were 10 weeks, should she be able to abort it? If it is 26, should she be able to abort it, or should the surgeons attempt to “birth” the fetus?

    Although my faith says these issues are very black and white, there needs to be reason and science in order to be able to argue for legislation. For that reason, I do not believe we have enough science to completely ban abortion in this nation…although in an ideal world, I would like to see no abortions.

  53. James – My faith, as in what I know in my heart…Not theology.

    However, many religious Christians DO find biblical basis for this belief. You’ll have to ask them where…a simple search will no doubt provide that information (You may wish to start here: http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/prolife.html).

    Beyond that, as far as I can tell, there is disagreement among reasonable, intelligent people about when life begins…at conception? implantation? viability? birth?

    Viability is important because, even if we ever get to a point where we all agree that life begins at conception, there is still the issue that we have a unique type of human life–one that cannot survive before week 24 without feeding off the mother.

    What if the mother is going to die? Or the fetus has almost no chance of surviving outside of the womb? Does the mother have more rights than the fetus even though we say we are all created equal? Or do we mean that we are all BORN into equality?

    What if the baby COULD survive if removed from the womb?

    At what point do the baby’s rights legally approach or equal those of the mother?

    Let’s say a woman’s health is at risk…if the fetus were 10 weeks, should she be able to abort it? If it is 26, should she be able to abort it, or should the surgeons attempt to “birth” the fetus?

    Although my faith says these issues are very black and white, there needs to be reason and science in order to be able to argue for legislation. For that reason, I do not believe we have enough science to completely ban abortion in this nation…although in an ideal world, I would like to see no abortions.

  54. James – My faith, as in what I know in my heart…Not theology.

    However, many religious Christians DO find biblical basis for this belief. You’ll have to ask them where…a simple search will no doubt provide that information (You may wish to start here: http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/prolife.html).

    Beyond that, as far as I can tell, there is disagreement among reasonable, intelligent people about when life begins…at conception? implantation? viability? birth?

    Viability is important because, even if we ever get to a point where we all agree that life begins at conception, there is still the issue that we have a unique type of human life–one that cannot survive before week 24 without feeding off the mother.

    What if the mother is going to die? Or the fetus has almost no chance of surviving outside of the womb? Does the mother have more rights than the fetus even though we say we are all created equal? Or do we mean that we are all BORN into equality?

    What if the baby COULD survive if removed from the womb?

    At what point do the baby’s rights legally approach or equal those of the mother?

    Let’s say a woman’s health is at risk…if the fetus were 10 weeks, should she be able to abort it? If it is 26, should she be able to abort it, or should the surgeons attempt to “birth” the fetus?

    Although my faith says these issues are very black and white, there needs to be reason and science in order to be able to argue for legislation. For that reason, I do not believe we have enough science to completely ban abortion in this nation…although in an ideal world, I would like to see no abortions.

  55. James – My faith, as in what I know in my heart…Not theology.

    However, many religious Christians DO find biblical basis for this belief. You’ll have to ask them where…a simple search will no doubt provide that information (You may wish to start here: http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/prolife.html).

    Beyond that, as far as I can tell, there is disagreement among reasonable, intelligent people about when life begins…at conception? implantation? viability? birth?

    Viability is important because, even if we ever get to a point where we all agree that life begins at conception, there is still the issue that we have a unique type of human life–one that cannot survive before week 24 without feeding off the mother.

    What if the mother is going to die? Or the fetus has almost no chance of surviving outside of the womb? Does the mother have more rights than the fetus even though we say we are all created equal? Or do we mean that we are all BORN into equality?

    What if the baby COULD survive if removed from the womb?

    At what point do the baby’s rights legally approach or equal those of the mother?

    Let’s say a woman’s health is at risk…if the fetus were 10 weeks, should she be able to abort it? If it is 26, should she be able to abort it, or should the surgeons attempt to “birth” the fetus?

    Although my faith says these issues are very black and white, there needs to be reason and science in order to be able to argue for legislation. For that reason, I do not believe we have enough science to completely ban abortion in this nation…although in an ideal world, I would like to see no abortions.

  56. Household6 says:

    I am Pro Choice but I am right there with you scratching my head at her passing the blame to everyone but herself. You have pointed everything I would have asked her about as to why she didn’t try harder to never let it get to the point of termination in the first place.

    Would I like emergency contraception be available easily sure but that doesn’t mean that was her only choice either. A similar effect works when you take 3 BC pills at once – which is available easily.

    Terminations should be completed responsibily, not to be used as a form of birth control or as a tool for someone to just behave recklessly.

    If she’s reckless, gives up easily and doesn’t research well I sure as heck don’t want her on my side should I ever go to court.

    After 6 years in Europe, I often agree on the impression that some Europeans have about Americans – that there are Americans who are stuck with the “quick fix” mentality. Not everything is fixed with anti-biotic and not everything is fixed just because you want it now. If she didn’t want to be in that situation there were many, many things she could have done to prevent it.

  57. Household6 says:

    I am Pro Choice but I am right there with you scratching my head at her passing the blame to everyone but herself. You have pointed everything I would have asked her about as to why she didn’t try harder to never let it get to the point of termination in the first place.

    Would I like emergency contraception be available easily sure but that doesn’t mean that was her only choice either. A similar effect works when you take 3 BC pills at once – which is available easily.

    Terminations should be completed responsibily, not to be used as a form of birth control or as a tool for someone to just behave recklessly.

    If she’s reckless, gives up easily and doesn’t research well I sure as heck don’t want her on my side should I ever go to court.

    After 6 years in Europe, I often agree on the impression that some Europeans have about Americans – that there are Americans who are stuck with the “quick fix” mentality. Not everything is fixed with anti-biotic and not everything is fixed just because you want it now. If she didn’t want to be in that situation there were many, many things she could have done to prevent it.

  58. Household6 says:

    I am Pro Choice but I am right there with you scratching my head at her passing the blame to everyone but herself. You have pointed everything I would have asked her about as to why she didn’t try harder to never let it get to the point of termination in the first place.

    Would I like emergency contraception be available easily sure but that doesn’t mean that was her only choice either. A similar effect works when you take 3 BC pills at once – which is available easily.

    Terminations should be completed responsibily, not to be used as a form of birth control or as a tool for someone to just behave recklessly.

    If she’s reckless, gives up easily and doesn’t research well I sure as heck don’t want her on my side should I ever go to court.

    After 6 years in Europe, I often agree on the impression that some Europeans have about Americans – that there are Americans who are stuck with the “quick fix” mentality. Not everything is fixed with anti-biotic and not everything is fixed just because you want it now. If she didn’t want to be in that situation there were many, many things she could have done to prevent it.

  59. Household6 says:

    I am Pro Choice but I am right there with you scratching my head at her passing the blame to everyone but herself. You have pointed everything I would have asked her about as to why she didn’t try harder to never let it get to the point of termination in the first place.

    Would I like emergency contraception be available easily sure but that doesn’t mean that was her only choice either. A similar effect works when you take 3 BC pills at once – which is available easily.

    Terminations should be completed responsibily, not to be used as a form of birth control or as a tool for someone to just behave recklessly.

    If she’s reckless, gives up easily and doesn’t research well I sure as heck don’t want her on my side should I ever go to court.

    After 6 years in Europe, I often agree on the impression that some Europeans have about Americans – that there are Americans who are stuck with the “quick fix” mentality. Not everything is fixed with anti-biotic and not everything is fixed just because you want it now. If she didn’t want to be in that situation there were many, many things she could have done to prevent it.

  60. Household6 says:

    I am Pro Choice but I am right there with you scratching my head at her passing the blame to everyone but herself. You have pointed everything I would have asked her about as to why she didn’t try harder to never let it get to the point of termination in the first place.

    Would I like emergency contraception be available easily sure but that doesn’t mean that was her only choice either. A similar effect works when you take 3 BC pills at once – which is available easily.

    Terminations should be completed responsibily, not to be used as a form of birth control or as a tool for someone to just behave recklessly.

    If she’s reckless, gives up easily and doesn’t research well I sure as heck don’t want her on my side should I ever go to court.

    After 6 years in Europe, I often agree on the impression that some Europeans have about Americans – that there are Americans who are stuck with the “quick fix” mentality. Not everything is fixed with anti-biotic and not everything is fixed just because you want it now. If she didn’t want to be in that situation there were many, many things she could have done to prevent it.

  61. roshelle says:

    i agree with you 85% after reading this i did a little google search to see how difficult it is to get your hands on plan b after 10 minutes i found a website that had all 50 states listed with clinics that currently offered the pill secondly i found another complaint of not being able to find plan b this time a rape victim (http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/dailystar/99156.php) the laws should be changed it’s being restricted for bull s**t political reasons

  62. roshelle says:

    i agree with you 85% after reading this i did a little google search to see how difficult it is to get your hands on plan b after 10 minutes i found a website that had all 50 states listed with clinics that currently offered the pill secondly i found another complaint of not being able to find plan b this time a rape victim (http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/dailystar/99156.php) the laws should be changed it’s being restricted for bull s**t political reasons

  63. roshelle says:

    i agree with you 85% after reading this i did a little google search to see how difficult it is to get your hands on plan b after 10 minutes i found a website that had all 50 states listed with clinics that currently offered the pill secondly i found another complaint of not being able to find plan b this time a rape victim (http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/dailystar/99156.php) the laws should be changed it’s being restricted for bull s**t political reasons

  64. roshelle says:

    i agree with you 85% after reading this i did a little google search to see how difficult it is to get your hands on plan b after 10 minutes i found a website that had all 50 states listed with clinics that currently offered the pill secondly i found another complaint of not being able to find plan b this time a rape victim (http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/dailystar/99156.php) the laws should be changed it’s being restricted for bull s**t political reasons

  65. roshelle says:

    i agree with you 85% after reading this i did a little google search to see how difficult it is to get your hands on plan b after 10 minutes i found a website that had all 50 states listed with clinics that currently offered the pill secondly i found another complaint of not being able to find plan b this time a rape victim (http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/dailystar/99156.php) the laws should be changed it’s being restricted for bull s**t political reasons

  66. Roshelle:

    I feel for those who have survived a rape–and I certainly understand the desire to obtain emergency contraception early enough to prevent implantation or conception.

    She should have been able to obtain Plan B–and she would have been. I’m really amazed more people do not know about Planned Parenthood.

    However, in the article to which you are refering, it is:

    (A) A STATE (not federal) issue.
    (B) A state where a law allowing pharmicists not to prescribe Plan B was actually VETOED.
    (C) Actually a CORPORATE policy that seems to have gotten in this woman’s way:

    “The issue surfaced in Arizona last winter, when Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have permitted pharmacists to refuse to dispense it on moral or religious grounds.”

    “But her veto was essentially meaningless, as most of the drugstore chains that dominate Tucson already allow that as a matter of corporate policy. Most also require that the customer be immediately referred to another pharmacist or drugstore willing to fill the prescription. ”

    “But the biggest roadblock to obtaining emergency contraception was that most pharmacies simply do not stock it…”

    In other words, even if there were a law making it available over the counter, that would not guarantee instant access…unless you are in favor of a law ordering businesses to stock certain items.

    Again, Planned Parenthood would have been the best bet:

    “The two also attempted to obtain the drug at a Planned Parenthood clinic, but could not afford the $70 cost and apparently were not informed that Planned Parenthood will work out payment on a sliding scale fee.”

  67. Roshelle:

    I feel for those who have survived a rape–and I certainly understand the desire to obtain emergency contraception early enough to prevent implantation or conception.

    She should have been able to obtain Plan B–and she would have been. I’m really amazed more people do not know about Planned Parenthood.

    However, in the article to which you are refering, it is:

    (A) A STATE (not federal) issue.
    (B) A state where a law allowing pharmicists not to prescribe Plan B was actually VETOED.
    (C) Actually a CORPORATE policy that seems to have gotten in this woman’s way:

    “The issue surfaced in Arizona last winter, when Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have permitted pharmacists to refuse to dispense it on moral or religious grounds.”

    “But her veto was essentially meaningless, as most of the drugstore chains that dominate Tucson already allow that as a matter of corporate policy. Most also require that the customer be immediately referred to another pharmacist or drugstore willing to fill the prescription. ”

    “But the biggest roadblock to obtaining emergency contraception was that most pharmacies simply do not stock it…”

    In other words, even if there were a law making it available over the counter, that would not guarantee instant access…unless you are in favor of a law ordering businesses to stock certain items.

    Again, Planned Parenthood would have been the best bet:

    “The two also attempted to obtain the drug at a Planned Parenthood clinic, but could not afford the $70 cost and apparently were not informed that Planned Parenthood will work out payment on a sliding scale fee.”

  68. Roshelle:

    I feel for those who have survived a rape–and I certainly understand the desire to obtain emergency contraception early enough to prevent implantation or conception.

    She should have been able to obtain Plan B–and she would have been. I’m really amazed more people do not know about Planned Parenthood.

    However, in the article to which you are refering, it is:

    (A) A STATE (not federal) issue.
    (B) A state where a law allowing pharmicists not to prescribe Plan B was actually VETOED.
    (C) Actually a CORPORATE policy that seems to have gotten in this woman’s way:

    “The issue surfaced in Arizona last winter, when Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have permitted pharmacists to refuse to dispense it on moral or religious grounds.”

    “But her veto was essentially meaningless, as most of the drugstore chains that dominate Tucson already allow that as a matter of corporate policy. Most also require that the customer be immediately referred to another pharmacist or drugstore willing to fill the prescription. ”

    “But the biggest roadblock to obtaining emergency contraception was that most pharmacies simply do not stock it…”

    In other words, even if there were a law making it available over the counter, that would not guarantee instant access…unless you are in favor of a law ordering businesses to stock certain items.

    Again, Planned Parenthood would have been the best bet:

    “The two also attempted to obtain the drug at a Planned Parenthood clinic, but could not afford the $70 cost and apparently were not informed that Planned Parenthood will work out payment on a sliding scale fee.”

  69. Roshelle:

    I feel for those who have survived a rape–and I certainly understand the desire to obtain emergency contraception early enough to prevent implantation or conception.

    She should have been able to obtain Plan B–and she would have been. I’m really amazed more people do not know about Planned Parenthood.

    However, in the article to which you are refering, it is:

    (A) A STATE (not federal) issue.
    (B) A state where a law allowing pharmicists not to prescribe Plan B was actually VETOED.
    (C) Actually a CORPORATE policy that seems to have gotten in this woman’s way:

    “The issue surfaced in Arizona last winter, when Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have permitted pharmacists to refuse to dispense it on moral or religious grounds.”

    “But her veto was essentially meaningless, as most of the drugstore chains that dominate Tucson already allow that as a matter of corporate policy. Most also require that the customer be immediately referred to another pharmacist or drugstore willing to fill the prescription. ”

    “But the biggest roadblock to obtaining emergency contraception was that most pharmacies simply do not stock it…”

    In other words, even if there were a law making it available over the counter, that would not guarantee instant access…unless you are in favor of a law ordering businesses to stock certain items.

    Again, Planned Parenthood would have been the best bet:

    “The two also attempted to obtain the drug at a Planned Parenthood clinic, but could not afford the $70 cost and apparently were not informed that Planned Parenthood will work out payment on a sliding scale fee.”

  70. Roshelle:

    I feel for those who have survived a rape–and I certainly understand the desire to obtain emergency contraception early enough to prevent implantation or conception.

    She should have been able to obtain Plan B–and she would have been. I’m really amazed more people do not know about Planned Parenthood.

    However, in the article to which you are refering, it is:

    (A) A STATE (not federal) issue.
    (B) A state where a law allowing pharmicists not to prescribe Plan B was actually VETOED.
    (C) Actually a CORPORATE policy that seems to have gotten in this woman’s way:

    “The issue surfaced in Arizona last winter, when Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have permitted pharmacists to refuse to dispense it on moral or religious grounds.”

    “But her veto was essentially meaningless, as most of the drugstore chains that dominate Tucson already allow that as a matter of corporate policy. Most also require that the customer be immediately referred to another pharmacist or drugstore willing to fill the prescription. ”

    “But the biggest roadblock to obtaining emergency contraception was that most pharmacies simply do not stock it…”

    In other words, even if there were a law making it available over the counter, that would not guarantee instant access…unless you are in favor of a law ordering businesses to stock certain items.

    Again, Planned Parenthood would have been the best bet:

    “The two also attempted to obtain the drug at a Planned Parenthood clinic, but could not afford the $70 cost and apparently were not informed that Planned Parenthood will work out payment on a sliding scale fee.”

  71. kbug says:

    Having been pregnant three times, I can tell you that life begins before birth. From the time you feel that first flutter kick, you know that baby is alive. I don’t care what science or anyone else has to say about it…I know from having been there.

    But I don’t know when exactly people stopped taking responsibility for their own actions. It always seems to be someone else’s fault these days. This is truly a disheartening thing…

  72. kbug says:

    Having been pregnant three times, I can tell you that life begins before birth. From the time you feel that first flutter kick, you know that baby is alive. I don’t care what science or anyone else has to say about it…I know from having been there.

    But I don’t know when exactly people stopped taking responsibility for their own actions. It always seems to be someone else’s fault these days. This is truly a disheartening thing…

  73. kbug says:

    Having been pregnant three times, I can tell you that life begins before birth. From the time you feel that first flutter kick, you know that baby is alive. I don’t care what science or anyone else has to say about it…I know from having been there.

    But I don’t know when exactly people stopped taking responsibility for their own actions. It always seems to be someone else’s fault these days. This is truly a disheartening thing…

  74. kbug says:

    Having been pregnant three times, I can tell you that life begins before birth. From the time you feel that first flutter kick, you know that baby is alive. I don’t care what science or anyone else has to say about it…I know from having been there.

    But I don’t know when exactly people stopped taking responsibility for their own actions. It always seems to be someone else’s fault these days. This is truly a disheartening thing…

  75. kbug says:

    Having been pregnant three times, I can tell you that life begins before birth. From the time you feel that first flutter kick, you know that baby is alive. I don’t care what science or anyone else has to say about it…I know from having been there.

    But I don’t know when exactly people stopped taking responsibility for their own actions. It always seems to be someone else’s fault these days. This is truly a disheartening thing…

  76. Monica says:

    She could have tried large doses of Vitamin C to prevent implantation. Vitamin C is not particularly dangerous and, of course, she did not have to take those doses for a very long time.

  77. Monica says:

    She could have tried large doses of Vitamin C to prevent implantation. Vitamin C is not particularly dangerous and, of course, she did not have to take those doses for a very long time.

  78. Monica says:

    She could have tried large doses of Vitamin C to prevent implantation. Vitamin C is not particularly dangerous and, of course, she did not have to take those doses for a very long time.

  79. Monica says:

    She could have tried large doses of Vitamin C to prevent implantation. Vitamin C is not particularly dangerous and, of course, she did not have to take those doses for a very long time.

  80. Monica says:

    She could have tried large doses of Vitamin C to prevent implantation. Vitamin C is not particularly dangerous and, of course, she did not have to take those doses for a very long time.

  81. sylvia says:

    WOW…how lazy can you be? Just bc she was too lazy to use birth control in the first place…and then to “busy” to trace down plan b…now it is everyone else’s fault!!! BOO HOO!!!! What an idiot, my 13 yo cousin was able to get a hold of plan b all by herself with nothing but a phone book and a bus pass…all w/o letting anyone know until after the fact!!! I strongly feel that this is what is wrong with the world today…everyone is always so quick to pass the buck…people refuse to take any responsibility for their actions at all..it sickens me to see what we have become!!!!!

  82. sylvia says:

    WOW…how lazy can you be? Just bc she was too lazy to use birth control in the first place…and then to “busy” to trace down plan b…now it is everyone else’s fault!!! BOO HOO!!!! What an idiot, my 13 yo cousin was able to get a hold of plan b all by herself with nothing but a phone book and a bus pass…all w/o letting anyone know until after the fact!!! I strongly feel that this is what is wrong with the world today…everyone is always so quick to pass the buck…people refuse to take any responsibility for their actions at all..it sickens me to see what we have become!!!!!

  83. sylvia says:

    WOW…how lazy can you be? Just bc she was too lazy to use birth control in the first place…and then to “busy” to trace down plan b…now it is everyone else’s fault!!! BOO HOO!!!! What an idiot, my 13 yo cousin was able to get a hold of plan b all by herself with nothing but a phone book and a bus pass…all w/o letting anyone know until after the fact!!! I strongly feel that this is what is wrong with the world today…everyone is always so quick to pass the buck…people refuse to take any responsibility for their actions at all..it sickens me to see what we have become!!!!!

  84. sylvia says:

    WOW…how lazy can you be? Just bc she was too lazy to use birth control in the first place…and then to “busy” to trace down plan b…now it is everyone else’s fault!!! BOO HOO!!!! What an idiot, my 13 yo cousin was able to get a hold of plan b all by herself with nothing but a phone book and a bus pass…all w/o letting anyone know until after the fact!!! I strongly feel that this is what is wrong with the world today…everyone is always so quick to pass the buck…people refuse to take any responsibility for their actions at all..it sickens me to see what we have become!!!!!

  85. sylvia says:

    WOW…how lazy can you be? Just bc she was too lazy to use birth control in the first place…and then to “busy” to trace down plan b…now it is everyone else’s fault!!! BOO HOO!!!! What an idiot, my 13 yo cousin was able to get a hold of plan b all by herself with nothing but a phone book and a bus pass…all w/o letting anyone know until after the fact!!! I strongly feel that this is what is wrong with the world today…everyone is always so quick to pass the buck…people refuse to take any responsibility for their actions at all..it sickens me to see what we have become!!!!!

  86. jim says:

    I am strongly pro-abortion, not pro-choice, pro-abortion. There is a difference. And, I am, of course, not religious at all. But, I do study it as I find religion interesting subject from an academic standpoint. As a result, I know more more scripture than most of my religious friends and family.

    So, from a religious standpoint “the life of the flesh is in the blood” and “the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.” come to mind, which actually defines life. The deut passage clearly seperates flesh from blood. So, an embryo/early fetus without blood does not have life, while a fetus does have life, from a religious context. A fetus does not begin to make its own blood, and hence be its own life, until the fourth month, so that is where life begins. This actually, although I doubt it was designed that way, lines up pretty well with newly enacted laws . By the way I am an antheist and a republican, and yes we do exist.

    So the conception argument is largely baseless from a religious context. I would bet that most people who use religion as the basis for thier beliefs do not real the bible nearly enough, and rely on what evangelical/radical priests/pastors tell them. I would suggest reading the bible yourself and making your own interpretations. I have read the bible cover to cover, new and old testiment, in english and in latin, and to the best of my knowledge thier is only one mention of conception in and that isn’t overly clear in its meaning, not even close to the two passages mentioned above.

    However, from a biological standpoint the definition of life can get much more cloudy. Viability is a loosely defined term that can mean almost anything at any time, depending on your motives.

    However, i don’t think this issue is actually religiously based at all. It’s more about each persons morals and values. It can really be boiled down to a rather simple question: which is more cruel, aborting a fetus or bringing an unwanted child into the world? Since most abortions come from the poorer classes thier unwanted children are more likely to grow into criminals, and have a negative impact upon society. I didn’t make that up Donohue from Stanford Univ, Levitt from Univ of chicago did a study and attributed nearly 50% of the drop in crime from 1972 to present. Are they right? who knows? So the above question has to be answered in two ways, what is better for the child and what is better for society? Each person’s answers will probibly be different, just bringing up the point.

    I am personally pro-abortion because I don’t like paying for welfare babies. I want my taxes low. If you can’t feed ‘um, don’t breed ‘um. And that is the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. I am a huge fan of chinese style forced abortions.

  87. jim says:

    I am strongly pro-abortion, not pro-choice, pro-abortion. There is a difference. And, I am, of course, not religious at all. But, I do study it as I find religion interesting subject from an academic standpoint. As a result, I know more more scripture than most of my religious friends and family.

    So, from a religious standpoint “the life of the flesh is in the blood” and “the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.” come to mind, which actually defines life. The deut passage clearly seperates flesh from blood. So, an embryo/early fetus without blood does not have life, while a fetus does have life, from a religious context. A fetus does not begin to make its own blood, and hence be its own life, until the fourth month, so that is where life begins. This actually, although I doubt it was designed that way, lines up pretty well with newly enacted laws . By the way I am an antheist and a republican, and yes we do exist.

    So the conception argument is largely baseless from a religious context. I would bet that most people who use religion as the basis for thier beliefs do not real the bible nearly enough, and rely on what evangelical/radical priests/pastors tell them. I would suggest reading the bible yourself and making your own interpretations. I have read the bible cover to cover, new and old testiment, in english and in latin, and to the best of my knowledge thier is only one mention of conception in and that isn’t overly clear in its meaning, not even close to the two passages mentioned above.

    However, from a biological standpoint the definition of life can get much more cloudy. Viability is a loosely defined term that can mean almost anything at any time, depending on your motives.

    However, i don’t think this issue is actually religiously based at all. It’s more about each persons morals and values. It can really be boiled down to a rather simple question: which is more cruel, aborting a fetus or bringing an unwanted child into the world? Since most abortions come from the poorer classes thier unwanted children are more likely to grow into criminals, and have a negative impact upon society. I didn’t make that up Donohue from Stanford Univ, Levitt from Univ of chicago did a study and attributed nearly 50% of the drop in crime from 1972 to present. Are they right? who knows? So the above question has to be answered in two ways, what is better for the child and what is better for society? Each person’s answers will probibly be different, just bringing up the point.

    I am personally pro-abortion because I don’t like paying for welfare babies. I want my taxes low. If you can’t feed ‘um, don’t breed ‘um. And that is the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. I am a huge fan of chinese style forced abortions.

  88. jim says:

    I am strongly pro-abortion, not pro-choice, pro-abortion. There is a difference. And, I am, of course, not religious at all. But, I do study it as I find religion interesting subject from an academic standpoint. As a result, I know more more scripture than most of my religious friends and family.

    So, from a religious standpoint “the life of the flesh is in the blood” and “the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.” come to mind, which actually defines life. The deut passage clearly seperates flesh from blood. So, an embryo/early fetus without blood does not have life, while a fetus does have life, from a religious context. A fetus does not begin to make its own blood, and hence be its own life, until the fourth month, so that is where life begins. This actually, although I doubt it was designed that way, lines up pretty well with newly enacted laws . By the way I am an antheist and a republican, and yes we do exist.

    So the conception argument is largely baseless from a religious context. I would bet that most people who use religion as the basis for thier beliefs do not real the bible nearly enough, and rely on what evangelical/radical priests/pastors tell them. I would suggest reading the bible yourself and making your own interpretations. I have read the bible cover to cover, new and old testiment, in english and in latin, and to the best of my knowledge thier is only one mention of conception in and that isn’t overly clear in its meaning, not even close to the two passages mentioned above.

    However, from a biological standpoint the definition of life can get much more cloudy. Viability is a loosely defined term that can mean almost anything at any time, depending on your motives.

    However, i don’t think this issue is actually religiously based at all. It’s more about each persons morals and values. It can really be boiled down to a rather simple question: which is more cruel, aborting a fetus or bringing an unwanted child into the world? Since most abortions come from the poorer classes thier unwanted children are more likely to grow into criminals, and have a negative impact upon society. I didn’t make that up Donohue from Stanford Univ, Levitt from Univ of chicago did a study and attributed nearly 50% of the drop in crime from 1972 to present. Are they right? who knows? So the above question has to be answered in two ways, what is better for the child and what is better for society? Each person’s answers will probibly be different, just bringing up the point.

    I am personally pro-abortion because I don’t like paying for welfare babies. I want my taxes low. If you can’t feed ‘um, don’t breed ‘um. And that is the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. I am a huge fan of chinese style forced abortions.

  89. jim says:

    I am strongly pro-abortion, not pro-choice, pro-abortion. There is a difference. And, I am, of course, not religious at all. But, I do study it as I find religion interesting subject from an academic standpoint. As a result, I know more more scripture than most of my religious friends and family.

    So, from a religious standpoint “the life of the flesh is in the blood” and “the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.” come to mind, which actually defines life. The deut passage clearly seperates flesh from blood. So, an embryo/early fetus without blood does not have life, while a fetus does have life, from a religious context. A fetus does not begin to make its own blood, and hence be its own life, until the fourth month, so that is where life begins. This actually, although I doubt it was designed that way, lines up pretty well with newly enacted laws . By the way I am an antheist and a republican, and yes we do exist.

    So the conception argument is largely baseless from a religious context. I would bet that most people who use religion as the basis for thier beliefs do not real the bible nearly enough, and rely on what evangelical/radical priests/pastors tell them. I would suggest reading the bible yourself and making your own interpretations. I have read the bible cover to cover, new and old testiment, in english and in latin, and to the best of my knowledge thier is only one mention of conception in and that isn’t overly clear in its meaning, not even close to the two passages mentioned above.

    However, from a biological standpoint the definition of life can get much more cloudy. Viability is a loosely defined term that can mean almost anything at any time, depending on your motives.

    However, i don’t think this issue is actually religiously based at all. It’s more about each persons morals and values. It can really be boiled down to a rather simple question: which is more cruel, aborting a fetus or bringing an unwanted child into the world? Since most abortions come from the poorer classes thier unwanted children are more likely to grow into criminals, and have a negative impact upon society. I didn’t make that up Donohue from Stanford Univ, Levitt from Univ of chicago did a study and attributed nearly 50% of the drop in crime from 1972 to present. Are they right? who knows? So the above question has to be answered in two ways, what is better for the child and what is better for society? Each person’s answers will probibly be different, just bringing up the point.

    I am personally pro-abortion because I don’t like paying for welfare babies. I want my taxes low. If you can’t feed ‘um, don’t breed ‘um. And that is the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. I am a huge fan of chinese style forced abortions.

  90. jim says:

    I am strongly pro-abortion, not pro-choice, pro-abortion. There is a difference. And, I am, of course, not religious at all. But, I do study it as I find religion interesting subject from an academic standpoint. As a result, I know more more scripture than most of my religious friends and family.

    So, from a religious standpoint “the life of the flesh is in the blood” and “the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.” come to mind, which actually defines life. The deut passage clearly seperates flesh from blood. So, an embryo/early fetus without blood does not have life, while a fetus does have life, from a religious context. A fetus does not begin to make its own blood, and hence be its own life, until the fourth month, so that is where life begins. This actually, although I doubt it was designed that way, lines up pretty well with newly enacted laws . By the way I am an antheist and a republican, and yes we do exist.

    So the conception argument is largely baseless from a religious context. I would bet that most people who use religion as the basis for thier beliefs do not real the bible nearly enough, and rely on what evangelical/radical priests/pastors tell them. I would suggest reading the bible yourself and making your own interpretations. I have read the bible cover to cover, new and old testiment, in english and in latin, and to the best of my knowledge thier is only one mention of conception in and that isn’t overly clear in its meaning, not even close to the two passages mentioned above.

    However, from a biological standpoint the definition of life can get much more cloudy. Viability is a loosely defined term that can mean almost anything at any time, depending on your motives.

    However, i don’t think this issue is actually religiously based at all. It’s more about each persons morals and values. It can really be boiled down to a rather simple question: which is more cruel, aborting a fetus or bringing an unwanted child into the world? Since most abortions come from the poorer classes thier unwanted children are more likely to grow into criminals, and have a negative impact upon society. I didn’t make that up Donohue from Stanford Univ, Levitt from Univ of chicago did a study and attributed nearly 50% of the drop in crime from 1972 to present. Are they right? who knows? So the above question has to be answered in two ways, what is better for the child and what is better for society? Each person’s answers will probibly be different, just bringing up the point.

    I am personally pro-abortion because I don’t like paying for welfare babies. I want my taxes low. If you can’t feed ‘um, don’t breed ‘um. And that is the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. I am a huge fan of chinese style forced abortions.

  91. jim says:

    sorry to post again so soon, and apparently I need to learn to spell. sorry, I’m used to writing papers that I proof read before I submitt. I included paranthesis in my earlier post and they do not appear. So, here are the passages I quoted. The first 2 are leviticus 17:11 and Deuteronomy 12:23. The conception passage is Ruth 4:13.

    Also, many of you will say that a fetus has blood long before 4 months, which is true, but it is the mothers blood, as thus if “life is in the blood” it would be the mothers life, and the “baby” would only be a person when it produces its own blood and becomes its own life, which is about 4 months. The fetus is apart of the mother much life my arm, or a tumor, is a part of me. That changes when the fetus produces its own blood.

    Of course, none of this excuses the lady to lazy to open a phone book or clal planned parenthood, or get her husband a vasectomy, if she really didnt ever want more children. They even have no-scalpel vasectomies and vasci-clips, which are little plastic clips that go on the vas deference rather than having to scar/cauterize them closed as was the older way.

  92. jim says:

    sorry to post again so soon, and apparently I need to learn to spell. sorry, I’m used to writing papers that I proof read before I submitt. I included paranthesis in my earlier post and they do not appear. So, here are the passages I quoted. The first 2 are leviticus 17:11 and Deuteronomy 12:23. The conception passage is Ruth 4:13.

    Also, many of you will say that a fetus has blood long before 4 months, which is true, but it is the mothers blood, as thus if “life is in the blood” it would be the mothers life, and the “baby” would only be a person when it produces its own blood and becomes its own life, which is about 4 months. The fetus is apart of the mother much life my arm, or a tumor, is a part of me. That changes when the fetus produces its own blood.

    Of course, none of this excuses the lady to lazy to open a phone book or clal planned parenthood, or get her husband a vasectomy, if she really didnt ever want more children. They even have no-scalpel vasectomies and vasci-clips, which are little plastic clips that go on the vas deference rather than having to scar/cauterize them closed as was the older way.

  93. jim says:

    sorry to post again so soon, and apparently I need to learn to spell. sorry, I’m used to writing papers that I proof read before I submitt. I included paranthesis in my earlier post and they do not appear. So, here are the passages I quoted. The first 2 are leviticus 17:11 and Deuteronomy 12:23. The conception passage is Ruth 4:13.

    Also, many of you will say that a fetus has blood long before 4 months, which is true, but it is the mothers blood, as thus if “life is in the blood” it would be the mothers life, and the “baby” would only be a person when it produces its own blood and becomes its own life, which is about 4 months. The fetus is apart of the mother much life my arm, or a tumor, is a part of me. That changes when the fetus produces its own blood.

    Of course, none of this excuses the lady to lazy to open a phone book or clal planned parenthood, or get her husband a vasectomy, if she really didnt ever want more children. They even have no-scalpel vasectomies and vasci-clips, which are little plastic clips that go on the vas deference rather than having to scar/cauterize them closed as was the older way.

  94. jim says:

    sorry to post again so soon, and apparently I need to learn to spell. sorry, I’m used to writing papers that I proof read before I submitt. I included paranthesis in my earlier post and they do not appear. So, here are the passages I quoted. The first 2 are leviticus 17:11 and Deuteronomy 12:23. The conception passage is Ruth 4:13.

    Also, many of you will say that a fetus has blood long before 4 months, which is true, but it is the mothers blood, as thus if “life is in the blood” it would be the mothers life, and the “baby” would only be a person when it produces its own blood and becomes its own life, which is about 4 months. The fetus is apart of the mother much life my arm, or a tumor, is a part of me. That changes when the fetus produces its own blood.

    Of course, none of this excuses the lady to lazy to open a phone book or clal planned parenthood, or get her husband a vasectomy, if she really didnt ever want more children. They even have no-scalpel vasectomies and vasci-clips, which are little plastic clips that go on the vas deference rather than having to scar/cauterize them closed as was the older way.

  95. jim says:

    sorry to post again so soon, and apparently I need to learn to spell. sorry, I’m used to writing papers that I proof read before I submitt. I included paranthesis in my earlier post and they do not appear. So, here are the passages I quoted. The first 2 are leviticus 17:11 and Deuteronomy 12:23. The conception passage is Ruth 4:13.

    Also, many of you will say that a fetus has blood long before 4 months, which is true, but it is the mothers blood, as thus if “life is in the blood” it would be the mothers life, and the “baby” would only be a person when it produces its own blood and becomes its own life, which is about 4 months. The fetus is apart of the mother much life my arm, or a tumor, is a part of me. That changes when the fetus produces its own blood.

    Of course, none of this excuses the lady to lazy to open a phone book or clal planned parenthood, or get her husband a vasectomy, if she really didnt ever want more children. They even have no-scalpel vasectomies and vasci-clips, which are little plastic clips that go on the vas deference rather than having to scar/cauterize them closed as was the older way.

  96. BrooklynMom says:

    Actually I think you are being a bit of a witch to use this woman’s hardship for your own proselytizing. I am an athiest, but in this case I would recommend a hardy, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”

    Would would Jesus do? Not beat up on a confused, upset, unwanted pregnant, hormonal blogger.

    You should be ashamed, and you should apologize.

    Full disclosure: I am a big fan of both abortion and the morning after pill– both have made me a better human.

  97. BrooklynMom says:

    Actually I think you are being a bit of a witch to use this woman’s hardship for your own proselytizing. I am an athiest, but in this case I would recommend a hardy, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”

    Would would Jesus do? Not beat up on a confused, upset, unwanted pregnant, hormonal blogger.

    You should be ashamed, and you should apologize.

    Full disclosure: I am a big fan of both abortion and the morning after pill– both have made me a better human.

  98. BrooklynMom says:

    Actually I think you are being a bit of a witch to use this woman’s hardship for your own proselytizing. I am an athiest, but in this case I would recommend a hardy, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”

    Would would Jesus do? Not beat up on a confused, upset, unwanted pregnant, hormonal blogger.

    You should be ashamed, and you should apologize.

    Full disclosure: I am a big fan of both abortion and the morning after pill– both have made me a better human.

  99. BrooklynMom says:

    Actually I think you are being a bit of a witch to use this woman’s hardship for your own proselytizing. I am an athiest, but in this case I would recommend a hardy, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”

    Would would Jesus do? Not beat up on a confused, upset, unwanted pregnant, hormonal blogger.

    You should be ashamed, and you should apologize.

    Full disclosure: I am a big fan of both abortion and the morning after pill– both have made me a better human.

  100. BrooklynMom says:

    Actually I think you are being a bit of a witch to use this woman’s hardship for your own proselytizing. I am an athiest, but in this case I would recommend a hardy, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”

    Would would Jesus do? Not beat up on a confused, upset, unwanted pregnant, hormonal blogger.

    You should be ashamed, and you should apologize.

    Full disclosure: I am a big fan of both abortion and the morning after pill– both have made me a better human.

  101. Mama Luxe says:

    BrooklynMom–She’s not a blogger, or some random unfortunate we are picking on–she wrote a piece for The Washington Post, airing her own situation for public consumption, creating a political issue out of it, and blaming everyone and everyone else but her and her husband’s own decisions. And hormonal? pregnant? No. This was written after the fact.

  102. Mama Luxe says:

    BrooklynMom–She’s not a blogger, or some random unfortunate we are picking on–she wrote a piece for The Washington Post, airing her own situation for public consumption, creating a political issue out of it, and blaming everyone and everyone else but her and her husband’s own decisions. And hormonal? pregnant? No. This was written after the fact.

  103. Mama Luxe says:

    BrooklynMom–She’s not a blogger, or some random unfortunate we are picking on–she wrote a piece for The Washington Post, airing her own situation for public consumption, creating a political issue out of it, and blaming everyone and everyone else but her and her husband’s own decisions. And hormonal? pregnant? No. This was written after the fact.

  104. Mama Luxe says:

    BrooklynMom–She’s not a blogger, or some random unfortunate we are picking on–she wrote a piece for The Washington Post, airing her own situation for public consumption, creating a political issue out of it, and blaming everyone and everyone else but her and her husband’s own decisions. And hormonal? pregnant? No. This was written after the fact.

  105. Mama Luxe says:

    BrooklynMom–She’s not a blogger, or some random unfortunate we are picking on–she wrote a piece for The Washington Post, airing her own situation for public consumption, creating a political issue out of it, and blaming everyone and everyone else but her and her husband’s own decisions. And hormonal? pregnant? No. This was written after the fact.

  106. Renee says:

    Wow I’m pretty sickened by your part of the post. Abortion is tough in all ways and people often need to justify it in their mind any way they can. Thats their right. Your snarky replies offer nothing to anyone.

    No one should be forced to carry a child that they do not want. You have your morals and I have mine. The reality is that abortion is a safe and legal medical procedure. It is every woman’s reproductive right to have control of there body.

    I’m confused as to why you are so close minded and dismissive of another womans expirience.

  107. Candace says:

    Renee: Considering this was written in 2008, I’m not going to go back and defend my thought process. However, this was not about whether or not in agree with abortion but rather about an person who wrote an article blaming the government for her own poor choices. This is about the culture of victimhood that places blame on everyone else. This is not a woman I found and confronted…she is someone who chose to write an article to push her own political agenda. Her abortion is only a political football because SHE put the ball in play.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *