Blogs » Gakja's Blog » Abortion Protestors

Subscribe


"I noticed the Anti-Abortionists were out again today. I called the cops on them the last time they were "exersizing their rights" because a few people actually had signs with photographs of aborted fetuses. Its mostly old, white people with nothing better to do with their time than to shove their ignorant adgenda in our faces. They are such a black eye to the Victoria Community. I think they are organized by the catholic church, which just irritates me to no end. Kill an unborn child and you're evil; kill an Iraqi or Pakistani civilian, and you'll end up on their prayer list. The hypocracy demonstrated by these ignorant people is ubiquitous. Forget about their signs which read, "Abortion kills children." How about a sign that says "Anti-abortionists murder doctors." They are so STUPID! NOBODY, nobody is Pro-abortion. To outlaw abortion altogether would cause more harm good. Ever heard of a coat-hanger abortion? These demonstrations should be ended. Nobody wants to read their filth while trying to enjoy a Sunday drive or a trip to the grocery store. SHAME ON YOU ALL! "


Comments


  • You ain't perfect sister. You might think no one elses opinion has value, but you are wrong. And such a mindset flies in the face of your supposed Buddhist beliefs. Especially as noted by your repeated censoring of counter opinions.

    As I said before, I have good friends that are REAL Buddhists, and you have a long way to go to even come close to the state of humanity they enjoy. I find it humorous that one of the most insightful persons I know (a Buddhist woman), saw right through you at first glance. Apparently her poser comment hit home, probably not the first time you've heard such.

    You say you don't support abortion as a form of birth control, but that is exactly what each and every abortion ultimately is. All you obviously support is hedonistic free will. I imagine you will be sorely upset when you find out that tantra does not mean being plowed by three guys while standing on your head.

    I'll throw a Buddhist thought out to you, since you have noted in your off screen harassment of me that you speak for all Buddhism (yes, I have your actual comment of such saved):
    Sometimes, you don't know enough to even know that you don't know.

    October 8, 2009 at 2:17 p.m.

  • "That's entirely a religious point of view. And I agree with you for the most part. However, the law says that you cannot display signs like that in plain view of the public that are offensive. The only point of the slogan "ABORTION KILLS CHILDREN" is entirely for its shock value. It has no logical merit since there is no such thing as a "Pro-Abortion" platform. What if I were to stand out on Navarro with a sign that said "CATHOLIC PRIESTS RAPE YOUNG BOYS" You could not argue with that statement because it is partially true. There have been documented cases. However, the only value that sign has, since it is not true all the time, is in its ability to Shock and Offend people. That is the only point I'm trying to make. I support your cause, but please, change your signs! They are extremely offensive. You Catholics need to conduct yourselves better if you want to maintain some degree of respect and credibility."

    October 7, 2009 at 11:18 a.m.

  • It is called a Life Chain and it was organized by Catholics. Someone has to stand up for those innocent human beings! Not only does abortion take away a human life on earth, but it takes away an eternal life!

    October 6, 2009 at 12:19 a.m.

  • In America, anyone who wants to make a fool of himself standing on the side of the road holding a sign, can do so. The people holding the signs prefer living in the Dark Ages. Honk if you love Jesus! Keep them tithes coming in, the preacher needs a new Mercedes Benz.

    October 5, 2009 at 4:16 p.m.

  • RUKIDDINGME: That is a very good point.

    JohnnyHville: Ive been a "card-carrying" buddhist for 10 years.

    October 5, 2009 at 3:28 p.m.

  • "As your name implies, Ms. Chica, you are still a young girl, whom I hope, in time, will understand what has already been said."

    Actually, she's very much well-grown up. A grandma, even! Thanks for your uninformed insight though, it made for a good laugh.

    October 5, 2009 at 3:05 p.m.

  • The different attitudes about abortion are simple. Different people think life begins at different times. I doubt seriously that anyone that struggles with the moral issue, and has an abortion, thinks she is really killing a viable, living, baby.
    Then there are those who just don't care one way or the other. Those people should be "fixed".

    October 5, 2009 at 2:39 p.m.

  • I never posted "INNACCURATE" data, though in retrospect, I shouldn't have used the word "majority". I researched it and posted what I could find. You will also notice the following disclaimer, "Because reporting of abortions is not mandatory, statistics are of varying reliability." The statistics were also gathered during 1987-1988, at a time when abortions in the United States were at their peak. You will also notice that those numbers have decline every year significantly for 20 years; a trend which will most likely continue. So, percentage wise, the number of abortions performed as a matter of convinence has dramatically declined. According to my calculations, the number has declined by 40%! That's not a problem, that's a success story.

    October 5, 2009 at 1:42 p.m.

  • I,too was curious as to what brought them out. The VicAd this AM had an article the Supremes opening tomorrow. Roe Vs. Wade 36, years and counting.

    October 5, 2009 at 1:37 p.m.

  • Thank you for proving my point about the INACCURATE data you first posted. The latter indicates a little over 90% are performed as a matter of "convenience". I never criticized Buhdism, but you keep defending it. I doubt if your faith is who guides you to refer unborn children as fetuses. Again, you are using secular terms to explain violent deaths of unborn human beings, plain an simple. I believe that you have more good in you than what you are letting on by criticizing people who are standing up against murder of children. As your name implies, Ms. Chica, you are still a young girl, whom I hope, in time, will understand what has already been said.

    October 5, 2009 at 1:05 p.m.

  • Nice post Gakja. I too am offended when I see those signs but usually settle for yelling at the people carrying them.

    Abortion issues are PRIVATE and between a woman and her doctor. Everybody else should stay out of it. It is a LEGAL procedure.

    October 5, 2009 at 11:58 a.m.

  • Grandpa--It doesn't sound like you are understanding GAKJA's comment

    October 5, 2009 at 11:30 a.m.

  • Because reporting of abortions is not mandatory, statistics are of varying reliability.

    In 2000, cases of rape or incest accounted for 1% of abortions.[26] Another study, in 1998, revealed that in 1987-1988 women reported the following reasons for choosing an abortion:[27]

    25.5% Want to postpone childbearing
    21.3% Cannot afford a baby
    14.1% Has relationship problem or partner does not want pregnancy
    12.2% Too young; parent(s) or other(s) object to pregnancy
    10.8% Having a child will disrupt education or job
    7.9% Want no (more) children
    3.3% Risk to fetal health
    2.8% Risk to maternal health
    2.1% Other

    Do you want to be the person to tell these 8,570 rape victims that they can't have an abortion?

    Do you want to be the one to tell these 24,000 mothers that it would be better for them to die during childbirth than to have an abortion?

    How about the 28,000 unborn children that won't survive long after childbirth? Should we keep them on life support until they just die anyway?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_K

    October 5, 2009 at 10:57 a.m.

  • The number of abortions performed per year has fallen every year since 1990.

    Why are you suprised to hear that a buddhist is opposed to abortion? Perhaps you aren't fimiliar with it. Buddhism is the ONLY world religion that has not been involved in a religious war. I would argue that we believe in the sanctity of life even more than Christians.

    From Wikipedia:

    The most common prevention strategy is the manning of pregnancy help centers, also called Crisis Pregnancy Centers or CPC's. These centers provide pregnancy tests and present women with information intended to lead them to reject abortion. They also provide practical help which varies according to the organization's means, ranging from help obtaining public assistance to providing housing and medical care. However, many CPCs have been accused of dishonest tactics, such as promising help that is then not given, providing medically false information about pregnancy and contraception, telling women that they are not pregnant when they are, and falsely claiming to provide abortion services.[54]

    The majority of anti-abortion violence has been committed in the United States. At least nine people have been killed as a result of violence to abortion providers, the most recent being George Tiller in May 2009.

    This all comes back to the fact that these is no such thing as a Pro-Abortion platform. Holding up signs that proclaim "ABORTION KILLS CHILDREN" does not do any good because there is no one in opposition to that statement. Its only value is in its ability to SHOCK and OFFEND people. A 4 foot by 6 foot photo of a dead, bloody fetus, has no place in plain view of the public and neither do these signs.

    If they changed the signs to something reasonable, based in logic instead of shock-value, I might actually join them on the street.

    October 5, 2009 at 10:45 a.m.

  • It seems that there is a tendency of many who share your views that "logic and reasoning" are more important than personal or moral values. A person that values the sanctity of life, including the life of the unborn would hold this first and foremost, rather than justify some unfounded statistics of the reasoning of a "majority" of abortions that are performed. You do not have statistics to draw such conclusions. I think the truth will surprise you.
    I am surprised to hear you say of your opposition to abortion, and that to kill the unborn would bring bada karma. Is this the most sincerity and conviction you can deliver for such a violent and tragic act?
    I think that you do truly despise the killing of the unborn, and that the pictures of reality are offensive to who you really are. The millions of pro-life advocates are not murderers, and they do not condone such violence. They have membership from all religious denominations. I believe that they would gladly share information with you, as well as reveal the sources for all of their information, which may allow you to generate the reasoning to support such values that you say you share. I challenge you to stand up for the thousands of babies slaughtered so shamelessly, just because they are unwanted or inconvenient.

    October 5, 2009 at 1:15 a.m.

  • That is simply not the issue. I am a buddhist. I believe that life begins at conception and that killing sentient beings is very bad karma. My biggest complaint is that I don't like driving around town seeing such a strong message written in giant letters along a public road. Its offending, especially for women who have undergone such a procedure. How traumitizing for them to be reminded of that! I would like the police or the sherrif's department to protect me from such vile displays. I would rather look at the birds and the flowers. The problem is the argument that these people are making. "Abortion Kills Children" They have taken the stance to end all abortion no matter what the circumstance. Nobody has a sign that says "Abortion as a form of birth control kills children." Abortions are performed a vast majority of the time for sound medical reasons. Some examples would be (1) When a mother is deemed by her doctor to be in an extremely high risk pregnancy where both her and her baby will most likely die and (2) When the fetus has severe genetic defects and probably won't survive child birth. No goverment entity should come in between what you and your doctor discuss in private. Its precisely this kind of bold-faced ignornance that causes harm. Pro-life is pro-ignorance. On more than one occasion, physicians that perform abortions as a result of sound medical judgements, have been MURDERED by these so-called "Pro-Lifers." Moreover, I would also make the argument that these people are in support of having an army go across the globe and kill people. I didn't see anyone with a sign that said "End all war." They are hypocrits, pure and simple.
    Also, as a buddhist, I dont have opinions. All of my views come from logic and reasoning. I also support free speech as long as it doesn't harm others, (which in this case it does). I never said anything about harming anyone, be it the protestors or the unborn. I understand full-and-well "what abortion does" both physically and psycologically. I do not support abortion as a form of birth control and I do not like seeing those signs around Victoria.

    October 5, 2009 at 12:10 a.m.

  • You're entitled to your own opinions. I should be shocked to hear what you are saying, but then again, I'm not. It seems we have citizens that share your views in our own government. Please read the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing Americans the liberties as are being excercised by the pro-life citizens, not only through their public peaceful assembly, but in what materials or displays they present. You happen to be in the United States of America where we have this freedom, and your disagreement is simply that, since no laws are apparently being broken. Who would you have "end" their peaceful plea for life of the unborn? Are you suggesting someone perfom an illegal act to stop them?
    Furthermore, your cynical comments raise question toward your own consideration and value for the sanctity of human life. I hope that in time you will have opportunity to listen and expand your knowledge of what abortion does, not only to the innocent unborn, but for the life of misery left for those who make such choices. It hurts to see those pictures of reality, doesn't it.

    October 4, 2009 at 7:47 p.m.