This story from The Courier-Journal in Louisville gives us a glimpse of a remarkable woman who survived an abortion:
A 30-year-old singer and marathoner who says she survived a botched abortion attempt urged a Louisville gathering of more than 200 people to oppose abortion.
"What I often say is if abortion is merely about a woman's rights, then what were mine?" Gianna Jessen told the annual gathering of Kentucky Doctors for Life Foundation at the St. Matthews Community Center. " I live with the results of this tragedy in our lives."
Jessen, a Christian singer from Nashville, Tenn., said her teenage mother was 7 ½ months pregnant when she went to a Los Angeles abortion clinic.
Jessen said her mother had an uncommon method of abortion in which saline solution was injected. Jessen said she was born alive at two pounds, and taken to a hospital where she was placed in an incubator but suffered from cerebral palsy.
Read the whole story. Jessen is a living example that there are more than just one set of "rights" at play in the abortion issue.
Comments (9)
"Jessen, a Christian singer from Nashville, Tenn., said her teenage mother was 7 ½ months pregnant when she went to a Los Angeles abortion clinic."
Seven and a half? That is just untidy. Abortion is an unfortunate necessity, but when it is the best option, it should be gotten over with *early* - doing so reduces the ethical problem, the stress on the woman and the medical risk of complications.
In most cases, that is exactly how it goes - late-term abortions are quite rare, and usually for medical reasons.
September 7, 2007 11:26 AM | Comment Permalink
Jessen has almost no proof of her story - just a single page recording that she was born as the result of an attempted abortion. All the rest of it is fantasy, as her mother has never come forward; moreover, there was never a prosecution of the clinic or doctor concerned, even though such a late-stage abortion was illegal at the time.
In addition, she always melodramatically claims that the saline solution used for the abortion "burned" her for hours in the womb (therapy helped her remember it, she says). Huh? It's a mild salt/water solution - the *ocean* is a saline solution.
She's made a career of milking the pro-lifers by telling them exactly what they want to hear. And they obligingly roll over and allow themselves to be bilked.
September 7, 2007 11:42 AM | Comment Permalink
Nicely done, s8... it didn't even occur to me to question her story, but now you point it out... some of her claims hint at something off. Perhaps complete fabrication, but more likely just a great deal of exageration.
But remember the confirmation bias: Those who want to believe a story, probably will.
September 8, 2007 10:01 AM | Comment Permalink
Life is a gift from God and we have no right to choose whether it should be ended or not. Murder is against the law in most circumstances. Abortion is murder.
September 10, 2007 3:20 PM | Comment Permalink
Otherwise put:
"Abortion is murder, because I say it is. Trust me, I dont need to make an argument."
Try to work out why killing a human is murder, but killing a cow is not. When you can understand that (And no 'But humans are different!' excuse for a non-argument!), you are half-way to formulating a view on abortion that isn't based on knee-jerk reactions.
September 10, 2007 4:11 PM | Comment Permalink
It would be interesting to know if "Patricia" opposes the death penalty. I don't believe that it is hypocritical in and of itself to oppose legalized abortion but support putting a convicted murderer to death; however, I do find it amusing when people, in opposing the former, make arguments like "Patricia" did that could easily apply to opposing the latter...and it turns out said people are actually in favor of the death penalty.
September 10, 2007 10:43 PM | Comment Permalink
I find it more interesting that pro-life campaigners are not usually vegetarians. They defend the right to life of an embryo so enthusiasticly, yet none of those I have asked so far were able to tell me why it is that a human embryo has more rights than, say, a chicken. They usually veer into either quantum morality ("Human rights propagate backwards in time. It may have rights in the future, so it must have rights now.") or the groundless assumption ("Humans are special. They just are. Dont ask why.").
As there is nothing to distinguish the embryo of a human (And this applies to the extreme lesser-developed end of the fetus stage too) from that of a cow, other than some genetic material that hasn't yet done anything of import, it stands to reason that the two should be equivilent in terms of rights. And, as it makes sense that the moral worth of an adult cow is worth more than that of a cow embryo, all pro-life campaigners *should* be vegetarians. But they arn't, because most of them dont really think their position through.
September 12, 2007 5:38 PM | Comment Permalink
God gave us dominion over the other species and plants. Do you consider killing a spinach plant "murder"?
September 17, 2007 1:48 PM | Comment Permalink
See my example of a bad answer: "Humans are special. They just are. Dont ask why."
Its all very well to say humans are different from spinich. Or cows. But you need to be able to say *how* before you can decide how to classify the ambiguous cases. Its completly unhelpful to just declare that humans are under different rules. There must be a *reason* for the difference.
And as the 'god gave us dominion,' if you will excuse me, I have to go and torture my cats before the family gets home.
September 18, 2007 4:33 PM | Comment Permalink