The Raving Theist

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

Voices of Life: Maribel and Aja

February 28, 2006 | 70 Comments

Today’s Voices of Life — Maribel and her daughter Aja — can be heard (and seen) in this video clip shot earlier this month. Please view it before commenting.

Maribel was under pressure to abort by her family and boyfriend and visited four clinics before my friend Ashli got her phone number from a pro-life volunteer, and helped her make a different choice so she could start a new life. I have linked to their story before (Maribel is identified as “Gabbi” in the post), but it bears re-reading in view of my recent post regarding the nature of the “coercion” exerted upon pregnant women by pro-life volunteers. The next time someone complains about how sidewalk counselors and crisis pregnancy centers and other volunteers who accost and bully and frighten and infantilize women who just want to exercise their choice, please watch the video again and ask yourself if you are looking at and listening to a “victim.”

Last December I posted about a pro-abortion group which runs an “underground railroad” to New York to coordinate late second-term abortions and provide overnight housing for women who cannot find a clinic in their own states willing to perform the procedure. Had Maribel been delivered into their “non-judgmental” hands instead of Ashli’s, she would have been housed, and comforted and reinforced in her original decision to abort. Please watch the video again and consider whether that would have been a happier ending — or if what Ashli did was “wrong” in any sense of the word.

Comments

70 Responses to “Voices of Life: Maribel and Aja”

  1. allonym
    February 28th, 2006 @ 6:36 am

    Showing me a video of a happy mother who chose not to abort does little to convince me of your argument. The video doesn’t prove that what Ashli does is right, all it proves is that what she does at least occasionally corresponds with a positive outcome. Do you think there might be examples out there in the world in which “choosing life” didn’t turn out so rosy? Do you think there might be some examples where choosing abortion turned out positive? I certainly think so.

  2. Erik
    February 28th, 2006 @ 8:43 am

    Huh. You know, maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t recall hearing a pro-abortion stance that suggests that the mother who wants to get an abortion but cannot or eventually chooses not to will hate her child, and that therefore abortion is necessary and justified.

  3. Jahrta
    February 28th, 2006 @ 9:10 am

    Lone Ranger: “What’s that rumbling sound, Tonto?”

    Tonto: *holding his ear to the ground with a pensive stare* “That sound of stampeding atheists running away from one-time objective atheist mouthpiece turned ant-abortion activist with myopic views of the supposed sanctity of life who often confuses the concept of potential with that of the actual, Kemosabe.”

    Lone Ranger: “Really? That’s fucking retarded. Why would an atheist care about abortion and post on it endlessly?”

  4. malury
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:05 am

    This has nothing at all to do with atheism. It is not appropriate for this forum. Whats wrong with you?

  5. Zeemy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:09 am

    Keep up the good work RA. It’s good for people to know that not all atheists are reflexively pro-abortion. Plus this is your blog. Why would people complain when you write posts on topics you think are important?

  6. Kate
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:12 am

    Because they can.

  7. jahrta
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:13 am

    maybe because abortion has just about as much to do with atheism as does the Lone Ranger, which was my underlying point.

    Sure, this is his blog, but the title suggests a certain theme.

    If I had a blog called the Raving Chef, and went on incessantly about the flat tax, dropping by every so often to insert a thread about braised beef, you’d think I was off my fuckin’ rocker.

  8. HappyNat
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:30 am

    Rather weak argument. Anecdotal evidence . . .bah!

  9. Rhinoqulous
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:47 am

    Your powers of inductive logic are amazing RA.

    “Here is a women who thought about having an abortion, but decided not to. Look how happy her and her child are! Therefore, not having an abortion leads to a happy family and abortion is wrong!”

    Whoever taught you practical reasoning and basic logic must be weeping right now (or spinning in his/her grave).

    I’m pretty sure the people of the “underground” railroad would consider themselves “pro-choice” and not “pro-abortion”. Pro-abortion entails that they endorse abortion in-itself (hey everyone! You haven’t really lived until you try abortion!) Save the BS emotional appeals to the sods in your juries.

  10. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:48 am

    I knew RA was too good to be true.

    Anyhow, look up the meaning of a “mono-amneotic” (twin) pregnancy and you will see the reason we were happy to abort.

    Although I don’t have a video of me smiling, we are very pleased that the decision belonged to us and not some pro-life nutjob.

  11. Thorngod
    February 28th, 2006 @ 11:07 am

    Had Einstein been aborted, Einstein would not have cared. Nor would you or I or anyone else. We would never ask what had happened to the brilliant fellow who was supposed to have sprung that fantastic theory on us that still has not been formulated. As I said in another thread, there is infinite distance between an aborted “non-you” and the existent you. I find life thrilling and fascinating (What else COULD I find thrilling, or whatever!), but had I been disposed of before there was an “I,” what matter!

  12. cassandra
    February 28th, 2006 @ 11:26 am

    Huh. I knew that pro-life atheists existed, but I’ve never seen/met/knew one (this is my first comment on RA). It’s strange. Like a satanic priest.

    I’m glad that Maribel had a happy ending, but not all stories have as sweet an ending. I won’t give examples of those sad stories that would have a tragic ending becuse I’m sure you’ve all heard them before.

  13. PHLAF
    February 28th, 2006 @ 11:42 am

    I really don’t get the problem with an atheist being prolife, especially since most atheists get pretty pissy at the notion that their sense of morality or code of honor must come from a higher power.

    That being said, I also don’t like the idea of highly emotional, anecdotal accounts being used as an argument for or against anything. Each side of whatever issue is at hand can probably come up with an equal number of anecdotal accounts that support their position. In the end, this sort of stuff doesn’t get anyone anywhere.

    Besides, saying that abortion is wrong because someone who didn’t abort is now happy merely supports the argument that abortion is good because someone who did abort is now happy.

    It’s all a lot of meaningless, shrill white noise that cancels itself out in the end.

  14. Andrew
    February 28th, 2006 @ 11:44 am

    So if a rape victim is impregnated and decides to keep the baby and ends up loving it, the rape is justified? After all, but for the rapist, the cute widdly baby would not exist.

  15. NoDogBoy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:07 pm

    Ahhh, the open mindedness of Atheist is always a wonder too behold. You can beleive anything you want….except no pro-lifers allowed.

    Jaharta, your example was idiotic. Since atheism is a foundational premise upon which a multitude of worldviews can be built, it’s legitamate to talk about ANY subject. The only thing that has NOTHING to do with atheism is the suggestion that some issue is outsidAhhh, the open mindedness of Atheists is always a wonder too behold. You can believe anything you want….except no pro-lifers allowed. LOL

    jahrta, your example was idiotic.

    Since atheism is a foundational premise upon which a multitude of worldviews can be built, it’s legitimate to talk about ANY subject.

    The only thing that has NOTHING to do with atheism is the suggestion that some issue is by definition outside the purview of atheism.

    This group is by far the most irrational, dogmatic, close-minded collection of people I have ever encountered.
    the purview of athiesm.

    This group is by far the most irrational, dogmatic, close-minded collection of people I have ever encountered.

  16. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:14 pm

    It’s not that RA is “pro-life”, it’s that he believes the system is only acceptable if he can create a climate where everyone is forced to act, if not believe, as he does. He’ll be happy when abortion is banned.

    As an athiest, I am content to hold my views that religion is wrong and also discuss them with others. Heck, I even try to encourage others to abandon religion.

    The difference is however is that I don’t advocate blocking people from their religions, whether by clogging the church steps or by outlawing worship altogether.

    RA would.

  17. NoDogBoy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:22 pm

    It’s not that RA is “pro-life”, it’s that he believes the system is only acceptable if he can create a climate where everyone is forced to act, if not believe, as he does. He’ll be happy when abortion is banned.
    …blah, blah, blah, look how great and open minded I am…blah, blah, blah…

    RA would

    Really, where’s your evidence that this is the position he holds?

  18. jahrta
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:24 pm

    Nodog boy:

    1.) Why do you feel the need to hijack another poster’s handle and turn it into your own? Do you lack the creativity to make something unique?

    2.) Call me what you will – at least I know how to use the post system without looking like a complete and total doofus.

    3.) Prove to me in any way that abortion has more reason to appear on fifty or so threads within a decidedly atheist website than, say, tips on how to prepare a brisket. Abortion has nothing to do with atheism. Many things fall outside the realm of atheism, but TRA can’t seem to stop talking about this one topic – to the detriment of his blog. There’s never anything new, and all that he writes is emotional claptrap.

  19. PHLAF
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:28 pm

    I’m not familiar enough with RA’s full positon on abortion to know how extreme it is, but I’m not sure that even openly working towards criminalizing abortion is out of sync with the state of not believing in a divine force or higher power, or whatever.

    People are messy. They hold a lot of seemingly inconsistant and contradictory views. It’s just the way we are. Why should atheists be any different from the religious crowd?

  20. NoDogBoy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:39 pm

    1.) Why do you feel the need to hijack another poster’s handle and turn it into your own? Do you lack the creativity to make something unique?

    Yes.

    2.) Call me what you will – at least I know how to use the post system without looking like a complete and total doofus.

    I didn’t call you anything. I said your example was idiotic, and it was. That doesn’t mean you are an idiot (though you might be-I honestly don’t know).

    Oh, and I suppose you’ve never made a mistake posting in a comments discussion which provides for no ability to edit. It’s always a great tactic to point out such innocent errors and proves your superiority. *rollseyes*

    3.) Prove to me in any way that abortion has more reason to appear on fifty or so threads within a decidedly atheist website than, say, tips on how to prepare a brisket. Abortion has nothing to do with atheism.

    Prove to me how abortion has nothing to do with Atheism? It’s RA’s site, and he is an atheist. If he determines it has importance for HIS atheism, well then it does. What you really mean is that it has nothing to do with YOUR atheism.

    So, if you don’t like RA’s brand of atheism, leave already (you keep threatening to) and go start a site supporting your brand of atheism. Why stick around here and bitch, moan and whine about the content of someone else’s site.

    It is what it is, take it or leave it.

  21. jahrta
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:41 pm

    In case you missed it -and you seem to have done just that – my point wasn’t that “no atheist can be anti-abortion” but rather “abortion isn’t an atheist issue.” It has become an issue hijacked by the religious right (a more oxymoronic name there never existed), and they use it to try to control others, or force the government to pass legislation based on their religious views. If it is in any way a “religious” issue, it is only because the fundamentalists have made it into one, due to their belief in souls, heaven and hell.

  22. benjamin
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:45 pm

    A pro-life atheist is rare. It’s part of what makes this blog unique. Personal anecdotes do very little for me, however.

  23. NoDogBoy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:51 pm

    In case you missed it -and you seem to have done just that – my point wasn’t that “no atheist can be anti-abortion” but rather “abortion isn’t an atheist issue.” It has become an issue hijacked by the religious right (a more oxymoronic name there never existed), and they use it to try to control others, or force the government to pass legislation based on their religious views. If it is in any way a “religious” issue, it is only because the fundamentalists have made it into one, due to their belief in souls, heaven and hell.

    What drivel.

    So, what you meant was that it’s not one of OUR issues (that was not at all clear from your earlier posts). Why the hell is that? Just because a certain position is associated with religious folk means it’s no longer allowed as an atheist issue? Is that what you are saying? Do you realize how foolish that sounds? It’s totally irrational.

    Atheists are human beings, right? So any issue can be a particular atheist’s issue (obviously abortion is one of THIS, as in RA, atheist’s issues).

    Saying it’s not an atheist issue implies that there is some kind of overarching objective stance that atheism imposes, which is obviously nonsense.

    Saying abortion is not an atheist issue is like saying tax policy is not an atheist issue. All issues that affect human beings affect religious and non-religious alike, and it’s totally legit to speak on those issue. It’s legit even if the position taken is not the one taken by the majority of ‘like-minded’ people.

    I wonder, if RA’s posts on abortion where pro-abortion, would you make the same argument?

  24. Mookie
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:57 pm

    Ah yes, another abortion post. To those lurkers who are curling their noses in disgust, know that RA does this from time to time, probably to increase readership. Sit it out and he will eventually go back to bashing religion.

    RA,

    These abortion posts are getting worse and worse. I know you wrote one already, but can you make another post outlining your stance against abortion, and actually have it make sense? Didn’t think so. Well then, I am forced to conclude that this is a stunt to get you more clicks. Cunning scheme, to draw theists in here with your “anti”-abortion stance and then smack down their idiotic religious views. It almost makes up for the horrible “logic” of your abortion posts.

  25. jahrta
    February 28th, 2006 @ 12:57 pm

    I don’t come here for RA’s views on abortion – I come here mainly for the forums. I find that when anyone starts arguing from emotion, they’ve already lost the debate. it’s sad to see an atheist go this route, but it does happen.

  26. jahrta
    February 28th, 2006 @ 1:07 pm

    NDB –

    Yes, we’re all humans, and we all have belly button lint, but you don’t see RA making 50 threads about it. Still don’t get the point?

    TRA doesn’t go on and on (and on) about tax policy, food, belly button lint, or a host of other issues we’d find equally strange to bring up here, but he does this with abortion, and it’s the WAY he argues it that makes a lot of us mad as well. It’s plain to see that he likes to paint pro-choicers as indifferent to life, and a pack of liars who can’t be trusted by anyone. He does more to villainize the pro-choice group than any religious site, and his rationale is highly flawed when cornered on his position.

    I’m not particularly sure why you’ve chosen to focus on me, but I’m beginning to think you’re a troll…especially from your own admittance that you have to modify someone else’s handle to “make a name” for yourself out of a sheer lack of creativity.

    Or are you No God Boy’s alter ego?

    Abortion by and large is only contested (with the exception of late-term abortions, which I find objectionable in most cases) because people equate a lump of cells with an actual human being, which it clearly isn’t. The issue of abortion isn’t about “protecting life” but rather of controlling women based upon a religious mandate.

  27. kate
    February 28th, 2006 @ 1:13 pm

    Ramen!

  28. Erik
    February 28th, 2006 @ 1:16 pm

    I have no problem with the RA posting about anything at all. It’s the RA’s blog.

    I also don’t have a problem with some emotional arguments. After all, one of the reasons I would argue that a moral person should not gratuitously insult someone else is that it is a deliberate evocation of a negative emotional reaction. But I generally agree that anecdotal evidence is not the strongest.

    I am a little surprised that the RA seems to think that emotional coercion of any kind is appropriate at or near the time of the event under scrutiny. The RA is, IIRC, a lawyer. One of the reasons for the rules against plaintiff’s lawyers from directly soliciting clients at or near the time of the event (i.e, “ambulance chasing”) is that the state bars generally don’t want people to make decisions when they are in an unstable emotional situation.

    What I am still unsure of is whether the RA would support a law that imposes criminal sanctions on someone having or performing an abortion.

  29. jahrta
    February 28th, 2006 @ 1:36 pm

    Erik: “What I am still unsure of is whether the RA would support a law that imposes criminal sanctions on someone having or performing an abortion.”

    My initial feeling on this would be yes, as he equates it unequivocally with murder and seeks to villainize those who defend it.

  30. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 1:52 pm

    It’s ok for TRA to be anti-abortion. That fine. If he does not want one, fine again. Argue against it all you want.

    Some people are not content to have their views and live by them. The have to force them on others.

    Some popular examples of things a loud few seek to deny the rest:

    Alcohol
    Lottery Tickets
    Firearms
    Abortions

    It’s one thing to have your opinion. Its quite another to truly suggest that people’s ability to chose should be taken away. I drink alcohol, I buy (on occasion) lottery tickets. I own firearms and my spouse and I (on occasion) have had abortions.

    Anyone who interferes with another’s liberty should be taken out and shot in the head.

  31. Erik
    February 28th, 2006 @ 2:02 pm

    jahrta,

    I’m not so sure, although I haven’t read everything the RA has said about abortion. There is a difference, of course, between being opposed to something and wanting to bring the force of the state to bear on the behavior.

  32. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 2:13 pm

    It’s one thing to set up rule for society that constrain my liberty in how I relate to others (property rights, speed limits, etc).

    It’s quite another to try and control what a man or woman does to their OWN BODY based on one’s moral convictions. It’s safe to say that you have NO interest there that needs to be taken into consideration.

    Thats outrageous!

    Which of the following should members of society run past the TRA morality scanner as well:

    Tattoos
    Body piercings
    Circumcision
    Menstration (remember, that egg can become a person all by itself thanks to parthenogenesis)
    Masturbation
    etc….

    Jehova’s witnesses are opposed to blood transfusions (and probably organ transplants etc). Does that mean that because this offends THEIR moral compass they should be able to reach out into society and disturb my behavior which is wholly unrelated to them? Given enough clout they would.

    The reality that these nuts like TRA seem to miss is that their morality, at least as it effects ones person, ends where their flesh does.

    Don’t believe in abotion? Don’t have one.

    Leave every one else alone.

  33. Mister Swill
    February 28th, 2006 @ 3:49 pm

    Yes, RA, I’ve read the story about Maribel, a.k.a. “Gabbi” before. Lemme see if I have it straight…

    Maribel was being pressured, especially by her hypocritical boyfriend, into getting an abortion. She went to several clinics seeking one, but she didn’t really want one. Still, she was succumbing to the pressure until Ashli came into the picture and showed her that she did have options.

    So Ashli’s actions are basically pro-choice. Rather than allowing this woman to be forced or coerced into something she didn’t want to do (in this case, have an abortion), she helped ensure that Maribel was able to make an informed decision based on her own wants and needs.

    So, no. I have no objection to Ashli’s actions, nor have I ever. And I don’t really have any objections to most of the stuff that YOU describe happening at crisis pregnancy centers.

    But come on, let’s not fool ourselves into believing that every case of a woman seeking an abortion is like Maribel’s. And let’s not fool ourselves into believing that all crisis pregnancy centers are ethical places concerned with appealing to women’s opinions. Remember our discussion about the New York law that says CPCs are not allowed to advertise themselves as abortion providers? Well, I recently found out about a technique alleged to be common to CPCs:

    Woman calls, asks for abortion. Receptionist says, sure, we’re busy, but let’s make an appointment for a couple of weeks in the future. Woman comes in, has exam, is subjected to anti-abortion propaganda. Woman says she still wants abortion. Clinic person says “unfortunately, the doctor had to leave on an emergency, but let’s make an appointment for next week” This continues until the pregnancy is to far along for the woman to legally have an abortion. Nobody’s mind has been changed, but woman is now legally compelled to carry her pregnancy.

    What’s your opinion on that? Anti-CPC propaganda? Would you support such behavior by an actual CPC? If it turns out that most, or many, or even a few CPCs use that technique, would you then support laws saying CPCs are not allowed to misrepresent themselves as abortion providers?

  34. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 4:13 pm

    Not every abortion is some troubled single girl, abused and neglected, that is lost and just in need of a little help.

    My spouse and I made a decision. We wanted one, we got one, and thank our lucky stars every day that the pro-choice crowd has kept the anti-abortion hypocrites at bay.

    We are THRILLED that the pregnancy is GONE FOREVER. It was an absolute good, and a decision we will NEVER REGRET.

  35. PhalsePhrophet
    February 28th, 2006 @ 5:58 pm

    Here is some rhetoric I’ll regurgitate again:
    Abortion is never going to go away. Rape, incest, malfunctioning birth control, and medical necessity will always be present somewhere in life.
    If anti-abortionists are really concerned about life, where are the voices on birth defects? 3.5 million children die every year from preventable birth defects including defects caused by STD’s, fetal alcohol syndrome, and drugs. What about the starving children dieing of hunger and related diseases? I say we care for and support the children who made it into the world already and leave it up to the women to decide for themselves whether to abort or not. It is their bodies that must sustain the process. I do not promote abortion (just the right to choose), I do not like the amount of abortions performed annually, I do not like the division caused by the issue, however, I do not believe all the voices are totally sincere about protecting life when children are dying from preventable causes every day and these same voices remain silent.

  36. Mister Swill
    February 28th, 2006 @ 6:00 pm

    You know, NGB, giving up concepts like God and the sanctity of life does not necessitate becoming a Social Darwinist.

    We humans are primarily emotional creatures, and our ability to reason tends to be at the service of what we feel. There may be no logical reason that human life is sacred, but most of us certainly feel it has some important value, at least among the lives of those closest to us. That is not a flaw or a defect, but simply the way we are.

    Things get complicated, of course, when we are compelled to search for the thick, distinct lines between human and non-human, life and non-life. Such lines do not exist. Based on your comments here and your comment on the RA post about Frank Jump, it seems that your solution to this problem is to forego the lines entirely and declare that since life can logically have no absolute meaning, we must not allow ourselves any emotional attachment to it. That might make sense if we had evolved from computers, but alas, we evolved from apes.

  37. PhalsePhrophet
    February 28th, 2006 @ 6:06 pm

    Today’s paper had an article by a columnist who wanted the abortion crowd to not go for the home run on abortion in South Dakota. He wanted them to take the small ball approach and get a few singles and drive the runners around as opposed to going for the fences. He thought that those going for the fences strike out a lot. While he wished them well, he wished they would do it differently. He wanted another approach. He commented about a popular pro-choice lady who crossed ranks and joined a Christian evangelical anti-abortion group. Their plan is to get laws passed that require abortion providers to fully inform their patients, including sonograms of the fetus. They feel that if the mother to be sees the picture, they will cancel the abortion.

  38. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 6:15 pm

    No, Mister, I simply accept the reality that, in a godless world/universe, man is not supposed to survive to the exclusion of all other species.

    The reality is that human life is no more sacred than fish life or bear life or bug life. The fact that mitigates against humans is that there are far far too many of them. Were there some 3+ billion 175 pound deer running around (or 1 billion brown bears) the calls to “cull the herd” and “manage the population” would be deafening. We would have year round hunting season until the numbers could be reduced to “sustainable levels”

    Abortion is no more murder than animals who eat their young or the young of others. Nature seeks balance and man, clearly, wants none of that.

    TRA and others accpet no such rules for humans. We are all sacred precious little gifts, loaded up with rights, feelings, potential and unimaginably rosy futures. Culling that herd, no matter what its impact on the planet is unthinkable. Every pregnancy must be born and the lives or the old extended until no longer technologically possible, no matter what the cost in resources.

    Nowhere else in nature is this practice condoned.

    TRA and others see none of the impacts of their “morality”, only a smiling baby with a great future. Whats worse, the religous see this as a short-term problem that need not be solved for surely soon we will all go to heaven in the rapture leaving this life and planet behind us.

    As a practical matter we MUST slow the worldwide birth rate and reduce the number of humans or most life on this planet is doomed.

    Abortion should be encouraged. Births should be discouraged in all but the most appropriate circumstances.

    Remember, there is no god to save us.

  39. SBW
    February 28th, 2006 @ 6:29 pm

    Nice post RA.

    I’ve met plenty of women that wanted abortions or were coerced into having them and regretted/felt bad about it for a long time afterward. I’ve never met a woman at her daughter or son’s high school graduation, or the wedding of that child who said, “Damn!! I should have got that abortion like my boyfriend wanted me to.”

    The constant shrill of atheists who claim that another atheist cannot be pro-life is annoying and has no basis in fact; same as feminists who claim that feminism is somehow antithetical to being pro-life. I was under the impression that atheism was simply a lack of belief in god or gods. Can someone correct my definition of atheism if I’m wrong?

  40. PHLAF
    February 28th, 2006 @ 6:44 pm

    I’ve met women with older children who’ve admitted to regretting having children at all. Admitting they regret not aborting is still too tabu in this society, but that doesn’t mean some women aren’t thinking it.

    Again, all this is anecdotal. The argument that abortion is bad because some women later regret it is saying that abortion is good because some women don’t.

    You need to come up with a better argument than this. That someone regrets a thing later doesn’t make that thing bad or wrong or evil. Regret on the part of some (a minority, actually) of the participants in that thing isn’t hard evidence of anything other than that some women didn’t think long enough about the choice they were making.

  41. SBW
    February 28th, 2006 @ 7:08 pm

    ///PHLAF said: Admitting they regret not aborting is still too tabu in this society, but that doesn’t mean some women aren’t thinking it. ////

    I agree, but I think, and I of course have no empirical evidence to prove this, that those women are few and far between compared to those that have second thoughts about their abortion.

    I’ve also met women that feel that their abortion was the best decision they ever made. I don’t think all women fall into one category after or before their abortions.

    ///Again, all this is anecdotal. The argument that abortion is bad because some women later regret it is saying that abortion is good because some women don’t.///

    My reasoning for being anti-abortion is much more developed than this. I do however think that if there are more women who regret their abortions than those that are glad they had them, this is something to think about.

    ///You need to come up with a better argument than this. That someone regrets a thing later doesn’t make that thing bad or wrong or evil. Regret on the part of some (a minority, actually) of the participants in that thing isn’t hard evidence of anything other than that some women didn’t think long enough about the choice they were making.///

    Many women rationalize their abortions after and before the fact. I had one friend tell me how long it took her to really get ver her abortion even though I don’t think she felt she made the wrong decision. And there are many women that felt like abortion was their only choice. Another thing to think about is that half of all women getting abortions are doing so to please other people, namely the childs father or their parents, or because they don’t believe they can take care of another child. Many women, if given all necessary resources and support from family and the child’s father would not choose abortion.

    Again, I don’t want to peg all women in one category. There are many women that have had numerous abortions and don’t regret a thing.

  42. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 7:21 pm

    Why are we so worried about whether or not these women regret their decisions?

    Why aren’t we trying to prevent them from having sex. Thats where it starts.

    Don’t have sex. You might regret the outcome – an abortion or an unwanted child.

    Once again, the nuts focus on the abotion.

    I wish like hell I had not drank so much in college and in fact had gone to class more.

    Thats no reason now to order all the bars closed.

    We live with our choices. Period. I don’t need your help.

  43. Lucy Muff
    February 28th, 2006 @ 7:40 pm

    Jesus be Lord, abortion be wrong
    which part of that are you not understanding?

  44. PHLAF
    February 28th, 2006 @ 7:50 pm

    Because the abortion issue has been so completely hijacked by the religious people that any talk of anything to do with human reproduction is obstructed by those who want women who have sex outside of a religious marriage to be punished somehow.

    I can’t understand how people can be so selfish and so hate women that they’d refuse contraception in the same breath they’d refuse abortion. That’s pretty twisted. But not all that surprising, given the faction of the population you’re dealing with.

    I wish these extremists would pool their funds and purchase some real estate and start their own country. Weren’t they all going to move to South Carolina and then secede from the Union at one point? I was kinda hoping they would because then we could declare war on them and get rid of them all in one fell swoop. I guess they were all talk and no action, though. Too bad…

  45. SBW
    February 28th, 2006 @ 8:01 pm

    ///The No God Boy said: Why are we so worried about whether or not these women regret their decisions?///

    Believe it or not, there are still people left that don’t just care about ourselves. Some people would actually like to lead altruistic lives.

    ///Once again, the nuts focus on the abotion.///

    All I can is that we have to pick and choose our battles. Planned Parenthood is doing their best to make sure every man, woman, and child over the age of 12 is on birth control.

  46. The No God Boy
    February 28th, 2006 @ 10:32 pm

    “Altruistic” is often another term for busy-body. Far too many people would love to “save” me from my beer, lottery tickets, guns, barbeque grill, atheistic lifestyle….. on and on.

    The reality is that most people want to be left alone (hence freedom).

    The truth is that I an my spouse made the decision a long time ago that our bodies would do as we decide. If we unexpectedly wind up pregnant we would probably abort as it is the wrong time in life for us. If the pro-lifers want to “save” the cells then can come get the little bastard and gestate it themselves.

  47. Andrew
    February 28th, 2006 @ 11:04 pm

    SBW wrote: “Another thing to think about is that half of all women getting abortions are doing so to please other people, namely the childs father or their parents, or because they don’t believe they can take care of another child. Many women, if given all necessary resources and support from family and the child’s father would not choose abortion.”

    Two out of three statistics are completely made up.

    But let’s put that aside and assume your 50% number is right. I can rephrase your point this way: “about half of all women getting abortions are doing so because, after considering the impact on their husband/boyfriend and family, and their ability to provide for a child, decide it’s not the right time for them to have a child.” Would it really be better if women only had abortions based purely on their self-interest?

    SBW also wrote: “The constant shrill of atheists who claim that another atheist cannot be pro-life is annoying and has no basis in fact; same as feminists who claim that feminism is somehow antithetical to being pro-life.”

    Who is claiming that an atheist _can’t_ be pro-life? I have no problem with RA being pro-life and an atheist. I think there are decent non-theist arguments for the pro-life position. I also have no “problem” with RA posting pro-life material on this blog, in the sense that it’s his blog and he can do with it what he likes. What disappoints me is the vacuousness of RA’s abortion posts — he simply repeats the same tired old point over and over again.

    Admittedly, many of RA’s atheism posts aren’t exactly brilliant exercises in logic, either, but they have the merit of being funny.

  48. SBW
    February 28th, 2006 @ 11:45 pm

    ////The No God Boy said: “Altruistic” is often another term for busy-body. Far too many people would love to “save” me from my beer, lottery tickets, guns, barbeque grill, atheistic lifestyle….. on and on.///

    “Saving” someone sounds religious to me. I don’t want to save anyone from anything. I want to help those that need/want/ask for my help. If they don’t want it I don’t try to force it on them.

    ///The reality is that most people want to be left alone (hence freedom).///

    Humans are social animals and although we like being alone at times we also desire contact with other people. I’ve never heard of anyone that would like to be alone forever. Seeing as how your married, I think you can understand that being alone is not the way that the vast majority of people want to spend their lives.

  49. SBW
    March 1st, 2006 @ 12:00 am

    ///Andrew said: Would it really be better if women only had abortions based purely on their self-interest?///

    Yes and no. A woman has to make decisions based on her own self-interest. The question is,”If a woman is making a decision because other people have made other options unavailable to her is she really making a decision based on her self-interest or is she being coerced by forces beyond her control?”. Are you even making a decison in the truest sense of the words if you only feel you have one option?

    //Who is claiming that an atheist _can’t_ be pro-life?///

    Several of the posters above have intimated that being an atheist in contradictory to being pro-life. I didn’t mean that you personally were saying it.

  50. The No God Boy
    March 1st, 2006 @ 12:39 am

    Ok-

    1. “Saving” someone sounds religious to me. I don’t want to save anyone from anything. I want to help those that need/want/ask for my help. If they don’t want it I don’t try to force it on them.”

    Thats good. TRA and others however are different. Let me give you one example. Because of THEIR view of morality most vegan animal-righters would, if they could, deny me access to meat. The oppose it, decide the animals suffer, that eating meat is immoral and POOF….there goes my steak. They’ll tell themselves I’ll be happier and healthier once I realize the eco-benefits of veggie-burgers and soy milk. Dosen’t matter what I want. They know better for me.

    2. Humans are social animals and although we like being alone at times we also desire contact with other people. I’ve never heard of anyone that would like to be alone forever. Seeing as how your married, I think you can understand that being alone is not the way that the vast majority of people want to spend their lives.

    I married my wife for companionship, not control. Most people want the society of others, but with limits. No one wants others views foisted on them. I met a woman once who told me guns are “inherently evil”. She would have gotten rid of all of them if she could have.

    Such a person I have no use for. They lay in bed at night and worry about which of my possessions I should be allowed to keep.

  51. hermesten
    March 1st, 2006 @ 11:25 am

    I thought I’d found THE atheist blog. But as it becomes more about abortion and less about atheism I find my interest waning. I used to look forward to what I’d find, now I’m down to dropping by every few days to see if there is something posted that isn’t about abortion. Oh well, I guess nothing good ever lasts.

    I do appreciate the RA for his wide open and uncensored forum. But while I respect a man that doesn’t ban people or ideas from his own controlled space, when he certainly could, and so many others do –that doesn’t make all the abortion talk any less boring.

    However, I guess the same thing is true of just about any blog. Even when the discussion is on topic, how many times do you have to see the same well-worn theistic cliches and trite “arguments,” repeated ad infinitum by every new Godidiot posting here, before that too gets boring? When is the last time a Bible Beater showed up here and said something any atheist over thirty hasn’t heard at least 100 times already? Has it ever happened?

  52. Bruce
    March 1st, 2006 @ 1:42 pm

    Maribel was under pressure to abort by her family and boyfriend

    Pressuring someone into having an abortion isn’t pro-choice and doesn’t reflect the pro-choice movement at all.

    Last December I posted about a pro-abortion group which runs an “underground railroad”

    Pro-abortion? So this group is actively recruiting pregnant women and coercing them to have abortions? Give me a break. You can use the term pro-abortion all you want to try and villify pro-choicers, but being pro-abortion is like being pro-triple-bypass or pro-chemotherapy. Abortion is there for women who want one of their own free will, just like any other medical procedure.

    Giving a woman information on abortion and helping her obtain an abortion after she has decided she wants one is not coercion. You are beginning to sound like the Christian wackos who equate teaching kids about birth control and sex as encouraging kids to have sex.

  53. The No God Boy
    March 1st, 2006 @ 2:19 pm

    Look,

    The Anti-choice crowd needs a villian. They need an evil to fight or their cause just runs out of gas. If they were to announce they were against personal choice they would be ignored.

    So, they come up with their abortion “facts”:

    – Women are being forced and coerced.
    – Women greatly regret it later
    – Women suffer severe psychological damage
    – Its murder
    – The subject of the abortion was going to be the next Ghandi
    – Its only desperate women that have them

    What bullshit. I know plenty of women who had made the CHOICE to terminate a pregnancy and they are happy as clams.

    If ya don’t believe in it, don’t get one. Steak. Beer. Lottery tickets. Abortions.

    Leave me my choices.

  54. Mister Swill
    March 1st, 2006 @ 2:46 pm

    Not to keep dogging No God Boy, but I have the strangest hankering that I might know who his favorite author is…

  55. ProveIt
    March 1st, 2006 @ 2:55 pm

    jahrta said:
    Nodog boy:
    1.) Why do you feel the need to hijack another poster’s handle and turn it into your own? Do you lack the creativity to make something unique?

    I find this rather amusing myself… Dog would of course stand for Dogma… no? Jahrta is just jealous cause wtf is jahrta… really.

    As far as RA being a raving pro-lifer I’m not totally conviced. Could it be that he enjoys playing devils (sic) advocate so he incessently feels the need to post this bs? I come to the main page very rarely. Why is it that ever time I happen out here there is another abortion rant??? Have we run out of thought provoking ideas? Isn’t there a new religious book out that we could review (not that I know how to read)? Seriously, if I were interested in a man’s point of view on the subject of abortion… Do you see me telling you when you should and shouldn’t have your prostate removed? Until you would like to provide me the right to chose when and which invasive procedure you will be receiving why not let me decide wtf to do with my own body. The seed planted was yours?? Cum in your hand next time… as soon as it enters me it’s mine. I don’t see you wanting it back (or claiming rights to it) when the wet spot is on my side of the bed.

    Just a question… If the premise of your idea here, is that by having a positive outcome to this unfortunant pregnancy truly proves that abortion is an unnecessary part of life…

    Wouldn’t the fact that my life has been nothing but shit and uncertainty prove your point wrong? Maybe I could have been spared had my mother had an abortion. Glad she didn’t cause I live for the mysteries of life… Just the same… It coulda gone either way and I wouldn’t have given a rats ass. My mother on the other hand; had she not been ready for me to come along I would have rather she spared my life and grown up until she was ready to have children.

    Just me maybe… But I see so many dirty little children. They haven’t had bathes, you wonder when the last time they ate anything but a candy bar was, why they are drinking a full can of soda when they are barely big enough to hold the can without dropping it, at 11 oclock they are at the corner store with their mother who is buying a carton of basic 100’s, a roll of tp and a pregnancy test -ratty hair pulled up into the ponytail on the side of her head… Yeah, you’ve seen her. You think those childrens lives are enriched? By the time they are 6 they know how to get around the eviction laws, which outlets throw out the best discards (and what day to show up), how to apply for food stamps (which line or clerk is the quickest), and which lunch lady has the softest heart at school.

    But I suppose you’re correct. Bring all the babies into the world that you can pass through a loose snatch. The more the merrier. I love the fact that my life, single with no children at the age of 27, not only pays for your filthy piece of shit, can’t hold a job, welfare seeking ass but also suffers for it. My only delema being should I pop out some titty sucking rugrat so that I would qualify enough for housing that I could afford to go back to school and receive discounts up the ass? Nahhh… I’ll save the anal for those better quailfied. At least there’s a chance I might at least enjoy that…

  56. JUST_ANTOHER_PRIMATE
    March 1st, 2006 @ 3:02 pm

    And with an article with a headline like this (just in at MSNBC) …

    Mississippi advances bill to ban most abortions
    No exceptions would be made in cases of rape and incest

    HA …. news to make the Raving Atheist and the Christian “Right” jump for joy.

  57. qedpro
    March 1st, 2006 @ 3:51 pm

    RA.
    maybe you could just change your site to the raving anti-abortionist and stop pretending that this is a site that
    discussing “How Religious Devotion Trivializes American Law and Politics”

    that way it would be clear and all us atheists can go to another site and discuss ad nauseum how religion is taking away our rights.

  58. Viole
    March 1st, 2006 @ 4:20 pm

    You know, I was going to suggest that he change to name to ‘The Unfortunately Unaborted Incoherent Antichoicer.’ It has a nice right to it, and plenty of alliteration.

  59. BN
    March 1st, 2006 @ 4:48 pm

    Raving Atheist, doesn’t it bother you that Ashli rationalizes using the following text from the linked website you provided?:

    “In her darkest moments Gabbi turned to God for strength, because He was all she had left. When her mother was telling her to abort, one recurring theme was that sometimes you have to disobey your parents in order to obey your Father (God).”

    You think God doesn’t want you to get abortions and that’s why it’s wrong, or are just okay with people who use this reasoning? The same train of thought leads people to comdemn homosexuality as well.

    From an atheist point of view, this tale took a sour turn after learning that decisions were based on religious motivations and therefore shaky judgment.

  60. john
    March 2nd, 2006 @ 4:50 am

    Surely the argument is not a “right and wrong” one. It’s about choice. Choice is a very basic kind of freedom. Where would we be without it?
    The video is irrelevant. It misses the point. Freedom to choose is the point – and She was able to choose. It sounds as though it turned out ok for her but for many others it may not, but she was able to make a choice.

  61. Thorngod
    March 2nd, 2006 @ 11:53 am

    The production of every human has implications far beyond assumptions of intrinsic value, personal potential or divine spitit in the particular individual. Most will produce others, and they still others, and the thoughtful soul will consider the consequences of his or her selfish nature-driven act. From your single production of a darling adorable baby will in all probability eminate a whole dynasty of humans, many of whom will be miserable wretches, many of whom will inflict misery on others, and very few of which will really contribute meaningfully to needs of their suffering fellows. There are now six times as many miserable people on Earth as there was just two hundred years back. The 20th Century was the most horrendous period of wholesale slaughter in the history of man. In all liklihood, there are even greater entertainments just ahead. So lay on, and keep multiplying, you good and faithful servants. The more victims, the greater glory!

  62. Lucy Muff
    March 2nd, 2006 @ 6:25 pm

    I have been told lotsa of my church frend to come hear and leasrn of the abortion clerver argument mr A is saying. They agree that in him heart he probably do know loveo Jesus and is cvlvere man to use phony atheist site to edukate atheoist in ways of murders to baby that is wrong because they no listen when they here this from Christian because they is all to prejoodiced against Church. It be best trick ever by Mr A.

  63. JUST_ANTOHER_PRIMATE
    March 6th, 2006 @ 2:02 pm

    YAY and a hip hip hooray!!!!!

    RA can now celebrate! The headline is no longer that a bill has been sponsered but rather that a bill has been passed !!!

    “South Dakota bans nearly all abortions. The bill would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman’s life. It would make NO EXCEPTION IN CASES OF RAPE OR INCEST”

  64. Andrew
    March 8th, 2006 @ 3:22 pm

    Ashli is still a bully, a bigot, and a fucking moron.

  65. mbuel76
    March 9th, 2006 @ 5:43 pm

    John,

    Killing humans is about choice? How do you think they would feel about that?

    thankfully we can find out:

    http://members.tripod.com/~joseromia/survivors.html

    “Gianna Jessen
    On April 6, 1977, Gianna’s 17 year old birthmother (named Tina) sought a saline abortion at seven months pregnant. Saline abortions involve injecting a caustic saline solution into the amniotic fluid, which (normally) causes the fetus to be scalded to death and then delivered dead. In this case, however, things didn’t go according to plan. In the early hours of April 7th, Tina went into labor and gave birth to a living baby girl, Gianna. Fortunately for Gianna, she was born before the abortionist had arrived at the clinic for the day. As a result, instead of being killed at birth by the abortionist, she was transported to a hospital. She was severely injured by the abortion attempt, requiring a three month stay in the hospital, but she survived to be placed in a foster family specializing in high risk babies.

    As a result of injuries from the abortion, Gianna was diagnosed with cerebral palsy. Doctors believed she would never be able to sit up, let alone walk. She surpassed all expectations. Today she is able to run, dance, and walk…and has even taken up rock climbing. She has also become a tireless advocate for the pro-life cause.

    Many would expect Gianna to be bitter or angry about the fact her birthmother tried to abort her, especially at such a late point in the pregnancy. However, Gianna does not have any hatred towards her birthmother. She has forgiven her mother for the traumatic circumstances of her birth and treats the post-abortion women who hear her speak with compassion.

    On April 22, 1996, Gianna testified before the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee on the issue of abortion. Sadly, out of 13 members of the subcommittee, only 2 were willing to listen to her testimony; abortion supporters boycotted the meeting. ”

    it’s funny how much the pro-abortion crowd sounds more like raving lunatics than the pro-life crowd. I was in a debate earlier today where one pro-choicer was saying that we are obligated to kill babies in the womb because there may be a chance that, that baby would become a killer!

    It’s funny how nazi-esque it all is.

    here’s some facts:

    1) Sexual intercourse is pre-meditated. We know that babies are produced from it, we know ways to prevent babies from being produced from it.

    2) If you FAIL to act in ways that prevent the growth of said baby, that baby is your responsibility, you’ve created a life and now you need to deal with it. If you decide to abort… that’s akin to pre-meditated murder. You are deciding that you can’t deal with the hardships of parenthood.

    No god boy,

    “What bullshit. I know plenty of women who had made the CHOICE to terminate a pregnancy and they are happy as clams.”

    That’s because they aren’t told the truth of the matter. They are told bullshit like;

    “it’s just a clump of cells it can’t even feel” – Unless it’s within the first week it’s not just a clump of cells, they are throwing away ARMS, legs and other body parts. That’s what a fetus consists of.

    “It can’t reason!” – Can a baby outside of the womb? CAN YOU? Or do you just continue to spout the same tired shit about why it’s good to kill babies?

  66. Thorngod
    March 10th, 2006 @ 10:22 am

    It’s certainly true, mbuel76, that nature has us by the balls, in more subtle ways than we can imagine (though researchers in anthropology and neurobiology are constantly revealing new and fascinating facts). Emotion is a necessary component of animal existence, but we humans, with our exponentially increased capacity to foul our own nest, overpopulate ourselves, and to starve and bomb ourselves back to the stone age, need to give our intelligence precedence over our more primitive emotions.
    I suggest you might benefit–that humanity might benefit–if you would try hard to weigh the value of a million insensate fetuses against the anguish most of them will likely endure if they are introduced as victims into this increasingly suffering world

  67. jahrta
    March 21st, 2006 @ 4:19 pm

    Prove It said:

    “jahrta said:
    Nodog boy:
    1.) Why do you feel the need to hijack another poster’s handle and turn it into your own? Do you lack the creativity to make something unique?

    I find this rather amusing myself… Dog would of course stand for Dogma… no? Jahrta is just jealous cause wtf is jahrta… really.”

    Right – not sure why I’m even bothering with this, but here goes anyway. If Dog implies dogma, as you assume it does, why would a theist embrace the title? Given his/her comments, No Dog Boy is either a theist or a troll – not an atheist.

    My name comes from a novel i’m writing – a fantasy / sci-fi about a new breed of angel called a Jah’rta. Just out of curiosity though, given the wide range of ethnicities and nationalities who post here, why would you assume it wasn’t my name?

  68. Brian
    March 23rd, 2006 @ 3:03 pm

    Sometimes a picture really IS worth 1,000 words.

    Warning: Picture may be offensive to some viewers who’d rather not deal with what abortion does and rely on euphemisms such as “clump of cells”.

    And no, it isn’t one of those photorealistic pictures of an aborted fetus, it is a recently created cartoon that sums everything up quite nicely. It’ll still shock your system of course, I’ve been against abortion for years and I still was saddened by it.

    http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4843/1885/1600/mychoice.jpg

  69. Priceless : The Raving Atheist
    December 12th, 2008 @ 5:06 pm

    […] and emotional support they need to be joyous. And then, perhaps, she will realize what is truly priceless. Category: […]

  70. Priceless (Updated) | Unorthodox Religion Pregnancy
    December 16th, 2008 @ 8:18 am

    […] and emotional support they need to be joyous. And then, perhaps, she will realize what is truly priceless. Share and […]

  • Basic Assumptions

    First, there is a God.

    Continue Reading...

  • Search

  • Quote of the Day

    • Fifty Random Links

      See them all on the links page.

      • No Blogroll Links