Best “Choice” A Woman Can Make Is To Die For Her Fetus
If a woman refuses chemotherapy that would save her life in order to
not endanger her pregnancy is that a choice to be celebrated? For the conservative website “Hot Air” the answer is a resounding yes.
When diagnosed with cancer and pregnant, Stacy Crimm faced a series of
choices. She could terminate the pregnancy and undergo chemotherapy,
treat the cancer and, presuming a positive outcome, try for another
pregnancy. Or, she could refuse treatment in an attempt to save her
developing fetus.
Crimm chose the later, dying three days after giving birth to a
significantly premature infant. And the anti-choice supporters could not
be more proud. They romanticize Crimm’s physical suffering, calling it
“unimaginable” and point to Crimm as a hopeful example to help all
mothers see “nothing is worth the sacrifice of their own child.”
Not surprising though, these anti-choice supporters are silent on the
fate of Crimm’s premature infant now. The child is not being raised by
her mother, and who knows what kind of medical complications she faces
as a result of her mother’s decision.
Furthermore, the anti-choice crowd is silent on the fact that Crimm
is lucky that she had a choice to make. Abortion was an option–not one
that Crimm chose to take–but an option nonetheless. And the fact that
the anti-choice crowd refuses to acknowledge that key fact while
simultaneously holding up Crimm as a martyr for her choice shows just
how little regard this “life” movement has for actual life.
Read More: http://www.care2.com/causes/best-choice-a-woman-ca...

















However, today those who defend this dogma don't know why it is they are defending it, and certainly aren't intelligent enough to figure out that, in a world of 7 billion people, this dogma is no longer important enough to over-ride other concerns.
Who's the one who brings out pictures of coat hangers when Roe V Wade is challenged?
Tell that to this guy.
WRONG!
Your Hero.
Do you even give a damn about the 145,000 children that are waiting in foster care this instant that are waiting for loving family that will never see any family life of their own?
Particularly when you have no respect for women and their quality of life and personal circumstances. Women make up the majority of those living under the poverty level, until they have control over their reproduction that will always remain that way. they will remain as slaves to their bodies.
"Particularly when you have no respect for women and their quality of life and personal circumstances."
First of all, that's not even a sentence. Second, you are projecting what you believe I feel about women when you know no such thing. Again, you are playing psychological games to justify your bankrupt position.
Christians all over the planet accept that position. Their god commanded genocide, infanticide and the slaughter of the unborn and that is completely acceptable to them. The god of the bible is not pro-life on any level.
I and many life me are very much in favor of treating women and their existing families with as much consideration and humanity as possible. They are already here on this planet and need to be protected and nurtured and helped to become as productive as possible to be able to achieve their goals. They should not be oppressed and given any more burdens to keep them impoverished or enslaved by debt or finances or stress. They need as much encouragement and help by society as possible.
People like you have no concern for those who are already living and the live they have to deal with every single day. You abandon the image of the fetus the instant it is born and you also have no ongoing concern for the children in foster care either. That is classic hypocrisy, you never see the whole picture.