Mariah Walton was born with a birth defect that could have been fixed rather easily, if her parents had only allowed it (if there’s an ad in the video, it’s worth waiting through it):
I take parents’ rights very seriously, but how many examples of children being harmed by their parents’ belief in faith healing do we need before we step in? And is there any point at which faith healers will acknowledge that they were wrong? Or is it like prayer, where no response simply means the request wasn’t according to God’s will, or the person’s faith wasn’t strong enough? Do they never stop to wonder why life expectancy was so low back when virtually everyone had to rely on faith and superstition to heal the sick?
Finding Truth 
Also, and I only ask because you are MENSA material and all that, but it took four times for you to realize what was making those babies?!?
LikeLike
There are also countless stories like this one:
https://doctorly.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/black-and-white-and-blurry-all-over/
LikeLike
I just want to say that Lauren makes some very good points, I cant help but comment on the part about Rape, incest, life of the mother, etc…
These are all, in my mind, reasons behind a decision to abort that I would never argue with, however, if everyone agreed that exceptions should made made for each of those cases, that wouldn’t settle the issue. We use those as examples why abortion should be a choice, because they’re sensible, but then usually want to extend that choice for much less sensible reasons.
Again, I wont throw any stones, but I can’t help but see a bit of hypocrisy (lack of a better word).
Ruth mentioned the contradiction between those who believe they value life so much that they think all abortion is wrong, but who wont give their children adequate health care – I see that point, but just think that the inconstancy may work both ways – “there are those who care some much about the lives of convicted murderers and rapists, but think that aborting a child is right there with getting a hair cut.”
And again, I’m not trying to institute set rules and regulations. And I have doubt at all that women have more of a burden when it comes children – but i didn’t set it up that way, and I’d hope that however it affected me personally wouldn’t change an objective outlook on it. Now, whether or not I adhere to my own personal moral code is my business.
But so far, I’m not sure my conscience would be pure if I took part in an abortion other than to protect the life (opposed to death) of the mother , but I believe my conscience would be clean if I killed a person for specific reasons.
LikeLike
have no doubt… sorry
LikeLike
EXCELLENT information, Lauren! You brought out points that I instinctively “knew,” but hadn’t really thought about.
The thing that gets me in these type of conversations is that it’s frequently the MAN who is against abortion — the one who has little to no stake in the matter from a physical standpoint.
BTW, sometime back I wrote a post about a woman who killed six of her newborn babies immediately after they were born. She either strangled or suffocated them, wrapped their bodies in a towel or a shirt, put them in plastic bags, and then packed them inside boxes in the garage of her home.
While many are adamantly against abortion, in a case like this, wouldn’t it have been better if she had ended the life of the fetuses — which are arguably human — than waiting to kill what most certainly could not have been mistaken in any way, shape, or form as being HUMAN babies?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nan,
We’re often so focused on life of the mother as an exception that we forget the quality of that life and the psychological and mental health of the woman involved.
LikeLike
I think there are exceptions, but also once excepts are made, they can keep being made and for pretty much anything.
Why not kill her new born babies? They depended on her. They were hers. Who knows how much suffering she spared them from. If only she had terminated their lives earlier.
All that’s fine, except now we wont listen to any exception for a person who refuses medical treatments to their children for spiritual reasons, who also care for them to the utmost in every other way. It’s usually those who aren’t spiritual or religious minded who criticize those parents. It’s tough choice, why not let them make it?
Think about the mental and emotional struggles the parents would endure by believing they went against their god and secured a place for them and their children in hell? It’s a lot to live with. Had they aborted their children, there’d be no issue at all.
Both are tough. I guess I decided I don’t care enough to judge either. Abort your kids, don’t abort them. Take your kids to the doctor or dont. I guess I just dont want to be told what to do.
LikeLike
While I agree that a reason outside the usual rape, incest, life of mother might not be “sensible reasons” for me, to say that for someone else feels wrong. How can I decide for someone else what a sensible reason should be? What about a young, 13 year old girl, who had a rough few years as kid, and then was brought up by a grandmother that was very religious, and didn’t believe in educating the girl about safe sexual practices beyond abstinence only. The young girl feels emotionally neglected in life, and unfortunately she reaches out to another young guy her age to physically and emotionally connect because there are several things missing in her development. As she’s turning 14 she gets pregnant and has a baby this past January. Is it sensible for her to carry a pregnancy to full term? Especially since her body isn’t fully able to support another being? How will her pelvis recover since it’s full maturity isn’t reached until somewhere around 16 years old? Is it sensible for her to be a mother that young? Or for her grandmother to have to care for the newborn? It wasn’t rape, or incest, just two kids barely into puberty, no proper sex education, lack of supervision, 5-10 minutes, one egg, one sperm…but what a huge life consequence.
These may be less common examples, but my point is what may be sensible to me may not be to another. And like you said, I too don’t feel comfortable regulating that.
And as Nan and Ruth said there are many other factors to take into account besides the actual life of the mother. The quality of that life, the ability or position she may be in at that time, the situation that newborn is brought into, the quality of the newborn’s life long term. Will it continue the destructive cycle of the previous generation? That’s quite a sentence to place on someone. Really it’s placing big consequences on more than just one person, many people are affected. And I agree with Nan, and probably most people really, that it seems less horrific if those six babies had died before birth rather than after. How tragic!
LikeLike
I’ve never heard equating an abortion with getting haircut. I feel confident saying that most women who get them put more thought into it, and realize it’s more permanent than a new style.
LikeLike
lol, well I guess I’ve never heard anyone equate an abortion to hair cut either…. I just mean that when they say, “can’t tell a woman what to do with her own body” is a bad excuse. I think they’re trying to make it sound insignificant and small.
Because if a woman gets a hair cut or cuts her nails, no one cares or should care.
If a woman tried to kill herself or cut herself and otherwise harm her body, no one steps in support with “can’t tell a woman what to do with her own body.” Instead, i think most people rightly see a big issue and think she needs help.
Which of those is abortion most like?
I just think it’s a dismissive and poor excuse, whether or not I can agree that there should be a choice.
LikeLike
and yes, there are many reasons to get an abortion, some I see and some I dont.
In that some token, should be stand in judgement of the utterly religious who refuse medical treatments to their own children out of love?
I’d call it ignorant love, but still love.
Can we condemn one but condone the other?
That’s really my only question and point?
LikeLike
But in my experience we do give exceptions to those that refuse medical treatment for their children. We have parents that are Mormon that come in and sign refusal of care consents regarding blood products before the infant is born. Those parents have their rights to make those decisions. So do those that don’t immunize. Seems crazy to me, but they have that choice. As long as it doesn’t interfere with my rights I think the area is kind of gray. It just seems unfair when those young babies and children like the one in the original post don’t/can’t have a voice yet, so they have to rely only on the voice of deluded parents.
And would the parents be held by their god as being responsible if the state stepped in and enforced the medical care they were so against? Couldn’t they see that it wasn’t their choice therefore they shouldn’t face consequences?
LikeLike
sure, but in this blog article we’re discussing whether they should. I think most of us feel like they’re crazy and the kid’s health should trump their religions…
But the majority of us also seem to be willing to take a different approach when it comes to an unborn child’s health.
I guess I want to be sure I’m not basing my opinion off of emotional arguments similar to the ones I’ve heard, and once made myself, in defense of or support in religion.
LikeLike
I don’t see them as all that similar. We know that medicine works, and we know that lack of treatment is dangerous.
Abortion is different, because even though we know an abortion will kill the fetus, we also have the rights of the mother concerning her own body.
LikeLike
“And would the parents be held by their god as being responsible if the state stepped in and enforced the medical care they were so against? Couldn’t they see that it wasn’t their choice therefore they shouldn’t face consequences?” – lauren
who knows, depends on their religion I guess.
LikeLike
“Abortion is different, because even though we know an abortion will kill the fetus, we also have the rights of the mother concerning her own body.” _ nate
well yeah, but then there’s the parents rights to raise their children as they see fit and their right to their religion.
If we can forego any potential rights of a human life because it;s unborn, why couldnt do the same to child who’s still under the oversight of its parents?
LikeLike
If we can forego any potential rights of a human life because it;s unborn, why couldnt do the same to child who’s still under the oversight of its parents?
I can understand a person having objections to abortion. Let’s get that out there. However, I think there’s a world of difference between “potential rights” and actual rights. In most cases abortion is only performed before the fetus is viable.
I’m not trying to get you to change your mind about abortion, William, but can you honestly say there is no difference between a fetus which cannot survive outside it’s womb and the girl in this video(or even a newborn baby, for that matter)?
LikeLike
no, I’m with you.
Sure there’s a difference, but i am sure why i think so.Is there an actual shift in value, or is it only perceived because it’s tucked away, with an identity that’s harder to see?
But even when we talk about rights, I’m somewhat confused. Are we meaning legal and constitutional rights, or some higher and natural order of rights that each person is endowed with just because?
But i do see a difference. I’m just not sure it’s a distinct as we’d like. Again, I wouldn’t fight over this or verbally or physically abuse anyone over it. I understand there’s different reasons for it, and I wouldnt scold any one for making the choice.
I do not think a lot of the excuses given for are good ones, but then, what i think doesnt really matter.
again, i’m just talking through my own thoughts.
LikeLike
I’m talking strictly about legal constitutional rights.
And, again, I’m not talking about value. I’m talking about empathy. Empathy for a child who faced a lifetime of suffering because her parents were so damned sure that they were right. Perhaps if the state had stepped in it would have been a burden off the mind of those parents. They could have kept their sacred cow and their child could have a better quality of life.
LikeLike
She also had two miscarriages during those 10 years. She was a walking baby factory. With our last daughter, she went in at four in the afternoon, and by six, she and I were having pizza at a restaurant.
LikeLike
I can get down with that. And that’s how I see it personally.
But then I guess personally, it what i would assume to be most rape cases, I think the same would be true too though. Find someone other way of caring for the life besides terminating it.
LikeLike
Intellect and trust don’t always go hand in hand – I truly believed that she was taking her pills.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You have a point….emotions usually do a number on intellect.
LikeLike
Are you saying that a woman who is raped should carry the child to term and find some other way to take care of the child? So, no empathy for the woman? Just an unborn fetus that wouldn’t know the difference? That’s the point. Once a fetus reaches a point of viability it does know pain, it does know the difference.
LikeLike
I sent my last comment too early by mistake – sorry.
In response to Ruth’s comment about constitutional rights and empathy, I personally agree.
But I also have empathy for a life that wont get to have a name, or be hugged by its own mother. One who cant defend itself and wont have a chance to experience any part of life outside of the womb.
My empathy doesn’t make right or wrong.
and laws can be just or unjust. I guess i’m more interested in what is truly just and what is truly good sort of thing. But even with constitutional rights, children under a parent’s care don’t have the same full rights as the adult caregivers.
I guess I’m talking what should be if a utopia were real.
LikeLike