A Vaccination for Michael

[nyj]

I posted this one awhile back (a long long time ago) but felt it was good enough to be re-posted. I found it in the July 2001 copy of Birth Writer, the magazine of Birth Choice a pro-life organization found in Oklahoma. They said that they themselves came across this article in a magazine, which in turn took it from a church bulletin in Texas. Since there is no copyright on this article, I have presented it here again.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dear Mom,

Gosh, can you believe it's 2023 already? I'm still writing "22" on nearly everything. Seems like just yesterday I was sitting in first grade celebrating the new millennium. I know we haven't really chatted since Christmas. Sorry. Anyway, I have some difficult news, and I really did not want to call and talk face-to-face. Ted's had a promotion and I should be up for a hefty raise this year if I can keep up those crazy hours. Yes, we're still struggling with the bills. Michael's been "okay" at Kindergarten although he complains about going. But then, he wasn't happy about daycare either, so what can I do? He's been a real problem, Mom. He's a good kid, but quite honestly, he's an unfair burden in our lives at this time. Ted and I have talked this through and through and finally made a choice. Plenty of other families have made it and are much better off as a result. Our pastor is supportive and says hard decisions are necessary. The family is a "system" and the demands of one member shouldn't be allowed to ruin the whole.

He told us to be prayerful, consider all the factors, and do what is right to make the family work.

He says that even though he wouldn't probably do it himself, the decision is really ours. He was kind enough to refer us to a children's clinic near here, so at least that part's easy.

I'm not an uncaring mother. I do feel sorry for the little guy. I think he heard Ted and me talking about "it" the other night. I turned around and saw him standing at the bottom step in his PJ's with the little bear you gave him under his arm and his eyes sort of welling up. Mom, the way he looked at me just about broke my heart. But I honestly believe this is better for Michael too. It's not fair to force him to live in a family that can't give him the time and attention he deserves. And please don't give me the kind of grief Grandma gave you over your abortions. It is the same thing, you know. We've told him he's just going in for a vaccination. Anyway, they say it is painless. I guess it's just as well you haven't seen that much of him.

Love to you and Dad,

Jane.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Pray for an end to abortion.

 

[ZooMom]

Oh. God.

Christ have mercy.

 

[LilyLamb]

that was chilling ....

Christ have mercy indeed





\

 

[Kotton]

Words cannot say what feeling that gives.

Kotton  

 

[seebs]

On the one hand, it's a powerfully written piece.

On the other, it's an astoundingly blatant abuse of the slippery slope argument.

 

[jukesk9]

I sure would love to see that read on national tv during a presidential election year. Lord have mercy.

 

[Miss Shelby]

I remember reading this on your website a long time ago.. I thought it was so good. (at getting the point across)

Michelle

 

[nyj]

Today at 09:12 PM Miss Shelby said this in Post #7 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=645461#post645461)

I remember reading this on your website a long time ago.. I thought it was so good. (at getting the point across)

Michelle

Thanks, I'm about to blog it.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Today at 07:26 PM seebs said this in Post #5 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=645244#post645244)

On the one hand, it's a powerfully written piece.

On the other, it's an astoundingly blatant abuse of the slippery slope argument.

It isn't that far out there. I have seen people justify abortion by arguing that infants aren't persons because they are still developing their higher brain functions (or something like that. It's been awhile and I didn't spend much time reading it after I realized what they were saying). Once one allows other considerations to infringe on the sanctity of human life, drawing a line becomes difficult if not impossible.

 

[nyj]

Today at 09:39 PM fragmentsofdreams said this in Post #9 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=645522#post645522)

It isn't that far out there. I have seen people justify abortion by arguing that infants aren't persons because they are still developing their higher brain functions (or something like that. It's been awhile and I didn't spend much time reading it after I realized what they were saying). Once one allows other considerations to infringe on the sanctity of human life, drawing a line becomes difficult if not impossible.

Peter Singer, Professor of Ethics at Princeton (I believe it's Princeton), has made the claim that children under the age of three are not humans because they do not have the proper mental faculties. He contends therefore, that it should be ethically possible to end their lives w/o it being defined as murder. He also believes that this can be applied to the elderly who have lost their mental faculties as well (alzheimer patients, etc).

Sadly (but ironically?) his mother died of Alzheimers and when pressed with this fact and his statements his reply was "Perhaps I need to reconsider the ethical implications of terminating the elderly."

Reconsider indeed.

 

[Auntie]

Today at 06:24 PM LilyLamb said this in Post #3 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=645123#post645123)

that was chilling ....

Christ have mercy indeed





\

chilling indeed.


I can believe that a woman who is open to the idea of destroying her child in the womb, would also consider taking his life outside of the womb.

Many women have lost the natural instinction to protect their young, even momma animals will attack you if you try to hurt their young.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Peter Singer, Professor of Ethics at Princeton (I believe it's Princeton), has made the claim that children under the age of three are not humans because they do not have the proper mental faculties. He contends therefore, that it should be ethically possible to end their lives w/o it being defined as murder. He also believes that this can be applied to the elderly who have lost their mental faculties as well (alzheimer patients, etc).

And yet this utter profanity gets NO PRESS at anti-Catholic boards? (how often do you hear pro life preached ath that board Just lunancy and end times conspiracy?

Michelle

 

[seebs]

Today at 09:39 PM fragmentsofdreams said this in Post #9 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=645522#post645522)

It isn't that far out there. I have seen people justify abortion by arguing that infants aren't persons because they are still developing their higher brain functions (or something like that. It's been awhile and I didn't spend much time reading it after I realized what they were saying). Once one allows other considerations to infringe on the sanctity of human life, drawing a line becomes difficult if not impossible.

I think there are a number of lines that can be drawn. I'm not sure which of them would be the "right" line, but, as a trivial example, the Old Testament seemed to use "birth" as the dividing line between when it's the woman's fruit, and you owe her money, and when it's a life, and you're a murderer.