A Tale of Three Choices



On July 7 the New York Times had what is doubtless their 666th pro-abort piece this year, an op ed by a woman celebrating her mother’s abortion.  (So long as it wasn’t you being tossed out like so much garbage, right honey?)  If you enjoy irony, go here to read it.

Katy French, an epidimeologist  has written a grand response:

Merfish writes that her mom was 20, engaged to her dad, 21, both co-eds at  Texas’ “public Ivy,” the University of Texas at Austin. My mother, Terry Cavnar  French, was 18. She couldn’t afford to go to an elite college, and instead,  lived at home and worked her way through the local commuter college, the  University of Houston. She didn’t have a fiancé to lean on (the father was not  in the picture), and was barely acknowledged by her dysfunctional parents. Her  ninth month was spent at a home run by Catholic Charities.

Merfish writes that her parents, though about to graduate from college and  marry, were simply not ready to be parents. They drove across states lines for  an abortion. My mother wasn’t ready to be a parent either. She could have driven  to another state, too. Instead, she drove to college, sitting in traffic every  morning with the windows rolled down to try to beat the Houston heat in those  pre-air conditioning days. Merfish writes that her parents were made to “feel  like criminals” by the abortionist they visited. My mom was made to feel morning  sickness-induced nausea from traffic fumes during her commute, often pulling to  the side of the road to throw up and then back on the road to class.

Merfish writes with pride about her mom’s choice to kill her brother or  sister because he or she was a few years early for her parents’ taste. Today,  I’m writing with pride about my mom’s choice to save my brother’s life and give  him a loving, intact family that could provide him the life he deserved.  Merfish’s mom had to endure the judgmental attitudes of the abortionist. My mom  had to endure months of morning sickness and ten hours of labor and delivery.  Then she endured the pain of letting another woman, a woman who was ready to be  a mom, take her baby boy home.

Merfish writes of the solidarity she felt with her mom while the two of them  shouted down a Texas bill that would protect unborn babies who are old enough to  recognize their mother’s voice, and would require unregulated Gosnell factories  to meet the same hygiene standards as medical facilities in the state. Today,  I’m writing of the solidarity I felt when my mom and I recently prayed at the  hospital bedside of my sister’s baby. He had just been diagnosed with a genetic  disease that would cripple and kill him in a few years. If the diagnosis had  come a few months earlier, when he was still in the womb, many physicians would  have handed my sister an abortion referral along with the test result. We later  found out that the diagnosis was wrong. Luckily for him, he has a family that  celebrates his life instead of a family that celebrates the killing of children  on the altar of Almighty Convenience.

Merfish’s mom married her dad shortly after her abortion. They finished  college and went on to have better-timed children and, presumably, successful  lives. My mom later met a dashing grad student at that commuter college. They  married, graduated, had two daughters, successful careers, and are now  approaching a secure retirement. Choosing life, no matter how inconvenient,  doesn’t have to end anyone’s chance at the American Dream.

Go here to read the rest.  My maternal grandmother was seduced and abandoned in the middle of the Great Depression.  However, she did not look upon my mother, the child born of her affair, as a problem but the light of her life.  She rolled up her sleeves and went to work while my Mom was looked after by her maternal grandmother.  Money was tight.  The greatest luxury my Mom had growing up was on Saturday nights when she and her Mom had a glass of milk and a cookie each.  Ultimately my grandmother met and married a longshoreman who became a father to my Mom, and a doting grandfather to her eventual children, myself and my brother.  But for the courage of my maternal grandmother and her love for my Mom, my brother and I would never have come into existence alone with my three kids and his one.   The choices we make in this life, for good and evil, rarely just impact ourselves but tend to resonate through time and eternity.


More to explorer


  1. Something about this and Motley Monk’s article really jumped out at me. In the recent gay marriage debate, there has been a lot of personalization. The idea is that it’s easy to “discriminate” against an unknown person, but if you can put a face on gay marriage, especially the face of a loved one, then people will be more welcoming. I think there’s something to that, in the positive way that the gay-marriage supporters would hope, but there’s also a negative effect that works in their favor, namely that guys don’t want to think about guys having sex. In the face of a visceral reaction, there’s a tendency to say “fine, whatever, just don’t talk about it in front of me”.

    It looks like abortion supporters are thinking of using the same personalization tactics. No one wants to tell a woman face-to-face that she’s killed her child. (Also, no one wants to hear a woman talk about her private biological stuff.) I guess they’re thinking that they can use this to their advantage.

    Personally, I can’t see it helping a candidate. If a guy bragged about his divorce he’d be eaten alive. Likewise if a male candidate said that he had two kids “as far as I know” he’d get no sympathy. The female candidate who tries the same thing would have a pretty hard time. But – and this is a biggie – it would take the subject off the table, out of fear of being called a bully. If you dare to criticize the proud abortion-survivor woman you’ll be alienating everyone who’s even slightly ambiguous on the issue. You’ll be the bad guy. Like I said, I don’t think it would work well for candidates, re Motley’s article, but it may put a face on the pro-choice movement, re this article, in a way that shifts public support in their direction.

  2. Anyone who remembers France in the 1960s & 1970s, before the Veil Law of 1975 (Law No. 75-17 of 18 January 1975), will know that pretty well every village seemed to have its « faiseuse d’anges » or “angel-maker.” Everyone knew about it, nobody talked about it and the police regarded it as “women’s business” and turned a blind eye. Occasionally a woman died and, then, the Parquet, like Captain Renault in “Casablanca” would be shocked, shocked to discover that such things went on and there would be a brief flurry of prosecutions of unqualified women, quickly rounded up and, so, obviously known to police. Medical practitioners, doctors and midwives were never, ever, prosecuted.

    In that atmosphere, the 1971 « le manifeste des 343 salopes » when 343 mostly prominent women admitted to having had an abortion and challenging the authorities to prosecute them had a profound impact. Needless to say, there were no prosecutions. Perhaps even more significant was the publication of a similar manifesto in February 1973 by 331 doctors, including clinical professors in the leading teaching hospitals, admitting to performing abortions and, again, challenging the authorities to prosecute them. The procurator of the Republic excused himself on the grounds of “lack of evidence.”

    The Veil Law was passed two years later, with the National Assembly solemnly proclaiming “The law guarantees respect for every human being from the outset of life. There shall be no derogation from this principle except in cases of necessity and under the conditions laid down by this Law” whilst allowing abortion up to the tenth week, if the woman was in “a state of distress.” This apparent flat contradiction exactly corresponded with the public mood.

  3. Choosing life, no matter how inconvenient, doesn’t have to end anyone’s chance at the American Dream.

    Amen. And not only a generic “American Dream,” but the exact one Merfish implies was only possible through abortion. I was in nearly the exact situation the Merfishes were – except my bride was not a student at UT, only I was. Other than that (and perhaps the dates of attendance at UT), the situations were identical. We were able to choose life, graduate, raise a family, go on to law school, have a reasonably comfortable life and will be celebrating our 27th anniversary.

    There is one more difference between us and the Merfishes: we are not murderers.

  4. Pinky,

    It will work, when people are already ambivalent. I am only surprised that no one has come up with an English equivalent of that ghastly euphemism, « faiseuse d’anges » as a sop to weak minds and wavering consciences.

  5. MPS- those “personalization” examples work so well because it’s hard to bring the dead out to challenge anyone. Gee, each of those abortionists killed at least two women, and maimed a dozen more? Well, it was swept under the table, and they’re not going to show up, and their families won’t say “my daughter died from an abortion.”

    *feels ill*

  6. Pinky:
    “Choice” -that must mean you are in full support of INFORMED choice. A living egg cell with one set of DNA is fused with a living sperm cell with a different set of DNA to create an entirely new and unique human being with a separate metabolism, etc….. This human is killed by abortion.
    “Reproductive Health” : obviously not for the baby. The percentage of mothers killed by abortion since bringing them out of the “back alley coat hanger” days is MUCH HIGHER. Witness: Pro-aborts fight tooth and nail to prevent any kind of medical standards for these places.
    “Decision” – you made that decision when you chose to have sex – and invited this new human being into your body.
    “What I do with my body” – just plain selfish. Don’t have sex. You’ll make a lousy partner and a lousy parent, anyway.

  7. I loved the rebuttal!

    I wish Catholic Republican politicians would be more consistent about Life. Yes, abortion is the flagship issue. But what about the living human beings outside of the womb? What about preserving and restoring the environment, so that those precious souls can actually live full lives once they make it to the world? God bless. Let’s push for a Godly culture of Life.

  8. “But what about the living human beings outside of the womb?”

    Ben, somewhere along the way people equated love and care for “living human beings outside of the womb” with large federal government programs intended to help those people. Therefore, the logic goes, anyone opposed to those large federal government programs must not care for their fellow human beings.

    Do you see the disconnect in that logic? Do you understand that political conservatives help their families and communities in ways that do not involve the federal government? The Republican agenda can (not always does, but can) enable people to help others while cutting back on some federal programs.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: