What's Really Behind The Abortion Decision

| 8 Comments

For many years, we have heard pro-choicers give numerous reasons for their position, such as: It's in the woman's body, so it's her decision; it's not a human; it's a human, but it will interfere with my work or school; I'm just not ready to have a child, etc. When you examine all the justifications closely, it seems that there is one underlying reason for abortion. It clearly is a self-centered view of the world by the people involved in the abortion decision. Even the title "pro-choice" could easily be changed to "pro-me" or "pro-self," and it would mean exactly the same.

Over the past 30-40 years, our culture has changed, in general, from one of self-sacrifice and sense of community to one of being self-centered. In the 1950s and 1960s, many families had five or six children. You were taught that you were one of a group, and the world did not revolve around you. In general, children didn't go on long vacations every year. If you did, the parents really sacrificed economically so the whole family could drive to Disneyland or wherever. You learned by watching your parents about the sacrifices you had to make to raise a family.

From the late 1970s until today, most families have had only one to three children. A high percentage of those parents indulge their children in whatever activity they want to do, no matter how much it costs. Many parents give the impression, either intended or unintended, that the child is so important that the world often revolves around them. "If it feels like you should do something, do it." If something does happen to go wrong, the child doesn't have to face the consequences because many parents are there to bail them out. They don't need to have self-sacrifice because parents don't want their children to suffer in any way, even though this suffering often will make them stronger. Of course, these are generalizations, but it is all too prevalent in our society.

When the young woman gets pregnant, the logical conclusion is "How does this affect me personally?" How does it affect my school, career, or social life?" What's the quickest way to alleviate my problem?" These kinds of reasons sometimes do not seem that they are adequate, so those who support abortion have to come up with the other responses as to why abortion should be acceptable. Then they have to justify it by using "it's my body, it's not human, it's a parasite, etc." To many, this reasoning is easy since they are implementing their belief system that has permeated their entire life.

Another by-product of this self-absorption view is the change over the years of being an young, unwed pregnant girl. Thirty to forty years ago there was a strong stigma attached to being pregnant in high school. Thus, it was very rare to see. Of course, today there is very little negative reaction to a pregnant teenager. If something is universally acceptable, it's much easier to engage in that activity. Also, since there are so many more pregnant teens, the possibility of abortion becomes even greater.

The pro-lifer has to find a way to deflect the self-absorption of the pro-choice person and get them to focus on the unborn child. This is a hard nut to crack because you're trying to change someone's belief system they have always had. It can be very frustrating, because it seems so obvious that there is a baby that is being killed in the abortion procedure. Often it may look like you're not making any progress, but you are planting a seed in the pro-choicer's mind. If they actually are confronted with the abortion decision, it is very possible that what they have heard from a pro-lifer will surface.

8 Comments

Unfortunately, although you have a couple of good points, such as this generation's self-centeredness, you completely miss the larger problems associated with abortion and it is quite obvious you have rarely if ever really communicated with women who have chosen abortions. Your post fails to mention the influences of poverty, lack of health care, lack of transportation to appointments for children, and lack of support for impoverished families in the United States. Saying we need to get women to focus on the unborn babies is irrelevant - most of the women who choose abortion ARE focused on their unborn babies, and they see that they would be bringing children into a life of misery, of poor health and poverty and malnutrition.

Furthermore in the 1950's, teen mothers were not non-existent ~ they were made invisible, by parents and aunts who would shuttle them out of state for illegal abortions or to be put in special "homes" where they would give birth, the children would be taken from them, and then they would be shuttled back home.

Please do more research before spouting such nonsense. To eliminate or reduce abortion in the United States would require that we focus as a nation on drastically improving conditions for women, children, and families ~ and this is a commitment that the pro-life legislators, who want to reduce or eliminate funding for social support like food stamps and welfare, have been unwilling to make.


These "compassionate" arguments ("misery, poor health, poverty",etc) lead to some bad places. Couldn't we use the same thinking to justify
killing the children of divorced parents? Numerous
studies show divorce leads to depression, poor health, poverty, a divorce cycle as the children of divorce are more
likely to divorce, drugs, etc.
Why let them risk such unhappy lives? The logic is the same. The truth is: no one can foretell the future for an individual life.

The point is, S Moore, that the women who are choosing abortion are not doing it because they are NOT thinking about the life of the unborn child, as the author of this blog post assumes; rather, they are considering what would be best for their unborn child. If you can't provide for a kid, you can't provide for it, period, and many many women see this and choose abortion.

The underlying concept remains unchanging: if you want to reduce or eliminate abortion, fund social safety nets that will provide for families. And if you're unwilling to scrape up enough "compassion" for the unborn child to want to send some tax dollars to poor families, then shut the hell up. :)

Adoption. You didn't answer my argument; the logic is the same. Your ad hominem attack betrays a lack of confidence. Also, the women in question certainly aren't thinking about the life of the child before they have sex, are they?

"what would be best for their unborn child"?
Death? Please. How twisted is that? But such is the evil of the day. And I don't plan to "shut the hell up" as you so politely requested. In fact, I and many others in the pro-life movement are doing exactly the opposite.

And how do you know that I don't give dollars to social nets to help poor families? You have no access to my tax returns or deductions list. You are attacking over there at some caricature of a pro-life defender, but I'm over here and you are missing the mark completely. Reason cannot function in the service of an evil end; you so clearly demonstrate that here, and for that I thank you for your example. A demonstration of error is just as good a tool for casting light on a subject as other means.

Adoption does not seem like a viable option for many women when there are millions of children worldwide already waiting to be adopted. And as far as consideration for the unborn before *conception* ~ well it's not unborn if it's not conceived yet. For many women, who are in coercive or abusive relationships, abstinence is not an option. Simply telling women to keep their legs shut is honestly completely ridiculous when there are so many other factors at play here. Aggressive men, hypermasculinity, and a culture that simultaneously reinforces the benefits of consequence-free hypersexuality and extols the virtues of motherhood are all factors that seem to be lurking just under the surface ~ present, but not seriously discussed.

And I didn't mean to say that you, personally, S Moore, do not donate to charity; rather, that taken as a whole the vast, overwhelming majority of pro-life legislators are voting against birth control, emergency contraception, social support for families, education, and comprehensive sex-ed ~ in short, all the things that have been proven to reduce abortion rates and support families.

To address the needs of a child is a tremendous burden, and women who can look at their lives, and their world, realistically and see that they will be unable to provide housing, education, and/or food for their children will go to great lengths to not bear those children ~ because greater is the suffering of a child who must starve or freeze to death than that of a child who is, seemingly, mercifully killed while still in utero. Sick, and sad, and heartbreaking, and also the unfortunate truth. Further, even pro-life women who do the "right" thing and bear a child they KNOW they cannot care for are penalized by a system who says they are bad parents if they bring a child into the world they cannot care for ~ when the unmet needs are discovered, the children are swept away into foster care rather than aided so the families can stay united. Delve into the lives of low-income families in America for some proof.

People who have always had their needs met cannot imagine the kind of poverty that exists in America that leads women to choose abortion, but that doesn't make it non-existent, and choosing to believe that you can just tell women to stop sleeping around and it will fix the problem of rampant abortion is a deadly fallacy.

(( By the way, there is a difference between Ad Hominem, and Passionately Well-Educated. ))

Bee wrote:"By the way, there is a difference between Ad Hominem, and Passionately Well-Educated"

Def: Ad hominem: to attack the person, not the argument. To appeal to emotion and not reason or logic. To attack motives or character, not the argument.

Def: Well educated: able to use reason and logic; able to maintain civility in debate. ("then shut the hell up. :)") Yes, there's a difference, alright.

And what is the difference, again, between killing the unborn child who may or may not be born into difficult conditions and the child of divorce who is no less vulnerable along the terms of your criteria? While you are speaking of differences, what, again I ask, is the difference?

"To appeal to emotion and not reason or logic." - And you're not, by repeating over and over that abortion kills babies? Well yes abortion DOES kill babies. It's a really terrible fact and I will agree to that 100%. So lets look at yet (another) reason WHY women would choose such a drastic measure (in addition to ALL the other things I have already pointed out - which you are conveniently ignoring):

QUOTE: MORE THAN 80 PERCENT OF ABORTIONS ARE UNWANTED AND _64 PERCENT_ INVOLVE COERCION - AND SOMETIMES VIOLENCE.

SOURCE: The Elliot Institute - UnChoice ad campaign

MEANING to the topic at hand: Those doing the coercion are not likely to be affected by the pro-life rhetoric that it really is a child.


However your last post proves that YOU (personally) are not inclined to look at the Big Picture, the issue of Abortion as a whole, overarching set of problems. Abortion is a symptom of a larger problem and as such it will not go away if it is made illegal and it will not go away if you (general) simply tell women to stop being self-centered sluts. It will not go away if it is made illegal, it will go underground, as it was when it was illegal. Teen pregnancy will not go away if abortion is made illegal and contraceptives are made unavailable; they will keep having sex and then resorting to extreme measures to deal with a problem that people want to re-stigmatize.

These is the problems that I see with the Pro-Life stance advocated in the blog post to which I was responding. The author here titled the post, "What's _Really_ Behind the Abortion Decision," but makes an entirely fallacious argument based on half-truths. The reality is that there is an enormous set of social problems underlying abortion.

Let's support families. Let's provide comprehensive education. Let's reduce the number of hours a person must work in order to support their family so they can have more time WITH their family, to solidify their relationships and prevent the likelihood that teens will be having sex. Let's provide housing and health care for all citizens. Let's set up comprehensive counseling and support services for victims of domestic violence. Let's ensure that women can come forward after coercion and violence and have ample protection from their family / friends / partners who are pushing them into abortion and know they will be protected and supported if they carry the baby to term.

Why do I so rarely hear people in the Pro-Life movement discuss these issues? Why do I rarely, if EVER, hear the Pro-Life leaders discuss the issue of poverty in America? Why do I so rarely hear Pro-Life activists talk about what happens AFTER a baby comes into a mother's life? -- It seems all about getting the baby born, and then once they're extra-utero they all disappear. THIS is the perspective I am attacking, THIS is the change I am working for.

And finally, to address the utterly ridiculous question you keep repeating: The difference between an unborn child and a child who is born and old enough for their parents to be divorced is that a child of divorced parents is much more likely to have a place to live, support from two parents, and health care ... ie all the guarantees they are not going to be homeless and starving. What unwanted and unplanned-for children coming into the world have this as an immediate assumed guarantee? Take for example a 15 year old expecting mother - her own parents say they will throw her out of the house if she bears the child; her boyfriend offers to pay for abortion; since she is still legally registered as living with her parents she doesn't qualify for welfare, food stamps, or medicaid. If her parents kick her out on her own, she is still legally their dependent and so still legally may not qualify for aid. So here she is, and she has the choice: carry a baby to term and put it up for adoption, possibly dooming it to a life in the foster care system, not to mention after suffering through a pregnancy with who knows what kind of health care and nutrition she's been lacking ... OR she could carry the child to term and attempt to raise it herself, and start out homeless, starving, with no health care, no place to sleep, nobody will hire her because she's pregnant or just had a baby, and she can't afford day care ... OR she could take up her boyfriends offer and "just" have an abortion. She will be permanently damaged and regret it the rest of her life, but she will still have a home to live in, health care ... and later on she knows she will probably be able to bring another child into the world to "make up for" the one she lost. See the problems?

I've BEEN a pregnant teen. Rape - Coercion - Emotional Abuse -- these are all easy enough to talk about if you're saying, "Well but it's a baby's LIFE at stake" -- but the choices that you have to make coming out of this are, not so easy.

I've lived in poverty so absolute I was scraping money out of gutters to buy dry beans and rice that my autistic son ended up not being able to eat. I went a year without health insurance and ended up ruining my credit because I have chronic health problems and had to rely on the E.R. to keep me alive. Do you know what it's like to make diapers out of old rags and then hand-wash them, because you have no money for diapers?

Guess what? These are NOT easy problems to tackle, and anyone who offers an easy solution doesn't have their facts straight.

Of course these are not easy problems; I certainly don't think they are. I know first hand about some of these problems myself. My point in asking about the difference between the two situations (pre-born and child of divorce, my "silly problem") is to point out that our society is foisting on women an "un-choice", as the Elliott Institute calls it, in the guise of "compassion". I am attempting to point out that just as I believe it is immoral to commit homicide to spare suffering in one case, it is just as immoral in the other. In one case it is easier to see the absurdity than the other. It is harder to empathize with a tiny human with whom we have no relationship; no history, no social bond. I certainly am aware of all the coerced women who are forced to abort or be killed, abandoned, lose their existing children, etc. I believe our culture has coerced women to accept abortion in the guise of a false compassion: better dead than poor, etc. In my experience, I know many, many poor women who fight tooth and
nail to keep their children. If the social engineers had their way, only the wealthy would be licensed to procreate. (Sanger's idea). The others are just too much trouble. I believe every women has a right to bear her child. Unfortunately, the party that is most pro-life and business oriented, is so often the most tight fisted with social net services. And the party that holds out the social net also
holds out the false "hope" of what turns out to be, coerced abortion, calling it a "right",therefore making women feel obligated to choose it. It is telling that our candidate of "hope", Obama, is our most radical advocate of abortion, even surpassing NARAL is openly working against the Infants Born Alive Act. How any human being can justify an infant being left to die alone an agonizing death is hard to fathom. But so he does. And he is such a pretty man, a charmer of the masses.

I was born into circumstances which today would have had me removed from the home. I have reason to know that I would have been aborted, had it been the legal option.
So I have made it my life's work to be a voice for the unborn. I certainly do not judge anyone who has chosen the legal option dangled before them;or pushed on them, but neither am I willing to make myself blind to the evil of such a bargain with the devil. Legalizing abortion has corrupted every institution in society. Un-legalizing it will not stop abortion for some, but it will reduce the rot from the top and cut down on coerced abortion.

By the way, both my parents are dead now. I am still alive and kicking and glad to be here. Thank you for telling me your story, Bee. God bless you and your son.




button02b.gif

Categories

Archives

Pro-Life Articles

add your site
Reclaiming Our Children Jan 1, 1970, 7:00 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:39 pm
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:39 pm
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 2:13 pm
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:39 pm
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 1:09 pm
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 2:13 pm
Christian Musician...Pro Life! Sep 18, 2017, 12:02 pm
A Catholic Life Sep 23, 2017, 11:44 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 7:02 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 4:29 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 2:55 am
Greater Fitchburg For Life Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
Greater Fitchburg For Life Sep 23, 2017, 4:20 am
DEACON FOR LIFE Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
DEACON FOR LIFE Sep 23, 2017, 3:15 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:13 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:13 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:13 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:13 am
Opinion Times Sep 23, 2017, 12:13 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 9:11 pm
Spero News Dec 31, 1969, 11:00 pm
BIG C CATHOLICS Sep 22, 2017, 10:39 pm
BIG C CATHOLICS Sep 22, 2017, 10:27 pm
Pro-Life Unity Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 9:27 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 10:03 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 9:50 pm
BIG C CATHOLICS Sep 22, 2017, 9:22 pm
Rebelution Sep 22, 2017, 8:49 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 9:12 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 9:12 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 9:12 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 9:12 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 9:12 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 9:17 pm
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 8:31 pm
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 4:41 pm
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 4:29 pm
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 8:51 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 8:32 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 7:35 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 22, 2017, 10:38 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 22, 2017, 10:39 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 7:33 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 7:56 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 7:45 pm
BIG C CATHOLICS Sep 22, 2017, 6:00 pm
BIG C CATHOLICS Sep 22, 2017, 6:05 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 7:14 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 6:32 pm
NoisyRoom.net Sep 22, 2017, 7:13 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 7:15 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 5:32 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 5:57 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 6:56 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 6:06 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 6:54 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 6:21 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 6:43 pm
Happy Catholic Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 6:00 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 4:22 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 20, 2017, 2:00 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 20, 2017, 9:00 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 20, 2017, 9:15 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 20, 2017, 3:00 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 20, 2017, 3:01 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 19, 2017, 11:00 am
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 19, 2017, 5:59 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 19, 2017, 4:33 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 20, 2017, 11:00 am
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 19, 2017, 6:24 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 21, 2017, 3:01 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 21, 2017, 3:00 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 21, 2017, 5:10 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 22, 2017, 4:10 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 21, 2017, 7:51 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 22, 2017, 5:49 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 21, 2017, 8:01 pm
Students for Life of Illinois Sep 18, 2017, 4:00 pm
Reclaiming Our Children Jan 1, 1970, 7:00 am
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 3:12 pm
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 4:29 pm
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 4:41 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 4:50 pm
Leaven for the Loaf Sep 22, 2017, 4:54 pm
March For Life Sep 22, 2017, 3:51 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 3:31 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 3:34 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 22, 2017, 5:49 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 2:38 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 3:01 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 2:19 pm
The Ohio Anglican.blog Sep 22, 2017, 2:35 pm
The Ohio Anglican.blog Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 1:07 pm
open book Jan 1, 1970, 4:00 am
Live Action Blog Sep 22, 2017, 2:07 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 2:07 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 1:20 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 12:44 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 1:00 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 1:13 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 1:08 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 1:05 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 1:04 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 1:12 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 12:57 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 12:57 pm
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 1:26 pm
Christian Newswire: All Releases Sep 22, 2017, 4:10 pm
The Common Room Sep 22, 2017, 12:34 pm
LifeNews Sep 22, 2017, 12:59 pm
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 11:34 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 10:19 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 11:20 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 11:43 am
BIG C CATHOLICS Sep 22, 2017, 11:45 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 9:47 am
Les Femmes - The Truth Sep 22, 2017, 10:00 am
Greater Fitchburg For Life Sep 22, 2017, 10:20 am
Greater Fitchburg For Life Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
Greater Fitchburg For Life Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
Greater Fitchburg For Life Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
Fundamentally Reformed Sep 22, 2017, 2:35 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 8:43 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 8:18 am
Catholic Church Conservation Sep 22, 2017, 9:15 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 4:41 am
Catholic Fire Sep 22, 2017, 5:26 am
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 2:47 am
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 2:16 am
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 2:14 am
Opinion Times Sep 22, 2017, 1:52 am
CNSNews.com Headlines Sep 22, 2017, 3:18 am
Reclaiming Our Children Jan 1, 1970, 7:00 am
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 11:58 pm
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 11:51 pm
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 22, 2017, 12:07 am
EmpowerShop Prolife Sep 21, 2017, 11:57 pm
DEACON FOR LIFE Sep 22, 2017, 12:15 am
Fletcher's Blog Sep 21, 2017, 10:42 pm
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:03 am
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:01 am
The Aquila Report Sep 20, 2017, 4:01 am
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:04 am
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:01 am
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:03 am
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:04 am
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:08 am
The Aquila Report Sep 20, 2017, 4:08 am
The Aquila Report Sep 21, 2017, 4:02 am
Spero News Dec 31, 1969, 11:00 pm
PM Notes Sep 21, 2017, 9:40 pm
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 9:07 pm
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 9:07 pm
NoisyRoom.net Sep 21, 2017, 9:07 pm
Live Action Blog Sep 21, 2017, 8:26 pm
LifeNews Sep 21, 2017, 9:22 pm
LifeNews Sep 21, 2017, 8:10 pm
LifeNews Sep 21, 2017, 10:05 pm
FRC.org - Web Log Sep 21, 2017, 7:49 pm
Catholic Fire Sep 21, 2017, 8:26 pm
A Lifestyle of Peace Sep 21, 2017, 8:22 pm
Pro-Life Unity Jan 1, 1970, 12:00 am
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 7:37 pm
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 7:37 pm
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 7:37 pm
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 7:37 pm
Opinion Times Sep 21, 2017, 7:37 pm
Operation Rescue Sep 21, 2017, 5:43 pm
LifeNews Sep 21, 2017, 7:25 pm
LifeNews Sep 21, 2017, 7:50 pm