Abortions have no long-term effects? A woman doesn't mourn her lost baby? She just shrugs it off and continues business as usual? Can you believe any of this? What a downright lie!
Yes this is what I've been told, very matter-of-factly, by one of our professors, who teaches Publics Health course. Just so you get an idea about what sort of woman she is, some minutes before that she told us about the latest feminist congress she attended.
When I approached her during the break and asked if she knows anyone who has gone through an abortion, and how can anyone claim this has no long-term effects on the woman's physical and emotional well-being, she made an attempt to hush me up by saying that studies were made, and proved that 'overall, on a general scale, abortions only cause a short-term discomfort and there's no scientific proof that women who went through abortions suffer for a long time later on.'
Alright… so now we need scientific proof to show that a woman who lost her baby suffers for many years after the event and never quite forgets it? Excuse me, but I think that's bollocks. I asked her for sources of the aforementioned studies, but she didn't remember any exact quotes. Not that it matters. It's only too easy to guess who could have funded studies with such spectacular outcome, which support the abortion industry and the abortionists' agenda and goes against common sense, morality, decency, faith, and every positive value that is the pillar of our culture (I'm sure it was the same gang who tried to convince us that casual sex and promiscuity aren't supposed to hurt us and break our hearts and that chastity is a retrograde patriarchal myth).
That same teacher later argued that 'pro-choice movements put the woman in the center' – I felt it was beyond my ability to continue arguing then, but may I ask, the center of what?? How on earth promoting abortions, then pretending nothing happened, helps women? How on earth telling women they are not supposed to mourn their lost unborn babies because this 'has been proved scientifically by numerous studies', does anything to promote the well-being of women?
I know I sound a bit angry in this post, and I guess this is because I am angry. I can't feel anything but anger when I hear this sort of crap being pushed down the throats of 70 students who nod and take notes. I can't help but be angry when I hear that a woman must give up on the idea of having a large family if she wants to be a capable and intelligent human being ('most women of the Third World have ten children and are uneducated; Mary Sue has ten children, therefore Mary Sue is an oppressed, uneducated slave who belongs in the Third World'. Do you get that kind of logic?).
So, where am I getting with this rant? I think we should keep two things in mind:
1. Not everything that is 'scientifically proved' is true, logical, or trustworthy.
2. Whether we like it or not, this is precisely what we are being taught in secular colleges all the time. Be careful. I repeat: be careful.