Yet another reason to be proud to be pro-life

posted at 9:25 pm on October 17, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Last week, a friend of mine who is a Missionary for Life updated her Facebook status with an encouraging post.

“Every day I see more and more how the pro-life community is more than just a movement — it’s a family,” she wrote. “Abortion will end because my family is working on it and my family is AWESOME!”

I know what she means. Who doesn’t want to be associated with a Dick Retta or an Abby Johnson? Now, add the name Stacy Crimm to that list. Crimm is neither a sidewalk counselor nor a pro-life spokesperson: She’s a woman who lived out pro-life principles as purely as is possible. She gave her life for them:

She laughed and cried all at once that day in March as she explained that five pregnancy tests showed she would be having a child. It was a joyous surprise at age 41 but even more so because she’d been told she would never be able to get pregnant, said her brother, Ray Phillips.

But even as she shopped for clothes for the child she longed to hold in her arms, she knew something was not right. …

At her family’s encouragement, she visited a number of doctors. In July, a CT scan revealed that she had head and neck cancer.

Now she had to choose between her life and her baby’s life. Phillips said she agonized only for a while before deciding against taking potentially lifesaving chemotherapy in hopes that she would soon hold a healthy baby in her arms.

Without chemo, the aggressive cancer intensified quickly. By August, the invasive tumor had begun to wrap around Crimm’s brain stem. In the middle of the month, she collapsed and was rushed to the hospital, where doctors decided to deliver her 2-pound, 1-ounce daughter, Dottie Mae, by C-section. Both mother and daughter were confined to respective intensive care units — and it became increasingly apparent Crimm might die without seeing her daughter at all. At that point, a couple of determined nurses stepped in, working with the medical center’s neonatal transport team to devise a safe way to enable Dottie to visit Crimm.

Nurses wheeled Dottie down the hallway to her mother …

They placed the baby on her mother’s chest. Mother and child gazed into each other’s eyes for several minutes. She smiled at the baby who at last lay in her arms.

No one said a word. No one had a dry eye.

Stacie Crimm died three days later.

Her brother described that moment between mother and child as “perfect.” Today, he and his wife are the guardians of little Dottie, still just five pounds, but healthy enough to be at home with the Phillipses and their four children.

Crimm truly did have a choice: Even if abortion were illegal, she could have opted to receive chemotherapy. That she bravely chose to place her child’s life before her own recalls forcibly to mind why the phrase “a mother’s love” has such resonance. When we talk about abortion, rarely do we talk about the ache many women feel after they choose to abort their babies. Crimm’s physical suffering must have been unimaginable — and, yet, three days before she died, she was able to hold close the fruit of her choice in what Phillips said was a perfect moment. Would that her story might help all mothers see nothing is worth the sacrifice of their own child.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Pro-lifers aid the socialists in creating a larger welfare class.

thuja on October 18, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Read the article. The baby was taken by her brother. You’re off the hook for this one.

What an icon to Conservatism you are.

hawkdriver on October 18, 2011 at 11:58 AM

If you are anti-choice then you’re really anti-freedom and pro-fascism, plus you’re also for government intrusion into our private lives.

To try to bully/terrorize individuals to adhering to your (religious) beliefs is the essences of fascism, no matter how nicely you put it and how many emotional stories you attach to it.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 10:58 AM

What you and some others who have posted similar comments fail to understand is that this isn’t about pro-choice or anti-choice. This is quite simply about a women who believed she was carrying another human being, her own child. She decided to give up her life to save its life. Simple story. Why is that so difficult to understand whether you agree with her belief in the concept of the unborn as a human being or not?
As for abortion, it really had nothing to do with the federal government until Roe made it so. That’s why doing away with Roe makes more sense even if your pro-choice or whatever. Leave it up to the states or even cities to decide if necessary. There are so many variations on lots of supposed rights…driving, property, marriage, inheritance, even consumption, etc. that this would be no different. And isn’t that what pro-choice is all about? Or would you prefer no controls on anything at all?
Oh and please none of that excuse about inconvenience. People cross state lines and drive distances for all sorts of medical procedures today, why should this be any different? Oh wait, I know…they can’t do that if they’re poor. Hmmmm…is that what this is all about then, controlling the number of poor? See how that works out

Deanna on October 18, 2011 at 12:05 PM

Hmmmm…is that what this is all about then, controlling the number of poor? See how that works out

Deanna on October 18, 2011 at 12:05 PM

“Grand Illusions; the Legacy of Planned Parenthood”, George Grant.
Available at:

http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Illusions-Legacy-Planned-Parenthood/dp/1581820577/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1318956707&sr=8-1

$6.91, used, paperback.

oldleprechaun on October 18, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Prochoice is just a euphemism for murder.

davidk on October 18, 2011 at 3:17 PM

I fail to see the point of your post….

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Actually while I read the story what I had said was not directly related, except to say that I can understand the pro-life perspective because I have a wonderful niece today thanks to my sister’s decision not to abort.

But had she chose to abort it would’ve been the right decision at the time and it is no one’s business to prevent her from doing that.

“deciding to put her child first is anti-choice?”

yes it is anti-choice to favor a clump of cells and deny the rights of the mother any decision over her own body.

“Always choosing abortion if there is the slightest chance of “inconvenience” is pro-choice?”

You seem to think that abortion is like going in for an oil-change. It is a very difficult and traumatic experience for women, but they do it because they are being realistic and pragmatic.

If you don’t have a job and no one to support you, how will you pay for diapers and formula and a myriad of other things one needs to raise a child?

How will you finish your education in order to get a decent job? Taking care of a baby is a 24-7 commitment.

That was my point in the story, my sister and her husband were in no position to have a baby because neither of them were employed at the time.

I find that pro-lifers bathe themselves in emotion and completely ignore the very real difficulties that women who get pregnant face.

Whether it was accidental or deliberate, a baby is a 25 year commitment. People who have children they did not want give them a terrible life.

As for letting my niece know (one day when she’s older) that she might’ve been aborted won’t upset her because she’ll understand that her parents were idiots who shouldn’t have had unprotected sex when they were not ready to raise kids.

I read somewhere that 99% of abortions occur in the 1st trimester when the fetus is barely more than a clump of cells, so you guys are belly-aching over nothing.

Not to mention 90% of these abortions are due to birth defects/deformities/downs syndrome.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 4:47 PM

It’s not just the extended families. It’s all 53% of us. The tax payers end up paying for all the welfare babies who are then raised to think that they should just be provided for by the government. Pro-lifers aid the socialists in creating a larger welfare class.

thuja on October 18, 2011 at 11:51 AM

We completely agree there. Not to mention that if the pro-lifers got their way, millions of babies who have birth defects and downs syndrome will be born instead of being aborted.

These babies will also be a huge drain on society and the health care system. Sarah Palin knows this that’s why she wanted to allocate $40 billion or so to help ‘children born with special needs.’ They are aware they’ll have defective kids and plan to throw (our) money at them.

Pro-life (anti-choice/abortion) is the Christian equivalent of Sharia Law. Religious fanatics who want to impose their warped views on our secular democracy.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Prochoice is just a euphemism for murder.

davidk on October 18, 2011 at 3:17 PM

Pro-life is a euphemism for christian terrorism

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 4:59 PM

Deanna on October 18, 2011 at 12:05 PM

I wasn’t commenting on the woman’s decision to sacrifice her own life for the babies, just the issue of abortion in general.

I don’t think it’s very smart to let a child be raised without a mother but that was her choice.

Of course the typical corruptive influence of religion. People work very hard to try to civilize society and others come along and dismantle the advancement and then call that progression.

Roe v Wade was a brilliant decision and now people like you want to force women to return to more barbaric means to have abortions and general create greater corruption in society due to masses of unwanted babies who grow up to be psychopaths and criminals.

And please spare me the one anecdotal example of an orphaned kid who grows up to be a corporate executive while 99.99% do not.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Your comment is just rife with brow-knitting wonderment. Wouldn’t even know where to begin.

hawkdriver on October 18, 2011 at 11:42 AM

we may differ in our views but I admire the creative way you worded that. :)

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 5:13 PM

I read somewhere that 99% of abortions occur in the 1st trimester when the fetus is barely more than a clump of cells, so you guys are belly-aching over nothing.

Not to mention 90% of these abortions are due to birth defects/deformities/downs syndrome.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Obviously you hate people who believe in a higher power, and you have the right to feel that way. So let’s keep this scientific, shall we?

That “clump of cells” you dehumanize to justify killing it is just as human as you are. Every cell in its body contains human DNA, just like you. It’s also just as alive as you are. An amoeba fits the definition of life, just like you do, and the human you so desperately want to kill does. The only difference between you and it is time. You are also merely a “clump of cells”. Every statement I just made is scientifically valid and you know it.

If I can get the govt to agree that you should be killed, based on me describing you as a “clump of cells”, are we still in the realm of science? Of course not. Now we’re using politics to justify killing humans. How many times has “science” been used toward this end? Does the name Margaret Sanger ring a bell? She advocated eugenics as science, and decided that black people were scientifically inferior, thereby justifying rendering such people unable to have children, or killing the ones still in the womb. But none of this was science, it was all politics. Nothing more. This is the company you keep. I bet you’re just as proud as you can be about that as well.

Finally, show me one scientifically valid source that backs up your last paragraph. Just one. You stated it as fact, knowing full well it was an outright lie. You are a horrid person.

runawayyyy on October 18, 2011 at 5:16 PM

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 4:47 PM

yes it is anti-choice to favor a clump of cells and deny the rights of the mother any decision over her own body.

You and I are a clump of cells. Can I “abort” you if I find you tiresome? I find it amazing though that this lame and tired argument is all that pro-abortionists seem to have left in their quiver.

If you don’t have a job and no one to support you, how will you pay for diapers and formula and a myriad of other things one needs to raise a child?

How will you finish your education in order to get a decent job? Taking care of a baby is a 24-7 commitment.

That was my point in the story, my sister and her husband were in no position to have a baby because neither of them were employed at the time.

None of this is a consideration. Not even for a second. If I truly can not provide for my children I will find someone who can. Either through friends and family or adoption. No childs life is so valuless that a little hardship that may befall them makes abortion a logical choice. It only makes abortion an excuse.

Whether it was accidental or deliberate, a baby is a 25 year commitment. People who have children they did not want give them a terrible life.

A terrible life is better than no life. Although this assertion is nothing but conjecture on your part. Often parents find they the little miracle they have been blessed with isn’t so bad after all even if they didn’t want a child to begin with.

As for letting my niece know (one day when she’s older) that she might’ve been aborted won’t upset her because she’ll understand that her parents were idiots who shouldn’t have had unprotected sex when they were not ready to raise kids.

If I were your sister I would take your niece out of your home and never take her back there again.

I read somewhere that 99% of abortions occur in the 1st trimester when the fetus is barely more than a clump of cells, so you guys are belly-aching over nothing.

Irrelivent. This 40 year old clump of cells is grateful my mother did not abort me as an unborn clump of cells.

Not to mention 90% of these abortions are due to birth defects/deformities/downs syndrome.

Total hogwash. The vast majority of abortions are abortions of “convenience”. Meaning that it was just too inconvenient to the mother to let her child live.

Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 5:47 PM

We completely agree there. Not to mention that if the pro-lifers got their way, millions of babies who have birth defects and downs syndrome will be born instead of being aborted.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 4:54 PM

And? What makes you God?

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Obviously you’re practicing the muslims’ smear tactics of calling anyone who opposes them ‘hate-mongers’ which is essentially an ad hominem attack designed to shut down debate and defame your ideological opponents.

I happen to be an ex-Christian and bought into the same mythology you did until I recognized it for that and left. You Christians should consider turning your scrutiny onto your religion rather than defend it dogmatically without even knowing what it is you’re defending.

To say that a blastocyst is the same thing as a fully developed adult like myself is like saying a hunk of metal is the same thing as a Porsche. No they are not and if you can’t understand that, you really need to take some science classes before pretending to be educated on the subject.

A clump of cells has no eyes, brain, legs, hands, a consciousness, the ability to think and feel and so forth. It is nothing more than a bunch of undifferentiated cells. Each time you scratch your arm you’re potentially killing a bunch of cells, but I don’t see you calling them ‘life’ that must be protected.

All you pro-lifers demonstrate is that you have a very poor understanding of science which explains why you’d equate an amoeba to a human.

So obviously because you got the science wrong, it lead you to the faulty conclusion that to terminate a fetus is equivalent to murder. You should read up Roe v Wade so you can understand how the ‘viability’ of a fetus is defined.

If something is growing in your body and you don’t want it there, essentially it’s a tumor and you have every right to have it removed.

Obviously as the fetus develops more and becomes viable then in time one could say it has acquired rights-basically late in the 3rd trimester. Otherwise, to call a bunch of cells (in 1st trimester) the same thing as a fully developed human is sheer lunacy.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 6:52 PM

God Bless You, Stacy Crimm.

He has already blessed your beautiful daughter with a mother who cared to give her life to allow a new one to begin.

Siddhartha Vicious on October 18, 2011 at 7:08 PM

In my post above I was quoting:

runawayyyy on October 18, 2011 at 5:16 PM

This post for:

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 5:47 PM
You and I are a clump of cells. Can I “abort” you if I find you tiresome? I find it amazing though that this lame and tired argument is all that pro-abortionists seem to have left in their quiver.

That’s just a reductio ad absurdum, I’ve answered this in my post above.

None of this is a consideration. Not even for a second. If I truly can not provide for my children I will find someone who can. Either through friends and family or adoption. No childs life is so valuless that a little hardship that may befall them makes abortion a logical choice. It only makes abortion an excuse.

Well good for you man who’ll never get pregnant, but some women have no interest in carrying an unwanted baby in their body for 8-9 months with all the risks that entails, including death from a complicated pregnancy.

So please spare me your bleeding-heart mumbo-jumbo, some people have real lives to live and they don’t need a troll on their shoulder telling them to do something they don’t want to do.

A terrible life is better than no life. Although this assertion is nothing but conjecture on your part. Often parents find they the little miracle they have been blessed with isn’t so bad after all even if they didn’t want a child to begin with.

You’re right here-I think living on the streets, starving facing disease, exposure to the elements, facing violence is worse than living.

It seems you probably lead a sheltered, cushy life with little to no suffering. It’s no wonder you’d make such casual and informed declarations.

Your line of argumentation makes me thing of a muslim woman telling her young daughter, “ya we have to mutilate your vagina, but you’ll be blessed with this butchering so really it’s not so bad after all.” lol

If I were your sister I would take your niece out of your home and never take her back there again.

I think you missed the part where I said she’s supporting her family on her own. We don’t live together.

Well you sound like a tyrant who wouldn’t want her daughter knowing the truth about her life. Just proves Christians like you like to force your crazy views on children who can’t defend themselves and rip them away from their family members against their will. I’m glad my sister is not a loony-Christian bully like you.

To your last point, yes I’m about to trust the stats of a Pro-Life site. lol Whatever the reason that a woman wants to abort that’s her body and her decision not yours.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 7:15 PM

And? What makes you God?

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 5:48 PM

What does god have to do with it? But speaking of which, technically because women can create life, essentially that makes them god, they can destroy it as well if they choose.

My point is that deformed babies are a drain on society, not just on the families that are stuck raising these vegetables who’ll never grow up to be productive members, but on the social/health system as well.

Therefore it is much better to abort them than let them live. What a shocking concept, we practice quality control on everything we consume but ourselves.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 7:19 PM

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 5:47 PM

I replied to this but the post hasn’t appeared, hopefully it will soon.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 7:29 PM

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 6:52 PM

Obviously you’re practicing the muslims’ smear tactics of calling anyone who opposes them ‘hate-mongers’ which is essentially an ad hominem attack designed to shut down debate and defame your ideological opponents.

Obviously, huh? Taking apart your argument amounts to smear tactics? You running for political office?

I happen to be an ex-Christian and bought into the same mythology you did until I recognized it for that and left. You Christians should consider turning your scrutiny onto your religion rather than defend it dogmatically without even knowing what it is you’re defending.

No relevance to anything. Just a demonstration of your own intolerance.

To say that a blastocyst is the same thing as a fully developed adult like myself is like saying a hunk of metal is the same thing as a Porsche. No they are not and if you can’t understand that, you really need to take some science classes before pretending to be educated on the subject.

A clump of cells has no eyes, brain, legs, hands, a consciousness, the ability to think and feel and so forth. It is nothing more than a bunch of undifferentiated cells. Each time you scratch your arm you’re potentially killing a bunch of cells, but I don’t see you calling them ‘life’ that must be protected.

A hunk of metal must be formed and worked by an outside force to take shape and it is not alive either. When sperm meets egg the only logical conclusion is that a human being has just been formed. The “clump of cells” will not become a chicken, rat, dog, horse or Porsche 911. The only thing it can be is a human being thus it is a human being. Trying to parse development stages does not change that fact. A feeble old man whose body is failing and is being kept alive with the help of machines is no more or no less human than a zygote or you or me.

And the essence of life is not a skin cell or any other cell in your body. To use your example, scratch the paint on a Porsche and it is still a Porsche. Run it through a shredder and it becomes scrap metal.

All you pro-lifers demonstrate is that you have a very poor understanding of science which explains why you’d equate an amoeba to a human.

So obviously because you got the science wrong, it lead you to the faulty conclusion that to terminate a fetus is equivalent to murder. You should read up Roe v Wade so you can understand how the ‘viability’ of a fetus is defined.

Please point to a single person in history who has ever confused an amoeba with a human being. Perhaps you did at one time?

And WTH does a legal definition have to do with science? And speaking of ad hominem…

Ultimately though, I think you seem to be having difficulty understanding the fertilization and cellular growth processes in human beings. Because I am having trouble figuring out why you might confuse a amoeba with a human being.

If something is growing in your body and you don’t want it there, essentially it’s a tumor and you have every right to have it removed.

You do realize that your entire body renews itself (minus your brain) at least once over the course your life, don’t you? So are all of your innards tumors? I do see a general theme here though. It is very important for your mental well being apparently to dehumanize an unborn child as much as possible.

tumor – An abnormal growth of tissue resulting from uncontrolled, progressive multiplication of cells and serving no physiological function; a neoplasm.

A child is not a tumor for a child is not abnormal and certainly does serve a physiological function in the propogation of the species.

Obviously as the fetus develops more and becomes viable then in time one could say it has acquired rights-basically late in the 3rd trimester. Otherwise, to call a bunch of cells (in 1st trimester) the same thing as a fully developed human is sheer lunacy.

A human being is a human being. The term human being covers all stages of development, from zygote to dying old man. You don’t get to choose who is or is not a human being because of a court ruling. Slaves were once considered nonhumans under the law.

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 7:33 PM

What does god have to do with it? But speaking of which, technically because women can create life, essentially that makes them god, they can destroy it as well if they choose.

My point is that deformed babies are a drain on society, not just on the families that are stuck raising these vegetables who’ll never grow up to be productive members, but on the social/health system as well.

Therefore it is much better to abort them than let them live. What a shocking concept, we practice quality control on everything we consume but ourselves.

thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 7:19 PM

So women produce their own sperm and impregnate their own eggs?

Your point is specious. Shouldn’t we be exterminating OWSers based on this logic? And if not, why?

NotCoach on October 18, 2011 at 7:38 PM

All you pro-lifers demonstrate is that you have a very poor understanding of science which explains why you’d equate an amoeba to a human.
thinkagain on October 18, 2011 at 6:52 PM

How dare you use the phrase ‘understanding of science’ in a comment fraught with pure lies.

At 4 weeks (20 days) – the heart starts beating. Pro-life people call abortion murder because both the clinical and legal definition of death number one event is – you guessed it – the heart STOPS beating. By 8 weeks (56 days) the brain has divided into 5 regions and the embryo becomes a fetus.

Even the 1973 ruling says viability is 28 weeks (196 days) and can be as low as 24 weeks (168 days). Medical care has reduced that to 24 weeks as being a 50% chance of survival. So scientific fact proves your

and becomes viable then in time one could say it has acquired rights-basically late in the 3rd trimester.

wrong.

jackal40 on October 19, 2011 at 9:11 AM

Comment pages: 1 2