Pro Choice or Not

[LuvDuke]

as far as I know, the catholic church does offer programs for women who need help and a reasonable alternative to abortion. Shelters and things like that. There's a big difference in some cases between being pro-life and being anti-abortion.

There's also a big difference between being "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion" no matter what the propaganda coming out of the right-to-life movement.

 

[moviegirl11]

My mother, who will be 88 later on this month, told us that if they missed one month, and they didn't want another baby, they went to the pharmacist who gave them "something" to take care of it. She said several of her sisters did that. Or they would go to their doctor who gave them "something". I would imagine it was some combination of hormones that took care of "it".

So abortion is nothing new.

...i know. You're the second person to tell me that abortions have always been around. I dont know where I said otherwise or if I implied that I thought it was some new thing, I apologize. I'm not unaware of the history of the subject as it pertains to our society (or other societies). It being around since god invented pregnancy doesnt change my opinion of it. Slavery was around for centuries before people decided that was a bad idea. It took generations to get used to the idea that it was wrong. Just because it's "always been around" doesnt make it right.

If the above is unclear in any way feel free to ask questions. So far this conversations been fun and non-heated which I like I like that we can disagree without getting mad or calling each other names.

There's also a big difference between being "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion" no matter what the propaganda coming out of the right-to-life movement.

I dont disagree. Both "sides" of the "movement" have a tendency to pigeon-hole the other side. Not all anti-abortion people OR pro-lifers are trying to "control women's bodies" and not all pro-choice people have had abortions or think abortions are the greatest thing ever.

 

[punkin]

So abortion is nothing new.

Actually, historically abortion is very old.

 

[punkin]

not all pro-choice people have had abortions or think abortions are the greatest thing ever.

NO ONE thinks abortions are the greatest thing ever.

 

[moviegirl11]

Actually, historically abortion is very old.

who is arguing that abortion is new? What does that have to do with anything? Something being around for a long time doesnt make it right. Slavery was around for centuries. I think most of us would agree that was a good practice to abolish. It took generations for people to really start to accept that black people were actually human beings. Changing people's minds about something doesnt happen overnight and certain practices can go one for centuries before it occurs to enough people that maybe its wrong.


And fine, no one thinks abortion is the greatest thing ever. You misinterpreted what I said and only quoted half of my sentence.

 

[Luv'sTink]

Yeah I dont think making it illegal will stop it from happening. More needs to be done to lower the number of abortions in this country than just banning it. Educating young women AND men on the consequences of sex, for one thing. Stressing the importance of safe sex for women AND men. Easier access to birth control too.

I'm aware of the history of abortion and the fact that some women (not as many as people think but it did happen) went to extreme measures to obtain an illegal or "back alley" abortion when it was illegal.

The thing is, saying its going to happen anyway doesnt justify it or make me think its any less wrong. Thats like saying there's always going to be crime so why bother trying to stop it. From the perspective of someone who believes the unborn deserve the same protection as everyone else, I couldnt just shrug it off. Its a social issue that needs to be addressed from a number of angles. Fewer unwanted pregnancies would obviously be a big start.

It was illegal, no one kept records of them because they were illegal. People did not talk about it because it was illegal and shameful to some women/girls.

So just exactly how do you know that there were not as many as people think? Is that just your opinion, it looks like you are stating fact.

 

[Luv'sTink]

Oh, I can definitely agree with you guys there. I would think losing a child would be different than losing an unborn child, emotionally. The grieving would be different too. I just think in both cases, a life was lost. The personal attachment to the life lost would always vary. A parent who lost a child they barely saw or knew due to a divorce or some other circumstances would grieve differently than if they lost a child they raised themselves. Thats just human nature.

How emotionally attached we are to someone varies as does our grief when we lose that person. But again, this is why I asked if whether or not the child was wanted determines the value of its life. Its natural to vary the value you place on the things in your life, including people. Therefore, many are ok turning a blind eye to the abortion issue because whether they realize it or not, they allow people to set the value of their own offspring. Someone who is giving up their child to abortion has likely placed a very low value on the life growing within her. Meanwhile two rooms down another woman is crying as she looks at the white blur on the monitor in front of her because that blur is her child and she's in love with it already. Both unborn children could be at the exact phase of development. The only difference is that one is wanted and one isnt.

Just some thoughts on the whole issue, there. This is what makes it a complex debate. Belief and emotion are too closely tied to the issue for it to be as cut and dry or for someone to be proven right or wrong by one simple analogy or hypothetical situation. You know?

The problem with what you have written here is that there are a lot of women who WANT the baby but feel they can not keep it for their own reasons.

I know quite a few women who have terminated a pregnancy for medical reasons and those were all WANTED babies.

Yes, some terminate because it is unwanted but not all.

 

[moviegirl11]

Its all speculation on both sides. That was my point. How bad it really was is subject to opinion. No one is saying it didnt exist and I didnt mean to imply that I somehow had knowledge about the subject that no one else does.

 

[moviegirl11]

The problem with what you have written here is that there are a lot of women who WANT the baby but feel they can not keep it for their own reasons.

I know quite a few women who have terminated a pregnancy for medical reasons and those were all WANTED babies.

Yes, some terminate because it is unwanted but not all.

In that situation, I consider it along the same lines as a miscarriage. I dont have the actual statistics but I'm willing to bet that most of the abortions done in this country arent for medical reasons.

The issue of getting an abortion for medical reasons is something that is very personal to me and I pray to God I am never faced with that kind of decision. I would not presume to pass judgment on a woman who had an abortion because the child posed an immediate mortal threat on her wellbeing. Again though, it doesnt change my opinion on whether or not the child inside her is real, human and alive.

 

[kaytieeldr]

100% pro-choice female here.

Like for example in HEROES, Hiro speaks with his future self!!!! Impossible.

Why? Just because it’s impossible in “Back to the Future” doesn’t mean it’s impossible

I am thinking why did people vote for Bush knowing his agenda was to abolish abortion. That was the reason for his election.

Don’t blame me – I voted for Muffy (sorry – Boston conservative talk-radio joke )

I am not saying the other side is the way to go, I'm saying discuss the options.

Fine, great, discuss the options. But the ultimate decision goes to the woman.

This is so obvious that even the anti-choice organizations don't push it any more

I know you’re not talking about abortion, per se, but if you don’t mind I’d like to use your statement to point something out to the minority viewpoint: People talk, and post, about comparing apples to oranges. That personifies this issue. The ‘sides’ need to be either ‘anti-abortion vs. pro-abortion’ (false) or ‘pro-life vs. anti-life’ (also false) or ‘anti-choice vs. pro-choice’. Any other pair of comparisons IS ‘apples to oranges’.
Being pro-choice doesn’t mean you’re anti-life, it simply means you believe it’s the right of each individual pregnant person to choose what is right for that person.

And, as for adoption...it's not a 'cure' for anything. I'm sorry, but, comparing it to abortion, I would rather see my child/fetus die in the hands of a doctor/medically trained professional than in the hands of a (possible) rapist/murderer/molester/robber/etc.

Assume much? Potential adoptive parents are screened thoroughly. It’s more likely that a birth parent will be a criminal than an adoptive parent.

Is that some kind of 'new' Jewish law? Because I've never heard of it before, and most of my family is Jewish...perhaps it's just never been spoken of in my family.

JennyMominRI] oh yes,,they invented and changed 5000 years of Jewish history just for me..

5767, but what’s a few hundred years… ?

So first you call Chobie a troll and now you question Jenny's knowledge of Jewish law. Good luck.

Well, no – it’s Jenny’s rabbi’s knowledge of Jewish law that’s being questioned…

ETA: I'm still trying to wrap my mind around your logic, LuvDuke. According to your logic, since you are pro-choice, why don't you have an abortion as a show of good faith? Doesn't make sense now, does it?

Because pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. It means being for each woman making the choice/s right for her.

 

[punkin]

kaytieeldr, did you just read the entire thread and post answers to everything?

 

[Ariel Mae]

Assume much? Potential adoptive parents are screened thoroughly. It’s more likely that a birth parent will be a criminal than an adoptive parent.

What, now I can't have an opinion? I was just stating my viewpoint as to why I felt such a way. If I hadn't, I would have, probably, gotten, "Why didn't you explain yourself?"

I never said that was how it always was, but that because of the risk, even if slight, it's not something I, personally want to take a chance with.

And, adoptive parents may be screened thoroughly in the present, but what about the future? We can't surely say they are or aren't going to become, say, bank robbers. It's just not a chance I want to take.

I'll state it again.

I'd rather see my child die at the hands of a doctor than a potential rapist.
And, please provide the statistics to your assertion on, "It's more likely...". Please.

but what’s a few hundred years… ?

Yes, because we're following the Bible exactly as it was written, still. Oh, wait, we're sans slavery and men beating their wives for pleasure. Religions change. New things are always being found...but that's an entirely different topic.

 

[punkin]

Yes, because we're following the Bible exactly as it was written, still. Oh, wait, we're sans slavery and men beating their wives for pleasure. Religions change. New things are always being found...but that's an entirely different topic.

Where exactly in your bible are men allowed to beat their wives? For pleasure or otherwise.

 

[Ariel Mae]

Where exactly in your bible are men allowed to beat their wives? For pleasure or otherwise.

I don't know exactly, but I believe, according to what I've been taught, that there's some subsection that allows men to beat their 'spouses'. That wasn't the point, though. The point was that religion changes with time. *shrugs* But that has diddly to do with abortion, last I checked.

Okay, so, there's no aspect of men beating their wives, but I'm finding that it's okay to sell your wife to sexual slavery.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-bibleatrocities.html

The Bible found no fault with Abraham and Isaac for knowingly giving their wives to other men for sexual use. (Genesis 12:11-16; Genesis 26:7-10.) In fact, the Bible praised Lot and Ephremite for offering their daughters to be raped, so this fate would not befall their male guests. (Genesis 19:1-8; Judges 19:22-24.)

Again, the point being...religion seems to, for lack of a better word, 'evolve'. Or else we'd be selling our daughters to be raped.

 

[punkin]

I don't know exactly, but I believe, according to what I've been taught, that there's some subsection that allows men to beat their 'spouses'. That wasn't the point, though. The point was that religion changes with time. *shrugs* But that has diddly to do with abortion, last I checked.

You are right. This has nothing to do with abortion (I am on the same side of that debate as you apparantly) . I am just more and more amazed at the authoritative tone you use when posting absolute drivel.

 

[Soubrette]

It's been great to check in with this thread every so often and see the percentages of the poll remain quite constant. Those numbers speak volumes, IMO, and gives me hope that if, God forbid, the Supreme Court goes crazy and the states take the issue to the polls, pro-lifers will have a major uphill battle to fight.

God bless American democracy.

 

[punkin]

It's been great to check in with this thread every so often and see the percentages of the poll remain quite constant. Those numbers speak volumes, IMO, and gives me hope that if, God forbid, the Supreme Court goes crazy and the states take the issue to the polls, pro-lifers will have a major uphill battle to fight.

God bless American democracy.

Amen, sister!

 

[Oreo Cookie]

And, adoptive parents may be screened thoroughly in the present, but what about the future? We can't surely say they are or aren't going to become, say, bank robbers. It's just not a chance I want to take.

I'll state it again.

I'd rather see my child die at the hands of a doctor than a potential rapist.
.

This is very, very frightening. In life there is a BIG difference between possibility and probability.

Also, how many biological parents are abusive and have broken laws?

 

[Oreo Cookie]

It's been great to check in with this thread every so often and see the percentages of the poll remain quite constant. Those numbers speak volumes, IMO, and gives me hope that if, God forbid, the Supreme Court goes crazy and the states take the issue to the polls, pro-lifers will have a major uphill battle to fight.

God bless American democracy.

Another Amen Sister!

 

[Ariel Mae]

Also, how many biological parents are abusive and have broken laws?

So, it's all right to assume they're not going to become rapists, but it's not all right to assume they are? It's assuming, either way. The difference in my situation and yours is that I know I won't be an abusive parent. But I don't know that Bob and Jane who are adopting my daughter Jilian aren't. Or are. It's just not a risk I'm willing to take!

This is very, very frightening. In life there is a BIG difference between possibility and probability.

EDIT.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I'm sorry I posted a reason behind my opinion. It won't happen again.

[/sarcasm]