Pro-Choice & Pro-life
The genius of the republican party (as all dominating political forces throughout history) has been controlling the language that we use to debate. The abortion debate is a perfect example of where progressives in our country need to claim back the language of debate.
Since the two sides of the abortion debate are pro-life and pro-choice, those who are pro-choice are immediately equated to being pro-abortion or, even worse, pro-death. Without going into the obvious hypocrisy of republicans who support pre-emptive war, the death penalty, and free assault weapons with every happy meal calling themselves pro-life, just look at the inconsistency of the stance of the republican party on sexual education and abortion.
If republicans truly want to reduce the number of abortions, then why not prevent unwanted pregnancies with effective sexual education? Here's a novel concept: teach people how to use condoms and other forms of birth control instead of just naively telling them to not have sex. Abstinence-only education essentially amounts to crossing our fingers and hoping that things turn out for the best with the sex lives of adolescents and young adults. (Check out this post for info about how much of a failure abstinence-only education has been http://theprogressivepatriots.blogspot.com/2004/11/need-for-realistic-sex-education.html). So not only has literacy taken a hit during president bush’s stellar presidency, but also our abilities to use a condom seem to have taken a hit. That sounds like a dangerous combination.
So progressives need to fight back. Republicans with their naive form of sexual (un)education are pro-unwanted pregnancy-they are pro-abortion. Unless republicans do something to prevent unwanted pregnancies, progressives cannot allow them to claim to be anti-abortion. Liberals who support realistic sexual education are the only ones doing anything to keep the number of abortions down-so how come we are the one's deemed pro-abortion?
Pro-choice.
Pro choice for who? The fetus, (latin for little one), doesn't have any choice about infanticide. Is it the mother's form of B/C or a legalized hospital style killing. Perhaps the democrats see it as an assisted suicide for the fetus. The country suffers from the 40 million killed taxpayers prior to or at birth. Why save the whales if we are to kill the children? Why protect endangered species if we allow rampant infanticide? Why do the democrats use this as a litmus test to appoint activist judges? Why?
Why do you presume?
You presume that everyone considers the fetus a fully functioning human. I do not. I believe this is a religious view far more than a scientific one or governmental one. For me infanticide is limited to third trimester infants (when they could survive outside the womb) and full term and born children.
To me, letting children starve in Africa, bombing innocent children in Iraq, etc. are more worse examples of infanticide than abortion. If we can't save those children first, we have no business bringing other unwanted babies into the world to suffer the same fate.
For the above reasons (and more), I believe that the woman must make the choice, not me.
Why do you presume?
Do I understand you to say that it is religion that tells us there is a baby in there? Trust me, religion had nothing to do with it when I stood at my wife's side in the birthing room (or at the other end of the transaction, either!). Just to be sure, we confirmed it 4 times. Yup, it was a baby each time.
All kidding aside; I whole heartedly agree with your comments RE: 3rd trimester.
I don't see the relevance of the war in Iraq, etc., to this question. I think there are other forums for discussing those issues.
RE: A woman's choice. I think the choice was made a little earlier in the process. (I assume you are aware of the mechanics of how the baby gets in there.) But that is a settled issue. The courts have ruled and I, reluctantly, accept it. I think it's time to move on to things we can agree on & resolve that I believe are, heretofore, unjustifiably peripheral to the issue.
I hope, since by all accounts, we can agree far, far, too many abortions are committed in this country. I believe I will not find much disagreement on that point. I also think we need to accept that the courts have spoken and it is the woman's decision. I do not think it helpful to fail to accept that fact. I do, however, feel it important that we find a mechanism to reduce the choices resulting in these far, far, too many abortions. That is partly why I advocate counseling pre-procedure. It may not reduce the number of abortions but it is a life changing decision (for the woman, at least, irrespective of when one believes life begins) and it may reduce the collateral damage after the fact.I don't understand why we give less weight to it than we do driving a car or owning a gun. They, too, are life changing decisions but we require training, licensing and/or waiting periods, for those decisions. From the standpoint of very real, or at least potential, impact on the psyche of the woman shouldn’t we prepare her for the subsequent effects or consequences?
Red
I think you missed my point. Even if your belief is not religion based (I apologize if I jumped the gun on that). We still have very differing opinions on what constitutes viability and infanticide. Should those who believe that life begins at conception, based in readings of the bible, be allowed to force their views on those of us who don't? That is the issue at hand. If you believe there's is a baby in there, wonderful. But until the third trimester, I don't.
There are those who would wish to do just that. Those people, especially those who support killing the innocents in unjust wars, yet claim to be prolife, must not be allowed to make those changes.
I value your views on counciling, and for the record, I believe that abortion should be legal, safe, and RARE. Young people that find themselves in that self created but still unfortunate position need to know there are other options. Bravo for helping to provide them.
Since you are experienced in this area, could comment on the following. I teach in the inner-city schools of Chicago. I know this is an old story that you've heard many times, but it's not going away any time soon. This year I have 169 students and 14 of them are pregnant, most 16 and younger. Half are Mexican and recent immigrants (2 years or less). While most will get married when of legal age and formalize the process (admirable), most also admit that they did not know they could get pregnant by what they did. The pregnant African-American and White girls won't get married, will drop out school, and be destined to a life in poverty. So, sex ed., counciling, the church, the parents, all somehow failed them.
So if it's not working this way, with sex education, counciling on options (including abstinence), availability of contraceptives, etc.
where do we go from here?
Thank you for your input.
ProChoice
Emilio-I understand your right to voice your opinion and I would fight to the death to defend your right to speak your mind even if I don't agree with it. That is what our America was founded on. What I don't understand is why you or anyone thinks they have the right to tell someone what they can or can not do with their body which includes anything inside or on their body. I have lost 4 children to miscarriages and now can no longer even try because I had to have surgery. I would give anything to be able to adopt an unwanted child and sometimes I get angry about people using abortion as birth control. BUT, as a Registered Nurse for 24 years who has worked with women and young girls having abortions I have seen many of them who became pregnant through rape. My question to you is , if your sistr, daughter, wife, mother , any woman in your family or any female friends became pregnant through rape would you force her to have that child, to carry the child of some man who took her by force and be reminded daily of that evil? I have sat at the bedside of a raped teenager who was pregnant from that horrid crime and watched her agonize over the decision she had to make, but ended up unable to face herself or her family or her friends, carrying the child of a rapist and aborted the baby. Yes it is terrible but if you were in the situation and had a family member in her place what would you do? Would you really make her carry that child- don't answer here but in the privacy of your own mind, what would you do? You see I think the problem with the vote this year was not what people really wanted but waht they thought would look best to their family or their preacher or their congregation or their boss. I think too many people thought somehow their vote would be "Found Out" so they voted as they were told to or preached at to do or as they thought their family and friends wanted them to and that made this terrible thing happen and now everyone will pay the price for the fear that bush and his goon squad have put into the hearts of many people who say they are christians. First, anyone who believes bush is a Godly man needs to be psychologically eveluated. Does a Godly man start a war on the wrong country costing thousands of innocent lives? Does a Godly man let the man who really attacked us go free by taking our soldiers out of the area where they had him surrounded? Does a Godly man lie to his country about why he started that war? Does a Godly man take away jobs and health care and insurance from the people of his country? Does a Godly man consistantly lie about and berate and gather a group of people to publicly attack his opponent in an election? Does a Godly man arrogantly ignore advice from his hand picked advisors, thinking he is being led by God -today that is called schizophrenia and psychiatric hopitals are filled with those people. Does a truly Godly man think he has the right to change every thing that has been fought for and gained to bring our country from the dark ages just to take us back to the pre civil rights ages? Will he be holding witch trials next? Do you know where he will stop? How far will he go? Who will he dicide is acceptable to live in his country? When will he set himself up as King George or Dictator George? You may laugh at this but who would have thought he could have stolen the election twice-first in 2000 and now again in 2004- all the evidence shows it but will it ever come to light and be used to put things right? Look into your heart instead of your head and you will see the thruth. If you know the Bible,you know the verse that says-Beware the man who stands on the street corner and prays aloud for all to hear for surely he shall have his just reward, but rather go ye into thy closet and pray to thy Father in Heaven in private and He will reward you openly. And 'Beware those wolves who come in sheeps clothing for to deceive you and steal your soul" and how about Revelations that tells us to 'watch for the great deceiver who will change the hearts of even those who are the most Godly men for He will speak and deceive their hearts and confuse their minds until they cannot recognize his true self,woe be unto those who follow the false prophet for he is the t evil serpent, that one called Lucifer. Think and pray and study and look and see-maybe it is the beginning of the end. I am glad I didn't take on the mark of the one that has deceived too many already by casting my vote for him-it is all reocrde you know by names and numbers and codes. You did know that ,right?
Pro-Choice
The problem with this country is that things are too easy, and ease and leisure are viewed as the goal, and hard work and sacrifice is left to the down trodden, and the loosers.
Values, like patience, sacrifice, forgiveness, unselfishness, other centeredness, and giving, used to be American values. Now, the "Me Generation" has replaced those with selfishness, immediate gratification, revenge, taking and forgetting.
Tragedy happens to good people all too often, but before, people who met with tragedy, and faced it with determination, and self-sacrifice, and integrity were allowed to feel proud of themselves. Never allowing themselves to compromise their own values, in order to take "the easy way out". Now, people who choose sacrifice, are discouraged from doing so, always encouraged to do "what is right for them"."
If I, or my daughter, or sister were raped, I would be so proud of her willingness to self-sacrifice for 9 months, for the good of the baby, and good of the family that would be able to adopt. Furthermore, that act of love and unselfishness, could be enough, to get her over the terrible act of hate and rage that is rape.
However, telling a person who has met with tragedy, that taking "the easy way out" will make it all better, is a lie. Those girls will have to live with two tradgedies for the rest of their lives, one the rape, and two the loss of their first born.
Either way she chooses, there will be mixed feelings - loss, rage, resentment, anger, victemization. But which choice, could the woman look back on with pride? Only one choice, could the woman be proud of making - the self sacrificing choice, for the well being of the baby, and the adoptive family.
Don't sell women and girls short of what they are capable of dealing with. Adversity leads to strength, coddling leads to weakness.
What choice can a woman look back on with Pride in herself?
Only one, choosing life!
Hey Carmen San Diego
Part of me loved your post and part of me wanted to throw up. Do you have a daughter? I do, and I cannot write the words you wrote -- I have no idea how I would feel if this terrible crime would to happen to one of my own. Healing would be desirable, but perchance impossible. I would definitely want all options open as far as pregnancy goes. One cannot know ....
Sure choosing life would be better for one -- but I would want ALL options available.
Prochoice: All I can say is "
Prochoice: All I can say is "wow" , you said everything I was thinking...I too, as a Planned Parenthood volunteer, I have seen too many girls, some at the age of 10 and 12, who were the vivtims of rape and/or incest. There simply needs to be something in place for these girls, unless anyone can suggest a way to rid our society of rape and incest? Perhaps all men should have vasectomies?
Or castration if guilt is fou
Or castration if guilt is found, with the use of (such as DNA testing)
But then what if it was consentual and the woman sues for money?
What another one?
Good grief, Emilio is another conservative who doesn't read real data and real news.
If you think any sane person uses abortion as birth control you are mistaken, but there are so many ways the Christian Coalition and Conservative Bush increase the need for using abortion as birth control. They think they can simply tell people to just say no -- worked good for Reagan with drugs ... NOT. Now you have more uneducated, unfortunate, unwed women with unwanted pregnancies. There aren't "shot gun weddings" anymore -- not that there should be -- and that leaves many women alone with the responsibility about what to do with the unwanted pregnancy when IF they had been educated and IF a condom was available perhaps the pregnancy would have been avoided. Education, Jobs, making everyone fortunate, providing birth control supplies, these are the things needed to make abortion the last resort. We must be able to feed and cloth, give health care and homes to any unwanted child -- how are you going to do that? This is a complicated issue that requires much more inventive thought then to say "make it illegal".
Pro-lifers are nothing more than Pro-Birthers...
This precludes any need for them to stop their nonsense and think about the problems.
The latest facts to develop...show clearly that with full employment and health care availability...the trend of abortions went down. Now that millions are out of work, have no health care, and abortions are on the way up again.
The blame for unwanted pregnancies still falls entirely on the women. Deadbeat Dads and 'run into the sunset boyfriends' are seldom blamed. If a family has no income...and many today fall into this category, has no health insurance...an increase in family size is not a prudent move(bankers and Repugnants like to use the term "prudent").
We forget sometimes that Repugnants practice what they preach. Little Georgie impregnated a 15 year old girl when he was in his mid-20s. In anyone else's book...that would be rape. In any case, Daddy Bush arranged for the girl to go to a major Dallas hospital where she obtained an abortion--when the procedure was still illegal in America. Bob Barr, another fire-breathing Repugnant, paid for his wife's abortion...they were getting divorced...because he didnt want to be saddled with child support.
The list is almost endless. Women do not use abortion/choice as birth control. If a family is at the financial breaking point, does it make sense to add children to the family? I think not.
The arguments against are so trite. They are tired and old. Common sense should come into play--except that Fundies and Repugnants have no common sense.
Sex education is something we owe our children. The failure to teach them properly is a crime against our young. Choice is between a woman and her physician. Period.
Pro-Lifes are nothing more than Pro-Birthers
Well, duh! It is utterly laughable to say (twice so far in the replies above) that abortion is not being used for birth control. It is very difficult to lend credence to anything said by that source after a statement like that.
I am a generally middle of the road independent (somewhere between conservative Dem & Rockafeller Republican). I am also quite Pro-Choice. I feel it as absolutley a woman's right to choose: birth control, abstinence, or a child. I just don't think taking a life is an option. I confess I just don't get it that the extreme liberals are so abhorant of personal responsibility.
I also confess confusion at the most overlooked aspect of abortion: PTSD. Unfortunatley I have had intimate experience with 2 different women regarding abortion. The first clearly used abortion as birth control of her own volition. The second at my suggestion for the same purpose. I lost touch, over the years, with the first girl. I can tell you though the truama (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) the second woman deals with is heartbreaking. It is so for me as well. (& we knew all about our legal choices, etc.) I speak from experience when I tell you this is very much a women's issue. Just not in the sense made out by the ongoing debate. If we can require driver's ed before taking the wheel of a car, why can't we require taking some form of counseling before taking a life? That, of course, supposes the continued court sanctioning of taking those lives.
I say this from the heart: I do now believe abortion is the taking of a life. If not the child's, then certainly in a significant way, the mother's. Could we not move together on this devisive issue and make some accomodation? Right now I see 2 victims and no one productively doing anything for either.
I agree that it is taking a l
I agree that it is taking a life. But I don't think I should
impose that on anyone else because they're my beliefs. Because
of that, I'm pro-choice. That would be a nice accomadation
for a abortion clinic, though -- a family counciling person,
preferably offsite.
I agree that it is taking a life . . .
Please forgive me as this is purely hypothetical: If it is my choice to take your life; Is it o.k? It's just a choice, right? I do not mean to be so mean sounding or threatening to ask such an awful question. I am just trying to evoke empathy for the mother or "fetus" (baby).
My guess, and I cannot speak for them, is that if we were to ask the "fetus" (baby) the same question, we might get just the same reaction, probably anger, you felt.
I can speak for myself in regards to someone asking me the question I've asked above; I know I feel alarmed and very threatened when someone suggests my destruction.
If we do accept the inevitability of abortion, after all it is here to stay since something like 1973, we cannot blithely blind ourselves to the very real damage that it does.
I thank you for your support of my suggestion for counseling. I wonder why you feel it should be off-site, though? I would've thought you'd want it on-site so as to minimize interference with the service being sought. I like your idea because I think it would be more effective/contemplative.
I apologize if I've offended you with my question above. I do hope to keep the conversation on a civil footing.
I'm not offended or alarmed,
I'm not offended or alarmed, lol. It came across as a constructive
argument, not as a threat.
But you're right. I don't believe abortions are right, but I
can't impose that belief on anyone. I do happen to respect people
for not choosing to have an abortion and raising the child. Banning abortion wouldn't make many people change their minds about it.
What would be better is to give the family (or allow them to see
that they have) more options than aborting.
I mentioned counciling being off-site because choosing to have an
abortion is very sensitive and just being in that atmosphere
without having made a decision may be too much for them (mentally).
Maybe like sitting near a warzone before joining the army. If
a person chooses to see it first, that's also their choice.
I'm not so easily offended, though I thank you for your concern. :)
Red asks, "Could we not move
Red asks, "Could we not move together on this divisive issue and make some accomodation?"
While this sounds like a well meaning and truly good hearted request, I can't imagine a way for there to be an "accomodation" between the various sides of this issue. The positions are quite disparate, and all sides have positions which are solidly grounded in core, deeply held values, despite the tendency of each side to accuse the other of thoughtlessness or immorality. Abortion is a difficult, personal choice-- how could you possibly suggest that a woman who makes that choice is not exercising personal responsibility in the most poignant and profound way? By the way, the conservative side has been pretty successful in shaping the dialogue about abortion. Most pro-choicers now fall all over themselves in saying that while they personally would not have an abortion, they are still supportive of the right to choose. Well, there are still those of us who are not only pro-choice, but whose values and sensibilities make us less squeamish about abortion, and do not apologize in seeing it as a last resort form of birth control. So, as unpleasant and divisive as it has become, the abortion war is going to be waged for a very long time.
Red asks: "Could we not move . .
Thank you so much for your quite respectful reply. I agree with so very much, nearly all, of what you've said. Ironic that, and I sense I am correct, you & I disagree completely on the core of this issue. I think we can also agree that will not change.
You, the liberals, have won this issue via Roe v. Wade. We are not ever going to turn that back. Though I wished it never happened I cannot say it would necessarily be helpful to reverse it now either. Courts do not easily, if ever, over turn precedent, particularly their very own.
I hope to take issue with you, and others, on a few points you've made though. The first being: "I can't imagine a way for there to be an accommodation" on this issue. I honestly have more confidence in your imagination then you've expressed in yourself. (You're a liberal aren't you?) ;-)
On the other point: "The abortion war is going to be waged for a very long time." If we were to get a sense of accommodation from each side I think that peace can be imagined. Acceptance of accommodation is acceptance of reality. Acceptance is the demise of conflict.
If we discuss related issues just off the bull's-eye perhaps each side could give a little. Discussion of counsel prior to the procedure is ripe for accommodation. Liberals discussing it can be seen as a concession to conservatives advocating it. Liberals can see it as fortifying acceptance of the reality of legal abortion, a major concession by conservatives, and advocacy of their own agenda of promoting women's health (emotional & mental) issues. Accommodations such as legislated guarantees not to interfere with the ability to receive these "services" and choices as to availability of neutral (trained psychology technicians) or "faith based" options can be in the mix.
I see this as moving the debate from the intractable to the tractable. Who could possibly be unsupportive of advocating a significant women's health issue? I see this as a win-win for everyone. That it gets abortion off the national radar is more than just icing on the cake. It's progress.
Bottom line; re the abortion
Bottom line; re the abortion matter...
Poor little rich (red state's) daughters of wealthy families that vote for 'right wing conservatives'...have private doctors and pay enormous amounts of money to have their abortions performed away from the 'hideous abortion clinic'....
The poor white/black young girl that doesn't have family affluent ties --has to resort to the 'abortion center'....where it's affordable and no questions asked --your choice.
So if preserving life from the 'elite to the poor ' is why the government doesn't want to fund and/or agrees with 'free standing abortion clinics'. -- Why not privatize it -- just another issue the FedGov needs to consider fair and not a 'moral issue' -- FedGov knows this issue has to remain as part of our social freedoms -- but chooses to use it as a 'political tool'.
Re; right wing conservatives -- they are 'Pro-Life'..however; they are the biggest supporters of 'cutting childrens programs' first and 'no child left behind'; is another myth.
Other issues the Federal Govenment needs to get out - 'gay civil unions (marriage), social security (state tax instead)...and numerous other issues.
I thought the 'gay marriage' ballot issue in 2004 election was a 'genius strategy'...in order to derail the election. --
This issue should have been debated out and should not have been included in the 2004 platform.
The GOP will make sure they appoint all their own kind by 2008 --making it impossible for 'debate' and to ensure this issue is another tactic to win.
Continue to fight for Pro-Choice rights and never let Rowe v Wade be overturned --this will be a hot topic in '08.
Live Free or Die.
Pro Life or Pro Choice
You pro-murder...sorry, pro choice regressives need only to look at yourselves to find out why you aren't in power anymore. My party left me when it began to promote the murder of innocent life and protect the lives of guilty murderers.
You fail to recognize that the majority of the people of the US no longer support the abortion lobby. We support the real right to choose! The real right to choose is exercised before the penis hits the vagina. The real right to choose is based on the instruction of the young that all life, viable or not, is precious. The real right to choose is based on real information about the consequences of giving the gift of your body away to the wrong person. Real choice is informed choice.
You deny that informed choice to people seeking abortion "counseling" and abortion information. Go ahead and waste your time posting to each other...you're on the deck of the Titanic and you can't hear the band!
I am a first time poster on t
I am a first time poster on this website. I have posted on other blogs, mostly redical conservatives sites, thought I would come to my own base so I would not get shouted at and be called a traitor.
My feelings on abortion. It's a woman's right and that's the bottom line, I can't believe this issue has been made out to be the whole countries concern. I am a woman and it is my body, I will do with it as I please.
I am not pro-abortion. I don't like abortion but believe the right to have one needs to be there whether I like it or not.
Let's also look at this from a medical standpoint. I used to be in the medical profession. A fertiziled egg is not a baby (human life). What about all the fertilized eggs in fertility clinics that are thrown in the trash? If human life starts at the moment of conception then we are throwing hundreds of them away every day. It is a baby (human life) when it has a heart and a brain.
Also I would like to question people who are against abortion but believe in the death penalty. If you are going to argue a "life" is a "life", that means all life, not the ones you choose to pick deserve life.
Life is also more than being and breathing. Why have a child who you know is not going to be born into poverty and pain? Life is one thing, living is another. Look at the children who are born in Africa that are born to starve until they die? Who never experience living, only suffering?
Pro-Choice
This issue needs resolution, although I'm not sure how that will look. Red, I am with you on this need, and so appreciate that you and Dragon are pro-choice, even with your personal beliefs. I am pro-choice and I am so glad to hear from a group of people intelligently debating this issue and trying to come up with solutions.
While issues like right to privacy and women's rights are at the heart and soul of this debate, the pro-choice/ pro-life drama is also a distraction from issues like poverty, abuse, lack of education, lack of contraception, etc. that contribute to demand for abortions. No one ever talks about WHY women choose abortion. Those issues are so much harder to talk about and solve than picking a side and hoping a well-placed Supreme Court Justice will overturn Roe v. Wade. I'd like to see the pro-lifers rally with as much enthusiasm over homelessness, child abuse, hunger, and poverty as they do about the "right to life".
Just throwing out questions, do we need legislation to make Roe irreversible? I know this is potentially asking for trouble, but what about talks between pro-choice and pro-life leaders to legislate a permanent solution? Privatizing will put a real burden on organizations to find funding, and I think could put many providers out of business. Plus there is still the issue of how poor people will afford it. Many clinics do a lot more than provide abortions, so maybe federal $ can be used for reproductive health care, pregnancy prevention and education instead, and keep the groups afloat. I think it could be a conversation worth having - I hope you weren't being sarcastic.
Anyway, I hope this conversation can remain civil. Thanks for this forum and for giving me a soapbox. This is a complex and emotional issue, so I just appreciate the chance to ask questions and wrestle with solutions too. Thanks.
Pro What
Think about it for a moment, when we become Pro Life and legislate it we legislate a women's body, we do not have a write to do so. Are we going to start making men get the surgery so they are no longer have children at a certain age too. Religion needs to stay out of politics. King George can take his Bible and shove it. The Bible is Philosophy, it is no better than Plato and The Republic, or the Writings of Aristotle, I get real frustrated when the Bible enters politics, it has no business except in you personal life, and church.
Pro-Choice v. Pro-Life
Lanwiecz - Thanx for continuing the civil discourse. I think I should clarify that I am Pro-Life. I was afraid when I stated in my comments above: "I am also quite pro-choice. I feel it is absolutely a woman's right to choose: birth control, abstinence, or a child" some would see the phrase "Pro-Choice" and skim over the rest. I did not mean any deceit but, obviously, to make a point. The point being that it is a misnomer to imply by semantics liberals are anti-life or conservatives are anti-choice. I know most here disagree with that belief and, again, I do not attempt to dissuade, simply to seek accommodation.
As I read the comments on this subject today I see soo much more that we agree on than the one point, albeit THE BIG one, we disagree on. I am unrepentant in my belief that if we focus on what we do agree on we can get a lot more done than if we simply rant about a point we already know will never be resolved between us. I am encouraged by the civility and intelligence I have seen in most of the posts I've seen here today, though I disagree with most, on the central point.
I hope comments irrelevant to the discussion such as the Iraq war, starvation in Africa, etc. are left to those discussion groups. I certainly do not want to demean those issues as they are certainly, in my opinion, of the utmost importance, too. I just don't think it progresses us in resolving this issue. Actually I feel it weakens the point because it comes off as obfuscation to cover up a weak argument. Many here, whom I certainly disagree with on this issue, have made excellent points. I'll even admit some, just some, better than my own. ;-)
Again, Lanwiecz, because of Roe v. Wade I don't see the need for legislation trying to outlaw outlawing abortion. Simply b/c courts rely more heavily on precedent than legislation and are loath to overturn, especially there own, precedent such as the Roe decision. Right now Congress is discussing ideas to potentially usurp what they see as the courts usurping their legislative prerogatives (abortion, gay marriage, etc.). I don't think either is necessary nor do I think either would succeed. And for the better.
To Karl Marx & legislating choices regarding a person's body: We do it all the time in our society. We have controlled substances (prescription drugs), tattoos & piercing at the age of consent, suicide laws, etc. Ironic that a teenage girl can get an abortion in many states but not an ear piercing or tattoo. If there's any time a young teen needs parental counsel, and a parent's prerogative should be respected, it's at a time like this. In my opinion it is ill advised to punish (put at risk) all teenage girls to "protect". the very few. Even for those rare exceptions laws already on the books protecting children come into play for an abusive situation. Divorcing all teenage girls from parental counsel is like burning the house down to kill the rat.
Problems of Government
We have been ruled by fear for 45 months but that is not the point.
The issues of a women's right to choose must never be legislated, we attempt to do so because King George and his bible says so. It is her body, and the government should stay neutral.
Euthanasia, again, the government should not legislate a person's right to die, Oregan has this legislation, and I believe it has no problems, this is a personal choice, a deep personal choice, not one that the government should legislate, because it will ultimately happen anyway.
Marriage, we have the write to define the defination of marriage, but what we don't have is the right to treat those with a different sexual orientation as less of a human being because of that. In the middle ages of Plato, sexual pleasure was between a boy and an older man, Marriage was symbolic, and for children only. We are going backwards by trying to write hate into the constitution. So we must define marriage as between to consenting adults. Marriage is civil law, you can be married in the court, but religously, you can be married in a religiously centered place.
Children and parent control, I believe that at the age of 16 children are at a point that certain things such as abortion, if necessary should be able to be performed with out parent consent. We need to think a little more about what we need to control and what we have to control. Unlike King George like is much better if we choose our battles and the ones I have talked about are control issues.
We must also be reminded that the Bible is a work of Philosophy, and it is no more valuable than Plato and The Republic, or Aristotlen and his writings. We have no objective proof of who really wrote the Bible.
Problems of government
I think you & I are on opposite sides of an ideological divide. There is much, though, we have in common as evidenced by your comments above. I hope you will bear with me as I digress on each of your points. I am so glad we have points of agreement to share:
Ironically I disagree with your first point. I am sorry if you have felt ruled by fear these past 45 months. I have not. When it comes to political discourse I arm myself with information. It is a good armor.
As far as legislating b/c of the bible. Surely that is so. Our nation is founded on that premise. I think we agree on that. It is a good and useful premise as evidenced by our successes in respect to human rights. Sure, it takes a long time, often too long, to get it right but we eventually do. You call it a philosophy and you are correct, or at least I agree, to a degree. Others call it more than that. For them it is so, too.
Euthanasia - We agree 100% on your comments. Hey, one in a row! ;-)
Marriage - I agree with the result of your comments here, too, tepid though I may be. I do feel same sex marriage is a distortion of the original foundation of marriage as sanctioned in our Judeo-Christian, Islamic, and other cultures. However our courts and laws have set precedent, rightly, that one cannot discriminate based on gender. In this instance I don’t like it but feel I must tolerate it. I’ll just have to get over it. Hell, maybe one day I will even embrace it. (Honestly? Yuck! So far) As an aside: I hope you have contemplated that virtually all of the world’s cultures/societies moved away from &/or, did not embrace the lifestyle you purport for the middle ages of Plato.
Children and parental control. Scary, but I think we agree mostly here, too! ;-) There is an age at which the apron strings loosen & eventually unravel. There is also precedent for it being recognized prior to the age of full majority. Until that time who is the government (your argument for respect of women’s choices regarding their bodies) to interfere between a parent and a child? Are you to legislate my upbringing of my children? Am I yours?
Lanewiecz presents situations that are problematic to those teens in abusive environments. (Thank you for taking the time to describe them to me.) I feel those situations can be handled in the context of Child Protective Services and corresponding statutes with little or no modification. This is where I feel it counter productive (burning the house down to gat the rat) to give license to all teenage girls to obtain abortion on demand. I feel that puts many more at risk (all) of consequences of a life altering decision, made by a teen, to address the exceptional situations of a few. Exceptions should be treated as exceptions, in my humble opinion, and there are, or can be, provisions in existing laws to do so without endangering all young teen girls.
I thank you gentlemen, and all the others, for your intelligent and civil discourse. It makes it easier to believe we can meet somewhere between even our very great differences. I am encouraged.
oops
Sorry for the mistake, red. I just re-read your posts and caught your discussion of choices. I just think it's interesting that you do not seek to overturn Roe, although I think the risk of it being overturned is a bit more serious than you think. I have heard many Republicans say they don't really think Roe COULD be overturned. The pro-life movement has changed their tactics to limit access through state legislation and court cases, and possibly make it illegal, like in cases of domestic violence etc., making penalities greater for those who harm a pregnant woman. Even the Peterson case could set a precedent about fetal rights. I'm not as well-versed in the minutiae as I should be, but the risk is growing.
I also want to respond to your discussion of parental notification. I worked with teenagers in a pregnancy prevention program, and two students sought abortions. In my state, teens can obtain abortions without parental notification. In both cases, the students faced serious abuse at home, and possible homelessness if they were forced to tell their parents. I counseled them on all options - birth, adoption, and birth control afterwards, and none of the options worked for them. Adoption was too painful emotionally (oddly enough) and required them to tell their parents. The choice to have an abortion was difficult but one student actually told me that I saved her life. I've known a lot of girls in the same position, who would have faced horrible consequences if they had the baby. In a way, I think this isn't a fair choice, and I wish these teens didn't have to go through this. We need to protect and support teens who do get pregnant, and provide more effective pregnancy prevention. The point is, this isn't a reality yet - teens are scared to tell their parents about sexual activity, and many face horrible consequences. Those teens need to be protected, and unfortunately there is no way to know who will be safe and who will not. Many teens DO choose to involve their parents - I forget the stats, but its pretty high. I'm not sure I follow you when you say that it's a mistake to punish all teenage girls to protect the very few. There's nothing that says parents can't be involved. Many of the girls I counseled who became pregnant or even THOUGHT they were pregnant told their mothers (usually, the fathers were absent).
Thanks again for your openmindedness, red. I really enjoy the conversation.
My Thoughts on the Subject
People always tell me I don't have a right to talk about abortion because I'm divided between pro-life and pro-choice. They tell me I have to be one or the other. But honestly, I am split in my opinion and I'll explain the reasons why. I hope I don't make anyone mad... not my intentions. I'm sorry if I do. Read all of it though because There will probably be at least one point in here everyone will agree with reguardless of which side you are on.
Half of me is pro-life because I believe that there are too many people out here not taking responsiblity for there actions. People are turing sex into a "recreational" pleasure. Now I'm not a conservative Christian.. I'll keep my religion my business... but people need to take a good look at this issue. I don't believe that sex is only for people who are married.. but I think it is a very sacred thing that should be shared by two people who love eachother. The point I'm getting at is that a lot (Not all) of men and women head for the bedroom just for kicks and aren't responsible enough to think about what consequences they could be facing.
To women who fall into this catagory (recreation w/o responsibilty)- Please note this is only 1 catagory)I'm sorry.. but there are way too many forms of birth control for the rate of unwanted pregnacies to be so high. I don't feel that I should be telling someone how to live someone's life , but if your not going to grasp the idea that sex is a more than just something that makes you feel good and that birth control is more than just a "time consuming" option, then I take no pity on you for becoming pregnant because you've asked for it and you should be held accountable for it. There needs to be changes to communicate with women like this. Maybe the importance of responsibility should be more emphasized at home and at school instead. I don't know.. it's hard to change a person's way of thinking. A friend of mine suggested that the women that fall into this catagory should have a right to one abortion and then have her female organs removed... There are times when my anger tempts me to agree with that... but I don't think that is what this country is all about. These people just need to be better eduacated and maybe be counsled instead of being turned away and looked down upon all the time. The more you look down on these women.. the less likely they are to listen and change. Men need to pay attention to this too because it takes TWO people to make a life. Don't kill your offspring just because you made a mistake. Scroll down to read an alternate that you've heard about all too many times before. It's the next paragraph actually. If this catagory of people can change they're ways and views a bit.. most of the abortion statistics would probably drop.
Women who have been raped:
It's really unfortunate that stuff like this happens. I'm not going to say too much because I might start man bashing and I don't want to to that. If I were raped and I coudn't handle the thought of having my attacker's child.. I still would not have an abortion... the reason is this: There are so many couples out there who can't have children that want children so bad. This life is part of you too! Wouldn't it be better knowing that your child is out there living it's life instead of knowing you killed it just because the father is a miserable human being? I have known women who don't have the biological make up to have kids and I have to say that it's heartbreaking to see these people suffer because they don't think they'll ever have the chance to be what people take for granted... a parent. Adoption doesn't just give your child a chance at life... it brings joy to people who are less fortunate and can't give life. I think there should be a proposed program in law for raped women who become pregnant.... first of all, COUNSELING! They have been through a very tramatic experience and they are going to need it! But to add to that and make the choice of abortion less likely, the program should offer free maternity care and adoption services to the victim. That's just an idea though.
Now here is where my opinion shifts...
I am pro choice for the following reasons:
There are women out there who get pregnant and either have or develop serious health problems. In a lot of these cases, many women who carry a baby to full term risk the chance of dying themselves.
I think it would be wrong to deny these people a choice because that would be like sentencing a woman to death just because she wanted to try to bring a life into this world. My hearts go out to these people.. but I must say, if you are a woman who has a Pre-Exsisting condition before you conceive... please think seriusly about chancing it... go for adoption.
This is the first time I've ever expressed my opinion on the issue so be gentle. The simple fact is though that most people are on either one side or the other and see no compromises. It really is ashamed becuase if you get people together that can see both sides and put aside there differences... we might really be able to come up with some answers to lower abortion statistics (it'll never be illiminated completly even if it is made illegal.) That's just my personal opinion. Sorry if I ramble on too much. Blessed be to you all on both sides and I hope that one day we all unite.
Gibbygilr98's Thoughts on the Subject
You go girl! I loved your comments. I thought they were very insightful, thoughtful, and a sincere effort at being sensitive and non-judgmental. It's just such a difficult situation to get our hearts and minds around.
I, for one, have become Pro-life over the years b/c of experiences I've had with (2) women that've had abortions. I hope that does not cause judgment of me but if it does just know I am hard on myself for it.
I reluctantly accept the fact that abortion is here to stay. I fervently hope we can put aside what we simply cannot agree on, and sometimes even discuss civilly, and find some accommodation. I hope you will, or have, read my comments above on the subject (especially counseling) for what I think could be done to that end. I know I've enjoyed reading yours and have been enlightened by sharing thoughts of others in this forum. Thanx for sharing.
.