WANTED: Abortion Logic.

I am looking for logic from so called "pro-life" people. Please explain (logically) why you feel you have the right to intrude into peoples' personal lives.

 

Logical Pro-Lifers(pro-life is another term for anti-choice). If that's not an oxymoron I don't know what is.

 

I think its pretty easy to understand that they think it is wrong, and that they want to save the babies lives........

 

People who are wrong, usualy feel the need to force their views on others...

 

If they want to save babies, why aren't they all out there adopting the ones that are already here and aren't wanted instead of fighting for the ones who aren't here and aren't wanted? Every "logical" explanation I've ever heard from a "pro-lifer" can be disputed by an even more logical argument.

Edit: the preceding was written before the one above it was read.
If you start legislating any amount of control over what women do with their bodies, there will always be room to add more control. When does it stop?

 

anti choice i like that

 

I'm not a pro-lifer, but some of the arguements don't seem accurate. For one, there are plenty of people waiting in line to adopt babies. Essentially every BABY could be adopted by someone waiting. When I was much younger I got my girlfriend pregnant and we went through the whole adoption process....we were able to choose parents out of a seemingly unlimited supply of applicants, and were able to negotiate a deal where they paid our rent while we moved away to go through this hard time.

I think it is in a sense murder, I know that sounds dramatic, but you are definitely ending the life of a person to be. That being said, I don't feel horrible when i hear about a 3 week old fetus being aborted. I do see late term abortions as completely immoral unless it is to save the mothers life.

I still am in favor of the right to choose however, and in no way allign myself with any fundamentalist religion. I don't look down or judge people that have abortions either.

 

I dont know where to begin
this is all your opinion, so you cant say some are right and some are wrong..
How would it be murder? any why should a case like that be illegal..
You are bringing religion into it and thats shit..
I just think people need to judge themselves and not tell people other people how wrong they are and take it upon themselves to tell someone that they are a murderer ..I dont consider abortion murder, I consider it none of my damn business..

 

Damn straight!

 

Shame theres alot of kids who aren't babies that no one wants.

As for me....I will always try to do the right thing.....but my mistakes are mine, not yours and I will have to answer for the choices I make...as it should be.

So Shroom is correct as far as I'm concerned, if it does not directly involve you, stay out of my bizwax.

 

No matter how you look at it, it really is none of your business and you should stay out of it.

 

To abort ior not is the woman's choice. It is her body, but not only that, it is her life decision whether or not to bring a baby into the world. Easy enough for the man, whether or not to provide it. But that is where his responsibility starts and ends, for the sperm has left his body, it is no longer his any more than if he were jacking off. Why? Because the only difference is that it is the woman's body that causes it to become anything more than that! Not just a uterus, but part of a person who must decide whether or not to dedicate the rest of her life to raising this child.; Either she is happy to do that or she isn't, and if not, then it is within her right to abort it because she has a constitutional right to her happiness. We're not talking about a puppy here that you can just surrender to someone ellse. To adopt the child is no clear answer either, then you always have to wonder if the child is okay, and if you really knew how genes are, you may even fear you could be held responsible for bringing another horrible creep into the world by the time it's grown. Men should get their perogotives set. Once the sperm has left his body, it is no longer his property. It's like donating blood. And if he's such a great guy, then she'd probably be happy to keep the baby., and him. But to continue as a single parent because abortion is not socially acceptable, knowing it decreses her chances of finding and being in a position to dedicate herself to another better relationship in the future--I'd rather see for HER benefit that she is left the right to abort and not be guilt tripped about it. There are some men who think they acheive a marriage situation by getting you pregnant. That is nothing but a control freak, and at least it tells him otherwise at the same time! I'd rather support aborting earlier on than watch the public struggle through things like partial birth (3rd trimester) abortions, simply because it makes it too hard on the woman to do what she feels is the necessary thing to put HER life forward. After all, without her in the first place, the sperm would have dried up in the wind anyways. And for all those God freaks: You say that is is morally wrong--there is ALOT morally wrong with the world today. Why do you think we need to keep this an explicit right of the women? Why isn't enlistment into the armed forces considered murder or causing murderers? If this God thing always had it's way, there'd be a perfect mate for everyone and we'd all be happy and following it's plan. But too many people church instead of trusting that there is a God out there who's will could be followed. As it is, though, the book that the christians follow does tell them that their God gave them FREE WILL, so there's double proof that anyone who says God doesn't want it that way surely must realize that you can't pick at the women for the way they must handle life today because of the way the rest of it is. A welfare program and less money into the armed forces, sure, I'd bet abortion statitics would go down. But to sacrifice and live your life as a single parent who has to struggle to make ends meet, plus do the house work, plus dedicate her enjoyment to the child she can't share with the father because she can't tolerate him is injustice. Women have an equal right to the happiness set forth in our constitution, and if a man thinks he WANTS a right to help decide whether or not to abort, he had better look instead to being a better man for the woman. After all, this is the woman he's deciding to spend his life with. If they can't get along this far, why push it into a crazy, twisted up version of "what's best for the baby". I think it's a far worse crime for (hardly) grown young men to be carted off to war and many killed, many more emotionally and physically injured as they return. That happens on a large scale, and those were kids that WERE wanted. Wouldn't they have made great dads instead? Maybe the Pres. should consider THAT into his family values when he makes his speaches! At home here, where are all the good men when it's time to make babies in a female's life? It's slim pickin's and many of us single moms used to depend on welfare so we could at least give our children a comfortable home life, even if it was with only one parent. It appears that abortion is becoming a viable choice to many young women, now that there is no welfare. That's quite a sacrifice to ask of the young women in the event of accidental pregnancy, that it's just theirs and now they must work and support it. Women are citizens too, and most these days want a life. Not that raising children isn't, but that decision shouldn't be robbed from her. If abortion sounds so horrible to you that you think women shouldn't be in a legal position to make that choice, and I'm sure that aborting is a horrible decision to have to make, but then help make the world a better place, and consider they wouldn't be doing it if they didn't feel they had to to get ahead or keep up or to stay happy or find better chances for happiness.

 

One last thing. I'd certainly like to see some statistics on the mortality rate of women in
America since the welfare became W2. I cry sometimes. I see women walking around bloated and bitchy. They bloat because they are SWOLLEN from the extroadinarilly stressful lives they are forced into as child bearers AND working, tax paying citizens. Swollen, bloated, and bitchy because they are forced to take on too much and it is killing them. And all men can do is complain they aren't attractive enough. They are unsympathetic and abusive simply because that is what they do. They should take on a role of at least leave them alone, carry your own weight and keep the work place a pleasant atmosphere, without expectations that the women kiss up to the men or feel that they must provide for them on any unspoken level. Much like we are your friends, not your sponges. What else can some women do besides abort if they ar3 working and cannot quit and do not want to have to raise a child in a day care or for any other reason, at a certain time, you must decide that because the world isn't right, that you must weigh all the circumstances and realize, yes, women have the right to make that decision. It's not only a matter of her happiness, but it's to a degree that for many women it could mean a shorter life and a torturous life. Does that sound worthy to say, hey, we woulddn't want troops from another country coming in and saying, treat your women better or we'll blast ya? In other words, it is another form of oppression, to take that decision from the woman, even though it is a progressive (contemporary) or relatively "new" problem that women face and only applies to countries where women are liberated enough to have to bring it to this solution, still, you can only sew the flag one stitch at a time. And since we do have our "stars" on this issue, we have to keep sewing until the flag is complete, i.e. bring this country forward and make law what the progress is to perfect it. I guess abortion could then be looked on as a smaller war women fight in solitude against the perils of a disorganized nation that isn't quite all the way civil.

 

One last thing. I'd certainly like to see some statistics on the mortality rate of women in
America since the welfare became W2. I cry sometimes. I see women walking around bloated and bitchy. They bloat because they are SWOLLEN from the extroadinarilly stressful lives they are forced into as child bearers AND working, tax paying citizens. Swollen, bloated, and bitchy because they are forced to take on too much and it is killing them. And all men can do is complain they aren't attractive enough. They are unsympathetic and abusive simply because that is what they do. They should take on a role of at least leave them alone, carry your own weight and keep the work place a pleasant atmosphere, without expectations that the women kiss up to the men or feel that they must provide for them on any unspoken level. Much like we are your friends, not your sponges. What else can some women do besides abort if they ar3 working and cannot quit and do not want to have to raise a child in a day care or for any other reason, at a certain time, you must decide that because the world isn't right, that you must weigh all the circumstances and realize, yes, women have the right to make that decision. It's not only a matter of her happiness, but it's to a degree that for many women it could mean a shorter life and a torturous life. Does that sound worthy to say, hey, we woulddn't want troops from another country coming in and saying, treat your women better or we'll blast ya? In other words, it is another form of oppression, to take that decision from the woman, even though it is a progressive (contemporary) or relatively "new" problem that women face and only applies to countries where women are liberated enough to have to bring it to this solution, still, you can only sew the flag one stitch at a time. And since we do have our "stars" on this issue, we have to keep sewing until the flag is complete, i.e. bring this country forward and make law what the progress is to perfect it. I guess abortion could then be looked on as a smaller war women fight in solitude against the perils of a disorganized nation that isn't quite all the way civil.

 

In answer to the original question, why there are persons who are "pro-life". I don't even like that term, because it makes it sound like the only important thing about life is what's going to happen to that lady's fetus. Who cares if she doesn't! I mean, is it any of anybody elses business? and if so, do something on a larger scale so abortion doesn't appear to be the only choice for so many women. I used to think that the murder of a fetus couldn't be justified. But as I got older, I learned that we live in a social structure that depends on laws that the people must agree with and to continue to improve those laws. Right now, it doesn't try to improve, it only maintains. I used to be very nieve to the world around me and why a woman would want to abort. I certainly am just as much an idealist as I ever was, but now I put it into perspective. I say "this is the way it should be", but also "this is the way that it is". People who are "anti-choice" are idealistic and uninformed, at best. Outside of that, I'm sure there's plenty of religious fanatics out there that are that and pompous about it as well.

 

I'd like to elaborate one more time on this subject, sorry if you're getting tired of me. I've often theorized that men have a harder time with life, taking on the role of warrior and authoritarian. I say, ole' chap, I don't like seeing those two words in the same sentence! How will we bring about a world of no more war and complete equality (or at least fairness) of the sexes so long as it is men in power? Is it possible in their gene structure they confuse the war tendencies with the dominance role they take on as the head and protecter of the family? We now live in a world of tact and diplomacy (at least we'd like to think so), and it is not as though we don't know how, we DO know how and that it is necessary if we are going to progress life to continue on this planet. What I'm saying is that those who don't have it to save the world shouldn't be the ones in power. All they are is pensil pushers and are not in a mind to give the necessary direction that is necessary to promise a future for this planet, such as ecologially sound energy sources, and, superior diet and growing technigues that are promissable alternatives for the planet in the long term, like organic farming, rather than all the shi_ crap that is out there now for us to buy and consume. Our country must take hold of these problems and enforce change, now, before everyone is too sick and dying to even make it look like there's any hope. I' can't complain that some women choose to abort. If there chances of happiness improves with that, then that is their perogative. And on a larger scale, Happier families make a happier socialization, no matter how it got that way, like I said, it's our little war against the imperfect world we are forced to be a part of, and at least someone benefits from it here--The woman and her future prospects. I, in fact, think we should have a right to public money to stay home and raise children RATHER than work, simply because if there's not enough marriage material available, and I can BE a good parent, INSTEAD of being at a job all day, then I should have the right to make that choice. My body is not both male and female. Bearing children is a stressor on the woman's body and wears it down. Men's bodies are in better shape to work, and for real, the planet can't afford for everyone to have a job. Not in it's current form, anyways. And with so many jobs available, a job ould be easier to get. The way it is now, there are homeless people in the winter who live outdoors, in the city, where it is supposed to be civilized and to provide and it can't get it straight 4enough to face that it isn't doing it's job, there isn't enough work for everyone, and there are families forced from their homes due to downsizing at the company. We are in an economic crisis and an ecological one as well. I think the women SHOULD get the break and be offered money to stay home and raise the children that provide for the future of our socialization.

 

I'm not pro-life (not completely anyway) but.....

I could ask that same question to anyone who gets an abortion. Why do they feel it is their right to take away a life that is not their own?

I think both sides of the argument....anyone with more than a 5th grade education should KNOW that it is NOT part of woman's body that is being aborted, it's not like you're cutting off hair or fingernails or something. And a developing baby is far from being a "mass of unspecified cells" as so many pro-abortionists claim. Any woman here who is a mother knows that. Also, A woman has a choice (except in exteme cases) to have sex or not, or to use protection or not. It is not the fault of an innocent child if the mother isn't capable of being responsible for her own actions.

On the other hand, there are so many pro-lifers out there that love to preach at people about what they SHOULD be doing, but they hate welfare programs and other forms of charity that are meant to help the children who AREN"T aborted live a healthy life. If they are entitled to life at all, they should be entitled to a decent one. You can't claim to care about something when it's someone else's problem, but then suddenly give a fuck less how much he/she suffers after it's born.

It has always seemed to me like both pro-lifers and pro-choicers are more concerned about being right than they are about the well-being of the child or it's mother.

 

I live in the City Which contains Jerry Falwells church, unfortunately. So I know some pro-lifers. I have not asked but from what I have seen this is my take on it.They believe it will be an integral part of some vision to improve the moral stature of this country.

I don't agree with them. I think regulating it would be best. Prohibition did'nt work and even if Bush gets his way it won't work out in the end. Don't feel defeated... some big problems take generations to fix, find inspiration through the words of John Muir, Henry David Thoreau, and Rosa Parks. Don't give up. This is our country too.

 

Chuck, I gave you rep that cut me off. What I was trying to say is, I appreciate others in my tribe. You rock. (Does a little white girl boogie in your honor and for your amusement).


And Micheal, I understand that this is an issue that has given you much personal pain. I'm sorry for others unexcuseable actions.

 

I agree that the father should have say in the matter.
Although a woman carries the child, if the father cares enough to even argue the point and he is involved or even if he isn't, the choice should be part his also.

Its just such a shame that alot of women use this as a form of birth control.
IF they HAPPEN to get pregnant....awww, just get an abortion.... throw away society.
The responsibility lies with both who are making the choice to have sex and both should know that there is no 100% birth control, other than abstinence.
So if you make the choice to play then you have to accept the consequences.
BUT...bottom line is that a previous poster is correct in saying that most guys that have not made a serious commitement to the mother,,, are probably not going to take fatherhood too seriously.
In the end it is the woman who needs to take responsibility for her body and what she chooses to do with it.
It is unfair, very unfair to bring a child into this world that you are not prepared to raise,its unfair to the child, to yourself and to society.

I am all for sex education in schools, should be mandatory....yes parents should be the ones teaching it at home...but look around...that plan isn't working.

The abortion debate will always be around...as will abortions, legal or not.