A woman's right to choose?

[Guest]

Re: This is something I've had to think about

A lot of people around here know that I'm pregnant. I'm currently 12 weeks along...

Don't forgot, hon, to mention how the last time you were in labor it almost killed you. So, you had a lot to think about once you found out you were pregnant this time. (Not to mention, also, that brief lil' thing that happened too! More, um...)

At any rate, I am pro choice. I don't think I personally could have an abortion myself, but I think it's vital that the option be there for women. I mean, why should a politician, a man, have the right to tell a woman what she can and can not do with her body?

I could get into a very heated, passionate debate here if I allow myself, but I don't really want to. I'm sneaking into this thread pretty late in the game, it seems, and will now vanish from it. Take care all and have fun!

~Lindsay

 

[teresafannin]

I got pregnant twice while on BC & was faithful about taking the pill, because I didn't ever plan on having children. I had a miscarriage the first time & my son 3 years later. My son was a wonderful accident & the 17 years we had together were the best years of my life. Because of some health problems I have, it was a real possibility that my son could have had some major problems, thank goodness he was healthy. I chose to have him because the doctor told me it was probably my last chance to have a child.I am pro-choice, but abortion should not be used as birth control. We need better education for males & females on sex, contraceptives, the whole nine yards. Adoption is great if you have a caucasion baby, the majority of people who adopt are white & they don't want AA, hispanic or mixed race babies. It is an emotional issue, but ultimately women have to make the decision. I know this is sexist & politically incorrect, but men have no concept of what it is like to make this kind of decision. I also think it is easy for those who have no children to preach one way or the other. You have to live through something like that to know what it is like. Until you have been pregnant & had to make the decision, you really can't understand what it is like. Every case is different & it isn't fair to make a blanket decision for every instance.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

before you preach unwanted babies, open the classified section of your local newspaper and count the number of ads placed by people begging to give some baby a loving home.

Not every child put up for adoption gets adopted and a lot of children raised in the system will be in the system for the rest of their lives

Actually, you're both right about this because not all children are in equal demand by couples wanting to adopt. Generally, parents want babies rather than older children and the older a child becomes, the more difficult to find parents to adopt him/her.

What results is a system in which parents may wait many years for a healthy baby (especially white babies, which are in the highest demand) while older children bounce from foster home to foster home. It's very sad.

As for the abortion issue, your position ultimately rests on your opinion of what exactly a fetus is. Is it a person or is it not?

If you believe it's a person, then how can you be faulted for wanting the lives of fetuses protected in the same way the rest of our lives are. Operating under such a belief, abortion is simply a subtype of murder and should be punished as such.

Conversely, if you believe that a fetus is merely a potential person, a mass of growing tissue in a woman's uterus, it's clear that there can be no law that would be just that would prohibit her from having it removed.

The Supreme Court's refusal to address the issue of when life begins in Roe v. Wade is part of the reason for our continuing conflict on the issue. Nevertheless, every day science shows us more and more the incredible complexity of human development. The heart begins to beat at 3 weeks gestation: before a woman knows she's pregnant. A fetus reacts to pain and other stimuli at about 3 months. The more we learn, the harder it is to justify abortion for other than purely social reasons.

And this brings up Eve's question about alternatives, which I see as being the only real way of resolving this issue. If we can come up with viable alternatives to abortion (e.g. better birth control, better adoption systems, etc.) I have a feeling the support for abortion will wither away.

In the 1850's, my ancestors claimed that slavery was an economic necessity to live in the South and went to war to protect it. In hindsight, it's almost inconceivable how they could've honestly attempted to justify such a morally corrupt institution... and yet they did. Time has borne out their mistakes.

I think time will do the same for the idea of abortion. Maybe not in my lifetime, but eventually. As things are now, there are too many problems that result from unwanted pregnancy. If we can solve them, the abortion issue will solve itself.

 

[Rosebud]

I don't like abortion and would never have one...but i believe that a woman has the right to choose whether she gets one or not, for certain reasons. If she abuses abortion and uses it as a birth control then they should cut her fucking baby maker out. I believe that a baby is a person at conception or shortly there after...but i cannot force my beliefs on others. For those of you who fully believe in abortion...i have one question for you...how can a woman legally abort a child but if a man kills a pregnant woman...he is charged with two murders??? I believe in abortion for rape and incest or if the baby is badly deformed...if women want to commit murder and get away with it, then i can't stop them

 

[dancinvixen]

This is a topic that makes me mad

It is fully the woman's choice. I mean come on, it's our body, we know whether pr not we want something in it. Should we be forced to give birth, just to give it up for adoption because we do not want or need the responsibility right now??? I mean, I have never had an abortion or ever have one, but still, us women need to come together. Do we really want someone else, a man no less, that we must or must not do something because they feel that something else is the right thing to do??? Are we not entitled to make our own desicions or mistakes??

 

[Vlad]

I don't like the idea of abortion, especially late term, but I am for the right to choose.

 

[SeXy ReDHeD]

I will start by conceding that the fetus is actually an unborn child. But (as many pro-choice activists believe) this is beside the point. Whether or not the fetus really is a person has no bearing on this, because it's THE MOTHER'S body that the baby must grow in... if it is a person (just as with any other person), then the mother has no obligation to it at all. Also, if this baby is to be considered a "person", then it has no more rights than the mother. And since the baby is a person that needs the mother's body to live, then the mother has the right to deny the baby what it needs to live... just like you could deny your home to a freezing homeless person. Just because you SHOULD do something, doesn't mean you HAVE to do something.

Jarvis Thompson (a moral philosopher) uses the analogy of a sick piano player... he is famous and renowned around the world, and he needs a kidney transplant to live. You happen to have healthy kidneys. Would it be right to kidnap you and take your organs for him because he's more important than you are? No? Then why is right to assume that a baby can use your body to develop?

Admittedly this analogy has many holes, but if a woman and her partner take reasonable precautions against pregnancy, why should it be wrong for her to "take care of her problem". It is not irresponsible... in this case, the woman's rights and wishes should outweigh those of the unborn child.

The only instance that I can think of where I don't agree with abortion would be one where both partners acted exceedingly irresponsibly. But then, who I am I to judge someone's sense of responsibility?

I think that women should be able to make their own choices where their bodies are concerned.

Personally, I do not want anyone telling me what I can or cannot do in that sort of situation. Having a child is a HUGE responsibility, and honestly at this point in my life, I am not capable of assuming that responsibility. I have no money, no desire, and no time in my life for a child. Having the child in that environment, to me, would be as "wrong" as an abortion.

[Edited by SeXy ReDHeD on 11-02-2000 at 07:10 PM]

 

[Laurel]

Misery - I respect your opinion. It's just that - your opinion. I have an opinion, too. In this great country of ours, we have the right to our opinions and our beliefs, and we should have the right to act on those beliefs without undue restriction from the government.

"When Life begins" is a question that's up for debate. That's why the abortion issue IS an issue - because there are intelligent people on both sides. If it were cut and dried, there would be no debate.

I don't believe that guns should be outlawed. Yes, irresponsible people will behave irresponsibly with guns, to the detriment of others. Guns cause death - their sole purpose is to kill. But I believe that the rights of citizens - Our Freedoms - outweigh any possible risk. I don't own a gun - I hate them. I don't see a need for one. However, I am not the only person in the country. I must respect the rights of others. And someday I may need one - if I decide to live in a place where a gun is a necessity.

Same goes with abortion. It comes down to this: Governments Should Not Legislate Morality. The abortion issue IS a moral issue. Would I get an abortion? Probably not. Unless my health was a risk, I would do what I could to carry the child to full term and then make sure it was adopted by a loving home. However, that is my CHOICE. I'm not so naive as to believe that I am always right, or that I know what's best for others.

No birth control is 100%. Even tubiligation can fail. Even so, it is neither your right nor the government's right to tell anyone - man or woman - how they can run their life. That's what they do in Iran and the old Soviet Union. That is not what should be done in a nation that prides itself on protecting the Freedom of its people.

 

[RisiaSkye]

another 2 cents

I have one major problem with the moralizing about "unborn babies" and the mother's irresponsibility: you can't know the whole story, and that's why we don't have the right to make this choice for EVERYONE based on our own circumstances and opinions.

I understand the desire for personal accountability. I too find it disheartening and morally bankrupt for people to refuse responsibility for the consequences of their actions. However, our system is designed to force women into childbearing. As a woman who has no desire for children, I have witnessed this phenomenon firsthand.

I spend an appalling amount of time explaining to well-intentioned but ignorant strangers how I can be a married woman and NOT have kids--and not even want them. The facts (that I was raped and have an extremely scarred cervix--virtually assuring the need for caesarian, that my family has a history of diabetes, heart disease, drug addiction, and schizophrenia and I don't wish to continue the gene pool) aren't part of their thinking because they don't ask, and don't care when I tell them. It is my JOB to have kids--it's NATURE. There must be something wrong with me.

In fact, this attitude pervades the medical system as well. I am (recently) 25 years old and have talked to 4 different gynecologists about tubal ligation--despite several years of firm decision, they won't do it because I might "change my mind". In other words--"your Natural Mothering Instincts *tm (cue sickly sweet nursery music) will kick in and the baby making urge will take over. You don't know what's good for you. Let us decide for you, honey."

I am not ready, willing, or able to be a parent. I can barely keep a houseplant alive, imagine how a child would fare in my charge. I don't enjoy the company of children, and I don't melt at the sight of babies. To many, this makes me a bitch, to some it makes me unfeeling; at the very least, it marks me as different from many. But it is a difference I enjoy. I like the life I lead, and I am not interested in tying myself to an incompletely formed human pupa.

I have always taken responsibility for my actions, and for the consequences of my sexual activity. Despite an allergy to "the Pill", I use other birth control methods religiously. But I am not your (or anyone's) breeding machine, and my uterus does not suddenly become state property if it goes into unplanned use. In the 8 years I've been sexually active, I have never conceived. Perhaps this is because I am so careful, perhaps it is merely good fortune. But if I did get pregnant despite taking every precaution, I would abort--and I wouldn't apologize for it.

 

[Svedish_Chef]

More power to you Risia Skye

Thankyou for posting it was most stimulating

 

[Rosebud]

Yes it is the womans body...but there are other forms of birthcontrol than killing a child. Try one of those and if you are taking it right and you still get pregnant then consider abortion...just don't use it as a convenience because you are to fucking lazy to use another form of birth control.

 

[fun4me/him]

Way to go Laurel

I think one of the most misguided ideas about pro choice is that the issue is strictly about abortion. I love to see when someone address the fact that it is about a persons (not just womans) ability to make personal choices about what they do with their bodies. Abortion is a moral choice that each individual deals with when they are in the situation. Unless you have been in that position yourself, you are probably not qualified to pass judgement. Pro- Choice, however, is an attempt to keep government out of our personal decisions.....and if they are not kept out, where does it stop?

 

[shit4brains]

Absolutely "Pro- choice", a woman has the right to choose!

 

[Laurel]

Everyone SHOULD have the right to choice, be it guns or abortions or religion or lovers or lunch or whatever. That's the point. You can't allow freedom of choice in one arena and not in another simply because you disagree with the options. I think there are women who misuse the abortion option. I think there are people who misuse guns.

There's something greater at stake here. The question isn't "should we or shouldn't we allow abortion?" - it's "does our government have the right to decide morality for us?" And the answer is "no".

Yes, murder is illegal, and rightly so. However, is a fetus considered a life? Is a fetus's life of the same worth as a born child? Is a fetus's life worth more than the mother's? It's a complicated question. It comes down to morality and beliefs, not science.

The late Carl Sagan wrote an essay (I'm fuzzy on the details of it) in which he defined a life as a collection of experiences. The gist: a fetus has no real life experience, and thus is not truly a life. I don't know how much I agree with that. There are those who say that if it lives and grows, it's alive. Well, my nails grow and I cut them all the time without a shred of guilt.

I believe that an abortion is not something to be done at the drop of the hat. I do believe a life is lost. However, I don't believe it is the equivalent of murder. To broadly condemn or support abortion is to ignore the fact that each situation is different. That's why I support a woman's right to choose what's best. Whether their choice is to my personal liking is irrelevent.

 

[Rosebud]

Laurel, my lovely most loved beautiful woman... i understad what you are saying but once again i bring up the fact that a woman can abort a baby legally but if someone kills a pregnant woman...they are charged with two murders...kindof double standard isn't it...

i am going to write soon it has been a while sine my last bribe...LOL just kidding but i miss not hearing from you...you sexy seductive goddess you...okay have i kissed it enough yet??? not that it is a chore...it is fun

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Rosebud is right that the law is very ambiguous when it comes to the life of a fetus. It's legal for a mother to abort a fetus, but one causes a woman to miscarry a pregnancy he may be charged with "feticide", a crime which in my state carries a penalty roughly equivalent to that of manslaughter.

No matter what side of the abortion question you come down on, the inconsistency is undeniable.

Laurel, I take issue with you on the question on your assertion that goverments should not "legislate morality". This is precisely what they do on a regular basis. In fact, aren't laws simply prohibitions based on moral priniciples? If not, what are the prohibitions based on? Are they purely arbitrary?

A couple of examples: stealing is prohibited because of the moral principle that individuals have a right to own property. An even better example is the prohibition of slavery. Slavery is prohibited because we believe that human beings have a basic liberty right to not be owned by other human beings. What is that if not legislated morality?
And how could a prohibition of abortion be more of a legislation of morality?

Another example: "hate crimes". How can you explain the concept of "hate crimes" without morality? These laws target specific attitudes our society has deemed unacceptable (racism, etc.) by punishing the offenders of these laws more severely. The objective is obviously to make a statement of what is and is not morally acceptable.

That being said, I'll be the first to admit that there are a considerable number of problems with such a prohibition. As mentioned in this thread, as long as women have unwanted pregnancies, they'll continue to have abortions, prohibition or not... and if not medically safe abortions, then dangerous ones. The hospital I train at used to have an entire GYN wing devoted almost entirely to the complications of unsterile abortions. And it must be incredibly hard to carry a baby to term, give birth to it, and then just give it away.

All these problems makes me wonder about a future like in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World in which babies are gestated in vitro in artificial womb-jars instead of in utero. No fetuses die and the woman only bears children if she wants to. Worth a thought...

[Edited by Oliver Clozoff on 11-02-2000 at 11:07 PM]

 

[insideShiraz]

Abortion is killing a Life without a Vote

What if every woman who wanted an abortion had been aborted themselves? We'd have that many less loose women with no concern for their own flesh and blood. Rape and incest is just eggshells for women who believe all the Rap hype...

I feel that women should be allowed abortions, but after the second one, their ovaries should be removed so they can't throw life away anymore...

 

[Laurel]

Interesting point, Oliver. Hmm... I dunno - are laws prohibiting murder and theft moral designations, or are they designed to keep society from degenerating into anarchy? I guess I'll amend my statement to this: so long as my actions don't cause harm to another human being, the government shouldn't interfere.

The more I think about it, I don't think that laws against murder, rape, and theft are moral laws. They set boundaries between citizens and enable society to exist. However, I am against the criminalization of prostution, gambling, and drugs because I feel those ARE laws that with a moral bias.

But you DID get me on the hate crimes issue. Frankly, I'm not sure where I stand on that. Laws should increase our freedom, not impede it. I believe that stiffer penalties for hate crimes don't unnecessarily restrict society. I could be wrong.

My point on the hate crimes bill & GWB in the earlier thread was more that he refused to sign it because of the inclusion of gays. He wasn't against the idea of a hate crime bill - he just wasn't for the protection of gays. That, I found odd.

But that's another thread...I gotta go eat before I pass out.

 

[RisiaSkye]

And where ARE the men?

One last thing: I keep reading about the "loose women" (in various forms) who need to be punished for their inappropriateness--or who need to be legislated into being less promiscuous. [I can only assume that this means abstinence, as it is the only completely "safe" option.]

So, my question is: where are all the men? Why are the women solely to blame for the unwanted pregnancy, and left to the court of moralistic opinion when they even consider having an abortion?

I was just last night watching a documentary claiming that men are "naturally" (there's that word again) inclined to sleep around as much as possible in order to promulgate their genes. This ran on a major network without any apparent outcry. Why is this okay with us? Aren't the men who sperm sponsor these little science projects at all accountable for their biological success?

Why is the woman a whore for getting pregnant, and the man is just "being a guy"? The claim is that fetuses need protection, so we should enclose them in a protective shell of governmental guardianship for the good of all. And if that just happens to take away the equal citizenship rights of women for their childbearing years, so be it. After all, we're protecting the future. Don't the politics of THAT double standard frighten you at all?

If you're interested in this subject, you might take a look at Lauren Berlant's _The Queen of America Goes to Washington City _(esp. ch 5), Valerie Hartouni's _Abortion Politics and the Negotiation of Public Meaning_, and K. Clark/R. Felman's "Women, Religious Fundamentalism and Reproductive Rights" (in the journal Reproductive Health Matters, 11/96)

*stepping off soapbox*

 

[insideShiraz]

Duz your man Care?

Do the two of you have Family??

Would you abort the Child that you have by some other man?

 

[RisiaSkye]

Huh?

I'm not sure who that comment was for, but my husband and I have families. How does this make it THEIR decision? Why would they even have a voice in this? I don't get involved in their sex lives or reproductive processes.

My husband agrees with me--I've never hidden my views from him. I wouldn't have married him otherwise. This seems too obvious, I'm guessing that I missed something.

Clarification?

 

[Closet Desire]

Really hotted up didn't it?

Of course, one of the most divisive issues in America with two extreme sides and an awful lot in the middle who don't get listened to.

I posed the question "who owns a woman when she is pregnant" for a very good reason. I must ask those who would dictate what is right or wrong for a woman if they are prepared to accept THEIR responsibility for the decisions THEY are imposing on another human being (in a supposedly "free" country). I don't mean rhetoric either. Are you prepared to take out your cheque book and make the necessary investment to care for a child for the next 18-25 years...more if the child is ill or disabled?

When society makes the decision to incarcerate a criminal it also takes the responsibility to house, feed, clothe, and care for the criminal. Are you prepared to do that for a woman and her child?

Although I live in Europe I am an American and I am constantly confounded by the contradictions that prevail in the US. I grew up in a self-rightious, ultra religious family that preached the evil of sex, unwed pregnancy, divorce, etc. Yet, this family has a higher than average rate of teen pregnancy and higher than average rate of divorce.

Abortion is not nearly the issue over here that it is in the US, but not because it's easier (it isn't) or because people don't care, but because unwanted pregnancies don't occur at nearly the same rate they do in the US. In fact, the country with the most lenient attitude toward sex (Netherlands) has the lowest rate of abortion and the lowest rate of unwanted pregnancies of any industrial nation. Why? Because they admit that sex is a fact of life. They admit that children are going to have sex. They make contraceptives available, even to children, without anyone's consent. They teach children about "Double Dutch" which means both the man and the woman take responsibility for contraception. They accept that unprotected sex sometimes takes place and make the morning after pill available over the counter without a script for those situations. If you look at each European nation and compare the issue based on how actively they promote responsibility you will find strong corroboration for the value of a realistic approach. Here in England it is the worst and here in England matters like contraception and sex education are the most restrictive and more like that in the US.

My opinion, bottom line, nobody owns a woman and her choices about reproduction are hers alone. If you don't like the results then I suggest you look at the causes because abortion only becomes an issue when you fail to deal with the realities of the underlying causes. Stop pretending that children don't have sex. Stop pretending that unprotected sex doesn't happen. Stop pretending that contraceptives don't fail.

Just as an aside...I am a man, married, with children. My sons were given condoms when they turned sixteen and my daughter will be given condoms when she is thirteen and the pill if she asks for it.

By all means have your own opinon against abortion, but unless you are one those very, very rare ones who backs up that opinion by adopting unwanted children and taking responsibility for them the rest of their lives then don't play God with women's lives. Dropping a few pennies in the offering plate doesn't make you God. You can no more understand any individual's circumstances than they can understand yours. Life is a very messy, complicated business. Everyone should mind their own.

 

[dancinvixen]

Closet, God, I so kiss you right about now. Teehee, my readily available speech always deserts me when i get upset. You stated everything that I was going to and failed to. <s>

 

[*Eve*]

Gee look what I started........

I think there is a trend here. I don't think anyone on this thread is pro-abortion. I think Oliver brought up a good point about having alternatives to this solution. Until we do have those solutionS we need to leave it up to the individual to figure out what's best for them.

 

[Closet Desire]

Yeah...you're a real troublemaker!

Isn't that the weird thing about it? American culture is very much of the plus/minus mindset. By that I mean if you're not against it then you must be "for it". Next thing you know you have doctors being shot, homes being vandalized, and hatred spreading like the common cold. We're not immune to here here in England either.

A few months ago a little girl was abducted and killed by a paedophile. It seemed like the whole country went up in arms about paedophiles and the threat to children, completely ignoring the disturbing fact that over 90% of all children in this country who are killed or seriously injured are victims of their own families.

Vigilantes set forth to burn and pillage the houses and cars of known paedophiles. A national newspaper published a "Name and Shame" edition with the photos and addresses of convicted paedophiles. The vigilantes paid them all a visit and embarked on a violent crusade. They didn't care that nearly half the people they terrorized were not paedophiles. In one case in Wales, the stupid fools didn't even know the difference between "paedophile" and "paediatrician" so they vandalized her house while she working with children at the local hospital. When she returned home she took one look, packed up her stuff, and moved away. The local area, which desperately needed pediatricians, lost a valuable asset.

My point? Passions that run unchecked because of self-rightiousness all too easily cross the boundary from opinion to action and form the individual to the mob. As I sit back and watch abortion protesters in America from here I see no difference between them and the vigilantes here or the football hooligans who cause such havoc in Europe. Their mission is the same...to intimidate human beings into obeying their desires. There's nothing American about that.