♥ ~Sigy the Arctic Kitty~♥ asked:
I’m not being mean, I really would like to know. It seems from some of the pro life questions I see that there is not just a difference of values and POVs but a real communications gap.
I’m not being mean, I really would like to know. It seems from some of the pro life questions I see that there is not just a difference of values and POVs but a real communications gap.
For example, I read and answered 2 pro life questions today here, and I honestly don’t understand what their relevance is to the right of choice.
Edit: My mistake re Ms. Stepfjord’s question “Pro-Choice women who have children, did you….?” . She was just asking something, not connecting it to abortion rights.
12 responses so far ↓
1 hero // Dec 9, 2008 at 6:23 pm
15 years is not the age for family planning
2 Blissful Execration // Dec 10, 2008 at 4:23 am
I want to applaud Raj for his brilliant response.
To answer: it is a difference of values.
3 Know It All // Dec 11, 2008 at 8:55 pm
There is no confusion. If you believe that you have a choice regarding carrying the baby through, barring any fetal complications, you’re pro-choice. If you firmly believe that all babies have the right to survive, you’re pro-life.
The discussion gets heated up when some pro-choicers take it upon themselves to tell others that a fetus isn’t a baby unless it is born. Since I am all for choice, I can/will support both pro-choicers AND pro-lifer’s POV. Just don’t tell me that it is NOT a baby, and start comparing it to snot.
Aren’t you a bit young to be worrying about this and getting ‘confused’ in the process?
4 x Char x // Dec 12, 2008 at 6:27 pm
I understand the pro-choice view much better now than I used to… many pro-choice women actually wouldn’t choose abortion for themselves but still want other women to be able to make that choice. I even agree with some pro-choice points, like that abortion needs to be legal for medical cases. I think the whole pro-life/pro-choice debate just comes down to when you believe life begins.
5 Morbid One // Dec 13, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Anti-Choicers are often also wrapped up in religious jargon. They (often) don’t see any room for compromise, and everything is black and white…
That’s why you hear things like:
“You’re either with us, or against us”
“You either love Jesus or you love Satan”
Good/Evil, Heaven/Hell, Abortion Yes/Abortion No The idea of looking at things from an individual perspective is a foreign concept…
6 Melissa // Dec 17, 2008 at 4:43 am
My confusion is with the “pro-choice” stance.. it’s with the viewpoint that if the fetus is “wanted” its a baby, and if you harm it, it’s manslaughter… but if the fetus is “unwanted” it is not a baby and it is okay to remove it.
I’m not stating a preference either way.. I’m not saying when I personally think “life” begins because that is not relevant.. I’m just saying that this is not determined by whether or not the fetus is “wanted”.
Life start at conception? No Abortions
Life start at birth? No laws protecting fetuses
Life start somewhere in between there? Pinpoint that time and legislate around that.. we shouldn’t allow this to be such a gray, subjective area.
That’s my point.
I’m not trying to offend anyone based on their pro-choice, or pro-life stances.. I just think things should be more consistent.
EDIT: I also know some religious pro-choicers and more than a few non-religious pro-lifers.. it’s not always divided down religious lines.
7 Spuddy // Dec 20, 2008 at 3:08 am
If you believe an individual and her doctor, and not the government, should be able to determine whether or not an abortion should occur, you are pro-choice.
If you believe a fetus has a right to life, and that right trumps a woman’s right to choose, and the governement should be the one to enforce the fetus’ right, you are pro-life.
Both sides like to mudsling because they are so blinded by their convictions that they are unwilling to even listen to the other side. This is quite evident by some of the responses above me. That is where the misunderstandings come in, and many people are just fine believing their midunderstandings, such as all pro-lifers are religious nut-bags who **** women, and all pro-choicers are murderers.
8 Bonzai Betty // Dec 20, 2008 at 7:43 pm
The women who are “pro life” are basically anti woman. Sorry thats just the way it is. You give more value to an undeveloped fetus than you do to the person carrying it. If those women are so concerned about “life” than maybe they need to go off birth control and get pregnant each year! Then they wont have time to type nonsense online!
9 La Belle Dame Sans Merci // Dec 23, 2008 at 7:24 am
Nothing. Pro choice means that I will live my life the way I want to and so can you. Anti-choice believe God talks to them and that everything that they feel, no matter how ill-educated they are, is Gospel. They want their opinion to be your law. Essentially most people are pro-choice for few people these days would kill the mother and take her life in favor of an unborn child. So everyone is pro-choice to a certain degree. Some would extend the line to **** and ****** pregnancies. Others simply think “the law” should **** out, and let people’s own consciences govern their lives.
10 Imposter H // Dec 26, 2008 at 7:49 am
I guess it’s that the position of pro-choice isn’t consistant with the way we deal with other concepts in law. For instance, nobody would ever say; “personally I would never own a slave, but I support other’s rights to do so.” Usually people who are pro-life believe the fetus to be a child. If that is the core of their belief, how could they come to any other conclusion than abortion is murder? Most people who are pro-choice come from the belief that a fetus only becomes a child after a certain period of gestation. Even if you believe this to be true, is there much doubt that the fetus would become a child if it were not aborted? The legal definition of murder is; “the killing of another human person with forethought.” The legal definition of a person is “a human being.” Therefore, the question of when a fetus becomes a person is very important. You’re telling me that you don’t think the government has the right to define murder? I say we get a bi-partisan scientific study together and define the exact moment when a fetus becomes human. They then need to take their findings to the Supreme Court and argue that precedent be altered to reflect their findings. This is the fairest possible process. I for one don’t agree that a fetus is a child the second the ***** touches the egg. However, I think it probably is human when it has the general form of a human. This line is important and needs to be firmly established under the law. Also, before it is brought up, no studies done to this point were ever unbiased. Therefore, I don’t want to hear both sides telling me how they have evidence to prove their side is right. Simply put, the pro-choice argument is a much more complicated argument than the pro-life one. This is due to the fact that the premise it is built on is cloudy and gray. In western law, it is not an individual choice whether or not to murder another person. The problem comes because of a shady definition of “person.”
Belle; According to PBS, 59% of abortions occur within the first 9 weeks. How many of those do you think are “medically necessary” given that most complications become evident much later in the pregnacy? I believe that under any circumstance there must be an exception for “medically necessary” abortion. I do question how many fall under that umbrella.
11 Greg's Wife // Dec 29, 2008 at 1:29 am
La Belle’s answer made me so mad I had to answer.
This has NOTHING to do with religion. There are many pro-life groups that are not Christian at all. There are “gays for life”, “atheists for life” and “scientists for life” groups all over.
Frankly, this has nothing to do with the woman either. We believe in choice before (abstinence) and after (adoption) etc. This has to do with the fact that we believe that this is not a women’s rights issue, this is a human’s rights issue. We believe that thousands of humans are being slaughtered legally every single day. We will not back down from this and this is worth going to war for.
We will stand on the side of humans rights and remember how history looks upon those who stand on the other side.
12 LaughingAtLife // Dec 29, 2008 at 9:34 pm
I don’t think that there is anything confusing about the pro-choice position. I believe in the Roe v Wade decision states my beliefs:
Roe v. Wade is the historic Supreme Court decision overturning a Texas interpretation of abortion law and making abortion legal in the United States. The Roe v. Wade decision held that a woman, with her doctor, could choose abortion in earlier months of pregnancy without restriction, and with restrictions in later months, based on the right to privacy.
All state laws limiting women’s access to abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy were invalidated by Roe v. Wade. State laws limiting such access during the second trimester were upheld only when the restrictions were for the purpose of protecting the health of the pregnant woman. Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in the United States, which was not legal at all in many states and was limited by law in others.
Basis of the Roe v. Wade decision: Roe v. Wade was decided primarily on the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights. The Court’s decision in this case was that the Ninth Amendment, in stating that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,” protected a person’s right to privacy.
(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician.
(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.
(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.
You must log in to post a comment.