What America gets right about the abortion debate

[LesyaUkraina]

Interesting article in the Spectator today

www.google.com/amp/s/www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-america-gets-right-about-the-abortion-debate/amp

Shows America as a serious moral country? Please. This is not an issue that should even be up for debate.

At least give us a link that makes any sense.

That's actually the whole point of the article

Ah yes. The old myths perpetuated by the right wing, about Roe as supposed political activism by the far left that suppressed political debate. The fact is the original decision was a judgment by a Republican Supreme Court, on a topic that didn't have warring culture clash camps set up around it. Building it up as such has been a targeted political drive by far right zealots that gradually have taken over the Republican party. Also, not sure what's newsworthy in this piece? Pretty run of the mill for people of a certain persuasion and certainly doesn't contain any new arguments.

Something like this

What a cunt. I have no interest in this man's views and find it abhorrent that he thinks this debate in America is 'rather impressive'.

This seems like a great solution to America's concerns.

There's a man who can't comprehend a woman's needs/ wants/ point of view. All dressed up in the patriarchal star spangled banner.

What America gets right

Sweet Fuck All (particularly when it comes to women

Michael Moore wrote a good article about this.

https://www.facebook.com/100044628390313/posts/523953269102282/?d=n

So fed up of all of this "debate". It's completely stupid unless they're planning to sort out all the other problems in society which might help and contribute to a lower abortion rate. Ensuring that men aren't dickheads would be a good starting point. Anyone else noticed how it's always the woman's fault if she falls pregnant/ has a child with a learning or emotional need/ SEN. The problem is men and it's about time men were held accountable.

I am worried for women in America. The inequality of rights and opportunities is widening not getting smaller as you would expect in an 'advanced' nation.

I will certainly never visit again and will educate my daughter about the disadvantages she would face as a woman in that country compared to the UK.

I think the article makes a very good point that the debate has pretty much been shut down in the UK, which is worrying as it is never a good sign when only one side are allowed to voice their opinions. It is
concerning when a country can no longer have healthy, open discussions about serious moral issues like abortion, as such issues require serious thought and nuanced, civilised discussion. Polls show that the majority of women want the abortion limit to be lowered not liberalised, but the public space is so dominated by well-funded activists and academics that we never actually hear from ordinary people with opposing views, beyond the confines of a few online forums (although even these are often very hostile to such discussions). I am pro-life, and I am ashamed to admit that in real life I would be very, very careful about voicing my opinion for pure fear of being sworn at, mocked and blacklisted by institutions and even acquaintances. The article has given me some courage to be more confident in not staying silent on the topic within my own circles. I believe the pro-life argument is ethically much more sound than the pro-abortion one, so the only thing I am fearing is derision from people who don't know how to have sensible, respectful discussions.

I'm going to try to be polite, OP, but how can you say the pro-life argument is more ethically sound when it would logically mean sexually abused children being forced to remain pregnant and give birth?

That’s a long winded way to say you don’t believe women should have autonomy over their own bodies.

Really, OP? So do you agree that the woman who had abortion should be convicted for murder too?

But, OP, “Polls show that the majority of women want the abortion limit to be lowered not liberalised”

no one is forcing a woman to have a later abortion. Or any abortion.

If you are pro life, that's great, don't have an abortion.

But it is cruel to tell other women what they can and can't do with their own bodies.

Op if you don’t want an abortion then don’t have one. It’s not compulsory.

@LesyaUkraina - you think debate on this issue doesn't exist in this country? I think you need to open your eyes and ears. I come across it a lot.

I could take the pro-life stance seriously if there was cradle to adult financial and emotional support for children born to women who didn't want them. But there's not, so no debate.

Pro-life = misogynistic abuse

The article isn't worth the server space it takes up.

I think the article makes a very good point that the debate has pretty much been shut down in the UK, which is worrying as it is never a good sign when only one side are allowed to voice their opinions. It is* concerning when a country can no longer have healthy, open discussions about serious moral issues like abortion, as such issues require serious thought and nuanced, civilised discussion.*

There are plenty of moral issues we don't really debate anymore though eg the death penalty. And some people would say they think it's worrying the debate on gay marriage is effectively over. Should we continually discuss all of these things all the time to avoid being accused of not having a healthy debate.
If there was an increase in public interest in changing the abortion laws, it would be debated more.

Absolutely. It's all about the child until the moment it's born, and then mother and child are on their own. As a conservative who is generally pro-America, I'm totally appalled by this misogynistic crap which is just weird men and bible-thumpers punishing women for having sex. Pro-life" - except women's.

I’m happy to have respectful discussions about any topic. But I can’t have any sort of conversation with a person who agrees with a ridiculous article that describes America as a moral country.

America is a country that is happy to allow the poor to receive limited healthcare. A country with virtually no welfare system. A country that has people working for slave wages because it won’t implement a minimum wage. A country that doesn’t want to allow women choices about their own fertility but then expects them to raise the children it would force them to bare in poverty because ‘they chose to have kids, it’s their responsibility to look after them’. I assume that your moral and ethical discussion doesn’t encompass solutions for any of the above, but that’s where the focus should be. Not in preventing women from having choices.

Almost nobody in the UK is the extreme kind of "pro-life" that wishes to prohibit abortions where pregnancy will kill the mother, or where the foetus will be born only to die in agony a few hours/days later, or where the foetus is just a body with no brain, etc.

And almost nobody in the UK is the extreme kind of pro-choice that wishes to allow abortion of foetuses right up to term for any or no reason (and if they do argue for this, it's generally with the understanding that in reality, women would almost never actually choose to abort a late-term pregnancy for no good reason).

So it's difficult to make blanket statements about ethical soundness of different positions as if it's an easy comparison, when neither of the positions debating is taking a clear-cut, clean, absolutist stance.

There are always muddly bits discussing degree of risk and suffering for the mother, degree of potential suffering in the foetus, and so on. Abortion in the UK isn't on-demand, it's about risk of damage and suffering, including mental.

So, assuming you're not the kind of extremist who's happy to see women like Savita Halappanavar die, how is your position "ethically much more sound" if what you're doing is just taking a slightly different view on, for example, what level of suffering and risk is okay to require people to accept?