to understand why some people have a problem with abortion?

[LolaRennt]

I am pro choice first of all, just to get that out of the way.

But what confuses me is that on many threads I have seen if someone in a tiny voice dares to admit that they might have a an anti abortion view they get jumped on pretty quickly.

But surely if someone belives from a purely emotion point that abortion is the ending of a life you can't change that view simply by calling them a woman hater or abusing them? I can understand how pro choice people don't see abortion as a feminst issue or a human rights issue at all and can't get past the view that it is just ending a life.

I am a vegan and I don't wear leather or fur. I see it as murder. I know other people do it (even my friends, husband and family) but for me it will always be murder. Its a purely emotional view that go against what the vast majority of the western world see as normal. But there is nothing any of you could ever say that would make me change my mind. So maybe I can empathise better than some?

My belief is that women need safe access to abortion, no one likes the idea of abortion butit needs to be avalaible because the alternatives would be devastating. Wouldn't it make sense to approach it from that point of view to someone who is anti abortion? Accept that the idea maybe abhorent (and that they arent wrong for feeling that way) but it is a basic human right to not be forced to pregnant and that for many reasons it is the best choice for the woman?

AyeRobot - it made sense to me :)

I suppose this whole discussion boils down to how much compassion you have - are you happy allowing a tiny being to be killed? All because of some fucking dogmatic feminist ideology? Get a grip ffs.

yes feminist ideology is awful fancy women wanting to have control over their bodies, god what will they want next equal pay, the right to divorce what a bunch of witches

no-one is happy about having to terminate a pregnancy.

you talk of compassion. is it compassion that has you forcing women to endure and unwanetd pregnancy, labour, childbirth, mastitus, the heartache of raising a child you didn't want/can't afford, or giving that child away and knowing for that one day questions will be asked and that one day you will have to tell a child that it exists for no reason other than some otehr people thought it should?

i dont think happy is quite how i would describe it

mdowall: That's really not the question - I doubt anyone is "happy" about abortion as a concept (though many women are enormously relieved about their own).

The question is rather one of the relative importance of the rights of an embryo/foetus versus those of a fully grown woman.

Also: You really cannot blame feminism for abortions. What feminism (along with other concerns) has contributed to this issue is that abortion is - for the time being - safe and legal. However, abortion has existed for a long, long time before feminist concerns ever came into it.

The difference then was that, in addition to the foetus, the mother was also quite likely to die as a result. Hardly better, is it?

Thank you LolaRennt.
It's pretty refreshing tbh to read a post like this.
I'm all controversied out at the moment.
I'm fed up with being told to shut up, bored stupid by the countless times I have been told that my views aren't welcome, and sick to the back teeth of having anything I say twisted out of all recognition.
On the last thread I was told that I was shit that wouldn't flush.
And that pretty much sums up the reception that awaits anyone who says that they think that abortion ends an actual life.

It might not be happy learningtofly but it is a damn sight better than being murdered. For me, everybody like you freudianslipper, learningtofly and booyhoo and other frigging guardian reading leftwing feminists on this site should be forced to witness the murder of a 20 week old child warts and all. "Social termination?" Jesus, what the hell is this world coming to.

but the point of the posters you mentioned was that being consistent was the issue - generally the view expressed was that it was an uncomfortable view but it would be difficult to believe it was one persons right above anothers.

and i am not a leftwing feminist by any stretch of the imagination!

mdowall: WOW! Just wow!

I actually find this outpouring of pure rage paired with your rather sick fantasy a little bit concerning, ...

< have never read the guardian>

anyway.

mdowdall. so would you rather a mother and foetus die then?

NotADudeExactly - not rage, exactly, although I am sure it probably suits your cause to paint me as some kind of crackpot. What's the sick fantasy btw? Am I missing something...

"I think that people should be allowed to abort up to 40 weeks though I am uncomfortable with that idea except in very extreme circumstances. I also know that so very fer abortions take place at 24+ weeks that it would be highly unusual for abortions to be carried out as late as 40 weeks"

I can understand prioritising the life of the mother at 40 weeks if the delivery is likely to kill one or the other. I can understand terminating at that point for the purpose of preventing suffering for a baby that has no chance of survival after birth. But I really, really can't understand how anyone could support abortion on demand at the stage that it involves ending the life of a baby who was full-term three weeks ago.

As for the assumption that it would be highly unusual for anyone to abort at that stage, remember that people have been known to kill their (post-delivery, we-can-all-agree-it's-a-baby-now) infants because they wanted to punish the baby's other parent, or because they wanted a different gender to the one they got, or because they balked at the last minute at the responsibilities of parenthood. And that's once they've had to look at the baby and accept that it's a real live person, and that's when they know that what they're doing is illegal and in no way socially acceptable. Why should we assume that if abortion were freely available up to 40 weeks, it would be so highly unusual for someone to abort at that point based on reasons that might make many of us more than "uncomfortable"?

mdowdall what every you want to call me i could not give a toss yes i am left wing and yes i am a feminist and very proud to be. as i have said before a women should always the right to have full control over her body. there are many different reasons why a women may choose to have a termination late in pregnancy, like i posted before dv often starts in pregnancy and what ever her reason is in this country she be able to make that choice to have full control. thankfully the feminists before us allowed women to have this control and stopped so many dying from having back street abortions

No BooyHoo. In my ideal world, people would take more responsibility re unprotected sex etc. If, for whatever reasons, somebody got pregnent and decided they didnt want the child, they would be given all the information and support possible. At a certain point (I am no medical expert but strongly feel that the current cut off point for abortion is way out of kilter given what we now know) they would be told that they had to have an abortion OR they would have to carry the child. This whole thing needs some proper debate.

why does eceryone go to the extreme arguments - what about the run of the mill abortions - your everday - had sex, didn't take precautions - already have three kids andother kid would leave me financially strapped - kind pf abortions.

its always about one life versus another life and the rape one - yes yes etc

There isn't much need for painting someone as a crackpot exactly when they consider forcing people to witness murder appropriate punishment for the crime of having a different opinion.

'Nuff said.

Because it would be more than highly unusual, it would be practically unheard of. Like your examples are so rare as to be massive news, and very tiny possibilities.

Pro-choice is the only logical position, because it doesn't make any difference how uncomfortable one is about other peoples choices, it only holds that no-one else can make a choice for each individual. And if you don't agree with that, your position is that a woman is not allowed to decide what happens in her own body, or whether she is forced to have a child or not. And that, quite frankly, is sickening in a supposedly civilised society and I can't understand how "pro-lifers" can live with the shame of that stance.

what if a women does not know she is pregnant, is in denial as the pregnancy is a result of her being raped, violence has started in pregnancy and is getting worse. you think it is in the best interests to tell that women well tough should have done it sooner

Yes, FreudianSlipper. The laws on abortion were made many years ago. Things have changed, medical advances have happened. We know now a lot more than we did in the late 60s. Unborn kids can be saved now that didnt have a cat in hell's chance, say, 20 years ago. So, all me and many others are saying is give them a chance. This is not me being or mysognist or whatever. It is simply asking that we have a bit more compassion, start behaving a little more like a civilised socity and start standing up to the left-wing ideology which, for decades now, has held sway where the whole abortion debate is concerned.

"This whole thing needs some proper debate."

so what the hell are you doing swearing, name-calling and in throwing aroun demotive terminology? that isn't debating.

you call forcing women to have children they don't want civilised and compassionate?

"why does eceryone go to the extreme arguments - what about the run of the mill abortions - your everday - had sex, didn't take precautions - already have three kids andother kid would leave me financially strapped - kind pf abortions."

you mean like my situation a few weeks ago? single parent, 2 kids, had sex, condom failure, took MAP, period was late, almost dropped dead out of sheer panic?

what are your thoughts?

Whereas the correct right-wing stance on the matter would be to force women to give birth to children they cannot afford, haven them live off the state for want of other opportunities and then have the prime minister bash them because the responsible thing to do is to wait until one can afford a family. Right?

Left-wing feminist and proud!