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?

no, ll31, you just made it sound like they as deserving of support.

no, ll31, you just made it sound like they are less deserving of support.

I think in your opinion that view is barbaric - in my opinion I think it may be awful, dreadful, horrific sometimes ..... I see it as two people to be honest -and both have rights... and if I see it that way then its hard for me to think that one party doesn't have right to stay alive...

I never said that a woman in an unbearable situation isn't deserving of support. I have no idea where you got that from.

And I am very sorry, after reading your posts, that you had such a hard time through your childhood due to feeling (and being told) that you were unwanted. That is awful and I can understand why this topic is so emotive for you. I wasn't referring to your personal situation but with all due respect I don't think that it renders null and void all other views on right to life v. right to choice.

I was trying to explain my understanding of the logic of an argument you made reference to and repeatedly asked about. You're extrapolating things from my posts that aren't there.

Good night.

Not one single pro-lifer has acknowledged that making abortion illegal in no way stops abortion.

Abortion has been here since the dawn of time and will continue to exist as long as human beings exist.

So - how do pro-lifers intend to actually STOP abortion in any meaningful way? Seriously - any suggestions?

If they acknowledge that making abortion illegal does nothing other than control and restrict women's access to safe abortions, are they OK with this?

One final thing - pro-lifers never actually come out and say this: "I believe I have the right to tell you what to do with your own body. I believe I have the right to make the most far-reaching decision a person can make on your behalf".

They think this, but they never have the balls to come out and say it, because they clearly acknowledge how ludicrous it actually is.

For the record, I had an abortion in my early 20s. I now have two children and do not think I could ever have another abortion, no matter what. Indeed, the idea of having one is quite repellant to me now.

But I will always be fiercely and utterly pro-choice. Never would I deign to tell another women what she can or can't do with her own body.

If someone really does not want a baby why are they not using contraception or availing themselves of the morning after pill?

Yeah,. so stupid are we that we didn't think to use contraception! [ffs]

Mini pill & condom. As I was exclusively bfing.

This was the first time we had sex postnatally, as I had a section. We were determined not to have any more. I asked my surgical team to sterilize me at the section, they said no, because it didn't work effectively! But less than a yr later, the same consultant sterilized my friend during her section. The only difference, she had just had her third, I had had my second.

Vasectomy wait list on public health here, 7+ yrs. I looked into it. Privately, a few weeks, but we can't afford the $10k price tag.

I didn't use a morning after pill because there was NO indication what so ever that anything had failed. Not until the nausea started a few weeks later.

Plain enough for you?

making abortion illegal in rumania did stop abortion to large extent -albeit with fairly horrific consequences...

don't agree with your comment in bold - think most pro lifers say exactly that to be honest but without the commetn tha they think its ludicrous

I think it is down to when foetus becomes capable of independent life and thats clearly amassively difficult question to answer....

I suppose i'd be thinking if youj're pregnant and decide to have baby - do you have any responsibilities to the baby you're carrying ? If you do ie re drink/drugs then if you've responsibility to behave properly re these issues, then how does issue of abortion stan d

I will never, ever understand why someone needs 6 months to decide they can't have a baby. I personally believe that aborting a healthy 24 week baby is barbaric

Most terminations at that late stage are because of illnesses incomparable with life. I know lost of woman who have aborted & if it is an unwanted pregnancy, the woman usually wants it over with asap.

Things have not 'matured' especially the lungs

Trouble is, those lungs are pretty important. Doesn't matter if the baby is completely intact & everything is where it should be.

Those lung are not matured = the baby cannot breath unaided.

I find it laughable when people say they have no issue with abortion after rape yet then claim that a foetus has rights. What they actually mean is that some foetuses have rights but not all

IMO. they only say that re rape as they don't want to sound as heartless as they actually are. I mean it is one thing to disagree with termination, but to deny a woman who was raped one is horrific, isn't it? So I believe they say it as a 'out' if you like. They don't really mean it (that termination after rape is different), but they daren't say that they think that too, is wrong.

i wonder if they would be prepared to sacrifice their own, living children for themselves too

If you can't see the difference between existing children & a foetus, then you are thick! And to say that any mother would sacrifice her born children for themselves is crass!

My children are precisely the reason I had a termination. Because with another baby, I wouldn't have been the mother they deserve. I couldn't have coped with 3. I didn't/don't want three children. My body was still recovering from the section I had 5 months previously, as well as the other not so pleasant side effects of birth. Another pregnancy so soon would have taken it's toll & worsened a lot of the ailments I had, which would have prevented me being a mother to my children. Instead of being able bodied mother of 2, I would have been completely unable to cope with 3. Which is why I went all out to prevent it.

I am a good mother, a mother who (regardless of what you like to think) puts my children first, just as any other mother should/would. And part of being that good mother was knowing my limitations & being prepared to stick to them. Part of being that good mother was recognising that every child I have has the right to be wanted, planned. And also has the right to have a mother who can care for them adequately & not resent them.

differentname hello again. :)

May I just say how appalled I am that you were not allowed to be sterilized when you wanted. Talk about telling someone that they can't have control over their own body! How patronizing.

Hello again, cheerful!

Yes, it is rather appalling isn't it. As was it when my dr refused on 2 occasions to refer me post birth for the same.

I asked him at 3 weeks post op with an infection & at 6 weeks (when the hospital told me I should) and he said no. That I was a new mother reacting to a traumatic birth. I was a second time mother, after a planned section. But 'practice policy' was that they didn't refer before baby was a yr. But ironically, he told me at the 6 week post natal check, that he would happily refer my dh for a vasectomy!

The practice manageress didn't like it when I complained (in a private room, but loudly) that they were all responsible for what I had been through. No one apologised, because it would be an admission if guilt. And I didn't take take it any further because I was emotionally exhausted!

"if you have to make a decision in a situation where two people's rights are in conflict with each other, that decision must be based on which right is most important to defend"

The embryon is a cluster of cells, not a "person"!

The vast majority of abortions are done in the first three months of gestation. If you have a problem with this, you will lose this debate and this fight, as abortion in the first trimester will and should never be illegal.

If your problem is with late abortions, I believe that there is a point to be made there. About 40% of late abortions are apparently done because the pregnant woman couldn't decide what to do and/or took time getting to the doctor. Those of you feeling strongly about this should campaign to abolish late abortions except in cases of medical (incl. psychological) necessity. Of course, then you will also allow women much quicker access to gynecologists.

different you make a very good point about the rights of your existing children taking precedence over the rights of the foetus.

i made the incredibly painful decision to have an abortion when i fell pregnant accidentally, whilst using contraception, because in the end, it would have been disastrous for my ds1, who had recently endured the acrimonious breakup of his parents' marriage, and who was finally in a place of relative calm and emotional safety after several years of horrible upheaval.

to have brought a new sibling in, with a man i had only just met (who is now my dh, as it happens), would have absolutely been wrong for ds1.

was it right for me? no, not really, and nor for my dh, and i still think about that baby all the time, especially when i look at ds2 and dd who came along afterwards. but is was unquestionably the right decision for ds1, and his rights, in this instance, took precendence over mine or the baby's.

no doubt some lovely person on this thread will now tell me that i am a slut because i've had 2 husbands, and that i shouldn't have ever had sex again after my 1st marriage broke up if i didn't want another child

Cote you're taking one part of one post, and arguing with it out of context. The next line in my post was:

"The argument only works, of course, if you are of the belief that a foetus is a human person and therefore is entitled to human rights. But that belief is where the argument is coming from, and in that context it is a logical one to make"

I was responding to someone else saying that pro-lifers put the rights of the foetus above the rights of the woman, by trying to articulate the fact that to someone who believes that a foetus is a person, it's not necessarily about which person is more important, but which right is more important (life or choice).

I have already said that if you see the embryo or foetus as "a bundle of cells", that argument doesn't work.

I think the "bundle of cells" thing is too simplistic (we're all just bundles of cells, you know), but despite that I am entirely in favour of the free availability of legal abortion, up to the point of viability outside the womb. The whole thread is about trying to understand where another person is coming from, even when we don't agree with them, and I think that this is where some pro-lifers are coming from. They're not all women-hating control freaks.

mrsravelstein

if they do, that is their problem, not yours nor mine. What you did, what I did was out of love. No one can accuse of us of not caring.

"I think diffname in terms of "what life unwanted child " will have - well at least he or she will have life.."

i dont understand this logic.

ll31- how is it better for a child to live a knowing it isn't wanted. hurting daily, living the pain of it's own mother's resentment than to never get to a point where it feels that pain? how is that a preferable choice? how can anyone say they would rather a child be alive to suffer?

Bottom line:

Abortion is the death penalty for the unwanted

The idea that abortion is a "right"
is false.
It is part of our entitlement culture.
No one has a right to insist that an abortion is provided for them.
Abortion is something that is done for you.
It is emotional blackmail to say if the state won't provide a doctor to kill your unborn child in a way that keeps YOU safe then you will harm yourself..

It is as outrageous as demanding that the state take on the role of killing your born children "safely and legally".

At the ground, the pro abort argument is emotionally driven and rationally inconsistent.
It's a baby when it's wanted, it's a potential life and a bunch of cells when it's not.

smallwhite i was referring specifically to ll31's comment to differentname saying at least he/she would have a life. implying that a life of suffering (as is possible) is better than nothing. i disagree. i dont think a child should be born at all costs. who is it in the best interests of to do that? certainly not the child

queenmary can you please use the correct terminology. the word is pro-choice, not pro abort. i am not pro abortion. i do not want women to have abortions. i am pro-choice, i want women to have the choice to terminate if that is what is best for them. there is a big difference.

" queenmary can you please use the correct terminology. the word is pro-choice, not pro abort. i am not pro abortion. i do not want women to have abortions. i am pro-choice, i want women to have the choice to terminate if that is what is best for them. there is a big difference "

Pro abort is more accurate.
No one is truly pro choice. You can't choose to kill your born children, or even to kill yourself.
Many women say they have an abortion because they feel they have "no choice". If pro choicers are all about real choice, why don't they campaign to make sure that abortions like these never happen?
They don't, because they are all about abortion and "keeping it legal". That is the point.
Pro choice is a silly word because "choice" has never existed and never will, and it wouldn't even be desirable anyway.