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?

We get ultrasounds here too! Cotedazur at 12 weeks and at 20 (or more if you are having difficulties) the midwives do a check everytime they see you which is nothing to do with the ultrasounds.

I think the general idea is that too many ultrasounds is not ncessary and potentially dangerous to the fetus.

""Pro choice" is a very misleading and inaccurate term because no one really believes everyone should be free to choose whatever they want to do.
That's why we have certain laws which curtail our freedom to make all kinds of "choices"."

(1) The choice here refers to whether to terminate the pregnancy or continue with it and have a baby. We are not talking about all possible choices, ever

(2) Yes, we have laws. Good to hear you respect them. One of these laws is that women have the right to abortion in the first half of their pregnancies.

msteak

" I am for your personal choice with no interference from anyone else "

But that is precisely what you require when you demand legal abortion.
You want the state to provide a doctor to kill your baby on your behalf, and to do it safely (for you)
Why should my taxes be required to pay for your "choice"?
Why should a third party be required to do it for you?
Because interference from someone else is exactly what you do need.

So rather than just answering the question with a yes or no you've spent a few lines telling me why you won't answer!! funny.

Ive read your posts MsTeak and stand by what I said. I think the pro-abortion - oh, sorry, pro-choice - lobby, dresses its language up in euphemistic terms because it knows full well that using more direct and honest langauge where abortion is concerned would be unpallatable to most right-minded people.

queen.....you would obviously like your taxes to be spent on a child, slightly higher rate I would imagine. Abortion pill £60 (approx) whereas raising a child at least £100k.

" So rather than just answering the question with a yes or no you've spent a few lines telling me why you won't answer!! funny "

No, it's not funny.
The nswer I gave previously took a lot longer than a few lines.
i'm too busy too keep repeating myself.

mdow.....nope it's about the choice of the woman, therefore pro choice and not pro abortion.

Clearly...way too busy.

" queen.....you would obviously like your taxes to be spent on a child, slightly higher rate I would imagine. Abortion pill £60 (approx) whereas raising a child at least £100k "

Yes, I would. You can't put a price on people.
I resent my money being spent to kill them.

It's ok to oppose the war in Iraq, but not the war on the unborn.
Maybe I should organise a "Stop The War on The Unborn" and "Not In MY Name!" march in London?

Lola - I think the main difference is that we have monthly visits to our doctors, while you see the midwives. Also, we have internal examinations during these monthly visits but I remember an English friend who had here 2nd here being horrified at the thought, so I am guessing these are not common in the UK. We also usually have a last ultrasound at 8 months where any last minute observations like weight and position of the baby are made. (A friend in the UK who gave birth to her DD a month before mine was told by midwife that her DD was head down, whereas she was breech. They released this many hours into delivery and she had to have an emCS. This would never happen here.)

You might fall upon a knowledgeable and lovely midwife, in which case you would be fine, I guess. Or, you could get one who doesn't know what a fetus is and calls you are murderer for having terminated a previous pregnancy I suppose then you would wish you were followed by a specialist doctor who sees these things as biological terms rather than in emotional ones.

too busy to keep repeating yourself that is all you have done jsut twisted your words

or does it question you conscience of forcing a girl of 12 to go through with a pregnancy, a pregnancy that came about through rape. its a hard to argue that the fetus has as much rights as the mother when she had all her rights taken away and her life could be at risk from giving birth so young, of course a doctor can perform a life saving termination (so again her choice is taken away) but to do that her life would have to be in the balance

I didn't realise quite HOW pro choice I was til reading through this thread :)

CoteDzur
Do you want to compare perinatal mortality stats for midwife led care?

I want to do a poll of all the pro-choicers' here just to try to work out whether your stance is driven by genuine concern for the welfare of women or pig-headed political dogma.
So let me ask you all this - how would you describe your political stance - is it:
a. Left wing
b. Centre
C. Right wing

left wing mostly. It isn't influenced by political dogma though as abortion isa very sore subject in my country and you have left and right wingers with very strong views on either side.

What the pro-choicers won't address is why it's ok to end another human life

There are many examples given on this thread alone, where the mother's life is in danger being one of them.

" What the pro-choicers won't address is why it's ok to end another human life "

It will be interesting to se if you get any answers to this beyond a hysterical rant accusing you of "forcing" women to be pregnant.

why are you so obsessed by peoples political beliefs, their sexuality and what ideology they believe in

are you a christian conservative supporter, whote middle class that reads the daily mail and feels you have the higher moral ground? if i said i was does that mean i would be against women having the choice to be able to have control over her body

"What the pro-choicers won't address is why it's ok to end another human life "

IMO it is not a "human life" till it is able to sustain life independently, up until that point it is another part of the woman's body. So I don't believe it is ok to end a human life, but I do believe it is ok for a woman to choose what happens to her own body.

" There are many examples given on this thread alone, where the mother's life is in danger being one of them "

if the mothers life being in danger was a genuine argument then why does the baby have to be killed before it is born?
Why can't it just be born early and take it's chances?

"Why does the bigger person get to choose? Just because the baby is totally dependent on its mother? Just like a newborn baby in other words?"

a newborn baby is not totally dependant on it's motehr for survival. it is dependant on an adult for it's survival. that adult does not have to be the mother. tehrefore the mother has a choice in whether she cares for it or gives it to someone else to care for. there is no law stating that a new mother must be the person to care for it.

a pregnant woman cannot hand the baby to someone else without removing it from her uterus. in order for the baby to survive outside of teh uterus it must have reached a certain point of gestation. tehrefore in order to remove a baby from teh uterus and keep it alive, a pregnant woman woul dhave to remain pregnant for several months. removing the baby before this point is called a termination.

why should a pregnant woman have less choice than a new mother?

"I want to do a poll of all the pro-choicers' here just to try to work out whether your stance is driven by genuine concern for the welfare of women or pig-headed political dogma.
So let me ask you all this - how would you describe your political stance - is it:
a. Left wing
b. Centre
C. Right wing"

what has that got to do with a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body?