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?

And empathy, or at the least sympathy. Judging by the web link which has been removed, and the posts, they're both missing.

there also seems to be a strong undercurrent with many of the pro-life posts that it is a woman's fault for getting pregnant unexpectedly, with no acknowledgement that contraception can and frequently does fail, and that they should almost be "punished" for enjoying their "sexual freedom". which makes me very uncomfortable.

and there seems to be this image of abortion clinics as places full of cackling evil doctors in blood stained aprons trying to coerce a queue of desperate women into termination, despite the experiences of myself and others that in fact there was good gentle counselling and the opportunity for reflection and discussion before any decision was made.

what is also very frustrating reading this thread is that in fact i think SOME of the pro-life's arguments might well be good points for discussion:

i think many people ARE uncomfortable with late abortions

i think everyone would agree that, if it's really happening, we need to somehow address the issue of women having multiple frequent abortions as 'a form of contraception'

i assume most would agree that good unbiased counselling should be offered to women who are making what can be a very difficult and traumatic decision

but suggest that banning abortion is the answer to all these complex issues, which can vary so much on a woman by woman/case by case level, is just too simplistic to reflect real life.

i think everyone is uncomfortable with late abortions. jsut because you may feel late abortions are sometimes a necessity (and i personally can not put a limit on time, the law does) does not mean i do not feel uncomfortable with it as i believe to reach that decision the circumstances will be complicated or that women are having multiple terminations but prefer to look deeper into the reasons why, why she is willing to put her body through that. to me that is not the sign of a confident happy women who respects her body

being 100% pro choice or what ever name it is given does not mean i am celebrating women having terminations it means i feel its an absolute right for every women to have control over her body and to be able to make the choices that are right for her

UntitledNo2 your post wasn't inarticulate, it made very interesting reading :)

the numbers suprise david steel

I do see that some of the potential circumstances surrounding pregnancy can be, and often are, horrendous.
I don't want to minimise those concerns, and I do think that it is important that we have the interests of these individual at the front of our minds, and be always seeking to assist/protect them.
But it is impossible to have a debate about whether abortion is wrong or right, without being sidetracked by sundry ethical dilemmas.
Abortion is wrong because it's a baby, and it is always wrong to intentionally kill a baby.
There are many ethical dilemmas and appaling stories of human suffering, but the response to those is never to make a wrong thing right in order to alleviate the suffering.
Either an act is wrong or it is not.

Many commenters here have referred to a bundle of cells or an embryo.
But again, this is merely sidetracking the issue, since pro "choicers" are not arguing for abortion only while the conceptus remains an embryo but far beyond that point.

Pro abortion arguments depend on obfuscating the real issue.
They energetically avoid any evidence of what abortion is or what it does, (and I assume that the link that was deleted was one that linked to a website showing the testimony of a former abortionist about why he changed his mind) so they become very censorious about any attempts to break through the fiction that abortion is a minor procedure which is humane to the fetus.
It is not.

"I daresay the anti slavery campaign felt quite oppressive at the time too."

I don't see abortion as being a womans fundamental right over her body , as many commenters here have said.
Abortion is much more complex than that,
And although I have been accused of black and white thinking, I think this is where pro "choicers" fall into the same trap.

Abortion is not something women do with their own bodies. It is something done to someone elses body.
It isn't even something women do, it is something they insist is done for them.

As for the insistent questions about what I would have done with sundry family memebrs who aided and abbetted abortion, well again, that's just an attempt to steer the conversation off course, surely?
Firstly, to the commenter who asked what I would do with her family, well the answer has to be "nothing" I imagine.
They haven't brioken any law have they?
I'm not quite sure what that question was driving at.

As for framing the law, I think abortion is wrong. As such it is perfectly reasonable to believe that it should not be legally provided for, and certainly our tax money should pay for it.
I am not obligated to go further than that and define how to frame the details of law and punishment for it's transgression.
I will add that the law is often faced with dilemmas, such as "mercy killings" and that is a matter for judges to decide, not me.

So you believe that when a woman is 2 days pregnant - she is carrying a 'baby' queenmary?

"Abortion is wrong because it's a baby, and it is always wrong to intentionally kill a baby."

I wouldn't say that this is technically true. At which stage would you say it becomes a "baby"?

MsTeak
" ^>>>"I daresay the anti slavery campaign felt quite oppressive at the time too."

well if they could not have it done for them in a safe environment they would very often be doing it themselves and putting themselves in great danger as many many women (my great aunt nearly dying from doing this, my great granny done this on more than one occasion) did in the past.

maybe you can not understand that feeling of being pregnant and desperately not wanting to be, the feelign you get is overwhelming take away safe terminations this is what will happen as it still happens in many countries and we still have women who travel to get a termination, or who go to some unsafe back street hovel because they are that desperate and if that was not an option they would do it themselves

valium
" So you believe that when a woman is 2 days pregnant - she is carrying a 'baby' queenmary? "

Are you saying that abortion is ok within a 2 day post conception limit?
Because if you're not then that is a pretty pointless question.

Would you rather women died performing their own abortions?

"it grants them absolute rights over someone elses body."

So when in the preganancy does the collection of cells become "somebody else". And how do you define "somebody else"?

Empusa

" Abortion is wrong because it's a baby, and it is always wrong to intentionally kill a baby."

I wouldn't say that this is technically true. At which stage would you say it becomes a "baby"?

as I said to valium, that question is only worth answering if you are agreeing that it is wrong to intentionally kill a baby.
It sucks
It swallows
It dreams
It kicks and bounces off the uterine wall
It sucks it's thumb
It pees
It hiccups
It responds to painful stimuli

What is it then?

At which point in the pregnancy would you say this is true? As someone said earlier, 2 days after conception? Does it do any of the above at that stage?

inflames

" Would you rather women died performing their own abortions? "

No.
And I'd rather women didn't jump off bridges with their disabled children.
That doesn't mean that I think we should kill their disabled children for them.

Queenmary - I questioned what you class as a 'baby' - from conception?2 days? a month?

" At which point in the pregnancy would you say this is true? As someone said earlier, 2 days after conception? Does it do any of the above at that stage? "

Empus
Are you saying that when a "conceptus" can do all these things that it would be a baby and therefore wrong to abort it?
If you aren't what's the point in the question?

What do YOU think queenmary? Stop throwing the question back.

queenmary My view, as I said earlier, is that it is not a "baby" until it can sustain life independantly. It must be able to survive outside of the womb. I'll admit there is a grey area there due to technological advances, but there is still definitely a point up to which even technology cannot sustain a foetuses life. I do not believe a foetus which can sustain life should be aborted, no. But I do believe that up until that point it is essentially a part of the woman's body, and if she feels (for whatever reason) that she does not, or cannot carry it to term then she should be able to abort.

Basically, if it can sustain life independently, then it's life should not be taken*. But if it cannot sustain life, then there is no life to take.

*I am aware there are exceptional circumstances though.

Now I've answered your question would you care to answer mine? At which point due you believe that a foetus becomes a baby? Does 2 days after conception count as an independent being to you? If so, why?