To think that just because I'm pro-life doesn't mean I hate feminism?

[TinkerSailerSoldierSpy]

Friend and I were having a discussion, I'm 18 weeks pregnant, and it was a bit of an inconvenient surprise, considering I've started a new job just 2 months ago.I mentioned that it wasn't going to look good, me taking maternity leave after not even being there for a year, and she suggested perhaps considering there was no dad on the scene and my new job, I should terminate. I felt a bit uncomfortable but told her that I could never do that as I'm pro life and view it as killing a child. She then proceeded to stare at me like I had an extra head and ask me why in a shocked voice. I explained my reasons and views and we got into an arguement about it, the usual stuff, what about in cases of rape and if the woman's not financially able to support the child, to which I countered but is it right for a woman to get an abortion just because she wants to continue a party lifestyle? And she stormed out the house shouting that I was misogynistic and women have the right to their own bodies. Let me be clear, I certainly would never stop anyone from making their decision about an abortion, I just can't seem to get over the idea of it, it repulses me. But I wouldn't judge a woman who got one. I understand the other viewpoint but I can't agree with it myself, and in all other respects I would say i was very liberal about womans rights. When I mentioned it to other friend she said it was my views but they were quite outdated and misogynistic. Are they? I need advice, should I apologize to friend A?

Without statistics you are projecting your own judgements onto the matter.

OK- so what do you think the breakdown of the 140 post 24 week abortions might be?

I have no idea what the breakdown might be.

What social reasons megsmouse?

I think 'social reasons' is the term used to be flippant about any non-medical reason for abortion. Because women are just to silly to have real reasons.

Yes Megsmouse, what exactly have you 'witnessed'?

Please remember, everyone, that the squealing about how awful late abortion is is what leads to women dying because of other people's squeamishness and misogyny.

This is MaterFacit's link posted upthread which gives a summary of reasons given for abortion requests post 22 weeks.

The 'social reasons' include plenty of mistakes by GPs in recognising and dating pregnancies. Other factors in the requests are: youth; depression; drug use (methadone dependency); homelessness and poverty; fear.

Real party animals, those women, aren't they? Especially the 14 year olds.

Do you argue coherently then SGB, while the rest of us, who aren't so absolutist "squeal" if not in agreement with your pov? Are you as black and white about everything in your life?
I see myself as more misanthropic than mysogynist, if we have to throw labels about

I'm afraid it has to be black and white. Either a woman has control over her body or she doesn't, and somebody else does. There isn't a third way.

There is a 3rd way and it exists across many countries in the world except mine where interestingly the majority of people are as black and white about the issue as you are just in the opposite direction.

There isn't a 3rd way with bodily autonomy.

What you are talking about is compromising the bodily autonomy of women with rules, laws and contingent interpretations, and then calling it a 3rd way.

Seems quite simple to me, abortions should be granted upon request at any point in pregnancy.
If the fetus/baby/products of conception/whatever you prefer, can live independently then every effort should be made to help them to do so.

No the 3rd way tries to balance the conflicting right to bodily integrity of the woman with the recognised in most countries across the world right to life of the foetus. It is a difficult balancing act to walk since both ends of the spectrum refuse to recognise the others view point making for a highly devisive debate at both ends of the spectrum.

How does the 3rd way work?

Better to ask how the abortion to birth would really practically work i think given that the 3rd option seems to be already in operation in the uk from what others have written here.

Very true about the polarisation Neun.

Unfortunately, SGB, abortion being available up to the time of natural birth means viable foetuses dying. I am not sure how this squares with any concept of equality.

Actually Sgb abortion is legal at any gestation if the mother's life is at risk, and i'm confident that no one on this thread would wish that to change, so no, "squeamishness" about late abortion does not lead to women dying.
Just saying it doesn't make it true.

Recognising that these questions are nuanced and difficult does not make people idiots, and treating them with contempt does not win any debates.

framey the reasons that that is not a simple or realistic answer have been discussed at length upthread.

You cannot talk about the "right to life" of the foetus, without acknowledging that you no longer support the bodily autonomy of women once they've reached a certain point in pregnancy.

If your right to life as a human being is dependent on lodging in someone else's body, or even using the body parts of them (for example, forcing them to regularly give you blood every day) then by definition your right is being elevated over their's - you are being given leave to use their body with or without their consent in order to stay alive.

In no other medical situation would this right to life at the expense of another person, be countenanced. It's only pregnant women who lose the right to bodily autonomy for the benefit of another person.

Indeed, Basil, it's almost as if pregnancy is a unique situation creating extremely complex ethical issues, with no obvious parallels in other aspects of life.

Incidentally if I had to give blood every day in order to keep another person alive I'd do it.

I am finding myself saying the same things so I am going to bow out before it looks like I am trying to get the last word in . I have found this discussion really interesting but it really has not changed my views at all I am still horrified with the notion of allowing abortion to term as the gold standard of promoting women's rights but I understand others have different views. I do think though that because pregnancy is a fairly unique situation that trying to find other similar examples of medical situations is a pointless exercise.

x post

But would you make a law that said everyone else had to do it?

Thus removing everyone's bodily autonomy and handing it over to the state/ medical profession? There's a perfectly respectable school of thought that would support that.

Pregnancy may be unique, but the concept of bodily autonomy isn't. You can argue that because pregnancy is unique, women must lose their bodily autonomy at some stage in that unique situation. If that's what you're arguing, fine, own it. It's only what has been argued for millenia - that women don't have the right to control their own bodies because they bear children (unfortunately once you concede that in one, unique situation, women lose the right to bodily autonomy, it becomes much easier to argue that they also have no right to bodily autonomy in many other, non-unique situations, but that's another thread).