These types of comments infuriate me.

[QuackPorridgeBacon]

I can’t believe a woman said this. The comments are on a picture to do with abortion it was a meme and someone said it was sad. Apparently this is all we are while pregnant. It’s quite sad actually.

Strange, but a point of view. Not one I share

Its unclear but could they be being sarcastic/trying to say that this is how it is viewed in society and is wrong?

I think to a lot of people women (pregnant or not) are just incubators. Makes me sad.

loopsdefruit No sarcasm unfortunately. She goes on to say that only god should decide who lives or dies and women need to stop using abortion as birth control.. lots of capital letters and exclamation marks.

Was it really a woman? The SIMPLY in capitals seems like trolling. No one actually thinks that except hardcore misogynists who are also completely ignorant about pregnancy, though there are a lot of those admittedly. Even most of those wouldn't spell it out quite so blatantly. I'd chalk it up to an incel trying to upset people unless there's good evidence of it being an actual woman. Still shitty though.

Also says how it’s not fair on the fathers who want to keep the child. I agree it’s sad for them but a woman shouldn’t be forced through pregnancy and childbirth because the one who won’t suffer, wants her to.

Had a nosey on their profile. They are a woman but extremely religious. The other person (a male) responding is an evangelist so I’m thinking I should probably just ignore and move on. I am not religious myself but respect those who are, I just don’t like their religion forcing others to do things, in this case going through with a pregnancy.

To be fair, an unborn child does actually have a life of it's own, and a mother killing one can be an upsetting thought.

Pregnant women aren't "just incubators" though fgs. They are humans who are providing life for another human. The statement was made to make a point, a typical American anti-abortion point, but I kind of get the sentiment.

The annoying thing about American anti-abortion folk is that none of them actually live under circumstances where an abortion would be necessary.

Qcng That is a good point, they don’t experience the need for one so therefore no one needs one. But, I don’t think I fully agree that a baby has a life of its own. It’s a potential life but it is not promised if you see what I mean. To me, if it can’t survive without the mother (it’s host, technically) then it’s not really it’s own person. It sounds awful to think like that but it’s all individual isn’t it. If a baby is wanted then it’s the most amazing thing in the world but if it isn’t, it’s a whole different story.

I'm rather conflicted on the issue.

It seems wrong to enforce an unwanted pregnancy, but I'd feel much better if the foetus could be transferred into an incubator. No matter what one's view on when the baby becomes 'a person', an abortion is still terminating what would likely be a human life spanning decades, and doing so for the sake of a few months. But I'd not want to carry a rapists baby, for instance, so can't see an alternative. Either the baby or the mother has to lose out.

terminating what would likely be a human life spanning decades, and doing so for the sake of a few months
It's not a few months though is it? Your child is your child forever. And if you give your child up for adoption you'll never know if they had a good life or not.
It's not a simple decision either way. We're in the right place, in the US it's getting to be impossible to have an abortion, and in Russia they're practically compulsory (Russian men are apparently particularly bad at wearing condoms, the HIV rate is very high in some cities and the average woman has had half a dozen terminations).
It's not a nice thing but it should always be legal.

Selective sex abortions too?

You can't argue with stupid and people can be right twats on social media.

I suppose considering how well-organised and prolific American anti-abortion campaigners are, it explains why the US has a world-leading fostering and adoption system that is efficient and well-funded, resulting in the successful outcomes for the majority of children entering care.

Not to mention how advanced and accessible their health system is for mothers of all socio-economic whose pregnancies put them in danger or curing significant medical conditions of foetuses highlighted in scans.

Oh, wait a minute...

Sometimes, I think abortion is just another stick for misogynists to beat women with.

And if you give your child up for adoption you'll never know if they had a good life or not.

But they definitely won't have a good life if they die.

By the above I'm not saying that it shouldn't be allowed btw. Just that I'm slightly uncomfortable that lots of people seem to debate on whether the foetus is yet a person, wen the fact is that it undoubtedly would've been.

But they definitely won't have a good life if they die.
Of course not, but you won't have to worry about whether they are being fed properly, cared for or groomed by paedos whilst being bounced from care home to care home. My point was just that I'd be sick with worry if I had to re-home a cat, never mind give my child up for adoption, yet it's painted as a straightforward thing to do.
A termination provides closure. Like I said, it's not nice, it does affect women and I am instantly suspicious of women who treat the subject light-heartedly as if it were nothing - but it needs to remain legal and accessible.

I understand your point about closure. I guess it's just sometimes one of those situations where something has to give and there's no way to ensure that both mother and baby get the best outcome if the baby isn't wanted. In the whole scheme of things we're no more important than ants really despite the importance we place on being human, so I'm not particularly sentimental about human life anyway.

OP there's a thread on AIBU about being pro life with similar comments.

See this is where I become utterly unstuck philosophically, I think one either has to reduce a woman to an incubator with no rights, choices or liberty of her own, which is evil no question. Or one has to do the same to the unborn baby and rob them of all humanity and personhood, which is equally evil. I struggle to engage with either extremists as I’m deeply uncomfortable with either side’s ability to “other” either the woman or the baby.

As unsatisfactory as I know that position is until I get some flash of inspiration that lands the objectively right ethical position in my brain I have to look at it from a strictly utilitarian perspective and look at where less loss of life occurs. To my current understanding if you make abortion illegal MORE women and babies die from people seeking them illicitly as criminals will ALWAYS provide what society will not, and a law designed to protect life that fails in its intended purpose has no business being on the books.

there's no way to ensure that both mother and baby get the best outcome if the baby isn't wanted

A foetus not carried to term suffers no disadvantage whatsoever. It never gains consciousness to dream up some life it could hypothetically have had. It also never suffers the pains that life could bring. I can see no logical basis for suggesting that abortion isn’t the ‘best outcome’ for any foetus. It loses nothing. Our fear of ‘what might never have been’ in our own cases (which is usually the emotive distraction in these arguments) has no relevance whatsoever to the pros and cons of aborting a foetus.

Don't argue with stupid, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience (the meme not posters on this thread)

Yes Dixie if you argue from nihilism but you’ve just set the stage for saying nothing really matters, especially if as you say not existing is preferable to existing.

Personally, I'm a little baffled - the tweet reads like a caricature of a pro life argument, but it's a big movement I guess and I know there are many with odd views.

Fwiw, as someone who is openly prolife, I do not think a woman is just 'an incubator' and I consider such views to be contemptible. I understand the different points raised on this thread, and if you truly hold that a life in utero isn't actually a life, then obviously none of this is even a question.

The trouble for me, and the reason why I've found myself so uncomfortably straddling the fence on this, is every argument I've seen used why a foetus is not alive, if it were used on someone who has actually been born, would be seen as an horrendously dehumanizing attack on them.

Therefore, logic tells me I cannot accept those arguments, the unborn are alive, and so I find myself in this horrible limbo of believing very firmly in the importance of female bodily autonomy, but having this firm line that killing someone else doesn't really come under personal rights.

I have no answer to this conundrum at all.

FloralBunting all you say really resonates with me so I’m essentially stuck in the same place. Despite our fence straddling I think we can still advocate for better sex ed, contraception and some sort of social care pooling of resources to ensure abortions don’t occur purely out of financial desperation.

TheVoiceOfRaisin It’s not for the sake of a few months though. I’ve had to babies, both wanted. I can’t even shit properly since having my second. That hasn’t lasted just a few months, it’s been three and a half years since I gave birth. I think people imagine the baby being born fine and then lovingly adopted as soon as it’s out when in reality, that is not always the case.