I’m not new to Hatrack, but since I don’t want to be stigmatized here and I am not interested in being attacked, I am posting this under an alternative screen name. Abortion is a very contentious topic here, and there have been some very hot headed words thrown around. Perhaps the people doing the throwing do not realize that they are hurting some people that they may have considered to be friends. I know that I am hurt, and that my feelings of friendship towards some of you has been diminished by harsh attacks.
I had an abortion when I was 18. I was a freshman in college, and I believe it was the right choice for me then, and that faced with the same circumstances, I would do it again. There. I said it. Listen to my side of it before you begin posting your denouncements of me, though.
All through school, I was unpopular, a nerd, and a misfit. Going away to college was my first chance to be on my own, to reinvent myself and to start over. I hadn’t dated in high school, and I knew that one thing that I would need to boost my self-esteem (and the esteem of others) was a real boyfriend. OK. I was naïve. But I really thought that if I had a boyfriend, it would prove me to be desirable and worthy of popularity. I had low self-esteem, and I really believed that my worth was proven by what others thought of me, not by what was innate. I met a guy just a couple of weeks into school. He was older (a graduate student) and that made him seem more sophisticated and mature. Looking back, though, I see that he really wasn’t. In fact, he was a bit of a creep. But he won me over with cheap flattery. If you have never known the depression that accompanies the feeling that you are worthless, you can not understand the power that flattery can have. This guy, his pet name for me was “Beautiful”. Me! I never considered myself pretty, I had a long litany of obvious (to me, anyway) defects, and this guy thought I was beautiful! I was charmed. I wanted to show him off to everybody, tell everyone about my older, sophisticated, doting boyfriend. It seemed, though, that he was a bit embarrassed to be hanging out with all the freshmen, and when I met his graduate student friends, he was reluctant to tell them that I was his girlfriend. “What we have is so beautiful, Beautiful, why do we have to care about what other people think? Forget about them, we have us.” I was hungry for romance, and he was quick to feed that hunger. We were always going off, just the two of us, walking, hiking, talking, and kissing. I was inexperienced in kissing, but I liked the closeness of it, the snuggling and hugging. But, according to the guy, this made me one of the worst things a girl could be – a “cock tease”. He chided me for this more than once for refusing to have sex after I got him all heated up with kissing and hugging. He put my hand on his erection as an accusation. “Can’t we just stop and let it go down?” I’d ask. But he explained that I didn’t understand men, and the way things worked. Apparently, he could come to physical detriment from my teasing. It was a couple of months into our relationship, and he was saying that it was a mistake to get involved with me, I was too immature, I was too young, I was a tease.
You can see that he was a creep. Looking back, it is clear to me, too. But back then, I was terrified. I needed to have a boyfriend! It proved my worth! Having a boyfriend was very important. He supplied the condoms, and took the lead. I just lay back and waited for it to be over. I can’t say I ever enjoyed sex with him. But I figured that this is what it would take for me to be a worthwhile person, and not that horrible creature, the tease.
Accidents happen. A condom broke. My period was late. And the guy was angry with me trying to trap him. I was in my first semester of college when I woke up and knew for a certainty that I did NOT want to marry this guy. I saw that he was selfish and manipulative and not at all good for me. I knew that I had made an awful mistake. I knew that I did not want to have sex with him again, and that I didn’t want to have sex with anyone again until after I was married. I knew that I made a bad start of my “new start”, and I just wanted to turn back time and have a chance to do it all again. But I couldn’t. I was pregnant.
I was not raised in a religious home, but I was becoming more and more involved in the religious groups on campus. I had religious friends and role models and I became more closely allied with them as I began to turn from the guy. I read and researched and asked questions about what my religion taught about the beginning of life and of abortion. The answers were not clear cut, but it was evident to me that, in the teaching of my faith, that it was not a grievous sin to have an abortion in my circumstances. I did.
I started over, this time a little wiser, more cautious, but also more sure of myself. Would I have loved to have been one of the “cool ones”, one of the popular sorority girls? Not anymore. Now I was content to be myself, and to do what I wanted and not what someone else said I should want. I found my niche and my own group of friends in the religious groups, the science fiction club, the Dungeons and Dragons crowd, the poets and writers, the volunteers. I had been isolated from most of these groups because I had been so singularly involved with the guy, and the guy didn’t want to hang out with anyone but me.
Now I believe that abortion is not a good thing. I also believe that if I had had a baby when I was 19 and had landed up bound to the guy for the long term, that would have been a worse thing.
If you believe that human life, the existence of a soul, begins at the moment that sperm joins egg, then abortion is indeed murder. But I am a religious woman, and my religion does not teach that this is when life begins. My faith teaches that life begins with the quickening, the point when the baby can be felt moving inside the mother. Until then, it is only potential life. A wonderful potential. One that should not be wasted. But there are circumstances that allow it.
I was not impregnated by rape. I was not impregnated by incest. My life was not in grave danger. But a baby at that time would have been wrong for me, and I chose not to have one. I was foolish and made stupid mistakes. You don’t have to tell me that. But, if I were to advise a girl in the same circumstance that I was in at that time, I would tell her to consider abortion as one of her options.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Thank you for sharing your story.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
You did what was best for you at the time... People's circumstances can be so frustrating and difficult...
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
For what it's worth, you saying that it was the right choice for you at the time is enough for me. If you say it was, then it was.
Thanks for the post.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
I completely understand what you mean, and I know how it feels to have men treat you that way. It's a horrible feeling to have someone you care about say those kinds of things about you. Being coerced into doing things is so painful. I hope your experiences since have been much, much better.
Thanks for this post.
-pH
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I know this isn't what you intended by posting, but I couldn't help wondering how we'd've reacted if the person posting that story had, instead of being you, been the creep. Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
On behalf of men everywhere, I'm sorry.
As a guy who could have very easily turned into the guy in your story, I'm sorrier.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
What Bob said.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
You are living proof that life is not defined by statistics. Everybody has a reason, and they is an important part of your motivations in life; I wish more people could see things that way. Nice post.
Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
I admire you for sharing your story.
A.
Posted by Squish (Member # 9191) on :
AltName: I'm sorry you had to go through that situation. I think it takes a lot to be able to come out and share your story with everyone.
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: You are living proof that life is not defined by statistics. Everybody has a reason, and they is an important part of your motivations in life; I wish more people could see things that way. Nice post.
I definately agree with Orincoro
I spend more of my time reading threads rather than posting when I come here, so I haven't made a whole lot of friends but even I still feel hurt/attacked/judged by what people have posted on all of the abortion threads. I don't think abortion is the right when people (who think getting pregnant is a game) abuse it. But if someone has gone through an abortion and chose to do so for what they think are the right reasons, having people judge them based on a singular action without knowing the reason behind it... to me, that's the last thing they'd want to deal with. I don't know about everyone else, but going through the experience and the inner turmoil is enough.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I don't know what else to say to this thread and its story other than that I am sorry for your experience, and that the first guy who showed an interest in you was a predatory schmuck. It was very unfortunate that the first guy was not something better, but I suppose that's life. However this thread does not appear to be, in spite of its title, a discussion concerning abortion beyond the confines of the story itself, so I will not discuss it.
I am happy for you, though, that you have learned from this experience, and turned something pretty crappy into something you can, at least by negative example, benefit from.
Posted by MissAmandaJones (Member # 9460) on :
AltName, I understand how you feel. I too have have an abortion. I post here under another name and have often wanted to jump up and scream on those threads that you can't make sweeping statements because every case is different. I am having to go back and re-type this every few lines because my hands are shaking. I was an idiot, I believed an older man when he said he loved me. He made me feel like we'd be together forever and always until I got pregnant. Then he did not want a baby. My family wanted me to have an abortion, he wanted me to have an abortion. I wanted my baby. I wish I had been a strong enough person to stand up for myself and try to get some help but I was not. I also know that I have had a "better" life because I have no ties to this man and did not have a child at such a young age and the guilt of that realization eats me alive. I am Pro-Choice, no one should be able to tell someone what they can do with their body but I know that for me, I could never do that again. I am now married to a good man and we have a child. I have a good life, but I often find myself looking at my child and wondering how it would be to have a 12 year old right now and what I let go. Every statistic is a story and do not think any one does this on a whim. We're people with hearts and I think a lot of them got broken.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
MissAJ:
Another good post.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Thank you for sharing these stories. My heart goes out to you both.
For those of us reading thses, than you for not turing this into another debate. I will avoid doing that as well. Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Yes, well this thread is rather obviously an argument-or at least a position-in favor of a pro-choice belief. But only so long as it remains focused on the story being told, and does not branch out.
That is already starting to happen, though.
Posted by enochville (Member # 8815) on :
I thank the two of you for sharing your stories.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Thank you for sharing these stories.
I have to admit that I don't consider it "sharing" when it's anonymous, especially over the Internet.
Posted by Dante (Member # 1106) on :
I agree with Tom.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
quote: Now I believe that abortion is not a good thing. I also believe that if I had had a baby when I was 19 and had landed up bound to the guy for the long term, that would have been a worse thing.
I read this as a false dilemma. There were other options.
In my book, making moral choices isn't about what's best for me. It's about what's best, period.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
This does not seem to be a thread for debate on the benefits and drawbacks of abortion, Swampjedi. Yet. It is drifting in that direction and although obviously I cannot decide for you, I think it would be better not to overtly nudge it in that direction.
On an unrelated issue, I agree with Tom and Dante. In telling a story anonymously and on the Internet no less, the teller has not really shared a piece of themselves, because no one knows whose story it is. Sharing is both a dilution and a growing. It is not truly sharing unless something is lost or diluted in some way, regardless of whether or not the benefits (friendship, personal growth, greater opportunities later, whatever) outweigh the loss.
Posted by AltNameToo (Member # 9461) on :
I am using a false name so that I too can participate in this contentious debate without dealing with repercussions.
quote:But a baby at that time would have been wrong for me, and I chose not to have one.
This is disingenuous. Even granting that it was wrong for you to raise a child then, there are many ways to choose to not have a baby, and abortion was not the only one still open to you.
Most people choose to not have a child at that age.
You didn't merely choose to not have a child. You chose to abort the fetus you were pregnant with.
quote:For what it's worth, you saying that it was the right choice for you at the time is enough for me. If you say it was, then it was.
If somebody says a choice was right for them, it was? Do I have that kind of cart blanch already, or do I have to get pregnant?
quote:This does not seem to be a thread for debate on the benefits and drawbacks of abortion, Swampjedi.
Should this be a thread for one side of the issue to freely make statments about abortion while the other side must stay silent? If so, where's it's evil twin?
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
In response to Tom's comment, there are some things that are very hard to talk about. I've discussed things under an alternate name before and I understand the need to do so. Although I never got any credit for "sharing" on those occasions, I think that was more an indication of a lack of empathy for what I was sharing rather than the fact I was sharing anonymously.
As for the first post, it's brought up a lot of feelings. Unfortunately many of them are not likely the ones the poster intended. So, I'm going to try to keep this as level and rhetoric-free as I can.
quote:Yes, well this thread is rather obviously an argument-or at least a position-in favor of a pro-choice belief. But only so long as it remains focused on the story being told, and does not branch out.
That is already starting to happen, though.
As Rakeesh points out, this happened with the first post.
Both of your situations are emotional. Both of you admittedly made poor decisions. This isn't new or unsusual. People make poor choices. I've made many myself. As with Erosomniac, I could have been the guy in the first story, except that I was wheedling and emotionally manipulative rather than controlling and browbeating.
I don't lack sympathy or understanding of your situation, nor do I feel that you haven't paid a price for your actions. As has been repeatedly stated, having an abortion is no picnic.
But it's worth pointing out that Miss Amanda Jones, in particular, would not have been in her situation were abortion not legal. Does no one else find it shocking or problematic that a woman was pressed into an abortion against her will? and yet here she is, essentially stating that a law which would have prevented her boyfriend and parents from doing as they wanted to with her body is somehow bad because
quote:I am Pro-Choice, no one should be able to tell someone what they can do with their body...
She appears to be saying that, because we find her situation a horrific abuse of her person, that we must be unsympathetic to her.
I think you both made the wrong decision. That doesn't mean I don't sympathize or understand. That doesn't mean I hate you or revile you. To be honest, I kind of resent the implications that it does.
But the facts of these matters are, two people who would otherwise have had a life do not and the reasons for this have everything to do with minimizing the difficulty of the lives they would impact. I will not be shamed into not saying so because it is somehow "mean." I would say so to the face of my best friend or my own children. I would expect them to say so to me, if the situations were reversed. There are plenty of things about which they have, and should have, criticized me. Taking these things as personal attacks is refusing to learn from your mistakes, which might be an even bigger tragedy yet.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:If somebody says a choice was right for them, it was? Do I have that kind of carte blanch already, or do I have to get pregnant?
Of course you do. The very nature of being pro-choice is to allow people to make this decision. You decide for you and your fetus (should you happen to be carrying one).
I'm not sure what you are objecting to or questioning. Why would you think I wouldn't support your choice, whatever it is?
I support the following position with respect to abortion: Every adult female in our society has the right and responsibility to choose what happens to their own body and any fetus that may be inside their body.
People who are of an age or mental capacity where parents or guardians make their legal decisions for them do not automatically have the same rights and responsibilities, but should be able to petition a court for emancipation if they want to make the decision for themselves.
You seem to be asking what about for other things, or issues not related to pregnancy...I think the same position can be generalized.
Do you have a specific situation in mind?
Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Thank you for sharing these stories.
I have to admit that I don't consider it "sharing" when it's anonymous, especially over the Internet.
I think that’s the beauty of Internet. It gives people the impression that they can be 100% “anonymous”. And thus it makes it easier to share painful experiences. But much (yet not all) of the activity on the Internet can be traced. So anybody using it (the Internet) should assume a minimum of responsibility about what they say “anonymously”.
Now, TomDavidson, are you implying that it seems to you that the person starting this thread is dishonest? If the story is purely fiction, and has “an agenda” then I qualify it as utter dishonesty. Yet I prefer to believe that it is not the case, and that generally, people are “basically good” (rather than "basically evil"). Call me naïve if you want.
A.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Now, TomDavidson, are you implying that it seems to you that the person starting this thread is dishonest?
How on earth would what he said be implying that?
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I'm so sorry you had to go through that. I'm sorry if anything I said in the other thread has hurt you. This is a big part of why I am politically pro-choice: I believe the choice you made would not have been one that I could have lived with, BUT I could never quite muster the arrogance it would require to claim that I have the right to make those kinds of decisions for everyone. Obviously, I have enough trouble keeping myself in line with what I think is right for me. Also, what Bob said. *hug*
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
I don't think the point of the original poster was to try to score points in the abortion debate without letting the other side say anything, which AltNameToo seems to be implying.
I think the original post was basically a request that people do not make broad insults aimed at people who have had abortions in the past, because there are members here who are part of that group, even if they don't like to tell everyone. In one of the other threads somebody said that anyone willing to have an abortion lacked all moral fiber or critical thinking skills and would be a terrible parent anyway. That's more than just a controversial debate, that's being insulting.
Not all of the pro-life people are insulting in presenting their side of the issue, of course. By no means would I want people to feel like they can't post any pro-life view. I just think this is a reminder that there are women on hatrack who have been through this.
--Enigmatic
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Not all of the pro-life people are insulting in presenting their side of the issue, of course. By no means would I want people to feel like they can't post any pro-life view. I just think this is a reminder that there are women on hatrack who have been through this.
Enigmatic, there are almost certainly abortion survivors here - people whose mothers came very close to obtaining an abortion - as well. Perhaps posters ought to be conscious of what the choice they are talking about very nearly meant to those people, and how they feel when they are referred to as potentially life-ruining or as not quite as important as some other policy consideration.
Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:Now, TomDavidson, are you implying that it seems to you that the person starting this thread is dishonest?
How on earth would what he said be implying that?
Let's just see what TomDavidson had in mind. This is the point of my question.
A.
(PS: I don't see WHY did he feel the need to make that comment in the first place)
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
Because it was true? Altname started it with the thread title, "You know me...". Well, I submit that I do *not* know her. She could be telling the truth, or she could be a troll.
I'm a little sad that Altname felt too ashamed or afraid to come out with this story under the name they are known by (if in fact they are a real person at Hatrack), as I've seen more often than not Hatrack being very accepting of members who would otherwise be judged and disgraced for choices they have made.
Note: I'm not saying Altname should 'come out' if she doesn't want to. She doesn't have anything to prove to me, and I don't much care to know who she is.
Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
sarcasticmuppet, what TomDavidson said was a personal consideration. It seems that you share it. I'm not arguing its truth value, but I'm wondering why it was needed to be said like that.
You know, the Earth is round anyway!
A.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
Dagonee, I agree that the "ruin my life" style language could possibly be hurtful for an abortion survivor. Not being one myself (um, as far as I know ) I'm not sure if it really would be, but I can see the potential there.
There's two differences that I see though, and it could just be a matter of perception. One is between a woman saying that FOR HER a baby at that time would have been life-ruining, and someone saying that ALL women who have had abortions lack moral character and thinking skills.
The second difference is that AltName is not a hypothetical person who may possibly have their feelings hurt. She's a real person who did have her feelings hurt. If there's an "abortion survivor" here who has been genuinely offended by some of the pro-choicers comments, by all means they should speak up (anonymously if they choose) and let everyone know how that feels and why we should be more sensitive.
I agree with you that there should not be a double standard for two sides of the debate. I haven't seen you post anything I thought was insulting. But other people have. And no, I don't like it when pro-choicers call pro-lifers oppressive or domineering or other insults, either. I'm sorry I don't more frequently say something in those cases, especially because I have seen you and JimMe getting dogpiled at times.
--Enigmatic
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: I have seen you and JimMe getting dogpiled at times.
In all fairness, I deserve it, sometimes.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Jim-Me, I think you said what was on my mind very well.
I have the right to think a decision was wrong. That doesn't make me mean. That doesn't make me judgemental.
You made a hard decision, our anonymous poster. It evidently still weighs on you. You have my empathy, if that matters in the least.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
As for abortion survivors, my sister is one. She's adopted, and was found in a dumpster at just a few hours old. I have little doubt that if the birth mother could have afforded an abortion, my sister would not be with us. All of that joy and love wouldn't be around.
Posted by AltName (Member # 9459) on :
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: In one of the other threads somebody said that anyone willing to have an abortion lacked all moral fiber or critical thinking skills and would be a terrible parent anyway.
It was precisely this comment that motivated me to tell my story. I've grown up and changed since the time that I recounted in my first post. I've gained much better judgement, lots more maturity, have married a wonderful man (who knows about my past, and was willing to wait until after the wedding for consummation), and raised wonderful children. I don't think that I'm a terrible parent. I think I am a really terrific parent and I have terrific kids. I made mistakes in the past, and have learned from them. I don't think that it makes me an unfit mother.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
Alt, whoever you are, I think you're very brave.
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
I do have to say that I think it sucks when someone on my side in a debate says something rude or hurtful, because to the people it hurts, it feels as though the insult is coming from the entire pro-life side in the argument, when I work very hard not to say things like that. It's like the insulters are speaking for me, in the minds of many, and are saying things I would never say.
If such people, on BOTH sides (and they do exist on both sides), could learn to have some tact and control themselves, I think the rest of us could make some real progress here, without the debate degenerating into hurt feelings.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:Does no one else find it shocking or problematic that a woman was pressed into an abortion against her will?
I don't find it shocking at all, because in my work with a pro-life ministry I've talked to many girls and women who felt they were forced.
One was forced by her boyfriend who threatened to harm her if she didn't go through with it. One was held down by four people while it was performed with her screaming at the top of her lungs to please not kill her baby. The abortion clinic went ahead with it because she was a minor and it was her father insisting on the abortion. One was told by her parents she would be disowned and thrown out of the house if she didn't have it. And the list goes on.
What's really sad is we could have helped those girls, especially the last one - our ministry specifically was set up to help unwed mothers financially, emotionally, whatever they needed. Unfortunately, the part of our ministry that was utilized the most was this one - post abortion counseling. I've heard hundreds of tragic stories of women heartbroken and in severe pain because of their abortions, and not all of them made the choice willingly. Almost everyone told me they were at the least encouragaed by boyfriends and/or family to have the procedure and many felt they were coerced.
I realize it's a skewed sample - a post-abortion trauma counseling session is not likely to attract someone who is perfectly happy with their decision, but the sheer numbers of women suffering emotionally was very, very telling and it really got to me. One of the reasons why I no longer volunteer there - I still support them financially, but I couldn't keep up, it was beginning to affect me in a detrimental way. I do honor the men and women who continue in that work, I really do.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Amen to that, rat. I can empathize with the poster, and would never presume to make that decision for anyone. My feelings on the issue and my religion are my own. I think that part of my pro-choice stance has to do with being a member of a minority religion. I understand very well that my religious beliefs and practices are not those of most people, and I would never think of imposing them on others. And I wish no interference from those of other religions concerning the practice of my own. Let each individual decide what is right and moral in this circumstance, and let us all realize that there is enough disagreement on the subject that the imposition of one group's beliefs on another is unwarranted. So while I might be opposed to abortion personally, I shy away from making that my political stance.
And not to knock or insult AltName, Sterling, but if she were truly brave, she wouldn't be hiding behind an alias. She may be many things, but posting under an alternative screen name is hardly a brave thing to do, no?
Posted by Boothby171 (Member # 807) on :
Tante,
There's brave, and then there's plain dumb. I'll assume that AltName is who she says she is--someone we all know and whom we've traded barbs with in the past. If she choses to reveal some very private information about herself in order to add to a discussion that always seems to have an active thread somewhere on Hatrack, then more power to her. And if she also choses to use a different pseudonym than the one she normally uses, I see that as a right to privacy.
Or are we now to equate the desire to maintain a right to privacy as akin to cowardice?
Sounds like something from the NSA, or from 1984:
PRIVACY = COWARDICE
IGNORANCE = STRENGTH
FREEDOM = SLAVERY
WAR = PEACE
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
I didn't say she was cowardly. I think she has good reasons for staying anonymous. But bravery isn't one of them.
Were I in her place, I'd likely use a pseudonym, too.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
I support AltName's decision to stay anonymous. I once made a stupid joke on a message board, and a few people took it the wrong way. I apologized, but they hounded me in every thread I posted in after that.
Sometimes if you want to participate in a community, it's best to leave some things unsaid. At least, under your main identity.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
And yet, it makes things kinda one sided. She can discuss and comment without repercussions on her "main" identity - but anyone who disagrees (such as myself) isn't hiding. So I could make someone quite mad by my disagreement, and never know who.
That's not really making much sense, as I read it. I guess there's just a disconnect. Those of us posting on known screen names don't have the freedom from accountability that the anonymous posters do.
I want the rules of engagement to be equal on all sides.
Plus, honestly, I think that anyone who won't have anything to do with you because you had an abortion doesn't really belong here anyways. Those people just aren't worth your time.
I guess the anonymity is like the abortion in that I can understand where you're coming from, but I think the end result wasn't optimal.
Posted by Kristen (Member # 9200) on :
AltName: I realize you wanted to share your story and put a 'face' on abotion as a means of grounding the debate in reality, and I think that's admirable. It's so easy to discuss ideas without realizing that there are people to whom they directly apply. I really respect that, and you are brave for sharing your story. I can't imagine relieving a time that painful. I'm sorry you got involved with such a rotten person, but I'm happy that you are content with your life as it is now--that's inspirational.
However, I am ardently pro-life and obviously disagree with your choice. That being said, I don't think you are a bad person and for people to frame you solely in terms of your abortion is absolutely wrong. I think we pro-lifers SHOULD read stories like yours to remember that we are talking about real people with real experiences, often traumatic, and that the decision to have an abortion is rarely uncomplicated.
I wish that our society didn't stigmatize youthful pregnancy so much--I know people who probably wouldn't have had abortions if they were in a supportive enviromment (my high school, for example would expel you for being pregnant). But that's a whole other topic.
Anyway, I really hope this was helpful for everybody who read it. It didn't change my beliefs, but I will keep your perspective in mind the next time I discuss them.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Well said, Kristen. Another excellent statement of my position. Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Dagonee, I agree that the "ruin my life" style language could possibly be hurtful for an abortion survivor. Not being one myself (um, as far as I know [Wink] ) I'm not sure if it really would be, but I can see the potential there.
It really, really would be. Obviously not all, but all the ones I know (a non-representative yet sizable sample). I have personal knowledge of this.
The only "possible" remaining is whether there is such a person here at Hatrack. Most people with that history don't know about it - which is probably a good thing.
quote:One is between a woman saying that FOR HER a baby at that time would have been life-ruining, and someone saying that ALL women who have had abortions lack moral character and thinking skills.
Let's break it down for a minute. First, with regards to the (much, much rarer) actual abortion survivor - the person born after a botched abortion - then the "the mother made the right decision" always rhetoric will be hurtful, because it will be saying that it was the right decision, thwarted by incompetent doctors, for this person's mother to attempt to have her terminated.
Second, something that hasn't come up this time but has come up before, is the aborting of "defective" children. Broad statements about how it's better, not just for the parents, but for the children if the pregnancy is terminated, coupled with statements about the very idea of wrongful life suits make at least as personal a statement.
Several of the abortion survivors I know are Down's children whose mother walked out at the last minute. None of these people know about the survivorship, but statements such as those are hurtful even to those who didn't have near misses.
Third are the more general near misses. The statements that it would have been OK for the mother to go through with the abortion have just as personal an impact in my experience.
Maybe we don't have any such person at Hatrack or, more likely, they don't know about the near miss. That doesn't change the standard that should be used in judging hurtfulness.
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
quote:But, if I were to advise a girl in the same circumstance that I was in at that time, I would tell her to consider abortion as one of her options.
Just out of curiosity, how did you feel about your other options at the time? (e.g. adoption, having the baby and dropping out of school, having the baby and staying in school, getting help from parents, etc.)
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kristen: I wish that our society didn't stigmatize youthful pregnancy so much--I know people who probably wouldn't have had abortions if they were in a supportive enviromment (my high school, for example would expel you for being pregnant).
Hear, hear. A lot of people want pro-lifers to somehow take more responsibility for the issue. I think the stigma placed on girls who became pregnant young (especially in contrast to the lack of stigma to the fathers... mostly there because it was easy to see who the mother was and relatively easy for the father to hide) is one place where social conservatives desperately need to step up and take credit for sowing the wind.
Posted by reconstituted (Member # 9462) on :
I support AltName's decision to remain anonymous.
I'm another regular Hatracker, though I haven't been posting as much as I used.
I have trouble just reading the abortion and sex threads, and there's no way I could participate in them. I feel I should say something because I think a lot of people aren't considering the realities of some situations.
I was raped by a friend in college. A lot of people dismissed it because I wasn't beaten up and because it happened at his house. I had wanted to spend time with him, but not romantically. He was a nice person. He used to take my friends and me to the mall because we didn't have cars. He liked to tell stories. He was much older than me. He'd been in the armed forces before going to college, and by the time I met him he'd finished college and was in law school. His hair was already salt and pepper colored. I didn't consent. I didn't want to have sex with him. But I couldn't prove it, and I didn't file a police report because I didn't want to ruin his life. I felt so guilty and devalued. That is how I lost my virginity which was something invaluable to me.
My boyfriend blamed me for it. He didn't do it openly at first, but slowly he became more and more degrading and used it to make me have sex with him. He always told me that that part of me was his and what a slut I was and how I had cheated on him with the rapist and he knew I would sleep with anyone because I couldn't control myself. He would say things like, "You can't go out tonight. You know how you are."
I already felt guilty enough, and he just pressed my face harder into the dirt. He would say that I had to have sex with him a certain amount of times a week. He didn't really seem to care if I enjoyed it or if I wanted to do it. Alot of times, he would refuse to use condoms because they didn't feel as good for him and he would say that it was my job and that I should care about his feelings. He would pull out, but that was horrible too. It was like he was degrading me even more by getting that stuff all over me. By this point he lived with me so he was there all the time.
He finally broke up with me because he said he was miserable and that I didn't care because I was so selfish.
Had I become pregnant by either of these men, I would not have hesitated to have an abortion. By the grace of God, it never happened, but I think that a woman should be allowed to judge her own situation. After all, with my boyfriend, I wasn't really being raped.
That was a while ago. Since then, I had a few relationships, and I always tried to tell them what happened, but they either didn't care because I wasn't tied up or beaten up, so it's not real rape and it's just really common for young women to lose their virginity that way, or they would get offended if I tried to tell them not to do things because they made me uncomfortable, saying that I was accusing them of being rapists. One man in particular did this after I kept trying to refuse to perform certain sex acts for him, and he would leave me little to no choice.
I've had a much more considerate, loving significant other for a good amount of time, but there are still times when I just burst into tears because I feel a disgusting person. I am always apologizing to him because I still feel like I've done something wrong. I'm always afraid that I'm not doing my "job" and keeping him sexually satisfied, no matter how much he tells me otherwise. I feel guilty for not doing things with him when I'm feeling sick or tired, even though he always tells me that he doesn't think he ever deserves sex as an inalienable right.
I can't share this kind of thing under my regular username. I don't want to be known as a rape victim. I dont' call myself a rape victim, I say "I was raped." It is something that happened to me. It is not who I am.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
quote: It really, really would be. Obviously not all, but all the ones I know (a non-representative yet sizable sample). I have personal knowledge of this.
Since I don't have personal knowledge of it, I appreciate you sharing your insight, just as I appreciate AltName sharing hers as someone who had an abortion. I think these kinds of reminders are valuable for people on any side of the debate, to keep the discussion civil.
--Enigmatic
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
That's insane. I mean, that a guy who professed to be your friend could treat you that way. Any time I've been romantically involved with a woman, the main thing that held me back was my absolute terror that I might do something that made her uncomfortable, and I couldn't deal with the thought of making someone feel that way, even when another side of me wanted to press the romantic relationship very much.
I can't imagine what could possibly be going through a person's head when they're having sex with an unwilling partner. I mean, predators in dark alleyways are easy to dehumanize and think of as monsters, and then they sort of seem to make sense and fit into the world. But a friend, who you assume should care about you, who suddenly decides that what you want is completely secondary to what they want from you? It messes me up, and I'm really sorry you went through that.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: The second difference is that AltName is not a hypothetical person who may possibly have their feelings hurt. She's a real person who did have her feelings hurt. If there's an "abortion survivor" here who has been genuinely offended by some of the pro-choicers comments, by all means they should speak up (anonymously if they choose) and let everyone know how that feels and why we should be more sensitive.
Something slightly different has happened here in the past -- I offended Belle very deeply with an analogy in an abortion discussion, and subsequently apologized. I certainly don't think she should have kept it to herself and not spoken up; then I never would have known she (or anyone else) was offended. I think that goes both ways; I certainly speak up when I've been offended, though I try to wait and cool off a bit first, especially if I'm really mad.
There is one context on this forum where I go out of my way to remain silent, but that's to preserve my sanity rather than to keep myself from getting offended.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I'm not sure if one can win. If a woman has a baby in a certain situation, she is vilified as a single mother, if she has an abortion, the same. It's hard to make these sort of decisions enough as it is without vilification and judgement. People need support and compassion to help them get through things like this and to cope. Judging and lecturing only makes it worse. Just like being too black and white about people's personal pain and experiences.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
reconstituted, you need to meet new guys. Move to Seattle, I know a bunch who are way, way cooler than the ones you're used to. ^_^
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Well, this thread has become a discussion on abortion. I suppose it was inevitible, especially when such a provocative and dismissive statement about that came at the very start
AltName,
quote:Perhaps the people doing the throwing do not realize that they are hurting some people that they may have considered to be friends. I know that I am hurt, and that my feelings of friendship towards some of you has been diminished by harsh attacks.
You ask for empathy here, but you don't seem to give much of it yourself. The simple fact of this issue is, there are many people who feel abortion is murder: the killing of an innocent child. There are even some people on your own side of the fence who believe that abortion is the killing of a human being, but a human being who is sub-human and thus whose life is less worthy of protection than the convenience of the mother. That is not a popular word to use with regards to this situation, but it is accurate nonetheless. It was not, in your situation, a necessity that you get an abortion. Therefore it was a luxury, or a convenience.
I don't understand why it is reasonable to say, "I know you think abortion is murder of children. But don't criticize me, because it would be mean and hurtful." That to me sounds like a fundamental denial and dismissal of the opposing position, because 'being mean' is not a sufficient reason for a person of conscience who believes that way to remain silent, quite frankly.
quote: Listen to my side of it before you begin posting your denouncements of me, though.
Your side of it presents mitigating circumstances, it's true. What it doesn't do, as you seem to imply-and even demand of others, somewhat-is make the abortion acceptable. At least not according to those who believe differently than you do.
Under your own personal belief system, abortion is not murder. I understand that, and I even respect it. But you seem to wish to be asked to be judged on the basis of your own beliefs, and none other. That's the impression I get, anyway. But people don't work that way. You don't work that way, because you are hurt and offended when people criticize you from their own set of beliefs. You would apparently rather they stay silent.
------------
Perhaps it is an impossible thing to have happen, perhaps it is unfair of me to desire it. But as someone who is pro-life, I am honestly irritated when I hear premises like the one behind this thread which seems to me to be, "I know you think that abortion is the murder of a child. But my feelings get hurt when you criticize abortion, and thus those who abort and make statements about them. So don't do it, don't be mean."
Empathy is a two-way street. If you expect empathy, you should realize that some of the people you ask it of believe that you have, in fact, murdered a child-your child-in servicie to your own lifestyle needs. That is not what I believe. I do not believe abortion is necessarily child-murder. But I can at least acknowledge the people who do, and respect the restrain they offer without getting really upset.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: And not to knock or insult AltName, Sterling, but if she were truly brave, she wouldn't be hiding behind an alias. She may be many things, but posting under an alternative screen name is hardly a brave thing to do, no?
Very few people here post under their true names. Some make no secret of the identities behind their screen names; Some make it easier to discover who they are than others.
By telling this story, Alt still exposed herself to the possibility of harsh criticism and moral condemnation by those who oppose the choice she made. That doesn't hurt any less because its target is behind a mask.
I don't think any less of Alt for not wanting her experience and the reaction to it attached to her "normal" identity for perpetuity. You may feel differently, but I'm holding to my opinion that this was courageous. I hope that I would feel that way, whichever side I was on.
And on that note, the responses of those who oppose abortion have largely been respectful. Thank you.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Rakeesh, well said as always. The "don't say anything if you don't agree" thing bothers me too.
I don't think anyone (on this thread) has denounced AltName. No "you're a horrible person" or "you're going to burn in hell" have I seen.
Disagreement != Denouncement.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
A lot of it DOES turn mean, though. I can completely see how someone who'd had an abortion would see a lot of the, "Oh, well if a woman doesn't want to have a kid, she just shouldn't have sex" stuff as an attack.
-pH
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
So, how about the other "A" word?
Adoption.
So many times when the issue of "choice" is discussed, only two choices are presented:
single motherhood
and
have an abortion
But, I personally know a wonderful married couple who have a daughter now because of adoption.
It may not be any easier a choice than the other two, but it is a viable choice, one I almost never see discussed.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
pH,
One of the responsibilities of communication is that it is mutual. Viewing all such statements as an attack is akin to sticking your foot out into a crowded hallway, and then getting angry when it gets stepped on.
"If a couple was seriously committed to not getting pregnant, they could choose to abstain," is not an attack. It's simply a true statement.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
pH, I can understand that - but on my end, there's a big difference between "an attack" and "oversensitive to disagreement." On the other end, obviously, there isn't. I can't control that, though.
Edit: Too slow.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
The thing is, it can easily be viewed as an attack so long as people continue to stigmatize unmarried pregnancy. It can make the pro-life movement (partly) look like a strong-arm tactic to make women stop having premarital sex or to make it more blatantly obvious who has engaged in such activities.
-pH
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Sorry, but I'm going to always think unmarried pregnancy is a problem. That's not going to change.
As for premarital sex - that's between two consenting adults, so I don't have a problem with it. I think it's not the best thing to do, but I don't think it's my job to enforce that on anyone else. Obviously I see abortion differently.
Again, you're not mentioning the adoption issue.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
quote:"If a couple was seriously committed to not getting pregnant, they could choose to abstain," is not an attack. It's simply a true statement.
Well, the statement includes an assumption about what one could reasonably call a "serious commitment." Some would say that the use of prophylactics that reduce the chance of conception to near zero is sufficient for a serious commitment to not getting pregnant.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
I don't really think that the availability of adoption is a good substitute for the legality of abortion.
-pH
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Particularly considering we practically throw teenagers at cars, and the overall chance of death due to being in an automobile (not even talking about the chance for a teenage driver) is approximately equal to the complement of the effectiveness of birth control pills + condoms. Are people less committed to not killing their teenage children than a couple using bcp + condoms are to not getting pregnant?
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
I don't see why not, pH. The mother doesn't have to take care of the child, it makes another couple happy, the mother saves herself from possible physical or emotional trauma, it appeases the vast majority of pro-lifers, and the child can live a full, healthy life.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Can you cite that, fugu? The odds of dying in a car accident lifetime are 1 in 82. In one year, the odds for a given person (not teenager) is 1 in 6,345.
Obviously, given those statistics, you could still be right. But I'd really like to see the cites on that.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Whoa.
I didn't say anything about adoption being an abortion substitute.
I wondered why it tends to be the "choice that is never named" in this debate.
It is a valid choice, but you'd never know it from the way it's almost never mentioned by either side.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
To elaborate: I don't think it's particularly courageous to tell people anonymously that you've had an abortion. Lots of people have had abortions. But I don't think the original poster was trying to be courageous; I think she was trying to remind people that you can be a moral, decent, intelligent person and still choose to abort a child.
But I got something a little different from her story, because -- and people who've been here for a while know this one, too, because I'm not particularly into anonymity, even if it'd preserve my reputation -- I've been the creep. I wasn't as bad as the guy in her anecdote, but I took advantage of the innocence and naivete of someone I was dating and persuaded her -- perhaps even pressured her -- into sex. And we weren't ready for a child, and we both knew it, and we strongly suspected that we'd be terrible parents -- and, of course, weren't willing to face our own parents with our distress and shame. So we opted for an abortion.
It was horrific. I won't go into the details, but the experience turned me from a passionate pro-choicer into a regretful pro-lifer. And it all happened -- or, well, mostly happened -- because I was a sleazeball.
So maybe we made the right decision. Maybe not. But I don't think the fact that there's someone more obviously to blame in the first anecdote on this thread necessarily works to justify the decision; had he been a little less urgent and a little less scummy, he could easily have been me, and his situation would have been my situation.
There's a grey area, obviously. But one of the things I've come to believe as I grow older is that those arbitrary, unfair, often silly-sounding standards and traditions and "values" -- those "principles" by which we define ourselves and our communities -- exist precisely because the grey areas are dangerous. Sure, if you get lucky, you can successfully parse all the variables for any particular issue and navigate it without harm -- but it's far easier and far safer for most people to simply maintain a rigid firewall of "principle" well short of the actual danger zone.
And so it is with abstinence. Yeah, sex is great. And most days, I don't actually regret having had a lot of premarital sex, as much as it complicated my life. But had I been a little stronger in my adherence to principle, a little less willing to push the envelope, I would have never wound up killing a completely innocent human being.
And unlike the anonymous poster who started this thread, I wasn't some naive innocent betrayed by a callous cad. In that scenario, I was the cad. Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: A lot of it DOES turn mean, though. I can completely see how someone who'd had an abortion would see a lot of the, "Oh, well if a woman doesn't want to have a kid, she just shouldn't have sex" stuff as an attack.
-pH
The fact is that no one says "Oh, well if a woman doesn't want to have a kid, she just shouldn't have sex" out of the blue. They say it in response to people who try to assert the unreliability of birth control as a reason why abortion is necessary. When one voluntarily has sex, one is taking the risk that a pregnancy will result, even when that risk is only 1 in 2000 over the course of a year.
Barring rape, no one is "forcing" a woman to have a child by banning abortion. They are removing one particular means of not giving birth, but it is still entirely within the woman's control as to what probability of pregnancy she is willing to face: 0% to 15% depending on sexual activity engaged in and birth control method used.
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
fugu, your point makes no sense. The fact that so many people die in automobile accidents means that stricter driving laws need to be in place, and, though I see the point you are trying to make, it doesn't change the fact that, knowing contraception to not be 100% effective, they chose to have sex, and take the risk of becoming pregnant.
AltName, I'm sorry you had to go through that, but, as Rakeesh said, that doesn't change the fact that abortion is murder in my eyes.
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
Tom, it's big of you to admit that.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:But you seem to wish to be asked to be judged on the basis of your own beliefs, and none other.
I actually didn't see AltName asking to be judged.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
If abortion were banned though, the problem would be a lot worse... I've never been in that situation before, but I am not sure if I could get an abortion even though I am pro-choice because I am anti-restrictions and limits. Impose too many restrictions and the problem gets a lot worse. Botched abortion attemps, folks going to back alleys, the rich being able to afford to go to places like Mexico and Canada to get it done. I'd have a hard time doing it myself, but it's too complicated to call it murder, and you really cannot win because not all children who go up for adoption end up in happy safe homes. The best a person can do in these situations is to take care of people regardless of what they choose. If they choose to have a child, they need support, not condemnation, though the best thing to do is to either avoid sex (hard to do, and if the opportunity presented itself, I'd give in!) or to use birth control and condoms to avoid conception, but that is not always practical. A person could miss their pill, a guy can complain about sheathing himself in what is essential a one finger rubber glove, folks get caught up in the heat of the moment and make mistakes I think middle ground is needed, slack, room for people to do something about their mistakes. And I am completely against the concept of screening a fetus and aborting it because it doesn't live up to a standard. It's such a complicated issue, which is why I try to avoid it all together because it stresses me out.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
And yet, you judged her in your first post on this thread, Bob. It was a positive judgment, but a judgment none the less.
Edit: Let me be clear, I'm not trying to condemn you for that. I'm attempting to point out that we all make constant judgments about right and wrong.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Botched abortion attemps, folks going to back alleys, the rich being able to afford to go to places like Mexico and Canada to get it done.
Compared to 3700 abortions a day, every day.
quote:you really cannot win because not all children who go up for adoption end up in happy safe homes.
Not all children who are born end up in happy safe homes. Not all children aborted would have ended up in unhappy or unsafe homes.
quote:he best a person can do in these situations is to take care of people regardless of what they choose.
It entirely depends on what you mean by "take care of people." I cannot, by silence or words, provide moral cover for abortion. That does not mean I have to point my finger at every person I know had an abortion and tell them they did wrong. It does mean that I cannot, in the course of comforting someone, seem to support the idea that nothing wrong was done.
quote:And I am completely against the concept of screening a fetus and aborting it because it doesn't live up to a standard.
I am, too (obviously), but I still have a hard time seeing how financial, occupation, educational, or other hardships can justify an abortion if disability cannot.
Posted by Evie3217 (Member # 5426) on :
First of all, I would like to commend AltName on her courage to tell this story. While some of you may agree with me, I think it takes tremendous courage to stand up and tell a story like that, even if it is anonymous.
I also think that she made the right decision FOR HER in the situation. I agree that abortion isn't for everyone. I'm pro choice because I believe that every woman has the right to choose for herself. I don't think it should be dictated by a law. Plus, even if abortion was illegal, it wouldn't stop women from having them, and it would only make abortions less safe for the women involved. I don't know how I feel about abortion personally. I have no idea what I would do in a sitation like the one AltName was placed in. But I do feel that I cannot make the choice for anyone else. I can state my opinion and give them advice, but I would never attempt to force a person to either have or not have an abortion. I think that goes against the freedom that we hold so high in this society.
You may disagree with me. I accept that different people feel differently than I do. I don't think less of people here for having different opinions, and I hope that they feel comfortable to share them with me. I'm willing to learn more about the other side of the arguement.
I would also like to thank everyone for being so civil about such a controversial topic. I think it means a lot that we can talk about abortion so calmly and civily.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Impose too many restrictions and the problem gets a lot worse.
I'm wary of any argument based purely on the difficulty of legal enforcement. That's not a moral argument; it's merely a practical argument.
On the reasonable extreme, we can say "banning liquor is bad because it creates a black market in liquor." That moves us to "banning LSD is bad because it creates a black market in LSD." And from there, we get the absurd extreme of "banning murder is bad because criminals will still commit murders, and they'll commit more ghastly murders if they have to hide them."
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Bob,
Yes, she was asking to stop being judged while reminding people that she was not a bad person...asking, in effect, for a different judgement.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
It doesn't work like that. It seems like limiting people's choices and putting their backs against the walls makes the problem worse, and not better. It doesn't apply to something like murder which is clearly wrong, and yet there is self defence to consider as well.
quote:I am, too (obviously), but I still have a hard time seeing how financial, occupation, educational, or other hardships can justify an abortion if disability cannot.
I can't really explain why either, except to say that I believe that abortions should be extremely rare, should not be used as a form of birth control either and are largely up to the individual person depending on the circumstances and the people involved. Every story is different.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:It doesn't apply to something like murder which is clearly wrong...
I need to observe here that, from the pro-life perspective, that's exactly what you're applying it to.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Your own statistics support what I asserted, Dag . Notice the table only covers single methods of birth control.
1 in 6345 is about .01%.
Since both birth control methods must fail for pregnancy to occur, the approximate pregnancy rate for using both BCP (combined) and condoms, from your table and assuming proper use, would be .003% (this is not completely accurate because one would have to multiply the failure rate to get the new failure rate, then use that value to calculate chance of pregnancy; it should be close, though). Even using improper use statistics the chance would be about .014%. Heck, layer in a rhythm method and it gets much much better.
Also, there's an extraordinarily important statistic missing from the chart you link: the amount of intercourse assumed in a year. By every factor of ten the amount of intercourse is decreased, that's a factor of ten decrease in the odds of getting pregnant.
Flaming Toad on a Stick: No. Regardless of if traffic laws are good or bad, currently, it is extraordinarily clear that most people (I suspect including yourself) consider the risk of driving under them reasonable. Given, as I suspect few would argue, an unexpected pregnancy is not worse than death, then it would seem pretty reasonable for most couples to accept the risk of pregnancy given appropriate precautions, provided they are willing to accept it as much as one accepts the risk of death while driving, or the risks of his or her teenage child dying while driving.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"I'm wary of any argument based purely on the difficulty of legal enforcement. That's not a moral argument; it's merely a practical argument."
Its not "merely a practical argument," to point out that enforcing a particular law would be difficult, if the difficulties involve applying the Rule of Law, necessitating Big Brother type survelience, and enforcement beyond mere capriciousness. Those are moral issues, as well as practical issues.
Of course, every moral argument is ultimately a practical argument, so maybe practical vs moral is a needless distinction?
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Actually, I can give you even better approximations since we know the frequency of pregnancy absent birth control is 85%. The pregnancy rate for any given method will be failure rate * chance of pregnancy given failure, and the worse chance of pregnancy given failure will be is 85%.
So if we have two birth control methods with failure rates f1 and f2, then they individually have pregnancy rates at most p1 = f1*.85 and p2 = f2*.85, and together they have a failure rate of f1*f2*.85, which happens to equal p1 * p2 / .85 .
So the chance of pregnancy given proper use of both condoms and bcp (combined), assuming whatever rate of intercourse the chart does, is at worst .003% / .85, or about .0035% .
Still quite comparable.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick: I don't see why not, pH. The mother doesn't have to take care of the child, it makes another couple happy, the mother saves herself from possible physical or emotional trauma, it appeases the vast majority of pro-lifers, and the child can live a full, healthy life.
Well, speaking from my personal perspective, carrying a child would cause extreme emotional trauma that would likely lead to physical trauma. Under ANY circumstances, not simply the "young, unwed mother" scenario.
-pH
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:I didn't say anything about adoption being an abortion substitute.
I wondered why it tends to be the "choice that is never named" in this debate.
It is a valid choice, but you'd never know it from the way it's almost never mentioned by either side.
While it certainly is a valid choice, even an excellent choice, it takes incredible strength of character to make it. From my personal perspective, it seems like a very difficult thing to do. A woman that gives up her baby bears the shame of unwed pregnancy, the burden of carrying a child for nine months, and the trauma of giving that child up. Both keeping the baby and abortion seem to me like easier options. I think the reason why adoption isn't mentioned more often is because it takes very high levels of maturity and nobility. It doesn't seem like the option that the average person would choose.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
The problem with adoption is that it addresses only part of the problem of pregnancy. Its a good option for someone who doesn't want a child, but is willing to go through the life altering physical processes of bearing a child.
Since those life altering physical processes are, well, only worth it to most people if they want to have a child, its an option that, while a good option, isn't very helpful.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Of course, I rather doubt that most women have an abortion and don't suffer emotionally for it. It's not like it's not traumatic.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
Swampjedi- If that was addressed to me, I never said that abortion wasn't traumatic. Or even that it was less traumatic than adoption. I just think that in the short term, it is an easier choice to make.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Oh, I wasn't denying that. I'm just not sure that, in the long run, abortion is a 'less pain' option for the mother.
I know you're not suggesting that it is. It's just a general observation.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sterling: By telling this story, Alt still exposed herself to the possibility of harsh criticism and moral condemnation by those who oppose the choice she made. That doesn't hurt any less because its target is behind a mask.
I don't think any less of Alt for not wanting her experience and the reaction to it attached to her "normal" identity for perpetuity. You may feel differently, but I'm holding to my opinion that this was courageous.
I'm changing my mind. Maybe it was brave.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:That doesn't hurt any less because its target is behind a mask.
It would hurt less for me if I were the one behind the mask.
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
I'd like to thank both sides of this for making what had the potential to be a total bloodbath one of the more positive discussions I've seen. Even the anonymous posters are taking some serious emotional risk here, because it's very easy to feed the "if they really knew me they'd hate me" monster... especially with a traumatic experience like an abortion. Tom's post, as has already been said, took considerable courage, too. But my main point is that people are letting some strong emotions into play here on both sides without it wrecking the atmosphere. I think that's both a good and deeply commendable thing.
Edit: about the one behoind the mask thing... it festers, believe me. it may hurt less immediately, but it really can reinforce the idea that you are worthless and people only like you because they don't *really* know you. That's from *my* personal experience, so appropriate caveats regarding anecdotal evidence, etc.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by reconstituted: I was raped by a friend in college...That is how I lost my virginity which was something invaluable to me...My boyfriend blamed me for it...It was like he was degrading me even more...After all, with my boyfriend, I wasn't really being raped...Since then, I had a few relationships, and I always tried to tell them what happened, but they either didn't care...or they would get offended...there are still times when I just burst into tears because I feel a disgusting person...I feel guilty...
Recon, I am seriously moved by your plight. You've been treated badly and are still not healed of the wounds that you received. I'll bet that if you found a sympathetic counselor, maybe a psychologist, you will be able to put your horrible experiences behind you and move on in a healthier relationship. You sound like you are living with depression, and maybe post traumatic stress disorder. Medication along with counseling may help to make you happier and better adjusted. I wish that you didn't have to feel guilty, and that you would be able to reach a point where sex is a good thing, something that you do for you, not for someone else's pleasure. But that sounds like a journey for you -- it's not where you are now.
Good luck. I really hope that you can get help and learn how to have a healthy and good relationship.
(Hugs to you.)
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: Well, speaking from my personal perspective, carrying a child would cause extreme emotional trauma that would likely lead to physical trauma. Under ANY circumstances, not simply the "young, unwed mother" scenario.
-pH
You seem to be trying to make a blanket statement about pregnancy. Not all pregnancies are traumatic, and (excluding cases of rape), the mother and father are responsible for it. I've known quite a few people that have had abortions. Not only did some suffer severe physical problems (one is now sterile) but every one of them suffered an emotional trauma.
I'm not saying that pregnancy is perfect, but they took that risk when they had sex. I'm all for women's rights, but if there is an option that doesnt include the killing of your baby, then why not take it?
Synesthesia, I don't see your point. The fact that people will break the law will invalidate it? By your argument, every law that has ever been broken is invalid.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Toad, I WAS speaking from a personal perspective. I said, speaking for me personally, that pregnancy would be damanging. To me. I, personally, am not sure that I could handle pregnancy under any circumstances whatsoever. And no, I don't think that that would change just because I got married.
-pH
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
That's not exactly what I mean... Limiting the options will make the problem more severe and lead to desparate actions, where as people who are wealthy would still be able to get abortions if they were banned in this country... I'm not stating that laws are invalid or something....
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Just because she is posting under an alternate name doesn't mean that she won't ever tell us her identity. It could just be possible that she just wanted to see our reaction before deciding whether or not to tell her identity. There are loads of people on this forum that are thought very highly of and if the alt name is any of them then maybe she thinks that we'll view her as a coward or think less of her if she posted under her real name. Obviously this goes the same way for those thats posts are disregarded, as since they don't recieve much attention or are not thought highly of, this could make them feel even more worthless.
I don't care who Alt Name really is because other from this website I don't know her and will probably never meet her. It took a lot of courage just to relate this story to someone else, especially since many of us don't know Alt Name personally or live thousands of miles away. The distance and the impersonality between the the poster and the responders opens the poster up for much more criticism and a lot less consolation. I don't really care what you guys think about Alt Name, but if you ask me it took a lot of courage to relate this story to us.
Posted by AltName (Member # 9459) on :
Thanks, Soapy. I appreciate your words.
And thanks, also, to everyone on this thread who endeavored to keep things cool. We don't all agree on the issues, but it is nice that we can agree to be civil and respectful here. This is what makes Hatrack one of my favorite places to be.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:There are loads of people on this forum that are thought very highly of and if the alt name is any of them then maybe she thinks that we'll view her as a coward or think less of her if she posted under her real name.
I've got to say that this fear is inconceivable to me. It is completely contrary to my own experiences on Hatrack.
Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
Generally, I'd agree with you on your last post, Tom. But in this particular situation, we're talking about a highly sensitive topic, one that has caused significant controversy in the past. I signed up an alt with the intent of posting in this thread, because what I was planning to say was something that I'm not proud of having in my history (no, not along the lines of what AltName and AltNameToo posted) and then decided that what I would have said really didn't have enough bearing on the discussion to have been of any help.
As for the adoption suggestion (and this I am willing to admit to under my own name): I gave up two children for adoption. I was married and had two of my own, and when #3 made her presence known through failed BC, I knew there was no way financially or otherwise that I could deal with it. Fortunately for everyone involved, a good friend of mine knew a couple who were not able to conceive themselves and had just about run out of insurance coverage for IVF. Through my accident, I was able to give another family a chance. And then when #4 came because my then husband refused to accept no for an answer (minor derail - does that make it rape??), I immediately went to that family and asked if they would be interested in a biological sibling, an offer they most gladly jumped at. But not every woman is able to go through what I went through. I was fortunate to have lots of support from my parents, the adoptive parents, and our mutual friends (not so much the spouse, however), and because I had my children already, I was able to redirect the maternal bonds that wanted to form with the children I carried. And believe me, that is NOT an easy thing to fight.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Have we been having a problem with people calling people who support abortion rights whores or something?
I mean, I know Irregular said that one thing, but otherwise, I thought we were all being pretty civil.
Were we not being civil?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Good heavens, there was more personal angst about Belle's cat then when... well, let's see... who was the last Jatraqero to come out of the closet?
We don't get upset about finding out BIG NEWS. Naw, we get upset over minutia. Cats. Child discipline.
Fan fiction, for heaven's sake.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Can I just say one thing?
TomDavidson - it seems like as the years go by (wow, isn't it scary I'm referring to my time on hatrack in terms of years?) I gain more and more respect for you.
You may have, in that one situation, been the cad as you say, but you're one heckuva guy now.
quote:We don't get upset about finding out BIG NEWS. Naw, we get upset over minutia. Cats. Child discipline.
Fan fiction, for heaven's sake.
*looks about warily*
Scott, how did you know that just today I kicked my cat, screamed at my kids, and sat down to write some Harry Potter slash?
Have you and the men in black been bugging my house again?
Posted by Nathan2006 (Member # 9387) on :
Okay... I'm a pro-life, 'evil' left-winged (Or is it right-winged?) conservative... But I do really sympethize with women in the situations... I can't empethize, because I'm a homeschooled 16 year old male who has never been faced with a decision to make an abortion. So, keep in mind that I am looking at this from a distance, not up close from a personal experience.
One objection to abortion is just that I believe that there is a bond between mother and child the moment there is a fetus, and that most mothers which I know and have heard of (From a friend of a friend. <Rolls eyes>) really feel bad about it and have issues later in life... Not that I would presume to tell a mother not to abort her baby 'for her own good'. I'm not a mother, and I've never experienced pain from an abortion... But if there is that bond (Completely theoretical bond) then shouldn't there be a living being to which the mother would be bonded? Does a person feel a bond with a group of cells fertilized by sperm?
And in this situation, why not give the baby up for adoption?
But is this thread even about abortion? Is this more about a women's defense of her choice in the face of harsh accusations from the evil conservatives? And I use the word defense because the thread does seem like a defense... Not simply an explanation. And I, as a person never faced with the choice to abort or not, do wonder who (Or is it Whom) it is to which (Or is it Whom?) she is defending herself. Surely it's not us... We made sweeping generelizations (I speak of the evil pro-life zombies) not a specific attack against her... The person who seems to defend herself out of principle, not her good name, since she is anonomous.
I would like to stress that I do really feel sorry about her situation, and I'd like to think that I understand (Who really 'understands' unless they've lived it?), although I probably just think I understand and in reality, do not. And I think that faced with the situation, she did as many others would have. And, If life does start with stirrings, then there was absolutely nothing wrong.
I would also like to point out that if I ever make a sweeping generilization (Although I've been privalged on this board not to have ever posted about hot political issues before) it is the choice to kill (Or terminate) A life (Or fetus which is technically not life), never the mother.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:We made sweeping generelizations (I speak of the evil pro-life zombies) not a specific attack against her.
Sweeping generalizations can't hurt individuals? Well, gee, then how silly of people to get all up-in-arms about racism.
-pH
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
I think the decision to post anonymously is extremely legit. Depending on your belief system, finding out someone had an abortion does change what you think of them. And I'll be honest, despite being pro-choice, when I found out someone I knew had an abortion, it did change how I viewed them. It was a married couple, very well off, no health issues, already had children. Just one more wasn't in their plans and so that was that. And I can't help but think less of them. I know it is wrong to judge others, but at some level, I just think, selfish, irresponsible people. On the other hand, I have known other people who have had abortions and it didn't affect how I thought about them at all (the stories posted here would not change my opinions about the people posting them).
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe: Just because she is posting under an alternate name doesn't mean that she won't ever tell us her identity. It could just be possible that she just wanted to see our reaction before deciding whether or not to tell her identity.
If this were the case I would be very upset. I would not appreciate being made a test subject.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
"Test subject?" Because someone didn't want to reveal her identity and risk other Hatrackers looking at her in a much more negative light? That's pretty harsh.
-pH
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Just one more wasn't in their plans and so that was that. And I can't help but think less of them.
Why?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I might think less of them, but for a very specific reason. I might think less of them because, if I knew a good deal about the circumstances, I could conclude that they did not take the crucial (in my opinion) uncertainty (not a matter of opinion) about when exactly human life begins seriously enough.
But that is all. I'm not going to be made to feel guilty or oppressive about that, either.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
How much information about someone else's circustances is enough though?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Scott, how did you know that just today I kicked my cat, screamed at my kids, and sat down to write some Harry Potter slash?
Have you and the men in black been bugging my house again?
Just me. All the Men In Black are... ...indisposed.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Expressing unasked-for opinions about something that affects two adults who can speak for themselves is one thing, and I tend to shy away from that except in the abstract. Expressing an unasked-for opinion about something that affects someone who cannot speak for themself is quite different, in my opinion.
Bear in mind Bob that your stance on how much is enough information to make a judgement is basically required by your philosophy on abortion. Advising someone to take someone's word for something because you take their word for something is hardly persuasive, but I realize you may not have been trying to persuade me about this.
Now as for this thread...well, I don't consider myself under the same obligations of restraint to someone who hides behind a mask as I do someone who speaks to me face to face.
I have actually been in this situation before-confronted with a friend who went with his girlfriend to get an abortion. He called himself a Catholic, no less. I did not express the disapproval I felt then, verbally or facially. He even thanked me for that later, because he knew as he told me how I felt about such things.
AltName's thread is not like that. She was and is, in my opinion, pretty obviously asking for juddgement...affirming judgement. Opinions and rhetoric are welcome, so long as they are either friendly and agreeable or friendly and vague, refraining from any sort of personal criticism of such a decision. That's the impression I got, due in part to the tone of the original post and due to the fact that she did not restrain friendly agreement with her actions.
Thus, judgement is welcome so long as it is the right kind of judgement. And anyway, posting under an altname is only a hair's breadth away from considering the issue in the abstract in my opinion. I don't regard her doing so as cowardly, but it is certainly not brave either.
So, I will discuss something so personal when it is in the abstract, as this plainly is. So will you, actually. Not this particular issue, but other deeply personal, spiritual, and ethical issues. That's a lot of what we do around here, express opinions about the deeply personal.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
And for that matter Bob, what of women who have been in AltName's situation? Obviously their circumstances cannot have been exactly identical, but I think we can agree that there are many whose were close. Potentially several on this very board, who chose not to have an abortion. What would you say to them about expressing their opinion?
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Thanks for sharing your homesty. While some prominent members of my religion have opined that life begins at the quickening, it is not doctrine, so I don't know if that is the same religion.
I can relate to the circumstances of your becoming pregnant. Truly but for the grace of God, there go I. Though I'm sorry for the baby and for some infertile couple that you didn't carry the baby and allow it to be adopted. But you alone have walked in your shoes, and if you have accepted God's mercy I rejoice for you.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I got the impression that Tom was asking what factors made scholar think less of one couple that got an abortion and not others.
Posted by Irregardless (Member # 8529) on :
quote:Originally posted by AltName: It was precisely this comment that motivated me to tell my story.
OK, let's analyze your 'critical thinking':
quote: I read and researched and asked questions about what my religion taught about the beginning of life and of abortion. The answers were not clear cut, but it was evident to me that, in the teaching of my faith, that it was not a grievous sin to have an abortion in my circumstances. . . If you believe that human life, the existence of a soul, begins at the moment that sperm joins egg, then abortion is indeed murder. But I am a religious woman, and my religion does not teach that this is when life begins. My faith teaches that life begins with the quickening, the point when the baby can be felt moving inside the mother
This ought to be obvious, but if you have a question about biology, you research biology to find an answer, not religion. Your approach makes about as much sense as determining whether a particular law is constitutional by seeing if your preferred political party supports it.
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Just one more wasn't in their plans and so that was that. And I can't help but think less of them.
Why?
Just speaking for myself, if one more just wasn't in their plans, why did they not just opt for vas/tubal BEFORE they got pregnant with a child they weren't willing to have?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Irregardless:
Altname was looking to find out if it was a sin to abort her child. One of the things (in her mind) that would make it a sin would be if the fetus had a spirit at the time of the abortion.
Biology cannot tell us when the spirit enters into a child, since the spirit isn't a quantifiable or measurable or detectable thing.
So she looked to her religion.
Her actions make sense, when seen through the lens of her thinking. I don't agree with them, but I can understand why she did what she did.
Your hostility, (as evidenced by your use of the phrase 'critical thinking') is unwelcome.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: Just speaking for myself, if one more just wasn't in their plans, why did they not just opt for vas/tubal BEFORE they got pregnant with a child they weren't willing to have?
That's an excellent question. But the person who said he thinks less of them is pro-choice. In that scenario, no one died. The mother underwent a surgical procedure.
Would you think less of someone for having a boil lanced, if she'd picked at it until it got bad?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Huh.
I don't think that most pro-choice people think of the fetus as a completely value-less collection of cells. I think they recognize the human potential, but there are mitigating factors that cause them to value abortion rights more than the potential they see.
Of course, being pro-life, I'm not really sure if this is accurate or not...
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:My faith teaches that life begins with the quickening, the point when the baby can be felt moving inside the mother
What faith is this? I'm sorry if I sound completely ignorant, but I truly don't know.
I find the idea of waiting until quickening really arbitrary, honestly. I mean, women feel movement at different times, no one is the same. Frankly, women who are heavier, will feel their babies move later. So their babies don't gain life as quickly as someone else's? That really isn't something I could wrap my head around and be comfortable with.
Also, women usually feel movement earlier in subsequent pregnancies, I know I felt Emily move faster than I did Natalie, and the twins even faster yet. Did they get their souls earlier? If I felt Natalie move at 14 weeks, and Emily at 10, does that mean that an abortion at 12 weeks is only murder if it's Emily I killed, not Natalie?
I haven't posted much in this thread because something about it really bothered me, and now I am pretty sure I know why.
We have no idea if the first post is true or not. We really don't. Of course, we don't know if what anybody posts is ever really true, but we can be pretty sure if the person is someone we've known for years and is consistent. I don't think many of you doubt that I live in Alabama and have four kids, for example. I've been here long enough, and have met enough people IRL for most folks to be pretty confident they know me.
But let's say I wanted to make a point on the pro-life side, I could register a new name, and come in and post a sob story. I could. I wouldn't, because I respect everyone here and don't want to do something so dishonest. But I don't know who altname is, and don't know if I can really trust what this person says.
I also get frustrated whenever someone says "You can't judge people who have abortions unless you know them, they're real people you know." I get frustrated because it assumes that pro-lifers don't care at all about the woman getting the abortion, we only care about the baby. Not true. My work in the pro-life movement has been all about the mothers. The organization I volunteered with didn't do anything that you think a typical pro-life organization did. They didn't picket, they didn't protest, they didn't spend their resources lobbying politicians. They spent their resources on supporting unwed mothers financially and emotionally and they provided free counselling to women who had abortions and seriously regretted them now.
I'm fed up with the idea that pro-life people don't care about the woman involved. We do. We just care about the unborn life too.
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Belle, that's one thing that bothered me about this thread also: that it could be a made up story to put a 'real' face on for the argument.
OTOH, I also don't have a problem with AltName preferring to be anonymous. It's a sensitive issue and in her place, I don't know I would want people to have that in their impression of me, especially if there were lots of years between now and the experience. I wouldn't want something that far in the past to strongly color people's understanding of me.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
I'm pretty sure I saw "quickening" used as the marker for the beginning of life in an article by a Jewish ethicist (the article was on stem cell research), but I don't know if that is a cutoff agreed to by most rabbis or not.
In this particular article it wasn't when the woman first noticed movement, though, but the time when the fetus could be observed medically to move. I believe it was cited as about 40 days. So either 4 or 6 weeks pregnant, depending on whether it's 40 days from conception or from last period.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
I think Scott R sums up my view pretty well. I don't see abortion as murder, but I also don't see the fetus as without value. There is more to it than a clump of cells. There should be a balance and in this case, the decision struck me as not putting any emphasis on the fetus.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
That is fairly close to my own thoughts about this issue as well.
Posted by Seatarsprayan (Member # 7634) on :
As for abortion survivors, I don't know if this counts: my mother had me tested in utero, and I didn't have any disabilities so she allowed me to born. She told me that had I been disabled, she would have aborted me.
That didn't make me feel too good.
Posted by MissAmandaJones (Member # 9460) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: I get frustrated because it assumes that pro-lifers don't care at all about the woman getting the abortion, we only care about the baby. Not true. My work in the pro-life movement has been all about the mothers. The organization I volunteered with didn't do anything that you think a typical pro-life organization did. They didn't picket, they didn't protest, they didn't spend their resources lobbying politicians. They spent their resources on supporting unwed mothers financially and emotionally and they provided free counselling to women who had abortions and seriously regretted them now.
I'm fed up with the idea that pro-life people don't care about the woman involved. We do. We just care about the unborn life too.
Belle, I wish I had known back then there were organizations like yours, but I had never heard of any before and at the time I was not very focused. I now know about Birthright and try to help them out when I can. I think the work you do is wonderful and I hope you can get the word out to more people that you and others like you are there if people want that choice. I know at the time I only ever thought about the picketers when I thought Pro-Life. Now I know better.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote: We have no idea if the first post is true or not. We really don't. Of course, we don't know if what anybody posts is ever really true, but we can be pretty sure if the person is someone we've known for years and is consistent. I don't think many of you doubt that I live in Alabama and have four kids, for example. I've been here long enough, and have met enough people IRL for most folks to be pretty confident they know me.
But let's say I wanted to make a point on the pro-life side, I could register a new name, and come in and post a sob story. I could. I wouldn't, because I respect everyone here and don't want to do something so dishonest. But I don't know who altname is, and don't know if I can really trust what this person says.
The only way this matters is if you deny that the Altname's story has taken place, anywhere, ever. If it has taken place, it doesn't matter WHO it is.
Besides, she's stated clearly enough: she's not after converts, she's not after sympathy or warm sentiments, she wants understanding and moderation when we have these discussions. This thread, for the most part, has executed that beautifully thusfar.
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
quote:Originally posted by MissAmandaJones: I hope you can get the word out to more people that you and others like you are there if people want that choice.
Catholic Social Services will be happy to help with a crisis pregnancy. 1-800-Baby-Due
Local churches usually have some help as well. We received a ton of food, toys, and clothing from Prestonwood Baptist Church in Dallas for Christian and St. Mark's Catholic for Katherine.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:The only way this matters is if you deny that the Altname's story has taken place, anywhere, ever. If it has taken place, it doesn't matter WHO it is.
I disagree. It does matter, very much if the person is being dishonest. Before I take stock in what this person says, before I change the way I look at the debate or whatever you think they're trying to accomplish, I want to know that the person urging me to do that has some credibility. And you can't establish credibility by hiding behind a false name, you just can't.
It does matter who says what, and whether or not that person is credible. Because otherwise, you're talking about someone who has no personal stake at all, and is only out to manipulate others by posting a false story. Now, I'm not saying that is what happened, but I'm saying that by hiding and not being forthright and admitting who they are, altname has put sufficient doubt in my mind so that I can't take what they say at face value.
I've talked to women who've had abortions, I don't need some anonymous person posting a story that may or not be true to put a face on the abortion debate for me, I've seen those faces in real life. I'm just saying that I have trouble buying into the stories, if the person posting them isn't going to admit who they are. That's all.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:I also get frustrated whenever someone says "You can't judge people who have abortions unless you know them, they're real people you know." I get frustrated because it assumes that pro-lifers don't care at all about the woman getting the abortion, we only care about the baby.
I don't assume that.
I'm also very glad organizations like the one you describe exist.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
It's a horrible feeling to have someone you care about say those kinds of things about you. Being coerced into doing things is so painful. I hope your experiences since have been much, much better.![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) I'm not sure if it really would be, but I can see the potential there.![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
...indisposed.