posted
First, it is not agreed that they are murder. Second, I was disupting that women had those values before, and that the sexual revolution somehow undermined them.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
All women trying to get pregnant who miscarry grieve when it happens. Correct?
What if a girl of 17 years of age gets pregnant and has a abortion without a second look back. She meets the right man and she gets in a stable marriage at 25, tries to get pregnant to have a child with her husband, and has a miscarriage. She would no doubt grieve, right? Then why would she grieve for the loss of the unborn child later, during marriage, when she didn't have a problem whatsoever with doing the same thing 8 years beforehand?
Why do some women (namely pro-choice supporters)act sympathetic for women who lose their babies before birth and yet support abortion?
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The very first day in office, Bush signed an executive order yanking funding from programs teaching women's health information worldwide. Why? Because they refuse to be gagged and required not to mention abortion under any circumstances. Scientists, health professionals, and educators are understandably reluctant to be told they can only tell their clients part of the truth. We desperately need these programs for a number of reasons. Yet he did that. I feel he is an enemy of women's rights.
Posts: 2843 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would it be better if people didn't have sex until they are ready to have children? Possibly. I'm not convinced that sex outside of those circumstances is a "bad thing."
For practical purposes, did birth control, such as condoms, make it possible for women in particular to choose when to have children?
Yup, sure did.
Yes and no are all well and good, but historically, pretty crummy at results.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would love to see stats on how many people think it's appropriate for tax dollars to pay for abortion services.
I think even a lot of pro-choicers think it's wrong.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea that I need the availability of a surgical procedure to make me equal to a man. Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In none of the programs Bush suspended funding for did tax dollars go to abortion. The programs spent monies acquired through donations on teaching about abortion, all tax dollars went to contraceptive information.
Clearly Bush was helping make abortions unnecessary by cutting off information about contraceptives.
posted
Belle- I can't help you with that particular question mark very well, but its not just legal abortion, its the entire idea that women can have sex and walk away from the man at some point following the sex, which only happened with the availability of birth control.
Now, as far as I know, you think sex outside of marriage is immoral, which is fine... but if you think inside that box, you won't see a problem. If you try to think outside it, you should be able to realize the dramatic differences, not only in sexual options, but in what those sexual options meant. Only part of it was the attitude that men and women shouldn't be employed in the same location, which is a perfectly logical and rational, and probably moral, thing to do in the circumstance where pregnancy can't be prevented.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, historically, that seems to be a false statement.
Look, we can argue the morality of sex before marriage all we want, and we're not going to agree, because I don't see any compelling evidence that it ISN"T moral. I've chosen to wait, because that works best for me. Does it work best for everyone? No, no it does not.
If you want to argue that people shouldn't have sex outside of marriage, thats fine with me, but it has no practical value, because that argument has been around, and failing, for 2000 years. So, what say we find BETTER ways of preventing pregnancy that don't involve teh subjugation of women, what?
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, if you don't have sex. However, married couples have sex, and they're a large part of the problem, for instance in third world countries. Many of them do not have easy access to or good knowledge of birth control, but even if they did there would still be pregnancies. Are those pregnancies preventable? Sure, if you expect a married couple to not have sex. And what about married couples that consider birth control immoral? Granted they probably consider abortions immoral too, but who knows.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
The argument that "all pregnancy is preventable" is predicated on people not having sex outside of circumstances where they want to be pregnant, otherwise the argument has no logical backing and fails before it gets off the ground.
I tend to think history is a fairly reasonable guide to how people will act. Since, historically, pregnancy has NOT been preventable by the means advocated by your argument, I suggest that humans are not capable of preventing all unwanted pregnancies within the guidelines of "all pregnancy is preventable"
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:In none of the programs Bush suspended funding for did tax dollars go to abortion. The programs spent monies acquired through donations on teaching about abortion, all tax dollars went to contraceptive information.
Clearly Bush was helping make abortions unnecessary by cutting off information about contraceptives.
I have an annual budget of $10,000. I spend $2,500 of that in use X. I spend $7,500 on use Y.
If you don't want to contribute any money to use X, it doesn't do any good to say the money you donate goes to use Y, when that money clearly frees up other money for use X.
posted
What kills me is that people who are against abortion ought to be FOR the widespread dissemination of reproductive information and the free availability of birth control, yet they gut programs which teach about these things, because the teachers and educators understandably will not agree to gag rules about never mentioning abortion, even in cases where the health of the mother is at great risk.
Posts: 2843 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
quote:The argument that "all pregnancy is preventable" is predicated on people not having sex outside of circumstances where they want to be pregnant, otherwise the argument has no logical backing and fails before it gets off the ground.
But isn't that what "reproductive rights" is? The freedom to choose when to have children? You don't have to be married to decide to have children. If you choose not to have children, there are options.
quote:I tend to think history is a fairly reasonable guide to how people will act. Since, historically, pregnancy has NOT been preventable by the means advocated by your argument, I suggest that humans are not capable of preventing all unwanted pregnancies within the guidelines of "all pregnancy is preventable"
And historically, birth control wasn't widely available. Thus, history is not always a reliable guide for present actions.
[ April 25, 2004, 10:09 PM: Message edited by: Jon Boy ]
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly, ak. If we can make birth control 100% effective, there is no reason for abortion. Win win situation! People can have sex if they choose, and no abortions need to be performed, meaning no murder in the eyes of those believing embryo's to be people.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know of no one who thinks that abortion is a good thing. All the pro-choice people I’ve heard speak say that they acknowledge that abortion is a very terrible procedure, they just don’t feel it should be legalized. So I don’t think we have to establish common ground on abortion being a very bad thing, which is normally where these discussions end up going. What we have to do is draw a line.
We have to figure out when we are willing to stop those things we know to be damaging society. We have to figure out when we are willing to step and tell someone that we think that they are making the wrong choice and we will not let them ruin their life, and possible other’s.
I know exactly where my line is drawn when it comes to abortion. I’m ambiguous when it comes to the legality of abortion, though I think that anything after around first trimester shouldn’t be that hard to show makes legal sense, but regardless of the legal situation, to me, every time someone gets an abortion, someone else dies, and I would break the law to save someone’s life. That means every time I vote on an abortion issue, despite the legal question, I would vote to stop abortions.
posted
Jon Boy I strongly suggest that you go back and reread my post.
It talks about BIRTH CONTROL. You've been arguing at me like I'm advocating abortion as birth control. I'm not.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, Paul. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I really do agree that the best solution would be effective birth control and good education. I can accept that people are going to have sex outside of marriage. And since I really don't think that anybody wants to see abortions continue, I think the best solution is to prevent the pregnancies that would have ended in abortion. In my opinion, the pro-choice people are putting their emphasis in the wrong place.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not fair to say that birth control should be used, and that this will remove the need for abortion. Aside from abstinence, there is no fool-proof method of birth control. (Well, there probably are some non-reversible methods, but you get my point...)
So it's pointless to point to the woman and say that she shouldn't get pregnant. Accidents happen. They happen to everybody. Accidental pregnancies will exist as long as people keep having sex.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Education is key, I agree that much more money should be put into this, people should make informed choices about when they're having sex and what they'll do to prevent pregnancy, as well as what to do if it occurs.
posted
I agree with Jon Boy that people should be educated about birth control. But it cannot be a complete solution, because birth control can never be 100% effective.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:So it's pointless to point to the woman and say that she shouldn't get pregnant. Accidents happen. They happen to everybody. Accidental pregnancies will exist as long as people keep having sex.
I'm not trying to say that it's the woman's fault or responsibility. If that's what it sounded like, I apologize. That's not what I meant. What I mean is that if a couple is in a situation where they don't want a pregnancy, there are a couple of reasonable options: (1) use birth control, cross your fingers, and be prepared for an unexpected pregnancy; or (2) if you absolutely cannot accept the possibility of a pregnancy, don't have sex. Yeah, #2 is a crappy option for most people, but it's less expensive, it won't possibly endanger your life, and it won't cause the emotional damage that an abortion could cause.
[ April 25, 2004, 10:29 PM: Message edited by: Jon Boy ]
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I quite agree birth control education is necessary. Which is why I consider it so awful Bush cut all that funding for birth conttrol education.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jon Boy, it didn't sound like you were saying that. At least not to me. But it was an extrapolation of what you were saying that I wanted to hedge up. I pretty much agree with you. Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank Anne Kate. I don't agree with Bush in this instance, that's for sure. Why would he think cutting educational funding would limit accidental pregnancies?
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hypothetically, let's say government tax dollars went to fund Syrian students attending college. College is good, right? They get an education and have the ability to better themselves, both principals of our capitalistic democracy.
Now lets say all the students were being taught to hate Westerners and that blowing themselves up to kill us was a good thing. Let's say that upon reaching office, Bush pulled funding to this program.
Now, you could argue that was really mean of Bush. He's denying those children a chance to attain an education. Education is a good thing, right? To about half the country, these two scenerios are identical. Education is nice, but education that advocates the death of the helpless is just plain evil.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
How exactly does educating people about birth control cause death of children. I was very well educated about all kinds of birth control in high school, and I'm not pro-choice. And your analogy doesn't work. The people who learn about birth control and sex are not being indoctrinated to hate anything. They made their choice about what they believe, and I don't see how the education could have caused them to be pro-choice. Save the "Bush is never in the wrong" routine for somebody who believes it.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have never said "Bush is never wrong". I disagree with him on a great many subjects. I can see teaching abortion if we're very careful about it. Personally, I would prefer the money be awarded on a case-by-case basis based on content.
Teaching 'abortion is ok if the baby doesn't happen to be conveinient' is teaching murder. Teaching the procedure exists is not. Discussing the uses and implications in a culturally and religiously sensitive manner doesn't bother me. Saying "And if the pills fail you can always abort" does.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks like this should have been called The Loiter for Women's Lives.
That, and did anyone else find it mildly amusing that they were having this "march" underneath a giant phallus?
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
These discussions don't come down to whether or not we agree abortion is a bad thing or not - they come down to the question "Is a woman's desire not to be inconvenienced by a pregnancy she did not prevent worth more than the life of the baby she's carrying?"
Some people think yes.
Some of us think your right to live as you wish to does not trump the right of someone to LIVE.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Is a woman's desire not to be inconvenienced by a pregnancy she did not prevent worth more than the life of the baby she's carrying?"
It all comes down to recognizing that every act has a consequence and whether people are willing to accept the consequences of their actions.
Having said that, I think our current system is not doing a good job of holding fathers responsible for unwanted pregnancies. I can see (and somewhat agree with) the feminist argument from that angle. If women are always stuck with the chore of raising an unwanted child, of course that is a violation of women's rights.
Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY."
Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people
" Let me try to illuminate how livid, and hurt, and outraged I am. 'Today, I was at the Klan march, where we celebrated the inherent superiority of the white race!' "
You have bragged about going on a family vacation to the 1915 birthplace of the modern Klu Klux Klan, Stone Mountain, bought in 1958 to be completed for the same reason as the Confederate battleflag was placed on the Georgia state flag in 1956: to show the state government's opposition to desegregation.
"You realize, that you a celebrating something that a lot of people consider to be a travesty, murder, something too horrific to even contemplate, and you are celebrating it and wondering why some of us are upset?"
You were the one who advocated murder of innocents: cutting off humanitarian food shipments to people who were being starved to death in a longterm famine (in many ways, induced) worsened by the Taleban to consolidate their political hold on Afghanistan.
Some of you are going to hate me for saying this, and I know some of you are livid that I had a great time at this March (I'm sorry, Belle )....but I'm going to be honest, I just don't care.
I always used to get worked up and angry when people had these discussions on Hatrack. I felt they were attacking me personally, and since Hatrack is so overwhelmingly pro-life, I felt really alone. Part of me posting these pictures was defiance -- say what you want.
I am pro-choice. I am proud to be pro-choice. And there are millions of other women just like me. YES!
So say what you want. Believe what you want. It doesn't hurt me, bother me, or even irritate me. I'm not going to change you, and you're not going to change me.
I'm happy you have found strength of convinction. Because I have finally found mine.
So there.
[ April 26, 2004, 07:12 AM: Message edited by: Kasie H ]
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
[quote]Having said that, I think our current system is not doing a good job of holding fathers responsible for unwanted pregnancies. I can see (and somewhat agree with) the feminist argument from that angle. If women are always stuck with the chore of raising an unwanted child, of course that is a violation of women's rights. [\quote]
If I get a girl pregnant, I have no choice in whether or not she carries the baby to term. I can only hope she values the life of the innocent as much as I do.
After the child is born, if we are not married, I have no practical rights to have custody of the child. If I pick him up from school and take him home, for example, it is conceivable that I could be prosecuted for parental kidnapping. If we do marry, then divorce, the possibility of me getting custody of my child are virtually nil, no matter how fit a parent I am.
Inequality? Oh, yeah.
Deadbeat dads should be made to pay-- but good fathers are not allowed to be good fathers for the simple fact that they lack the boobies.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
)....but I'm going to be honest, I just don't care.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
