I totally disagree! Abortion may be inherently a medical procedure, but as an issue ethical concerns are paramount. To say that abortions are morally neutral is to say we should be ethically indifferent to life or death as long as it's in the womb. Whatever the legal parameters, society and government should work in concert to reduce the number of abortions and enable women to choose life. I firmly believe that America wants a culture of life, and not death. The above posts seems to triumph in 'body autonomy,' I suppose free from the imperatives of religion and any other external or internal constraint. Human nature and culture aren't autonomous for theists.

not to mention the whole "indifferent to life or death as long as its in the womb." That womb is NOT independent from the life and health of the woman its a part of, and that person is much more important than any potential life.

I agree that the woman's life has priority over the fetus, but that's not to say that the fetus has no inherent value save what the mother gives it. The fetus is life too and as such she/he has intrinsic worth. Therefore, society should make certain that the mother has a legitimate choice under the present law. No woman should feel that abortion is her only option. Let's make certain that choice is real and not just a label.

That if she chooses to keep the child that we as a culture value that and help make it possible for her to make that choice.

As in: No woman should feel like she has to have an abortion for economic or safety issues ( as in abuse)

Anyway that is what I think they are saying.

Exactly!

I've never, ever wanted children. Nothing - no amount of money, no big house, free food, whatever - could have coerced me to carry to term. Nothing.

I'm not alone.

Birth control fails - even used perfectly every time. My tubal ligation + uterine ablation has a failure rate, and I can't not use those or use them wrong.

The OP if this thread is right.

I was talking about being able to really choose. No woman should have to give birth for any reason unless she wants to. I also think that any woman that wants to should have the support of society to be able to.

These terms may seem obvious to each of us, but they ARE different for each of us. In order to have a somewhat rational discussion, we need to define a couple terms first. Thank you.

What does "choice" mean?
What does "life" mean?

Thank you.

Not for everyone. For women who do not want to be pregnant, it is how they take control of their bodies and their futures.

No, I understand that ethics are not the principal issue for everyone, but I suspect that the mother has to deal with it in her mind before making the decision. I think it takes priority. She may not resolve it like I would, but I can't believe she's indifferent to ethical imperatives.

is the imperative. While I'm sure some women struggle with ethics, I know several who were glad they had abortions and it was not a wrenching decision.

Medical decisions belong in the medical office between a doctor and patient. YOU and especially THE CHURCH have no rights there.

It's not a medical decision in a vacuum. As long as another human life is involved in this ethics are relevant. It seems to me prudent that the women seeks counsel from her spiritual adviser and her family. I fear that if the mother looks at this purely in medical terms, she trivializes what's involved and may have profound regrets later.

If this woman were I, you could leave the spiritual adviser part out. I'm sure there are other women who don't have family and even some who have neither.

I don't think I'm assuming any more than you're not. If she doesn't have family or counselor, then I would take into confidence a best friend. No one should have to face it alone. Obviously, that's what I think is prudent. Clearly, the choice is in her hands.

It's really not up to you or anyone to tell a woman whom she should consult in this matter. I use myself as an example b/c I'm my own spiritual adviser. I'm also a grown-up with a clear sense of who I am and where I'm going. I am also highly informed about the world around me. If life throws me something unexpected, I deal with it within the parameters I create for myself. I suspect I am not the only woman who lives her life this way. No. In fact, I know I'm not b/c the women I know who have had abortions have made their decisions this way.

Is this an emotional decision? I can't speak for all women, but for me it was. Are we as women incapable of sorting out our own feelings? No. Do we have to know what everybody and their brother think about it before we make the decision? No. I did have some emotions to sort through, but I did sort through them and came to a place of peace about my decision. I did not need any person or deity to help me come to peace with it.

Until its able to sustain its own life outside its host, its no more than a clump of cells.

You may WANT women to agonize over this, seek advice etc. but that's not every woman's journey. Its her CHOICE and she gets to make those choices with whomever she decides is relevant. If its just her and her doctor then you have no right to interfere.

Ever.

If you regress every human's life timeline, you would have an integrated grouping of cells on the wall of the uterus. That is human life in my judgment. What else could it be? Left alone, it develops into you and me. I have no inclination to interfere with her. I want her to make her choice, and I hope it's for life.

and its certainly not welcomed on this site in my experience. If this makes you feel uncomfortable there are other DUers who are far less polite than what you've experienced on this thread.

As long as you respect a woman's right to determine her own health care choices WITHOUT coercion then you may endure. You will have to stipulate that upfront, every time, to be "heard" however - just a word to the wise.

Good luck.

Thanks for the warning. I never could have imagined a group that claimed to be liberal minded so closed to any thinking but a singular opinion. I thought that was a monopoly of the other side. Really disappointed.

It has to be hooked up to someone's body and sustained by them to become a human life. If you leave it alone, it won't last.

The very few who do had problems before the procedure.

You do not get to decide for anyone but yourself. What you think is "prudent" is what you think. You cannot think for anyone else.

I had a 14-year-old neighbor many years ago. The boyfriend of her older sister wheedled his way into having sex with her. At 14, she was not really capable of giving consent, and the 25-year-old boyfriend of her sister manipulated her. She got pregnant after that single instance. The boyfriend of her sister was persona non grata after that to the sister and to the entire family.

But here's the shitty deal. The girl's parents were fundie pro-choicers. The girl wanted an abortion. She did not want to carry the fetus of her rapist. The parents flat-out refused to even discuss it. So, she ran away. She ended up in a town about 100 miles away with her aunt, who took her to the Planned Parenthood clinic, where she had the abortion. Her own parents disowned her and left her to her own devices. Fortunately, the aunt took her in, got her through high school. She's now married, in her late 20s and has two lovely children. I get a Christmas card from her every year.

You do not get to decide for anyone else what they should do with regard to their reproductive choices. Never. It is not your business. It will never be your business.

Your poor view of women and the ability that can think through their own decisions w/ out advice from others is truly disgusting.The only counsel a woman needs is from her doctor. I've never regreted any of my terminations and I don't know any woman that has.

not the b.s. abstinence only stuff, but programs that allow underage females to have access to birth control w/o parental consent - b/c the ones who need this are usually from religious rightie families anyway...

until they want to fund a program which does not benefit them in any way or coerce anyone to have anything to do with them....

the anti-choice crowd has nothing worthwhile to say.

There will never, ever, no doubt in my mind be a time when I will agree that a woman should be forced to carry a rapist's baby to term, however. never.

There will never, ever, no doubt in my mind be a time when I think the govt, rather than a doctor, should be the one to consult with women on healthcare. There will never, ever be a time when someone's religious conviction trumps the reality of science and the fact that a blastocyst has no consciousness, no brain, no spinal cord, no viability beyond consent.

Roe v. Wade established guidelines that take the issue of viability into consideration.

So, if the anti-choice crowd wants to meet reality and those of us involved in it over here on the Roe v. Wade side - welcome.

Otherwise - you're spouting religious belief but nothing that relates to actual gestation.

Except medical care so sick people can get well instead of die, food stamps so people can eat instead of die, strong OSHA standards so people can remain healthy at work instead of die, the death penalty, war, etc.

It's only about the life of fetuses. Once people are born, there is no culture of life. Therefore, that whole line is a complete lie.

You disrespect members here, both men and women, with your rightwing bullshit

Be gone

Just because I'm pro-birth, I'm right wing. It's amazing how perceptive you are with so little information. I support Obama because I believe he best has a pro life agenda. Don't run people off who have a different opinion than you. How arrogant. President Obama, Senator Nelson need people like me in Florida. Let's expand; not contract.

You are accusing someone of beings arrogant when you've come here expounding on how women should make very personal decisions?

Last edited Tue Oct 23, 2012, 11:49 PM - Edit history (1)

I read every post, and had no desire to be exclusive because someone didn't share my opinion. So yes, if someone excludes on the basis that I don't share his/her opinion, I think that is rather arrogant. Why can't Progressive thought be big tent enough to include those who are pro-birth. I never said that women should be coerced to make decisions. I just said that ethics should be given priority. I value both the woman and the fetus, and I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. Life is a beautiful gift, and I want to live in a culture where women have all the assistance they need to choose to carry the child to term.

I find it interesting that you choose to engage in this discussion on a progressive discussion board and then seem surprised to get push-back.

I wonder what you'd do to women who have no desire to ever carry a(nother) child to term under any circumstance - or do you arrogantly assume that woman = mommy?

Newsflash: we don't all wuv babies and/or want any.

"Woman" does not equal "baby machine".

Funny as in strange or hilarious - take your pick!

need to make the decision which is best for them. Having worked with women getting abortions, "chose to carry the child to term" is not always their best choice. The choice should be between them and their health care provider.

A friend had cancer and chose to not do chemo, even though "life is a beautiful gift" and they may have had their life prolonged by a year. Was she wrong?

I've known many women who get abortions for many reasons and true, there is not enough REAL support for them. Low cost education, health care, child care, jobs that pay at least a living wage, all of these are lacking in our country. However, if they "chose to carry the child to term" or chose not to, that is their choice and I will support them in any way I can.

derp

It's about dominance and control of women and taking away our autonomy and dignity. If they honestly gave a crap about babies and families, this country would look very different. But you can tell by what they cut, they don't. They don't give a fuck about those things. Therefore, what is this about?

I find it amazing that if you don't share the general opinion, then how people judge you. It never occurred to me that fellow Progressives could be so narrow minded. I value all life, especially women and babies. I have no desire to control anyone. Let everyone be decided in their own mind. I was simply reacting to the original post with my opinion. I thought that's what this site was about. I had no idea it was just to confirm a monolithic opinion.

topics out there your initial entry into this community.

Learn to read the thread tree.

I know it isn't where you were going with this, but shouldn't this extend also to men, where everyone, regardless of gender, is in control of their own bodies? If so, shouldn't we address quite a few things other than abortion; circumcision, suicide, recreational drug use, etc.? All of these things have some amount of impact on society at large, but that doesn't mean society or government should dictate our choices, should they?

absolutely

And they can't get financial aid for college if they don't.

If a woman is going to have one, it should be safe and legal.

She does not want the government interfering in a woman's choice. She remembers what life was like for women before Roe vs. Wade.

you you cannot. It sounds extreme given the way the current debates trend, but pro-choice also means anti-forced abortions.

Anti-choicers like to use the term "pro-abortion" to refer to those who support the right to choose. But there is a real "pro-abortion" position, and that's forced abortions like what they have in China.

Look, I am sorry I was presumptuous to share an opinion on an original post that caught my attention. I'm dismayed that there is no tolerance for positions that deviate from the general consensus. Somehow this doesn't come across as Progressive to me. I'm just guilty of saying that I treasure human life no matter the stage. I'm not trying to coerce, but give witness to what I feel is deficient in the original post. I must assert that diversity of thought is not a bad thing, but exclusion is.

You presumed to say that even though you don't think they should, they "can" have an abortion but first must consult their spiritual adviser and their families. After you participate in this community a while longer, you will learn there are women here who find that offensive.

No, I don't believe women 'must' do anything. I believe it would be prudent.

Women are fully capable of making serious decisions by themselves.

Its just a fundamental difference of opinion. We are Dems here. We believe in CHOICE. And MEDICAL PRIVACY. And respect for those two things.

Choice is progressive. Anti-choice is not.

Sorry, but I think being pro-birth is the progressive position. I understand that most would not agree with me on here, but that's where I stand. Having said that, I am for volitional and not coercive pro-birth position. I want the best for the mother and child and that constitutes a progressive position to me.

What are your other progressive positions?

I oppose capital punishment, I support universal health care, I am pro-environmental, etc.

I do know how it feels to be attacked here for having a differing opinion than the majority on this board. And good for you for being against capital punishment. Not many so called pro-lifers are against capital punishment. I have a question. I see you are pro universal healthcare. Since you are pro-birth are you also pro birth control, pro sex ed, and pro social programs for low income women who chose to have their babies?

Yes, to all of the questions'

Often considered to be mutually incompatible positions. Just sayin'.

Birth can kill.

This is a medical decision and being "pro-birth" isn't nuanced enough to account for women dying.

Females need to weigh whether they want to risk dying or not without coercion from outside forces.

Sorry you got your feewings hurties.

I don't like anyone telling a woman that she is less important than a blastocyst. I also dislike liars quite a bit.

If you're contending that I don't assign great importance to women, then I'm afraid you are gravely mistaken. My feelings are fine. I'm just surprised that people are so narrow minded and yet insist in calling themselves Progressives. The President said in his book that pro-life and pro-choice people should work together to reduce the number of abortions. Clinton's said abortions should be safe, legal and rare. Have they departed from orthodoxy?

Stand up for your own words. I mean, if you can.

I'm surprised to see someone calling themself "pro birth" and crying about those mean mean progressives ... and doing it with a straight face.

In fact, this cat has served on a jury!

I have conducted myself with dignity. I have not been rude or vicious. Why would I be the one with the alert? I'm just stating that I value life, and I don't see how that is so controversial. In any case, open hearts and open minds are not what needs to be given an alert. It's closed and mean spirited ones' that do. I assume you can agree with that notion, or do you want to alert me for that too? I respect every opinion on here. I'm just asking for the same treatment. I think some have created a straw man and expressed outrage. A fair reading of my posts shows that I have no agenda that's coercive, but only one that celebrates choice and the dignity of life.

If you can take a break from telling us how mean we are, mind addressing the issue (without hiding behind the words of politicians - if you can, that is)?

I'm the only one who lives in it. My soul, my conscience, my being reside in it and it infuriates me that someone else has the gall to tell me what to do with it.

Abortion is a medical procedure and if I chose to have one, I have that right. If I don't I have that right. Like, I said, it's my body and I'm the only one who lives in it. If you don't like it, you have that right, and you can do what you wish with your body.

Abortion should never be a political issue and should not be under governmental control. Anything less is forcing religious beliefs on women, which is nothing less than oppression.

I totally understand your position, and I too believe that women should not be coerced.

And I should know: I wrote a book about it.

George Carlin tells it far more eloquently than I can!

I know you mentioned it (thank you, btw!) but it really can't be brushed aside that easily.

Similarly, the "right to privacy" doesn't exist, in a generic sense (invasive drug tests, warrantless wiretap, constant public surveillance, etc.) In reality, the "right to privacy" is a "right to sexual privacy" alone.

What I'm trying to say is that I think both the privacy and bodily autonomy argument would resonate much more loudly were they more universal.

The right to opt out of a lingering, horrible death; "drug" tests (I'm a bit paranoid; I always suspect they do a dipstick urinalysis for common health problems as well as these tests are cheap, easy and can be done by a trained cat); employers mandating off-duty behavior; CCTV becoming more prevalent in public spaces; drug use; etc - there are so many hands reaching into my life and body (so to speak) and it's very unsettling. Even more unsettling is how many people accept this and the rationale for it.

Logical exercise:
If we lived in a society
- in which birth control was not just available, but provided for free to every woman.
- abortion is available at any point of gestational age.

BUT

The abortions are exclusively performed with the fetus teleporter. Healthy fetuses are painlessly, nonsurgically extracted in a risk-free way from the mom and placed in a device which acts as a incubator. At birth, the parents have the choice of raising the child or placing it up for adoption.

a) would you support this?
b) would you support it if the child was entitled to the monetary support of the biological parents until they reached adulthood?