Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider

[serious crayons]

So you are against innocents having any rights.

Rights are not always synonymous with "choice." I think what Buffymon is saying is that a fetus is realistically incapable of making choices. If you want to talk about a fetus' rights, that would make more sense, IMO.

[Shasta542]

It's not about depriving fetuses of their rights. It's just the simple reality that a fetus is not able to choose anything whatsoever. If an abortion does not take place, it's not because the fetus "chooses" to live.

Yes. But the term anti-life suggests that abortion-rights supporters are against life in general. They're not. Whereas "anti-choice" is accurate; abortion opponents ARE against choice in general. They don't want individuals to be allowed to choose in this matter.

I like "abortion-rights supporters" and "abortion opponents," myself.

Then anti-life is accurate as in after an abortion--the baby has NO LIFE. You see it as you see it--I will see it as I see it. I am correct in my own perception. You perceive differently. That doesn't make you right and me wrong.

[Monika]

after an abortion--the baby has NO LIFE.

I think very few people would disagree on that

[serious crayons]

That doesn't make you right and me wrong.

Of course not!    You're arguing your POV, just as others are arguing theirs. It's a subjective issue.

[Mikaela]

One thing I have a difficulty understanding if I were to take the "pro life" activists at face value, is why the "life" seemingly is so infinitely more worth while it's in a woman's womb. Haven't I seen the conservatives on this board and elsewhere moaning and groaning many a time over those living on welfare and how horrid it is to have to be paying taxes towards their welfare payments etc etc. Many single moms who have to live wholly or partly on welfare might have decided to get an abortion if that was a safe and easily accessible option to them, with no stigma involved. Yet here are those precious now-born lives and their moms, in need of support after they've actually been born and are real living human beings - and the enthusiasm for the value of their lives seem to decline all at once. While the ire and contempt directed at the "welfare moms" increase correspondingly.  

Again, this proves to me that it's not about the life of the fetus (or resulting child) at all, but about repressing women and taking away from them both rights and responsibilities surrounding their own bodies, - and heaping guilt, shame and pain on them in the process. I am especially sorry to see women actually buying into this kind of ideology.

[Monika]

Of course not!    You're arguing your POV, just as others are arguing theirs. It's a subjective issue.

It´s clear that this is a issue, that is personal to many, and I guess that´s why people easily get emotional.
There are a few subject I could probably debate forever, and this is one of them. But don´t worry. I won´t.

[Mandy21]

Wow, this is getting quite heated.  

I believe that every woman has a right to decide what goes on with her own body,and that no politician or husband or fiance or boyfriend has a right to change that decision about whether or not to bring a life into this world.  They can certainly give their opinion if the woman chooses to tell them about the pregnancy in the first place, but they also certainly shouldn't presume that they're going to change her mind.  That woman in question, besides rape or incest, might also have been advised by a doctor to let go of that baby or might also not be financially capable of raising it, or might not have had the father anywhere in sight, who knows.  That woman might have a million reasons to make the choice she did.  It's up to every woman to decide.

Shasta, I do see your point.  I do see both sides of most every story, and I appreciate your point of view.  But I have to lean in a certain direction in this case.

[Monika]

One thing I have a difficulty understanding if I were to take the "pro life" activists at face value, is why the "life" seemingly is so infinitely more worth while it's in a woman's womb. Haven't I seen the conservatives on this board and elsewhere moaning and groaning many a time over those living on welfare and how horrid it is to have to be paying taxes towards their welfare payments etc etc. Many single moms who have to live wholly or partly on welfare might have decided to get an abortion if that was a safe and easily accessible option to them, with no stigma involved. Yet here are those precious now-born lives and their moms, in need of support after they've actually been born and are real living human beings - and the enthusiasm for the value of their lives seem to decline all at once. While the ire and contempt directed at the "welfare moms" increase correspondingly.  

Again, this proves to me that it's not about the life of the fetus (or resulting child) at all, but about repressing women and taking away from them both rights and responsibilities surrounding their own bodies, - and heaping guilt, shame and pain on them in the process. I am especially sorry to see women actually buying into this kind of ideology.

This is something that has striked me several times as well. To quote George Carlin on the subject: once you´re out of the womb, they couldn´t care less about you. 

[milomorris]

Denying women free and easy access to contraception and/or abortion is and has always been repression of women, pure and simple and heinous.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "denying women contraception." What kind of female contraceptives would have been available back in those days? The herbal preparations?

And why should any of this be free? Men have to buy condoms--unless they happen upon some subsidized non-profit that is handing them out. So women should have to pay for their contraceptive methods too. The cost of abortions should be split between the parents, IMO 

[serious crayons]

I do see both sides of most every story, and I appreciate your point of view.  But I have to lean in a certain direction in this case.

That's how I am. A friend of mine once said she couldn't understand how anyone could possibly be against legal abortion. But to me it was pretty clear: If you see abortion as murder, then you must oppose it.

The difference between the two sides isn't whether or not a woman should be allowed to choose, IMO. It's whether killing a fetus is murder. To me it's not. But I can see why, if you thought it was, you would think the fetus' life is more important than the woman's choice.