it's been 30 years

[melon]

When I was in high school, in a small, very conservative right-wing Southern town, a classmate of my sister's got pregnant and had to 'go away' for awhile. She left town to have the baby and put it up for adoption. When she returned, she was an outcast. My sister was her only friend. One day she (the girl) passed around stones to her classmates that had the Bible verse quoted in this story painted on the stone.

I quoted this from another thread in here.

To be honest, *this* is a huge part of the problem in regards as to why women have abortions. Certainly, in an ideal world, people would not have sex until they are married, blah blah blah. But the reality is that we don't live at all in that "ideal," black-and-white world, and people are going to make mistakes. So what do people do to those who get pregnant? Start judging, sneering, and casting those proverbial stones. Why would anyone want to put themselves through this? So a lot of women will make likely the difficult decision to abort the child, rather than take on all this abuse from "Christian" people.

I went to a Catholic high school. I cannot count on my hands the number of popular girls who had abortions; some of them having multiple ones. But what happens to those who "do the right thing" and carry them to term? They miss school and get snickered at. The legality of abortion will not change this fact, and women will certainly get "back alley" abortions if they are made illegal.

We must face this fact, and stop the self-righteousness.

Melon

 

[RavenStar]

Im just saying that if those 43 million abortions werent done safely the mothers could have died too.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Yep, thirty years since women haven't had a coat hanger inserted into their vaginas to end a pregnancy. Thirty years that women haven't bled to death in private homes when they had abortions. Thirty years of women controlling their own reproductive systems. Thirty years since women have had the right to make their own decisions about their own bodies. Thirty years where almost every young woman of a certain age brought to the emergency room wasn't the result of an abortion she got at the hands of a person with a piece of wire. Thirty years of access to safe pregnancy termination. Thirty years of men not having a say in what happens to my body.

There is no debate on the need for safe and legal abortion. As one of my favorite sayings goes: Against abortion? Then don't have one.

I can speak up and say it is wrong for you to impose your theology on my body.

AMEN!

 

[joyfulgirl]

I quoted this from another thread in here.

To be honest, *this* is a huge part of the problem in regards as to why women have abortions. Certainly, in an ideal world, people would not have sex until they are married, blah blah blah. But the reality is that we don't live at all in that "ideal," black-and-white world, and people are going to make mistakes. So what do people do to those who get pregnant? Start judging, sneering, and casting those proverbial stones. Why would anyone want to put themselves through this? So a lot of women will make likely the difficult decision to abort the child, rather than take on all this abuse from "Christian" people.

I went to a Catholic high school. I cannot count on my hands the number of popular girls who had abortions; some of them having multiple ones. But what happens to those who "do the right thing" and carry them to term? They miss school and get snickered at. The legality of abortion will not change this fact, and women will certainly get "back alley" abortions if they are made illegal.

We must face this fact, and stop the self-righteousness.

Melon

 

[hiphop]

I think the little egg changes the moment the little swimmy thing crashes through and gives it the fertilization that makes cells start splitting.

the women doesn't own anything, God does!

does anyone agree with me?

I strongly disagree with the second paragraph. God doesn?t own me. So why should he own any other life.

I agree with the first paragraph, but I think women should have their free choice. if you or anyone else decides to not ever abort for whatever reason, fine by you. But if a potential mother chooses not to be mother, its her decision.

Yes, there are the potential rights of the unborn child. But the unborn child can?t execute them. It should be upon the person who is closest to the unborn, which in my opinion is the mother, to decide.

I don?t think that every mother who aborts is totally careless or stupid. I think its a very difficult decision in many cases, so equalling it with killing someone, like as if I took a gun, ran out on the street and murder someone just because I?m in the mood to do so, is not drawing the right parallel.

What about rape, like I mentioned in another thread. Why should a woman who has been raped be forced by law to keep a baby she probably doesn?t feel as being her baby, for 9 months as a part of her body - (at the very least, if then there would be the possibilty of adoption)? Don?t you think the unborn baby recognizes that its not wanted?

What about the abortions that will happen anyway when they are forbidden, then women won?t be treated in a hospital, but probably get an infection bc of a stupid doctor? Women died for that. Don?t they have a right to live?

Its a difficult question, and I am against careless abortion. But I think you can only leave the decision to the potential mother (and probably a little to the potential father).

 

[bonosloveslave]

As I've said, I don't agree with abortions. I would never have one and I do not condone their use in any situation.

In 1857 the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Dred Scott Decision. By a 7-2 vote it ruled that black people were not "legal persons," that they were the property of the slave owner, who was granted the basic constitutional right to own a slave. Abolitionists protested, to be met with this answer: "We understand you oppose slavery and find it morally offensive. That is your privilege. You don?t have to own a slave if you don?t want to. But, don?t impose your morality on the slave owner. He has the constitutionally protected right to choose to own a slave."

In the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates, Mr. Douglas defended the right to choose. Abraham Lincoln?s answer comes down to us resoundingly clear. His reply was "No one has the right to choose to do what is wrong."

I see way too many parallels to our situation today.

 

[hiphop]

I think also that comparison is useless, just like the one with Hitler.

Slaves, if they were asked, could have had the theoretical possibilty of saying "No, I don?t want to be a slave".

Unborn babies can?t.

Anyway, I appreciate your support of life.

 

[nbcrusader]

The comparisons all point to the same conclusions. The only way someone can be comfortable with a position supporting abortion is to deem the unborn child some thing less than a life.

 

[sulawesigirl4]

This is all staying quite civil and I thank you all for that, but as we are straying a bit beyond the scope of what this particular forum is intended for, I am going to move it to FYM. Please continue to discuss. As always, if anyone has any issues regarding my decision please feel free to contact me via PM or email.

Thanks,
sula

 

[martha]

The only way someone can be comfortable with a position supporting abortion is to deem the unborn child some thing less than a life.

Or, the only way you can be comfortable supporting forced pregnancy is to deem the woman carrying the fetus as nothing more than a vessel for a man's seed.

 

[bonosloveslave]

I think also that comparison is useless, just like the one with Hitler.

Slaves, if they were asked, could have had the theoretical possibilty of saying "No, I don?t want to be a slave".

I'm sorry that you can't see the similarities. Someone arbitrarily said, this group of people is lower than me, they shouldn't have the same rights as we do. Britain and America said that and 'owned' slaves for hundreds of years - don't you think that maybe more than one of them said, 'I don't want to be a slave'? I can only imagine the punishment they got if they said that to a white person. Hitler said the Jews (blacks, handicapped, fill in the blank) should be exterminated, simply because they were Jews. People thought this could never happen again, but it was just a few years ago that we were dealing with 'ethnic cleansing' in the Balkans! These atrocities were able to happen because these groups of people were dehumanized. When you dehumanize someone, it's easy to rationalize why they should be exterminated. These millions of preborn humans have been dehumanized - they are blobs, they can't speak, they are not as important as the mother's right to do what she wants. We have reduced their worth to ease our consciences.

 

[pax]

This is all staying quite civil and I thank you all for that, but as we are straying a bit beyond the scope of what this particular forum is intended for, I am going to move it to FYM. Please continue to discuss. As always, if anyone has any issues regarding my decision please feel free to contact me via PM or email.

Thanks,
sula

I'm thinking I might merge this thread with the one I have going now...

 

[martha]

Please don't. That would make it too long to keep track of.

 

[DebbieSG]

In 1857 the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Dred Scott Decision. By a 7-2 vote it ruled that black people were not "legal persons," that they were the property of the slave owner, who was granted the basic constitutional right to own a slave. Abolitionists protested, to be met with this answer: "We understand you oppose slavery and find it morally offensive. That is your privilege. You don?t have to own a slave if you don?t want to. But, don?t impose your morality on the slave owner. He has the constitutionally protected right to choose to own a slave."

In the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates, Mr. Douglas defended the right to choose. Abraham Lincoln?s answer comes down to us resoundingly clear. His reply was "No one has the right to choose to do what is wrong."

I see way too many parallels to our situation today.

yes, but remember, Lincoln was the presidential candidate. he became the 14th? president of the United States of America. he was probably more centered on his hardship of walking twenty miles in the snow to school as a young kid in Illinois and didn't really think much about small creatures in the womb of any women, right? The answer probably is in your hands because you can use it so effectively to counter a part of Douglas's well thought out platform on this very sensitive issue. many babies were killed and many died, and many females suffered. but so did the slaves. it's funny that we (the 20 or so states, that is) fought a war over slavery and not over abortion! perhaps, as an interested person of this great era in our history, you would find the time to read Uncle Tom's Cabin, which pretty well describes the situation in the South and how a lot of slaves were brought to freedom in the North. The offspring of plantation owners and and female negroes, i mean African-Americans, were never killed, surprisingly. but they now populate the majority of our large urban centers, even residing in rural and semi-polulated areas.

Did you see the Oprah show where many "white" people actually have African-American ancestry, if they trace it back? the issue is much more complicated than a simle "Sambo" stereotype. And Sambos is a restaurant that we DON'T have in the U.S. anymore, just Denny's and Sizzlers and such.

OK? Come to Jamaica, says the ancient advert for the clear bubbly stuff...

Peace!

edited for grammer

 

[nbcrusader]

Or, the only way you can be comfortable supporting forced pregnancy is to deem the woman carrying the fetus as nothing more than a vessel for a man's seed.

The great American tradition - you can justify anything if you are a victim.

 

[hiphop]

I can speak up and say it is wrong for you to impose your theology on my body.

 

[nbcrusader]

I can speak up and say it is wrong for you to impose your theology on my body.

A law to outlaw abortion is no more a theological issue than any other law designed to protect human life.

Again, the idea that a "theology" is being "imposed" on your body is a victimization of the issue.

 

[martha]

Again, the idea that a "theology" is being "imposed" on your body is a victimization of the issue.

I'm not following you and your talk of "victimization." Haven't those who oppose the right to choose been talking about the little "victims" of abortion for years? I'm serious; how does me wanting to decide my own health care outcomes make me a victim? Please explain this to me.

 

[PaleBlueDot]

I don't want to get involved in the debate, but I just want to jump in and count myself among the pro-choice.

I consider myself a very moral, spiritual person who acknowledges the sanctity and preciousness of all human life. I myself could never live with myself if I had an abortion, so I personally would never choose to have one. However, I never want to see the day where the coathanger becomes an image that has as vivid a meaning for my generation as it did for our parents' generation.

Further, believe in the seperation of church and state. Firmly. However. If I were to bring God into the debate, I'd say...it appears to me that God is pro-choice too, otherwise he would not have given us the choice in the first place. Just because he told us not to do it doesn't give us the right to run around taking other people's freedom to choose away.

Dot.

 

[nbcrusader]

I'm not following you and your talk of "victimization." Haven't those who oppose the right to choose been talking about the little "victims" of abortion for years? I'm serious; how does me wanting to decide my own health care outcomes make me a victim? Please explain this to me.

The argument in favor of abortion is that the woman is a victim of the pregnancy and that denying her the ability to kill the unborn child is a form of indentured servitude.

Also, this is not a form of imposed theology. While our criminal law can be traced in large parts to the Old Testament, our society has been quite happy with the bulk of our criminal statutes as not being a form of forced religion.

 

[Scarletwine]

Woo Hoo Martha!

Seriously, I do believe a fetus (not embryo) is a creation. However that creation is totally dependant on its host.

My son was born 3 months early and after that I wouldn't be able to have an abortion personally, but would defend with my life my sisters right to have one.

The fight for reproductive rights is the main way men were able to control the lives of women for hundreds of years. Matriarchial society relied on herbs and potions to control reproduction. As patriarchial society et al Israel and later Christianity, ect. developed men these ways were lost.

RU486 should become easier to find. It provides a quick solution to a POSSIBLE pregnancy. By the way the birth control pill acts in the same manner. It also causes menstruation upon the stoppping the pills. So if you were taking the pill and an antibiotic and got preganant, when you started taking the sugar pills you would also slough off your pregnancy.

Mainly prevention of pregnancy should be the norm. I'm amazed at the number of young girls that could care less if they got pregnant and these girls have their babies. What a loss to our society for the things they might have contributed through furthering their education ect.

Education of human sexuality prevent pregnancy, early sexual activity, and STD transmission. Try telling that to Bush's soon to be favored abstinence AIDS programs.

 

[bonosloveslave]

My son was born 3 months early and after that I wouldn't be able to have an abortion personally

Why?

 

[Scarletwine]

Because I wanted him so much. And he was part monkey (still hairy) and so skinny. They always laid him down in frog position - too funny.

It is more of a feeling of motherhood I had. I couldn't because I know the love I felt for that child and would for any other child I carried.

That doesn't dismiss a young women, too young for motherhood, from having that option.

 

[hiphop]

...abortion is that the woman is a victim of the pregnancy

A woman a victim of pregnancy?

You must be male.

I am male, too, and I am ashamed to hear that talk from one of the same gender.

A woman that wants to make her own decision if her child has to live, and this over a time span of three months, is neither a victim, nor victimizing.

Pregnancy is one of the greatest gifts on earth.

 

[Scarletwine]

Pregnancy is one of the greatest gifts on earth.

Or for a very young woman, rape victim. or incest victim it can be the greatest curse.

 

[bonosloveslave]

Or for a very young woman, rape victim. or incest victim it can be the greatest curse.

And abortion is a great way to keep it a secret.

 

[Scarletwine]

No, it is a great way to solve an additional problem. Besides, it is their lives that are in the balance, not yours, mine, or ultimately the father of the unborn. It is a personal decision and should be kept so.

edited for typos.

 

[nbcrusader]

A woman a victim of pregnancy?

You must be male.

I am male, too, and I am ashamed to hear that talk from one of the same gender.

A woman that wants to make her own decision if her child has to live, and this over a time span of three months, is neither a victim, nor victimizing.

Pregnancy is one of the greatest gifts on earth.

I think you either misread my comments or have taken them out of context. Of course a woman is not a victim of a pregnancy, which you so properly describe as "one of the greatest gifts on earth."

The comment was based on the assertion that a law against abortion would be an imposition of theology on a woman.

This, of course, leaves one question unanswered - does an abortion "impose a theology" on the unborn child - a theology that deems the child a "non-life" or that permits the killing of a child.

 

[hiphop]

Or for a very young woman, rape victim. or incest victim it can be the greatest curse.

Thats true, Scarletwine, I guess. I can only guess though.

My point was that if you are for free choice of abortion, it doesn?t mean that pregnancy is victimizing.

bonosloveslave: did you mean that as an argument? Start to think again, before you type, please. You?re not only throwing Hitler, slavery and abortion in the same category of crimes...

but also implying that abortion has the negative effect of keeping horrible crimes like incest and rape a secret.

I don?t think that keeping it a secret has to do with abortion, but with the evil ill mind of the raper and the child molester, and with the fear of the raped woman/ molested child.

Or are you trying to say that your potential thirteen year old daughter should "carry out" (sorry no dictionary) her pregnancy from a rape because you value the life of the baby?

 

[hiphop]

I think you either misread my comments or have taken them out of context. Of course a woman is not a victim of a pregnancy, which you so properly describe as "one of the greatest gifts on earth."

The comment was based on the assertion that a law against abortion would be an imposition of theology on a woman.

This, of course, leaves one question unanswered - does an abortion "impose a theology" on the unborn child - a theology that deems the child a "non-life" or that permits the killing of a child.

Okey, I guess I have misread something. sorry, English is not my mother?s tongue.