# Pro-Choice But Believe It's a Baby?



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

I've seen the subject mentioned a few times on this thread and I was just wondering. I'm pro-life so it's not something really in my experience. How can a person be pro-choice, yet still believe that the fetus is human or a baby or alive? To me, it doesn't make sense. I imagine it does make sense to those who think this way, so I'm just wondering if you can explain...


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

I assume it is because I am pro-CHOICE, not pro-abortion.

I would not have an abortion (for an unplanned child, I don't know what I would do in certain medical situations) but I am not willing to infringe on other's rights. Just because *I* view an embryo/fetus as a baby does not mean that everyone does, should or has to. Freedom of religion includes freedom *from* religion, IMO, and this debate is hopelessly bogged down in religous termanology.


----------



## hvl25 (Jan 28, 2003)

I am pro choice. I don't believe I have the right to tell someone else what to do with their body. And to tell them that they have to bring a child into the world that they don't want or can't afford or don't love. I think its an individual choice and one that should not be made lightly. I don't think its the gov't business either.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

i am pro-choice because i believe that if we make abortion illegal, women will still desire control over their bodies and will still seek out abortion services regardless of whether they're safe or legal. we have a responsibility to women to keep abortion safe and legal; it's a service they will seek out even if we outlaw it. one of my sisters gave herself an herbal abortion when she was 13, after she was raped and had no access to abortion. she hemmoraghed but luckily was ok.

i believe they're babies because they ARE babies. duh? maybe this has something to do with the fact i'm a mom, or the fact i'm a microbiology major heading into med school... but when at 11 weeks i heard my BABY'S heartbeat -- yeah, that kind of influences a person's opinion. if it's not a person, what is it? a parasite? an illusion? why would it suddenly :: become :: a baby at the moment of birth? how stupid is that?

*~* edited for clarification.


----------



## EFmom (Mar 16, 2002)

Well, I don't see it as a baby. I've had numerous miscarriages when we were trying to conceive and I never felt like I lost a baby. I see it as an embryo with the potential to be a baby. I fully realize that many people who miscarry do feel that they've lost a baby--I just don't.

In any event, I'm pro-choice for all the reasons others have stated. Not my body, not my decision. I also agree that women will continue to have abortions regardless and do not want to go back to an era where abortions are back alley butchery.


----------



## pugmadmama (Dec 11, 2003)

Yes, yes and yes to the first three posters who answered the question so well.


----------



## aravinda (Jan 10, 2004)

while i had had intellectual reasons to accept the pro-choice position - incl the ones mentioned above plus feeling that if our goal is to reduce abortions we must reduce unwanted pregnancies and how in the world will making abortion illegal do that ....?

BUT when i became pregnant and began to relate with and feel the growing baby inside me, i felt MUCH MORE strongly that NO ONE should ever be pressured to have a baby if they had doubts about wanting it and loving it -- and just as strongly, that NO BABY should have to come into the world with less than this unconditional, overflowing love.

of course personal ambivalences may be there, and can be dealt with according to ones choice and with help of loved ones of ones choice, but finally it must be ones own choice. because IT IS A BABY.

--aravinda


----------



## pilesoflaundry (Dec 9, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by TiredX2_
*I assume it is because I am pro-CHOICE, not pro-abortion.

I would not have an abortion (for an unplanned child, I don't know what I would do in certain medical situations) but I am not willing to infringe on other's rights. Just because *I* view an embryo/fetus as a baby does not mean that everyone does, should or has to. Freedom of religion includes freedom *from* religion, IMO, and this debate is hopelessly bogged down in religous termanology.*
That was what I was going to say







.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I believe life begins at conception, and I would never have an abortion even if my life were in danger. But I support anyone else who wants to. I don't think I can explain this to anyone in a way that makes sense. There are a lot of us out there, though. If you lurk on the pro-choice threads, maybe you would understand the way some of us think.

Hopefully just lurk, though...


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

T

Quote:

I believe life begins at conception, and I would never have an abortion even if my life were in danger.
Well, since any pregnancy carries a higher risk of maternal death if carried to term than an abortion, I guess we all accept this risk at some level. But if it were 99% certain you would die during a pg, would you really do that to your living children? Even if the baby was also going to die?


----------



## steph (Dec 5, 2001)

Let's see, how can I say this - yes, I think it's a baby - after a certain point. Up till about 8 weeks, for me, it's still an embryo. I've had a miscarriage and an ectopic pregnancy, both at or before 8 weeks. While I grieved, what I grieved most was the loss of that potential baby. I didn't perceive my loss to be a baby per se. With the ectopic, this was especially brought clear to me by seeing a video of the surgery that removed my right tube (laproscopic surgery). Seeing my right tube and the size of it compared to my left tube made me realize just how small it is at 8 weeks. I'm sorry if this sounds cold to some people. Let me assure you, neither situation was easy emotionally - Dh and I tried to conceive for 15 years, before we adopted. However, I think somewhere after 8 weeks, when the heart and nervous system are more developed, yes, it's a baby.

And as has been so well stated before - it's not my place to tell another whether she should or should not have a child. That's a decision that takes place in one's one heart.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

But if it were 99% certain you would die during a pg, would you really do that to your living children? Even if the baby was also going to die?
If the baby was going to die, no. (Although, if I was fine and only the baby would die, I'd still want to give birth to it.) If I was the only one who was going to die I would wait as long as I could and then be induced or have a c-section and just hope the baby would make it. Some babies do make it who are born in the early 2nd trimester.


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Megs Mom_
*How can a person be pro-choice, yet still believe that the fetus is human or a baby or alive? To me, it doesn't make sense.*
This question seems to be coming from a place where thought and feeling is stuck on this idea that embryos/fetuses are tiny babies and killing them is sad. Yes, it is sad. Again and again, that was never the debate, nor was it ever about advocating abortion, encouraging it, or wanting more of them. Maybe it is the terminology that is misleading. Understanding the moral complexities of the unstoppable reality of abortion has to move beyond the initial reaction of horror or sadness that a 'potential' baby is being killed. Yes, we ALL feel that...and?
We have to move past that to deal with the reality. The reality is not a simple, black and white matter. That's why we have our intelligence...to sort through things that are not simple.


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Megs Mom_
*How can a person be pro-choice, yet still believe that the fetus is human or a baby or alive?*
Sophie's Choice. if life were as simple as the question implies, we wouldn't need places like MDC.


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*I would never have an abortion even if my life were in danger.*
even it meant leaving your current children as orphans?


----------



## Tanibani (Nov 8, 2002)

I am pro choice, but anti-abortion. Does that make any sense? *It's my hope people make the right choice*. Which is generally to 1) be responsible in the first place and (easy to say in hindsight) 2) not do it unless your life is in danger. I don't want it made illegal EVER because I don't want to see women go through illegal, unsafe channels in desperation. Death/infertility rates would increase dramatically. (And of course, since this is a medical procedure, that could happen anyway. There is always a risk with any medical procedure. I learned of a young woman who wanted breast implants at age 24 or so. She died. She left a 17 month old daughter. Horribly sad.)

I would never have an abortion. I knew this when I was single. If I got pg with my stupid then boyfriend (miracle I did not) as much as he would have been a nightmare partner to co-parent with (not THAT bad, but not easy) I would have kept the pg. Boyfriend # 2, if I got pg, easy, we'd get married. We did get married.







But I realized that if I was ever single again, I'm not sleeping with anyone who wasn't "father material."

Quote:

_Originally posted by hvl25_
*I am pro choice. I don't believe I have the right to tell someone else what to do with their body. And to tell them that they have to bring a child into the world that they don't want or can't afford or don't love. I think its an individual choice and one that should not be made lightly. I don't think its the gov't business either.*
If you can't afford a child, or don't "love it" there is no rule saying you have to keep it. Many, many adoptive couples want children. They are so desperate, they are going abroad. That's one route. It's very brave and difficult to do if you end up bonding with your newborn.

Rape - personal choice. I personally would keep my baby. It would still be MY baby. But I wouldn't want to "tell" a woman what to do here. I would hope she could separate the act from the baby. If she can't, if she will resent the child, she should not be the mother. She could put the baby up for adoption... lining up a family BEFOREhand to make sure the child would not end up in foster care. It's a lot to ask of a rape survivor. *Bottom line is that pregnant women need support and emotional counseling, not idiotic anti-abortion activists screaming in their faces.*

I wonder how many women who have had abortions *deeply regret it.* You rarely hear of those stories. I was listening to Dr. Laura a few months ago (I generally like her show, I agree with 90% of what she says on air, but some some topics, she's a twit) and a woman called in because she is still grieving the abortion she had. She wanted to stay with the boyfriend (I don't think he knew, or she thought he didn't want a baby or something odd) and she was shocked/sadded about how easy it was to do... and soon after she realized she made a horrible mistake.


----------



## Ilaria (Jan 14, 2002)

Ditto Tiredx2, hvl25, klothos....









I have no right to tell other people what to do. Especially if I am not willing to accept the consequences...i.e. raise someone else's unwanted child.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:

Especially if I am not willing to accept the consequences...i.e. raise someone else's unwanted child.
i guess that's the difference between me and a lot of people ~ i would gladly raise someone's child if they came to me and said, "i can't raise this child; i'm going to have an abortion." i offered that to my good friend, before she had her abortion, but her boyfriend was pressuring her so much that she ended up just choosing to let him pay for it and not going through with the pregnancy.

that's something else to consider about the abortion/adoption issue ~ not all women would just give up a baby after a pregnancy; many women would rather not go through with a pregnancy at all. a pregnancy is a huge change for any woman to go through, regardless of whether they keep the baby or not. to bring a baby to term has HUGE effects on the mother, and you can't ever reverse that. a lot of women out there, facing an unwanted or unplanned-for pregnancy would rather terminate the pregnancy than deal with those changes.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

I don't consider her a baby until she cal live outside my body on her own. Until then, she is my sweet little growth of cells, or my beloved fetus. I might say "I am going to have a baby," but until the fetus is viable aprt from me, I don't have one yet.

I think a lot of pro-choicers who call fetuses babies think of them more in terms of potential babies. As many as 1/3rd of preganancies end in miscarrage, many without the woman knowing she was pregnant (if she wasn't charting, it would just seem a long cycle). Saying life begins at conception is as complicated as saying it begins at viability.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

i guess that's the difference between me and a lot of people ~ i would gladly raise someone's child if they came to me and said, "i can't raise this child; i'm going to have an abortion."
You should put an ad in the paper! Seriously. Make it so these women can find you. Athough then I guess you'd have too many.

I tell everyone, "I have 2 kids" or "There are 4 people in our family" and started after I got the







back for #2.


----------



## Ilaria (Jan 14, 2002)

Quote:

i guess that's the difference between me and a lot of people ~ i would gladly raise someone's child
Actually, I probably would too...we are considering adoption for#3.
But, I know many people who would deny a woman her choice are not up for it.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:

I know many people who would deny a woman her choice are not up for it.
see, now, that just pisses me off. it seems so... hypocritical.


----------



## hahamommy (Dec 18, 2001)

... just thought that thought was worth repeating








I, too, believe that *I* have no right to tell someone else what to do. I would really, really, really like to see abortion be a truly private decision, between a woman and her doctor; without the intervention of legislators or protesters.
I consider myself both pro-life AND pro-choice ~ Life is a precious thing, I happen to like mine ~ but again, I do not have, nor do I want, the power to make that decision for ANYONE else.
~diana


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

see, now, that just pisses me off. it seems so... hypocritical.
ITA. I *have* met people before who are ardently pro-life and have adopted several special needs children and foster others (including drug addiciton, etc...). *THEY* walk the walk and when they say that *every* baby is wanted by them, I can at least respect them for it. Its when people don't support abortion, free birth control, governmental help for those in poverty, etc... all at the *same* time I get


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by TiredX2_
*I assume it is because I am pro-CHOICE, not pro-abortion.

I would not have an abortion (for an unplanned child, I don't know what I would do in certain medical situations) but I am not willing to infringe on other's rights. Just because *I* view an embryo/fetus as a baby does not mean that everyone does, should or has to. Freedom of religion includes freedom *from* religion, IMO, and this debate is hopelessly bogged down in religous termanology.*
BUT you are pro-choice-for-having-an-abortion, right? Like you say, that you can't make that decision for someone else?

If the debate were not bogged down in religion, would you still feel the same?

Specifically, what kind of religious terminology?


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by klothos_
*i am pro-choice because i believe that if we make abortion illegal, women will still desire control over their bodies and will still seek out abortion services regardless of whether they're safe or legal. we have a responsibility to women to keep abortion safe and legal; it's a service they will seek out even if we outlaw it. one of my sisters gave herself an herbal abortion when she was 13, after she was raped and had no access to abortion. she hemmoraghed but luckily was ok.

i believe they're babies because they ARE babies. duh? maybe this has something to do with the fact i'm a mom, or the fact i'm a microbiology major heading into med school... but when at 11 weeks i heard my BABY'S heartbeat -- yeah, that kind of influences a person's opinion. if it's not a person, what is it? a parasite? an illusion? why would it suddenly :: become :: a baby at the moment of birth? how stupid is that?

*~* edited for clarification.*
Oh, how awful for your sister, I'm so glad she was OK.

By the logic at the beginning of your message, men will rape women whether it's legal or not - so we should make it legal in order to regulate it and keep it safe for everyone involved.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by aravinda_
*while i had had intellectual reasons to accept the pro-choice position - incl the ones mentioned above plus feeling that if our goal is to reduce abortions we must reduce unwanted pregnancies and how in the world will making abortion illegal do that ....?

BUT when i became pregnant and began to relate with and feel the growing baby inside me, i felt MUCH MORE strongly that NO ONE should ever be pressured to have a baby if they had doubts about wanting it and loving it -- and just as strongly, that NO BABY should have to come into the world with less than this unconditional, overflowing love.

of course personal ambivalences may be there, and can be dealt with according to ones choice and with help of loved ones of ones choice, but finally it must be ones own choice. because IT IS A BABY.

--aravinda*
How does adoption fit into your thinking?


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Snowy Owl_
*This question seems to be coming from a place where thought and feeling is stuck on this idea that embryos/fetuses are tiny babies and killing them is sad. Yes, it is sad. Again and again, that was never the debate, nor was it ever about advocating abortion, encouraging it, or wanting more of them. Maybe it is the terminology that is misleading. Understanding the moral complexities of the unstoppable reality of abortion has to move beyond the initial reaction of horror or sadness that a 'potential' baby is being killed. Yes, we ALL feel that...and?
We have to move past that to deal with the reality. The reality is not a simple, black and white matter. That's why we have our intelligence...to sort through things that are not simple.*
So...enlighten me. What is the debate about? What are some of the complexities?


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dado_
*Sophie's Choice. if life were as simple as the question implies, we wouldn't need places like MDC.*
Again...enlighten me. Where are the complexities? To me it is that simple, so the reason I started the thread is that I want to understand why others believe it isn't.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Tanibani_
*Bottom line is that pregnant women need support and emotional counseling, not idiotic anti-abortion activists screaming in their faces.

I wonder how many women who have had abortions deeply regret it. You rarely hear of those stories.*
First paragraph quoted here - I totally 100% agree, which is why I'm such a huge fan of crisis pregnancy centers and the like.

Second para: I hear of those stories a lot. Here are some.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Ilaria_
*Ditto Tiredx2, hvl25, klothos....









I have no right to tell other people what to do. Especially if I am not willing to accept the consequences...i.e. raise someone else's unwanted child.*
I love the Alice Walker quote!

What if you were willing to raise that child? Would you still feel the same?


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by klothos_
*a lot of women out there, facing an unwanted or unplanned-for pregnancy would rather terminate the pregnancy than deal with those changes.*
Granted. And since I became pg for the first time I understand this even better. BUT if you believe you are carrying a BABY, I would think you'd be willing to go through those changes in order to allow the baby to live...


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by mamawanabe_
*Saying life begins at conception is as complicated as saying it begins at viability.*
How so? Conception is a moment in time when the sperm fertilizes the egg. Viability is tremendously variable from child to child and circumstance to circumstance.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*I tell everyone, "I have 2 kids" or "There are 4 people in our family" and started after I got the







back for #2.*
Me too, except that I skipped the two and went straight to three.


----------



## kerikadi (Nov 22, 2001)

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But if it were 99% certain you would die during a pg, would you really do that to your living children? Even if the baby was also going to die?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this is one of those decisons you can't make until you are there. However, I raise my children to believe that life begins at conception so having an abortion, even to save my own life, would tell my children that I murdered their sibling, I couldn't live with that. So yes, even if they told me I would die I would continue the pregnancy.

It bothers me that this is tossed around a lot though "Ok, if the mom's life is in danger or she would die"
The thing is you don't know until you know. We see stories all the time where the doc projects that the baby won't make it or the mom won't make it and everyone comes out ok.
I know someone irl that was told that having a baby would kill her. She chose to get pregnant, told during her pregnancy that she HAD to abort by 2 different doctors or she would die. She had the baby almost 3 years ago and everyone is fine. She will need heart surgery in the future but everyone is fine. Had she listened to the doctors she would have aborted or never gotten pregnant.
Doctors don't know and I don't trust them so I certainly wouldn't kill my unborn child, the sibling to my children because of a doctors opinion.

Keri


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Megs Mom_
*Again...enlighten me. Where are the complexities? To me it is that simple, so the reason I started the thread is that I want to understand why others believe it isn't.*
does a mother with already-born children have a right to orphan those children for the sake of creating another child?


----------



## emmasayshi (Dec 5, 2003)

I think it's interesting that fertility doctors who do invitro fertilization do many eggs at once. They fertilize as many as possibleand then choose from the strongest fertilized eggs and emplant them in the mother's womb. They discard the rest and know that ususally all of the eggs will not live once they are implanted. In other words doctors do not think that a fertilized egg is a baby.

But I guess that isn't your question. How can a mother have an abortion? Let's rephrase the question. How can society treat children of mixed races children born out of wedlock children with disabilities children to low income mothers in such a way as to make the mother feel that it is less painfull for the child to have an abortion, than it is to give birth How is it that our society makes it impossible for a mother to admit she has been the victim of rape or insest and have her and her child welcomed where does she go if she has no education and her husband beats her up. Some of us say,] I would raise someone else's child but how many women can admit they need that kind of help Before we start judging the woman who feels she must choose abortion we ought to be looking at the society that refuses to support t her. Let's look at our tendency to judge women first before we ask why.


----------



## kerikadi (Nov 22, 2001)

IMO Desperation does not condone murder. A lot of people are desperate but that is no excuse to kill someone whether an unborn child or anybody else.
Many families are desperate to pay the bills, choose life and go on. You never know what's around the bend or the potential of a child if you don't allow it to live.

Keri

Let's all keep in mind as well that most abortions are not women that have been raped, cases on incest or saving the life of the mother but out of irresponsibility to accept that choosing to have sex is choosing to get pregnant.


----------



## hvl25 (Jan 28, 2003)

What about teenage abortions? Those that are forced to have one because their parents insist? I had a friend in high school that had one, her mother forced her. She is pro choice now also and never would have made the choice her mother made for her. I think if the teenager doesn't agree to it, then the docs shouldn't be allowed to do it.


----------



## Ilaria (Jan 14, 2002)

Quote:

What if you were willing to raise that child? Would you still feel the same?
As stated previoulsy, I am willing to adopt a baby, we are considering that for #3. BUT, I cannot raise ALL the children that would otherwise be aborted, so I do not feel I have the right to tell other people what to do.

I do think that if every person who wants to take a woman's choice away adopted one baby, it would make much more sense and the world would be a better place.
It's easy to say '"it's a baby, it's murder, you shouldn't have an abortion" and end it there.


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by kerikadi_
*IMO Desperation does not condone murder.*
other facets of human life directly contradict this. as a society we justify killing every day. if society has that right, it is difficult to argue that an individual member of that society can not also claim such a right.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

BUT you are pro-choice-for-having-an-abortion, right? Like you say, that you can't make that decision for someone else?

If the debate were not bogged down in religion, would you still feel the same?

Specifically, what kind of religious terminology?
First, Megs Mom, I do hope you come back









Religious terminology: where life begins is determined by what religion you follow--- as Dado has referred to there are even religions that specifically mandate abortion in some circumstances. In addition, others have cut off lines for when it becomes a life (rather than just cells). The entire debate seems to be that it is bad or wrong to take a life/murder a baby, but if you do not believe that the embryo/fetus is a baby that entire arguement makes *no* sense. If you do not believe it is a baby/murder that removes any problems with it.

I am not willing to dictate to others what they must believe about creation/life. You must come to that yourself and imposing my beliefs on others is *not* what *I* fell is morally correct--- we are all supposed to follow the dictates of our own conscience (as Catholocism teaches)--- it is worse to do the "right" thing if your inner voice says it is "wrong" than to do the "wrong" thing if you inner voice says it is "right", IMO.


----------



## kerikadi (Nov 22, 2001)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dado_
*other facets of human life directly contradict this. as a society we justify killing every day. if society has that right, it is difficult to argue that an individual member of that society can not also claim such a right.*
Could you please provide an example of how society justifies killing humans every day?
If you are speaking about the death penalty I am against that as well.

Keri


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

Could you please provide an example of how society justifies killing humans every day?
I know you weren't asking me, but how about war? It's OK to kill people who are "foreigners." It's also OK to kill in self-defense. Legally, if someone breaks into my home when I am there I have the right to gun him down, even if he has no weapon and I don't know what his intentions are. I also have the right to kill to defend myself against rape, even if the rapist has no weapon and I am certain he would not kill me.

These are situations where others have decided that security is more important than human life. I know people who absolutely do not believe in violence, not even to protect themselves, and that is their right.


----------



## kerikadi (Nov 22, 2001)

Thanks for the response.

I believe I said that desperation does not condone murder which I do believe when it comes to an innocent life. Killing in self defense is completely different if one is fighting for his or her rights.. The unborn is not attacking the mother and it is EXTREMELY rare that a mothers life would be in jeopardy due to pregnancy.

In Texas you can shoot someone on your property - you don't even have to drag them in the house or prove they meant you harm just that you felt threatened. One of those cases of 'just because it's legal doesn't mean it should be.'

Keri


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by kerikadi_
*Could you please provide an example of how society justifies killing humans every day?
If you are speaking about the death penalty I am against that as well.
*
you bet, death penalty is a very clear example, especially since we now - to my extreme embarassment and horror - execute children and mentally handicapped.

we also have generally looser standards on when a killing is "bad" based on if the killer is wearing a uniform (ie policemen). we also deliberately value some of our citizens more than others (eg, shooting a cop, automatically murder-1 and potential capital offense, shooting a civilian, not necessarily murder-1, that sort of thing).

and of course we drop bombs on people who have annoyed us or who we believe might annoy us.

even if we as a group decided on whether or not a foetus was or wasn't a "real" human, it wouldn't solve the debate because we all have different definitions of what constitutes a justifiable killing of another human and, further, we have codified in our laws the fact that some lives are simply worth more than others.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I know burglars are not innocent, but where do we draw the line and decide that someone is so horrible they do not deserve to live? Burglary is not a capital crime. Neither is rape. How come I can shoot someone for breaking into my house, but not my car? Can I kill someone for trying to steal my bike? (Bike theft is a huge problem in my college town and people say all the time that bike thieves should get the death penalty.)

Anyway...my shcool newspaper distributed a booklet by some right-to-life group about, guess what, abortion! It was 12 pages full of peoples' stories, abortion "facts" (some were wrong, like descriptions of procedures used) and stuff about how many single college students don't find parenting an to be an inconvenience at all.







: But nowhere in the book was information about birth control, sexual assault prevention, getting child support, getting aid from the state, child care centers, free condoms, etc. which made it hard to take seriously.

I don't think the pro-choice and pro-life people are ever going to come to an agreement. Does anyone else? Do you really believe if you just say everything convincingly enough, someone else is just going to drop the beliefs they have had for a long time? I know I won't convince anyone.


----------



## spero (Apr 22, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dado_
*does a mother with already-born children have a right to orphan those children for the sake of creating another child?*
Speaking of hypocritical...
Like Keri said, if you are raising your already-born children to respect/honor/preserve life at all stages, how can you possibly justify the murder of their unborn sibling?

My children would not be orphaned if I died. They have a father.


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by kerikadi_
*The unborn is not attacking the mother...
*
if it is putting the mother's life in danger, there is nothing wrong with describing it in that way. a similar situation can develop between twins, where one in essence attacks the other by killing its food supply.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

we also deliberately value some of our citizens more than others (eg, shooting a cop, automatically murder-1 and potential capital offense, shooting a civilian, not necessarily murder-1, that sort of thing).
YES!!! Why is it you get more time in jail for killing a police officer than for killing a (born) child?! Who can say whose was the more valuable life?


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by skellbelle_
*My children would not be orphaned if I died. They have a father.*
if that's ok with you, then...that's ok with you. i could not in good conscience take a course of action knowing there was a good chance a bunch of motherless kids would be the outcome. that's *my* belief, i'm not saying it has to be yours, or that yours is wrong for you.

and, at least in this thread, i would appreciate an equivalent level of respect in return.


----------



## spero (Apr 22, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*I don't think the pro-choice and pro-life people are ever going to come to an agreement.*
I would have to agree with you on that one









Quote:

*Do you really believe if you just say everything convincingly enough, someone else is just going to drop the beliefs they have had for a long time? I know I won't convince anyone.*
No. BUT...

...although I wasn't convinced by any human person, I can say that I was once as rabidly "pro-choice" as a person can possibly be. And now...well, most of you have seen my posts on these threads.

So I have to say...if my stubborn thinking can be so radically changed, anyone's can.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:

choosing to have sex is choosing to get pregnant
all of my mother's 5 pregnancies were conceived while using birth control.

she chose to keep all of us, but in the beginnng she did not choose to get pregnant -- hence why she used the birth control.

my friend shannon's 2 babies were conceived on birth control, the first of which also being a failed condom + failed birth control baby.

choosing to have sex does NOT mean you choose to get pregnant. that's why contraception isn't called 100% effective... and whether people would like to admit it or not, not everyone is going to think abstinence is the greatest deal ever. abstinence can ruin a relationship... if you have a strong, solid, committed relationship with someone, at some point even if you're not willing to have kids, you'll want to have sex. it's normal, and it's healthy, and people do it, and contraception fails, and not everyone is ready for a baby.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

choosing to have sex is choosing to get pregnant
I would say that choosing to have sex - if it is a true choice, after all - means you have chosen to accept a certain level of contraceptive failure.

Anyone who has vaginal intercourse should discuss what they will do if the .001 to 20% likelihood occurs. (Men included; maybe they will someday learn that women don't get pregnant by themselves!)

But to say "choosing to have sex is choosing to get pregnant" is like saying that someone who is TTC should be fine with getting Norplant.

OK, not really, but you know!


----------



## kerikadi (Nov 22, 2001)

Yes, choosing to have sex is choosing to get pregnant because unless the woman has had her uterus removed it is always a possibility. We put so little value on human life







We need to accept the responsibility that each time we have sex a baby could be the result and if you're not ready to have a baby - you shouldn't be having sex! I didn't say people who don't want kids shouldn't be having sex but need to know it is a risk that you need to be responsible for. I am not ready for more children right now so we are careful but know that nothing is 100% and that pregnancy is a possibility.

You can make the arguement about rape or mothers life or whatever but the truth is most of the women getting abortions chose to have sex and most of them had unprotected sex - they were just irresponsible.

I agree that we put more value on certain people like you said if a cop is shot or the president the criminal would more likely be given the death penalty or a stronger sentence than, say, if a black woman had been killed but that doesn't make it ok.

For the record I am against killing anyone - the unborn, the terminally ill, handicapped, elderly, criminals, etc.

Keri


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by kerikadi_
*I didn't say people who don't want kids shouldn't be having sex but need to know it is a risk that you need to be responsible for.
*
i agree with much of what you're saying. but to make informed choices, people need to be, well, informed.

some info on reproductive education in the US. with education this poor is it any wonder there are so many unintended pregnancies?

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_sex_ed02.html

• There are currently 3 federal programs dedicated to funding restrictive abstinence-only education..

• Federal law establishes a stringent 8-point definition of "abstinence-only education" ...prohibits them from advocating contraceptive use or discussing contraceptive methods except to emphasize their failure rates.

• There is currently no federal program dedicated to supporting comprehensive sexuality education that teaches young people about both abstinence and contraception.


----------



## hahamommy (Dec 18, 2001)

Quote:

Let's all keep in mind as well that most abortions are not women that have been raped, cases on incest or saving the life of the mother but out of irresponsibility to accept that choosing to have sex is choosing to get pregnant.

Quote:

the truth is most of the women getting abortions chose to have sex and most of them had unprotected sex - they were just irresponsible.
I must say, *these* kind of statements are NOT helpful to the cause. YOU have never been down this road, you've already admitted... how can you possibly know what is in the hearts, souls and minds of the women who do make this very, very, very difficult and personal decision?? It's not a glib thing, it wasn't for ME nor for any of the other women I know personally ... My reasons are my reasons and they are not the same as anyone else's nor are theirs like mine. Any woman who may portray the situation as *no big deal* is not being truthful to you. Do you know anyone IRL who walked this path? Are you friends? Have you looked into her heart without judgement?







Women are crueler to one another than ANY man on the planet ever could be...









~diana


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

You can make the arguement about rape or mothers life or whatever but the truth is most of the women getting abortions chose to have sex and most of them had unprotected sex - they were just irresponsible.
Even if this is the case, we must look at why this is so. For example, abortion is not spread evenly over all socioeconomic, age and race levels. Why not? If people of one race or income level are more likely to be "irresponsible," why is this so? Why doesn't everyone receive the same type of education?

I know several adult women, high school graduates, who believe that oral sex can get you pregnant but that jumping up and down after sex will prevent pregnancy. How are they supposed to take responsibility if no one will give them the correct information? Who is going to tell them where to look?


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:

the truth is most of the women getting abortions chose to have sex and most of them had unprotected sex - they were just irresponsible.
*all* of the women i know who have had abortions, and *all* of the teen girls i've counseled facing unwanted pregnancies were using some kind of protection that failed.


----------



## pugmadmama (Dec 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Megs Mom_
*Again...enlighten me. Where are the complexities? To me it is that simple, so the reason I started the thread is that I want to understand why others believe it isn't.*
Have you read the answers to the originial post? A lot of us took the time to answer your question and yet three pages later, you are acting as if no one had answered.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

*all* of the women i know who have had abortions, and *all* of the teen girls i've counseled facing unwanted pregnancies were using some kind of protection that failed.
The majority of the women I know who have had abortions (literally hundreds) were pregnant as the result of rape. Sometimes it was incest. There were several contraceptive failures, some due to incorrect use, and there were only a few who did not use protection at all.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Greaseball, i get the feeling you know more women than i do.









however, you did remind me ~ one girl i counseled was pregnant with twins after molestation by her uncle. she was 11.

(she chose to keep the babies.)


----------



## sleepies (Nov 30, 2001)

i do realize my "logic" is a little weird...but here i go.

i am pro-choice

i do think the fetus is a baby...

but i do think it is the mother's right to decide if the baby should go to term and to decide if she wants to carry and be pregnant and give birth.

pregnancy and birth are HUGE and i feel they are the women's right to choose.

HOWEVER< i do think it is BEST to prevent pregnancies by birth control or whatever first. i realize that doesn't always happen or work.

i also onlyl am pro choice for the first few weeks or unless the pregnancy/birth puts a high risk to the mother.

im against later term abortions. as i think the mother needs to decide quickly.....as the more the baby develops the worse it seems to me.


----------



## kerikadi (Nov 22, 2001)

I have three people very close to me that have decided to end a pregnancy through abortion.

I am a strong supporter of an abortion recovery group.

Everyone I know (not a lot) that has had an abortion or been part of one is regretful and wishes it hadn't happend and feels it should be illegal. I don't condemn them but support them in their recovery. On person is very close to me and
My DH was pro-choice when we met and married and only changed his mind after I was 10 weeks pg with DD#1 and he realized that is when most abortions occur (around that time). I felt DD kick at 13 weeks. To my surprise DH did a 180.

Now these are the people *I* know. Not everyone thinks theirs was a mistake or would have made a different choice.

I absolutely agree that girls and boys are not educated about sex but I don't feel that is the governments job, it is the parents job. I don't want anybody teaching my children about sex for fear they will be given misinformation.

For me the bottom line is that we don't have the right to take a life of an unborn child. It's just not our place.

I haven't said anything personally attacking anyone, just stating my opinion.

I have friends irl that are pro-choice and I love them. However, if one of them told me they were considering abortion I would do my best to convince them otherwise because I feel that is my job as their friend. I would have a hard time being friends with someone who made the decision to abort but I don't have a problem being friends with someone that has had an abortion and regrets it. Make sense? Maybe not but that is how I feel.

Peace,
Keri


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

My information may be a little biased, since most of these women I knew from my work in mental health and crisis clinics. But the majority of people I knew who were pregnant in high school had all been raped, as well as other personal friends of mine I met in adult life who have had abortions.

Another thing - it seems in the last few years I have been seeing more news articles about girls as young as 10 getting pregnant. I don't believe 10 and 11 year old girls are willingly having sex with boys old enough to ejaculate. The youngest mother in history got pregnant at age 4, and the articles all said "This was not a result of rape." I seriously doubt 4-year-olds are having consensual sex.


----------



## hahamommy (Dec 18, 2001)

Quote:

_Originally posted by kerikadi_
*I have friends irl that are pro-choice and I love them. However, if one of them told me they were considering abortion I would do my best to convince them otherwise because I feel that is my job as their friend.*
I would agree that supporting your friend is a very important role ... I would hope that you would love her enough to support her no matter her own personal decision ... Listening and not judging ... That's what my good close friends do for me.

Quote:

_Originally posted by kerikadi_
*I would have a hard time being friends with someone who made the decision to abort but I don't have a problem being friends with someone that has had an abortion and regrets it. Make sense? Maybe not but that is how I feel.*
It would be a shame to end a friendship or refuse to begin one with a woman who wasn't feeling guilty enough for your standards. You could be missing out on some amazing people, myself included.

I just want to put another face in your mind, I'm the woman who firmly knows in her soul that the right decision was made at the time the decision had to be made. Life is way too short for regrets. I wish peace and acceptance for those who hang on to regret, may you find a way to bring that to the women you meet.
~diana


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dado_
*does a mother with already-born children have a right to orphan those children for the sake of creating another child?*
I'd really prefer to discuss the other 99.9% of abortion situations....


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Megs Mom_
*I'd really prefer to discuss the other 99.9% of abortion situations....*
an outright ban affects these women *especially*. if you're willing to grant an exception for this case, i'm willing to drop it as an issue. if not, too bad, it has to be dealt with.

more specifically, it is a precise answer to the question you posed.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by emmasayshi_
*I think it's interesting that fertility doctors who do invitro fertilization, use many eggs at once. They fertilize as many as possible, then choose from the strongest fertilized eggs and emplant them in the mother's womb. They discard the rest, and know that ususally all of the eggs will not live once they are implanted. In other words doctors who do in vitro, many of whom refuse to do abortions, do not think that a fertilized egg is a baby.

But I guess that isn't your question. How can a mother have an abortion? Let's rephrase the question. How can society treat children of mixed races, children born out of wedlock, children with disabilities, children to low income mothers, in such a way as to make the mother feel that it is less painfull for the child to have an abortion, than it is to give birth? How is it that our society makes it impossible for a mother to admit she has been the victim of rape or insest and have her and her child welcomed by her neighbors? Where does she go if she has no education and an abusive husband? Some of us say, I would gladly raise someone else's child, but how many women can openly admit they need that kind of help? Before we start judging the desperate woman who feels she must choose abortion, we ought to be looking at the society that refuses to support her. Let's look at our tendency to judge women first, before we ask why.*
I totally agree with you until your last sentence. I think abortion encourages some of these problems - a quick "solution" to a lack of support for mothers and children. So, while I believe abortions should not take place, I also believe we have to work to eliminate the perceived necessities for them.

As far as infertility doctors, I do believe those embryos are babies and that it is immoral to destroy them but that's a whole other can of worms to some people (to me it's the same issue).


----------



## guestmama9924 (Mar 16, 2002)

I am pro-choice, and for some I guess that sounds icky, but I guess I could say that I believe abortion, and the decision to end a pregnancy or life of an offspring is not unique to humans.
I believe it is a part of the dichotomy of life bearers. This is not to say that I do not think it is sad, or preventable, or has an alternative. I believe all those things, including the belief that life begins at conception- I do believe that.
Pro-choice does not always mean pro-abortion - I am not pro-abortion, I suppose I am just accepting of it as a choice.


----------



## Peppermint (Feb 12, 2003)

Meg'sMom

I understand your OP to be asking pro-choicers who believe that the fetus is a child/baby how they reconcile that belief. I struggled for a long time understanding that position too, my best friend (male) feels that way, and what I came to understand of his position was this_
#1- although he feels it's a baby, he does not feel that it has a right to life until out of the mother's body- her right to not have to be pregnant, birth a child, etc overrides the baby's right to live (in his opinion)
#2-he recognizes that other people do not believe it is a baby and doesn't feel that he has the right to impose his views on them.

Basically- IMO- people who call the fetus a baby and are pro-choice- don't *REALLY* see it as a baby the way you and I do (equal to a born baby), and so they don't afford it equal rights. You see, if a person actually thinks it is a baby- they could never give anyone the right to end it's life- as they wouldn't think it ok (or mind imposing their views about it) if someone were to be killing a born baby.

Did I make any sense at all? I just wanted to respond, b/c this puzzled me for so long as well, and I think it's as simple as "is it a baby equal to a born baby?", and to pro-choicers, it is not.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dado_
*other facets of human life directly contradict this. as a society we justify killing every day. if society has that right, it is difficult to argue that an individual member of that society can not also claim such a right.*
Well I don't think any of those justifications are morally acceptable either.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by TiredX2_
*First, Megs Mom, I do hope you come back









Religious terminology: where life begins is determined by what religion you follow...

I am not willing to dictate to others what they must believe about creation/life. You must come to that yourself and imposing my beliefs on others is *not* what *I* fell is morally correct--- we are all supposed to follow the dictates of our own conscience (as Catholocism teaches)--- it is worse to do the "right" thing if your inner voice says it is "wrong" than to do the "wrong" thing if you inner voice says it is "right", IMO.*
Oh, I didn't disappear on purpose, just busy with my little ones and with trying to sleep more than three hours a night!

I think at some point society *does* have to define when life begins. It isn't a religious issue so much as a scientific one, IMO. After all, society used to believe that slaves were not people. Would you have had a right to dictate to slave owners what they should believe about their "property"?


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*I don't think the pro-choice and pro-life people are ever going to come to an agreement. Does anyone else? Do you really believe if you just say everything convincingly enough, someone else is just going to drop the beliefs they have had for a long time? I know I won't convince anyone.*
Maybe we aren't going to convince each other, but I'm trying to convince the ones on the fence!









I'm also trying to help pro-choice folks understand where I'm coming from, and I'm honestly trying to understand you all, even if we don't change each other's minds.


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Megs Mom_
*Well I don't think any of those justifications are morally acceptable either.*
how far are you willing to take this?

not having universal healthcare is saying wealthier lives are more worth saving than poorer lives. having only males register for a potential draft is equivalent to saying we need to emphasize preservation of female lives. are you willing to subject the president to the same risk of violence as every other citizen walking through DC without Secret Service protection? the relative ranking of lives is extremely entrenched in our society - in every society, really.

the point of all this is deciding on a common definition on when life begins will not end the abortion debate. it won't even slow it down. all it does is change the wording of the question without advancing the consensus.

posters who are saying "they must not really believe foetus is a human or they wouldn't kill it" are completely missing the point. while for some that is undoubtably true, for many others it clearly isn't. there are people who have abortions believing/knowing full well they are killing a child: but their reasons for doing so are compelling enough that they do it anyway.

making that claim is like arguing a soldier "doesn't really know" the shadow in his rifle sight is another human being because otherwise they wouldn't be trying to kill them. and before anybody goes down the "but soldiering is different!" path let's be blunt and admit it's just another way of saying "our" lives are more important than "their" lives - IOW, yet another relative ranking of human lives.

we can argue whether or not the reasons to abort are/aren't valid - that is a discussion a society *should* have - but to dismiss these women as "not really understanding" what they are doing is insulting and will not in any way advance the cause virtually all of us share - reducing the number of abortions women feel obligated - for whatever reason - to take.


----------



## Peppermint (Feb 12, 2003)

But, truly- are there people who believe that the in utero baby is equal to the born baby? B/C, if so, than wouldn't we allow infanticide, clearly it is different in pro-choice people's minds- except people who are only pro-choice in cases where the mother's life is at risk. I mean, really, is there anyone who would argue that infanticide on demand (for any reason) would be acceptable, so long as it is your own child, and your reasons need not be explained to anyone?
This is why I say clearly it is not a child in the same sense of a born child.

Also- the soldier is, in theory at least, trying to kill you as well, which in abortion that is simply not the case (except in life of the mother cases).


----------



## dado (Dec 31, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by jess7396_
*I mean, really, is there anyone who would argue that infanticide on demand (for any reason) would be acceptable*
why not? we claim a right to kill all sorts of people "on demand". we have the head of this country saying publicly - and proudly - that he reserves the right to kill anyone, anywhere, if he thinks it's the right thing to do. since a number of those killed are children, he is in fact arguing for infanticide "on demand".

you can't separarte an issue from its cultural context and expect to resolve anything.

i am unaware of any society, ever, that did not treat some lives as worth more than others. that didn't - in effect - grade humans the way the USDA grades beef. once that principle is allowed, it is no longer sufficient to argue "but you're killing a child!", it becomes necessary to demonstrate "this child is worth not-killing because this other life isn't worth as much".

it's a real problem.

imo one of the reasons the abortion debate rages so violently is because we so rarely talk about the real, fundamental issue: that we systematically treat some lives as more valuable than others. often subconciously.

some of these are very hard lines to draw!







some of the lines are easier, depending on the person. eg, i have zero trouble stating loudly and proudly that IMO there is no contest, the life of a mother is more valuable than the life of an unborn child of *any* age. partly because i have little doubt a child asked to make a choice - hypothetically, i would never advocate someone actually do this - would certainly take mother's milk over a sibling. partly because the mother is irreplaceable, a sibling (usually) isn't.

and again i come back to the basic point: the abortion debate has very little to do with when the foetus is deemed to be a child. we could all decide tomorrow it is a child from the moment of conception and it wouldn't change a thing.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

This country is split more than 40/60 on the abortion issue (40 pro-life, 60 pro-choice) depending on how the questions are asked (can be as high as 50/50).

Yet on a Dateline I watched about a couple who agonized about whether to end thier pregnancy when they learned the fetus was moderately to severly brain damaged (they kept the baby), the doctor reprted that 90% of parents faced with a similar diagnosis choose to abort.

So somehow we move from about 50% pro-choice to 90% when faced with real difficulties?

These decisions are so very complex, much more complex than pro-life rhetoric would let us believe.


----------



## spero (Apr 22, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*The youngest mother in history got pregnant at age 4,*
Where are you getting this information? I need to see some evidence to back that up.

You would think that, if a 4-year old actually had the ability to conceive







, you would find the story all over the internet. I have been unable to find anything.

Can you provide a link?


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dado_
*if it is putting the mother's life in danger, there is nothing wrong with describing it in that way. a similar situation can develop between twins, where one in essence attacks the other by killing its food supply.*
Are you talking about twin-to-twin transfusion? I have NEVER thought of that in terms of one attacking the other, any more than I think of a preborn baby attacking its mother.


----------



## zinemama (Feb 2, 2002)

Interesting discussion. And part of what makes this whole topic so fascinating to me is how the beliefs expressed are so much a product of this particular point in time, and not of timeless, enduring religious truth.

From everything I have read about abortion through history, at least in the West, it has always been a common and to some degree acceptable - if unsafe - practice. Even the Catholic Church used to teach that abortion was ok until "quickening." Not until recently - less than a hundred years ago, I think -did that change. I wonder how many of us would still feel the way we do if that kind of guideline was still in place.

To answer the OT: I am pro-choice. I believe that abortion is killing. No way around it, and I don't have a problem "admitting" it. I don't believe that it 's murder or in any way the same as killing a full-term baby, but I do believe it is killing something. And I think that each woman, in the privacy of her own heart and soul and circumstances we know *nothing* of, should have the right to decide whether to nurture the potential life within her, or not. Since becoming a mother, I have come to believe this more strongly than ever.


----------



## Ilaria (Jan 14, 2002)

Quote:

Do you really believe if you just say everything convincingly enough, someone else is just going to drop the beliefs they have had for a long time? I know I won't convince anyone.
It does happen!








I used to be against choice and now I am vehemently pro-choice.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Skellebelle - Here you go!

http://www.sexualrecords.com/WSRprev...oungest_mother

Quote:

The youngest mother whose history is authenticated is Lina Medina, who delivered a 6½-pound boy by cesarean section in Lima, Peru in 1939, at an age of 5 years and 7 months.
So she was pregnant slightly before the age of 5.

Quote:

Girls such as this suffer from a hormonal imbalance, or precocious puberty
That's not all they suffer from...


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*Who can say whose was the more valuable life?*
ITA!


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by klothos_
*if you have a strong, solid, committed relationship with someone, at some point even if you're not willing to have kids, you'll want to have sex. it's normal, and it's healthy, and people do it, and contraception fails, and not everyone is ready for a baby.*
I believe this is a situation where you can't "have your cake and eat it too". With rights come resposibilities, etc. If you choose to have sex you choose to take the *risk* of a pregnancy.


----------



## spero (Apr 22, 2003)




----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by pugmadmama_
*Have you read the answers to the originial post? A lot of us took the time to answer your question and yet three pages later, you are acting as if no one had answered.*
Point taken.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by klothos_
*however, you did remind me ~ one girl i counseled was pregnant with twins after molestation by her uncle. she was 11.

(she chose to keep the babies.)*
OMG do you know how she's doing now?


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

... last i heard, she was trying to get the guy charged with molestation but her parents didn't want to believe her.









i hope she's doing ok.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Okay, now *that* is something that the govt needs to get involved in.

An 11 year old CAN NOT consent to sex. Period. Do a DNA test to determine the father... forget molestation, CHILD RAPE is what happened and what he should be charged with.

Kay


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

I believe this is a situation where you can't "have your cake and eat it too". With rights come resposibilities, etc. If you choose to have sex you choose to take the *risk* of a pregnancy.
This argument, though, is completely non-sensical if you don't believe there is something WRONG with having an abortion. Yes, basically everyone realizes that a risk of sex is getting pregnant. For some people that would mean they would have to carry a child to term. For others, they may consider the consequence of birth control failure and abortion.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleepies_
*im against later term abortions. as i think the mother needs to decide quickly.....as the more the baby develops the worse it seems to me.*
why?


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

... last i heard, she was trying to get the guy charged with molestation but her parents didn't want to believe her.
The law should be on her side here. Her parents could be charged with child abuse as well just for not taking legal action.

Even if an 11-year-old was begging for sex (highly unlikely) anyone who gives in is a criminal.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I used to be pro-life a long time ago. I also used the argument "well, you know if you have sex there is ALWAYS the risk of getting pregnant so you need to take responsibility".

I look back on myself saying that and sadly laugh at how completely naive and ignorant I was. I, a Catholic girl, surrounded by rich white Catholics, had no idea what millions of women face in their lives each day. Low self-esteem leading to sexual irresponsbility, crushing poverty, drug abuse or other addictions, abuse by men, subordinate ranking of women, complete ignorance on the facts of sex (and we can partly blame the pathetic sexual education system in this country for that), or just a very emotionally dysfunctional person who isn't prepared to think about "consequences" or hell, your average teenager whose every hormone is screaming SEX!!!!! but who lacks the emotional maturity to deal with the consequences.

Like it or not, we are all animals, and the single greatest urge for all life on the planet is SEX. You can't stop people from having sex. Prostitution, adultery, fornication...it's all as old as time. Most people simply AREN'T capable of treating sex rationally, with due thought and concern to the possible consequences of pregnancy. The abortion issue will NEVER be solved by simply reminding everybody that sex = babies.

As for the OP's question. I do believe it is a human life from the moment of conception.

However, the reality is that for an embryo to reach term a mother must go through a pregnancy. At the very best of times it's work, it requires responsibility in diet, behaviour, moderation of drug and alcohol use, etc. It requires medical care, which millions of women lack access to. It requires that one not be emotionally traumatized by such a pregnancy. And let's not forget giving birth: a painful and serious process that should not be taken lightly. Then let's not ignore the emotional consequences of bringing a baby into the world: give it up for adoption? How easily this rolls off the lips of pro-lifers.

I believe life begins at conception. But I am also avidly pro-choice. In my mind there is no conflict. Until a fetus can be maintained outside the womb, the woman has the ultimate choice in whether to carry a child to term or not. And actually, given the legal and emotional ramifications of having one of your offspring running loose in the world, women should still have the right to terminate the pregnancy or destroy the embryo. Adoption is complicated enough when both parties have chosen this path. To "force" woman to give up a child would be wrong.

I also totally agree with dado. Even if we all agree it's a life, that doesn't change much about the issue.

So, to sum up my long rambling post....yes, it's a human. But the rights of the mother supercede it's right to life.


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

Very well put, Piglet68.... that was great.
Yes, I think it is clear that it is not hard for us to agree that it is a baby, that it is alive...and if you think it is murder to have an abortion, don't have one! Not everyone feels the same way!


----------



## AmyB (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Megs Mom_
*I'm pro-life so it's not something really in my experience. How can a person be pro-choice, yet still believe that the fetus is human or a baby or alive?*
The problem is that you are asking the wrong question.

There is a huge difference between the potetial for a baby and an actual baby.

Pretty much any fertile woman is a preganancy waiting to happen (a statistical possibility of a baby) and a fertilized egg makes a baby even more likely, but it is not a baby yet. In fact, early on there is a pretty good chance that the potential baby will miscarry by nature instead of developing and being born.

Early on the potential baby absolutely requires care that ammounts to more or less to blood transfusion and organ donation from another person. I don't think this could be required by law in other circumstances. The fact that the fetus is borrowing the organ of another person also means that it can endanger the other persons life.

So, the root of the question is, does the life, health and economic well being of the mother or the potential for a baby deserve greater protection under law? The answer can't be "neither" because real situations happen every day when one or the other must take priority.

The slippery slope of "life begins at conception" is that a woman who miscarries becomes a murderer, especially if she didn't follow doctor's orders at some point.

--AmyB


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:

What about teenage abortions? Those that are forced to have one because their parents insist?
Forced to have one? Did they strap her down and do it to her? I had ds at 16 and if my parents had told me to abort him I would have told them to bite me.

Quote:

*all* of the women i know who have had abortions, and *all* of the teen girls i've counseled facing
And I know people who have had abortions that weren't using any contraception when they got pregnant, but still had an abortion.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

Forced to have one? Did they strap her down and do it to her? I had ds at 16 and if my parents had told me to abort him I would have told them to bite me.
Teenagers can be forced to have abortions. People underestimate just how much power parents have over them. I think it's condescending to say "Well, she could have just run away from home." That's what they often say about teens who are victims of incest.

BTW, there was a thread a while back about an 11-year-old girl who was pregnant by rape and her parents wanted to keep it a secret from her. They wanted to tell her she was getting an appendix out or something and then have her put under and given a D&C. I don't know what ever happened with that, but if that girl wanted to have the baby she would have been powerless.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:

an 11-year-old girl who was pregnant by rape and her parents wanted to keep it a secret from her. They wanted to tell her she was getting an appendix out or something and then have her put under and given a D&C.
yup, and don't forget that parents/guardians have full control over a minor's medical issues.

it's disgusting to me that a parent would have that little respect for their children... but it happens all the time still.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I think it's really sick that after she was so grossly violated by the rapist, her parents have to perpetuate it by doing something that says her body is not her own.

It's not like she wouldn't find out about it, anyway...









11-year-old girls have had babies before, sometimes vaginally. I think she should have at least been asked about what she wanted.


----------



## Megs Mom (Mar 19, 2002)

Well, Grease, you and I sure do agree on that one!


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

That case is the exception though. Most teenagers that are pregnant know that they are and can (if they want to) find a way out of having to depend on their parents. I had to move out of my parents house, so that's what I did. There are lots of resources out there for pregnant teens that need help.


----------



## GoodWillHunter (Mar 14, 2003)

forgot what I wanted to say.

Guess it'll hit me later....


----------



## GoodWillHunter (Mar 14, 2003)

I think Piglet_68 put it perfectly... Untill the fetus can live independently of the mother's body... Although, I wouldn't advocate an abortion for anyone...However, again, it is not my body, not my call.


----------

