(no subject)

[ocelot]

Abortion discussion below. If you're very strongly on one end of the pro-life/pro-choice spectrum and feel the need to forcefully express your opinion to anyone who feels differently, please don't read. Or at least don't comment.

Some of you have mentioned that seeing the ultrasound pictures made you re-think your views on abortion. That (and the pregnancy itself) have made me re-think my views from both sides of the issue, though in the end I come to the same conclusion as before.

I've had moments of complete despair over the past few months, and on occasion I've thought (though not for long, and I'm not planning on acting on it, so don't worry) about abortion or suicide. This is despite being in a pretty good, if not 100% perfect (is it ever?) situation. I like kids, and the thought of having a baby wasn't exactly something I was dreading. I've been supporting myself for years, and know that I am employable in several fields. My family and friends are mostly supportive. The father is very supportive, and more happy about the baby than I am. I can only imagine how much worse it must be for someone without my resources.

I had a pregnancy scare when I was 19 (my period was several months late). My main concern at the time was losing my friends (a fear that was somewhat justified, given the response of several of them to my pregnancy now). This sounds incredibly shallow, but consider that I'd just started college, and, for the first time in years, had found a group of people in real life who seemed to like and respect me. I was pretty starved for attention at that point. I'd also just broken up with my boyfriend (who would have been the father), and while we remained friends, the idea of being tied to him permanently like that was very scary. I didn't have even a student job at that point, and had never had a real full-time job.

Anyways, even then I don't think I would have chosen abortion, but it would have been a much more difficult choice than now.

I'm not quite sure what that has to do with anything, but I do understand at least something of the emotional state of people who choose abortion.

On the other hand, the image in the ultrasound looks essentially human. I'm (possibly) feeling her kick, even this early along. Perhaps it's just a bunch of automated reflexes, and there's no actual soul or humanness there yet. Perhaps I'm just anthropomorposizing too much. But it seems to me that an abortion at this point would be killing a person.

In an argument I had a few months ago about abortion, the person I was arguing with felt that it didn't matter whether or not a fetus is actually human, but that no human had the right to be a parasite on another without their consent. My view (both at the time and now) is that by having sex, you implicitly consent to the creation of a life. Even if you take steps to protect against it, you're still accepting that risk, as nothing is 100% effective short of abstinence.

This apparently makes me a sex-negative woman oppressor in many people's eyes.

In my opinion, this is ridiculous. Sex has consequences, as much as some people would like to pretend it's the perfect risk-free recreational activity. If pregnancy wasn't a risk, there would still be AIDS and other STDs that you can't just get rid of because you think they might make life inconvenient. And there are plenty of ways of expressing yourself sexually that do not incur a risk of pregnancy.

This is not a religiously based opinion, though my belief in the humanness of a fetus may be religiously influenced.

Despite all that, I currently will not vote pro-life, or side with the pro-life activists.

Our society isn't set up to handle unwanted pregnancies. We don't do enough to prevent them, and don't provide enough support when they happen. Outlawing them will most likely just lead to an increase in illicit abortions. This is most likely to harm the people with the least resources - the poor and the young - as people who can afford it will still be able to get safe illicit abortions from sympathetic or greedy doctors.

Conditions that need to be met before I will support any legislation outlawing abortion:

• Comprehensive, sex-positive, sex education. People are going to have sex. They need to be made aware of the risks involved and ways of alleviating these risks, and the information needs to be presented in an accessible way. Countries in Europe with comprehensive sex education from a young age have a much lower teen pregnancy rate than the US. Teaching abstinence is fine (and important, as it's the only 100% effective method of birth control), but only as part of a program that addresses the possibility that people will have sex anyways.
  
• Widely available effective birth control.
  
• Adequate living arrangements for all children (regardless of race or disability) that result from unwanted pregnancy. This doesn't necessarily mean an adoptive parent for each child. Communal childraising has worked in the past, but it has to be a dedicated, child/community centered effort (like the kibbutzes in Isreal), not orphanages.
  
• Greater support (financially and socially) for pregnant people. All pregnancy-related expenses should be covered, and the level of care should be equal to that available to people who can afford to pay. Socially, unwed/young parents should not be ostracized, and pregnancy should be no more of an inhibition to education or career than medically necessary.
  

Until these conditions are met, outlawing safe abortions will simply lead to many unneccesary maternal and fetal deaths.

I don't think that this is an unobtainable ideal for a human society, but I don't think that the US is going to get there any time soon, especially the direction things are headed these days.

I'm not sure how I feel about abortion in the case of rape/incest or birth defect.

In the case of rape/incest, it's possible that abortion is the lesser of two evils. I'm undecided on this.

The case of birth defect is harder. What exactly makes a birth defect bad enough to necessitate an abortion? Down's Syndrome is one of the defects that people frequently choose to abort, but just about anyone who has worked closely with people with Down's Syndrome (or other disabilities) will tell you that they are wonderful people. They're still people as much as anyone else, and I don't see how depriving them of life is any different from depriving a "normal" baby of life.

But then there's other disorders, where the babies are very unlikely to live past birth. Is it right to force a woman to go through an entire pregnancy for a child that will die within days of birth? What if that time could be weeks, or months, or years? What if there was a chance the child would live, but a greater chance that it wouldn't?

Is it right to force these people to go through the emotional, physical, and financial expense of pregnancy and caring for a special needs child? Do we have a right to decide, in any case, whether or not a child should have the chance (however short) to live?

I don't know.

A few months ago (on Halloween, coincidentally just about the time lemurbaby was concieved), some pro-life group bought an insert in the UCD newspaper. Though I hesitantly classify myself as pro-life, this was just sickening. The statistics made little sense, and sometimes actually contradicted what they said in other articles. They equated partial birth abortions with normal first and second trimester abortions without explaining key differences between the two (as far as I know, partial birth abortion (or third trimester abortions) are only available when the life of the mother is at risk from continuing the pregnancy. It isn't an elective operation.) They claimed that having a baby is therapeutic in the case of rape or incest, and that becoming pregnant is a good way for kids to get our of incestuous relationships. They also didn't say anything about birth control, except to state that Planned Parenthood was originally a racist/classist conspiracy, and therefore shouldn't be supported or patronized.

It was sick. I really wish the pro-life movement would focus on reducing the need for abortions rather than spreading misinformation.

I guess actually acknowledging that people have sex just isn't appropriate from a "Christian" standpoint.

Comments

[theducks.livejournal.com]

There's a stack of stuff in that post, and I can't address it all, since it will take all night, but I agree with pretty much all you said.

I would however say I am pro choice, since without safe and legal abortions, there will be unsafe an illegal abortions, but I also think it's an unplesant choice, but at the same time, it might be what is really needed for the mother. I would never describe myself as pro-life, because of all the bad things that have been done in the name of it, much like you said. I think being pro choice means allowing the choice for other people, not necessarily yourself.

And yes, sex implictly means consent to have children with someone, which is something I always keep in mind.. and try to avoid the possibility of this, since I'm yet to actually sleep with anyone I really want kids with right now ;p

[figgy-newton.livejournal.com]

I agree with all of what you said.

As to Jess, I guess my thing is, I am pro-choice, but I am kind of anti-abortion. The biggest problem with arguing the issue, however, and the reason it will never be resolved, is that the two sides aren't starting from the same "set of facts" Most pro-lifers will tell you the baby has a soul and so to abort the pregnancy is to kill a person. I am Catholic and I don't agree with that. I think there are too many miscarriages (less than 25% of conceptions result in a live birth) for fetuses to have souls. It doesn't make sense. I don't think the baby gets a soul until some point in the third trimester, or at birth, I don't have official opinions on this. It isn't part of my pro-choice argument. That and as you've states, there is a ton of misinformation running around the pro-life camp. I understand what you mean about never being able to have an abortion. At the moment, I might because I have no benefits, and my living arrangments and livelihood are dependent on my ability to care for someone else's children. Of course, my response to this is to avoid relationships and sex because I am not in a place for them right now. Unfortunately, not everyone is willing to look at it that way, as you said. I think all of your suggested policies need to be in place regardless of whether abortion regulations come with them. I do think abortions should be rare, and not something you can get at the drop of a hat, like condoms. I don't think that saying that anyone who has sex is putting themselves in a position to have a child with the other person makes you an opressor of any sort. I think it makes you honest and realistic. Idealists, including feminist idealists, hate realists. They want to live in a world where there are no hard facts and everything can be changed if everyone would just come to their way of thinking. Bullshit.

That is all... For now

[fiorebrilliante.livejournal.com]

I am and will likely remain, pro-choice, but that was one of the most compelling and reasonable discussions of the pro-life that I have ever seen.

My stance is this - I do not know that I could hae an abortion personally - I have had a scare or two, and thought about it, and honestly don't know. After seeing how *real* (you know what I mean) the lemurbaby was after only 11 weeks, I substantially doubt it. I felt all sorts of maternal and and other special emotions just looking at the still pictures of an ultrasound that wasn't mine. This is probably because she is the child of a first friends I have ever had experience pregnancy from the beginning, as adults, when the baby is a happy thing. But that's the point. If I feel like this for someone else's child, then I think it likely that, after about a month, I would feel that way about my own.

But that's me.

I cannot support banning abortion because I cannot make that decision for someone else. Ever. Because if that decision was made for me, I would kick, scream, fight, and feel somehow cheated of my right. It would be awful, and I am not even someone who would look for back-alley alternatives, like many women had to do and would do again.

I realize that there are somethings that are malum in se - bad in and of themselves. Murder one is an example. But while many people make fine arguments that abortion is murder, the fact remains that not everyone considers it so, and a measure of half is not enough to establish a crime in our nation. With murder one, there is no question (beside those cases where a person terminates the life of someone who is brain-dead - and that is another long discussion) of whether someone has caused the death of another human being (the four elements of murder). With abortion, each of those elements - "causes", "death", "another" and "human being" can all come under heavy fire, if you analyze them thoroughly, like legislators and courts must.

Perhaps I sound like a slimy lawyer here, and if so, I'm sorry. But I do believe that leglislation should be enacted or banned, or things should be criminalized only when there is a clear public policy mandate with all lements of the crime present, and the evils of the ban must necessarily outweigh the evils of commission.

abortion chat

[clamdip.livejournal.com]

Wow, that was an interesting post to read.

I am a pretty far left liberal on almost every issue. Many issues seem very clear to me, but abortion is not one of those issues. (For example, I have literal tolerance for the NRA freaks.)

I find myself irritated by the very terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice" and refuse to use either in reference to myself. I am both! Who isn't in favor of choice, and in favor of life? Those terms are only effective for setting up straw-man arguments that over-simplify these issues. Both sides are just as guilty of doing this. I am tired of those from both ends of the spectrum who try to simplify the abortion issue.

On a personal level I'm sure I would have a strong emotional reaction to ultrasound pictures or related media, since I desperately want to have a child. (I'm about ready to hire a surrogate in the absence of a relationship!) It's hard to understand why a person wouldn't want to carry the child to term and give it up for adoption, since there are so many willing people out there who want infants.

Another point I wanted to make is that I find myself generally on the liberal side of most issues because typically it seems to me that it's the more compassionate end of the spectrum. I associate the conservative side with greed, corporate interests and religious intolerance. But on the abortion issue, "pro-choice" doesn't seem to be very compassionate to the being growing within. I'm not sure how anybody can decide at one point the child becomes a viable human being. And I am VERY unsure how one can determine the presence of a soul--a religious idea that is debatable in the first place.

So, I find myself pretty squarely in your camp I think. People need to take responsibility for their sexual choices. It seems to me if they end up with an unwanted pregnancy they ought to follow through enough to give birth, and give up the child then.

If you know anybody in this situation, tell them there is a nice guy out here who would be more than happy to raise the child! :)

S

Seems to be a common topic these days....

[cymrullewes.livejournal.com]

One of the webcomics that I read daily is also discussing abortion. And doing it very well, IMO. http://www.clanofthecats.com/