Whose life? Certainly not the womans’.
You and I are going to fundamentally disagree on this.
I have to wonder if your anti-choice stance is related to religion in any way?
I’m not anti choice or religious. If you want to have an abortion, that is your choice and I will not attempt to stand in your way legally, physically or in any other way. I will also not think less of you for doing it. If I were the US, I would happily escort someone to an abortion clinic if they asked me to. However, the way I see life will not allow me to see it as irrelevant before birth. That is one small part of what pro life means to me.
Anti-choice = pro-life, for me the former is more honest.
But thanks for not trying to take away my rights i guess.
I specifically said that I would do what I could to ensure that women have a free choice. Having a particular view on an issue does not mean that you don’t support other people’s right to have their own, and to be able to make free decisions based on that.
3 Likes
@kimmo linked to a video the other day where self-identified Reps and Dems identified where they stood on issues.
It was noticeable that ‘Are you Pro-Choice?’ wasn’t the exact opposite of ‘Are you Pro-Life?’
2 Likes
What you’re describing isn’t “pro-life” in the context of abortion laws or debates that lead to them. In that context it simply means restricting a women’s access to abortion with legislation that makes it illegal, that criminalizes it.
All the things you describe are better termed “pro-compassion” IMO, and you are correct that they are not exclusive to either camp.
I’d bet my bottom dollar that you would prefer there be less abortion, and that so would @Missy_Pants. So if you’re determined to disagree you’ll need to come out and say you want laws that prevent a woman from having that decision remain between her and her medical practitioner. Laws do remove autonomy, that is what they are for and how they can be misused.
If you agree with wanting fewer abortions, then the best thing to do would be to emulate what we do in Canada. We have fewer abortions here than the US. Lots of reasons, better social safety nets in general being the largest. But having unrestricted access definitely plays a role.
No laws about abortion is actually the winner hands down in most every respect you can observe it. Fewer abortions, the pro-choice camp is satisfied that there is access and autonomy, the pro-life camp is free to try and prevent what abortions remain with social policy that supports the decision to keep a pregnancy, libertarians ought to love it too but oddly enough the libertarians on the Right still want it outlawed whereas the libertarians on the left are mute on it (it’s a non-issue), but you can’t have it all!
A large, mostly religious based segment still tries to have it outlawed here, but it isn’t likely to occur. Not the least of reasons being that we don’t want more abortions.
7 Likes
The number one thing that lowers abortions? Comprehensive sex ed! Access to birth control!! … and yet, the right doesn’t want those either. Makes no sense!! Its almost as if they’re not actually concerned with reducing unwanted pregnancies…
13 Likes
It makes sense. They want to maintain the control over women to which they believe themselves entitled.
6 Likes
Chattel. We’ve come so far, and yet here we are…
5 Likes
I strongly encourage my pro life American friends to vote Bernie Sanders for the reasons you gave. Poor sex education, a poor social safety net and lack of access to services are harmful to women and don’t decrease abortion at all. The damage also can’t be covered up by charity or good intentions.
I’m not describing a camp, I’m saying that I’ve met a lot of pro life people who are not militant anti abortionists and who show their respect for life in many ways. I have also met abortionists who were not pro choice, which is kind of the worst of both worlds.
1 Like
That’s it right there. And they believe the same of their children.
5 Likes
What is an “abortionist”? A medical doctor that performs a variety of medical procedures? Or the village wise woman circa 1700?
A partner or parent who coerces a woman to have an abortion, for example.
That is just an abuser then.
Using coded language like “abortionist” is only going to muddy your point and get an emotional rise out of people.
5 Likes
Derp. Duh.
1 Like
No, it’s just pointing out that being pro abortion is not necessarily pro choice, and bring pro life is not necessarily anti choice. This is the way it is framed politically in the US, but it doesn’t represent the full spectrum of positions people might have.
I think what you and your friends are doing is wonderful. however, if you want less abortions, we need fact based sex ed, easy access to birth control, and support for women’s reproductive health. We don’t need planned parenthood shut down. We don’t need restrictions on whether or not birth control pills are covered. We don’t need to stigmatize women who have children out of wedlock and punish them for it.
And I don’t think that pro-lifers are the only one who do things like what you describe. Plenty of pro-choice people also foster children.
I know this is the alternative floated, but this carries its own set of problems, for the child and mother.
9 Likes
Forcing someone to do something against their will is not pro choice, whether the action being forced on the person is an abortion or a live birth. Forcing someone to do something against their will is wrong. On that we agree. But bringing in the motivations of people that are willing to take bodily autonomy away from another person is silly, I don’t care what those people think, they are irrelevant, they have demonstrated their abusive nature and we should not be swayed by their opinions whatever they may be because they are abusive and do not respect the bodily autonomy of others.
And again, we are going to fundamentally disagree. There is only one stance: and that is pro-choice. Period. Full stop. No conditions. No moralizing. No coded language. Anything other than full and unrestricted access to all reproductive health care is an attempt to limit bodily autonomy of someone else. And I cannot stand by and allow that to happen.
And with that I’m done.
For anyone interested in supporting women’s rights to autonomy in areas where abortion is restricted please give to Women on Waves, a medical ship that goes to countries and helps women access safe medical care.
9 Likes
I basically said all of that in my comment about Bernie Sanders. I don’t agree with a number of the things pro life people say and do. Sometimes I think it’s well meaning but counterproductive. Sometimes I think it says something about their lack of compassion. However, there are enough pro life people who do not fit this stereotype (pro gun, pro death penalty, anti social system, anti women) that it is worth taking the claim seriously that they are actually coming from a pro life perspective.
Not only pro life people foster at all, what I am saying is that it’s a bigger philosophy than anti abortion and many people do walk their talk.
Sure, I agree that not all pro-lifers are as icky as some of the movements public face. But there is also something to the movement being in part of about disciplining women and getting back into their proper roles. They can all be great people and I can still feel as if they have an oppressive view of women’s role in our world. They just don’t get to decide that.
And I understand what you’re saying about pro-life, though. That it’s fundamentally about respecting life. Pope Francis, right? There is a consistency there I respect. Sure. But it still comes down to who the hard work in the family home falls to - still primarily women.
4 Likes
