Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mom Confessions Mom Confessions

Pro Life with exceptions IS NOT Pro Choice! ****ETA****

Posted by   + Show Post

IMO, if someone wants abortion illegal, even with exceptions, you are still PL. I get so annoyed when a PL person says "I think abortion should be allowed for rape, incest, maternal health" and someone comes back with "That makes you Pro Choice". It doesn't, Pro Choice (again IMO) means giving women all their choices, freedom to choice regardless of reason. If you are only giving her choices under special circumstances, how is that "Pro Choice"? I get that it isn't entirely Pro Life either, it is somewhere in the middle. 


**ETA**

From the responses, it seems many people don't/can't separate their personal feelings from their political views. So, to be sure we are all "on the same page", lets keep the opinions to your political views on abortion. Do you feel the federal or state government should ban it? Place stricter regulations on it, that sort of thing. Ya now, how would YOU VOTE if the subject appeared on your ballot?


“If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed”.

-Albert Einstein

by on Oct. 12, 2012 at 1:48 PM
Replies (451-460):
SevenKisses
by on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:20 PM
2 moms liked this

Which is why I will only use the terms 'pro-abortion' and 'anti-abortion'. Solves those kind of petty problems. I think we should get rid of the words used to make some people feel more comfortable and call it like it is.

pmmacdonell
by on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:31 PM
1 mom liked this

Sometimes the problem I see with these discussions is that people get so hooked into semantics, they aren't connecting how this language is connected with policy. Women need to pay close attention to how abortion plays out in politics and the real world.  If abortion is made illegal in all cases but to save the woman's life, it is very likely that women will die anyway because any doctor who considers performing such an abortion would be under great legal scrutiny. Therefore such a doctor may elect not to perform an abortion to save a woman's life to avoid trouble.  I know a lot of people here are under the impression that male politicians will make sensible decisions regarding this.  I have a lot of doubts about this based on recent statements by male politicians who do not even appear to understand the most rudimentary aspects of how pregnancy works.  I believe that if Roe v. Wade is overturned, women are going to begin dying because of the hesitancy to perform life-saving abortions and because women will try to terminate pregnancies outside of the law.  Also, women who have miscarriages are going to suspect.  A politician in my state tried to pass a law where women who miscarried where required to contact the police, thereby prompting an investigation into each miscarriage.  I believe that if Roe is overturned, politician will be emboldened to try to pass similar policies.  

To me, this is not about being pro-life or pro-choice.  On the most basic level, it has to do with what is most valuable to us as a culture: the life of a woman or a zygote.  Ultimately, of course, it is an argument as to whether a woman should have jurisdiction over her own body or not.  We can be nuanced in where we draw the line on the issue, particularly in our own lives.  But, I don't think that's how it will add up if Roe is overturned.  Like Lori Lou is saying, we either have a right to make determinations about our own bodies or we don't.  If zygotes get legal protection, a woman's right to make decisions about the most intimate aspect of her life becomes irrelevant.  

cleo_is_mine
by on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:36 PM

 

moonphases you nailed it. Without healh insurance coverage, costs for Birth Control are around $50-75 (maybe + for brands I dont know!). Women struggling financially can not afford this every month. Granted even if there was an increase in birth control usage, the issue of abortion wouldnt disappear but it would certainly help more women to avoid the need of this difficult decision.

Quoting moonphases:

I think that there are VERY FEW people who use abortion as a form of birth control. Abortion is not a fun or easy process.  Taking a pill every day is so much easier and anyone who has experienced an abortion (unless really, really mentally unstable) will do everything in their power to make sure they are never in that position again. 

The key is making birth control more readily available to women so abortion is unnecessary. Unfortunately, we have a subset that not only want to make abortion illegal, also want birth control to be inaccessible to the poor. These are the very people who want to see cuts to food stamps, WIC, free lunch programs and education for the very fetuses they are advocating be born.

 

 


Anonymous
by Anonymous 28 on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:36 PM
1 mom liked this

dandruff has human DNA , so what? 

heartbeat alone doesn't make a newborn baby. They need to be able to live outside of the womb. There is a reason why a fetus is called a fetus and not called a newborn baby. 


Quoting jessw2010:

umm excuse me, if you looked at my sonogram when I was pregnant and then looked at the sonogram of a woman who was raped there would be no difference. so yes, it is a person worthy of protection,even if you were raped! the "fetus" still has a heartbeat and human dna. . . . .rape makes no difference!

Quoting Bellarose0212:

That's easier to defend than, "A fetus is a person and worthy of protection unless the mother didn't have consensual sex because if she did have consensual sex she should have kept her legs clothes or deal with the consequences. If she was raped, the fetus is no longer a person and no longer worthy of protection, even though the fetus is biologically and developmentally the same no matter how it was concieved." Incest is also difficult because in most cases of incest, the risk of any health issues with the child as a result of incest are slim. Also, how would they enforce those laws? Every woman who wanted an abortion could claim rape or incest and it would be hard/take to long to prove otherwise.Your exception is easier to prove, with documentation of an ectopic pregnancy, life threatening preeclampsia, cancer, etc. from a doctor.

Quoting AllofFive19:++

A fetus is a person and worthy of protection, until that protection threatens the life of the mother carrying that fetus. 

Quoting Bellarose0212:

Okay, but then you are saying that the fetus doesn't really have personhood and are making exceptions to what you deem murder.

A mother's mental health may or may not be in jeopardy because she was raped and may or may not be in jeopardy even if she had consensual sex (but has other obstacles in her life that might make a pregnancy traumatic, like domestic abuse or not enough to go around for her kids or extremely religious parents who may harm her). As soon as you are making exceptions based around life circumstances, it is about judging her life circumstances and deciding if those are good enough reasons to abort. If you are judging whether an abortion is justified, you are giving consenses that the fetus does not have personhood and is not always deserving of protection, as a born child would be. So, that is harder to defend than, a fetus is a person and always worthy of protection.





jessw2010
by Member on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:41 PM

yeah dandruff has human dna, but not a heart beat or arms or legs. just because a baby can't live outside of the womb doesn't make it less of a person. . . . .you can argue that all you want, but that doesn't make you right. it's ignorant people like you that are ruining this country.

Quoting Anonymous:

dandruff has human DNA , so what? 

heartbeat alone doesn't make a newborn baby. They need to be able to live outside of the womb. There is a reason why a fetus is called a fetus and not called a newborn baby. 


Quoting jessw2010:

umm excuse me, if you looked at my sonogram when I was pregnant and then looked at the sonogram of a woman who was raped there would be no difference. so yes, it is a person worthy of protection,even if you were raped! the "fetus" still has a heartbeat and human dna. . . . .rape makes no difference!

Quoting Bellarose0212:

That's easier to defend than, "A fetus is a person and worthy of protection unless the mother didn't have consensual sex because if she did have consensual sex she should have kept her legs clothes or deal with the consequences. If she was raped, the fetus is no longer a person and no longer worthy of protection, even though the fetus is biologically and developmentally the same no matter how it was concieved." Incest is also difficult because in most cases of incest, the risk of any health issues with the child as a result of incest are slim. Also, how would they enforce those laws? Every woman who wanted an abortion could claim rape or incest and it would be hard/take to long to prove otherwise.Your exception is easier to prove, with documentation of an ectopic pregnancy, life threatening preeclampsia, cancer, etc. from a doctor.

Quoting AllofFive19:++

A fetus is a person and worthy of protection, until that protection threatens the life of the mother carrying that fetus. 

Quoting Bellarose0212:

Okay, but then you are saying that the fetus doesn't really have personhood and are making exceptions to what you deem murder.

A mother's mental health may or may not be in jeopardy because she was raped and may or may not be in jeopardy even if she had consensual sex (but has other obstacles in her life that might make a pregnancy traumatic, like domestic abuse or not enough to go around for her kids or extremely religious parents who may harm her). As soon as you are making exceptions based around life circumstances, it is about judging her life circumstances and deciding if those are good enough reasons to abort. If you are judging whether an abortion is justified, you are giving consenses that the fetus does not have personhood and is not always deserving of protection, as a born child would be. So, that is harder to defend than, a fetus is a person and always worthy of protection.


 

 



Anonymous
by Anonymous 28 on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:44 PM

So would abortion be okay if it happens before a heart beat?

Quoting jessw2010:

yeah dandruff has human dna, but not a heart beat or arms or legs. just because a baby can't live outside of the womb doesn't make it less of a person. . . . .you can argue that all you want, but that doesn't make you right. it's ignorant people like you that are ruining this country.

Quoting Anonymous:

dandruff has human DNA , so what? 

heartbeat alone doesn't make a newborn baby. They need to be able to live outside of the womb. There is a reason why a fetus is called a fetus and not called a newborn baby. 


Quoting jessw2010:

umm excuse me, if you looked at my sonogram when I was pregnant and then looked at the sonogram of a woman who was raped there would be no difference. so yes, it is a person worthy of protection,even if you were raped! the "fetus" still has a heartbeat and human dna. . . . .rape makes no difference!

Quoting Bellarose0212:

That's easier to defend than, "A fetus is a person and worthy of protection unless the mother didn't have consensual sex because if she did have consensual sex she should have kept her legs clothes or deal with the consequences. If she was raped, the fetus is no longer a person and no longer worthy of protection, even though the fetus is biologically and developmentally the same no matter how it was concieved." Incest is also difficult because in most cases of incest, the risk of any health issues with the child as a result of incest are slim. Also, how would they enforce those laws? Every woman who wanted an abortion could claim rape or incest and it would be hard/take to long to prove otherwise.Your exception is easier to prove, with documentation of an ectopic pregnancy, life threatening preeclampsia, cancer, etc. from a doctor.

Quoting AllofFive19:++

A fetus is a person and worthy of protection, until that protection threatens the life of the mother carrying that fetus. 

Quoting Bellarose0212:

Okay, but then you are saying that the fetus doesn't really have personhood and are making exceptions to what you deem murder.

A mother's mental health may or may not be in jeopardy because she was raped and may or may not be in jeopardy even if she had consensual sex (but has other obstacles in her life that might make a pregnancy traumatic, like domestic abuse or not enough to go around for her kids or extremely religious parents who may harm her). As soon as you are making exceptions based around life circumstances, it is about judging her life circumstances and deciding if those are good enough reasons to abort. If you are judging whether an abortion is justified, you are giving consenses that the fetus does not have personhood and is not always deserving of protection, as a born child would be. So, that is harder to defend than, a fetus is a person and always worthy of protection.







jessw2010
by Member on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:49 PM

no, it's still a developing baby. it amazes me that if you murder a pregnant woman it's a double homocide, but the mother has the "right" to kill her own baby and if you "kill" a bald eagle egg you get a large fine. . . . .really, we value a bald eagle egg more than human life?

Quoting Anonymous:

So would abortion be okay if it happens before a heart beat?

Quoting jessw2010:

yeah dandruff has human dna, but not a heart beat or arms or legs. just because a baby can't live outside of the womb doesn't make it less of a person. . . . .you can argue that all you want, but that doesn't make you right. it's ignorant people like you that are ruining this country.

Quoting Anonymous:

dandruff has human DNA , so what? 

heartbeat alone doesn't make a newborn baby. They need to be able to live outside of the womb. There is a reason why a fetus is called a fetus and not called a newborn baby. 


Quoting jessw2010:

umm excuse me, if you looked at my sonogram when I was pregnant and then looked at the sonogram of a woman who was raped there would be no difference. so yes, it is a person worthy of protection,even if you were raped! the "fetus" still has a heartbeat and human dna. . . . .rape makes no difference!

Quoting Bellarose0212:

That's easier to defend than, "A fetus is a person and worthy of protection unless the mother didn't have consensual sex because if she did have consensual sex she should have kept her legs clothes or deal with the consequences. If she was raped, the fetus is no longer a person and no longer worthy of protection, even though the fetus is biologically and developmentally the same no matter how it was concieved." Incest is also difficult because in most cases of incest, the risk of any health issues with the child as a result of incest are slim. Also, how would they enforce those laws? Every woman who wanted an abortion could claim rape or incest and it would be hard/take to long to prove otherwise.Your exception is easier to prove, with documentation of an ectopic pregnancy, life threatening preeclampsia, cancer, etc. from a doctor.

Quoting AllofFive19:++

A fetus is a person and worthy of protection, until that protection threatens the life of the mother carrying that fetus. 

Quoting Bellarose0212:

Okay, but then you are saying that the fetus doesn't really have personhood and are making exceptions to what you deem murder.

A mother's mental health may or may not be in jeopardy because she was raped and may or may not be in jeopardy even if she had consensual sex (but has other obstacles in her life that might make a pregnancy traumatic, like domestic abuse or not enough to go around for her kids or extremely religious parents who may harm her). As soon as you are making exceptions based around life circumstances, it is about judging her life circumstances and deciding if those are good enough reasons to abort. If you are judging whether an abortion is justified, you are giving consenses that the fetus does not have personhood and is not always deserving of protection, as a born child would be. So, that is harder to defend than, a fetus is a person and always worthy of protection.


 

 


 



sav820
by Silver Member on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:50 PM

IF the Governments ( taxpayers)  "PAYING" the Bills for it  they sure have that right... If you want a Abortion pay for it yourself..WHY should tax payers have to pay for you being IRRESPONSIBLE??  Abortion is NOT a MEANS of BIRTH CONTROL and should NOT be used as such.

 

And WE shouldn't be supplying OTHER COUNTRIES PAYING & SUBSIDIZING THEIR ABORTIONS.,...

  IF you want to have SEX  Take responsibilty...use BIRTH Control it's NOT like it's NOT already available. it's NOT 1960's-1970s'  they have HUNDREDS of types of BC available NOW..ANY HEALTH DEPT in ANY CITY will Give YOU BIRTH CONTROL. and Condoms FREE  even HIGH SCHOOL HAS CONDOMS FREE.

Our government doesn't OWE any of us ANYTHING.  Responsibility is in YOUR HANDS!! Stop being negligent. where your body is concerned.

 (minus rape incest or emergency situations)

pittsburghnic
by on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:51 PM
1 mom liked this
I absolutely agree.


Quoting jessw2010:

if you support the killing unborn babies for ANY REASON then you ARE pro-choice.


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
drivenleonian
by on Oct. 14, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Pro Choice is just that. Many women have had babies after being raped, etc... Because they are Pro-Life.
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)