Back-Alley Abortions in 2011: How Anti-Choice Zealots Force Women to Go to Dangerous Clinics Like Dr. Kermit Gosnell's

I've spoken about reproductive rights before, but always with the understanding that some people out there are Pro-Life. I haven't been respectful of that position, but I've at least tried not to judge it too hard.

To be clear, my definition of Pro-Life is NOT someone who is against abortion, but against women having the freedom to CHOOSE an abortion.

Everyone is against abortion. EVERYONE. No one ever wants to have one and if there is a tiny minority out there who are using it as their ONLY method of birth control, I don't want them contributing to the gene pool anyway.

That said, the freedom to choose is continually under assault in the US, with government funding non-existent for it (can't fund baby-killing, don't ya know?) Ironically, the same asshats who are against any sort of government subsidy for abortion are also against WELFARE, which means that a poor woman who can't afford an abortion and who will be FORCED to carry a child she doesn't want and/or can't support will have no help for the child once it is born. So they want to force women to be broodmares, but then take no responsibility for the child after it's born.

Every day, doctors who provide abortions are threatened with DEATH. The graduating classes of medical schools are given leaflets threatening them with what will happen if they choose to help women who have been raped, victims of incest, whose lives are in danger or, MOST IMPORTANTLY, who simply don't want to carry a child.

To be very, very clear here - to me, there are no exceptions to abortion. As Doug Stanhope once said about those who are in favor of it only in cases of rape and incest, "What, it's only okay if the father is an asshole?"

Women have the right to have sex as freely as they wish to. Yes, they should take reasonable precautions against pregnancy but a) birth control doesn't always work and b) someone else's sex life is NONE OF MY FUCKING BUSINESS. Or yours.

Either a woman's body is hers or it isn't. After seeing this MURDER case and seeing women in the US going back to a pre-Roe Vs. Wade society, I no longer have ANY gray area here. Well, just one.

If a woman gives birth to a child with fetal alcohol syndrome or addicted to a controlled substance, I'm willing to discuss it as child abuse once it's breathing on its own outside of her body, but even there I feel as though it's a slippery slope. It's telling a woman that her body is no longer hers once she's pregnant and I just don't know if I can be behind that. I almost feel as though there shouldn't be any government support for women who do this if they keep custody of the child, but again, it's a VERY slippery slope, :( and I'm willing to hear other thoughts on this aspect of it and this aspect alone.

This is my line in the sand, friends' list. I don't mind if you believe that life begins at conception (even though I disagree) and work to give women other options. I'm 100% in favor of women having the freedom to HAVE THE BABY if that's what they wish to do - reproduction should never be a financial concern, even though it always is, :(. The issue here is about giving women the freedom to be able to choose what's right for them and what they will be able to live with.

However, if you identify as Pro-Life (rather than Pro-Woman, which is how I identify because Pro-Choice has become synonymous with Pro-Abortion), and are someone who actively demonstrates against abortion, who supports politicians who vote against my right to choose and who believes that every pregnancy should end in a baby regardless of the wishes and/or physical and mental well-being of the woman carrying that baby, please defriend me now, as I don't want to be anywhere near you, even virtually.

Reproductive rights must be absolute and the rights of the born must outweigh the rights of the unborn, 100% of the time. Otherwise, women are nothing more than broodmares.

Neigh.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Your opinion is more than welcome here (I actually think you're right about a lot of things), but I'm going to respectfully request that you delete this comment and repost it with another icon.

Nazi imagery isn't welcome in my journal under any circumstances.

Everyone is against abortion. EVERYONE.

I'm not. To me, it's unpleasant on the order of root canal or heart surgery, but I'm not against either of them. I think abortion is a good thing, and I think the framing of it as a "tragedy" has given the forced-birthers a huge PR victory.

No one ever wants to have one and if there is a tiny minority out there who are using it as their ONLY method of birth control, I don't want them contributing to the gene pool anyway.

Yeah, because women are never in coercive relationships where their men sabotage their birth control or anything like that. Or brainwashed against birth control by fundie xtian or whackjob-Catholic upbringings, because planning to have non-procreative sex is a "sin" (though somehow they manage to justify the abortion).

Any form of "I'm pro-choice, but..." = "I'm in favor of legal abortion but I just can't resist commenting on all those irresponsible sluts out there who don't do what I think they should be doing with their bodies." I don't think it's any of your business, or your other commenters', how many abortions a woman has or why.

Okay, this icon I love. :)

And you're right. I have no right to judge any woman for what she does with her body. I'm not living her life.

Still, my 'gene pool' argument has gotten at least one person in my offline life to reconsider their position on the topic of restricting abortion for those who have more than one, so I can't quite bring myself to get rid of it.

Thanks for your thoughts & for re-posting, :).

So you're proud of making other people think women should be restricted to one abortion?

How does this make you any different from the people you claim you can't be near and what gives you the right to decide how many abortions a woman can have?

Oh and I'm sick of the "but they use it for birth control!" B.S. It is just that- B.S.

Um, no - you misread me.

I was arguing with someone offline who was IN FAVOR of restricting abortion to only one, but when I used the gene pool argument, he backed off and told me he was 100% pro-choice (whereas before he'd only been 95%.

No one has any right to judge any woman for what she does with her body. EVER.

My right to tell someone else what to do ends where their body begins and the rights of the born outweigh the rights of the unborn 100% of the time.

Anything else is a slippery slope that I'm doing my best not to step on (even though I fail with that from time to time, obviously).

My mistake. Apologies that I misread you, but there seem to be a lot of comments here that say "I'm pro-choice but..."

I getcha, :).

You're welcome.

I think it's a pity that most people have to be convinced by framing the argument as "We're actually punishing the person more effectively this way!" I think punishment has its place, but, at least in U.S. politics, it's given too much emphasis over solutions that actually work.

BTW, I hope you don't mind, but for anyone who didn't see my original comment and was wondering: The icon was of Hitler with the words "My mom chose life." My sense of humor is probably darker than yours; I respect your choice not to have that icon on your journal, but I wanted to make clear to anyone wondering that I wasn't simply throwing around swastikas or the like gratuitously. (FTR, I'm ethnically Jewish.)

Definitely a pity, no question, especially since it really is no one's business, :(.

In the US, we appear to be going backwards where abortion rights are concerned (though I don't think that we ever got very far with them), :(.

And I don't mind, :).

For or Against

Back-Alley Abortions in 2011: How Anti-Choice Zealots Force Women to Go to Dangerous Clinics Like Dr. Kermit Gosnell's

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject