Are you pro-choice or pro-"life"? — Page 4

blonde - if you define abortion as murder, then yes, it's a terrible reason. But if you don't, then it's basically just saying "there are too many people. I shan't have a baby. Come along dearest, let's use a condom tonight".

But I'm not getting into the "where does life begin?" and "what is abortion really?" debate, because it's tangential to the point that I'm so desperately trying to defend (and the fact that people can't see it as tangential is why it's so tricky to debate). I neither know nor care where life begins, personally, but I want to be able to decide for myself whether or not to have an abortion should I ever find myself pregnant, just as I want to let you decide for yourself that you'd really rather not have an abortion thanks all the same.

EDIT: I'm going quiet now. That's because I'm going out, and I don't want anyone to take my silence as any sort of concession. This is a great thread though; we're passionately putting our points across without name-calling, and it all started with mtf3! Who woulda thunk it?

---

Updated On: 9/11/08 at 10:50 AM

You're right, I am saying "I don't think anyone should be allowed to choose abortion for themselves no matter what the circumstance". And I'm not saying it to force my opinion on people. I'm saying it because it's a fundamental thing we're taught since we're little: Murder is wrong.

---

While I agree with most of the 'pro-choice' agruments, here's another perspective on the issue:

If 'pro-life'ers were truly convinced that they we, as a nation, were killing millions of babies; they would FIRST reform the foster care/adoption system. I think if the foster care system wasn't so messed up and the adoption process wasn't insanely expensive (and closed to the hundreds of LGBT families wanting to adopt), women MAY decide to have the child and give it out to adoption more often. However, NO ONE in the 'pro-life' movement even mentions the foster care/adoption system and so, for me, I can't see evidence that we Americans are too concerned with the life of a child.

Furthermore, IMO, if you have never been in the situation where you had to make a decision to terminate a pregnancym, you shouldn't get to have a voice in the matter. Period.

---

I'm "pro-choice", but I'm not "pro-abortion", as the so-called "right-to-life" like to call it.

No one thinks abortion is a "good" thing. But sometimes it is least catastrophic alternative.

I hate rap music, but I don't believe it should be illegal.

I think tattoos are disgusting, but if you want to permanently disfigure yourself, you have the right.

"I'll be bold enough to state that abortion is NEVER an easy choice, and no woman really and truly ever WANTS to have one."

I'm sorry, Mistress, but you're incorrect.

I had an abortion, it was an easy choice, and I truly wanted it.

thanks God I could have it. No regrets.

---

I'm pro-choice, even though I don't think I'd be able to have an abortion myself.

But like previous posters said, it's my choice, not the government's choice.

Like Jon said, just because one is pro-choice does not mean they are pro-abortion.

Jane, I had one when I was 19. I wasn't happy about it, but at the time to me it was the right thing for me to do.

---

Thanks for telling me, StockardFan.

I was extremely happy about mine because I knew that I didn't want a baby.

And yes-I used the same birth control I had been using for two years with the same man but I guess it's not foolproof.

---

That's the thing, none of it is 100% foolproof.

You know, that really IS the thing here. Here I was, doing what I could to prevent a pregnancy, using the same methods (I used 2 methods at once to be extra safe) and I still got pregnant.

---

I agree with Weez on just about every point posted- especially about the grey areas in the two options we've been given to label our support on a rather complex issue. I've never thought it was a black or white, yes or no issue, and forcing us into either a "Pro Life" or a "Pro Choice" camp creates a lot of ambivalence caused almost entirely by semantics. What it comes down to in my head is that there are three points of view to choose from: You're either Anti-Abortion (no abortion for anyone, ever, regardless of cause, because it's murder), Pro-Abortion (abortion is a perfectly acceptable form of ongoing birth control and why the heck won't everyone accept that?), or Pro-Choice (choose your own adventure based on your personal moral code and beliefs).

For the record, I place myself firmly in the Pro-Choice camp, and whether or not I would choose to have an abortion is completely irrelevant- as it should be when setting legislation. I also realize I'm trying to distill a very complex issue into sound bytes, but whatever.

Now for the opening of an extra-large can of worms... The biggest issue I have with the absoluteness of the Anti-Abortion / Pro-Life camp is this (playing Devil's advocate here): IF we theorize that the stance of conception = child is correct, and IF we subscribe to a religious or moral code that states that terminating such life is a sin, AND if abortion is 100% illegal: is morality in the absence of free will morality? I don't think it is. Doing what is "right" because you have no choice not to doesn't make one a moral person. Doing what is "right" in the face of an opportunity not to, however- that to me is the core of moral living and why it baffles me that the religious communities want to make so many things illegal (whether we are talking abortion, or same-sex marriage, etc.). Not having any religious background whatsoever, this may sound naive, but it just seems that churches would want people to make the right choice (whatever they define it to be) rather than take away free will which I *think* is a component of most major religions. Whew. That wasn't a tangent or anything.

---

"it's always stated very clearly that new life begins when a sperm fertilizes an egg. "

At that point, and for some time after, it is not a baby. It has the potential to be a baby, but for quite some time it's a mass of cell tissue not unlike a bloodclot. I don't believe that if you have that mass removed from your body you are killing a human being.

That's my personal belief and I'm not trying to force it on anyone.




It can't be said any better than that.

---

Wow, what's with all the analogies to blood clots? It couldn't be further from the truth. Blood clots are essentially dead tissue.

The fertilized egg is a mass of cells growing and changing.

If it was anything like a blood clot, there'd be no stem cell debates.