s/o 100% against abortion unless it's me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"... I refuse to accept that women are not the masters of their own uteri. I will not stand for a patriarchal government that dictates to me with regard to birth control or emptying my own uterus if I feel I must. Anything else returns women to the status of slaves. A citizen has to have absolute rights to his or her own body."
I agree. I used to be unsure of my stance on this issue, as I always lean toward being pro-life because i do feel that abortion is terminating a life - but I am now sure that I am pro-choice - because how can we trample all over the rights of a woman in favor of the rights of a fetus? If we have to choose between protecting the rights of the two (and we do have to choose), then we have to protect the woman's rights.

What we need to do is eliminate the need for an abortion in the first place.

just like the internal combustion engine ended the need for slavery. some day people who got an abortion will be thought of in the same light as slave-holders. slave holders were human just like people with unwanted pregnancies..they didn't want to suffer and could rationalize the subjugation of an "inferior being"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"... If we have to choose between protecting the rights of the two (and we do have to choose), then we have to protect the woman's rights.

/quote]

And I believe the choice should be to protect the fetus' life, because the right to a life is primary than the right to do something with one's life. It even is listed first in the Constitution:

"the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

The right to a life is first (fetus) and the pursuit of happiness is third (woman's right to do with her body what she will).

So, essentially, a woman can do whatever she wants with her body, but if there is another life involved, that trumps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a thread on terminating beause of severe maternal illness, a poster noted that while she was 100% against abortion, she considered it when she had the same illness. This sentiment is why we call it "anti-choice" when you are against abortion rights and access. The fact that the poster ahs the opportunity to even consider ending her misery is because of activism keeping access to abortion safe and legal. That she could not morally make that decision is fine, the fact is she had a decision to make. So just something for anti-choicers to think about- when you are participating in removing women's access to abortion (by voting for crazies, etc.) No one wants you to have an abortion if you don't want one, but your moral choices should not dictate the choices for everyone.

It's not too different from anti war protesters insulting the very soldiers that protect their freedoms.

I'm opposed to insulting soldiers and I think people who do that are pathetic and self-centered.
But for the record, very few soldiers have actually "protected my freedom." I thank Alice Paul for fighting to give me the right to vote. I thank countless other grassroots feminists for fighting to give me the right to own property, the right to equal employment, and the right to fight back against sexual abuse and rape. I thank the ACLU for fighting to protect my civil liberties. The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, and Korea for example, did nothing to protect those freedoms.

I honor soldiers for their service to our country, but thanks to the policies of administrations over the years (both Democratic and Republican), most (but not all) of our wars have had everything to do with advancing state interests and little to do with actually protecting our freedoms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"... I refuse to accept that women are not the masters of their own uteri. I will not stand for a patriarchal government that dictates to me with regard to birth control or emptying my own uterus if I feel I must. Anything else returns women to the status of slaves. A citizen has to have absolute rights to his or her own body."
I agree. I used to be unsure of my stance on this issue, as I always lean toward being pro-life because i do feel that abortion is terminating a life - but I am now sure that I am pro-choice - because how can we trample all over the rights of a woman in favor of the rights of a fetus? If we have to choose between protecting the rights of the two (and we do have to choose), then we have to protect the woman's rights.

What we need to do is eliminate the need for an abortion in the first place.

just like the internal combustion engine ended the need for slavery. some day people who got an abortion will be thought of in the same light as slave-holders. slave holders were human just like people with unwanted pregnancies..they didn't want to suffer and could rationalize the subjugation of an "inferior being"

I believe we are headed in that direction as well, and technology and medical advances are on our side, as we can see the growing child inside the womb, and understand more and more about fetal development, and have been able to see babies live earlier and earlier outside the womb.

[Anonymous]

As an example: Dick Cheney has a right to LIFE. But the only thing that can keep him alive is a donated heart. Does society have the right to say that if you die, doctors can take your organs to use for others - without your pre-death consent? After all, doesn't his right to LIFE trump your desire to dispose of your own or your loved ones organs the way you see fit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"... I refuse to accept that women are not the masters of their own uteri. I will not stand for a patriarchal government that dictates to me with regard to birth control or emptying my own uterus if I feel I must. Anything else returns women to the status of slaves. A citizen has to have absolute rights to his or her own body."
I agree. I used to be unsure of my stance on this issue, as I always lean toward being pro-life because i do feel that abortion is terminating a life - but I am now sure that I am pro-choice - because how can we trample all over the rights of a woman in favor of the rights of a fetus? If we have to choose between protecting the rights of the two (and we do have to choose), then we have to protect the woman's rights.

What we need to do is eliminate the need for an abortion in the first place.

just like the internal combustion engine ended the need for slavery. some day people who got an abortion will be thought of in the same light as slave-holders. slave holders were human just like people with unwanted pregnancies..they didn't want to suffer and could rationalize the subjugation of an "inferior being"

Aside from the problems with your analogy, the anti-abortion crowd has already opposed the technologies that could eliminate the need in the first place. No to promoting birth control in schools, no to morning after pills, no to including contraception in health care plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"... I refuse to accept that women are not the masters of their own uteri. I will not stand for a patriarchal government that dictates to me with regard to birth control or emptying my own uterus if I feel I must. Anything else returns women to the status of slaves. A citizen has to have absolute rights to his or her own body."
I agree. I used to be unsure of my stance on this issue, as I always lean toward being pro-life because i do feel that abortion is terminating a life - but I am now sure that I am pro-choice - because how can we trample all over the rights of a woman in favor of the rights of a fetus? If we have to choose between protecting the rights of the two (and we do have to choose), then we have to protect the woman's rights.

What we need to do is eliminate the need for an abortion in the first place.

just like the internal combustion engine ended the need for slavery. some day people who got an abortion will be thought of in the same light as slave-holders. slave holders were human just like people with unwanted pregnancies..they didn't want to suffer and could rationalize the subjugation of an "inferior being"

Aside from the problems with your analogy, the anti-abortion crowd has already opposed the technologies that could eliminate the need in the first place. No to promoting birth control in schools, no to morning after pills, no to including contraception in health care plans.

Not no to saying no in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"... I refuse to accept that women are not the masters of their own uteri. I will not stand for a patriarchal government that dictates to me with regard to birth control or emptying my own uterus if I feel I must. Anything else returns women to the status of slaves. A citizen has to have absolute rights to his or her own body."
I agree. I used to be unsure of my stance on this issue, as I always lean toward being pro-life because i do feel that abortion is terminating a life - but I am now sure that I am pro-choice - because how can we trample all over the rights of a woman in favor of the rights of a fetus? If we have to choose between protecting the rights of the two (and we do have to choose), then we have to protect the woman's rights.

What we need to do is eliminate the need for an abortion in the first place.

just like the internal combustion engine ended the need for slavery. some day people who got an abortion will be thought of in the same light as slave-holders. slave holders were human just like people with unwanted pregnancies..they didn't want to suffer and could rationalize the subjugation of an "inferior being"

Aside from the problems with your analogy, the anti-abortion crowd has already opposed the technologies that could eliminate the need in the first place. No to promoting birth control in schools, no to morning after pills, no to including contraception in health care plans.

Not no to saying no in the first place.

So your solution to the "abortion problem" is abstinence education? Good luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"... I refuse to accept that women are not the masters of their own uteri. I will not stand for a patriarchal government that dictates to me with regard to birth control or emptying my own uterus if I feel I must. Anything else returns women to the status of slaves. A citizen has to have absolute rights to his or her own body."
I agree. I used to be unsure of my stance on this issue, as I always lean toward being pro-life because i do feel that abortion is terminating a life - but I am now sure that I am pro-choice - because how can we trample all over the rights of a woman in favor of the rights of a fetus? If we have to choose between protecting the rights of the two (and we do have to choose), then we have to protect the woman's rights.

What we need to do is eliminate the need for an abortion in the first place.

just like the internal combustion engine ended the need for slavery. some day people who got an abortion will be thought of in the same light as slave-holders. slave holders were human just like people with unwanted pregnancies..they didn't want to suffer and could rationalize the subjugation of an "inferior being"

Aside from the problems with your analogy, the anti-abortion crowd has already opposed the technologies that could eliminate the need in the first place. No to promoting birth control in schools, no to morning after pills, no to including contraception in health care plans.

Not no to saying no in the first place.

Saying "no" is not a technology, which was the earlier poster's point.

To your point, we have given abstinence a try as a public policy, and it hasn't taken off like one would hope, even after several thousand years of preaching it.

[Anonymous]

Abstinance is the control of you uterus . If you don't control your uterus it can put you in the position of having to snuff out a helpless baby in what should be the safest place in the world. Even slaves who were considered 3/5 of a person had a life and they didn't commit suicide in massive numbers so they would rather live that horrible life than die.

[Anonymous]

Not no to saying no in the first place.
>>>>>>>>>>>

You are so right. These loose males really need to keep their sperm in their pants. If they would just stop banging every hole that walks by, problem solved. I'm telling you, the government really needs to do something about all this unregulated sperm out there. Could save the taxpayers millions!

[Anonymous]

Has anyone who supports abortion rights ever been persuaded by attempt to equate a slave with an embryo or fetus?

I'm pro-choice, and I agree with the poster above who said that at some point, you just have to draw line, and it's a bit arbitrary, because viability is not a clear category. But anyone who can't distinguish between a slave and an zygote, embryo/fetus needs a lesson in biology before I'm going to listen to his or her opinions about abortion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone who supports abortion rights ever been persuaded by attempt to equate a slave with an embryo or fetus?

I'm pro-choice, and I agree with the poster above who said that at some point, you just have to draw line, and it's a bit arbitrary, because viability is not a clear category. But anyone who can't distinguish between a slave and an zygote, embryo/fetus needs a lesson in biology before I'm going to listen to his or her opinions about abortion.

its exactly the same human failure. subjugation of a helpless soul in order to avoid hardship. people have not changed since the beginning of time....we practice evil and hate to be called on it.

[Anonymous]

10:11, you may go sit with the people who make this decision solely (and soul-ly) on theology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:10:11, you may go sit with the people who make this decision solely (and soul-ly) on theology.

I choose to sit with those who think we have a soul. If we don't have a soul, then Hitler is neither right or wrong. Everybody knows abortion is wrong in their heart, thats why they are so sensitve and defensive about it. Thats why you can't post pictures of aborted babies on T.V., billboards etc.. Everybody knows it is a horrible moral failure that damages your mind and soul. thats the bottom line, everything else is just window dressing and smokescreens.