"Brr-footed and Pregnunt"The South Still Trying to Control Women

[AlteredEgo]

Abortion Measure Heads To Governor

I'm almost too angry to even make a coherent post. When will they learn that it is unneccesary (and impossible) to control female sexuality? I do believe that's what's truly behind anti-abortion movements. If it were really about saving lives, why did they take so long to make it legal to simply abandon unwanted babies with law-enforcement officials, and firefighters? I remember being a little girl when I first heard the suggestion being debated at my supper table. Pro-life has never been about babies, it has always been about controlling women, and the women who have been blinded and who would deny their sisters the right to control their own bodies sickens me.

These new tactics equate to terrorism. How dare these fucking bastards!? Read:

The bill also tightens consent laws for minors and requires abortion providers to perform a sonogram and give the pregnant woman an opportunity to listen to a fetal heartbeat. It is just one of several abortion laws being considered across the country.


South Carolina lawmakers this week discussed a measure that would force a woman to view ultrasound images of the fetus before undergoing an abortion. In Oklahoma, a House committee on Tuesday approved several abortion measures, including one that would define abortion, in part, as a procedure in which a drug is injected into a fetus' heart to cause death.


And in Kentucky, a bill being considered would require that a woman considering an abortion be informed that at 20 weeks an "unborn child has the physical structures necessary to experience pain." The normal gestation period is 40 weeks.


This makes me feel very confrontational. I'm contacting the ACLU to find out what they plan to do.

 

[SpoiledPrincess]

I'm of the opinion that no one has the right to tell a grown woman what to do with her body, and I'm sorry but that also includes the father of the baby, she's the one who has to carry it, give birth to it and in most cases be the main care giver for it for at least the next 16 years. I think abortion should be available on demand, a lot of the later and more traumatic abortions are late precisely because it can be so difficult to get an abortion. Imagine if we tried dictating to men on what they had to do about something that was enclosed in their body?

 

[rob_just_rob]

Pro-life has never been about babies

Agreed. A great way to make this point is to point out how many of the groups trying to make abortion illegal are the same groups that are in favour of eliminating state-provided school breakfasts, welfare (young single mothers are disproportionate welfare recipients), and the like.

In other words... once the baby is born, they couldn't give a rats ass whether it starves, gets a decent education, or has to live in poverty.

 

[Gillette]

What an appalling attempt to scare or guilt women into continuing an unwanted pregnancy.

Unfortunately I can't entirely object to their suggestions. The key to any decision is being informed. These are unpleasant tactics they're trying to introduce but none of the information mentioned being given the pregnant women is untrue. Once the fetal stage of development is reached the details of abortion are gory to say the least. The mother shouldn't have these things shoved in her face but I do think it her responsibility to inform herself as to what occurs. If she does this then she can face her decision with confidence and not be cowed by those who seek to shock her.

Consent is an entirely different issue. The only consent ever required should be that of the pregnant woman.

I think the insistence on the mother viewing the ultrasound is pointless. She's there for an abortion, she already knows she's pregnant.


*Side note - while checking on a few websites I read one that mentions the stage at which tastebuds developed that said "the baby may savor it's mothers meals". Unless the fetus is licking a leak in the umbilical cord - NO.

Where do they get this shit?

 

[DC_DEEP]

I wonder if those sponsoring those particular bills would be willing to include an amendment to the bill which would require that they provide all medical care and expenses up to and including the birth, and also require that they adopt those babies?

I understand that it would not be a viable concession, and that a woman seeking abortion obviously prefers not to carry to term; but if the entirety of financial and social responsibility were placed squarely upon those who want to make the law, I doubt it would have a chance of passing.

For what it is worth, I am personally opposed to abortion, but I'm not deluded enough to think that my personal views entitle me to make those personal decisions for any other human being. My body, my decision. Your body, your decision.

And SpoiledPrincess, I agree with you about the men having a voice in the decision - guys, if you are opposed to abortion, do not put yourself in a situation to impregnate a woman who may make that choice. Pretty fucking simple, right?

 

[Lex]

... My body, my decision. Your body, your decision.

...

As it should be.

 

[DC_DEEP]

*Side note - while checking on a few websites I read one that mentions the stage at which tastebuds developed that said "the baby may savor it's mothers meals". Unless the fetus is licking a leak in the umbilical cord - NO.

Where do they get this shit?

From some of their comments, I get the impression that "they" really don't understand anatomy - they think the mouth is the "in", the pelvic area is the "out", and that in between is some kind of formless void. You eat something, it just kinda drops down into this empty space, also where babies grow, and the poop magically comes out the correct space, the pee magically comes out the right space, and the baby just magically pops out of the "nether place", a little like the coin sorting machine at the bank.

Sigh.

 

[madame_zora]

I watched this last night. Anybody who believes any of this is about the preciousness of life is retarded, these fundamentalists are the same fucktards supporting war. Gimme a fucking break.

Yeah, I'll agree to be a breeding unit for my government when they agree to support me 100%- providing both me and my child with medical care, food, lodging, education, transportation, and dammit I want free cable too! Oh, not willing to do that, then get the FUCK out of my uterus!

 

[Shelby]

I'm entirely pro-choice but it's no stretch for me to see how others may have ethical problems with abortion.

I will say this though. If the woman has complete say in this manner and the man has none, he should be able to legally opt out of any responsibility if he wishes.

 

[DC_DEEP]

I'm entirely pro-choice but it's no stretch for me to see how others may have ethical problems with abortion.

I will say this though. If the woman has complete say in this manner and the man has none, he should be able to legally opt out of any responsibility if he wishes.

Shelby, you have hit on a complex issue that I discuss with my partner from time to time. The legal aspects, and how they are interpreted by the activist pro-life judges is fascinating. Out of one side of the mouth, they want to claim that two lesbians do not have a legal right to marry. But if a lesbian couple opts for artificial insemination, one bears a child, and they subsequently split up, the courts have been known to require the non-biological lesbian to pay child support.

But I say again, if a guy does not want the responsibility of making a joint decision about abortion, or a concensus decision about legal responsibility, he should not do anything which can put him in a position to have to make those decisions. It's easy to tell people "if you don't want a baby, don't make one." But will telling them do any good?

Zora - perhaps some of these idiot legislators can come up with this sort of solution: if the woman does not want to gestate the embryo, and they do not want her to kill that embryo, they should offer her the option of allowing them to remove the embryo and artificially gestate it to term, and then take care of it from there. Oh, our technology can't do that? Then tough shit, it's her body, she should have a right to decide what is allowed to grow inside it.

 

[Dave NoCal]

For these creeps, life is "sacred" from conception to birth.

 

[B_big dirigible]

I'm entirely pro-choice but it's no stretch for me to see how others may have ethical problems with abortion.

An essential part of the politics of outrage is the automatic and emphatic denial of any possibility that there can be a counterargument. Therefore, ipso facto, any opponent, or anyone with even a slightly divergent opinion, must be a madman, idiot, or villain. Very simple and logical. Irrefutable, even, once the initial postulate is accepted.

It's no way to make public policy, but it certainly does ease the task of dodging life's major intellectual hurdles.

In the abortion case, there are three people involved, or two people involved, or only one person involved. The correct course for the law to follow obviously depends on whether it's a one-, two-, or three-body problem. But there is no way, based on first principles (rather than implicit assumptions, i.e. prejudices), to decide which model (1, 2, or 3) is appropriate. If one is arbitrarily picked, everything else is easy. But still arbitrary.

 

[RideRocket]

For these creeps, life is "sacred" from conception to birth.

'Creeps'? I also happen to believe that life begins at conception. I've always found it rather interesting how society conveniently renames or uses scientific terms (fetus, blastocyst, zygote, embryo,etc.) for a human life to make it more palatable when we abort it.

As I've said before though, however much I disagree with abortion, I support one's right to make that decision.

 

[madame_zora]

I'm entirely pro-choice but it's no stretch for me to see how others may have ethical problems with abortion.

Oh, me too. I con completely see how someone would be against having an abortion, or having ehtical problems with it, for themselves or an impregnated woman with whom they were the father.

I will say this though. If the woman has complete say in this manner and the man has none, he should be able to legally opt out of any responsibility if he wishes.

I agree with this too, and just as emphatically. If a man does not WANT to be a father, he should not be expected to. If the woman has ethical problems with abortion, that's her conscience, not his. I don't think, however, that if a man is pro-life and the woman does not want to carry the baby, that there's any way she should be forced to do so.

Zora - perhaps some of these idiot legislators can come up with this sort of solution: if the woman does not want to gestate the embryo, and they do not want her to kill that embryo, they should offer her the option of allowing them to remove the embryo and artificially gestate it to term, and then take care of it from there. Oh, our technology can't do that? Then tough shit, it's her body, she should have a right to decide what is allowed to grow inside it.

Wow, I'm impressed! That's the first actual solution I have ever heard suggested. I can't think of anyone who would object to allowing a fertilised egg to be removed and given to someone who wants it- I think that's an amazing solution. But yes, until the time comes that that becomes an option, abortion is all we have. It's a bad solution to a bad problem, but we also don't have the technology of 100% effective birth control, and don't even get me started on abstinence. If MEN were offered abstinence as the only viable option for anything, it would be sneered at, and promtly rejected.

Of course, we could suggest that everybody just be gay, haha.

 

[deleted13797]

I'm entirely pro-choice but it's no stretch for me to see how others may have ethical problems with abortion.

I will say this though. If the woman has complete say in this manner and the man has none, he should be able to legally opt out of any responsibility if he wishes.

Quoted for truth.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Abortion is a messy issue, but guilt-tripping women is not going to do anything but ruin lives further. Of course, this was probably put through by men who can spunk all day long and not worry about the consequences. I'd have thought better education and protection measures should be put in place. (Yep, condom adverts).

Anyway, what about pregnancy due to rape cases?!?

Damn.

 

[B_Hickboy]

I hereby declare this thread laughable.

 

[Nitrofiend]

My stance on Abortion (short and sweet, and posted once):

I am 100% in favor. The only thing that irritates me is how ignorant pro-lifers force pro-choicers to come up with absurd loopholes IE "the baby has no feeling at this stage therefore it can be terminated". Just call it what it is. It's murder, I understand that. Stop pussyfooting with trimesters and all that jazz.

But what makes killing unborn children any less holy than:

-Sending our youth to die in Iraq

-Killing Iraqi women and children

-Denying support for healthcare services (hey, all life is sacred and must be protected, riiiight?)

Hm? I believe I've stated my point. It's just another "necessary" evil that oversteps most people's bounds on morality. Some can flex their morals, and others can't. But it's no one's business who can or who can't, and neither should be forced to change their beliefs. So believe what you want, and I'll leave you alone as long as you leave me alone too.

 

[BIGBULL29]

Abortion and homosexuality: They are the only subjects that conservatives seem to discuss. Oh, oh, oh...I forgot about how they can ensure that their money stays with them.

Take away their money and see what "fine" people they are. See how much they love God then.:biggrin1:

Materialism is a mortal sin in Christianity. How did all those verses get skipped over?

 

[SpeedoGuy]

In other words... once the baby is born, they couldn't give a rats ass whether it starves, gets a decent education, or has to live in poverty.

The ugly underbelly of so-called "pro-life" conservative philosophy.