I think people should, in general, choose not to have abortions

[el_bryanto]

I think the decision should 100% be up to the woman involved; I don't think that Abortion should be restricted, I vote against Abortion Restrictions whenever possible. I think the contraception should be made much more readily available than it is is (including Plan B and other forms of Emergency Contraception), and I think that the Federal Government needs to aggressively pursue Anti Abortion Groups that engage in violence.

That said I was adopted as was my brother and sister; I was raised religiously. It some point as a fetus develops it stops being just a growth and becomes a potential Human. I don't know when that is; but I know that me and my kin were unwanted pregnancies - and I'm more or less glad to be alive. I could have been aborted (I was born a few years before Roe Vs. Wade, but I was in the North west, so they could have gone to Canada?), but wasn't. That colors my position on Abortion; I could have been aborted.

It seems like right now at DU, what is required is not just that you vote the right way (as I clearly would) but that you have the same opinion on the practice of Abortion (which I clearly don't).

Obviously I don't expect this to be well received; but better to be honest I suppose, even if that puts me on the outs here. Please forgive any inexactness in language - trying to be as clear as I can.

Bryant

[PCIntern]

1. I give you credit for your guts...

and sometimes, 'guts' is enough.

[ann---]

2. I ran into that same problem

here merely because I said I PERSONALLY would not have an abortion and would try to discourage family members from doing so (and offer to take the child). I also stated I was PRO-CHOICE for all other women. I was crucified by a person in the original post who wanted to CENSOR speech here by not having any thread that did not 100% agree with a woman's right to choose.

[HERVEPA]

48. Not your business to discourage family members. Their choice, not yours.

That's what's wrong with your position, not the fact that you wiouldn't personally have one.

[elehhhhna]

81. all hypothetical baloney

I'd offer to take the baby. Riiiiiiight.

[rbixby]

156. I'd have the baby for them!

Oh wait, no, that wouldn't work

[ann---]

394. Yes, it is

If I love them and want what's best for them, I would suggest NOT having an abortion and giving the baby up for adoption. However, the final CHOICE is always theirs regardless of what I say to them. There is NOTHING wrong with the position that a life is a life and if one wants to CHOOSE to have an abortion - the law allows it, but I would appeal to the person's conscience and ability to handle having the abortion.

[HERVEPA]

395. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Women handle an abortion

much better than an adoption.

[MadrasT]

397. If you love them and want what's best for them, you should keep you nose out of their business.

It is exactly none of your business what choice another woman makes about her pregnancy.

None.

[ananda]

76. Pro choice means just that .. choice.

That means that everyone has the right to choose against abortion as well.

[boston bean]

90. They have a right to choose against abortion for themselves.

Or they choose for themselves to have one.


That is pro choice.

[Silent3]

267. Making a choice "for yourself" doesn't mean making it free from all input from anyone else.

It's not a crime to offer your opinion to someone else so long as they're receptive.

Besides, what opinions do you have that aren't based on influences from other people anyway? Is there some special cutoff age when people should stop telling other people things that might change their opinion on having an abortion? Is there a special rule that a person has to ask you first about abortion before you offer your opinion? Is there a special time window around when a person might decide to have an abortion in which input from other people is forbidden?

This whole gambit to shut people down who are offering opinions you don't like by telling them that something is someone else's choice (I've seen this come up with other issues like religion, not just abortion) is simply a bit of rhetorical handwaving that ends up not making any sense if you think about it much.

[boston bean]

268. Limiting choice and shaming women is NOT pro choice.

It is anti choice.

[Silent3]

285. I hardly consider offering an opinion to be "limiting" or "shaming"

I give women credit for having stronger minds, not so easily limited or shamed.

[boston bean]

286. I suppose you feel this way about civil rights, gay rights?

Words mean nothing. Ok.....

[Silent3]

303. Can you give me an example...

...where someone, say, suggesting that another person consider adoption rather than abortion would at all parallel someone telling another person that they should be a second-class citizen?

I see where you're trying to go, but I don't think the parallel is close enough for your analogy to make much sense.

[boston bean]

307. Well, abortion is about woman autonomy and agency.

Im sure if you think about it long enough you could find a parallel yourself.

[Silent3]

312. Abortion isn't that simple -- even if for well-motivated reasons you want it to be

Unless you assign absolutely zero value to an embryo or a fetus until the very moment it emerges alive from a woman's body (at which point it would magically, instantaneously go from zero to fully-protected human value), abortion isn't 100% about a pregnant woman and nothing else.

I think a woman's autonomy is very important, which is why I'm pro choice, but I think late term pregnancies have enough value as developing human life that some advocacy on behalf of that life is certainly understandable. The civil rights and gay rights issues you offer as a parallel have no similar complication.

[boston bean]

314. The law is very clear on when women can access an abortion

I agree with the law. Don't you?

You are getting into anti choice arguments, fear mongering that women are killing live viable babies on a whim..

I'm tuning out soon.

[Silent3]

323. Are you saying you're fine with the laws (at least the more liberal ones...

...where Republicans haven't gone crazy) as they are now? If you're saying you agree with the laws that place some minimal restrictions on late term abortions, then yes, I agree with you on those laws too.

[boston bean]

324. No I am not fine with any restrictions on abortion which seek to undermine

Roe v wade.

[PeaceNikki]

325. I think we should follow Canada's lead - ZERO laws/restrictions. None.

On January 28, 2014, Canada will celebrate 26 years of reproductive freedom. Since our Supreme Court struck down Canada's abortion law in 1988, the country's experience is proof that laws against abortion are unnecessary. A full generation of Canadians has lived without a law and are better off because of it.

Canada is the first country in the world to prove that abortion care can be ethically and effectively managed as part of standard healthcare practice, without being controlled by any civil or criminal law. Our success is a role model to the world.

After 26 years with no legal restrictions on abortion whatsoever:
- Doctors and women handle abortion care responsibly.
- Abortion rates are fairly low and have steadily declined since 1997.
- Almost all abortions occur early in pregnancy.
- Maternal deaths and complications from abortion are very low.
- Abortion care is fully funded and integrated into the healthcare system (improving accessibility and safety).
- Further legal precedents have advanced women's equality by affirming an
unrestricted right to abortion.
- Public support for abortion rights has increased.

Responsible abortion care: Since 1988, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) has successfully managed abortion just as it does for every other medical procedure -- by applying policy and encouraging medical discretion for doctors, subject to a standard code of ethics.

Doctors abide by CMA policy and guidelines, and follow best medical practices based on validated research and clinical protocols. Criminal laws are inappropriate and harmful in medicine because they constrain care and negatively impact the health of patients.

http://www.rabble.ca/columnists/2013/01/benefits-decriminalizing-abortion

[Silent3]

337. Even without criminal laws, there are "CMA policy and guidelines"...

...which discourage late term abortions, and plenty of doctors who don't want to do them except under exceptional circumstances. Don't such things end up amounting to strongly discouraging late term abortions, what some absolutists in this thread might call "interfering" with the mother's choice?

[PeaceNikki]

339. of course, ffs. trust. them.

[Silent3]

342. That kind of trust isn't out of line with the OP for this thread. n/t

[PeaceNikki]

343. I don't see it that way.

[idwiyo]

318. OK. Right now there is at least one person somewhere on a donor waiting list who needs

a part of your lung, and they WILL be dead if you don't donate it. There is another one who needs your kidney. And another one in need of liver transplant. They WILL die unless you go under the knife. Actually you MUST go under the knife because these are living. breathing human beings and their lives have a lot of value.

So, if it's OK for you to volunteer my body as an incubator with legs to save a foetus, it's definitely OK to force you to donate save people who are already here, regardless what you think about it. No?

[Silent3]

321. Merely expressing, as in the OP...

...that you think adoption might be preferable is hardly akin to forcing someone to be an incubator.

[idwiyo]

335. It's trying to shame and guilt-trip them into becoming one. It's about maintaning a stigma,

an attempt to make any woman look like a murderous selfish monster for aborting unwanted pregnancy.

And never mind that only women are repeatedly told that what they want doesn't matter, that something else has more right to their body than they do.

[PeaceNikki]

322. What percentage of abortions are late-term and why are they performed?

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html



Don't you think woman and their doctors can be trusted to make moral decisions?

Trust women.

[Silent3]

328. Laws have to cover unusual circumstances.

I think it's rare for mothers to beat their children too. That doesn't make it an insult against all women that their are laws to protect children against parental abuse.

[PeaceNikki]

329. trust women. There should be zero restrictions. None.

On January 28, 2014, Canada will celebrate 26 years of reproductive freedom. Since our Supreme Court struck down Canada's abortion law in 1988, the country's experience is proof that laws against abortion are unnecessary. A full generation of Canadians has lived without a law and are better off because of it.

Canada is the first country in the world to prove that abortion care can be ethically and effectively managed as part of standard healthcare practice, without being controlled by any civil or criminal law. Our success is a role model to the world.

After 26 years with no legal restrictions on abortion whatsoever:
- Doctors and women handle abortion care responsibly.
- Abortion rates are fairly low and have steadily declined since 1997.
- Almost all abortions occur early in pregnancy.
- Maternal deaths and complications from abortion are very low.
- Abortion care is fully funded and integrated into the healthcare system (improving accessibility and safety).
- Further legal precedents have advanced women's equality by affirming an
unrestricted right to abortion.
- Public support for abortion rights has increased.

Responsible abortion care: Since 1988, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) has successfully managed abortion just as it does for every other medical procedure -- by applying policy and encouraging medical discretion for doctors, subject to a standard code of ethics.

Doctors abide by CMA policy and guidelines, and follow best medical practices based on validated research and clinical protocols. Criminal laws are inappropriate and harmful in medicine because they constrain care and negatively impact the health of patients.

http://www.rabble.ca/columnists/2013/01/benefits-decriminalizing-abortion

[idwiyo]

345. K&R

[seabeyond]

333. find me a late term abortion ever, that did not have to do with health of mom or health

of baby. you are arguing a none existent issue and holding it up for people to defend. it doesnt happen. that simple. when you prove it does, then we can have a debate on this. but it is nasty to argue something to make it sound as if it is frivolous, when it is nonexisting.

[seabeyond]

336. pisses me off almost always men arguing abortion bring in the late term nonsense.

thank you for the graph. a person does not even have to read but only look at the picture. but, you wont hear the poster back off his argument that is bogus in the first place.

[JaneyVee]

221. I agree with your position. One can be personally against abortion while being pro choice.

I'm 100% pro choice, which is just that, choice.

[Puzzledtraveller]

3. If it's personal to a woman so should the feelings we all have about it.

Respect all around gos a long way.

[Brickbat]

4. Any of us could have been aborted; you're not the only one.

No matter where or when we were born, any of us could have been aborted.

[el_bryanto]

5. That's true - but I think you look at it differently when you know, 100%, your Birth Mother

didn't want you.

Bryant

[The Midway Rebel]

347. My wife gave up her daughter to adoption when she was a teenager.

It was not that she did want the child. In her case, she was 16 years old and she knew she was not ready to be a mother and there were plenty of families that wanted a child and they were ready for it. Want had nothing to do with it. It might have been the same with you.

[OregonBlue]

373. I fail to see what your mother not wanting you has to do with abortion? She made a choice. Other

women make different choices. That's the whole point. I was an unplanned child that my parents chose to keep. So what, they could have chosen not to have the baby and of course, I would never have been here much less been able to lament not being born.

If you are opposed to abortion, don't get a woman pregnant unless you have mutually agreed to have a child.

[winter is coming]

6. +1. I was an unplanned child. My parents never made any secret of it. n/t

[ieoeja]

7. People are sick and tired of being told they are "immoral" or evil for wanting an abortion.

Why is it so difficult for you to say you support the right to abortion without adding the fact that you thing abortion is wrong?

[el_bryanto]

9. I suppose because it feels dishonest. nt

[procon]

8. Double down...

yeah, that'll work.

As a wise old lady, let me offer some sage advice to you; as a young man; please feel free to "practice Abortion (sp)"... or not, it's entirely your choice.

However, don't presume that ANY woman wants to listen to one more man preach and proselytize his person religious conviction when it comes to our reproductive rights. It is none of your business.

[LiberalEsto]

10. I agree with you

because you feel the choice should be left up to the woman.

My mother had an abortion.

She was a WW2 refugee living in a displaced persons camp in Germany in the late 1940s. She and my father and her mother were trying to avoid being sent back to Estonia because it could have meant death or deportation to Siberia at the hands of the Stalinists.

They were trying to emigrate to the UK, because they both spoke English. Unfortunately, my mother was pregnant, and the UK would admit married couples with only one dependent. So either my grandmother had to be left behind to starve in Germany or be deported to Estonia to an uncertain fate, or my mother would have to get an abortion. She loved her mother very much, and chose to have an abortion. Heaven only knows what risks she took to undergo it. She only talked to me about it once.

As the fates would have it, before they could get papers to go to the UK, they managed to find a sponsor to come to the U.S. I don't know whether the U.S. would have allowed two dependents or one, but the three of them came here in 1949 and I was born a few years later.

[Tikki]

11. Do you know for sure that you all were unwanted pregnancies..because some very young girls would..

have wanted to keep and raise their baby..but that was not always going to happen.

I apologize for bringing this up if you all know everything about the circumstances of your and your siblings births.


Tikki

[el_bryanto]

12. From what I understand that is my Brothers situation

I only know fragments, and I'm not one who's ever felt the need to reconnect with my Birth Mother.

Bryant

[Tikki]

13. You have never connected with your birthmother, pretty hard to be 100% then..

I didn't mean to high-jack your OP.
There are like a million things that go on in the life of every woman..before, during and after a
pregnancy…
We need to not assume…
Tikki

[notadmblnd]

222. I agree with you. My grandmothers baby was stolen from her

She was an unwed mother in the 1940's and she had been raped by her sisters husband. My great grandfather threw her out of the house. She got a job working nights and had the baby. One day while she was sleeping the baby wandered outside and the neighbors called the authorities. When she went to court thinking she was going to get her child back, she was tricked into signing papers giving her away. My mother found her years later after my grandmother has passed away.

All my life, my grandmother was a very sad person, I never knew why she was so melancholy and wished often to die. I met my aunt a couple of times. She looked almost exactly like my aunt Sharon who I loved very much. I never got close to my Aunt Janice (the child who was taken fro y grandmother), it bothered me that she so admired and loved the people who helped steal her away. y mother keep in contact with her though.

[riderinthestorm]

86. So you don't know if you were unwanted. Your birth mother may have had a terminal illness

For all you know. Or a mental illness

Your making assumptions about your situation that you don't know at all. Then you dare presume that every other woman who gets an abortion must be that way.

[boston bean]

14. Why do you think what you think should matter.

Keep your moral judgments to yourself and for yourself, it's none of your business.

That is what PRO-CHOICE is. If one is truly pro choice, they understand this conversation is not pro-choice. It's a moral judgment being made just as any right winger anti choicer would make. Trying to make women who have or would consider an abortion feel bad about it. THAT IS NOT PRO-CHOICE.

[leftstreet]

16. +1

[el_bryanto]

17. Is how people vote my business? Or am I allowed to have an opinion on how people should vote? nt

[boston bean]

18. ah yeah you can have an opinion.

[el_bryanto]

19. Can I express that opinion? nt

[boston bean]

21. I don't want to hear about your opinion on abortion

if it in any way reflects an anti choice pov on DU. And admit it or not, what you are speaking here is of moral judgments regarding abortion, that is in no way considered to be part of the pro-choice stance.

Now, I've expressed my opinion. Am I allowed to do that?

[el_bryanto]

25. Of course you are - this is a discussion board

I fully accept and embrace the fact that people differ from me on this issue. Feel free to disagree with me (not that you need my permission in anyway); a spirited discussion can only be positive. For one thing you might be right and convince me. But even if I don't end up agreeing with you, it will sharpen my arguments.

But then again I'm not the one saying "This opinion is allowed, this opinion should be kept to yourself."

Bryant

[boston bean]

44. Make no doubt about it, your personal opinion on abortion

should not be a point of discussion in a pro choice discussion, unless you are stating that it is your personal choice. That is not what you are doing here. You are making a moral judgment trying to convince others why abortion would be wrong for them.

[el_bryanto]

50. And, if I understand you correctly, people who have that opinion should keep it to themselves

and shut up completely. Is that what you are recommending?

Bryant

[boston bean]

52. What I am saying is your OP is hard to equate with anything

I recognize as pro choice.

Pro choice is the choice for you is yours and yours alone. No judgment of others.

Not, I don't think women in general should have abortions.

[el_bryanto]

55. So Pro Choice, to you, is a matter of having the right opinion about abortion

and not a matter of taking the right action (i.e. votes) on abortion? If one votes 100% the way you do, but thinks that woman should choose not to have an abortion, he or she is is not pro-choice in your opinion?

Bryant

[boston bean]

60. Pro choice to me means keeping my nose out other womens choices.

I make the choice for myself and myself only.

I don't place moral judgments one way or the other. Why because it's none of my business.

I give women agency over their bodies and what they feel is right for them.

[el_bryanto]

65. I guess I see two issues here

1) - is expressing a generalized opinion really interfering with anybodies agency? i.e. if I say "I wish people would stop seeing Adam Sandler Movies?" does that prevent anybody from going and seeing an Adam Sandler movie (yes this is a trivial example)? I would never go up to an individual woman contemplating an abortion and tell her what to do - unless she asked me.

2) - How does it apply in this one case and not in all others? Again, people at DU are oftentimes a pretty judgemental bunch, suggesting that people should do all sorts of things differently - voting differently, eating differently, and so on - why is this one area off limits?

Bryant

[boston bean]

69. People who are pro choice don't say they think women, in general, should not

have abortions.

You are trying to use your own personal experience and relate it to why women should not have abortions. That is not pro choice.

What is so difficult about this.

If you were to say, I could never have an abortion for myself, because I believe this, but would never force those views on others, that would be choice. However, you are saying your personal reasons for not having an abortion are reasons why you don't think other women should have one. does.not.compute. as a pro choice stance.

[el_bryanto]

72. OK I think I understand where you are coming from

Believing that people should have the choice is not sufficient - one also needs to not have an opinion on how they should use that choice. It is completely up to them what they choose, and I should keep my mouth shut, even when talking in generalities.

Bryant

[boston bean]

75. To be pro choice one knows the decision they make is for THEMSELVES

They don't place moral judgments upon others and blather on about how women should not choose abortion.

How much more clear can I be.

[el_bryanto]

78. Thank you for clarifying. nt

[boston bean]

100. You're welcome. Now may I ask why you chose to write "people" instead of "women"

In the first sentence of your OP (the subject title)?

[el_bryanto]

101. I should probably have written women on reflection

It was composed in the heat of the moment, and possibly my word choice wasn't ideal. While there is room for the father to give input in some cases, the decision should be 100% up to the woman effected.

Bryant

[Zorra]

94. Should we also allow posters to tell us about how they don't think gays should get married?

Why do you think you have the right to express your conservative opinions about what women should do with their bodies on this progressive board?

Should we just allow every anti-choice troll from Conservative Cave to come here and start posting their sneaky little OP's in order to tell us how they feel abortion is wrong in an effort to validate forced birthing laws?

I'm sick of religious conservatives telling me what I should/can do with my body, and who I should/can marry.

You want to express your conservative opinions? Their are plenty of conservative websites that will welcome you with open arms.

[el_bryanto]

96. I suspect they'd accuse me of being a baby-murderer for believing that Abortion should be legal

You are aware that the conservative position on this issue is that Abortion should be outlawed except in cases where the Mother's life is in danger (and sometimes not even then)? That's not really my position is it? I thought I made it clear what, from a policy angle, I'm in favor of and opposed to.

Also I'm not really a religious conservative either - I'm religious, yes, but they believe in a whole host of things I don't believe in.

Is it possible you don't know what religious conservatives actually believe?

Bryant

[PeaceNikki]

106. thank you

[Drahthaardogs]

186. I see ant union shit all the time here

Why is abortion and gay marraige sacred but not labor?

[nomorenomore08]

213. You don't *have* to keep it to yourself.

But on the other hand, you shouldn't expect other people to keep their own opinions to themselves. Even if those opinions are critical of yours.

[el_bryanto]

224. I don't - I welcome discussion nt

[nomorenomore08]

228. Good. That's what I like to hear.

[TorchTheWitch]

340. There is no discussion

Nothing to be discussed about this on a liberal/progressive forum. Anyone else's opinions on abortion stop where someone else's body begins. PERIOD. Whether a woman has an abortion or not is not any one's business but hers and her doctor's just like any other personal and private health/life choice anyone makes. Not. Your. Business. Get it? Nobody should have the right to any personal opinion on what someone else decides to do concerning their personal health/life choices. You're free to take your neanderthal busy body opinions about the PERSONAL and PRIVATE health/life choices that other people make to a conservative forum where such anti-choice opinions would be welcomed. There is NOTHING to discuss about it here, and the actual pro-choice members here - which we ALL should be since that is a KEY part of the Democratic platform - have every right to be offended by your opinion as well as your desire to discuss it. THERE. IS. NOTHING. TO. DISCUSS. Not here. Not among liberals/progressives on a forum designed to be only for liberals/progressives.

[Violet_Crumble]

354. Sorry, but I don't entirely agree...

Whether a woman has an abortion or not is not any one's business but hers and her doctor's just like any other personal and private health/life choice anyone makes. Not. Your. Business. Get it?

If my daughter ever finds herself in the position I was in when I found out I was pregnant with her, I'm definitely going to have an opinion, and screw anyone that says I shouldn't. The thing is the decision on what she does is up to her, and whichever way she'd go, I'd support her 100%.

[TorchTheWitch]

359. Oh for heaven's sake, that's your DAUGHTER

The OP is clearly talking about women that are total strangers. And daughter or not if she's an adult best keep your opinions to yourself. Or do you find it necessary to voice your opinions to an adult daughter concerning any other medical decisions she makes?

Since I always knew what my own mother's opinion would be on me or any other woman having an abortion should I ever have been in such a predicament I'd never tell her in a million years. Same reason my sister kept her abortion secret from our mother to this day.

Every single woman's personal experience is different than anyone else's, and unless you're that pregnant woman whatever your experience was and your personal feelings about it have shit in shinola to do with any pregnant woman, daughter or not because their personal experience, situation and personal feelings are going to be entirely unique to anyone else's. If your daughter is not of legal age then why the hell are you even bringing up this stupid argument? It has NOTHING to do with the OP or how and why I responded to it as I did. Bringing up your daughter at all is stupid since it's obvious that is not what the OP is talking about.

[Violet_Crumble]

360. And no-one's got any right to tell me to keep my opinion to myself when it comes to my daughter...

See, I didn't keep it a secret from my mum when I was pregnant and was considering an abortion. She had her opinion and went on to support me 100% in my decision. If I'd had an abortion, she was going to come with me, and when I decided to go ahead with the pregnancy she was there for me. That's the sort of relationship I have with my daughter now, and I find it totally bizarre that people would expect her to keep it quiet when we're open about everything else...

Personally I think the reactions of some here to the OP are really OTT and trying to portray them as an anti-choicer when they're not. Originally I didn't agree with Skinner's stance on allowing people with anti-choice views on DU because I thought it was a clear red line. But reading this thread has made me realise that some people want to blur that line and paint people as antichoicers who aren't, and that sucks...

[boston bean]

363. the only blurring of the lines I see is how some are pushing

the bounds of this discussion into anti choice territory, while ever so happily staying just inside the line here, by proclaiming, my personal opinion.


One wants to talk about their opinion for themselves, fine, I am fine with it. Start talking about what others should do, expect some push back.

Oh and PS I'm not talking about you and your daughter, that is extremely personal. A discussion best left amongst yourselves without outside interference, or any shaming form either side.

[vaberella]

327. If you didn't want to hear his opinion, why post on the thread.

Just by the title; you were a given a hint as to where this post might have went. I think you're just choosing to be argumentative, but with no purpose.

[boston bean]

330. I clicked on it and read it.

How else is one to determine?

[vaberella]

332. Fine, but you said you didn't want to hear his opinion. Then ignore it.n/t

[boston bean]

334. It's a response. I'll do as I please within the bounds of what Is acceptable on DU.

Thanks for your concern though.

[procon]

45. Sure you can

You can say that you would never consider having an abortion under any circumstances. Fine. That's your opinion.

However, when you want to expand that view to include everyone else, then it's no longer just your opinion; its rightwing activism for sweeping policy changes that make women 2nd class citizens according to authoritative, paternalistic religious morals.

[el_bryanto]

49. I feel like my OP made it very clear where I stand on that. nt

[Niceguy1]

137. I applaud

Your courage on taking on this topic...I don't bother anymore due to the total irrationality that surrounds it. I have never seen a topic where 100% agreement is required and no opinions are allowed.

[seabeyond]

166. irrational. of course, women are irrational. one womans issue you have supported?

ever? just one where you have not been on the side of misogyny?

oh, women should be allowed to freely be a prostitute. massive support for our women i see, as usual.

[Niceguy1]

168. I am 100%

Supportive on all of the major issues, including choice. I do not suppot the idea that opinions aren't allowed or that someone on a message board simply posting what they personally believe has any effect on another persons right to choose. The op's opinion has zero effect at all. They are just words in a screen.....

[tkmorris]

23. I think he was just being honest BB

I'm not sure how you conclude he is trying to make women feel bad about it, and for the life of me I cannot find any moral judgments in that post.

[sibelian]

64. Indicating that choices have consequences does not invalidate the right to make the choice.

You appear to be struggling with this.

[get the red out]

103. Great comment

I agree.

[cali]

202. people have opinions and they have every right to express those opinions

[PeaceNikki]

218. You would be banned for saying you don't think gays should marry or adopt

And that would be the right thing. The same standard should apply for choice.

Not all opinions are acceptable to tout here on DU.

[cali]

376. not analogous. The OP made it clear that he supports abortion rights

[PeaceNikki]

377. If this OP read: "I think, in general, gay people should not adopt children"

but... blah, blah, blah...


that wouldn't fly. Nor should it. Not for a fucking second.

[LaydeeBug]

391. +1. nt

[frazzled]

15. There were millions of abortions before abortions were legal

They were just done by grandmothers in kitchens or back-alley abortionists. But believe me, abortion was around for millions of years before Roe v. Wade. I remember my mother alluding one time to my grandmother "knowing how to do it," and having done so multiple times. I was never clear if that meant for herself or for others.

So you can rest easy now. You were not not aborted (double negative there, for emphasis) simply because you were born before Roe v. Wade. Abortions were available, just unsafe.

So you don't have to say what people should and shouldn't do anymore! I think I've taken a great burden off your shoulders.

PS: I'm perfectly accepting of people saying what they themselves should do with regard to abortion. I'm never tolerant of people saying what other people should do. It's never okay to say what you "think people should, in general" choose to do with their own bodies. That is up to them to decide.

[anneboleyn]

209. As a medievalist, I can say that there were recipes, etc in manuscripts to help women

end unwanted pregnancies (and believe it or not there were condoms in the middle ages made from various materials like animal gut and other forms of birth control and abortion herbal mixtures that midwives and medieval physicians knew very well). You are right. It has been around forever.

[Zorra]

20. Your expression of great concern about what you think women should do is duly noted.

Why don't you sincerely tell us your concerns regarding same sex marriage as well?

[el_bryanto]

26. I've done that - but would take us pretty far afield to open that in this discussion.

I'm not sure it would be of much value.

Bryant

[dem in texas]

22. Too much discussion on Abortion

Find something else to talk about. Let every woman make her own decision and everyone else - But Out!

[cbdo2007]

24. that's just DU for you, hahahah

I applaud your truthful post.

It's funny that so many people here want to exclude, and in many cases denegrate, those of us who are pro-choice but don't really believe abortion is right when that is how MOST pro-choice people I know believe. They need our votes for anyone to get to have choice so it is ridiculous they can't just be happy about it. Being a male, they don't even want me included in the discussion so actually maybe it would be better if I started voting against choice candidates....hmmmm...

[Sheldon Cooper]

27. Hmmmm...

so you'd vote for an anti-choice candidate because someone hurt your feelings on a message board? Really? Your last sentence says way more about you than you probably think.

[cbdo2007]

31. Of course, I always tell the truth on message boards

just like everyone else here.

Is this your first day on the internets?? Have fun, there's a lot to see out there!

[NuclearDem]

32. Alright, so then we can't trust you to tell the truth.

[Sheldon Cooper]

38. So, you lied in order to make some sort of point, because your feelings got hurt on the internet?

That puts you in a good light, too.

[seabeyond]

167. perusing down the thread to this point, we have ever anti feminist cheering the "honesty" of this

post. i have only made it to this point.

amazing.

[NuclearDem]

29. Well, aren't you a progressive.

[cbdo2007]

33. Yep....and now starts the labeling....

lol

"What number are you on the progressive spectrum? I'm 98% progressive pure"

"Oh golly geez, I'm only 84% progressive. I guess I'm on the wrong forum and should have voted for Romney. That's for setting me straight progressive police!"

hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[NuclearDem]

37. You just said you'd vote for an anti-choice candidate

Because a woman was mean to you on the internet.

Voting to deny rights for half the population doesn't make you a progressive by any stretch of the imagination. It isn't a damned wedge issue.

[cbdo2007]

43. Where did I say that???

"Oh golly geez, that darn sucker got me all riled up with his sarcasm and innuendo again! Guess I'll have to go be the progressive police on somebody else!"

[NuclearDem]

46. Oh, it was sarcasm?

Silly me, I thought you just got caught making a bigot out of yourself and now are just frantically backpedaling when no one found that misogynistic crap funny.

A black person was mean to me so I'm gonna vote for someone who wants Jim Crow back! WHY YOU GETTING ALL PURIST ON ME IM A PROGRESSIVE

A gay person said something that made me feel sad. ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE! I'm a liberal guys, calm down!

Ladies and gentlemen, THIS is privilege.

[NCTraveler]

40. Amazingly foolish arguement.

I am sure FR is throwing their support behind some candidates who will help you to get back at those mean women.

"Being a male, they don't even want me included in the discussion so actually maybe it would be better if I started voting against choice candidates....hmmmm..."

[idwiyo]

351. Your post makes me doubt you actually vote pro-choice. People who do support Universal Human Rights

don't make threats like the one you just did in your post.

[NCTraveler]

28. I respect your opinion and position.

I also thank you for your support. Your thoughts about the morality of abortion, and your position on its availability, can go hand in hand. That does not mean you have to share your moral beliefs publicly. Pleas notice I said that you don't have to, not that you can't. Just understand that women are under siege. They are being shamed, ridiculed, and all around shit upon. Even though it is not your intention in any way, your argument on morality gives anti-choicers a part of your beliefs to hold on to. You validate their whole argument. I am sure you understand that we need your help right now. We need all the help we can get. With what is at stake, I don't think it is too much for you to leave out the morality of the subject when talking about it. I am not saying that it is not important to you. I am saying that the bigger picture is more important. Thank you for your support.

[el_bryanto]

47. I appreciate your response

You are responding to what I said instead of just telling me I should shut up and keep my opinions to myself.

I would note that in public or in a generalized setting I would probably keep this opinion to myself; while I do have an opinion there's no reason to interject into a general policy discussion as it would add little. The most important thing is to stress that it should be a woman's choice without the Government sticking their nose in and putting up roadblocks.

But DU is a community - and one that should have room for difference of opinion on this issue at this level. I think anybody who wants to legally restrict abortion should probably go somewhere else, but I think there is room for people who are have different opinions on what an abortion means. To me it's a bit more like discussing something around the dinner table, as opposed to discussing it out in the open. We should be able to say what we think here (within reason).

But once again thanks for your thoughtful post.

Bryant

[NCTraveler]

59. Thanks for the reply.

I do understand the difference you are making between discussing it on DU, and discussing it openly in public. It is very difficult because the fight for safe abortion access is being lost, not won. Sometimes it feels as though even your friends are not with you. When it comes to abortion rights, there seems to be something negative at every turn.

[calimary]

30. I recently posted about being an adoptee, and finding my biological kin. My birth mother's mother

evidently is the one who insisted her under-age daughter give me up at birth. STAUNCH Catholic. The boy involved evidently was not a Catholic and she just Was. Absolutely. Not. Having. It. I suppose I could have been aborted, although with rigid Catholic thinking governing the family I kinda doubt that such an option ever came up for discussion. I guess that's just the luck of the draw here.

I think about that a lot. I also grew up, married, and eventually had children of my own. It was MY choice to do so, and MY choice to hold off from doing so for as long as I did. Both my pregnancies were extremely difficult, and each of my babies had to be delivered before their due date because it was literally becoming life-threatening for me. But that was MY choice. I was pro-choice BEFORE I got pregnant. Those difficult pregnancies really cemented that view in place for me. They rendered me more ardently pro-choice than ever before. My takeaway from there, besides (thankfully) two healthy normal babies, was that NO woman should EVER be forced to go through that unless she freely chooses to. It's quite simply no one else's business. I'm afraid this is an absolute, it is a non-negotiable, at least for me.

Your second sentence - "I think the decision should 100% be up to the woman involved" is the baseline for me. If someone's against abortion I'd say - "well, then, don't have one! Nobody's forcing one on you." And that's how it should be.

[wercal]

56. Do you mind if I ask...

Where did you go to look for the adoption history...assuming this was an adoption facilitated by the catholic church.

[calimary]

134. I hired a woman whose business was "The Adoption Specialist."

She was recommended to me by a longtime friend with whom I'd gone through grade school and high school. She was adopted and hired this lady, and was able to find a biological sister. She was very pleased and suggested I check it out if I was ever interested. Worked for me, too. But I wound up having to pay more than twice what it cost my friend because her search was undertaken in California where the information is more openly available, whereas mine had to be in a closed state, where I was adopted. If you PM me, I'll be glad to give you her contact info, wercal. Ask me anything.

I'd already attempted to dig up information on my own but got nowhere, and with the hurdles of red tape that confronted me, I didn't know what to do or how to proceed, I had no internal contacts that might help me, and I kinda ran out of steam. Other stuff comes up, you know how it is. My friend said it sounded like I needed professional help. Glad I took the risk. Actually, the hardest part was getting over ME, and my own trepidations! Mainly, I was afraid. I was hesitant about forking over that much money because of the risk of coming up empty-handed, although I would have only been charged half the amount if the search turned up nothing. I didn't know if I was ready to face that prospect. What if I went that far and still came up empty? I wasn't sure how I'd feel about that. I really only wanted to know medical history, and thought it'd be kinda neat if I could also ever know what they looked like, but that wasn't as urgent. Finally, I just took a deep breath and said "what the hell?" And I went for it. It took a year. And it paid off. But it was a risk. Scary. It's a real shot in the dark.

[Marrah_G]

331. My birth family and I found each other on an online adoption search page.

[me b zola]

371. I was assisted by a free adoption search angel

They have access to the same data bases as those who will charge you money, but often with better results. I had done almost fifty years of digging around on my own and found my paternal side of the family on my own. Once I contacted my search angel it took her only one day to find the maternal side of my family.

What you do with the information is entirely up to you. Some people just need answers and are not seeking a reunion. Just knowing is by far the most liberating event of my life! But for me I sought out a relationship with my mother, and it turns out that she missed me as much as I missed her. Different story with my father. I wasn't interested in him nor he with me---and thats okay.

There is a huge adoptee community on facebook (it is the ONLY reason that I have a FB account).

https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/AdoptionTruth/

^^this is a good place to begin^^ The folks are friendly and helpful. They will help you with questions you have and point you in the direction of reputable search angels.

Good Luck!

ps...
If you wish to keep your adoption search activities private/separate from your friends & family (as many of us do) you can create an account just for that. I did that and was liberated from the pressure of hurting anybody's feelings. My search was about my right to know, not what others thought I should do--or feel.

[wercal]

372. Thanks fo rthe info

[PeaceNikki]

34. I think, in general, you should keep your opinions on what others do to your damn self.

Shittier OP than the last awful one.

Congrats.

[el_bryanto]

41. You're welcome - it's nice to be recognized for ones skills. nt

[NoOneMan]

54. Link to last awful one please.

you should keep your opinions on what others do to your damn self.

Creating more mouths to feed if there is an alternative is an action that directly imperils all of our viability as a species. At what point are people allowed to stand up and express an opinion as to methods to avoid a 6th extinction?

[el_bryanto]

61. I self deleted it - at PeaceNikki's request, actually

But it was a poll (doing it from memory) - "In a perfect world would the decision to have an Abortion be a tough decision."

And then I qualified it to say that a perfect rule includes whatever access to Controception and education you feel is appropriate and Abortion is completely legal and safe.

Bryant

[Puzzledtraveller]

105. Do you do not make your opinions known here about

passionate issues on DU also and issues you feel passionate about? Maybe try not reading what you may find disagreeable? I do it all the time here, anywhere, it's works and I keep my stress level down.

[PeaceNikki]

111. posters would be banned for saying they don't think gays should marry or adopt

As they should.

I think the same standards should apply for choice

[sibelian]

349. Homosexuality isn't a choice. nt.

[PeaceNikki]

350. um... did you miss my signature?

I said gay MARRIAGE or ADOPTION.

[oldhippie]

207. Didn't you just give your opinion on what others do ..... ?

.... yourself? Won't follow your own advice?

I think, in general, you should keep your opinions on what others do to your damn self.

That is SO going to come back to haunt you. I'm going to use it a lot and link back to your post. It should come in very handy when someone expresses an opinion on what I do. Thanks!

[PeaceNikki]

211. so.. you're going to stalk me?

Get a life.

[oldhippie]

217. No, I'm just going to use your statement to back up some points ...

.... now and then. No stalking required. Sorry.

[PeaceNikki]

219. creep.

[oldhippie]

225. A little sensitive, are we?

You freely participate in a contentious discussion on an internet forum, call people names, and then call someone who wants to use your discussion comments a stalker and a creep? Skin a little thin?

[The Straight Story]

398. Like when someone buys a gun, smokes, chooses to be part of a religion, other personal choices?

Oh, someone says - those choices 'can' affect others. Well, the choice to keep a child can impact others as well (or not to) since it took two to get there. The choice may be up to one (as in the cases I mentioned) but the impacts spill over to others.

Hence, the reason people voice opinions on them.

[snooper2]

35. If you were aborted you wouldn't know anything so the point is kind of mute

[NoOneMan]

36. I think that given the alternative of having a baby, abortion is the better option

But thats not my choice. There are 8 billion not so unique planet fuckers already exploiting the shit out of our ecosystem. Putting more here at the cost of the woman and the public health infrastructure, simply because doing otherwise offends your sensibilities, defies all sense and logic.

If people had any brains and care for our posterity and our planet, they would want to see the rate of pregnancies terminated by abortions drastically increase. And believe it or not, that can happen while the overall abortion rate drops.

[Vashta Nerada]

42. A great thing about opinions: just because you're online doesn't mean you have to share your's.

Some opinions should be kept to oneself.

[Puzzledtraveller]

107. Or read it.

Don't like it?

Don't read it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. I think some people missed what you wrote

It's DU.

[wercal]

53. You've got guts for being honest

All this abortion talk points to a coming collision in abortion politics. Some on this board, perhaps even this thread, are fully in favor of 39th week abortions...and anything less is an affront to the mother's right to choose.

However, most of the nation is fixed on 26 weeks, unless there are extraordinary circumstances. IOW, the majority of the population doesn't have the stomach for a 3rd trimester abortion....so its not a popular political position.

And that window is getting tighter. Miracle babies are being born even earlier. My twin nephews were born at 23 weeks, for example. So, we have seen a movement to a 20 week limit. Its not prevalent or extremely popular...yet. But the pendulum is slowly swinging in that direction...when is the last time you heard of a law being passed extending the time limit?

Well the 20 week limit starts to collide with the mother's ability to know she is pregnant, or have pre-natal tests done that would predict a healthy pregnancy.

So the battle is coming...and it will be a nasty one.

[MadrasT]

57. I think people should, in general, keep their opinion's about other people's abortions to themselves

Other people's choices are none of your business.

[Daemonaquila]

58. Shaming is shaming.

And you're shaming.

I've always had a huge problem with the argument that "you, or I, or your best friend might have been aborted!!!" Aside from the shaming aspect, it's intellectually dishonest.

There's the religious counterargument... Mainstream christian/catholic doctrine (until politics made them fudge about it in recent decades) was that a fetus isn't ensouled until it's born. This was absolutely rational doctrine - after all, why would an omniscient, omnipotent, loving god bother dropping souls into fetuses that he knew would never be born, particularly in the long centuries of ridiculously high mortality rates? That's just crazy. So, no problem. Someone who's a believer would reasonably conclude that if mom was going to have an abortion, god would do the logical thing and put them in a fetus that was going to make it instead. When I hear religious pro-liars making this argument against abortion I want to ask them when they stopped believing in god, and maybe they should tend to that personal problem first.

The non-religious counterargument really isn't all that different. Worst case scenario, you never would know the difference and you wouldn't be missing a thing. In the better-case/mystical/scientific weirdness scenario, you have to ask about the nature of consciousness. The fact that you, or the illusion of you, came into consciousness is pretty staggering. But there is no scientific or mystical reason to believe that if a specific biological entity never made it out of the womb, "you" would not have some other opportunity to come into being. Shaming based on baseless assumptions in an area of fabulous scientific mystery just doesn't cut it.

Abortion. Safe. Legal. Available for any reason. Without limitation. Without shame. The end.

[Lars39]

63. Well said!

[JustAnotherGen]

66. Amen

Abortion. Safe. Legal. Available for any reason. Without limitation. Without shame. The end.

[el_bryanto]

67. That's a well stated argument

In some senses I don't find it entirely convincing, but it is certainly worth thinking about.

Bryant

[PeaceNikki]

70. yup

[progressoid]

108. ^^^this^^^

[FreeState]

144. +1

Growing up Mormon this was done in church constantly - with the same middle of the road explanation - I'm all for your choice but let me shame you into not doing it.

[riderinthestorm]

158. Adding a post here to highlight this excellent point. +10000 nt

[gollygee]

159. +1

[tblue37]

197. Actually, traditional doctrine was the the fetus was ensouled at the quickening,

the point in gestation at which the woman felt it move. That is why that point is called the quickening, which means to come into life.

[myrna minx]

208. Thank you for your magnificent argument. If I could K&R your post, I would. n/t

[Vashta Nerada]

214. +infinity.

You win the internet.

[nomorenomore08]

230. Yeah, I pretty much have to agree with this. It sure comes off as shaming even if not meant to be.

And framing the issue in that way certainly doesn't help the pro-choice cause.

[JustAnotherGen]

62. Well kudos to you

As I posted on another thread (the one I think you self deleted) it's a personal choice.

But I've also been 'chastised' at DU for wanting my very own personal flesh and blood child. There's nothing wrong with abortion OR adoption. Your parents made a decision the same as another set of parents would make a decision.

But sometimes the 'pro life and adoption is an option' crowd spills over into those of us on the baby making treadmill and we get 'chastised' for bypassing adoption in favor of one of our own. As long as you can accept that - then I'm AOK with the adoption is an option opinion. Just know that for some of us - neither abortion or an adoption are options and bless us on our path.

Give us the same respect you gave your adoptive parents in their decision.

[Bluenorthwest]

68. Why not type 'As a man I think women should do____?

Religious folks think they have standing to tell other people what they think others should and should not do. This is not the case.

[el_bryanto]

73. I don't think that would be an accurate statement of my position, so I chose not to phrase it

that way.

Bryant

[newcriminal]

71. I am a woman, and

I agree and have the same beliefs as the OP.

[PeaceNikki]

74. I am disgusted that this passed jury (before my alert) - Can someone post results?

At Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:42 AM you sent an alert on the following post:

I think people should, in general, choose not to have abortions
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024020467

The reason for the alert was:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

You added the following comments:

This is shaming pure and simple. I take serious issue with expressing an anti-choice opinion on DU. The Democratic Party platform states:

Protecting A Woman's Right to Choose. The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way. We also recognize that health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. We strongly and unequivocally support a woman's decision to have a child by providing affordable health care and ensuring the availability of and access to programs that help women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, including caring adoption programs.

Make a decision, jury - but I think this violates our community standards.

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this post at Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:07 AM, and voted 2-4 to keep it.

[el_bryanto]

80. I'd be curious to see those results as well.

Do you think I should be banned from DU for having this opinion?

Bryant

[PeaceNikki]

89. no, but the shaming needs to stop

There are at least two anti-choicers I think should be.

[nomorenomore08]

234. You yourself don't deserve to be banned. Or at least I haven't seen anything that indicates that.

What shouldn't be welcome here, on the other hand, is anti-choice rhetoric. Which your OP, at the least, skates dangerously close to. I'm not in favor of censorship but it's not even about that - it's about whether we, collectively, are truly supportive of a woman's basic right to bodily autonomy. From your posts it seems as if you're at least passively pro-choice, for the most part. Just be careful how you frame things, because loaded, emotional language ("I could've been aborted!&quot only serves to bolster the anti-choice side.

[JustAnotherGen]

84. Yes it is

But as long as we don't break TOS in our responses - we can be clever, passive aggressive and stand right on the line . . . right back.

He posted it deliberately after his earlier post this morning. Maybe o.p. needs to learn that you know what -

Adoption is not an option either . . . and adopted kids, eggs, or embryos aren't good enough or 'acceptable' to some of us either. Some people choose not to do that. And no one should have to - that wants their own bio child.

That's why Reproductive Endocrinologists exist. And maybe I just believe women should do that before just rolling over dead and playing the adoption 'shell' game.

And you know what - I didn't break TOS or do any personal attacks with what I just wrote.

I simply stated my beliefs that I don't think Adoption is all it's made out to be.

[el_bryanto]

92. What do I need to learn?

I did post it right after the other one - after last weeks posts about how the language Safe Legal and Rare is not good, this subject has been on my mind. I have been trying to come at it from angles so as not to offend people while having a discussion, but after the reaction to that poll this morning, I decided it would be best to approach it directly.

I am also confused about the second half of your post - it sounds like you are saying something pointed. But obviously advances in Reproductive Health are to be applauded.

Bryant

[Zorra]

104. Here, PeaceNikki, I was the alerter.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your alert

Mail Message
At Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:01 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

I think people should, in general, choose not to have abortions
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024020467

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS:

This post is thinly disguised anti-choice religious trolling.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:07 PM, and voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Alerter is being reactionary. This is a well-thought-out, polite and articulate post that can serve to elevate discussion on a controversial issue. Just because it's ever-so-slightly not the party line does not make it thinly disguised anti-choice religious trolling. Quite the opposite. It's extremely reasonable.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Not the way this particular alerted post is written, but the thread might devolve in subsequent posts that might lead to alerting. IMHO, this particular post is just an opinion at this point in the discussion.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Do not agree that it's "thinly disguised anti-choice religious trolling" because the word CHOICE is being used. If one can CHOOSE not to have an abortion, one can also CHOOSE to have an abortion. Isn't that what this whole argument is about? The right to choose, no matter what one's choice is?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't see how it can be anti-choice trolling when Bryant states quite clearly he thinks abortion is 100% the woman's choice and shouldn't be restricted. I am about as pro-choice as they come but I understand that Bryant's position is one shared by a large number of Democrats. If this were a simple, black-or-white issue we would have figured it out long ago.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: Voting to hide. I don't appreciate the slow creep of even semi anti choice posts here on DU. I understand what the OP is saying, but I just cannot abide by religion playing any part in discussing a medical procedure.

[el_bryanto]

112. Thanks for posting this - I was curious nt

[Zorra]

126. Honesty and transparency are important, don't you think? nt

[el_bryanto]

128. Yes they are. Very important. nt

[Arugula Latte]

77. Yeah, get back to us when you grow a uterus.

[renie408]

82. I have a uterus and have had an abortion and I agree with him. When should I get back to you?

[Arugula Latte]

88. Now is fine.

It's the men telling us about their distaste for abortion who should STFU.

[renie408]

93. I think its OK for him to have an opinion about this as long...

as he acknowledges that he would vote for a woman's right to choose.

I also understand thinking that it would be better if we never had to make the choice. As well as I understand that this is a decision some women find less haunting than others. And I don't judge the women who do not occasionally tear up when thinking about the child that might have been. It's just different for different people. Which is why we need the right to choose AND the right to have an opinion.

[nomorenomore08]

236. Nothing wrong with that. But anyone else should have the right to tell the OP

that he's framing the issue in a problematic way - namely, in a way that strengthens the anti-choice side.

[LanternWaste]

79. "I think people should, in general, choose not to have blood transfusions."

"I think people should, in general, choose not to have blood transfusions." Another opinion based on another religion.

I think people should, in general, choose not to have medical procedures done." Yet another opinion based on yet another religion.





The above being so patently absurd, so outside of rational thought, that I'd have a difficult time believing them to be true at all had I not so read it myself.

But, people can be rather stupid... and it's my own opinion (the fulcrum of your post, honesty of opinions that is, yes?) that those decisions are pretty stupid, and may be called as such when relevant.

Now, I wouldn't call for banning any member of DU who believed that any and all medical procedures should not be practiced, but I'll certainly call a stupid opinion what it is... a stupid opinion.

[el_bryanto]

85. Thank you for your response

That said, I think it's interesting to consider that someone who posted "I think people should, in general, choose not to have blood transfusions." would be attacked as kind of stupid -but do you think they would be told those opinions should be kept to themselves with the vehmenance exhibited above?

Bryant

[LanternWaste]

113. I'd ask a creationist to butt out of a conversation regarding the geological age of the planet...

I've seen little vehemence (but then again, I realize we see that which we want to) in this thread.

And if they desire that all transfusions be kept to a collective minimum number based not on objective science, but rather merely on a religion or a philosophy, I'd kindly ask them to keep their irrelevancies to themselves, in much the same way I'd ask a creationist to butt out of a conversation regarding the geological age of the planet.

Honestly, who wants their time wasted by a religious-based assessment when discussing medicine and science? (except those who are unable or unwilling to know the difference)

[nomorenomore08]

239. Exactly! Creationism is a perfect analogy here, for more reasons than one.

Especially because the same people who embrace the irrationality of creationism, tend to also embrace the irrationality of calling a first-trimester embryo a "baby."

[renie408]

87. Well, yeah, if it is not the exact same opinion as yours, it must be stupid, right?

Being a woman who has had an abortion, I can tell you that an abortion and a blood transfusion are two different things. I think it is kind of stupid to conflate the two.

Anybody that thinks that having an abortion is the same thing as having an ingrown toenail removed (or a blood transfusion) is an idiot.

[LadyHawkAZ]

116. True. I was a lot happier and more relieved about the abortion than the blood transfusion. n/t

[Luminous Animal]

163. Yes!

[LanternWaste]

119. Some positions are not opinions, but simple science. And I'll take science over opinions any day

" yeah, if it is not the exact same opinion as yours, it must be stupid, right?"
Nope. Your inference is rather inaccurate, if not simply petulant.

Some positions are not opinions, but simple science. And I'll take science over opinions any day. Medical procedures are medical procedures, regardless of how you yourself may redefine them...

[Silent3]

284. While the OP mentioned being raised religiously, the OP argument wasn't phrased...

...in a particularly religious way.

I'm an atheist myself. It doesn't take religious dogma to see a fetus, especially a late-term fetus, as having some value -- less that a fully-born human being, but still some value -- that's worthy of consideration.

[katsy]

83. Oh crap....

Wrong room.

Where's recreational abortion for fun & games chat?

😈

[nomorenomore08]

240. +1

[renie408]

91. And you have your answer. When it comes to tolerance, the DU has some glaring issues.

The good, tolerant, open minded people of the DU will burn you alive for thinking that an abortion should be more of a big deal than having a splinter removed.

I understand what you are saying and, to an extent, agree with you. I wish there was never the necessity for abortion. That said, however, the reason I think they should be safe and legal is that you cannot understand every situation or the individual needs of every woman. This is truly something between a woman and herself. And maybe the man involved, depending on how involved he is willing to be. I do not think that any of us should have a say in what a woman decides to do with her body. Period. But I also understand saying that, personally, you wish people did not have to decide to have one. Why anyone should have a problem with that is beyond me.

[el_bryanto]

95. DU is a community full of passionate people

Actually feel like there have been a wide range of responses - obviously the ones that are more or less "STFU" are discouraging, but there have been some more thought ful responses as to why one might choose not to post this kind of message. Worth considering anyway.

I take it as read that, for the most part, people are acting in the best way they know how - even the people who just say STFU feel that that really is the best response to my OP.

Bryant

[nomorenomore08]

242. The "problem" is in how we collectively frame the issue. It's far beyond personal opinion.

And using loaded, emotional language like "I could've been aborted!" only helps the rabid anti-choicers. The people who, if they could, would not only ban abortion, but many forms of birth control as well. That's why it's a big deal.

[Zorra]

97. This OP seems like an attempt to undermine the right of women to make decisions regarding pregnancy.

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

http://www.issues2000.org/celeb/Democratic_Party_Abortion.htm

[el_bryanto]

102. I can categorically state that such was not my intention

But I can see how it could be taken that way. All I can say is that this is my opinion.

Bryant

[Puzzledtraveller]

109. Yes, that's it.

One persons opinion will undermine the efforts at safeguarding and insuring a woman's right to choose.

[BlueToTheBone]

98. You know, we could have all been aborted

and with the population of the world overwhelming the whole, maybe more of us should have. But here we are.

There is a Tibetan Buddhist story about a blind turtle that lives at the bottom of the sea and every 10,000 years he surfaces. On the surface of the ocean lies a a ring and as the turtle rises, he comes up through the ring. That is how rare and precious human life is. So, I guess what I'm saying is that each of here were fortunate to be born into higher consciousness of human birth.

So, I guess it's our obligation to become the most authentic human possible.

[TBF]

99. Are you a physician specializing in the reproductive health of women?

If so I'd be interested to see which studies you are basing your opinion on (and I do hope they've been peer-reviewed). If not, pffftttt ...

An abortion is a medical decision between a woman and her doctor. Period.

[bullwinkle428]

114. If you REALLY want to see the number of abortions go down

in this country, then you need to start putting all of your time and energy into trying to expand and promote the availability of birth control, especially to those of lower income that don't just have those extra bucks laying around once food and shelter is taken into account.

[PeaceNikki]

115. You would be banned for saying you don't think gays should marry or adopt

And that would be the right thing. The same standard should apply for choice.

[el_bryanto]

117. So you think I should be banned?

Or am I reading you wrong?

Bryant

[PeaceNikki]

120. yes, I changed my mind. However, I think you're safe

since the same standards clearly do not apply.

[el_bryanto]

123. I'm curious though - what percentage of the Democratic party do you think has an opinion

close to mine? Not DU - i'm talking general Democrats out there. I would think it would be pretty high, but I could be wrong.

Bryant

[PeaceNikki]

125. it doesn't matter . Party platform clearly defined what our common ideals are.

seriously change the topic. Imagine that someone posted a long diatribe about why they think that same sex couples should not get married.

[el_bryanto]

127. I do intend this to be my last post on the subject

For a while anyway.

I think you have to stretch the party platform to suggest that expressing the opinion I did in my OP is beyond the pale - if for no other reason that I can probably pull up comments buy dozens of well respected Democrats saying essentially that. "I don't personally think abortion is a good idea, but I believe it should be up to the Mother."

Bryant

[PeaceNikki]

129. good.

[el_bryanto]

130. I'm glad to have pleased you at least briefly. nt

[PeaceNikki]

131. Also - you didn't say that YOU wouldn't have one, you said others should not.

[Lurker Deluxe]

139. Just out of curiosity

Nikki,

What would you think about a candidate running for public office who said, "We can agree we care about life, and we can agree that we want the same goal, which is zero abortions to occur."

Just curious what you think about that kind of statement?

[PeaceNikki]

141. I would tell them to get the fuck out of legislating

[Lurker Deluxe]

142. Well ...

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/11/11/wendy-davis-clarifies-pro-life-comments-in-cbs-11-interview/

Guess you better pull that support for Wendy Davis back kinda quick like then.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024020316#post1

Just saying ...

[PeaceNikki]

143. I am not in her district.

[Lurker Deluxe]

147. In the post I linked you expressed

"I adore her and am so excited for TX and her campaign"

I am assuming you no longer mean that, and would not have any vocal, or other, support for her??

Or is it when a politician says it ... or a female, it's different??

I will wait to see the OP from you condemning Wendy Davis and her entire campaign.

[PeaceNikki]

149. hold your breath

[Agschmid]

150. It does seem to be somewhat like a double standard...

[PeaceNikki]

170. When the OP filibusters for 11+ hours for choice, or Wendy Davis posts those words here,

you'll have a point.

If I were in her district or her state, I'd very much take her to task for those words... just like I did with a Democratic candidate for governor here in WI recently who used the phrase "safe, legal and rare".

[lumberjack_jeff]

196. Would you lobby for banning her from DU? n/t

[boston bean]

133. That is NOT what you wrote:

You wrote:

I think people should, in general, choose not to have abortions

BIG difference than what you just said above (what I am responding to).

You did not leave it up to just a choice for you. You contend "people" should not choose one. Not just yourself, and we got a lot of personal morality to go along with it. That is not pro-choice.

[el_bryanto]

136. I'm not sure how to respond to this

Did you read the OP - i made it clear I believed that the decision should be up to the Woman, and not by the Government or anybody else - certainly not me.

I have the opinion that people should choose not to have an abortion.

When a politician says "I don't think Abortion is a good idea, but it's up to the mother" isn't that more or less the same thing? And if it's not I guess I don't see the distinction.

I do have the luxury of speaking more plainly than most Politicians.

Bryant

[boston bean]

138. I read the OP and you think "people"

still not sure why you used that term on first writing... Women get abortions, not men..... shouldn't have one based on some personal morality you created to frame your position.

Pro choice persons understand their morality does not come into play with other decisions.

How many more times do I have to state this.

[el_bryanto]

146. OK - I understand that

And I appreciate you being patient with me - despite my unorthodox positions.

I also responded to the my misstatement earlier - but you are right I should have used Women instead of People.

One counter question, though - do you think that my position is an unorthodox position in the general Democratic party? Obama has used the Safe Legal and Rare language. Harry Reid is more or less Pro-Life. Nancy Pelosi seems to be 100% pro-choice. Joe Biden has been banned from his diocese for his pro-choice votes, but also voted against Partial Birth Abortion and against Federal Funding of Abortions (both of which he defended as recently as 2007). Hillary Clinton made the following statement on the issue in 2008.

I believe that the potential for life begins at conception. I am a Methodist, as you know. My church has struggled with this issue. In fact, you can look at the Methodist Book of Discipline and see the contradiction and the challenge of trying to sort that very profound question out.

But for me, it is also not only about a potential life; it is about the other lives involved. And, therefore, I have concluded, after great concern and searching my own mind and heart over many years, that our task should be in this pluralistic, diverse life of ours in this nation that individuals must be entrusted to make this profound decision, because the alternative would be such an intrusion of government authority that it would be very difficult to sustain in our kind of open society. And as some of you’ve heard me discuss before, I think abortion should remain legal, but it needs to be safe and rare.

So how beyond the pale is my position really - to the point that i should be embarrassed or even banned for expressing it?

Bryant

[ancianita]

171. Real moral questions are compelling and clear; religions only "struggle" when male leadership ego

has something to "lose" over the "moral" issue at hand -- usually it's control, whether moral, social, or even legal.

One moral underpinning of church dogma is that "our bodies are not our own." My answer, then, is: then what the fuck is the purpose of the dogma of "free will"?! Religions simply cannot -- NOT -- have 'it' both ways. If each and every soul is to answer to its creator, then what women do with their bodies and souls does not even come within ANY religion's moral parameters.

A priest told me that embodied spiritual equals are here on earth with free will, and that if it is not written anywhere in the Old or New Testament, then what abortion comes down to is this: women have what he called God's "prior rights" of existence, which include – before, during and after fertility years -- the right to decide whether to let a potential other being exist or not, and that women's bodies are not just men's external uteruses.

That Women have souls, spirits, free will and the right to decide who or what goes into or comes out of them. Including new human beings. They can get abortions if they want them. That their decision is between them and their god or the universe. Even an infinitely loving and forgiving God would accept anything they do. That the final battle for spiritual equality will be won when men acknowledge that life from God takes the form of the Holy Spirit working through women. He said that if men can hold that concept of a god working through the Holy Spirit for themselves, they must hold that concept true for all women of any religion or non-religion, as well.


When Christianity and other Jesus-believing religions follow their calling morally, they will follow Jesus' exact words without catechismal spin or excuses -- the heart of his teaching being The Two Great Commandments. I won't quote them here, since I assume everyone knows them.

[el_bryanto]

173. This is an interesting argument and well stated

I'm not sure I want to argue with it, as it takes us directly into theological concerns, so I'll just say well said, even if I don't find it 100% compelling.

Bryant

[ancianita]

182. Why should you. It's not in your interests to handle what male theologists have 'tackled' before you

is it. I don't claim to know your motives, either. But that's my first reaction, given your previous personal info.

The whole backing off from women's theological arguments is a common reaction of the more humble male religionists. Perhaps men truly believe women are not up to the spiritual task, or have the spiritual capacity to understand the range and depth of the theological or teleological turf that men have heretofore taken great pains to claim for themselves.

[el_bryanto]

189. I apologize for having offended, that wasn't my intention

But lets dive right in,

I believe that human life is a combination of the soul and the body. The body eventually dies and then soul goes somewhere else. At some point the soul joins the body - maybe that happens at birth. Maybe it happens before birth. As a theological question it's very
difficult to answer. I don't know if there is an answer.

It's possible that the Divine only provides souls to those fetuses that are going to be born. In which case any fetus aborted never had a soul anyway. I don't know - but the counter argument is that since we don't know when a fetus becomes a person, aborting a fetus is problematic.

Let me pause here to reiterate - I oppose all restrictions on a woman's right to chose, as stated above. My personal theological concerns are all the more reason to suggest that the person most qualified to make that decision is the woman herself without any governmental interference.

I should say again I know that a lot of people feel that I'm arguing in bad faith, but I didn't intend to denigrate your position above - I just have seen where religious discussions in General Discussion end up, and it's not a place I'm eager to go. But I'd rather face that then show you and your argument a lack of respect.

Bryant

[ancianita]

299. Thanks. "People" do know that "choose" in relation to abortion is about free will; therefore

morality and all of the individual and presumptive institutional territory that claims it. I'm glad you responded as you did.

You reiterate that you oppose all restrictions on a woman's right... But your OP is also your stance. I say that, push come to shove, you can't have it both ways and that, unless you're willing to admit here and now that you take back your OP, you're pandering in the guise of rational discussion.

When you decide that public discussion of private decisions is the public's prerogative and publicly state what the private decision should be, you privilege consensus of opinion over individual 'free will.' It's really a contradictory stance, since we all know that 'people' have been trying to kill free will in other people for millennia.

I'm going to say that, once enough men have heard the faulty underpinnings of patriarchal morality, they will stop raising the issue of "having their say" while publicly establishing social and legal consensus that sides with their male-identified power interests --after they've built 'sanctioned' violence/punishments to back them up -- and which lie with controlling as many humans as possible, starting with women and children.

I only bring up the religious issues here because too many might be tip-toeing around the language often associated with their religious "training." Many deeply held feelings of our formative years last into our adulthood, and so do the associations with that training's patriarchal moralities.

[el_bryanto]

306. I will have to disappoint you as I have no intention of taking back my OP

I don't think you close off free will by disagreeing with someone - on every issue on which we disagree, one presumes I think that I am correct and you are wrong. I'm guessing that you feel more or less the same; if people disagree with you, they are probably wrong. Disagreements don't take away free will; without disagreements there isn't any such thing as free will.

I don't know what you mean by pandering in the guise of rational discussion, but I deny having any agenda other than discussion and debate.

Bryant

[ancianita]

316. I don't think that people who disagree with me are necessarily wrong. They simply haven't convinced

me to the extent that I've studied, thought and experienced the issue discussed. I suppose they can say the same, but then, I can tell that that usually comes out in effortful exchange. Which I was making. I really take you at your word, but your word contradicts. I thought I'd provoke some decision from you by pointing out your OP stance vs. your "reiteration" of your own belief. Forced agreement -- as in the religious, legal and social systems that ritualize conditioning women to believe on pain of ritualized stigma, punishment, violence or death -- also takes away free will. That's the basis of the war against women.

Do I need consistency from you or agreement from you? No. And if you can live with your contradictions, that's fine by me. At least you've aired them here. I hope honestly. Still, I believe that men will always take the side that best fits their power relations individually and with their larger male group. If I thought you were having these same discussions with other men, I'd feel some hope about the unequal power relations on the planet, abortion being only one manifestation. But I never hear or read of such things. I will only believe what I see them do.

Thanks for your thread. I've learned a lot here.

[myrna minx]

235. "Partial birth abortion" is a loaded right wing political term and not a medical term.

*cough* Death taxes. Feminazi. Partial birth abortion.

If you are being earnest, please use actual medical terms and not radical right wing spin when describing medical care for women.

[el_bryanto]

241. I apologize - i was using the language at Wikipedia about Biden's political positions

He voted in favor of a 1999 bill to ban in most circumstances partial birth abortion and on the 2003 Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Biden has defended these votes as recently as April 2007. He has also stated his opposition to federal funding of abortions.

Political positions of Joe Biden

Bryant

[myrna minx]

243. Yes - it's a right wing shaming and political term and not a medical term.

The medical term is "Intact dilation and extraction" and it's a procedure that's usually used to *save* the mother's life during a difficult and/or complicated pregnancy, during a complicated childbirth or to not force a woman to carry to full term essentially a miscarriage or dead fetus - usually a *wanted* pregnancy.

Unlike what the RW tries to portray, it's not a procedure one has casually in between lattes and manicures.

[el_bryanto]

245. I see your point - the right wing has been very successful in pushing their preferred terminology

I'll try and be more careful about it in the future.

Bryant

[Zorra]

121. That's not our decision to make. nt

[boston bean]

124. So true, allowing anti choice sentiments if it can be categorized as not rude,

and not happening all the time is fine.

We get the poke in the eye.

To me they are all rude, because it's an attack of a womans autonomy, but that is just me. I don't make the decisions.

[Zorra]

148. Yes. I'm done, I'm taking a break from DU. My autonomy should not be at issue, and the continual

shaming of women by conservatives being allowed here is just so wrong.

[el_bryanto]

151. I'm sorry to see you go - good luck with your break. nt

[MineralMan]

118. It's my opinion that I should have no opinion about

other people's reproductive choices. Period.

So I don't.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

122. I think women, in general, and specifically, should choose what suits them.

[Scout]

132. ALL of us "could have been aborted" ...

doesn't make me feel special that i wasn't. it doesn't color my position on abortion. i guess i don't understand why you say it colors your position. if you had been aborted, you'd never have known it

[anneboleyn]

212. Yes. My mother had three miscarriages b/n my brother and me.

Honestly, for some reason people seem to forget how common miscarriages are when these discussions about abortion take off -- I knew friends who had them (multiple miscarriages when they were trying to have children), I had one, my mother had three, my mother-in-law had two, and on and on. Just the act of coming into the world is a very risky business. Of course none of us like to think about all of the chance that went into making us "us" but that is the way it is...

[Le Taz Hot]

140. I wish my mother would have had the option to abort me.

Growing up unwanted and unloved and "in the way" fucks you up pretty bad and it takes DECADES to reverse that, as much as it can be reversed. Not a way to have to live your life with that 2,000 lb. stone hangin' around your neck.

[PeaceNikki]

165. .

[Le Taz Hot]

172. Thanks, sweetie pie.

Did the physician-heal-thyself thing some time ago but wasn't a fun journey and it took a LONG time.

[PeaceNikki]

176. I really feel for you.

I have a son with a father that has treated him that way. I see what happens with one parent who doesn't give a shit... and one who does very much. I can't imagine both. It's been very painful and my heart is very much with you.

[redwitch]

169. I am so sorry!

That is awful. You are not in the way and I am hoping you have been able to recognize that she had the problem and it was not you.

[Le Taz Hot]

178. Oh yeah.

Life is good now but the hell you have to go through to get to "here" was not pleasant. Surrounded by great family (mostly of my own making) and friends and most of the mountains have been climbed. But thanks for the note. That was kind.

[el_bryanto]

177. That is pretty rough

My adoption affected me certain ways too - although i was eventually adopted into a loving family - but I didn't have anything near as bad as this - I'm sorry you had to go through that.

Bryant

[Le Taz Hot]

187. You don't seem to realize that there is a

stigma attached with those who choose adoption as well -- it's why she didn't take it, it would make HER look bad. In many MANY cases it's better for the CHILD if he/she is just not ever born. Take it from one who has walked the walk and can now talk the talk. NO child should ever have to go through that. Most never get over it. I did because I'm strong, smart., managed to accomplish many things through sheer will and I finally figured it all out. But the time that took could have been spent having some sort of self-worth rather than having to actually find it on my own. Think through your anti-abortion stance as not all children are wanted children and the hell unwanted children have to go through is indescribable.

[el_bryanto]

192. I can certainly understand what you are saying.

And the things we do to children in our society is pretty awful all the way around - that said, if there's a choice between existing and not existing, well I know which one I prefer.

Bryant

[nomorenomore08]

300. But the reason you prefer "existing" to "not existing" is because you've had a halfway decent

life, presumably. That point deserves some consideration as well.

[Le Taz Hot]

355. Then for you, this has NOTHING to do with

what is best for the children and EVERYTHING to do about ideology. Thank you for finally admitting it.

[el_bryanto]

389. I don't understand this response

I want a world in which children are born into loving happy families where they are taken care of and given a chance to grow up and be productive happy members of society. I wasn't born into such a family, but after a time I was adopted into one. I think that some adopted kids have a really rough time and that really upsets me. On the other hand some biological parents abuse their kids as well, which is also pretty terrible.

But I don't think the appropriate response is that it's better that those kids never existed. I think the appropriate response is that we as a society need to get serious about child abuse and neglect and all kinds of terrible things that shouldn't be happening. And the fact that some kids who are adopted have a terrible time of it doesn't mean that all kids who are adopted have a terrible time of it.

I don't see how you make that out to be all about ideology.

Bryant

[Dorian Gray]

145. I was born and adopted

in 1971. I know my birth mother was 17 at the time, and I was an unplanned pregnancy. I'm glad I'm here, and I went through years of fertility treatments in order to conceive my own child. So I know how loaded and subjective this whole subject is. I would never pressure anybody to do anything, and I would not choose to have an abortion, ever. (Though it was never an actual issue for me given my fertility issues.) I would be saddened if my daughter ever had to choose to abort, though I wouldn't hinder her decision. And if by some horror, she ended up sexually abused and pregnant as a young preteen, I would make that difficult choice for her.

That is why I hold the position I do despite it being a personally difficult thing for me to embrace.

[peace13]

152. A reminder goes out that what you consider an abortion and what goes on...

...at abortion clinics may be two different things. Services include but not limited to the removal of dead fetuses, the removal of fetuses that endanger the life of the mother, the termination of fetuses that will not survive after birth, the removal of fetuses that were wanted babies that can not make it after birth! This whole discussion about abortion endangers the lives of many women who have NO OTHER PLACE TO GO. Be ever so careful when you endanger ANY life because god will get you for that. Tearing at the structure for safe abortions endangers so many. It takes the medical profession out of critical care for women.

Feel free to have your opinion but stay away from endangering women and children and the very fabric of the family.

This is spoken from the mouth of a friend whose friend had to cross an abortion clinic picket line to have dead twins removed. It tore her and her family apart. Those people on the street had no right to do what they did to her!

[msanthrope]

153. I can understand and respect your opinion, without agreeing with it. Nor do I

think your opinion undermines my fundamental rights to privacy or liberty.

[Capt. Obvious]

154. I salute your bravery

in not having an abortion

[peace13]

155. I like the fact that people are different than women.

It would read so much better if it said people can have abortions if they must, just not women! He lost me at hello!

[Rex]

157. I think people should, in general, mind their own business.

nt.

[blueamy66]

160. I was adopted through Catholic Charities, back East, during the 60s...so was my older brother....

I was also raised religiously, in the Catholic Church. I still attend Mass.

Abortion. Safe. Legal. Available for any reason. Without limitation. Without shame. The end.

I'm sorry, but I just hate it when men offer their opinions about abortion.

[newcriminal]

161. Well, I am a woman

While I have always believed it is a woman's choice. That being said, I myself could not do it. I usually stay out of any of the abortion posts on here, but lately there have been so many being very flippant on the subject. Saying the only feeling they had was relief after having an abortion and all of their "friends" also ONLY felt relief. That abortion could and should be used as birth control if it were free.

This is a woman's choice and with it comes a hell of a lot of feelings. I certainly think one could feel relief, but don't make it out to be less than what it is. It is not the same as a blood transfusion or a prostate exam.

[boston bean]

174. Why are you so insistent on placing your feelings on others.

Your post is clear that it is you who don't accept other womens feelings on this. The reason you get push back is because you seem to think every woman should feel the way you feel about it.

[newcriminal]

181. That is not true.

You belittle every woman who had to go through that tough decision by saying it is no big deal. That we all should feel nothing but relief. I don't say a woman shouldn't feel relief. Why do you deny that a woman can feel sorrow over it as well.

[boston bean]

185. No I do not. I understand some women feel sorrow.

I just don't think their personal sorrow should have any bearing on whether other women get an abortion or not.

[newcriminal]

194. I agree their sorrow should not have a bearing on whether another woman has an abortion or not.

[blueamy66]

223. It is what is is to each person that has experienced it

And it may just be nothing more than a blood transfusion or a prostate exam to some.

And it doesn't always come with "alot of feelings".

[newcriminal]

226. I guess I think more of women than you do.

[boston bean]

229. What does that mean exactly?

That a woman who doesn't feel like you felt is some sort of monster.

Please tell me exactly what you mean, so I don't get the wrong idea.

[newcriminal]

231. How I felt?

[boston bean]

232. No, what you wrote?

about giving women more credit. What does that mean?

[newcriminal]

233. That I don't think any woman would take something like an abortion

so lightly as a blood transfusion.

[uppityperson]

244. having helped hundreds of pregnant get abortions, there is a wide range and for some, yes

it is taken "as lightly as a blood transfusion". For some, it is a horrendously difficult decision to make. No one can or should tell them how or what to feel and no one should impart feelings of shame for how they feel or why they made the decision they did. Whether it be easy or difficult or somewhere in between or a mixture or whether or not their feelings change over time.

It is very individual.

And as far as that blood transfusion? Why would you need it? How to you make sure the blood is not contaminated with HIV or Hep? Blood transfusions are not taken lightly very often. But that is another issue for another time.

[newcriminal]

246. I wouldn't impart shame on them for getting an abortion.

I would however feel shame for them for taking it so lightly. I admit that is just my opinion, but I guarantee you won't be able to change that. I have thought long and hard about this.

[blueamy66]

251. Don't waste your time feeling shame for "them taking it so lightly".

It's none of your business and sometimes one should keep their opinions to themselves.

[newcriminal]

254. I can waste my time on whatever I choose.

I will keep my opinion to myself when you do the same.

[REP]

252. Shame on you, then

For thinking you know if someone has taken an abortion "too lightly" or not.

The emotion I'd feel for those like you is 'contempt' if only they weren't beneath it.

[PeaceNikki]

255. .

[newcriminal]

258. I am the one continuesly stating women do not take it lightly.

There are a few on here that keep saying women take it that lightly. I give women more credit than that.

And I don't really care how you feel about me.

[REP]

259. Yet you keep replying to me

Which one of us are you trying to convince?

You're doing a terrible job.

[newcriminal]

261. You replied to me.

Can you read? I am not trying to convince you of anything, it is the few here that are trying to convince everyone here that abortion is a great and easy thing to do. Hey use it as birth control, why not. I don't see it that way.

[boston bean]

262. Are you morally judging women who don't feel like you do about having an abortion?

Why?

[newcriminal]

263. I guess you can't read either.

I never stated that at all. Are you all getting kicks out of misrepresenting what I say?

[boston bean]

264. I can read. Are you calling them liars? Nt

[newcriminal]

266. Yes

Anyone that says that abortion is a great and easy thing to do, Hey use it as birth control, why not is a liar.

[boston bean]

271. Well at least we got to the truth of your feelings.....

newcriminal

266. Yes

Anyone that says that abortion is a great and easy thing to do, Hey use it as birth control, why not is a liar.

[newcriminal]

273. I have stated that the whole time.

[boston bean]

275. Nice to have it put so clearly.

[uppityperson]

290. Wow. I need to share that with women I know who "took it lightly". They are liars, according to you

[uppityperson]

304. What should pregnant women feel when they get an abortion and why should it be difficult for them?

serious questions

[uppityperson]

289. Yes, you are and have said that. Those who "take it lightly" you feel shame for. And how can you

feel shame without judging them? How do you decide if they "take it lightly" without judging whether, in your opinion, they do or not. You do judge.

[PeaceNikki]

265. It *is* birth control.

It's not contraception, but it's birth control by definition.

birth control
noun
(Concise Encyclopedia)
Voluntary limiting of human reproduction, using such means as contraception, sexual abstinence, surgical sterilization, and induced abortion. The term was coined in 1914–15 by Margaret Sanger. Medically, birth control is often advised when childbirth might endanger the mother’s health or substantial risk exists of bearing a severely disabled child. Socially and economically, limitation of reproduction frequently reflects a desire to maintain or improve family living standards.

emphasis mine.

[myrna minx]

278. In the year of 2013, Women of the United States and the rest of *world* should be free

to receive *scientific medical treatment* without the obstacle of religious interference and slut shaming.

If someone's religion requires such stigma, by all means - I guess, testify, but leave the rest of us out of the fold because we have the freedom *from* religion in this country.

This is medical treatment between a doctor and patient and not a pharisee/politician/message board vs a woman.

[newcriminal]

280. "we have the freedom *from* religion in this country"

I never brought religion into it.

"slut shaming."

Never called anyone a slut or even brought up sex in any way.

"This is medical treatment between a doctor and patient and not a pharisee/politician/message board vs a woman. "

I agree a woman should have the right to choose.

I don't agree in the flippant way some on here regard abortion.

[uppityperson]

291. You did say you feel shame for those who "took it lightly". You do judge whether or not

someone "took it lightly". Incredible.

[myrna minx]

293. So what do you believe women should "go through" to get an abortion?

Since according to you, many here are so "flippant" about abortion, what do we women need to do to satisfy the qualifications to receive this medical procedure? Do we need to feel ashamed or guilty? Do you believe women should agonize about this decision? Pay money? Confess in public? I understand that not all women feel relieved after an abortion, but the attribution that if you don't feel guilty or ashamed for some reason is rather RW.

[idwiyo]

370. Can you please elaborate on a "flippant way"? Do tell what should I do before I decide to abort.

Should I spend restless nights thinking about my decision? How many nights? Should I contemplate "sanctity of human life" aka "foetus's rights"? Should I feel as selfish monster for possibly denying the world 'another Einstein'? What is it that I should feel about a clump of tissue and a simple procedure that removes it from my uterus?

[PeaceNikki]

282. sing it, sister

[REP]

301. You're doing it again!

Abortion does not harm women, emotionally or physically. Some people seem to really, REALLY want it to. Why is that?

You may have anecdotes about women who cry and cry over their abortions, but those are not worth much. I can provide all those scientific papers again, showing that women do suffer harm from abortion.

[uppityperson]

288. I say "some" do, and you feel shame for them. Incredible.

[newcriminal]

294. yes

If they take abortion that lightly, and I'm not convinced they truly do, I feel shame for them.

[uppityperson]

298. You dare judge, shame them, call them liars. Incredible.

[ancianita]

283. It's not for anyone BUT women to say whether they take it heavily or lightly.That is the sole point.

It's not even a collective decision, either. I took one abortion heavily, then I took another one lightly. It varies, and is between me, myself and I.

[uppityperson]

302. I guess then they would say half-shame, you half-liar? It is incredible, what they are saying.

It is no one's business but the person involved. It is just incredible that someone on DU would say that.

[uppityperson]

287. How will you decide who has taken it "so lightly"? Or will you feel shame for them all?

I have worked with many who have gotten abortions and your feeling shame for them will not help anything or anyone but cause pain instead. Or else they will shrug and call you an impolite name.

[newcriminal]

296. It isn't for me to decide.

You are the one that said they take it so lightly.

[uppityperson]

297. And you are the one doing the judging and shaming. I said "some". eom

[newfie11]

361. I don't think anyone has the right to judge until they are in that position

How would anyone know what the woman having an abortion has been through or what her thoughts are.

This is a personal decision and no one else's business.

[blueamy66]

248. Okay.

Don't know you came to that conclusion, but, okay.

[chowder66]

162. (Women) "should, in general, choose not to have abortions"

"I think the decision should 100% be up to the woman involved".

(But, they shouldn't choose one way over the other - per your opinion - which means their 100% ability to choose is really not something you support).


The only argument I see you having is with yourself, here is what that looks like;

a) you "could" have been aborted

so

b) women should choose not to have abortions.

So this is really about you and NOT the women who make choices about their lives. Your life matters more than theirs.

IMPORTANT: Fewer than one in four have abortions > so women are in general choosing not to have abortions.
Most are not teenagers and are adult women who have a child or have children.
There are many reasons a woman may choose to have an abortion and some you may agree with or disagree with.

Personally I think you have more thinking to do on this.

[el_bryanto]

164. I probably do have more thinking to do on this

I do take issue with this statement though.

(But, they shouldn't choose one way over the other - per your opinion - which means their 100% ability to choose is really not something you support).

It's been thrown at me a fair amount, although not as succinctly as this. I don't agree that having an opinion on how people should use a choice means that I don't think they should have that choice.

I am capable of supporting freedom of speech, for example, while also disagreeing with how some people use it. Aren't you?

I am capable of wanting everybody to be able to vote, while wishing people wouldn't vote for Republicanoids. Aren't you?

So I don't see where the fact that I have a generalized opinion about how this choice should be (and I recognize that every woman is in a different situation, and I would not presume to insert my nose into anybody's specific situation), means that I don't believe they should be able to choose.

Bryant

[chowder66]

188. "I am capable of supporting freedom of speech, for example,...

while also disagreeing with how some people use it".

You did not state in your argument.... "how some people use it". (this is where your conflict probably lies)

And we are talking about a biological process that only women can go through. I think you need to delve deeper.

Do you think people should choose not to use freedom of speech, in general?
(It's the "in general" part that is obscuring your argument and leaving you open to the kind of comments that are coming your way).

The point I'm making is that you are talking about abortion as a whole and not being as specific as I think you may need to go with yourself.

I am 100% pro-choice, the reasons are none of my business, unless I'm the one experiencing it. Then the reasons ARE my business and no one else's. See how I did that?

Do I want all people to attempt at being responsible in all areas of life? Yes... but not everyone is, not everyone can be, not everyone falls under some simplistic situation. Try to be careful with generalities in topics such as these and anywhere else you can stop and give thought to. Generalities obscure so much and there is no tone on the internet typically so people cannot infer how you are coming at this easily.

You sound conflicted or confused and there is nothing wrong with that but before you go posting about this on a board that is pro-choice you might want to be a little more thoughtful in presenting your opinion. Obviously we can't always get it right the first or even second time but you need to do some work on this. You should do some work on this. You might get answers that will help you settle this conflict.

Some introspection about what really causes you to say the words... In General... Women shouldn't have abortions... would be a good thing for you to examine further.
Do you think all women are aborting all the time? Do you know that abortions go down when more education, access to healthcare and contraception is available? If you support safe, accessible options for women seeking abortions while also wanting the numbers to get as low as they can then support the things that get us there. And if you support a woman's right to her body and her health then find a way to get good with that but first you have to figure out your actual conflict and what that is about.

I'm pretty sure there will be enough people here that will work with you through that process.

And as I stated; Your general opinion is an actuality, it's a fact that women by and large give more live births than opt for abortion.

[el_bryanto]

195. How would one be specific on this issue?

I think if I were to bring up specific cases talking about women I think shouldn't have abortions, or thinking about situations in which a women shouldn't have an abortion, that would be even more problematic. Because the moment I create a specific situation in which I don't think a woman should have an abortion, than I would be accused for believing that all situations are like that.

It should be noted that this comes in response to posts in which the phrase "Safe Legal and Rare" was attacked as being anti-choice; it does feel like there are those at DU that believe that it's not just important that we all vote the same way but that we all feel the same way about the issue. I don't know if that's most people here or just some.

Bryant

[chowder66]

198. Do or don't dig deeper, post or don't post. It's your choice. nt

[el_bryanto]

199. Thank you. I don't intend to start a post on this again (at least not any time soon).

Sort of a shame too - there was a great quote by Hillary Clinton I'd like to run a poll on - but best not too.

Bryant

[boston bean]

200. I see you took admins words as not posting this stuff frequently and as long as you are not "rude"

[el_bryanto]

204. I haven't heard from the Admins this time around

I feel like you believe that I'm being less than honest with my postings - possibly I'm reading too much into your words. But if you do think I'm a liar or a betrayer of some sort you should just say so - in IM or here, so I know where I stand with you.

But actually I feel like I've accomplished what I meant to and I can drop it for now. I felt like there is a trend at DU for orthodoxy on this issue to be enforced - it's not enough to vote the right way; it's important to believe the right way as well.

There are certainly other aspects about this discussion that interest me, but its probably best to set it aside after this debate.

Bryant

[Niceguy1]

205. I think you hit the nail on the head

With

it does feel like there are those at DU that believe that it's not just important that we all vote the same way but that we all feel the same way about the issue.

I think that is the root cause of all the strife we have seen lately, especially over the word rare.

[spanone]

175. it's NOBODY'S DAMN BUSINESS. a woman & her doctor.

[Starry Messenger]

179. Well, we've managed to totally eliminate all those manbortions.

So it's just the other 50% of humanity you can be judgy about. There's a word for those "people", can't think of it right now.

[PeaceNikki]

180. .

[lostincalifornia]

183. It is no one's business except a woman and Her doctor. everything

Else concerning this topic is irrelevant

[ScreamingMeemie]

184. I am against abortion...

...for myself.

That is where my opinion on abortion should end. It is also not a place (myself and abortion) where other opinions should ever be considered.

I think people, in general, are mature enough, rational enough even, to be allowed to make their own decisions and form their own opinions.

[Warren DeMontague]

190. I know you're desperately waiting to hear what I think, so here goes:

I think people should use their heads to worry about the body that that head is attached to, and let other people's heads worry about their bodies.

[Ilsa]

191. Any of us could have been the 30-40% that never

makes it past the first trimester. It really is that high.

I'm glad you and your siblings were adopted and raised by a loving family that chose you. And that is part of my point: they chose you. You weren't forced upon them by antiquated reasoning or religious laws.

[PoliticalPothead]

193. My position is that we shouldn't even be having this discussion.

Abortion is a private medical procedure and the only people who should be discussing it are the woman and her doctor, and no one else. It's really not anyone's place to tell someone else that they should or should not undergo a medical procedure, no matter what your personal beliefs are.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

201. i know religous folk who vote for gay rights but think homosexuality is immoral

i think they contribute to cultural homophobia much in the same way you contribute to cultural misogyny but it's better than contributing to cultural and legal misogyny

[Gravitycollapse]

203. I think people in general should either support the woman's right to choose or say nothing at all.

You can imagine what I think of this OP.

[idwiyo]

238. +1

[Hekate]

206. Bryant, I understand your point of view and your journey

Thank you for making the personal journey to understand women's needs. I'm sorry that too often DU simply has flame-fests rather than trying to understand different povs, but there it is.

I also had to make an interior journey, as I'm probably the age of your parents. That's why I understand Hillary Clinton's formulation "Safe, legal, and rare." I became pro-choice in college, but without the fury of the front-line feminists (though we needed their fire, and still do).

I keep learning. I learned how lucky I am: that my high school boyfriend was scared of too-early marriage, that I was able to obtain the Pill when I was in college, and that it worked for me. That I was never raped, as a friend of mine was -- abortion was legal by then, but in order to get one she had to buy a plane ticket to another state. It goes on and on. I'm a good planner, but I learned how much sheer luck plays a part.

Women very close to me have had abortions, sometimes more than one. A friend younger than I had a legal abortion in her senior year of high school, because it just made sense for her entire future; then in her late 30s her contraceptive failed, and though she wanted a 3rd child in her family, her husband was adamant they couldn't manage it. It's never casual or easy. I never judge.

The older I get (now 66) the more pro-choice I become; I have realized with dismay that the true anti-choicers are going to take away the very means of preventing pregnancy if they have their way. They have to be stopped. They are the reason we are having this discord here.

But let me say this: I honor your journey, as you honor our ability to choose. You are alive. Your birth-mother looked at that fork in the road of her life and made that choice. And I honor your journey.

[REP]

210. If my grandmother hadn't had her abortions, my mother wouldn't exist

And I wouldn't exist to regret not existing. Or if my parents had done something else that night in March, I wouldn't exist.

Fewer than 2% of women with unwanted pregnancies surrender their newborns for adoption. Most will find a way to abort the pregnancy. Even endure dangerous illegal abortions, like my grandmother did. I don't want that to happen to any woman ever again.

[gollygee]

215. If my parents hadn't had sex when they did, I wouldn't be alive

Maybe every single woman should be forced to try to get pregnant every menstrual cycle to make sure every potential life has a chance.

[REP]

250. Or to make sure his religious feelings don't get hurt

[3catwoman3]

216. I find it very sad...

...that every pregnancy is not a reason for rejoicing, but, for a wide variety of reasons, not every pregnancy is - maternal age or health, personal or family finances, unprotected teenage sex, devastating genetic problems, etc, etc. Unless those who oppose abortion are prepared to step in and take care of each and every infant conceived under less than joyful circumstances, personal opinions ought be just that - personal opinions.

Perhaps a more sensitive outlook would be to wish that no woman ever found herself in circumstances where abortion was wanted or needed.

When I was a little kid, a common playground rejoinder to nosy playmates was "MYOB". Still good advice.

[we can do it]

220. It's really none of your business at all.

[babylonsister]

227. It is not a decision taken lightly by any woman; most of us,

I think, agree with you. I do. But there are personal circumstances where an abortion seems like the only option. If nothing else, this decision made by a woman usually makes her a whole lot more cautious in the future to prevent another harrowing decision. It did for me.

And ftr, I'm glad you and your siblings are here.

[idwiyo]

237. Too bad crap like this OP is allowed to stand. Nice attempt at shaming.

[Demo_Chris]

247. Nonsense. I disagree with the OP but as a liberal I value free speech...

and have no interest in supressing it.

[REP]

249. "Free speech" doesn't exist on private boards

There are a number of things that will get a person banned from this board or get a post hidden. Free speech applies to the government suppressing speech, not private webboards with rules. Like this one. HTH, HAND.

[Demo_Chris]

253. A RIGHT to free speech does not exist here, but the PRINCIPLE of free speech...

... is an entirely different matter, and one the owners of this site clearly do their best to embrace.

[REP]

256. ... Except when they don't.

Your right to express religious homophobia, for example, will not be met with tolerance.

Your right to express racism will not be tolerated.

Your right to express a wide range of things - clearly enumerated in the TOS - will not be tolerated.

HTH, HAND.

[boston bean]

257. Yes we know they allow all sorts of opinions regarding women's rights.

It's all fair game. It's playing out in this thread.

[el_bryanto]

269. I don't know that they would allow someone to call for abortions to be made illegal

I wouldn't think that would be appropriate.

Bryant

[PeaceNikki]

272. A DUer famously called it "murder" and lives to post.

So - yeah.

[el_bryanto]

274. well I stand corrected - but I'm not sure the right call was made in that case nt

[PeaceNikki]

277. I told Skinner that, too.

[boston bean]

279. May I inquire as to his response?

[PeaceNikki]

281. it's been years...

In a nutshell, we were put on forced ignore on DU2 and he, while being strongly opposed to her opinion, felt it wasn't worthy of banning.

She's still here. Avoiding these threads, has me on ignore, but here.

[idwiyo]

308. Bollocks. It's forced-bithers unudulterated bullshit. Would you like same racist shit here too?

You know, for the sake of "free speech" and all. Lets invite some flaming homophobes too, and don't forget to advise admin on not banning any trolls. After all, there are bigoted Democrats of both stripes so, according to your logic, they should be allowed to post here.

[Demo_Chris]

352. Nice Straw man. The jury system handles nonsense like that...

Some are offended because the jury system instituted by this site's owners did not return results that they desire.

As for this thread, the chief complaint cannot be with his clearly stated pro-choice position. That he agree is apparently no longer enough for some, and a purity test must also apply to the reasoning behind this position. Some seem to believe that if this reasoning does not match their own the offending thought criminal must be silenced.

I do not need such protections, and the site owners apparently agree.

[idwiyo]

368. Don't try to backpedal now. One either supports "free speech" for all or one is a hypocrite.

According to your posts, only some "free speech" is OK, one that has to do with an issue of abortion. Rest of it, as you put it ...nicely... just a "nonsense", and judging by your post, it doesn't bother you if its hidden by the jury.

BTW, I had a mistaken belief this website did not allow frorced-birthers propaganda against abortions, doesn't matter how "nicely" it's expressed. Apparently I was wrong, hence there will be no more donations from me.

And please, spare me bemoaning about "purity tests". I don't give a flying fuck what anyone think, I do give a fuck when they "nicely" try to force their beliefs on me, just like this OP did.

[Demo_Chris]

374. This is a False Equivalence. Racism is, by definition, irrational. nt

[idwiyo]

375. Oh, and misogyny isn't? It's perfectly rational to have a desire to force one's set of beleifs

on another person one way or another?

[Demo_Chris]

378. I am not going to chase your goalposts...

Racism is, by definition, irrational. It is always irrational. This means it cannot be rationally defended -- like, for example, a phobia about butterflies or a fervent belief in invisible unicorns.

The questions surrounding the abortion issue are not irrational. Some of the conclusions people reach might be, and some of the responses in this thread almost certainly are, but the "question" itself is not. Rather, it is a complex topic debating of the relative weight or importance one places on the rights of women -- specifically versus the potential future life of any offspring she might have. There are numerous questions involved here, such as what constitutes a "reasonable" infringement of rights (and who decides this subjective measure, using what standards, and what authority), when does human life become invested with individual rights (and are those rights absolute or limited), why that point and no other...

I could go on but I hope the point is clear.

You believe you have "the answer." As it happens, I suspect we share an conviction that a woman's right to choose takes absolute precedence over any other consideration, and that no moral attachments can be made to any conclusion she might reach. More, the original poster in this thread had apparently reached the SAME CONCLUSION.

In any case, I have given this nonsense enough of my time for one day.

[idwiyo]

379. You said you support free speech, but it looks like your support for it covers abortion issue only.

There is nothing to discuss when it comes to other person's body and what they want to do with it. It is completely irrational to even think anyone has a right to dictate to another human being that they MUST share their body with someone else.

I would love too see anyone advocating for forced organ donation, for an instance. Never mind of course how many lives of already living human beings it will save. How is that proposition any more irrational than advocacy on the topic of when it's OK to forcefully turn one into incubator with legs?

[roamer65]

260. Oddly enough, Canada was much later to fully legalize abortion.

It wasn't until 1988 that the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the 1969 law restricting it to safety and well being of the mother.

One of those odd, rare moments where the USA was more progressive than our northern neighbors.

[PeaceNikki]

276. But they've been 100% without ANY restriction since. None. No criminal, no civil laws restricting.

And since then, we've been restricting everywhere. hundreds of new laws in every state.

So, that didn't last long.

[seabeyond]

270. i do not know what other women should do so i do not even try to suggest. a friend got an

abortion very young. she felt massive guilt and refused herself ever the pleasure and joy of having a child in her lifetime to punish herself. so i do not play that game.

that made me awfully sad when she finally confessed that in her mid forties.

[Decaffeinated]

292. Why is this a controversial point?

[el_bryanto]

295. Because many people believe that by stating this position on this issue

1) you are shaming women who might choose to have an abortion.

2) you are creating a culture where having an abortion is a negative thing, which makes it easier to legislate against it.

Or those seem to be the two main arguments against it. They feel that if you have this opinion you should change your opinion to the correct one or shut the fuck up.

Bryant

[myrna minx]

313. Or, inevitably in such discussions, many believe that in a free and secular society,

for example, the United States of America, religious dogma should not supersede the healthcare and science of its corporal citizens. That includes women.(!)

[el_bryanto]

315. Well yes - but if you read the OP

You would know that I don't favor restricting a woman's right to choose. I'm opposed to that. This isn't about policy, it's about orthodoxy. It's about the importance not of us all voting the right way but of us expressing our support in exactly the right way, with no deviation.

Bryant

[myrna minx]

320. Yes, I read your OP as well as your *deleted* poll about whether or not

women should feel troubled or shame about having an abortion.

It may seem strange to you but I believe women don't like having their health care and forced births used as "orthodoxy" thought experiments.

No, even after reading your OP, I don't know anything about your support of women's choice. There's really nothing through out today that supports that idea at all. You've spent the whole day on DU in - what I would call - a passive aggressive way - trying to thwart real arguments for choice - even trying to add "partial birth abortion" into the mix until you were called on it. Hey, if that's your religious beliefs - great, but don't try peddling that anti-choice ideas are mainstream Democratic or main stream woman. Hey, you vote "pure" for your beliefs, but those of us that believe in science and medicine and liberty may not tag along.

[el_bryanto]

338. Do you think i'm essentially a dishonest person?

Or that i've been posting dishonestly?

Bryant

[myrna minx]

346. I have absolutely no idea who you are, so who can say?

You could be HAL 9000 for all I know.

[HijackedLabel]

305. As long as no one advocates for restricting a woman's right to choose,

we shouldn't care about how they personally feel about abortion.

Many people have the same stance on many different issues for many different reasons.

I don't care why someone believes in the freedom of choice as long as they do.

[Demobrat]

309. My gay boss would agree with you

He and his partner want to adopt and are having trouble finding a birth mother. He told me just the other day that abortion should be illegal because there are plenty of people like him who want to adopt.

I told him I didn't think the topic was appropriate for the workplace. Where do you even begin?

[on point]

310. The personal anguish in this decision is enough disincentive

It is not like women are rushing to get pregnant in order to enjoy an abortion! This is a plea to support sex education and birth control.

[truebluegreen]

311. I think people should, in general, butt the eff out.

People, in general DO choose not to have abortions. "People" don't choose abortion as a method of birth control, women choose it when they have no other option. I think people should, in general, find something else to do with their time. Like minding their own "souls" if that is what concerns them. "God" is not such a barbarian that He would deny Entrance to Heaven to the Innocents....and isn't that what this whole "thing" is about?. Unless the whole thing is about control of women.

[matt819]

317. Oh, FFS

I'm sorry but this post deserves an "Oh, FFS" response.

For those who support a woman's control over her reproductive rights, you should know that there's no abortion or non-abortion quota. It's not a matter of whether it "should be" rare or that even if you are pro-choice you should choose not to have an abortion.

I'm a middle aged guy. I've never confronted the issue of abortion in my life. But I think I understand the following: If you're not the pregnant woman or the spouse of the pregnant woman, IT'S NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS. We don't care if you think it should be common or rare or that there's a certain percentage of decisions that should be in favor of continuing a pregnancy. If you are pro-choice, these issues are irrelevant, and, let me repeat, IT'S NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.

Now let's stop these idiotic discussions.

[William769]

319. There is no pro abortion/anti abortion.

It's all about a womans right to privacy & the right to choose what happens in her body. Like it don't like it doesn't matter, right to choose is all that matters.

If your a female and don't want an abortion thats great! Don't have one, it's your choice. If you are a female & choose to have an abortion that is also your choice and no one should have the right to tell you otherwise. If your a man and are against abortion, guess what? Tough shit! You don't get a say in the matter and you just need to get over it.

Forcing your morality on someone is just wrong, as a Gay man I think I'm an expert on that subject. Forcing your religious beliefs on someone is also just as wrong, once again as a Gay man, I am an expert on that subject.

It all boils down to this, if you don't like it, just don't do it and leave everybody else the fuck alone.

With that said, I'll leave you with this.

[vaberella]

326. I am both pro choice and pro life.

I personally am pro-life but believe that it is not my right to pass judgement on the decision of others. If I had a friend who asked for my personal opinion on their pregnancy...I would advocate pro-life but let her know that I would stand by her, whatever the decision. Which is what I have done in the past.

[seabeyond]

341. or you could just tell her to do what is best for her and talk about her and her situation.

instead you are sure to let her know you believe it is murder, but wtf.... you will stand with her.

real support there buddy. what a guy.

[ancianita]

348. Agreed, when you put it that way. But maybe he could mean that support doesn't equal agreement.

I've supported lots of friends and family and done everything a person who'd agree with them would do for them. That's love. But my support has not necessarily been agreement. Because different lives, different beliefs, different karma.

I'm in favor of living in a big society where not everyone agrees with the way others live, but still gives their support to others such as they may live their lives as they see fit. My support might mean paying taxes for their benefit, or standing up for their right to "have their say," or not legislate away their constitutional rights.

[vaberella]

384. Uh...I don't believe it's murder. Never said such a thing.

I have never told anyone that they are a murderer. I don't appreciate people putting words in my life. I simply believe in going through with a pregnancy.

Secondly, I'm not a guy.

[hughee99]

344. It odd that while just about everyone here seems to agree that abortion should

be legal and unrestricted, there's a significant amount of contention here in the 10-15 threads on this subject over the last few days. You'd think among people who are in agreement on THAT much the discussions would be somewhat more civil.

[sabrina 1]

353. You have every right to express your opinion and I would not worry about anyone who tries

to prevent you from doing so. Censorship is far more harmful to everyone's rights and freedom than someone expressing an opinion we don't agree with.

[Violet_Crumble]

357. I agree. This thread's been a real eye-opener for me...

I'm pro-choice and before I came to DU used to hang out on forums run by American anti-choicers and make fun of them, so I'm kinda familiar with the frothing at the mouth folk who want to ban abortion. What I'm not understanding here in this thread is the ire directed at the OP who has a personal opinion on abortion, but isn't anti-choice and doesn't want to see it made illegal. Maybe some of the folk getting outraged in this thread should focus on people who are the real problem, and those are the people who want to take away the right of women to have autonomy over their own bodies when it comes to reproductive rights...

[seabeyond]

366. it is about shaming/guilty. one step away from the forced vaginal probe to shame and guilt

which is one step away from closing abortion clinics. which is one step away from taking womens rights.

that is why there are women bothered with this perspective. living in a nation where our rights are being taken from us.

give an inch....

[hrmjustin]

356. The politics of Abortion is very simple for me, Women should have a right to choose and

i do not support putting more restrictions in place like the GOP want.

The morality of abortions are harder for people. No one likes abortions but sometimes they are the only real solution for a woman. I have questions whether it is the right or wrong thing to do but I personally feel I have no right to sit in judgement of someone who chooses this. I am a gay man so I personally will not have to really deal with this issue so I do not feel it is my place to judge people who have to make these decisions.

[Blecht]

358. I think people, in general, should not meddle in other people's medical decisions (nt)

[newfie11]

362. +infinity!!!!!!! Nt

[RedCappedBandit]

364. It's none of your business.

That's all there is to the discussion about the legality of abortion. Your personal feelings on the matter are completely irrelevant.

Don't like abortion? Don't get one.

[el_bryanto]

365. Thanks for all the thoughtful responses - i am taking a few days off from DU

So if I don't respond that's why.

Bryant

[LWolf]

367. I understand what you are saying.

I think more people, in general, should choose not to have children at all. The planet doesn't need billions of us.

I think birth control should be free, and so ubiquitous that nobody, male or female, ever has an excuse to do without.

If I were to limit reproductive choice in any way, it wouldn't be abortions. I'd limit it this way:

Automatic vasectomies for every boy when he hits puberty, to be reversed when he finishes his education, establishes an adult life, and decides that he's ready to become a father.

I don't, for those frothing at the mouth after reading that, advocate limiting choice. Not really. I do admit to sometimes fantasizing about it, when dealing with damaged kids whose parents shouldn't be parents, which I do on a daily basis as a teacher.

As for your defense of your own existence? A natural response. I'd say more, but I don't think this is really the best environment for that conversation.

[Puzzledtraveller]

369. el_bryanto

You got any hair left? I can't lend you any, I'm losing mine naturally but I have plenty on my chest I can spare. I only post at work so checking in this morning I see this thread is still burning out of control and wanted to see how you were.

[el_bryanto]

386. I'm doing fine - thanks for the concern - i was getting riled up a bit so took some time away

Plus had to focus on my job.

Bryant

[johnlucas]

380. I'm not a fan of abortion either. Birth control solves the issue before it starts

There is a line when fetus ain't just a fetus.
When women have complications that can endanger their health & they have to abort, nobody should have a problem about that.
But the ONE thing the anti-abortion folks got right is that they don't want life to become cheap.
Problem with those guys is they seem to only care for the fetus. They don't seem to value life once it comes outside of the womb.
Sort of like kids with puppies who don't quite seem to give the same attention to them when they're full grown dogs.

Some lady with no health endangerment issues gets up to 9 months just before delivery & then says she wants to abort.
The woman has 100% control of the decision.
But which doctor really wants to abort a baby at that stage?
That's why they put time limits on the thing except in case of health endangerment.
If it's wide open like that, it COULD lead to a slippery slope where women have the possibility of aborting a baby just before the due date.

Everybody shutting down the the topic starter, el_bryanto, forgets that there ARE 2 lives involved.
It's not just the mother. It's the baby-to-be-born TOO.
And making life & death decisions like this should not be taken lightly.
It's the same reason why the Death Penalty needs rethinking.
Same reason why societies discourage suicides.

el_bryanto is not gonna stop Roe vs. Wade by making a post on a forum.
Nobody wants to go back to the bad old days where women aborted babies unsafely in secret locations.
Abortion should be monitored & regulated like it is today to protect the safety of the mothers.

But just because people understand that the legal rights should be intact doesn't mean they really LIKE abortion morally.

Me? I say sidestep the entire issue altogether & go with birth control so a baby can't be formed in the first place.
Birth control brings other problems but I would rather deal with those problems over abortion issues.
One day they'll figure out male birth control & you probably won't have to worry about either one of these issues anymore.

This man is speaking from the perspective of a baby that could have been aborted.
He was glad his mother decided against abortion even if he supports her choice to do it.
No need to villify the dude. Nobody's taking your abortion rights away for goodness sake!
John Lucas

[Scout]

381. "Some lady with no health endangerment issues gets up to 9 months just before delivery & then says..

"Some lady with no health endangerment issues gets up to 9 months just before delivery & then says she wants to abort."

doesn't happen, your right-wing rhetoric notwithstanding.

and, ever heard of birth control failure rates? try googling.

[johnlucas]

382. Yeah I know birth control fails. That's why I'm not against the option for Abortion.

All you wanted to do was attack me & give some ridiculous label like "right-wing".
Didn't even read what I had to say. Just instant attack mode because everybody is not personally cool with abortion.
Just because I don't like abortion personally doesn't mean I'm against the legal option of abortion being available.
Same as the topic starter.

Same thing with Divorce.
I don't like Divorce either but that doesn't mean I don't think the option should be available.
Both Divorce & Abortion are best to be avoided if all possible.
But sometimes life is messy so people understand why both Divorce & Abortion should be available.

And for all those saying no man has any right to say anything about this issue.
It was a Supreme Court FULL of MEN who decided IN FAVOR of Abortion Rights in 1973.

I'm a Black man but that doesn't mean I think White people have no say in Black issues.
Those who think like that are arrogant & ridiculous.
Men will CONTINUE to have an opinion on the issues in this nation INCLUDING Women's issues.
In turn women will continue have opinions on the issues in this nation INCLUDING Men's issues.
Straights will have opinions about Gay issues & Gays will have opinions about Straight issues.

Ain't NOBODY shutting up NOBODY around here.
Don't like it? Tough.
John Lucas

[Scout]

385. i did read your post

it was full of right wing rhetoric/talking points just as i stated. this one is not any better.



talk about attack mode, your posts are full of hostility.

[johnlucas]

396. You may have "read" it but you certainly didn't comprehend it

Believe what you want to about "right-wing" this & "right-wing" that.
There's a woman on this thread who HAD an abortion & agrees with the original poster.
You're gonna call her right-wing too?

There's a reason why people call the positions 'Anti-Abortion' & 'Pro-Choice' instead of 'Anti-Abortion' & 'Pro-Abortion'.
NOBODY is really PRO-Abortion. NOBODY wants to really encourage abortion.
What they DO understand is that sometimes abortions are necessary for various reasons & that people should have the option, the choice to have one legally if that necessity arrives.

Life & Death matters should ALWAYS be considered carefully so that life isn't made cheap.
That's why people wigged out over Dr. Kevorkian & why people wig out on televising executions.
Why most people don't really support a recognized right to commit suicide.

And overall I have always thought this silly Right-Left thing was nonsense.
Political thought doesn't work on some simplistic 1-dimensional spectrum.
Those who buy too deeply into that will not understand views like mine, the original poster's, or the lady who had an abortion yet agrees with the original poster.
They will never understand nuance & put everything in a binary pattern no matter what.

That works for some things but sometimes you need a more analog mentality on matters.
There's really no such thing as The Right & The Left on political views. It's a bad construct.
John Lucas

[Scout]

399. you're just digging yourself in deeper, repeating the same nonsense.

lots of broad brush generalizations, and pure crap in your latest post.

[johnlucas]

401. Not really. I'm on solid ground actually. And my post makes sense

You just don't like what I have to say.
You have the right to your opinions as offbase as they may be.
Just because everybody's not "RAH RAH No Limits On Abortion Whatsoever!" doesn't make them the enemy.
This ain't a cartoon world. This is real life.

Simple.
Some people don't like abortion but recognize the option for it to be available.
Deal with it.

The end result is that they agree it should be available. How hard is that to understand?
You really have no issue to debate here.
What are you fighting about?
John Lucas

[PeaceNikki]

383. wow - yeah, that's some of the most ridiculous bullshit.

[Orsino]

387. Your subject line seems to have been intended to provoke...

...as the rest of your post isn't too severe.

I think that sex education and contraception should be freely available for a couple of generations before we even think about restricting access to abortion. If ever.

[el_bryanto]

388. I don't think we should ever restrict access to abortion, myself.

[LaydeeBug]

390. Maybe you should change the title to WOMEN should not have abortions…since ONLY women can. nt

[el_bryanto]

392. That's been noted above and it's a fair cop - I should have used women instead of people. nt

[me b zola]

393. As an adoptee, I detest the anti-choice people who use me as a poster child for their cause

I support choice and become infuriated when others use my adoptee status (which I did NOT choose) as reason to deny women access to health care.

Look, there is no bigger mind-fuck than adoption. That of course means that not all adoptees will agree on all issues. Lets be kind to one another rather than allowing the hate to divide us. Its not that difficult.

[PowerToThePeople]

400. I agree.

Good birth control methods should be available for all women to use. Education needs to improve. Many things can change. Abortion should never need to be used as a form of birth control.