A question for pro choicers? Not derogatory?

Question

Do you base your rationale on the fact that its a womens issue or are you really looking at it from both the babies perspective and the womens?

I find it hard to dismiss the idea that the only reason abortion is legal and so many people are pro-choice is because of the polically correct who base their decision on the inferiority complex associated with it being a womens rights issue.

Essentially pro-choice is not about abortion but about women vs mens rights.

Can anyone agree/disagree?

Answer 1

I am pleasantly surprised so see 4 men that responded who actually have an inkling of what it is to be pro-choice.
It is not an easy decision to make. It is a decision that stays with a womarn for the rest of her life.
I look at it from both sides. It is not politically expedient in this country to give a woman the right to govern her own body.
Men would not like it if they were told they had to have a vasectomy if they don't want to have kids at this time but maybe in the future they could have it reversed. There would be an uproar.
If there was not a choice for a woman who would want to terminate a pregnancy whether it was because rape, or what ever the case may be, there would be back door abortions putting womens' lives in danger.
It would be a women vs men rights if a man could carry a child. He can tell a woman what she can do with her body only when he can give birth.
Termination numbers while they are high are actually decreasing in this country.

Answer 2

It's not about Women -vs- Men.

It's about women being allowed to make their own *life decisions*.

Why should anyone be *forced* to go through 9-10 months of pregnancy, then a painful labour, then all the responsabilities of being a mommy when they do NOT want to be a mommy.

If a women wants to terminate her pregnancy, then I totally support their decision, because being a parent is a big deal and some people should just NOT be parents.

Why bring a child into this world if it's not going to be loved or taken care of?

Why go through all the trouble of having a baby, and then just giving it away to someone?

I know it sounds weird, but I'd rather have an abortion, than give a baby up for adoption. It's actually less heartache, because you know where the baby is (when you have an abortion).

But if you give it away, then you have no clue if that baby is being raised right, if it's being abused or raped or in a crappy foster home or whatever.

This is always a very touchy and sensitive issue to talk about. But when this issue comes up, I always am in support of a woman making a choice for herself and deciding what she wants to do with her body. And not letting some govt tell you what you can and cannot do.

Cheers

Answer 3

I like the way you phrased this question. Thank you for being reasonable - and curious! I hope this develops into a rational dialogue.

Abortion is absolutely a women's rights issue. It is a power issue for women to decide what to do with their bodies, an issue that has been decided for them since the dawn of time by men. Of course women want to assert their right to choose whether or not to carry a child to term and to be responsible for its care. Nevertheless, I don't believe when a woman finds herself with an unplanned pregnancy, the first thing that goes through her mind is whether she will assert a right or a power - it's what's best for me and any potential offspring that will come or not from this decision.

Legalizing abortion was not a sympathy play to bolster women's previous inferiority. It's a common sense approach to a public health problem - women will have abortions whether or not it's legal. They always have and they always will. It's also a freedom *from* religion thing - why should anyone's religious beliefs determine what any other woman wants to do if she doesn't believe the same thing?

If people believe life begins at conception and couldn't find abortion acceptable, then they must NEVER have sex in a situation where an unplanned pregnancy is a problem. PERIOD. If they truly believe abortion is wrong, then they MUST aggressively support sex eduction in schools and free birth control to anyone at any time. Until that time, they must not criticize those who make hard decisions because it's what's best for them.

Answer 4

I can see where a man could possibly think that way, especially if he would want the child and the woman chose to have an abortion anyway. I can see that being totally unfair to the man involved in that situation. And, I just don't have an answer on how to change that. I do believe that women should be able to obtain a safe and legal abortion in this country though. Way back when, women were obtaining illegal abortions and most women died of infection or hemorrhage from botched abortions. I really wouldn't want to see that happen again. If a woman is desperate enough, she will find a way wether it be legal or not. Just my 2 cents.

Answer 5

I'm not exactly pro-choice, but I look at it this way...

There are thousands of kids on the streets right now (in the US alone). Possibly hundreds of thousands or more. Children, freezing to death, murdered in the streets, prostituting or being exploited for survival, being tossed into dumpsters.

If abortion were legal this number could reach the millions very quickly.

It is really upsetting to know that abortion is used as birth control, especially in situations when the father wants to step forward.

But were not taking care of our society's unwanted children as it is....the system is overflowing with kids.

So yeah I do look at it from the child's point of view. I just wish the hard core pro-lifers would put their money where their mouth is and foster some kids. Then restricting abortion would be a no brainer.

Answer 6

I would agree with that as a pro- choicer (kinda, I don't personally like abortion at all, but I'm a male and it' not my choice)

what is the point of having a kid if the condom broke and you could not support it? the kid would grow up in poverty, hated by the parents. That kid would have a miserable life. the argument is that the kid might go on to do something great, but the whole nature vs nurture thing comes in here. Kids are products of their environments. both of my parents have advanced degrees. I am highly educated as well. Did my parents have an effect? Hell yes. To say that your parents had no effect on you at all is idiocy at best.

And the mother. The child could be a painful reminder for her. A big reminder of how she failed.

etcetera, etcetera.l you've heard it all before. but the big point is that it's not just a one sided argument. Both sides have many different aspects and perspectives. It's not an easy debate.

I don't like abortion. I never will. However, it should be kept safe, legal and rare.

Answer 7

It's worth mentioning that this is partly a religious issue, having to do with beliefs concerning the soul.

One big question is whether you believe in an intangible soul that is present from the instant of conception, or whether you see the embryo as a developing being which does not have full human functioning when it is conceived, but only gradually grows into having human functions - such as emotion, intellect and understanding, tactile sensations, etc.

To those who believe in an intangible soul that is fully present in the cells at conception, it may seem like murder to abort, even if the embryo has only two cells in its "body," because the soul still somehow "lives" in those two cells - even without a brain or mind to house it.

But to those who don't think it's necessary to envision an intangible soul as part of being human, or those who think that the soul may grow into being human along with the brain and body, it's fairly clear that an embryo at very early stages has no real human characteristics - it it is a mass of cells without much differentiation, and it cannot think, feel, or experience its existence in any meaningful way.

However, it WILL eventually grow into a real human being who can experience pain and fear and loss, at which point it WOULD be truly cruel to kill it. Therefore, if a child is unwanted, if it is likely to have terrible difficulties due to a birth defect or congenital disease, if the mother will be unable to properly care for it, or if bearing the child to maturity would threaten the mother's life, it may seem kinder to abort the growing organism before it does develop really human characteristics.

There are different opinions as to when the fetus may actually become aware, or have the ability to feel pain, etc., and most people who support abortion also support erring on the side of caution, so as not to abort a fetus that might be far enough along to really be considered aware and able to experience things. Therefore, the intention is not to say that the child's rights don't matter, but rather to say that bringing a child into the world when it is not wanted, or cannot be properly cared for, may actually be the most cruel thing to do, while aborting a pre-human organism isn't really cruel at all.

And, I have to say that the argument (which is often used) that "You wouldn't think that way if your mother said she had thought of aborting YOU" doesn't necessarily hold water. My mother's doctor advised her to do so. Of course, from the vantage point of my adult life, I can say I'm glad she didn't, but if I had been aborted, according to my way of thinking, I wouldn't exist, so I don't really think I'd have an opinion one way or the other.

Of course, if you see the blastocyst (early undifferentiated cell-mass) as possessing a soul from the very instant of conception, this answer could be very different for you. Then you can imagine the soul of the unborn baby feeling just terrible that it never got the chance to have a life.

So it's all in how you look at it.

Answer 8

I agree. Do you think all the women out there who have abortions and say it is a woman's choice to decide what she should do with her body are pregnant with boys? Would that make the decision to kill ok? I've had an abortion and I don't criticize those who have had one also. It's the repeat offenders I have a problem with and the women who proudly talk about their operations. I find them ignorant and cold. The worst are the people who preach freely about how abortions are ok and should be legal and yet they don't know the first thing about what it's like to go through the process. They don't know what it is like to have a little, tiny person growing inside them and then have it ripped out in a matter of minutes... seconds. They don't know what it is like to reach the date their baby was supposed to be born. Too many ignorant people in this world follow what others say instead of thinking for themselves. They don't stop to think that just because others tell them it's ok and the right thing to do that ... maybe it isn't.

Answer 9

Well first off it is a woman's right to her own body. Basically how would you feel if the federal Gov't told you you had to get a vasectomy even if you didn't want one?

I support abortion mainly for the fact it is needed at times, medically, not as birth control as some of those pro-lifers want to claim.

Abortion needs to stay legal so in the instances of the mother's life is at stake, the proceedure can be done properly and not in some back ally like it used to be when it wasn't legal.

Look at it this way...you and your wife are about to have a baby, complications set in and if the baby isn't aborted, you will not only lose the baby, but also your wife. But if the abortion is done, you and your wife can plan to try again after she's fully recovered.

So tell me, what's more important, losing both or saving the one person who can give you another?

Mark my word, if abortion is made illegal again, expect to see plenty of those "pro-lifers" running to Canada or Europe or where ever to get an abortion when it hits home for them.

Answer 10

I look at it from the standpoint of a women's health issue. For some unknown reason there is a thought that if you make it illegal, as it was, you won't have abortions. That is out and out nonsense as anyone alive before Roe v. Wade can tell you. In fact, before the decision, the major argument for it was that doctors were feeling helpless when women came in with the aftereffect of illegal abortions, things like pelvic infections and emergency hysterectomies and pelvic scarring that would lead to permanent sterility. And all of this was preventable simply by having clean legal abortion available to women who couldn't afford to go to Europe. It was assumed women knew that being pregnant would lead to a child, so no need for those strange laws that seem to think you need 24 hours to learn that, and no need for government to step in when a woman wanted to make a decision not to carry to term. If men could carry the fetus it would be a mans decision, but its not, so forcing a woman to be pregnant against her will is Orwellian.