First of all, I don't make moral judgments about a choice I will never face as a man. That said, what happens to our body and inside our body is completely within our right to control, and our medical decisions are private and no one's business.
We can make nonsense religious arguments about the moment of ensoulment, when pain can be suffered, the personhood of a zygote, but it is all crap. It is not the place of government, especially not a secular democratic government, to tell a woman that from the moment of fertilization she is declared an incubator and her womb the property of the state, even though neither the state, nor the busybodies who would tell her what she must do with her body, will take responsibility for the child if brought to term. It is especially not the place of an institution of eunuchs like the RCC, many of whose officials are misogynist homosexuals and pederasts, to dictate to any woman what she must do about child-bearing.
I've known a number of women who have had abortions. None of them went skipping and tripping to the clinic with a song in their hearts. But all had enough problems without some fundamentalist fool throwing blood on them and calling them a murderer. I know people from my old church that travelled around with the thugs in Operation Rescue. Bunch of ex-bikers, recovering alcoholics, rednecks,Stepford wives and folks otherwise in need of a life-long course of Zoloft and several decades of psychotherapy (if not a beat down), trying to fix their own emotional defects via their self-appointed role as heroic protectors of the unborn on a mission from god. Never saw many of them at an Amnesty vigil for an execution, and those are living, breathing people being put to death without any necessity of self-defense, not three-day old 150-cell blastocysts that anti-abortion moralists insist are persons that would be murdered by stem cell research.
Vegans make moral judgments about my occasional gorgonzola-stuffed petite filet mignon. They can think what they want as long as they respect my space and my right to be an omnivore. The anti-abortion folks are similarly free to think what they will of abortion and market their ideas in society, same as anyone else, as long as they respect a woman's space, privacy and right to ignore their concerns about what is happening inside her own body and what she chooses to do about it. But to be blunt, it strikes me that life is not all that "sacred", especially to the protestants among these folk, who seem pretty four-square (pun intended) behind the death penalty, and who seem to get most interested in women's issues when it provides the opportunity to treat women like brood mares and cattle. I respect my mother too much to stand for that.
2007-04-14 10:51:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I do not think I or anyone else has the right to make that choice for another person. I don't want the neighbor telling me not to have an abortion if I think I want one. It would be my decision and not his. I had four children and two of them I may have aborted if I had had that choice, but now I shudder when I think I might have lost that son or daughter by a choice that would have been wrong. I love them both so much it hurts, and thank God they didn't allow abortions at that time. But I still don't want someone to tell me I don't have that choice. I am glad someone else has to make the decision for or against abortion and not me.
2016-05-20 00:08:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by shannon 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
My parents were splitting up when my mother found out she was pregnant. My father was very abusive to her, and at the time, he was trying to take our home away. He cheated on her numerous times (with both men and women). This was in the early 80's, when there was this strange new disease killing gay men across the country (later known to be AIDS). My mother was in a panic, and ended up having an abortion. She went through it all alone, and regretted it ever since. She only told me about it a year ago. At first, I was shocked, but honestly, I have no idea what I would do under those circumstances. It's been a struggle for me to have children. I'm lucky enough to have a beautiful daughter, but lost a son a year and a half ago. My mother thinks it's the Lord paying her back.
It's a shame so many don't bother to use birth control, then we wouldn't have to worry about all these abortions.
2007-04-14 10:30:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by liberpez 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, it is free will and no one is saying there is no such thing. It's my free will to steal a car too. It's wrong to steal. It's wrong and against the law BUT I still have the free will to do so. That kid had the free will to shoot and kill his principal at school a week or so ago. It was a very poor choice It was murder. His free will, was a will to commit a crime and kill someone. His free will choice is being called, arrested, and prosecuted, as being a wrong.free will, a wrong decision. We need not call a wrong right. If we see a violation, there is nothing wrong with objecting to it. Free will isn't stopped, the poor result of that free will is. There are better decisions than abortion. If abortion doesn't kill something, then what does it do? Some people treat abortion (aborting, stopping, a human life) with about as much regard as they do for what goes into a toilet when they take a $hit. Not a good idea.
2007-04-14 10:18:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
I mostly agree with a woman's right to choose, however, I have moments when I must weigh the facts. After all, 1/3 of all women will have an abortion at some point in their lives (who knows, maybe my mom had an abortion or two at some time in her life) and I think to take this right away from them would be wrong. Secondly, if a woman is raped or her life is in danger I definitely think she should be allowed to have an abortion.
My only concern with abortion is that it is going to rob our world of genetically superior human beings. People always say abortion saves poor mothers and children from a lifetime of hardships, but these poor, ghetto mothers are rarely the type of women who have abortions. Most often women who have abortions are sophisticated career women in their 30s and 40s who just do it to be progressive or older women who get pregnant by accident. But if these women would have more children our world be better off in the next 20-30 years.
I am afraid we are going to live in a future where there will be two human races: a genetically superior race of attractive, healthy, smart rich people, and a dim-witted race of fat, stupid, poor people. God help us all!
2007-04-14 10:42:20
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dreams 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I have wanted to ask this question for a long time but never quite phrased it correctly in my mind - or forgot about it. Or had too many cookies. THANK YOU!!! "Free will" indeed! Actually, without the "godly" representation of free will, the term includes why many of us live in a rational and forward-advancing world.
I must bring this up as well: it may sound harsh, but it is certainly the truth as far as I have seen it. It seems many people who believe women have no right to choose to be in control of their own bodies (and who set women's rights back so far we might as well be living in the days of the cavemen) also believe it is alright to abuse children once they're out of the womb. "Pro-life" (which we ALL are), I believe, is the answer of the extremists.
There are some really awful "pro-life" parents out there. Many. Maybe all. There is no such thing as pro-life, especially when something isn't anywhere near alive. These people insist that "free will" doesn't apply to children, which is so hypocritical I am constantly shocked by it. They are usually flag-waving, narcissistic jerks who would happily send their first, second & third-borns into a civil war in another country that never attacked us in the first place, or posed a threat in anything beyond it's dictator. (Look what Georgie has done for all the dictatorships in Africa. The one in Georgia. Nothing. Exactly). Whoo - bad me, I am getting political. This is so often a politically-charged question however. EVERYONE is anti-abortion. Noone wants it to happen. Noone wishes for it. It is a woman's prerogative what to do once that seed is planted though. Period. I used to say I was for choice but against abortion. I needn't put it that way now. Of course I wish abortion never had to happen. I don't believe I could choose it myself but I have never been in a position to have to contemplate it either, thank goodness.
I hope one of these supposed pro-lifers recognize their own hypocrisy whenever they hit or swear at their children. Somehow, though, I doubt it. Poor kids.
2007-04-14 10:19:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Me, Thrice-Baked 5
·
2⤊
3⤋
I actually agree up to a point. If I have an opportunity to have freedom of choice in casting my vote for righteousness, I'll do so. I'll also not stay silent about my belief if what I believe is a killing of the innocent taking place. Silence is as much a sin in that case. But I would never physically harm anyone or interfere with them in their choice of sin. Their judgment, unfortunately, comes soon enough.
2007-04-14 10:24:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by JohnFromNC 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
So everyone has the right to commit acts that are wrong and no one else should ever intervene?
If you see someone pull out a gun and start shooting random people on the subway, should you try to stop them or just shrug your shoulders, say "That's his choice," and move on?
If you are walking to your car and notice that a woman is being raped in the back of the van beside it, should you try to stop the rapist or just ignore him because it's "his choice?"
Refusing to "judge people" who you know are doing wrong is effectively the same thing as giving them encouragement to continue. The world is filled with choices. Ignoring them doesn't make them go away.
2007-04-14 10:24:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by scifiguy 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Heather,your avatar is very distracting ...I can't think....but anyhow...I am very opposed to abortion. I do not judge those who have had abortions,but would do all that I could to convince someone to avoid proceding with one.
Acutally, I was instrumental in preventing one years ago...and the fruit of that desicion,is a beautiful little 11 year old girl that I visit quite often...she is a real joy..and loved very much. Being,adopted,myself, I did not know how much one could love a child that was not your own....Now I get it...
2007-04-14 10:16:53
·
answer #9
·
answered by bonsai bobby 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Any way you cut it, taking a human life is murder.
Many people take it upon themselves to protect babies from murder, and this is a noble motive. I wouldn't think twice about protecting my family from danger, nor would I hesitate from protecting a stranger.
Why not protect children? How is it so hard to understand that this is a good thing to try to do?
Women who think they have the right to do what they want with their own body are just self-centered and cruel. They forget that the baby's body does NOT belong to them. Their right to their own body begins and ends with the decision to have sex. When they become pregnant, their body becomes a shared vessel, like it or not, and their rights end.
The decision shifts to the woman AND the baby, and for a valid decision, a woman will have to allow the baby to be born and grow up before asking for the baby's opinion on whether or not it wants to be aborted. Sounds ridiculous, but how can you just sweep that right under the rug at the same time you're claiming it for yourself?
Here's the kicker:
If you murder an abortion doctor, you've just defeated your purpose, haven't you? The idea is to NOT kill, and there are numerous ways to do it without being violent at all.
2007-04-14 10:12:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
5⤋