Abortion debate trivializes rape

[Ken Morgan]

No offense taken Bushido, but I think you misunderstand the dynamic at the "Gates of Hell." (Yeah, they actually call it that.)

At least when I was there, the majority of protesters were quiet reasonable people. They came, they said the Rosary on the sidewalk, and they left. It's mildly harassing, but they don't address the patients directly or impede their paths. And I have no problem with prayer at all. The problem with a setting like that is that it attracts wingnuts like flies to a turd. They're the ones who constitute the problem, and the reason most of us escort. It's never okay to scream in a stranger's face that they're going to hell, especially at a vulnerable time like that.

So yes, it's okay to have strong feelings about something. But we escorted to protect patients from those who didn't understand the line between having strong feelings and resorting to intimidation and threats. All of us escorts would have been much happier sleeping in on a Saturday if only there weren't a need for us.

:asian:

 

[Flea]

Honestly, I wonder why abortion demonstrators aren't more violent. I know what I'd do if I knew somebody within my arm's reach was going to kill a child...

Bushido, what are you saying here?

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Actually, Flea...I've done what you did. In New Mexico, Washington and Oregon. As you saw, I found most of the people to be quiet and reasonable..along with a few yahoos. As you said, we all wished there was no need for us.

What I'm "saying here" is, honestly, I find many abortion detractors cowardly. If I knew...knew, not believed (I realize this is by nature theoretical)... my next door neighbor was going to get in his car tomorrow and kill a baby child...my neighbor would not live through the night.

Since the objection to abortion is that it's "murdering a child" I'm surprised more people don't take stronger action than scaring already terrified 17-year-olds.

 

[Flea]

Ah. My bad. I apologize. The way you worded it, I came away with approval for violence against providers. Thanks for escorting. It's hard work, and something I never want to have to do again. Sadly, there will probably always be a call for it.

 

[WC_lun]

The obvious answer is they do not believe it is murder. They do believe it is the escape of the consequences of having sex.

 

[Carol]

My sister is a fundamentalist Protestant...too much so for my taste. But, I admire her deeply. Because not only did she raise two of her own, after they left the house she adopted a sibling unit of four (ages 6 to 14) at age 50.

That's courage, character, bravery, faith, and a desire to actually live one's values instead of merely talking about them.

I disagree with her on many matters...but I still admire her greatly.

 

[Sukerkin]

{In response to post#25 above} But don't believe in taking circumstances into consideration?

I do have to say tho', that I am much more in favour of 'birth control' before conception than after; it' s just that I cannot 'walk' in the shoes of women who have to make this hard choice, so I find it very difficult to criticise their decision ... especially when it is sometimes a choice that they have no realistic alternative but elect to take.

 

[Blade96]

Honestly, I wonder why abortion demonstrators aren't more violent.

I am very glad that they aren't!

 

[bushidomartialarts]

I am very glad that they aren't!

Damn straight.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

The obvious answer is they do not believe it is murder. They do believe it is the escape of the consequences of having sex.

Or more to the point...they've been told so by people who's only sincere belief is that by painting it as murder, they'll get the political support of those who think it's wrong to escape the consequences of having sex.

 

[cdunn]

{In response to post#25 above} But don't believe in taking circumstances into consideration?

I do have to say tho', that I am much more in favour of 'birth control' before conception than after; it' s just that I cannot 'walk' in the shoes of women who have to make this hard choice, so I find it very difficult to criticise their decision ... especially when it is sometimes a choice that they have no realistic alternative but elect to take.

Things happen. Short of a hysterectomy, birth control fails. Sometimes, the child-to-be is wanted, but the biological development fails. The path from zygote to human is not trivial. Fetuses may be lacking entire systems of organs, may threaten the mother's life, and may, on occasion, be better described as lumps of cancerous flesh than as fetuses.

As usual, it is a great melange of greys - no black and no white, no matter how much some people may wish otherwise.

 

[Empty Hands]

Like many of the wedge issues in the US, I can't fault the protesters too much. If I honestly, in my heart, was certain that abortion was the murder of children it's possible I'd be taking direct action.

I would agree if that were the case, but I don't think it is for the reasons I outlined. Even if the protestors firmly believe that abortion is murder, their actions don't really back it up. If children were being murdered, I wouldn't accept it if the murderer was a Christian virgin. I wouldn't be too concerned about the sexual activities or morality of the murderer. Nor would I try to deny the murderer other means to prevent the murder in the first place. Nor would I not want the murderer to stand trial or go to jail for murder, which very few pro-life movement followers endorse.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

I would agree if that were the case, but I don't think it is for the reasons I outlined. Even if the protestors firmly believe that abortion is murder, their actions don't really back it up. If children were being murdered, I wouldn't accept it if the murderer was a Christian virgin. I wouldn't be too concerned about the sexual activities or morality of the murderer. Nor would I try to deny the murderer other means to prevent the murder in the first place. Nor would I not want the murderer to stand trial or go to jail for murder, which very few pro-life movement followers endorse.

That's sort of my point.

 

[Big Don]

What pro abortion people seek to do is trivialize abortion. That is, to make it just one more medical procedure, that has nothing to do with morals. As far as the rape or incest question, its a bunch of crap. When incidents of rape and incest come within a factor of ten of producing the same number of pregnancies as casual sex, that might be a different story. Until then, it is nothing more than a stalking horse used to distract from the fact that the vast majority of abortions are preformed for convenience.

 

[granfire]

What pro abortion people seek to do is trivialize abortion. That is, to make it just one more medical procedure, that has nothing to do with morals. As far as the rape or incest question, its a bunch of crap. When incidents of rape and incest come within a factor of ten of producing the same number of pregnancies as casual sex, that might be a different story. Until then, it is nothing more than a stalking horse used to distract from the fact that the vast majority of abortions are preformed for convenience.

STOP!

It's not 'pro abortion', it is pro choice.

And that is the decisive difference: Pro choice is for the option, you may or not, if you choose.
Anti abortion/pro life aim to take the option away.

 

[Big Don]

STOP!

It's not 'pro abortion', it is pro choice.

And that is the decisive difference: Pro choice is for the option, you may or not, if you choose.
Anti abortion/pro life aim to take the option away.

The choice to wear plaid? The choice to walk funny? The choice to dye your hair? No, the choice to have an abortion, ergo, PRO ABORTION.

 

[granfire]

The choice to wear plaid? The choice to walk funny? The choice to dye your hair? No, the choice to have an abortion, ergo, PRO ABORTION.

nope, still pro choice.
Let's see:
Pro choice does not drag women kicking and screaming into dark alleys to make them have abortions
Anti abortion forces a woman to deal with having a child regardless of circumstance, with no provision to help out with the consequences of said anti stance for the next 20 or so years.

The difference is that pro choice does not superimpose personal ideas onto another person.
Anti abortion does this in a matter that is rather disturbing, since it does not affect you the slightest in any way if this woman is or is not having a child. But your stance on her body function greatly impacts her. See the difference?

Like I said, I don't see too many people walk the walk on the pro life issue. That means, I see a lot of pro lifers, but non that put their money where their mouth is to defray the consequences incured by non abortion, like adopting or even fostering kids.

 

[Big Don]

Yeah, because nobody adopts kids or fosters them anymore. There hasn't been one adoption since Roe v Wade...
The only choice those who use the term "pro choice" are about is the choice to have an abortion, pretending that isn't true is disingenuous.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

What pro abortion people seek to do is trivialize abortion. That is, to make it just one more medical procedure, that has nothing to do with morals. As far as the rape or incest question, its a bunch of crap. When incidents of rape and incest come within a factor of ten of producing the same number of pregnancies as casual sex, that might be a different story. Until then, it is nothing more than a stalking horse used to distract from the fact that the vast majority of abortions are preformed for convenience.

Do you have anything to back this up? Statistics showing the causes of aborted pregnancies for example? Maybe a study of the intake questionnaires? How about a study showing repeat abortions to indicate the frequency with which women consider abortion a convenient contraception method? Or is this all just ideological talking points?

I'm being such a stickler about evidence because what you just typed assumes a lot, and makes pretty clear your preconceptions about the women getting abortions. I don't believe those preconceptions apply to most or even many of them, so I call B.S.

Personally, my belief about allowing abortion doesn't really depend on the motivations or sexual promiscuity of the women who get them because it's not about whether they get them, it's about their right to choose.

 

[Empty Hands]

When incidents of rape and incest come within a factor of ten of producing the same number of pregnancies as casual sex, that might be a different story. Until then, it is nothing more than a stalking horse used to distract from the fact that the vast majority of abortions are preformed for convenience.

Again, why does this matter to you? If it's murder, then it doesn't matter whether it's performed for "convenience" or because you were raped. A child is still murdered either way. The "rape and incest" clauses are only distractions because the debate has already effectively conceded the point that abortion is not murder. If that was in serious dispute, then the focus would be on murder, not assigning fault.

So if it's not murder, why does it have moral consequences?