|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 8:53 am
Changing Hearts | From Pro-Life to Pro-Choice at RHRealityCheck. The author tells her story about changing sides slowly and reluctantly, but also urges readers to try not to think of it in terms of "sides". Anna Clark at RHRealityCheck ]Pro-choice society, like democractic society, is predicated on space for those who disagree. When we play sides, we forget there are no enemies in the vision we pursue. Our inclusiveness of those who choose not to have abortions, and even those who judge abortion to be morally wrong, is our movement's power. When we approach anti-choicers as friends, not only do we act on the heart of our beliefs, but we create space for anti-choicers to become our allies. I urge reproductive health advocates to remember the ones who will change their minds. We must build spaces where those of us who move slowly into the pro-choice movement are recognized as true partners, rather than tagalongs. Our beliefs are not created by what -- or who -- we are against. They exist because of what we are for: comprehensive reproductive health for all, and the ability to decide for ourselves if we will or will not have an abortion. As individuals and as a movement, we must act from that truth. It sort of reminds me of the "Healing of the Abortion Controversy" topic that was created a while ago. I haven't been there in ages and I have no idea if it's still going or how it ended, but I remember a lot about it and I'm still not sure what to think. On one hand, I'd really like people to stop the fighting and have an actual intelligent conversation. On the other hand, I want that to happen partly because I think more people will become pro-choice once they actually understand what it means. (Which scares me, because as an atheist I know some religious people see me as just a potential convert to preach to. What am I if I want to do the same thing?) On one hand I hate the "us-vs.-them" mentality, on the other I love it. I always tell myself that everything is relative, and that nothing is ever really black or white, this or that. On the other, I know it's choice or no choice. Overall, the "healing" topic in the ED just made me feel more like the pro-life side cannot be trusted and does not respect women. It just reinforced the feelings of hatred--feelings I don't like to admit to but can't deny--that I have for them. This sounds awful, but I could never be friends with a pro-lifer, and I'm really not ashamed of it. I don't feel like that's exclusionary or hateful. I just can not respect someone who does not respect my right to choose. I see that belief as inherently misogynist, and I don't see why I should accept it as a perfectly valid but different belief. I can accept that people feel abortion is wrong, but I can not accept their belief that because it is wrong, it should not be an option. So... How do you feel? What do you think? How do you feel about cooperation and conversation? How do you feel/what do you think about pro-lifers? Do you see them as enemies, possible converts, regular people, lost/confused people? Could you be friends with one? My comment on the article is the "Anti Does Apply" one (by Sayna). I said anti-choice is a realistic label. Do you agree or disagree?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:15 am
I tend to think a lot of pro-choicers are misguided rather than intentionally hateful towards choice. And honestly I've always thought that pro-choice works because it's very much the "different strokes for different folks" mentality that actually seems to work a helluva lotta the time. Like to-may-to, to-mah-to. You do this, I do that. No restrictions. I like that, even though it's quite idealistic.
Case in point: I have a pro-life friend who is Christian. Her religion basically decides what she believes, which she doesn't have a problem with. It's because of her religion that she believes being gay and gay marriage is wrong. (Incidentally, this was a reason I shunned religion - I wanted to decide myself what I thought was right and wrong.) It's probably because of her religion that she's pro-life. She just sees it as murder.
Other, interesting case point: one of the pro-lifers in Gaia actually has practically the same view on EVERYTHING as me - except abortion. So there must be something different about how our minds work, 'cause I find it wrong to force choice on to people, more wrong than killing. What the hell kind of life will you have if you're not allowed to make your own decisions? (I probably feel this way because my decisions are forever being stifled by my mum... so I want everyone to make their decisions, for better or worse.) I'd rather that I make my decision for worse than someone else make it for better.
As a former lifer, I know how easy it is to sucker young people into believing all death is wrong and should be prevented. Part of my own long struggle to choice was growing up, and empowering myself.
I've hated it being a question of sides, especially since the pro-choice 'side' does more to prevent pregnancy in the first place than the pro-life 'side'. But they don't give us room. If there were initiatives about preventing pregnancy then I would gladly work with pro-lifers on them. Quite honestly, I get along with some people simply by avoiding discussion of what we disagree on. I don't discuss anything to do with pregnancy or sex or abortion with my pro-life friend (who is abstinent) much like I wouldn't discuss politics with anyone who wants the Labour party to stay in power. If I realise I can't change their minds, I don't bother trying, and we just stay friends.
(I used to be Seeing the Kraken by the way.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:33 am
(Thanks! You seemed familiar. I recognized the avi, but not the name.) Quote: ...I find it wrong to force choice on to people, more wrong than killing... Here's the thing, though: You can't force choice on people. Unless you're forcing your choice on them. You can, however, force life/continued pregnancy/childbirth on people. (Not morally/ethically, but realistically.) That's why I insist that it's pro-choice. Because you support the right of a person to choose for themself either way. I think I meant a different thing when I said to be friends with someone. Maybe it's because I don't take the term "friend" lightly. (I have two. In the whole world. One if you don't count my boyfriend.) I can talk to them and hang out with them as long as we don't discuss anything abortion/politics/religion/reproduction/sex/whatever related, but I can't consider them anything near a friend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:50 am
I phrased that wrong. >.< Badly, at least. I meant it's more wrong to force YOUR choice on someone else than to kill. Like, I kinda think rape can be worse than murder.
And I think we have different ideas about what constitutes a friend. For me, a friend is someone who's nice to me, who likes me, that I like, and get along well with. If you count really heavy friends, then I've probably only got two as well. One of whom I only know via internet. And the other is my boyfriend. I mean, there's different levels of relationship. Acquaintences are people I know, get along with, but don't talk to much or try and see regularly. If I like talking to people, and we talk about our lives and share stuff, then they're a friend. I can disagree with opinions, but I'm alright with that.
(I might disappear for another two weeks now. >_> My boyfriend is home for Christmas and it is finally time for me to leave work. : D But you guys are awesome so I'll try not to be gone too long again.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:14 pm
Quote: How do you feel about cooperation and conversation? -I believe that if the two sides were to talk, there could be some problems out and work them out as along as the religious aspect is left out. But I doubt there would be any kind of whole agreement. Quote: How do you feel/what do you think about pro-lifers? Do you see them as enemies, possible converts, regular people, lost/confused people? Could you be friends with one? As long as they understand they will not convert me and that my decision is final, I am fine with them. The first religious tract handed to me from them will be tossed aside right in front of them like I do to any of my customers at work who try to convert me top Christianity. I see them as people who do not fully understand the standards of this current society. In the 1950's I can understand the arguement for pro-life, yes when everyone had a good job, monetary security, not needing a college education to get a good job, women not fully integrated into the workforce and less chance of divorce. I may not agree with 1950's standards but I can understand then for a pro-life stance. Today, without a college degree, it takes both parents to work to support 1 healthy child while being on food stamps and hardly affording the gas to get to work. Even with both parents having a college degree and health insurance, it is almost impossible for a child with a health condition to get the treatment they need. There was a customer who came through my line with a daughter who has had several heart transplants, the girl is only 8 years of age. Her bills come to over 50,000 dollars a month. I am not saying she should have been aborted, I am pointing out how hard it is for her family right now. I am still friends with many pro-lifers and my family too. My fiance is a pro-lifer, but he and I have discussed over situations where I would abort, and he completely agrees with those situations. To not be friends with them or not to talk to them after you find out they are either side or if you are pro-life and your friend had an abortion and you protest them the rest of your life, is childish. But ignoring them because they do protest you and call you a satanist is perfectly acceptible. As long as they respect your position, you should respect theirs and vice versa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:42 pm
with the exception of a couple really good friends of mine, i never even bother to discuss abortion with friends. if they bring it up, i'll let them know what i think. if they ramble on about some stupid pro-life appeal to emotion bullshit i'll call them out on it. otherwise, as long as we've got enough in common to be friends, i'm not going to bring up a subject that lots of people (including myself) get really pissed about. on the other hand, if i know someone is pro-life from the get-go, i tend to avoid socializing with them without even being aware of it. i try my best to give people the benefit of the doubt but apparently i seem to have a hard time doing that with pro-lifers. though it makes me seem like a b***h, i'll admit that i have a hard time looking at someone the same way once i find out that they're pro-life. i'm pretty sure that's because i've had an abortion before, though.
basically, if i don't know someone's pro-life, they're just another person, possibly even a cool person. however, if i know they're pro-life, i avoid them like the plague. don't get me wrong, i'm not rude to pro-lifers (unless they're protesting, then i'll flip them the bird) but i have no desire to befriend one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:19 pm
Quote: When we approach anti-choicers as friends, not only do we act on the heart of our beliefs, but we create space for anti-choicers to become our allies. I agree with this sentiment but I would highly urge all pro-choicers to never forget that it is, as the poll puts it, pro-choice or no-choice. The ultimate goal of the pro-choice movement is to ensure that women's rights are upheld - in particular that they be guaranteed a right to their own bodies and the ability to defend it from all invaders (e.g. abortion). The only way to do this is to convince those who do not currently side with pro-choice that being pro-choice is the way to go. Screaming at them about how horrible they are no more convinces them than calling us babykillers convinces us. While it can seem sickening to me to be cordial to those who would happily and willingly strip women of their rights, turning them into breeding cows for the government... I acknowledge that the vast majority of them are ignorant or in denial about that particular end in their anti-choice movement, and as such I think it is best to approach them from a non-hostile stance. In short - I agree, it is pro-choice or no choice, because the government that can force a woman to remain pregnant is the government that can force her to abort. No choice in reproductive health means just that, no choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:49 pm
Well said, Talon. Streex I see them as people who do not fully understand the standards of this current society. In the 1950's I can understand the arguement for pro-life, yes when everyone had a good job, monetary security, not needing a college education to get a good job, women not fully integrated into the workforce and less chance of divorce. I may not agree with 1950's standards but I can understand then for a pro-life stance. But why is it lifestyle/ability to care for a child financially that's important and not choice and desire to have a child?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:15 am
Streex I see them as people who do not fully understand the standards of this current society. In the 1950's I can understand the arguement for pro-life, yes when everyone had a good job, monetary security, not needing a college education to get a good job, women not fully integrated into the workforce and less chance of divorce. I may not agree with 1950's standards but I can understand then for a pro-life stance. I would still consider the 1950's standards inconsistent. A woman cannot be raped in the 50s (except by their husbands). This isn't because she has a husband (single women could not be raped either). This isn't because she is well provided for (poor women could not be raped, even though I am sure, just as today, the poor recieve less justice for crimes committed against them). No, in the 1950s a woman could not be raped because the violation of her body was a crime. It had nothing to do with how fiscally well off she was or how nice her family was. So long as women have a right to their bodies, they have a right to abortion. Of course, since men were allowed to rape their wives in the 1950s because they were owed her body... I can imagine it would be consistent within the 1950s paradigm to say that fetuses owned their mother's bodies as well. Of course, this is indicative of a society that does not consider women people too... which is what we'd like to avoid at all costs. sweatdrop So I'm not sure how proud people from the 50s would be to defend it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:28 am
PhaedraMcSpiffy How do you feel about cooperation and conversation? How do you feel/what do you think about pro-lifers? Do you see them as enemies, possible converts, regular people, lost/confused people? Could you be friends with one? For me, there's a distinct difference between the pro-lifers I've encountered online and those I've encountered in person. Those online tend to be more extremist in their views, more misogynist, more blood-curdlingly and mind-numbingly stubborn in their views and they tend to bring me to an equally stubborn -and dare I say extremist- stance. Those I've encountered in person have almost always been morally opposed to abortion per se, but have recognized the usefulness of sex education and keeping abortion legal. The most they would like to see happen is reducing opportunity for abortion. So while I may debate them on those grounds - there is something we agree on. This kind of *lifer* -perhaps they're closer to pro-life personal, pro-choice political- I could be friends with. I'm not, as it is, but I could. Those who staunchly oppose the legality of abortion as a whole I could never be friends with. I'd bear to much of a grudge towards them to overlook it, I'm afraid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:29 am
PhaedraMcSpiffy Well said, Talon. Streex I see them as people who do not fully understand the standards of this current society. In the 1950's I can understand the arguement for pro-life, yes when everyone had a good job, monetary security, not needing a college education to get a good job, women not fully integrated into the workforce and less chance of divorce. I may not agree with 1950's standards but I can understand then for a pro-life stance. But why is it lifestyle/ability to care for a child financially that's important and not choice and desire to have a child? I was more or less going for the financial aspect rather than the unwanted aspect. My bad for not pointing that out. As for the freedom from children aspect, there is more for women to do no than it would be then. Pretty much then back then, there wasn't as much as you could do now. There are more business oppurtunities in high places. We can go into technical majors without being looked down upon. We can get into colleges easier and not forced to take "feminine" jobs like nursing or social work. It is more acceptable for self-fullfilment now. And Talon-chan.... I didn't know about the rape thing.... what point I was making was the a pro-life stance would be more likely be widely accepted in the 50s than it would be now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:15 pm
I can't see people on either side setting down their "weapons" to at least bring more civility to the debate; there are cuntwads on both sides. I'm sure that most of us can think of 5 pro-choice jerks and 5 pro-life jerks, and then some.
When you have a topic that is sooooo emotional, people are bound to get mean and nasty.
Noora of God is weird...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:25 am
Quote: How do you feel about cooperation and conversation? I can not cooperate with someone who does not respect women, how we have suffered for rights, but conversation is a possibility, only if they show signs of respect for me. Even though I'm a female, and even though I believe in freedom and happiness, and therefore, am pro-choice. Quote: How do you feel/what do you think about pro-lifers? Do you see them as enemies, possible converts, regular people, lost/confused people? Could you be friends with one? I am a friend with the person, not with the opinions. My best friend is anti-choice, and while I find that sick (she's also against birth control. But get this, she's not Catholic. Just has the sexual ideals of one.) While I find her lack of respect for women disturbing, I am still her friend and I still love her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:24 pm
(Good topic. 3nodding ) Quote: How do you feel about cooperation and conversation? It can happen with pro-lifers who are actually committed to ending abortion through real strategies--not be illegalizing it, misleading women, or creating sneaky laws that make it harder for women to obtain abortions and contraception, but by getting rid of abstinence-only education, eliminating poverty and helping single and working mothers. For example: In the Christian section of God's Warriors, there was an evangelist pastor who strongly advocated a solid separation of church and state. He said, "And I am pro-life to the core of my being." He then said: Quote: I -- I don't think [you have to vote for a candidate who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade to be pro-life]. To be pro-life is not just to be about -- concerned about the womb. It's to be concerned about life. For example, what's the relationship between poverty and abortion? And studies show that there's a direct correlation there. So, maybe the best way to lessen abortion in society is to go for the candidate that you think is going to do the most for poverty. This is an example of a lifer I could get along with--one who actually wants to put an end to abortion, and who wants to do so realistically. Yes, I disagree that abortion is morally abhorrent and should never happen, but since this sort of stance is realistic instead of ignorant, and we share common goals, I don't mind. Quote: How do you feel/what do you think about pro-lifers? Do you see them as enemies, possible converts, regular people, lost/confused people? It really depends. I won't lie; I do pass judgement when someone proclaims that they're pro-life. But I also listen to what they have to say--if they're a militant, ignorant lifer who sticks hir head in the sand whenever hir inaccuracies are called out, I make a mental note to never associate with them. If zie listens, and actually tries to have a discussion, I won't write hir off. It's completely dependent on the situation and the specifics of hir beliefs. Quote: Could you be friends with one? Again, it depends. I'm friends with a couple right now, but I did not know they were pro-life until after I had befriended them. Any religious pro-lifer I'm not going near, because if they're that religious they probably don't like queers like me as well. If they're just plain ignorant and don't listen, I'll stay away. I'm a very politically-oriented person, and I can't not talk about politics ever with any particular person. So it's close to impossible to just avoid the subject. Quote: My comment on the article is the "Anti Does Apply" one (by Sayna). I said anti-choice is a realistic label. Do you agree or disagree? Anti-choice is a very realistic label. But I don't use it when discussing abortion with anti-choicers, because I know they'll steer the topic to that instead of actually talking about the issue. Personally, I don't give a s**t if they call us "anti-life". Yeah, it's inaccurate, but so is everything else they say. I really don't care. Anyone worth their salt isn't really going to believe that we're against the life of a fetus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 1:20 pm
PhaedraMcSpiffy How do you feel about cooperation PhaedraMcSpiffy How do you feel/what do you think about pro-lifers? Do you see them as enemies, possible converts, regular people, lost/confused people? Could you be friends with one? PhaedraMcSpiffy My comment on the article is the "Anti Does Apply" one (by Sayna). I said anti-choice is a realistic label. Do you agree or disagree?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[Ernie]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/92/33/c08bbf4183392_flip.png?t=1464681375_6.00_00)
