Welcome to Gaia! ::

Is the pro-choice side built on one big non sequitur? The point isn't that some of us hate choice, it's just that we don't think abortion should be one of them. And considering even "choice" has it's limits (what about the father and his choice?), I don't see why the pro-choice argument hinges on the basic idea of "choice" when the issue concerns women painting themselves into a corner where there's only one other choice besides taking care of the baby.

It's not like all Pro-Choicers are for every choice available. Or Pro-Lifers are against anything that might cause death. The two chosen terms are very open-ended and vague, but are actually about a very specific issues.

I read them as "Pro-Choice-of-the-Pregnant-Woman-to-Electively-Abortion" and "Pro-Legally-Protected-Life-of-the-Unborn-Human" and I think those make a bit more sense.

Seriously, you can't just take the chosen name of a group and start looking for ways it doesn't fit that group. There is far more to the discussion than just that topic, much of it both more interesting and more productive.

Pro-Life isn't as much of a misnomer, however, when we're willing to compromise our position in certain cases. We're against abortion, but I think the majority of us would allow for it in instances of rape, extenuating health issues, ectopic pregnancy, etc. Yet, almost without exception, I've seen pro-choice advocates shoot down pro-life rhetoric and extol the virtue of abortion.

Theoretically, pro-choice doesn't mean anti-life. But if we're going by how that argument goes down, well, the majority of them might as well be anti-life.

I don't see the pro-choice side as being that complex. It's not simple, necessarily, but they're for choice, but they're for the wrong one, IMO.

I'm going to speak as a Mod and remind everyone of the "Be Civil" rule. Thank you!

I disagree. I already have control of my sex life. *wink*

Seriously, though, from my point of view, the right of all humans to control their own bodies trumps the right of anyone to live using another's body as life support. If there were a way to immediately remove an unborn human (before, what is it now, 23 weeks?) that didn't result in its death, I would advocate that.

And abortion isn't easy. It isn't even the easiest of the available solutions. But, from the point of view of the majority of the women who choose it, it is the best solution available.

Which is why I believe it is very important to provide support (financial, emotional, and day care) for children and parents who are living below the poverty line, and for anyone who is struggling with what to do with an unexpected pregnancy.

Well, I mean, ethically I don't see removing the unborn human from the pregnant woman as taking away its right to control its own body - in that it doesn't have the right to use her body against her will. I think that technologies to allow an unborn human to survive outside of a pregnant woman need to be developed quicker. (I know they're working on this, but I'm impatient!)

That's understandable. Being in the ED for too long makes everyone a bit defensive and confrontational. And also crazy. *big crazy grin*

If I don't want a cat, would that make my cat stop existing? Of course abortion is "killing something". I don't understand how anyone could feel differently, unless they were greatly misinformed.

I completely agree!

I agree that anyone who doesn't want a child (at this time), but is still having sex, should take precautions to make sure they don't get pregnant!

I can't. It's a view I don't understand (like my vegan friend's "solution" to the amount of cattle being farmed, "Well, they shouldn't exist"). Obviously, humans are a part of nature, and (while I agree we should take steps to try and protect the environment as well as just humans) we aren't going to stop existing because of someone's beliefs. Though I hope that people who believe such things choose to sterilize themselves.

If you don't feel like using quote tags, why not just address all the points at the end?

Anyway, how are setting limits on abortion not a compromise? The two sides being "abortion is alway legal, no matter what" and "abortion is never legal, no matter what" (not to say that anyone believes these, just that those would be the two extremes), then limiting abortion/allowing abortion for exceptions are both compromises from those two extremes. I could as easily say "how is allowing abortions to save someone's life a compromise, since that should be a given?" But that isn't especially productive.

There is more involved in abortion than just an unborn human (rather obviously). There is also the woman to consider, since the unborn human is inside of her body. It isn't just about killing or not killing the unborn human, it is very much about if the woman should retain the right to deny use of her body to other humans even though she is pregnant.

I don't feel that getting an abortion is an irresponsible action, though I do feel that having unprotected sex is. I feel that even if one is pregnant through an irresponsible action, then abortion can be a responsible choice (if one cannot afford to care properly for a child, the best solution is to not have a child to care for - and since there is no way to allow someone else to care for an unborn human until viability, I feel that abortion is the only immediate option available).

If I said that consent to having a house guest was consent to that guest moving in with you, you'd scoff at me (rightfully so). To me, this makes as much sense as saying that consent to having sex is consent to carrying a pregnancy to term. To me, it isn't logical to say so (since pregnancy, while caused by sex, is preventable and can be terminated), though I understand that you disagree.

I envy your views, that abortion is so simple. I cannot help but see all the shades of gray in the world, and wish I were able to see things as just black or white, as you seem to be able to.

See, I think that trying to solve the problem of people not using contraceptive methods (properly) once that person is already pregnant is like trying to fix the dam after all the water has escaped. It just doesn't do anything. Obviously the dam (or lack there of) was the original problem - but that problem can be solved after the new problem is taken care of. Which is exactly why many abortion clinics give the Depo shot after a woman gets an abortion (to help prevent future pregnancies). You can't prevent a pregnancy after there is already a pregnancy, all you can do is provide options to the unintentionally pregnant woman, and education/contraception so that she (hopefully) won't end up in the same situation again.

Because an older person isn't living inside someone else's body? Because an older person is able to still think and make choices about their own life? Because bringing a child into the world is an expensive and somewhat risking choice? Because there is no immediate way to remove an unborn human from a pregnant woman's body before medical viability that doesn't result in its death?

Of course you don't think that abortion is a responsible action! You're Pro-Life, and if you thought that, you'd be Pro-Choice, now wouldn't you? *grin*