Woo, a real argument with premises and conclusion. A tight argument I stumbled over on the Killing the Afterlife blog. (http://killtheafterlife.blogspot.com) A neat thread to look at if ya have the time.
1) A person owns themselves
2) Self ownership implies the right to free will
3) In having free will, you cannot have a duty to perform any affirmative actions.
Conclusion– You have no duty to provide another with the means to live.
Therefore it is permissible to remove anything classified as a separate entity from your body.
As my partner edified for me in talking about abortion on a feckless youtube thread. Do not even go down the ‘personhood’ road. It starts and ends with a persons right to their own body. I think this particular argument does a nice job of augmenting that sentiment.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
202 comments
June 16, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
I’ve written a post on abortion that you might be interested in reading. The address is http://twentyfiveyears.wordpress.com/2008/10/02/abortion/
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 12:59 pm
The Arbourist
Well, I read your post. It does contain many passionate arguments for ‘saving babies’ and what not.
However, as the argument put forth in my post is concerned the owner of the womb has control of what of what goes on in the womb. Anything less would make the person less than fully autonomous. It is like saying, you have rights to every part of your body except your uterus, there the state has precedence over your wishes.
That is a totalitarianism urge I cannot abide by.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Neil
You beg the question by assuming that full autonomy of one’s body trumps the right of the unborn to have any autonomy.
Scientific fact: A new human life begins at conception. Abortion ends that human life.
The totalitarianism canard ignores the pesky fact that the government didn’t impregnate these women against their will.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 2:50 pm
The Arbourist
“the right of the unborn to have any autonomy.” – Well as soon as they can exhibit signs of autonomous behaviour they certainly can have the rights.
One human being does not have the right to use another detrimentally to live. It is the choice of the host whether to support the parasitic relationship or not.
An analogy:
A man has a failing kidney and (having already lost his other kidney) will die without a transplant. His brother has two perfectly healthy kidneys and could easily donate one saving his brother however he chooses not to. The man with kidney failure has the right live but not the right live by means of intruding on anothers rights to Self- Ownership.
The brother cannot be forced to share his kidney anymore than a woman can be forced to share her body/ nutrients/ blood supply. Regardless of whether or not you think that the brother should have given up a kidney because it was the “moral” thing to do, he does not have to as he has the right to Self-Ownership stating that the kidney is his to control. Likewise, a women’s womb is hers and only hers, so if she does not wish for a fetus to be in her womb, it has no right to be there.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
Wow Abourist, you did not just compare a precious baby to a parasite. Did you? As for the brother analogy you posted, the healthy brother didn’t create his brother or force his brother to be a part of this world so why on earth you posted that, I have no idea. If a woman does not wish for a baby to be in her womb, she shouldn’t have done the act that forces the baby to be there. You don’t “catch” pregnancy like you catch an unwanted cold.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Neil
You completely ignore how the human fetus got there to begin with and substitute made up philosophical “rights” about autonomy to rationalize killing innocent human beings. As 25 Yr. Old Woman notes, you don’t catch pregnancy.
If she doesn’t want a human being growing in her room, she shouldn’t do the things that result in them getting there.
Side note: It is amusing how pro-aboritonists always use the term “fetus” to dehumanize the unborn. They ignore the scientific fact that she is a human embryo, human fetus, human baby, human teenager, etc. Fetus is just a stage of human development. The intrinsic worth is there.
The kidney analogy fails miserably, most notably because the brother didn’t force the other brother to need a kidney, whereas the woman is involved in creating a new human being.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Neil
It is fun to debate pro-abortion extremists like you. I realize you probably won’t be swayed by scientific facts, but I love when middle grounders see the inevitable conclusions of your views. Until the umbilical cord is cut you consider the living human beings to be fair game for murder. I assure you that the more the middle ground sees views like yours the more pro-life they become. They aren’t swayed by the “parasite” talk.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Intransigentia
It’s none of my business, but it would inform my opinion of your argument if I knew whether you’d ever had intercourse with a man, ever wanted to, or ever been in a relationship with a man who wanted to have intercourse with you. If I’m reading you right, I’m not sure which is the worse outcome:
1. A woman who enjoys participating in heterosexual intercourse should carry to term every pregnancy that results – and if her contraception fails repeatedly this could mean having a baby every year from when she loses her virginity either until menopause or until the strain of repeated pregnancies kills her.
2. Because all forms of contraception short of a total hysterectomy can fail, a woman should refrain from heterosexual intercourse unless she is specifically trying to make a baby. If she doesn’t want to make a baby, and doesn’t want to suffer the health effects of early menopause caused by a total hysterectomy, no intercourse until natural menopause, and maybe not even then because you never know if a stray egg might get through.
Do you really, honestly believe that either of these options are liveable? I’m assuming you’re just young, and unpartnered/unmarried and haven’t had to really think your moral stance through as to how it applies to real life. If I’m wrong, I’m interested in how you reconcile your belief with how you live your life.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Mystro
25 year old woman and Neil, you both suggest that the reasons why person A is dependent on person B for survival somehow affects person B’s right to refuse person A the aid they require. Every reason imaginable would still allow B to decide weather or not to supply the aid. Except if the reason is “person B is a woman who had sex”. Sudden, just because B is a woman who had sex, B must then give up parts of her body to be used by whatever demands it?
First off, saying that rights are contingent on anything is a gross perversion of the basic idea of rights. Second, making one of the contingencies ‘not being a woman’ is flat out patriarchal and misogynistic. Third, making the second contingency ‘not having sex’ is another perversion: one should not have to give up one right to obtain another.
If a person takes up dwelling inside my body, no matter what my gender, no matter what other rights I’ve exercised, no matter how much my new tenant’s life depends on their remaining in my body, I have the right to say, “This is my body, I don’t want you in it. Get out.”
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Intransigentia
Neil, please see my question to 25-year-old – I’d be interested in your view as a man. Which is preferable to you:
1. Be willing to take the risk, if contraception fails, of killing the woman you love through repeated pregnancies
2. A lifetime of celibacy except when trying to make a baby
3. Castration, since vasectomies fail
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 4:32 pm
The Arbourist
“It is fun to debate pro-abortion extremists like you.”
Supporting the woman’s right to her control her body would hardly be considered radical.
“I realize you probably won’t be swayed by scientific facts”
Please, you so often mention you have scientific proof. Please cite the peer reviewed scientific study that you are referring too or cease with the probably baseless claim that science is ‘on your side’.
“but I love when middle grounders see the inevitable conclusions of your views. Until the umbilical cord is cut you consider the living human beings to be fair game for murder”
Argument from emotion. An abortion is not murder, rather a medical procedure to remove a potentially dangerous growth from a woman’s body.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Intransigentia
Never mind that advocates of women’s rights to control our own bodies are not generally “Death to all fetuses” types. We (or at least I) just believe that pregnancy and childbirth are a big deal and should only be undertaken by people who really, really want to do it.
Considering the massive fundraising machine of forced-childbirth advocates seems to come from people who honestly want to save babies, you’d think it could be used to fund research into something that both sides could potentially agree on, like a procedure for removing an early-stage embryo/fetus from the womb unharmed and either implanting it into someone who wants it or freezing it for later. Instead we get “crisis pregnancy centres” where women who want their pregnancies terminated are guilted, misinformed, misled about whether the centre actually provides that service, and sometimes stalled until their pregnancy is too far along for a simple D&E or D&C.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 7:01 pm
timberwraith
Read this book, people. It gives a very riveting account of what it was like for women before Roe vs. Wade. It’s a piece of history that should be taught in every US school.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 7:14 pm
The Arbourist
Welcome, timberwraith. Thanks for the steer, and not so many thanks for adding yet another book to my reading pile. :>
I hope we will not have to return to the ‘good times’ that existed before RvW.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 7:24 pm
The Arbourist
“you did not just compare a precious baby to a parasite. Did you?”
I sure did. The fetus has a functional parasitical relationship with the mother in question. As Neil is so fond of saying, it is a scientific fact.
No, but the brother needing a kidney has the same type of relationship that a fetus does with his mother. The analogy is intended to show that a human being should not be forced to give up a part of themselves to satisfy another human being.
The circumstances are not relevant to the analogy.
As a side bar, is there any part of the original formulation of the argument that you disagree with? …. (the argument that starts with 1. A person owns themselves.)
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Neil
If you don’t want any risk of pregnancy, don’t have sex.
If you accept the risk, don’t kill any innocent human beings that it creates.
Pretty simple stuff, morally speaking.
Gladly: Try http://abort73.com/index.php?/abortion/medical_testimony for starters. The whole site is outstanding and addresses many of the bad philosophical arguments presented above.
Go check out any embryology textbook. Scientific fact: A new human life begins at conception. Therefore, abortion kills an innocent human being.
If you want to argue that it is acceptable to kill innocent human beings, feel free to do so. But you look less idiotic if you don’t use such silly philosophical arguments.
You keep forgetting that another human being gets killed in the process, and more often than not a female (virtually all gender selection abortions are done to kill female human beings for the sole reason that they are females).
The parasite bit, as clever as it may sound, fails on multiple levels, not the least of which is that you could have a fully delivered human killed as long as the umbilical cord hasn’t been cut. Other than Barack Obama and Peter Singer I don’t know anyone who goes for that.
And of course, if you are imaginative enough to believe the parasite bit, you’ll have no trouble rationalizing infanticide and more. After all, your primary claim is that the unborn are dependent. You’ll just reason that financial dependency is as big a deal as physical dependency. Oh, look at me, doing your rationalization for you!
My irony meter is going off here. You should realize, of course, that you are the ones saying that the rights of the unborn human beings (scientific fact, remember?!) are contingent on the whims of the mother.
Heh – you think I’m arguing from emotion? Please. Abortion kills an innocent human being. If it doesn’t kill an innocent human being then by definition it is not successful.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 8:33 pm
The Arbourist
“Go check out any embryology textbook. Scientific fact: A new human life begins at conception. Therefore, abortion kills an innocent human being.”
Yep. And the fetus’s survival is contingent on the mother’s goodwill. The fetus is taking her resources, her nutrients, her womb to develop. It is her womb, and does not belong to anyone else. Concomitantly she has no obligation to carry the fetus and an abortion is her right. The embryo has a lesser moral status than a fully developed human being.
This post started with a argument.
) A person owns themselves
2) Self ownership implies the right to free will
3) In having free will, you cannot have a duty to perform any affirmative actions.
Conclusion– You have no duty to provide another with the means to live.
Therefore it is permissible to remove anything classified as a separate entity from your body.
Removing a fetus, or killing an innocent human being that is inside the womb is not relevant to argument presented. The original argument stands as you have not refuted any of the above premises.
Note: The rights/contingent quote is not from my post. I suggest responding to the author of that post rather than me.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
Intransigentia, since you asked, I am married so yes, I do have sex with my husband and I have not yet become pregnant because we are careful and take precautions. I am not trying to get pregnant right now but if it does happen (unplanned), I will welcome the baby because my husband and I made the child and I know that the timing is God’s timing.
Arbourist, you keep saying that the woman owns her body and that is where you and I disagree: I believe that God owns my body and that my baby belongs to Him. Also, referring to a baby as a parasite sickens me. Humans make babies; dogs have fleas (parasites). I’ve never met a dog that made its own fleas. Also, I can’t imagine a husband and wife who have sadly had a miscarriage and they are crying and broken hearted and a person walking up to them and saying, “It’s ok, you just lost a parasite” to try and console them. Do you see how heartless, rude, tacky, and wrong that would be? That’s what you’re saying.
Come on people, lets take responsibility for our actions.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 10:23 pm
The Arbourist
Well, I am glad you hold that particular delusional belief. Please do not propagate the fairy tale and the supposed ‘morality’ that comes along with it on the rest of us.
Please note that I have said the fetus has the functionality of a parasite or functions as a parasite.
So who is responsible for the miscarriage then? It would be god then, would it not? He is, after all the most prolific abortionist of them all. Perhaps the sky-fairy is not so benevolent after all.
What I find heartless is people who would actively campaign against a woman’s reproductive freedom, in the misguided attempt to preserve life.
I do agree with you, we should be responsible for our actions, if we lay claim to ownership of our bodies that comes with the rights to do with our body as we see fit, and of course getting an abortion falls under that aegis.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Katie
To the 25-year old woman,
So as an 18-year old senior in high school, you would have expected me to walk the halls of my high school with a pregnant belly? Are you kidding me? I had my abortion with no regrets, at 5 weeks of pregnancy. They didn’t even know the procedure was a success afterwards, they had to send me to the hospital to get blood work done. That’s how small this clump of cells was.
I had the procedure done because, at 18, I didn’t think I could support a baby with enough love and money, so I decided to wait until further notice. Having said that, don’t try to pull the “baby killer” BS on me. I LOVE babies and children and have been babysitting and working with kids for over four years, since I was 17 (before the abortion). That throws that argument right out the window.
Neil, I’d like to see some evidence of that. You usually can’t find out the sex of the baby until almost the second trimester (8 weeks at the earliest, or month two) : http://www.childbirth.org/articles/decide.html
Since most abortions are performed during the first trimester (http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/articles/846.html) I really don’t see the argument about killing based on gender. Maybe in other countries, but surely not here. And as far as the partial-birth abortion argument is concerned, it’s meaningless to me as it almost never happens. You have your sources.
Stay out of my uterus please!
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 11:06 pm
Mystro
First off, saying that rights are contingent on anything is a gross perversion of the basic idea of rights. (From a previous post)
My irony meter is going off here. You should realize, of course, that you are the ones saying that the rights of the unborn human beings (scientific fact, remember?!) are contingent on the whims of the mother.
(Your “response”)
That was me. And the points I made were ignored, I noticed. You just took a quote out of context and added your twisted beliefs at the end. Your point that the thing inside the uterus was human was never contested. Quit repeating, “The fetus is a HUMAN fetus, its science!’ as if that’s what we’re talking about.
The point was made earlier that just because one entity requires another to survive, that doesn’t make the other morally obligated to provide whatever it is the first needs (the brother’s kidney analogy). You couldn’t refute that, so you tried to say that the situation is different simply because the person who is having the aid demanded of them is a woman who had sex. Read my previous post (the part you ignored) as to why this is ridiculous and immoral thinking.
As I can say “No” to a fully grown adult who for some reason has become terminally dependent on my aid, I can also say “No” to an unborn human, weather or not it has its own rights. I am NOT saying that the rights of the unborn are contingent on the mother. I am saying NO ONE has the right to demand the body (or pieces of the body) of another, even if the one demanding needs that body (or pieces) to live.
LikeLike
June 16, 2009 at 11:35 pm
Mystro
25 year old woman, stop harping on the parasite label. It was meant, and used, as a biological description of the relationship between a woman and a fetus. The connotations of something ‘disgusting’, ‘useless’, or ‘better off dead’ were never implied. In case I’m confusing you, here’s a definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=parasite)
par·a·site (pār’ə-sīt’)
n.
1. Biology An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.
If you’re going to argue against the validity of this term, do so based on how its actually used, not on how you can misconstrue it.
Oh, by the way, my god says that you’re god doesn’t know the first thing about morality, citing the book of Leviticus, which we call “101 Reasons to Stone your Neighbor and his Goat” (thanks to cdk007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfbERKwNszU) .
And as I can provide just as much evidence for the existence of my god as you can yours (more probably), I guess we gotta throw out that theistic “reasoning”, as equal amounts on opposite sides cancel each other out.
But WAIT!! My buddy’s god also says that your god is a misogynistic redneck who’s had more murders caused in his name than did Hitler. That’s two unprovable deistic powers to your one. You lose.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 6:52 am
Neil
“Yep. And the fetus’s survival is contingent on the mother’s goodwill.”
That argument supports infanticide as well, as most of your other arguments do.
“The embryo has a lesser moral status than a fully developed human being. ”
The human embryo is a human being with intrinsic worth. The level of development of a human being does not impact her value. Your claim would make it a lesser crime to kill a toddler than an adolescent, etc.
“This post started with a argument.
) A person owns themselves
2) Self ownership implies the right to free will
3) In having free will, you cannot have a duty to perform any affirmative actions.”
Once again you imply that pregnancies were forced by the government. You ignore that actions have consequences. People choose to have sex. That sometimes creates human beings. It is immoral to kill those human beings just because it would be inconvenient for you.
“Conclusion– You have no duty to provide another with the means to live.”
That supports murder outside the womb as well.
Katie, I’m sad that you made such a poor choice and hope you get out of denial and get therapy for it someday. I don’t need religious arguments to make the pro-life case, but I will remind you that forgiveness and healing is possible in Jesus. Yes, I know you will mock that now. But one day I hope you’ll remember it and seek it — before it is too late.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 6:57 am
Christine
The definition of life is the period of time between birth and death. I am so sick of men who even have an opinion on abortions. IT IS SIMPLE! YOU DO NOT HAVE A UTERUS SO YOU DONT GET TO VOTE!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 7:06 am
Christine
So you will get to make the decision to keep, abort, and or adopt your baby. That is your choice since it is your uterus! Now what if you were raped by a man that had aids; I bet you would be in line to have an abortion. Responsibility includes realistic choices for women.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 8:15 am
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
All of you really need to read my post at http://twentyfiveyears.wordpress.com/2008/10/02/abortion/ and the comments that people have left it because it addresses so many things that we’re talking about here.
Christine, a man does have a right to voice his opinion about abortions because he is half of the reason that the baby was made. Especially if he’s the father, he has a say so in the future of his child.
Mystro, there is absolutely no reason to be rude and insulting. We can all have different opinions here and state our feelings on the subject without being condescending.
Katie, my best friend got pregnant when we were 14 years old. She chose to have her baby because it was her action that brought him into this world and he shouldn’t have been punished or killed for what she did. She’s now 26 years old, married to an awesome man, and has another child too. She is so happy and blessed and loves both of her sons with all of her heart and her husband has adopted her son because the guy that got her pregnant in high school wouldn’t help. Life begins at conception. There’s a girl who posted a comment on my abortion blog whose mother got pregnant with her when her mom was a teen so she gave her up for adoption and the young lady stated that she was so thankful that her mother didn’t kill her. Also, why is it that Scott Peterson was found guilty for two counts of murder for killing his wife and their unborn son? He was given first degree murder charges for his wife and second degree murder charges for his son. The court viewed his unborn baby as a human life. If not, they’d just have found him guilty for just one count of first degree murder.
Arbourist, you keep saying that an individual has complete right to their own body to do with what they want. Well then, why is it that when a person attempts suicide and fails, if the hospital and government find out about it, they force that person into psychiatric care and won’t release them until they feel that the person is no longer a threat to themselves. If we “owned” our bodies, why don’t they just say, “Well, they can kill themselves if they want to, it’s their body.” Also, with the analogy of the brothers, the relationship really changes the situation. A brother is not responsible for another brother’s life (unless he is his guardian) but a mother is responsible for her children unless she gives them up for adoption. If you had a mother who just left her 5 month old baby in his high-chair for a really long time and never fed or changed him and the baby died, I can’t imagine what the courts would do to her for slowly starving her baby to death. They would find her responsible for his life. Why should a layer of skin change a mother’s responsibility?
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 8:41 am
Christine
Well… I just totally disagree with you. You obviously are entitled to your opinion. The whole pro-life pro-choice debate can be simple and out of the ‘goverments’ hands. So you think abortion is bad; have the baby, abortion is killing a human life, Gods will, men have a right to an opinion etc… I think it is all a nice way to think. But reality is what we live in. If you would be concerned about only your uterus we would not be having this discussion. And for the men; I wonder if your wife would say it is okay for you to make a decision regarding her uterus. Not only your wife but any women you have had sex with. Bottom line not even you can afford to feed and raise the unwanted children in this world… none of us can. If you get your wish and abortion becomes illegal; sign off on about another 20% of your income to take care of these children. Easiest way to get this debate solved is mind your own business; be concerned with your own body and not any others.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 9:31 am
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
I am a woman. I’m a 25 year old married woman. So your thought process is to kill all unwanted and not “perfect” babies to save us money?
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 10:46 am
Christine
To Twenty Five Year Old Woman. The alternative is the people give all their unwanted babies sick or not to the government for us to raise. Who do you think is going to pay the money to raise these children? Do not be naive; working taxpayers would pay for it. What do you think would happen to our population? How much does it cost to raise a perfectly healthy baby? Okay now how much more would it cost to raise one that is very sick, has aids, addicted to drugs or alcohol, mentally retarted or just emotionally distraught because the child is born and there is noone to raise or love them.
I got an idea call your local Child Services Division, or local home and see the number of children already in our systems. Pro-Choice activists do not take in consideration what will happen to these unwanted children if abortion was illegal. I would challenge anyone that is against abortion to adopt and raise at least 2 of these children. Then we would see the reality in what you are suggesting. Then put your self in the shoes of a woman that has been raped and wants an abortion. I think you would want one too. What if it was your daughter, sister or mother? Wouldn’t you respect their decision.
I get that you are a 25 year old married woman. I would bet that you have had a good life and have not been exposed the the real world. All people make decisions based on money. Where they live, what they drive, how many children they will have, what groceries you buy…. this is really the same thing. Abortion may not be right for you and that is your choice. Helping the children in your local area that are already going with out is also your choice. That is what it all boils down to.. choices. We all have the right to make choices. You should just worry about your choices and stop judging others. When government gets to decide abortion rights, controlling populations is not that much farther off. That would be like the government saying you can only have one child.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 11:09 am
Christine
Abortion does not kill a innocent human being. That is like saying the “eggs” that women drop every month are human beings. The fetus, eggs, sperm all have the potential to be a human being. My suggestion for you is to worry only about your uterus… oh I forgot you do not have one. Then I guess you should worry about your wifes uterus. I am sure your mother, sister, aunt, cousins would not want your opinions on their bodies.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 11:19 am
Christine
Neil, Your comments to Katie are stupid and immature. The poor choice is just your opinion; Katie made a very mature decision based on what was best for her life. God loves us all! Whether or not you are pro choice or pro life. CHOICES!!! Katies, mine, or any other woman choices are none of your business. I remember God says one should not judge! Wow you might really be in trouble if you get to heaven.!
‘Katie do not listen to these comments! Tell them to mind there own business! I say Neil and the Twenty Five Year old Woman should open up there doors and raise 4 children in our welfare systems. See how that works. After they have started raising unwanted children … reality might get the silver spoons out of their mouths.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 11:26 am
Christine
Wow so what your saying is that if a woman is impregnated by rape or incest.. abortion is okay. Because she did not do anything to catch the pregnancy bug? you can call it a baby, fetus, human being, whatever you chose. The choice is the womens not yours. Morally, ethically, medically, religously, or whatever… CHOICES!! You control yours we can control ours
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 11:49 am
Christine
Katie your decision was a very mature decision. My goal here is to respect everyones right to make that choice. You deserve the respect from all of us! I am proud of you for making a decision that was best for you!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
Christine,
My uncle has cerebral palsy. He is a fantastic Christian man who is married and has four children. Even though his body has problems moving and he has some difficulty talking, his mind is fine. He has a job and drives a car with hand controls. I praise God that my grandparents wanted him because they saw him as a gift, whether “perfect” or not, he was and is perfect to them, perfect to us, and perfect to God. Do not think that my opinion is formed because I am naive and not in the real world because in both cases, you are wrong.
Rape must be one of the worst experiences that I could ever imagine. Doctors have said that an extremely rare number of rape victims get pregnant during the rape because their bodies are in too much stress to conceive. Ok, here are the facts: 2% of all pregnancies in America are caused by incest, rape, and life of the mother. So for these 2%, we allow the other 98% of babies to be killed. You cannot build policies on exceptions. A study in Minnesota and Pennsylvania of 5,000 rape cases resulted in not one pregnancy. But there are a small number of victims who do get pregnant from the terrible act. But the thing is, the child should not be punished because of what that horrible man did. I know that the victims didn’t want or expect the pregnancy but there is now an innocent life inside of her. I think that the government should pass a law that states that all of the medical bills for a pregnant rape victim will be covered and the victim can, if she chooses, allow the child to be adopted. Again, I can’t even begin to imagine how horrible and unfair that whole ordeal would be. But God can bring good from the most awful of situations. That child who had no fault in the rape and who was allowed to live and be adopted could grow up and discover the cure for cancer; we don’t know what God has in store.
It annoys me that we categorize people as either pro-life or pro-choice. It should be pro-life and pro-abortion because I’ve found that most pro-choice people have no tolerance for people who choose life; that doesn’t seem very pro-CHOICE to me. The name pro-choice sounds like the person would support people who choose whether they believe abortion to be wrong or acceptable. I choose that it is wrong and that is reflected in my category: pro-LIFE. Having and stating an opinion is not judging others, it’s having an opinion and knowing what you believe.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Christine
The government can pass a law that pays for the rape victim to have the baby> Are you serious?That is the biggest joke I have ever heard. The government does not even provide for the homeless and or abandoned children we have now. Why would our government want to pay for unwanted children? I see you are pro-life and that means as long as some one else pays for these children you are all for it. I did not see you volunteer anything for the children now living that do not have a home, food, clothing, healthcare, parents…. Illegalizing abortion would make those problems so much bigger. You are again way off base I am for the pro life people.. and the pro choice… I WANT TO CONTINUE TO LIVE IN A COUNTRY THAT ALLOWS ME AND YOU TO HAVE A CHOICE. You say I have no tolerance for pro-life stance … not true at all. I just think that most people that are so called pro-life; do absolutely nothing to pay for, raise, visit, help, open their homes to the unwanted children currently in the world.. but of course wants there to be many many more born!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Intransigentia
Yes, right now you are willing to have the baby if your precautions fail. I’m asking you to think about your /whole/ future. After you’ve had at least as many babies as you originally planned, and definitely at least as many as you can deal with. Yes, you can get your tubes tied or your husband can get a vasectomy, or even both. It’s incredibly rare, but they can fail. What then?
I’m glad you’ve finally addressed the original argument though, about who owns your body. I feel sad for you that it isn’t you – that makes you a slave.
I also have some concerns about how you determine what God’s will is with regard to your body, it seems very difficult. If it’s God who decides that you are going to get pregnant on a schedule other than your own, and you are morally obligated to comply, what other things does God cause to happen in your body that you may not like but are not permitted to take action against? For example, what are you morally permitted to do to stop yourself from dying?
And with regard to the parasite – obviously it’s rude to minimize someone’s pain. I would argue that a wanted embryo/fetus, whether human or not, has been welcomed into the emotional/relational network of the mother and her family, and losing someone in your emotional/relational network really, really hurts. Losing a hope and a dream also hurts, and there’s a lot of hoping and dreaming involved in choosing to have a child. I’ve heard of women who are trying to conceive who grieve every time they get their period. It’s impossible to know whether an egg has been fertilised and so whether they really did lose a “baby”, but they have so much longing for their future child, so much emotional investment, that losing the possibility that this might be the month it happens, is painful.
Conversely, there have been times when my period has been a little late but it’s too early to test and I have been extremely DO NOT WANT!!!1!, where when my period finally came I’ve celebrated. Again, impossible to tell whether I was dancing on “anybody”‘s grave.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Intransigentia
Hear Hear, Katie!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Katie
Thank you Christine. For some reason, the last few comments are not showing up on this site, but they are showing up in my e-mail so I will respond.
My abortion was the right CHOICE for me. Having said that, it may not always be the right choice for everyone else. Having said THAT…and I must be careful how I word this… I fully support the right for a teenager to have their child. However, as I once was a teen myself, and we all were, then we all know that most teenagers do not have the financial or emotional stability to raise a child without much help from others. No, I do not want my tax dollars to go funding these children that these teens decide to bring into the world any more than the next person, but I would still support their decision whether or not they have the baby. It goes back to the whole “pro-choice, not pro-abortion” thing that you people don’t get.
And thank you Christine, for defending my choice. I have the feeling that if Neil was the father of the child, and as such, he would have been a senior in high school like me and on his way to full scholarship at Penn State for aerospace engineering, a true genius and a true sweetheart, he may reconsider. That’s my boyfriend then and now. He paid for it, he came to the clinic, he squeezed my hand when the pro-lifers were outside screaming “Murderer! Look at the little Hitlers go!” He told me he loved me and supported any decision I made. And I am still with him today and I would be shocked if he didn’t propose by Christmas. But even with all that, the final decision rested with me. It was my body. I was the one that was going to walk the halls at school pregnant, not participating in gym class because of the pregnancy. Do you know the humiliation when the guidance counselors and school nurse told my mom I was pregnant because there had been nasty rumors going on that I was, and when she found out, she was mad. Of course, my mom is just as pro-choice as I am and totally supported me too, after the initial shock wore off.
It goes back to: the woman gets the say, yeah sure, the man can discuss options too, but overall, the woman has final verdict. If the man doesn’t like it, he can say, “I won’t pay child support” and he knows where the door is. Men in individual relationships have the right to an opinion based on THEIR situation. YOU, Neil, do NOT have the right to tell me what I should do, Matt has the right to make suggestions. In the end it didn’t matter, I had the abortion at five weeks, and that was that.
Thank you Christine and others, for respecting my decision. It was hard enough being called a murderer at the time by people who had no clue about my situation. To be reliving that over three years later…The humiliation and shame around this must end!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
Christine,
Again, you make assumptions about me and my life which you shouldn’t do. I don’t presume to know you or your life. Since you’ve brought it up though, I’ve worked an entire summer at an all girl’s orphanage for free (where the children had NOTHING), I’ve also headed up fundraisers for the orphanage to provide them with money, clothing, and food. I know a family who has a special needs child here in my town and the father just lost his job so my husband and I were able to give them $800.00 (praise God!). We help in any way we can and as often as we can so don’t presume that I just talk the talk and don’t walk the walk.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Christine
Wow hats off to you for working at the orphanage for free and for giving $800. to the father that lost his job. That is something that you should be very proud of. But, illegalizing abortions is going to take a whole lot more thank $800. and working for free for one summer. Lets just say if there were 600 potential abortions pro-life people got outlawed. How many of these children are you and your husband, church, family, orphanage going to support? How much of your weekly paycheck can be donated to a cause you belive in? Abortion is a choice for everyone. And if you support that the choice should be taken away. Then you have to have a plan to care for all these unwanted children. I personally do not have the means to support this adventure. If you pro-lifers believe so much in forcing the birth of these babies; you better get ready to pay for it. I maybe selfish but I would just assume provide for my own family and every one elses. You do walk the walk you believe that abortion is murder and not good. Your choice. I believe that the decision to carry a pregnancy to term or to end the pregnancy is the choice of the woman. … not anyone elses. Keep walking the walk and talking the talk! Just be careful what you ask for.. when you get it … it maybe not the right thing.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Christine
Katie do not let anyone make you feel humilulated or ashamed. You are going to be just fine! You sound like more of an adult than most.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Katie
Thanks again Christina. And to the 25-year old woman, you DO really presume over other people’s lives that you know nothing about. You did it to me! You assumed that carrying the pregnancy to term was the right thing to do, and an abortion was wrong. Today I know that it WAS the right decision to abort.
Please stop making judgments about me and maybe other people will stop making judgments about you.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Katie
Yes Christina, I went to Walmart once with my boyfriend and we were randomly looking in the baby’s section because I think the cribs and little girl’s dresses are so cute (yeah I’m a baby killer alright!) and we were looking at diapers. We did the math in our heads of the final cost of diapers for a child to be upwards of $5000 (I later came to research this and find it accurate: source: http://www.naturalfamilyonline.com/5-diap/45-diaper-cost.htm)
Do any of you have $5000 that you’d like to donate to pay for my baby’s diapers? No, you didn’t three years ago and you wouldn’t now. Well, I don’t have $5000 either, so I’m not having a kid. We’ll start with the fact that I can’t afford diapers and go from there because let’s face it, babies need diapers.
To the 25 year old, that is wonderful that you were able to do that and help! Having said that, it takes a lot more than a little volunteer work and $800 to support the thousands of unwanted children you are pushing to force into the world. When I start getting straight answers from you pro-life people as a whole on how these children are going to be supported day in and day out once they are born, I will believe you. Till then, sorry!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Christine
Katie, you are right on. Pro-Lifers have some big planning to do to be able to support these babies forced into the world. I would venture to say if every person getting an abortion was to walk up to the prolifers and say I cannot afford to take care of this baby; Will you do it? The answers would more than likely be no.. not yes
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
Again, that’s where we differ. I believe that if you put your faith and trust in God, He will provide. I can’t tell you how he would have provided you with money for diapers but I believe that he would have. And I’m not just saying that, I truly believe it. My best friend that got pregnant when we were 14 didn’t get any help from the father or from her family. She had her baby when we were 15 and it was really hard on her. She was talked about, had to drop our of sports, went to school, had a couple of jobs, and had to pay for his sitters but she made it and she has such an amazing life now; God has really blessed her. So I’ve seen it happen. She has told me so many times that she didn’t get an abortion because it was her decision to have sex when she was 14 and it wasn’t the baby’s fault that he was now here. She said that all of those hard times, she brought those on herself. You may think that I’m not understanding to your situation. My best friend, Meg, and I are still best friends. We were each others maid-of-honors. She knew that I disagreed with her having sex before marriage but I still loved her and love her now. She made a mistake but she took responsibility for it. When we were teens, everywhere she and I went together, her baby came with us. She was and is a fantastic mother.
You ignore the fact that you could have given the baby up for adoption. My husband’s boss and his wife can not have children. They paid for all of the hospital bills for a teenager who had gotten pregnant and who wanted to put the child up for adoption. They paid for all of her bills and they adopted her baby. For you, what’s done is done. I believe you were wrong to have an abortion but I know God still loves you and I bet you and your boyfriend are very good people. You made a mistake like all of us make mistakes but life is precious and a gift from God and I won’t apologize for believing that.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
Christine,
Why should “pro-lifers” be financially obligated to support babies that other people brought into this world. I’m all for helping whenever we can but the people who made the baby really should be accountable for THEIR child. This, “You have to pay and take care of my child that I made and don’t want or I’m going to kill the baby” is wrong.
Responsibility for our actions people!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Katie
You know, I am really starting to get sick of the “adoption” argument. Putting a child up for adoption is not just like snapping your fingers. It won’t solve your problems. I personally would not be able to live with myself putting my child up for adoption as I would always be left wondering. And adoption can be very hard on the kid. I’ve seen that happen with my one friend who was adopted. She called me up sometimes and asked to stay at my house because her adopted parents could be so mean.
Good for your friend, I am glad that decision was right for her. But it is not going to be the right decision for everyone, and certainly not every 14-year old. I didn’t even get my period till I was 15 1/2!!! I was still a baby myself! A baby having a baby even when I was 18.
I respect your friend’s decision to have her baby, so please respect my decision to not have mine. This is like the fourth time I have said this.
I know Christine, I would like some people to step up and put their money where their mouth is.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Katie
Uhh…yeah pretty much. We don’t want the baby. You want to force us to have it by banning abortion? Fine, YOU take the baby.
Plain and simple!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Twenty Five Year Old Woman
This is the last that I’m going to say about of any of this on this blog. Here’s what you just put: “I personally would not be able to live with myself putting my child up for adoption as I would always be left wondering. And adoption can be very hard on the kid.” Yeah, you killing your baby was much easier on the child; are you KIDDING me?!
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Katie
Yep. I knew you were going to say that, and this is my response: YES! A baby never born is a baby that has never suffered. An adopted baby is one who may grow up with problems they will have to deal with forever.
Seriously, get out of my uterus.
(That’s my new catch-phrase as a PC-er. But since she’s never coming back to this board, she got the last word, in her book!)
LikeLike