Friday

Abortion: Is It REALLY "Pro-Choice"?

If you are for abortion because it is the woman's right to choose what she does or doesn't have happen to her life, then aren't you being a sexist?

What about the MAN'S right to choose?

Does he have no say in how HIS life goes?

What about the child?  Does he/she have no right to choose?

Let's evaluate the right to choose.  Is it really the right to CHOOSE.  For everyone involved?

Does anyone else find it a little disturbing that ONLY a woman gets to determine how her life goes?

A man doesn't get to say, "I don't want to have a child right now so either you abort or you relieve me of all financial duties."  He also doesn't get to say, "I want a child right now and I'm willing to take on the financial and physical task of raising that child."  He gets NO say.  Only the WOMAN gets a say.  She gets to determine not only how HER life goes but also how the life of the father goes.  Wow.  Talk about control!

A child doesn't get the opportunity to say, "You know what, you're going to be sucky parents & frankly I'd rather not be raised by you so don't even let me live."  The child also doesn't get to say, "I want the opportunity to change the world.  No.  I just want the opportunity to live.  Don't abort me.  Don't kill me."  Nope.  The child gets no say.  Only the WOMAN gets a say.  She gets to determine not only how HER life goes but whether or not another individual even gets the CHANCE at life.  Wow!  Talk about control!

I posed this question once to a friend.  Her response?  The man's opportunity to choose comes when he decides whether or not to have sex with that woman.  WOW.  Are you kidding me?  When does the CHILD'S opportunity to choose come in?  If a MAN loses HIS right to choose the second HE decides to have sex with a woman shouldn't the same also go for the woman?  Shouldn't BOTH of the two people who are ABLE to speak for themselves get to exercise THEIR rights when determining whether or not to even be involved in an act which could create a child?

Once they have CHOSEN their path by choosing to engage in an act that could create another life do they then get to END another life because they don't like their choice?  Or rather...does ONE of those people get to exercise control over ALL other people in the situation without further thought to anyone's life but her own?

I don't get it.  I thought it was about the right to choose.  I thought they were pro-CHOICE.  Clearly, it's only about the woman having control over men and children.  Seems sexist and selfish to me.

Still, if we're going to go by THAT standard, why stop at any age?

If I don't like the choice I made to have children when times get hard and my kids are 10, 8, or 3, do I get to kill them?  I mean, it IS about MY right to choose at the expense of my children's lives, right?  Why should age matter?  If I can kill my children when they're fully-formed babies at 6 months of life after partially-birthing them, then why not now?  Why do they suddenly have rights?  When do they get rights?

If they're a full life with rights if born premature at 6 months then why are they not a life with rights if I decide to kill them at 6 months gestation?  If the line between them being a life and not is blurry when they clearly CAN survive outside of the womb at 6 months, then why not keep it blurry for the convenience of all women?

How much easier would it be on us women if we COULD decide that we no longer wanted that child and could kill them...regardless of their age?  Seems to me if they become an inconvenience on me then I should have that right as a woman.  That IS what it's about, right?  JUST the woman having a choice and no one else.  Clearly it is.  So why stop that "right" at any age?



12 comments:

Melody said...

Ooooh! You go girl! Awesome post! Love it! Mind if I share the your link so others can read it? This was good stuff!!!

Luke said...

I think this would be rejected by pro-choicers because for them it's not a choice between life and death. It's not a choice about babies. It's a choice about what medical procedures you can choose to do. And since these are medical procedures that only women can have--that would eliminate the man's choice. He certainly--the argument goes--be allowed to tell a woman what she can and can't do!

And, again, kids don't have a say because they aren't kids yet. They don't have life yet. Or, at least, not enough life to warrant consideration in this field.

So, yes: Pro-choice is about a woman's choice. Granted, you are right to point out that many other choices and issues are completely ignored, but it is completely consistent within their own narrow application of the idea of choice.

~Luke

Thoughts of THAT mom said...

I agree with you Luke. I'm sure most "real" pro-choicers wouldn't agree with me. I don't really want them to. I'd just like an answer on why those other issues ARE ignored. If they just see the baby as a "medical procedure" then that would explain why.

That though makes me shudder, though.

Amy

Jay Paterson said...

Wow! Heavy duty message, but you hit the mark!!! I have the same thoughts and questions roaming around my head ALL the time.

(Facebook)

Chris Osip said...

Thanks for being brave enough to speak the truth even though people don't like to hear it or want to take it out of context!

(Facebook)

Elizabeth McClelland said...

Amen! I completely agree. I couldn't have said it better myself. As far as I am concerned, the "right" to "choose" is nothing more than a "right" to an easy out for being irresponsible in the first place (in most cases). It makes me SICK!

(Facebook)

Thoughts of THAT mom said...

Me too, Elizabeth!

Chris...Thanks for your kind words!

Jay...I think a lot of people do, but they don't know how to say it.

Jay Paterson said...

Amy: Well, it was your "assignment" to say it today, and you expressed it well!

(Facebook)

Tiara Sweeney said...

‎"choice" has always been a crap argument, a way for people to feel better or empowered in their selfishness, there is no other place in everyday life when people can say "I chose something else" and kill you, it makes no sence.
I didnt thi...nk I was ready to be a parent so I used birth control, God (as is his style) felt diferently and decided it was time for me to become a parent, I felt his going around my methods (yes 2) of birth control was enough of a message to get myself together and get ready cause here comes baby... no where in there did I think "wow this is way wrong for me right now I have to go kill the baby!" and I dont care what the situation is I will never understand it.
If I can go from quiting my job, leaving a realtionship of 3 years (unmarried) and moving out of the house we shared to stay on a friends couch and get my head on straight after all that ... just to wake up 3 weeks later to find myself still unemployeed, still basicly homeless and learn I was pregnant and never have murder cross my mind.... well I guess I wont understand the argument of " its just not the right time for me to have a baby right now" I'm with you on this pro- choice is just pro control of others...

(Facebook)

Jay Paterson said...

Amy ... I really wish more people had commented on this post. Actually, I am surprised.

(Facebook)

Becoming Supermommy said...

The idea of a child choosing seems pretty loaded to me. You see, an embryo isn't a child- it's a potential child. The same way that an unfertilized egg isn't a child- it's a potential child.

It's we're going to say that every embryo would "choose" life, then we should also posit that every egg would "choose" life, which would mean that a woman who didn't get pregnant at every single opportunity was denying her "children" a right to life.

But aside from that... let's just say that we're only talking embryos. What if every single embryo was grown into a human child? First of all, it would be a miracle to women who want to have babies everywhere- one in three pregnancies end in early miscarriage. Making many abortions pretty much a non-issue, as most women who have them get them within the fist six weeks- the time most likely to miscarry and also the fastest time frame possible. And most of those women, the vast majority of them, are poor.

The strain on society of providing for those children is massive. There's their educational costs, their childcare costs, their medical costs... and if a woman is already poor? I got advice from a teacher once- he recommended all his students marry rich people. He said, "You don't need any help being poor." Well, nobody will help you be poor more than a child. And we as a society have an obligation (particularly as a self-proclaimed Christian society) to take care of the poor. One that we utterly fail at.

Then there are the more complicated choice issues. What if the woman already made a choice NOT to get pregnant? Let's say that she was already taking birth control. Birth control is only 99% effective. People still get pregnant when they're taking it. What if she was raped? What if she's mentally ill, or addicted to drugs? What if she is in some way completely incapable of caring for a child?

It's sad to say, but most children that go into foster care never come out. Most families looking to adopt are looking to adopt healthy, NORMAL babies. Not the babies of crack addicts, not babies with serious health problems, not babies born addicted to heroin. Those children go into the foster system, and they rot there. They get involved in crime, they go to jail, they get killed. It's horrible.

I say, until we actually take care of the children- ALL of the children- that we already have... until all of the breathing, needy children who go hungry every day, who suffer violence every day, who commit crimes and live entire childhoods without once hearing the words "I love you..." Until we as a society do our part to care for those children, we have absolutely no business telling anybody that they MUST bring another child into the world.

I think abortion sucks. I think it's a shame. But I don't think it's nearly as bad as what I've seen happen to the children living in poverty in our own neighborhoods.

That's my opinion as a mom, as a religious observer, as somebody who has worked extensively with impoverished youth, and as a pregnant lady.

I say, if you're going to fight against abortion, start by fighting for the kids who really need you. And the sooner that having an unwanted baby doesn't carry the risks that its life will be like the lives of the unwanted children among us today, the sooner women will make the choice to have the baby instead of aborting it.

Thoughts of THAT mom said...

Becoming Supermommy: My post never gave my feelings on abortion. I only posed questions regarding it truly being about choice. I think the questions I posed are valid questions...and your response didn't address one of them.

 
ss_blog_claim=5f12071e297865b5da7de79fc3eee05b