"Pro-life" and "pro-choice" are both stupid expressions

Great Debates
61

You’re really gonna go with that, huh? So, what you’re saying is, make women raise an unwanted child as punishment for making a mistake. Fantastic idea there. :rolleyes: Not to mention that accidents can happen even with the best of intentions. Birth-control is not 100% foolproof, so even responsible people can end up with an unwanted pregnancy.

And here’s the thing: You’re already identifying exceptions. If there are excections, someone has to decide what the exceptions are, and where to draw the line. Wouldn’t it be better to have the woman and her doctor make that decision as opposed to the government?

62

Pro-Choice = Pro-Death

Pro-Life = Pro-Life

63

Ever hear of these things called…condoms?

64

My aunt and uncle adopted 3 “unwanted” pregnancies and all 3 kids are bright, beautiful, and wonderful human beings. Who says the woman needs to be the one to raise them? There are many, many, many people out there would gladly raise any “unwanted” child no questions asked.

65

So every child in America has been adopted into a loving home, eh? Last time I checked, that wasn’t the case.

66

Pro-Choice = Pro Choice. Pro-Freedom, Pro-Justice. Good.
Pro-Life = Pro-Tyranny. Pro-Malice, Anti-Woman. Evil.

You mean the things generally opposed by the same people who oppose abortion ? Because, of course, the majority aren’t pro-life at all, but anti-woman and anti-freedom and anti-happiness.

And many more that won’t. And many that gladly would, but shouldn’t be allowed to.

67

So! I know let’s not even give the kid a chance! Let’s just KILL IT!

:smack:

68

So a reasonable person who is pro-life would not use a condom simply because they are opposed to them, and go ahead and risk conceiving a child? How about not just bump uglies then instead of being so damn selfish.

69

Masturbation? Really, really, well-practiced masturbation? If a couple abruptly finds themselves in a situation where they absolutely cannot afford to support a child but they got a case of the hornies, maybe it’s time to roll up those sleeves, lube up those palms and get scrubbing.
:smiley:

Is the use of a condom really that much of a hindrance for the enjoyment of sex? It may not be 100% effective at preventing pregnancy, but it helps. Then it is all about the balance of risk.

It always perplexes me that the enjoyment of sex cannot be compromised for any reason, yet if someone enjoys a lifetime of cheeseburger indulgence, they are scoffed at for being caught off-guard by a triple bypass later on. And abortion is a medical procedure, so why run that risk in lieu of birth control? Is sex really so sacred that it cannot be compromised in any way so as to avoid circumstances which would put a woman under the scalpel? If someone takes birth control pills prior to intercourse that kick-in after the pregnancy and cause a fetus to miscarry, it’s not an abortion (abortion implies a deliberate termination of pregnancy) but it is a legitimate effort at pregancy prevention and there is nothing irresponsible at hand.

I am of the opinion that men should be legally required to provide for 50% of 18 years of a child growing up when pregnancy occurs. Whether the pregnancy is carried to term is irrelevant. Of course, I wonder how many people would fight for a man’s right to “abort” his fatherhood duties. Sexual intercourse brings with it an enormous responsibility and it is taken too lightly in many ways, and is too highly revered in other ways.

There are some folks who see it as a valid form of contraception.
That’s a gray area that would need to be worked out legally. I know that is a huge legal mess, but that is the problem with the issue of abortion. Both sides tend to be very black-or-white about their perspective. I would like to see trustworthy statistics on how many cases are “abortions of convenience.” I cannot imagine that very many women proudly declare that they have to keep getting those pesk abortions because of all the sex they have. Admittedly, I may have succumbed to some of the pro-life propaganda in assuming that there are a “lot” of cases like that. Even so, just one person every fifty years is too many.

I don’t like to be called “pro-life,” because it puts me into the same category as the extremists. I fall into a middle category where I recognize that abortion is a valid option under certain circumstances. Especially in cases of rape or where the woman’s health is at risk. These are often the “pro-choice” counter points and they are valid. It brings with it questions like “Is she claiming rape just to get an abortion?” and “how much of a health risk is this situation?” What a legal nightmare, but my opinions are just opinions and the limited plausibility of them are what make me politically aloof.

Can I be “Pro-Life-And/Or-Responsible-Choice?”

Well, that’s where you and I differ. I am not saying that seeking an abortion is irresponsible. I am saying that circumstances where a woman is faced with that decision are often preventable.

70

Sure, why not? It’s not like we’re facing a critical shortage. Yet.

71

Why not ? It’s just mindless tissue. Not a “kid”.

First, a reasonable person is not “pro-life”. And the reason why they don’t just not have sex is because they want to have sex, of course. If the result is an unwanted pregnancy, oh well, terminate it. It’s no more immoral than having a wart removed.

72

Pro-Tyranny, I get what you’re saying.
Pro-Malice, not quite getting it. But…
Why is “Pro-Life” seen as “Anti-Woman?”

I once got into a debate with a guy who made this claim. I said, “but if abortions were outlawed, the man should be required to ‘own up’ and provide his share of 18 years of childcare (financial and otherwise).”
He replied, “But then we can’t fuck 'em and move on.”
Yeah, real “Pro-Woman” there.

In my Pro-Responsibility Plan, men would be required to use caution with sex. This would force men to take responsibility with their relationship with a woman, to avoid a lifestyle which objectifies women, to commit to a long-term monogamous relationship with one woman without cheating, and to put women up on a pedestal, where they belong.

73

Because it denies pregnant women control over their own bodies.

I’m not saying that that’s not a defensible position, given the assumptions that “pro-life” people are making about full human personhood beginning at the moment of conception.

After all, even most abortion-rights supporters are in favor of legal restrictions on abortion during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. That denies pregnant women control over their own bodies too.

But the “pro-life” position of denying a woman the right to choose an abortion at any point in pregnancy whatsoever is so extreme that it is often perceived as simple misogyny.

Women do not belong “up on a pedestal”, and it is not in any sense “Pro-Woman” to advocate “putting” them there.

And requiring people “to use caution with sex” does not solve the abortion problem. Plenty of unwanted pregnancies occur even when the partners are being responsible and cautious about birth control.

Moreover, forcing people to adopt any particular sexual “lifestyle” is way too draconian to be acceptable. No, cheating and objectifying women are not good things in and of themselves, any more than destroying a potential human life in embryo is a good thing in and of itself. But people should be free to make their own choices about such matters.

74

Relationship by force. Sounds romantic. But women don’t belong on a pedestal like ethereal beings or members of an alien species, just as they are not children who must be told what’s best for their own lives and bodies. Pro-lifers are historically and almost undeniably anti-woman. Even the rape or health exception that some of them grant pregnant women (too kind) is basically admitting that only ‘innocent’ women don’t deserve the punishment of childbirth. The only evidence instance I can think of in which pro-lifers aren’t anti-woman is when they speak out against abortion as a result of sex screening (in favor of male children)… which pro-choicers are also againts.

75

Oh, crap. Rephrase:

In my Pro-Responsibility Plan, men would be required to use caution with sex. This would strongly discourage men from being irresponsible with their relationship with a woman, from engaging in a lifestyle which objectifies women, from getting into unloving and uncommitted relationships with multiple women, and to treat women like dirt and spit upon them. In other words, asshole men would get the short end for once.

76

I’ll grant this proposal a second glance when childcare and custody settlements aren’t univerally and overwhelmingly in the woman’s favor and to her advantage. Not all men are all assholes, but equally under the law, they’re all treated as such.

77

A. As I noted above, even cautious sexual behavior sometimes results in unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. This does not solve the abortion problem.

B. How are you going to “require” individual men to follow any particular course of action about something as private and personal as having sex?

Clearly, requiring men to pay child support for accidentally conceived children is not in itself sufficient to deter risky sexual behavior or sexual exploitation of women. Because we already require men to pay child support for accidentally conceived children, unless the woman chooses an abortion. And plenty of men go on having shallow and/or exploitative sexual relationships with multiple partners anyway.

78

Because it reduces women to the status of brood mares. Because the people who call themselves “pro-life”, by and large ARE misogynist. Because it endangers women and takes away their freedom.

It’s not your business to tell people how to live. And reducing women to the level of wombs with legs “objectifies” them far more than finding them attractive does. And it wouldn’t force men to put women on pedestals, but to look upon women as enemies. Whether they, or the woman in question, wants it that way.

And there’s nothing innately good about a “long-term monogamous relationship with one woman”; attempting to force men to live like that, whether they or the women they involve themselves want it that way, is wrong.

No, it would force men to regard and treat women as enemies. And visa-versa. As someone who can inadvertantly screw up their lives for many years, if they dare have sex with them. Including men and women who are married and in love, or do you assume that everyone wants to have children until it drives them into poverty or kills them ?

79

What kid? It’s this kind of dishonesty that makes your side lose all credibility. An abortion is not “killing a kid”.

80

As long as we’re making such a concerted effort to understand each other:
Laws should be passed to firmly ensconce the absolute right to be pregnant only by choice. All such choice would be considered to be reversible, therefore unrestricted access to free abortion services up until the moment of birth. Additional laws should protect the rights of trained medical personnel to perform procedures designed to safely terminate an unwanted pregnancy without legal interferences, but “the right to terminate one’s own pregnancy shall not be abridged” will be a right specifically established, not derived as a subset of any other right such as the right to privacy, etc, but on its own as a unique and unalienable right.

No medical facility receiving federal reimbursal (Medicaid, Medicare) or accreditation, and which provides obstetrical and/or surgical services in general should be allowed to refrain from offering abortion services.

Surgical residences for medical students must include experience with the different abortion techniques.

Now that we’ve got that cleared up, I understand you are very uncomfortable with abortions and wish they were rare. Want to work together to improve the quality of available birth control technologies for both sexes, comprhehensive birth control information, and a push to celebrate the exercise of reproductive control? I’m in favor of all of those things, and together they constitute a solidly practical plan for reducing abortion rates.

I want to live in a world where unintended pregnancy is vanishingly rare. In the absence of unintended pregnancy, the only abortions are going to be due to a change of mind or something going awry health-wise. I totally support the right of a person t change her mind and end a pregnancy she intentionally started, and don’t expect you to agree on that one, but there won’t be many of those to fight over if we erase the unintentional pregnancy problem.