Yes they do. I’m pointing out that if you support them, you violate your “principles”; if you oppose them, it’s more evidence of your callousness towards humanity.
Or my wolf one, while we’re at it!
Let me ask you this:
Let’s suppose, hypothetically, that you’re married (as I don’t know whether you are or not).
Your wife comes home from work one day, several hours late. When she finally arrives home, brought home by a squad car, she’s barely able to tell you anything.
You find out from the police that she was sexually assaulted by someone in the parking garage after work. She was found, unconcious, by a complete stranger who called 911.
After a few weeks of trying to help her rebuild her life, she tells you that she’s late.
Due to the nature of her assault, you all have not been having sex.
She then, a week or so later, goes to the doctor, and learns that she is pregnant.
Seriously…I want you to visualize what you’re going to say. Are you willing to allow that reminder in your house, for at least nine months? How would you explain to your wife, who, by the way, wants to try to move past this ordeal that she has endured, that your belief system dictates that she has to carry this child for nine months? That you’re willing to force her to carry the emotional and physical scars because she would be wrong to want to rid herself of any evidence of this ordeal?
Now, lest you say that that’s unlikely, let me say that, with a few minor details changed, that’s my story. Or, rather, my then-fiancee’s. She was assaulted by someone she knew (in this case, an ex-boyfriend), and thought that she was pregnant because of it. Luckily, it ended up being a false alarm.
But I don’t see where she should be forced to carry around this reminder, even if it’s put up for adoption.
Allow me to quote something that Dennis Miller said regarding the abortion controversy:
"Pro-life activists attempt to paint anyone pro-choice as having no morals. On the other side of the ledger, pro-choicers are tagging pro-lifers as crazed and backward bible-thumpers bent on running the lives of the people who disagree with them. The truth, as always, is, the case of human endeavors lies somewhere in between. As much as the advance scouts on either side of this issue might not want to admit it, good people do get abortions and other good people are pained by their decision to get one.
Where do I stand? Well, I’m like most of you, I presume, I think there are far too many abortions performed in this country. And I also believe that at the end of the day, as much as I might disapprove, none of them are really any of my business.
<snip>
Now there’s some things all right-minded human beings should agree on. We should all agree that abortions should be legal in the case of rape, incest and when the mother’s life is at risk – that’s just common sense. But excluding that obvious assumption, everything else in the abortion arena is “in play.” There are many quagmires complicating this issue. Religion. Now it seems that religion is most often the backboard for every bank shot put up by someone making it their business to get into your business. Roman Catholic doctrine forbids abortion. Fine. Take that into consideration when you make your decision. Right-to-life proponents contend that abortion is immoral. Fine. Take that into consideration when you make your decision.
<snip>
But the more you think about it, and the more it makes your head spin, and the more confused you get trying to figure out someone else’s life for them, it becomes increasingly apparent that it has to be the call of the individual who is pregnant, because the collective, one way or another, won’t have to suffer the consequences of that most personal of all decisions.
My fellow Americans, it is time to suck it up. Look deep into your immortal soul (if you believe you have one) and do the right thing. Have the courage and strength to live your own life, by your own standards, and stop trying to call the shots for everyone else. We all live with glaring inconsistencies, and sometimes, when you see something going on right in front of you that offends you to the very core of your being, sometimes the best thing you can do is walk away, because you know that’s exactly what you would want them to do for you."
Yesterday I read a review of a book written by a former president of NARAL. The review tells the story which explains why she became pro-choice.
The author, Kate Michelman, was 27 years old, a devout Catholic, and married with three young daughters when her husband announced he was leaving her for another woman. A few weeks later, she learned she was pregnant and tried to kill herself. This was before Roe vs. Wade was decided, so, in order to have an abortion, she had to go before a panel of three doctors to prove she was unfit to be a mother, thus eligible for a therapeutic abortion.
Updike, you keep making noises about personal responsibility and Catholicism. I’d like to read your comments on this story.
I keep reading the canard over and over again that if you don’t want kids you shouldn’t have sex. I have an old friend who has decided not to have kids because of health problems in her family and her husband’s family. Is anyone really suggesting she and her husband should never have sex? Not even the Catholic Church goes that far! I’ve made this argument often enough to know the standard counter-argument that she and her husband should use birth control. They do, but we’ve got several Dopers on this message board who’ve had birth control fail.
Crowmanyclouds, I wanted to thank you for the statistics on infant mortality. I’ve lost my bookmark to a page which had the number of abortion providers by state, but when I did a search for abortion providers in South Dakota, I didn’t find any websites listing any, and two which referred people to doctors in Kansas and North Dakota.
I keep reading that the pro-life position is all about protecting the lives of children. This time, however, I’m looking at a state which is trying to make having an abortion completely impossible instead of nearly so, yet which has higher than average infant mortality rates, especially among Native Americans. If we were truly talking about the sanctity of life, wouldn’t we be trying to do something about the babies dying after they’re born? Wouldn’t there be a push to do something so that the odds of a Native American child dying weren’t double the national average?
CJ
Possibly. I’m not adopted. I have had 3 friends who have (all started in their teens) looked for their birth families though (yes I realise 3 is not a study that would convince anyone).
One friend found her mum, they went through a honeymoon period that lasted about a year then it fizzled out. I remember the fizzle because she cried a lot. She never found her dad.
Another friend found her mum, she was living in Australia. My friend flew to Oz to meet her mum. When she knocked on the door her “mum” told her that her husband and her children didn’t know she exisited and that was the way it was going to stay. She then slammed the door in her face. She then found her dad, they exchange Xmas cards. A great relationship.
My third friend is 42 in June, she has never found either parent (difficulties with other countries). She never stops thinking about it. She is FORTY TWO and is consumed about finding her “parents”. Her adoptive parents are wonderful, lovely people but she still keeps looking for the egg and sperm donor. In her words “I just need to know who they are”.
You are lucky you don’t care because it seems to hurt a lot when you do.
I see two solutions to this debate, we could castrate all men, then there would be no unwanted babies to be conceived, or we could implant the fetus in the womb of a pro-life woman, then tax all anti abortion people to give one third of their income to support the child from birth to death, so the child could live a good life, free of poverty, it would be well educated, loved and wanted. A foolish suggestion? Perhaps… but then everyone would be taken into consideration. a child could be born, a woman would not be forced to bear a child that she could not carry, and men who want the conception to go to full term could help support it, every one would have their wish. No more abortions, no need for a law and it would take into consideration that the woman would have her life respected too.
Monavis
Yes! What a great solution, only a couple of hiccups.
-
The adopted children might still want to know who their birth parents are.
-
The anti abortion types might want to take the child but the pro abortion types might not be willing to supply the child.
-
Men being castrated, voluntarily? Yeah right!
Good try though.
I only have a few moments and there is a lot I would like to say in this discussion. In fact, I wish I could take the day off.
I only have time to respond to this post, and will post tonight when I get home.
I do in fact have daughters; a 12 year old and a 14 year old. I’ll address a concern with your post, and most of the others here later, but I’ll simply say this now: They all seem to start halfway through the story; sometimes the posts/examples/analogy starts at the end of the story.
To answer your question I would say/do this:
I would hug her, and likely cry with her. I would listen to her story and do my very best to understand her fears, her pain and anguish. I would be non-judgemental and patient. I would reaffirm my unwavering love for her, and I would let her know that I would not abandon her or berate her in any way.
We would discuss the fact that she has created another human being, and that human being needs care also. What’s done is done. I would do my part (and then some likely) to help her through the process of pregnancy & birth. I would talk with the young man in question if he was amenable.
While I would never (read:never) berate, humiliate or be judgemental towards my daughter, I would also not waver from the principle that this is a child, and while killing it through an abortion may be the expediant thing to do, it is murder, plain and simple. You simply don’t compound bad decisions by making more bad decisions. Killing a child is convenient, fast and brutally efficient.
My daughters have been raised to understand (among many other things, many of which make this scenario less likely) that it is a function of your character to accept the consequences of your choices. Making a child was a bad decision (despite years of training, counsel and and loving direction; a fact we would both be aware of and would necessarily remain unspoken) and will be a life altering set of events. The consequences will be felt for the rest of all our lives. It will place a burden on all of us, and most certainly the greatest burden on my daughter. It will be my commitment to help her, and support her, although I would not ‘validate’ her choice. Despite the burden, it would likely have many, many moments of joy and happiness, and have the real potential for growth and a positive outcome. She [we] can’t unring that bell. As a family, it is our commitment to have a positive outlook and make the very best of what has happened. There is every reason to believe the end of the story will be positive.
But you don’t kill that baby to make your problem go away.
No, not really. And unless you’ve been there, you have no way of knowing.
How nice for your daughters that they have such a loving, supportive father who would help them through a difficult decision like that. Truly. But not everyone who’s faced with an unwanted pregnancy has that luxury. So what’s a girl supposed to do if she doesn’t have anyone to offer her that kind of support?
the raindog, i’d like to pose a question to you for when you get back.
While I don’t agree with your basic premise (that a foetus from conception is a human with personhood), I do find your logic as based on that choice to be consistent - I imagine that if I too believed that premise, then I would share your position. Is the reverse true? I mean, if you believed our premise - that a foetus is not a yet a human nor has personhood - would you agree with our position? Do you find the arguments we pro-choicers have presented to make sense if that premise were true?
“Yes, dear, you made a mistake, you have to live with that mistake for the rest of your life (no matter WHAT your choice), you will never get to fulfill the plans you made for your life, here is your punishment which i hang around your neck forever. Now, love it, and don’t resent it or be angry just because you’ll never have the chance to be young and independent. Oh, and I’ve already made your choice for you; this is what you’re doing. No, you don’t get to decide. You’re obviously not fit to make any major life changing decisions for yourself, but I want you to make all of them for another human being for the next 18 years. And you can stay here, I’ll help you and tell you exactly how to make decisions for this person, too.”
Gee. How white of you.
I read a story the other day about South Dakota. There is one abortion clinic in the whole state, run by Planned Parenthood. This clinic receives so much opposition and hostility that they can’t get local doctors to work there any more. The abortions are carried out by doctors flown in from nearby Minnesota.
Ah, here’s one article that refers to this issue. Here’s another.
In practical terms, the SD bill won’t actually change much for the state. Many women from there already go to Iowa or Minnesota for the procedure.
Also, even though Roe v. Wade ensures that a woman can have an abortion, in practical terms things aren’t always so easy. Even though abortion is legal, it can still be very hard to get, especially if you live in the heartland outside a big city. According to this article, 83% of US counties don’t have an abotion provider, including half of all metropolitan areas.
There are also other factors working against abortion providers:
Yes, that’s right, some councils require neonatal resuscitation equipment at abortion clinics.
In Australia, where on-demand abortion is still officially illegal, it’s actually often easier for a woman to receive a legally- and medically-sanctioned abortion than it is in the US, where abortion is officially completely legal.
All wanted children are gifts. The rest are burdens, or if you had your way, punishments.
Actually, the ultimate result of a sexual axt is an orgasm (ideally, at least one per participant). At least, that’s the typical result kaylasmom and I engage in sex acts. I suppose sometimes a zygote has resulted, as a side effect. Once, there was actually a viable zygote, which implanted in kaylasmom’s uterus. The ultimate result of that zygote is Michaela (a child).
Stands up and applauds. This is my feeling on the subject infinitely moreso than any other.
That said, I consider myself in the same category as a bumper sticker I once saw: Pro Born.
You, sir, are an ass. And that’s putting it much more kindly than I would ever want to.
Know what, I am in the process of looking at Tubal Ligations vs Hysterectomies - and your percentage of failure rate for tubal ligation COMPOUNDED by post-procedure complications are WRONG. DEAD WRONG.
Do you wear a condom? EVERY SINGLE TIME? Never had a “whoopsie” moment? Ever had a uterus? Ever had a menstrual period? Ever had the anxiety of wondering if you are pregnant? Ever had problems and complications caused by menstruation?
No? Then fuck off to YOU, sir, for your ignorance and your unbelieveable vitriol and RUDENESSS. You fucking cunt-wannabe.
You want to make the decisions? Go get a sex-change, have a uterus implanted, go through the birth process and then I might have more sympathy for your “decision”.
Inky
What if complications developed early on (say, around 3 months along) and her doctors said it was either her or the fetus?
My pleasure. Gots to keep my google-fu skills finely honed!
I searched (Googled “abortion providers in South Dakota”) but didn’t find much that wasn’t severely biased.
I did turn up this, from the Guttmacher Institute (yes, they’re not neutral of the subject either, try and find a cite that is),
[
](State Facts About Abortion | Guttmacher Institute)
Given that infant mortality rate for American Indians and the highest rate, 59.4, was among mothers who had no prenatal care, (and I would assume a large overlap between those two groups) it’s clear to me that saving the lives of Indian and poor babies just isn’t as important as stopping abortion.
Of course since making prenatal care available, (oh, say, free to any anyone in need) would cost money, I’ll believe they’re pro-life, and not just anti-abortion, when I see them put their taxes where their mouths are!
CMC
I agree whole-heartedly. After giving this issue a bit of thought and doing some reading, I’ve come to the conclusion that this is all a bit of political grandstanding done so that South Dakota politicians can show how they’re all in favor of saving unborn babies while doing nothing about those babies who are dying after they’ve been born. “Sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
CJ
DirkGntly FYI your statement that “a properly-performed cauterization tubal has a less than 1/10th of 1% chance of failure” is incorrect.
Way, way incorrect.
From the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1996;174:1161-8
(You can look it up at your local library or pay to read the article online).
Cumulative probability of pregnancy per 1000 procedures in women undergoing Tubal ligation by various methods is as follows:
Bipolar coagulation 5 years: 16.5 10 years: 24.8
**Silicone band/ring ** 5 years: 10.0 10 years: 17.7
**Spring clip ** 5 years: 31.7 10 years: 36.5
Interval partial Salpingectomy 5 years: 15.1 10 years: 20.1
**Postpartum Partial Salpingectomy ** 5 years: 6.3 10 years: 7.5
**All methods ** 5 years: 13.1 10 years: 18.5
That’s between a 5 year 0.6% failure rate in the best case to a 3% 5 year failure rate in the worst case. With an average of 1% 5 year failure rate and 1.8% 10 year failure rate.
i.e. A woman who has a tubal ligation has almost a 1 in 100 chance of becoming pregnant in the next 5 years and a 1 in 50 chance of becoming pregnant within 10 years…NOT a 1 in 1000 chance, 1 in 50.
Vasectomy and Mirena are thought to be more effective, but we’re talking about the difference between 1 in 100 and 1 in 200 or 1 in 500.
If 1000 women take the oral contaceptive pill at the correct time of day, every day, without interference from antibioticsor diarrhoea for 1 year, only 1 of them will become pregnant i.e. 99.9% effective.