Thursday, July 28, 2011
Pro-Choice = Pro-Abortion
Is this another Hate Statement? Why is it when you get close to the Truth of the Matter you're accused of making a hate statement? So nobody in the abortion clinic, not the doctor or the woman or the boyfriend or any member of the nursing staff or a counselor or the janitor is really for what is taking place? Everybody is morally sleepwalking through the entire procedure? It's a surreal conclusion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Fair enough. If you're supporting anyone other Ron Paul then you're in favor of more War, more Debt, more Enslavement, more Tyranny, and so on and so on.
ReplyDeleteSo someone's Pro-Life...
Hardly a virtue if the intended goal is serfdom.
"Conservatism without pro-life is an empty victory." Z-man
"A life without liberty is hardly a life worth living." - Soapster
Soapie you're missing the point. The sole focus of this thread is why isn't anyone out there pro-abortion and if you say someone is you're accused of making a hate statement? Stay on track.
ReplyDeleteFor the same reason people don't round around calling themselves Pro-War/Pro-Death I suppose.
ReplyDeleteNothing more to say on the subject.
Let me know when y'all are interested in talking about monetary policy.
But soap there ARE pro-war people and John McCain is one of them. Actually I don't consider "pro-abortion" to be used as a pejorative like "pro-death", it's just accurately descriptive in many cases. I just wanna get the liberals out there to finally finally admit that yes Virginis there are pro-abortion people out there.
ReplyDeleteI believe they're called Eugenicists.
ReplyDeleteIf there are people who are pro-abortion I don't know any. I know many, many people, including myself, who are pro-choice. The choice you make isn't as important to me as the fact that you have a choice to make.
ReplyDelete"If there are people who are pro-abortion I don't know any."
ReplyDeleteBut you've probably come across people who have been a party to them or women who have had them but of course they're not for the procedure either. Einstein revolutionized the traditional world of Newtonian physics, you're utterly transforming Logic here. Why would you go through something you're not for? Let's see, I'm not for porn but let me go rent a Ron Jeremy and I'm not for drugs either but let me go shop for a good crack pipe.
The only person I know who has had an abortion did it under personally catastrophic circumstances. At the time it was the only viable option she had. It happened on my sixteenth birthday and so every single year since then I have to hear about it. Call me heartless but it's gotten old.
ReplyDeleteShe will readily admit that it was the only real option for her at that time in her life and that it wasn't a mistake. At the same time she does wish that her circumstances could have been different and that she hadn't had to have the abortion.
So I wouldn't call her 'pro' abortion in any sense or form. She did what she had to do at the time. It was the right choice for her at the time. But that doesn't mean she hasn't spent a lot of time telling me how she wishes it could have been different. It makes for me a really happy birthday every year. Not.
Here's another thought. I have never had an abortion, but I did have a miscarriage. It was so early on that I didn't know I was pregnant until I miscarried. Scott and I had only been together a couple of months.
ReplyDeleteThis also may sound heartless, but I wasn't sorry that I miscarried. It saved me from having to make traumatic decisions that there was no winning answer for and probably saved our relationship; it was too new to handle that kind of thing.
At the same time I have often wondered what it would have been like for us to have that child.. who would now be 20(ish).
And so this is how karma works itself out. I wasn't sorry. That doesn't mean it wasn't traumatic on some level or that it didn't affect me. Significantly, I've never gotten pregnant again in all these 21 years.
I know we've been over this a hundred times, and I know you'll never understand this, but I am not in any sense or form 'pro' abortion. But I do passionately believe that the option should be available, and that no one has the right to judge what circumstances would contribute or lead to a woman making a decision to have an abortion.
See I also had miscarriages, very early, and because I wanted a baby I was heartbroken! Thankfully, I have had one live birth for each miscarriage I have had, and have two beautiful, wonderful children.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I say only a wanted unborn child is considered an actual person, the unwanted are considered lumps of cells. It disgusts me really.
P.S. Yes, it is heartless!
ReplyDeleteSaty: "So I wouldn't call her 'pro' abortion in any sense or form."
ReplyDeleteI would, the Logic simply dictates it. She obviously sees abortion as being a positive social good at least in her case and by extrapolation from her own personal experience she would like to keep it being a positive social good for other women in similar circumstances, in other words keeping it legal. Now seems many misunderstand when I say this but by "pro-abortion" I don't mean aggressively so, that she's out saying other women should do what she did but since she sees at least some positive aspects to what she did (it "solved" her problem whatever that is) then she is pro-abortion and other women like her at least on some level are pro-abortion. I'm not being judgemental here but why is it so contentious for some people to admit they're in favor of this procedure at least in certain cases? Macbeth agonized and then agonized again over killing King Duncan of Scotland but he was in favor of it ultimately and did it in the end so as to become King himself so in some sense this Shakespearian villain was pro-murder. No Shakespearian critic that I know of says he did it but was not really for it.
No, I can't agree with you here. Maybe because I'm bombarded every single September and it's been every single September for 25 years and I think unless you have to go through that you just can't understand her perspective.
ReplyDeleteBeth, it doesn't matter to me whether you think it's heartless or not. On a completely different level this is all karma working itself out and what happened with me happened for a reason and I'm okay with that... what the reason is I don't quite know but I know there's a reason and that's enough for me.
I do know on a biological level an enormous percentage of miscarriages, especially early ones like mine, do happen because there is some problem or issue that can't be worked out, some kind of lethal error in the genes. It's all right. Things happen like this and work out just the way they're supposed to. If we were supposed to have a baby we would have.
Like I said, I don't think anyone can really judge anyone else or the situations they find themselves in, or presume to be able to make decisions for them. People make decisions and like my friend, they have to live with them. Whether or not it was at the time the right decision for her she still has to live with it one way or the other. That's her personal thing and I really don't think anyone else can make any kind of pronouncement on it.
Karma, sharma!
ReplyDeleteDo you realize how often Saty you need to justify your bad behavior? Always saying you're tired or sick or another nurse was getting on your nerves, seriously! Libs can't just suck it up and take responsibility for their actions! You are the one who suggested that you sounded heartless, btw, I just happened to agree with you for once!
Justifying bad behavior? A miscarriage is 'bad behavior' that I'm supposed to 'take responsibility for'? And here I was thinking that it was something I totally had no control over when it happened. Thanks for clearing this up for me... for the last 20 years I've been thinking it was something that happened TO me, not something I did.
ReplyDeleteThe understanding of karma for me is a religious one, Beth, so if you choose to denigrate it please do so with the knowledge that you're denigrating my religion. Thanks for that too.
You're talking about Situation Ethics Saty. How do you feel about animal testing and medical experimentation in labs?
ReplyDeleteI'm talking about Beth's comment. I'm waiting for a reply.
ReplyDeleteI think Saty if you came across as even mildly anti-abortion your whole framework here might be more palatable but it always comes across as a Maude thing. Interesting to know your thoughts on medical experimentation on animals and by implication on human fetuses let's say.
ReplyDeleteI'm not going to get into anything else until I get this one finished. I'm waiting to understand how having a miscarriage is some kind of 'bad behaviour' that I (as a liberal) 'refuse to take responsibility for'.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention the part about karma.
Let's not change the subject until the subject's been addressed. I notice that Beth has been uncharacteristically silent since her tirade and I'm anxiously waiting to hear her explanation of it all, since I'd rather not pass judgement until she has a chance to speak on it.
Oh gee, sorry, I decided to live my life instead of getting back to you, Saty, how mean of me!
ReplyDeleteThe miscarriage isn't the bad behavior, does that help?
And if karma is a religious term to you, then I apologize for making fun of it.
Then let's move on.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with animal experimentation in broad principles; I believe if it can be at all avoided it should be and if I have an option between two identical products, one tested on animals and one not, I'll take the one that isn't.
That being said, there do come times when medications or whatever do have to be tested. When this is the case I would be very insistent that the animals be treated as humanely as possible. As far as genetic experiments go, the standard lab insect is Drosophilia (fruit fly) which is overall still taking lives but not on the level of say St. Bernards or orangutans.
Either way all the people who do these experiments will take on bad karma for it and have to deal with that themselves. So overall my feeling is that if there's a way not to, don't; if there's no option, do it as safely and as humanely as possible. Does that, by implication, sound at all familiar to you? Because it's the exact same principle in terms of abortion. I'm more consistent than you think.
So how do you feel about the people who work in slaughterhouses, where they've documented on film the unbelievable tortures and abuses that they put the animals through (and laugh about it) far beyond just killing them? If I had to defend it, there's at least a point to medical experimentation beyond giving someone a Big Mac.
Not that long ago I actually blogged about people who work in slaughterhouses and people who work in animal shelters that have to kill perfectly healthy dogs and cats and do this on a regular basis. I couldn't do it, it's weird work to be honest and I'm wondering how it goes down with women when you tell them this is your line of work (my guess, not too well). I don't care how many conservatives are for the death penalty that's a weird career as well. In fact without judging them I think these people probably hate themselves on some level. I mean out of all the career choices you have at your disposal you choose to slaughter animals or kill them in shelters or gas and electrocute criminals (at least these were the corporal methods in the past) not to mention Mortuary Science but studies say there may be some kind of necro deal going on there.
ReplyDeleteAt least when you deal with Mortuary Science they're already dead. I don't know, I think you could probably say that funeral directors and morticians do a valuable and important service helping people deal with the loss of a family member. I mean, you can't just toss Aunt Maisie in the backyard compost pile.
ReplyDeleteNo you're right, that's the reason they exist in the first place but have you ever seriously considered it as a career? Saw a film on it on cable and seems most students tend to drop out of the class.
ReplyDeleteI did consider forensics, which I think might be a little worse?? All that dissecting and all, but it's for a good reason...
ReplyDeleteI went to school with a kid whose parents owned a funeral home and it seemed to be sort of a family business passed down kind of thing. The funeral home was actually like a huge and beautiful addition they put on their home, so they lived there (with all those dead bodies on the other side of the door...)
One thing you have to say, it's pretty much an economy-immune business. Sure, more people are choosing cremation cause it's cheaper, but for as long as people die, they're gonna need funeral homes. Unless you wanna put Aunt Maisie in the compost pile or build a REALLY big bonfire in the backyard. Actually isn't it against the law to do things like bury people in the backyard and/or do the home cremation thing?
Why is it legal to kill an unborn child but not legal to burn a dead body in your backyard or otherwise do bad things to corpses?
ReplyDeleteFuneral homes AND flower shops. Worked at a flower shop in the Bronx for a brief period of time and the bulk of the business was weddings and funerals, I think more funerals.
ReplyDeleteI've always viewed the whole funeral biz with ambivalence. Yeah it's a vital public service but it also smacks of the commercialization of death. Few years back my Dad got a nice brochure in the mail from Woodlawn Cemetery in the Bronx and my Mom got upset and sent it back with a note.
ReplyDeleteI noticed that Saty didn't reply to my inquiry, because how could she? It makes no sense that we criminalize desecrating a corpse but killing a baby in its mother's womb is legal.
ReplyDeleteNot only that, the point about animals should be tested and experimented on if need be only in the safest and most humane fashion possible for the animal but when you consider abortion any old method so long as it works will do. Back in the day the horrific saline abortions were done on midterm fetuses...another contradiction.
ReplyDeletewhen you consider abortion any old method so long as it works will do.
ReplyDeleteI don't recall ever saying anything whatsoever like that.
But I don't recall the same such concerns for the fetus as you expressed over lab animals. You're right, it's not anything you said but what you didn't say.
ReplyDeleteGood point, Z-man, as always, it does seem curious that Saty has such great concern for how animals and dead bodies are treated, but when it comes to abortion she says it's not for her to tell someone not to have one, in other words she couldn't care less what happens to the unborn children.
ReplyDeleteI think you and I, Z-man, are consistently against mistreating animals or humans (regardless of age or medical condition), as well as being respectful for the deceased.
Except all those animals that get tortured, beaten and abused for their short lives so you can eat them, right, Beth?
ReplyDeleteI have always consistently said on the topic of abortion that I believe it should be as safe and as humane as possible. Because I DO have concerns about ALL life, Beth, not selectively, like 'let's protect life, but don't take away my fried chicken.'
You may pat yourself on the back if you like and make yourself feel better that you're so concerned about abortion, but think of all the thousands of needless murders your supper plate has contributed to during your life. So much for your concern about animals.
And I'm not all that concerned about how dead bodies are treated and I don't know where you got that from. Why would anyone be?
Here's something else that occurred to me whilst on the way to work (70mph on back roads, watching for deer will give you fodder for contemplation).
ReplyDeleteThe way we look at it, a spirit soul is a spirit soul. Jiva is jiva. There's no distinction. Dog, cat, experimental insect, cow, tree, Aunt Tillie, it's all the same. No cause to value one over the other; jiva in a different body. No difference, no distinction. Spirit soul is spirit soul.
People make choices and they take the karma pertaining thereunto. If you decide to eat meat, you take on that karma of participating in murder. Equally, if you have an abortion you take on that karma. Now, these are choices an individual has to make. In the sense of the jiva there's no difference; spirit soul, different body. No distinction. They're both equally the same in terms of karma.
So can I legislate away your choice to participate in the murder of animals? That's your choice and as a result that's your karma and you're going to have to address it at some moment. No one is going to take it away from you and you're not going to get out of it, period. In the same way, I am not going to legislate away someone's choice to have an abortion. That's their choice and as a result that's their karma and they're going to have to address it at some moment.
We make choices and we have to be responsible for the karma attached to them.
If you think that there's a difference between participating in the murder of animals (and eating them, giving companies a reason to kill more of them, is participation) and abortion, then you don't understand what the jiva is and that a body is only a temporary material designation that lasts for just one lifetime.
There is NO difference.