The Culture Wars: Pro-Life vs. Pro Choice

This is a series speaking primarily on the social changes regarding generational attitudes toward certain things where we, at one point, held a more conservative position on the matter. Sometimes, it's worth noting that such changes can be referenced to earlier events that may lead to something else.

ROE V. WADE: THE FUTURE OF LIFE & CHOICE​

Ever since the Supreme Court made their ruling back in the 70s regarding the abortion debate, it's been in fluctuation with each passing generation. Initially, there were more people who identified themselves as pro-choice, but 10-15 years since, it's been a little complicated. I did a thread on it and you can view it right here. While the majority of people still the position of being pro-life, many of them would still hold the view that it's a personal choice and wouldn't want to enforce their own views on others.

The case that could be best mentioned would be in Mississippi on the Personhood Amendment. The state government have been passing laws banning abortion on a myriad of circumstances. However, when the people were allowed to vote on the amendment to define a fetus as a living person, it was shut down by a small, yet sizable amount.

Still, the majority of Mississippians identify themselves as pro-life. Their neighbor, Louisiana, even attempted this similar route, thanks to former State. Rep LaBruzzo. However, it failed in the State Senate and this would have prevented people from obtaining abortions and closing down the facilities in Baton Rouge and elsewhere.

The most current case lies within Texas. And we're not talking the Wendy Davis situation, but the situation involving a mother who is brain dead and yet the state law goes against the family's wishes to take her off the machine and let her pass on. She's pregnant with a child and the doctors, abiding the state law, would want to keep her on the machine until the baby comes out...for another few months. This is the case of impractical laws being enforced and infringing upon the rights of others at the expense of people who live in contradiction.

The debate on what constitutes life still rages on, yet there's more of a libertarian slant which yields on the idea of any form of government intervention, and at the same time, liberal-progressive groups are trying to dial back the conservative clock and keep the country from falling into a state of backdoor practices which can cause greater harm to the woman.

Questions:

1. Where do you see the debate going towards in the next few years?
2. What would it take to eliminate the need for abortions?
3. Is there a divide between the pro-life movement and women's rights?

 

What would it take to eliminate the need for abortions?

Universal standards for sex education with the ready availability of birth control to women of all socioeconomic classes.


No offense MS but if you look around there aren't too many who like to think about hard-hitting issues on this forum. The majority of the discussions revolve around sexual flirtations that will lead nowhere. Keep posting but I suggest saving the introspective topics for a different audience.

 

The audience is still around, but sadly...they don't want to deal with hot button issues at the moment, not so much because of their directives are elsewhere. Rather, it's more about not engaging in threads from a pariah.

 

That's BS Saty. don't speak for the audience here - The fact is unless you agree with him, most here cannot have a debate with MS without him resorting to condescending responses coupled with name-calling how stupid the poster is. He is not interested in discussion, his mind is made up and he will ram his POV down your throat if you have a differing opinion.

The silence is not because people don't have an opinion. Please.

 

Actually, with threads with this, I don't really care to interject my thoughts to convince you otherwise. Rather, I'd ask you questions on your position if I feel the need for you to clarify.

Other than that, I won't engage in discussions.

 

The only thing that could possible change the stalemate is the growing number of secular anti-abortionists.

https://www.facebook.com/AtheistsAgainstAbortion

http://www.prolifehumanists.org/secular-case-against-abortion/

http://www.secularprolife.org/

The biggest mistake both sides made is framing this issue as Women Vs. Religion.
As long as abortion is labeled as a "womens issue" instead of as a "human issue" there isn't going to be any movement on either side.

 

First off, I think the case in TX is heart wrenching. At 20 weeks, that baby is nearly viable and I'm surprised to learn that the family wants to remove mom from life support. It's a sad case no matter which way you choose to view it (legally, morally, whatever).

As for your questions though, we'll never be able to eliminate the need for abortion. I agree with satyr about education and the accessibility of birth control, but that still won't eliminate the need for abortion. People get pregnant on birth control routinely, even when taken correctly...I have a 9 year old child to prove it lol. IMO we'll never be free of abortion, and we should probably focus on the more realistic goal of education and protection.

And there's absolutely a divide between the pro-life movement and women's rights. Many pro-lifers put the potential future life of a cluster of cells, above the freedom of choice that a woman should have over her own body. Absolute nonsense. Many pro-lifers like to make it seem as if pro-choice means pro-abortion. I don't have to agree with abortions to know that it's none of my damn business what another woman does with her body. How on earth people can think its ok to force a woman to carry and deliver a child against her wishes is beyond me.

IMO it absolutely is a women's issue. Calling it a human issue is all encompassing when in reality the "human" whose rights are ultimately trying to be infringed upon is a woman.

 

Of course it involves women, but it isn't limited to a "womens issue". Abortion effects everyone.

I'm a man, but abortion is an issue that I feel very strongly about.

The reason i say the "womens issue" label is a mistake, is because any opposition to a "womens issue" makes people (men especially) seem sexist and bigoted.

If we call it a "human issue" then it becomes easier to discus and/or debate without the perceived discrimination.

 

I guess this is up for debate also IMO. Just because anyone can have an opinion on a topic, doesn't mean they're truly affected by it. Majority of the time, women going through abortions are doing so alone. I've been in those procedure rooms...the men aren't typically anywhere around. Just speaking from what I've seen obviously. I appreciate the idea of making this a human, we're-all-in-this-together, kind of thing. Honestly, I think I've just seen too many times that that's really not the case.

 

I would never say that I understand what it's like for a women in that situation. It must be very difficult.

It's important to remember that pregnancy means that there is a father out there somewhere. Even though some men are deadbeats, there are still men who want to be involved.

 

Actually, the fetus was 16 weeks when she died.the lack of oxygen begs the question what damage this early fetus took. Is it really viable considering the lack of oxygen. Also, who is paying? Is the family liable for the cost of keeping them alive? Is the family liable for the cost of a child with very possible severe birth defects? What resources is that taking away from the existing child? Not to mention the legacy and emotions that comes out of this.

I'm on the fence here, but going against the familys wishes at 16 weeks, with oxygen depravation, not very viable is really questionable, especially consider where the burden, economically and emotionally etc will end up. People are given the right to short fetuses that are proven to have birth defects but somehow this is different because the mother died?

I am not speaking against value of life if you are mentally handicapped, of course its equally valued. Its adding on keeping a corpse alive for a very long time to sustain a 16 week fetus that suffered a substantial oxygen deprivation. Its a quadruple whammy. Can you imagine how this will affect the family? Do you think the state will pick up bills and upbringing? Nitbto mention a few other things I can think of.
Meaning emotional baggage.
Lots to think about. I'm repeating myself. Ranting. Ugh.

 

There are some who would like to join a discussion such as this IF the discussion would remain respectful, even if heated.

 

So very sad. I didn't realize the fetus was 16 wks when mom went down, and I failed to take into consideration the amount of time that fetus lacked oxygen. It's certainly a tough spot for the family

 

i actually like to discuss/dialogue on important issues but that can't happen here on this site due to the "said" audience...it's not that people don't want to it's just not worth it anymore...if you don't follow the herd and have the same idea as everyone else then you must be a racist...or you get called names...negative repped....taunted...etc

so let the senseless never going to happen flirting continue:smt061

for the record, i am pro-choice and not just due to circumstances that a bunch of politicians have decided they will allow abortion to happen

let the pro life preach abstinence
let the pro choice spread education, birth control for females and condoms for males

 

Pro-lifers are a diverse group, it isn't just made up of religious fundamentalists.

The pro-life movement has quite a few secular groups.

Feminists, http://www.feministsforlife.org/

Doctors, http://www.prolifephysicians.org/

Atheists, https://www.facebook.com/AtheistsAgainstAbortion


Most pro-lifers know that preaching abstinence isn't the solution and it can even make the issue harder to discus. That's why you don't hear moderate religious people and secular pro-lifers talk about it.

 

RE: Thump

I'm actually curious about something. You constantly state that abortion is a strong issue for you. So, I want to ask you the following:

• What events occurred that triggered you to hold this stance?
• How devoted are you? Do you picket abortion clinics or does it bother you a lot that people are getting them, even if the reasons are sound?
• Are you someone who would be quick to outlaw abortions outright?

You're free to answer them here, but you're than welcomed to give off your thoughts on the other thread. Go click on this page so that you further elaborate on your stance.

 

My views came naturally to me. When I was growing up I thought everyone felt the same way I did.

My biggest "aha!" moment came when i was told the story of my great-grandmother. About how after getting pregnant as a young woman she was encouraged to get an abortion. She refused and she gave birth to my grandmother. Who herself went on to have many children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and even a couple of great-great-grandchildren. And none of those people would exist if my great-grandmother had gotten that abortion.

I don't protest or picked abortion clinics, because the women who chose to have abortions aren't bad people. And it must be hard enough for them, as it is.

Since I view unborn babies as people, yes abortions bother me. but it's the law of the land and I respect it.

If there is a serious medical need for an abortion, then what ever needs to be done, should be done.

 

Cool cool.

 

I appreciate a pro-lifer who can at least admit to the bolded parts above. It's a shame there aren't more of them like you.

As for the underlined part, anyone who's debated the topic of abortion before knows that often times this is the biggest bone of contention. You view unborn "babies" as people. Based on that fact alone, I can certainly understand your opposition to abortions. If you take your heart out of the equation though, it's a fact that an embryo is not a "baby" (scientifically speaking). I understand though, that many peoples beliefs tell them differently.

You honestly seem like one of the most clear-headed pro-lifers I've had the chance to chat with, and I think that's what makes it so easy to hold a conversation with you. You remain respectful, so you'll always get that in return from me. Fact of the matter is that it's completely possible to hear/debate an opponents point without feeling like you have to agree with them in the end. Just takes a mature mindset. Thank you for always displaying that Thump :freehug: