First, and very importantly, abortion is not a “heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make.” A great many women are not conflicted at all about their abortions. Many feel relief and even joy at having their lives and their futures more fully back in their control.
This is as it should be. The simple fact is that a fetus is not a baby, it is a subordinate part of a woman’s body.
You know, people chastise fundamentalists for their anti-scientific views. Someone should tell these poor-choicers that treating a fetus as a woman's body part is not correct biology. Frankly, that whole meme is really outdated. This sounds like a 70's feminist throwback.
A woman has no moral obligation to carry a fetus to term simply because she gets pregnant. And a woman who chooses at whatever point and for whatever reason to terminate a pregnancy, should feel fine about doing so and should be able to.
Well, you got to give them credit for moral consistency. They think that if a woman wants to have their fetus stabbed in the head in the third trimester as part of a PBA, that's A-OK.
How unfathomably callous do you have to be to hold that position? They only care about one group of humanity-- women-- but not another-- babies.
It's feminist supremacy gone wild.
When it comes to abortion, there really is only one moral question: Will women be free to determine their own lives, including whether and when they will bear children, or will women be subjugated to patriarchal male authority and forced to breed against their will?
It's easy to dismiss the only real question at the heart of the abortion issue, when you hold scientific ideas about the fetus. The only question is this: is the fetus a human being, and does he have rights.
The rest is details.
But, as I wrote previously, “To talk today of reducing the number of abortions is to talk about strengthening the chains on women. The goal should NOT be to reduce the number of abortions. The goal should be to break down the barriers that still exist in every sphere of society to women’s full and equal participation as emancipated human beings. In this society, right now, that means there will be—and therefore should be—more abortions.
Oh joy. More abortions. More destruction of human life, as if killing a fetus were a completely banal act, like squishing a bug.
Do these people have kids?
Right now, as you read, real women’s lives are being foreclosed and degraded due to lack of accessible abortion services.
Oh.my.God. The rhetoric. "Foreclosed." IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD! OH MY GOD, I HAVE TO GIVE BIRTH, MY LIFE IS OVER!!!.
Give me a break.
If, for some reason, you really cannot take care of a baby, here's an idea...
Place the baby for adoption.
After nine months, you no longer have the responsibility of a baby. You can go on to fulfill your dreams without a baby hampering your existence. The kid will have parents who love him. You can choose anything that you want to do.
What’s perhaps even more outrageous is the fact that Obama—rather than challenging the mandate embedded within the “original sin” mythology that women become obedient breeders
Because mothers are "breeders"-- like dogs and horses. (Oh brother)
I don't think this person really understands the motivation for pro-lifers.
When I think of the right to life cause, I don't think of Adam and Eve. That's what anti-Christians think of, because of their ideology.
If I think of a Bible passage, it's more likely to be Luke 1, where the unborn John the Baptist prophesizes prompting St. Elizabeth to acknowledging Mary to be the Mother of God, that is the unborn baby Jesus.
The think that somehow we're all out to make women into some kind of oppressed breed.
They've got to be joking.
The motivation is and always will be the right to life of the unborn child.
Whether a woman has kids or doesn't have kids is so far from the minds of the average pro-lifer. That's not the "emergency".
