Overturn Roe v. Wade!
Dear Jen, Of course, I support this legislation [HB235 S1]. I believe that Roe v. Wade needs to be overturned. This may be the chance the Supreme Court needs to do just that.
I agree with you that other people should not be trying to control your body. But, when it comes to abortion, I believe that there is more than just your body involved, so the picture becomes more complicated.
I believe the unborn child has the same rights to have her body protected as you do. I do not believe that she has the right to kill the body on the outside of her (your body), just as I do not believe that you have the right to kill the body on the inside of you (her body).
Like it or not, because of the decision you made to engage in sexual activity, a human life was created. And, because of the choice you made, the two of you are stuck together for the next nine months.
That is a long time, and it may cause great inconvenience and discomfort to you, but I believe that you are the person responsible for that condition. I further believe that you do not have the right to avoid the natural consequences of your choice by robbing the unborn child of her body.
I believe that it is reasonable for society to expect fathers to provide for their children. I also believe that it is reasonable to expect mothers to do the same. No one forced you to have sex. You chose that. Now, you need to take responsibility for your choice.
You do not have the right to put your interests above the life of your unborn child. If you do not want the child, fine. There are literally thousands upon thousands of wonderful couples who would be thrilled to provide it with a loving home.
All you have to do is not kill your child before it is born. That is all. In my opinion, it comes down to simple ethics: Her right to live outweighs nine months of your life.
Sincerely,
Alienated Wannabe
http://www.alienatedwannabe.blogspot.com
The preceeding is a comment I posted on February 2, 2007 to the blog Jen's Green Journal in response to the proprietor's article entitled: Utah Taliban: Keep Your Religion Off My Body which expressed her opposition to the proposed legislation HB235 S1 seeking to outlaw elective abortion in Utah.
posted by Alienated Wannabe @ 10:57 AM
9 comments
9 Comments:
What you and most wingnuts rarely want to talk about is the reality in which women make these decision.
I do not believe that most women welcome the idea of having an abortion as people like you frequently suggestion. This is not an easy decision. Women are frequently forced into these decisions by the economic and healtcare hardships that the Republican party has ignored and even increased over the years.
Imagine you are a young girl, you are pregnant, you are working at Wal-Mart for minimum wage with no health insurance. That is a difficult situation and that is the reality that Republican policies have encouraged.
Republicans don't care to address these issues and instead they want to make all abortions illegal and forget the underlying issues that women face in this country.
Another thing that people like you don't even care to think about is this isn't the 60 and 70s. Even if abortions were made illegal there are several drugs that could force a miscarriage. I am sure there would be a black market instantly created like any other drug(say the ones Limbaugh was on). As long as the underlying issues that cause abortion are present women will take the necessary steps not to be put in these difficult situations.
But you continue waving your self-righteous finger at women like Jen instead of taking a hard look in the mirror at you and policies of the party you support.
Another thing is if Roe v. Wade was overturned it would be the immediate end of the Republican party as the abstract idea of abortions being made illegal would be made into reality for every woman in this country.
Once again alienated, you miss the point. You are defining the beginning of life on your religious view points. Do you have any non-religious proof that shows clearly that a fully developed nervous system, fully developed brain and a "soul" are all present at the point of conception or during the early stages of clump of cells or embryo?
If you cannot without a doubt prove this without religious arguments, than how can you compare a clump of cells to my life as a fully developed human being,with a fully developed nervous system and brain with emotions, memories, relationships? You can't without religion and you know it. There fore you are using YOUR religion to deny MY rights.
Did you know alientated, that the law can't force you to donate a kidney to save your own child's life-- and that is for a person that has a fully developed nervous system and brain. The law can't force any person to be a life support system for their own children -- YOU GET TO CHOOSE. Why do I have to be a life support system for something that is not yet fully human? Because your religious beliefs tell you so.
It's doesn't matter to you that your religious beliefs are based upon a book(s) that was written by men who thought women were inferior to men, or who thought women's primary function on the planet was to be incubators for their ejaculations. This isn't ancient times any more, and I get to choose whether I want to create children or not, not your misogynistic religion.
"Her right to live outweighs nine months of your life." Try 20 + years and really much more, alienated -- this is a decision that affects the rest of your life.
Abortion has always been with us and always will be -- you can choose to condem women who cannot handle pregnancy or motherhood to dangerous abortion and death, or you can choose to understand that even if you don't like it, we should save as many FULLY DEVELOPED human lives as possible and help to keep the procedure safe..
With the first option, you might "save" a few babies from being aborted, only to come into a planet where we kill people all the time for fabricated reasons (Iraq War, as an example) , where a lot of people are going to suffer and die for lack of food and water and all the climactic shifts we will be seeing due to global warming, where that child will likely live in poverty, possibly abuse, where more and more babies are found in dumpsters, just to name a few possibilities.
We cannot even begin to take care of all the children we have on the planet. Your efforts would do much better to focus on the kids already here and suffering than by trying to bring new ones into the world.
"But you continue waving your self-righteous finger at women like Jen"
And I chose to give birth to my kids -- I hate to see how much self-righteous anger I'd get if I had had an abortion.
Dear Marshall,
First of all, thank you for visiting my site and leaving comments. I honestly appreciate it.
Secondly, I am very fond of Jen, and do not seek to "point the finger at her." (Or, anyone else for that matter!) She actually has never had an abortion. Rather, she has heroically, at great financial, physical, and emotional expense to herself, brought two precious daughters into the world. She chose life instead of an abortion. God bless her!
Some equally wonderful women have chosen something else. I do condemn them. But, I do lament their decision, and I feel a moral responsibility to raise my voice in defense of those who cannot defend themselves--innocent, unborn children. To do otherwise would put me in the same category as those who did not speak up against the enslavement of African Americans, the cruel abuse of Native Americans, or the slaughter of European Jewry.
What you have read here is actually only a portion of an ongoing discussion I have been having with Jen on her website--which is far superior than my own, by the way. This discussion is taking place by the mutual consent of us both. We are big people, we can handle frank discussion. The airing of differences (not to be confused with the Festivus Airing of Grievances) is actually a good thing.
I believe that we need more civil and thoughtful debate in this world. Without it, all we have is name calling and talking past one another. This, inevitably, is followed by violence. I do not want to see that. Instead, I hope to fight our current culture war with love, patience, and reason--not the sword. That is why I blog.
I am not engaged in this fight for the unborn for any other reason than because I feel a moral obligation to do so. I know all too well that none of us are righteous, so whatever hopes I might have otherwise entertained of being self-righteous have been completely dashed many years ago. All I have now is guilt or hope in Jesus Christ. Sometimes I waiver between the two, but I prefer the hope in Jesus.
If I have offended you, please forgive me. I am sincerely trying to do something else. I look forward to reading more of your posts here. Thank you, friend.
Sincerely,
Alienated (Yes, I am a wingnut) Wannabe
Dear Jen,
I agree with you. The "nine months" reference in my message did understate the level of sacrifice a mother makes in giving life to her children. That was a mistake on my part. Please accept my apology.
However, even granting that appropriate correction, my position remains the same. The price the aborted child is asked to pay is far greater than what the mother is asked to pay. And, when one takes into consideration that generally a pregnancy results from a freely made decision made by the mother, the ethical choice is clear:
If someone has to be held accountable for the pregnancy, it should be the mother, not the unborn child.
Sincerely,
Alienated Wannabe
"Do you have any non-religious proof that shows clearly that a fully developed nervous system, fully developed brain and a "soul" are all present at the point of conception or during the early stages of clump of cells or embryo?"
You still haven't been able to give me any answer to this -- and as it turns out, although I've just started researching this, there aren't even any religious scriptures that tell when "ensoulment" occurs, and the bible, in fact seems to indicate that an embryo and fetus are less important than a living woman -- and those were some pretty misogynistic times (see Exod. 21:22-25). Then there are the parts of the bible that seem to indicate that life begins at the first breath.
We do know that the nervous system being fully developed doesn't even happen until early in the 3rd trimester, at which point fetuses are protected by Roe v. Wade. Most abortions happen in the first trimester, with very few happening early in the 2nd.
If you can find scriptures from the bible, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, D&C, Koran, or any other major religious work that tells when "ensoulment" occurs, I'd love to know about it -- with the understanding that these religious texts are not the law of the land and should never be allowed to be the law of advanced societies that founded on freedom of religion.
If you can't give me non-religious proof or religious doctrine to back up when "ensoulment" occurs, you can't with any authority claim abortion as murder.
Your support, then, of dangerous bills like HB235 that would affect thousands of living women's lives would be based on nothing
Sorry, evidently this was an A - B conversation. I am glad that is an ongoing conversation about the reality of women in this country. I hate that the argument has been distiled downed to pro-life or pro-choice because both are terribly inadequate labels.
Also I wasn't trying to insinuate that Jen had an abortion but rather was addressing what I feel is your absolutely condescending attitude toward any woman that advocate abortions rights. You frequently talk about women as if they are almost subhuman and incapiable of even understanding the most basic concepts of pregnancy and abortion.
Dear Marshall,
Thank you for coming back. I am sorry that I have written something that you have found to be offensive.
Please accept my apology, and please identify for me what exactly it was I wrote that conveyed this impression to you. I want to figure out what it is I am doing wrong so that I can make any needed changes.
Thanks, friend,
Alienated Wannabe
Correction:
I just re-read my first comment to Marshall above and noticed a typographical error in the third paragraph:
"Some equally wonderful women have chosen something else. I do condemn them. But, I do lament their decision..."
Of course, unless Freud is right, I actually meant to say that I DO NOT CONDEMN THEM. God alone is able to balance the scales of Justice and Mercy. My job is simply to love, forgive and not pass unrighteous judgment. That is what I am trying to do.
Sincerely
Alienated Wannabe
Post a Comment
<< Home