The Point: Abortion Melodramatics

A bit melodramatic, don’t you think? For the Colson Center, I’m John Stonestreet with The Point.

If there’s one thing I am tired of these days, it’s the overdramatic and completely unhinged from reality connection of the dystopian novel “The Handmaid’s Tale” with abortion restrictions.

And yet, on Tuesday of last week, to protest Ohio bill SB 145, which would ban the brutal and bloody dilation and evacuation abortion method, a group of women dressed like handmaids from the new Netflix series and sat in on the Ohio state house.

So how again does banning an abortion procedure sentence women to a life as enslaved breeders, which is what the dystopian story describes as the fate of certain women?

I’ll say it again, pro-abortion forces are losing the cultural debate and losing their grip on the cultural imagination, and as a result they’re getting desperate. It’s not over; we still have a culture fully addicted to the sexual revolution. But don’t be intimated by the melodramatics. Keep making the case for life with your friends, your family, and your neighbors.

 

Resources

The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture
  • Scott Klusendorf | Crossway Books | March 2009

Comment Policy: Commenters are welcome to argue all points of view, but they are asked to do it civilly and respectfully. Comments that call names, insult other people or groups, use profanity or obscenity, repeat the same points over and over, or make personal remarks about other commenters will be deleted. After multiple infractions, commenters may be banned.

  • jason taylor

    It would follow from that that the experience of most men is to be privileged cult leaders. Funny that is not at all like my experience.

  • Steve

    When people are bound by a rigid ideology, as the pro-abortion people are, they need to ignore the facts because the facts are against them.

    • gladys1071

      The same can be said about pro-lifers, they want to ban abortion all the way to conception. As a pro-choicer i am willing to agree to 2nd trimester bans if Pro-lifers are willing to compromise and leave 1st trimester abortions alone, but i doubt it. So each side in entrenched because neither side wants to agree to a middle ground which is sad.

      By the way i am not pro-abortion, i am pro-choice. I think it should be left to the woman to decide.

      • AtTheCrossroads

        Good Friday Gladys! Can I ask why you’re not pro-abortion? If it really frees women from the trauma of pregnancy as you’ve said in many words and many ways on other posts, what’s there to not to love about it?

        It’s so strange to me when so many people say this, but I guess both sides of this debate could use some deliverance from our penchant for marketing gimmicks.

        Anyone who says they’re Pro-Choice is talking about the choice of abortion . . . and everyone knows it. Anyone who says they are Pro-Life is talking about the life of the unborn. (OK, many expand this to other “vulnerables” like the aged who are increasingly encouraged to end their lives if a burden to anyone else).

        So I’m willing to say I’m against abortion, even though being “anti” anything is not good from a marketing perspective. Is there anyone out there that will admit to being pro-abortion . . . anyone?

        • gladys1071

          Being pro-abortion would mean that i want every pregnant woman to abort, and that is NOT so. I am pro-choice in that i believe in the woman making the CHOICE whether to give birth or abort, that ultimately it is her choice. Should i call you pro-birth? since you believe her ONLY choice should be to give birth.

          So yes i believe in the choice to abort or give birth, is that clear to you?

          • Sam Benito

            FWIW, all the dictionaries I consulted listed “pro-abortion” as synonymous with “pro-choice”. So, either pro-abortion does not mean, as you allege, “wanting every pregnant woman to abort”, or else “pro-choice” does mean “wanting every pregnant woman to abort”. Which is it? You can’t have it both ways.

            BTW, I’ve interacted with an awful lot of folks on both sides of this issue, and I have yet to meet one who believed “pro-abortion” means “wanting every pregnant woman to abort.” Just sayin’.

          • gladys1071

            Call me whatever you like if it makes you feel better or morally superior.

          • AtTheCrossroads

            Sorry to have missed some more lively discussion, and hope you all had an enjoyable weekend. I’m still not sure why no-one (and by no-one I mean like 90%+ of those who stand up for a-woman’s-right-to-have-an-abortion) won’t admit to being pro-abortion.

            Do you think anyone would have been confused about what colors someone was flying during the civil war if she demanded, “I’m not pro-slavery, just pro-choice-for-a-slaver-to-choose-slavery.”

            Kind of a strange comparison on the “pro-birth” idea Glady’s. But I would not hesitate to call myself pro-birth if that means I believe that every child that is conceived should get the chance to be born. Would seem pretty hypocritical of me to accept that gift for myself, but not want to protect it for others.

          • gladys1071

            so i am right you are pro-birth, you believe in women giving birth no matter what the cost. You don’t seem to care about the pregnant woman and what she may have to go through or endure to bring such pregnancy to term, but i am aware that you DON’T care about the pregnant woman, its all about the fetus/embryo to you, who cares about the pregnant woman and her rights i get it. If being on the side of women having the CHOICE then sure call me pro-abortion, it will take the label gladly, i will continue to stand for a woman’s right to choose and not be dictated by pro-birthers.

          • AtTheCrossroads

            Good Tuesday Morning! First Joseph: “People object to being called “pro-abortion” because it’s oversimplifying a very complex situation.” In the 1800s, could you see yourself saying “People object to being called “pro-slavery” because it’s oversimplifying a very complex situation.”? It wasn’t complex for the slaves . . . you were either free or enslaved. It isn’t complex for the babies . . . they are either alive or dead. It’s only complex for those who know it’s wrong and still want to justify it.

            And hi, Gladys: “. . . you believe in women giving birth no matter what the cost. You don’t seem to care about the pregnant woman and what she may have to go through or endure . . .” If you knew me, you’d know how much I care for both pregnant women and their babies. I wish I had been there for my older sister who was deceived into having an abortion at age 17. So I give to crisis pregnancy centers, stand in front of abortuaries to pray, and try to speak the truth to this matter as graciously as possible. No woman should have to live with the shame of abortion just because no-one is willing to say what most everyone already knows. It’s wrong to kill an innocent, defenseless child . . . and it’s just as wrong to tell a woman in crisis that abortion is her way out.

            My sister found healing and deliverance in Christ, but only by confessing what she knew to be true, and letting go of the justification she was clinging to. This is the only way out . . . confession, repentance, restoration.

          • gladys1071

            The problem is that you see this issue as being black or white I don’t. I see it more nuanced and complex and that each person’s circumstances are different. I don’t look at abortion the way you do and do believe it should be left to each person to decide between them and God.

            Abortion sometimes is the better choice for that person at that time such is life .

          • gladys1071

            You really have no compassion in that you think that you completely disregard peoples circumstances. You just believe in dictating that each woman make the same choice give birth no matter what. It is not a one size fits all answer to a crisis pregnancy . Yet you think you know better than the pregnant person’s circumstances. That is cruel and asinine.

          • Joseph

            Crossroads, I would put aside your repeated analogies of abortion to slavery…but since you’ve got us on this topic now, isn’t it conservatives who argue that southerners weren’t really pro-slavery, they just wanted “states’ rights,” etc.? Sounds complex, especially considering this was the most divisive issue facing our country. If you were a Christian then, you might well be citing the Bible to argue in favor of slavery, as many did.

            With regard to abortion, however, these issues are complicated, even if you insist on seeing the world in strict black and white terms. On an individual level, the idea that a woman gets an abortion without weighing heavily is out of touch with reality. Politically, like with all issues, we necessarily balance competing rights and needs. Legally, are you prepared to put women who have an abortion on trial for first degree murder? Subject to capital punishment? Prosecute doctors?

          • gladys1071

            The pro-lifers want to enforce a one size fits all solution to crisis pregnancies , life is more messy and complicated for a all size fits all solution.

          • gladys1071

            You don’t have the monopoly on truth. You standing at an abortion clinic trying to stop women from having abortions is absurd. You don’t know the person’s circumstances and you trying to tell them having an abortion is wrong is not Christ like at all . You don’t get to dictate and intrude into the private lives of pregnant women, unless you are asked too by them. Abortion is not black/white issue, should be left to individual consciences.

          • AtTheCrossroads

            So it’s OK for the media, government, abortion industry, etc. to tell a woman there is nothing wrong with abortion . . . but I have no right to try to convince her there is?

            The 13,305+ women (that’s just the ones that have come forward) who are now enjoying the blessings & freedom of having protected their unborn child, just because some “asinine” people cared enough to talk with them outside a clinic, disagree with your contempt: https://40daysforlife.com/

            Glady’s, if I paid for and sent the “40 Days for Life” book to you, would you agree to read it? I know you would be touched by the other side of the story that you’ll never get from media, government and the abortion industry.

            Please consider.

          • Joseph

            People object to being called “pro-abortion” because it’s oversimplifying a very complex situation. It sounds like conservatives believe that pro-choice people think of abortion in a casual, superficial way. Most pro-choice people take these decisions very seriously. Just because someone believes a woman has the right to make her own decisions doesn’t mean those decisions come easily or are made half-heartedly. I won’t call a conservative pro-death if he/she supports going to war, destroying healthcare, and implementing the death penalty.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            And yet, as we’ve seen here, many of your fellow pro-choicers will call us pro-birthers and forced birthers and various other names. Sounds like they believe we think of these issues in a casual, superficial way.

          • Joseph

            Gina, I’m not debating you on this. I was explaining to Crossroads why some people might take offense to a “pro-abortion” label.

            After decades of being labeled baby-killers, slave-owners, and nazis, I think coming up with a pretty meaningless term like “forced birth” is a pretty tepid response in retrospect.

            When almost all abortion policy decisions are made by rich white men, yeah, it’s debatable the extent to which at least conservative policymakers take this issue seriously. Personally I think a lot of Republican politicians don’t care one way or another, they’re just afraid of the base if they aren’t sufficiently anti-abortion.

            But it sounds like you agree that we should try to respectfully use the terms with which people refer to themselves, right?

          • gladys1071

            Joseph,

            If it wasn’t for the pro-life movement Republicans would have lost a lot more elections. The pro-life movement garners blind sheep followers to be be single issue voters . In a way if abortion was outlawed, their would be no reason to vote for pro-life politicians and Republicans would lose elections in droves. Yes i agree a lot of republicans are not really pro-life, they just pander to the pro-life movement to garner votes.

            As far as forced birth it accurate description of what pro-lifers want. They want to force women to give birth by force of law.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            Calling people “sheep” is stepping over the line, Gladys. Don’t do it again.

          • Joseph

            Just for clarification, referring to people as melodramatic, “completely unhinged from reality,” desperate, and “fully addicted to the sexual revolution” is all well and good, but “sheep” is crossing the line. Got it.

          • gladys1071

            Gina isn’t forced birth what the pro-life movement’s goal? I am describing what the pro-life movement wants, to force women to give birth by force of law by outlawing abortion. is that not an accurate description of the goal in mind for pro-lifers, for all women to give birth no matter what and remove the option of an abortion?

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            You have yet to prove, Gladys, that ensuring all women give birth is a bad thing.

          • gladys1071

            Prove to me that it is always bad to have an abortion or prove to me that it is always good to give birth? are you privy to the private lives of millions of people? to make the determination that giving birth is always good? i doubt it.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            And yet I’ll bet there are lots of things you could tell me are definitively wrong without being privy to the private lives of millions of people. Let’s take child abuse as an example. Will you tell me that we can’t know whether that’s always bad without knowing the details of every situation?

          • gladys1071

            Actually outlawing abortion can lead to more child abuse by forcing parents to give birth to children they don’t want, thank you for making my point.

            Abortion is a morally gray area and is not black/white, only people like you think it is. Half of this country hold a different view and find it acceptable valid choice for a crisis pregnancy and believe it is best left to the woman to decide.

            So do not compare it to child abuse which is universally condemned, abortion is NOT.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            That sounds rather like you believe child abuse is always and everywhere a bad thing. Would I be correct in inferring that from your comment?

          • gladys1071

            Yes child abuse is, but not abortion, women have a right to refuse to gestate for 9 months.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            So you do believe that we can unequivocally say some things are wrong without knowing all the circumstances of people’s private lives.

            You’ve just torpedoed your own argument.

          • gladys1071

            yes , but abortion is not one of them that one is not universally wrong or univerally right, it is gray area, to be left to each person to decide.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            Why? If we can say one thing is always evil, why can’t we say another thing is always evil?

          • gladys1071

            because nobody has the monopoly on truth, morality is construct. With abortion you cannot have two people having the same rights to the same body, one of them will supercede the other.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            And yet you seem to believe you have a monopoly on truth where child abuse is concerned.

          • gladys1071

            I don’t it is universally accepted by society.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            What if society changed its mind about that? Would you?

          • Ann Morgan

            What is society changed it’s mind about handwaving away the egg and sperm? Would you?

          • Ann Morgan

            Because not all situations are equivalent, otherwise by your logic, if we could say that murdering two year olds is always evil, then we must also be able to say that eating apples and collecting stamps is always evil.

          • gladys1071

            look we live in a society where individual rights are very important. Forcing women to gestate a pregnancy for 9 months is a violation of those rights. The unborn do not have any rights as long as they are being gestated inside another person. As a nation we have decided the woman’s rights supercede. So even in abortion is considered wrong by some, we have the right to do morally questionable things with our bodies that is the basis of individual rights.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            And again, what if society changed its mind about that? On what would you base your arguments then?

          • gladys1071

            I would be against forcing women to gestate anyway and would probably help women get illegal abortions

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            So you’re saying that society’s view is NOT the be-all and end-all.

          • gladys1071

            example prohibition laws, many people agreed, some did not, yet alcohol still flowed, if abortion is outlawed their will be still illegal underground abortions, just like prohibition did NOT stop anyone from drinking.

          • Ann Morgan

            I might ALSO mention that there were deliberate loopholes built into the prohibition laws. For instance it was still legal to own alcohol made ‘before prohibition’. And I think we all know that there will be loopholes built into any abortion laws, so the rich can take a quick trip to Mexico, Canada, or a boat with a clinic conveniently anchored exactly 7.1 miles off either coast. Or an Indian reservation, for that matter.

          • Sam Benito

            How is abortion not child abuse? smh

          • Ann Morgan

            Unfortunately, not a valid comparison. Your claim is that ‘birth is always good’. IF that is true, then it is ALWAYS true. It isn’t ‘not true’ when that’s convenient, then suddenly BECOME true, when THAT is convenient.

            Meaning: If BIRTH is ‘always good’, then it is ALWAYS GOOD.

            ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS!

            Even BEFORE the woman has conceived. Meaning – if you advocate celibacy, then you are OPPOSING the very thing you claim is ALWAYS GOOD. What you SHOULD be advocating, by your premise is – forced sex.

            Otherwise your claim is like claiming that child abuse is ‘bad’ except if the child touches their own genitals, or some other arbitrary circumstance happens, then child abuse is ‘good’.

            Not dealing with reality, in other words.

            Again, not dealing with reality. And you are also trying to conflate the actual suffering of thinking, feeling children, with the imaginary ‘suffering’ of mindless cells.

            Again, not dealing with reality, you are trying to assert the very thing you need to prove, which is that ‘killing’ mindless cells is a moral offense, and THEN only SOME mindless cells, of your choosing, for arbitrary reasons, since the egg and sperm are handwaved away. For no good reason. You cannot take the ‘rights’ out of a zygote and show them to me, and then show me that the ‘rights’ are magically not in the egg 1 second before the sperm touches it. All you do is assert it, but you cannot prove it.

            Again, not dealing with reality.

          • Ann Morgan

            If birth is ‘always good’, then that must always be true, all the time. This puts a lie to sobs about ‘celibacy’, because if BIRTH is ‘always good’, then it must be good, even BEFORE the woman becomes pregnant. How can birth be ‘not good’ when a woman is celibate, but suddenly ‘become good’ when a sperm touches a egg? The magic moment of conception doesn’t suddenly alter all of the other circumstances in a woman’s life. It doesn’t undo her drug addiction, or drop a gold bar in her hand. So if birth is ‘always good’, then to be consistent with this, then pro-lifers should be advocating forced sex, not celibacy.

          • Ann Morgan

            Gladys, you may not have noticed this, but accuracy and real world facts are not Gina’s forte’.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            I’d love to see some examples of that, Ann. 🙂

        • gladys1071

          You know you really have me all wrong. I think a woman should have the choice legally to abort an unwanted pregnancy, if a woman wants to carry it to term than that should be her choice TOO. You trying to label me pro-abortion is absurd, since i support a woman’s right to CHOOSE either way. I don’t encourage anything, i just want to option to STAY legal for all women.

          Are you pro-birth? since you think every woman should give birth regardless of her circumstances, you want to ENFORCE birth.

          • Ann Morgan

            gladys: Notice that Gina, who claims she ‘moderates name-calling’ against both sides, doesn’t seem to be hopping on the ‘pro-abort’ name calling very quickly, is she?

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            Do you consider “pro-abort” name-calling, Ann? (By the way, I just did a search and I didn’t find any examples of that precise term in this thread.)

          • Joseph

            “BP This Week: The Shooting, the Baptists, and the Pro-Aborts Unhinged”

            Pro-abort is deliberately misleading, and what’s most important in this context is that it’s only used by conservatives as a slur. You certainly don’t hear pro-choice people calling themselves “pro-aborts.”

            I’ve been reading this website for long enough to recognize the subtle digs its writers and commenters take against those with whom they disagree (even as they preach otherwise). It’s hard to take it seriously because I don’t think there’s a lot of thought put into it, but they don’t realize how insulting their rhetoric often is.

  • Mariana

    True Christians are forbidden to be involved in politics, and aren’t interested in political worldly matters anyway. It’s these “religious extremists,” motivated by power and profit, who funnel money from their tax-exempt “religious organizations” to money-hungry politicians. The politicians then proceed to spend their time (and taxpayer resources) on pro-religious extremist legislation, which fails to meet constitutional scrutiny and is outside the realm of government’s role in society. Anything religious-based isn’t the government’s job, because our Constitution specifically says our country is 100% neutral: Everyone is exactly equal if they have a public religion, a private religion, or no religion. As a taxpayer, I want my elected representatives to work on what government is responsible for: Roads, public safety, national security, safe drinking water, and food inspection. Nothing else! Stay out of my gun safe and stay out of my ob-gyn appointments!

    • Sam Benito

      “True Christians are forbidden to be involved in politics”. What is the basis of that confident assertion?

      While we’re waiting, note that because ours is a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”, all adult American Christians, by mere dint of being citizens of the United States, are involved in politics. So the question is not “whether”; the question is “how much”? And when morality (a domain Christians historically have been heavily invested in) in our nation increasingly parallels that of decadent Rome, one hopes the answer would be “very much”.

      As for demands that the government “stay out of my ob-gyn appointments”, one might be more sympathetic if the number one cause of death among innocent young people in the world today did not occur in, or as a result of, those appointments.

      • gladys1071

        government should be staying out of such appointments, medical records are private . If government can stick their nose in medical appointments then it will stick its nose in other private areas of your life too like how much you eat or how much you drink, smoke etc.. how would you like that?

        • Sam Benito

          I’ll go you one further, Gladys. Government should not even be put in the position of ever needing or ever wanting to review our medical records. We could outlaw abortion outright on the grounds that it is the premeditated murder of an innocent little human being. Then the feds would have no need to snoop into our medical files. They could simply monitor the business practices of the clinics and pharmaceutical companies. Problem solved.

      • AtTheCrossroads

        I’m sure glad our founding fathers (most of whom were true Christians) never heard that they were forbidden to be involved in politics! Basis for declaring true Christians are forbidden . . . still waiting . . . “chirp, chirp . . . “

  • gladys1071

    you do have a point. It is just frustrating for a seek I some kind of common ground, but it appears that is not possible.

    • AtTheCrossroads

      You do have a point Ann. Depriving a mother the right to have the head of her perfectly healthy baby, who would easily have survived if allowed to be fully delivered, crushed by a “Dr.” while in the birth canal . . . is a serious violation of her right to choice. God help us that we even have to debate this. Really, God help us.

      • Ann Morgan

        You do have a point. Depriving mindless cells that can’t survive due to a lethal defect of the right to rip a hole in the mother and kill her is a serious violation of the fetal fantasy.

  • Nancy

    I don’t believe that abortion or other ways to prevent having a child are going to go away. There may be times when the mother is in danger. I am pro-life and yes, I would like the politicians to not designate that money I make go to pay for abortions. Thank you

    • Sam Benito

      Not to split hairs, but it seems important to note that abortion is not a “way to prevent having a child” any more than shooting your spouse is a “way to prevent having a husband”. Abortion kills a child that is already present–in the womb.

      • Nancy

        Perhaps I could’ve worded that differently. But my point is that for those who are up in arms that these devices and/or procedures are going to disappear need not worry. As much as we would want abortion to go away, it won’t. And this is where we get into the ‘politics’ of it – I don’t want to pay for it. Gee, that’s all I’m saying……abortion takes a life.
        Stay well

        • Sam Benito

          “As much as we would want abortion to go away, it won’t.”

          Rewind to the 19th Century. What if we had said, “As much as we would want slavery to go away, it won’t.”

          If we all make up our minds that abortion won’t go away, we insure that it won’t.

  • Gina Dalfonzo

    All of that must have been very hard on her, and on you as well. I hope your sister is doing better these days.

    • gladys1071

      abortion was a good thing for her, better than giving birth to addicted child, that is what i am trying to convey, their is no one size fits all solution to these kinds of things.

      • Gina Dalfonzo

        Are you saying it’s better to die than to suffer? You might want to be careful with that line of thinking . . .

        • gladys1071

          depending on the situation yes if one has a heart.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            If who has a heart? The sufferer? Or the person who makes the decision to deprive the sufferer of life?

          • gladys1071

            it depends on the situation.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            Well, if I’m ever suffering, Gladys, I hope you won’t mind if I ask you to go stand waaaaaaaaaaay over there. 🙂

          • gladys1071

            why would you want a child to be born to suffer (knowingly) ?

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            What if that child had a chance to recover and live as full a life as you or me?

          • Ann Morgan

            Interesting question. I’ve had pro-lifers tell me that they are opposed to aborting a fetus with lethal defects, specifically because they WANT the baby to suffer as much as possible before dying.

            You may judge the morality of pro-lifers for yourself, from that sort of attitude.

        • Ann Morgan

          **Are you saying it’s better to die than to suffer? You might want to be careful with that line of thinking . . .**

          Which pretty much means you should be supporting forced sex, otherwise the egg and sperm die.

          • Gina Dalfonzo

            Ann, come on, let’s at least TRY to keep in touch with reality. Monty Python was never meant to be taken seriously. 🙂

          • Ann Morgan

            No, I am quite in touch with reality. Each of us was once an egg and a sperm. If the mother is celibate, the baby dies in the gamete stage. Why is it better to ‘die than suffer’ in the gamete stage, but not in the embryo stage? The gamete is just as capable of suffering as the embryo is.

  • gladys1071

    “Abortion is never the better choice for the baby that is killed, such is death. I’m convinced it is also never the better choice for the woman. She could escape a lifetime of denying her conscience and trying to justify her choice, by carrying her baby for 9 months . . . even if it is very difficult to do so”

    I respectfully disagree, i can tell you circumstances where abortion was the better choice, and yes and i am NOT speaking about myself at all but of other women i know. Ever heard of not using the “never say never” . You being convinced is the better choice is presumptious, many women do not regret it and it turned out better for them, you CANNOT make that assumption for others. So stop with the one size fits all solution for women, you are not qualified to make that decision.

    • Ann Morgan

      **”Abortion is never the better choice for the baby that is killed, such is death. **

      So is menstruation and male masturbation. When you are talking about mindless cells being killed, I fail to understand what possible difference it could make – from the point of view of the mindless cells – at WHAT point, precisely they are killed, since they are DEAD at all hypothetical points, regardless of whether they are diploid or haploid, they are still equally DEAD.

  • gladys1071

    Roe vs Wade will not be overturned to do so would enslave women to 9 months gestation, that will never fly in this country based on individual rights, but oh that is right you don’t care about women’s individual rights to refuse 9 months gestational servitude, yet you talk about slavery, how ironic?

    So gestational servitude type of slavery is alright with you?

  • Gina Dalfonzo

    That’s rather interesting, considering that you feel entitled to make the choice for the baby.

    • gladys1071

      embryo/fetus cannot make any choices, it is what it is.

      • Gina Dalfonzo

        Plenty of people can’t make choices who might not want you making their choices for them.

        • gladys1071

          such is life, their will always be somebody that makes choices for others. Parents make choices for their kids all the time, people in comas get disconnected by “others” making that choice for them, are you going to outlaw family member’s disconnecting loves ones from life support? that is also a choice made on behalf of another that cannot choose themselves.

          • gladys1071

            Of course I see right through it . Many so called prolifers run to abortion clinics under the right circumstances, and throw their convictions out the window.

        • gladys1071

          So are you against loved ones making the painful decision to disconnect a loved on from life support? the person on life support cannot decide? such person maybe a vegetable? i hear no outcry about that or any kind of legislation to outlaw that?

        • Ann Morgan

          making a decision to NOT donate an organ is NOT ‘making someone else’s choices for them’. You just want to pretend that it is, and THEN only in the case of the human fetus and ONLY the human fetus.

          What if a woman is celibate? Isn’t she ‘making the choice’ for the baby that otherwise would have been conceived? I bet you’re pretty glad you’re here, aren’t you? What if I went back in time and convinced your mother to go to the movies instead of having sex the night you were conceived? Would you be good with my killing you in the egg stage?

    • gladys1071

      of course i am entitled to make the choice, if i am the one carrying it in my body and gestating and taking the risk to my body to bring it to term. Person doing the gestating gets the right to make that choice.

  • Gina Dalfonzo

    Do you? Because you keep falling back on them as a basis for your positions.

    • gladys1071

      I have always believed it is the woman’s choice for it is her body that is doing the gestating. Self-abortions have been happening for thousands of years, ultimately it is her body and in my opinion no government or church is going to dictate to me what i do with my pregnancy.

  • gladys1071

    i agree , but pregnancy has to do with the woman’s body and what is happening inside her body. the embryo/fetus has not rights. You cannot protect the embyo/fetus without going through the mother’s body first.

  • Ann Morgan

    IMHO, it should be a felony for any individual in a position of authority (including being a teacher in school or a worker in a clinic) to knowingly provide FALSE medical information about fetuses, birth control, or abortion. The first offense should be punishable by the individual having to spend at LEAST 10 times as much time providing the CORRECT information in the same venues where they provided the false information, the second offense gets at least 10 years in prison, no early parole.

  • gladys1071

    So you say you are against slavery, yet you have no problem with forcing women into gestational servitude of 9 months? against their will. So it is NOT ok to own a slave, but it is ok to use the power of the state to enforce pregnancy? Hmm.. interesting?

    I think you have the slavery thing all backwards. I don’t think you have really thought through the slavery comparison.

  • Joseph

    I strongly disagree that “the only reason it is a heavy weight is because they know it is wrong.” That sounds pretty presumptuous. Even women who don’t believe it’s wrong will still weigh this decision heavily. We weigh life and death issues all the time, and even if we feel we come out on the “right” side, we still weigh these decisions heavily.

    For the legal argument, so women who choose to have an abortion (who aren’t “preyed” upon (and who decides that?)) should also be prosecuted for murder? Or is it murder-for-hire? Accessory to murder? Should we round up the women who had abortions pre-Roe and prosecute them too? There’s no statute of limitations for murder.

    • AtTheCrossroads

      Joseph “We weigh life and death issues all the time . . . “. So are you admitting that abortion is a life and death issue? If so, you’re reinforcing my point. The reason it is a heavy weight is because on one side someone may be inconvenienced for 9 months (OK traumatized if you wish) . . . and on the other side someone is always dead. Yes, thank-you, it’s life and death . . . that’s the point.

      One the legal side, first you fix the law to do what law is meant to do, protect the rights of the weak from the ambitions of the strong . . . then sort out the outcomes. You could look at the unraveling of slavery as a good example of how this could be done for abortion. Seeing how kind and gracious most people of the nation are towards women who have been subjects of even the most horrifying of abortion practices today, I have no doubt this would be the case once the wrong of Roe v. Wade is made right. The scare tactics of claiming women would be rounded up and thrown in jail is an epic fail in light of history and reality my friend!

      • gladys1071

        so you have NO problem with gestational servitude for women, yet you say you are against slavery? You want to power of the state to enforce pregnancy for 9 months that is what you would have to do to stop women from having abortions.

        You say you are against owning slaves, but you are ok with forcing another “kind” of slavery= gestational servitude.

        You think it is ok to subject a woman to the trauma of childbirth against her will?

        You would have to tie me down or lock me up to stop me from having an abortion. I would consider it a grave violation of my body to prevent me from terminating a pregnancy and many other women would feel the same.

        • Gina Dalfonzo

          Gladys, you do realize, don’t you, that in all but a small handful of cases, the child is in the womb in the first place because the woman deliberately participated in the activity that put it there? You make it sound as if some evil dictatorial entity planted it in the womb wholly against her will.

          • gladys1071

            irrelevent, whether pregnancy happened because of birth control failure, being irresponsible or rape does not mean that the state should by force of law compel any woman to gestate for 9 months. Being irresponsible or birth control failure does not mean a woman loses her rights to her body. Woman still owns her body and owns her uterus regardless of how the pregnancy happened.

      • gladys1071

        Oh, so you say you are against slavery (owning a person), but you are ok with the state compelling a woman to gestate for 9 months against her will by force of law? I think that is a contradiction. I think you have not thought through your position much when it comes to reducing women to 2nd class citizens.

        You say that i should think about my pro-choice position, i think you need to think though your enforce pregnancy position because by wanting to outlaw abortion, you reduce me and other women to 2nd class citizens with the states controlling our bodies.

        If i don’t have a right to my body, then i don’t have any rights at all.

  • gladys1071

    it has nothing to do with my conscience, i call it as i see it. dictating to a woman that she must gestate and endure the trauma of childbirth IS cruel and NOT compassionate.

    You mistakenly think that i am trying to justify myself. I am not, i have never been pregnant or had an abortion, i have nothing to regret nothing on my conscience, yet i am not so myopic to try to impose my values or my solution to other women as you presume to do. “you saying is never a better choice” is a FALSE presumption on your part.

  • gladys1071

    their will always be women Christian and non-Christian that will seek to terminate a pregnancy and will find the way to do so, whether it be self-aborting or black market/underground, remember Prohibition, it did not stop people from drinking, but sure created a huge underground of bootlegging.