If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I would. My choice, is and has been anti- abortion, I honestly feel too adverse to taking a life potential to have an abortion. I might be liable to change my mind under the circumstances you mentioned. I was trying to make the point that the 'pro-choice' and 'pro-life' labels in themselves should be exploded. I believe you can be both, and neither.
You appear to be guilty of context dropping.
That particular directive ('let he who is without sin cast the first stone' ) was issued (by Jesus) at scribes and Pharisees who were engaging in a form of entrapment (that law enforcement officers are wont to do).
I think it's the labelling I'm not comfortable with. I don't see your position as anti-abortion: you think women should have access and you're not necessarily discounting yourself from ever having one. Maybe I'm getting hung up on semantics, but that doesn't strike me as an anti-abortion stance. I understand it's not an option you can immediately imagine yourself choosing, but I think that's different.
Agree.
However, I do object to people not respecting the child/embryo (whatever you want to call it) for what it is. I could very well be wrong but it seems that at least some women treat it like some kind of horrible disease they have to be cured of immediately.
You can be against something and at the same time recognise the rights of others to come to their own decision about it. Usually in areas where you feel a particular way about something, but realise that you don't have the objective basis to impose your feelings on other people. I really hate Eastenders, but I recognise the rights of others to watch it if they choose to do so. Hell, you could be pro-abortion and think the world would be a better place if they were more widespread, but that doesn't mean you'd be suggesting compulsory abortions unless it went further than just a personal view.
Who said anything about trying to convince someone they are wrong? I'm just asking for clarification and definitions.
Well for me i see it as very similar to my vegetarianism. I don't eat meat, but if people want to that's ok and really got nothing to do with me.
See above But i am assuming it's 'Ms A. (herself) would't have an abortion but is in favour of any individual making their own choice without repercussion.'
I don't really understand this either, but then I guess it works better if we don't try and put stuff into boxes.
For me, on a really simple level, abortion screams out "wrong". But the thing is... it isn't simple. There are so many things which make each individual cases different and more complicated. So yeah, I do think people should have a choice.
I think in a lot of these ethical dilemmas people focus on life vs death rather than quality of life. E.g a life being 'saved' = a win, when in fact.... I think quality of life should matter a lot more than that.
:yes:
Just out of interest - from when do you believe that an embryo is a baby?
Exactly.
Some people would never get an abortion, and don't necessarily agree with it. Some are anti-choice. There is a difference.
Of course.
It's just the term 'anti-abortion' doesn't seem to fit right, certainly in people's explanations here. Like I said before, it might just be me getting hung up on semantics, but if you wouldn't outright rule it out for yourself, and you agree that other people should be able to have them, 'anti-abortion' seems like a mislabelling. I guess to a certain extent it might depend one's reasons for the stance.
I thought I already had.
I cannot see many, if any reasons, why I would actively promote the idea of abortion for a child of mine. For me, it's just not a real option because I value the life which I have helped create.
That doesn't equate to enforcing those beliefs on others. That isn't my choice, it isn't my life and so my personal stance on abortion shouldn't be a factor.
I'm pro-choice. However for me, that choice is to say "no".
:yes: and I suspect its a pretty common position. I can support the right for women to abort, whilst hoping that they don't do so. Same as I can support the right that people vote BNP whilst hoping the don't.
Though generally the trouble with abortion debates is that it polarises into extreme and absolute positions, which doesn't reflect the wide range of views. On one side the extreme seems to be the mother can do anything she wants right up to the the cutting of the umblicial cord and on the other side that no abortion can ever take place however the pregnancy resulted or whatever the harm to the mother.
In reality most people have more nuanced views and very few people are always against abortion or totally believe in choice, they just differ on where lines are drawn.
This.
It's why I found the question about my stance interesting. It suggests that you cannot be both, that you either have to be completely anti- or not. Life just isn't that simple.
Saying that, abortion over about 12 weeks gestation makes me feel quite sad
This.
I was talking to a male friend of mine and he pretty much said this. He thought it was wrong (!) for him to have an opinion on abortion when ultimately, it's the mothers' decision.
When you think about giving birth a child, what is important is if you can take care of him and love him. But if you can't, you barely think about the rest of the people who can't have kids. Your decision is based on your needs, not the rest of the people needs.
We can't go against technology, and the posibilities of making a good abortion are better and better every day.Nevertheless, consequences such as later conceiving problems or malpractise , should be known and taken into consideration by the mom.
Also, I think It's better not to have a kid, than have one with no care for him.
:wave:
I often see interviews with action-moms that manage to hike and jog up mountains far into their pregnancies. In movies women are out and about until the last minute and all of the sudden the baby is there. There's a certain charm about it all, pregnancies and babies are such wonderful things. *throws some sparkle*
I personally was quite shocked to find out that due to a certain side effect directly linked to my pregnancy I can't bike, run or walk too far. I can't clean my own apartment properly and have had to reduce work. I'm now almost in constant pain and spend a lot of time in the sofa at home. If I wasn't committed to what I'm doing this process would probably feel like a living hell. I find it quite easy to imagine that if I really didn't want this baby and had to have it, there's a lot of things I could do that were harmful to both of us but might help me cope mentally with this ordeal. Lots of alcohol, painkillers that actually WORK, using my body wrong, etc.
Abortion isn't a thing to directly recommend but neither do I believe in condemning people who choose to go that route. Just because some people can't have children is not an excuse to send women on a guilt trip because they don't feel they are in a position to care for a baby. Pregnancy is a major issue and takes a large toll on a woman's body. I say let each woman decide for herself what suits her needs.
I've always said that I am totally pro-choice and that no-one would have any right to tell me I couldn't have an abortion. But I have general fertility problems and if I had an unwanted pregnancy, I don't know if I could have an abortion in case it was the only chance I had to have a baby.
GB x