Choice or Life? You may want to skip if you're overzealous...

[ayoub]

Ignorance is bliss, but then you run the risk of being shot in the head and not knowing why...

I'm not trying to offend here, just stating my views.

There have been a fair few posts on being Pro-Choice, or Pro-Life, and frankly put, I'm neither.

I have respect for all living things, but I'll kill a cow and eat it. I have respect for all human life, but if a child is being brought into the world to merely survive, I think that's a bad thing.

What bugs me most, is the one dimensional view of both campaigns. As I said above, I'm not trying to offend here, just stating my views.

The Pro-Life crowd focus on the child, and not the difficulties faced by the mother in raising a child. Imagine a 15 year old, raped, with a kid that is downs syndrome. Apart from a 15 year old not being emotionally ready for motherhood, how the hell will she give the kid a life?

Conversely, the Pro-Choice crowd focus on the mother and not the child. If a foetus is a bunch of cells, then who's to say that the cells won't grow into a perfectly formed individual? And if a kid has an abnormality, does it really mean he or she can't be loved and give love in return?

My opinion, though, is that governments have enough control over us as it is, and they shouldn't have a right to that. The government should not be making laws to prevent things by force, they should be helping pregnant women decide what to do with ALL of the information at hand, and supporting that decision. Each individual case should be measured for the best of the Mother AND the Child, not either or, and I feel, even though the subject is a touchy one, people need to start thinking on those lines rather than trying make each other guilty for supporting the other side.

I'm just anti government, I guess.

Comments

[poetbear.livejournal.com]

gosh, you think? the reason we are friends, i think, is that i'm an anarchist in the same sense as you, Ayoub. there are just too many things that governments have no business sticking their nose into for me to be pro government!~paul

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

:D

This kind of anarchy works :)

[poetbear.livejournal.com]

yep.~paul

[lilgeorgiawhore.livejournal.com]

My identifying as being pro-choice isn't about protecting the abortion procedure, it's about protecting that choice. It's about being able to have one, if I so choose. I don't care what a woman does with her body, as long as all options are open to her. It is possible to identify yourself as pro-choice and still want to have children. If a pro-choice woman were to get pregnant at rather inconvient time in her life, I wouldn't automatically tell her that she just had to have an abortion and I certainly wouldn't think any less of her if she chose to raise the child. It's her body, her business. Pro-Choice, for me, isn't just about being pro-choice-to-have-an-abortion -- it's about being able to choose what you want, what is best for you and the baby.

I think what you said about how the government should be helping pregnant women decide what to do with "All" the information is an important point because that is the problem, women aren't being told all the information. There ARE more options than just "have an abortion" versus "raise the child," and there are pros and cons to BOTH of those options, as well as to all the OTHER options out there. The problem is that, at least here in the good ol' U.S. of A., this topic is approached from two poles with no middle ground and no understanding being reached or even talked about between the two opposite groups.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

it's about being able to choose what you want, what is best for you and the baby.

Definitely

That's the rub isn't it? Even the advising doctors are clouded by their own opinions...

[lilgeorgiawhore.livejournal.com]

Even the advising doctors are clouded by their own opinions

Sadly, people being clouded by their own opinions isn't limited to doctors and the topic of abortion, such as pharmacists who refuse to fill birth control perscriptions because they don't agree with it.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

That is saddening...

[lilgeorgiawhore.livejournal.com]

It is very sadenning, and has caused several court issues regarding it, when women want their birth control prescription and not getting it, instead getting lectured by the pharmacists. The law that I'm thinking of, though I can't remember which state it's from, sides with the woman, saying no one can stop her from getting her presription, but it allows the pharmacist to pass the job off to another worker if they have ethical issues filling the order.

[neneithel.livejournal.com]

I oppose abortion because it is the wrong choice for both mother and child and also because I believe that if you start excepting people from the list of those to be accorded rights by race, religion or by age, you end up robbing everyone of their rights. I don't try to make people feel guilty, I just try to inform people about what abortion is. Many people don't realise that most children are aborted at an age when they show signs of fear and can feel pain. There is no possible moral or ethical difference between aborting a twelve week old foetus and beating a six year old child to death. If I say torture is wrong, will you say I am trying to make people feel guilty for supporting it?

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

I think that abortion, in the light of cold facts, can sometimes be good for the child, or at least, better than brining it into a world of pain.

A moment of pain is better than a lifetime of suffering.

I don't think a decision to abort can be generalised, ever. It has to be made on an individual basis, and with all of the information, and the mother needs to be aware of all the facts. Aborting just for the sake of it is wrong though.

Torture is a much simpler issue than this.