Yet, "anti-choicers" are fighting back against these unfortunate embedded norms of our culture. Over 20 states have possible laws requiring ultrasounds prior to abortion, a tactic designed to initiate an emotional response amongst these mothers. Admittedly, this seemingly productive strategy has proved woefully ineffective in achieving its intended objective.
However, the philosophical basis of the program, the notion that women have an biological imperative towards motherhood and that a palpable stimulus could conjure up strong emotions, speaks to the deleterious cultural memes underpinning the abortion argument. Abortion advocates have belittled early pregnancy, the inchoate stages of life, so much that women deny themselves the emotional richness of motherhood. One woman makes this despondency quite explicit:
But a number of women at the Birmingham clinic, which was the site of a fatal bombing in 1998, said they simply did not want to subject themselves to images that might haunt them. “You almost have to think of it as an alien,” said Carmen, 28, who was there for her second abortion in three years.The proposed law seeks to counter this cultural evil. Will it work?
During the six days the law was in effect, all of the patients at the Reproductive Services abortion clinic in Tulsa averted their eyes from the ultrasound screen, said Linda S. Meek, the clinic’s director. But they could not avoid hearing descriptions of fetal length and heart activity, she said. Many left in tears, but none changed course.Perhaps the prattling about "women's rights" and "clumps of cells" is far too potent a force to undermine. Nonetheless, by virtue of the proposed law, the abortionists have relinquished some control over the public message and I'm in favor of this increased diversity.
36 comments:
OneSTDV,
If I may, this is yet another example of a case that has been, for all intents and purposes, settled by the American People - we want Abortion. Period.
It's really as simple as that. These little stop-gap measures, such as the ultrasound and the like, can only at best, nibble around the edges. They won't be gamechangers. Abortion will not be rolled back or made illegal. It is simply the law of the land.
The real debate isn't whether a Woman has the right to abort her baby, but about Reproductive Rights, and what that really means. No matter where you fall on the issue of Abortion, one thing is glaringly obvious and true:
Men HAVE no reproductive rights that any court is bound to respect.
THIS is the issue, One. And it's an issue that both sides, the Left and the Right, are strange bedfellows in their opposition against it, by the way.
If a Woman has the right to determine whether she wishes to be a parent, then so too does a Man. We cannot tell Men that they have responsibilities in this regard, but at the same time, they have no rights, no say in the matter. What we have is full-on, flat-out, in your face, out and out discrimination against one half of our country's population in this regard. So long as we keep the debate as is - that "reproductive rights" is seen, couched and presented as solely a "Woman's Issue" - we will never get to questioning the very legality of the notion that a full half of the country has no reproductive rights at all.
If indeed the choice of having a child rests solely with the mother, then on what basis do we hold the Man responsible? What logic, what reason, is brought to bear on such a question? For my part, I can think of none. If a Man has no say as to whether a child is born or not, it seems fair to me then, that he can have no responsibilities either.
And both the Left, and the Right knows this - which is why BOTH fight tooth and nail, for example, against making Paternity Testing MANDATORY upon the birth of the child. They know that nine times out of ten, Men will walk with the quickness if they found out that their child really isn't theirs - leaving the mom there to deal with the consequences of her decision. Of course, should the Man want to continue being a parent to the child, he would be required to legally signify that; it's his choice.
Here's an interesting assignment for all those reading this:
The next time you're talking to someone who has identified themselves as strongly pro-choice, ask them if they also are "pro-choice" for a Man to have the right to walk away from a child he didn't want? if they favor MPT, no questions asked or exceptions?
And take note of the responses. Don't be surprised if the same people who bleat on about fairness, justice and equality, suddenly become Kafkaesque when it comes to Men in this regard.
It has been said that the best way to see if someone truly believes in equality, is to give it to them. Choice for Men, is the ultimate acid test for those who talk a mean game about "reproductive rights".
The horse is outta the barn, One, and it ain't goin' back. We need to go all the way now - we need to lobby for the right of a Man to Choose.
The Obsidian
http://www.theonion.com/video/new-law-requires-women-to-name-baby-paint-nursery,14393/
If I may, this is yet another example of a case that has been, for all intents and purposes, settled by the American People
Nonsense. Nothing is EVER settled. Instead, there is a group of people who want things to be one way, and another group of people who want things the opposite way.
Today one group has its way, tomorrow it's the other guys' turn.
Who knows, maybe the plan actually backfired for most women. When a friend of mine got an abortion, she first had an ultrasound. I think it made her feel better because she said the fetus was no bigger than a dime.
@ Obsidian:
I was going to post on that issue but it was getting late and I didn't have time to look into counter arguments such as this article that I haven't even read yet:
http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/2010/05/26/men_right_to_choose/index.html
I've tried to debate women on this but its a non-starter. Definitely not a good conversation to have with women who may have cute friends.
Along with the ultrasound, they should explain that the fetus is the size of a dime, show an ultrasound of an animal fetus in the same stage of development (which might look indistinguishable) and also explain that the fetus has the cognitive capacity of a comatose adult in advanced stages of dementia.
I'd feel more guilt executing Osama Bin Ladin than I would aborting a fetus. That's sensible. Bin Ladin experiences complex emotions, fear, the capacity for moral reasoning, empathy. An 8 week old fetus has none of that.
FemX: "I'd feel more guilt executing Osama Bin Ladin than I would aborting a fetus. That's sensible. Bin Ladin experiences complex emotions, fear, the capacity for moral reasoning, empathy."
You've botched the logic here. Since Bin Laden has the capacity for moral reasoning and empathy then he bears some guilt for his actions and his execution is more justified. An unborn child is wholly innocent.
China goes from one extreme to another in just one generation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ax3dRAEgosY&feature=channel
All those cute little petite Chinese women that geeks and nerds fantasize about are getting surgeries to make them TALL.
Now who will socially awkward American men turn to?
But seriously, it shows just how much "globalization" is negatively affecting cultures around the world. Not just our own.
Like Rabbi Schmuley says, (real) feminism is dead.
"then he bears some guilt for his actions and his execution is more justified."
I think his execution would be justified, but I also think there would be a tragic element to having to do it. I think Bin Ladin really means well for all of humanity. He just has wrong information. Post modernists have wrong information about biological influence on intelligence. Bin Ladin has wrong information on the veracity of the literal word of the Quran. He murdered thousands, so he ought to be executed, but he has my sympathy. A fetus in its early stages does not have my sympathy.
"An unborn child is wholly innocent."
So was the sausage patty I ate for breakfast.
In an ultrasound less than 4 weeks there is nothing to see, so I doubt any "emotional response" would be elicited.
Another factor, women may cry and regret that they've had to make this decision, but if they cannot afford to raise a child in a healthy and comfortable manner, would you suggest they opt to bring that fetus to full term and into the world?
"If I may, this is yet another example of a case that has been, for all intents and purposes, settled by the American People - we want Abortion. Period."
Uh, huh.
Slavery was the law of the land for far longer, and it was abolished. Never say never. Period.
Abortion pro/con polls at 50/50.
I have no idea how this will eventually end up, but the idea that current law settles anything is bull.
The American People don't want illegal immigration, period. Illegal immigration is far less popular than abortion and the feds only make phony half hearted efforts to end it while spending hundreds of billions in Iraq and Afghanistan on "security". Right.
The American People didn't want the trillion dollar health care bill, but we got it. It is also less popular than abortion.
Politicians don't give a sh-t about what the American People want.
"Men HAVE no reproductive rights that any court is bound to respect. "
Nonsense, they can keep their dicks to themselves.
No offense, but the glorification of single motherhood (particularly for impressionable and emotionally stunted teenagers) is a WAY bigger problem than abortion. Who is going to pay for all these "children" who get saved by this new ultrasound policy? The resources that are going to be used to validate irresponsibility and care for its results are going to be paid for by the responsible taxpaying population, and will ultimately end up draining them of money that would be better spent on investment in their own children.
I agree with Bama Girl on this one.
Bristol Palin is being called "brave" for having a baby at an age that was once considered NORMAL for young women to bear children at AND she has a WEALTHY FAMILY to fund her and her baby, what to speak of her own money which she is making via publicity tours.
For the rest of us - it ain't so.
I know ADULT women who have chosen abortion ONLY BECAUSE they were struggling to support THEMSELVES at the time - supporting someone else was out of the question. Had these women been wealthy, they most certainly would have had those babies.
And a few of those women were even MARRIED.
I know ADULT women who have chosen abortion ONLY BECAUSE they were struggling to support THEMSELVES at the time - supporting someone else was out of the question.
It's a question of life or not life. If life starts at conception, then all this grousing about economics and life circumstances is moot.
Imagine if someone made the following statements trying to justify being a hitman. "Well I really need to feed my family, so that's why I kill people for a living."
The focus should be on the definition of life, not after the fact justification. And IMO, if abortion is NOT murder, then ANY reason should suffice, including the kid not having the right hair color or predicting the kid won't root for your favorite sports team.
Obsidian writes,
“If I may, this is yet another example of a case that has been, for all intents and purposes, settled by the American People - we want Abortion. Period.”
I had understood that nine Supreme Court Justices had made unrestricted abortion the law of the land. Did I miss a national referendum?
“Abortion will not be rolled back or made illegal. It is simply the law of the land.”
Ummm…did I miss a Bill in Congress? A Presidential signature?
I believe that abortion is legal because nobody has seriously questioned either Marbury v. Madison or Roe v. Wade. By the Constitution as written and by US Code, abortion is in no way the law of the land.
It is possible that abortions in the second trimester will be banned but I doubt 1st trimester abortions will be outlawed.
And IMO, if abortion is NOT murder, then ANY reason should suffice, including the kid not having the right hair color or predicting the kid won't root for your favorite sports team.
If you believe abortion is murder, do you believe both the mother and the doctor should be charged with first degree murder?
Also, +90% of abortion take place in the 1st trimester, so even outlawing 2nd trimester abortions will not put much of a dent in the abortion rate.
Women want abortions because the men who got them pregnant were Beta or came to be perceived as Beta.
An Alpha fetus? No way women would abort!
Women like babies. However they hate Betas. And love Alphas. A baby by a Beta is worse than pursuing an Alpha (and the opportunity for an Alpha baby).
Simple as that!
OneSTDV,
You're right that the question boils down to whether abortion is equivalent to murder or not, except the answer to whether life is present wouldn't quite settle that first issue. Those in favor of abortion would argue that a fetus is a life, but that no life in such an undeveloped state is worthy of legal protection (i.e., mere life isn't sufficient; [arbitrarily chosen] traits like sentience or viability are necessary for rights). See: FemX.
She thinks the small size or incidental, temporary lack of reasoning ability in a fetus disqualify it somehow from either being a human person or meriting legal protection. Or "sympathy." Perhaps she admits a fetus is a human being -- a living organism, with its own unique DNA code, of the species homo sapiens sapiens from the moment of conception -- but that not all humans possess dignity according to their inherent nature.
On that view, rights are not bestowed upon us by what we are naturally, but by somethings else, such as which of the pre-established, innate capacities have been activated yet.
I have no doubt that she has honestly reflected on the utter lack of rationality present in an infant and made an entirely logical conclusion that sentience, not rationality, is the noteworthy human trait which guarantees protection from murder. And not just because that happens to allow for abortion, or that she knows slaughtering a 2 months-old baby just won't sit right with the public.
Whiskey, not ALL women go ga-ga over babies OR small animals like kittens and puppies. Sure, they're cute. Do I wanna be around 'em 24/7? NOPE.
"And IMO, if abortion is NOT murder, then ANY reason should suffice, including the kid not having the right hair color or predicting the kid won't root for your favorite sports team."
Well, in India sex selective abortion has always been the norm.
I don't get how some people can oppose 1st trimester abortion but support mass-scale (adult) animal slaughter.
It's baffling to me how some people are so dismissive of a human fetus, comparing it to an animal or even being less than so. It seems to me that they miss the descriptor, "human", and all that would imply. This to me is the larger issue. In this crazy PC world where everyone is the same, and loyalty to your race and nation is frowned upon, some even have lost loyalty to their own species.
"I'd feel more guilt executing Osama Bin Ladin than I would aborting a fetus. That's sensible. Bin Ladin experiences complex emotions, fear, the capacity for moral reasoning, empathy."
You're presuming to know the contents of Osama's mind and psyche. Mindread much? Maybe he's a sociopath.
"Wrong information" is fatuous, naive in every sense.
Do you know nothing of abnormal psychology?
Do psychopaths and sociopaths have "wrong information"? What is this information you speak of? Information is facts, not moral judgements. These people are unable to feel empathy and don't care what happens to their victims.
Epic fail.
Obsidian is a broken record.
Last year according to him the American People wanted "the public option" in health insurance.
We know how that turned out.
Template: The American People want [insert liberal-left policy do jour.]
Predictable. Transparent. Pathetic.
Alpha foetus? Beta foetus?! How the hell can you determine that in the womb?? It's possible that a Beta father could have an Alpha son (though it's more likely an Alpha father would have a Beta son). However if one was to presume that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree then most women would be happy to keep the child who was the product of rape.
Bin Ladin definitely does not strike me as a sociopath. Do you people know any sociopaths?
Bin Ladin had the option of living a very privileged life in Saudi Arabia. He could have wielded a lot of power there without much effort. Instead he chose to live a life of hardship out in tents and caves. He also doesn't seem to seek control over any region or control over peoples personal lives, which is what a cult leader would do. He seems to let taliban types push others around while he plots his next move in the holy war. I think he probably really really believes in his holy war thing.
"If you believe abortion is murder, do you believe both the mother and the doctor should be charged with first degree murder?"
Just the doctor.
The mother is under duress.
What is the doctor's motive? $$$
He is easier to dissuade, as he can make a living providing other services.
That is the way it was before abortion was legal.
"I don't get how some people can oppose 1st trimester abortion but support mass-scale (adult) animal slaughter."
I am a vegetarian and I get it. People eat animals to survive.
Killing an animal and killing your own offspring are nowhere near similar in a civilized society even though technically both are animals.
I've got to side with Feminist X on this one. I feel that there may be legitimate arguments to be made about abortion, but the notion that it is equivalent to murder is one of the sillier notions I've seen.
Yes an embryo (most abortions affect embryos, not fetuses) is alive and yes a human embryo is a human, but there is a distinct difference between removing a small non-sentient parasite from the uterus and ending the life of someone with hopes, dreams, thoughts, and feelings.
If you were to grow a group of human skin cells in a culture, that would also constitute "human life", but I doubt that many of you would raise hackles if the petri dishes with those cultures were thrown away when they had outlasted their use.
It should also be pointed out that life does not begin at conception--it continues at conception. The two precursors to a zygote (the egg and the sperm) are also alive. However, we don't consider menstruation to be a moral travesty nor do we consider the death of the vast majority of sperm to be an insult to our values.
One could argue that an abortion ends the potentiality of a child and is thus murder in that regard, but by that same argument, abstaining from sex should be seen as murder, Russian-roulette style, as it prevents the potentiality of a child.
Now, all of this is not to say that abortion is not in some way a tradgedy. Embryos (of all animals) are amazing things that inspire a degree of awe into all that take the time to look at what they do, so it is sad when they are killed, but arguments equating abortion to murder are laughable and a great discredit to the pro-life movement, as are arguments from innocence, as FemX pointed out with the sausage analogy.
If you want to argue that abortion has a corrosive effect on society for reasons X, Y, and Z, go ahead. If you want to argue that there are perverse incentives and choices being made in this area, be my guest. If you want to argue that abortion is a tragedy because it ends the amazing development of a new organism, I'm fine with that.
But don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that an embryo and a fully developed human are functionally equivalent. They are not. The reasoning behind the "abortion is murder" arguments seems to come from people who can use words but fail to understand their meanings. And as I stated earlier, this serves as a discredit to the pro-life movement.
But don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that an embryo and a fully developed human are functionally equivalent. They are not. The reasoning behind the "abortion is murder" arguments seems to come from people who can use words but fail to understand their meanings.
The above and the rest of your argument could be applied to late term abortion as well or even a baby a minute after birth. Niehter of them are functionally equivalent to a sentient, autonomous, viable human being. Are you in favor of infanticide or late term abortions (or plugging the plug on the handicapped)?
The problem with your argument is that it's a slippery slope combined with a wildly arbitrary demarcation between "OK to abort" and "not OK to abort".
I believe FemX gets around this inconsistency by supporting infanticide, but almost no one goes that far.
"What is the doctor's motive? $$$
He is easier to dissuade, as he can make a living providing other services.
That is the way it was before abortion was legal."
Do you really want to see conditions return to the days of back alleys and coat hangers?
Abortion is NOT going to go away. It needs to be kept safe and hygenic.
Far back in the 1960's I was preparing for an abortion speech to be given at the renowned Friar's Club in Los Angeles. This esteemed private club sought a "conservative" view because-being mostly Jewish and liberal- they already agreed about abortion as a matter of choice for all women.In my preparations I found a recent tome on this penultimate moral issue and counted some 700 pages. It occurred to me that experts fully and completely disagreed because they did not agree on the nature of the embryo and the problem of morality applied to a process that was continuous.
OneSTDV is right to point out the "slippery slope" problem because the embryo seamlessly develops into a fetus which is hardly different just before birth than after birth, when all of us would deem life extinction to be murder.Few biologists would argue that late term abortions are acts of no moral consequence.
Abortion is surely viewed differently around the globe and mostly gives Christians the greatest challenge because they view human life as "distinct" from non-human forms. This is due to the belief in soul. As a biologist who learned not to believe in soul, I had to find something special about human nature to defend against amoral abortionists. My decision was based upon the very unique capacity of the human brain to use language and build concepts that serve as an absolutely unique edifice for poetry, art, mathematics, and model-building. Since no other species enters the human domain of mind, it is enough to defend against reckless destruction. Humans can be viewed as special whether you use the "soul" route or my route.Relativists are a formidable enemy because they appeal to the craven masses whose previous Christianity has been eroded and replaced by hedonism and celebrity culture. Egalitarians have but one moral mission: the creation of a society of sexually depraved but utterly "equal" clones dedicated to enlarging this sphere of amorality.They must in their egalitarian stupor give full priority to women so the moral distinctions will be ignored. The amoral minions cannot abide by evidence such as ultrasound.
As a follower of a dharmic religion, I understand that all life forms have a "soul" - soul meaning that which gives life, distinct from dead matter. We call it "atma" or "the animator".
In that sense all life forms are to be respected, but we realize that one form of life is food for another. It cannot but be so. Thus different dharmic faiths have different dietary taboos based on the particular schools of philosophy.
The human form of life of course is considered the highest form on Earth, precisely because of what you say - human capacity for thought and emotion, which exceeds the "lower" life forms.
Abortion isn't a cultural evil. It's practically universal; about 1 in 5 Brazilian women of child-bearing age has terminated a pregnancy. What's evil is institutions like the Catholic church (protector of pedophiles) using it to guilt-trip people to maintain their power.
There are problems related to abortion, but abortion is the symptom, not the cause. If family formation or expansion is unaffordable, women are likely to abort. Holding out for an "alpha" (your pet peeve, 1STDV) is a response to that. Having one's retirement disconnected from raising productive, well-behaved children (Social Security) is another disincentive; when the costs are privatized and the benefits socialized, raising that next generation is Somebody Else's Problem. We have met the enemy, and he is us.
Lack of abortion is a bigger problem than abortion. The girl shot in the neck by Detroit police last month turns out to have been one of SEVEN children of one 25-yr-old guy by 2 women. Detroit schools (and Detroit families) don't exactly do a good job of turning kindergartners into educated, capable graduates 13 years later. Yet our social "safety net" is a hammock comfy enough for these women to have large broods (and the lack of child-support enforcement in Detroit doesn't discourage the men). Wouldn't you rather encourage the opposite? Unfortunately, the "pro-life" meme directly discourages responsibility.
If "pro-lifers" want to mandate ultrasound, I'm fine as long as the pro-lifers have to pay for it and they have to compensate the women whose time is wasted on these non-therapeutic tests. This is all theater anyway, having nothing to do with the real problems out there. Needing a ridiculous income to get your kids into a school that's not a racial battleground and dropout factory whose few graduates tend to be illiterate isn't something you can fix with an abortion law, and people who think about their children's future before bearing them are MORE moral than the self-styled "moral majority".
Post a Comment