Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
What about a man's right to request an abortion?
Suppose a woman gets pregnant. If a man has no right to ask her to get an abortion, then he should have zero rights to support the child.
I don't see why it would work any other way.
Conservative thought fails in so so many areas, but I'd have to put Risk Management at the top of that list. Responses to terrorist attacks, tiny changes in power dynamics, you name it. I think this failure comes from being afraid all the time.
Imagine how you might overcorrect if you find your car spinning out of control on a patch of ice. It seems that those predisposed to a conservative mindset spend their whole psychological lives in just that scenario. Their only toolset is flailing elbows.
That's because you're a small minded, men's right's spouting dufus. It's HER body. The fact that you (theoretically, as I can't imagine it's ever happened in real life) supplied some sperm doesn't give you the right to demand what someone else does with their body.
#6
I agree with you.
But if a woman has 100% ownership, then a man has 0% responsibility.
The film is tangential and whose sole purpose is to be provocative.
And as far as "helping the other side" is concerned, acting like a legal "right" comes packaged with zero moral or ethical "responsibility" is a great way to empower those who think the right needs to be taken away.
It can be rationally consistent to believe in a right and also believe that use of that right should be restrained.
In the state of Washington, you can use deadly force if you you hold a rational belief that your life is directly and immediately threatened by another. I believe this to be a legal right, but that doesn't mean I necessarily can't or shouldn't consider and criticize a homocide where the killer rationally thought his life was in jeopardy.
In more cases that not I think what is behind this viewpoint is just intellectual laziness. 'Safe, legal and rare' is just the received idea that anyone who is a 'good person' is supposed to have.
A ton of people think that abortion should be safe, legal and rare. I don't see how that makes them bad allies, as long as they truly believe (and support/vote for those who believe) it should always be safe and legal.
@15: for the most part, catholics ARE trying to make it illegal.
"What in hell are you thinking, risking a pregnancy you're not ready for? The rhythm method doesn't work very well. Use a rubber, seriously, or get an IUD! Abortions do have a risk, albeit small, of serious complications, they're expensive, and by all accounts traumatic. Objectively, if you don't want to have a kid, you are far better off using contraception in the future!"
See, it's the lack of contraception that is the issue here not the abortion resulting from it.
I don't really care why she had to get an abortion, or what she did/didn't do that led to that moment. It's just the video...I dunno.. It's pretty weird. Like, a little too calculated or staged.
I guess I'm a monster. whatever.
We don't need the theatre, and the granular divisiveness around the issue that Paul amplifies. I think we're all on the same team for a woman's right to an abortion, even a late term one.
Sorry, I am just not as jaded as the younger generations.
Actually what you need to be is very dimly literal minded in order to believe this statement. This is something that those of the right-wing persuasion cannot seem to get their brains around: not everyone believes your simplistic definition of what a life is. Really truly, this is your viewpoint and that's it. Not some sort of profound truth you have on your side.
I was expecting something which allowed a moral judgement to be passed, but unless you're making assumptions then you can't judge her decision.
However, Paul is wrong. Every action comes with the potential for judgement. If this girl was just bare fucking on a prayer after counseling so many other women, then she and her partner(s?) are idiots at best. But, if that's what she wants...
Also, as @39 says, am I missing something about the "she's foolish for not using the most basic of birth controls" comment? Is there some information that was shared elsewhere about her not using birth control? I mean, it doesn't affect my feelings about the video at all, but it's weird that people would jump to the conclusion that "got pregnant" = "not using birth control".
Her lack of responsibility, even in the context of her work with Planned Parenthood, is beside the point. The point is that a video like this was made necessary by the continued assault on women's right to choose.
It's alright to call her an idiot, right? Because fucking one-night stands without contraception (either hormonal or condom) and basing all her sex on her cycle? Idiot. If she catches HIV, she can't get an abortion for that.
So you consider a pregnancy an "affliction"?
Also, you need to read up on the concept of a Moral Hazard before rending judgement.
But ... if I think you'll regret marrying your asshole same-sex partner, that your seventh divorce is probably a sign that you've been making some poor decisions in your life, that you're a fool for voting for a different sleazy politician than I did, or that tithing to a bigoted institution is a terrible idea … that doesn't make me a "bad ally" of marriage equality, voting rights, or the free expression of religious belief. Believing absolutely in a right does not mean I have to unequivocally support all expressions of that right.
It is absolutely none of my business how any particular person got pregnant or why they want an abortion. (Frankly, I don't know what sort of cad would ask or want to know more than what is willingly shared.) Abortions should be accessible to women who want them, covered by insurance like any other medical procedure, and people shouldn't be so worked up about them. But it's reasonable to talk about them as imperfect outcomes, sometimes preventable, with economic and medical risks.
You're also wrong about this being a good strategy in keeping abortion legal. It's very much the opposite. For many, many people, an abortion means ending a life. We can argue all we want about the unknowable, indistinguishable stage at which life becomes life, but whatever you want to call it, abortion violently ends it. That simple fact will always have more moral power than "a woman's right to choose" (one of the squishiest calls-to-arm ever created). That's why the pro-life movement continues to hold sway in this country. It's just not possible to win the "moral" argument on abortion by thinking of it (as you are essentially saying we should do) as just another form of birth control. Our moral high ground is found in the consequences of a world without abortion, i.e. unwanted children, desperate women with coat hangers, etc. It's an unfortunate necessity, not a gift to mankind.
In a perfect black and white world (i.e. the world most pro-lifers live in), abortions wouldn't be necessary, but those of us who understand the world is grey realize it has to be legal and accessible to all.
And if your so addled as to believe otherwise, then honestly I'd rather you moved to Texass or Mississippi or some other douchebag infested hellhole where you'll be surrounded by your own kind.
Are you seriously making this argument given that many other first world countries have legal abortion and don't have remotely the same moral outrage about it? Americans obsess about this shit because this country is dominated by religious nutjobs.
When Roe v. Wade first came down, it was a non-issue. For the first few years, the federal government paid for abortion for Medicaid recipients. It took three years for a political backlash to even start, and another 40 years of relentless "pro-life" propaganda to get us to this point.
Whether abortion is right or wrong doesn't matter to me. I would never have an abortion. Wait... I'm a guy.... not an real issue.
Leave people alone to do with their bodies as they see fit. But hey, I'm preaching to the choir, I'd be shocked if any reader of The Stranger would want to force women carry a zygote until it becomes a fetus, and a fetus until it becomes a baby, and a baby until it is born. And then my gawd, what happens over the next 18 years!!!!!
Oh, that's right, it's not my issue!!!
It is her body; her life; her decision. It is no one's business why any woman has an abortion. End of story.
No it isn't. A life is being preempted. Life is what happens between when you're born and when you die. No birth, no life.
The video has been around for months. What triggered this sudden shitstorm of media interest is the article she recently authored for Cosmo (and which Paul should bloody well have linked to) -
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/advice/healt…
And now since I have a penis, I'll be running from this topic as fast as I possibly can.
All the anti-abortion piety about the "sacredness" of life doesn't ever seem to consider the sacredness of the duty people accept by making the choice to bring a human life into this world. If you're not ready, willing, and able, don't do it. The world is not in danger of running out of people. Not one of you sanctimonious pricks suffers in any way, shape or form because a woman doesn't bring a baby to term.
People say they believe abortion is the taking of a human life -- I actually don't believe them anymore. I think it's just a thing people say. What I believe is that people are uncomfortable with it on a visceral, instinctive level, but it's more of a taboo than a moral stance. Think about it. Do you think a dead human body -- especially of a loved one -- is "just tissue"? Probably not. You probably think it deserves some variety of respect and special treatment. But do you think a dead human body is the moral equivalent of a living human being? Again, probably not.
It's a visceral squick factor, and right wingers used to be able to use that exact same phenomenon to argue against gay rights.
When you shame women who have abortions, for any reason, you are enabling the patriarchal right wing culture that wants to take away women's reproductive autonomy. So knock it off already.
1/3 of women who will have an abortion before age 45. None of them should go into the procedure afraid and ashamed because of the messaging around abortion.
It's important to teach the handwringing pearl-clutchers this:
Birth control fails all the damn time. It very fucking common when you look at the numbers. A BC method that has a 1% failure rate means that out of 100 women over the course of a year one of them will get pregnant. Now check this out:
According to the 2010 census, there are 103,129,321 women between the ages of 15-64. Of course not all of those women are having sex or able to become pregnant (Just back of the envelope-ing here), but 1% of that number is more than a million people.
As you can see, a whole damn lot of women may need an abortion at any given time. It does no good to shame them for "not being responsible", or "not using birth control" if you don't know for damn certain that they weren't. Because it's likely she has had a BC failure through no fault of her own. Even if they weren't using anything, who gives a shit?
If she doesn't want a ZEF in her body, for any reason, she has the right to remove it anyways.
And it still makes not one damn bit of difference.
I have no opinion on what other people (men or women) do voluntarily with their own bodies.
Fucking straight people and gay people, if you're sleeping around, use a fucking condom. If you don't use a fucking condom, you are all disease spreaders. And if you're not using condoms, use fucking birth control if you don't want to get pregnant. Unless you like having abortions.
"that it is wrong for a father to disown his grownup gay son. I think most of us would also agree that a law forbidding him from doing so would be undesirable."
Such a law exists in France. Disowning one's children in one's will is forbidden. A part of the deceased parent's ownings is reserved for them (from 1/2 to 3/4, depending on the number of children). The rest will be distributed according to the desires of the deceased, thus a child can be favored in a will over her/his siblings but no dog will inherit the whole estates, unlike in the US.
Freedom from money abetting by one's own parents. One of the basic freedoms guaranteed in France.
As for the Earth Mother chanting--I assume that she was doing a pain management technique, but, believe me, the cramping associated with a dilated cervix is not something you can handle with a calm face. It is, at best, extremely uncomfortable. A whole monastery of chanting Tibetan monks could not soothe a woman with a dilated cervix.
I appreciate the exposure for something that's so often vilified and shunned, but I smell a staged video.
"if you agree with the above comments, you are a bad ally when it comes to abortion rights."
Paul, how could even you disagree with the idea that she's foolish for not using birth control?
I guess none of the people calling her stupid or an idiot have ever made any mistakes. I can't say the same for myself, so I'll withhold judgment.
That just sounds like a sweet ol' pile of stupid. Happy judging, though!
When a woman should have an abortion: when she wants to terminate her pregnancy.
Really, are you talking about yourself? Because I have never seen any indication in your Slog comments that you are willing to accept that you're a fucking idiot.
You want exactly what the right wing in this country is so het up about -- the right to judge others and not be judged in kind. You want the privilege to throw around the "idiot" label freely, but never accept it for yourself. I judge that your words prove you to be an arrogant, entitled, thoughtless, smug asshole. Do you accept that judgment? Or are you going to call me an idiot, and prove my point?
@The Misanthrope- She did accept the consequences of her actions. She had to get an abortion.