A Moral Dilemma For Pro-Choice Liberals?

[doppelganger]

Thus, to be "pro-life" is not to be anti-abortion so much as it is to be pro-birth control and pro-social justice.

Any Evangelical Capitalists want to pick up that banner?

 

[lilithu]

I specifically said it in response to the term "anti-abortionist."

Funny, because I used the term "anti-abortionist" in an attempt to be purely descriptive of your stance, trying to avoid a flagrantly rhetorical term such as "anti-choice." And yet you prefer to be called "anti-choice." Go figure.

 

[Draka]

Approximately 46 million unborn children are aborted every year. 46 MILLION, EVERY year. The numbers don't even begin to compare. Not even CLOSE.

You know, I find this strange. If you are all for promoting and saving lives, then the birth of 46 million more people into this world every year would make a huge problem even worse. Look at the problems we have when it comes to the children already in this world. Abortion may not be the answer for the problem, but stopping abortions certainly won't help it.

​

 

[Quiddity]

How do you know there's not? There's no field or combination of fields of the social sciences that could help us understand the effect criminalizing abortion has on the incidence of abortion?

How do I know what's not?

I want to make sure we are talking about the same thing.

 

[lilithu]

I personally don't think that would be the case. No real way to find out but to implement it.

It's already been implemented. i.e. pre-Roe v. Wade. Thus, there should be data. I just don't know what it is.

 

[Quiddity]

You know, I find this strange. If you are all for promoting and saving lives, then the birth of 46 million more people into this world every year would make a huge problem even worse. Look at the problems we have when it comes to the children already in this world. Abortion may not be the answer for the problem, but stopping abortions certainly won't help it.

I’ve never understood why such connections are made. It’s not like pro-life people are saying “let’s have more kids and then let them starve”. That’s just bogus! Who in the world do they think is over in Africa feeding the hungry? I’d be willing to bet that a vast majority of them are pro-lifers who’s hearts ache in seeing such atrocities take place. As you said, neither of them will solve the problem and that’s because starving kids is a problem we should all be accountable for, not just Christians who believe the right to life is more important then the choice to end it.

 

[Quiddity]

It's already been implemented. i.e. pre-Roe v. Wade. Thus, there should be data. I just don't know what it is.

You mean it was implemented before Roe vs. Wade, right?

 

[lilithu]

Now, if somebody were actually "anti-abortion" and "pro-life," they'd be aggressive advocates for social justice, and economic development throughout the world, AND they'd be a staunch supporter of sex education for youth and birth control education and availability, as the data shows these two factors are the biggest correlates to reducing abortions.

Thus, to be "pro-life" is not to be anti-abortion so much as it is to be pro-birth control and pro-social justice.

:jam:

 

[Draka]

I’ve never understood why such connections are made. It’s not like pro-life people are saying “let’s have more kids and then let them starve”. That’s just bogus! Who in the world do they think is over in Africa feeding the hungry? I’d be willing to bet that a vast majority of them are pro-lifers who’s hearts ache in seeing such atrocities take place. As you said, neither of them will solve the problem and that’s because starving kids is a problem we should all be accountable for, not just Christians who believe the right to life is more important then the choice to end it.

Why are such connections made? That should be obvious. On many points actually. If there were no abortions ever performed our world population would increase at a substantial rate. We have problems within our own country with families having enough to eat and having enough to live on, and having suitable shelter. Then to look at other countries where they don't even have what the poor and starving here have. And then think about there being millions upon millions more mouths to feed and shelter and cloth. You can go over to Kenya and volunteer in the ABC for FTC all you want (which I happen to think is a great place and charity by the way), but it in no way means that you can suddenly say that because of that that we will "make do" with millions more to handle.

I'll not even get into the whole thing about advocating having the baby and then not ponying out the financial help to do so. That irks me as well.

Oh, and that bit about the majority of charity workers and volunteers have to be pro-lifers...thus insinuating that we heartless and cold pro-choice people don't care enough to do such things is just stupid.

 

[Quiddity]

Why are such connections made? That should be obvious. On many points actually. If there were no abortions ever performed our world population would increase at a substantial rate. We have problems within our own country with families having enough to eat and having enough to live on, and having suitable shelter. Then to look at other countries where they don't even have what the poor and starving here have. And then think about there being millions upon millions more mouths to feed and shelter and cloth. You can go over to Kenya and volunteer in the ABC for FTC all you want (which I happen to think is a great place and charity by the way), but it in no way means that you can suddenly say that because of that that we will "make do" with millions more to handle.

I'll not even get into the whole thing about advocating having the baby and then not ponying out the financial help to do so. That irks me as well.

Oh, and that bit about the majority of charity workers and volunteers have to be pro-lifers...thus insinuating that we heartless and cold pro-choice people don't care enough to do such things is just stupid.

It's insinuating no such thing but what you injected into it. I know some pro-choice people that volunteer in such programs, but I can also count them with one hand. Go figure?

As to your argument about not enough resources, I would say that problem is with us whether we make abortion legal or not. Not unless we plan on telling people they can't have kids? All it does is buy us time. This is assuming the problem is as bad as some say. Personally, I don't find it all that convincing. I think greed is part of the problem.

 

[Draka]

It's insinuating no such thing but what you injected into it. I know some pro-choice people that volunteer in such programs, but I can also count them with one hand. Go figure?

As to your argument about not enough resources, I would say that problem is with us whether we make abortion legal or not. Not unless we plan on telling people they can't have kids? All it does is buy us time. This is assuming the problem is as bad as some say. Personally, I don't find it all that convincing. I think greed is part of the problem.

My point being that with the world population as it is and the lack of equal resources spread among its inhabitants, then 46 million more people born each year would not help in any way. As I said, abortion is not the answer, but getting rid of it entirely at this point will certainly not help matters. And the problem is worse than some say.

Thing is, until we can get to a point in civilization and society where we have no worries about everyone having enough and we can all learn how to help each other and live together on this planet (think Star Trek NG way of life), then bickering over abortion is not helping matters any. There are far more pressing things to deal with to even make this world livable for the babies we have now and the babies yet to be born. Throwing millions more into the mix just because some people don't agree with the procedure is not going to help us out, or the families with those unwanted pregnancies.

 

[Quiddity]

My point being that with the world population as it is and the lack of equal resources spread among its inhabitants, then 46 million more people born each year would not help in any way. As I said, abortion is not the answer, but getting rid of it entirely at this point will certainly not help matters. And the problem is worse than some say.

Thing is, until we can get to a point in civilization and society where we have no worries about everyone having enough and we can all learn how to help each other and live together on this planet (think Star Trek NG way of life), then bickering over abortion is not helping matters any. There are far more pressing things to deal with to even make this world livable for the babies we have now and the babies yet to be born. Throwing millions more into the mix just because some people don't agree with the procedure is not going to help us out, or the families with those unwanted pregnancies.

Fair enough, but I very much doubt that eliminating all the problems would resolve the dilema that seperates us either. The world could be perfect and that wouldn't eliminate people from wanting the choice. At the very least I appreciate very much that you would at least change your mind if you did indeed believed it was a life at the early stages. Others don't share that with you.

 

[lilithu]

Why are such connections made? That should be obvious. On many points actually. If there were no abortions ever performed our world population would increase at a substantial rate.

The alternative is that we stop insisting on abstinence only sex ed (which is what the Bush administration does both domestically and abroad) and actually empower women with the ability to not get pregnant in the first place. Yes, there would always be some unwanted pregnancies, but substantially fewer.

 

[NuGnostic]

Fact: To make abortions illegal it is basically asserting that the government has control over people's bodies when it comes to health and psychological matters. (and I know that I cringe at the thought of some guy in a government building telling me what I can and can't do with my own body)

This is my point exactly. We may believe it is wrong, but it is far from clear and we don't need the state to come and decide for us.

If you have a problem with it try and persuade people not to have them, don't use force and aggression to force your private morality onto someone else.

 

[doppelganger]

And those world abortion stats do not take into account infanticide or the selling of unwanted children into slavery, both of which are common practices in some parts of the world.

The abortion rate per capita is 22 in 100,000 live births in North America where it is legal but 39 in Latin America where is is predominantly illegal, and especially high in Chile and Peru where abortion is heavily prosecuted.

In fact, per capita rates of abortion are lower in N.A. than any other continent.

 

[Quiddity]

And those world abortion stats do not take into account infanticide or the selling of unwanted children into slavery, both of which are common practices in some parts of the world.

The abortion rate per capita is 22 in 100,000 live births in North America where it is legal but 39 in Latin America where is is predominantly illegal, and especially high in Chile and Peru where abortion is heavily prosecuted.

In fact, per capita rates of abortion are lower in N.A. than any other continent.

And what do you think the cause of this is?

 

[doppelganger]

And what do you think the cause of this is?

The data shows that the two main causes appear to be poverty and the lack of birth control

Thus if you really want to be pro-life, you won't be anti-abortion. You'll be pro-condom and pro-social justice.

 

[Draka]

Fair enough, but I very much doubt that eliminating all the problems would resolve the dilema that seperates us either. The world could be perfect and that wouldn't eliminate people from wanting the choice. At the very least I appreciate very much that you would at least change your mind if you did indeed believed it was a life at the early stages. Others don't share that with you.

The thing is, if there were no poverty, no food shortage in different areas, and there was birth control, health care, and sex education available worldwide to all who needed it, then the chance of an unwanted pregnancy would be almost nil in the first place. Thus ridding the concept/need of abortion.

And Victor, I do believe it is life at the early stages. That is not at question for me. The thing is, that people can see the different stages of life in different ways. What can be considered "pre-consciousness/pre-awareness" or being at the stage of development where it is impossible for it to survive as a fully formed human being outside the womb of its mother, is where I give the leeway for the decision of abortion to be made. Fact is, as I have said, I am personally pro-life. I don't really believe in aborting, BUT I find that I can not tell someone else what they believe is best for them or their family. I don't believe aborting past a certain stage is in any way acceptable at all either, because at that point of survivability I think it should be born and let to live. If the parent/s don't want the child then it can be adopted. It comes down to me recognizing that there may be circumstances and situations that I am not in, that may affect a person or couple in such a way that they may feel the need of an abortion. I am not going to stand in their way because I am not them or have any control over their lives or their bodies.

It's one of those, "I don't agree with what you may be doing, but I have no personal right to force you to do what I want or to change how you feel."

 

[lilithu]

At the very least I appreciate very much that you would at least change your mind if you did indeed believed it was a life at the early stages. Others don't share that with you.

Victor, of course it is a life. The disagreement is over whether is it a "person."

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

The sad thing is that I believe you honestly cannot comprehend the difference.

Pro-choice. Choice of what? ALL choices over one's own body. If a woman chooses abortion, I support her right to choose. If a woman chooses to bring the pregnancy to term, I support her right to choose. If a woman chooses to have 12 kids, I support her right to choose.

Pro-choice means pro-choice.

Except that Pro-Lifers AGREE with you on the second and third choices...thus, the CHOICE that differentiates the Pro-CHOICE movement from the Pro-Life one is the CHOICE of ABORTION. I don't know how much clearer to make it.