Let’s Play in the Mud

A subject I’ve thought about broaching here, is Abortion. Its a mess, its a nasty polarizing issue, and frankly my position on it is a total fucking mess. Let’s start with what got me to decide to drop this one:

Now that’s a GREAT video and it covers a wealth of bases about viewing abortion through a Libertarian mindset. I’m of the mind that human rights should be honored, and babies, even those in the womb have rights and should not be killed for personal convenience. Also I fully believe that the idea of “Viable Birth” is constantly evolving.

That’s me over 30 years ago. Amazing that I turned into this:

It was touch and go for the first few days of my little life, but I made it.

These days 4lbs 4oz isn’t a big deal, and Ambulance Driver’s little girl was quite a bit smaller than I was.

Needless to say defining “when life begins” at anything but conception doesn’t really carry much weight with me.

So Abortion is murder…there you have it! Right?

*sigh* nope, we haven’t even started yet. As disgusting abortion is to me, I’m also a realist and a scientist and I know it doesn’t take much to kill a fetus. Moreover if done early enough its easy enough for somebody to terminate a pregnancy and CONCEAL it.

Also here in America abortions are done in clean operating rooms with surgeons in good standing attending.

When was the last time you cracked over a bottle of booze from a common brand and got a batch of bad stuff? And by “Bad Stuff” I mean “It was Poison”. Probably never. Wild Turkey couldn’t sell a bottle filled with methanol and have it not be both a national news story, and the end of Wild Turkey as a company. Yet this stuff happened all the time during the prohibition of alcohol. This stuff happens all the time in the illegal drug trade. Somebody gets a needle full of bad shit, and the modern day temperance movement clicks their tongues and proclaim that we should “Just say no to drugs”.

You see when the bootleggers and drug dealers run the show, not getting caught is the biggest priority, and lawsuits are the least of their worry as their trade will land them in prison if they do a safe and conscientious job or not.

You think this would be any different if Abortion was rightfully declared murder? Well you can’t end the procedures because its relatively easy, and easy to conceal. What WILL happen is those clean operating rooms, and skilled surgeons will dry up, and we’ll start getting abortions that are of the same quality and safeness as a dime bag of coke bought out of the trunk of a car from a gang member. Also all the black market violence that comes with that drug trade will come with black market abortions.

So there’s my thoughts on Abortion. Abortion is Murder….but prohibition of abortion is prohibition which will result in the death of many in the name of the protection of a few.

Man, that’s a shit deal, no matter HOW right it is. So Abortion IS Murder, and I’m pro choice.

Told you it was fucked up.

This entry was posted in Biology, Family and Friends, Freedom, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Let’s Play in the Mud

  1. Looking at the second picture, I can think of one or two people who would have counseled for abortion, or at least smothering you with a pillow. Can’t let premies grow up to be insurrectionists.

    Sometimes I want to smack both sides. How is “Abortion is Murder!” and “Keep your Laws off our BODIES!” any different than “Shall not be INFRINGED!!!!!!” It is a pose, and doesn’t persuade anyone. The only way to have a lasting win in either issue is to convince a majority of people that you are right. But that’s too hard for some people.

  2. breda says:

    Maybe I’m a heartless bitch but if they declared abortions to be murder and then women started dying because of botched backroom abortions, then you know what? DARWIN.

    Game over. Sorry, you lose.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      It IS an interesting point. NOT getting pregnant is pretty friggin’ easy with modern birth control. Frankly That’s really where I focus and don’t even bother looking further.

    • Jennifer says:

      I with Breda here. I don’t have any sympathy for the idiots that get blown up in their meth labs either.

      • Weerd Beard says:

        Its a very interesting point, and one that I haven’t given much thought to, nor I suspect many other people.

        Here in Mass we had a “Doctor” from Brazil doing black market cosmetic surgery which caused a lot of problems and at least one death. I certainly didn’t have any sympathy for the women who elected for the cheap and ghetto liposuction on this asshole’s kitchen table, and certainly no sympathy for the quack.

        While there are some strong differences between abortion and cosmetic surgery, there are certainly some strong similarities too….

  3. Much as I hate to quote Bill Clinton, “Safe, legal, and rare” is probably the best way to go for abortion. So many pregnancies die in the first trimester, I really can’t get all worked up about more. The “fetal wastage” rate is 50-75% FFS.

    But, I must say that in a place with the pill, and the diaphragm, and Norplant, and Depo-provera, and IUDs, and condoms, and cervical caps, and tubal ligations and vasectomies, and contraceptive sponges and spermicides–you gotta really, really be negligent to need an abortion if you don’t wish to be pregnant. I know advanced planning isn’t fun or sexy, but come on, people.

    Taking of innocent life is wrong. Agreed, we must act to minimize harm. I have a headache, now.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      “Safe, legal, and rare”, would be nice, not sure if it will ever happen.

      Yeah self-terminating pregnancies are VERY common, which is another reason why clean and safe abortions should be legal, because if a healthy young woman dies to murder a fetus that may not have lived longer anyway what does that solve?

      I think pushing contraception and just doing everything we can to study and minimize abortion is the best we can hope for.

  4. Lokidude says:

    You’re actually about where I stand, Weerd. Abortion is a terrible thing. There are, in most cases, far better options. But the libertarian in me finds most any ban to be a bitter pill to swallow.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Prohibition is a horrible thing no matter what it does. Just look at the Prohibition of Alcohol. I’m sure drunk driving, alcoholism, and violent crimes involving alcohol were WAYYYY down for those years.

      Except you had whole speakeasies found dead form some poison hooch, you had gangsters machine-gunning and fire-bombing each other, and you had the creation of a bloated and murderous federal agency.

      Sorry no matter how much you’re disgusted by drunk driving, and the damage done by alcoholism et al, can it REALLY justify what happened in the 20s?

      I see drugs as the same way. Yes buying heroin at the pharmacy is a scary thing, but is it any more scary than Jose Guerena gunned down in his own home while in his underwear because the cops thought he might have some weed on him?

  5. Sailorcurt says:

    I’m sorry, but I don’t see the moral equivalence between a prohibition on choosing to get three sheets to the wind and a prohibition on murder.

    Heck, you’re right. It’s so messy, inexact and potentially painful for the victims, why don’t we make it legal for parents to choose to humanely “put down” their children on demand up to the age of consent?

    That way we can avoid all those unsafe bathtub drownings, smotherings, shaking to death etc, and keep it clean, neat and safe for everyone.

    Oh…except for the poor kid that’s being killed.

    You freely admit that killing an unborn child is murder, is a violation of their rights and is morally repugnant.

    Then you posit that such murders should remain legal in order to keep them as safe and convenient as possible for the murderers.

    Something doesn’t compute here.

    Murder should be legal because sometimes people die of natural causes anyway?

    Why is it that you advocate gun ownership again? Shouldn’t we make it safe and convenient for the bad guys to murder you? The current state of affairs means it has to happen in secret, in dark alleys, and under unsafe conditions for the murderer.

    Besides, you might have died in a car crash the next day anyway, so it’s really not that much of a loss.

    Except, maybe, to you.

    If you really feel the way you say you do about abortion and the safety of those who would commit it, then shouldn’t the same standards apply to you and those who would commit the exact same crime against you?

    You’re empathizing with the criminal, rather than the victim. Sorry, but that’s not a very rational position as far as I’m concerned.

    Yes, it will continue to happen if it’s made illegal. So does murder, rape, burglary and any number of other crimes.

    Yes, it will become more hazardous for the perpetrator. Committing murder should be hazardous. That’s why I carry a gun…to make murdering me hazardous to the would-be murderer.

    The unborn are unable to provide for their own self defense. With that in mind…who will defend them?

    Apparently not us.

    And that makes me very sad.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      One of the best comments, and I must thank you for writing it here, Curt.

      That’s my own conflict. My big issue with why abortion is different is the ability to conceal it. It takes several months of pregnancy for a woman to start really showing that she is with child. furthermore abortion is only a moderately invasive procedure that leaves no visible scaring. The departed has neither a birth certificate nor any record of existing.

      Furthermore most early stage human life doesn’t succeed, an argument could be made that many a fertilized egg spontaneously aborts prior even to the mother having any idea that she had conceived.

      Furthermore if you wanted to make one on the cheap an “Abortion Clinic” could be stuffed into just about any residential building. It wouldn’t even be detectable by the high-powered grow-lamps that are used to grow marijuana in concealment.

      I will not compare people making hooch in a speakeasy, or people cooking up heroin for sale with abortion on any moral level. One is somebody engaging in risky behavior that effects no unwilling parties. A fetus wants to live.

      I will say that the enforcement would be ever so much a nightmare as the war-on-drugs or the prohibition of alcohol.

      That is what I fear.

      • Jake says:

        I will say that the enforcement would be ever so much a nightmare as the war-on-drugs or the prohibition of alcohol.

        The thing is, that fear doesn’t really hold up to the historical record. As far as I am aware, back when abortion was illegal you didn’t have the same issues with back-alley abortionists killing others in battles over territory, stealing one another’s product, etc., that we have with drugs now, or that occurred with bootleggers during Prohibition. It’s simply not an activity that lends itself well to such things.

        I’m going to have to agree with both Breda and Sailorcurt – murder is murder, and it’s wrong no matter what. If someone decides to kill an innocent, and dies in the process, I just cannot bring myself to feel any sympathy for that person.

        There is one exception: I do feel sympathy for rape victims who become pregnant from the attack. I can understand that it is a long and painful reminder of one of the most horrific things that can happen to a person. But I still cannot condone the killing of an innocent child for the evil deeds of its father. No matter how brutal the crime, it does not, it can not, justify the killing of an innocent.

  6. bluesun says:

    Child sacrifice, plain and simple. Maybe not on the altar of Molech, but certainly to the god of personal convenience.

    But… you can’t legislate morality. Making it illegal won’t fix anything, though it would change the situation a bit, as other commenters here have stated.

    A hard thing to think about.

  7. Ahh, another member of the premie club, 4lbs 2oz @ 6 1/2 weeks early.

    On the abortion front I try to stay out of that fight. I have noticed one thing, men have no problem telling women what they’re going to do with their bodies. That little thing bugs the hell out of me.

    Do I have a moral objection to abortion, you bet your ass.
    Do I think abortion is wrong, you bet.
    Do I think I have any right to tell a woman what she can and can’t do with her body, hell no.

    My personal brain exercise that says my ass needs to shut up and sit in the corner is thinking about a woman who is violently raped and ends up pregnant. I have absolutely NO !@#$ing business what so ever telling that woman she has to carry and give birth. Anyone who thinks they do needs to honestly think about what they’re saying. It wasn’t enough to be violated for the short time, but for 9 months and possibly the rest of their life. While the woman may choose to keep the child, it is NOT my problem, it is NONE of my concern, yet many especially men seem to think they have a right to pass judgement. If you place that exemption, how can you say it’s OK for some and not for others? At the same time if you create the law prohibiting it, what prevents you from forcing others to do things against their will with other laws.

    Ultimately all I can say is I morally disagree with it and using it as your method of birth control while sexually active is quite simply and absolutely murder. At the same time, the woman has rights over her body and no one, not even the law, should be allowed to force her to do something against her will. While she may be carrying a future child, she has the option to place her body first, it is hers after all. When a woman decides to have a child she loans her body out as an incubator. Is it not within her rights to take her body back? What prevents doctors from forcing medication on the mother to “help the baby” if the baby is a life to be protected? Is it not within the mothers rights to refuse medication? On that note, men ultimately shouldn’t be spouting their lips about this all that much because you are not the one having to live with either side of this decision, and remember the man could have kept his cock in his pants.

    On contraceptives: The wife has a friend who has three children, each while on different birth controls, ring, patch, and pill. My only comment was, fertility should be her middle name. I can see the pill failing due to possibly forgetting, I have a friend who’s first child was because of exactly that. There’s also health concerns that come with most female birth control options such as bone loss, blood clots, and libido is lost. Barrier methods work, but have a higher failure rate and by god you better put it in/on just right. Most never really think of the actual numbers involved in effectiveness. Nothing is 100% effective, except abstinence, everything else is just a stop gap to decrease your odds. Even a vasectomy and tubal ligation is only 97%-99% effective. Meaning out of 100 people using it for a year, 3 end up pregnant. Ring and Patch are 92, and the barriers are 71-85. Just because you’re safe doesn’t mean you’ll end up without a little mirror image.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      All good points, I could open a can of worms discussing the polled reasons for abortions in America, or ask how 9 month unwanted pregnancy might compare to the life-long commitment that might entail having a severely disabled child. (and who wants or plans that?)

      I’ll just jump to the Premie club. My stats are very close to yours, about the same stage of development, and I had two ounces on you (they’re in my gut right now)

      Funny despite how pathetically small we start out at, how big we got!

      • Big is an understatement for me. Even in high school playing sports, swimming, water polo, and weight lifting, I was still 270lbs my senior year with a 38 inch waist. I don’t think I’ve been below 200 since my freshman year of high school.

        I know I need to drop a bunch of weight, I have lost a bunch of that muscle mass and replaced it with the cushier kind. I wouldn’t mind an hour of weights and 4 hours of swimming a day again, I just don’t have time for it when coupled with work, taking care of the house, and all my other hobbies.

        • Weerd Beard says:

          Heh I got about 30lbs around my middle that need to go as well.

          Iroic isn’t it. Our peers popped out at twice our size, and now we’re struggling with TOO MUCH weight!

          Will to survive! We has it!

  8. Ratus says:

    Not a bad argument Weer’d, but I have to call bullshit on your main premise of safety

    “…in America abortions are done in clean operating rooms with surgeons in good standing attending.”

    Just Google “philadelphia abortion clinic”

    “…we’ll start getting abortions that are of the same quality and safeness as a dime bag of coke bought out of the trunk…”

    Apparently, we have had those for decades.

    But you what, I just don’t care anymore. My Give-A-Fuck Meter is broken.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Yeah I’m aware of the substandard abortion clinics, and I see that more as the exception that proves the rule more than anything else.

      The majority are done in clinics like Planned Parenthood.

  9. Tam says:

    This is one that will never be resolved sanely, because on one side you have people who are comfortable with what amounts to infanticide because, hey, Mother Gaia’s too crowded already, and on the other side you have the Every Sperm Is Sacred crowd who do their thinkin’ with the Book of Leviticus. When both sides are basing their viewpoints on religion, there’s not going to be a lot of room for logic or compromise; if you don’t believe me, look at the Middle East.

    The obvious answer is to pick a time, probably somewhere in the second trimester, and draw the line there, saying that, in effect, the only legitimate reason for abortion beyond that point is actual, physical ‘self-defense’.

    Tune in next week when I balance the budget and reveal my plan for harmony in Israel.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      I’ll be tuning in, Tam!

      Of course drawing that imaginary line doesn’t seem all that different than the dorks who draw the line at 11 rounds in the magazine, or TWO evil arbitrary features on a rifle.

      • Tam says:

        Not at all.

        It’s deciding what is or isn’t a person, and therefore deserving of protection under the law.

        Some people say “A sperm and an egg!” Some people say “A live-born baby!”

        They can’t both be right. Fetch me my sword.

  10. Eck says:

    I’ll give my stance, short form.

    It’s not MY body therefore I have no say. I do oppose abortion but read the prior sentence. So MYOB applies.

    Eck!

  11. Sailorcurt says:

    It’s not MY body therefore I have no say. I do oppose abortion but read the prior sentence. So MYOB applies.

    Do I think I have any right to tell a woman what she can and can’t do with her body, hell no.

    That’s the problem right there.

    By that logic, we shouldn’t intervene in anything that doesn’t directly impact us.

    Sorry your child was murdered right in front of me and I did nothing to stop it, but it didn’t directly impact me, so…MYOB right? What? You want taxpayers to pay the police to investigate, and the legal system to prosecute and incarcerate (or execute) the person who murdered your child? Why should I support my money being used to pay for that? It’s none of my business.

    In the issue of abortion, it’s not about a person choosing what to do with their own body, it’s about the person choosing whether another living human being gets to live or die.

    This isn’t a matter of privacy, or choice; this is a matter of individual rights. Does that unborn child have the same right to life as anyone else?

    If you believe the answer is yes, as I do, then it is irrational to be pro-abortion, or to claim that it’s no one else’s business…unless, of course, you also feel that the murder of human beings in their fourth or subsequent trimesters of life are matters of personal choice and privacy…

    • Weerd Beard says:

      “Sorry your child was murdered right in front of me and I did nothing to stop it, but it didn’t directly impact me, so…MYOB right?”

      Just to analogise, do you think the other people who were packing at the New Life Church shooting who froze up should be charged for their lack of competent action?

      Yeah do the right thing, do what you can do to make the world a better place, but yeah the law really shouldn’t get involved, because like everything else, they’ll just fuck it up.

      • Sailorcurt says:

        Not a good analogy.

        The point was that preventing crimes if possible, and enacting consequences for the perpetrators of those crimes, is absolutely the business of society at large. Therefore MYOB is not a valid response.

        I did not even imply that bystanders should be criminalized for failing to intervene when they witness a crime occurring. But I think we can all agree that if it were our child being abducted, we would HOPE that someone nearby would get involved and try to prevent it. MYOB would be the farthest thing from our minds.

        When I am aware of a person committing a violent crime against a child, whether it’s my child or yours, whether born or unborn, it ABSOLUTELY is my business.

        That is not to say that I should have a LEGAL obligation to intervene in whatever lawful fashion I can, but I feel that I have a MORAL obligation to do so.

    • This isn’t a matter of privacy, or choice; this is a matter of individual rights. Does that unborn child have the same right to life as anyone else?

      But there’s the catch. While the fetus is dependent on the mother for their life do they really have any “right” to it? If you can guarantee the life of the baby, but the mother only has a 70% chance of survival would you have the law force the mother to risk her life for the “right of life” for the baby. We have come full circle on the definition of a right. Anything that depends on taking something from or forcing actions on another is NOT a right. As long as the fetus is DEPENDENT on the mother for survival the mother ultimately has the right to make any decision she feels is best for her.

      • Sailorcurt says:

        Do day old babies have a “right” to life? They can’t survive on their own either. So I guess it would be perfectly OK for a mother to kill her child without legal consequence at any point up to the age where it can forage and fend for itself because, under your definition, the right to life doesn’t exist until one can survive without assistance.

        I will say, however, that even though I disagree with your premise in the strongest terms, if you truly believe that an unborn child has no right to life, at least support for abortion is a logically sound position to take.

        As far as your second point, the safety of the mother is the only acceptable grounds for abortion in my mind. If, in the opinion of qualified medical personnel, carrying the child to term would pose sufficient risk to the life of the mother, then an abortion is no different than killing another in self defense.

  12. I go back and forth on the topic of abortion. Interestingly, the older I get, the less I’m for abortion. Every pregnancy has the potential to lead to the birth of a child, a human being, precious. BUT (of course there’s a “but”), I still think it’s absolutely wrong to force a woman to carry a baby to term if she doesn’t want to. It’s as bad as forcing a woman NOT to have a baby.

    Also, I’ve noticed that the majority of commenters here most vehemently opposed to abortion are men. The sex who don’t have a uterus, can’t get pregnant, or have a baby. I’m really tempted to say “STFU,” except that would be rude.

    There are a plethora of birth control options out there, but as other commenters have pointed out, nothing is 100% effective.

    So, back and forth I go. Abortion is the termination of a life. That’s a fact. But it’s still absolutely WRONG to force a woman to have a baby against her will. Also a fact.

    And never the twain shall meet.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Totally worth it dropping this post just for the interesting opinions.

      Its mud, its dirty, it smells, and we’re all reluctant to play in it.

      Your conflict mirrors my own.

    • Tam says:

      So, back and forth I go. Abortion is the termination of a life. That’s a fact. But it’s still absolutely WRONG to force a woman to have a baby against her will. Also a fact.

      And never the twain shall meet.

      There are times I envy the untroubled consciences of those at either end of the debate… Surety is such a comfort.

      • Sailorcurt says:

        Surety is such a comfort.

        You say that like it’s a bad thing.

        Surety is a comfort. When you’ve taken the right side and you know it, you sleep better at night.

        For the record, I wasn’t always so adamantly anti-abortion. I was very much “woman’s body, woman’s choice” when I was young.

        Of course, that position is very convenient for men, because as long as women continue to choose abortion, they don’t have to worry about pesky little details like fatherhood and financial responsibility.

        Be that as it may, after two kids, five grandkids, and many years of soul searching, I’ve realized that protecting innocent life is too important to be wishy-washy about it.

        Interestingly, it was at about the same time that I came to that realization, that I started regularly carrying a firearm for the defense of myself and my family.

        • Tam says:

          SailorCurt,

          You say that like it’s a bad thing.

          No I don’t. Not at all. I envy you that.

          Surety is a comfort. When you’ve taken the right side and you know it, you sleep better at night.

          Your diametrical opponents have that same surety. See, they’ve taken the right side, too. I envy them their surety as much as I envy you yours.

    • Sailorcurt says:

      Sorry, but I gotta disagree.

      First, the fact that I was not gifted with the ability to bear a child (and I believe most mothers would agree that this is a gift, not a curse) has no bearing on whether my opinion on the legal ramifications of murdering children, whether born or unborn, is relevant.

      That’s not an argument, it’s a way to stifle dissent and avoid the argument.

      Secondly, except in the rare instance of pregnancies caused by rape, no one is “forcing” a woman to conceive and carry a child. The decision making for this particular biological process ends with consummation of the act who’s consequences include bearing a child.

      Once the seed is planted, the decision has been made. Even if the woman (or man) is using birth control, it is a well-known fact that no form of birth control is 100% effective…and that risk must be weighed when making the decision as to whether to engage in that particular activity or not.

      If you put a gun to someone’s head and pull the trigger, it’s a little late to decide “oh…I didn’t really want to kill them” while the bullet is traveling down the barrel.

      What you’re condoning is the execution of the innocent to avoid the consequences of one’s own actions, and I find that reprehensible.

  13. Matt says:

    Might want to re-check the stats on that whole “harm many to save a few” thing.

    Abortion is the leading cause of death in the United States. The only reason that isn’t front-page news is that the media doesn’t accept that it counts as “death” unless it happens after birth. Amercian couples who want to adopt babies aren’t flying to China and Africa and Eastern Europe because they love airline food so much.

    I’m sympathetic to the argument regarding the social costs of trying to enforce an absolute prohibition of it, at all stages from conception until birth. Failing that, though, there needs to be a line…even if an arbitrary one.

    The present situation, wherein it’s legally considered “cold-blooded premeditated murder” to cut open the head of a baby and suck out its brains after it’s completely out of its mother’s body, but “a safe, legal, and responsible reproductive choice — every woman’s inalienable right to decide for herself” to do exactly the same thing while exactly the same baby is only 90% done emerging from the mother’s body, is simply an example of yet another way that Americans have managed to use the force of law to pass the consequences of their own choices onto innocent third parties.

    So fine…if we must, then leave it open during the early stage of pregnancy, where it’s so easy to conceal that enforcement would be a tyrannical joke if we tried it. But if we’re ever going to consider ourselves civilized, Roe must go.

  14. Cargosquid says:

    It’s my body.

    Except its not. Its the baby’s body too. If the right to abortion is based upon the fact that the baby is dependent upon the mother, then that right would extend until the child could “fend” for itself.

    Let’s look at it this way. Assuming that the sex was consensual, does not the father have a right? Is not the father a part of the child? Why doesn’t the father have rights? This looks like “possession is 9/10’s of the law.” If a father is willing, if not married to the mother, to assume all responsibility for child, haw can he NOT have a, at least, a say in the matter?

    Furthermore, people have gone to jail for murdering a fetus during assaults on the mother. How is it that those people are guilty of a crime, yet abortions are legal? Are abortions justified homicide?

    I’ve had pro-choice advocates state that defunding Planned Parenthood would result in more abortions because cheap contraception and family planning would not be available while also stating that abortions for personal convenience are rare. They’ve told me that conservatives are hypocrites because our concern stops with the birth and we don’t care about the poor people having to care for said poor children and that those children would be a drain or detriment on the system, resulting in MORE government spending.
    So we should allow cheap, easy abortions.

    Part of this problem is that we have lost the idea that all sex is a statement that the mother might become pregnant and that both would be parents. Of course, the father can run away today. Why don’t we have a system to tie the father to the….oh, yeah…what was that called….marriage. That’s it.

    I was told that it was ridiculous for two people that have sex to consider that act as consent that the woman might become pregnant and the father be responsible.

    Long live the sexual revolution.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      “then that right would extend until the child could “fend” for itself.”

      No healthy baby can “Fend For Itself” even several years into the game. They always need parental care.

      Also note above how I’m in that incubator and my eyes are patched over. Light would have blinded me, and I would have died of exposure in a warm room. I guess I wasn’t alive yet. When should I celebrate my birthday?

      I have no problem of defunding planned parenthood, I’m sure there are zillions of anti-rights people who love the idea of dead babies would be willing to reach into their wallets to help irresponsible teens that slept through health class. And by “Help Irresponsible Teens” I also mean the retarded sperm donor that couldn’t be bothered to shoplift a box of condoms (let alone buy some) because he knew he could just walk away from the problem.

      You’re right about the sexual irresponsibility. It also doesn’t help that so many downplay the effects of abortion on the mother. You get knocked up without the desire or means for a baby, its not going to be a good outcome no matter what!

  15. Silverevilchao says:

    I’m staunchly pro-choice. This doesn’t mean that I LIKE the fact that fetuses get killed in the process of abortion. Rather, I believe that, in terms of rights, the female carrying the fetus gets priority over the fetus. Because it is the woman suffering for it. Because the mere ACT of giving birth can kill women. Because the woman is thinking and feeling, while the fetus at an early stage (current laws don’t even allow late abortions unless the mother’s life is at risk, IIRC)…isn’t.

    We already have a concept of prioritizing living things based on how much intelligence it possesses: insects are killed by the millions without any guilt despite the fact that said insects are, on a cellular and physical level, more advanced than a fetus – they have fully-developed body parts and nervous systems and can reproduce, therefore being mature, whole entities. And yet there are no problems with this because they are not sentient. Abusing or killing a dog will get you fewer legal consequences and social stigma than abusing or killing a child. My logical side asks why this is so for other living beings and yet isn’t so for human life.

    This is even shown legally – you’re not a US citizen, or a citizen of any country, for that matter, unless you are BORN. Your age and legal existence starts with your BIRTH. Placing so much emphasis on something that isn’t even legally existing at the cost of someone who is is incredibly inconsistent and relies entirely on emotion for any kind of justification – in fact, much like the anti-gun movement you readers despite so much.

    Hell, wanna know what, even on an emotional level, the anti-abortion stance fails. This is because most of the proponents for it are male and thus do not naturally have the empathy required to understand just how utterly physically and emotionally devastating a pregnancy is, even an intended one. Being fine with forcing someone, a thinking, sentient being, to go through that HELL in the name of morals is utterly sociopathic, cruel, and greatly demonstrates the lack of empathy for the suffering of a pregnant woman. Even worse, the fertilization of an egg requires two people, and this argument only punishes one of them, and the one who has to suffer the most for it, to boot. That just doesn’t sit well with me.

    Furthermore, I find it incredibly hard to believe that the anti-abortion movement is really in it for the “saving” of these fetuses, because they often justify it as a consequence for unprotected sex. If they really cared about these fetuses as living entities, they would not see them as a punishment that the woman must suffer through for not keeping her legs closed. This also doesn’t even take into account if the mother is emotionally or financially ready to support a child – and if not, the child is made to suffer for it. The cycle of suffering continues, all in the name of good “morals”.

    And this is talking about pregnancies through willing sex. The suffering is even worse if it is done by rape. Even if laws had provisions for such things, the amount of hoops jumped through and the money, time, and emotions spent to be able to get an abortion makes it salt rubbed into wounds already inflicted by the act in the first place.

    Plus, as we’ve learned through our BELOVED War on Drugs and already demonstrated by the Prohibition…banning it won’t make it go away. It will just drive it underground.

    Do I like fetuses getting killed? No. However, I do not believe that the forced suffering of women should be legislated, especially since it strikes me as particularly hypocritical.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Absolutely great comment, thanks for submitting it. (I told your Mom last night she must be really proud of you. Cliche, I know, but seriously when I was your age I was a slack-jaw’d retard, and I’d never have done a a VC with a 19 year old me 🙂 )

      I wonder what the breakdown of Pro-life/Pro-Choice stances are. Honestly NOBODY is really talking about it, which is why I’ve been wanting to post about it for a while. Most of the people who “Talk” abortion are the people Sean mentioned above who are simply dropping talking points with minimal thought. I do wonder how the woman breakdown works.

      I certainly know a bunch of men who are pro-choice, but the question is how they came to that. Certainly one statement about the male end of the sexual revolution is more sex with less commitment and less unwanted children from poor planning.

      I do know a bunch of pro-choice, or like myself deeply conflicted pro-life women. But again there isn’t a ton of discussion on this dirty issue.

      Also the question on how many of these aborted pregnancies come from rape or incest is deeply controversial (hell even the definition of rape can be controversial. I know a few people who have been accused of rape with what appears to be consensual sex that came with 11th hour regret….the Kobe Bryant rape case is a well publicized version of this) certainly biologically an unwilling vagina is certainly hostile to sperm…not that pregnancy can’t happen.

      Again great comment and discussion, thanks!

    • Matt says:

      “current laws don’t even allow late abortions unless the mother’s life is at risk, IIRC”

      100% false, at least in the United States.

      Current law (that is, Roe v. Wade) states that killing an infant at _any point up until the moment of “birth”_ is a Constitutional right. I don’t know if there’s case law on the question of whether a baby whose permanent body is entirely outside the mother, but still connected by the umbilical cord has been “born”, but Constitutionally-protected abortions are regularly being performed on babies whose mothers have already completed their last contraction, and for whom the only thing still left standing in the way of becoming a fully-protected American citizen is the absolute determination of their mothers and doctors to cut their heads open and suck their brains out.

      It is fair to say that the mothers of those children have already endured all the pain and all the health risk that pregnancy has to offer them. And yet the Supreme Court has declared that they have an absolute right to kill their children at that point.

  16. Suz says:

    Late to the party, as usual. Bravo, Weerd, for having the guts to admit that your reasoning is fucked up. But it’s not. This is the one issue that consistently turns self-proclaimed libertarians and conservatives, into raving “there ougha be a law!” liberals, and there is a very good reason for that. We Americans deeply believe in our rights to life and liberty, and abortion pits one against the other. An unborn baby’s right to live vs. an adult female’s freedom to control her body. In the end it doesn’t matter when “life” begins, nor does it matter that most unwanted pregnancies are the result of irresponsible choices on behalf of women. The fundamental question is, “Which is more important, life or liberty.” Our own history is full of people who have willingly given their lives for freedom. Granted, unlike a fetus, most of them CHOSE that fate; it was not chosen for them. Then again, they were free to do so. The logic goes in circles, and there IS NO CORRECT ANSWER. Before we start nit-picking over which variables can be legislated fairly or effectively (pfft!), let’s be honest about that fundamental question. And let’s be mindful of how easily we can take for granted our freedoms, which have never really been at great risk.

    Is it really OK to take away from every female of reproductive age, the right to control her own body? Maybe. Maybe that’s less important than life itself. But who really has the right to make that decision, to codify that priority, for all of us? Politicians? The “majority?” The church? These are three groups of Americans not well known for protecting the rights of the powerless. This would be a very good time in our history to err on the side of caution.

    Abortion is a very serious moral issue, no doubt about it, but it should not be a legal issue, for many MANY reasons. In truth, it could and should become a very small issue; if we really want to prevent abortions, we have the option of doing everything in our power to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

    Oh wow. I did it again. I refer to myself as a logic-oriented moderate, slightly libertarian and slightly liberal. And there it is. Thanks for this post, and for the opportunity to discuss the issue rationally and without too much emotion. Frankly, this is probably the most reasonable commentary on the subject, that I’ve ever encountered. Again, Bravo!

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Wow, GREAT comment. Interesting point on the conflict between life and liberty.

      Also the Liberty of the unborn is a REALLY muddy world. Does an unborn fetus have the right to be born to an unwilling Mom (not to mention does an unwilling pregnant mom have the right to take special precautions to protect her baby like eating sushi or skydiving or drinking?)

      Furthermore the liberty of the unborn really is a mess, as we all know people who were born into shitty and abusive houses.

      A fucking mess it is. In the end I lean on the ugly side of liberty when it comes to the law, and I’ll PERSONALLY become that asshole using all his influence to talk a pregnant friend or family member into keeping an unwanted baby at LEAST to term.

      Also I love laws like the safehaven laws where women can drop off an unwanted new baby at Police, Fire, or Medical facilities with no-questions asked and no legal repercussions.

      • Jake says:

        Also I love laws like the safehaven laws where women can drop off an unwanted new baby at Police, Fire, or Medical facilities with no-questions asked and no legal repercussions.

        + 1e1000000000000000

        We have that here, too. A law I would defend to my dying breath.

  17. Jake says:

    In the issue of abortion, it’s not about a person choosing what to do with their own body, it’s about the person choosing whether another living human being gets to live or die.

    This.

    The decision making for this particular biological process ends with consummation of the act who’s consequences include bearing a child.

    And this.

    So fine…if we must, then leave it open during the early stage of pregnancy, where it’s so easy to conceal that enforcement would be a tyrannical joke if we tried it. But if we’re ever going to consider ourselves civilized, Roe must go.

    And this.

    It’s my body.

    Except its not. Its the baby’s body too.

    And especially this – the biggest elephant in the room that is nearly always conveniently “overlooked” by so many in this debate.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Yeah man, but your a GAY MAN you have NO RIGHT TO HAVE AN OPINION on this!!111!@!! (Kidding of course) 😉

      • Jake says:

        Heh! 😀 😛

        Also, (since some people really would think that) I’m more of a 4 on the Kinsey Scale. Unless it’s relevant, I usually just say “gay” because it’s simple, and avoids confusion and tangential debate (it’s amazing how many people refuse to believe that bisexuality even exists).

        • Weerd Beard says:

          “I still fuck chicks on the side as to not be all-the-way gay, but my tubby companion over here LOVES THE COCK!”
          -Jay “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back”

          😀

  18. Cargosquid says:

    This is an email from someone that I argue quite regularly with and she has agreed to let me post her email. This is a topic that “gets her going” because she “has seen how illegal abortions killed young women.”

    I’ve argued that that reason that so many had illegal abortions was the stigma of pregnancy for single women. That stigma is gone and adoption is available.

    We’ve gone over and over it. Especially about a father’s rights and the existence or lack therof…..

    Also, I am living proof that unwanted children are loved. To put it shortly, I was a surprise. 6 weeks in an incubator, premature, 6 lbs 4 oz. My next sibling is 14 years older than me, and my mother was having….. issues in her life. She later told me, bluntly, when we saw the signs stating, “An unwanted child is an unloved child” that she didn’t want me when she was pregnant because she was terrified. That, if a) she hadn’t been devoutly Catholic and b) abortion was legal, she might have aborted me. But she also said that those signs were lies. I have a direct stake in the fact that in 1962, abortion was not legal.

    From my “political opponent”
    *******
    First off, murder is defined as illegal killing. If abortion is legal in the USA as defined by Roe v Wade, then it isn’t murder. It might be distasteful killing and killing many people think is immoral but it it isn’t murder.

    Secondly, would you differentiate between fertilization and conception? There is a medical difference.

    Thirdly, if you don’t trust these politicians, how can you trust them to make deeply personal decisions for your family? I am not willing to let politicians make personal decisions for me. I am capable of making my own. If I need help I will rely on family members, my clergy, or a counselor.

    This is a place where govt needs to stay out of people’s private lives.

    As for father’s rights–they have none unless the woman gives him the rights. That’s probably a compelling reason to 1. chose wisely before having sex with a woman
    2. treating her well.

    And you are right…it boils down to possession being 9/10ths of the law.

    *******
    I will state that she (above) does NOT advocate abortion nor is she casual about it. She just puts her priority on the woman over the child. The father and the baby have no rights.

    So there is the argument. Does an unborn child have legal rights or not? If not rights, what are the actual responsibilities of the mother? If it’s legal to abort the child, why is illegal to kill a fetus through assault or neglect? Notice, I’ve left out all “religious” arguments. Is a fetus a possession? Does a father, half of the origin, have any rights over his creation?

  19. Jennifer says:

    This is a great post and excellent comments. It really is far more complex than either side would like to make it out to be. Personally, I think abortion is an abomination. But the answer to that is not prohibition. The practice may be reprehensible, but it will never be stopped by the force of law.

  20. Pingback: Quote of the Day: North | Weer'd World

  21. Pingback: Again, Anti-Freedom, not Anti-Gun | Weer'd World

  22. Pingback: More Libertarian Pro-Life | Weer'd World

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *