who supports right to choose

[BJean 16]

If you don't care, then why use all the capital letters and exclamation marks? I think you really do care. I think you are just as passionate about your beliefs as Robin is about hers. That's not a bad thing. I believe it is a good thing to have strong feelings about important subjects. It's a free country, you're allowed to express your feelings without fear of censure. Go for it!

[ELENATION 0]

If you don't care, then why use all the capital letters and exclamation marks? I think you really do care. I think you are just as passionate about your beliefs as Robin is about hers. That's not a bad thing. I believe it is a good thing to have strong feelings about important subjects. It's a free country, you're allowed to express your feelings without fear of censure. Go for it!

You are right about being passionate and being a good thing, and I am! when I said I don't care, I meant I don't care if Robin or any other person in particular still can't see that the question was indeed answered, because it really doesn't matter because it's not going to affect the way I feel, I din't mean that I dont' care about the subject itself in general or the debate... it's hard for me to express what I feel while I'm posting as opposed to in person, sometimes it's missunderstood or just doesn't come out right....

[green 6]

I confess that I do get what Robgobblin was on about when he was talking about this biz of bravery. The truth is that before abortion was legalised women were opting to abort even though they were knowingly running a risk of killing themselves by doing so. There were back street abortionists and there were certain docs who, perhaps for money or perhaps because they figured that one life saved was better than two lives lost, risked jail time in order to provide safe abortions. Women who don't want to continue on with their pregnancies will do anything including risk death in order to avoid this. It is better that the choice option remain available for those women. It is equally important that the state permit medical staff the freedom of choice, and permit folks like you the freedom to suggest alternatives to those women who are ambivalent.

[L8BloomR 1]

<p>

</p> <p>I am sorry, L8Bloom that you decided that I was getting personal with you several pages past. I wasn't getting personal at all. I was trying to make my own point and I did not mention your name in the process at all. I was shocked by your accusation that I was being harsh. Unless of course that harsh is anyone who disagrees with you. I can understand that - DEFINITELY - because the many times here, the harshest people are the ones who claim to have the best interests of unborn babies at heart.

</p> <p> </p> <p>You may not have said my name, but you brought up what I had just posted.... I didn't say you were getting personal, I just was bothered by being accused of saying something I didn't say and then basing a whole post against it. I think that happens all too often here. We see something within a post that hits us wrong and we jump on it, instead of reading the whole thing and looking for the bigger message. I have been guilty of it, and so have many others. And I do believe that "harshness" is in the eye of the beholder. Seems to me that most of the harshest statements come from the opposite side.... But the opposite side would disagree, I'm sure.</p>

[BJean 16]

That's a good point L8Bloom, we do tend to read into a post whatever pushes our buttons, don't we?

:ranger: I for one tend to get a bit carried away when I start typing and sometimes I become impassioned in a way that I didn't necessarily feel when I began. I was actually responding to several posts at once that time, not just yours. So it may have seemed like I was being harsh to you, but I had several posts in mind when I wrote.

Let's face it, this is a volatile topic. It isn't surprising that those of us who care so much about the issue can sound pretty extreme when we post, especially by those who disagree with us.

Mostly we've been pretty good about saying what we think and not holding opposing views against the person stating them. I hope we can get back to that, if it is at all possible. Granted, that's asking a lot, but we can try.

[green 6]

Is it not even less right to bring unwanted children into lifelong suffering and to strip women of thier choice? Making abortion illegal is not the way to prevent it. There is a much larger picture that starts with much deeper roots.

Another question, how many that are anti-abortion are men? How many of them will get pregnant?

Derick introduces a very good point. I am aware that I have previously offended good and sensitive men who are in favour of protecting a woman's right to choose when I stated that this issue is a woman's issue and that men should not have a voice in this debate. Of course what I meant is that it is women who carry the entire weight of pregnancy and childbirth; men, apart from the initial spasm of pleasure, have little to do with the biz. Their engagement, post-orgasmic spasm, is largely optional. It is always the woman who will be physically, psychologically, and economically sidelined by this relatively simple biz of sperm meeting egg. And it is the woman's life which will be altered forever, physically, psychologically, and financially. It is the female who will always carry the burden of reproduction, is it not?

This is the reason why I am always edgy when men enter into this reproductive debate. There are many men who hold conservative, perhaps rigid, moral beliefs concerning this issue and often it is these same men who hold positions of power in their state legislatures and who thus can exert a considerable amount of control over women and their bodies. An easy decision for them. They are not going to lose 9 months out of their lives, and they are not going to have to live with the damage, much of which will only display itself after menopause, that pregnancy and childbirth can wreak upon a woman's body.

The way Green sees the deal is this: for those women who have a powerful desire to have children the pain and the disruption is no big deal, it is only part of the (heavy?) price of admission. The pay-off is maternity, the pleasure in a new cat, and brute joy. This is a good thing, is it not?

Derick makes the only good point that any man can make in my opinion: he points out that there ain't going to be any men who are suffering from unwanted pregnancies.

Whenever a woman is happily connected to her desire to have her baby, the secondary issues, issues which are also important predicators as to how well this child will survive, become secondary in her eyes but they are still important indicators to the future well-being of this child.

(And what are these secondary issues anyway? Well, that the child will have contact with both a mother and a father and will rest within a stable and loving extended family unit - this is of course only fancy speak for saying that the kid will have a loving and stable set of parents and on-going contact with grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins, blah, blah. It also seems important that the kid live in a stable household, one where education is prized and drug-dealing, early pregnancy, and mindless violence are viewed as being as being nothing more than interesting manifestations of social pathology. (I would inclined to urge that all problem children be forced to watch Weeds over and over again.)

[ELENATION 0]

Derick introduces a very good point. I am aware that I have previously offended good and sensitive men who are in favour of protecting a woman's right to choose when I stated that this issue is a woman's issue and that men should not have a voice in this debate. Of course what I meant is that it is women who carry the entire weight of pregnancy and childbirth; men, apart from the initial spasm of pleasure, have little to do with the biz. Their engagement, post-orgasmic spasm, is largely optional. It is always the woman who will be physically, psychologically, and economically sidelined by this relatively simple biz of sperm meeting egg. And it is the woman's life which will be altered forever, physically, psychologically, and financially. It is the female who will always carry the burden of reproduction, is it not?

This is the reason why I am always edgy when men enter into this reproductive debate. There are many men who hold conservative, perhaps rigid, moral beliefs concerning this issue and often it is these same men who hold positions of power in their state legislatures and who thus can exert a considerable amount of control over women and their bodies. An easy decision for them. They are not going to lose 9 months out of their lives, and they are not going to have to live with the damage, much of which will only display itself after menopause, that pregnancy and childbirth can wreak upon a woman's body.

The way Green sees the deal is this: for those women who have a powerful desire to have children the pain and the disruption is no big deal, it is only part of the (heavy?) price of admission. The pay-off is maternity, the pleasure in a new cat, and brute joy. This is a good thing, is it not?

Derick makes the only good point that any man can make in my opinion: he points out that there ain't going to be any men who are suffering from unwanted pregnancies.

Whenever a woman is happily connected to her desire to have her baby, the secondary issues, issues which are also important predicators as to how well this child will survive, become secondary in her eyes but they are still important indicators to the future well-being of this child.

(And what are these secondary issues anyway? Well, that the child will have contact with both a mother and a father and will rest within a stable and loving extended family unit - this is of course only fancy speak for saying that the kid will have a loving and stable set of parents and on-going contact with grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins, blah, blah. It also seems important that the kid live in a stable household, one where education is prized and drug-dealing, early pregnancy, and mindless violence are viewed as being as being nothing more than interesting manifestations of social pathology. (I would inclined to urge that all problem children be forced to watch Weeds over and over again.)

Green, your debating style is great and respectful, even if I don't agree all the time, I enjoy it always, I truly appreciate it very much, I hope one day I can be as good as you, thank you.

Elena:D

[green 6]

Very big thanks to you, my friend Elena. I appreciate, and you probably have no sense of just how much, your generous remarks to me. I am currently sitting in that awful swamp of the North American pre-Christmas.

Elena, I must tell you that you have no idea how deeply I am moved by your display of generosity towards me. Ain't internet a seriously bluddy wonderful thing???

[DerickM 1]

i wanna grow up to debate like green when i get old!!! :eek:

[ELENATION 0]

Very big thanks to you, my friend Elena. I appreciate, and you probably have no sense of just how much, your generous remarks to me. I am currently sitting in that awful swamp of the North American pre-Christmas.

Elena, I must tell you that you have no idea how deeply I am moved by your display of generosity towards me. Ain't internet a seriously bluddy wonderful thing???

I meant dear Green, I did! keep it up! I admire you!:clap2:

[ELENATION 0]

i wanna grow up to debate like green when i get old!!!

So do I Derrick!

[marjon9 6]

I don't necessarily think that most woman who are pro life are trying to inflict their beliefs on others, I am certain that is not my intent. My intent is to try to protect those unborn children. If their own mother is unwilling to, who will? Someone has to at least try to make a difference.

The baby has a heartbeat long before she even knew she was pregnant. How can killing the child even be an option? It just seems so wrong. I don't think I will ever understand where this thought process stems from. It just seem selfish. If your ready to have sex then going into it you have to be ready to accept the consequence of sex. A possible baby. Which is why I believe in sex only within the bounds of marriage. Of course that is also unheard of in these times. If those values where still instilled in our children then maybe we'd have less unwanted children. ??

I think your views are very understandable. I support your right to do everything you can to influence others to believe the way you do. But to me, that is not the issue. The issue is, do you, and people who believe as you do, have the right to force others to live their lives by your beliefs through the establishment of laws and use of the criminal justice system. I do not believe you have that right. I understand that you will never be able to understand the pro-choice point of view. I have no interest in trying to convince you that this is the "right" point of view. But I do have an interest in stopping so-called "pro-life" advocates from using the police force of the state to require my wife, or my daughter to take actions in their own personal lives with which they strongly disagree.

To me, this debate is always focusing on irrelavant issues. One side tells a story about beating hearts in the womb, another side tells a story about great tragedy caused by a woman having a child she could not handle, etc. But to me, these things are not the issue. The issue is, does one side have the right to force everyone else to live by their view of morality. I say no. Everyone should feel free to do everything they can to convince others of their point of view. But no one should have the right to force others to live by their moral code in this most personal of all decisions.

I understand, of course, that "pro-life" people believe they have the right to force mothers to carry unwanted embryos to full term because they are "protecting the life of the baby." But the "life of the baby" is so intertwined with the life of the pregnant woman, and the consequences to the pregnant woman are so enormous, that her freedom of action must be protected. Unwanted pregnancy is never a happy thing, and sometimes it ends in tragedy either for the fetus or the mother. There is no "winner" with an unwanted pregnancy. The only real question is, who gets to decide what to do about it. Does the legislature get to make laws that determine the outcome, and force mothers to take actions that cause great tragedy in their lives? Or, is this a personal decision that must be made by the mother. I think the obvious answer is, the decision belongs to the pregnant woman.

[BJean 16]

marjon9: You have totally hit the core of the issue for me. I believe that your post eloquently states exactly how I feel about the issue. I can't tell you how much it means to me for you to have written this. Thank you so much.

I also agree that green is a terrific debater and I value her friendship and intellect very much.

[ELENATION 0]

Just to clarify that I'm prolife but I don't feel that I have the "right" to "force" women to do anything at all....yes, I'm not pro-abortion, I wish that people would take the necessary precautions to avoid unwanted pregnancies, men and women both... and I wish that if they failed to do so, or if the contraceptive method failed, I wish they would face the consequences by giving that child an opportunity at life, a child/baby for me and for some of us, an embryo which is not life yet for you and for others, unfortunately we can't agree on that.. and yes, my feelings are these because I want protect the baby's life, however, I will not force anybody.... I understand that you want to protect the mother's right, ultimately we are both trying to protect someone's right...

Everyone has to live with the consequences of their actions so I don't force anybody...and I'm not here to force or judge.. I'm trying to explain myself here, but I'm sorry if I'm not doing it so eloquently....

[marjon9 6]

Just to clarify that I'm prolife but I don't feel that I have the "right" to "force" women to do anything at all....yes, I'm not pro-abortion, I wish that people would take the necessary precautions to avoid unwanted pregnancies, men and women both... and I wish that if they failed to do so, or if the contraceptive method failed, I wish they would face the consequences by giving that child an opportunity at life, a child/baby for me and for some of us, an embryo which is not life yet for you and for others, unfortunately we can't agree on that.. and yes, my feelings are these because I want protect the baby's life, however, I will not force anybody.... I understand that you want to protect the mother's right, ultimately we are both trying to protect someone's right...

Everyone has to live with the consequences of their actions so I don't force anybody...and I'm not here to force or judge.. I'm trying to explain myself here, but I'm sorry if I'm not doing it so eloquently....

The thing is, Elena, so many of the so-called pro-life faction does fully intend to seek legislation to make abortion illegal, and to lobby to overturn Roe v. Wade, etc., and to use the police power of the state to force women to take actions against their will that have profound lifelong consequences for the mother. That's the whole issue as far as I'm concerned.

Let me ask you a question. You say that you are not trying to "force" anyone to do anything. Does that mean that you support Roe v. Wade? If not, if you support overturning Roe v. Wade, then you support a course of action designed to force women who disagree with you to live by your moral code. This is not a personal attack, it is just an discussion. But I think it is a point worth raising. If you support overturning Roe v. Wade, then in my opinion you cannot honestly say that you are not trying to "force" anything on anyone else. People who are interested in overturning Roe v. Wade have every intention of forcing women to live their lives by a moral code with which they profoundly disagree.

As for your own pro-life point of view, I agree with quite a bit of it. I'm not the least bit pro abortion. What I am is pro choice. I hope you continue to do whatever you can to convince other people of your point of view. Just please keep the police power of the government out of the life of my wife and daughter. This is a personal choice, not for someone else to decide.