without criminalisation of the women One doesn't have to criminalise women, but physicians, who do abortions, or people dealing with medical drugs.
I know I can't convince you or anybody else already so strongly decided 'pro-choice'. But my comment was about the treatment of people who are 'pro-live'. Ruling about abortion is in any case ruling about very high valued rights. Is there really not a big difference in being 'pro-live' and being 'pro-war' or 'pro-torture' or against universal health care or 'pro-destruction of the planet'? If you read this thread and through ET, it seems like it.
For that matter, the treatment of creationists on ET is as well a bit hyped - and I say this as somebody living from the curiosity of people for the early universe. Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den MenschenVolker Pispers
If I were this child's parent I'd have encouraged her to have an abortion while simultaneously trying to make sure she understood that if she chose to keep it, she'd get my full support. That's presumably the sort of pressure you're talking about. But what are parents, friends, etc. supposed to do - refuse to talk about it, offer no advice?
I don't think the pressure is equally on both sides. Maybe in Poland it is that way, maybe in the US, but in Germany I'm pretty sure it isn't. And of course it depends on the milieu. In the small catholic village, things are different than in the city. Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den MenschenVolker Pispers
I utterly defend a woman's right to choose what happens to her own body. This is not equivalent to recklessly having abortions as though it doesn't matter, nor is it forcing abortions on anybody. In my eyes it is a breach of my human rights to take that choice away from me. Ad astra per aspera
Say you are against choice and want to impose the unwanted pregnancy. There are even some arguments for it. But that has nothing to do with being "pro-life". Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
Pro-life vs. pro-choice are the two frames of the US debate.
By saying you're anti-choice you're adopting the opposition's frame. But people here are reacting to pro-life by saying they won't debate in that frame. A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
Where we might disagree, is in our attitudes to human-caused death, whether it's eating meat, putting down unwanted or suffering pets, or going to war in defence. Not to mention all the ways of dying on the road, at work etc in accidents - especially if they are caused by negligence.
Regarding Palin, I find it hard to accept pro-life and hunting as a combination, especially when pro-life is promoted as having religious origins. All god's creatures etc....
I find all sorts of conflicts in my own behaviour: I'll swat a mosquito, a wasp or a moth, but gingerly rescue any bee or butterfly that wanders in to my house. I still eat meat - even having filmed in abattoirs. I have never hunted, but I know countryside Finns who do and I respect their choice, though I don't agree with it. Hunting is strictly controlled in Finland - moose for instance are 'culled' ie in the hunting season permits are issued up to a certain number nationwide.
Death brings out the complicated moral skeins of all our lives. You can't be me, I'm taken
And for the foetus, and 'life': The removal from the human body of a small cluster of cells that would otherwise parasitically suckle life from that body for 9 months before it ruptures alien-like form the female nether-regions is hardly tragic, or problematic, or difficult, or anything else. I don't cry when my body on a monthly basis expels the unfertilized ovum along with the uterine wall. Why would I feel much different about a fertilized lump of cells, or a fish-like thing with gills swimming in amniotic fluid being removed? It is not a person. It does not have a developed sense of self, and no stake in its own life. And it most certainly has no right to claim my body for its nurishment.
As I said - the physical and mental health of the women is paramount. It is your body - you do what you like with it. Same for me - as long as it doesn't impact on the health of someone else.
Thanks for sharing your view. I cannot share what it is like to be a woman, but your view makes sense to me. You can't be me, I'm taken
When I call myself pro-choice, it means pro-choice, not pro-abortion. Ad astra per aspera
For that matter, the treatment of creationists on ET is as well a bit hyped - and I say this as somebody living from the curiosity of people for the early universe.
The treatment of creationists on ET is mild and mellow. And the treatment of creationists in general is incomparably nice, above-board, honest and honourable compared to the way creationists treat honest, hard-working scientists.
If you want an example, you can start with the result of a five-second Google search.
The fact that creationists are routinely ridiculed and showered with contempt is a result of their insistence on shoving their early-19th-century theology down everybody's throat. I think that you'll find that most here (and elsewhere) fully support the right of consenting adult creationists to engage, in the privacy of their homes and churches, in whatever intellectual and religious practises they desire.
But attempting to teach patent bullshit to other people's children and then filing baseless lawsuits in order to get special treatment and/or harass political opponents tends to get under said political opponents' skins. Rather quickly.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
