This is horrifying and outrageous! Murder for any reason -- political or otherwise is obviously so very wrong.

But, one does not have to be pro-abortion to be a feminist. In fact, I think abortion is the number one reason so many women say, "I'm not a feminist but...". The agree with most of the "Feminist Agenda" but, like me, are confused as to how the murder of defenseless babies is Feminist.

The murder of these doctors was horrible and this loony-tunes reenactment is just crazy. But my guess is you won't be running any video of the thousands and thousands of babies whose brains these "doctors" scrambled either.

Abortion is murder and clearly so wrong. Someday soon, this period of time where it was okay to murder children will be looked back upon with the same disgust we look back upon slavery and the internment of the Japanese-Americans during WWII and the way we treated women for so long in this country.

Abortion is and always was a patriarchal scheme to make access to women easier for men in search of easy and fast sex. "But what if I get pregnant?" "No problem, we'll just have it killed!"

Now, when you all start ranting and raving at me for thinking the murder of babies is wrong please note that I probably won't be answering, because this site will ban me immediately for not toeing the "Feminist" line.

Wow. I am awed, shocked, and stunned. What the fuck is wrong with people? I didn't bother watching the video, but shouldn't this type of thing be considered domestic terrorism? Because it's certainly meant to cause terror in abortion providers and women seeking abortions. Where's HLS when you need them?

is murder pro-life?

pro-life.

yeah, riiiiight.

Wow. Just... Wow.

And Sheila - YIKES.
It's true, you will likely hear a lot about your post. I will only say that I believe feminism is about choice. Women should have the CHOICE to abort a FETUS, or to carry the FETUS to term and give birth to a baby. Women should not be forced to carry a FETUS to term, anymore than you should be forced to abort a FETUS if you don't want to. And I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of what is so wrong about your post, except to say that you must have a very low opinion of people in general to assume that abortions are only used by folks who simply want to fuck with impunity.

Of course murder is not "Pro life". But judging those who oppose the legalized murder of innocent babies by the lunatic fringe is as unfair as when we as feminists are judged by the lunatic fringe.

I used to have a college professor (a woman aggravatingly) who whenever I offered a feminist opinion would say "And all sex between men and women is a rape by the man, right? Isn't that what you feminists believe?"

Uh, no... some lunatics on the fringe of the movement might have said that but not any where close to all feminists believe that.

Abortion is murder, just that simple. And don't even try the old worn out argument that "it isn't a baby". If it isn't a baby then why are you murdering it?

Sheila, if you'd barged in yelling that women are murderers and we're all going to hell and we're sluts, yeah, you'd be banned. However, though I vehemently disagree with you, I don't know why you think you would be banned for your post.

Sheila,

You don't have to be "pro-abortion" to be a feminist.

You do have to be pro-choice to be a feminist.

Oh, and I care not if it's a "baby" (although it isn't). What it is is another being living off of a woman's body. She has to consent to that. If she does not, she has the right to terminate the parasitic activity. Same as if some person needed to use my kidney to clean out theirs and tried to force me to be hooked up to them for the nine months that would take. They can't do that and I have the right to refuse that, even if their death will certainly result from my refusal.

okay, Sheila Kelly, so if abortion is murder, how much time should who receives one serve in jail?
btw, not all of us believe that abortion is murder, a lot of of people would think that the issue is much more complicated than what your simplistic, black and white statement would lead one to believe.

Sheila,

I would second kissmypineapple's point. Even though the majority of us who post on feministing identify as pro-choice, we are usually willing to engage with people who want to substantively discuss these issues and don't resort to vicious personal attacks.

If you're interested in some of the reasons we believe reproductive justice is central to feminism, I would suggest searching this site for other recent posts on abortion politics.

*sorry, i meant "a woman who receives one"*

Just a couple of days back someone told me you couldn't go to a war zone and not return a believer in God. I guess there is nothing like all-out carnage to demonstrate belief in an all-loving God to some people.

i remember this reenactment being in the news when it took place and it's so incredibly disturbing.

sheila--whether or not a bundle of cells that is essentially a parasite qualifies as a "person" is a matter of personal philosophy and, in case you haven't noticed, an issue that is open to intense debate. this is why the pro-choice stance is only true feminist one. don't like abortions? great, don't have one.

Shelia, maybe you should read up more about abortion before you say stuff like "scrambling babies' brains up"..? It seems like you are making abortion a much more simplistic concept than it is..much like most anti-choicers.

And I have yet to meet a person who is pro-ABORTION.

Sheila, do you know what cyclical logic is? Saying that it's murder because it's a baby, and it's a baby because you're murdering it is not a sound argument.
And I don't think anyone, has ever been 'pro-abortion' but rather pro-choice.

Sheila, isn't that a little specious? If you don't think a fetus is a baby, of course removing it isn't murder, any more than I could be sent to the electric chair for cutting off my own arm.

"If it isn't a baby then why are you murdering it?"

If it was a baby, then it would be able to live outside the mother's body.

Also, if it was a baby, why isn't miscarriage a crime?

Uh, Sheila... Nevermind. God.

Mz. Stillette - Thank you for your calm and reasoned disagreement. I understand your conv0lusions in your attempt to justify the murder of babies, but as you knew when you typed it, it just falls flat.

It's a baby, you just happen to think that as long as you can't see it and if its a tad inconvenient at that time to allow it to live that its okay to scramble its brains so your social calendar isn't messed with.

Your attempt to suggest that all abortions spring forth from considered, reasonable and deep thought is as irrelevant as any excuse offered for murder. When you are dead does it make it okay if someone argues it was for a very good reason?

How silly you must think people are when they grieve over a miscarriage. They didn't lose anything, just a "fetus", no big deal.

One of my best friend's is a model of feminism and has been my mentor. I was shocked a couple of years ago when she suddenly became pro-life. She explained. She was pregnant with her first child -- about in her late 5th month -- when she began cramping and bleeding. She fell on the floor at her office and the paramedics arrived shortly.

She said, "After all the pro-abortion rallies and my years of counseling women that 'it isn't a baby, feel free to kill it' and all the other lies. As I layed there bleeding I heard myself screaming to the paramedics, "Save my BABY, Save my BABY". It wasn't a fetus or zygote or any of those other lies. It was a baby. And, she lived.

It's a baby, please do not murder it.

Calling a fetus 'essentially a parasite' is just inflammatory. A fetus carries your own genes (unless the woman is a surrogate), that is one easy distinction from a parasite whose genes have little to do with yours. Also, parasites want to spread themselves to other hosts. I haven't known any fetus try to do that.

Sheila, you're not a feminist. You're a dullard and a troll.

Normally I try to be nice and diplomatic, but I had my halo taken off yesterday and therefore I don't have to act angelic anymore, so here goes.

First of all Sheila, FUCK YOU! I am sure that you are old enough and I hope that you are smart enough to realize that just because someone is pro "choice" they are not pro abortion. I have never heard anyone here say "You're pregnant? You really need an abortion!" No, it is about choice. I have been pregnant twice and have given birth twice, but I am still vehemently pro CHOICE. It is a woman's right to do to her body what she will.

Oh yeah, let's get rid of choice and then we can start telling pregnant women what they can or can't eat (No fast food for you, Missy!) what they can or can't drink (You want a sip of wine, NO WAY!) where they can go (It is homebound for you, baby!) where they can give birth (No homebirths for you lady!) who they can have at said birth (It is a male ob/gyn, the females are at home being good women) and then how they can raise those children.

I really hate the argument that the legalization of abortion is so that men can have sex without consequences...PUHHHHLEAZE! There are many men who have sex, get a woman pregnant and leave, yeah some have to pay a measly child support, but they don't have to be a part of that life if they don't want to. And you are just assuming that it is men who want sex, like women are not able to want to have indiscriminate sex, HA HA HA! Men aren't the only ones with a libido. Here's a big shocker, I don't remember the names of some of the men that I slept with and no, I am not ashamed of having a hearty sexual appetite.

I am sure that those women who made the choice to terminate pregnancies due to fetal deformities would love to hear that you think that they are murderers.

If something is living off of MY body, and I don't want it there, it is MY choice and keep your fucking nose out of MY uterus!

so if abortion is the same thing as killing a baby how much jail time should a woman who procures one serve?
life?

farhat, sheila's "omg noz don't murder the widdle babiez!" comments are pretty darned inflammatory. i'm responding in kind. nothing will be accomplished here; no one's mind will be changed, it's just some mindless troll-baiting to pass the time.

See, that was circular logic though. If it's not a baby, it's not murder. A baby is what happens when a fetus is birthed.

"Sheila, you're not a feminist. You're a dullard and a troll."

Yes, Daniel, I agree. Where is the troll repellant?

Sheila - First of all, my handle is "Mz.Stilletto", not Mz.Stillette.

Secondly, your statement "...but as you knew when you typed it, it just falls flat" just baffles me. Do you often go around telling people what they are thinking? It must be nice to be able to read minds... But OH WAIT - that WASN'T what I was thinking, so I guess your mind-reading skills are on the fritz.

Everyone else on this board who is pointing out that things are not all black and white as you put them is correct. You can disagree with what we are saying, but coming here and telling us we're all potential baby murderers is way out of line, in my opinon.

And just for the record - I had a miscarriage when I was 19, and I didn't grieve one bit, since I was planning on aborting the FETUS anyways.

Perhaps you now think I am a soulless murderer for having a miscarriage?

Sheila,

I would recommend you check out the organization SisterSong, which is a women's health collective committed to reproductive justice. They define reproductive justice in the following way:

* the right to have a child;
* the right not to have a child;
* the right to parent the children we have
* the right to control our own birthing options.

All of the pro-choice feminists I know would support women who mourned the loss of a desired pregnancy through miscarriage. Being pro-choice is about supporting women in making all the reproductive choices they and their partners must make over their lifetimes.

Sheila Kelly - I know I probably won't be changing your mind any time soon, but lets see if we can have a reasonable discussion.

I'll come clean - I'm pro-choice (or pro-abortion, should you want to lob that label at me). I don't want every pregnancy terminated, but I do want a real option for women put in a tough situation. And lets be clear, we're not talking about bashing in babies heads, we're talking about the removal of a lump of tissue from a woman's uterus.

I also don't buy the abortion as birth control line. No way, no how. Having an abortion, either surgical or medical, is not something women do willy nilly. There are so many other birth control methods availabel. Abortion is not a tremendously pleasant experience, though I venture neither is being a single mother trying to raise a child.

Unplanned pregancies happen for many different reasons. Sometimes birth control methods fail, such as antibiotics and other medications interfering with hormonal birth control or condoms breaking. Most women then weigh their options. Is raising a child an acceptable option? Will there be support from the the father or other family and friends? Will I be able to give the child the emotional and financial support it needs?

My personal opinion is that women who acknowledge that they are not in a position to raise a child has made a very unselfish decision. And granted, my opinion may be a little biased from my life experience.

"so your social calendar isn't messed with"??

wtf?

PLEASE go read some more on abortion politics. Women don't go in go-go boots to clinics to get abortions so they can party the following weekend. Seriously.

Thank you all for your reasoned and intelligent responses. Discussion is very healthy, again thank you.

Two points: The "parasite" argument is also very old and so easily dealt with. How is an unborn child any less a parasite than a one-month old baby, or a 2-yr old baby? Or a teenager who really isn't able to support themselves. My 88 yr old grandmother lives with me now and is very sick and sleeps like 22 hours a day. Sorry to say this but by your definitions she is a parasite and it would be alright if I killed her.

Secondly, the "no one is pro-abortion they are just pro-choice" is really silly. Back in the late 1840's and 1850's the plantation owners of the south knew that the days of legal slavery were numbered, so they actually had an association and hired people who would eventually be called "lobbyists" in Washington, DC. They pointed out that slavery was a "personal" decision and each state could decide for themselves, each state could "choose" whether slavery would be legal there. And that's what we had; states where slavery was legal and states where it was not.

But the anti-slavery movement very justifyingly grew and the plantation owners fought back and hired a New York Public Relations firm (times haven't changed much have they) to place articles and run Ads in support of their position.

On January 16, 1851 they ran full page ads in 12 U.S. Daily news spelling out their position. They aid their movement was not "Pro-Slavery" but it was "Pro-Choice" (YEP, the same disgusting phrase). They said if you didn't believe in owning a slave, then don't own one. But you had no right to interfere in the rights of others to own one. They said they weren't "Pro-Slavery" but they -- in a free country -- were "Pro-choice" on slavery.

"Pro-choice" then was just a code word for: It's okay to own slaves. "Pro-choice" now simply means: It's okay to murder a baby.

The definition of parasite in my dictionary doesn't say anything about having to have completely different genes from the host. It says that a parasite is an organism living in or on another organism (the host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense. Fetus lives in another organism...check. Fetus benefits by deriving nutrients from the host...check. This loss of nutrients costs the host...check. No one's saying that fetuses (feti?) are horrible awful things. But parasites they are.

When one puts the value of the fetus over the woman who's carrying it, the only person who has to make that final decision in the first place; it undermines her responsibility to her own body, and is therefore sexist. You don't like it? Nobody is forcing you to have one.

Sheila seems a bit histronic, what with the repentant feminist falling on the floor cursing her prior, pro-aborting ways while the life of fetus hangs in the balance.
DRAMA!
seriously, though, i love the "how much time should she serve" frame because i feel like it forces pro-lifers to get past the "cute widdle baybeez" rhetoric and admit to their feelings about how much agency a woman should have when it comes to her own body.

When one puts the value of the fetus over the woman who's carrying it, the only person who has to make that final decision in the first place; it undermines her responsibility to her own body, and is therefore sexist. You don't like it? Nobody is forcing you to have one.

Mz.Stilletto,

You have a wicked and evil uterus, how dare it expel that child of god?!

Shelia, does your grandma sleep in your uterus?? I'm confused.

Your attempt to compare abortion with slavery is absolutely ridiculous.

Please go away now.

Well, it certainly seems as though Sheila has alienated everybody and sidetracked this entire thread. But however at odds her views may be with the tone of this site, she made ONE reasonable point that has been washed out in all the noise: it's unfair to judge any movement, be it feminists or pro-lifers, by its lunatic fringe, and the Army of God is DEFINITELY the lunatic fringe of the anti-abortion movement.

Can we all just ignore Sheila? She's obviously a troll, won't have any mature discussions, and refuses to consider anyone's opinions but her own. She's a waste of time and doesn't deserve any attention at all.

LOL SassyGirl - I will be sure to scold my uterus soundly. Naughty, naughty uterus!

And seriously, the image of Sheila's grandma clinging to her body all day long and gently sucking on her shoulder to extract nutrients just made me laugh out loud!

referencing slavery in the american south in an abortion discussion should really be the godwin's law of feminism.

13lesslee--i completely agree re: "how much time should she do?" it's brilliant. notice how sheila would rather talk about slavery than answer that simple question.

Good greif.

Sheila, why don't you answer some of these questions from Jill at Feministe.

Back to the original post:

The idea of valorizing murder reminds me of all the military imagery from the film Jesus Camp. As someone who grew up around Christians who drew from their faith the ethic of non-violence, I find it extremely disturbing when Christians turn their faith into a weapon, or justify violence with religion.

And the slave-owners argued it was okay to enslave negroes because they weren't really people; and the Nazis said they same about he Jews; and now we say it's okay to murder babies for the same reason... sigh. Genocide is genocide.

the differences between your slavery comparison and the current issue are so obvious I can't believe I have to explain them.
The more apt parallel to be drawing there is that the slavers are like the anti-abortion lobby, trying to force womens' decisions on them. Women being denied their reproductive rights are akin to african-americans being denied their civil rights.
You've got it backwards.

Sheila, if we were saying it's okay to kill a birthed baby, then I might see your analogy to killing your grandma...but since no one did make that argument... Also, your grandma is not attached to your body. She needs your money and care to survive, and though many people would think you're cold hearted for doing it, it is your right to cut off your supply of financing to her. Though, again, parasite is something that lives in or on your body...no one is talking about the colloquial usage that people describe mooches with.

ok sheila--what should the punishment be for all these women baby murderers? life in prison? put your money where your mouth is.

And the slave-owners argued it was okay to enslave negroes because they weren't really people; and the Nazis said they same about he Jews; and now we say it's okay to murder babies for the same reason... sigh. Genocide is genocide.

Someone call Godwin. Because the goal of women getting abortions is to kill the entire ethnic group of...fetuses?

Sheila, you are oversimplifying the abortion issue. I am not as eloquent as others in the ability to point out the flaws in your argument -- I'll wait until EG weighs in on the matter and then say "just what she said". However, one statement of yours I do want to address -- although I have never experienced an abortion, from everything I've read and heard it's not all that convenient, especially with people like Huckabee and the Army of God doing all they can to impede our options.

OT: Is there anyone that believes a fetus is a baby but would still have an abortion? I am trying to wrap my mind around this. I truly believe the fetus is a living being, yet, I have no interest, inclination, or desire to have a child. Should my contraception fail and I become pregnant, I would not hesitate to have an abortion. Not to hijack this thread or turn it into a confessional but I have never met anyone to whom I could ask this question and I figured that a group of like-minded (pro-choice, feminist, etc.) individuals would provide non-judgemental but informative responses. If this is not the approprate place for this discussion, if someone could direct me to a thread, web site, etc. where a similar issue would be discussed I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.

Sheila,

Oh wow! If you are going to be a misogynist could you please at least get your facts straight. To say abortion is patriarchal is so out of line with reality to be laughable.

Before the mid-nineteenth century and the medicalization of pregnancy and child birth, both abortion and child birth were largely in the hands of women. Women, with or without the assistance of a mid-wife or herbalist routinely ended pregnancy. Until the mid-nineteenth century abortion was legal until the time of quickening. WOMEN fought to regain the right to control their own bodies, which the lost with the Comstock Act in 1873.

You show your misogynist stripes in your responses. Women "kill their babies" because it is "inconvenient" or doesn't fit into their social calendar. Women have abortions for many reasons.

If it makes the antis feel any better, I'll concede a point. Fine, it's a baby. That does not change my stance one iota. Whether it is a cute cuddly precious widdle baby or a hairy 6'2 350 lb line backer, any creature that attempts to use my body for it's own ends does so at MY pleasure. If I say it goes, it goes.
I cannot think of another circumstance in which a human being can compel me to give even a drop of blood to sustain it's existence. Yet somehow, because the one being used by another creature is a woman, she should somehow be compelled to turn her entire body over to another creature to sustain its existence. Oh no, there is nothing patriarchal about that.

Sheila, that fetuses aren't people is not the main reason abortion rights should be preserved.
Even if fetuses WERE people, no person has the right to attach itself to my body or remain on my property unless I allow him/her to.

Even if I were to die without it, you are not legally required to donate an organ to me against your will.

Shelia, isn't genocide the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group?

I think you were looking for the term "infanticide", even though that would be very incorrect as well, because babies are born humans and fetuses are not.

"Abortion is murder, just that simple. And don't even try the old worn out argument that 'it isn't a baby'. If it isn't a baby then why are you murdering it?"

That makes as little sense as "Pulling out wisdom teeth [which do have enough DNA to become identical baby sisters or brothers of the dental patient if they're given enough help in a lab!] is murder, just that simple. If it isn't a baby then why are you murdering it?"

"okay, Sheila Kelly, so if abortion is murder, how much time should who receives one serve in jail?"

...and what should the police do when they notice a woman or girl having irregular periods, in order to not let people get away with abortion?

Of course not all irregular periods are signs of having an abortion at 2 or 3 months - and not all deaths in car crashes are signs of vehicular homicide either, but the police still should investigate them all to make sure they're not letting bad drivers get away with killing people.

"My personal opinion is that women who acknowledge that they are not in a position to raise a child has made a very unselfish decision."

In the U.S., the majority of women who get abortions are already raising children. In many cases, they are women who acknowledge that they are in a position to raise their children and are not in a position to raise one more child.

"Or a teenager who really isn't able to support themselves. My 88 yr old grandmother lives with me now and is very sick and sleeps like 22 hours a day. Sorry to say this but by your definitions she is a parasite and it would be alright if I killed her."

By *your* standards, you have no right to make them stop if they stick any of their body parts inside your body against your will.

"When one puts the value of the fetus over the woman who's carrying it, the only person who has to make that final decision in the first place; it undermines her responsibility to her own body, and is therefore sexist."

Not to mention sympathetic to slaveowners. After all, forcing pregnant slaves to give birth even when they didn't want to carry to term was profitable for them...

if abortion = infanticide and infanticide is a punishable criminal offense, how much time should she serve, Sheila?

I don't really agree with kicking someone out of feminism because they can't get on board with abortion. While I don't agree with Sheila's arguments, isn't it important to include other viewpoints in the discussion? I realize that most pro-lifers will never be converted (nor will most pro-choicers), but is it absolutely necessary for each side to demonize the other? And so there's no confusion, I am pro-choice.

OT: Is there anyone that believes a fetus is a baby but would still have an abortion?

not4nothin, I think your question is an important one. Although I have not become pregnant yet, I know that if I did face an unplanned pregnancy, even if I decided to have an abortion, it would be a deeply ethical decision to make. I do believe that a fetus is a developing child, and as a potential and developing human being deserves our respect. I don't think that belief is inconsistent with being pro-choice, or even being personally willing to have an abortion in some circumstances.

I would recommend checking out Frances Kissling's piece: "Is There Life After Roe?" on Catholics for Free Choice, which talks about the moral dimensions of abortion.

Also, there's a fascinating new book out on reproductive technology that touches on some of these issues called Baby Business, by Debora Spar.

Why hasn't Sheila Kelly been banned?

Here is the point at which she became a troll:
It's a baby, you just happen to think that as long as you can't see it and if its a tad inconvenient at that time to allow it to live that its okay to scramble its brains so your social calendar isn't messed with.

'A tad inconvenient' is her assessment of women's motivations to end pregnancies. She will not address what people actually say.

She pretends to respect people by offering effusive thanks and then writes egregious insults. Here's a tip for trolls: starting a post with 'thank you' does not make it civil or well-considered.

And she has hi-jacked this thread to pursue her own agenda.

Troll troll troll troll troll.

"Shelia, does your grandma sleep in your uterus?? I'm confused."

If her grandma did stick her hand all the way up there, maybe Sheila would just lie back and think of that hand having separate DNA...

"The more apt parallel to be drawing there is that the slavers are like the anti-abortion lobby, trying to force womens' decisions on them. Women being denied their reproductive rights are akin to african-americans being denied their civil rights."

And don't forget how African-American women's and girl's reproductive rights were violated during legal slavery.

"Someone call Godwin. Because the goal of women getting abortions is to kill the entire ethnic group of...fetuses?"

Some people out there will accuse a woman or girl of cultural genocide against her own ethnic group if she doesn't give birth as often as possible...whether she uses abortion, contraceptives, and/or staying an unmarried virgin for a while after menarche.

"Even if fetuses WERE people, no person has the right to attach itself to my body or remain on my property unless I allow him/her to."

Exactly!

My new year's resolution was not to feed trolls. Let's see how long it lasts!

The idea of valorizing murder reminds me of all the military imagery from the film Jesus Camp. As someone who grew up around Christians who drew from their faith the ethic of non-violence, I find it extremely disturbing when Christians turn their faith into a weapon, or justify violence with religion.

Didn't Jesus say he came with the sword, though? I mean, the God's Army people are clearly homocidal freaks, but Jesus wasn't completely non-violent, either.

It's just a damn pity all that energy couldn't be devoted to something that would, you know, make the world better, rather than killing doctors for providing medical services.

Sheila --

1) Saying that a someone is pro-abortion is like saying someone is pro-chemotherapy. It's not a spa treatment or a lifestyle, it's a costly and uncomfortable medical procedure used to restore a patient to her previous state of health.

2) Would you mind telling us where you are from and where you had Sex Ed? I'm just concerned because based on your descriptions of abortive procedures and the development of the fetus, it sounds like you've been fed some of those grossly inaccurate and inflammatory anti-choice talking points. I was appalled to see the blatant lies they hand out to pregnant women, saying that a fetus in the first trimester is the size of your hand and all that. It's a system of mis-educating women so they can't make an informed choice.

3) Different women have different reactions to their abortions, just like they have different reactions to getting divorced or sick. (Women are not all the same -- gasp!) Grief is just as common as relief, and often both occur simultaneously. When I had my abortion, I was very sad because the father and I were in love and wanted to have kids together years later, but we knew we personally had to feather the nest before we hatched the eggs, so to speak. THAT was the most responsible thing for us. Having a child we weren't ready for would tear our (and its) life apart. It was emotional but I'm SO glad I made that choice. I will be a better mother because of it, and when I do have a baby it won't suffer they way that embryo would have if I had let it develop.

4) There are lots of stories about women who are glad they kept their babies, or almost lost one, like your mentor. But abortion-shaming keeps a whole other volume of stories out of sight, and those are the ones like mine -- women who did not carry to term and thank god every day that they had a safe, legal, supportive way to resolve their crisis.

KittenFluff-

I wouldn't have a problem with anything Shelia said if the arguments were coherent, fact-based, and respectful instead of the "gee thanks for the responses, baby-killing whores" attitude she's taken on.
I know anti-choice people and obviously this topic is going to be an emotional one, but intentionally not answering a question that has been asked at least 5x while continuing on "but it's a babeh! People get abortions for fun!" rhetoric is old.

Didn't Jesus say he came with the sword, though? I mean, the God's Army people are clearly homicidal freaks, but Jesus wasn't completely non-violent, either.

Oh, I agree: the Bible gives plenty of justification for violence, xenophobia, sexism, etc., etc., if you choose to use it that way. However, having seen how powerfully religion can inform people's convictions to fight injustice in nonviolent ways, it saddens me to see it used as a tool for warmongering and the propagation of fear.

Thanks for the info annajcook!

Why is this group of cells so important to override the will of the mother?

It completely disgusts me that someone's murder is being glorified in such a way. Pro-life? I call bullshit.

I believe the second point Sheila was trying to make is:

MEN who are irresponsible, would love women to have an abortion. Sure a man can leave a pregnant partner or partner and child at any time, but at least he can be judged for those, as a "deadbeat," or what have you, perhaps even prosecuted. A man without a child, particularly if it was a casual encounter, has few or no legal obligations to a non-spouse. To a child from even a casual encounter, the man is legally obligated until adulthood or completion of education, whichever is later. I believe this was another underlying message for the pro-birth control pill ad aimed at men.

I am curious about the feminist view about these men who are relieved of their obligations to a woman or a child who never was, so the men can screw around. Men like self proclaimed Jack Nicholson who boasted in a recent interview that he probably fathered 7000 children in his time, wouldn't consider it funny if they had to support them all.

"Also, if it was a baby, why isn't miscarriage a crime?"

I loved the "Masturbation is murder" photo.

1. You cannot be anti-choice and be a feminist. The two are mutually exclusive. Plain and simple. Women cannot have equality without reproductive control and feminism is a belief in equality for women. So there you go.

2. I am TOTALLY pro-abortion. This world is overpopulated, and until every single child has a home and no children starve to death or die from lack of clean drinking water, etc., I don't even want to hear about it.

I am also pro-abortion because the aborted fetus could have become a terrorist.

"self proclaimed Jack Nicholson"

Self proclaimed playboy, Jack Nicholson, that is. His implication that he left perhaps 7,000 women, and possibly children, is hardly worthy of boast, or a testament to his manliness.

I am curious about the feminist view about these men who are relieved of their obligations to a woman or a child who never was, so the men can screw around.

Feminism benefits everybody. Even assholes.

annajcook, I am in the same position as you. I also see a fetus as a developing child, but I believe in abortion rights and would likely end up making the decision to terminate an unwanted pregnancy at this stage in my life. I haven't been at my job long enough to qualify for paid maternity leave, I do not have a trust fund, and my parents (who are both pro-choice and would be supportive of my decision either way) live halfway across the country, so leaning on them for financial support would be difficult (I live in NYC and my rent is astronomical; I am also in a serious relationship and could not ask my live-in boyfriend to abandon his job/life to relocate). That said, these are just some of the reasons why I take precautions to avoid pregnancy. No plan is failsafe, but my birth control is over 99% effective if used properly.

In some ways, I think having a child one cannot care for is almost more selfish than terminating a pregnancy. Having a child whose needs will be unmet (whether emotionally or financially) because you don't want the guilt or stigma of having an abortion? Though on a larger scale, it seems similar to how a cheating partner will come clean, telling him/herself it is because their partner has a right to know, when really it is a way of assuaging one's own guilt over being dishonest.

viceabbess, not to nitpick, but the terrorist comment was, i hope, not serious. that sounds exactly like the anti-choicers when they play the "what if the mothers of mozart, gandhi, einstein, etc. had had abortions?" some babies grow up to be beethoven, some grow up to be hitler, in either case it's a completely irrational argument for having or not having a child. most babies grow up to be regular people. that's not the point.

However, having seen how powerfully religion can inform people's convictions to fight injustice in nonviolent ways, it saddens me to see it used as a tool for warmongering and the propagation of fear.

Oh, I have to agree. I'm not a Christian, but Jesus seems so fearless in much of the Gospels-- I think it's one of the most compelling things about him. To have so much cowards' rhetoric on the 'conservative Christian' side is just terrible.

The who-would-this-person-grow-up-to-be thing is really interesting. I would venture to say that their lives would be pretty crappy if they grew up unloved and uncared for, or even abused.

I lived not far from Dr Barnett Slepian when that murder occurred, and I knew people who were friends with his kids, so forgive me if I don't jump for joy. Fuckers.

That video was awful. Shelia, a fetus is not a baby. Life doesn't begin at conception, it begins at birth. Pregnancy begins when a fertlized protoplasm attaches itself to the uterus. Why should a woman be forced to keep something she doesn't want becuase it fits the zealous world view of a few bitter bible-thumpers?

"Even if fetuses WERE people, no person has the right to attach itself to my body or remain on my property unless I allow him/her to."

That is a very interesting analogy. I have not heard that one.

rileystclair, i was indeed, being facetious. i don't mean to make light of a serious issue, i am just sick and tired of going round and round with these idiots. considering the administration's stupid rhetoric about preemptive actions to prevent terrorism, i figure they ought to change their stance on abortion to keep with their party line ;)

I flagged the shit out of that video and several others on YouTube. There is one that is "A tribute to Paul Hill, a true soldier in God's army." Not sure if that's a parody or not, but thinking not.

rileystclair, i was indeed, being facetious. i don't mean to make light of a serious issue, i am just sick and tired of going round and round with these idiots. considering the administration's stupid rhetoric about preemptive actions to prevent terrorism, i figure they ought to change their stance on abortion to keep with their party line ;)

Oh come on, folks, let's not kid ourselves. Sheila is clearly right -- we do love to kill babies. In fact, every time I see a baby, I mentally place a big red target over its face. In fact, in line with my militant feminist, baby hating ways, I killed at least two babies this morning! See, I can't even keep track. Of course we're defending "murdering babies" -- babies are just so much fun to murder!

Also, I hate women who have babies, I go around kicking pregnant women in the stomaches because I think that no woman should carry a wanted pregnancy to term, I participate in massive orgies (baby-killing orgies, of course), and openly resent any woman who doesn't have unprotected sex with different man every night for the express purpose of upholding the patriarchy with their decisions to act like little sluts and have casual abortions.

Did I miss anything? Or can we actually just end this ridiculous conversation? I think that I just saved Sheila some time by beating her to the world's most moronic arguments.

You know what's really sad? Is that a post about the murder of OB/GYNs who perform abortions has been derailed by an extremist anti-choice trolls. But what's saddest of all is that I'm not surprised.

Also, for those of you who have said that they can't see why Sheila would expect to be banned, I have to be honest: I would have banned her. But a lot people have more tolerance for "baby murder" rhetoric than I do. What can I say, patience is not one of my virtues.

You know, I decided that I actually am pro-abortion. Pro-choice, of course, because choice is what it's all about. But I think abortion is really cool.

I think it's amazing that we have a relatively safe way to stop a pregnancy from continuing. I think that is so awesome!

I don't care how many abortions a woman gets, it's up to her. If someone wants to use it as birth control, fine, if that is what they've decided is best for them.

I understand that some people see abortion as horrible, and that's fine, that is their right. Just as it is my right to have my own opinion.

Some people think that I am a "murderer" because I have an IUD. Oh, the horror of possibly not allowing a teensy clump of cells to implant in my uterus.

Gah, so sick of people like Sheila.

"OT: Is there anyone that believes a fetus is a baby but would still have an abortion?"

*Raises hand.* I have thought a lot about this, and my husband and I have both agreed on my decision. There are three circumstances under which I would have an abortion: 1. My health/life were in danger due to my pregnancy; 2. The baby has some horrible genetic disease which will cause it to live a short, painful life (e.g. spina bifida, DMD, etc.); 3. The pregnancy resulted from rape.

#1 is a very real possibility for me considering my mother and grandmother's medical histories during pregnancy. My mother had to have an abortion to save her life, and we all believed my sister (we had even named her at that point) was alive at that point; we mourned her and set up a memorial site (the hospital does not allow you to have the body). My sister would not have been able to survive if my mother died. If my mother had not been able to have the abortion and she died, there would be three less people in this world, instead of one less (my sister) because my brother never would have been concieved.

Some pro-lifers argue that #1 and #3 should still be legal. What if #1 was legal? Who determines whether the woman's life is in danger? How does the government make sure women and their doctors are not lying? What paperwork/legal procedures must be done before the abortion is performed? How many women will die waiting for the legal go-ahead? For #3 - again, who decides whether the woman was raped? Would it require conviction? With such an abysmally low conviction rate, wouldn't the law essentially force these women to carry the pregnancy anyway? For these reasons I think it is best to trust women and their doctors to make the decision, and not involve the goverment. This is part of my pro-choice stance.

The other part is...I believe the fetus is a human life...BELIEVE being the operative word. There is no way we can definitively determine whether a fetus is a full human life; when does it become conscious? When does it get a soul? When can it define self? What does it mean to be human? These are all religious and/or philosophical questions, and cannot be legally mandated. Pro-choice to me is in some ways pro-freedom of religion. My belief in a fetus being a human life comes from my religion, and I have no right to force that belief onto other women's bodies, nor does anyone else.

Every argument offered in support of abortion could just as easily be applied to murdering people at any stage. All you have to do is describe its age, "It's not a baby, its a fetus" can be, "Its not an adult, its an adolescent", etc.

Pro-abortion people do not really think a fetus isn't a baby, a human being, they just think its okay to kill them.

In one of the many cases that came before the U.S. Supreme Court on slavery one of the Justices -- during oral arguments -- asked the lawyer representing slave-owners on an amicus brief, "And what would the slaves say if I asked them their position on slavery?"

What would the babies say?

A very pro-abortion friend of mine and I witnessed a terrible house fire in which the fire fighters suddenly realized there was a baby sleeping upstairs in the flame-engulfed home. A fire captain pointed at a fire fighter and the fire fighter pulled his helmet and mask tighter and they sprayed him with water and he ran INTO the burning home and then minutes later back out with the baby. He was burned and fighting to breath.

I asked my friend if she thought he was a fool to risk his life to save the baby and she said, "No!"

When I had my children I never had discomfort relative to the pregnancy until the late 3rd or early 4th month. I then had 5 or 6 months of pregnancy related symptoms and discomfort. If a woman gets pregnant when she does not desire a baby is it much to ask TO SAVE A LIFE for her to suffer 5 or 6 months of discomfort and then give the baby to one of the MILLIONS of families seeking babies to adopt?

Often, when I ask a woman that question she says that she would rather abort her baby then let someone else raise "her baby". Sigh, suddenly its a baby and its just about them.

No histrionics, no drama. If you kill something it's murder. Sorry to make you all feel so uncomfortable.

Sheila is obviously a misogynist troll.

Most of the ardent misogynist trolls I've seen on this site have been men...

I wonder if somebody is using a woman's name to gain more credibility in a conversation about a topic which they know is really none of their business. I just have the weirdest hunch.

Before I reply, let me just say that I'm pro-choice!

I just wanted to comment on this "fetuses are parasites" defense. A parasite is described as an organism that leeches of it's hosts nutrients in order for it to survive. Fetuses, on the other hand, don't leech off the woman's nutrients. Rather, the fetuses only get the extra nutrients that the woman doesn't need - as in, during her pregnancy, the woman will have to consume almost twice as much as she usually does in order to take care of the fetus (well...maybe not twice as much...but still more than she usually does).

Why should society be allowed to force a woman to do this? That's almost like forcing a woman to adopt a child...forcing her spend her time and her energy to take care of another. If woman can choose whether or not they can take care of other people's kids, why can't they choose whether or not they will take care of a fetus that's inside them?

I would have banned her. But a lot people have more tolerance for "baby murder" rhetoric than I do.

I'm willing to give people some benefit of the doubt, but as soon as it's clear the person is not interested in open and informed conversation, I'm not interested either. We always have the choice just to disengage and move on.

Pro-choice to me is in some ways pro-freedom of religion.

That's one powerful way to think about it! Thanks for the thoughtful post, Leah.

"It's unfair to judge any movement, be it feminists or pro-lifers, by its lunatic fringe, and the Army of God is DEFINITELY the lunatic fringe of the anti-abortion movement."

http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/10/30/sugar/

kind of silly webcomic, but it mentions this, which I think has some merit.
"He blames the moderates for the continued existence of the extremists because they shield them from criticism." Don't judge the entire movement by the extremists...but do judge the extremists.

"What would teh babiez say??"

Ha ha ha! That is hilarious!

Babies can't talk. Fetuses aren't babies.

that seems to be the biggest sticking point the last few years, the whole when does life actually begin debate.

my issue with this is that i dont see it starting at conception but i also dont see it starting at the end of the birth canal. for me it seems life begins when it is capable of surviving "on its own". not meaning it can provide its own food but it can live outside the body of the mother. only problem with this is that its different for every individual.

since we cant know for certain we try and set a timeframe with weeks or trimesters. seems to me abortion should be a safe and readily available option but as soon as you qualify it you really open up the debate to the pro-life people. i guess thats a necessary evil, as much as i am for the reproductive rights i struggle with the thought of a woman in perfect health, who as far as is known, will suffer no ill-effects from her pregnancy getting an abortion at 35 weeks. if you draw a line at all, people will try and move that line backwards, just the nature of things. frustrating.

Sheila Kelly,

I was in the 16th week of a pregnancy that I wanted and started having contractions. I was driving by Rochester, MN at the time, so I drove up to the Mayo Clinic, parked my car and staggered in. They checked me in, and several hours later my water broke. They told me that because it was at 16 weeks there was nothing to be done and either I could go through labor naturally or induce the labor to quicken the process--but either way 16 weeks was too early for a forming baby to survive. I chose to be induced after my husband could make it there. I had been starting to have hopes and dreams about my coming baby, so I was very distraught. I knew that everything was formed in 'my baby' because the billboards always say everything is all formed, the heart, the fingers, etc. But, when I asked the nurse if they could transplant anything from this soon to die life inside of me, she told me straight out that nothing was fully formed enough to be used by any baby or person. They were very nice in the hospital. When the miscarriage occurred (and it was called a spontaneous abortion) they dressed the aborted fetus in a little hospital robe and encouraged me to view 'it.' I have to admit I was totally disgusted by what I saw. The "baby" looked like a skinny tiny alien dressed in a ridiculous robe, but they were trying to be sensitive to the fact that to a woman who wants her pregnancy to end with a baby, this was my baby. What I realized from this whole experience was that when you are pregnant it has the potential develop into a baby, but it isn't a baby yet, it is the woman and her family's hopes and dreams of a baby. Losing these hopes and dreams is extremely painful and it is easy to think that the hopes and dreams are a reality, but in truth, they have not happened yet. I mourned for a long time for the loss of "my baby," really, for the loss of my hope of a baby.

The news that anti-choicers were reenacting and celebrating the murder of a doctor horrified me. It horrifies me even more that people see it and say, in one breath, "Oh that's bad, but what's really bad is pro-choice feminism."

SERIOUSLY?

There is a domestic terrorist group killing American citizens who had the nerve to become OB/GYNs? And it's more relevant to scold feminsts for assuming women should have the final say on what happens to their bodies?

And SERIOUSLY?

Women making reproductive choices is the same thing as systematically wiping out an entire human ethnic group? Because women who have abortions believe that all babies don't have the right to live.

But I guess that answers the question for Shelia regarding what punishment she thinks women should get. The same as those who participate in genocide. Or the same as those who participate in slavery. Tried for war crimes or crimes against humanity and executed.

And EVEN MORE SERIOUSLY?

A group can call themselves "pro-life" and CELEBRATE AND HONER A MURDERER at the same time?

Q: "I am curious about the feminist view about these men who are relieved of their obligations to a woman or a child who never was, so the men can screw around."
A: "Feminism benefits everybody. Even assholes."

Reproductive freedom for women means being able to put chemicals or foreign objects into their bodies, or to undergo invasive procedures that carry occasional, but known risks, if they do not want to become pregnant or carry a fetus to term.

Reproductive freedom for men means . . . if they are lucky (pro-choice partner who practices contraception and does not need a man for support), they get to screw around?

Doesn't this sound lame to you? It does to me.

"I wonder if somebody is using a woman's name to gain more credibility in a conversation about a topic which they know is really none of their business. I just have the weirdest hunch."

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Sheila is obviously a misogynist troll.

Racist, too. Maybe we should start a bingo card.

"Sheila" is a man - right?

"Pro-choice to me is in some ways pro-freedom of religion."

That's another new one for me. People should promote this idea for a Constitutional right to free choice, as opposed to the current administration seeking to limit Constitutional freedoms, or ban gay marriage.

Can we once and for all establish that YES, fetuses are alive. A fetus is a "life form." A sperm is also a life form, as is an egg. So is a tree. So is a ladybug.
Why do people go on and on regarding whether or not a fetus is "alive?" Of course it's alive.

It's not a person.

"I realize that most pro-lifers will never be converted (nor will most pro-choicers),"

In my life, I have changed my mind three times depending on arguments made: life/choice/life/choice

While abortion is legal and I have my nursing training, I do not expect it will change again.

"No histrionics, no drama. If you kill something it's murder."

You mean if I kill a roach it's murder?

Calling an embryo (or fetus) a baby is about the same as saying that some flour, sugar, and an egg are a cake.

1) My spouse got "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" on DVD for Christmas, and the whole time I watched this video, I was thinking of "Charlie Wants an Abortion" and "Charlie Goes America All Over Everyone's Ass." (Street theatre being the last form of organic artistic expression.)

2) Okay, but seriously, I am very disturbed by this video and the accompanying "Paul Hill Days: Q&A." I was thinking of flagging them, but I can't tell if the person who posted it is siding with the Army of God types or trying to publicly humiliate them.

3) "Pro-choice to me is in some ways pro-freedom of religion."
x2. Leah, are you familiar with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice?

4) "If you kill something it's murder." Actually, Sheila, it's not. We kill something every time we eat, whether plant or animal. Even if you mean "If you kill a person it's murder," that would still be inaccurate. Murder is to kill another person with a malicious will. Both civil and religious traditions have a long tradition of recognizing justifiable homicide in certain circumstances.

However, I noticed that Sheila still hasn't answered the burning question on many people's minds . . . if abortion is murder, and a woman procures an abortion, how much time should she do?

I'll take my 10 demerits for feeding the troll now.

"Every argument offered in support of abortion could just as easily be applied to murdering people at any stage."

Not the arguments in favor of having control of one's own internal organs.

"is it much to ask TO SAVE A LIFE"

It's not asking her to save a life, it's asking her to make a new one.

"for her to suffer 5 or 6 months of discomfort and then give the baby to one of the MILLIONS of families seeking babies to adopt?"

What about when a woman tries to give a baby to one of the millions of families seeking babies to adopt, and all the families she asks *don't* want to adopt her baby?

"Don't judge the entire movement by the extremists...but do judge the extremists."

Good point!

Litchfield

I am very sorry to hear of your experience. I hope that as a nurse, I will be able to provide people with the kind of care that THEY would like to receive.

This is just another reason why health care professionals should not be judgmental, in this case, it's a baby vs. it is unformed tissue. There are women on both sides, with their own feelings, who must be supported with compassion.

Even this "Sheila" person, if it were say, an angry man grieving the abortion his girlfriend had without his input, would be deserving of emotional support. If he asked for it.

Eric

Johanna - yep, but thanks :) I'm actually thinking about getting involved in Catholics for Choice, but I don't think they have anything in my area (so it would just be through the internet).

What's really interesting, is that one of the very few bible verses I could find that delt with pregnancy/pregnancy termination indicated that the fetus was NOT considered a person (Exodus 21:22). The chapter is concerned with punishments for various crimes. This verse discusses the penalty for beating a pregnant woman and causing her miscarriage; the punishment is to pay remuneration to the woman and her husband plus "eye for an eye" for any damage caused to the woman. Just an interesting tidbit.

But this is waaaaaay off topic :)

Some of you use the word "troll" while obviously not knowing its meaning. I've been coming to this site for over two years and often post. Some of you have previously agreed with me on other issues and supported my posts.

You do NOT have to be pro-abortion to be a feminist. MANY feminists are pro-life. I truly believe that the main reason feminism doesn't mainstream is the unbelievable disregard pro-abortion supports show for common sense, family and babies.

Remember, most pro-abortion people also think a child should be able to have an abortion without parental involvement or permission. Let's see, she can't get an aspirin at school, but she can kill her baby!

Every person who believes in the right to abortion knows it kills babies, they just think that's okay.

"I'm actually thinking about getting involved in Catholics for Choice"

DO IT. They always need more activists! And they have the sweetest t-shirts!! :)

"What about when a woman tries to give a baby to one of the millions of families seeking babies to adopt, and all the families she asks *don't* want to adopt her baby?"

I do not mean to be insensitive to families seeking to adopt a child, who are perhaps even willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars to adopt children from overseas, but yes indeed, there are an abundance of "less desirable" children (not infants, for example) available for adoption. There are even foster children up to age 18 who would love to be adopted. (My neighbor's 17 year old foster child was recently adopted by some family in Georgia. Georgia? We're in freaking Hawaii.) Families having their own children, do not get to pick and choose; at least, not once they are born and taken home.

"Not the arguments in favor of having control of one's own internal organs."

Mina (and several others before her!) hit the nail on the head. No BORN person has the right to usage of my organs without my permission. Previous Supreme Court rulings uphold that right (Shimp V. McFall). Even if another person is going to die, they do not have a right to usage of my organs, blood, body, etc. If pregnancy becomes compulsory again, and fetuses are given an additional right that no other born person has (the right to use someone else's body against their will), we open the floodgates to forced organ donation, forced blood donation, etc. People should not be forced to allow others to use their bodies. It is unconstitutional to force a person to allow someone else to use their body, even if the other person will die. So, even if a embryo or fetus is a person, it has absolutely no right to use another's body without their permission, just like no other person has that right.

(and scrambling brains? COME ON 88% of abortions occur in the first 12 weeks or before then, when the embryo/fetus looks something like this:

http://www.centrus.com.br/DiplomaFMF/SeriesFMF/11-14weeks/images-centrus/3d-9-10weeks-01%20copy.jpg

And has no "brains" to scramble, unless an undeveloped brain stem counts

Sheila, could you PLEASE try to tone down the saccarine sentimentality and use some reason here?

You literally sound like you're re-typing a list of anti-choice talking points (which are all inaccurate).

You're right though, pro-choicers all hate their families (those who even have them!).
/eye roll

Ahhh, millions of families consisting of a mom, a dad, and the twelve children she wanted to abort.

I think that the strongest argument for being pro-choice has nothing to do with whether or not the fetus is a "baby" or "human" but with the fact that regardless of how you personally feel about abortion, abortions will happen.

This Sheila person can have her opinion, but regardless of that opinion desperate women will seek abortions. If it were possible I would love to give people the opportunity to sit in on abortion counselling(as a very respectful fly on the wall...not able to actually communicate with the woman). These women are distraught and making a life choice they have put a lot of thought into, agonized over in most cases. Who am I, or who are you, to tell them what is right for them and their situation? Who is anyone to judge?

Because of her obvious disregard and inability to empathize with others, I find this Sheila person incredibly insulting, and inappropriate. Walk for a day in the life of a pregnant 13 year old and then tell me that abortion should be outlawed. Or perhaps the mother of 4 who was struggling to make ends meet and couldn't afford another child. It would be pretty hard for her to carry a child to term and then give it away.

Anyway, the real point of this post is the heinous reinactment of a murder. That I just cannot even stomach today.

Going home to read a good book and be thankful for all of you who fight for women's rights everyday...

"Can we once and for all establish that YES, fetuses are alive. A fetus is a 'life form.' A sperm is also a life form, as is an egg. So is a tree. So is a ladybug."

More accurately: fetuses, sperm, and eggs are human life the same way tree leaves are plant life and ladybug wings are insect life.

"Every person who believes in the right to abortion knows it kills babies, they just think that's okay."

That is simply untrue.

That's a very good legal argument, FemiDancer.

I have seen a number of new and good analogies made in just this thread. They should be added to pro-choice sites. Really. Because let me tell you, the pro-life sites are just increasing and expanding, despite the Bible saying only what it has always said, and nothing explicitly pro-life. Openly implies pro-choice, however.

Leah, at least some traditional Jewish law calls for the life of the mother to be valued over the life of the child she's giving birth to, if complications arise-- IIRC it actually addresses dis-membering a full-term baby in the womb, if necessary. They thought it was more important for a woman to be there for the children she did have-- and for the opportunity to have additional children if she so chose.

Interesting how a culture that often addressed women as merely baby-making machines was still smart enough to realize that the life of a real, breathing woman was worth more than that of an unborn possibility.

Leah--
That has got to be one of the most beautiful and well-worded pro-choice arguments I have ever heard. Brava.

Shelia, please don't talk about "common sense" again when you are talking about the brain-scrambling of a FETUS (not my term) that doesn't even have a brain yet. It's insulting (and laughable).

How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?
How much time should a woman who aborted serve, Sheila?

you've been asked this question uncounted times before.
When will you answer?

Did y'all know abortionists are now brainWASHING the fetuses before they get to the scrambling part?

"Remember, most pro-abortion people also think a child should be able to have an abortion without parental involvement or permission. Let's see, she can't get an aspirin at school, but she can "

Have you heard of HIPAA? No? Basically, it's a federal law that means other than the patient, in this case, pregnant child seeking abortion, that no one else has the right to know. Would I like to know if my daughter is getting an abortion, and hurt if she could not come to me, because I would give her my support and not turn her away or shame her? Sure. But I can't force her, and it is not my body. My daughter being pregnant and having or not having an abortion is not your business, either.

Even leaving aside the issue whether abortion is killing or not, one would think anti-choicers would want to ensure there are as few abortions as possible.

So why aren't they promoting comprehensive sex ed, free contraception and a social environment more welcoming to children? It works over here in godless Europe...

"I do not mean to be insensitive to families seeking to adopt a child, who are perhaps even willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars to adopt children from overseas, but yes indeed, there are an abundance of 'less desirable' children (not infants, for example) available for adoption."

Aren't some infants available for adoption too?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1027/p11s01-lifp.html

"...Families in foreign countries cite the availability of newborns as the primary reason they choose to adopt in the US. Canada and Europe don't have as many babies available for adoption. Therefore, 'if you want a newborn, you go to America,' says Bart van Meurs, Elisa's dad...

"...'Most of our families just want a baby as young as possible, and the US is the best place to go for a newborn,' explains Lorne Welwood of Hope Adoption Services in Abbotsford, British Columbia..."

At the same time a newborn may be rejected by some potential adoptive parents for other reasons like disability, ethnicity, likelihood of the relatives getting the child back, etc.

I had no idea that this pro-choice/pro-slavery "argument" was so prolific. I did a Google search, expecting to find a plethora of Snopes-like debunking. I did not, sadly, but that slavery thing is all over the place.

Um, hey fundies, you know, a lot of words and phrases used commonly in the 1800s are still in use today, but have completely different meanings.

OMG! I always thought of myself as pro choice, yet Sheila insists that I am pro abortion. Ok, now I think that every woman reading this should go out and get pregnant TONIGHT! We can then all go and have abortions at the same time and talk about what a fun experience it was and how we can't wait to do it again. Who's with me?

I mean, come on, wouldn't that be "pro abortion"?

SO sorry you guys. I've been away trying to prepare for our Feministing retreat (!) this weekend. Troll be gone is here. Whew.

I Heart Jessica. :)

Shelia-

Why did you (supposedly) have a baby when you could have adopted a child that you so vocally demand should be here in this world even though their mother didn't want or could take care of?

Oh and in case you didn't see it...

How much time should a woman get in jail if she has an abortion?

"Aren't some infants available for adoption too?"

Which is why another million "unwanted" children born every year would be a strain.

K guess she's gone. I typo'd. I meant:

Why did you (supposedly) have a baby when you could have adopted a child that you so vocally demand should be here in this world, even though their mother didn't want or could NOT take care of them?

I hope you don't think your grandmother is a parasite. But you have every legal right to stop supporting her anyway, even if the process causes her death. Just like I have a right to evict a "baby" from my body. Even if the process causes death. If the government would like to provide shelter to these homeless "babies" into volunteer women, I wouldn't mind so much. Of course, if these women aren't willing to save my aborted babies, shame on them.

>:]

Ha, you know if someone actually marketed a novelty product called "Troll Be Gone," I would totally buy one.

"At the same time a newborn may be rejected by some potential adoptive parents for other reasons like disability, ethnicity, likelihood of the relatives getting the child back, etc." - Mina

Yes, definitely. As my friend who wants to work in adoption/social services says, "the little brown babies" have a lot harder time finding homes. Meaning children of most minority backgrounds, aside from usually Asian children. Also, a lot of adoption agencies try to adopt children of an ethnic background to parents of the same background, and apparently African Americans are less likely to adopt than white americans (for an obvious variety of reasons, lower SES, and cultural values of "family" being your genetic family). Also it is much cheaper to adopt a black baby than a white baby, sort of a supply and demand thing. (how terrible is that?) Low supply of white babies, high demand, higher supply of black babies, low demand.

Sheila--
Does it really matter how 'in line' with the mainstream Feministing readers you've been on certain issues? Fact of the matter is, you are currently acting like a troll. You're evading questions which have been postulated to you numerous times by numerous people and instead using ill-informed rhetoric to churn out the usual anti-choice talking points (and ineffectually, at that).
And I don't believe for one second that either of the stories you told about your 'friends' and their babies are true.

This is probably going to sound really dumb because I know she was an awful annoying troll and everything, but I'm kind of glad sheila came on here.

I'm really really new to all of this. I'm a young woman, younger than I'd like to say, and I just purchased Full Frontal Feminism less than a month ago and read the whole thing in a day. I can't even tell you how life changing it was. My perspective on so many things that I had ignored had vastly changed in an entire day and it was so overwhelming but wonderful all at once.

As far as pro choice vs. pro life I know I've always been pro choice but I've never had any good reasons to back it up. I just knew there was something wrong with not having full control over my body even if I couldn't explain why. My solution? Never talk or think too hard about it, when discussion arises, do not put in any input. Bad solution for sure.

This was really my first exposure to people actually talking it out, listening to real arguments and reasons for why pro-choice is the way to be. I got to hear all the strange things pro lifers can come up with.

I was so dissapointed in myself at first. I'd read something sheila had said and almost agree with it, but then I'd read everything else people were saying and be able to compare theories for myself. By the time she was banned I was really starting to look at what she had to say, and by myself think "You're kidding me right?" I was able to come up with reasons on my own why what she said was BS and I was really PROUD of me.

So she was an annoying troll and all, but I was glad I read this. I'm even more glad I found this site.

Thanks, Jessica!

Sheila could very well be a woman. I know far too many anti-choice women who spew this rhetoric.

I thought the re-enactment was horrifying. But at the same time I was sort of giggling. It was like performance art for the red states.

smlove611: That's great! And don't worry about being young, I'm only a college senior and I've seen posts from college women and high school students. You're never too young to fight against inequality. Unless maybe you are two years old, then it's kind of hard. :)

smlove611,

just curious, where'd you get your user name?

"Unless maybe you are two years old, then it's kind of hard. :)"

I don't know about that . . . have you seen this!

haha I know what it sounds like but my name is Samantha M. Love so it's the screen name I used in 9th grade and I just never stopped using it.

Peggy:::giggle:: It sent me to the main page but I assume you mean the "Now that I'm safe, I'm pro-choice" shirt" Which is pretty hilarious. :) But two year olds would have trouble typing blog posts :)

About the issue: That is TERRIBLE. I just saw the YouTube video, there are some who are spoofing it. But still, they should stop calling themselves pro-"life" at this point.

About "Sheila Kelly": She/He seems suspicious. Wasn't there a "Colleen Kelly" a while back who ALSO posed as an anti-feminist woman? I think it's the same person, their styles of trolling are the same...

smlove611: welcome to the club and i'm glad you got to use this post for something productive. debate IS a good thing, especially when it's with someone who isn't a troll and actually responds to your arguments in a remotely intelligent manner. a good debate can make you re-evaluate your positions, hone your arguments and even occasionally give you some perspective about the other side.

I was a feminist before I was pro-choice. So although I am pro-choice now, I do believe that feminists can be pro-life(tm), and I would urge the other posters to be respectful of such people. After all, I wouldn't have become pro-choice if other feminists hadn't politely explained their reasoning to me. That's not to say Sheila wasn't a troll, though. And I think "if it's not a baby then why are you murdering it" is the funniest thing I've read in a long time.

smlove611: I don't know if you have facebook/or enjoy using facebook, but there is a pretty neat group "Support a woman's right to choose," which has some really neat members, and often has discussion about many topics related to women's reproductive health. It also has a compilation post which gives a good starter look at a bunch of things having to do with abortion.

http://agnesscott.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2208211036

and this is the compilation post:

http://nyu.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2208211036&topic=3729&start=0

smlove611: I am a college woman who has been lurking for a while here but just started commenting extremely recently. And I agree--it was actually very beneficial for me to read all of Sheila's arguments and the rebuttals posted by everyone here. I really think (and HOPE, with the upcoming election) that it's a great and exciting time to be a young feminist. In fact, because of this site and the whole world it has opened up to me, I'm taking a Feminist Philosophy course next semester--completely unrelated to my major--and I couldn't be more excited. Thank you all so much!

Anyhow, to get back on topic...That video and the concept behind it are sickening. I honestly can't fathom how people who claim to value each person's (fetus's) life so much can be so cruel.

Next time they try a "re-enactment", they should take some tips from the local theater folk. Oh, right, too much sex going on there, not to mention the fags. Little wonder they're incapable of getting out of (a poor version of) the elocutionary speech pattern. And reading from paper! How fucking sad. I'd almost feel embarrassed for them, but the a Sheila or a Huckabee turns crawls out from under a rock.

I feel the need to add to what judgesnineteen was saying. In all my years of studying what feminism is about, I've always been told one major thing: feminism is about choice. Shouldn't that cover choice on everything, including if you want to be pro-choice OR pro-life?

I'm not at all trying to be inflammatory, I'm just asking. It seems to me that so many people say that right to choice is something a feminist has to believe in, but if I sign up for the Democratic or Republican party, do I have to agree completely in every way with the party line?

I have a very good friend who is a feminist, but she's very pro-life, and actually leans a bit towards the conservative side. We were having the conversation about how feminism and conservatism can come together in one person, and she asked if I hated her beliefs because I'm liberal. I don't hate her beliefs. I don't understand them all the time, but she can do and believe what she wants, as far as I'm concerned.

As for me, I personally think abortion in and of itself is abhorrent, and I think it's ridiculous that so many people are willing to be slightly more careless about contraception because they know they have another way out. (I know this isn't common, but it does happen. I knew someone who did that often, and it annoyed me greatly, but it is still her choice.) That being said, I am 100% pro-choice. As much as I hate the idea of abortion, that is overshadowed by my complete and total belief that a woman has a right to choose what to do with her body no matter what. Also, as much as I hate abortion, I don't look down on those who have them, because I am able to celebrate the fact that we have this choice.

So, with my somewhat conflicting ideas, does that make me a bad feminist? I personally don't think so. I think I have the choice to hate the idea of abortion, and even if I were full-on pro-life, I would think I have the right to choose that, too. Because I believe feminism is all about choice, regardless.

So, with my somewhat conflicting ideas, does that make me a bad feminist?

No, I think that makes you a thoughtful feminist. What you're missing is that choice requires having one. That is, anti-choice people wish to limit other people's options. There's nothing wrong with being personally anti-choice, for yourself. Your body, your rules. That doesn't mean your rules should apply to other's bodies, however.

I was confronted by one of an Army of God's leaders, the Rev. Donald Spitz after I worte something on my blog about 1st century Christianity on display. Here is his email address, so you can chew him out and brand him for what he really is -- a terrorist.

Glory2Jesus@armyofgod.com

I just posted about this both on youtube and on my blog.

http://aikenareaprogressive.blogspot.com/2008/01/christian-terrorist-organization-to-re.html

It is sickening and disgusting that anyone would glorify terrorism. The Army of God is another world enemy to democracy.

smlove611, I was hoping we pro-choicers would have the opportunity to lay down a bunch of solid arguments against Sheila before she was banned. Some trolls can actually serve a purpose, as they often argue our points for us!
So thanks for a.) visiting this site and b.) bringing this up!

Manda, the "choice" to be against choice is, well, anti-choice. There is a difference between choosing not to have an abortion yourself and choosing to support policies that take that choice away from others.

Not all anti-choice people limit other people's choices. I know several that say that they are completely against abortion, but understand that they have no right to stop others from getting one.

I really think it is possible that pro-life women (and men!) can be feminist as long as they don't try to force others to believe what they do. As was mentioned earlier in the discussion, the "I'm not a feminist, but..." phrase has a lot to do with our views on abortion. So many people think that you can't be against abortion AND be a feminist, so their turned off from the concept. Even though reproductive rights are an important part of feminism, there are so many other important aspects which require as many people as we can possible get to support them. So why chase away all the pro-life people?

Oh, no, I'm not missing that. I know that's what the anti-choicers are after, and it drives me mad. It's like you said, my body, my rules. I wish more people would understand that and quit trying to take other people's rights away.

We're supposed to be one of the more progressive countries, and yet we have these people trying to hold our women, poor and minorities down. I know that we have it better than LOTS of places, but still...land of the free? It seems more and more like that is only aimed at certain groups 'freedoms' to persecute what they don't like and to tell other people their beliefs are wrong. Oh, and let's not forget, murder in the name of 'life' and 'God's will'.

Sorry, I'm getting all kinds of riled. I'm a nice person, really.

Anjali, people who don't wish to stop other women from getting abortions are NOT anti-choice; they are pro-choice.

There seems to be a lot of confusion about what beliefs/actions make one pro-choice.

What would the babies say?

Probably something like "Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa? Gurgle."

meh...I think of people that would never get abortions themselves as pro-life and others as pro-choice
No, I'm not saying that you have to have had an abortion to be pro-choice lol...I'm just saying that I think people are pro-choice if they aren't opposed to considering abortions themselves. hmmm...that's not worded that great lol...but I think (hope!) you get what I mean!

Just because you think of it that way doesn't mean that's how it really is, Anjali.
The terms do have actual definitions.

yea I figured that...I probably should've explained my definitions of them before I used them...my bad

Anjali: I think of those people as personally pro-life and politically pro-choice. They do not like abortion, and would not get one themselves, but they do not want to make abortion illegal or restrict the options of other women. Which in general kind of makes them all pro-choice, because they believe in their right not to choose abortion and other women's rights to choose how they please, but a lot of times people who are "personally" pro-life want to make it clear that they themselves would never consider an abortion.

anjali--there are probably a LOT of pro-choice women who would never consider abortion for themselves. that's NOT what being pro-choice means at all. pro-choice is about CHOICE--about recognizing that you don't have any right to decide for another woman what is best for her.

if you think abortion is wrong, but you understand that it is not your place to impose that belief on others through any type of legal means, you are pro-choice, whether you own up to the label or not.

Well, apparently a significant number of pro-choicers are mis-labeling themselves, which means the poll numbers people rely on to demonstrate the percentage of lifers vs. choicers is off (and in our favor).

FemiDancer: That's exactly where I am. Personally pro-life, politically pro-choice. Although, I don't think I can EVER actually say I would NEVER get an abortion, because all kinds of situations could happen. I like to say that I would never WANT to get one, but circumstances could always change.

I like that y'all use 'anti-choice' as the name for these types of people. I think a lot of people get confused over pro-life/anti-choice as they do over pro-choice/pro-abortion. Because, if you take the words 'pro-life' at their actual meaning...who isn't pro-life? (Except murderers.) It's a rather odd terminiology, because pitting 'pro-life' against 'pro-choice' still almost makes it sound like 'pro-choice' is 'pro-murder', in the sheer fact that we know pro-life and pro-choice are opposite ideals. Pro-life and pro-choice are both very positive ways of saying things that are on the opposite ends of the spectrum, one of which isn't exactly positive itself (taking away women's rights, etc.).

It's the anti-choicers that are the zealots, not ALL pro-life people. Just like how pro-choicers aren't really pro-abortion or pro-murder. I think more pro-lifers are actually somewhat moderate than we think they are.

"anjali--there are probably a LOT of pro-choice women who would never consider abortion for themselves."

For that matter, what about when men, infertile women, and intersex people who can't get pregnant are pro-choice...?

Seriously. Wow.
From what I've seen, people have left one major thing out: what about the women whose reproduction is out of their hands? Who don't have knowledge of/access to birth control? Who are victims of our fucked up abstinence only ed? Who can't possibly afford the jacked up prices of bc? Or are raped?

JAYSUS. I wish the anti-choicers would look to the root of the problem as opposed to crippling people's agency even moreso.

adaerid -- I was thinking the same thing. Sheila's little anecdote about how a friend being devastated when a wanted pregnancy almost ended in a miscarriage magically means fetuses are babies and abortion is murder... didn't "Colleen" tell exactly the same story, accompanied by exactly the same argument?

And, IIRC, wasn't her authenticity called into question when she apparently mixed up the name of the city she claimed to have served as a cop in (so that no one could contradict her when she said that no woman anywhere ever can be an effective cop), then tried to say someone had impersonated her (or, hell, maybe him) and made it look like she was confused in order to discredit her? And then it turned out that post posts had come from the same IP address?

Is there any way this could be looked into?

I allow women who have had miscarriages to decide whether to grieve, feel relief, or simply move on. If a woman says it's her baby, it is. Please be sensitive to people who have miscarried.

If this video were available a few months ago it wouldve been good to add it onto a webpage for a feature story I was doing for a journalism class. The topic was about reproductive isues. Anti-choicers are freaks.

If that was addressed to me, A Male... I have nothing but sympathy for any parent who had a chance to carry a WANTED child to term and lost it due to bad luck, assault, sickness, anything -- that's tragic, and it's a whole different animal from dealing with the consequences of an UNWANTED pregnancy and INTENTIONALLY not carrying the fetus to term.

That's why I get so angry when people claim that being pro-choice means we/I hate babies or don't care or are glad when a woman has a miscarriage -- it's a deliberate misunderstanding of pro-choice ideas: that a woman's body and beliefs are HER OWN and no one else's; that a fetus is a potential baby, not a baby; that the only good pregnancy is a pregnancy chosen by the woman; and, most relevantly to your post, that the only good way for a pregnancy to end is however the woman wanted it to. I wasn't being insensitive to this woman's fear of losing a child she hoped and wanted to have; I was saying that it was a separate thing from another woman's determination to remain free of a pregnancy and child she did not want to have. Obviously, the right to either of these decisions should be respected and protected by anyone wishing to call him- or herself pro-choice.

And if it wasnt addressed to me... well, at least I got that off my chest.

I'm glad at least that we pro-choicers are starting to take more control of the dialogue. The anti-choicers have controlled the debate for too long, by their shock tactics and by their successful promotion of their terminology. I love that the question about "how much time" has gained traction. I think it's shocked quite a few people.

I also think that it would benefit more people to see videos like this just to see how looney these people are. I think that fewer people would identify with the anti-choice argument if they saw what lurks in their hearts for real. Even if they are the lunatic fringe, they are the fringe that is running the movement.

One other point that needs to be illuminated, though, is that the anti-choicers (I think we should all adopt this term, it's part of taking control of the debate) seem to paint women two ways - you have women who have babies and become mothers, and those who have abortions. When most women who have an abortion (or girls, which is a minority of those) later go on to have children and become mothers.

Also, more attention needs to be called to the fact that outlawing abortion only drives it underground. As we can see in countries that have done so. As we can also see in our sooooo successful War On Drugs. Or Prohibition. Outlawing something does not prevent it, it just lays out penalties for those who choose to do it anyway. And they will.

Finally - hey, adoption is not the answer all the time! There are many women who would pay a steep price for going through a pregnancy - ranging from social stigma to beatings and murder. So get off the high horse about "why doesn't she give it up for adoption." Everyone should know by now that there is no more dangerous time in an American woman's life than during pregnancy. And these days, it's not because of anemia, or complications of childbirth. It's because of abuse. Gah!

dear "sheila" (who was banned, but may still be lurking). my mother is pro-choice. my mother had an abortion. my mother miscarried a different pregancy and was heartbroken. my mother started hemmoraging early in her pregnancy with me and had to go to the emergency room to save me and spent the rest of her pregnancy on bed rest hellbent on keeping me. my mother took me to planned parenthood to get my first prescription for birth control. my mother took me for my first HIV test.

none of those experiences, feelings, and beliefs are mutually exclusive. the bullshit story about your friends sounds as realistic to me as those urban legends about people waking up in tubs full of ice the morning after a wild party missing vital organs.

a wanted baby, a pregnancy that will kill or seriously injure mother or fetus, and an unwanted pregnancy are all different beasts.

you add nothing to logical discourse, so, go die. (dear readers, sorry to be so hateful, but she basically called my mom a genocidal whore)

kthxbai

I'm pregnant, want to be pregnant more than anything, and AM STILL PRO-CHOICE.

This pregnancy has been incredibly complicated and risky. The entire experience has made me want to throttle every fundie dipshit who says "Oh, just have the baby!" (as if pregnancy was some inconsequential walk in the park) and I'd probably do it, too, except that I've been on bedrest for the last seven weeks.

Prior to this pregnancy, I lost three embryos and grieved quite a bit for the children they might have eventually become. I'd still support a friend through an abortion if that was her choice, though. Hell, I'd drive her to the clinic myself if she needed me to, except, y'know, bedrest, horribly ill, bla bla bla.

"As for me, I personally think abortion in and of itself is abhorrent, and I think it's ridiculous that so many people are willing to be slightly more careless about contraception because they know they have another way out. (I know this isn't common, but it does happen. I knew someone who did that often, and it annoyed me greatly, but it is still her choice.)"

That's a little like saying, I don't need to watch what I eat or exercise, because there is liposuction. Or Jenny Craig. Or gastric banding. The Pill, a condom, or no sex at all, are a lot safer and cheaper than the alternatives. As for that woman you mention, I know readers here do not like to talk about it, but like other invasive procedures, termination of pregnancy (abortion) does have health risks, which can in addition, affect the outcomes of future pregnancies. I certainly wouldn't recommend abortion for birth control.

Every argument offered in support of abortion could just as easily be applied to murdering people at any stage.

Really? Including the one about other people not having the right to use my body against my will? You must have some weird relationships, then.

Reproductive freedom for women means being able to put chemicals or foreign objects into their bodies, or to undergo invasive procedures that carry occasional, but known risks, if they do not want to become pregnant or carry a fetus to term. Reproductive freedom for men means . . . if they are lucky (pro-choice partner who practices contraception and does not need a man for support), they get to screw around?

Yep, it does. And in large part that's down to a simple fact of biology: women get pregnant. Men do not. That means that 1) we have far more invested in keeping ourselves from being pregnant and 2) we are the ones who have to take action if we find ourselves pregnant. What sexual freedom has given women is the ability to have sex without running the risk of being tied for life to the person we've had sex with. Look at it like this: if not for abortion and contraception, those 7,000 women might now have an unbreakable tie with that scumbag Jack Nicholson, instead of a one-night stand and a vague sense of having cooties. I know which one sounds better for me.

Feminism can't stop men from acting like assholes. There's no law against being a jerk. What it can do is make the consequences of those actions less onerous for women.

If a woman says it's her baby, it is.

That is exactly how I think of it, and I think that's precisely what's so frightening to the pro-forced-birth crowd: it means that a woman's desires actually have weight and meaning.

I guess the other thing is that I just don't think that promiscuity is inherently bad. I mean, don't get me wrong, I think that Jack Nicholson is a repulsive sleaze, but if he's gotten laid 7000 times and the women were all psyched about it, well...good for him. And them too. I suspect he has treated women quite badly (just a gut feeling), but the fact that he's a big ol' slut isn't the problem as far as I'm concerned. I also suspect that he'd be a lousy father, so it's all for the best. Honestly, lack of access to birth control and abortion never stopped a cad from being a cad--it just meant that the women suffered more.

"'If a woman says it's her baby, it is.'"

"That is exactly how I think of it, and I think that's precisely what's so frightening to the pro-forced-birth crowd: it means that a woman's desires actually have weight and meaning."

And naturally, if on the other hand, a woman would like to move on, because she doesn't believe she's lost a baby, that's fine too. Before I was born, my mother had a miscarriage when she didn't even know she was pregnant. She just found some stuff about the size of a fingernail, on the toilet seat. I heard that story exactly once or twice as a young child. If that had been born, I would not have been, because my mother's plan was two children. Then she had her tubes tied.

This establishing killing of pregnant women as a hate crime, would work around the legal problem of legalized voluntary abortion vs. involuntary murder of fetuses.

"I think that Jack Nicholson is a repulsive sleaze, but if he's gotten laid 7000 times and the women were all psyched about it, well...good for him. And them too."

Hey, if some woman told me, "I screwed Jack Nicholson!" I would consider it cool. If all the women wanted to get together to form the "We screwed Jack Nicholson" fan club, I would consider it funny. But all day, I've been unable to clear my mind of the thought that Jack Nicholson (and Wilt Chamberlain - Mr. 20,000, "The Big Dipper") helped spread disease*. That's a lot of duct tape. That is not responsible.

* What? You think they tested themselves and all the women first? Chamberlain claimed he was doing it 7 or 8 times a day since the age of 15.

I'm not a Christian, but I do find it absolutely offensive and perverse that the man in this play actually compared Jesus Christ to someone who murdered two people. This is an example of how sadly far off base some Christians have gone from their supposed beliefs. I really wish more stories about real Christians who honestly do good work and live the way they are supposed to according to what their own bible says made it into the news more often. It's people like these crazy extremists who make it harder for honest Christians to get the true message of love and acceptance that Jesus taught out, and I think that's a shame. It's much like the reason that many Americans really don't understand the principles of Islam and what the religion is really about, all they see is the extremists.

A male: I agree with you 100%. And it is unfortunate that there are people out there who don't really think about the consequences.

Even the woman's mind frame...I mean, really. No matter how pro-choice you are, no matter how much you may not want to have a baby, you NEVER know how you're going to react to an abortion. Some women don't think twice about it and some women who were gung-ho about getting rid of it end up depressed. And yes, there are health risks...as there are with ANY procedure.

I think that's one thing the anti-choicers don't understand...I really think they believe us pro-choicers are all just running around having abortions for fun. I don't think they realize that, although we believe in a woman's right to choose, we also acknowledge that abortion is not something to sneeze at. It's a serious matter, and I feel we all take it seriously.

Sorry, I'm just rambling. I think my cold medicine kicked in, and I'm going to put myself to bed, now.

"One other point that needs to be illuminated, though, is that the anti-choicers (I think we should all adopt this term, it's part of taking control of the debate) seem to paint women two ways - you have women who have babies and become mothers, and those who have abortions. When most women who have an abortion (or girls, which is a minority of those) later go on to have children and become mothers."

Don't forget the ones who have children and become mothers *then* get abortions.

"'Reproductive freedom for women means being able to put chemicals or foreign objects into their bodies, or to undergo invasive procedures that carry occasional, but known risks, if they do not want to become pregnant or carry a fetus to term. Reproductive freedom for men means . . . if they are lucky (pro-choice partner who practices contraception and does not need a man for support), they get to screw around?'

"Yep, it does."

Not exactly. Reproductive freedom for men also includes being able to wear condoms, choose vasectomy, resist pressure from fathers and grandfathers to marry and sire sons, etc. RISUG is also in clinical trials right now:

http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2006/03/30/new_male_contraceptive_clears_hurdle.html

"...Currently, RISUG's developers are arranging a collaboration with US researchers. Lissner says that to gain FDA approval, US researchers will have to begin with animal tests, so studies in North American men would not start for several years. Still, she notes that 'We shouldn't be discouraged. We already know that RISUG works, which is half the battle in drug development. Men in studies in India have been using it for more than a decade. Now we just have to finish our homework.'

"RISUG's chief developer, Prof. Sujoy Guha of the Indian Institute of Technology, says myths about men not being interested in contraception are just that: myths. 'I get letters from men all over the world who beg to come to India and participate in this study at their own expense.'"

" It's people like these crazy extremists who make it harder for honest Christians to get the true message of love and acceptance that Jesus taught out, and I think that's a shame. It's much like the reason that many Americans really don't understand the principles of Islam and what the religion is really about, all they see is the extremists."

I totally agree. Also, too many people out there seem to forget about the denominations within Christianity and Islam.

This thread prompted me to put in my 2 cents.

Anti-choicers so obviously lack the independence of thought and sublimety of mind which characterizes so many of our choices in LIFE today they must attempt to take away any semblance of CHOICE from those that have those profound qualities.

Having said that, perhaps a brief explanation is in order.

I have had an abortion and in no way did I consider the act, an act of grievous harm on another PERSON. I sought one for my own reasons which are none of anyone's business.

Last June, I became pregnant. I decided to continue the pregnancy to its fruition for, again, my own personal reasons and no one else's business but my own and by my own choice, the father's.

I am now 8 months pregnant and feel all the joys, worries,and discomforts of an advanced pregnancy and in NO WAY do I feel regret about my previous abortion.

Anti-choicers can not nor will they permit anyone the liberty to have the choices others and I have made because they are UNABLE to.

At first glance, this looks like a simpistic statement.

Anti-choicers have a tendency to see things in black and white and lack any mental flexibility to accommodate different choices when presented with a similiar life situation.

In a way, I envy them for having such a easy life as all their choices are made for them by a religion or whatever.

I wonder if any of these people have ever made a decision with a piece of stenograph paper with pro's and con's on opposite side and actually made an informed decision for themselves.

To end this post, I am proud to say I have always been a Feminist and will remain staunchly pro-choice and if anything this pregnancy has even made my Feminist and pro-choice beliefs stronger.

Instead of making tasteless videos celebrating a health care provider's death and attempting to close clinics, etc etc etc, anti-choicers should help alleviate the REASONS women have abortions in the FIRST place instead of simply trying to restrict their right.

As with a previous thread here and elsewhere on other blogs and news organizations, legally limiting abortion doesn't decrease the number of them. Women's lives are just more at risk.

If I was anti-choice, this is what I would do as it would make more sense.

Of course, the funny thing about anti-choicers is that they are often anti-birth control and anti-emergency contraceptive, things which prevent unwanted pregnancies and therefore prevent abortion. Some are even against any condom usage. So, its hard for them to try and alleviate women's unwanted pregnancies, if they want to block every avenue for them to prevent them.

But all day, I've been unable to clear my mind of the thought that Jack Nicholson (and Wilt Chamberlain - Mr. 20,000, "The Big Dipper") helped spread disease*. That's a lot of duct tape. That is not responsible.

Well, yeah, obviously. That would be part of the being a sleaze thing and treating women badly, but it's not a condition of promiscuity itself, and it's not something that would have been alleviated in an era that didn't have access to reliable birth control.

Oh, and they also don't want any tax money going to organizations the help women obtain birth control more cheaply or provide education about birth control/STDs. They are also anti-comprehensive sex ed and pro-abstinence only. Basically, there is a reason we call them "anti-choice."

The only choice they want women to have is, twiddle your thumbs and stay a virgin until you are married, and then pop out as many babies as you can when you are married.

I gotta say, I'm torn between liking "Sheila's" 'slavery' and 'grandmother' arguments for comedic value. In reality, it's the pro-birthers who are the slvaers, trying to enslave women. However, the idea that Sheila---if it's really a woman---somehow shoved her grnadmother up her vagina and into her uterus is kind of fascinating in an awful way.

Maybe her uterine dwelling grandmother is quite diminutive, say, 12 inches tall.

Well, evidently women are also forcing fetii to plant crops and harvest them...from inside the uterus....so, in her universe, I guess anything's possible!

"This establishing killing of pregnant women as a hate crime, would work around the legal problem of legalized voluntary abortion vs. involuntary murder of fetuses."

Not if we could get hate crime legislation for ALL WOMEN.

*sigh* A girl can dream, right?

"Oh, and they also don't want any tax money going to organizations the help women obtain birth control more cheaply or provide education about birth control/STDs. They are also anti-comprehensive sex ed and pro-abstinence only."

...apart from the ones who are anti-abstinence too:

"The only choice they want women to have is, twiddle your thumbs and stay a virgin until you are married, and then pop out as many babies as you can when you are married."

For example, some of these want their daughters to do that as much as possible, so even still being a virgin a year after menarche is verboten.

"Maybe her uterine dwelling grandmother is quite diminutive, say, 12 inches tall."

"Well, evidently women are also forcing fetii to plant crops and harvest them...from inside the uterus....so, in her universe, I guess anything's possible!"

Maybe she just has a very large, hearty, crop-growing, slave-worked womb.

Misspelled: Oh yeah! I remember that it was really funny; NYC/Chicago, LAWL! xD

A miscarriage is a spontaneous abortion, not an induced one. How someone would even ignore these differences baffles me.

"The only choice they want women to have is, twiddle your thumbs and stay a virgin until you are married, and then pop out as many babies as you can when you are married."

Very sad, but true. Strip off all the layers of bullshit from them and that's what you get. *sigh* Conservatives having power sucks balls. *duh*

A: "This establishing killing of pregnant women as a hate crime, would work around the legal problem of legalized voluntary abortion vs. involuntary murder of fetuses."
B: "Not if we could get hate crime legislation for ALL WOMEN."

I could support that. Even so, I believe the killing of a pregnant woman - pregnancy being documented as a special risk factor in abuse and murder - should be considered especially heinous, with longer sentencing guidelines, if not seen as its own crime. Not because it is harming/killing a potential baby, but because of the woman's condition which makes her an even more vulnerable target than for her gender alone.

Calling an embryo (or fetus) a baby is about the same as saying that some flour, sugar, and an egg are a cake.

No, no, it's like calling raw cake batter a cake. Watch out! That stuff can give you salmonella.