Please answer this question (abortion)...

[Dawgs]

Which choice best describes your position on abortion? Please read all of the choices before responding.

I'm writing a paper and I went to get as much honest feedback as possible. Thanks.

[skipos]

1. Should always be legal but would like to see the number reduced

by improving economic conditions, improving birth control information and availability, etc.

[annabanana]

2. I am a post-menopausal mother of sons..

The decisions are not mine to make. If I were an "interested party" to a potential abortion, I would expect to put in my 2 cents, and then back off.

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. I am definitely pro-life, but...

I think there would be greater harm done, to women and to society as a whole, if abortions were recriminalized. The best solution for the situation is to encourage responsible sexual activity, teach birth control methods, and make sure that both men and women use those methods correctly and consistently except when both want to become parents.

[American Tragedy]

21. If you believe it should remain a legal option

that seems to me to be at least implicitly pro-choice.

Do bear in mind that contraception isn't 100%, even in cases of perfect use.

[TechBear_Seattle]

38. Pro-choice and pro-life are not mutually exclusive positions

I strongly value human life. I also reject the position that life begins at conception. My view is that life begins at viability, ie when the fetus has developed enough to survive outside the womb (about 27 weeks.) I would have little problem with outlawing abortion in the third trimester as long as it remains fully legal before that; many states already have laws along those lines with very little consitutional conflict. On the other hand, I feel my time and resources are better spent supporting abortion alternatives (such as birth control and medically accurate sex education) than in trying to change abortion law.

And, for the record, I oppose war and capital punishment, making me overall more pro-life than the vast majority of anti-choicers :hi:

[Dawgs]

4. Hmm, no votes for making abortion illegal.

:shrug:

[bigwillq]

5. Option #1

As a man, I have no right to tell a woman what to do with her body. People need the choice to do whatever they choose with their bodies.

With that being said, I'm a bit sick of putting the sole responsibility of birth control on a woman. The man should take the responsibility to cover his own dick.

[Fleshdancer]

6. Every woman's situation is unique and private

In all the latest abortion debates, the issue of privacy doesn't seem to be addressed. The idea that abortions are ok only in the way I want them to be is ridiculous. At the end of the day, every situation is different.

[Pool Hall Ace]

7. I would prefer that women not use abortion as a primary form of

birth control, but only for their own health and safety (not because I believe the fetus is a human being).

I do not believe in harshly judging a woman who has had multiple abortions, but she should be made aware of birth control methods other than having her innards scraped out.

To decrease the number of abortions, people need to have access to safe, effective, affordable birth control.

It would also help if people would really think about whether or not they want to become parents. People who decide they do not want children at all should be able to pursue the option of vasectomy or tubal ligation without condescension or having to jump through hoops.

Unfortunately, we don't really encourage anyone to think about whether parenthood is desirable for them. Instead, we tell them, "It's different when it's your own!" or "You don't know what love is until you have a child!"

I can't put a number on it, but I do believe there are plenty who decide after-the-fact that parenting isn't so great and fulfilling after all. I doubt that many would admit it, though.

[Der Blaue Engel]

31. I'll admit it....I try to educate as many people as I can

Having a kid was probably the stupidest decision I ever made. I love my son, but I do not love being a mom. I feel like I've lost decades of my life and ruined my body, and I will never be able to own a home or, it seems, even real furniture.

I am also quite aware that I have not been the greatest mom (even though my son seems to be turning out pretty well in spite of me); people with my mental health issues (bipolar/depression/PTSD) should probably avoid the experience.

I am also pretty certain my parents regretted having children. They married quickly due to an unplanned pregnancy, and my mother had similar issues to my own.

Whenever someone I know is unexpectedly pregnant and trying to decide whether to have the baby or not, or even just considering parenthood, I tell them exactly what I've said above in the hopes that they'll think about what they're really deciding to do: become the caretaker and constant companion of another living being who will frequently treat them badly and whose needs will always supercede their own.

I think it's far better to take rational stock of one's life and decide to abort a pregnancy than to have a child and constantly try to overcome your resentment. It's not fair to the kid.

[Pool Hall Ace]

37. I think it is commendable that you are honest with people.

My brothers and I were fortunate to have a loving, caring mother who truly wanted us. We believe Dad may have been dealing with some undiagnosed depression, but he truly dreaded being around us and made no effort to hide it.

The experiences with Dad, plus my own depression, played a major role in my decision to forego parenthood. Terminating a pregnancy is far less painful than giving birth and treating a child like a nuisance.

[BlooInBloo]

8. Interesting....

A LOT more birth-control-abortionists than I would have thought....

[harpo]

9. who uses abortion as birth control? This whole framing is screwed

[Katherine Brengle]

59. I agree with this -- here's what the "abortion as birth control" meme is

There are two things going on in this frame--

1) There might be like five women out there somewhere who actually do this. I have never met any of them or known anyone who knew any of them, but I am forced to assume that there are a few out there somewhere;

and

2) Women who have more than one abortion in their lifetimes are assumed not to be using any other birth control methods. The best bc methods have a 1-2% failure rate. This means that most women have several chances throughout their lifetimes to become pregnant even though they are using birth control. People who judge them fail to realize this.

[tyedyeto]

10. Choice to me means that all health care issues...

should be decided between a person and their physician. Female or male, we should all have the right to make health care decisions without interference by government.

[lost_anthropologist]

11. for your paper

When a word is possessive, it gets an apostrophe:
Jan's abortion was followed by 2 weeks of mind-numbing cramps.

When a word is plural, it does not receive an apostrophe:
In the last year, more states put issues dealing with abortions on their ballots in order to try to bring out conservative voters to draw more votes for the republican candidate for president.

If a word is both possessive and plural, or possessive and naturally ends in an 's', the apostrophe follows the word:
Jesus' teachings do not help christians' decisions regarding abortions.

Also, don't ignore the international community's stance on abortion. Look into China's practices, and ask yourself, Why don't good Christians stand up and start a war with China for their ruthless murder of so many souls?

[MrPrax]

12. Kinda Offensive Poll...

It's the same 'incrementalist' moralistic garbage that the Pro-Life movement has been so successful...

The ONLY public reference here is whether or not abortions are a safe medical procedure--it is...therefore the public has NO say in what a woman and a doctor decide is the best course of treatment.

If the woman is relying on medical termination of pregancy for 'personal reasons' like 'birth control', then there still is NO public role.

If the woman obtains an abortion due to rape, incest, miscegenation, sex selection, is irrelevent...consent or lack thereof has nothing to do with this issue whatsoever, UNLESS you are Pro-LIfe.

The poll questions all ask basically the same question and quite noticeably the question, "Do people have a right to contract safe medical services without interference or reference to 'other peoples' ethical concerns?" hasn't been asked...the answer...of course...

And go to hell dumb fundie fucks...

[Katherine Brengle]

60. Amen. Hellz yeah Amen!

Damn straight and thank you for saying that! (Of course, the paper is probably about perception, but that should have been one of the options.)

[ScreamingMeemie]

13. Abortion is Wrong...

...for me.

[TahitiNut]

15. Succinct. I like that.

No surprise coming from you - it's very often the case that I admire where you come from, kiddo! :yourock:

[ScreamingMeemie]

34. That means alot coming from you.

Off topic, have you heard anymore from Punkingal on her impending visit? :hug:

[TahitiNut]

39. Not yet - but soon, I think.

When the top goes down, it's time for this bear to stop hybernating. Daylight Savings Time is my favorite season for schmoozing and cruising.

[TahitiNut]

14. All the 'choices' in this poll ...

... conflate a personal perspective/choice/principle with a political principle. It's my belief that the very fact that I value my own right to make a personal choice impels me to forbid government interference in making such a choice.

In other words, I can BOTH believe that the laws of our country should be completely agnostic regarding abortion and allow someone to include it as a 'birth control' approach AND personally regard it as an option to be taken only under more extraordinary conditions.

I do not believe it's ethical to value one's own liberty to act according to one's own values and attempt to constrain others from doing so. I further, and probably even more important, regard any such law as a blunt instrument that cannot possibly accommodate the vast diversity of complex situations, each unique and difficult in its resolution.

[Nickster]

16. Well spoken, but you are assuming that Neocons are able to accept

diverse,complex life situations into their concept of the world. They clearly can't. A Neocon is a black and white kind of person, you're with us or against us, that's why their belief system is devoid of any humanity at all.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

18. I'm afraid I disagree.

I think that the government does have the right to interfere in personal choices. I think early/mid term abortion is a choice it shouldn't interfere in, but for reasons specific to abortion, not because of a general principle about individual liberties.

[TahitiNut]

22. Quibble: Governments don't have 'rights' - they have powers.

Only individual human beings have rights. Neither governments nor mobs have rights - just power, sometimes authorized sometimes not.

Human reproduction is a core area of personal privacy - individual rights. The very freedom we have to adopt values and principles particular to our own sovereign authority over our reproductive rights inherently delegitimizes government abridgment.

A government with the power to prohibit an abortion is a government with the power to require an abortion! Once the sovereignty is abridged, the manner of that abridgment becomes mutable.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

25. Neither governments nor individuals have inherent rights, I would argue.

A right is something that humans choose to accord to one another or to something else. No other definition works. Because of this it's not a term that I'm terribly fond of: it implies that certain priviledges are bestowed by a higher authority (note: this is my personal view, it's not, I think a widely held one - it certainly wasn't the view of the founding fathers of America, but I don't think there's any other definition of rights that can make sense of the question "what is and isn't a right").

An electorate can give a government whatever rights they choose, and take them away. Similarly, citizens have precisely those rights they choose to accord one another.

*Any* government can require, or prohibit, an abortion if it's electorate empower it to do so. However, there's nothing at all inconsistent in granting the power to do the former but not the latter, which is what I would advocate.

[Greyhound]

52. Somebody's paying attention...

quick! Round him up and get him into the re-education center before this gets out and corrupts our herd further!

:sarcasm:

[Donald Ian Rankin]

17. I ticked "other".

I very nearly agree with both the first one - I don't have a problem with early or mid term abortions being used as birth control if a woman chooses to - and the one about wishing that there were fewer of them, even though there should be legal - abortion is often traumatic , and occasionally dangerous - but I think that the qualifier "in the first two trimesters" is sufficiently important to add to the legality that I went to "other" instead.

I support abortion because a foetus is not self-aware; as it becomes more so abortion should be legal only in certain circumstances. I'm in favour of abortion on demand up to 20-24 weeks, and in certain circumstances (medical complications, rape, incest, disability etc) even afterwards, but I'm not happy with late-term abortions being used as birth control.

[VelmaD]

20. Do a little research...

women don't just wake up one morning when they are 8 months pregnant and decide to get an abortion. Late term abortions are rare and happen in really dire circumstances where the life of the mother is at risk or the fetus is severely malformed. To believe otherwise is to fall for the anti-woman bullshit being spewed my fundy nut-jobs who want to see women barefoot and pregnant.

[VelmaD]

19. I am sick and fucking tired...

of people claiming women use abortions as "birth control". :eyes: I'm also sick and fucking tired of people acting like abortion is any of their fucking business. If you don't believe in abortion...then don't fucking have one. Otherwise, leave other people the fuck alone.

End. Of. Rant.

[NaturalHigh]

23. This is a common theme...

as is the idea that abortion is none of a man's business. If that's the case, then what obligates me to support abortion rights? If I am not supposed to have an opinion one way or the other, why should I boycott South Dakota or vote for someone endorsed by EMILY's list? Why should I stop feeding IAMs to my cat just because it's made in South Dakota? Why shouldn't I visit Mt. Rushmore?

Obviously, I'm never going to have an abortion, but that doesn't mean that I can't have an opinion on the subject. I think the real issue here is that some people don't want me to have an opinion about abortion unless it mirrors their opinion.

[VelmaD]

26. What obligates you to support abortion rights?

How about a belief in everyone's right to privacy and to control their own body?

If you can't work yourself up to support women...how about just the self-preservation inherent in understanding that they will come for YOUR rights next?

[NaturalHigh]

27. Does that mean that I'm allowed to have an opinion...

or just that I should support what you want me to?

I've been open in other threads saying that I think abortion is wrong. Never have I said anything about outlawing abortion, but I'm morally opposed. Often, I'm told that it is none of my business. Why is that? If I'm not supposed to have an opinion on abortion, then why shouldn't I just ignore what a political candidate says on the issue and vote accordingly? Why should I support or fight for something that is none of my business?

You can't have it both ways.

[VelmaD]

28. Here's the meat and potatoes of it...

would you be ok with me poking my nose into YOUR personal life? Do I get to have an opinion on what medical procedures YOU can and cannot have? Do I get to write MY opinion about what YOU should do into law?

You obviously failed to actually read my last reply to you. Why should you support a woman's right to chose...because they will come for YOUR right to control YOUR life next.

[NaturalHigh]

29. I read your post...

and I never said I wanted to write a law concerning anything you want to do. You have totally ignored what I was asking in the first place.

If I am not supposed to have an opinion concerning abortion, why am I supposed to fight, fight, fight for abortion rights? To phrase it another way, if you want my support on the abortion issue, why am I not supposed to express my opinion? It is a political loser to tell men to STFU about abortion and then expect us to be in the streets or in the middle of a boycott when restrictive laws are passed.

[VelmaD]

30. Yet again your lack of reading comprehension...

rears its head. What part of THEY WILL COME FOR YOUR RIGHTS NEXT is not getting through? That is why you should fight like hell for women's right to privacy and to control their own bodies. YOU will be next. I can't seem to state that clearly enough for you.

And I'm not telling men to STFU about abortion...I'm telling EVERYONE to STFU about it. Unless you are the one pregnant or have been specifically asked for your opinion/advice by someone who is pregnant...then it isn't any of anyone else's concern. I'm tired of watching so many people in this society think they have the right to butt into other people's lives.

[NaturalHigh]

50. "Then it isn't any of anyone else's concern"...

That position will really garner a lot of support.

STFU unless you're told to support abortion rights, then get out there and march and boycott and vote as you're told to vote. Do as you're told, when you're told.

You've got a real winner there.

[VelmaD]

51. Are you really that clueless?

I will explain this to you ONE more time...you should support women's right to control their own bodies because eventually they will try to take away YOUR right to control YOUR body. It's purely self-preservation for you. YOU will be next. If you are incapable of comprehending that...*shrug*

[NaturalHigh]

53. I guess I don't really buy the "slippery slope" argument.

[VelmaD]

54. So you're ok...

with them taking the right to privacy away from women. They're doing the same thing to gays. But as long as they haven't come for you yet you're happy to stick your head in the sand?

People who don't believe in the slippery slope are generally the ones who don't have to worry until the snowball gets to the bottom. That's pretty damn short sighted. Enjoy the avalanche when it finally hits you.

But it's always good to know who doesn't have your back.

[NaturalHigh]

55. Again, you want me to STFU about abortion...

but you want me to support abortion rights even though I personally believe that abortion is wrong. We're back to where we started.

[VelmaD]

56. It's all about you...

What. Ever. :eyes:

You still haven't figured it out and I'm done trying to explain it to you. One day, when it's your rights and stake and you want my help...maybe it'll finally sink in.

[NaturalHigh]

58. Fair enough.

[tyedyeto]

48. Bravo!!!!!

[bleedingheart]

57. Bravo! I agree!

[pat_k]

24. Number three = pro-life position

As far as I can tell, a vast majority of the people who identify themselves as "pro-life" have staked out a belief system that begins and ends with the following:

It's bad.
It shouldn't happen.
I want it to stop.
People who don't think it is bad are evil.

Although many would prefer different terms (e.g., "I wish it were unnecessary"), few Americans reject the cluster of ideas that make up this "pro-life core."

A vast majority of Americans incorporate the pro-life core into a more comprehensive system of premises and conclusions that encompasses Constitutional principle and real world implications.

A minority combine the pro-life core with the belief that "If we make a law against it, it will stop" to create a self-contained system that is unsullied by Constitutional principle or real world implications. This minority coined and commandeered the term "pro-life."

Why do we continue to allow this group to have sole custody of a term that applies to us all? I say screw them. It is not pandering to tell the truth: We are all pro-life.

Since a vast majority of Americans have a more comprehensive "pro-life" belief system, we could be "Pro-Life Plus." (Too silly?)

Anyway, if we are all pro-life, how do we convey the Democratic position?

The short version:

Everybody is pro-life. The difference is, Democrats don't want to put frightened women and their doctors in jail.

Long version:

We are all pro-life. The difference is, Democrats don't think that frightened women and their doctors should be thrown in jail. Democrats believe women should never have to face such desperate circumstances -- no health care, poverty wages – that the only option they see is ending a pregnancy.

Democrats are fighting for our right to equal access to healthcare. Democrats are fighting to guarantee a living wage for every American worker. Democrats are fighting to make it possible for families to have confidence they will be able to give their children, and their children’s children, the life they deserve. Democrats are fighting to give women more options, so they can be assured that when they bare a child, that child will be loved, protected, and provided for, even if they are unable to do so themselves.

Democrats are committed to true individual freedom, which cannot exist without freedom from fear of economic hardship. Democrats know that a vigorous private sector cannot exist if work is not valued. Democrats know that economic security requires access to quality education and medical care. Democrats know how critical those first months are in the life of a child; they know paid family leave benefits all of us. Democrats know that private industry can only flourish and create prosperity for all when the power of the people to protect their interests is embodied in strong public institutions.

We are all pro-life. The difference is that some of those who call themselves pro-life think throwing frightened women in jail is the solution. The threat of jail did not work before 1967. Democrats know we can do better than that.

Key Points
The word "abortion" has become a powerful "stimulus" that provokes a rigid, emotional response. That conditioned response is a barrier to any sort of dialog. If we don't want to evoke the conditioned response, we have to stop using the term. Figure out, and practice using, alternate words and phrases.

Never concede that the Democratic position is NOT pro-life. Assert the fact that the position is pro-life – and assert it with confidence.

Simple truths are expressed with simple words. Instead of saying something like “Democrats don’t want to criminalize abortion”, say “Democrats don't want to put frightened women and their doctors in jail.”

Examine your assertions. Feelings and imagery shed light too. If your statements are "dry," are there more evocative ways to convey your assertions?

Results
I don't know if I changed any votes, but when I put this to the test while doorknocking for the Kerry campaign, I definitely got some thoughtful looks when I made these points to the people who identified themselves as pro-life.

My standard response to people who said they were voting for Bush because they were pro-life, was "So am I. Probably the only difference is that I don't think frightened women and their doctors should be thrown in jail. John Kerry believes women should never have to face such desperate circumstances -- no health care, poverty wages – that the only option they see is ending a pregnancy."

Sometimes this led to a brief discussion -- sometimes with very encouraging results. But, as I said, even people who cut off the exchange often looked thoughtful. There were a few that looked very taken aback, or sort of blanked, like a circuit shorted out.

It may be hard to fathom, but I'm convinced that many have never thought through what they are fighting for. All they know is that they don't want women to end pregnancies when they are unable to deal with having a child. They believe it shouldn't happen -- ever. They want it to stop. Period.

Of course, making it illegal doesn't actually accomplish their goal. The notion that they are fighting to put people in jail is a notion they don't seem to have internalized.

Words are important. Simply putting the emphasis on the word "never" seems to make the points more effective (perhaps "never" connects with the attractive simplicity of all or nothing thinking).

[TahitiNut]

32. I'd say "Everyone is 'Pro-Choice,' but some as long as it's THEIR choice."

The funny thing is, I don't see how MY right to make choices can be protected if OTHER choices are not also protected. But that's just me, I guess. :shrug:

[pat_k]

42. letting them monopolize esteem for life legitimizes their propaganda

The difference between "their side" and ours has nothing to do with valuing life, but when we allow them to commandeer the term pro-life, we are conceding to their propaganda.

We need to ground our position in some basic truths and moral positions.

The first truth is that they want to throw frightened women and their doctors in jail. They are pro-prison.

The second truth is that being pro-prison has absolutely nothing to do with valuing human life, parenthood, or family.

Morality demands that we take responsibility for the consequences of our actions.

History tells us that tossing frightened women and their doctors into jail does absolutely nothing to stop a frightened woman from doing whatever she must-- even to risk her own life -- to end a pregnancy she can't cope with.

It is immoral ignore the lessons of the past and advocate a policy with such awful consequences. (Women and doctors imprisoned, their skills locked away; families broken apart; lives cut short.)

Esteem for human life is the driving for behind the fight to minimize the conditions -- no health care, no job security, no cushion -- that make it impossible for many women to even contemplate taking a pregnancy to term. This fight reflects a belief that every human being has a right to be free from want and fear.

We value life and can (and I think should) embrace the pro-life label with pride. I think it is time to put an end to their monopoly on the term and the ideas it embodies.

[Der Blaue Engel]

33. Other: Your poll's wording is manipulative

Can you elaborate on what kind of a paper you're writing, and for what, and why you've framed the options in this manner?

[Dawgs]

40. I'm not sure what you mean.

How are they framed, and how are they manipulative?

I certainly don't have an agenda. I was just trying to get some honest responses using a wide range of opinions. I pulled them off the top of my head.

[Der Blaue Engel]

43. Well, for starters, why is there no simple option for

“All abortion should be legal and available for all” without addendum? Why does that option include an opinion about abortion as birth control? I personally think the concept is a myth, and a sexist, right-wing one at that.

I don't think you consciously had an agenda, but you've written the poll in a way that can't get at accurate answers. The only way I can register my staunch belief in unrestricted abortion is to imply that I believe the premise that there are vast numbers of women (or even modest numbers) who make no attempt to practice birth control and then just skip off to the abortionist every time they have an “oops!” It’s a right wing meme, and if it happens to be true on that rare occasion, I’d neither condone it nor condemn it, because I’d assume the woman in question had not been properly educated or afforded the opportunity to take reasonable precautions against pregnancy, or might possibly be mentally incompetent.

No woman enjoys an abortion. No one sees it as a trivial outpatient “trip to the dentist” sort of experience. But it is an elective procedure that every woman has a right to obtain without being subjected to moralizing from others, because it is her own, personal flesh.

Again, I’m curious about the paper you’re writing. What is your paper about, who is it for, and why did you choose to phrase your options as you did?

[Dawgs]

46. Uh, that is why I included other.

All abortion should be legal and available for all” without addendum?
Is this a question?

Anyways, I disagree that women don't use abortion as birth control. I know of at least two women that have done just that. I'm not saying they are wrong. I'm just saying that it happens.

And, I agree on all your other points.

Again, I had no agenda. You're trying really hard to make something out of nothing.

[Der Blaue Engel]

47. That was my question to you, yes

Starting with "Why is there no option for..." in the subject line.

I'm not trying make something out of nothing. I am expressing my dislike for the use of words that I feel are right-wing talking points not based on reality and thus skew (IMHO) the entire poll, the option of "Other" notwithstanding. We simply disagree.

I never said you had an agenda, but I have asked you twice what kind of a paper this is. It's kind of weird that you won't answer that.

:shrug:

[Nutmegger]

35. Safe, legal and rare. [nt]

[Mountainman]

36. I think the idea that women us abortion for birth control is ludicrous.

Women get abortions in the rare case that they find them selves in the position of having an unwanted pregnancy. I can't imagine a woman having unprotected sex and thinking that abortion will be there birth control of choice. In that case they most likely would have had multiple abortions in the past.

It really pisses me off when I hear the idea that women use abortion as a method of birth control. That is a fundy statement used to get their knuckle dragging followers in a lather.

Abortion is a medical procedure nothing more. No one should have the right to deny a class of people their medical procedure because it is against their beliefs.

[Der Blaue Engel]

45. Exactly.

The concept is ludicrous. Who the hell would want to go through that procedure every time they had sex? (Which is the potential in this imaginary scenario.) Who the hell would want to go through it at all? No one, that's who.

[SidDithers]

41. The issue is privacy and control of your own body...

An abortion is a medical procedure, and the decision to have one is ultimately between a woman and her health care providers. She may ask for, and consider, input from other people, but she is the final arbiter of the her course of action. Her reasons for making her decision, and her past medical history, are really none of our business.

If the final decision isn't hers, then who gets to make that decision for her? The courts? State congress? And if you believe that the decision should be made by someone other than the woman, are you then comfortable allowing that person the authority to make other medical decisions affecting your health? What's stopping them from compelling you to donate a kidney to save the life of a stranger?

The issue is privacy.

Sid

Edit: Speeling

[pat_k]

44. They are pro-prison; we are pro-life

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=782542&mesg_id=785003

[darkism]

49. Safe, legal, rare. n/t