Bad Kitty

Cheetah,

It seems this thread is now just sort of a useless argument between you and I. Perhaps it has jumped the shark?

If so, I'd just like to say that I did enjoy reading your posts, though I didn't agree with all of them.

Plus, your kitty is adorable, and that thread is ever so much more fun than this one.

Regards,

Michelle

cheetah

No, just that after it's said, it's said, and I wondered what else was to be discussed.

cheetah

You never know when a turn of discussion will lead to new things unexpectedly. It is fascinating.

Bad Kitty

Sorry, here is your full quote. Is there some reason you chose to include me in that first sentence if you know full well the truth of the second?

???

Bad Kitty

Apparently alot, given the number of posts, eh?

cheetah

My idea was to give you a chance to still be included in that group, though acknowledge that you aren't against sex ed.(there's a difference between advocating prevention of pregnancy as a way to reduce abortions vs. thinking sex ed is an ok thing). If you wanted to include the former (in parens) with the latter for yourself, fine, but if you wanted to make a subtle distinction between the reasons for thinking sex ed is ok and actively using prevention of unwanted pregnancies as a touchstone for the pro-life movement, it would have allowed you to do that, also.

cheetah

Ah, but if you are still reading, maybe there is something else we can hash out. You believe in sex ed and contraceptives, but we all know nothing but abstinence is full proof. Do you then expect that people who do not want to have children or have had "their fill" of children should stop having sex, because if they did and got pregnant, they shouldn't, ideally, abort it?

I have railed against this for years. I never intend to have children, but obviously no dr. would sterilize me. My partner is considering getting sterilized, but I hear they are even reluctant for males, and in any case, I can't imagine having spent the last 7 years with him having no sex until he got sterilized. We use precautions and have thankfully never fallen into the .01% failure rate to date. However, I don't think I should never have sex just in case. I also think I have a right to decide not to have children ever and that right should not require me to stop having sex, essentially.

Bad Kitty

No, I think people should 1. use contraceptives correctly to greatly minimize their risk of pregnancy and 2. accept that sex can have serious consequences and be ready to accept the responsibility for your actions (i.e.; you may have a baby).

In fact, this is what I practice myself, as I don't want to be a parent.

For teens, who seem the most likely to incorrectly use birth control and thereby get accidentally pregnant, I want more and better sex ed and I want contraceptives readily available. I want them encouraged to use the concept of mutual masturbation and I also think there is nothing wrong with presenting abstinence in a positive light (I just don't have my fingers crossed). And I want a society that says sex is OK, but teaches the ramifications and responsibilities attendant to it. This is wanting alot, I know. If I had a wish list, I want even more reliable birth control methods -- though when used properly, we have some pretty good ones now.

I feel it is completely wrong for doctors to refuse sterilization requests from anyone of legal age. I believe in personal responsibility and it should be the patient's decision entirely. Basically, doctors should but the fuck out. Admittedly, I have sort of a bad attitude about doctors, due to experiences I have had (and continue to have) as a cancer patient. I am often shocked at how I'm treated in the medical system and often I have to make a clear effort to get the service I believe I am due.

It sucks that biology dictates that women are the only ones forced into this position (though certainly men can argue that pregnancy can affect them greatly, I am here referring to the biological aspects of pregnancy). It sucks that sex may have this consequence. It sucks that babies aren't born by some other convenient fashion. But biology is a fact. For me, if a woman gets accidentally pregnant, the greater harm between the two available choices (1. force the woman to deliver or 2. abort the fetus) is the abortion. I'm not saying this is a pretty choice. Philosophically I struggle with it, because I recognize that "forcing" women to have a baby is terrible. But ethically, if I honestly believe that a fetus deserves basic rights, I can't choose death over forced pregnancy. I do, however, believe that a woman as a right to abort if the fetus threatens her life.

This is why I am still honestly seeking answers about when "personhood" does and should begin.

Also, I continue to struggle with other grey areas, such as rape/incest. I REALLY struggle ethically with this one.

Again, I find it interesting that when you look at the attitude towards abortion across the country, people become more ok with the "forced pregnancy" concept the closer the fetus gets to viability. This says to me that people believe that "viability" is the key to personhood. I think that is a problem, because "viability" is going to be a sliding standard as medical technology advances. I'm not sure "viability" = "personhood" anyways.

I feel I should mention that I personally think that it would be best for society, at this point, if abortion were "phased" out as society's attitudes changed. I'm concerned about what would happen if it were just suddenly made "illegal".

I would be ethically "happy" about the sudden protection of fetuses, but would be incredibly concerned that without a corresponding change in attitudes about sex, pregnancy, personhood, birth control etc. We would simply have a whole lot of dangerous and illegal abortions, and could add dead women to the list of dead fetuses. That would benefit nobody.

Anyways, I think my beliefs qualify me as a reasonably moderate pro-lifer. Perhaps a little too idealistic about what society can accomplish?

Michelle

Edited for the same reasons as always.

winstonjen

TheBigZoo, you have some good points relating to the use of birth control and education to prevent unwanted pregnancy. But what about women who have it forced on them through rape, or cases of incest?

cheetah

I agree with much of what you have said except to essentially abandon the women that have taken precautions and never intend to have babies, etc. That is saying the only way to really be sure not to have babies is to not have sex, and I think it is both unrealistic and unfair. Sex serves so many functions other than procreation. I guess I am glad that at least you weren't hypocritical, and still feel that the fetus is a life, but I cannot accept the punishment for the woman. There has to be a better way. perhaps in the phasing out idea you are speaking of (though i still don't believe in making abortion illegal, ever); how would this work?

I think the underlying thing here (and this may open another can of worms) is that I don't believe life is sacred. I believe that after you are born, you have a right to remain that way, i.e. that no other human or agency has a right to take that away from you, but I don't believe that life is sacred in and of itself. It is just life. We cling to it, we love it, we don't want to die, but what qualifies as sacred? So, I don't think every life that is created needs to be preserved. I think we can help people preserve their lives, if they are ill, and that it is not my place to take the life of another person, but objectively, there's nothing "special" to me about "LIFE." I know I am in the extreme minority here, but it's just another reason why I think the plight of post-birth humans should be considered above a fetuses.**

**I got off onto this tangent because I was thinking of saying that maybe someday viability would extend to removing the egg from the womb and raising it in a betetr version of the current artificial womb. But, I still disagree with this. If a woman does not want her genetic material in the world, she shouldn't have to ahve it there, even if she can avoid the 9 months of gestation. To revert back, it's more about controlling one's one reproduction. If the only REAL way to control it is to never have sex, well, you don't really have any control, do you?