Top 10 reasons why pro-choice side is wrong

Seattle Times ^ | Jan 22, 2004 | Sylvia Sullivan

[bolobaby]

Abortion remains a convenient escape of parental responsibility for men.

Well, that's just about the most sexist thing I've read in a long time. What about women? Women can't escape their parental responsibility through abortion? Bah. If that woman decides to have that baby, the courts will make sure that the man doesn't escape his responsibility.

Let's face facts - under the current abortion laws, women have "choices" and men have "obligations"... despite the fact that both parties are usually equally responsible for an unwanted pregnancy.

The funny thing is, when you confront a pro-choice feminist about the forced obligation a man has if a woman "chooses" to have her child, she'll start to sneer about deadbeat dads and say something like, "He should have thought of that before he decided to have sex with that woman!" Ooooooooooooh... I see... so you are advocating ABSTINENCE???

Hypocrits.

[passionfruit]

Great post! This lady lays out facts that I have been looking for. I knew that there were many deaths and serious side effects associated with "safe" abortions. Does anyone have a web address for the "Blackman Wall that the author listed here?

[wardaddy]

I wathced part of the NARAL celebration on C-Span tonight.

Sickening.....aboslutely disgusting.

Self obsessed narssistic folks with issues projecting their own collective neurosis on society and cloaking it as idealism fighting evil.

But as you listen and observe, you understand the roots of the pro-infanticide movement are solidly founded in feminism and anti-male and anti-Christian deconstruction underneath. That is who they truly despise: Christian Males.

[passionfruit]

It's really not sexist. Women I know have been pushed into aborting babies that they really wanted by husbands or boyfriends that didn't want the responsibility. Yes, TODAY women can get child support (probably) with the help of the courts or the State, but that is a more recent development.

When Roe V Wade was passed, there were not such conveniences. If a man didn't pay, he didn't pay. Also, there was no such thing as a womens shelter in most cities then. If she feared abuse, she had better do what she was told, or he could beat her until she either relented or lost the baby or her own life. She was lucky if he didn't jusdt skip out.

Roe v Wade is terribly one sided though. I know that plenty of men have wanted to be good fathers to babies that selfish women have aborted, and they had NO choice.

This is a two way street.

[polemikos]

BlackmunWall

[Richard Kimball]

The polls are consistently showing that Americans are becoming more pro-life. A poll conducted by Zogby International reported that by a 53-percent-to-36-percent margin, the public supports the statement, "Abortion destroys a human life and is manslaughter." A recent Gallup poll found that 72 percent of young people between ages 13 and 17 believe abortion is morally wrong.

For years, the media has played both sides of the fence. If a polled individual indicates that he or she believes abortion should be legal in cases of rape, incest, or to protect the life of the mother, they are counted as pro-abortion, and the news story will state that "most Americans believe that abortion should be legal in some circumstances". If, on the other hand, an elected official believes that there should be any restrictions on abortion, the press reports them as being anti-abortion. Polls consistently show that most Americans believe abortion should ONLY be legal in cases of rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother.

The pro-aborts also insist that the term "protect the health of the mother" be inserted. Politicians who have to vote the Rat line while dealing with a more conservative constituency back home will use this as an excuse to vote against any abortion restrictions. Legally, the Supreme Court has defined "health of the mother" to include emotional health. This totally guts the law. The abortionists just lead the girl to say that she'd be emotionally upset if she carried the baby to term, and they can legally sidestep the law.

Abortionists do NOT want the mother to see ultra-sounds of their baby. That was what changed my life. When I saw my daughter sucking her thumb in the womb, it hit me that all we'd have to do is say, kill her, and the doctor could have legally committed murder.

[Doninnj]

I am a man who once was pro choice and who finally came to the conclusion that no one has EVER proved that the fetus is NOT a living human being.

As a matter of fact, baby murderers continue to ignore technological advances made since Rowe v. Wade that show a fetus smiling, crying, sucking it's thumb etc.

[AlienCrossfirePlayer]

Roe v Wade is jurisprudentially bogus. Read Renquist's dissent (published concurently). Click on http://www.fedworld.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?waisdocid=8350008157+0+0+0&waisaction=retrieve. Then search to REHNQUIST.

[AlienCrossfirePlayer]

Sorry, the link does not work. Copy the link to a browser command line. Then it will work.

[LaraCroft]

The address is good, although the link doesn't work.

Remove the period at the end

[AlienCrossfirePlayer]

http://www.fedworld.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?waisdocid=8350008157+0+0+0&waisaction=retrieve

[AlienCrossfirePlayer]

Thank you.

[Keith in Iowa]

The time for choice is before your knickers hit your ankles...

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP - PRO-LIFE

[Marie]

I'll never forget watching my son sucking his thumb when I was 7 months along. I'll also never forget him grinding into my stomach with his foot every time I tried to sleep on my belly!

[Honestfreedom]

Actually, many women undergoing abortion lose their lives to the abortion. Consider the Blackmun Wall, which is a Life Dynamics Web site that lists women killed by legal abortions, along with the facts of the circumstances of their death. Although the site lists 347 women dead due to abortion since 1973, it is only the beginning, as they have many more names to be added. They found that an overwhelming majority of abortion-related deaths still remain to be verified. The RU-486 chemical-induced abortion death of 18-year-old Holly Patterson is particularly heart-wrenching. Her parents watched helplessly as she died tragically. <<

This is a weak and largely untrue argument. 347 women died having abortions? How many died in childbirth? I respect the pro life argument but its strength is not the relative safety of abortion it is the right of the baby to live.

[AlienCrossfirePlayer]

Better to search to "REHNQUIST, DISSENTING".

[longtermmemmory]

I think a more valid argument is the psychological trauma a woman has with an abortion years after the procedure. Every baby, every child playing becomes a moment of "what if" that hurts any feeling normal woman.

I have a friend who got divorced from a woman who had an abortion during a previous marriage. Her first ex-husband did not want the baby because it would upset "their" career goals. (both corporate types) She got the abortion and they divorced after.

She met my friend, and they married after about a year. It only lasted 6 months. His side was that it became a constant shadow. She could not even discuss the matter without tears. He said it was like the marriage was just another accessory and she went full steam back to career mode. She refused counseling and refused to accept the fact that the loss of the child had to be dealt with.

I met her a couple of times. She seemed nice enough, not what you would expect in terms of a woman who would have an abortion to favor a career and husband. I don't know, enough myself.

I do know that women need post abotion counseling. It is choice, and these women who choose to have an abortion have to be treated as a woman who has lost a child to death. (especially since it is a death selected by the woman who would be mother.)

[Eala]

The Seattle Times printed this? Simply amazing!!