Interesting fact.
Another long, controversial post which will probably piss people off. As a reminder, I am only constructing posts about views of mine that are consistently asked about. I was asked my religious views and asked my view on abortion. Though I’ve posted about both before, I wouldn’t go to this extent if not requested. If you think it will bother you, don’t read it. If you have questions, ask them. I don’t mind having discussions, as long as they don’t turn into immature arguments. I am not trying to change anyone’s opinions, morals, or anything of that nature. I am only stating my opinion and my reasoning behind it.
So here we go: the abortion debate. Admitting I’m pro-choice in front of people who aren’t gets me a look like I just picked up a nine-month-old giggly baby and savagely beat it to death. I want to clear up some of the misconceptions about people who are pro-choice, especially myself. Religion does not equate to morals and vice versa. Just because I am not a religious person doesn’t mean I’m an advocate of mass murder or armed robbery. I am not a sociopath: I’m not pro-choice because I enjoy the idea of abortion. But I’ll explain this more later in the post. First of all:
What actually is your stance on abortion?
I believe abortion should remain legal. Because of this, I am usually considered “pro-choice,” not “pro-life.” I find these labels incredibly warped, considering if you’re not “pro-life,” you must then be… “anti-life.” Which is kind of offensive, for obvious reasons. But bottom line: I think abortion should be legal. I don’t think it should be used as continual birth control. In other words, I’m not saying it’s totally fine (in my opinion) for someone to never use contraception and just get abortions every time they happen to get pregnant. However, my true and strongest decision for being pro-choice is not about contraception. It’s not about choices. It’s not about where life begins, but rather, it’s about where life ends.
What the hell does that mean?
There are a ton of statistics on abortion. Some are collected by unbiased parties (though usually not, unfortunately), some by “pro-lifers,” some by “pro-choicers.” However, all studies done on how often abortions occur have discovered the same odd fact: the number of abortions does not significantly drop if abortion is illegal. Thousands of abortions occur in countries where it’s not legal to receive one. However, while the amount of abortions performed does not waver, the safety of abortions performed does.
What I mean by this is that because abortions are forced to be taken “underground,” they are no longer safe. They can no longer occur in sanitary, clean rooms with proper machinery and precautions. Some of you may be familiar with this image:
A coat hanger is not a medical tool.
Someone once asked me what the coat hanger meant. Many have asked if it’s satirical, if “coat hanger abortions” ever really occurred. The unfortunate truth is that they did. For a long time. Roe v. Wade occurred in 1973. Abortions or attempts at it have occurred since the time of the ancient Egyptians, probably even earlier. A “coat hanger abortion” is a horrible, graphic procedure. A woman bends a coat hanger so that it can fit inside of her. She then tries to scratch the lining of her own uterus in order to cause bleeding. The true intention of most “coat hanger abortions” was not to stab the baby to death or many other misconceptions. Most of the women were a.) trying to get their bodies to bleed to the point where they would miscarry or b.) trying to change the environment of the uterus to the point where doctors were forced to terminate the pregnancy. Needless to say, a “coat hanger abortion” is not safe. At all. Further statistics have proven this as well.
In fact, in and around the 1950s, one of the leading causes of death between women ages 18-25 was botched abortions. A “botched” abortion is an abortion gone “wrong,” in that it terminates not only the life or potential-life of the fetus but the life of the mother as well. There are hundreds of images online of deformed and damaged bodies of fetuses. I have seen them before, and yes, they do disturb me. But there are also equally-as-terrifying photos of women collapsed in their own blood, dead from botched abortions. In modern day Brazil, where abortion is illegalised, around 13% of the deaths of pregnant women are from botched abortions. While the medical field continues to make advances in safety, this doesn’t pass on to panicked women in their own homes who do not have the tools or sanitation procedures necessary. They still, even today, resort to horrifically unsafe procedures that often kill them.
Would you advocate abortion? If someone came to you in desperation, would you advise them to terminate their pregnancy?
Do I advocate abortion? No. Not at all. Abortion is a frightening, scarring experience. Nobody “enjoys” abortions, and if they do, there is something seriously wrong with them. If someone came to me, already two months or so into their pregnancy, I wouldn’t advise them to get an abortion. I would tell them that, for now, the option is legally available, but I would also tell them to weigh all of the other options. I don’t think every unintentional pregnancy should end in an intentional termination. It is not my right to tell someone what to do with their pregnancy; its theirs. Which is kind of the point.
Is abortion murder?
This question depends on your definition of murder. Merriam-Webster describes it as such:
the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
There are a lot of things about this definition that could be interpreted in roughly 500 different ways each. I’ll try to stick below 500, for the sake of readers and my over-typing fingers. First, let’s single out “unlawfully.” At the present time, abortion is not against the law. Thus, by this definition, it’s not a murder. Second, let’s look at “person:”
the body of a human being; the personality of a human being
This term would encompass a fetus as a “person,” as fetuses are human beings. They’re not aliens. (If you think your fetus is an alien, I suggest you seek medical help. O:D)
The last term I’d like to focus on is “malice:”
desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another; intent to commit an unlawful act or cause harm without legal justification or excuse
Because, as mentioned, nobody enjoys or desires abortion, it is not malice. Also because it is not (for the time being) unlawful, it is again not malice.
Does abortion constitute as murder? Bottom line: that depends on how you look at the terminology. According to the dictionary used, it’s not.
Haven’t you seen the pictures?
Arguments from both sides of this debate usually provide pictures. A common one on the pro-life side is a picture of a fetus sucking its thumb. On the pro-choice side is one of a zygote or an embryo. Both have good points. A fetus sucking its thumb shows human behaviour, the endearing actions of a “baby.” However, scientifically, a “baby” is never something in a womb. At conception, it is a zygote. From then to 2 months in the womb, it is an embryo. After two months, it is a fetus. At birth, it is a newborn, a baby. The pro-choice image is showing the difference between a baby (by the scientific definition) and a zygote or embryo. Undeniably, there is a difference.
I discussed previously the pictures of aborted fetuses. Do I find them disturbing? Yes, I do. They have many characteristics of a forming human being. They do not look like little forming horses. (Or aliens.) I will not deny that. However, there is again the idea of biology. Biologically, the peripheral neurons, the spinal cord’s connection to the brain, and the brain itself do not fully develop until weeks into pregnancy. Therefore, many fetuses that are aborted cannot yet feel pain. Some can. Again, the “debate” has two sides. Abortion does scientifically “stop a beating heart.” However, the heart’s purpose is to pump blood through the body. While emotionally we describe our hearts as “breaking” or “hurting,” (Ah, adolescence :P) this is biologically inaccurate because the part of you that sends pain signals to your brain is not in your heart.
But can’t you understand that someone who murders their child may deserve death themselves? Like capital punishment?
I don’t understand that at all, actually. Firstly, we have to go back to the argument that by some definitions, abortion is not “murder,” though I recognize that morally it can be deemed as such by others. I myself have never understood capital punishment; I think it is an archaic and horrible way of providing “justice.” I do not think that anyone ever “deserves” death.
This is a statement often turned against me. Some consider abortion the “genocide of the innocent.” However, the termination of a pregnancy and the murder of an adult person have to be seen as different. Fetuses, as horrid as it sounds, are technically parasitic. They rely on a “host,” their mother, to survive. Adults survive by themselves, out of the womb. Capital punishment is the killing of a person who is by every definition alive. This person has memories and thoughts, developed organs, and can feel pain, as well as shame, fear, depression, and hopelessness. A fetus knows nothing but the womb. Does it have thoughts? We don’t know. A fetus’s organs are not fully developed until all the way to the end of the pregnancy. As mentioned, some cannot feel pain or emotion. As also mentioned, some can. I’m not going to ignore the other half of this; that’s incredibly immature and illogical. But we have to recognise the difference between an unborn fetus and a born adult.
Also, abortions are not something taken lightly by anyone. (Except the highly disturbed.) Most abortions, contrary to popular belief, do not statistically occur by desperate or irresponsible teenagers. Most people obtaining abortions are women in or around their 30s and/or women in poor financial situations. Most women who receive abortions already have children. Though some argue they are “anti-life,” a lot of women can barely afford the children they already have. Their reason to obtain an abortion is not to end a life but to continue the lives of those already out of the womb, their other children.
Abortions are not enjoyable. They are painful and emotional. Women can feel lost, suicidal, guilty, confused, and all ranges of emotion before, during, and after their abortion(s). Considering them “murderers” is not considering the full range of this “debate.”
There is no justification for abortion. If you don’t want a baby, don’t have sex, right?
Wrong. I have a lot of problems with this. Even religions (well, the sane ones) admit that sex is a normal, natural, and enjoyable human experience. To say that everyone who has sex should/must want to have a baby is just obviously inaccurate. These statements usually regard teenage girls who have premarital sex. While I agree that no one should have sex until they realise the possible consequences, I also realise that some people have considered the consequences. Many situations can lead to a pregnancy, even with those who take precautions. The pill is only 99% effective. Condoms are even less effective and can break or be used improperly.
If a condom breaks and someone doesn’t want a pregnancy, there is always the morning-after pill. However, as of right now, it is legally acceptable for a pharmacist to refuse to give someone the morning-after pill if it is “against their moral beliefs.” If the birth control pill is not effective, there is no way of knowing you are pregnant until after the 72 hours in which the morning-after is still effective. Abortions are not always a choice by the irresponsible and immoral. In fact, they’re usually not.
Why do you consider abortion a feminist issue? It takes two to make a baby.
Well, I feel it proper to tell people that not all feminists are women. There are male feminists. In fact, most guys are feminists; they’re just not aware of it. But that’s another story. Anyway, I consider abortion an issue for women for a lot of reasons, one of which is the picture at the top of this post. Men will never be pregnant. Thus, they cannot understand the situations of pregnant mothers, the emotional roller coaster, the physical roller coaster, the entire perspective.
Do I think the father of the baby should have some say if it is a healthy, trusting relationship? Yes. If the father leaves or if the father is already a father and a bad one, I don’t know about that. But in some cases, yes, I think they should be able to state how they feel about it. However, at the end of the day, the father is not carrying the baby. The father does not have to go through pregnancy, birth, and any complications along the way. Because of this, I think abortion is a debate that should be mostly for women. Only women can receive them. Only women can get pregnant. Only women can therefore fully understand.
Did you know that rape and incest, a major argument for pro-choicers, only makes up 2% of abortions?
Yes, but I don’t understand the reasoning behind this argument. 100 women go in for an abortion. 2 of them were raped by a family friend, a stranger, or someone who is directly related to them. There are a lot of abortions performed each year. As this number increases, so too does the “2%.” It does not matter if “only” 2 in 100 were raped. That’s still two women (or girls, as they are often young) being forced into what is usually a scary and complicated experience.
What if I still think abortion should be illegal?
That’s fine. You’re free to have your own opinion. However, I myself have questions for those who hold this opinion. Do not take them as attacks of any kind; it’s my true curiosity as to the opposite side. Please answer respectfully if you do. Here are my questions:
- Anything illegal has a legal consequence. If we deem abortion illegal because it is murder and murder often results in serious sentences, what should the prison sentence for the woman be? Should she receive life? The death penalty? If something is literally illegal, it must have a legal consequence. The argument that “her punishment should be taken up with God” would not fit into a judicial system in a country where Church and state are separated.
- I have showed you a statistics about abortion when it was/is illegal. What if we make abortion illegal again, only to find that hundreds of women die from botched procedures? If this occurred in modern day America, would you change your opinion?
- Do the cases of rape and incest change your opinion?
- If the answer to the above question is yes, would a rape or incest victim have to prove they were a rape or incest victim? Would there have to be intense testing to legitimately prove they were abused and if they “failed” such tests, would they be denied their abortion?
- This is a hypothetical question, but it would inevitably occur. Hypothetically, abortion is illegal, and a woman wants to have one but cannot. She knows she would not be a fit mother, but after nine months, she decides not to give the baby up and try to raise it herself. If she was right in her original thought and she becomes an unfit mother, what would happen if the baby were put into foster care? Our foster care system is incredibly warped. Thousands of those presently incarcerated were once in the foster care system. Foster care kids often live terrible lives of abuse and neglect. Would it have been “better” for the woman to have received her abortion or for the child to live a terrible life?
- What about cases in which the mother would die? Many women do not know that pregnancy could be fatal to them until they are already pregnant. Would they be forced to give birth and risk their own life?
Once again, my intention was not to insult or offend, just to offer my point of view. You do not have to agree with me by any means. I don’t mind you sharing your own point of view, as long as you be as respectful as you can about it. Thanks for reading, if you actually read the whole thing. It’s almost 3,000 words. O.o Sorry!
Happy Sunday,
Cat
