Skip to main content

View Diary: A Shout-Out to "Dear Abby" (47 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's not an issue that Dear Abby (6+ / 0-)

    is going to resolve any time soon. I'm po-choice, always have been. But if someone truly believes that a fetus is equivalent to a person, it is inconsistent for us to expect them to ignore abortion, any more than we can be convinced that murder is a private matter. Once a person is convinced that that fetus is a person, they are not going to stand down just because we say "it's the pregnant woman's right - period". The more logically consistent argument we should be making is "no, it is NOT a person".

    •  The message we need to repeat over and over (9+ / 0-)

      to the anti-choice people is that the pregnant woman is a person and just as your needs and rights don't trump mine, the rights of an unformed person don't trump that of the woman.  You may choose to donate a kidney or part of your liver to someone, and accept the medical risks associated with that choice, but our government should never, ever compel you to make that choice for you.  Even if the organ recipient will certainly die with out it.

      Socialist? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

      by Kimbeaux on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 06:44:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Let's say for sake of argument that instead (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        marina, nzanne, LSmith

        you thought that human life started at birth and that many people thought it started at age 5. Your neighbor has a 3-year old, and decides not to feed her. The claim the neighbor makes is "it is my right not to have to work to support her, and since she is not even a real person, it is none of your business what we do in our home". Would you accept that, or insist that it just isn't right to allow a 3-year old to die?

        For anti-abortion people, the fetus is no different than a 3-year old is to you and me. So of course they are not going to accept that a woman's right to make decisions about her body trumps the kid's right to life itself. While many anti-abortion people are obnoxious in their style, this is simply not as black-and-white an issue as many of us would like to believe (if it were, there would be a specific moment in pregnancy where science could determine when sentient life begins; but, alas, consciousness emerges not at one moment but evolves over time). The Roe v. Wade decision is an excellent one in that it comes up with a reasonable compromise, but no one really believes that trimesters really demarcate life.

        •  That is a false analogy: our society does not (10+ / 0-)

          force the neighbor to parent the child no matter what.  It says that if the neighbor chooses to parent this child, they must meet certain standards.  The neighbor can choose not to parent the child by surrendering guardianship to the state or by letting another person to adopt the child.  Anti-choice advocates would insist in your example that the neighbor must feed the child herself, even if she cannot afford food for her other children, even if it involves risk to her life and health, even if she's emotionally incapable of caring for the child.  Notice that in this example, as for all anti-abortion people, only the rights of the fetus are represented, advocating that the neighbor should lose her right  to body autonomy because she became pregnant.  Instead, by allowing the neighbor to surrender guardianship, the neighbor's rights are still protected.  

          In the example of the neighbor, there is a solution that protects the both the right of the child and of the neighbor.  However, such a solution is not always available.  Sometimes people will die without bodily support from another person.  This is true for both the fetus and the organ/tissue recipient.  That doesn't mean that the at-risk person's right to life trumps the right to body autonomy of the donor.  This is why no one can be compelled to donate blood, tissues, or organs.  And this is why our laws need to remain pro-choice.

          Stephanie Zvan has written a blog with excellent graphs showing the rights of the fetus versus the pregnant woman based on fetal viability and on how fetal viability is used politically.  

          Socialist? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

          by Kimbeaux on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 08:33:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You can say that the analogy doesn't (0+ / 0-)

            apply, but the truth is that if your neighbor insisted it was her "choice" to kill her 3-year old, and you disagreed with your neighbor over whether a 3-year old was a real person, you'd be in the same quandary we're in now. When you insist that the child must be nourished your neighbor would call you anti-choice.

            •  Funny that you keep insisting. (9+ / 0-)

              Why do you think the concept of viability is relevant to discussions of reproductive choice?

              The whole point of the decision in Roe v. Wade is that if the fetus could live outside the woman's body-- if it could potentially be handed off to someone else to nourish-- then there are pretty strong restrictions against ending the pregnancy.

              Asshats who claim to believe that a first-trimester embryo or fetus has full moral personhood need some calling of bullshit. They themselves will have never attended a funeral associated with some family member's first trimester miscarriage. They won't be agitating down at the statehouse for improved Medicaid coverage of prenatal care and they won't be staunch advocates for universal access to no-cost birth control, both of which are policy positions which would logically follow from health concerns for embryos and fetuses.

              •  Funerals for tampons! Because every fertilized (6+ / 0-)

                egg is a person.  Get your tiny coffin at PersonhoodFunerals.com!

                Socialist? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

                by Kimbeaux on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 10:09:45 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Jeesus... Somebody made a website for ova? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  eowynsdottir

                  I sure as hell hope that's a joke and people aren't really buying funeral packages for tampons and maxi pads.  I clicked On it and read some of it - couldn't believe it.  My mother, on the other hand, would believe it, parody or not.

                  Although it does reinforce what I've always told right wing friends... Every menstrual period "could" be a miscarriage of sorts.  While women release eggs every cycle they don't always get fertilized and don't implant in the uterine wall.  The moment of conception is not so much when sperm meets egg as when implantation is successful.  If it's not quite the right time in her cycle, a fertilized egg can't implant and thus, passes through and is expelled.  Happens all the time.  It's why I don't get why rape victims can't get a "morning after" pill - it prevents implantation - no implantation, no conception.  If you don't conceive, you can't abort, right?  It's a contraceptive pill, not an abortion pill.  

                  "Focusing your life solely on making a buck shows a certain poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself. Because it's only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential." - Barack Obama

                  by Ricochet67 on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 10:35:08 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  It is a Poe. (0+ / 0-)

                    But I was taken in at first.

                    Socialist? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

                    by Kimbeaux on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 10:40:02 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  ... and ejaculation without hope of fertilization (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    eowynsdottir, Calamity Jean

                    is genocide.

                    So, if you need a funeral for a tampon, you need an entire cemetery for a used condom.

                    •  Isn't it also reckless abandonment? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Calamity Jean

                      I seem to remember that from "Legally Blonde."  / snark

                      If you don't keep track of all of your "emissions" so you know where they are at all times and if they are not being put to proper "use" - it's abandonment.  

                      (rolling eyes) - how many teenage boys (and adult men) are guilty of that nearly every day?  

                      "Focusing your life solely on making a buck shows a certain poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself. Because it's only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential." - Barack Obama

                      by Ricochet67 on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 06:22:19 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  The neighbor could call me a proselytizing (0+ / 0-)

              christian and be just as wrong.  However, if the neighbor calls me anti-choice in response to a comment I made supporting a woman's right not to be a parent to a fetus or child of any age, she is clearly either lying or delusional.  

              However, not all anti-choicers are delusional, so it is worth repeating the message that no person's or fetus' rights should trump someone else's.  That a woman should not lose her rights because she got pregnant.

              Socialist? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

              by Kimbeaux on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 10:06:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  "the fetus is no different than a 3-year old" (6+ / 0-)

          I call bullshit.  Forced-birthers may claim that's what they believe, but they don't.  To prove it, just submit them to a simple thought experiment.

          You're standing in a corridor in a fertility clinic.  The building is on fire.  20 feet to your left is a portable device holding 10 frozen embryos (all viable & waiting to be implanted). 20 feet to your right is a sick 3-year old child (unable to walk on her own).  You have time to go in one direction, and save the child or the fetuses, but not both.  Which way do you go?

          Anyone who truly believed that a fetus = a child would have to save 10 over 1.  Do you really think anyone would make that choice?  I don't know anyone so inhuman.

          "If you want me to treat your ideas with respect, get better ideas." John Scalzi

          by SoCalJayhawk on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 10:14:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's called a thought experiment. (0+ / 0-)

            You may think that calling a 3-year old non-human sounds ridiculous. But these people think that calling a fetus non-human is ridiculous! You can try to put yourself in their shoes, to better try to understand where they are coming from. Or you can not.

            •  But, the forced birthers have a double standard (4+ / 0-)

              They never talk about forcing anyone to give parts of their bodies to keep born children alive.

              Once you are born, you are not worthy of taking parts of your parents to live.

              Could that be because men could be forced to do it too?

              Women create the entire labor force. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

              by splashy on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 11:58:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  But, wait (3+ / 0-)

          About this: "For anti-abortion people, the fetus is no different than a 3-year old is to you and me."

          But, they never talk about forcing parents to give parts of their bodies to the point of dying to keep the 3-year old alive. That says it all.

          It's only when a girl/woman is affected that they want to force them into giving parts of their bodies. Once a child is born, they don't want to force anyone into anything when it comes to giving parts of their bodies. I'm sure that's because men would be on the hook too.

          Women create the entire labor force. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

          by splashy on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 11:56:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Even if they think of the unborn as a person (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Themistoclea, gardnerhill, m00finsan

      No one is pushing for the parents of born children to sacrifice parts of their bodies, to the point of death, to keep them alive.

      No one wants to make it a law that both parents have to give parts of their liver, a kidney, or any other body part to save the life of their child.

      They only care when they are the unborn. That says it all. It's only about putting this burden on girls and women, never forcing men to sacrifice themselves for their children.

      Women create the entire labor force. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

      by splashy on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 11:51:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site