Skip to main content

View Diary: Open thread for night owls: Roe v. Wade at 38 (376 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Legality isn't the only perspective. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rainmanjr, Amayi

    I chose "other" in the poll.

    From a legal perspective, I believe abortion should be legal at any point during a pregnancy, and for whatever reason the woman decides is "good enough."

    On the other hand, from an ethical perspective, I believe that any woman who is in a position to choose should take her decision very seriously and not dilly-dally without reason or be coerced by other people in her life.  Third trimester abortions "should" (by choice, not by legal mandate) be limited to circumstances that could not have been foreseen earlier in the pregnancy.  Similarly, a decision to carry a pregnancy to term and bear a child should be made thoughtfully, and with consideration of the consequences.

    The unspoken fear that some people have is that the same carelessness or powerlessness that can lead to an unplanned pregnancy could (in theory) be carried into the abortion decision.

    A Wall Street "bonus" should not be more than what my house is currently worth.

    by bushondrugs on Fri Jan 21, 2011 at 11:31:16 PM PST

    •  Well put. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I've not seen you before but enjoy your thoughtful approach to things.  I would rather see a child put up for adoption, rather than aborted, but wouldn't impose my desires upon a woman's choice.  It's her body.
      I don't, however, believe our tax $ should pay for any reason other than life/health and rape/incest.  It was the couples event that created the problem so it's their responsibility to pay for it.  Even of the rape/incest we should be able to recover the cost from the perp if possible.

      "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

      by rainmanjr on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 04:16:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  A right ceases to be a right when all means for (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pandoras Box

        exercising that right are eliminated. Wrongful denial of a right by the use of the elimination of the mechanics of exercising that right, does not eliminate its theoretical existence, but most certainly does bar its existence in fact as something which can be done.

        •  That's why we need a solution that protects... (0+ / 0-)

          the rights of women.  I've proposed one.  What's yours?  Just keep fighting for the status quo?  It's not working.  New generations might well stop the violence but Dr's will continue to be targeted until the older populace dies off.  Even then, there are a lot of younger anti-choice people.

          "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

          by rainmanjr on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 10:02:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  A lot of these plans contain as one element the (0+ / 0-)

            physical equivalent of the demand "If you will cut off and give to me two of your fingers, woman I will let you keep for now the rest of what you want, as long as you remember I will be back with my full demand again, looking for two more fingers next time."  So many of the plans love to live in the land of the theoretical, the ethical 'idea' when the problem lies in the land of toxemia, diabetes, bad hearts during pregnancy, fatal defects in the structures of the fetuses, and the like, which are not matters to be argued, only to be treated, or not. What else does the United States or any state do, other than the now voluntary military, where there is a huge cost to be paid, and all women of childbearing age are required to pay it, a particularly problematic notion as a lot of the costs women pay are those not known at the last point before what you need to be an irrevocable choice is made, the conduct which brings the fetus into being in the first place. I have kin with bad hearts which were damaged out of a pregnancy, relatives who had toxemia every time out, and the like, relatives whose babies got stuck in transit before Caesarians or at the point when it was too late for that. I have a lot of relatives who have no funds for fancy obstetrical care or any at all. I have friends and acquaintances worse off than that. I do not think you grasp as fully the nature of the problem you theorize about. For women, ain't no theory there.

            •  It's you who don't grasp what I said many times. (0+ / 0-)

              It should be paid for by insurance if necessary to protect the mother's health or end a severe deformaty (even late if it was not known of earlier).  So your argument boils down to "because women get pregnant there should be no questioning their decisions at any time and those who oppose them must pay for it."  Well I, and a multitude of men, disagree.  This is a strange area that med tech has made possible and without a solution that satisfies all the anger, rhetoric and death will continue.  I am in favor of treating the issue with a special tax.  Sorry that bothers you, Christy.  Really.

              "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

              by rainmanjr on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:23:35 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It doesn't either bother or surprise me. (0+ / 0-)

                I am used to those calling themselves progressives being endlessly willing to pronounce on the lives and choices of others which never touch the pronouncers, and becoming vastly nonprogressive once they themselves see themselves as touched by an issue. When those who want to pronounce pay in lives shortened, bodies damaged beyond repair and the like, and not in mere money, I will be more interested in what they, you, think. But I also know that ain't ever gonna happen and you will never be in the position of having this issue touch more than your wallet and your so called principles.

                Interesting that you say

                Well I, and a multitude of men, disagree.

    •  How can one prevent (0+ / 0-)

      being coerced by an abusive partner or a incestous relative, especially if she's underage?

      How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

      by skohayes on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 06:18:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Exactly...but then how can one prevent (0+ / 0-)

        being coerced into having a late-term abortion?  It's a concern that we don't like to think about.

        A Wall Street "bonus" should not be more than what my house is currently worth.

        by bushondrugs on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 09:31:27 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site