One of respect.

From what I understand these are woman who signed a petition saying that they had an abortion. Ms. magazine got permission from these women before they published their names. They couldn't fit them all in the magazine so the ones that didn't fit, they put on the website. Their point is that abortion access is becoming more scarce and they want to keep them safe, legal and accessible.

Their point is that abortion access is becoming more scarce and they want to keep them safe, legal and accessible.

and what a good point that is.

Why should women be the only ones that have the right to choose what they can and can't do with their bodies, and only in this one particular area? "Rights" are funny things in that they can be made up off the top of your head. Abortion denies the parental rights of the father.

As for these women, I have to respect people who stand up for what they believe in and are willing to have it known, even if I can't respect their decision, and think it was a criminal one. I would just urge people to rethink the idea that there is some objective value that requires abortion to be an accepted, legal practice. I can't smoke pot, I can't sell my kidney, I can't drive to the store without wearing a seatbelt, so telling me that we have the inherent right to choose what we do with out bodies falls a little flat.

ON a serious note, I am reminded of politicians in the early 20th century. Many were proud to have their name associated with the KKK. Today, not many want to be reminded that they were a part of that organization.

I am with Baker on abortion. Yet I think these women who are strutting their vagina loud and proud today, are going to rue it later in life.

For the other 99.9% of women who have had the procedure, for whatever reason, they are not proud of it. It was either a necessity (in their minds) or a shame to be erased. They are not parading it for all to see.

think these women who are strutting their vagina loud and proud today, are going to rue it later in life.

I don't have a vagina to strut, but if it means safe legal access for all (and not just the wealthy who can go around the law in various ways if it were illegal) then if I had one I'd strut it.

Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Wednesday, October 04, 2006One of respect.

Respectfullly accepted!

They couldn't fit them all in the magazine so the ones that didn't fit, they put on the website. Their point is that abortion access is becoming more scarce and they want to keep them safe, legal and accessible.

Reply By: ShovelheatPosted: Wednesday, October 04, 2006Their point is that abortion access is becoming more scarce and they want to keep them safe, legal and accessible.and what a good point that is.

Yes, I know. I agree that it should be kept safe, legal and accessible.

Why should women be the only ones that have the right to choose what they can and can't do with their bodies, and only in this one particular area?

Because it's their body regardless. And there are times when the male is not in the picture.

As for these women, I have to respect people who stand up for what they believe in and are willing to have it known,

I can respect the fact that they are doing that. I would think they would want this to be a private matter. However, I'm beginning to understand as I said in my article that they are doing it to keep the rights of women free. That I do respect them for.

I can't smoke pot, I can't sell my kidney, I can't drive to the store without wearing a seatbelt, so telling me that we have the inherent right to choose what we do with out bodies falls a little flat.

Well, in a way, you're protecting your body here, you're doing what you choose not to do. It might be the illegal to do these things, but people still do it, smoke pot and sell their kidneys. While this type of choice is not the same as someone having an unwanted child, or if their unborn child is in jeopardy or they have been raped, that's a totally different matter.

Yet I think these women who are strutting their vagina loud and proud today, are going to rue it later in life.

I honestly don't think they will Doc. For the simple reason that anyone who would rather a woman use a coat hanger, that is the shame our society should remember.

I don't have a vagina to strut, but if it means safe legal access for all (and not just the wealthy who can go around the law in various ways if it were illegal) then if I had one I'd strut it.

Exactly Joe.

"Well, in a way, you're protecting your body here, you're doing what you choose not to do. It might be the illegal to do these things, but people still do it, smoke pot and sell their kidneys. While this type of choice is not the same as someone having an unwanted child, or if their unborn child is in jeopardy or they have been raped, that's a totally different matter."

Is it? I don't think so. It's subjectively more important to you, but you can't weigh it as more important than the issues that matter to other people. Unwanted children can be adopted, and frankly killing an unborn child because it is in jeopardy doesn't make much sense.

Believe what you want, but what resonated with me in your article is that you take it for granted that abortion is a 'duh' issue. It isn't. You live in a democracy where people have the "choice" (pun intended) to craft their nation's ethics the way they want. When you hold that we can't outlaw abortion on moral grounds, you remove our "right to decide" as American citizens. (pun intended)

What happened with Roe v. Wade wasn't a victory, it was a dark day for Democracy, and hopefully one that will be fixed soon. If the people of America want abortion, fine, let them "choose". Right now we are denied the right to decide if the one sacrosanct, unregulatable right is the killing of an unborn child.

I honestly don't think they will Doc. For the simple reason that anyone who would rather a woman use a coat hanger, that is the shame our society should remember.

Remember the real Roe. She regrets it. My answer was not a call to arms against abortion (all know my position on it), but the fact that in life we live and learn, and while all will not regret it, many do.

I killed a pet. Do I shout it? Or do I regret it?

That is what I am saying.

I personally believe in every woman’s right to choose freely that which she has to do. Whether it’s her choice to keep a child or to have an abortion, regardless of what our society believes, or what you or I believe, it’s each individual’s right to do what is right for her. It’s no one’s business.

I'm pretty sure I do not agree with this. While it is everybodies right to do what they please with their own bodies, we give up that right when we decided to share our bodies.

When a man and woman decide to have unprotected sex, they both are aware of the underlying potential of pregnancy. When people have sex, they are no longer 2 individuals, but they become one person. These 2 people no longer have separate rights, but the rights of one. Both women and men give up their individual rights when they decide to make the union of sex; union being the key element.

The joining of a man and woman for the sake of sex is temporary if, and only IF the woman does not become impregnated. You might ask how is this. Well consider that a male deposited his seed into a female, making it "our" seed. That seed moves to your egg and becomes "our" egg. Even after these two people separate, the union of "our seed and egg" still remains in the females body.

Some females think that just because its in their body, that her pregnancy is hers alone; not true. The pregnancy was derived under the contract of the woman and mans initial union which still in fact exists in the form of a now living fetus.

The old saying goes, possesion is only 9/10ths of the law. The problem is ajudicating the extra 1/10th of the law.

.............

Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, told Cybercast News Service that the pitch from Ms. Magazine takes "absurdity to a new level with a campaign bragging about their past abortions."

Are these women really bragging? Or fighting for the right to have an abortion, regardless of if its a man or womans right. If these women are fighting, then its for both the man and womans right to abort a pregnancy.

If the government can not make a woman have an abortion, why should they prohibit them from having one should both members of therelationship agree to have one.

The rest of it seems to be the same ol' song and dance, or as it seems to me. If I'm wrong, forgive me. I'm not much up in the political arean.

I’m sure they know that there might be consequences, harassment and such like that because the people who don’t believe in this can be maniacal fanatics who don’t respect an individual’s choice.

If this is an unlawful assembly, then these women have no right to do what they are doing.

I hope I responded well to your post, as I said, I'm not to good with political discussions.

xythe

Is it? I don't think so.

I guess if you don't think you are protecting yourself from the harm that taking drugs can do to your body or smoking can do to your lungs, your body..then I guess I can't respond to that one!

and frankly killing an unborn child because it is in jeopardy doesn't make much sense.

If the child's life and the woman's life is in jeopardy...I guess both of them dying is better then.

but what resonated with me in your article is that you take it for granted that abortion is a 'duh' issue.

YOu have to point out to me where in my article I took this discussion as a 'duh' issue. We're obviously on different page, which is apparent, and that's fine, however, make your points and we can discuss them. 'duh' issue....I'm a bit flabbergasted by this statement!

When you hold that we can't outlaw abortion on moral grounds, you remove our "right to decide" as American citizens. (pun intended)

How does it remove your right to decide. YOu have the right to choose not to. What these women are asking for is the right and freedom to be able to choose for themselves. How would we be a democrasy if they can't even do that?!

What happened with Roe v. Wade wasn't a victory, it was a dark day for Democracy, and hopefully one that will be fixed soon. If the people of America want abortion, fine, let them "choose". Right now we are denied the right to decide if the one sacrosanct, unregulatable right is the killing of an unborn child.

Baker, the day when we (everyone) as American cannot freely make a decision to do what they want, is the day when our country is not free anymore. That's the point I'm getting at here. If you want to choose to do something other than what I want, that's your business, go right ahead. If I choose do something that I want and you dont' agree with, that's my business, I should be able to do whats right for me. That's the America we cannot afford to lose. Because the day we do will be a dark day for democracy!

I don't agree with women who uses abortion like they change their underwear, no where in my article or my responses do I state that. I do however agree with a womans' right to choose because it's her fundamental right as an individual!

My answer was not a call to arms against abortion

I didn't think it was Doc.

but the fact that in life we live and learn, and while all will not regret it, many do.I killed a pet. Do I shout it? Or do I regret it?That is what I am saying.

And we do AGREE on this! I stated that I'm not sure why the women who regretted doing this would sign their name to a petition, but I do understand why they would. They would if it means that women lose their right and freedom to choose. That I've come to understand is why they are doijng what they do.

I'm pretty sure I do not agree with this. While it is everybodies right to do what they please with their own bodies

It is their right that's correct.

Are these women really bragging? Or fighting for the right to have an abortion,

I beleive they are fighting for the right to do that.

why should they prohibit them from having one should both members of therelationship agree to have one.

I agree that both people involved have the right. Most times, both people are not involved. Most times the man is out of the picture for whatever reason, and the woman will decide to do whatever is right for her in that case. The hope will be the choice is to have the child and give it up for adoption. There is still so much stygma placed on an unwed, unmarried woman these days and it's worse when she lives in a small town. Is it any wonder some women do what they do? Because they don't have the support or the money, that is sometimes the reason why some women do it. As for the others who dont' give a damn either way, that's a different story.

I’m sure they know that there might be consequences, harassment and such like that because the people who don’t believe in this can be maniacal fanatics who don’t respect an individual’s choice.If this is an unlawful assembly, then these women have no right to do what they are doing.

The unlawful assembly would be the those people who harrass people who make the decision for themselves. It's like politics and religion, and the subject does have a lot to do with both Xythe, this is the type of topic where some feel it's too taboo to talk about even today. or they end up being mad at each other, fighting or worse.

I hope I responded well to your post, as I said, I'm not to good with political discussions.

You held your own Xythe, not to worry!

I believe abortion is wrong. So in my mind I can understand why someone who does something wrong would not want it made public. If they truly believe the baby is just "tissue" and there is nothing wrong with abortion, then really what is the big deal who knows they've done it? In those terms its much like getting a mole removed. And how offended would they be if people knew that?

I admit I come at this from a pro-life angle and so can't really wrap my mind around the fact its legal in this country to kill our offspring.

"If the child's life and the woman's life is in jeopardy...I guess both of them dying is better then."

There's a supreme difference between doing all you can to save the life of the mother and child and in the end the child dying, and killing the child pre-emptively as though it was a "condition".

"YOu have to point out to me where in my article I took this discussion as a 'duh' issue."

I say that because you pre-suppose that abortion is a right and that it would be somehow unjust if the American people democratically decided to end the practice legally. You characterize opponents as "frenzied factions" or moneybag interests, as if NoW and the ACLU aren't five shades more active, more influence peddling, and more outspoken.

I don't believe, for instance, that it is right for 16 year olds to have sex. I can't, though, say it is a great wrong for the people of Washington DC to democratically decide such. I have my values, they have theirs, and we live in a nation where the people, not esoteric ideals, rule.

"How does it remove your right to decide."

By making abortion an untouchable ideal you remove the right of the people of the US to decide democratically what they want to be legal in their nation. We have been denied a voice on this topic by a few black-robed dictators 30 years ago. Federal authorities had no good cause to overcome the democratically decided wishes of the states.

"Baker, the day when we (everyone) as American cannot freely make a decision to do what they want, is the day when our country is not free anymore. That's the point I'm getting at here. "

The US body of law is volume after volume of things that we can't freely do without legal opposition, and a great deal of it is "victimless", "My own body" stuff. I defy you to name one other aspect of your life, one other personal practice that isn't legally regulated by the government.

I don't believe you can. In that light, why do you believe that women have the special right to be free from imposition on this one, narrow issue? Why can we legislate whether or not I sell a rich guy my kidney or have a doctor help me commit suicide, and yet women have the unfettered right to pay a doctor to kill their unborn child?

"I do however agree with a womans' right to choose because it's her fundamental right as an individual! "

I think you and I both have reason to thank God that our society was designed so that the PEOPLE can decide if such a statement is true. The perspective of pro-abortion organizations seems to be that these rights simply exist as some platonic ideal, outside of the will of the people.

Do you believe that to be true? Do you believe that there are esoteric ideals that we should have imposed on us whether we democratically deem them worthy or not? If so, do you really trust the government to not abuse such a blank check to impose ideals?

I keep losing my reply, I'm not sure why. Will try again tomorrow.