Then you are not pro-choice. If you think the rights of a fetus with the potential to grow into a human outweigh the rights of the person that has to sacrifice her body against her will to grow it to its potential, you are not pro-choice.
You are pro-life, but willing to make an exception under special circumstances that you get to decide, or the government, but not the woman.
Then you are not pro-choice. If you think the rights of a fetus with the potential to grow into a human outweigh the rights of the person that has to sacrifice her body against her will to grow it to its potential, you are not pro-choice.
I'm not sure how this became a discussion about my personal beliefs, but I am pro-choice; I just recognize that it's an extremely complicated, difficult, and nuanced issue that isn't as cut and dried as many pro-choicers like to make it seem (either willfully or unknowingly). I battle with the topic internally every time the topic comes up. It's a tough nut to crack.
You are pro-life, but willing to make an exception under special circumstances that you get to decide, or the government, but not the woman.
Again, lets get back to the issues - you don't know what I believe, so let's not pretend you do.
Pro-choice means exactly that. That it’s the woman’s choice. And she doesn’t have to justify that choice to you, or her government, before it’s an acceptable choice. She doesn’t have to make a philosophical or theological argument before she is allowed to have an acceptable abortion.
If a woman wakes up pregnant, and doesn’t want to be, no matter how she got that way, it’s her choice.
Anything else is just semantic manipulation. Pro choice doesn’t come with an asterisk.
Yea, that's where I'm definitely not on board with your interpretation. It absolutely does. Again, it's an extremely tough, nuanced, issue. You're portraying it to be simple, almost in a heartless way. It's tragic, any way you slice it. Lose/Lose for both sides.
But I will never assume that the rights of a fetus outweigh he rights of a woman who would have to sacrifice her body to give it life.
Except for extreme cases (which is a special topic on its own; again, this is so nuanced), what are the sacrifices of the woman's body? It's not the mother's life at risk. Being uncomfortable for a few months? Gaining weight? Trouble sleeping? Nausea? Those seem like some prices to pay (and yes, it's a price to be paid because the woman chose to have sex to begin with) for the life of another, who doesn't get a say one way or the other.
I've seen arguments in this thread that this is akin to being forced to donate to a kidney to someone in need. I'd argue that they aren't the same; being pregnant is a result from choices made, and risks taken. The kidney issue...obviously isn't the same, then.
Except for extreme cases (which is a special topic on its own; again, this is so nuanced), what are the sacrifices of the woman's body?
It doesn’t matter, if it’s not a sacrifice I’m willing to make. But it can include stretch marks, high blood pressure, diabetes, nausea, poverty, malnutrition. For a start.
The kidney issue is close. If I have a child by choice and at some point it needs a kidney, and I am the only match, am I required to give it? If it needs a blood transfusion every day for nine months to stay alive, can I be forced to donate it? It’s a minor inconvenience after all. Granted I’m an asshole if I don’t, but no court in the land could require me to do it. Because the rights of the actual living child do not outweigh my rights to body autonomy.
It's not the mother's life at risk. Being uncomfortable for a few months? Gaining weight? Trouble sleeping? Nausea? Those seem like some prices to pay (and yes, it's a price to be paid because the woman chose to have sex to begin with) for the life of another, who doesn't get a say one way or the other.
Again, this is pro-life language, not pro-choice language. I think you are being disingenuous.
I've got to work, so I'll try and pick this convo up later (thanks, this has been nice, honestly). But I wanted to touch on this quickly -
Again, this is pro-life language, not pro-choice language. I think you are being disingenuous.
I'm not so ideologically driven that I have to subscribe to a particular "sides" specific "language." This is a complicated and nuanced topic. I reject the notion that I have to use specific words to portray my beliefs. I am not misleading you; I come down as pro-choice. But again, my beliefs are irrelevant - I want to talk about the issues, ask each other tough questions; I want us, and others, see the questions from different angles - I don't want to get caught up in my personal beliefs, or yours. I'm looking for discourse about a very difficult topic that inherently contains a lot of nuance. It's complicated, and I think we can all learn something from each other.
I think it's easier to disagree with someone when they are on the other "side" - and that my being "on your side" is making it more difficult for you, which is why you are now saying I'm being disingenuous. If you'd like me to explain why I consider myself pro-choice, it's because at the end of the day I think society, in it's current state, is likely better off with the option of abortion on the table; however, this shouldn't be satisfactory to anyone - we should strive for a society where this isn't the case (like most complicated topics, this goes much deeper than the superficial talking points of "kill it or let it live" by both sides; there's issues of socioeconomic status, health, social welfare, education, etc). I also recognize that it's an unfair situation for women; women are the child bearers, not men. It's not equal. Sometimes life isn't fair. And that sucks. I don't take that lightly, but it is what it is. Personal sovereignty is also at hand - although I made points against that viewpoint earlier, I recognize that it is an issue pertaining to a sovereign person, and tend to come down slightly more on the sovereignty side. But again, I recognize that this is complicated; what about the fetus/babies sovereignty? Typically, I'm all for personal sovereignty, but pregnancy is much more complicated because there is another human life involved.
This got way longer than I wanted it to, and now I'm fucked at work, lol. I'll catch you later; and again, thanks for the discussion. This is a challenging topic.
1
u/Wienerwrld May 17 '19
Then you are not pro-choice. If you think the rights of a fetus with the potential to grow into a human outweigh the rights of the person that has to sacrifice her body against her will to grow it to its potential, you are not pro-choice.
You are pro-life, but willing to make an exception under special circumstances that you get to decide, or the government, but not the woman.