Why We All Need to Be Pro-Abortion

[Josie]

Please read the article and discuss if you agree or disagree.

Why We All Need to Be Pro-Abortion

The language we use shapes the way we think, the way we see the world, and the way we live our lives. This couldn't be more true for abortion care, and Whole Woman’s Health Alliance is working hard to create a world free of shame, stigma, and judgement. Every day, we see the positive impact abortion

www.wholewomanshealthalliance.org

So, there is a reason why we say we’re pro-abortion. Many abortion supporters identify as “pro-choice”, but choice is simply not enough. “Choice” assumes that everyone can get an abortion, and someone just has to choose whether or not they want one. It fails to address the many structural and societal factors that leave people with very few or no choices at all.

This is especially true in states where abortion care is restricted and clinics are scarce. If the nearest abortion clinic is hundreds of miles away, a person may have a “choice” to get an abortion – but if they are lacking transportation, the ability to take time off work, or the funds to afford care, their “choice” doesn’t exist.

It’s not uncommon for people to say “I’m pro-choice, not pro-abortion.” If you are one of those folks or know someone who is, we know your heart is in the right place. But this framing is hurtful to people who’ve had abortions and those who might need abortions in the future. It implies that....

 

[Loulit01]

Please read the article and discuss if you agree or disagree.

Why We All Need to Be Pro-Abortion

The language we use shapes the way we think, the way we see the world, and the way we live our lives. This couldn't be more true for abortion care, and Whole Woman’s Health Alliance is working hard to create a world free of shame, stigma, and judgement. Every day, we see the positive impact abortion

www.wholewomanshealthalliance.org

So, there is a reason why we say we’re pro-abortion. Many abortion supporters identify as “pro-choice”, but choice is simply not enough. “Choice” assumes that everyone can get an abortion, and someone just has to choose whether or not they want one. It fails to address the many structural and societal factors that leave people with very few or no choices at all.

This is especially true in states where abortion care is restricted and clinics are scarce. If the nearest abortion clinic is hundreds of miles away, a person may have a “choice” to get an abortion – but if they are lacking transportation, the ability to take time off work, or the funds to afford care, their “choice” doesn’t exist.

It’s not uncommon for people to say “I’m pro-choice, not pro-abortion.” If you are one of those folks or know someone who is, we know your heart is in the right place. But this framing is hurtful to people who’ve had abortions and those who might need abortions in the future. It implies that....

I like it but I don't see it catching on.

 

[X Factor]

Seems reasonable actually especially since many of the arguments are, in fact, pro abortion.

 

[Josie]

Moved to the correct thread @MamboDervish

Thanks for making my point. Anybody who is ACTUALLY ”pro-abortion” is someone who is desperate to enforce zero population growth - as if that were even globally feasible. People who mischaracterize themselves as “pro-abortion” are really merely pro-choice. What they are actually in favor of is removing restrictions on abortion. Big difference.

You're defining "pro-abortion" as in "all pregnant people should get abortions". That's not how they're defining it.

 

[Blue Dog]

Agree in principle with the article.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Utterly braindead article searching for a problem where there is none that debunks itself in its own body of text.

but if they are lacking transportation, the ability to take time off work, or the funds to afford care, their “choice” doesn’t exist.

So...if one was pro-choice...that would entail making sure women actually have to ability to carry out that choice no?

Is there a single person that is pro-choice but supports shutting down abortion clinics and removing abortion from healthcare plans? What is the author even talking about?

IMO they just want to frame themselves as more radical and righteous than other so called "pro-choice" advocates.

 

[Josie]

Moved to the correct thread @Lisa

Forcing people to have abortions is murder.

Murder of .... who?

 

[Hari Seldon]

Semantic nonsense. It's the pro fetus play book to make abortion unavailable or very difficult for as many as possible. Being pro choice means it should be readily available.

My daughter recently had emergency surgery for a burst ovarian cyst. I couldn't imagine if she was pregnant and lived in one of the medieval Christian nationalist states where the medical decisions are made by religious politicians.

 

[Lisa]

Moved to the correct thread @Lisa



Murder of .... who?

The fetus. Only the mother has the right to terminate a pregnancy. Their body and only their choice.

 

[Josie]

The fetus. Only the mother has the right to terminate a pregnancy. Their body and only their choice.

The fetus is a human being with rights?

 

[Ginger Ale]

What a great person she is! People need her in a day when anti abortionists are screaming baby killer to women already in a painful position. I think she has the right idea, and I'm grateful to have someone like her on women's sides.

 

[Lisa]

The fetus is a human being with rights?

I assumed that you were going to play this slimy semantic game.

No, they arent. Its about the mother's choice.

 

[Josie]

I assumed that you were going to play this slimy semantic game.

No, they arent. Its about the mother's choice.

How would an abortion against the mother’s will result in a murder of the fetus if the fetus isn’t a human being with rights? Wouldn’t it just be like someone killing her plant or gerbil?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

But this framing is hurtful to people who’ve had abortions and those who might need abortions in the future. It implies that abortion isn’t a moral good and that while legal abortions are needed, they are somehow bad. Language like this is stigmatizing and pushes the narrative that people who’ve had abortions should feel ashamed.

Actual progressive brain rot, assuming this person is even a progressive and isn't just some weird pro-abortion fixated individual.

These are the type of geniuses that brought us horrible terms like "Latinx" and "checking my privilege". This is meaningless garbage meant to allow them to feel better about themselves by shaming other people for using "harmful language".

The pro-choice slogan isn't hurtful to people who have had abortions. It doesn't imply abortion is morally bad. It doesn't stigmatize.

If you asked someone if they supported people having kids and they said they were pro-choice and people should be able to freely have kids or not have kids as they will...would you think they were stigmatizing having kids? Making a negative moral implication about having kids? Of course not.

At best, this is a rage bait article. At worst this person is actively malicious and trying to sow discontent among the pro-choice movement.

 

[Ginger Ale]

How would an abortion against the mother’s will result in a murder of the fetus if the fetus isn’t a human being with rights? Wouldn’t it just be like someone killing her plant or gerbil?

Why are MAGAs so sneaky and slimy? I guess they just attract those kinds of people?
Tell us your real motive for the thread, so we can have an "honest" debate.

 

[Ginger Ale]

Actual progressive brain rot, assuming this person is even a progressive and isn't just some weird pro-abortion fixated individual.

These are the type of geniuses that brought us horrible terms like "Latinx" and "checking my privilege". This is meaningless garbage meant to allow them to feel better about themselves by shaming other people for using "harmful language".

The pro-choice slogan isn't hurtful to people who have had abortions. It doesn't imply abortion is morally bad. It doesn't stigmatize.

If you asked someone if they supported people having kids and they said they were pro-choice and people should be able to freely have kids or not have kids as they will...would you think they were stigmatizing having kids? Making a negative moral implication about having kids? Of course not.

At best, this is a rage bait article. At worst this person is actively malicious and trying to sow discontent among the pro-choice movement.

I actually researched her and she doesn't sound malicious at all. She sounds pretty cool actually.

Slaying shame: Amy Hagstrom Miller wants to change the narrative around abortion - C-VILLE Weekly

The confirmation of conservative Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court has raised fears that Roe v. Wade could be undercut or even overturned. In fact, abortion access has been under attack for decades by restrictive state laws and regulations (more than a thousand restrictions have been passed...

www.c-ville.com

 

[Josie]

Why are MAGAs so sneaky and slimy? I guess they just attract those kinds of people?
Tell us your real motive for the thread, so we can have an "honest" debate.

Excuse me? The personal attacks (and lies) are unnecessary in a debate.

Someone in another thread said that no one calls themselves pro-abortion. They do. I posted this thread and directed the conversation over here.

 

[Ginger Ale]

Excuse me?

What's your stance on abortion?

 

[Josie]

What's your stance on abortion?

I’m against elective abortions.

 

[Lisa]

I’m against elective abortions.

That is typically very libertarian of you.

 

[Ginger Ale]

I’m against elective abortions.

Could you elaborate?

 

[Josie]

That is typically very libertarian of you.

Like I've said eleventy times, I don't walk in lock-step with any group.

So how would a forced abortion result in a murder of the fetus?

 

[Josie]

Could you elaborate?

Sure. Copy/pasted from the one of many times I've explained my position:

I'm not anti-abortion for any reason. Only idiots are.

Both humans have value. If the mother is dying because of the pregnancy, then an abortion is needed. If the child is suffering everything should be done to help him/her. If he/she will have lifelong suffering with no quality of life, then an abortion is compassionate, just like turning off life support for your suffering mother is compassionate. If a rape has occurred, then obviously that's a huge blow to the mental health of the mother and continuing the pregnancy will only make things worse for her health, then an abortion might be necessary.

However, the vast majority of abortions aren't any of those things. They are elective. Elective abortions aren't necessary. Does that make me a terrorist?

 

[Ginger Ale]

Sure. Copy/pasted from the one of many times I've explained my position:

I'm not anti-abortion for any reason. Only idiots are.

Both humans have value. If the mother is dying because of the pregnancy, then an abortion is needed. If the child is suffering everything should be done to help him/her. If he/she will have lifelong suffering with no quality of life, then an abortion is compassionate, just like turning off life support for your suffering mother is compassionate. If a rape has occurred, then obviously that's a huge blow to the mental health of the mother and continuing the pregnancy will only make things worse for her health, then an abortion might be necessary.

However, the vast majority of abortions aren't any of those things. They are elective. Elective abortions aren't necessary. Does that make me a terrorist?

It makes you disingenuous.

IMO. Trolling is never held in good light. It's difficult to debate someone who is insincere from the get go.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Disagree with the author's premise, based on this:

“Choice” assumes that everyone can get an abortion, and someone just has to choose whether or not they want one. It fails to address the many structural and societal factors that leave people with very few or no choices at all.

They aren't wrong that the reproductive choices of some women are severely restricted/hampered/outright eliminated in this country. It does not follow, however, that because they have a restricted ability to make that choice for themselves that "pro-choice" means one is implicitly satisfied with those circumstances.

In producing the Model T, Henry Ford once famously said "You can have it in any color you want so long as it's black." That's not a choice. All American women should be able to make reproductive choices for themselves, free of government interference. It doesn't mean one is pro-abortion, anymore than wanting to see a woman carry a pregnancy to term means one is pro-child or pro-family.

It means you believe it is a choice of the woman involved, without enduring hardships or hurdles from the state to exercise that choice.