Instead, before I’d even known I was pregnant, a molecular flaw had determined that our son’s brain, spine and legs wouldn’t develop correctly. If he were to make it to term—something our doctor couldn’t guarantee—he’d need a lifetime of medical care. From the moment he was born, my doctor told us, our son would suffer greatly. [...]
“I don’t want to have to do this at all,” I told her. “I’m doing this to prevent my baby’s suffering. I don’t want another sonogram when I’ve already had two today. I don’t want to hear a description of the life I’m about to end. Please,” I said, “I can’t take any more pain.” I confess that I don’t know why I said that. I knew it was fait accompli. The counselor could no more change the government requirement than I could. Yet here was a superfluous layer of torment piled upon an already horrific day, and I wanted this woman to know it. [...]“I’m so sorry that I have to do this,” the doctor told us, “but if I don’t, I can lose my license.” Before he could even start to describe our baby, I began to sob until I could barely breathe. Somewhere, a nurse cranked up the volume on a radio, allowing the inane pronouncements of a DJ to dull the doctor’s voice. Still, despite the noise, I heard him. His unwelcome words echoed off sterile walls while I, trapped on a bed, my feet in stirrups, twisted away from his voice.
“Here I see a well-developed diaphragm and here I see four healthy chambers of the heart…”
I closed my eyes and waited for it to end, as one waits for the car to stop rolling at the end of a terrible accident.
When the description was finally over, the doctor held up a script and said he was legally obliged to read me information provided by the state. It was about the health dangers of having an abortion, the risks of infection or hemorrhage, the potential for infertility and my increased chance of getting breast cancer.
I'm glad you pointed this out. The "pro-choice" vs "pro-life" dichotomy really does paint a false picture of the "pro-choice" angle. But in fact the pro-life advocates rely entirely upon this misunderstanding. They like to make it seem as though their opposition is arguing against life itself.
Which is why, when asked for my position, I always sarcastically respond "anti-life". :-)
I have also encountered the term "forced-birthers" referring to
anti-choice people...
-Brian.
> I'm glad you pointed this out. The "pro-choice" vs "pro-life" dichotomy
> really does paint a false picture of the "pro-choice" angle. But in fact
> the pro-life advocates rely entirely upon this misunderstanding. They
> like
> to make it seem as though their opposition is arguing against life
> itself.
>
> Which is why, when asked for my position, I always sarcastically respond
> "anti-life". :-)
> On Mar 16, 2012 1:04 AM, "Jace Eagle Bear" <jace...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Found this on facebook. I don't know what others think, but the project
>> website to me seems to give the impression that women are somehow forced
>> to
>> have abortions? And surprise, surprise; it is Christian-founded.
>>
>> http://vimeo.com/34761825
>>
>> http://WWW.BACKTOLIFEMOVEMENT.COM/
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> <http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2012/03/a-triumph-for-the-texas-taliban/>that
>> shows one anecdote of how the anti-choicers really do try to remove
>> choice,
>> if not literally than by liberal application of shame and lies:
>>
>> Instead, before I�d even known I was pregnant, a molecular flaw had
>> determined that our son�s brain, spine and legs wouldn�t develop
>> correctly.
>> If he were to make it to term�something our doctor couldn�t
>> guarantee�he�d
>> need a lifetime of medical care. From the moment he was born, my doctor
>> told us, our son would suffer greatly. [...]
>>
>> �I don�t *want* to have to do this at all,� I told her. �I�m doing this
>> to prevent my baby�s suffering. I don�t *want* another sonogram when
>> I�ve
>> already had two today. I don�t *want* to hear a description of the life
>> lie<http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/abortion-miscarriage>
On a more serious note, it just amazes me that the narrator in this video thinks that "they" [the politicians for pro-chioce] don't represent her. First off, she is not the only person in the US and there are plenty of women that are represented by Rowe vs Wade. Secondly, I am sure that her opinion would change when her life is in jeopardy because something is wrong with the fetus and it needs to be aborted.
I am amazed at how these christians that like to think they help so many people. What they dont really realize that this stupid battle over abortions is HURTING more people than it helps. It digresses political conversation from important topics like climate change, getting out of Afghanistan and fixing the economy. Their battle is selfish!
- Greg Axani
gax...@gmail.com
- Greg Axani
gax...@gmail.com
On 2012-03-16, at 6:56 AM, bpa...@ucalgary.ca wrote:
- For more options, like getting posts in a lump-sum digest, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/freethinkers-club?hl=en
--
You've received this message because you are subscribed to the University of Calgary Freethinkers Club mailing list. Lucky you! Here's the rules:
- To post an informal message on a new topic to this group, please send an email to freethin...@googlegroups.com with "CHAT" somewhere in the subject line; that little addition helps others deal with the HUGE volume of traffic!
- To reply to an existing message... reply to it. Yes, it's that simple!
- To post an announcement to this group instead, fire off a message to freethin...@googlegroups.com . Keep it brief and informative.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
- For more options, like getting posts in a lump-sum digest, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/freethinkers-club?hl=en
- For more options, like getting posts in a lump-sum digest, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/freethinkers-club?hl=en
--
You've received this message because you are subscribed to the University of Calgary Freethinkers Club mailing list. Lucky you! Here's the rules:
- To post an informal message on a new topic to this group, please send an email to freethin...@googlegroups.com with "CHAT" somewhere in the subject line; that little addition helps others deal with the HUGE volume of traffic!
- To reply to an existing message... reply to it. Yes, it's that simple!
- To post an announcement to this group instead, fire off a message to freethin...@googlegroups.com . Keep it brief and informative.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
- For more options, like getting posts in a lump-sum digest, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/freethinkers-club?hl=en
Graham Hill <gthi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The thing is, there actually is a separate “anti-life” position. It’s called antinatalism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism .
>
>This leads me to realize that there are probably several separate axes here:
>-birth-positive (new life has positive value) vs. birth-negative (new life has negative value)
>-abortion-negative (abortion is a bad thing which should be avoided) vs. abortion-indifferent (abortion is not a bad thing in and of itself)
>-pro-choice (the government should not interfere with reproductive rights) vs. anti-choice (the government should restrict reproductive actions)
>
>So:
>-the “pro-life” position is usually birth-positive, abortion-negative, anti-choice;
>-“pro-choice” can apply to any combination on the birth and abortion axes, since if you just want the government to stay out of people’s uteruses, it doesn’t matter so much where you stand on the other two dimensions;
>-antinatalism is birth-negative and abortion-indifferent, and may be anti-choice as well.
>
>Thoughts?
>
>Graham
>
>From: Evan Loughlin
>Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 1:21 AM
>To: freethin...@googlegroups.com
>Subject: RE: [FUC] CHAT: Pro-life or Anti-Choice?
>
>I'm glad you pointed this out. The "pro-choice" vs "pro-life" dichotomy really does paint a false picture of the "pro-choice" angle. But in fact the pro-life advocates rely entirely upon this misunderstanding. They like to make it seem as though their opposition is arguing against life itself.
>
>Which is why, when asked for my position, I always sarcastically respond "anti-life". :-)
>
>On Mar 16, 2012 1:04 AM, "Jace Eagle Bear" <jace...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Found this on facebook. I don't know what others think, but the project website to me seems to give the impression that women are somehow forced to have abortions? And surprise, surprise; it is Christian-founded.
>
> http://vimeo.com/34761825
>
> http://WWW.BACKTOLIFEMOVEMENT.COM/
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------