Letter: Freedom vs. Fear-mongering

There will always be those who personally consider this to be horrifying and will continue to activate against it, as they see it to be their duty to do so. People are going to argue about this until the sun goes nova. Did the mom of the octuplets have the "right" to have all those babies? A lot of people have weighed in on that one. This is a case of someone telling a total stranger what they can and cannot do. A lot of this has financial implications which always gets people stirred up.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by irishswearingen on February 9, 2009 at 9:21 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: Freedom vs. Fear-mongering

Last I checked the other side uses fear-mongering too. How about all the stories abt back alley hanger abortions? Are those not meant to scare?

The truth is that abortion has become a means of birth control. "Necessary to protect the life or health of the woman" is going to become a very good excuse. I can hear it now... 18 year old has unprotected sex, gets pregnant, and whines.... 'but my life would end if I had this baby!'

• Upvote 0
• Posted by whitneyxx on February 9, 2009 at 1:45 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: Freedom vs. Fear-mongering

Whitneyxx, that would be unfortunate. But you know what would be MORE unfortunate? A girl's life actually ending because she was forced to have a baby.

And as for the "stories about back alley abortions = fear-mongering," can it really be considered a fear tactic if it's true? Were Roe v. Wade to be overturned, God forbid, unsafe practices like that would happen. Scary? Yes. Fear-mongering? Not so much.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by G_E on February 9, 2009 at 2:28 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: Freedom vs. Fear-mongering

G_E:

What so many on the pro-abortion rights side fail to understand is that anti-abortion advocates really do see it as the ending of an ACTUAL life. Because their side sees EVERY unborn fetus as a full, valuable human life (second one after conception through the final second before birth), there is no room for debate. To them, abortion takes the life of an innocent and that is never justifiable.

And since science is not touching the issue of when life begins (isn't it a philosophical question anyway?), the only language that they speak, unfortunately, has a religious tinge... I believe this stunts the discussion in a big way.

Still, pro-choice people have a complete double-standard: whereas pro-lifers never have a good idea about what we'd do if all these babies were born or what would happen to the mothers, pro-choicers never have to answer WHEN a life begins. Everyone agrees abortion is "bad"...but after discussion begins, every question is answered with: "Who are we to say what's right or wrong" ... "it's a horrible decision to make, but I fight for her right to make it" etc., etc. That's a BS, pussy-footing cop-out, just like the pro-lifers have with the born children and new mothers question.

Most rational people would agree that late-term abortion is pretty damn close to infanticide, whether or not it is legal now. So where the hell is the line drawn? Just when IS it "OK" to end a life for the benefit of another? Can you never judge someone who uses abortion as often as birth control? Why is it unfair for anti-abortion people to err on the side of caution?

Point of all this is, both sides need to learn to speak a language that doesn't have mutual exclusive attitudes and find out why the other sides act the way they do.

Maybe I sound incredibly naive, but it's disappointing that I still today (this article and the comments included) am hearing the same tired rhetoric from both sides. They never really inspire debate or progress, just irritate the opposition and validate their "righteous" anger.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by pump on February 9, 2009 at 9:40 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal