fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2079 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2079 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 057 secrets from Secret Submission Post #297.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From what I understand, most pro-lifers do not believe abortion is okay in cases of rape, but I think those that do make the exception are only doing so because they know they wouldn't want to keep the baby to term if they themselves were raped. They simply can't imagine being in any other situation where they wouldn't want a baby, so they make an exception mentally just in case that does ever happen to them.

What really is awful about the abortion debate in my opinion is that we spend so much time talking about less common abortion candidates like rape victims and pregnant teenagers and we don't spend enough time talking about the realities of the majority of women who get abortions. I'll give a (half hypothetical) example.

I have a dear friend who went to basic training a few months ago. She had (and has) a boyfriend who she loves very much. They have sex and use birth control, because she is smart and she isn't ready to have a baby yet. If you are pregnant, you can't go to basic training; basically if she got pregnant her whole military future that she'd been planning for for years would change. We were having a discussion one day over dinner shortly before she left and she told me,

"I'm probably going to hell in a handbasket for it, but if I found out I was pregnant right now I would get an abortion. I can't have a baby right now, I just can't."

This is a perfectly valid (in my opinion) reason to have an abortion. If she waits to have a child, by the time she is ready to have one she will have a career and money and time to support the child. She will not have to give up everything she ever worked for to be a vessel for a being she didn't want. I think not addressing these cases is wrong because it suggests that the only reason abortion is even on the ballot is not for women like this, but for pregnant teenagers and rape victims. According to every news outlet everywhere it doesn't matter if your dreams of being,say, a fighter pilot are dashed, because the public doesn't find that story as interesting or sympathetic for whatever reason.

Idk, it's late and I don't know if what I'm saying makes any sense, but basically I think the whole argument surrounding abortion has been sensationalized and warped. I am pro-choice, I don't know if I could actually go through with doing it myself but I support the right for women to do with their bodies whatever they please.

I think what you're saying is an important part of the debate because it's only ever women who have to give up their life and their career because of getting pregnant. In every case the man has a CHOICE that a woman doesn't despite the fact that it's the man's baby just as much as the woman's.

Basically, it's not a woman's (or transman's) fault that they were born with a uterus. And we're not typically allowed to get them removed (unless it is needed for medical reasons) so why are we the ones who must carry a baby for 9 months?

I also think people gloss over the fact that pregnancy is a medical condition and there are very real risks that come with being pregnant. Even if you're not in danger of dying there is a lot of illness and other terrible things that can happen. Your body also changes forever, why should someone be forced to go through that?

Yeah, I am only too aware of the last reason. I love children, and I would love to have my own child, but I also have several fairly serious mental illnesses, and I am still grappling with whether or not it would ever be ethical for me to get pregnant with the chance that I might pass something down to my child. Getting pregnant for me also would mean getting off medication, and there is a high chance of relapse for me, particularly for my bipolar disorder. If I was being careful with birth control and I still got pregnant I really don't know what I would do.

"I think not addressing these cases is wrong because it suggests that the only reason abortion is even on the ballot is not for women like this, but for pregnant teenagers and rape victims. According to every news outlet everywhere it doesn't matter if your dreams of being,say, a fighter pilot are dashed, because the public doesn't find that story as interesting or sympathetic for whatever reason."

This happens because of lack of basic biological and psychological education and logic. It's easy to gross out people and prejudice them against killing a picture you're waving of a seven- or eight-month-old fetus, IF they don't understand abortions of ones that far along are almost totally because of (a) a bad problem with the fetus itself or (b) danger to the woman's life. And many people don't. They also don't realize many already-mothers, including married ones, get abortions because they can't afford another mouth; and that there ARE married people who don't want children.

It's often hard to control an emotional debate if you don't evoke extreme emotion. This is why pro-choicers so often look like unfeeling ice cubes, because they're deliberately cast as mustache-twirling villains who are out to slaughter helpless gurgling, chubby-cheeked "D'AWWWW" babies ... instead of advocating safe access to abortion for women who don't want a pregnancy to get anywhere near that advanced a stage.

Yeah, it was really late when I posted last night, so I didn't really touch too much on income and the fact that a lot of women who get abortions already have children, but it's absolutely true. Whether you're middle class or fairly poor, having another mouth to feed means a drastic change in the amount of income you're getting in. Another child may even be the difference between having a home and a comfortable life and being homeless. Many people suggest adoption for cases like this, but I think the fact of the matter is that people who already have children would feel guiltier adopting the baby away than aborting it before it is viable. They already have a child so it feels like unfair abandonment if they give one away, even if they can't afford one.

The adoption argument for laws against abortion access is meant to sound like a compromise, but it usually just pisses me off. It seems to assume a woman who doesn't want a child is nevertheless OK with going through a body-changing pregnancy and birth; and then that she's either found someone to adopt the baby and is OK with giving it away, or that she's OK with just sticking it out there in the world somewhere like a chip in a roulette wheel. If a woman doesn't mind 2 out of 3 of these things, then you don't have to pass a law forcing her to not abort - just be the person who agrees to adopt her baby.

[ SECRET POST #2079 ]

Re: anon for obvious reasons

Re: anon for obvious reasons

Re: anon for obvious reasons

Re: anon for obvious reasons

Re: anon for obvious reasons

Re: anon for obvious reasons