Salon debunks the idea that having an abortion has a negative impact on women's health.
Which got me thinking: even if it did, who cares?
You get an abortion, you go insane. You get an abortion, you get breast cancer. You get an abortion, you become infertile. Even you get an abortion, you go to jail.
All of those are so incredibly negligible compared with the alternative of going through an unwanted pregnancy and bringing an unwanted child into the world!
If someone actually thought "Well, I've thought it through thoroughly and determined that it's best for this child to be spared the misery of existence. Oh, but wait, if I did that then I'd have to take Paxil for a little while! We can't have that!" then they'd be entirely too selfish to have a child anyway.
Added Aug. 15 11:30 pm: Some people aren't going to like or grok or agree with this post because it's about abortion. But I just realized it isn't really about abortion at all. I wrote about abortion because the article that triggered these thoughts was about abortion, but it's bigger than that.
So reread the post, but cross out the word abortion and replace it with whatever your personal family planning goal is right this minute. For me, that's never becoming pregnant. For other people, it is becoming pregnant. Or perhaps having four kids. Or perhaps getting a vasectomy. Or perhaps adopting kids. Whatever your goal is, replace the word abortion with your goal and reread the post.
See how all those potential health effects are so completely negligible?
9 comments:
Excellent thought! I couldn't agree more.
Before the increased risk of breast cancer theory was debunked, I used to think, who cares? There are all sorts of cancer risks, and very little you can do to avoid it. Who would actually carry an unwanted pregnancy to term because of some theoretical, possible increased risk of cancer, far in the future?
Plus I just realized the Salon story you linked to is by someone I used to work with in the Haven Coalition.
ever heard of adoption. these aborted children arent unwanted, theyre just unwanted by their " mothers " who choose convenience over life. of all the pro-abortion arguments that understand least is the one that says the child is better off dead.
Magnolia, sure wish I lived in your world. The one I live in has hundreds of thousands of unwanted and neglected children.
Wow, a world where it's never better not to have been born AND there are no children waiting for adoption? Must be nice!
btw my previous message was for strumpette not i-girl. my boycott of laura and wmtc is permanent.
it is almost impossible to adopt a white child so yes there is a huge market for unwanted children. all of the children not adopted are aboriginal here and black in the states. perhaps abortion could be used in a supply-and-demand sort of way. there is absolutely no reason that whites should be allowed to abort children when there is such a HUGE demand.
People adopt children based on race???? Wow, that makes me extra thankful for Dr. Morgentaler's hard work! For an innocent child to be saddled with my genetics and gestational environment is bad enough, but to have all that and then be placed with parents who would only want to adopt a white child...no one deserves that! I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy!
Boy, Magnolia. What is it like on your planet?
Here on Earth, people make choices based on the facts available to them at the time.
You're prolife. Goody for you. So am I-I believe that every child I aid in conceiving should be brought to term. However, I see no reason why I can, or should, apply this principle to anyone else.
You have no right to impose pregnancy and birth and parenthood on anyone else.
Post a Comment