Hot ImagesHot ImagesHot ImagesHot ImagesHot Images
Hot ImagesHot ImagesHot ImagesHot ImagesHot Images
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts

July 18, 2011

Pro-Choice is Pro-Life (By Amelia G.)

This article was written by Amelia G., a woman who describes herself as "an undergraduate, feminist, seafood enthusiast, bookworm (and, more recently, blogworm)." She writes for Plenty of Otherwise!

"If you can't trust a woman with a choice,
how can you trust her with a baby?"
The other day I came across an article in the Michigan Messenger about how Thaddeus McCotter, a Republican running for president in 2012, signed a "Pro-life leadership pledge." This means that if elected, he'll "nominate pro-life judges, select pro-life cabinet members, de-fund Planned Parenthood and support legislation that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy."


CPCs pose as abortion clinics, but do not provide abortion or contraceptives (nor do they refer women to organizations that do). As the Ms. article points out, CPCs are notorious for providing false medical information about abortion in order to scare women out of considering it as a viable option that might work for them.

I'm really uncomfortable knowing that I live in a country whose government damn near shut down over an argument about whether to de-fund an organization that does as much good as Planned Parenthood. And it hurts even more to learn that people are actively working to ensure that the nation's laws are on the side of CPCs that flat-out lie to women who come to them for help and comprehensive information.

As someone who cares deeply about reproductive justice and people in general, I'd like to take this opportunity to explain — to Representative McCotter, Judge Pauley, and everyone else behind all of the legislation that has come up since the last election — that pro-choice is pro-life.

A lot of people will be surprised to hear this, but I didn't always identify as pro-choice.

Yeah, really. Because let's face it: the rhetoric sounds great. Don't kill babies. That's something I could totally get behind, you know?

Neither of my parents are U.S. citizens, so they can't vote. Therefore, politics just weren't discussed in our house when I was growing up. I've read that statistically, parents have a great deal of influence over their children's political views. That wasn't really the case for me. I had a few opinions, but those were based shallowly on what I felt to be common sense.

So, when asked for my views on abortion, I would proudly declare that I was pro-life and thought abortion was wrong.

But once I got to high school, I noticed that a lot of people I really respected were especially passionate about their pro-choice views. And important things were going on at the time that forced me to seriously reevaluate my stance. In 2006, when I was a junior, my school district considered adopting an abstinence-only sex education program, to replace the comprehensive one that was in place.

People went apeshit. Friends of mine spoke out against the proposal at school board meetings. Medical professionals came in from out of town to voice their opinion, too. And in the end, we stuck with a comprehensive program.

I was pleased with the school board's decision not to adopt an abstinence only program (even though I didn't believe in abortion, I wasn't quite that conservative; I've always fully supported birth control). But I still could not understand how or why my friends felt so strongly about the abortion issue in particular. And because I knew my friends to be intelligent, compassionate people, I wanted to understand their point of view, so I started researching the topic.

I don't remember a specific moment when I "became pro-choice." I do know, though, that I kept finding instances where I could see myself agreeing that abortion was an acceptable option: rape, incest, poverty, etc.

But what won me over fully in the end were the personal anecdotes. By reading tons of stories about women's experiences with pregnancy, I discovered that it was impossible to put them into boxes marked with the aforementioned labels. It hit me that I couldn't call myself pro-life without taking women's lives and diverse experiences into consideration.

The Supreme Court's upholding of the "partial birth abortion" ban in 2007 (the year I graduated from high school) is the event that both tested and solidified my new pro-choice views. I was furious with the decision, even though when George W. Bush had signed the bill four years prior, I hadn't had a problem with it. That's because on the surface, "partial birth abortion" sounds awful; it evokes images of selfish women who, after 35 weeks of pregnancy, suddenly freak out and realize that they don't want to carry the pregnancy to term. So they go out and have an abortion.

But for one thing, "partial birth abortion" is not a medical term; it was coined by right-wing politicians. And secondly, come on, there have to be reasons for women to get an abortion that late in the game.

And damn good ones, at that.

One woman's story has really stuck with me over the years. It appears on page 14 of  The War on Choice by Gloria Feldt:
We were awaiting the arrival of a son. I'm diabetic, so I had more prenatal testing than most women. At twenty-five weeks I had an ultrasound and the doctor's exact words were, "Vick, you are disgustingly normal and so is the baby." At thirty-two weeks I went in for another ultrasound and my world came crashing down. They discovered that [the fetus] had not grown past twenty-five weeks, and further testing revealed that he had nine major anomalies, including a fluid-filled cranium with no brain tissue at all. He could never have survived outside my womb. My body was the only thing keeping him alive, and I chose to remove my son from life support. I'm a mom. I had three beautiful children, and in fact I have a new baby boy who's here with me now. Who are the people on the anti-choice side to judge me? They've never been in my shoes. I never in my wildest dreams thought something like this could happen, but it happened to me.
The abortion she had in 1996 was made illegal under the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Her experience reminds me of the woman in NE who, earlier this year, was denied an abortion and forced to watch her baby die in her arms shortly after giving birth.

So this is why I feel so strongly that lawmakers should not get between a woman and her doctor. As NARAL's Speak Out for Choice Award recipient Katie Stack said earlier this year during her acceptance speech: "Women's experiences with abortion are nuanced and complicated. But . . . if [we are] given the opportunity to share these diverse realities, we can begin to challenge the stereotypes and falsehoods that are promoted by the anti-choice movement."

Pro-choice is pro-life. That's something I firmly believe and discovered simply by being curious and open. By reading. By trusting/caring about people, and respecting their personal opinions and choices.

I don't think that's too much to ask of humanity.

July 14, 2011

A Modest Proposal (Abortion Edition)

Last year in class we read A Modest Proposal (1729) by Jonathan Swift. It's a satirical piece in which Swift suggests that the Irish should eat their own babies rather than tackle problems of overpopulation and poverty head-on. We were asked to write a similarly satirical piece about an impassioned issue, so I chose abortion rights. [WARNING: The keyword here is "satire," people!]

Which side am I really on?
Written October 9, 2010

Abortion has been one of the most fiercely debated topics of the 21st century, and frankly, I’m tired of hearing about it. If right-wingers truly believe abortion is a sin, and the women who choose to abort are evil, heartless murderers, it’s time to do something rather than settle for bad picket signs and expect anything to happen. What, are we just going to say “no more abortions!” and wait for them to disappear like rats up a drain pipe? We need to get to the root of the problem.

First, we need to ask ourselves: what drives women to have abortions? Are these women simply born with demonic souls, or are they driven to kill after years of reckless partying, drinking, and hardcore drugs (because obviously, any woman callous enough to get an abortion must be sniffing the Big H)? 

Some will have you believe that the decision has less to do with a woman’s lifestyle, and more with what she can expect for the future of her baby. If a woman becomes pregnant, these pro-choicers cry, and her partner is irresponsible, refuses to pay child support, or just gets up and leaves, she may not have the means to provide for a child. Pro-choicers want us to think that if a woman has a dead-end job, absolutely no support, and struggles just to find her next meal, it’s okay for her to choose an abortion rather than let her child suffer. 

Evil, right?

I propose three solutions to the abortion epidemic in this country. First, we must outlaw condoms and sex education. By exposing children to the mechanics of sex and pregnancy prevention as early as middle school, we’re basically telling them (a) it’s okay to “get jiggy with it,” and (b) there are ultimately no consequences because any mistake (i.e. pregnancy) can simply be undone (i.e. abortion). By outlawing condoms, couples will know that their actions may result in an unwanted pregnancy, and they’ll refrain from doing the deed in the first place.

Next, we must set up a national fund to pay women for choosing life over murder. If a poverty-stricken woman is given a choice between having an abortion or receiving a lump sum and letting her baby live, she’ll definitely choose the money. Thus, dinner is served and she can live happily ever after — guilt and problem free — with her bouncing bundle of joy.

Finally, we must make it illegal for two people to have “relations” without first signing mutual contracts in which they provide vital information, including (but not limited to): their name, age, sex, complete medical history, social security number, financial records, and high school transcript. By making the intimate details of our medical histories accessible to the public, we will know at once who has heart conditions, bladder control problems, hemorrhoids, STDs, clinical baldness, etc. and can thus make better decisions about our sexual partners. Not to mention, women will never be in the position of deciding whether or not to keep her child because of an irresponsible partner — she will already have access to his bank account! It’s the perfect solution!

As long as we’re willing to give up any shred of privacy whatsoever and allow the government to have free reign over our personal lives, we can eradicate abortion in America once and for all.

Sure, we could take the easy route and assume women are intelligent and conscientious enough to make their own decisions about their own bodies; we could have faith in the fact that women don’t take abortion lightly, that they think about it long and hard, and are affected by it each and every day for the rest of their lives; we could even focus on better sex education and allow free access to birth control to lessen the chance that couples would have to face an unplanned pregnancy in the first place.

But we’re Americans, and we don’t like to take the easy route.

June 26, 2011

77% of Anti-Abortion Leaders


Speaks for itself, eh?

December 3, 2010

Random Thoughts for a Friday Afternoon: Abortion, Diets, and Krispy Kreme Donuts

There have only been about two days in the past few weeks where I actually got some free time, so while I regret not writing for a while, I don't blame myself. After all, it's hard to write anything interesting (let alone coherent) when your eyes are about to fall out of your head from exhaustion. But anyway, you know when you get into one of those crazy "thinking" moods? I've been like that a lot lately, just thinking, thinking, thinking. Here are my random thoughts for a Friday afternoon:

Abortion. I realized the other day in an epiphany-kind-of-way what being pro-choice is really about. People make pro-choicers out to be inhuman baby-killers (and I'll admit, I would never want that stereotype on my head), but it's a lie. When a woman has an abortion it's not as if she just bops out of the clinic whistling "Singing In the Rain." Having an abortion would tear anybody up inside.

Pro-choicers don't celebrate the act of ending a baby's life, but they do respect women enough to allow them to make their own decisions about their own bodies. That's what we're celebrating: the fact that we are intelligent creatures capable of intelligent, rational thoughts. Why should I let some governor in [insert state here] dictate what I can and cannot do with my body?

I'm not sure if the statistic "77% of anti-abortion leaders are men. 100% of them will never be pregnant" is true, but if it is, dang. How can they make decisions about something they will never, ever experience for themselves?

Maybe if we did more to make abortions unnecessary in this country - like amp up sex education in schools; make contraception more accessible to at-risk couples; and make it easier for single, pregnant women to receive report (financial and emotional) - women wouldn't have to suffer so much.

Overall? Being pro-choice doesn't mean that you're anti-life.

Diets. I haven't really blogged about my weight loss struggles before, but I'm horrified to admit that I've gained back nearly three-fourths of the weight I spent nearly a year losing. I let stress and school get the better of me, and used that as a (lame) excuse to drown my sorrows in Oreos and cheesy enchiladas. Well, I hopped back on the weight loss bandwagon two days ago, and I'm feeling a load better. I'm approaching things differently this time, and believe it or not it's all because of what I read in a random Yahoo! article.

The article said that when women try to lose weight, we're way too hard on ourselves. Instead of "Oh wow, I lost a pound!" we tend to say "Aww man, I only lost a pound?"

Well, no more.

I'm going to start celebrating little successes. If I get it in my head that this is a short-term "diet," I'm going to crash and burn. It's way less pressure to think of this as a lifestyle change, something I can stick to from now on. I'm going to make good choices and drink lots of water, of course, but if we're having pizza one night - dammit, I'm having pizza.

If you want to get healthy and start tracking your food, check out Livestrong.com. Sign up to use one of its features called The Daily Plate - it's great!

For an A&F clothing ad,
something invariably seems
to be missing.
Operation: Anti-Discrimination. Okay, this doesn't have a ton to do with Krispy Kreme donuts (though my group and I will be enjoying them on the day of our "operation"). What is this "operation," you say? On December 18th the girls from Real Beauty Revolution and I will be going under-cover at a nearby mall as different stereotypes to see how people treat us. I'm completely stoked because I'll finally be facing my demon: Hollister.

Whenever my brother and I walk past Hollister we plug our noses and make "snooty" comments. I absolutely abhor the store.

As an overweight woman I'm really interested to see how they react to me, if at all. I'm going to wear sweatpants, a sweatshirt of some sort (I've got a lovely one with my brother's face on it!), a cheap-looking bag, and no makeup. I might pretend that I've never been in the store before, and innocently ask if they have my size...

A part of me hopes we won't experience discrimination in any of the stores we target, but a larger part - a biased, immature part - wants to bust some suckers.

Am I biased against stores that routinely judge and treat customers like crap (i.e. Hollister, A&F, Nordstrom)? Yes.

But that'll make the results that much more interesting when I post them on the 18th!