Note: I realize that parts of this may reflect ideas that readers don’t necessarily share, so I ask you to help me to develop a theme that reduces the emphasis on “abortion,” and places it on a woman’s right to manage her own life.
1. No woman EVER wants an abortion. It is a desperate act to prevent even more desperate consequences. So - the GOAL ought to be preventing those pregnancies. How to do that? Ensuring that safe, effective and affordable birth control is ALWAYS available to ANY female - without a prescription and over the counter - who is capable of getting pregnant, no matter if they are 8 or 58. (See Colorado’s success with their drastic drop in abortion rates after access to birth control was changed.)
2. For those who oppose abortion, every single family / person decrying this choice ought to be required to adopt an unwanted child. Once the financial burden of raising a child becomes theirs, safe, effective and inexpensive birth control will suddenly become more available.
3. Any time pregnant femicide or infanticide happens, the news media ought to be required to add if the pregnancy or child was a forced birth situation. Stats now show that more women are staying in abusive situations out of necessity as they cannot afford to leave, especially if pregnant. And stats have always show that abusers are more likely to abuse (or murder) their pregnant partners.
You two have pretty much said it all. Clear and consistent terminology is essential to reasonable conversation and the perversion of the terms "Pro life" and "Pro choice", along with Bill's point about the political value of a continuing failure to resolve the issue is why we still have this problem.
This is a thoughtful and sensible way to look at "unwanted" pregnancy. Nobody wants to kill fetuses. We are ALL "pro-life". But terminating pregnancies when there are no other reasonable choices has been a human tradition since we dropped out of the trees. Every culture has done it.
I have two thoughts beyond the inevitability of abortion being part of human life as long as we exist on the planet - legally or not. Privately or publicly. It will always exist. Prohibition doesn't work.
First, your points about education and contraception should be at the center of the discussion - not the imposition of someone's religious beliefs - which may be viewed by a majority of us as primitive, superstitious and just another chapter in the sexism and male domination scenario we can't seem to shed. Feel free to follow whatever faith you like. But leave it at home.
Second, abortion for many politicians is just like immigration. Why address solving the need when it is just a terrific political football? Want to get a cheer out of an audience? Demonize "baby killers". And demonize "others who are coming to take away our jobs". It's all emotional nonsense. But it stirs up a crowd very effectively.
The number of abortions in America could be reduced to almost nothing with an effective strategy of making contraception a grade school concept and by handing out the newly available over the counter contraceptives to every young girl capable of reproduction. Teach and help.
But what bible thumping demonizer of "libtards" would want to really solve the problem? They need the ammunition to feed their howitzers of hate.
Excellent response, Bill! I may try to weave some of this into a revision.
Yesterday, I heard out of the corner of my ear, an MSNBC comment about how the Republicans changed the narrative from to "Global Warming" to "Climate Change," by telling their folks that "climate change" is the difference between someplace in the upper midwest and someplace in Florida. I don't recall who they attributed it to or the specific places, but it was in a discussion about a comment that POS Lauren Boebert made: "Nothing against climate change. I totally believe in it. It happens four times every year." Hearing that discussion made me think that my idea of refocusing the term to "choice" might be worth exploring.
Thanks, David. We'll have to agree to disagree. Too many times we've allowed the other side to define our narrative and paint it as something it is not, or something that is offensive. I'm not suggesting that we retire "abortion," but I am suggesting that we emphasize what's really at stake - a woman's right to manage her own life.
Ideas to help:
1. No woman EVER wants an abortion. It is a desperate act to prevent even more desperate consequences. So - the GOAL ought to be preventing those pregnancies. How to do that? Ensuring that safe, effective and affordable birth control is ALWAYS available to ANY female - without a prescription and over the counter - who is capable of getting pregnant, no matter if they are 8 or 58. (See Colorado’s success with their drastic drop in abortion rates after access to birth control was changed.)
2. For those who oppose abortion, every single family / person decrying this choice ought to be required to adopt an unwanted child. Once the financial burden of raising a child becomes theirs, safe, effective and inexpensive birth control will suddenly become more available.
3. Any time pregnant femicide or infanticide happens, the news media ought to be required to add if the pregnancy or child was a forced birth situation. Stats now show that more women are staying in abusive situations out of necessity as they cannot afford to leave, especially if pregnant. And stats have always show that abusers are more likely to abuse (or murder) their pregnant partners.
You two have pretty much said it all. Clear and consistent terminology is essential to reasonable conversation and the perversion of the terms "Pro life" and "Pro choice", along with Bill's point about the political value of a continuing failure to resolve the issue is why we still have this problem.
Thanks for posting this, Bob.
This is a thoughtful and sensible way to look at "unwanted" pregnancy. Nobody wants to kill fetuses. We are ALL "pro-life". But terminating pregnancies when there are no other reasonable choices has been a human tradition since we dropped out of the trees. Every culture has done it.
I have two thoughts beyond the inevitability of abortion being part of human life as long as we exist on the planet - legally or not. Privately or publicly. It will always exist. Prohibition doesn't work.
First, your points about education and contraception should be at the center of the discussion - not the imposition of someone's religious beliefs - which may be viewed by a majority of us as primitive, superstitious and just another chapter in the sexism and male domination scenario we can't seem to shed. Feel free to follow whatever faith you like. But leave it at home.
Second, abortion for many politicians is just like immigration. Why address solving the need when it is just a terrific political football? Want to get a cheer out of an audience? Demonize "baby killers". And demonize "others who are coming to take away our jobs". It's all emotional nonsense. But it stirs up a crowd very effectively.
The number of abortions in America could be reduced to almost nothing with an effective strategy of making contraception a grade school concept and by handing out the newly available over the counter contraceptives to every young girl capable of reproduction. Teach and help.
But what bible thumping demonizer of "libtards" would want to really solve the problem? They need the ammunition to feed their howitzers of hate.
Excellent response, Bill! I may try to weave some of this into a revision.
Yesterday, I heard out of the corner of my ear, an MSNBC comment about how the Republicans changed the narrative from to "Global Warming" to "Climate Change," by telling their folks that "climate change" is the difference between someplace in the upper midwest and someplace in Florida. I don't recall who they attributed it to or the specific places, but it was in a discussion about a comment that POS Lauren Boebert made: "Nothing against climate change. I totally believe in it. It happens four times every year." Hearing that discussion made me think that my idea of refocusing the term to "choice" might be worth exploring.
Thanks. I really enjoy your writing.
I prefer "Climate Crisis".
Boebert has the emotional development and educational equivalent of a 5 year old and acts like one who has eaten too much candy.
Thanks, David. We'll have to agree to disagree. Too many times we've allowed the other side to define our narrative and paint it as something it is not, or something that is offensive. I'm not suggesting that we retire "abortion," but I am suggesting that we emphasize what's really at stake - a woman's right to manage her own life.