portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

government | human & civil rights | police / legal

Open Mind on abortion

Can we have an open mind on abortion and possibly change our minds on this issue?
Open Mind on Abortion



Most pro-choice and right-to-life advocates have closed minds in regard to abortion. They will tell you, "My mind can't be changed no matter what you say."

Although I believe in freedom of choice for women, I do have an open mind regarding the issue of abortion. Yes, my mind can be changed if I can be proven wrong on a number of assertions that I am henceforth making.

Every baby that is born should be wanted and loved. Unwanted and unloved babies will find life adjustments to be extremely difficult if not impossible. Prove that this is not true, and I will change my position on abortion.

It has been estimated that if the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled otherwise on the Roe vs. Wade case the population in this country would consist of 40,000,000 more people than it does today. Prove that the more densely populated a country is the better life will be for everydody, and I will change my position on abortion.

Many babies with deformities are not adoptable and must live out their lives without experiencing love and attention from caring people. Prove that this is not true, and I will change my position on abortion.

Babies born from incest stand a much greater chance of inheriting defective genes from both parents who have those genes. Prove that this is not so, and I will change my position on abortion.

Mothers of babies born of rape will usually suffer from post traumatic stress disorder, which will often make the mother unfit for parenthood, resulting in lifetime abuse toward the child. Prove that this cannot be so, and I will change my position on abortion.

Making exceptions on abortion in regard to incest and rape means that some innocent unborn babies are entitled to be born whereas other innocent unborn babies do not have that privilege. Prove that this is not so, and I will change my position on abortion.

Some governments assume full empowerment to govern the matter of abortion, whether to force abortion for population control as in Red China; or to outlaw all forms of abortion as in some theocratic countries; or to selectively decide which women shall have abortions and which shall not to improve the human race as in Nazi Germany. Prove to me that the government knows what is best on matters of abortion, and I will change my position on abortion,

Prove that a life of intolerable suffering is always preferable to death, and I will change my mind on abortion.

Prove that a human zygote has the developed sensory organs of a normal newborn baby, and I will change my mind on abortion.

Prove that outlawing abortion will not result in many unwanted babies being thrown into dumpsters or being murdered, and I will change my position on abortion.

Prove that panicky young women will never die by attempted self-abortion or will never commit suicide rather than face rejection by their families, and I will change my position on abortion.

Prove to me that quantity of life is much more important than quality of life, and I will change my position on abortion.
Good points 19.Nov.2003 21:47

Fred

Good article.

okay but . . . 20.Nov.2003 01:55

deformed

How about changing your position on disability?

Journal of the American Medical Women's Association 54:26-28.
 http://jamwa.amwa-doc.org/vol54/54_1_5.htm [abstract and order link]

Disabled Women's View of Selective Abortion: An Issue for All Women
Marsha Saxton, PhD

Disabled women activists from the disability rights community have articulated a critical view of widespread prenatal diagnosis with intent to abort because the pregnancy might result in a child with a disability. Underlying this critique are historic factors, including resistence to eugenics, and the recognition of disability as a socially constructed phenomenon. These factors have combined to foster a growing activism against the current application of prenatal screening technologies in the United States, Germany, Britain, Japan, and many other countries. Concern about the ethics of selective abortion extend beyond disabled people's interests and include feminist concerns about women as producers of quality controllable products and the commodification of children. (JAMWA. 1999;54:26-28)

missing the fundamentals 20.Nov.2003 03:26

Sue Donim

I think the author is missing the real fundamentals. The real disagreement is not over such utilitarian arguments. The real disagreement is over a fundamental moral value: whether a woman's right as an individual human being to determine her own destiny and control her own body is paramount, or whether the supposed human rights of a fetus are. There is also an additional argument that is made sometimes, even by people who reject the view that a fetus has "human rights," which says that we should still not take a casual view of abortion, because it could lead to desensitizing people about the sanctity of human life, even if fetuses are truly not autonomous beings with the same rights as others. This addresses the "slippery slope" canard sometimes used by anti-abortionists, who say that unless we recognize the full human rights of a fetus, there is no reason why we should stop at legal abortions and not also condone infanticides.

To really understand the problem in the light of such considerations, you should look at some of the detailed arguments of ethicists on this. Especially interesting is Judith Jarvis Thomson's famous essay , "A Defense of Abortion."

Prove to me 20.Nov.2003 22:46

snow black

Prove to me a lifetime of suffering is superalative to death. Prove to me that a woman with multiple children to raise would seek solice in another baby and that the family would not suffer. Prove to me that women will not become so desparate to seek other means of abortion. i.e.. coat hangers, vaccum cleaners, different herbs and conconctions and shady doctors that are majorally dangerous to the mother. Prove to me everything before Roe vs.Wade , Prove it! We didn't just come up with legal abortion because it was cousey. It was necessary, it was, and still is a health issue.

actually, 20.Nov.2003 23:56

steve

>"Prove that a human zygote has the developed sensory organs of a normal newborn baby, and >I will change my mind on abortion."

I don't know about zygotes, and I wish I had time to look this up, but I've been exposed to a number of writings on fetal development, and I believe the basic functions of the nervous system are in evidence from around 10 weeks into the pregnancy, and the fetus is observed to be capable of responding to simple stimuli (i.e. it can 'feel pain' to roughly the same degree as the lab rats that a lot of pro-abortion folk always seem to be so concerned about protecting from torture and death.)

can't...resist...urge 21.Nov.2003 01:16

maurice fredublat

"Every baby that is born should be wanted and loved."

Why? Do ALL unloved babies lead wretched lives as adults? And are ALL loved babies fulfilled?


"Unwanted and unloved babies will find life adjustments to be extremely difficult if not impossible. Prove that this is not true, and I will change my position on abortion."

You are the one making the assertion, therefore the burden of proof is on you. Again, this is absolutely true? The gospel issues (dribbles?) from the mouth of Fred?


"It has been estimated that if the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled otherwise on the Roe vs. Wade case the population in this country would consist of 40,000,000 more people than it does today. Prove that the more densely populated a country is the better life will be for everydody, and I will change my position on abortion."

Why not resort to other means instead, such as weeding out the aged and useless, the senile drains of money and emotion, to address the hypothetical leap in population?


"Many babies with deformities are not adoptable and must live out their lives without experiencing love and attention from caring people. Prove that this is not true, and I will change my position on abortion. "

Again, this ALWAYS true? And, who are you to determine the quality of life for other humans when such a determination is as subjective as criteria come?


"Babies born from incest stand a much greater chance of inheriting defective genes from both parents who have those genes. Prove that this is not so, and I will change my position on abortion."

A greater chance, but what is greater or lesser without a context? Non-incestually spawned babies face risks of deformity. For instance, there is a much greater risk of deformity in birthed children than in "conceptual" children. Though, children face a lesser risk of immediate deformity than the aged who have been exposed to the varying hazards of life and light. So, perhaps we ought to abort all children, to nullify the risk of deformity, and then abort ourselves to nullify the greater risk of deformity we possess.


"Mothers of babies born of rape will usually suffer from post traumatic stress disorder, which will often make the mother unfit for parenthood, resulting in lifetime abuse toward the child. Prove that this cannot be so, and I will change my position on abortion."

One, the mother will suffer the stress regardless. Two, the allegation that such mothers are inferior somehow is insulting. Three, there is adoption.


"Making exceptions on abortion in regard to incest and rape means that some innocent unborn babies are entitled to be born whereas other innocent unborn babies do not have that privilege. Prove that this is not so, and I will change my position on abortion."

So you level the field ideologically by accepting all abortions, so there is fairness in death? Oookay.


"Some governments assume full empowerment to govern the matter of abortion, whether to force abortion for population control as in Red China; or to outlaw all forms of abortion as in some theocratic countries; or to selectively decide which women shall have abortions and which shall not to improve the human race as in Nazi Germany. Prove to me that the government knows what is best on matters of abortion, and I will change my position on abortion, "

Prove to me that YOU know what is best on matters of abortion, and I will change my position on abortion.


"Prove that a life of intolerable suffering is always preferable to death, and I will change my mind on abortion."

Again, you cannot know the quality of life of any individual baby before that life has been lived. Also again, who are you to determine what is intolerable suffering? For instance, suffering your logic was rather intolerable, so should I have been aborted? And, how would my mother have known I would encounter this time of intolerable suffering whilst carrying me?

It is not the baby's preference given weight, but the mother's, she who is no more authorized to determine the baby's course in life than a government is to determine an adult's.


"Prove that a human zygote has the developed sensory organs of a normal newborn baby, and I will change my mind on abortion."

Do sensory organs a human baby make? I don't purport to know when a fetus is human, though I can clearly see the development of sensory organs is rather arbitrary, no? I could just as easily say, "prove that a male child has developed the capacity to grow a beard and I will change my mind on post-partial birth abortion." The distinction is meaningless, as is your sermon (sermon=rhetoric) when placed squarely amidst the choir.


"Prove that outlawing abortion will not result in many unwanted babies being thrown into dumpsters or being murdered, and I will change my position on abortion."

What's the difference in discarding a log with thirteen or thirty rings to it?


"Prove that panicky young women will never die by attempted self-abortion or will never commit suicide rather than face rejection by their families, and I will change my position on abortion."

Prove that guilty young women will never commit suicide after having an abortion and I will change my position on abortion. Of course these things will happen but what solution mitigates death the most?


"Prove to me that quantity of life is much more important than quality of life, and I will change my position on abortion."

Have you ever considered other things, such as volunteer sterilization and awareness of the population problem as possible solutions? War, for example, is excellent for reducing the stampeding throngs to manageable numbers, but is that a good reason to support it?

The Twilight of the Golds 21.Nov.2003 10:42

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120392/

One could argue that being gay in this cultural context can lead to lots of suffering (such as being subject to the harassment and bigotry of the religious right), this movie explores the issue:

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120392/

Plot Summary for
Twilight of the Golds, The (1997) (TV)

When Suzanne Stein has a genetic analysis done on her unborn child, she discovers that although she has a healthy baby, the child will most likely be born gay, like her brother, David. She must decide whether to keep the child, or to have an abortion. Her family enters a crisis about love and acceptance as she makes this difficult choice.