<p>“There would be nothing to prevent a state from making pre-marital sex a crime. It is very naive to think that there are states out there not conservative enough to consider these things.”
And there would be nothing to prevent voters from choosing legislators who would not allow such a thing, if that was the will of the voters. States aren’t “conservative” voters are.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know a lot about this. My mother had a midwife (a close friend) for all of her children’s births, and I plan to do the same when I eventually have children. I absolutely think that the pregnant woman should be in charge of the birthing process - but to use a dependence on doctors to show the disempowerment of women who get abortions is just silly. Many would say that they are more empowered now that they can give birth in a hospital, relatively safely. Who are you to make that judgment call?</p>
<p>Question: Would you support abortion if it could be done, by the woman herself, herbally, at a minimal risk? (I know there are large risks to herbal abortions, assuming that the woman doesn’t have a good idea of what she’s doing, but it’s a hypothetical). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Great that you think that - I’d be inclined to agree for myself, too. But people are no longer living in huts and caves in the woods anymore; some might see this as a great sign of progress. I wouldn’t call it that, but to claim that women are disempowered by it is, to me, crazy.</p>
<p>unregistered, are you saying that the only info about FFL you have is from the website?</p>
<p>If so, then that explains our difference in views. I was a supporter of FFL for many years and have several dozen of their monthly newsletters. These provide a lot more details of their grassroots efforts. I’d be happy to copy some of the info for you, if you like.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you believe that some lunatics in Kansas have the right to legislate on what goes on inside the bedroom of two consenting adults, even if they are a majority?</p>
<p>“In matriarchal societies, wise women had knowledge of herbs, fertility cycles, etc. and were in control of their own fertility.”</p>
<p>And you don’t think these “wise women” knew about or used abortifacients? If you believe that, you are seriously mistaken. Abortion has always been and still is common around the world and in countless societies, including “primitive” and “matriarchal” societies.</p>
<p>An abstract from an OBGYN journal, in the NIH archives, on point:</p>
<p>[A</a> cross-cultural history of abortion. [Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1986] - PubMed Result](<a href=“http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&list_uids=3519038&cmd=Retrieve&indexed=google]A”>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&list_uids=3519038&cmd=Retrieve&indexed=google)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would like that very much, thank you!</p>
<p>I think a website is usually a pretty good source of information about an organization (though one must assume that it, like all of their promotional materials, will be very limited in what it shares concerning the organization…why is why the fact that it seems so blatantly misogynistic raises some real red flags to me).</p>
<p>I also did a google search of them - I found no mention of any activities extending beyond anti-abortion action. What else are they doing? I’ve asked this many times, and not gotten a response, seems like empty words to me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, the country’s in a mess right now, no doubt about it. You are speaking in terms of ‘what if’ but the reality is that bush’s patriot act has already stripped US citizens of many rights, and what’s really disgraceful is that the average American is completely oblivious!</p>
<p>Yes, unfortunately there’s always a risk of fanatics pushing some legislation thru…and contraception is but one of many possible targets. If the fanatics had it their way, it would be illegal to have religion other than Christian, and THEIR brand of ‘Christian’ at that!</p>
<p>That’s why I support Ron Paul…he has the best ideas on insisting that the govt. protect the liberties of each individual. And the fanatics have tried to corner him on issues like gay rights and he has taken the high road. I think he’s as close to being uncorruptable as you can find in a politician.</p>
<p>the abortion issue in this country is NOT about morality nor is it about popular opinion.</p>
<p>It is a question about the US Constitution. Abortion is not merely a ‘legal’ right. It is a right that is protected by the Constitution, and repeatedly upheld by the Supreme court. Unfortunately the Bush legacy of disregarding the Constitution has made its way into the Supreme Court with the recent appointees, so all bets are off.</p>
<p>lealdragon: I think that there is a movement afoot re contraceptives. Recall that Griswall was a married couple using contraceptives they had purchased through the mail in the “privacy” of their own home.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I googled this article and it exceeds what I could post. It should not be read other than in the complete article to avoid misunderstand and/or misrepresenting what it asserts. It particulary mentions McCain, but lists numerous candidates that may be for (or giving lip service to) outlawing all contraceptives.</p>
<p>The “logic” used to attack birth control pills is essentially the “when life begins” argument. Scary.</p>
<p>
Honey, we’re living the lives of feminists! Ask any adult woman on this board, and she can tell you the story of her life. Most of us went to college in the 70’s, when Helen Reddy made waves with her balad “I am woman.” We entered the work force when maternity leave meant you took the offramp into the mommytrack, and we fought to make working life more viable for our daughters and sisters. You don’t get to lecture any of us (imo) until you reach our advanced ages – approaching 50. </p>
<p>I find it interesting, to say the least, that the most vocal opponents of the prolife positions are NOT mothers. In my view, abortion allows men to avoid responsility for the lives they create. It’s a lot easier for a guy to pay for an abortion than to pay child support for 18+ years.</p>
<p>But I have yet to hear from any mother, who supports abortion on demand for the entire 9 month period of gestation. Are there any here?</p>
<p>Finally, mini made a point on a different thread. I don’t have the link, but it was something like this. If you think that abortion is the ending of a human life, then you must believe that abortion is always wrong. If you don’t have any problem with abortion, then why put any limits on it? Some people suggest that abortion should be available but rare? Why? If the fetus isn’t a “person” then what’s the problem? </p>
<p>Where do abortion supporters draw the line? At one day before delivery? Is that acceptable? If not, then why not? At the point of viability – as early as 22 weeks? If you draw the line there, then what do you do when medical technology allows a 20 week old fetus to survive? </p>
<p>I think that there are really only two logical philosphies on this. </p>
<p>Life begins at conception, and abortion is always wrong.</p>
<p>Life begins at birth, and abortion is always right. </p>
<p>Anything else, all the other qualifications – rape, incest – are compromises to a particular belief system.</p>
<p>leal, what is it you think that Ron Paul the president can do in this situation? He can’t interpret the constitution to protect the individual liberties that you believe in. All he can do is appoint justices to the Supreme Court. If he chooses strict constructionists, and everything he has said suggests that he will, then there will be no protection for personal liberties - at least no federal protection. You can’t have it both ways. If he turns abortion rights over to the states, then he turns reproductive rights over to the states - or at least to the voters in those states, as ZG says. So if the people of Kansas decide that birth control is illegal, Ron Paul has no say in it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You know a lot about a natural, midwife-assisted birth, because of your mother’s experience. (I think that’s wonderful, btw! that you plan to do the same. Very cool!)</p>
<p>But…do you know a lot about women’s experiences in hospitals? While many are completely comfortable with it, I have read many stories of women who felt that the hospital environment was disempowering - excessively invasive. (Do a search for Mothering magazines for articles on this if you’re interested.)</p>
<p>No, I certainly would never presume to judge what sort of birth a woman should have. I was just making the point that the birthing process, in general, has become a medical procedure, overseen by the ‘expert’ and this has taken a great deal of the power away from the women.</p>
<p>Then again, I also think that the medical application to degenerative diseases and minor ailments (basically any medical condition other than an acute emergency) has also disempowered people in general. I prefer a more wholistic approach in which people are active participants in their health instead of just following the expert’s orders.</p>
<p>As for herbal abortions, of course those do exist. But they have varying degrees of effectiveness. According to folklore, herbals only work if the woman has already communicated with the soul and the soul has already withdrawn.</p>
<p>Yeah, that sounds pretty farfetched, I know. Don’t jump on me for saying that - just passing on what many ancient peoples believed. Keep in mind they lived in a different time, when spirituality was quite different from spirituality today.</p>
<p>I suggest a search on articles by Jeannine Parvoti Baker regarding feminist midwifery, the use of herbs, etc.</p>
<p>“Do you believe that some lunatics in Kansas have the right to legislate on what goes on inside the bedroom of two consenting adults, even if they are a majority?”</p>
<p>If there is a dispute, then the courts should settle it. Who are you to decide who is a lunatic and who is not?</p>
<p>“I find it interesting, to say the least, that the most vocal opponents of the prolife positions are NOT mothers. In my view, abortion allows men to avoid responsility for the lives they create. It’s a lot easier for a guy to pay for an abortion than to pay child support for 18+ years.”</p>
<p>That’s exactly why I think teenagers need parental support and guidance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>pm me with address & I’ll send them to you.</p>
<p>IMO: Life begins at conception and it is OK under some circumstances to take that life from conception until birth and beyond, into old age.</p>
<p>vicariousparent, are you a mother? I don’t recall any gender-specific comments you’ve made in the past. I’m just trying to see if my statement, “I have yet to hear from any mother who supports abortion on demand for the entire 9 month period of gestation. Are there any here?” is true.</p>
<p>I’m a gender-neutral parent. But I will say this- I do not support abortion on demand for the entire 9 month period of gestation.</p>
<p>But you do seem to say that abortion is the default position. (see post #256) I won’t ask any further personal questions, but I do have a guess.</p>
<p>“under some circumstances” it is OK to take a human life regardless of age. For example I support the right to choose euthanasia in some circumstances. War and capital punishment are OK under some circumstances too.</p>
<p>My post#256 should tell you that I do not minimize the act of abortion. It is the taking of a human life and I.M.O. it should not be undertaken lightly. </p>
<p>OTOH, the fact that it is the taking of a human life does not automatically make it immoral, I.M.O. </p>
<p>And because all of this is I.M.O, and may not be I.Y.O, and it is a very personal matter, the state should stay out of it and respect the right to choice.</p>