Abortion regret

Post Reply New Topic

Article from FoxNews:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/pussycat-dolls-singer-shares-abortion-experiences-warns-you-will-regret-whole-life

Relevant quote for context:
Jones described growing up in an "abusive" music industry that left her with little self-esteem and led her to make "poor choices." She said her third abortion happened after she was raped by an old boyfriend. Even though she wanted to keep the baby, she said she decided to terminate again due to stress and complications.

"After the first one, you don’t think you’ve done anything wrong. It’s been normalized and what is a line until you’ve crossed it. You don't know what a line is. Once you cross that line, it’s a very slippery slope to continue to cross those lines," she recalled.

Not posting this to make any passionate argument against abortion...I've already done that plenty enough, not to mention I think any total ban on abortion is unreasonable, same as how I think most gun control arguments are unreasonable, same exact reason: It is right and moral to defend your own life.

What I found interesting about this article is that Kaya Jones points to pressures within the music industry for pushing her to have an abortion. It seems she initially approached abortion as something she felt was wrong, came to feel that abortions (because they're easy) aren't really a big deal, and came to regret it in hindsight.

I think it illustrates a bigger problem of being manipulated and controlled by others (industry pressure) and moral decay. The slippery slope she mentions seems to apply in a non-fallacious way to other facets of morality. A thing is wrong because it is WRONG--drunk driving is wrong because you put yourself and others in danger, and threatening your own life or other's is wrong. Consuming alcohol doesn't necessarily put you or others in danger, thus at worst consuming alcohol is morally neutral. But then you go from "no drunk driving" to bans on alcohol. When someone questions alcohol bans, it might be assumed that the reasoning is entirely a religious one. The prohibition of alcohol becomes a question of theology and superstition. If you don't wish to fall prey to superstition or you don't follow a tee-totaler religion, then there's no rationale for the prohibition of alcohol. Get rid of prohibition. Drink all you want. Then you decide to drive yourself home when you swerve into the other lane and hit someone head on, killing another motorist.

So I think the same pattern applies wrt abortion--historically, abortions have been known to happen with one or more rationalizations. But certainly nobody was ever prosecuted for it. And then someone points out some issues with abortion--first, abortion does destroy a human being (like it or not, this is true), and depending on specific circumstances this could constitute murder. Second, as a medical procedure, the wire hanger technique, the knitting needle, etc., can fail, result in irreparable damage to the uterus, or lead to deadly infections. So bans on abortions are reasonable given the context as a means of preserving the lives of women. Once abortions can be performed safely, the rationale for banning abortions is moot, leaving only the moral argument. If you can normalize the murder of the most vulnerable of us, you can normalize murder for ANY of us. And then you must content with why prohibitions against murder exist.

It would be a fallacious slippery slope to say if we legalize abortion, we WILL legalize murder. That has not happened, at least not at this point in time, and I'm not arguing that it ever will. But I do find a contradiction that one can be rationalized and NOT the other. I think at some point the conversation about why the preservation of human life is important will become a necessary conversation to have.

Thoughts?

We have legalized murder.
It’s called the death penalty.

Only if the legal definition of a capital crime is itself unreasonable or unfair.

I believe there are situations in which abortion is justified.

https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty

Don't forget War

My mother went through full grieving process after natural miscarriages (not abortions).
She did not find any understanding at these times.
I know some women who had abortions for serious medical reasons experience something similar.
It needs recognition.

Too many holes in aclu’s logic, which is often the case with them. Where to even begin? A person who unjustifiably kills others, or even one person, should be put to death. As to whether the state is justified for doing so, the criminals blood is on his own head. You can’t fault the state for protecting its people and providing justice. As to being cruel and unusual, I’d say being put gently to sleep in most cases is better than what the criminal deserves. Victims of violent crimes are seldom afforded the same mercy.

Regarding war, I believe in the principle of non-initiation of force. Violence begins where reason fails. Again, it is the proper role of the state to protect its citizens. Killing is always best avoided, but it’s reasonable and expected that a nation would fight a defensive war any time it’s invaded by another. Any time force is threatened, retaliation is reasonable behavior.

Jesus stopped them from stoning a woman to death.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
I doubt Jesus would be in favor of it.

I do not think anyone should be pressured to keep a pregnancy they do not want.

I also do not think anyone should be pressured to have an abortion.

What I do support is people making their own reproductive choices, period.

Religionists object to abortion while condoning (or even encouraging) capital punishment and non-judicial executions (e.g., “death by cop”). Buncha hypocrites.

As long as there is rape and incest, there will be abortions. Deal with it.

For sure, having to have an abortion for medical reasons when you wanted a baby is different than getting an abortion as soon as you know you're pregnant because you don't want to be pregnant.

I imagine the former is a more difficult choice than the latter, since in that case the person made efforts to get pregnant and it has gone wrong.

I'd say as long as there is pregnancy there will be abortions. But still deal with it, is right.

So why shouldn't a person abort an invader in their body they don't want?

If it is ok to shoot an invading force made up of human beings, than it should be ok to remove an invader from ones uterus if they don't want it there.

Women will be shamed no matter what they do. Shamed for being virgins, shamed for having sex, shamed for liking sex, shamed for not liking sex, shamed for being SA and not telling, shamed for telling, shamed if they fall pregnant when they don’t want to, shamed if they’re infertile or choose not to have a baby, shamed if they miscarry, shamed if they choose to abort, and in my case shamed if they choose not to abort even after SA. Shamed for wanting to talk about it or not wanting to talk about it. Shamed for stillbirth and SIDS. Shamed as single parents, as disabled parents, as working parents or even stay at home parents. Shamed if they stay in abusive relationships and shamed if they leave. Shamed as refrigerator mothers if their child is autistic, even if they’re autistic themselves.

It’s all mindfuckery and a lose-lose situation which I’d rather not revisit.

well if a "celebrity" says it's wrong, then it it must be./s

Just like it's wrong to make any major decision, including getting married, getting a divorce, moving, or getting a new job.

Shamed mostly by men who presume stewardship of women's reproductive organs, and who feel superior to women only when they can keep women feeling shame and loathing for themselves.

No man should decide what women can and cannot do with their bodies -- those men have neither right nor reason to do so.