watching a new tv show after hearing about it on tumblr and then getting addicted to it
if you stay overnight at my house im going to wake you up at 2 AM with questions like “do you think bread cares about what kind of sandwich you make it into”
They said: As a pro-life person I hope I can help with explaining why the movement shows graphic images. I don’t know if you will agree, but I hope we can come to a further understanding of both sides and ultimately arrive at what is true.Pro Life people realize that most medical procedures are gross. However, the purpose of the photos is to expose the lie that an abortion is *just* a medical procedure; the photos show that it is also the ending of a human life. In them you can clearly see that a fetus is a tiny baby. While G.A.P. (Genocide Awareness Project) has proven the photos effective in helping people understand the horror of abortion, my concern is that a picture can trigger a crushing feeling of guilt over women who have had abortions walking by, and they may not know where to seek healing, how they can mourn the loss of their child, and be forgiven.
I said: I appreciate the sentiment behind this and know from the bottom of my heart that I respect you deeply. Particularly because you understand the triggerous nature of these images, not only for people who have had abortions, but also for people who have miscarried. I won’t agree with you that a fetus looks like a human life, because most mammal fetuses look strikingly similar, but that’s beside my larger point.
I think the Pro Life movement, by and large, is fundamentally flawed because it takes almost no consideration of the person who is seeking the abortion (from extensive talks with you I know that you are an exception to this rule.) But also, because I just find it to be an incredibly anti-woman, anti-sex movement that is trying to infringe on the separation between church and state.
What would cause a person to seek out an abortion?
1. Because the life of the pregnant person is at risk.
2. Because the child will be born with a severe genetic condition malformation etc and the pregnant person knows they will not have the time, money, and the energy to give that person the quality care they will deserve. (Of course if there where things like socialized healthcare to help these pregnant people many more of them may choose to carry to term. Yet it’s odd how abortion opponents tend to hate socialized medicine or helping the poor and instead rant and rave about “welfare queens.” (Again, I know you’re an exception to that rule, but it is widespread and prevalent in the Pro Life movement.)
3. The child is a product of rape or incest. There is a high probability such a child will be neglected or abused by the pregnant person who sees them as the embodiment of the crime committed against them. I would also argue, that forcing anybody to carry out the pregnancy of the single most traumatic event of their lives is nothing short of a hate crime. (Note that I said FORCE, because the Pro Choice movement is about Choice. I’m not saying that governments should sway their position in either direction, but rather that ultimately it should be that persons choice.) And I know that the stats are that most abortions conducted are not the products of rape/incest, but that entire counter argument is meaningless to me considering that the vast majority of rape cases go unreported and (in my eyes) forcing a person to DETAIL and PROVE their rape in order to get a medial procedure is nothing short of torture.
4. The pregnancy is simply ”unwanted.” You may think this is cold and callous and greedy of the pregnant person, but then again as in example 3 there is a very high chance that if the pregnant person was forced to carry this child to term the child would be neglected and abused. You can’t force people to be “generous” through legislation.
There are a few pro-lifers who support choice in the case of rape/incest but those people then have to come to terms with the fact that then their entire stance is not about “saving lives” but rather about legislating the sex lives of women.
By outlawing abortions you aren’t stopping abortions, you are stopping safe abortions. And there hasn’t been a single argument I’ve read that can give me an answer to what would happen to these people who get unsafe abortions. Would it be jail time? If abortions truly are murder then the people who get them can’t be forgiven. That’s a double standard. Nothing is “sort of” murder. Yet no (sensible) Pro Lifer seems to be for the idea of incarcerating people who have had abortions. Why? Is it murder or isn’t it?
The truth is that scaring people with pictures of fetuses doesn’t stop abortions. Comprehensive sex education stops abortions. Condoms stop abortions. Stopping violence against women stops abortions. Stopping rape culture stops abortions. Birth control stops abortions. Access to healthcare and education stop abortions. All these things stop abortions AS WELL as actively benefit the society, and the lives of people who are already alive and whose lives we should focus on improving.
And finally, the whole religious component needs to be taken completely out of the conversation when trying to mandate legal reform. Pushing people’s faith values into law is not only irrelevant, it’s unconstitutional. The government can not try to legislate any consenting adults sex life. The vast majority of Pro Life arguments reek of trying to punish the woman for having dirty dirty sex in a context that seems ~indecent. That’s not okay. That’s sexist. And other people’s religious views on sex have no right to make their way into our legal system. Promote abstinence in churches all you want, go right ahead. But by and large abstinence-only education does not work, and further shames sexuality. Shaming sex leads to violence against women.
I know that what we both can agree on is that education, as always, is the key to preventing harm against women- which ultimately I know is both of our fundamental goals. But the rhetoric and dialogue needs to change.