Just saw a pro-life ad on television that I had no problem with

[WeDidIt]

It's from an outfit called "The Cradle"

Shows the stomach of a pregnant woman driving a car with this voice over:

"I didn't plan on this baby and I'm not ready right now. But I've chosen the best possible option for him, a family."

This sort of approach will do more to lower abortion rates than ten million screaming activists in front of women's health clinics.

[barbtries]

1. anti-abortion ad.

not pro-life, anti-abortion. i have a problem with people who have a problem with me having control over my own body.

[WeDidIt]

2. Nope, pro-life ad, not anti-abortion

I've seen anti-abortion ads.

This one advocated for choice. They are promoting one choice over the other, but it still allows for choice.

Nothing anti-abortion about the ad at all.

[barbtries]

6. really?

i respectfully disagree. strongly.

[enlightenment]

11. Choice.

Stating that carrying to term is the "best" option is not really advocating for real choice. Had they left out that word, I might agree with your take on it.

Categorizing carrying to term as the "best" is a clear implication that any other choice is flawed, so yes, the ad - while subtle - is anti-abortion.

[WeDidIt]

12. I disagree completely

Best is subjective in the context of the ad.

Best in the ad is best for this woman.

All women have a choice.

You are being anti-choice.

[enlightenment]

25. I disagree - and by the way,

when you have to start attacking the individual instead of the subject, you've lost the debate.

I was addressing the content of the advert, not your opinion of it. I expect the same courtesy from you. Grow up.

[JuniperLea]

177. You had me until...

"Grow up." That, IMHO, was pretty ironic, if not hypocritical.

I just don't think you can demand respect in the same breath as telling someone to grow up.

[enlightenment]

222. Why?

If I meet an immature 'adult' and they behave like a brat, why shouldn't I suggest they grow up? There's nothing ironic or hypocritical about it.

I realize that the phrase is often used as an alternative to writing something vulgar, but that isn't the way I meant it. I meant it sincerely - the OP needs to grow up and participate in adult discussion as an adult, rather then reverting to personal insult because they can't think of something intelligent to say.

[JuniperLea]

224. I see nothing immature in that post...

I see a statement of opinion, and nothing brat-like or untoward. I'm not seeing personal insult either.

[enlightenment]

236. Your perception and mine are obviously different, then. nt

[CTyankee]

45. I wonder if the woman is white...

a white baby has a much greater chance at having the "choice" of a family than a black child.

[WeDidIt]

This is true

and you could see the woman's arms. She was white.

She was also obviously third trimester, which means her choices were prety much limited to having and keeping the child or having the child and giving it up for adoption.

[CTyankee]

134. Years ago, Rush Limbaugh said on one of his radio shows, "The right women are having abortions and

the wrong ones aren't."

Hmm...

[dflprincess]

153. No. The way you described the ad it says she chose the best option for the baby

it doesn't say she chose what was best for herself. So the ad is still saying that the mother's interests come after the baby's.

[uppityperson]

156. Exactly. "best possible option for him" for the fetus, not for herself.

[Hepburn]

173. Exactly....

...women are NOT second class citizens to a fetus.

[marshall]

297. I think the argument lies in the use of the word "him"

Choice usually centers on the best choice for the woman. This ad places the reasoning outside the woman, onto "him". Most folks for choice want to emphasize primarily the woman and her choice.

Perhaps a better alternative that would still preserve the proadoption message would be for her to say she made the best choice FOR HER (continuing the pregnancy) and then she made the best for FOR HIM (adoption).

I see the ad as primarily a promotion of adoption. I'm fine with that. I wish the teen pregnancy programs I worked with when I was teaching had emphasized adoption as an option.

[NaturalHigh]

308. It might be anti-abortion...

but it says nothing about taking away anyone's choice. It merely reminds viewers that there are other choices besides abortion, and that deeply offends many in the "pro-choice" crowd.

[angstlessk]

181. I agree with you...I have always thought the "pro-life" people

should spend their money and effort on adoption vs anti abortion....If a woman does not want to carry a child it is HER BUSINESS..but if she does not want an abortion, but cannot afford to keep a child...ADOPTION should be available...OPEN ADOPTIONS...GUARANTEED ADOPTIONS!

[seabeyond]

289. do tell me who is anti life? nt

[Deep13]

3. +1 The message is "we don't need abortion." nt

[Gman2]

7. Would you critisize an ad, put out by Obama, that says we will support

a mothers choice to concieve, with cash payments, if needed? Would that also be, anti abortion?

Even though the ad was a glimpse at her being pollyanna/marie antionette, Bristol Palin's ad for abstinance is OK too. And hints at the rabid classism in all areas America.

[Deep13]

I guess I'm not following the reasoning in your example. nt

[Gman2]

119. There are decent people that help teen mothers, and arent anti anything.

[WeDidIt]

9. No, the message is "you have a choice, if you want to explore the adoption choice, call us"

:eyes:

Unlike you, I trust women to have a wide array of reproductive choices.

[defendandprotect]

26. No -- the message is about a "stomach with a fetus in it" . . . not a woman with a womb . . . !!

Not about a woman with CHOICES . . . !!

[Scout]

32. "Unlike you, I trust women to have a wide array of reproductive choices."

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

there is no "wide array" of reproductive choices once you are pregnant, fool.

you have two choice: squeeze it out (and keep it or give it away); or have an abortion.

you act like this ad introduced some revolutionary new concept that women haven't been aware of for generations.....

[WeDidIt]

42. You act like this is something destroying your rights

You are no better than those who would limit a woman's right to choose an abortion.

And there are a wide array of reproductive choices. Most start before there is a pregnancy.

[Scout]

49. well we're not talking about before you're pregnant, now are we.

we are talking about once you ARE pregnant, and then there are only two choices.

"You are no better than those who would limit a woman's right to choose an abortion."

:rofl: keep attacking all of us telling you how full of shit you are!

[WeDidIt]

59. And once a woman becomes pregnant, there are three choices

Have it and keep it.

Have it and put it up for adoption.

Abort the pregnancy.

Nothing in this ad advocated removing any of those choices. This ad simply promoted one choice.

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that. Those who have a problem with that are as anti-choice as those who would remove any other choice.

[Scout]

62. two choices: have it, abort it. n/'t

[arthritisR_US]

82. no, it's three choices, have it and keep it, have it and have it adopted and (3) abort.n/t

[Scout]

101. nope, two choices: have it, abort it.

keeping it and giving it up both require having it, they are two sides of one choice.

[anigbrowl]

133. Funnily enough, planned parenthood sees it as a three way choice

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/pregnancy/adoption-21520.htm

Millions of women face unplanned pregnancies every year. If you are deciding what to do about an unplanned pregnancy, you have a lot to think about. You have three options — abortion, adoption, and parenting.

I see your point about adoption necessitating having the baby, but since adoption vs parenthood is a timely decision, kicking the can down the road until after delivery doesn't seem very practical. It's pretty normal for someone to consider all three possibilities in the case of an unwanted pregnancy.

[arthritisR_US]

210. I concur with planned parenthood. Thanks for the link :-) n/t

[Scout]

221. appeal to authority is not an argument....

planned parenthood can call it 5 choices for all i care.... once you are pregnant, you have two choices: have it or abort it.

[anigbrowl]

230. And neither is just repeating your own view

I linked to PP just to point out that the three-way view is not especially unusual. You don't have to agree with it, any more than others have to agree with your outlook. Which I don't.

[Ichingcarpenter]

66. You are a male

as I'm I. You have no idea what choice is to a woman
But at least you LIKE THE COMMERCIAL

[Scout]

75. +1000 n/t

[Hepburn]

176. Iching...

...:hug:

[JuniperLea]

228. I'm a woman...

And I agree with him.

Sometimes opinions aren't tied to sex.

[Ichingcarpenter]

240. You agree 'its the best solution' in the propaganda commercial

that's your choice and your opinion without knowing the facts of the individual
but not mine, I don't buy it....on logic , consciousness nor personal morality.

Emotionally they achieved their message.


The folks that put that on TV have a lot of money and power to show it

they got their money's worth out of you.

[JuniperLea]

244. IMHO, You aren't being very nice...

You aren't listening to me, and you're putting words in my mouth. People CAN be anti abortion and pro choice you know.

I said, and I still believe, that pregnancy ending in family is the best option for all concerned, if it's an option. It's not always an option.

The person in the ad is voicing content with a decision... that's choice... being pro choice means the woman has more than one option.

I also said I much prefer this ad to the tearing to shreds of a fetus as seen at bus stops. I think it's a kinder, gentler way of getting THEIR OPINION across. People have a right to their opinions, and I think this voices their opinion in a far better way.

[Ichingcarpenter]

248. It's an indiviuals choice

You chose to agree with OP.

I don't and never have

So be it.

[JuniperLea]

249. It has nothing to do with male or female...

This agreement.

[Hepburn]

175. What a shock ~~ you are a man.

:eyes:

Come back and post about this when you have a uterus, OK?

[Cid_B]

355. I've never understood this...

Do you need to have children to have an opinion about how kids should be raised?

Should I tell the 99% of DUers who have never served in the military to go fuck themselves about anything having to do with the wars because of their lack of service?

The fact that someone hasn't done something or is physically incapable of it doesnt mean that they should be denied their opinion.

[defendandprotect]

346. And are you aware of how often those choices fail? That's how women get pregnant ....

This is simply more of the "it's your own fault" nonsense --

Half of the pregnancies are unplanned --

is that all the fault of women?

Let's get going on vasectomies if you really want to limit abortions!

First you need to limit pregnancies!

[defendandprotect]

24. Exactly -- it's insulting to women . . . !! Women aren't a "stomach" . . . for one--!!!

[Gman2]

120. You dont really expect them to show a vagina do you?

Just kidding

[defendandprotect]

257. Women are a "vagina" . . . . ?

Kidding or revealing the way you really think -- ???

You do know, I presume, that "Squaw" means vagina -- and that's what

the Western European invaders were calling the native American female.



What I expect them to show is what actually exists -- a live, thinking, feeling

human being who happens to also have the ability to create life -- a female!

[Mojeoux]

241. Reincarnation! Anyone?

Over a third of the planet believes in the concept of re-incarnation.

The Catholic Church taught me as a child that aborted souls go to "Limbo."

Now the Vatican issued an edict that there is NO Limbo.

IMHO an abortion is letting the tiny soul have a better chance at a mommy and daddy who are waiting.



God Is Love

[Freddie Stubbs]

288. You have a problem with people using their free speech rights to pursuade?

Would such an ad convince you to not get an abortion?

[barbtries]

298. they have the right to free speech

and to pay for their commercials as well. i was commenting on the nature of the ad. such an ad would only convince me that the anti-abortion movement is still around.

edited for a silly mistake

[defendandprotect]

348. Put another way, what would convince you to give away a living child?

[Ichingcarpenter]

4. Cough... cough....

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[redqueen]

5. This sort of approach will not change anything.

I love how anti-choicers think that women just aren't thinking hard enough / caring enough about the baby.

:puke:

[WeDidIt]

8. This is NOT anti-choice

They never said anything about you not having a choice. They simply promote one choice over another and give contact information if you want to explore that choice.

No hard sell.

No ranting.

No screaming.

Just choice advocacy.

But because they are promoting a choice you disagree with, you go crazy.

You're as bad as the screamers on the street outside my local Planned Parenthood clinic.

[redqueen]

10. No, it's soft-sell guilt-tripping... I'm really glad that you're so comfortable with it.

Tell me, do you have any idea what pregnancy does to a woman's body? That it, in itself, is a health risk?

Oh and btw, you may be comforting yourself by comparing me to anti-choice screamers, but projection sucks and you should stop it.

[darkstar3]

259. Too true.

:applause:

[defendandprotect]

278. +1000% . . . !!!

"Anything which will enable women to live for themselves first

has been attacked as immoral" --

-- Mararet Sanger



:)

[EOTE]

31. I think you should really tone down the attacks.

All this "You're just as bad as them!!" nonsense can be really off-putting. I can see how a number of people would see this commercial as being offensive. Women who are faced with the ridiculously tough choice to have an abortion really don't need to be told about the pros and cons. It's a gut wrenching decision and 99+% of those who go through with the procedure only do so because they see it as the only viable choice. Those women certainly don't need any more guilt. Just because you don't see that doesn't mean you need to insult those who do.

[treestar]

198. But is it guilting them automatically that not every pregnant woman

made the same choice? It's a reality that not all do. And that it's perfectly legitimate, too. Makes the right wing look even crazier claiming that anyone is "pro-abortion."

Pro-choice people are not saying get an abortion - the crux of the issue is that the pregnant woman decides, not that one should get an abortion, but that she decides for herself.

The other side screams that there should be no choice - have that baby that's it - they don't want there to be any decision.

[onpatrol98]

287. Women don't want to know the pros and cons?

"Women who are faced with the ridiculously tough choice to have an abortion really don't need to be told about the pros and cons."

:shrug:

I've had friends who chose to have abortions, and friends who decided to carry the child to term and become parents. But, in all cases, they wanted to know the pros and cons. That's what choice is about. 1) Having all the information you need; 2) Making the right choice for you USING all the information that you have at your disposal.

If you lack information, you're really not making an informed choice. I wouldn't want anyone deciding I didn't "need" to be told some relevant information that affects me, my body, and my well-being that seriously.

[defendandprotect]

349. What information would you need to convince you to give away a living child of yours?

[Scout]

33. "you go crazy" "You're as bad as the screamers on the street"

don't see anyone going crazy in this thread except you, bub.

nice attempt to shut down other people's opinions though.

[mitchum]

40. False equivalency...

but you already know that

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

138. And hopes it will work. But it won't. We can smell dishonest rhetoric a mile away. -nt

[fishwax]

50. "as bad as the screamers on the street"

How so?

:eyes:

[Scout]

73. you know, disagreeing with him on a message board, well, that's just so CRAZY! n/t

[fishwax]

84. IF YOU DON'T LOVE TEH PRO LIFE AD YOU'RE JUST AS BAD AS TONY RANDALL!!11!

:rofl:

[redqueen]

108. !

:rofl:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

140. From where I stand, redqueen doesn't seem to be the one who's "going crazy". -nt

[uppityperson]

158. 3rd trimester choice, keep or adopt out. Nothing about abortion there.

[Hepburn]

178. They are saying to make the choice to have the child...

...exactly what is confusing you about the FACT that this is an anti-choice message?

[Zoeisright]

189. B.S. And you're a man - BIG surprise. Here's a choice: MIND YOUR OWN

FUCKING BUSINESS.

[darkstar3]

262. Check your fire...

OK, so "no uterus, no opinion" is a perfectly valid POV in this case, but remember that the vast majority of anti-choice asshats are not just men, they are woman-haters, and it may only be a "man's man" who disagrees with them that changes their mind...

[redqueen]

13. Lots of views, few comments.

I wonder how many here agree that guilt-tripping women is reasonable and pro-choice.

[Johonny]

14. I just don't see how it will lower unwanted pregnancies

This does nothing in inform the viewer. So I agree with you.

[WeDidIt]

16. It won't lower unwanted pregnancies

but could lower the number of abortions.

In a perfect world, all women would be in a position where they could carry any pregnancy to full term, care for the child, and have 50% of the care and support of the child contributed by the father.

In a nearly perfect world, any woman incapable of the above would be able to carry the child to full term and put it up for adoption.

In our imperfect world, there are many women who will believe their only options are keep the child or abortion and will never consider the possibility of adoption. This ad was for those women. It's not a huge percentage of those women who find themselves with unplanned pregnancies, but there will be some.

[redqueen]

18. "there are many women who will believe their only options are keep the child or abortion "

LOL

[Ichingcarpenter]

19. I want to adopt you

So I can send you back to Russia

Sorry for the lame joke, but your OP is lame

[Scout]

41. "In a perfect world, all women would be in a position where they could carry any pregnancy ...

"In a perfect world, all women would be in a position where they could carry any pregnancy to full term, care for the child, and have 50% of the care and support of the child contributed by the father."

perfect for WHO, you? you assume WAY too much, that sure as shit is not MY perfect world. and i'd be willing to bet it's not a perfect world for very many people at all, especially not women-people.

[WeDidIt]

60. No, I don't. In a perfect world it would be as I describe.

In a perfect world, all pregnancies would be carefully planned and all pregnancies would be wanted.

We don't live in a perfect world.

[defendandprotect]

279. Vasectomies would help -- now there's a CHOICE more males could be making!!!

And that would certainly cut down on abortions!!

[PeaceNikki]

334. In YOUR perfect world. I don't think abortion is an immoral choice.

I think it's a brave one that empowers women and saves lives.

[ima_sinnic]

61. in a perfect world, there would be no hand-wringers around with their false morality

telling women what would be "best" for them to do when it's none of their goddam business.

[redqueen]

67. ...

:applause:

[Hepburn]

193. Oh, yeah...

...:applause:

[fishwax]

80. .

:thumbsup:

[defendandprotect]

280. Yep . . . .

"Anything which will enable women to lvie for themselves first

has been attacked as immoral" --

-- Margaret Sanger



Meanwhile, how many "pro-life/anti-choice" threads do we see here blasting males/Congress/Repugs

and "pro-life" Dems for sending millions of people to death in their wars!!

[ima_sinnic]

56. what a stretch. AS IF. like NObody knows they can put a baby up for adoption

unless some guilt-trippy TV ad tells them they can.

the ad is clearly anti-choice because it is basically screaming that if you make any other choice, it won't be the "best" one. think of the baby ferchrissake--and don't think about all those brown and black babies from crack-addicted, alcoholic mothers languishing, being abused, and bouncing around in foster care.

as usual, the DLC is on the wrong side of the issue.

[Gman2]

121. William Shatner needed to be told three times, to remove his wifes body from the pool

[Scout]

136. right, because discovering your wife's body floating in the pool is JUST like

a woman with an unwanted pregnancy.

puh-leaze :eyes:

[lukasahero]

88. "there are many women who...will never consider the possibility of adoption"

Why are you convinced that women are too stupid to know about adoption?

In my perfect world, all women would be in a position to make their own decision as to how they want to deal with an unwanted pregnancy.

[defendandprotect]

282. ...and let's point out that it only women who have ever stood with their

newborn baby in their arms preparing to turn it over to strangers to raise!!

How many males have ever experiences this or even thought about it!!???




"Anything which will enable women to live for themselves first has been

attacked as immoral" --- Margaret Sanger



:)

[Still Blue in PDX]

95. That's very true.

Women know that adoption exists, but they really don't feel they can carry a pregnancy to term and then give that baby away, so they don't really consider it an option.

[NYC Liberal]

107. "could lower the number of abortions" - And WHY is that such a noble goal?

We do not NEED to "lower the number of abortions." Because having an abortion is not wrong, immoral, or anything like it. Access to abortion should be increased in the same way that access to any other health care service should be increased. To say the number of abortions needs to be decreased is analogous to saying that the number of heart surgeries should be decreased. That's not a perfect analogy since abortion can be necessary as well as a choice (people don't choose to have heart surgery, it's necessitated). The point is, abortion should be available and provided whenever it is needed OR desired.

"In a nearly perfect world, any woman incapable of the above would be able to carry the child to full term and put it up for adoption."

So in a perfect world, nobody would have abortions? Why is that "perfect"? Just because a woman is CAPABLE of carrying a pregnancy to term (and surviving the many risks of doing so) does not mean that she WANTS to. That is an anti-choice meme, that the "preferable" option is to carry the pregnancy to term...abortions should only ever be considered if the mother is within an inch of her life and will die without it. That's bullshit. Abortion is NO MORE OR LESS PREFERABLE than carrying the pregnancy. Got it?

"there are many women who will believe their only options are keep the child or abortion and will never consider the possibility of adoption"

Ah yes, women must be stupid...they don't know about adoption! :eyes: I mean, you think women are going to see this ad and say, "Oh my...adoption! And to think, I was going to have an abortion, I never knew about ADOPTION!"

Protip: Women do not need to be informed that giving birth is an option. I'm pretty sure that everyone gets that. So do you really think a group spent thousands of dollars to produce and run an ad just to say "Hey, if you're pregnant, guess what! You can give birth!" Please.

[WildEyedLiberal]

154. Oh, what a load of crap - abortion > birth control? Really?

In a perfect world, there would be very few abortions because there would be free and equal access to birth control which would ensure that pregnancies were PLANNED rather than UNPLANNED, thus saving everyone the HASSLE of worrying about what to do with an UNPLANNED pregnancy. Promoting birth control before abortion is now suddenly an "anti-choice" meme? Are you fucking serious? This kind of stupid rhetoric - "abortions aren't just legal, they're FUCKING AWESOME!! And if you don't think they're FUCKING AWESOME you must be anti-choice!" - does our side NO FAVORS. Why can't you see that? Good Christ.

And don't compare abortion - except when the mother's life is in ACTUAL physical danger - to heart surgery. What a stupid analogy.

You know, I agree with everyone in this thread saying that this ad is nonsense, but the inability of virtually everyone - on every conceivable "side" - to discuss this issue rationally is why I never post in these stupid threads, and why I'm sure I'll regret posting in this one.

[NYC Liberal]

237. "Promoting birth control before abortion is now suddenly an "anti-choice" meme?"

No, but since I never said that, you must be mistaking me with another poster. Please read my post again, or as many times as it takes to comprehend it, before going off on your rant. What IS an anti-choice meme is that the "preferable" option is to carry the pregnancy to term. That's bullshit. The preferable option is whatever a woman deems best in her own situation. It is not up to you, me, or anyone else to make that decision.

In a perfect world, there would be very few abortions because there would be free and equal access to birth control which would ensure that pregnancies were PLANNED rather than UNPLANNED, thus saving everyone the HASSLE of worrying about what to do with an UNPLANNED pregnancy.

I really think you must have accidentally hit the reply button to the wrong post, because I never once said anything about not increasing access to birth control. Birth control absolutely must be made available and should not be stigmatized the way it is now, even in the most liberal of places. This discussion, if you read the original post and my post, was about women who are already pregnant. Got it? Are you going to go up to a pregnant woman who is trying to decide what she wants to do and tell her about birth control? No, that wouldn't make any fucking sense, now would it? That would be like telling a breast cancer patient about getting mammograms regularly.

This kind of stupid rhetoric - "abortions aren't just legal, they're FUCKING AWESOME!! And if you don't think they're FUCKING AWESOME you must be anti-choice!" - does our side NO FAVORS. Why can't you see that? Good Christ.

And people who talk about abortion abortion as a shameful thing that must only ever be done in the most dire of cases are part of the problem, not the solution. That kind of rhetoric keeps the stigma attached to abortion by anti-choicers alive and well. Abortion is no more or less "right" or "wrong" than heart surgery. You want to attach some kind of morality to abortion, then don't fucking have one. This type of thinking makes me thing of the mother who hated modern medicine so she refused to take their child to get chemotherapy, even though the survival rate was greater than 95%.

And don't compare abortion - except when the mother's life is in ACTUAL physical danger - to heart surgery. What a stupid analogy.

The similarity is in this notion that there is some sort of "morality" attached to abortion. That's bullshit no matter what anti-choice nuts claim. Even if you think abortion is wrong, the solution is to not have one. That is what being pro-choice is all about: allowing women to, you know, think for themselves. We don't ban heart surgery because Christian Scientists think modern medicine is immoral, and we should not ban abortion because some other group thinks that is wrong.

the inability of virtually everyone - on every conceivable "side" - to discuss this issue rationally is why I never post in these stupid threads, and why I'm sure I'll regret posting in this one

Of course. Everyone who disagrees with you is not rational. It can't be that people have differing opinions. What a ridiculous notion.

[defendandprotect]

350. In order to limit abortion, you have to limit pregnancy -- try VASECTOMIES....

Government financed -- run a government campaign!!

Very much needed!!

[WildEyedLiberal]

356. You said that it was "anti-choice" to imply that abortion would be rare in a "perfect world"

And my objection - phrased poorly, in retrospect - was that that statement implies that in your "perfect world" in which abortion is not rare, unwanted pregnancies are still apparently fairly common. Women who get pregnant on purpose because they want a baby are not going to have abortions. Thus, abortions - except in cases of the mother's health or extreme fetal defect - are a choice taken by women faced with an unwanted or otherwise unplanned pregnancy. In my perfect world, unplanned pregnancies would rarely, if ever, occur, because everyone would have equal and free access to birth control. It's not about judging abortion as "immoral." It's about acknowledging that it is a choice that has come about because a woman is in a circumstance in which she doesn't want to be in the first place, by definition. In my ideal world, women don't have to make that choice to begin with/ There's absolutely nothing "wrong" with abortion, but don't you think most women who have them would've preferred to not have an unwanted pregnancy in the first place? Making birth control universal would go a long way towards making women's lives better - and the incidental end result is that abortions would be rarer.

Also, I said "virtually everyone" is incapable of discussing this issue rationally - I did not say that "everyone who disagrees with me" is irrational. Abortion debates usually degenerate into people screaming at each other with emotionally charged rhetoric - thus, making rational debate nearly impossible. I suppose my very own post proved my point.

[NYC Liberal]

359. Seriously. Stop misquoting what I say and erecting strawmen.

You said that it was "anti-choice" to imply that abortion would be rare in a "perfect world"

I said no such thing. What is an anti-choice meme is that, as a generalized, broad-brush statement, carrying a pregnancy to term is preferable to having abortion. You told me exactly that in your previous post. That is bullshit, because there is no single preferable choice in every case. Every case is different. For some women, abortion is the preferable option. For others, carrying the pregnancy to term is preferable. And as I wrote earlier, to talk about abortion only as a "last resort" option keeps the stigma attached to it alive.

that statement implies that in your "perfect world" in which abortion is not rare, unwanted pregnancies are still apparently fairly common

Bullshit again, and another strawman. I never said that in a perfect world "unwanted pregnancies are still apparently fairly common." I said, "Access to abortion should be increased in the same way that access to any other health care service should be increased." That goes hand-in-hand with better sex education and greater access to birth control for people who want or need it. Abortion should be as available as adoption services are. Nobody is talking about encouraging women to have abortions when they become pregnant, they are advocating for allowing women to make the choice themselves. Yet on the other side of things, you do have people telling pregnant women they must have the baby, with no option to have an abortion. Or they stigmatize abortion by saying that it's "not preferable."

In my perfect world, unplanned pregnancies would rarely, if ever, occur, because everyone would have equal and free access to birth control.

That's great, but this discussion - and this thread - is about women who are already pregnant. Increased access to birth control is something I support 100%, as I have said before.

It's about acknowledging that it is a choice that has come about because a woman is in a circumstance in which she doesn't want to be in the first place, by definition. In my ideal world, women don't have to make that choice to begin with

That might be a logical thing to say if the only reason for abortion was simply that the pregnancy was unplanned because of a lack of access to birth control. That is not the only reason women have abortions. Per a study done in 2004 (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf">PDF here), the most common reasons why women have abortions are that: having a baby would interfere with their education or job, they "can’t afford a baby now", or they "don’t want to be a single mother" or are "having relationship problems". This is why the goal should not be making abortion "rare" but rather it should be increasing access to women who want or need it.



Birth control is a great means of preventing unplanned pregnancies, but it is not 100% effective and things happen. Abortion should not be stigmatized by saying that it is "less preferable." Anti-choicers do not spend all their time lobbying Congress or state legislatures to changes laws. A large part of their efforts involve shaming women who have abortions. While this ad may be more subtle than other tactics, stigmatizing abortion is very much anti-choice.

[uppityperson]

160. +++++++++++++++++

[Hepburn]

186. ...

...:applause:

Excellent post! :thumbsup:

[anigbrowl]

192. I think the point is that the sponsors of the ad consider it a noble goal

I don't think we need to lower the number of abortions; rather I think I think it should be possible for any woman who wants or needs one to be able to do so safely and legally.

Now, lots of people think it's morally wrong, for whatever reason. As far as their own body is concerned, that's a totally valid view and nobody should be forced to have one they don't want - and they aren't, at least in this country. Unfortunately, many of those people also feel entitled to stop anyone else from doing so, and like you, I have a problem with that.

But if people who think abortion is bad put their efforts into creating a more supportive and affordable alternative (eg by offering to assist with unpredictable medical expenses, that is a much better way to reduce the popularity of abortion than harassing or harming patients and staff of clinics which offer abortion procedures.

[Caliman73]

112. In a perfect world women will be able to choose their path...

Perhaps in your perfect world every pregnancy would be carried to term. Fortunately we are not living in your world.

The best way to impact abortion is to reduce unplanned pregnancies and if that does not work, then women should have the choice to do what they think is best for THEIR lives without anyone making them feel guilty for THEIR choice.

Adoption is viable choice. So is giving birth. So is terminating a pregnancy.

What is offensive is an add that makes a value judgment and attempts to make women feel inadequate for not choosing the "approved" method.

[CTyankee]

122. Here is one cite for you from AGI.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/09/3/gpr090308.html#boxref2

While this deals with abortion and mental health it does make reference to the fact that studies have borne out: abortions don't cause any more mental anguish for women than having the baby and giving it up for adoption or raising an unwanted child.

This is only one article. I'm sure there are scores more by responsible reproductive and mental health organizations.

[defendandprotect]

351. And, we might wonder what it would take to convince anyone

to give up a living child!!

How many here would give up one of their own children under any circumstances?

What we have see is the tremendous impact giving up a child to adoption has on females --

over their entire lifetimes -- they never stop thinking of the child -- and that

reality has caused adotpion procedures and the surrounding secrecy to begin to change.

:)

[uppityperson]

159. Chosing adoption will lower number of 3rd trimester abortions? Do you seriously believe that?

[Hepburn]

184. So it lowers abortions???

Even assuming your speculative conclusion is supported in any manner by any evidence, you forget one thing:

It is an anti-choice message. That in and of itself is destructive to the rights of women.

[defendandprotect]

258. How does it lower abortions? Are you suggesting that women give no thought

to reasons for or against abortion until they see this ad?

Are you kidding?

The best solution to abortion is all the things the right wing anti-abortionists fight against . . .

that is better sex ed -- more availability of contraception for anyone who wants it --

and better birth control -- including birth control products for males.

Encouraging vasectomy would also be an excellent move.

Now picture that ad, with the woman saying, "Glad I don't have to worry about an unplanned

pregnancy since my lover had a vasectomy! Maybe males and their partners don't give enough

thought to vasectomies?" --

Why doesn't this happen? Because the right wing is actually anti-birth contro -- and pro-

population increases. And, if you listen to the Pope, it's not about loving children . . .

it's clearly about LABOR for capitalism!

What's at stake if we had 100% effective-user-friendly-contraception?

Well, about half the pregnancies are unplanned --

An example: 1200 pregnancies -- 600 unplanned --

Generally women chose to go forward with half of those unplanned pregnancies --

and they also chose to terminate about half of them. 300/300 --

That's the reason that the right wing actually doesn't want to promote birth control/

contraception or sex ed -- they'd lose those 300 every year. One-third of the 900 pregnancies

that go forward.



What we really have understand is that behind the anti-abortion movement is the anti-birth

control movement. It's real, it's there!

Especially for the Catholic Church, because of they lose the debate on CHOICE -- and basically

have have lost it in their own church among members -- then there is no way to hold any line

on their anti-birth control position. It's too ridiculous, anyway.

But, members use birth control --

And, just as many Catholic women have abortions as any other women --

the only way for the Church to try to regain control over women is to influence government

to stop abortion.

[musette_sf]

271. Because in your "perfect world", women are Easy-Bake Baby Ovens:

"In a nearly perfect world, any woman incapable of the above would be able to carry the child to full term and put it up for adoption."

:puke:

But let's forget your "perfect world" of women as second-class citizens, not even equal to a zygote/blastocyst/embryo/fetus, much less a male.

Let's take a look at what adoption does to women in REAL life:

I have given a baby up for adoption, and I have had an abortion, and while anecdotes are not evidence, I can assert that abortions may or may not cause depression - it certainly did not in me, apart from briefly mourning the path not taken - but adoption? That is an entirely different matter. I don't doubt that there are women who were fine after adoption, and there is emphatically nothing wrong with that or with them; but I want to point out that if we're going to have a seemingly neverending discussion about the sorrow and remorse caused by abortion, then it is about goddamn time that we hear from birth mothers too.

Believe me when I say that of the two choices, it was adoption that nearly destroyed me - and it never ends. The only comparison I have is the death of a loved one. The pain retreats, maybe fades, but it comes right back if I poke at it.

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/03/breaking-silence-on-living-pro-lifers.html

[Control-Z]

292. When you lower the number of abortions

as opposed to unwanted pregnancies, there are women having babies who really don't want them.

Adoption doesn't come close to "nearly perfect". It's a fix for unwanted, or orphaned children. Both tragic, imo. And until every orphaned, unwanted, neglected or abused child in the world is in a loving home and being taken care of, I personally find it criminal to promote more unwanted children.

http://www.avert.org/aidssouthafrica.htm">There are 1.4 million AIDS orphans in South Africa...

If all pregnancies were brought to term, not only would women and children suffer, but our planet would suffer. In your perfect world I guess there are endless resources, and every parent is a good one, right?

I am one of those who is pro-abortion for any woman who wants one, at any time and for any reason.

There is no reason in the world to try and convince anyone to have a baby. It's what the human race does naturally. There is no reason (other than $$$) to promote adoption. Women aren't stupid.

How about promoting support for the children that are born, and the mothers?

[City Lights]

15. IMHO, it's a pro-choice ad.

"But I've chosen the best possible option for him, a family."

If abortion were not an option for the woman in the ad, they wouldn't have been able to use the word "chosen."

If one uses any form of the word "choice" in an ad, it's a pro-choice ad.

At least, IMHO.

[EOTE]

34. I think you're forgetting the frame work in which this ad is presented.

Everyone knows that abortion is legal in this country. Pro-choice people wish to keep abortion legal and safe. Acknowledging that abortion is legal and remains a choice for women in my mind does not advocate for choice, it just acknowledges a reality. By that same standard, the only "pro-life" advertisements out there would have to pretend that abortion is outlawed in this country and show some dystopic future where women and their doctors are imprisoned for having/performing an abortion. Anti-choicers acknowledge that there's a choice, they just want to take that choice away.

[City Lights]

55. I understand what you're saying.

I just think our side could make an issue out of their side using any form of the word "choice" to try and make their anti-choice point. Seems disingenuous to me and I don't think we should let them get away with it. I don't think we should give one inch on their using any form of that word to make their point. Choice is our word. We should force them to use some other word to make their point.

I feel the same way about the anti-choicers who want to have "choose life" license plates in various states. I see those as equally disingenuous. Everyone assumes that those are "pro-life" plates, but in a literal sense, they're really pro-choice plates. "Choosing life" over an abortion is still a choice, and that's not really what they're advocating. They want to force me to give birth when I become pregnant. An accurate "pro-life" plate for them to support would read, "force birth," which doesn't have the same ring to it.

[EOTE]

77. But who is to say what the feelings are of the person making the statement?

I assume that there are a number of people out there that believe that abortion should be safe and legal, YET wish to convince as many women as possible to "choose life". I wouldn't have such a license plate because I know what the connotations are, but I'd imagine there are plenty of people who believe that way.

And while choice may be our word, I'm not sure that it should be. I consider myself to be 100% pro-abortion rights. It may not sound quite as pleasant as "pro choice", but I think the word choice in itself can be disingenuous. Take, for instance, the way that the term "states rights" has been twisted and distorted over the years to mean some sick and evil things. Prior to the Civil War, states rights meant the right for states to allow the owning of another human being. Later on, it changed to mean the right of a state to deny people of a certain color their inalienable rights. So it's disingenuous to act as if rights or choice is always a good thing. That's why I think it's important when discussing these issues to be specific about what it is we do or don't support. I'm pro-abortion rights. They are certainly not "pro-life", they couldn't care less about life once it has left the womb, they are anti-abortion rights. Both sides have chosen words that I consider to be dishonest.

[defendandprotect]

264. The right wing does work day and night to distort reality . . . agree ...

they've even made "liberal" a dirty word in some minds!!

I'm a flaming liberal -- and love the word!!

[WeDidIt]

99. And I think our side needs to get smarter about using this issue like the other side does.

For example, write the "Pro-life Pregnancy Medical Care Act". Basically, any woman in the nation who finds herself pregnant would have the option to have all prenatal care paid for by the government. Furthermore, she would have postnatal care for six months after delivery paid for by the government if she wants it. Additionally, any children from the pregnancy would have free medical care from the government for the first five years of life if the parents would like to have it. No woman or child is forced to accept the free care, it's just a means to promote choosing to have the child if one of the overriding concerns is health care costs. You pay for it with a 3% tax on all advertising revenues in any medium (television, radio, magazines, newspapers, internet sites, etc.).

What the act would really do is start the process of moving the nation to a single payer for health care, but the way it is framed forces the hands on the Republicans. Would it lower the abortion rate? Probably not significantly, but it would be damned hard for the Republicans to vote against it. The long term effect, though, would be to decrease the infant mortality rate and the death rate for women in child birth. Both of these rates are unacceptably high in the United States.

[Hepburn]

187. If the govt pays for the pregnancy, then they should pay for an abortion if that is the choice.

Seems fair to me.

[Scout]

223. me too, seems damned fair.

edit to add: and a lot cheaper in the long run for the taxpayers.

[Hepburn]

232. You got that one, IMO!

:hi:

[WeDidIt]

260. I wouldn't have a problem with all abortions being paid for by the government

I don't think that's politically viable today, but hopefully it will become politically viable in the future.

[defendandprotect]

340. Absolutely -- 1000%

[defendandprotect]

352. Let's start a government program to encourage vasectomies -- and pay for them!!

[darkstar3]

265. USE the issue?!

Are you actually suggesting that liberals should USE women's bodies as a wedge issue just like the asshat right?

Fuck. No. I will NOT sink to THAT level.

[defendandprotect]

266. Single payer health care is smart -- ignoring Global Warming and overpopulation is dumb . . .

Granted patriarchy is suicidal -- but I don't think we want to increase the possibilities!!

We need to take care of the children already here -- 25% of them living in poverty in America!

We need to ensure that every child in school is properly and nutritiously fed --

That every child gets an education -- a liberal education -- teaching them to think for themselves!

And that existing children all get sufficient care of every kind --

Including national day care centers --

We also need to increase birth control effectiveness -- and encourage more males to get

vasectomies.



And how about adding a PS to that proposed legislation which will do so much to turn Repugs

around . . . ALL STATES MUST PERMIT HOMOSEXUALS TO ADOPT CHILDREN!!

[defendandprotect]

353. Let's have a Vasectomy Act . . .and have the government pay for it ...

if you really want to limit abortions, that is . . . !!

[defendandprotect]

263. Agree with you both --

and also as many make clear those who support CHOICE are also PRO-LIFE!!

CHOICE is a life-affirming option --

for females and their families --

not to mention often the right of "self defense" when a third trimester abortion

is necessary!

[fishwax]

36. acknowledging the reality of a choice isn't the same as advocating the legal right to choose

"If one uses any form of the word "choice" in an ad, it's a pro-choice ad."

It's rather silly to suggest that "Choose Life" is a pro-choice slogan. But by that standard, t-shirts like this offer a pro-choice message: http://www.thewearablegospel.com/products.asp?cat=59

[City Lights]

63. All I'm saying is I think we should take back the word "choice."

We've allowed them to co-opt it to make their anti-choice argument, even though choosing an option that's best for a woman isn't the position they support.

[defendandprotect]

268. Excellent point . . . !!! k&r ...

[defendandprotect]

261. And do you believe the ads where young males say they've "chosen" the military ....

as the best possible solution" . . . ?

We well understand that the kid is probably naive and coerced --

but there's that word -- "chosen" --

and it's used because the right wing understands that EVERYONE loves "Choice" -- !!

[HopeHoops]

17. If that's all it said, it also leaves open the option of adoption.

That's a good thing!

[apples and oranges]

46. I assumed that was what the commercial was getting at

[tammywammy]

70. I assumed that's what the ad was getting at. n/t

[defendandprotect]

269. I think it's up to the female to decide whether that's "a good thing" or not . . !!

[HopeHoops]

300. A good thing as in leaving it open. I support a woman's right to choose - that's not what I meant.

If a woman decides to go through with a pregnancy but also doesn't believe she can adequately care for a child then she needs all the help she can get to arrange for a good home through adoption. The "pro-life" crowd doesn't seem to give a shit what happens to kids after they are born - just while they are in the uterus.

[defendandprotect]

303. In discussing the ad, the suggestion is that adoption is preferable ....

at least for this woman -- about whom we know nothing!

That is an anti-choice directed ad --

In order to be impartial, it would have to mention ALL the options --

If we want a good shot at ending abortions, then VASECTOMY is the thing to encourage!

That's a good thing!



And, again, re adoption, it is generally "white" babies who are wanted --

and as I understand it many children are already available for adoption. Many more

than would ever be adopted. If this were the "belly" of a woman of color, then

adoption might not be such a "good thing" . . . ???

[HopeHoops]

361. All good points! As for the "big V", that's what I did. 15 minutes of being a baby on a table...

...and two weeks of getting stitches caught on EVERYTHING! Still, it is a minor procedure for a male and the female options are major surgery. Most of the guys I know who won't go that route are just chickenshits when it comes to their naughty bits.

And you are definitely correct about the demand, or lack of, based on skin color. That's a really sad reality.

What really pisses me off is people who want to ban all abortions under all circumstances and also don't want sex education or contraception to be available to kids. It isn't necessarily a birth control issue - STDs are out of control. We discussed it with our daughters early on and continue to do so. My standard line is, "PUT A RUBBER ON IT!" but so far they haven't needed them. My eldest is almost 19 and away at college. She's probably close to that time, but we sent rubbers along with her when she left for college. Our rule is simple: we'll get more if you need them and no questions asked.

[Fumesucker]

20. Of course the ad doesn't mention that there are *already* more kids needing families..

Than are being adopted.

If that were not so we wouldn't have so many kids in foster care and institutions.

[defendandprotect]

270. Of course, some states wouldn't CHOSE to let adoptive parents who were gay adopt that child . . .

[rocktivity]

21. It's a pro-choice ad

SHE'S decided to have the baby. And by "the best possible option for him--a family" might be referring to adoption.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[darkstar3]

267. It's a pro-ONE-choice ad

there, fixed it...

[ScreamingMeemie]

325. I'd agree if she had said "for me".

[NV Whino]

22. Assuming that The Cradle is an adoption place

I agree that it is a pro-choice ad rather than an anti-abortion ad. Adoption is a choice for women unable or undesiring of raising a child on their own just as is abortion.

Pro-lifers are only concerned with bringing the child into the world with no thought as to the future wellbeing of that child.

[WeDidIt]

39. It's an adoption advocacy group

that attempts to put women in touch with groups who will help them with adoption issues.

It's a perfectly legitimate choice and those decrying the offering of the choice are no better than those who would deny the choice of an abortion.

[boston bean]

51. You called it a pro life ad that you agreed with. Are you pro life? or are you pro choice?

[demwing]

86. Let's change the debate from "life" vs "choice"

to "personal rights" vs "no personal rights"

Why does anyone on this board care about whether a woman chooses abortion or birth (and the subsequent question of keep or adoption)?

Isn't the issue that its a woman's personal right to choose, end of story?

Are those against this ad saying they are against groups advocating one choice over another? If you are, tough. That's a 1st amendment issue.

And are those in favor of this ad able to honestly say that an advocacy ad in favor of abortion wouldn't piss you off? If you can say that, fine. You stand with personal rights.

The question shouldn't concern whether a group advocates one choice over another, but should concern the protection of the personal right to make your own medical decisions. End of story.

[anigbrowl]

114. 'Life' and 'choice' aren't opposites, last time I looked

One could be in favor of both. I respect women's choice to have an abortion or not, and I think there's nothing wrong with someone choosing not to do so and looking into the option of adoption as well. I'm just fine with an adoption organisation pointing out the existence of that option; some women might feel that it's the best resolution to the problem of an unplanned pregnancy.

[boston bean]

130. Then you are pro choice, NOT pro life. Pro life means no choice, you must have give birth no matter

what, even if you are gonna die doing it.

[demwing]

145. that's a surprise

being as how I am both pro-life AND pro-choice, and see no conflict outside of trying to convince you, and others like you, that there is no conflict.

But then again, I define the words I use to describe myself. If I say I'm pro-life, and you read into it that I am anti-choice, that's your issue.

Should I be pro-death, or anti-life?

What a stupid set of options you've left me with...

[boston bean]

147. Why don't you call yourself pro choice. Pro choice includes adoption and never having an

abortion yourself.

[demwing]

150. I call myself both, because I hold both opinions

I am pro choice because I believe that it is an individual's right to control their own body. This includes abortion, birth, all medical treatments, drug use, and suicide.

I am pro-life because I believe that life is a miracle, and should be preserved. War, murder, and capital punishment should be stopped at all cost, because they do not inherently violate an individual's right to control their own body.

Making Suicide and abortion illegal, on the other hand, does violate that right. And while I encourage people to make choices that sustain life, I am adamantly against the violation of said rights.

I don't see why I have to limit myself to a single viewpoint just because someone has not yet accepted that there are nuances to life.

[boston bean]

152. You are trying to re define choice. Choice includes believing whatever you want, sir.

Call yourself pro choice, that is what you are.

Why do feel the need to make the holier than thou distinction.

[demwing]

161. It is a distinction - It is not a "holier than thou" distinction.

Sometimes, a thing can be seen as simple. Sometimes, a thing can not.

Questions and answers surrounding life and liberty are often more complex than we want them to be, but there it is. Things are as they are, not as we want them to be.

If you're looking for simplicity, find it there.

[boston bean]

164. Excuse me, you are totally uninformed as to what choice is, you have to keep making a distinction

that you are pro life but would never force your views on anyone else. That is what CHOICE is!!!!!

[demwing]

169. here we go

[anigbrowl]

165. I reject that framing

I agree that many anti-abortion people have exactly that attitude, and actually I think it's been a mistake on the part of the pro-choice movement to let their opposition 'own' that phrasing.

To me, 'pro-life' encompasses a range of things.

I'm certainly for women being able to preserve their own lives in the face of possible medical dangers. And I'm in favor of preserving life that has a good chance of being viable outside the womb. Opponents of abortion focus on late-term abortion as a proxy for abortion in general, which I think is highly deceptive - the cases where one or the other need to be sacrificed for medical reasons are very few and far between. Women are just not going around aborting viable children for selfish reasons.

In a more general sense, if a woman is pregnant and feels sure that having the baby and parenting is not a realistic option, I think it's a good idea to seriously consider the option of having it with a view to subsequent adoption, if circumstances allow. It's not the 'right' choice, nor do I think anyone but the pregnant woman can properly evaluate whether 'circumstances allow' - a person's physical, financial, social and emotional situation is unique and only they can make the call.

Being a man, such a choice is inevitably hypothetical for me. On the other hand, it's not so mysterious that I can't imagine myself into that situation and ponder how I'd decide it. I've had to make choices in the past about whether I was willing to father a child; I've been asked in contexts of no-strings-attached and in a family setting, on several different occasions, and those haven't been easy decisions. Even though the physical effort of getting someone pregnant is trivial for a man, the emotional and legal consequences of doing so are not.

Similarly a man who unexpectedly fathers a child might have to make other difficult choices. There might be agreement that parenting is out, but he could have to make a choice about whether to provide financial support for the cost of an abortion, or the cost of a whole pregnancy, with the outcome riding partly on his decision. And there are even some circumstances in which he could find himself with obligations he couldn't have foreseen - if birth control fails, for example, or his partner misleads him about the use of birth control or her ability to get pregnant.

So while men don't directly experience pregnancy, and while many men don't care about anything beyond their own experience (ie, just want to have sex and forget about the rest), it's not necessarily a totally abstract issue for them. So getting back to the pro-life thing, if my buddy comes and says 'I got this girl pregnant, she's willing to deliver and have the kid adopted but only if I go halves on the medical bills', well then I'd urge that friend to go along with the idea and offer to help if I could.

I really dislike that the 'pro-life' crowd have managed to frame the debate in such a way that 'choice' becomes synonymous with 'death'. Certainly they are against women having a choice to begin with (I believe partly due to reproductive anxiety), but advocates of choice can do a better job to articulate why choice is so important and the range of choices it encompasses. I personally don't feel an embryo or fetus is necessarily fully alive, at least no more than my blood cells are (but I don't feel guilty if I cut my finger and some of them die). To me the moral question revolves around whether a fetus is developed enough to survive outside the womb, and whether its brain has grown sufficiently for it to be able to experience pain or begin to have experience. Before that stage the capability for suffering doesn't exist, so no harm takes place if the pregnancy is aborted. On the other hand, I have no time for people who go about describing an implanted embryo or fetus as a 'tumor' or suchlike. This is wrong in the technical sense, offensive to anyone who is voluntarily pregnant (directly or by virtue of having contributed), and plain stupid in the political sense because it fits in completely with the narrative of anti-abortion campaigners.

Just because some people are anti-choice and, as you say, think women must give birth no matter what, does not mean that I have to think in such absolutist terms. No single principle will yield the best outcome in all situations. I think the principle that choices about pregnancy should lie with the pregnant woman is the one which results in least overall harm. As with most other things, trying to reduce it to a simple dichotomy confuses rather than clarifies the issue.

[WeDidIt]

117. No, I called it a pro-life ad I had no problem with.

I am and have always been pro-choice.

[fishwax]

64. I don't think there's anyone decrying the option of adoption

"It's a perfectly legitimate choice and those decrying the offering of the choice are no better than those who would deny the choice of an abortion."

[defendandprotect]

272. Does this group fight for the right of homosexuals to adopt children???

[ParkieDem]

23. I have no problem, either.

I don't have a problem with pro-life groups that offer counseling to pregnant women faced with unplanned pregnancies, and their options (which, for most such groups, is adoption). The Catholic church, for all its problems, is great in this regard, because they stand behind their belief. They say, "we don't think this baby is a mistake, and we're going to prove it by taking care of it after it's born."

What irritates me are the pro-life groups that rail in-your-face against abortion, when will do nothing to care for the child after it's born.

[Scout]

27. yeah, 'cuz you know, women didn't know they could squeeze it out

and give it away until this ad campaign....

:eyes:

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WeDidIt]

37. That's a steaming pile of shit

You know nothing about me.

But your intolerance of an ad that promotes one option in an array of options shows you to be no better than the screamers outside my local planned parenthood clinic.

[Scout]

44. your tolerance and promotion of a steaming pile of shit tells me all i need to know about you. n/t

[WeDidIt]

47. You're having a problem with this ad tells me you are as anti-Choice as Terry Randall

Just in the opposite direction.

[Scout]

53. hahahahahahaha it's Randall Terry LOL at least get his name right

you can't even do that!

:rofl: trying to insult me ...

i don't like the ad, so suddenly i'm anti-choice, oh that's fucking rich!

:rofl:

[redqueen]

54. It is a rather amusing slam, isn't it?

:)

As many times as he's posted it, he should just put it in his sig and be done with it. :rofl:

[TokenQueer]

110. Maybe he meant Tony Randall...

[muffin1]

144. That's exactly what I was thinking!

:rofl:

[defendandprotect]

274. What's Tony Randall done?

[TokenQueer]

329. His stage, film and TV credits have been pretty sparse ever since his death six years ago.

;)

[defendandprotect]

341. I don't see that that would account for the anger here ?

Unless people are pissed that he had the nerve to die?

[EOTE]

81. Yeah, that's right. We have members on DU who believe in forced abortions for everyone!

Tell me, do you even think before you write the things you do? Do you have any idea how incredibly offensive you're coming of as?

[defendandprotect]

29. "But I've chosen the best possible option for him, a family."

For him . . .

him

. . ??

And, that was exactly the take of Rep. Henry Hyde on abortion and the cells being

part of a female's body --

"What if it is a boy body, he cried out!!"


Prejudiced ad -- and certainly anti-abortion!!

[Dogtown]

30. Disengenuous.

The ad and your comments.

[ljm2002]

35. "But I've chosen the best possible option for him"...

...I have a problem with that.

The ad implies that she has the right answer. Not a right answer, or the right answer for her, but THE right answer.

It may be the right answer for her. The ad does not address the situation of a woman with 5 kids and an abusive husband who just cannot deal with another child - and putting it up for adoption is not an option as hubby would never agree. It does not address the situation of a 13-year-old who is pregnant, whatever the circumstances. It does not address the situtation of a fetus with anencephaly, no chance of life or humanness at all. One could go on.

These people who put these ads out go to a lot of trouble to make them seem innocuous. Seems they have succeeded quite well in this case. But the underlying message does not change: abortion == wrong. There is no gray area. So yes, I am bothered by the ad.

[redqueen]

48. Very well put!

:hi:

[Hello_Kitty]

52. Yeah, it's almost as bad as the Tebow thing

Which implied that every pregnancy with medical issues will yield a healthy baby who will grow up to do great things. It puts an unnecessary guilt trip on women who choose to abort a problematic pregnancy.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

94. EVERYBODY read post #35 above. It has all you need to know about such "nicey-nice" ads.

+∞

[lukasahero]

97. Very well said

Thank you for making this point.

[defendandprotect]

275. Yes . . . it has the same simplicity and dumbness of the "Just say 'No'" ads . . .!!

[defendandprotect]

354. Terrific post -- !! K&R --

[joeybee12]

38. Thank God! For a minute I thought I was too late to un-rec this crap...n/t

[AngryOldDem]

43. Having an abortion or opting for adoption?

Isn't that what choice is? Some women opt for the former; others, the latter.

Seems to me that if it doesn't strictly advocate for the former, some people have problems with it. So much for choice. For some women, abortion is **not** the answer to their unwanted pregnancies. And folks, that's okay, whether you agree with it or not, and it's also okay, whether you agree with it or not, to advocate that view in the manner of this advertisement.

While I don't know if such a subtle approach will have much of an effect on abortion rates, I do have to say that it will, at least, bring some kind of thought and civility to the discussion, and I think pro-lifers can effectively make their case without the use of street theater or rhetorical 2x4s.

Flame away.

[Hippo_Tron]

96. I think people have a problem with advocacy one way or another

And in their defense, you don't see television ads encouraging women to have abortions.

It's a question of whether or not pro-choice means "I want it to be legal but I still believe it's wrong so I discourage women from doing it" or if pro-choice means "I want it to be legal and it's none of my business what women do". Maybe pro-choice means both. I don't know...

[defendandprotect]

277. Agree . . . those on the CHOICE said are protecting that choice, not advocating abortion....

Whereas those on the anti-abortion side are doing everything they can --

including murdering doctors -- to prevent women from being able to chose abortion --

EVEN WHEN THE ABORTION IS A THIRD TRIMESTER ABORTION FOR HEALTH REASONS OR PROBLEMS

WITH THE FETUS!

In "Partial Birth Abortion" we see an effort to prevent women from the universal right

to self-defense!

[booley]

57. Sounds pro-choice to me

She CHOSE what she was going to do.

Isn't that the frigging point of pro-choice? That the woman should be the one to decide what happens to her when she gets pregnant? Not some self righteous moralizers acting through the government.

That ad doesn't bother me either since it does something many pro-lifers are unwilling to do, try to convince someone their position is right.

That's fine. As long as they also accept that not everyone will agree regardless of how many commercials they put out.

[CTyankee]

58. Are you aware of the suffering that women who gave their babies up for adoption go through?

Several years ago I had a conversation with a retired social worker who counseled women who had done exactly that, back in the day when abortion was illegal. This social worker talked about how these women would feel grief over having gone thru the pregnancy and birth only to never see the baby again, and how they were tormented on every anniversary of the baby's birth...

The anti-choicers never talk about THAT!

[WeDidIt]

65. All choices involving an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy are difficult.

Women who choose to carry to term and keep the child suffer for that choice.

Women who choose to carry to term and give up the child suffer for that choice.

Women who choose to abort the pregnancy suffer for that choice.

The level of suffering for any of those choices will differ for each woman.

Determining which of the three choices in such a position is best will differ for each woman.

[Ichingcarpenter]

68. YOU are a male

Sorry WeDidIt you don't get to decide for women on their choices

[WeDidIt]

79. I do get to decide ONE THING regarding the issue

I mget to decide where I come down politically on the issue.

For every day of my political life, I have been pro-choice.

I am pro-choice, but I am also pro-ALL-choices.

[CTyankee]

71. Well, 2 things: women's suffering because of having an abortion is highly

overstressed. The most common feeling after an abortion is relief. I have known many women who had abortions and only one spoke of her regret. I am sure there are some, but I think that has been blown way out of proportion by the anti-choicers. You probably can check my assertion out if you go to the Alan Guttmacher Institute's website and look around for the latest scientific studies on the subject. AGI is the "gold standard" on research into reproductive issues.

Second, a woman doesn't know how she is going to feel after going through the pregnancy and birth and then giving up the baby. It's not like the movie "Juno." Advocating for this option, therefore, should carry certain caveats...but of course, this ad makes it all seem so easy and comfortable and that's a problem...

[Scout]

76. just because one might regret something doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do n/t

[WeDidIt]

83. I disagree completely

All women are not the same and thus no two women will have an identical reaction to an abortion. Furthermore, AGI has incomplete data because AGI can never know how a woman who had an unwanted pregnancy and chose not to have an abortion would ave reacted to the abortion, thus the data is only for women who chose to have an abortion. In those cases, I would agree with their conclusions, but the mere fact that a woman chose not to abort an unwanted pregnancy might could indicate her reaction to the abortion could have been severe.

We would know better if AGI could study Chinese women who were forced to have an abortion. I would think the data would be nearly the opposite of their current studies. Of course, the Chinese government would never allow such a study in the first place, so conjecture is moot.

[redqueen]

85. Good Gravy... key word there... "forced"

Christ... are you even fucking serious... or is this some kind of weirdo performance art shit?

[Scout]

103. i'd like to see a study of how many people regret having children

instead of an abortion....

[enlightenment]

234. Gads, I WISH it were performance art -

unfortunately, it isn't.

[CTyankee]

90. I would imagine that AGI studied women who had given babies up for adoption.

What gives you the idea that AGI wouldn't?

I don't know if you can compare Chinese women to women in a free society. However, I can relate one personal anecdote: when I was tutoring ESOL for a group of Chinese women who were in New Haven while their husbands were post docs at Yale I remember one woman talking about finding out she was pregnant. She very nonchalantly said "I think I'm going to HAVE it." It was odd because she said it so casually to the group, including me. That would never happen in a group of American women who knew each other casually...

[WeDidIt]

105. How the fuck could they?

They CANNOT study the effects of having an abortion on women who don't have an abortion. They can NEVER know how a woman would have been affected by having an abortion if she never has an abortion.

I agree, they CAN study the effects of giving a baby up for adoption for women who choose that option.

The point is, you have no fucking clue what having an abortion would have done to a woman who chose instead to have the child and give it up for adoption. The effects could have been incredibly severe, but you'll never know. The fact that she chose instead to give the baby up for adoption is probably a pretty good clue that she might have had severe psychological problems had she chosen to have an abortion.

No two women are the same, and no two women will have the same reaction to any of the options.

Hell, I'd go further and say no two pregnancies are the same and the same woman given two different unwanted pregnancies could well come to different conclusions about the best option. That is not to say that one of those two choices were wrong, just that circumstances were different in the two pregnancies.

[CTyankee]

131. Read the article that I posted for you above, from the AGI website.

It deals with the question you have raised.

Nobody is arguing that two pregnancies are the same; I don't know where you get that from. However, the issue of whether an abortion causes more mental anguish than adoption or raising an unwanted child has been studied a lot and again and again they say the same thing: the most common emotion women report after an abortion is relief. There must also be some longitudinal studies out there that deals with any more/less anguishing years later as well. You will find what you need if you research this a bit more.

Here is another point you should consider: women are moral agents. They can and should be the ones who take responsibility for this decision. They should be helped, by being given accurate information and facts, but ultimately the decision is theirs to make. They may, or may not have regrets for any decision they make.

You are saying that, in effect, the right decision is the adoption route, just as the ad says. Ergo, abortion must always be the wrong decision.

[WeDidIt]

273. Wrongo, bucko

I am saying I have no problem wiht the ad. It is fair for anybody to believe adoption is the best route. Fine, anybody can hold that opinion.

My opinion is, I support whatever decision any woman makes when faced with any pregnancy, regardless of which choice she makes. It is her decision.

Furthermore, I support as much information being available to women faced with such a decision as possible. The Cradle offers some information. It is by no means exhaustive and represents only one third of the possible legal choices, however, them offering information on the choice of adoption is a far better approach to their position on the issue than attempting to take away certain choices currently legally and safely available.

This is why I have no problems with the ads. Planned Parenthood places ads, too, and I have so little problem with their ads that I donate to them because I want to insure their information is available to all women.

[anigbrowl]

124. How is this different from stressing emotional suffering after an adoption?

Feelings are unique to the individual. Some people might make their choice (whatever it happens to be) without much difficulty and feel totally comfortable afterwards, others might find the choice painful and feel sad about it, even if they think they made the right decision.

I am absolutely pro-choice but I don't like the implied suggestion (even if it is inadvertent) from some folk that women who choose to ahead and have the baby are somehow victims or less independent for having done so. Respecting choice means abstaining from judgment of others' choices, even if they are not the choice one would have made for oneself.

[CTyankee]

216. I don't think pro-choice people suggest that women who choose adoption or

raising the child are all victims or less independent for doing so. What pro-choice folks don't like are attempts by anti-choicers that they are victims of the pro-choice movement or that they will suffer horrible regret later. AFAIC, I have NO say in what a woman chooses because what she chooses is different from what I would choose. None whatsoever. What pro-choicers do believe is that women can make these decisions on their own, based on their own needs and abilities. I don't see what is wrong with that...

[anigbrowl]

220. This I agree with...

but in #58 you made a sweeping generalization about the suffering of women who give babies up for adoption. And I saw one other message elsewhere on the thread to the effect of 'I don't know anyone who regrets an abortion, but I know people who regret adoption'. I can certainly think of counterexamples to that.

So I am not too sympathetic to the suggestions on this thread that promoting adoption is equivalent to 'forced birth'. I see nothing wrong with offering support for a particular option to people who would like to avail themselves of it, nor do I think that women who choose that option are the victims of force.

[CTyankee]

239. Look, here's the deal. I've worked for two prochoice groups: an independent women's clinic

and Planned Parenthood of CT (as a fund raiser not a clinical person). Counseling in those two places ALWAYS includes the adoption choice. ALWAYS.

What you are referring to in my earlier post is simply that we cannot look at JUST the suffering of women who might regret an abortion. They could and do regret giving the baby up for adoption. That is the point I was trying to make. The anti-choice people want to say it is ALWAYS bad to abort, ALWAYS good if you use the adoption choice. Ain't so. I did refer to scientifically accurate studies that have been done by the Alan Guttmacher Institute on this issue and the results simply do not bear out what the anti-choice groups say about abort or adopt. What was found in study after study was that the most common emotion after an abortion for women is "relief." This is one of the reasons that Surgeon General Koop (himself pro-life) said he simply could not sign on to Reagan's "abortion makes women suffer mentally later on" meme. His scientific background would not permit such a conclusion because it didn't exist!

Take it from Dr. Koop, not me...

[anigbrowl]

246. I'm happy to agree with all of that

The reason I reiterate the point is that looking at the website of this group whose advert is described in the OP, I don't see a word about abortion (or indeed morality) whereas they do offer both pre- and post-adoption counselling. So I have real difficulty with simply dismissing them as an anti-abortion front, as some posters are doing. given that the organization was founded in 1923, it doesn't seem fair to just write them off as culture warriors.

I am familiar with AGI's work, and don't buy into the meme about abortion inevitably resulting in greater suffering. In the examples I was thinking of, I know people who don't regret their decision insofar as they still think it was the right thing and would do it again under the same circumstances, but might not have done so if circumstances were more favorable - that is, they felt sorry about the necessity of their decision, so it's not unqualified relief. The same seems to be true of adoption, though whether to a greater or lesser degree I don't know.

[CTyankee]

253. and this is true in all decisions in life. Never have I had a decision that was truly

a stand alone one, there were always "contingencies." We expect that in life, don't we? The point here is "what do we do as a public policy with abortion?" and I think the decision to say it is up to the woman is the right one, given a free society. Don't you agree?

The decision to give women the right to decide is important in a democracy. This is the ultimate in taking responsibility for one's decisions. Think of that: a citizen making decisions on her own without the government making decisions for her. Now whether the woman regrets or doesn't regret is really not the issue: it is no your or my responsibility to regret her decision. It is hers or not hers if she doesn't. So what? Does this matter to US in OUR daily life. How are WE affected? We can still make our minds on our own, right?

This is the core issue I am trying to get to here.

[Hepburn]

190. I don't know anyone who regrets an abortion, but I do know of someone...

...who totally regrets having the child and giving it up for adoption.

The pregnancy was a result of a very, very brutal rape and guess what? Years later, this child found her, came to her and asked for help in finding his "daddy."

[Dorian Gray]

78. Of course they would feel a loss

and go through suffering. Giving up a child is a difficult thing to do.

I was adopted in 1971, and I am thankful for the sacrifice that my birth mother made on my behalf. I think about it every day, and I wonder if she still (assuming she is still alive) feels a sense of grief or
regret about the choice she made. (Despite abortion being illegal back then...)

I think that those who choose to abort their fetus also often feel a sense of loss. When i miscarried last autum and had a subsequent D & C, despite only being 8 weeks pregnant, I felt a huge sense of loss. It was terribly sad for me to have to go through that... physically, emotionally, and hormonally. Neither choice is easy to make: ending a pregnancy or choosing to give a child up for adoption. Pain will most likely come to the woman who chooses either option.

[CTyankee]

98. However, your miscarriage was a wanted pregnancy, so it would be natural for

you to have such a sad experience. A woman who had no intention of getting pregnant, did not want to be pregnant or simply could not BE pregnant, would no doubt feel differently. For those women, relief from a terrible situation would probably be the most common emotion, particularly after an early first trimester abortion.

[fishwax]

69. perhaps this conversation would have gone better if you had framed it as an adoption ad

It seems a bit disingenuous to say, essentially, "I saw this great pro-life ad" and then accuse anyone who doesn't agree that the ad sounds great of being the moral equivalent of Randall Terry.

[WeDidIt]

89. I could not frame it as an adoption ad.

Clearly, the ad is promoting one of three potential choices over the other two. Obviously, they feel less need in promoting having the child and keeping it, so it is clearly from the so-called pro-life movement.

I just found the ad to not be anti-abortion, but pro-adoption, Those who have a problem with the ad are demonstrating the same level of intolerance as Randall Terry. It's their way or the highway on the issue.

[Scout]

102. at least you got his name right this time..... LOL n/t

[WeDidIt]

195. So I transposed the first and last names

If you look earlier in the thread, I did not transpose his names.

:eyes:

[fishwax]

104. Sure you could have

You just did: "I just found the ad to not be anti-abortion, but pro-adoption"

[fishwax]

106. and the attempt to equate the posters on this thread to randall terry is ridiculous

Disagreeing with you that the ad carries no anti-choice message is not the same as advocating the elimination of rights or the intimidation of strangers.

[and-justice-for-all]

72. This is a well structured anti-abortion ad...

it is masked very well, but it is clearly obvious it is anti-abortion.

[Lucian]

74. Sounds anti-choice to me.

I don't know how anyone here can claim to like that ad. :puke:

[demwing]

93. There is a difference between anti-abortion and anti-choice

As Voltaire (may have) written: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

You can reject any conclusion, even as you fight for the right to think freely.

[redqueen]

100. Yes, one tries to guilt trip women out of making their own decisions...

by telling them so condescendingly what is 'best' (not for them, but for the baby, because really - do they even matter, once they get knocked up? of course not!)... and the other tries to place legal barriers in the way.

[demwing]

113. So let me ask you this -

What would an acceptable ad promoting adoption as a choice sound like, in your opinion?

[redqueen]

116. "I didn't plan on this baby and I'm not ready right now.

So I've chosen to put him up for adoption."

Is it really so hard to see how the word 'best' works in that ad?

I'm frankly amazed that so many are missing such a blatantly obvious ploy. Then again... it does explain a hell of a lot.

[demwing]

123. Maybe you've read too much into the word "best"

Would it have made a difference if the ad had stated:

"I didn't plan on this baby and I'm not ready right now. But I think I've chosen the second best possible option for him, a family."

or

"I didn't plan on this baby and I'm not ready right now. But I've chosen an ok option for him, a family."

or

"I didn't plan on this baby and I'm not ready right now. But I've chosen an option for him, a family. I just wish I knew in my heart that I was doing the right thing."

[redqueen]

125. No, I'm simply reading it.

And I know what the word means. It's used in a declarative statement. There is no grey area there.

Not exactly rocket surgery, now, is it?

[demwing]

132. I'm sure you know the definition, it's you focus on the word "best"

above all else in the ad that I question.

Let me give you an alternate understanding of why "the best possible option for him, a family" may not mean anti-choice.

If the ad is anti-abortion, but pro choice, then their range of "possible" choices is limited to exclude abortion. If so, then the woman may not be making the best choice for the child to try to raise it on her own steam.

In that case, the ad would not be talking to all women, and discouraging abortion as a choice, but would instead be speaking to women who have already chosen, rightly or wrongly, to not abort, and advocating that adoption is often better for the child than being raised by biological parents.

Unless you believe that ALL women would automatically choose abortion, unless acted on by outside influences, then I do not understand why you would have an issue with this ad.

If that is the case, then let me ask you whether you support choice at all, if you feel that the ONLY HONEST choice is abortion.

[redqueen]

135. WTF? I'm not going to do thought experiments to try to explain this to you.

There is NO 'best' option for everyone in this context. Simple as that. Pretending there is is insulting and idiotic.

[demwing]

143. You can't have it both way

You can't say there is only one way to use the word, and when I present an alternate meaning (which, considering the source of the ad, is quite logical and straightforward) you dismiss alternates as insulting and idiotic thought experiments.

Stop being so closed in by your own mind.

[redqueen]

167. *sigh*

I'm being closed in by logic. I know it's not popular, given the pretzel version so many seem so fond of (ahem)... but I'm quite happy being closed in by it, thank you very much.

[defendandprotect]

345. You are stressing "a family," as thought we all believe that automatically works . . .

How many children in foster care waiting for adoption?

What if it is a child of color?

You are trusting in a family where there are no guarantee of outcome --

What if the mother wanted to retain custody of the child and simply put him in

a foster home?

Permanent adoption is just that -- permanent.

[anigbrowl]

128. I think you're underestimating people

I can certainly see how their suggestion that adoption is the best choice is meant to further their point of view, and I don't see any evidence that it's missed by other people.

Equally, I also see that it's framed as a choice, and one that is freely undertaken. They could have framed it differently - for example, saying '...and giving him a family is the best thing I can do', which would substitute the idea of capability for that of choice. Or it could have talked about 'needing to do' something or any number of other possible framings which implied necessity over choice.

Choice is a two-way street. I have no problem with someone advocating for a particular choice as long as they acknowledge the freedom of women to make those decisions themselves, which this ad does.

[redqueen]

129. How is understanding language and the intent behind it

underestimating anyone?

The decision of what to do with an unwanted pregnancy is not the same as choosing a brand of soap, and pushing one option as the 'best' one for everyone is fucking insulting and idiotic.

[anigbrowl]

170. You're assuming that 'best' outweighs 'choice'

As described in the OP the ad suggests some people will consider adoption as the best choice.

The decision of what to do with an unwanted pregnancy is not the same as choosing a brand of soap, and pushing one option as the 'best' one for everyone is fucking insulting and idiotic.

It would be, if it had made that claim. But it is presented as the choice of an individual, made on behalf of what said individual considers a separate person; and by the time a pregnancy shows as a large bump, that is a valid perspective. You know, respecting the idea of choice means accepting the fact that there are women who may simply not want to have an abortion. They don't have to justify that preference any more than a woman who does not want to be pregnant at all has to justify that preference.

Nobody but the woman in question gets to make the call on how she should feel about her pregnancy or how she should think of what she has in her womb. If they have a different view of the situation from you or I that does not mean they are brainwashed or inadequate. And I think it is completely legit to offer adoption counselling to women who have that perspective.

I can just as easily imagine an ad along the lines of 'I didn't plan to be pregnant and I'm not ready for it right now. I went to planned parenthood and they helped me to choose the best option.' I wouldn't take that to imply that abortion was the 'best' response to an unplanned pregnancy, although a lot of people do go to PP for that reason. Nor would I take it as a suggestion that everyone else should do the same. As above, I think it's completely legit to offer abortion counselling to women who are not comfortable with being pregnant.

Is this Cradle organization against abortion? sure seems like it. But they have a right to express their viewpoint, and I have no problem with them offering what they consider to be a constructive alternative.

[redqueen]

171. "Best" qualifies "choice"

:wtf:

The statement is delcarative - adoption is the best choice. There is no way to spin that, no matter how much tapdancing you do.

[anigbrowl]

179. No it doesn't.

The statement is delcarative - adoption is the best choice.

You are presenting it in a declarative and blanket fashion. The advert presented it as the decision of an individual

Different individuals with different perspectives can make different choices about what they consider best. I respect the fact that other people may see and decide things differently from the way I would. You seem to be objecting to the idea they should express those views because they don't coincide with yours.

[redqueen]

185. More pretzel logic.

I didn't present anything, the ad did.

You can try to spin it as 'well it was only her opinion that it was the best choice' but that's flat-out bullshit. This isn't a woman talking to herself, it's an ad, and it was designed this way for a purpose. Good luck continuing to delude yourself that the purpose wasn't sending the message to women in the audience that this is the best choice, period.

[demwing]

199. Why is it pretzel logic?

It's very straightforward - the womans states the choice was the best for him, not the best for all. It doesn't qualify CHOICE, it qualifies HER CHOICE.

That's a big distinction.

Secondly, "best" does not imply that there were no other GOOD choices.

That's another big distinction.

And finally, OF COURSE the ad wants to influence women. But it doesn't suggest that other choices should be banned or criminalize. It ADVOCATES one choice over any other.

That's the biggest distinction of all.

[redqueen]

202. Do you think her fetus is vastly different from any other fetus?

It is advocating for adoption as the best option for any unplanned pregancy. Of that there is no question.

I really do wonder why a few people are going through such contortions to try to spin the meaning of this ad.

[anigbrowl]

209. It's her feelings about it which may differ from those of others

It is advocating for adoption as the best option for any unplanned pregancy. Of that there is no question.

Really? So, is it advocating the superiority of adoption over parenting and raising the child oneself?

[redqueen]

212. Obviously not.

She's already decided she's not ready... the declaration is quite obviously that in that situation, adoption is the best possible option.

Fucking hell. I'm out. Seriously. This is ridiculous.

[anigbrowl]

Well, that's the point I've been trying to make

Adoption is suggested as the best option for a particular situation.

It doesn't deny the validity of other options or other situations. It just offers support to those who are considering adoption. For some people, that would the best resolution. That doesn't invalidate the view of people who have made different choices.

[anigbrowl]

200. Call it what you want

I'm perfectly aware that they're offering their adoption counselling as the best choice. I am fine with that, because it's a legitimate point of view, and they're trying to connect with women that have had unplanned pregnancies who may share that view.

They're not saying people should be denied the right to make different choices. The entire point of the OP is that this ad differs from a lot of 'pro-life' advocacy in that it promotes an alternative rather than attacking the idea of having a choice.

[redqueen]

204. See post 35.

If that doesn't make it clear, nothing will, I suppose.

[anigbrowl]

206. I did, already. I happen not to agree with it. nt

[defendandprotect]

344. It would acknowledge and address the female, respectfully . . .

not her stomach, not her womb -- not centered on a fetus --

and would recite the programs -- the successes --

and would be open to counter ads -- which don't btw occur -- CHOICE ads are never shown.

In other words, we also need to know how many children need adoption -- whether

some people are excluded from adoptive parenthood -- like homosexuals, for instance.

What the general outcome is for children of color, for instance.

What true conditions are for children in foster homes.

How 10 months of gestation may impact a pregnant female -- her job, career, education, future.

What support is available financially that she can count on -- health care?

What other services may be available to her if her family situation is more complicated than

the 10 second ad might be able to address.

Whether she can ever have future contact with the child and the adoptive parents.

[Lucian]

109. No. There isn't.

Because anti-abortionists want anti-choice in this society. They're forcing their beliefs onto everybody else.

I don't know why you're defending those type of people.

[demwing]

118. You have that backward

Anti-choice people are, by default, anti-abortion.

But anti-abortion people are not necessarily anti-choice. A person does not have to agree with your choice in oder to defend your right to make that choice.

[Lucian]

137. Ah, touche.

I did get that backwards. And you're right. Anti-abortion people are not necessarily anti-choice.

I stand corrected.

[boston bean]

157. That is the definition of Choice.

The choice to have an abortion, even thinking it's morally evil.

The choice to have an abortion, because it's not the right time.

The choice to have an abortion, because you were raped.

The choice to have an abortion, because you don't have any $$ to raise a child.

The choice to have an abortion, because you are not ready for kids.

The choice to never have an abortion, because you feel it's morally evil

The choice to never have an abortion, because you believe it's killing a life.

The choice to never have an abortion, because of your religious beliefs.

The choice to give the baby up for adoption.

The only thing choice doesn't include forcing one's belief upon another, in essence making a choice for them.

So what are you really? You sound pro choice to me, if what you are saying is truly how you feel.

The pro life crowd has done an outstanding job in getting people to believe that they need to make the distinction to feel better eabout themselves. It's another tactic. Call yourself pro choice, because from everything i've read that you've written leads me to believe you are pro choice, which includes your personal right to feel however the hell you want.

[demwing]

163. When have I not called myself pro-choice?

What you are really asking for is for me to stop calling myself pro-choice AND pro-life.

That's and easy answer - No, for all of the reasons I've stated up thread and down.

[boston bean]

166. No, you don't know the definition of choice. You are the one making a distinction

for what reason, i don't know. Maybe your just being coy.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

87. The best thing that can be said about this ad is they have a constitutional right to air it.

And no more.

[Hippo_Tron]

91. I think this is basically the point of contention here...

"Is safe legal and rare" pro-choice or is "Safe Legal and it's none of your business how often it happens" pro-choice or are they both pro-choice?

This is why I usually don't debate abortion. People aren't going to be persuaded to change their views.

[ProudDad]

115. Safe, Legal and none of your god damn business

is the ONLY choice...

But we don't live in a pro-choice country...

Henry Hyde, Ronny Ray-gun, G.H.W.Bush, Bill Clinton and friends saw to that...

[Lars39]

92. What adoption agencies paid for the ad?

[anigbrowl]

213. It's called 'The Cradle'

It's an adoption advocacy and service organization which was founded in 1923. I don't see anything on their website about abortion.

http://www.cradle.org/home.php

[Lars39]

225. Fees to adopt are pretty steep:

http://www.cradle.org/adoption-agency/adopt_fees.html

[anigbrowl]

229. Yeah. I'm not sure how it stacks up against others

It does seem like a lot of money but then I've seen estimates that it can go as high as $40k. there is a ~$10,000 tax credit for adoption, and many states have some kind of subsidy too. So I guess those are partly built into the price.

However, I don't have sufficient knowledge to assess this in context.

[ProudDad]

111. Women who go to "The Cradle" ...

DO NOT GET THE FULL RANGE OF CHOICES!!!

The women who go to these places are pressured into the "God wants you" to have the child "choice" by the denizens of those anti-choice "clinics"...using the same tactics of smarmy used car salesmen and push-pollers...

Dog help any woman who goes to one of these places for any actual help...

[muffin1]

126. Hmmm

Do you have a uterus? Didn't think so. Pardon me while I :boring: .

[demwing]

139. I didn't realize that the ability or the right to choose our own medical options

was limited to those with a uterus.

[muffin1]

142. Do you want me to tell you what to do with your penis?

You have every right to have any medical procedure you would like.

What I'm saying is...MEN have NO BUSINESS telling WOMEN what to do with THEIR bodies. When you can get pregnant, and go through everything that entails, then get back to me.

It is actually NO ONE'S business what anyone else chooses to do with his or her own body. But to get abortion advice from an man? :puke:

Thanks, I'll pass.

[demwing]

146. And how does this ad, or the OPs commenst "give abortion advise"

you don't need to answer, the answer is self evident - they don't.

[muffin1]

148. Thanks for permission not to answer.

Would you like it better if I said his opinion? I sure hope so. I really, really care what a man of your stature thinks of me.

It is clear from the content of his (seemingly) never-ending posts what he is trying to convey.

DON'T HAVE AN ABORTION!!1! ADOPTION IS BETTER!!1!!

[demwing]

151. Well we have something in common

Neither of us is overly concerned with the other's opinion of our selves.

And just out of devil's advocacy, what is inherently wrong with advocating adoption over abortion?

[CTyankee]

183. For yourself? Nothing. For anybody else, MYOB.

nt

[demwing]

188. No, not an answer

Whats wrong with advocating adoption over abortion, or for that matter, adoption over being raised by biological parents?

[CTyankee]

196. I know this is not what you want to hear. Tis a pity.

Now, if what you want to do is to extol the virtues of adoption as generally a good thing, fine. Just don't presume you should have a say in what a woman confronting an unwanted pregnancy should do. You don't get a say. Try to cope with that reality, you'll be a happier person...

[demwing]

201. Too late, I've already embraced that reality,

It would be a rejection of my core beliefs to force a person into a path they they did not choose. Nor do I believe that we all get to sit around a big table and vote on whether Jane get's an abortion, and adoption, or becomes a mother.

But none of those describe advocacy, and you know that. It's a shame you feel that you have to cloud these facts in order to make your point.

[CTyankee]

214. What is behind your embrace of that reality? nt

[demwing]

218. My long held belief that it is an individual's right to control their own body

This includes abortion, birth, all medical treatments, drug use, and suicide.

Why do I believe that? Good question. I believe this of the self-evidential fact that our bodies are the only possessions that we are afforded at birth, possessions which we hold with us through our lives, and even unto the time of death. Every other possession can be stolen from us - our senses, our reason, our youth, our intellect, even our memories, but not this. Let's not even begin with less personal possessions such as real estate and real goods. Those things are like the sediment of our lives. They collect over time, but can be disrupted with the slightest movement. Financial possessions are the least permanent of all. But our bodies, even when broken and worn out, are ours for life, and our alone.

If there was anything which can be said to truly belong to us as a birth right, it is dominion over our own bodies.

[CTyankee]

219. How does this tie in with your advocacy of adoption over abortion? nt

[demwing]

235. I believe that all life is a miracle

and I'm not fishing for a debate on religion. Life is rare, and whether it's a miracle of nature of the super-natural, I just don't care.

So I will always defend your right to choose how to run your own body, but I will still continue to ask that people choose life first, even when difficult. Also, I do try my hardest to avoid the use of guilt as a tactic. I try to keep all debate focused on life and choice. If that makes me a bad person in the eyes of some, I'll deal with that. If my position makes me unpopular, I'll deal with that as well. Those are my weights to carry.

It's a position I've thought about a lot, and dug deep into my heart to consider. I came to a place where I can hold on to these two truths that are equally important to me, without being a hypocrite.

[CTyankee]

242. What you consider "life."

"I will still continue to ask that people choose life first, even when difficult."

I agree, but when it is the life that is existing and the life that is only in the "possible" stage, why do you not come down on the side of the life that exists here and now? And at what point in the existence of possible life do you say it takes precedence over the woman's life...at fertilization, at implantation, at "quickening", or is it some gestational age that you have determined OK? And why are you qualified to make that decision? Why is anybody qualified to make that decision, because SOMEBODY will, you know that, right?

[demwing]

247. That's easy to answer

The life of the child never takes precedence over the life of the mother, in the womb or out. Just as your life does not take precedence over mine, nor mine over yours.

[CTyankee]

252. OK, we're good then. You are pro-choice. If the woman decides not to give up for adoption

but to have the abortion, that is fine with you, right?

[defendandprotect]

343. Actually, there are times when the female, herself, decides

to sacrifice her own life for that of a living or an unborn child.

Does happen.

BUT, only when she makes that decision --

[demwing]

347. Yes, true. But that decision only belongs to her

Or in the event of her incapacitation, whomever she has allowed to make that choice on her behalf.

It's very simple, but in no way diminishes my desire to see all life nurtured and protected. The bottom line is that I know how to draw distinctions between my wants, and your rights.

[Hepburn]

197. Hint...

...it's none of your business what anyone else does.

[demwing]

205. If that were an absolute truth, then it's also none of your business

what I say or do, what the OP says or does, or what the advertiser says or does.

Clearly, you don't believe in such absolutes, because here you are, advocating your opinion.

[Hepburn]

231. I believe that my opinion is ONLY valid as to me...

...that is the difference between us.

[demwing]

238. so what encourages you to post it online? /nt

[muffin1]

250. It is a woman's decision to do whatever the hell she wants to do with her own body.

I've never known anyone, in my entire life, who wasn't aware that adoption options exist.
I am not the least bit interested in what somebody else thinks is the BEST option for me.

[NYC Liberal]

243. What's wrong is saying, point blank, that adoption is "preferable" to abortion.

Nobody can make a blanket statement that says one choice is inherently better than the other for EVERY woman. That is what this ad attempts to do.

If a woman wants to carry the pregnancy to term and chooses to put the baby up for adoption, that is her choice to make for herself. If she chooses to have an abortion, that is also her choice. If she wants to keep the baby, again, it's her choice.

[Patriot 76]

127. Why don't the anti-choicers care about the children after they're born?

CAUSE THEY DON'T FUCKING CARE ABOUT THE CHILD.

Only the control.

Fuck them!

[texastoast]

227. +10

And welcome to DU!

:hi:

[OwnedByFerrets]

141. Find ONE pro-choice person who ISNT pro-life

All of them I know are VERY pro-life. This is an ANTI-abortion commercial.

[defendandprotect]

284. ... and life-affirming . . . which is rarely seen on the right AFTER birth . . .!!!

Child care -- NO

School, clothing, shelter, medical care -- NO

If you're out of the womb -- "get lost!" --

[LeftyMom]

149. It's telling that the woman isn't a face to them, just a pregnant belly.

Ladies, they don't give a flying fuck about you. They just want you to give them a baby* and go away.

I used to work at a foster care agency that happened to be next to a women's clinic that provided abortions. Did a single one of those tools protesting out front ever walk over and donate a few dollars or a pair of shoes? Hell no, they wouldn't even cooperate with our trying to keep little kids from seeing their gory signs.

*Provided you'll produce a baby that's lighter than a frappuccino and healthy. Otherwise they just don't give a fuck. I got to deal with those kids.

[defendandprotect]

285. ... and the baby is a "him" . . . !!!

:)

[musette_sf]

155. anti-choice

"Shows the stomach of a pregnant woman"

Because the woman's face, background, CV, situation, etc. mean nothing.

"I've chosen the best possible option for him, a family."

Ergo all other choices are NOT "the best" choice.

"This sort of approach will do more to lower abortion rates"

No, this sort of "approach" objectifies the woman, depersonalized the woman, patronizes the woman, judges the putative "goodness" of her "choices", and minimizes the HUGE risk of ANY pregnancy.


:puke:

[redqueen]

168. Another excellent post.

:thumbsup:

[JuniperLea]

180. A family is the best possible choice...

this woman had that option, a lot of women don't... it's still their choice.

[redqueen]

191. Yes, if the woman gets preeclampsia

resulting in lifelong hypertension, or gestational diabetes, or eclampsia, or chorea gravidarum, or placenta previa, or an embolism, or any of the other myriad serious health issues that one risks when carrying a pregnancy to term, well that's all 'the best' option, too, right? Cause that's her duty to the fetus! After she's knocked up, her own life doesn't matter anymore. Do I have it right?

[JuniperLea]

203. No, you don't have that right...

I never said, nor do I believe any of those things. Please don't put words in my posts.

[redqueen]

207. Glad to hear that's not what you meant.

The 'family is the best possible choice' comment had me worried.

[JuniperLea]

217. I believe it is the best possible choice...

But women don't always have that option... so they need to have the option of abortion... for a lot more reasons than convenience.

All I'm really saying is that this ad is far more acceptable than the fetus torn to shreds ads at bus stops, etc.

Opposing views still have the right to free speech... I support this kinder, gentler version as opposed to the alternative.

I'd rather not see any woman going through any of the horrid situations where an abortion is absolutely needed... it's never an easy decision, and women suffer making it. Making the right decsion is hard.

[CTyankee]

255. You know, Juniper, it is NOT hard for some women. They make up their mind and have their abortion.

I'm really sorry if that upsets you but in a democracy we have different points of view and some women don't believe that pregnancy is a divine state. They simply don't view it that way. The moment of fertlization to them is not a holy act, and they simply view it as a mistake that happened, whether because of contraception failure or just an act of passion. We humans are fallible, right? An early first trimester abortion is not that difficult. And if they are not that complicated about it in their heads, why should YOU care if they suffer or don't suffer? What is YOUR stake in this?

Don't mean to take this out on you...just getting a little unhappy with the anti-choice folks...

[JuniperLea]

256. I'm fully pro choice...

I planned an abortion once, and couldn't go through with it... it was my choice to have the baby. Divine state? Naw... hormones.

Without exception, the women I know who have had abortions hated that they had to do it... but were grateful at the time for the choice... maybe not that day, or the next week, or the next month, but it caught up with them eventually... usually after having a "wanted" child and then the wondering began. Even women who have no real choice... die or give birth... or give birth to a child who would have no real life because they have no brain or something equally heartbreaking (one of my cousins had three such children, so I know what I'm talking about here) it's not always as easy as you say. I'd go as far as to think it less likely.

Why should I care if another woman suffers? Beats the fuck out of me, but I do... I have empathy for all living creatures. Sorry if that offends you. I think the world could use a lot more people like me quite frankly! People who care about others are in very short supply. I do care. Fuck me. I care about how other women feel, and I care about their safety and health. I fully support a woman's right to have a clean, safe, medical abortion. What I do not support is some sickening idea that abortion is always the best solution to an unwanted or unexpected pregnancy.

[CTyankee]

293. I really don't think we disagree here. And I am not uncaring. I want women to

have safe, legal abortions if they decide to. But beyond that, I cannot control what women feel afterwards nor should I. As I have said here, women are moral agents and can make up their owns minds about such things. As moral agents, we have to also take the responsibiility for our actions. Perhaps there will be regret; perhaps there will not be. But we all have watershed events in our lives and sometimes our decisions are good and some are bad...I've made my share, I know. But in a free society, people must be allowed to decide and then, yes, even to one day regret their decision, but that is part of being a free citizen, IMO.

As for caring, I have three granddaughters. My deepest fear is that they may not have the availability of safe, legal abortion and all of the horrible outcomes of such a situation. That being said, I am so thankful that my daughter and son in law are excellent parents, are in charge of giving the girls accurate medical information about sexuality, pregnancy, contraception, abortion. They are pro-choice and very progressive...that helps calm my fears but those fears are still in the back of my head...perhaps the reason I am so zealous.

I am sorry I have been argumentative with you! You sound like a very caring person and think highly of you for that...

[Ysabel]

326. not in my case / nothing "caught up" with me...

it has been over 35 yrs. and i've always been fine with it...

[Ysabel]

323. it was easy for me to make the decision to have an abortion...

- i did not suffer...

[defendandprotect]

286. The "best possible choice" is the pregnant female's choice . . .

We've seen homophobia in fighting against homosexuals adopting children --

We've seen abuse in foster/adoptive homes --

just as we've seen the same in biological family homes --

There is no sure bet -- adoption is a risk --

and it involves gestation -- and that's a presumption of the ad that the female

can simply decide to spend 10 months producing a child to give away!!



"Anything which will enable women to live for themselves first has been

attacked as immoral" -- Margaret Sanger

[Hepburn]

182. She is a lift support system for a fetus...

...that is exactly why the only section of her which appears is the one containing the womb.

How totally degrading...:puke:

I could not agree with you more.

[Ignis]

233. Great, succinct analysis.

Framing carrying a fetus to term and putting it up for adoption as "the best choice" is an obvious way of pointing a disapproving finger at the other available options.

[GoneOffShore]

162. Anti-abortion, pro forced pregnancy,

[Hepburn]

172. Sounds like a Jewish guilt trip to me...

...and I should know: My mother was a MASTER with tactics like that.

Choice is personal and private. If a woman wishes to discuss the issues, fine ~~ no one should influence her choice one way or the other.

[JuniperLea]

174. That's choice...

I agree... this is a far better approach. Accentuate the positive. Hate only breeds more hate... this should not be a hate issue. I feel there's been far too much hating shoved at the pro choice crowd.

[treestar]

194. It's good. If focuses on that sometimes the choice is not abortion.

The right wing will always assume the choice is to abort. The point of pro-choice is that it's up to the pregnant woman. That woman does not always choose abortion.

[Jefferson23]

208. Lowering abortions is the goal? Seems presumptuous that women

are careless, and thoughtless to me when I hear that goal. Abortion rights are what they are, so why would the
the number of abortions need to change? Unless you mean, more women should have access to free birth control,
because it is in the best interest for their health.

Here we are in 2010, and I still see only a focus on women, where are all the pharmaceutical companies coming
up with birth control for men? Men get viagra, and condoms, but for women there is a list as long as your arm
for birth control.

Something has to change here folks.

[PufPuf23]

211. Unrec

I seldom unrec a OP and do not like the unrec feature in general.

However, this OP is disingenious or totally tone deaf at best.

[Texasgal]

215. Ofcourse you have no problem with it!

It's not your uterus!

[texastoast]

226. +100 n/t

[VOX]

245. Nailhead, meet hammer. You got it, TG. n/t

[WeDidIt]

251. It's weird you have a problem with it

after all, the woman in the ad has a uterus that isn't yours.

[Texasgal]

254. Where did I say I had a problem with it?

This is really all I have to say about it: Keep your grubby little hands OUT OF MY UTERUS. And I'll keep mine off of hers and everyone else.

Get it? MY uterus and HER uterus are none of YOUR business.

[darkstar3]

276. That ad is NO better than these stupid ass billboards...

that show an ultrasound pic and say "Woman, behold your son." Fuck the ad, fuck the people who made those billboards, and fuck the anti-female and anti-choice agenda that came up with both.

[Hepburn]

281. ...

...:applause:

[darkstar3]

290. Gosh,

never thought I'd get applause for my repeated "fuck"ery...:)

Gratzi...

of COURSE it's a fucking "son"...'cause we all know daughters are easier to abort..."say it loudly, and proudly! FUCK YOU!"

[redqueen]

299. Well said.

:applause:

[defendandprotect]

283. The real "perfect world" ad goes like this . . . VASECTOMY .. .

Man sitting in car -- camera focused on his crotch . . .

I've made the best possible choice for HER . . . a vasectomy!" ---



Now THAT would actually lessen need for abortions!!

[CTyankee]

294. But...but...every sperm is sacred! Didn't you know that? nt

[muffin1]

295. Thank you!

Brilliant. I was thinking of posting something similar yesterday, but it never came to fruition.

Males on DU collectively hold their crotches...

:rofl:

[Scout]

296. why do you hate men?

:sarcasm:

you're trying to deny them their god given right to spread their seed! :rofl:

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

309. Yeah, because every woman loves a man who can't make babies

They rank somewhere between serial killers and guys with comb overs and halitosis.

[mzteris]

311. just had an idea -

no one gets a scrip for Viagra unless they've had a vasectomy. . .

[Mushroom]

291. It's an anti-abortion commercial

from the cradle (uterus) to "a" family car. Best possible option for him? Who knows.

I don't believe these half-assed commercials are produced to "educate" second-class citizens on the options of staying pregnant or for that newfangled thing called adoption. Who the heck doesn't know about staying pregnant or about adoption? And isn't it strange that misogynists stop short of calling adoption "child abandonment" especially by those folks who believe that forced motherhood is punishment for having sex. I still don't understand why abstinence/natural family planning isn't considered an abortifacient act if the act interrupts the development of life. If the egg and sperm from two developed human beings hold the key to life, then it would stand to reason not engaging in wild animal sex all the time is pure evil.

:hippie:

[NaturalHigh]

301. I can't imagine any reasonable person having a problem with this.

Then again, there are plenty of unreasonable people in this debate. I honestly think that some people are offended if any option besides abortion is offered.

[defendandprotect]

302. We are offended by "fanatical fetus fantasy" which ignores the woman and her life . . .

her actual established life -- perhaps even as mother to other living children.



"Anything which will enable women to live for themselves first has been

attacked as immoral." -- Margaret Sanger

[NaturalHigh]

304. Yours is one of the most bizarre posts I have ever read.

Did that commercial even come close to advocating taking away the "choice" of abortion? Not at all.

Like most of the "pro-choice" crowd, you seem to be okay with the choice only as long as that choice is abortion. As far as free speech goes, you're only in favor of that if the speech agrees with your point of view.

I don't even know who Margaret Sanger is, so that little tidbit of propaganda is lost on me.

[defendandprotect]

330. Evidently, you're used to not questioning ads where females are dismissed

and found inconsequential --

That's what "fanatical fetus fantasy" does -- disrespects females.

This ad focues not on a living female, but on the "fantasy" -- i.e., her womb with a fetus.

No information is offered as to her circumstances -- we are simply TOLD that "this is the best

outcome for HIM" --

It's manipulative and its intent is to produce guilt in any woman considering an abortion.

The number of abortions doesn't change whether abortion is legal or illegal -- the percentages

remain the same.

The only question is, will society permit women's established lives to be jeopardized by

making abortion illegal, or will they seek to protect women by keeping abortion legal.

That's the only question . . .

Again -- if you're not aware of this . . . . of 1200 pregnancies, half will be unintended.

Of those 600 unwanted pregnancies, half of those -- 300 -- will go to term and the other

300 will be aborted. If we had more user friendly, 100% effective contraception, those

300 pregnancies that go to term every year would be lost. THAT's what concerns patriarchy

and those who love cheap labor.

Needless to say, those involved with anti-abortion wars are also generally anti-birth control.

Also anti-sex education. Anti-contraception research. Anti-giving youth any information re

normal human sexuality.

There is one way to more surely limit abortions -- encourage males to have VASECTOMIES --

in fact, let's have government pay for them!

Overpopulation is a taboo subject in America -- we're reaching 7 billion on the earth now --

and Global Warming is a threat to all of us.


I'd offer that this looks like bragging about being ignorant . . .

I don't even know who Margaret Sanger is, so that little tidbit of propaganda is lost on me.

but you might not get that, either. Margaret Sanger helped bring an end to the enslavement of

women to childbearing in America -- with birth control information/products.

Nor do you have to know who Margaret Sanger was in order to understand the point of the quote.

[Ignis]

312. "I honestly think that some people are offended if..."

I find it interesting that you'd point out this hypothetical hysterical position, yet completely ignore the very real position that is held by many anti-choicers in the US, who are very offended by the fact that any option besides carrying the fetus to term is offered.

[NaturalHigh]

313. Both positions are very real.

Many of the replies to this post are indicative of the first position. I, for one, would find it refreshing if they would just come out and say that they not really "pro-choice" so much as pro-abortion.

[Ignis]

314. Please cite examples to support your claim.

I haven't seen a single post in this thread that bemoans the availability of adoption as an option for unwanted pregnancies.

[NaturalHigh]

315. Did I mention they won't come out and say it?

You are being intentionally obtuse. All the talk about how this ad is offensive because it (1) doesn't advocate abortion as the best choice or (2) doesn't talk about how difficult pregnancy can be for the mother are doing their best to advocate for abortion.

BTW, even though I do not advocate banning abortion, I do believe that abortion is wrong, and I don't apologize for that. At least I am willing to plainly state my position. Yes, I am of the male gender, so I know that I'm not supposed to have an opinion on the subject (unless I am enthusiastically for abortion, of course), but I still go in for the whole free speech thing.

[Ignis]

316. Ah, so it's "Support by Crystal Ball." Got it.

It should be easy to find support for item (1) upthread, shouldn't it? :shrug:

[Name removed]

317. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

335. Might some of us be thinking that "you won't come out and say it" . . .?

You sound more like a "pro-lifer" pretending to be pro-choice . . .

I think we all recognize that --

The ad is offensive because it dismisses the female -- concentrates on her stomach!

Ignores complicated circumstances which impact women's decisions re gestation vs abortion!

Why do you believe that "abortion is wrong" . . . could you be wrong?

How do you feel about vasectomies as a solution to the need for abortion?

Sex education?

What about homosexuals as adoptive parents?

You may be a male who believes in the "free speech thing" but if you're honest about it you

will admit that many males are involved in the murderous "pro-life" movement -- killing doctors --

and that women are dependent upon a male-dominated Congress and Supreme Court not to make

abortion illegal -- and that women do not have a sufficiency of representation to protect their

their right to abortion, though they are the majority of the population.

[NaturalHigh]

358. I am pro-life, and though I think abortion is wrong...

I don't advocate making it illegal. As for abortion doctors, I think all killing is wrong. The guy in Wichita (can't remember the name) who killed an abortion doctor is doing life without parole, as he should be. All pro-lifers can't be lumped together, just as all pro-choicers can't. Plenty of us fall into both categories.

[defendandprotect]

333. Many have made clear, however, that for children of color, especially . . .

and for those in foster homes -- it is not the joy suggested in the ad.

Further, in some states, homosexuals are barred from adopting children!

Thereby eliminating perfectly suitable parents -- highly desirable parents --

for children who need homes!

[defendandprotect]

332. No one is "pro-abortion" . . . certainly no woman I've ever spoken with . . .

Why would anyone want to waste their time seeking an abortion or going thru it --

or paying for it -- if they could rely on 100% effective/user-friendly birth control???

Do you somehow imagine that women enjoy having abortions?

Maybe you actually buy the right wing position that late term abortions happen because

women wake up one day, 6-7 months pregnant and they're just in the MOOD for an abortion???

Late term abortions are heavily supervised -- specifically because of the dangers to the

health/live of the woman!

The later the abortion, the more serious the effects of an abortion on the female.

Additionally, late term abortions are done for very serious conditions -- either the

pregnancy is creating a dangerous situation for the female -- or there are serious problems

with the fetus. The numbers of these abortions are very low -- about one in every county of

the US every year!

[defendandprotect]

331. Right -- "pro-life" ads get show . . . "pro-choice" ads don't -- !!

[walldude]

305. LMFAO... when you grow a womb call again...

How can you make an informed decision on an issue where you can't possibly be properly informed?

I say remove all men from the abortion debate. The only time they should get any kind of say at all is if they are the father.

[NaturalHigh]

307. Typical "pro-choice" rant.

Men aren't allowed to express any opinion, but they are expected to get out and march and vote for abortion rights and donate to abortion groups. It stinks of hypocrisy.

Nice to see that you're so high on free speech. :puke:

[Mushroom]

320. Typical "pro-life" mistrust of women.

"Conceit is God's gift to little men." Bruce Barton

[NaturalHigh]

321. How is having an opinion mistrust of women...

particularly when men are expected to donate money to and vote for "pro-choice" causes? Money and votes have to be earned.

BTW, my wife, my mother, and pretty much every woman in my family are much more pro-life (anti-abortion if you like) than I am, and I trust them completely.

[defendandprotect]

336. Because lack of support for CHOICE is based on mistrust of women and their

right to make their own decisions -

The point is that your wife, mother and every other woman in your family are FREE to

make their own CHOICE -- and free to act in self-defense should something go wrong in

a late term abortion

Would you take the right to "self-defense" away from women because the attacker may be a fetus?

CHOICE gives EVERYONE the option to decide what they want to do with their own bodies.

The "pro-life" position seeks to deny them that right in seeking to make abortion illegal.

[NaturalHigh]

357. I haven't advocated taking away anyone's "choice".

I would just like everyone to realize that other choices are available and that abortion may not be the right choice. Also, there are plenty of pro-life people who think abortion is wrong but don't advocate making abortion illegal.

[Mushroom]

360. Suppose

a pro-choice cause lowers abortion rates? Would you donate money then?

I have a pro-reality husband and if he got pregnant he would think about these issues after I revived him:

1. His health
2. Could he work and maintain a home/land while pregnant and puking or worse
3. Is he psychologically able to handle pregnancy and fatherhood
4. The cost of pregnancy and fatherhood
5. Monthly doctor visits
6. His sex life
7. Giving up coffee. That would be number 1 in all honesty, number 2. sex
8. Oh yeah, giving birth - he won't enjoy that part at all
9. Does his butt look wide
10. Constipation/hemorrhoids/gas. Forget the gas. He could handle that. I wouldn't be able to.

According to the male pro-life translation of freedom of speech, you have the right to advise my husband that The Cradle adoption agency could be his "best 'possible' option." Good luck with that. After I revive you, you won't ever tell a scared fat man again that money and votes have to be earned.

:rofl:

[SnakeEyes]

318. When you become president, call again

I don't see how you can possibly criticize the president when you've never been president. You just don't understand.

How can you criticize the Supreme Court when you are not a judge or taken a Constitutional Law class?

How can you talk about gun control when you've never owned a gun?

etc etc etc

Seriously, the argument made by you and others is one of the worst. It reeks of a lack of thinking and a lack of acknowledgment that education exists and that one doesn't need personal experience to have an informed and reasoned opinion.

[ScreamingMeemie]

328. Yes, because being a judge, president, gunowner changes your

life financially and emotionally over long periods of time. Because these careers and hobbies are exactly like working two jobs to support a child, not being able to insure them or clothe them, or be responsible for them... I would go on, but there isn't a need to.

[defendandprotect]

338. The difference with pregnancy, is that no male will ever be pregnant . . .

It is also an issue of patriarchy and the desire to hold control over reproduction

and therefore women.

In this case you do need to be female and have a womb to qualify to make the decision ---

Opinions -- no problem.

But, it is simply opinion.

Many women have gone from the "pro-life" demonstrations to seeking abortions when it happens

to them!

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

306. I don't believe in getting all worked up......

.....about a hypothetical woman in a fictional commercial.

[ScreamingMeemie]

327. If it was a diaper ad, I'd agree. A piece of propaganda? I think people

have reason to get "all worked up". :hi:

[defendandprotect]

339. It's a teaching/learning moment at DU -- not fun, but necessary . . .

[mzteris]

310. was she black?

I used to think all anti-abortionists should be required to adopt, until I decided I didn't want their hatefests being perpetuated. . .


(Spoken as a former foster, and current adoptive, mom...)



(edit spelling cause the madder I get, usually the worse I spell.)

[LuckyTheDog]

319. I have no problem with 'pro-lifers' pushing adoption..

... or even suggesting that it's the "best choice" ... just so long as they don't call for making abortion illegal.

Here is what I tell people all the time: I am thankful every single day that my son’s birth mother did not choose abortion. But is she had, I would not have wanted her to be thrown in prison because of that.

Abortion should be safe, legal and available.

If abortion also were to become rare, that would be great – assuming the change resulted from more women freely making other choices, and not from making abortion services unavailable.

[NaturalHigh]

322. +1

:thumbsup:

[ScreamingMeemie]

324. "But I've chosen the best possible option for him, a family". Perhaps if she had said "for me"

instead of "for him", I could see your point.

I know a lot of people, myself included, who often say, "I am against abortion...for myself".

[JanMichael]

337. Does it say anything about the woman having a pregnancy rider

on her insurance?

[WinkyDink]

342. Anti-choice. NOBODY is "pro-death", which would be the opposite of your term.