16 February 2012

truly

3 comments:

Corin said...

I've read your blog for at least a few years and have loved all your informative and passionate posts. I do however, have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. And I know my view of abortion (I am Pro Life) is the "unpopular" one, but someone must speak for those who can not.

I felt I had to comment on this particular post, because this slogan, to me, makes no sense used from a pro abortion stand point. I understand what it is intended to mean; the woman's body, the woman's choice (which one could argue the choice was already made when conception occured in most cases) yet, what is really obvious to me, is...what about the child's body??? So, that is not your body.... it is his or hers, so how is it your choice to take the life of that person??? "If it's not your body, it's not your choice." What is wrong with respecting the life of an innocent human, giving him or her up for adoption and letting that person decide what they want to do with their life? Isn't that everyone's right, the right to live???

Again, I love your blog and have loved being a reader. And I honestly don't have the intention of getting into an abortion argument, but since you posted it, I felt I should comment.

DoulaMomma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DoulaMomma said...

re-posting to fix typos:

Corin,
I completely understand your position and appreciate your thoughtful response (and readership still! ;-)

When I posted this, it was actually concerning all the stuff going on regarding birth control access- Rick Santorum saying it's "harmful to women", panels of religious leaders - ALL MEN - being assembled to debate access to birth control...but in reality, it's all part of the same big picture, I suppose. One thing though: I'm not pro-abortion and I hate the implication that people who are pro choice are promoting abortion...I do think it's fair to say "anti-abortion/choice" rather than "pro-life"...I'm all for life, but my idea of pro-life included people choosing their own paths and I'm against someone deciding what happens to a woman's body based on their religious beliefs. I have many friends who are parents because of adoption and the fact that another woman did not have an abortion...I celebrate that. I have other friends who were able to legally end pregnancies where the baby they were carrying and very much wanted had issues not compatible with life and the baby, if born at all, would have experienced great pain & I'm grateful for the mercy these families felt from this. I have had clients say if anything happens, save the baby and others who have felt the exact opposite for religious reasons (a life already here trumps one that is not yet fully here, according to some)...I honestly see both sides. The legal definition of life is not at conception, but rather viability...that's when the fetus legally becomes a baby. I get that that's a huge issue for religious folks...but it's the current legal standard, leaving morals to the individual, as I think is the only workable standard in a democracy. The fact that I have not ever had an abortion and am not sure that I would be able to go through with one (I've been lucky never to have to make that decision) is not really relevant to whether someone else should have access. I don't believe in abortion as a means of birth control; and though I try not to judge, I do feel judgmental when I hear instances of people having done so...but I would fight for their right to have access...because their body is not my body. And I would fight against someone being given an abortion they did not want...To me, it's not dissimilar to women having access to pain meds (that some say could be detrimental to the baby) or cesareans that are not medically necessary - I'm not in their body or their life, so who am I to judge.
I understand your position and appreciate it and your eloquence, even if I disagree. I'm honored that you opted to share your position here.

best,
Kim