What makes abortion, and your "pro life" position "political" is the insistence that the issue must be legislated and made illegal, based on a one-size-fits-all moral ideology.
I do not see how you could be a feminist while advocating for the right of patriachal institutions like government and religion to step in and decide for women en masse what the best and most ethical course of action is for each individual woman's life, health, happiness and, for that matter, their existing children (who are also vulnerable members of society).
I also do not see how someone with a "bleeding heart" could fail to muster enough empathy for other women, in an extremely difficult position, to at least be afforded the automony to choose what is right and moral for themselves based on their unique and often complicated circumstances. Some women are raped and must be allowed to decide for themselves if they have the strength to carry that reminder to term, and in many states, co-parent with their rapist. Some women have health issues where it is not safe for them to carry a fetus to term. Those women must be allowed to consult with their physicians and decide based on their condition whether the risk is too great, or if the result will likely be a miscarriage putting the woman at risk unecessarily. Late-term abortions are incredibly rare, particularly when "pro life" laws have not been enacted to impede timely access to an early medically induced miscarriage of a fertilized egg the size of a pea. Often, late-term abortions are due to tragic complications in treasured and wanted pregnancies. The law must allow for such women to make the only decision they will ever get to make as a mother for the child that will never be. The situational complexities possible for all current and future women is infinite.
There is no way to legislate every possible scenerio so that each outcome is moral and righteous in the opinion of all. But by NOT legislating the matter, and allowing women to make their own personal choice, then each outcome will be moral and right in the opinion of the best person - really, the only person, suited to make that decision.
Ok I get it your pro choice. I recently read an article where at the Children's hospital I think in PA that they have came up with a way to mimic the mother's womb. Actually created a artificial womb for extremely premature fetuses. They have sucessfully tested it on animals already. So my question to you, would you still agree with abortion, killing the baby, when a similar procedure could be done to transplant the fetus Into an artificial womb, and allow the child to live. What would your defense of abortion be then? I I can't afford the baby, i'd rather it be dead? If I am not willing, ready, or capable of being a mother, I would rob another woman and my child of the opportunity. I was raped so I will kill the jerks baby? My baby has Down Syndrome, it shouldn't be allowed to live? Most abortions are performed on healthy women and babies. To say otherwise is extremely false. If you say yes I think a woman should be allowed to kill her child than to allow it to live for no other reason than I want a dead baby, what does that say about you.
Oh Teresa: When everyone has access to the artificial womb and the world is full of wonderful capable parents who decide to adopt these babies (instead of using the technology to incubate their own children) we can revisit the subject. But for now, if you are raped, you are welcome to carry the jerk's child to term. If you find out that a baby you are carrying has Down's Syndrome and you think that you can provide for his or her care during your lifetime as well as after, you are welcome to do so. See where this is going? Be pro-YOUR life, that's the only life you're qualified to make choices about.
There is no moral rationale for eternity for a murderer. If you take a life that cannot protect itself, than you will be not protected by Christ when it comes to that sin. Christ Himself has said there is no salvation for a murderer, and a murderer is one whom takes life when the person is unawares, unable to protect itself.
"I'm a Bleeding-Heart Feminist. I'm Also Pro-Life. Why Is There No Room for Me in the Democratic Party?"
Because Feminism is a HATE GROUP and you're getting a little taste of the hate that Feminists have focused on Men for the last 150 years.
first-there IS room for you. has anyone tried to stop you from registering as a democrat and voting for a democrat you think will best represent you? Second of all-Feminism is not about being a bleeding heart. its about believing the sexes are or at least should be equal-socially, economically, politically. I think being a Democrat is a perfect fit for pro-life individuals too-if they truly are. Economic equality, sex education and access to resources bring down abortion rates. Simply making it illegal and demonizing people who seek it is not the answer. Yes, there can be reasonable restriction but women have been inducing abortions forever-making it illegal simply bc you disagree with it will only cause it to be done in unsafe manner and allow women to be taken advantage of by people who know they are desperate.
If you want to be a pro-life democrat BE one and don't worry about what Tom Perez has to say about it.
I also am a Pro-life Feminist because I believe ALL women (and all humans) should have a right to their own bodies, their own lives--- including those in the womb. Those who aren't pro-life are fixated on the dogma of the extremists. We don't want to take away anyone's rights, we want to protect everyone's rights. Most of us are caring individuals who would happily help a pregnant woman in a crisis pregnancy and most of us see contraception as an answer to the terrible abortion crisis. But to say we are in this because we want to take away your rights over your body is insane. We are in this because we don't believe anyone has the right to end the life of a body unless it's their body. I doubt the developing human being killed in an abortion would choose to die rather than live. By taking away its right to live--- you're promoting violence, selfishness, and irresponsibility. We who are mothers cannot understand how another mother can "choose" to kill not only another developing human, but her own offspring. It's unthinkable to me and not for any religious or political issue, but just because it's wrong. And if you think the products of an abortion are just a glob of cells, you've been turning your back on science and have neglected to see the products of abortion photographed over and over. These are human developing babies being dismembered and hiding your head in the sand and refusing to know all you can about a subject you so fiercely support is wrong IMO.
Very well said Tracy. I don't personally agree with abortion but I do see that there is the rare circumstance where it might be necessary. So if abortion is going to be legal, then rational people should be able to agree that stringent standards be met for an abortion, such as no abortion should be legal after the first trimester except when the life of the mother is at stake and no taxpaper funds should ever be spent to pay for abortion procedures. I don't think these positions are outside of the scope of what rational people, Democrat or Republican, would agree with. However, when you are dealing with extremists or absolutists you are not dealing with rational people. One extreme wants abortion to be illegal under any and all circumstances and the other extreme wants absolutley no restrictions on abortion what-so-ever. If it were up to them you'd be able to abort a baby up to the time it starts pre-school. We need to ignore both of these extremes and define the point at which abortion is no longer an option. It would be ideal if science could stipulate precisely when a cluster of cells becomes a human being or becomes "conscious" or "self-aware". But a scientific determination cannot be made about something that is currently philosophical. Given that, we should use scientific data which can be defined to determine the point at which abortion is no longer allowed, for instance, the precise point at which a fetus can feel pain.
Because you want to force your belief on others. Don't want an abortion? Don't have one. But it's a fundamental part of the Democratic Party's platform to support women's rights. If you aren't a supporter of women's rights, then you are at odds on this specific issue with the Democratic Party. You can still vote D if you want, just be prepared to be told you are incorrect when talking to fellow D's about this particular issue.
There is only one instance in which you theory is appropriate and that would be if you don't adhere to your own moral code. If your moral code tells you that having an abortion is killing a human being but the Democratic Party says that it is not, then there is no room for you in the Democrat Party as she states. If you believe that abortion is murder that is not a platform which you can just hold your nose on, if your position is different, and still vote democrat. Abortion is not just another "issue" like government spending, energy independence or climate change that people can ethically ignore at the polls. Tom Perez, the leader of the Democrat Party, said point blank that there is no room in the Party for people who are pro-life. How can someone who is pro-life ethically advocate for or associate with an organization which 1) states that they do not belong in that organization and, more importantly 2) has no problem with murdering babies? Presuming that moral people each follow their own moral compass, then Tom Perez is 100% correct. There is no room for a pro-lifer in the Democrat Party.
According to God, no murderer can have salvation in the flesh, and Jesus reiterates this in the NT also. Murder is defined by God as being premeditated. Lieing in wait, rising up against him. The unborn are as vulnerable as the unprepared who are murderered for no rationale worthy of Justice. Thus, the murderer will face the Lord God and the soul whom they destroyed when they are sent to HIm. While in the flesh, they will not have the security of forgiveness from Christ. That does not mean you should not seek God's forgiveness, but in the flesh, you do not have that sacred protection from the second death given by Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Your destination is between you, your victim, and God.
Good luck with that. Those who support abortion see nothing wrong with killing innocent unborn babies. If they are willing to deny that right, they are willing to deny any right, including your free speech and free association rights.