Pro - Life and GLBT

[Sharone]

Hi, all. I haven't posted in a while, but wanted to find out what folks think of the concept that abortion is violence against children and that, if we continue down the path we are treading as a nation, we will come to the time when people choose to abort babies because they are glbt. It will happen if we don't start having an outcry against the practice of allowing abortions in all 9 months of pregnancy for any reason at all.
I am a member of the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians. We are part of a network of groups called Consistent Life. We believe wholeheartedly that abortion and euthanasia are not compassionate or pro-woman or pro-child. They are violent acts.
So, now that I've OUTED myself as a rabid pro-lifer, what do you all think?
Sharone

[scott snedeker]

From a physician's point of view a pro-life legislation restricts clinical decision-making by uninvolved non health-professionals. This to me seems utterly flawed.

Let's take another medical decision: Heart attacks

Let's say a prominent political figure puts into law that all heart attacks must be treated with the clot-buster medicine. Now some heart attacks are not threatening enough to exceed the risk of using the clot buster. You will end up killing more patients than you save in small heart attacks in elderly patients. The clot buster commonly causes fatal brain hemorrages in the elderly. Clearly politicians have no place in this decision process.

Pregnancy management is an individual case by case decision. I myself have participated in a theraputic abortion in a leukemia patient on chemotherapy. The fetus would have no chance to survive and the mother hemorrage to death if we had not performed the abortion.

I do however strongly feel that elective abortions should have well adhered guidelines with regard to how many weeks, medical condition, and other issues. I believe that this should be standards set by the American Board of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, with criteria to be met and disciplinary action to those Obstetricians who don't follow the criteria and review by the Board. I myself review other cases by physicians in Internal Medicine.

Education is also key in preventing an endpoint that I also am uncomfortable seeing: late term abortions.

The "morning after pill" for instance (a high dose estrogen) reduces the risk of conception to 1 in 400 if taken within 24 hours after intercourse. If this were generally known and available at the seven-eleven ( in England it is available without a prescription) It would be merely a matter of post coital contraception. "Oops hot date last night! I'd better pick it up on the way to work"

My objection to blanket rules is that they cannot address each circumstance And i suspect come from "knee-jerk" reaction to fear.

[scorpiogirl]

As a feminist I have a bias towards this debate. I am Pro-Choice, not Pro-abortion as some take to calling it. I don't believe in getting an abortion just for the hell of it, but I do feel that it should be there for those that need it. Some women are put in situations out of their control (rape, incest) where the added burden of carrying a child out of that horrible situation can be all the more traumatizing and can cause damage to both the woman and the child. Also medical conditions can make an abortion necessary. Just my two cents.

[tpdncr4christ]

I would never recomend an abortion. I do not agree with abortion. I do not support it, I do not believe it to be the right option in any situation.

However, I don't believe the government has any right to restrict women from such a procedure. I don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean I have the right to deny it to others. I frown on it, but I will not say its illegal. If it must be done, do it. But don't do it unless you have too... Yeah, that's what I believe. <3

[Zerbie]

Too much grey area. That's why I always come down pro-choice in the end.

Abortion is a horrible thing. But there ARE circumstances where carrying a conceived fetus to term would be even *more* horrible.

I agree with some kind of reasonable restrictions on late term abortions. That should be only if the child, mother, or both are suddenly found to be in life-threatening condition.

Too much goes on though, in the way of rape, incest, and unforeseen circumstances. Life falls short of ideals. 12 year old girls get pregnant by their fathers - force them to carry their own siblings in their womb? Explain to a child that dad is also grandad?

[Pablo Rafael]

Sharone,

I am a strong believer in the idea that all people deserve a chance at life and that abortion takes away the most fundamental right of all - the right to live.

I believe firmly in the idea that each person needs to take responsibility for his/her actions. I am opposed to the idea of abortion as birth control. I do not oppose abortion when it is medically necessary or in the case of rape, etc. In those cases my personal opinion is that it might be the lesser of two evils. What I feel needs to be lessened is the use of abortion as birth control.

Saying this I do not think that making abortion illegal in the United States will happen. What I would like to see are programs to lessen the number of abortions. We need education programs that stress responsibility, abstinance and use of birth control. It is scientifically documented that abstainance-only programs don't work; abstainance and birth control education does. We need programs that support young mothers and encourage adoptions. I get annoyed with politicians that say they are opposed to abortion but do nothing to lessen its use. It is ironic that during the Clinton administration the number of abortions declined significantly while during the Bush administration some statistics suggest an increase.

Also I have to think that the Catholic church (my church) has an illogical position of opposing birth control and abortion at the same time. The ABC approach is a more reasonable approach.

Tu Amigo, Pablo

[dsdrane]

That's what President Clinton said, and that's what I believe.

I've marched in Washington for those words, and I'd do it again, if necessary.

David

[pnggrad79]

Perhaps my view is a bit jaded and cynical (something I fight against daily, but am afraid I am losing the battle), however, I am personally pro-life. Personally, if I ever was faced with the choice, I would not choose abortion as a solution to my problem. The flipside of that coin is this-I am a teacher and throughout my 20 years in the classroom, I have seen hundreds of children who parents neglect, abuse or mistreat them. Among those hundreds of children are the parents who are sporadically in jail, on drugs, have alcohol issues, involved in spousal abuse, or who just take a hike on their kids and never see them again. In short, there are some people in this world who should have never had children. In my mind, if you can't feed them, take care of them, aren't going to give a flying flip about them, then DON'T BLESS US WITH YOUR MESS! More times than I care to count, I want to say to some of these parents, "What made you think this was a good idea?" I don't say it, but I would like to.

I am pro-life generally, but there are some people who have no business having children.

Pardon me for my cynical, jaded slant on this.

[novaseeker]

I'm pro-life and pro-choice at the same time when it comes to abortion. That is, while I do think that the choice to have an abortion is, in many cases, a bad choice and a wrong one, nevertheless I don't think it's right for the state to preclude people from making their own choices on this issue. So, for me, when it comes to the state action part of this, I am pro-choice in that I think the state should stay out of these decisions. But given the freedom to make the decision, I am very pro-life, and think that people should generally make the life-giving choice when it comes to abortion choices.

By the way, I also don't view pro-life as being simply about abortion. I am also against the death penalty for similar reasons, and generally opposed to deadly violence for similar reasons. There are many kinds of life out there that need protection, not only unborn life.

[suzer1013]

Ummm -- what Novaseeker (and others) said.

I am anti-abortion, but still cling to a pro-choice stance because I don't believe that anyone, especially government, should be able to control a woman's body or choices in that way. I think abortion is awful, and I do think it is taking a human life, at whatever stage it is done. I have less of a problem with a morning after pill type thing, but I still believe that the embryo is a human life, despite its early stage of development, and should be sacred.

I don't like the term "pro-life" because of what it has come to be associated with (similarly, I sometimes don't want to call myself a Christian). Clinic protests and harassing women at a very fragile and emotionally wrought time, killing doctors and bombing clinics doesn't sit well with me. I feel the "pro-life" movement has made a bad name for itself.

On the other hand, I also know of too many stories and instances of women getting abortions as birth control -- it makes me ill.

What I believe needs to be done is that we all (whether we call ourselves pro-life or pro-choice) need to work on alleviating the REASONS women choose abortion. We need to provide adequate parenting classes in high school, we need to make sure child care is available for mothers (and fathers) who need to work, we need to address poverty and lack of education, we need to provide teenagers with birth control resources should they choose to have sex (I hate, hate, hate the idea of teens having sex, but I know they will go ahead and do it no matter what I think), etc., etc., etc. I wish there were some way we could root out the abuses of the right to have an abortion -- perhaps limit the number of elective abortions (where there is no medically necessary reason). But there is a fine line -- placing limits can also lead to problems. This is not a black and white issue, and I wish both sides would stop treating it as if we can either have unlimited access or no access -- it just isn't that simple.

I don't know the solution, but I do know it is a choice I would never make for myself, and if I knew anyone contemplating it, I would do everything in my power to help that woman choose to keep the baby or give it for adoption.

[Lydia]

Originally Posted by suzer1013

On the other hand, I also know of too many stories and instances of women getting abortions as birth control

That's odd - all of the people I've known personally who have had abortions picked that option for reasons like:

1) They had a medical condition that could make carrying to term dangerous (not impossible, of course. But it carried more health risks than they were able to deal with.)

2) Other forms of bc failed unexpectantly,

3) and/or they didn't have the financial or social support necessary to make carrying to term an option in their minds.

Interesting.

I do agree with what others have said about the necessity of more education and support.

I'd like to think that I'd never have an abortion, but I've never been pregnant and desperate (or even just pregnant ). I can't imagine what it's like, especially if one's situation is complicated by an abusive relationship or lack of money or the fear of being "kicked out" of one's family.

[nmwolfboy]

The position that Novaseeker articulated is real close to mine on this issue.

In addition i strongly support reproductive freedom & access to education and birth control. While i am both pro-choice and pro-life, I've taken a stand many times in support of Roe v. Wade, mainly because I've read the testimonies of medical providers who were around both before & after the decision and saw the immediate impact. From what i've read it was routine before RvW to see severly ill and dying women in Emergency Rooms as a result of illegal abortions, but after RvW that dramatically changed. I'd hate to see us return to those earlier days.

Safe, legal & rare.

[Blossom]

Wow, guys, this thread has been a (pleasant) shock. I didn't expect so many here to have views on abortion nearly this close to mine. I am pro-life, and feel the tension between the need for a tiny number of abortions to be performed to save the mother's life and the fact that the vast majority of abortions are a form of birth control. And yes, I do recognize the tragic cases and will continue to consider those in light of my view of life.

What really gets to me is when people call the unborn child a "fetus". What this becomes is the name game--call it a "baby" if you want it, a "fetus" if you don't. This fails to value life because it is, simply, life, and only values life if others value that life. Dangerous--for the aged, the sick, the deformed. Most every culture, I recently heard, believes that murdering another human is wrong--the difference between each culture is who they view as "human". In our culture, one is only alive and human if they are wanted.

[Sharone]

I am surprised too, Blossom.

I will answer a few things I've seen in the responses that I feel need to be addressed, but alas I don't have time to address everyone by name.

First of all, the actual percentage of abortions that are performed for reasons such as rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother is about 2%

That being the case, I really feel that our nation has gotten to the point where abortion is used as a form of birth control. I don't believe most women are cavalier about it or don't care. I just think that many have bought the line that abortion is legal, safe, simple and their "right".
I don't agree, obviously.

I find it fascinating that the pro-choicers have been able to use language over the years since Roe v. Wade that have caught on with the masses to the extent that a lot of women and men use them constantly. Phrases like reproductive choice are used when I speak to others about my pro-life stance. It might seem harsh to some, but I really think there are so many choices in birth control nowadays that personal responsibility HAS to be emphasized more. Abortion is a surgical procedure. There are many women who have been physically maimed or died as a result of "safe, legal" abortion.

Now, I'm not a medical professional and would never claim to be, but I have had friends who had abortions and I've seen the changes in them as a result. I have seen what it does to them. I absolutely feel that women need more education before they make this kind of decision, but there is such a divide between factions that getting both sides of the equation is unlikely. Clinics tell women how their perspective is and that's natural. Pro-life pregnancy centers are going to tell women about the risks and other options and that's natural. In a society that I'd love to see, a woman would get ALL of the information available and then could make an informed decision.

I'd just like to throw this out there for you all. PLAGAL's website has several informative pamphlets in PDF format that really help you understand how this issue affects the GLBT community and all of us at large. If you're interested in reading these, go to www.plagal.org.

I am a lesbian, so this issue doesn't affect me the way it would a bi or hetero woman, but it affects me just the same. I have nieces and nephews and want them to understand the repercussions of their actions.

Also, since many of us have a faith base here, the Bible is pretty clear on the issue of the preciousness of life. (Not clear like they say it's clear about homosexuality!!!! It really speaks to this issue.)

Thanks for all your responses, all. Hope I have given you some things to think about. You certainly have given me some food for thought.

[dsdrane]

But, I'm not gonna do it..wouldn't be prudent at this juncture.

I think the purpose of this thread was -- or at least should be -- expressing opinions about the "Pro-Life and GLBT" combo (or lack thereof) to get an idea of what's out there.

What it is quickly becoming is a debate on abortion, something that I'm sure could be carried on in any number of other venues ad nauseum.

I almost got caught up in it...but, folks, I'm walking away.

You Hatfield and McCoys have fun now, y'hear!

David

[Sharone]

Actually, David, if you're still listening, this is about all of that. As a lesbian, I am appauled that, in the not-too-distant future, people would be able to choose to have a baby or not based on it's sexual orientation! It's going to be another way to get rid of us. It probably sounds Orwellian, but when a "gay gene" is found, I know that I know there will be amnio testing to find out if a baby has it before they continue with the pregnancy.
Why aren't more of us speaking out? Because we have decided that a woman's "right to choose" is the same as privacy rights. It's not, in my humble opinion.

[Jamie McDaniel]

I was wondering when we would have a discussion on abortion. I just returned from the store and noticed a bumper sticker which read "You can't be both Catholic and for abortion." It made me think of this thread.

My background as a Southern Baptist shaped my early views. When I was in college, I posted a statement questioning the moral character of anyone who would consider an abortion. Five years later when I first came out, I hesitated to vote for some gay-friendly politicians because of their pro-choice position. However, I have since rethought my own position and also attempted to gauge how deeply the pro-life rhetoric affects those who spent so much time in conservative churches.

I am firmly against the death penalty and I'm also vegetarian. So naturally I'm going to be "pro-life." However, I've been searching for a way to express my feeling that stopping the pregnancy process very early on is not the same thing as killing a baby. So I really like how some of you said you were both pro-life and pro-choice (albeit with an explanation given. Hard to fit on a bumper sticker.) At first I wondered if that was similar doubletalk as some politicians stating "I'm against discrimination and I'm also against gay marriage."

I've concluded it isn't. I'm sorry, I just have problems accepting that a sperm and an egg does an ensouled human being make, although that was what I was taught, that life begins at conception. I do appreciate the scripture about how God knew us before we were knit in the womb. However we don't look at a string of yarn and call it a quilt.

At the same time, however, I have serious concerns about abortions performed after the first trimester (after a good start at knitting, if you will.) I can't accept that a late-term abortion is the same as any other surgery a woman might undergo.

So for the past several years I've been torn on abortion and I'd like to figure it out. I've also wondered how my being a gay man (I'll never impregnate someone accidentally) potentially affects my thinking on facing an unplanned pregnancy. (I see Sharone discussed this a bit from a lesbian point of view.) And I also want to consider that my being male (I'll never have to host another human being in my own body and have it emerge after nine months) might also affect my view a bit. (I really appreciated Lydia's three reasons from above.)

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

The "morning after pill" for instance (a high dose estrogen) reduces the risk of conception to 1 in 400 if taken within 24 hours after intercourse. If this were generally known and available at the seven-eleven ( in England it is available without a prescription) It would be merely a matter of post coital contraception. "Oops hot date last night! I'd better pick it up on the way to work"

I'm thinking this, along with sex education and condom machines at schools, would be the best solution to sharply reduce abortions (which we all agree we want to do.) If you disagree or have concerns about this approach, I'd be interested in hearing some reasons. Do we currently not stress the rare part enough of "safe, legal, and rare"?

[dsdrane]

Originally Posted by Sharone

It probably sounds Orwellian, but when a "gay gene" is found, I know that I know there will be amnio testing to find out if a baby has it before they continue with the pregnancy.

And this, my friends, will be the most exquisite dilemma for many if not most of the Right-to-Lifers out there.

Quel ironique, non?

Now I'm really going.

[suzer1013]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Wow, guys, this thread has been a (pleasant) shock. I didn't expect so many here to have views on abortion nearly this close to mine.

Blossom, I imagine you will find that GLBTQ opinions on this issue are as wide-ranging and varied as hetero opinions.

Also, regarding the specific question of genetic testing to determine any abortion decision (whether it be to abort a potentially GLBTQ child or otherwise), that smacks a bit too much of eugenics to me and of course personally from a lesbian standpoint is frightening.

I used to feel differently about this issue (used to be 100% abortion on demand), but as I've gotten older and known more women who have had abortions, and their reasons for so doing, I've had to rethink my position. I always assumed abortion would be a last resort for women, but found that was not always true -- among the women I've known who have had abortions, it was almost always a matter of convenience. I also did some research of my own on fetal development, and you'd be surprised how quickly "human" an embryo becomes. Part of this is also colored, to be honest, by my own desire to have a child and that I could never imagine not considering the moment of conception forward as being anything other than "my baby." I probably will never have children of my own (getting a bit old, I'm afraid!), but that doesn't mean the desire is not still there.

I hope my above comments were not taken as too critical of women who have chosen to have an abortion -- many women have abortions for what might be very valid reasons at the time, and I don't wish to heap judgment on anyone (as a lesbian, I've gotten enough of that myself). I just wish that abortion would be, as David and Jamie have iterated, much more "rare" than it is now. In fact, I wish it were almost nonexistently rare, but I know it's not a perfect world. I also think too much emphasis has been placed on the woman's decision, when the man also has (obviously) a huge responsibility in an unplanned pregnancy, too.

[Sharone]

Hi, Jamie.
One thing...the morning after pill has side effects that can be worse than an abortion for the woman! I'm sure our doctor friend could attest to that. Many feel it's the best thing since sliced bread, but as will all medications with powerful hormones, it can be a nightmare instead of a miracle "cure" to unplanned pregnancy.