As far as I'm concerned, the issue has nothing to do with the debate over whether a fetus is human (do people really question this?) or worthy of "personhood" status. It has everything to do with whether women should be allowed the same rights as men and have the final say over when and by whom their bodies are used.

Born people have no right to use another person's body against their will, even if they require it to survive. Why should the unborn have greater rights than the born and why should only one gender of our species be subjected to the unauthorized use of our bodies?

It's a human rights issue. It's also a slavery issue. Assigning lesser rights to women based on their biological makeup is simply discrimination against one gender. If men were the ones to incubate and birth offspring, my argument would still stand. You or I could accidentally (or even on purpose) run over a pedestrian or crash into someone else's car to tomorrow. We could be the direct cause of their need for blood, tissue or organ transplants but even convicted criminals proven guilty can't be forced by law to donate a SINGLE DROP of their heart's blood to save another...not even if they directly caused the need. Even if there were no other available matches other than the person responsible for the condition in the first place, the law would not legally force the "responsible" party to give over any bodily resources to keep the other party alive.

So my question concerning the validity of the prolife cause is why on earth these people believe that ONLY females should have their human rights curtailed for ONLY fetuses? When will men be forced to donate a few pints of blood to save their own offspring or spouses? Never. When will rapists be forced to undergo forced neutering? Never (unless vigilantes do it). When will the Pope be and the Vatican be called to task for excommunicating an innocent child rape victim and those who saved her health and life while ignoring the horrendous crime her rapist committed? Unless the church learns to respect the female half of their members, never. Abortion, even to save the life of a CHILD or preserve her health is a bigger sin to them than a grown man shoving her down and ravishing her!!!!

I find prolife "justice" sadly lacking and the assassination of Dr. Tiller is a fine example of how prolife tendencies devalue females as anything more than expendable breeding fodder and worship human fetuses above born humans.

I do commend you for being gracious and denouncing the act that was committed against the good doctor, though. You've made it on my tiny list of prolifers that don't encourage political terrorism. Congratulations, you're sane.

I'd like to add a quick apology to csleachy for my quite obvious anger and frustration. I really can't describe how infuriated it makes me when people treat unwanted pregnancy and abortion as a "convenience" issue. Even I, who holds a fair amount of disdain for the prolife movement, have been utterly shocked by the number of prolifers that are not only partying over Dr. Tiller's demise but are creating new topics about how evil he was and how much he deserved it.

My frustration is at an all-time maximum right now but I want you to know that I do appreciate prolifers like yourself that are not celebrating the death of Dr. Tiller.

Those may be the main two issues for you, but it's rather presumptuous to suggest that you have managed to coalesce the debate into two simply points upon which everyone would focus!

In fact, those whether the fetus is human or not is completely irrelevant to me. It could be human, animal, vegetable, mineral or divine -- and it would still be irrelevant. It could be the second coming of Jesus H. Christ, or the earthly manifestation of the flying spaghetti monster, but if Mary doesn't want to be the bearer of the next saviour then get that suction pump going.

Speaking of frustration i am also rather frustrated at the moment not with you personally but with the arguments you've presented.

Ok so your first argument is that its sexist and that somehow because women are the ones tasked by nature to bear children any restriction we place on that is somehow sexist. What would be sexist is if both males and females could bear children and only men were allowed abortions. But simply because women are the only ones who can bear children doesn't mean that every law passed about child birth is sexist it just means that it just happens to only effect them. I would be equally against abortion if men could have them because its still the same act, it is still homicide.

The problem with your world view is that you ONLY take into account the mother and forget the child. Lets take a rape for example. A heinous crime which leaves two innocent victims. The women who has been violated and her dignity stolen and the child who is now in the womb of a mother who didn't want it. Why should we give priority to the mother when the child is Completely innocent as well, the way you were talking its as if it deliberately latched on with the aim of being an inconvenience. The solution cannot be to favor one party over another. homicide is never a soloution.

Oh and by the way if you hit a person in your car or if you only see a person be hit you are expected to render assistance. You have a duty of care to your fellow man. N one is forced to give blood because its impractical. Abortion is a unique issue and cannot really be compered to other such incidents. The bottom line is this You have two victims, both of which need to be respected. Regardless of the circumstances, regardless of the persons gender to kill one for the convenience of the other is wrong.

If you have an issue which isn't covered by those to id be happy to discuss it. My main point was that those two cant be confused because their separate issues. And By the looks of your post i think you fit neatly into the second category anyway.

So nice to fit into one of your categories. I'm honoured.

Let's talk about that then, shall we?



No, I don't think it's sexist because it's "nature" anymore than I think that it's unfair that I have to spend an ungodly amount of money more than men to keep my knickers clean every month because of "nature". Let's clear this up, honey...my organs don't define me any more than they do you, savvy? I'm no more a womb than you are a walking penis. There is a function of an organ I happen to have that could result in little versions of me with bad DNA if I were stupid and careless enough to equate my worth as a female to how many sick little kids I pop out. By sick little kids I LITERALLY mean SICK, comprehend??? Are YOU going to take care of them? Didn't think so. Like most prolifers, you want us to breed mindlessly, regardless of whether it kills us or throws more garbage into the gene pool...as long as YOU don't have to pay for it, right?

*Shakes head* It has nothing to do about fetuses. Your next quote proves it.



I'll give you this: I feel sorry for prolifers on this subject because they're boned no matter what they say. If they support rape exceptions, their credibility is damaged because then it's more about the woman's behavior than the fetus. If they don't support rape exceptions, they're rapists themselves that want to use women against their will.

I could NEVER become a prolifer. I'm a rape survivor and quite simply, I view prolifers as rapists. They want to use my sexual organs against my will in a violent process that will leave me scarred for life. In my mind, that is evil.



Once again, nobody is required by law to allow use of their organs even for a perfectly risk-free procedure such as blood transfusion to save another person's life.

Put your personal feelings aside for a moment and think about what a horrible infringement on human rights it would be to force ONLY women to do what NOBODY else is forced to do.

I think its you who needs to put their feelings aside. Your rape has clearly had a deep psychological effect on you and is what has lead to you having such a strong stance against abortion. I don't blame you at all, you are a victim and your feelings are not your fault. You must understand that Rape is bad but homicide is worse. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I don't want to use you, all i want is for you to to abuse children.

I nver said a womens main role was to reproduce, now tour puttinng words in my mouth. You do however have a womb and this means that unlike men their is the potential for a child to be conceived of their in. If you want to blame someone for being sexist blame mother nature. Once a child is their you have no right to kill it. To do so would be selfish and abusive. It deserves the same chance you and i got. The fact that women are the only ones who can bear children does not make homicide right.

You said you view me as a rapist, thats a heavy claim and i could call you a murderer but i wont because homicide involves killing with malice, something i dont believe you would do. It doesn't make killing right but as william wilberforce said "im sure you are all people of humanity" and i believe that truely that you are simply misguided.

Someone who is 18, has no experience of life, and a complete inability to understand the use of the apostrophe simply comes across as an arrogant, insensitive know-it-all. I don't think you are misguided. I think you are dangerous and evil.

The apostrophe i will give you, but evil and dangerous Come on. I have enough experience in life to know the difference between right and wrong. I swear it to you i do what i do because i sincerely believe it to be right.
And If by dangerous you mean dangerous to your cause then you bet. You are doomed to lose ultimately because we will never stop fighting. Now matter how much of a hold evil takes, no matter how bad things get people will always fight for what is right. Hope is frail but its hard to kill. a second Wilberforce is not far away and they will show the world that homicide is wrong.

i forgive you, you know not what you do.

Wow, it looks like I inspired quite a few angry posts when I dared to prescribe to the idea that as a female I might have the right to decide what happens in my own fricken body. It's amazing how aggressive prolifers get when women stand up for themselves.

You're just misguided, dearie! Thinking you have a right to decide what happens to your own body is delusional!

The horror. The horror.

You have the right to your own body but not to that of another. The right to life must come before the right to choose, human rights must come before woman's rights.

Not if the other human in question is using my body against my will, csleachy. I'm not a farm animal, thank you very much.

And there you have it. Proof that the fetus is everything. Women are nothing. They don't even get to have human rights. There you go -- the non-sentient, parasitic glob off goo has more rights than a woman. Well, suck it out and put it on a throne. Women are not incubators for your sick view of the world.

VERY well said Darkmoon. What most pro-lifers don't understand is that feti do not mentally exist. The majority of pro-lifers cannot comprehend what it means to not mentally exist. Take this crazy scenario:

Someone chops off my head but keeps both my head and my body alive. Which would have more rights, my head, or my body? This is assuming I am still fully aware, and can talk, think, etc. The pro-lifer would tell you that both should have equal rights, because both are technically human. The Pro-choicer would tell you that that the head has more rights than the body, because that's where the mind lies. A fetus is like a decapitated body. It has no mind and therefore has no rights. Darkmoon, I wholeheartedly agree with you. However attempting to make a pro-lifer understand the concept of women's rights is and will always be futile.

Pro-Choice or Pro-Life? That is pretty much saying its either black or white? Life is full of the gray area and on this subject that is exactly where I find myself. Society promotes sexuality, teenagers are more promiscuous, discipline is now sought as abuse, crime is rewarded, but yet one of the most controversial subjects takes precedence over others. So I will express my opinion as "Pro-If". Laws allowing children to have an abortion without parental consent need to be abolished. Parents should teach abstinence but also be open to educate protection for the "if". We are a society that gives new meaning to "latchkey kids". Yes, abortion is made to easy and it is of my opinion abortion laws should have lower limitation as to when a woman can have the procedure. If a woman seeks an abortion I believe the man should be held just as accountable. If a teenager seeks an abortion, both sets of parents. I know this is not a possibility but if everyone was held accountable more precautions would be made instead of "rolling the dice" or playing "Russian Roulette." The gray area....rape, medically unsafe, genetic disorder, etc. a woman or young girl facing any of the gray area, abortion justified. (I still believe with a time limit)Pro life argues a life no matter what. Pro choice, woman's right no matter what. Pro life wants legislation to ban abortion but then they want the same government to take responsibility for poverty born children. Pro choice gives the freedom to live carelessly. Means to an end. Make a mistake no biggie. Sex should almost be an entered contract with the "if" both parties should be held accountable. Ultimately it is a choice that one human race has to endure and be held accountable by a higher being. I understand the concept of giving the "unborn" a voice however are we so barbaric that we want to embrace the "me man, you woman"?

So you're saying the safety that the pro-choice viewpoint offers women is bad? "make a mistake no biggie"? You're essentially telling me that parenthood should be a punishment for careless women, who (god forbid!) chose to engage in *gasp!* SEX! I know, to some the concept of women being something other than incubators is alien. I mean, how could a woman possibly be allowed to engage in sexual activity without the intention of "going forth and multiplying"?

You know what? You're right. These women need to be punished, put in their place. And what better way to do this than force them to bear and raise a child against their will? This is not about "russian roulette" (whatever that means). This is about a women's right to her own body. The right to choice is like a seat belt. The Pro-lifers may argue that if [seat belts] were made illegal, then no one would get into car accidents. But the pro-choicers argue that there needs to be a safety net, in case of a crash, no matter whose fault it is.