Home

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Colorado, Abortion, and Sheer Coincidence

  • May. 15th, 2008 at 5:40 PM
A - helping hands
SHEER COINCIDENCE:

- This morning, I was noting with consteration that I don't really spend much any time talking on my LJ about feminist issues (there are reasons; mostly it's because I feel, considerng my f-list, it's preaching to the choir).

- Just now, in a chatroom, a link comes up regarding a proposed amendment to Colorado's state constitution. I decide to post about it in my LJ.

- LJ gives me an advertisement banner along the side that says, "Let's Talk COLORADO" and seems to think I want to go there. Not like how gmail tailors your ads to your message content -- this was just the ad that was there when I opened this update-journal page.

COLORADO/ABORTION:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/rocky-mountains/anti-womens-health-amendment.htm

Please take a look at the link, particularly of course if you so happen to live in Colorado. I know you don't all have to agree, but I think abortion is such an important issue for women especially.

I'm vehemently against laws that would deny a pregnant woman life-saving treatment when it might endanger the fetus: while I understand the value of life and, myself, value it highly, I understand that value enough to accord it to the mother's life as well as the child's. That law doesn't just say the child's life is important, it therefore says the child's life is more important than the mother's, and I'll be damned if I ever vote for any law that says that because a woman has become pregnant, she's lost the right to defend her own life as stridently as other people.
I would never vote for a law that grants the government the right to decide on that criteria -- a person's phsyical state -- that any one life is more important than any one other life.

Normally a person only has their right to live in our society taken away by the goverment because they've irredemably broken the rules of that society -- whether they're exiled or jailed or given the death penalty. I will not support a law that would take away that right from someone without any crime ever having been committed, and I hope you will not either.

Pregnant women are people with a right to life too -- and not just a right to live "for their baby." They have a right to live for themselves, and so too do we all.

Comments

[info]thez wrote:
May. 16th, 2008 12:32 am (UTC)
I can only say "PREACH IT!" in a very choir-sounding fashion, perhaps underscoring something you already said in this post. Something about verbing to the noun.

You articulated very well many of the reasons that I myself am pro-choice, and if someone in the future asks me, "HEY Z, WHY YOU PRO-CHOICE?" I will have to point them here, or remember how you strung these words together.
[info]elisel wrote:
May. 16th, 2008 03:22 am (UTC)
Oh, oh, oh. I consider myself pretty old-fashioned and not all that feminist overall. But abortion rights are one of the few issues that I will get all growly about. I've definitely done some soul-searching about the "when does a ball of cells become a baby?" issue (and to be fair, I may be somewhat biased by having a biological background. Morula, blastula, gastrula....) but, in the absence of a definitive line that can be drawn, it's got to be a personal choice.

But for me the whole issue really boils down to one thing: Nobody should have the right to tell me what I can or can't do with my own body. It especially annoys me when it's a man behind the podium preaching pro-life regardless of the feelings of the mother. Because he's for sure not going to be having a baby anytime soon.

Froth, froth. Snark, snark.
[info]nkicroft wrote:
May. 16th, 2008 06:03 am (UTC)
i only hope that the proposed amendment gets squashed. like, now.

Latest Month

May 2009
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by [info]chasethestars