anti-abortion folks still get abortions

Thanks for posting this!
Apart from the hypocrisy, it makes a compelling case for the complexity of the abortion issue, and how oversimplifying it can help to confuse people.

What she looks like is not relevant. From the article quoted in the OP Do you dispute what is in the article? And why do you believe that so many women (and fathers, from the anecdotes quoted) act against their beliefs on such a serious issue?

Hi riVeRraT,As Holmes implied, this article is more a collection of narratives than research, but the reason it interested me is because I could partly relate to it. As a teenager I would have been against abortion, but had no understanding of the issues; just found the idea repulsive. I never campaigned or joined any anti-abortion lobby.As a young adult, however, I did have an early term abortion, and have not regretted doing so. Under the circumstances my becoming pregnant was both dishonest and manipulative (not to say that the other involved was better but still). Anyway, I saw the procedure more as righting a wrong, like returning to a store department after you’ve left it with an item unpaid for; embarrassing but still not as bad as leaving the store with it. . .I did and do feel guilt, and therefore learned to understand much more about the whole complex issue. Now I will support any woman’s right to an informed choice.Concerning the women who secretly had abortions and then returned to the picket line, I find it very hard to understand their thinking, and can only assume that they believe themselves unable to do without their support group.

So long as it’s clear that it relates to the women returning to the picket lines! It’s hard, For me too, the decisions I’ve regretted most were the ones made for selfish reasons. Could also have been a serial axe killer! I do believe that introducing emotional appeals confuses these difficult subjects further.
If there is “life before life”, I would feel bad for disappointing a soul that wanted to be born. Sort of like an employer who offered work and raised a lot of hopes, then withdrew the position. But not like murder, because whether or not there is awareness before life, it would not be extinguished by a termination.I feel guilty (sort of cringing) when I remember the circumstances under which I became pregnant. Looking back, the decision to terminate was the first time I really took responsibility. Before that time, I would have made a very poor parent! As for having been anti-abortion, I was simply nave, and didn’t try to impose my views, so no guilt there.From post 161 to brennakimi If a diseased limb could talk, would it ask to be amputated? Are you a vegetarian? Here I completely agree with you Finally, you indicated (in other posts) support for abortions based on medical grounds. And to me that’s as inconsistent with the quotes above as the women in the OP article. If an abortion is the same as murdering a baby, shouldn’ t the mother be prepared to risk her health to let it live?

Hi again RiVeRraT, I understand this as meaning that after conception, life will follow. Unless we disrupt it. But of course there are other possibilities. . . The point I was trying to make is that anything alive and able to express itself, resists being killed. (Except where there is a deliberate sacrifice for the greater good, a very high form of morality). Wanting to keep living doesn’t relate to the issue, until there is agreement on what living means. The interesting thing is that you followed this statement with two examples where the medical advice was, at best, questionable! I know of others, too. Therefore I would take responsibility for such a decision, taking into account medical advice. Just “trusting medicine” is to me an irresponsible cop-out.See, from your own account, I could become pregnant, shop around for a doctor who agreed that a depression could result from bearing the child (which is true), then “trust medicine” and have the pregnancy terminated. And we both know that it would be hypocritical.This is why I can see only two consistent positions - either no abortions under any circumstances at all (after all, our judgement and medical opinion could both be wrong and then it would be equivalent to murder). . .Or making a decision as responsibly as possible and living with the consequences.And supporting restrictive legislation on these issues is just another way avoiding responsibility, for self and others.

Hi again RiVeRrat, I’ll leave this alone as it has already been addressed. As stated in my previous post, I would certainly take medical advice into account. I would not blindly follow it, because it is fallible and not the “whole picture” - there are other factors to be considered. Depression is life threatening; talk to someone who was a friend or relative of a suicide! Treatment is available, but success is not guaranteed. That doesn’t mean that I believe that the possibility of depression should automatically lead to a termination. The issues are, as you agreed, complex. A fetus terminated by “honest mistake”, or to reduce a risk, is just as dead as one terminated for the most selfish of reasons. I didn’t say that; I said that medical advice should be taken into account. We agree again!
All the same, I think I understand your position; please let me know if not. You believe that legislation to prevent legal abortions except on medical grounds would prevent a lot of “selfish” abortions, and save a lot of fetuses.My difficulties with this are:
1. abortions will go “underground” again, and there will be deaths from infections, inadequate follow-up treatment etc.
2. poor people will be disproportionally disadvantaged; the wealthy will go to where the procedure is legal, or “buy” the required medical advice.
3. More children will be born to parents who do not want them, a horrible way to begin lifeI will continue to use my brain, and make my own decisions.