The Abortion-rights March in Washington
Actors Camryn Manheim, left, Cybill Shepherd, Whoopi Goldberg, center, Ashley Judd, and Christine Lahti, back right, march in Washington, Sunday, April 25, 2004, during an abortion-rights rally. Shepherd and Goldberg wave coat hangers. The day, which focused on protecting women’s reproductive rights, included men and women from across the country along with activists from nearly 60 countries. Also in attendance was Ted Turner, Candice Bergen,Moby, Kathleen Turner, Ani DiFranco,Sarah Weddington (the lawyer who successfully argued Roe v. Wade), and Ali G. Many of the women there wore shirts that read “This is what a Feminist looks like“.
One of the more comical placards read “Hey George, Get out of my bush!“
One of the more comical placards read “Hey George, Get out of my bush!“
There were tens of thousands of men and women in attendance.
Filed under: Politics by ramdac |
April 26th, 2004 at 12:38 am
A great response would be to have tens of thousands of infants playing in washington, with outfits that say “this is what a human looks like”.
Even if it has to be done digitally.
Anyone have a render farm I can borrow?
April 26th, 2004 at 12:45 am
One-man rebuttal
Zing!
April 26th, 2004 at 7:53 am
Pfunk, That would be an awesome response.
April 26th, 2004 at 8:05 pm
That’d get an awesome response too.
April 27th, 2004 at 12:16 am
Gee, those are some great suggestions from you males, but what would be even better is if we could get thousands of men to march with t-shirts that read “This is me taking away your reproductive rights!”
April 27th, 2004 at 12:28 am
As I posted hastily out of frustration and anger I feel I need to clarify that I do not believe that all men want to take away women’s reproductive rights nor do I feel that women have not also contributed to the loss of these rights.
April 27th, 2004 at 7:43 am
“Women’s rights” should have nothing to do with abortion or the attempt to ban it. “Why”, you ask? Because it’s not about the woman, it’s about the baby. The question is not, “Do I want to have a baby?” At the point of pregnancy, it’s too late to ask that question. By that time, the question is, “What is the best thing for the baby?” The problem is that people are trying to act like a child still in the womb is not alive or not human or something. Like he/she doesn’t have a right to live. The kid’s not going to come out as a chimp or something, she’s all human in there. And unless nature decides she shouldn’t make it to full term, she should have the same right to live that we have. That’s why it’s “Pro-Life.” We were all so horrified when that teenager killed her newborn baby. But we’ve raised a generation to believe that babies are not people, but some strange biological entity that we can manipulate to our pleasure and convenience. Is there some magic that changes a baby into an official human being once it’s whole body leaves the womb? Remember, partial-birth abortions, while they were legal, delivered the head and then killed the baby.
April 27th, 2004 at 7:48 am
I am not saying that abortion should be abolished completely. But this countries open policy concerning abortion is very bad for this country. IF the majority of the abortions were for medical reasons, then this issue wouldnt even be an issue. I believe in the civil liberties in this country, however I dont not believe those liberties should allow ppl to harm other people needlessly.
April 27th, 2004 at 8:39 am
I’m with Maddox — I’m against abortion, but for killing babies.
April 27th, 2004 at 9:41 am
Ah, if we were all only as “pro-life” as we say we are…
Ok, maybe that didn’t make sense. Here are the facts:
1. The number of abortions performed annually in the U.S. has dropped to levels not seen since the late 1970s. (Numbers from http://www.nrlc.org)
2. Those abortions would have represented %.43 of the population in the USA. That’s %.43 of people with mothers and fathers (and probably mostly just mothers) who didn’t want to have a child. This assumes that NONE of these childred had no medical problems.
Sure, that may be the case for most of them, but what about those women who got pregnant because of a rape?
A study was done from the US Justice Department, which surveyed 49,000 households annually between the years 1973-1987. In 1973, it reported 95,934 completed rapes. In 1987, the figure was 82,505. The study stated that only 53% were reported to police. Factoring this in, the totals were 181,000 rapes in 1973 and 155,000 in 1987. In August 1995, the US Justice Department, using a different study with different questions, returned a result of 170,000 completed rapes plus 140,000 attempted rapes.
There are approximately 100,000,000 females old enough to be at risk for rape in the United States. If we calculate on the basis of 100,000 rapes, that means that one woman in 1,000 is raped each year. If we calculate ont he basis of 200,000 rapes, that means that one woman in 500 is raped each year.
Now for the important question. How many rape pregnancies are there? The answer is that, according to statistical reporting, there are no more than one or two pregnancies resultant from every 1,000 forcible rapes.
OK, so they are rare, but I wanted to show that they do exist.
One important thing to note about abortions is that, if these babies were born to unwilling, unloving, uncaring, or unable mothers and fathers (either emotionally, or financially, etc..)– what kind of life would these kids have? Would we rather these kids be born to mothers and fathers who would rather their kids not be there? If they didn’t care about their child, they obviously wouldn’t care enough to try to get support from the government for taking care of them. Even if they did try to get help, the government doesn’t care enough to help these mothers and fathers. It doesn’t make sense to me for us to stress the importance of life, if we aren’t going to follow through with our passion to the end (of life). Life doesn’t end when the baby is born. We should dedicate ourselves to supporting families THROUGHOUT the lives of their children.
April 27th, 2004 at 12:05 pm
Oh, come on. I’d guess that unwanted children who are allowed to live have it so much easier in America than loved children in most other parts of the world. We have so much excess here that even homeless people can be helplessly overweight (dumpster-diving doesn’t burn THAT many calories).
/half serious
April 27th, 2004 at 12:10 pm
Ramdac, You shot your own arguement. you pointed out how rare it is for a women who is raped to get pregnant, So you made up for a very small portion of abortions.
Then you asked is it better for a baby to be born into a family that doesnt love him/her. You imply that death of the baby is better than giving the child a chance at life.
Next, SMoking or Drinking kills you not someone else, therefore not like abortion. Drinking and Driving is Illegal by the way.
I mean no disrespect to those of the “Pro-CHoice” movement, but you are not allowed to take the Moral high ground on this issue.
April 27th, 2004 at 5:21 pm
If I read that correctly, Jason has broached on an even bigger issue unknowingly.
Adoption. I just love how Pro-Lifer’s say “Well if you don’t want that baby, someone will!” Bullshit. Someone go fetch up the statistics for adoptions in the last 10 or so years. There are plenty of kids who need homes now that were babies 5, 10, even 15 years ago. What about all those kids? Are they any less special because they’re past the maternal bonding stage of their infancy? *waits for response* Go ahead… Rationalize it to me. Just you try. Pro-Lifers wants all the babies ever conceived to be born, but no one wants to make sure those children are fed, clothed and educated until they’re old enough to do those things themselves.
Everyone’s got their own opinion on this issue. There will always be an argument between those who want to control their own wombs and those who are so fucking uppity they find it necessary to attempt to control others.
I only hope that none of you find yourselves in the position to have to choose. Those of you who have seen me post on this issue before know that I speak from the rape-victim’s point of view. What you didn’t know, was that this Pro-Choicer found herself in the position to choose at the tender age of 16. While I was lucky enough to receive a mixed blessing and have nature terminate for me, I was going to carry to term for my own reasons. So, just because someone has the option to choose, doesn’t mean they’re going to choose what you might deem “the wrong thing”.
Get out of my womb…!
April 27th, 2004 at 7:35 pm
Couple thoughts:
1. I’ve got to say that one reason the adoption rate is so low is the amount of money and red-tape you have to go through to adopt. I’ve got close friends who adopted, and they had to come up with over $30k (which is way over what they make, combined, in a year). I’m not a big fan of the govt. getting involved in our lives; but if they insist, I’d suggest at least some tax relief and less bureaucracy when it comes to adoption.
2. You said:
“…and those who are so fucking uppity they find it necessary to attempt to control others.” Need I point out that Pro-choicers are attempting to control others also? Namely, the preborn. I’m all for people having control of their own lives; but if you exercising your own personal freedom means someone else must die, that’s where I object.
April 27th, 2004 at 8:08 pm
When you say “… means someone else must die, that’s where I object� how does that fit into the situation of if the decision comes down to the mother or the child?, no matter which life you choose to save, you are choosing to end the other. While this would be a horrible decision to have to make I think it should be left to the family in the situation.
April 27th, 2004 at 8:30 pm
I agree… and, that should be a special case legally. In the same way, if I’m in a situation where I’m with another person and we could only save one of us, I (or they) shouldn’t be charged for manslaughter or homicide.
April 28th, 2004 at 7:12 am
Heh, Joey. Not only did I point out how rare rapes were, but also how rare abortions are. The number doesn’t even represent one half of one percent.
April 28th, 2004 at 7:21 am
Brandy, to answer your question about adoptions:
click here for detailed statistics(Int’l and domestic statistics)
“The number of domestic adoptions occurring each year is unknown due
to difficulty of obtaining those statistics. We do know that in the
last five years, the number of families adopting in the United States
has almost doubled.”
Adoption Assistance, Inc
http://www.adoptionassistance.com/faqs.html
Here are some International stats:
April 28th, 2004 at 8:14 am
The greatest thing about this country is that we can all have an opinion. I myself am a pro-lifer, but I dont feel I impose my will on anyone. I just feel someone should protect the unborn. Now brandy, you have posted on this issue before, and I do respect you, and admire you for dealing with something as horrible as rape so well. The broad issue of abortion is what I am against. It isnt personal.
Pfunk and Ramdac, yall nailed the adoption issue. I know a family here in Ruston who found it easier to adopt international then here in the US.
Most of the older kids who are looking for adoptive parents are kids whose parents died or their parents were deemed unfit. Most healthy children born have parents waiting to adopt.
April 28th, 2004 at 12:09 pm
The difficult part about the abortion issue, for me, is trying to force a line where there is none. There’s no way to tell when a person becomes its own thing, ethically. Science sure doesn’t give us a clear line.
On one hand, I respect Catholics who refuse birth control; at least they seem to take a strong “all or nothing” stance, not willing to draw the line anywhere in the middle. I think they’re crazy, but I respect them.
On the other end of the spectrum, why say that a human is an individual (with individual rights) at the point of birth? Maybe they don’t gain individuality until they become self-realized. Why not allow abortions of post-birth infants?
Part of me wants to say that, if you take a child out of a womb and it can survive given normal stuff you’d give an infant, then that child is as individual as it gets. I don’t like late-term abortions. But, with technology, you could pull out a weeks-old fetus and nurture it to human form. Heck, with technology, I could probably splice a few random cells together and grow a new human. I guess that’s what the Stem Cell argument is about.
So, for those who are pro-choice: what makes birth a good line to draw in the sand, to say that “now we treat this thing like a full human with human rights”?
April 28th, 2004 at 12:50 pm
Technically, it is still impossible to produce a baby without the mother’s womb. Stem cell research is producing a baby then killing it to form tissue to save another person. This technology is still in the very early stages because of regulations. I am not sure how premature a baby can be and survive, but I believe it is around the end of the second trimester.
On the issue of late term, there is no excuse other than extreme medical situations for late term abortions.
May 6th, 2004 at 10:01 pm
I have said it befoe and I will say it again: after you have heard your baby’s heart beat and seen the ultrasound in real time with your own eyes, then you get to have an opinion. Until then, shut the fuck up.
We all need to be responsible for our actions. If you have sex, then know that it is your responsibility to raise that child if the dice don’t roll in your favor. In the case of rape, admit that you can’t kill the son-of-a-bitch that raped you and the next best thing is to kill the baby created during that rape. Or have the guts to carry the baby to term and let someone who can’t carry a baby to term adopt it.
Is this harsh? Yes. And life is harsh. People die. Shit happens. We all get stuck in situations that are not fair. Maybe you hemmed when you should have hawwed. “Bobby said he’d pull out. Bobby stayed in.” Whatever the circumstance, it’s your kid and you need to step up and be a man, or a women if you are one.
Do you want the benefits from stem cell research? Then admit that those cells come from dead people. Do you want the right to choose? Then admit that murder is acceptable. And damn right, some people deserve to die. I can name a dozen right now. But that doesn’t make it right, or legal.
Whatever side you come down on, just have the guts to admit the truth of your side. Don’t hide behind some bullshit excuse, whether or not it’s “scientific.” We can all fool ourselves into believing tremendously rediculous things. Reality - it’s what’s for dinner. Get in line at the buffet and get yourself a belly full.
And am I the only one who would rather Ashley Judd’s shirt say “This is what a feminist looks like naked” ???
May 7th, 2004 at 10:17 am
I agree with you Benissocool, maybe I wouldnt have put it so “honestly” but I agree.
Except Telling someone who hasnt had a kid to shut the F*** up. I happen to agree with your opinion, but Poeple do have the right to have an opinion whether or not they have had a kid. If I believe men have a right to an opinion on this subject, then women who havent had a baby have the same right.
May 9th, 2004 at 7:35 pm
Apologies for dropping the F bomb. Passionate opinions are fueled by rum.
All people are entitled to their own opinion, for sure. And I’ve always had an opion on most everything. Heck, I remember a 4-hour debate into the wee hours of the morning at the UofA on this very topic that managed to earn me quite a conservative reputation.
I can only say for myself, I had a “theory” about abortion as a single male. Until I was an actual parent, that was all I deserved. But now that I am a parent, I can tell you that until you are a parent it is just that, a theory.
May 9th, 2004 at 7:40 pm
Oh, and there were two song references in my original post that no one has caught yet. Springsteen’s “Spare Parts and Broken Hearts” and Colin James Hay’s “It’s a Beautiful World.”
May 9th, 2004 at 10:23 pm
I agree Benissocool, that I wont completely understand untill I am a parent. I was jsut saying people have the right to their opinion.
I got Springsteen’s
lost me on the other one.