Due Saturday (2/26) by noon
After reading the essay, “And So I Choose,” by Allison Crews place her discussion of “rights” in conversation with the article you read for class this week, “Beyond Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Life?” First (2 paragraphs), in your own words, please describe why each of these terms are in fact problematic or limiting to our larger discussion of reproductive rights. Why were each limiting in Crew’s reflection? What does a “reproductive justice” paradigm offer instead? Second (1-2 paragraphs) reflect on the recent arguments surrounding legislation addressed to congress (see links below). What do you think is at stake in politicizing women’s bodies and reproduction? What would a reproductive justice argument look like in response to this legislation?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/18/planned-parenthood-fundin_n_825258.html?ref=fb&src=sp
http://reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/Center%20for%20Reproductive%20Rights%20Testimony%202%2014%2011.pdf
These two terms are problematic and limiting to our discussion of reproductive rights because we are either controlled by the government or harassed by peers. The term pro-life is basically saying we have no say in it and will let the government decide what we do. Pro-choice means we have a choice to abort the fetus or not, and it is supportive over whatever decision is made. They were each limiting in Crew’s reflection because she had memories of her mother and friends to deal with, harassment over the Internet, and people telling her she is inadequate. As much as these rights set ground rules, they are much limited protests breaking out and by our surroundings.
ReplyDeleteA “reproductive justice” paradigm offers us to freely make decisions without outside pressure and harassment. We would be able to receive top of the line and sanitary treatment to abort a fetus and if we wanted to have the child, we wouldn’t feel pressured. Everything would be accepted and it would make life much easier. No matter what decision was made, people would be supportive without judgment and condemnation.
A woman’s body belongs to her. It doesn’t belong to a boy, her family, or the government. What she wants to do with it is completely her decision. Some things are out of our control; for example, rape. I find it inappropriate for the government to tell someone who has been raped that they can’t have an abortion. Because it wasn’t their fault and they weren’t being irresponsible. But where does government draw the line? If the government creates rules for abortion, a lot is at stake. They will be criticized either way, because our nation is split in decision. If a girl gets pregnant from rape and doesn’t have money to provide, the government will be at stake for forcing her to birth it.
Government will never come to a unanimous approval, which will always make someone mad. An argument to this debate would be where do they draw the line? They can’t just say that some people (rape victims) can abort and others cannot. In a world where we have reproductive rights, government wouldn’t have to get involved so much because everyone would be supportive over others. Unfortunately, this issue will never be settled because people stand firm on their personal decisions.
In Allison Crews’ “And so I Chose” and Andrea Smiths “Beyond Pro-choice Versus Pro-life” both focus on their views on whether a women should have an abortion or not. They didn’t really talk about the larger issue of reproductive rights. I think what we were talking about in class is the bigger issue in this topic; whether or not the government should be involved in the reproductive rights of women. Everyone has their own opinions on abortion but what some people don’t put into consideration is the government’s involvement.
ReplyDeleteI think that Crews and Smith have good arguments on abortion but they lack a bigger picture. The Reproductive rights subject is a complicated issue to deal with in our society today. There are two sides to this argument; the government can either control the reproductive rights of women or they can stay out of it and leave it to the women to decide what they want to do. The pro-life movement believes that the fetus is a person and pro-choice believes that the fetus is not a person until it is born. There will always be an argument between the two; I think the government should definitely be involved in the argument and have some say in who can have an abortion.
I think that the government should have a little involvement in the decision of an abortion. I don’t really believe in abortion but I think that if a woman feels like it is necessary she should be allowed to. In “And So I Chose” it states that one in three American women have an abortion; I think this number is way too high and the government should start doing a better job at teaching the youth of our country the risks and consequences of having sex. I also agree that the men are being left out of the picture, I think they should have a say in what decision the girl makes. I also think if a girl is under the age of 21 the parents should also have a say in the decision. Another issue is women not being able to afford an abortion; the government should not pay for everyone’s abortion. There needs to be a rule on who can receive help from government like rape victims or girls who might not be capable of having a child. I think the main thing the government should focus on is reduce the need for abortions by really reaching out to our youth.
The terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life” are problematical in numerous ways, mostly because they both out rule the real issues threatening women’s rights. The concept of pro-life revolves around having no individual choice at all. There are way too many tribulations in our criminal justice system to begin with, and criminalizing abortion would just add a whole lot more chaos to our government than we already have. Crew’s essay was pretty profound, and she uncovered to me a reason to believe I would and should have my own choice. Being attacked for a decision you make regarding your body and your future really counteracts the purpose of women having any rights at all. Pro-choice claims protection and support to whatever decisions a woman makes. Whether it be raising the child, putting the child up for adoption, or aborting the pregnancy. When Crew made her choice to have the baby, they ambushed her with the guilt of not being ready to raise a child, and without her personal permission, handed her child to the adoption agency. It’s just these actions that go against everything women activists believe in. How are we supposed to grow stronger if we, as women, can’t even stand up tall and prove our empowering independence?
ReplyDeleteOverall, these two concepts, if analyzed correctly, really don’t give women any lead way at all. What’s the point of creating sides when neither of them aids us on our road to freedom? Having the right to choose shouldn’t involve punishment or conflict, and it should be relatively simple. A “reproductive justice” paradigm would allow women the fully protected right to make any decision she wants regarding her pregnancy. Each choice would be viewed as personal, but would be given the advantage of encouragement and acceptance. Everyone walks the path of life in different shoes, and everyone has different opinions, and these are two things that will never change. We should allow ourselves to express our beliefs through our actions, and then, we would be able to come to peace.
In Terry O’Neill’s statement to Huffpost, she expressed her feelings regarding the vote to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood. She really did make an extremely valid point while discussing women’s individual health issues. Each and every woman on this Earth is different, mentally and physically. So naturally, we all carry different health related issues and struggles that could very well effect any decision made regarding pregnancy.
A reproductive justice argument would stand back and look at the underlying problems, and consider each individual woman’s issues. Creating full opportunities for women should not just involve us being able to make our own decisions, but also assistance and comfort, no matter what the outcome may be.
Pro-Choice and Pro-Life are two very different terms that cause much stress in a women’s decision to birth a child or not. These terms are both in fact problematic and limiting to the discussion of reproductive rights. Before reading “And So I Choose” my views were and always have been Pro-Life, however Allison Crew opened my mind to a new point of view. Pro-Life is problematic because Pro-Choice supporters see it as people letting the government control your own body. While Pro-Choice is problematic because Pro-Life supporters see them as irresponsible and not caring if they are killing a baby. In Crew’s reflection Pro-Life and Pro-Choice were both limiting because when Allison was younger and supported pro-life she saw how much that hurt the girls who were choosing what to do with their own body. On the other hand when Allison decided to keep her baby many supporters of pro-choice gave her a hard time. Now aren’t they fighting for a person choosing what to do with their body? Fighting for what you believe in was almost not worth it, because it ends up hurting others who believe in something else. So who gets to separate right from wrong? Reproductive justice would be such a weight lifted off of everyone’s shoulders. It would offer us to decide want we want to do with our own bodies without judging or harassment. No matter what we decided to do with our pregnancy we would have support all the way through the nine months. Though this sounds nice, I could never see it happening. Unfortunately life isn’t like that, everyone judges and everyone has his or her own personal views.
ReplyDeletePoliticizing a women’s body is like owning her body. Her body is for her, and her only. It should be her choice to let the world see her body, and if she is as low to allow herself shown like that to the public eye she should expect harassment.
After reading the links on what the government is doing by stripping federal funding from Planned Parenthood. In some aspects I agree with what they are doing, they are not allowing us money for contraceptives, HIV test, cancer screening and reproductive health services, they are just forcing Planned Parenthood to stop using the extra money on abortions and use it on the things listed above. Pro-Choices says the government shouldn’t control what we do with our bodies so why should they provide money for abortions? Since I know the question wasn’t my opinion and it is to answer how reproductive justice would respond to this legislation. I believe they would be angry that the government isn’t giving them money to help the poor with abortions.
@sc.thomas
ReplyDeleteI agree, there really isn't a point to sides when neither of them give us freedom. It seems like whatever choice we choose, we'll receive criticism from someone. It isn't fair that someone's personal issue is made into such a public controversy.
When reading Allison Crew’s “As I Choose, It helped me understand more about Pro Life and Pro Choice. Previously being an anti-abortionist, Crew, at a young age knew this meant having no individual choice. Anti abortionist like herself would stand outside community clinics such as Planned Parenthood and hold signs of pictures with baby’s who had been aborted as a young fetus. They thought there was no justice in having an abortion, and thought it is just as much the women’s fault then the mans, even if you had been abused or raped. But was this really Crews thinking, or just how she was raised? Pro Choice on the other hand gives you a difficult choice to make, whether to go along with the pregnancy, or abort the baby at several weeks. Pro Life activist supports the women’s decision with open arms.
ReplyDeleteWhen Crew became pregnant at the young age of 16, she had a difficult decision to make for herself, and it should be her right to make the decision on her own. Growing up as an anti abortionist, it is hard to drift to the other side, especially when people know you protest outside women’s clinics. Crew had a difficult decision to make after knowing how rude the protestors were. They truly thought the woman should have no rights but to bear the child. But that is not how we should look at the situation. If you don’t have the income, and want to continue with you education or career you should be able to choose whether or not you are mature enough to bring another human life into the world.
In the article Planned Parenthood Funding blocked in house vote, the legislation made a vote to end federal funding from Planned Parenthood. I personally do not think this is fair because saying that Planned Parenthood is the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive healthcare provider and advocate, it does not really “help” those women in need. One leading cause of abortions is because the woman (or man) does not have enough money to provide the child with what it needs. Being a clinic that gives women the right to choose, but does not assist them financially if they need it is wrong.
This paper “Beyond Pro-Choice versus Pro-Life: Women of Color and Reproductive Justice” argues that the pro-life versus pro-choice paradigm for understanding reproductive rights is a model that marginalizes women of color, poor women, women with disabilities, and women from other marginalized communities. The pro-life versus pro-choice paradigm serves to both reify and mask the structures of white supremacy and capitalism that undergird the reproductive choices that women make. “And So I Choose,” by Allison Crews was about pro-choice, she was pregnant at a young age and it put her through a lot such as harassment, feeling lonely, and feeling as if she cannot control her own life. Young girls who are pregnant should have their own choice to what they want to do with their life. If they want to have an abortion, they should have one. If they want to keep the baby or give it up for adoption it is there choice, not everybody else’s. All young adults need is support and the knowledge on every choice that is out there for them to choose from.
ReplyDeleteThe reproductive justice analysis understands that women and their communities experience reproductive oppression. Reproductive oppression is "the controlling and exploiting of women, girls, and individuals through our bodies, sexuality, labor, and reproduction by families, communities, institutions and society". Reproductive justice, on the other hand, emphasizes that a woman's reproductive health is not only based on individual choice but also a variety of factors and conditions within one's experiences, family, and community. Just as a person's reproductive health experiences cannot be separated from mental, social, economic, familiar, communal, or environmental well-being. This inter-sectional paradigm addresses that systems of oppression simultaneously discriminate based on race, gender, sexuality, class, ability, age, immigration status, and other factors.
We can distinguish what is at stake in decisions about reproduction. Personal interests have to do with effects on particular people. It can be the interests of the child that would be created by the reproductive decision in question, or the interests of those affected by the creation of the child, other than the child themselves.
Allison Crew's story of the young girl going into the planned parenthood building was heartbraking. Obviously, it affected her deeply and it did not roll off her shoulder meaninglessly. Allison describes her pregnancy as a whirlwind of opinions, suggestions, and eventually forcefulness. A pregnant woman clearly has her own problems to overcome and deal with, so why must they deal with everyone in society too? A reproductive justice paradigm would open a new world for women. A world without judgement and terror for the decisions they make due to their life. It would be safer for women who decide to have children as well as care for the women who decide not to have children.
ReplyDeleteThe term pro-life is a very powerful opinion that fights a woman's right to do what is best for her. The term pro-choice, however, is also fighting a woman's right because she will be ridiculed and seen as an "outcast" or irresponsible. These words are too sharp for the millions of households different situations.
Politicizing a woman's body is making it seem like a human life is just another "item". It gives no sense of personal well being or decision making. As the government makes more rules regarding abortion, the same amount of people are fighting. No matter what laws they make, people will always be there with an opinion that oppose them. A pro-life decision and a pro-choice decision always brings different factors into play. Do they have the money, support, love, commitment, maturity, and overall worth of raising a child to the best standards? Laws cannot be created based solely on age because these factors change in every situation. If the laws were based on rape or medical attention that would be a relief to some critics, but where will that stop? Criticism is an undeniable factor in each and every decision of government, so a satisfying medium is the only way to go about the issue.
The issue of abortion and the issue of "pro-life" versus "pro-choice" has been going on for decades. I think that it is absolutely ridiculous that for some reason people are made to feel that their views on abortion have to be categorized into one of these two views. I think that these categories are very limiting and that a lot are assumed about the people who consider themselves either "pro-life" or "pro-choice". For people who are "pro-life" it is assumed that they do not care about the woman and any health issues she may have. For people who are "pro-choice" it is assumed that they do not care about the unborn child and that they believe in murder. While for some people this may be true, I can imagine that majority of people do not feel either way. I also feel that a much larger picture is also being ignored and that a "reproductive justice" view is how these issues should be approached.
ReplyDeleteIn Allison Crews' reflection in "And So I Choose" both "pro-life" and "pro-choice" do not fit into what she is trying to say. Every woman has the right to decide if, when, where, and how that want to have a child. I think that what Crews is trying to say that essentially everyone is "pro-choice". Everyone chooses how they feel about abortion, and each woman's choice on whether to bear a child or not is an individual case. The only person capable of making the right decision for that woman is herself.
The Huffington Post reported that Mike Pence, a Republican from Indiana said, "Nobody is saying Planned Parenthood can't be the leading advocate of abortion on demand, but why do I have to pay for it?" Okay well lets think about this. Lets say a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, but she does not have access to a safe place to have an abortion or the finances to pay for it. Since some of the government funding has been taken away from the Planned Parenthood program she is forced to have the child. Meanwhile, the man who raped her is convicted and sent to prison which is funded by the government and tax payers money. So pretty much Pence is willing to pay to feed and house the rapist but not to pay for the innocent woman who unwillingly got pregnant to have an abortion? According to his statement, apparently so.
Also, America is supposed to be a free country. By cutting off funding for contraceptives and cancer-screenings for women, our right to make the choice whether or not to have children is taken away. If cancer-screening aren't available some women will become infertile and lose their option to bear their own children. If contraceptives aren't available to some women then they will lose their option to not bear children. The freedom for a lot of women to choose whether or not they want to have children is at stake and the government is to blame.
The terms pro-choice and pro-life are very extreme and very limiting when it comes to talking about abortions. A person who supports pro-life is a person who says that a woman should not have the decision to abort her child; the child deserves to be born into the world regardless of the mother's situation. A person who supports pro-choice believes that a woman should have the option to abort her child readily available to her and with out grief from people who don't agree with abortion. The problem with these two terms is that they are both so extreme that it really doesn't leave room for a woman to make a comfortable decision because both options bring along repercussions from the opposing parties. As described in Allison Crew's article, And So I Chose, the horrors that people face when becoming impregnated at the wrong time are made clear.
ReplyDeleteCrew's idea of reproductive justice is a very fair and unbiased way of looking at the idea of abortion. The point of reproductive justice is to support the mother and what the mother decides is best for herself as well as the future of her unborn child. Reproductive justice eliminates the terms pro-life and pro-choice and the extremes that those words bring along with them. In reproductive justice the well-being of the motherhood is all that matters and judgements of other's do not exist. Unfortunately, the argument of choice and life will never reach a point in which all people take the well-being of the mother into consideration over the idea of ending an innocent life. I like the idea of reproductive justice because it is specific to each and every woman who becomes pregnant and also because it is difficult for me to relate to this topic since I have not ever been raised to think one way or another. Also, I feel like since I have never been put in the position where I have to chose to abort a child or not, I do not truly understand all of the emotional ties and tragedies that come along with the topic.
After reading the article Planned Parenthood Funding and learning about all of the areas in which the house reduced funding, I understood the overall importance of this. Planned Parenthood is not only a place in which abortions can be provided for free to women who are choosing to have an abortion in the first place because of their money problems, but it is also a place that provides STD testing, STD awareness, safe-sex campaigns, and necessary procedures for women such as mamograms. It is unfair to take away things like this because the people who need these programs the most (women who aren't financially stable) will no longer be able to take advantage of them and a child may be born into a family that can not afford to take care of it.
@KatieSchauerman- I like the way that you contrast the problems between the terms pro-life and pro-choice because it shows how there are severe problems with both beliefs. A woman should feel comfortable when making a decision about her body and both words place such limitations on the feeling of comfort that any woman who goes through this situation in her life is going to have to deal with ever lasting judgements from people who support the opposite of what she may choose; a woman feeling like that isn't right either.
ReplyDeleteThese two terms are very problematic when it comes to the issue of abortion. The pro-life view argues that even non-viable, undeveloped human life is sacred and must be protected by the government. According to the pro-life view, abortion must not be legal and should not be performed on an illegal basis. The pro-choice movement argues that in the case that a woman gets pregnant, the government does not have the right to determine whether or not the woman can continue with the pregnancy. Both of these views overlook the fact that the majority of women who have abortions do not do so entirely by choice. Different circumstances put women in a position where abortion is the least-destructive option. Some of these circumstances include health issues, age, affordability, etc. Also, as we discussed during class, people were debating on this very same issue. Some people believe that the government has to have some kind of regulation on pregnancy/abortion; however, some believe that it is the individual’s own personal choice.
ReplyDeleteIn Allison Crews, “And So I Chose,” she mentions how life was before Roe v. Wade- there was no legal option other than to give birth to the child no matter what the circumstances were. Crew goes into greater detail about what being pro-choice means to her. I agree to what she is saying because I personally believe that everyone should have his or her own choice. Every individual has different circumstances and they should determine whether they want to continue to give birth to a child or not.
In my opinion, the decision should not just come from the woman, but both the man and the woman. The man is just as responsible for the pregnancy as the woman; it’s just that the child is in the woman’s body. In different circumstances, such as rape, forced pregnancy, health issues, etc., the decision of abortion should be available IF the woman decides to go that route. Terry O'Neill told HuffPost that the amendment, Planned Parenthood, is an attack on women. Most of the time that we hear about abortion it’s in a negative way. But sometimes abortion is “needed” because some of these pre-preventative pregnancy things are not always affective.
The articles that we read this week tackled issues pertaining to reproductive rights and abortion, taking the stance that commonly-used terms like “pro-choice” and “pro-life” tend to be too narrow in scope. Terms such as these tend to limit broader discussion about reproductive rights by oversimplifying the issues; both sides have flawed arguments and are all to ready to point the finger of shame at the other side. Pro-life and pro-choice arguments are also very exclusive in their focus; they tend to ignore the health and bodily integrity of the mother, as well as her status as an empowered figure with rights to health and safety, in favor of arguing about the fetus.
ReplyDeleteIn Crews’ opinion, someone who is truly “pro-choice” trusts a woman’s ability to make her own reproductive choices and supports those choices, no matter what they are. Crews says that a woman should always have the right to make any and all decisions regarding her body, that her decisions should be supported, and that her right to decide should never be taken away. Crews saw that those who were pro-life stripped women of their reproductive rights by deemed them unfit to make their own choices, and that those who identified as pro-choice believed that the only acceptable choice was one that they approved of. Neither group believed in the sanctity of the mother’s opinion when it came to matters of reproduction; only their own opinions on the subject seemed to matter.
Crews has broader ideas about reproductive rights than can be contained by the limited views of the pro-life and pro-choice camps; in her opinion, a woman should be able to chose whether or not to have children without fear of censure. This mode of thinking seems to align with the tenets of reproductive justice, a concept that links reproductive health with social justice. Reproductive justice acknowledges that a woman’s reproductive health is inextricably tied to the conditions in her life (such as class, race, sexuality etc.) and argues that women cannot have full reproductive rights unless the disadvantages caused by these conditions are addressed.
In an attempt to weaken Planned Parenthood, which provides a wide variety of crucial reproductive health services (including abortion services) to mostly low-income women, House Republicans have recently voted to strip federal funding from the organization. This attack is clearly a misguided attempt to stand against abortion, as many Republicans identify as pro-life, but this move also cuts money for things like contraceptives, HIV testing, and cancer screenings. Taking money away from these crucial services will hurt the reproductive health of low-income women who depend on Planned Parenthood as a source for health care. Reproductive justice would argue that reproductive freedom is a basic human right, one that the government is legally bound to protect, respect, and fulfill. By making abortion a political issue, Republicans are essentially bringing women’s bodies and into the political sphere without giving voice to their reproductive rights.
@ sc thomas: I agree with your idea that "we all carry different health related issues and struggles that could very well effect any decision made regarding pregnancy." It would be too difficult to judge the validity of an abortion on a case-by-case basis because each woman's situation is unique, depending on the different "issues and struggles" that the woman is dealing with.
ReplyDelete@ pm douglas: You stated that "pro-Choice supporters see it as people letting the government control your own body," but my beef with pro-life legislation isn't because the government is involved. The government has the power to enforce legislation concerning reproductive rights, true. But it's not about the government (for me); what makes me angry is that other people's opinions somehow take precedence over my rights and inspire the legislation that tells me what I can and cannot do with regards to my own body.
Also, you asked why the government should provide money for abortions, but Planned Parenthood doesn't spend any federal money on abortions. The Huffington Post article clearly stated that "the organization is already prohibited from using the money it receives under Title X, which funds reproductive health services, to perform abortions."
The terms pro-life and pro-choice each hold their own limitaions and problems. Pro-life can appear to be a very strict term, and is often seem as having the implication that anything other than carrying out a pregnancy is the wrong decision, and therefore, anti-life. Pro-choice, however, can be seen as being too open of an idea, which many people do not like. Some see pro-choice as having too many consequensces, especially emotionally.
ReplyDeleteThese emotional consequences are tied into Allison Crews article as well. Crews tells about her personal story of teen pregnancy, and shows how each of the terms were limiting to her. She had been raised pro-life, but when she herself became pregnant as a sophomore in high school, she began to question her views and made many appointments to have an abortion. However, Crews had been scarred by the sight of a young girl after having the procedure, and the emotional pain that she was in. The terms pro-life and pro-choice were limiting to Crews because once she had personally been put in the situation, she had difficulty taking a stance with either one of them.
In the recent issue discussed in the articles, it has been passed to cut funding to Planned Parenthood. This does not just cut funding for abortions, it includes contraceptives, HIV testing, cancer screening, and more. This is all in attempt to lower the number of abortions, however it is putting women at many higher risks of having reproductive problems. Just because they are cutting the funding for all of this does not mean that people are going to stop having sex, therefore without contraceptives being so available, HIV testing, and cancer screenings, imagine the increase in the number of health problems.
In the article "And so I choose," it looks at the issue of pro choice vs. pro life essentially. Both sides are so limited and thinks that the other choice is completely wrong. These two issues have no room for gray area. The issue of abortion is much more detailed then just yes or no. These to choices leave little room for discussion and the big picture of what is right for women's reproduction. These issues many times over looked and that many women have abortions for health issues and not just for personal preference. When reading the personal story of Crew's situation the pro choice vs pro life doesn't seem so easy. After being raised pro life once she got pregnant in high school her idea of the issue began to change. Once she was put in the position she wasn't so sure. She felt that with these to choices her rights as a woman were being taken away. Learning from this woman could help many people see the bigger picture. It is not as easy to choose what to do once the decision is placed in your own hands.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article about legislative recently taking away money from planned parenthood I was shocked. Planned parenthood is a vital aspect in helping a women in a time of need or concern for reproduction. Planned parenthood prevents uneducated or poor women from making terrible decisions for their bodies. I think what is at state is not having enough money to help women who can't afford certain things. The money that was taken away was not even used for abortion. The legislative is taking away money that is being put to "good use" in their minds and not abortion. The ignorance is show in many ways when passing this vote. I would argue to legislative that until you are a woman and in our shoes you have no idea about the reproduction organs and difficulties that we go through. Women can sometimes need abortions to save their own lives and might be a single parent and do what is best for her children. Legislation doesn't look at the realistic picture and this vote could change many women's lives for the worst.
@Lauren McClusky
ReplyDeleteMy blog was very similar to Lauren. I agree with a lot of the same ideas that she has. I think that the idea of abortion is so much more complicated then just yes so no. Women's reproduction is a very complex issue that doesn't deserve a quick one mind set solution.
@Jill Krieger
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Jill. The issue of Pro choice and pro life is very limited. The story of Crew really showed a person story that the topic involved. It is a very scary issue to tackle when its placed upon someone's shoulders. Jill has the same view on the legislation topic too. The ruling is to general and not helping women in need.
To me the two terms pro-life and pro-choice are problematic and limiting to reproductive rights, because pro-life orbits around giving women no self –rights to their bodies, and criminalizing abortions would hurt lots of women, for example those who are rape victims should be offered the right to abort a fetus. The government would be way over their heads if they choose to Criminalizing abortions. As for pro-choice, giving a choice to abort a fetus or give it up for adoption is made freely, and it is supported. However, the pain and aggravation brought on by anti- abortion groups could make a person feel utterly guilty. Andrea Crew reflects in here essay “An So I Choose” on seeing a young lady being a victim of feeling utterly guilty after having an abortion she speaks on the unbearding sadness the girl had on her face after seeing and hearing the comment from those groups.
ReplyDeleteA “Reproductive Justice” paradigm suggests real women support to whatever decision they choose to make, without being aggravation and put down by people with different opinions. It provides women to experience the loving feeling Crew felt at the end of her pregnancy. It gives the woman control and power to choose what they feel is best for them.
In the article Planned Parenthood Funding blocked in house vote, the legislation made a vote to end federal funding from Planned Parenthood. They are going about this all wrong. There are really some people in despaired need of Planned Parenthood. A lot of woman are having abortions because they and in a poor class and they know they cannot provide for a child. This also make the pro-choice term weaker, because if a woman choose to abort and she is a member of the poor class what choices do they offer her.
The arguments behind pro-life and pro-choice go so much deeper than just “abortion is wrong” and “its your body, your choice”. There are many social, economic and political factors that could strengthen or weaken each side. The pro-life side suggest criminalizing those who abort. After looking at our current prisons, is this really the best choice? How does putting someone in jail really teach them that abortion is wrong? If you want to educate people on all the negative effects of abortion, it should happen before or during pregnancy. Simply throwing them in jail is not going decrease the amount of women who have abortions. On the other hand, the pro-choice side still has several kinks to work out also. The amount of dangerous contraceptives available to women is outrageous. In some cases, it is more dangerous to actually go through an abortion, than to just have the baby naturally. Also, as Crews mention, how many “pro-choice” women are actually supportive of those who do think abortion is proper at a young age? Crew describes needing hope and support through these women while all she received was hurt and turmoil. Both sides of the argument need to reevaluate their arguments and notice what they can fix to make their arguments stronger.
ReplyDeleteBoth sides were very limiting in Crew’s case. As mentioned above, she had thought several times about abortion and was truly looking for support in those who “apparently” believed in what she was doing. On the other side, she had her mother who was pro-life, but Crew felt like they grew further and further apart as the pregnancy advanced. It seems as though neither side was willing to support Crew, but instead just wanted to make sure the opposite side was being undermined.
Honestly, I do not believe cutting the Planned Parenthood funding was right. I think that we need cancer screening, HIV testing, and parent education services. I do not mind paying taxes, so that the money can go to controlling HIV out break and possibly help research certain cancers. The one thing I do not support giving my money to help fund abortions. Since not everyone is this country agrees with abortion then we should not have to pay for other women to have it. I understand that not everyone is going to agree with every dime our government spends, but on an issue as big as this, we should definitely have some say.
Pro-life and pro-choice are such general terms. They do not encompass all the things that they were first intended to. Pro-life essentially mean that a person believes that life begins with conception and that abortion is killing a fetus and it is wrong. Pro-choice is the belief that a woman should be able to choose whether or not to abort a pregnancy based on her own personal beliefs and her situation. Reproductive rights are so much more than just pro-life or pro-choice.
ReplyDelete"Reproductive justice" is a wonderful term. It entails everything that the simple terms pro-life and pro-choice leave out. Reproductive justice acknowledges that women are oppressed when it comes to the bodies and their reproductive rights and aims to change that. They aim to allow women the fully protected right to make any decision she wants regarding her pregnancy and her reproductive life. It emphasizes that a woman's reproductive health is based on individual choice along with a variety of factors and conditions within one's experiences. As a victim of sexual assault, I have a new found appreciation for reproductive justice and the rights of those believe women should have more choices.
I first learned about cutting funding for Planned Parenthood through Facebook, of all places. How can our federal government find it okay to cut funding for birth control, abortions, HIV testing, cancer screenings, and other general health care that so many in our country rely on? Our lower income and teen communities rely on Planned Parenthood for so many basic health care options. It is not right for access to those things to be o severely diminished.
@Lauren McClucky - I really like your statement, "...both sides have flawed arguments and are all to ready to point the finger of shame at the other side." Both sides are more worried about how the other side is wrong and less worried about figring out a solution to this debate.
ReplyDelete@sc. Thomas - I completely agree with you that neither pro-life nor pro-choice really give the kind of aid and peace that a pregnant woman needss. If a woman is to get pregnant it's like no matter what choice she makes is right and neither side offers the kind of support she really needs to find acceptance in her choice.
@matt cape
ReplyDeleteUntil reading your post, I didn’t think about how both stories didn’t mention government as being one of the problems involving reproductive rights for women. You make your opinions clear in your post. You say that the male deserves a say in the abortion and also that if the girl is under 21 her parents should have a say. Thinking back to the conversations in class last week, we talked about both of those being an option. I do believe that a male should have a say to a certain extent, but if he is totally against abortions but the girl wants to proceed with one, it ultimately should be her choice—the male doesn’t have to carry the fetus around for months. Also, we discussed how we shouldn’t put an age limit on anything in this issue. People are raised in different ways, meaning that people’s maturity level varies (a lot). Plus, you are a legal adult when you’re 18, why should it be 21? Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and what they believe is right and wrong, but those were just some points I thought about while reading your post that everyone should think about as a rebuttal argument.
@mctittle
ReplyDeleteThe government cutting funding to Planned Parenthood was not a good idea at all. Women NEED all the other options you mentioned that PP offers. Besides, the funding was never directly going to abortions. By taking away their funding, they think it’ll prevent abortions happening, but it really is only forcing women to go find unsafe ways to attain abortions, going back to the way things were before Roe v Wade got passed.
@matt cape
ReplyDeleteThe government's say in the abortion does contribute to both sides' cases. In every argument ever made concerning America, it has came down to how much the government should control. Whether it be civil rights, gas prices, or any of the big topics we have today. I liked how you believe that we should go back to teaching safe sex education in schools. I know most think that abstinence is a joke, but i think with the proper education you can teach young adults about the dangerous of having sex before emotional and physically ready.
@Amanda Harrison
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do not believe abortion is right, I do not think the government should criminalize these women for their decisions. I do not know what the correct answer is to this issue, but our current prison system is not the answer. As I said above, I think education is the best way to go. It's the only way to make women realize how big of an impact this will make on their life. Also, I do not think its totally the pro-life groups that make these women feel insecure about their decision. Its a huge life change and there is always going to be that thought of "what if".
@sc.thomas I agree with your statement that a woman should be comfortable no matter what the outcome may be. Every woman comes from different backgrounds and have faced their own individual issues that may or may not cause them to want to birth a child.
ReplyDelete@Natalie Duffy I also agree with what you are saying about both sides are so worried about the other that nothing is getting accomplished and the issues dealing with abortion are not being solved.
In this class, the topic of abortion has been brought up numerous times. We have discussed how the words “prolife” and “prochoice” are very limited and in some ways the idea contradict themselves. The word prochoice is also limiting because women still have to deal with the consequences of either terminating the pregnancy or having the baby, both take a toll on a women’s body.
ReplyDeleteThe word prolife is limiting because it is referring to the unborn child and not the women and her body. Many people have different opinions on if they believe that the unborn baby is considered a life or not. By saying prolife you are also saying that the unborn baby is already considered a person. The most disturbing thing is that the life of the women is not included in the argument. This unborn child has certain rights and is protected by the states and some believe that these rights eliminate the woman’s rights to her own body. Reproductive justice views more of the situation as a whole, considering the women and her unborn baby. Reproductive justice does not take a side but evaluates both arguments and attempts to do what is believed to be right.
Because this is such a controversial topic, there are many arguments in legislature over this topic. Publicizing women’s body and reproduction in my opinion is a positive thing because many people are searching for answers. The problem with the argument is that it seems to force people to choose a side. The more people talk about an issue and get new ideas out there the more likely we are going to come to some conclusion, ever on a topic as controversial as this one.