Sensitive topic but curious to know..

I would probably never have one myself (although to be honest, I have never been in that situation, so who knows...) but I believe that every woman should have the right to choose what to do with her body.

I personally think the term Pro-Life is a big misnomer. People that do not believe woman should have the right to choose what to do with their own bodies, they are not Pro-Life, they are Anti-Choice.

JMHO.

---

Posted by Bride626

I'm with you. And everyone seems to confuse this as a RELIGIOUS issue. I disagree. It is a MORAL issue and I do not think that GWB is attempting to impose his faith on anyone based on his stance. It is an issue concerning how we as a society value life.

People automatically assume that I am some sort of religious zealot for my pro-life stance. This could not be further from the truth. I was raised without any religion and was torn on this subject. However, when you read any biology/embryology text, it will tell you that life begins at conception, that a heart is beating at 21 days past conception, etc. These scientific facts, not religious ideals, impressed me. I think that there should be exceptions in the case of danger to a mother's life, rape and incest. However, abortion for convenience is, in my opinion, a disgrace and will hopefully be overruled.

4 MORE YEARS

---

Many times people base what they believe to be moral on their religious beliefs. What I believe to be morally right may not be what you believe is right. So why do a few get to make the decision for the whole country? Because you believe that it's not right doesn't mean it's should be law.

I don't think that abortions should be used as a form of birth control. I think their should be more education on other forms of birth control and abstinence. Accidents happen and if a woman knows she can't take care of a child it's her choice to decide to terminate. It's between a woman, her God (if she has one) and her conscience (sp??).

My cousin and close friend had abortions and I know it wasn't an easy decision for them. But it was a choice they needed to make for themselves at the time.

personally i avoid subjects like this b/c there r just too many 'what ifs' to every side..the only thing i can say is that..

I think until you are actually IN the situation you cant say you 'know' what you would do...
its never that simple.

I think i get emotional over the issue of abortion because i don't know how to really feel about it..thats why i started this post. I just get so overwhelmingly sad thinking about it. Yet i wouldn't, like i said, tell anyone what to do or how to live their life. I have lived through two friends having abortions...I was there for them, even though I didn't agree..and I tried very hard to understand how it must have been for them. It certainly wasn't a decision made lightly.

However....i believe that the term 'pro choice' is a misnomer in many ways. Do men have a choice? The child? I just don't know...i never try to be a hypocrite, just trying to see both sides.

I'm pro-choice and yes I know several people who've had abortions...none of them more than once and none of them were easy decisions. My question is this: many pro-life supporters believe that because abortion is taking a life, but what of that quality of that life? Do you believe it is better that an unwanted child be born to a parent that will resent and mistreat them? What kind of life is that? Is it better to be put through the system, in foster care, moved from house to house with no stability? Is that better for the child? Is that a better life than none at all? Not in my opinion.

Further to that, I have a girlfriend who is married and all her doctors have told her not to get pregnant because the delivery will kill her. She will DIE if she gives birth to a child. She can't take the pill, because it interferes with her medication and she does use some kind of birth control because obviously this is not a risk you want to take, but if something should go wrong and her birth control fails, then what? Should she not have sex with her husband? Should he have not married her?

These are some of the reasons behind my position. I'm really putting these questions out there rhetorically, because no one will ever change my stance on this issue, and I don't really expect to change the opinion of anyone on the opposite side either.

---

Posted by nferrandi

I'm not trying to call anyone a hypocrite, but can you really be pro-life and believe that abortion in the case of rape is ok? If you're pro-life that should include under any circumstances.
I'm personally pro-choice and know many people who have had abortions. It has been any easy decision for some, which I really can't understand, and a painful decision for others. Either way, I believe it's a woman's choice what to do with her body.
I definitely agree with the sentiment that sex education is of the utmost importance. The more educated our youth, and not so youthful, are the less need there will be for abortions.

---

well said!

-Women under age 18 who had an induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 150%.
-Women of age 30 and above who aborted a first pregnancy increase their breast cancer risk by 110%.
-Overall, women who have an induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 50%.

I agree that in the cases of rape or incest, there is NO reason a woman shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion.

I will say the same thing to you pro-lifers that I said to the pro-choicers. Abortion is not just about the baby, but about the mother as well. You have to be able to look at both sides of the issue in order to make an educated, sound decision.

Those 'facts' aren't supported by anyone but pro-lifers/anti-choicers.

---

Anti-choice claims linking abortion and breast cancer fly in the face of scientific evidence. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), the American Cancer Society (ACS), and the The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) have all refuted the reliability of such an association (ACS, 2003; ACOG, 2003; NCI, 2003).

In February 2003, NCI convened the Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop to 'provide an integrated scientific assessment of the association between reproductive events and the risk of breast cancer.' After reviewing the body of scientific literature, NCI concluded that 'Induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk' (NCI, 2003).

In August 2003, after conducting its own review of the scientific literature, ACOG issued a committee opinion concluding that 'early studies of the relationship between prior induced abortion and breast cancer risk have been inconsistent and are difficult to interpret because of methodologic considerations. More rigorous recent studies argue against a causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk' (ACOG, 2003).


Reproductive Factors and Breast Cancer

While researchers do not know what causes breast cancer, reproductive factors have been associated with risk for the disease since the 17th century, when breast cancer was noted to be more prevalent among nuns. It is known that having a full-term pregnancy early in a woman's childbearing years is protective against breast cancer, and some studies have also indicated that breastfeeding, especially in women who are young when they give birth, may reduce a woman's risk of developing the disease. A woman's age at menarche and menopause also influence her risk for breast cancer, with earlier onset of regular menstrual cycles and later age at menopause associated with higher risk (Kelsey & Gammon, 1991). However, the best available evidence — from large population-based cohort studies — shows no net effect that induced abortion places women at increased risk for developing breast cancer (Bartholomew & Grimes, 1998).


Hypothesis: Hormones Lead to Breast Cell Differentiation

The theory linking pregnancy termination and breast cancer is based on the hormonal disruption that occurs when a woman's pregnancy is interrupted. Pregnancy initiates a surge of sex hormones (estrogen, progesterone, and prolactin), which leads to differentiation of the cells in the breast glands in preparation for lactation. The changing concentrations of hormones during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy lead to increased differentiation. In a first pregnancy, the results of these hormonal changes permanently alter the structure of the breast. Adherents of this theory claim that interruption of the first trimester of a first pregnancy causes a cessation of cell differentiation that may result in a subsequent increase in the risk of cancerous growth in these tissues (Brumsted & Riddick, 1990; Westhoff, 1997). Attempts to prove this theory, however, have failed.


Many Factors Contribute to Inconclusive Study Results

At least 80 research studies worldwide have collected data about breast cancer and reproductive factors such as childbirth, menstrual cycles, birth control pills, and abortion. Approximately 30 studies have examined the risk of developing breast cancer for women who have had abortions. Researchers at the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the World Health Organization, and major universities say that the most reliable studies show no increased risk, and they consider the entire body of research inconclusive (ACS, 1999; NCI, 2002; Rosenfield, 1994?; RCOG, 2001; WHO, 2000).


A number of factors may render a study unreliable:

Miscarriages and induced abortion affect a woman's body differently but many studies have not distinguished between them.

Many women do not report miscarriages because they are unaware they have had them.


Abortions are often unreported because of the privacy of the decision to terminate a pregnancy.

Some studies have not examined the possibly different effects of abortion after or before a full-term pregnancy.


Other studies have not been careful to examine the impact of age at the time of abortion and age at the time of first childbirth.


Many studies have been too small to be statistically significant. (Wingo et al., 1997; NCI, 2002).

---

---

Posted by Jordan

Those 'facts' aren't supported by anyone but pro-lifers/anti-choicers.

---

Acutally, that came from CWA, a cancer awareness organization. An organization that has nothing to do with pro-choice or life.

---

Posted by CubanBride

---

Posted by Jordan

Those 'facts' aren't supported by anyone but pro-lifers/anti-choicers.

---

Acutally, that came from CWA, a cancer awareness organization. An organization that has nothing to do with pro-choice or life.

---

The groups refuting those 'facts' aren't affiliated with pro or anti choice either...and they are a little more well-known, if you will.

---

The National Cancer Institute (NCI), the American Cancer Society (ACS), and the The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) have all refuted the reliability of such an association (ACS, 2003; ACOG, 2003; NCI, 2003).

---

---

Posted by CubanBride

---

Posted by Jordan

Those 'facts' aren't supported by anyone but pro-lifers/anti-choicers.

---

Acutally, that came from CWA, a cancer awareness organization. An organization that has nothing to do with pro-choice or life.

---

From the CWA web site:
'Concerned Women for America (CWA) will continue to fight and protect the sanctity of human life until all Americans are once again free from the threat of abortion.'

---

Posted by TwoBugs

---

Posted by CubanBride

---

Posted by Jordan

Those 'facts' aren't supported by anyone but pro-lifers/anti-choicers.

---

Acutally, that came from CWA, a cancer awareness organization. An organization that has nothing to do with pro-choice or life.

---

From the CWA web site:
'Concerned Women for America (CWA) will continue to fight and protect the sanctity of human life until all Americans are once again free from the threat of abortion.'

---

Thank you. I just did a quick Google and found a few CWA's...wasn't sure which one Cuban was quoting from.

One in particular, is a non profit Christian Int'l adoption agency...

---

Posted by Jordan

---

Posted by TwoBugs

---

Posted by CubanBride

---

Posted by Jordan

Those 'facts' aren't supported by anyone but pro-lifers/anti-choicers.

---

Acutally, that came from CWA, a cancer awareness organization. An organization that has nothing to do with pro-choice or life.

---

From the CWA web site:
'Concerned Women for America (CWA) will continue to fight and protect the sanctity of human life until all Americans are once again free from the threat of abortion.'

---

Thank you. I just did a quick Google and found a few CWA's...wasn't sure which one Cuban was quoting from.

One in particular, is a non profit Christian Int'l adoption agency...

---

I'm not sure if the one I quoted is the correct one, either. There is also the Christian Wellness Association...

---

Posted by TwoBugs

I'm not sure if the one I quoted is the correct one, either. There is also the Christian Wellness Association...

---

Either way...I think we get the point.

Bottom line - the abortion-cancer link is propaganda put out by the anti-choice. It's been refuted by REPUTABLE cancer research organizations, time and time again.

I wonder how many of you actually know someone who was raped and then became pregnant?

I'm a regular poster but posting under an alias for obvious reasons. I was sixteen when I was raped by my boyfriend and then had to come to terms with whether or not to abort my baby. I made the decision to abort the baby because it wasn't my choice to get pregnant and I never willingly chose to have sex with this individual. I was so emotionally shattered and fragmented, having that daily reminder in my life of how evil this person was would have destroyed me. Honestly my fear was the child would perpetuate his father's souless existence and I would hate it forever. Call me a hypocrite but I am pro-life. I never look on my decision to do what I did as being a hypocrite, just a human reaction to an unhuman act. I think of that child every year at the exact time it happend some 20 years ago. Therapy doesn't remove those scars. My sins will be judged by God someday...

---

Posted by Jordan

---

Posted by TwoBugs

I'm not sure if the one I quoted is the correct one, either. There is also the Christian Wellness Association...

---

Either way...I think we get the point.

Bottom line - the abortion-cancer link is propaganda put out by the anti-choice. It's been refuted by REPUTABLE cancer research organizations, time and time again.

---

Such as ????????

To answer the original question, no, I am ProChoice through and through. Regardless of whether it was an 'oops' or rape. Also the term 'partial birth abortion' is not a medical term - it is another catch phrase concocted by the AntiChoice. There is not a Dr in her/his right mind that would ever - EVER - perform an abortion on a woman at 8 months, 9 months just b/c she woke up that morning and felt like terminating her pregnancy. Abortions are performed that late in the game for 1 of two reasons...the mother is at risk or the baby is terribly deformed.

---

Posted by becks23

I personally think the term Pro-Life is a big misnomer. People that do not believe woman should have the right to choose what to do with their own bodies, they are not Pro-Life, they are Anti-Choice.

JMHO.

---

I agree with you 100%.

---

Posted by babygirl

---

Posted by Jordan

---

Posted by TwoBugs

I'm not sure if the one I quoted is the correct one, either. There is also the Christian Wellness Association...

---

Either way...I think we get the point.

Bottom line - the abortion-cancer link is propaganda put out by the anti-choice. It's been refuted by REPUTABLE cancer research organizations, time and time again.

---

Such as ????????

---

'Such as?????????', what?

---

Posted by babygirl

---

Posted by Jordan

---

Posted by TwoBugs

I'm not sure if the one I quoted is the correct one, either. There is also the Christian Wellness Association...

---

Either way...I think we get the point.

Bottom line - the abortion-cancer link is propaganda put out by the anti-choice. It's been refuted by REPUTABLE cancer research organizations, time and time again.

---

Such as ????????

---

The NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
a government run research organziation..
A LOT more reputable than your CWA

---

Posted by Jordan

---

Posted by babygirl

---

Posted by Jordan

---

Posted by TwoBugs

I'm not sure if the one I quoted is the correct one, either. There is also the Christian Wellness Association...

---

Either way...I think we get the point.

Bottom line - the abortion-cancer link is propaganda put out by the anti-choice. It's been refuted by REPUTABLE cancer research organizations, time and time again.

---

Such as ????????

---

'Such as?????????', what?

---

Which reputable organizations?