Scorpio Risen

Archive for the ‘Abortion’ Category

Fuck yes!

Posted on: 20 May, 2008

“22 weeks

The fifth and final abortion amendment is Richard Ottaway’s attempt to reduce the abortion time limit to 22 weeks. MPs are going through the lobbies now.

11.15pm

That’s it. MPs have rejected Ottaway’s amendment by 304 votes to 233, a majority of 71.

The first major Commons debate on abortion in almost 20 years has ended with the status quo.

The anti-abortion lobby has failed to change the law. The abortion time limit remains at 24 weeks.

So, after seven hours of debate, the only substantial changes to the law are new rights for single women and lesbians seeking to have a child through IVF.”

 

FUCK YOU to the Anti-Choice brigade.

20 weeks

MPs are now voting on whether to reduce the limit to 20 weeks, Nadine Dorries’s amendment.

10.50pm

Again rejected.

***

😀 This is good stuff, good stuff so far. I just hope that MPs don’t flake out and think that 22 weeks is a good compromise. It’s not. Just stick to 24 weeks, dammit.

However, I’m a realist, and I do realise that the anti-choice, anti-woman brigade will be back.

 

I’m tired, so forgive any ramblings.

Who else is desperately refreshing the rolling coverage of the abortion debate on the Guardian’s website?

I am so, so, so relieved that the proposal for a 12 week limit have been defeated. 12 weeks – are you fucking kidding me?!

You know, there has been so much said about this whole issue on the f-word and elsewhere. There’s not really that much more I can add, nothing new I can really bring to the table.

It is very worrying that there is a real possibility that women’s rights can be undermined tonight. And, if not tonight – well, Nadine Dorries and co will continue to fight for their anti-choice, anti-woman agenda. No, it’s not pro-life at all. It’s bullshit. What about the life of a woman who is vulnerable? Any reductions on the upper limit will be affecting those women who are most vulnerable. And that’s fucked up. I don’t care how many high-profile cases about babies surviving at 20-24 weeks there are. The reason why these cases are so high-profile is simply because they’re so goddamn rare. Duh, it’s a basic principle of news worthiness!

I’m now so relieved that the 16week proposal has been squashed. Thank Goddess.

I am  horrified, yes, horrified that these amendments have even been proposed. I don’t give a shit about what the BBC news reporters claim the debate is about: it’s not “sanctity of life” vs science. The real issue at stake is a woman’s fundamental right to choose, to have her own autonomy. Dammit all, feminists fought so hard. We’re still fighting. Writing letters (that’s about all I could do this time round), protesting, signing petitions.

Urgh.
Check out this bollocks.

Now – if that article creeped you out (holy shit – I think that bloke’s using that crucifix to compensate for something),  or annoyed/enraged/pissed you off, check out this piece by the f-word on it to calm you down a bit.  

Grr- damn those pesky anti-choicers. It seems they’d use every dirty trick in the book to undermine – or scrap – womyn’s abortion rights.

Whether it’s using shocking imagery (cheap and tacky, I know), making up ridiculous “post-abortion syndromes”, or – now – this whole ridiculous “post-abortive men” malarky.

*Sigh*

You know, they have some damn nerve. They do, they really do. I just love how they didn’t care at the time; in fact, it even says that one of them “felt only indifference” at the time, but now – it’s a totally different story. How convenient for those damn anti-choicers. It just seems to me that they’re using these supposed “men’s tears” to try to control women and manipulate the abortion debate with false emotions.

Men’s tears? So what.

Now, I do tend to attempt to be somewhat diplomatic with most issues, but no – not this one. Usually I tend to avoid invalidating people’s feelings. But – perhaps it’s because I’m inclined to cynicism – I doubt very much they really care about those abortions. It’s more than likely that they’re just pissed they couldn’t control those women.

I’m not saying that I think men aren’t affected by abortions; as it mentions in the F-word article: “As Broadsheet’s Catherine Price says: ‘I think few people would argue that the decision to have an abortion is a serious one, and that it carries the possibility of regret. There are plenty of instances when both women and men could benefit from therapy or counseling both before and after the abortion — and it is definitely not a decision to be taken lightly.’”
But I just a smell a rat with these guys. Just reading what they said makes me stop and think, hmm – wait a sec, there’s something not quite right. I can’t see them as genuine. That’s why I’m not at all sympathetic to their “plight”.

*Sigh*

Posted on: 19 January, 2008

I’ve just started writing a new post about post-abortive men (I read a link from the f-word blog), but I’ve had to put it in drafts already, as I’m feeling drained after a long argument about abortion with one of my friends who turned out to be very anti-abortion. It’s now a subject we can never discuss again, which really sucks as this is someone who I can generally be very open with.

When, quite simply, the lives “murdered” were never even born.

When the “deceased”  were a bunch of cells, barely even foetuses.

So, quite frankly, that bloody 6.7million statistic the anti-abortionists keep flinging about and projecting onto the Houses of Parliament can be shoved right up their arses.

 Personally, I prefer to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Abortion Act in Britain, rather than to “commemorate” it.

Who do they think they are? 6.7 million abortions = 6.7million unwanted pregnancies, which would’ve fucked the lives of women who found themselves in difficult situations. Where do they get off stigmatizing these women and the decisions they made?

 Shouldn’t we, instead, be welcoming the fact that safe abortions are more easily accessible for more women? That women are now in a legal position to make the autonomous decision to choose to keep a pregnancy – as opposed to continue a forced pregnancy – or to abort, safely?

Abortion is not easy for any woman, and so-called “pro-life” activity only makes it harder, by stigmatising women who exercise their legal right. I wonder how being anti-abortion is being truly “pro-life”, when anti-abortionists show little compassion to a fellow living human being.

Based on my musing earlier today, and this post from Lonergrrrl.

Men – y’know, those of the human race devoid of wombs and vaginas – who are “pro-life”/anti-abortion:

What makes you o so qualified to pass any judgement on a woman’s right to (access to) abortion?

I believe I have said this before, but when it comes to pregnancy and the choice to abort or not to abort, it is up entirely to the individuals involved. Not for society to chastice, judge, attempt to restrict, ostracise, criticise, or have any other kind of negative involvement, if the route taken is abortion.

I support the right to choose to abort, or not to abort.
I supported my friend’s decision to abort.
I supported, and still support, my other friend’s decision to keep her child.

It is down to the individual and her choice.