Jessica Valenti: College is Totally Worth Killing Babies Over

Wednesday, Lori Ziganto (one of my favorite bloggers) wrote a brilliant piece in response to an article Jessica Valenti wrote on Feministing. Another Feministing author, Lori, had heard about the ad campaign called “Abortion Changes You” last month that was putting ads on the New York subway.

Here is what the ad looks like:

Considering feminists cannot abide anything that might paint abortion in a negative light, this made Lori VERY angry. She explained that somehow, this ignores the experiences and reactions women have had with and from abortion.

I’m all for validating and honoring the experience of women who have had an abortion. But there are already TONS of really great support systems for women who have had abortions that are equipped to address a RANGE of post-abortion emotions and outcomes- glee, relief, guilt, sadness, loss, pride, no reaction at all, or a million other possibilities. When an ad campaign chooses to ignore these very real experiences of women who have had abortions, you have to assume that they have an agenda other than helping real women.

Perhaps Lori was blinded by her “ZOMG SOMEONE IS ATTACKING ABORTION YEAAAAARRRGHHHHH!” rage, but the whole point of this ad campaign is to point out how abortion can affect a woman. I know — all things negative relating to abortion must be kept super-secret. But here in the real world, when it comes to medical procedures, most normal women like to know exactly what will be done to them and what the possible risks and repercussions could be. Normal women, even pro-abortion women, don’t see abortion as something to be taken lightly. They don’t look at it the way radical feminists do. Impossible for feminists to understand, I know.

Well, this week, Jessica found out that someone had committed vandalism and defaced the ad. Of course, this just made her day.

Here is what it looked like after it was defaced:

Jessica’s response was to call the vandal a “pro-choice hero” and “Love. It.”

And this is where Lori got involved. She wrote a great post about the whole controversy.

A very mild ad, indeed. And an accurate one; abortion does change you. While feminists sneer at the idea of post-abortion syndrome, it does exist. And if they actually cared about women, they’d admit that fact and would stop encouraging women to have abortions without disclosing the trauma that can occur to the woman.

It’s clear that they don’t care about the dead babies, but they also need to stop insisting that they are For Women ™ , when they most obviously are not. You see, feminists, an unborn baby is not just a clump of cells. Many women who abort their babies, therefore, suffer intense pain and immense guilt. Their entire lives.

They may just be nutty wing nuts to you, but they are real people with true feelings. Because you do nothing but sneer at those feelings, in fact lie about their very existence, your For The Women card is hereby pulled. You are more concerned with one Supreme Court case, that you constantly use as a wedge and a pawn, than you are with actual women.

Jessica has now responded by attacking Lori Ziganto. And while I’m sure she and her fellow feminist zombies thought their responses were just so super intelligent and better than Lori’s post, all they really did was prove Lori’s point.

Going to college is a matter of “convenience”? Really? Women want higher education for “co-ed fun”?

I always wondered what anti-choicers meant when they said women get abortions “for convenience.” Did they think that women were procuring lunchtime abortions so they could go out and booze it up that night? That women didn’t feel like gaining weight and that ending the pregnancy would be so much easier? I figured that they had this bizarre fictitious woman in their minds and that they didn’t recognize the complex, personal, and often selfless reasons women decide to get abortions. But I was wrong.

It isn’t that anti-choicers don’t understand why women get abortions – it’s that they care so little about women’s lives that any reason given to obtain an abortion is seen as “convenient.”

Some things that are convenient: Providing for your existing children. Going to college. Having enough money to eat, pay rent, keep the electricity on. Not dying.

So yeah, I guess I would “rejoice” over women obtaining abortions when it’s convenient. (The inaccessibility of abortion for too many women makes actual rejoicing impossible.) Whether it’s for health, financial, and educational reasons – or simply not wanting to have a child yet – it would absolutely thrill me if women’s life decisions were respected, accepted and supported. But instead, we live in a world where a woman’s desire for something as basic as education is mocked as selfish. And we’re the ones who are “anti-woman”? I think not.

Reproductive health and justice is one of my strongest passions (I work with Planned Parenthood). When people try to block abortion access, I start crying and it’s hard for me to stop. I am still shocked at the huge disregard anti-choicers have for womens lives. They really do have no regard for human life, because, guess what? women are human. This: “Some things that are convenient: Providing for your existing children. Going to college. Having enough money to eat, pay rent, keep the electricity on. Not dying.” made me tear up. And honestly, if I were to become pregnant right now, I would get an abortion because I need to finish college and have enough money to eat, pay rent, and keep the electricity on. I am also bipolar, and I would have to stop taking my medication if I were to have a baby, which would be downright dangerous. Thanks for the post, Jessica.

But the point is that 4 years of college means a completely different life than a life w/o 4 years of college and anyone who doesn’t recognize that is either living in a dreamworld or is being deliberately obtuse. There is nothing “everyday” about going to college – it’s an incredible privilege that changes people’s lives.

And here we go, with feminists making women perpetual victims yet again, rather than empowering them. Jessica and her fellow zombies cannot seem to wrap their minds around the idea of a woman having a child and going to college at the same time. I know, I know — insanity, right? But somehow, my mother was able to work full-time, raise two children, have a loving marriage, and get her college degree. Somehow, several of my friends are raising children and getting their degrees. Where are the feminists encouraging women to do both? Heck, they don’t even have to raise the baby. There’s always adoption, the option that you’ll never hear someone like Jessica Valenti champion. If the college-aged girl wasn’t ready for a kid, all she’d have to do was carry the baby for nine months while she went to school and then she could help a couple who can’t have children make a family. But if a girl gets pregnant and it’s “inconvenient”, all feminists like Jessica Valenti can do is scream at the girl to HAVE AN ABORTION! HAVE AN ABORTION! Sometimes, you don’t get pregnant at a convenient time. I get that. It doesn’t mean that you have to choose between going to college or having a baby. But that’s the only option given to women if they listen to feminists. They have to choose either college or their child, because presumably, having a child at an inconvenient time would be the WORST THING EVER!!!

Look, I know all about not wanting to have a baby at a certain time. I’m engaged, but my fiance is a Marine with an upcoming deployment. If I got pregnant now, the baby would be born while Matt was in Afghanistan. I do not want to go through a pregnancy by myself, and I do not want Matt to miss the birth of his first child. I don’t want him to come home to the son or daughter he’s never met. We also don’t have a lot of money to be raising a child right now. A baby just is not in our plans at the moment.

But it could happen. And if it did, you can bet that abortion would never be an option for us. We would find a way to make it work. Why do feminists never present that as a viable option for women?

It’s like they practically salivate over the thought of another woman getting an abortion. I don’t know why, but it’s sickening how much feminists try to actively convince women to have abortions. And of course, never mentioned is the option of not getting pregnant if you absolutely cannot handle a baby at the moment. There’s birth control, and if you can’t afford that, the solution is simple: don’t have sex. But of course, telling a feminist that women shouldn’t have sex if they aren’t ready for a baby might make their head explode. I mean, really, dare you tell women that they should keep their legs shut if they aren’t ready to get pregnant?! Believe it or not, there is an element of personal responsibility at play here. The whole feminist philosophy is disgusting. They tell women to sleep around like men do. When women then get unintentionally pregnant (usually while unmarried), they tell the women to just kill the damn burden growing inside of you and throw it out like refuse. And NO, don’t you dare do any research about abortion, what your baby looks like, or the effect having an abortion can have on you. Just kill the damn thing and get back to your Womyn’s Studies classes because college is the MOST. IMPORTANT. THING. EVER! And no, you cannot do both, you must choose between being a pregnant, barefoot housewife in a kitchen or being a smart, single, feminist womyn with a degree in Gender Studies. If you have the baby you are contributing to the partiarchy! And you will be a victim! Do what we say! Don’t think for yourself!

It’s sickening, truly sickening.

All of this just goes to show how far feminism has fallen. Feminists were once made up of smart, strong women (who, incidentally, despised abortion and rightfully saw it as evil) who were fighting for real gender equality — the right to vote, to get an education.

Now, feminists crusade for abortion. It’s their number one cause. And they don’t even want women to be informed. They don’t want women seeing ultrasounds first because they know it’ll influence them to have the baby. They don’t want women learning that abortion can have devastating physical and emotional repercussions. They don’t want abortion to be “safe, legal, and rare”. Lori’s post showcased another example of a feminist accidentally exposing that trust, and it pissed Jessica Valenti off. Feminists don’t want women to be able to choose what’s best for them; they want women choosing abortion. I can only assume it’s because if women stop choosing abortion, then feminists will lose their last grip on relevance in today’s society. Getting the truth out about abortion and its possible effects, as the “Abortion Changes You” campaign does, terrifies and angers feminists.

It’s pathetic and disgusting, that someone would actually encourage abortion — the murder of the unborn — solely to help maintain their own grip on power and relevance in the world. Anything that harms the pro-abortion movement really is just harming modern feminism. And this ad is just another crack in the feminist “we help womyn” facade.

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary, or follow her on Twitter!

  • MJP

    This is a great article, I totally agree. It's so counter to the whole idea of empowering women when they have to kill their child to go to college or succeed. I've taught pregnant college students, we worked around her appointments and she passed. I myself am in graduate school and am planning to start a family soon. My husband and I have thought about the difficulties but I don't want to put my life on hold because of school. Besides, my univ actually has a good daycare and other services nearby for the few hours I'll be away. God provides.

  • susan

    I graduated at 17, went to college for 2 years, then went to technical school while working because my 2 yrs at "University" were worthless, became an LVN at 21, got pregnant at 24, had my son, went back to get my associates in nursing became an RN at 27, got married, got pregnant, had my daughter…continually working as an Rn until I was 38—then went back to school and completed my BSN–and now at 43…may go back to get my masters….so funny how having and keeping my kiids had no negative impact on my education whatsoever!!! somehow, I just don't think I am so smart, competent or anything–that no one else could do it!

  • Dixie

    Thank you for the truth! PP and Pro Choice voters won't accept it because that would be admitting it's true!

  • Melissa

    Awesome, fired up article! I loved it!

    As a side note. I have a BA, an MA, and (in December) a Ph.D., plus an almost 2-year old daughter and a 3-month old baby girl. Out of that list, can you guess which two achievements I'm most proud of? :-) At one time I thought higher education was something I absolutely couldn't live without. I thought that if I didn't have it, I would be poor and powerless. This is such a lie. Our current generation — with recent college grads unable to find a job or getting jobs that pay as much (or many times, less than) so-called uneducated, blue-collar jobs — is hopefully learning that much of what we're spoon-fed about the importance of college is an exaggeration. Yes, college is important, but it is not the most important thing. And it is certainly NOT worth killing for — not by a long shot. Truly, despite all my academic and professional successes, my children are what give my life meaning. And the thing is, almost every mother will say the same thing!

  • Tannis

    I will never understand how it is empowering to women to tell them they can have indiscriminate sex. Its wrong for men to sleep around and be all-consumed by their sex drive (women bash them for it – have for centuries) and so in order to prove our equality we're going to sink to that level. Really? It sort of reminds me of hazing: "its a bad thing but its ok as long as I get to do it too.."

    It is way more empowering to tell women that they can say no. That they can indeed be in control of their body in the most real and authentic way by saying no.

    I know all about being pregnant at an "inconvenient" or unexpected time. 4 times in fact. But I had enough control to know that inconvenient or not, my husband and I are able to provide a loving family to our children. We know that God wouldn't give us these blessings if He didn't feel we were ready and able to take care of them. Many days I can't imagine how we'll do it, but day after day He continues to provide.

  • Charlotte Anne Murph

    I totally love this arcticle! And completely agree that abortion is never the answer, but i dont think birth control pills are. I think abstinence before marriage and once you and your hubby are happily married stick to NFP (NATURAL family planning)

  • Vita

    I totally aggree – if in no way you'd be able to raise a child – don't have sex. And if you did get pregnant – there's a hundred more options than just abortion. I agree about birth control too – it's not an answer, it is not 100% reliable and has side effects (eg pills). The only answer, I have to agree with Charlotte – abstinence before marriage. Works 120% every time. Tried and tested :) Natural Family Planning these days is also rather easy, there are fertility monitors for that (I used Persona, brilliant) and I think it has a positive effect on a marriage – it strenghtens the willpower, keeps you in the grace of God, opens a dialog between spouses and has zero side effects whatsoever.

  • Abby

    ABSTINENCE :) so glad you said that in your article. But I don't exactly agree 100% Family Planning (at this point, I'm sure my opinion will change when I get married) – why not let God plan the family, and bring the children along when he wants you to have them?

  • Abby

    After thinking about it more, here's a thought on Family Planning: If you (and your spouse) decide that you want to have a child every 2 years, that's great. That part of Family Planning is great. so sorry, i didn't think it through very well :) now i get it :)

  • Frank

    Abortion is a woman's right in the same sense that owning slaves was a slave-owner's right; the right to treat people as property to be disposed of at the owner's whim.

  • Ninek

    I had achieved a "goal" a couple years ago. I was asked to give a speech. I looked out over the room full of people. There was an empty place where my child should have been. If I had been willing to work a little harder, make a few compromises, my child could have been there to share the experience. I looked out over that room and she was the only one absent and the only one worth giving the speech to. None of my accomplishments was worth it. I would rather have my child instead.

  • http://www.PAXbaby.com Jillian

    Whooot! YES! Great post! Loved it! I always know I've read a "good one" when I want to stand up and shout after reading! THANKS for writing the truth!

  • Laura Ferguson

    My stance on abortion has always been that "You can't go from an egg and sperm to a baby without the 9 months in between."

  • http://www.thoughts.com/livelife_3/blog lovelife_3

    @Laura Ferguson did you watch the video on this site? http://herestheblood.com/

    I think thats it, if not it's easy to find. Look for the tiny human hand covered in blood. It may bring realizations to you.

  • Arnica

    Women should either a) use birth control or b) not have sex… interesting… what if she's one of the few whose birth control fails? What if she doesn't have sex but someone had it with her? (eg. rape)

    I understand that the author wants women to think about working it out. My spiritual beliefs call for the same thing. But the examples she gave of "working it out" inlcuded her mother who had a "loving marriage" and herself who is engaged.

    What if a single woman is on birth control, raped by someone else, and her boyfriend dumps her because he thinks she was cheating? What if her family also doesn't believe her? You cannot go to school, and work, and raise a kid as a single mother with no partner or family support in this country. This is the reality feminists try to explain and I know they have a point.

    The "spirituality" I mentioned also calls for people to find compromise and common ground. Can we consider some exceptional circumstances where abortion could be allowed?

  • Frank

    @Laura Ferguson

    Your stance seems to ignore the science involved.

    Simple DNA testing proves that, when the sperm fertilizes the egg, a new human being is created at that very instant (not nine months later).

    A human embryo is created that has its very own unique DNA. It is not the mother's DNA and it is not the father's DNA; it is their offspring's DNA.

    And, by the way, the word "embryo" is nothing more than a word used to describe a particular stage of any person's development. (Similar to other such descriptive words as fetus, baby, toddler, first-grader, teenager and even senior-citizen).

  • Doc Joe

    I am retired from 8 years of military practice and 25 years of private primary medical. Have wondered about the psychological effects on 1:3 American women who had an abortion: How deep is this buried? How many women were unable to conceive again and lost their only chance? How many women have unadmitted psychological wounds?

    Reviewing the American medical literature produces no facts, just posturing. Foreign medical journals told a different story.

    So I called the American Medical Association about their investigations into the long-term effects of abortion. I got a return call on my answering machine [that I have preserved] from their Director of Ethics. She stated that the AMA has never changed their supportive position paper in 1978 from Roe v Wade nor have they ever done studies on the matter.

    In other words, the AMA continues to advise Congress to support abortion but has not done "due diligence" [a requirement for medical procedures to make sure that the procedure's complications are known].

  • http://generationsforlife.org/ John Jansen

    @Arnica, who asked: "Can we consider some exceptional circumstances where abortion could be allowed?"

    Can we consider some exceptional circumstances where killing a child who is already born could be allowed?

    Answer that question, and you'll have the answer to your question.

  • Marauder

    "You cannot go to school, and work, and raise a kid as a single mother with no partner or family support in this country. This is the reality feminists try to explain and I know they have a point."

    I think you're ignoring adoption…

  • Austin Nedved

    And of course, never mentioned is the option of not getting pregnant if you absolutely cannot handle a baby at the moment. There’s birth control, and if you can’t afford that, the solution is simple: don’t have sex.

    The birth control pill works the same way that abortion does. This is supposed to be a pro-life blog. In light of that, I don't think it makes much sense to advocate it here.

  • Austin Nedved

    Sorry, wrong link. Here's the correct one: http://archfami.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/9/2/126….

  • Hippy for Life

    True Feminists are empowered women. Empowered to embrace all that it means to be a woman. Empowered to be mothers, daughters, sisters, students, community leaders, doctors, scientists, astronauts, executives, politicians. True Feminists understand that peace begins in the womb. True Feminists believe that WOMEN DESERVE BETTER THAN ABORTION.

    Feminists for Life of America – Pro Woman – Pro Life
    http://www.feministsforlife.org/taf/index.htm

  • Jenn

    I got pregnant at 17 by being raped. I went to Planned Parenthood for a pregnancy test because that was the only place available to get a free test in St. Louis in 1992. The only thing they offered as an option for me was abortion, there was no mention whatsoever about adoption as an option and they told me "gloom and doom" stories about how hard it would be to keep my baby. I left there angry. I considered adoption, but then decided I would keep my child. I went to college, full time and worked part time. I ended up getting married and having 2 more beautiful children. My son is now 17 years old and the most amazing person I know. He's an inspiration to me and to everyone he meets. I consider him to be a gift from God, regardless of how he came into being.

  • Tamsin

    Good for you Jenn. A wonderful example and yes, ALL children are gifts from God. Well done for having recognised that fact when you were young, going through a tough time, and could so easily have been persuaded otherwise. You are clearly a very strong woman and we need more people like you to stand up and be heard. Too many women assume that rape victims cannot possibly carry on with resulting pregnancy. I have full sympathy for people in this situation, but you have proven that abortion is not the only possibility.

    Also, Ninek, I found your comment incredibly touching and powerful. Bless you for sharing and I hope that you may find peace and also that many may hear your testimony and be moved to reconsider their priorities.

  • KellyMarie

    you know i had my daughter when i was 15. when i found out i was homeless and living on the streets with my at the time drug addtic mother. i kept her, and made it through. she's 15 now and i can't imagine if i would have done what ppl told me too. (have an abortion) i know a lot of women who did have one and even a friend who had two, and they have suffered for years with guilt, shame and "what ifs?". ThankGod for His Grace that some of them have found helaing but it took yrs.. I never went back to school btw (my own choice some teen moms do) and it has all been worth it!!!!!!!!!! wouldn't change it for the world.

  • Roderick

    Feminism is about one thing and one thing only:liberalism. It has never been about the so-called subjugation of women nor women's rights. It is all about promoting a social agenda that is,at its core,anti-male and unconcerned about women's rights. Here's a wild idea:why not wait until sex after you are married? What a concept!

  • julia

    Nine Reasons Why Abortions Are Legal

    Abortion is never an easy decision, but women have been making that choice for thousands of years, for many good reasons. Whenever a society has sought to outlaw abortions, it has only driven them into back alleys where they became dangerous, expensive, and humiliating. Amazingly, this was the case in the United States until 1973, when abortion was legalized nationwide. Thousands of American women died.

    Thousands more were maimed. For this reason and others, women and men fought for and achieved women's legal right to make their own decisions about abortion.

    However, there are people in our society who still won't accept this. Some argue that even survivors of rape or incest should be forced to continue their pregnancies. And now, having failed to convince the public or the lawmakers, certain of these people have become violent extremists, engaging in a campaign of intimidation and terror aimed at women seeking abortions and health professionals who work at reproductive health clinics.

    Some say these acts will stop abortions, but that is ridiculous. When the smoke clears, the same urgent reasons will exist for safe, legal abortions as have always existed. No nation committed to individual liberty could seriously consider returning to the days of back-alley abortions — to the revolting specter of a government forcing women to bear children against their will. Still, amid such attacks, it is worthwhile to repeat a few of the reasons why our society trusts each woman to make the abortion decision herself.

    1. Laws against abortion kill women.

    To prohibit abortions does not stop them. When women feel it is absolutely necessary, they will choose to have abortions, even in secret, without medical care, in dangerous circumstances. In the two decades before abortion was legal in the U.S., it's been estimated that nearly a million women per year sought out illegal abortions. Thousands died. Tens of thousands were mutilated. All were forced to behave as if they were criminals.

    2. Legal abortions protect women's health.

    Legal abortion not only protects women's lives, it also protects their health. For tens of thousands of women with heart disease, kidney disease, severe hypertension, sickle-cell anemia and severe diabetes, and other illnesses that can be life-threatening, the availability of legal abortion has helped avert serious medical complications that could have resulted from childbirth. Before legal abortion, such women's choices were limited to dangerous illegal abortion or dangerous childbirth.

    3. A woman is more than a fetus.

    Some people argue these days that a fetus is a "person" that is "indistinguishable from the rest of us" and that it deserves rights equal to women's. On this question there is a tremendous spectrum of religious, philosophical, scientific, and medical opinion. It's been argued for centuries. Fortunately, our society has recognized that each woman must be able to make this decision, based on her own conscience. To impose a law defining a fetus as a "person," granting it rights equal to or superior to a woman's — a thinking, feeling, conscious human being — is arrogant and absurd. It only serves to diminish women.

    4. Being a mother is just one option for women.

    Many hard battles have been fought to win political and economic equality for women. These gains will not be worth much if reproductive choice is denied. To be able to choose a safe, legal abortion makes many other options possible. Otherwise an accident or a rape can end a woman's economic and personal freedom.

    5. Outlawing abortion is discriminatory.

    Anti-abortion laws discriminate against low-income women, who are driven to dangerous self-induced or back-alley abortions. That is all they can afford. But the rich can travel wherever necessary to obtain a safe abortion.

    6. Compulsory pregnancy laws are incompatible with a free society.

    If there is any matter that is personal and private, then pregnancy is it. There can be no more extreme invasion of privacy than requiring a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term. If government is permitted to compel a woman to bear a child, where will government stop? The concept is morally repugnant. It violates traditional American ideas of individual rights and freedoms.

    7. Outlaw abortion, and more children will bear children.

    Forty percent of 14-year-old girls will become pregnant before they turn 20. This could happen to your daughter or someone else close to you. Here are the critical questions: Should the penalty for lack of knowledge or even for a moment's carelessness be enforced pregnancy and childrearing? Or dangerous illegal abortion? Should we consign a teenager to a life sentence of joblessness, hopelessness, and dependency?

    8. "Every child a wanted child."

    If women are forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, the result is unwanted children. Everyone knows they are among society's most tragic cases, often uncared-for, unloved, brutalized, and abandoned. When they grow up, these children are often seriously disadvantaged, and sometimes inclined toward brutal behavior to others. This is not good for children, for families, or for the country. Children need love and families who want and will care for them.

    9. Choice is good for families.

    Even when precautions are taken, accidents can and do happen. For some families, this is not a problem. But for others, such an event can be catastrophic. An unintended pregnancy can increase tensions, disrupt stability, and push people below the line of economic survival. Family planning is the answer. All options must be open.

    At the most basic level, the abortion issue is not really about abortion. It is about the value of women in society. Should women make their own decisions about family, career, and how to live their lives? Or should government do that for them? Do women have the option of deciding when or whether to have children? Or is that a government decision?

    The anti-abortion leaders really have a larger purpose. They oppose most ideas and programs that can help women achieve equality and freedom. They also oppose programs that protect the health and well-being of women and their children.

    Anti-abortion leaders claim to act "in defense of life." If so, why have so many worked to destroy programs that serve life, including prenatal care and nutrition programs for dependent pregnant women? Is this respect for life?

    Anti-abortion leaders also say they are trying to save children, but many have fought against health and nutrition programs for children once they are born. The anti-abortion groups seem to believe life begins at conception, but it ends at birth. Is this respect for life?

    Then there are programs that diminish the number of unwanted pregnancies before they occur: family planning counseling, sex education, and contraception for those who wish it. Anti-abortion leaders oppose those, too. And clinics providing such services have been bombed. Is this respect for life?

    Such stances reveal the ultimate cynicism of the compulsory pregnancy movement. "Life" is not what they're fighting for. What they want is a return to the days when a woman had few choices in controlling her future. They think that the abortion option gives too much freedom. That even contraception is too liberating. That women cannot be trusted to make their own decisions.

    Americans today don't accept that. Women can now select their own paths in society, including when and whether to have children. Family planning, contraception, and, if need be, legal abortion are critical to sustaining women's freedom. There is no going back.

  • Em

    Wow. Coming on strong for just a difference of opinion. Isn't pro-choice just the right to choose? Anyone who truly believes in the ideal would respect the choices made- none better than another. Have sex, don't have sex. Have the child, take a Plan B pill or have an abortion. It's more important that you choose what works for you. Having a child is no small thing. Forcing women (or shaming or scaring them) into a 9 month commitment isn't exactly admirable. Especially when it's not your life- not your commitment to make. So in the end it's a disagreement over whose rights are more important. The pregnant woman's or the bundle of cells that would one day be a child? Clearly, Valenti thinks the former. Perhaps you think the latter. There's no need to tout your opinion as the one true answer, EVER. Because honestly, I think both arguments have some validity.

  • Pingback: I guess the “Liberal Hypocrisy” tag wasn’t enough to clue them in…. at Haemet

  • A.roddy

    "What they want is a return to the days when a woman had few choices in controlling her future. They think that the abortion option gives too much freedom. That even contraception is too liberating. That women cannot be trusted to make their own decisions."

    im for womens' rights too but I dont condone abortion for birth control as one of them. I am not against those to save the life of the mother. You make the choice and control your future when you decide sleep with someone. No one makes you.We females have the ability to say no or use birth control.. Its funny how the radical pro choice side attacks the Duggars and Octomom for exercising their choice.

  • A.roddy

    Hippy For life I couldn't agree more.

  • babydoll7691

    I don't think every woman wishes to abort a child but I believe it is the best thing for some women. I think abortion should be legal because ultimately, it is up to the individual woman to CHOOSE whether she wants to have an abortion or not. If you do not believe in abortion then don't have one! It is as simple as that. I also do believe that women can have children and still go to school and obtain their degree but could be stressful at many times. Just like abortion can cause many mental issues, so can stress to anyone and everyone. Stress can cause many health problems that could possibly be fatal. I am a college student myself and just from working and going to school full time is already a lot of stress. I think that abortion should be left to one person only and that is yourself.

  • Piratesunne

    “All they would have to do is carry a baby for nine months.”
    “All they would have to do is carry a baby for nine months.”
    “All they would have to do is carry a baby for nine months.”
    “All they would have to do is carry a baby for nine months.”
    “All they would have to do is carry a baby for nine months.”
    “All they would have to do is carry a baby for nine months.”
    “All they would have to do is carry a baby for nine months.”