Jim Baw asked in Social ScienceGender Studies · 1 decade ago

Her body, her choice - regardless of if it's morally reprehensible?

A question (posted by a troll none-the-less) got me thinking...

Many women support the right to choice claiming that it's the woman's body, therefore it's her choice as to whether or not to have an abortion.

Would these same women condone a pregnant woman drinking, smoking, doing drugs, and participating in other such behavior that could severely damage the developing fetus? At the very least, I think most people can agree that this is disgusting behavior from a morality standpoint, but can someone explain to me why it is any different than a woman having an abortion? I mean, afterall, it's her body, right?

Update:

Double hearts - so effectively killing the baby before it's born isn't ruining its life?

Update 2:

Dark Eyes - this question was more geared towards people are pro-abortion. Even in your answer though, there's a major flaw - you say the child's body will be impacted by the drinking/drug use.... wouldn't the child's body also be effected by killing the fetus? My point is that people would be quick to judge a person who brings a baby to term in those conditions, but in the same breath condone killing the child before it has a chance...

Update 3:

Double hearts - so drinking/doing drugs while pregnant is child abuse (your words!), but having an abortion isn't murder?!? How does that work?

Update 4:

Cassa - Wow.. just wow. I wish I could respond, but the lack of logic in your answer, and the extreme assumptions you've made pretty much make it impossible to respond, but I'll give it a shot... I think drug and alcohol abuse by ANY parent around their child is an awful thing, but abusing drugs and alcohol while pregnant DIRECTLY gives those items to the unborn child, thus making it even worse for a pregnant woman - the only post-birth thing equal to that would be for a parent to force an infant to drink whiskey and shoot heroin.... unfortunately that's the only remotely logical point you made in your completely irrelevant rant, so that's about all I can say...

27 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    That "her body, her choice" is just a catch phrase some women use to absolve themselves of real responsibility. It did take a man to get her pregnant. She is going to make a choice on behalf of 3? I'm not going to debate fetus/human status here, but it is 3 biological entities. And what if that was the man's only chance for the rest of his life to have a child (saying he was accidentally bitten by a radioactive spider which causes him to go sterile right after he impregnated the woman)?

    I once saw a pregnant woman smoking outside the door of a Wal Mart. I posted on craigslist rants and raves about seeing such a thing. A bunch of people threw me into the coals saying how it is her choice to do that. Oh, really? Is it the baby's choice to smoke? Is it my choice that my tax dollars may go to medicaid to care for her sick baby after it is born?

  • Sara
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    "this question was more geared towards people are pro-abortion"

    Reluctantly I'm pro choice (They should only really be the very last resort)

    If i've ever used the phrase "her body, her choice" I meant it in the context of abortion. Not what she does during the pregnancy.

    I'd hope she'd realise while pregnant, after deciding to keep it, that although it's her body she does have a duty of care to the little one inside her.

    That too though, is her choice to drink ect, I disapprove but I can't stop a woman doing that. I can only tell her it's wrong, selfish and will harm the baby.

    It's harsh, but you'd hope a woman who wanted to keep the baby would be grown up enough to take care of it from conception. Unfortuately, till it's born, there's nothing anyone could do about it

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Preventing is different than stopping.

    Scientifically speaking, if you have an abortion then you have destroyed something because that something was growing (growth is a trait reserved for life).

    It's irresponsible for a mother to behave in the ways you list because it puts the child at risk. Why? Because it's not just affecting her, it's affecting her baby. Regardless of what people want to think, upon conception the fetus is a separate organism that is reliant on the mother... It's not a part of the mother, it has its own makeup of DNA. Look at it this way: If it isn't a baby then why is it necessary to abort it in order to NOT have a baby? A seed isn't a tree, but if you plant that seed and it starts to grow into a sprout and then cut it off you have killed a tree. Why? Because it WILL without question, be a tree. The difference here is human life.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Generally speaking the same women would not condone damaging a foetus with drink or drugs. The reason they condone abortion saying it's their body their choice is self interest. This selfish justification is not only morally corrupt, but it is illogical because it is not THEIR body we are concerned about it is the BABIES body and the baby is the produrel evento parents, not one.

    Many feminists think it quite alright to murder a man's unborn child whether he consents or not because it's their body and then they have the audacity to bring men's morals into question.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    As a woman who supports the right to choice, yes, I would also support a woman's right to choose to drink/smoke while pregnant (though I would certainly also HOPE that she chose otherwise).

    Here's the deal- I do NOT support the criminalization/banning of abortion. I also DO NOT support the criminalization of bad choices while pregnant. Most people who are pro-choice see these two oppositions as logically consistent- I am thinking you may have just met a disproportionate number of the dumb pro-choicers?

    If we wanted to criminalize drinking/smoking while pregnant for women, why not criminalize occupational exposure to toxins or drinking/smoking for men (both of which negatively impact fetal health through their destructive impact on gametes)?

  • 1 decade ago

    I'm pro-abortion.

    Those things you mention are not "morally reprehensible" to me.

    I don't think normal drinking and smoking really affects babies all that much, frankly. Drinking a LOT does; smoking a LOT does. I'm not sure which drugs would affect what; some are toxic, some are non-issues.

    What I hear you saying is that you want to hold women--as the incubators--to a higher standard than you want to hold the men who also created the babies--and yet give those same men the same "rights".. Do you also advocate for the fathers to stop smoking, since second hand smoke is shown to be in some ways WORSE than first-hand?

    Or do you also advocate for all mothers (but not fathers, apparently) to cease smoking and drinking and druggin etc. Why are YOU focusing on pre-born babies? Or what about people who are just stupid, so poor caretakers? I bet a lot of kids DIE because their parents are stupid. Are you advocating for babies to be taken away from stupid people? Oooh, and you know what? Being ugly in society is a disadvantage--shoudl we pretty up al the ugly babies? Baby makeovers?

    See, what I'm saying is--you are focusing on ONE aspect of an entire genre of living: parenthood. If a woman doesn't want to be a parent, there is this perfectly legal procedure she can go through which will prevent her from being one. Men have--and all too often exercise-- the option of just walking away. Women do not. For some reason, you think it's up to you to decide what women should and should not be able to do, and most women , actualy most Americans, are saying--It's not your call.

    Source(s): I am totally against those laws which give perps a double whammy just because the woman is pregs, by the way.
  • 1 decade ago

    It's different because if a woman is definitely going to give birth to a child she needs to take responsibility and let it grow to be healthy. If she is planning on keeping it and continues to drink and do drugs she is ruining it's life.

    A aborted fetus is a aborted fetus. Gone. Done. Finished. Nada. No more. In short dead.

    How can someone not see the difference? One is coming and one is gone. Obviously the one who is coming should be cared for. The dead are not of more value than the living.

    I realize that not everyone views this issue in the same way though. I realize it but I can think logically and w/out emotions in cases like this. Probably because I don't even like babies or kids to begin with.

    Although a fetus may technically be a living thing that doesn't mean it's rights should supersede it's mothers. But if the mother is going to keep it she has to acknowledge that if she drinks and does drugs and harms it she is committing abuse. She is basically taking a bottle of alcohol and feeding it to her child and supplying it w/ drugs. Since it will be born it will be harmed thanks to her. A aborted fetus wont be living a life of illness. It will just be dead. We all die. Some just die a little sooner.

    Source(s): Cheers.
  • 1 decade ago

    What most of what people who believe abortion is perfectly fine but everything else you mentioned is wrong comes down to this. When the mother aborts, she has decided it's not living, and therefore it isn't alive. If she wants a baby, suddenly it's a living thing she needs to protect. Basically, the "logic" behind this kind of thinking is women play God and get to choose which fetus is alive and which isn't. It's all about more power for women. After all, what greater power is there for a human than the power to decide whether someone gets to live or die? I'm glad most people do feel it's stupid to do any of this if you're a pregnant woman, but there's no consistency with this point of view. I'll never understand how killing someone isn't bad but harming them in other ways is.

  • Helena
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Do you approve of contraception? This, of course, prevents the baby that would have been born from being born therefore ruining its life. I do not accept that argument myself but it is the next logical step to the point you have made. Would you take that step?

    I do not believe in abortion because there is contraception available and it seems wrong to start a life and then end it. I am an atheist and a feminist but this is why I believe abortion is wrong - the chances of one man out of billions meeting one woman out of billions and a single sperm of his out of millions meeting a single egg out of dozens of hers created a unique person against odds which are too enormous to be counted. This is a miracle of unlikeliness and I am so grateful it favoured me and I feel it is wrong to start this miracle and then end it. As a feminist I know that women are now able to use contraception and there is no need to get pregnant.

    Edit - I would LOVE to know if I was TD'd because I am anti-abortion, feminist or atheist. Anyone explain?

  • 1 decade ago

    I love these moral conundrums. It's questions like these that force people to evaluate their own moral compasses and how consistently they follow them. I often tell people, I don't care what you believe. Just be consistent in your thought. It's laughable how quickly people abandon their principles due to circumstances.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.