Guangcheng Chen has spent his life fighting against many of China's most abhorrent human rights abuses, including forced abortions and has suffered a great deal for his efforts. Personally, I find abortion to be, on its face, morally wrong. However, I am pro-choice in that I acknowledge that there are circumstances where the procedure should be available, and that because of the circumstances the choice is morally sound.
I am troubled by the callousness with which the folks that fall on the pro-abortion end of the pro-choice spectrum treat the ending of a human life - that for them "personal choice" (regardless of the basis of the choice) always trumps the fetus, regardless of whether it is a 1 day old fertilized egg, or an 8 month, 29 day old fetus. However, I assume that "forced abortion" rubs at least some of these people the wrong way - I am curious why.
Why is a forced abortion any worse than a forced surgery to remove a tumor? Both are invasive procedures done without the consent of the patient that remove a chunk of tissue. Certainly, they both offend the "choice" aspect of pro-choice - that is a given, but is also too easy an answer. If the "choice" issue is out of the picture, what remains wrong with it?
Update:Let me highlight the fact that I do not believe that the rights of the mother never outweigh the rights of the unborn - I happen to think that Roe v. Wade largely has the right idea with a sliding scale (those on both sides of the issue should know what this case, and its progeny actually says). Roe v. Wade acknowledges that an unborn - whether it is a few cells, or a nearly viable fetus, has at least some value to be weighed against a mother's right to "choice".
To put it more simply - to those who believe that the fetus has no worth, and who believe the issue is exclusively choice, why is forced abortion any worse than any other forced surgery?
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
I think many here missed the real issue. The real issue is : it's against your own will.
If you are a PRC woman and you are pregnant for a second child; and you are at a location where they enforce one child policy --
. If you are rich and powerful, you simply pay a large fine and you'd be okay.
. In some area, they drag you into a clinic against you will, and they force upon you an abortion. This includes late stage of pregnancy.
. In some area, they also perform forced tubal ligation procedure so that women can't get pregnant again.
. There are places the county government sets "forced abortion quota" such as 20,000 cases a year. They also set "revenue" goal for collecting fines.
. It's not known whether they do thorough medical exam on these women before they perform forced abortion on them. Or if the clinic is reputable and the doctor is well trained. There are cases women lost their lives in the process.
It's not by free will. They get you and drag you and force you to sign a consent form, and they do it on you. The enforcement varies by area.
What's so bad about forced birth, anyway?
I am troubled by the callousness with which the folks that fall on the Pro-Fetus end of the Pro-Life spectrum treat human rights - that for them "Life" (regardless of the basis of the choice) always trumps the woman, regardless of whether she was raped, or simply doesn't have the means to support another child. However, I assume that "forced birth" rubs at least some of these people the wrong way - I am curious why.
Why is a forced birth any worse than a forced organ donation? Both are invasive procedures done without the consent of the patient that let another person use their body. Certainly, they both offend the "choice" aspect of pro-choice - that is a given, but is also too easy an answer. If the "choice" issue is out of the picture, what remains wrong with it?
---------------------------------------
I'll give you a hint. Abortion isn't 100% about the fetus, it's about the woman too. Forced abortions are emotionally traumatizing.
""personal choice" (regardless of the basis of the choice) always trumps the fetus, regardless of whether it is a 1 day old fertilized egg, or an 8 month, 29 day old fetus."
I have a feeling that this does not reflect the majority view, or indeed the majority pro-choice view.
It is a tough subject, to be sure, and I can't see where to put an absolute right and wrong line with confidence. It is my understanding, perhaps incorrect, that the prevailing sentiment is that if the fetus is viable it's a person and abortion is wrong except to save the mother's life, if it's not it's not and abortion is the mother's choice?
"Certainly, they both offend the "choice" aspect of pro-choice - that is a given, but is also too easy an answer. If the "choice" issue is out of the picture, what remains wrong with it?"
If the fetus is undeveloped enough to be unviable, not much? But of course - it's not very realistic to take the "choice issue out of the picture", when choice is pretty much the whole of the issue here?
I'll just close by saying I appreciate that this is a very sensitive subject and I have no wish to offend anyone.
Here you go... Truth... The answer you won't read anywhere else...
Abortion (Pro Choice) is a "Democrat Party" platform is it not?.. "Democrats" fight for Abortion at any and all costs, do they not? Yes, of course they do... So it is then safe to say it is one of their "cornerstone causes" of the "Democrat Party"...
You bet your dupa...
So accepting that premise, which to be honest we must... We must then except that it is the "Democrats" who want and support Abortion on demand...
This is also correct and is a true line of thought.
So I ask you all right now....
Is Abortion a "Democrat form of Population Control"?
I believe it is because it is always "the Left wing of the Democrat Party" that says "Earth has too many People..."
This is another correct and true point as to who is concerned about the overall amounts of population found in America and the World.
56 Million Lives were stopped from coming to be in the last 39 years with Roe VS Wade...
Cannot you see the population controlling aspect of Abortions all at the "Democrat's hands".
I sure can...
This will set in the back of your mind all day and by this evening you will have come to the same conclusions I did...
§† FNS †§
ǝʌoןs’poƃsǝǝsɹǝʌǝu ǝʇɐɥɥʇıʍpǝןןıɟsǝʎǝpuɐsʇɹɐǝɥ
Sounds terrible. You look in an extreme state of emotion which keeps you from questioning immediately. you ought to use precise language and inspect actuality, or you will certain your self in delusions and reason pointless suffering. you're utilising incendiary and faulty language, and that's torturing you further. you weren't forced. in line with possibility you'll be dissatisfied for permitting your self to be forced. Being forced is different than being forced. you are able to nonetheless be dissatisfied at her for pressuring you with emotional appeals, yet that's a very different style of incorrect. you probably did no longer kill a infant. Abortion could be immoral, besides the shown fact that that's extremely different than killing a infant. basically a real monster can kill a infant, yet hassle-free people have abortions. discover some lifelike attitude, and don't enable extremist political rhetoric of ideologues define this deeply own adventure. perfect to you.
No doctor can force you to go through a procedure you don't want to go through. Not unless they have some proof that you're out of your mind.
They can not force you to remove cancer that will kill you. They can not force you to remove a limb that will otherwise rot off. They can not force you to take a shower even if it's been a few years since you've had one.
The only way they can do anything to you is with your consent, or with the consent from a guardian/close relative if you can not speak for yourself. They may be able to do something if they can prove you're out of your mind, but that's no easy task. Doctors get sued for doing what patients didn't want them to do without their consent, and rightfully so.
As far as why it's wrong, where do you want to start?
Doctors making money by doing things that they shouldn't be doing.
Eugenics. You know sure as 7ell that they aren't going to be forcing it on the rich.
Invasion of personal privacy.
I'm not aware of anyone forcing removal of tumors. Adults can refuse medical treatments.
I am also not aware of any who think you can abort a full-term pregnancy for non-medical reasons, though I do support late term abortions to save the life of the mother or to end a pregnancy where the fetus is either non-viable or would live only in intense suffering.
As one example, I have a friend whose child lived 18 months struggling painfully for every breath. When she became pregnant again, she had amniocentesis so that another child would not be born into such pain. Fortunately, that pregnancy was normal. I would have supported her decision to have an abortion otherwise.
In any case, the issue is choice. Forced, of course, means there is none.
because with a country like china it's a little more pragmatic than in the western world - although by saying that I'm not agreeing with he idea of forcing a woman to abort a fetus. they're desperately trying to decrease the population growth so there is enough material to go around and it's being undermined a little with so many more children in china. You can't say "you can have all the children you want" and let the country run itself into the ground like that.
So... kill a life [and it IS a life because it has the BABY has its own DNA from the beginning] because of a woman's irresponsibility? I suggest you keep ur legs closed if you can't handle a child.
And for rape.. whatever! I'm 6 months pregnant with a child from rape. I love my daughter more than anything and refuse to call her a mistake because of her dead beat dad. Abortion not only kills life [or could be life] but it hurts the girls too! mentally, emotionally and physically [in some cases]
If nothing else, because we ARE pro-choice, which means we believe it should be the woman's right to choose an abortion or not.
Also, unless they do it in China, no one can be forced to have a tumor removed unless they have been declared incompetent by the courts. As a hospice nurse, I worked with a lot of people who were terminal because they had made the choice not to remove their cancer.
By the way, I don't know a single pro-choice person who is pro-abortion. That's a myth you anti-choice people created to vilify the "opposition".