I posted a diary last Friday that, in my opinion, had nothing to do with abortion.  However, lots of discussion ensued, and I was unable to continue responding after a time.  I have attempted to respond to all comments made that I did not initially respond to in the threads.  I am not an expert, and I did not come prepared then or now to discuss this topic, though I have tried to be open minded and consistent with what I believe.  I have learned a lot from this, and I hope you have too.  I do not think that I will be able to respond to anything written in this post, and for that I apologize–if I can get away for a bit after the kids are in bed I will, but I don’t think that will happen.  The link to the initial diary is here:  

Hopefully it will work.–OK, I can’t figure out what the proper html codes are to put a link here, but if you go to my diaries it is titled: Living in a House Divided

Everything in italics below is a comment posted in response to the initial diary.

Pro Life People are Fetus Killers
The pro-life, anti-abortion people happily allow hundreds of thousands or millions of fetuses to die every year because, like all the rest of us, they believe the fetuses are not human life equal in rights to the postborn.
The failure rates of fertilized eggs are very high. If anyone at any time in history truly believed that fertilized eggs are “humans” then they’d have to have supported profound restructuring of virtually all social and scientific prioritities. Humanity has known the signs and rough probabilities of pregnancy since before civilization. We’ve had 10,000 years or more to make this the #1 human health priority it should be if any culture or God had ever truly asserted that fertilized eggs == people.
But they haven’t done it because they don’t believe it.
Furthermore there isn’t even the massive maternal care movement that would at least save thousands of “deaths” and perhaps hundreds of thousands of maimings annually due to all sorts of maternal life stress, rigors of employment and nutritional & maternal medical care that the right to “life” movement has not been flooding the streets to demand we address.
So the fetus=person argument is a fraud.
Since we’ve all agreed all along that fetuses are not fully entitled human beings, and all sides have always been willing to let them die by the thousands from neglect, I don’t see any morality left in the abortion “issue” except for government support of organized religious authoritarianism.

I would say two things to this:  One, I don’t consider myself “pro-life”.  To the best of my knowledge (admittedly limited) I don’t fit the definition.  
Two, your logic appears to me to be flawed–you appear to be saying that pro-life people a) pro-life people don’t put any priority on issues concerning the mother to be during pregnancy and b) are therefore responsible for avoidable deaths and c) therefore do not truly believe that a fetus is a person.  Again, I do not consider myself “pro-life”, and I will not attempt to speak for them here, but what you wrote here is definitely not an example of a+b=c.  Flawed logic.


Re: On the legality of abortion (none / 0)
If society were willing to prosecute the male in the scenario, then society would also have to establish the rights of the male in the scenario.  You can’t hold someone resposible for an abortion when they have no say over whether or not an abortion will take place.
I’m sure that after Mr Alito is confirmed he’ll do his best to make quite certain that men own the bodies of their wives and daughters. That said, it’s not the abortion the male would be responsible for, it’s the pregnancy. Now there’s a concept.

I cannot speak for Alito, and personally hope that he does not end up on the court.  I can say that in my opinion, the male shares equal responsibility (or should, at least) for every single thing that results from the act, with exception of the things that he cannot–the actual bearing of a child until birth.  Anything less on the part of the male in the scenario is unacceptable.


I find it hard to believe that in your state a wife’s legal consent for a husband’s vasectomy is required. If you have a cite for that I’d love to see it. It would be news to me.

Again, I had no intention of having a debate about abortion, I was not prepared when I posted the diary and I am not really prepared now.  I looked a little on the web and found some references to this, mostly relating to Michigan where I live but not exclusively.  In the limited time that I was able to dedicate, I did not find a conclusive link that I can provide.  I stated this in the threads based on my personal experience: My wife and I discussed vasectomy with my doctor and said that indeed spousal consent was required.  That is all I can offer on this, though I believe it to be true.


The reason that a married woman can get an abortion without the consent of her husband is easily explained. The supreme court has ruled husband consent laws are unconstitutional in our democracy.

The U.S. Supreme Court held that requiring a woman to obtain her husband’s consent prior to an abortion is unconstitutional. Planned Parenthood of Cent. Mo. v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, 67-72 (1976).

I accept and live with supreme court rulings every day of my life–as do you.  I don’t agree with all of them, and I don’t agree with this one–much as I suspect you wouldn’t agree with a court ruling that overturned Roe.  Easily explained is one thing, “right” in my estimation is another.  My opinion, of course, nothing more.  Here’s the crux of it for me–everyone is so concerned about men not taking responsibility for their part in a pregnancy.  I am 100% for men taking responsibility, always have been.  If you say that, though, you have to grant the man some rights.  I’m not saying he gets to choose whether or not a woman bears his child once the egg is fertilized.  I struggle with that, I’m unsure in my own mind.  But unequvically, once that child is born, the male has responsibilities and rights.


I also don’t really “get” a sense of equivalence between the health/morbidity risks and the damage to a woman’s body involved in a 9 month pregnancy compared to the same risks/damage from a vasectomy procedure. Can you explain what you mean?

I can’t explain what I mean because I don’t understand where you came up with that from what I wrote.  I certainly never intended to draw a corollary between pregnancy and vasectomy.


[new] Re: Living in a House Divided (none / 0)
As stated previously, if I am incorrect, it was not done in any way to mislead or muddle the issue.
Ya, but this is something you could research and discover what is actually true for yourself.
Much of your argument is predicated on the notion that such services are readily available to women everywhere in your state and the country and that poverty is no obstacle to personal responsibility. Whereas the reality most of us deal with is that any sort of medical care including access to contraceptives is difficult for low income women to access. It is, you see, a central premise of your arguments, not a peripheral issue.

You are right, I could research it for myself (and, thankfully, some have done some for me, see below, and many thanks) but I do not have the time.  As stated, I did not post about abortion–I posted about voters coming over to vote for the Dem pres candidate next election without making any major changes to the platform.  Apparently, if you include the word “abortion” in any post in any way the response I saw was typical.  I did not know this.  I could easily have used “gay rights” or something else to make my point in the initial post.  I still believe that a careful read of what I initially posted supports this.

I know that I read about groups handing out condoms in public schools in Texas, and how the religious right is having a cow.  I know from personal experience that here where I live groups are falling all over themselves to provide free contraceptives.  Even with what other people wrote and researched, no one seems to be claiming that at the root this is incorrect–as far as I can see, even now, if you live in the states and you want free contraceptives, they are available.  Yes, what is available may not work for you.  Yes, you may have to go out of your way to get these free contraceptives.  Yes, they may screw up the “freedom of the moment” or lead to a fight with your prospective lover, but they are available.  Just as food is available to the hungry and healthcare is available to the sick, contraceptives are out there free of charge.  We don’t excuse people for stealing food because it’s a twenty block walk to the soup kitchen, and they have to eat.  Why would we excuse people for not taking the necessary steps to procure contraceptives?  Yes, there are many circumstances in which it would be exceptionally difficult, but remember, I am only writing in relation to consenting adults who live in the states.  And I am only representing my own thoughts and feelings.


[new] Re: Thank you for the shift, though I (none / 0)
In fact, I’m pretty sure that somewhere along the line I’ve made a case for the responsibility of the male.
No you have not, I always read these threads with particular attention to the balance of that bias and, while you may have inserted a partial sentence addressing male responsibility you’ve mostly been addressing male rights. Indeed I daresay that any single young man averaging, say, 5 or 10 different partners a years and reading this thread would have worked his way up to a state of indignation about the horrendous irresponsibility of women in general. As usual in discussions about abortion the notion that male behavior is in any sense responsible has been given the lightest of rhetorical cover.

Doesn’t this next quote you pulled from what I wrote (which, by the way, is in no way the only reference I made to the responsibility of the male) itself render what you wrote here invalid?


How someone could hold the woman soley responsible, or consider them sinful or leave them to fend for themselves is beyond me.
Look, the culture does this. What else was welfare ‘reform’ about? Why do you think we have the highest child poverty rates of any of the industrialized nation? Why are the bulk of the poor in this country women and their children? What do you think the child support compliance rate is? And were you under the impression that there’s any male involvement or support in the vast majority of OOW births in this country? Were you aware that the House republicans just cut 5 billion in funding for child support enforcement from the federal budget? How insane is it that we spend billions of dollars trying to get (mostly) men to support the children they’ve been responsible for bringing into the world? And where do you get off attacking with false piety some woman you don’t know for her ‘personal view of men’ when she’s trying to address what is a bias large enough to drive a Mac truck through?

I can appreciate some of the rant above.  As I have repeatedly stated, all the time and effort poured into defeating/defending Roe would be much better spent on education and improving the circumstances of those in the situation.  The way, by and large, these issues are treated is a crime, and it needs to improve–drastically.  I have never said different.  Many of the issues you raise could be reduced significantly if there were fewer unwanted pregnancies, which is attainable to a greater or lesser degree.
As far as “attacking with false piety”, I don’t believe that you have the right to judge my motives or my thoughts any more than I have the right to judge yours.  What you see is what you get–I have no hidden agenda.  I stand by what I wrote, and condemning the actions of all men due to the actions of some is not acceptable.

* [new] Re: Living in a House Divided (none / 0)
Yes, I truly do celebrate the right for a woman to an abortion.  If a woman had an easier alternative at the time I believe she would take it (given not only the cost of abortion but also the in-my-opinion immoral roadblocks put in her path in trying to obtain it), so it’s always the “last resort” but often also the “best alternative”.

The wording in your response is interesting.  I did not ask if you “celebrated the right for a woman to an abortion”, I asked “Do you truly celebrate abortion?”.  I can understand celebrating the right to an abortion, but that is not what I was getting at.  You state “If a woman had an easier alternative at the time”, but the issue I am raising goes beyond the specific timing of the decision to abort–sure, after the fact, an abortion may be the best alternative, for many reasons.  My point is the overall timing of the effort to avoid birth of an unwanted child–what is the best alternative, use of contraceptives or abortion?  Again, I have yet to see anyone claim that they would choose abortion given the choice.  I know that I could be accused of oversimplifying the issue–but to make my point, and to have people relate, they would need to understand it.  My point is not that abortion is never necessary or is never the best choice–my point is that it is worth a lot of effort on the front side–including all the extra legwork necessary in some states–to procure and use contraceptives to avoid the “necessity” of an abortion in the first place.


[new] Not-bad does not equal good (none / 0)
WW, I appreciate your thoughtfulness and willingness to engage, but the basic point in my subject header seems to be one you consistently fail to grasp (at least in this context). To those who claim not to share your disquiet about abortion, your response is, “Do you really think, then, that it’s a good thing — something to be ‘celebrated’?”
Answer: neither. Denying that it is intrinsically “bad” (albeit at times, regrettably, necessary) does not commit one to holding that it is intrinsically “good” (to be celebrated).
The way you’ve set things up, the only alternative to your position that abortions are to be deplored (on moral grounds) is that they are to be cheered (on moral grounds). Wrong, wrong, wrong, WW.
To cast your interlocutor as committed to the view that abortion is “good” is to impose upon her/him the strange view that abortions are things to be promoted — there should be as many abortions as possible (other things being equal). I know that’s not what you intend, but that’s a consequence of the overly restrictive range of possible stances you allow for.
Please consider this.

First, see above.  Then, again, my point is not that they are bad, but that they are largely avoidable, that we are in large part lazy, that the extra effort to avoid the situation is worth it on so many fronts.  Why is it necessary?  Why can we not make a much better effort, in every possible way?  I have only tried–repeatedly–to break it down to the simplest question and then build from there–is it the best alternative?  I simply cannot believe that we cannot all agree that it is not the best alternative.  It’s as if people think that by agreeing with that statement they are agreeing to other things–and they are not.  Simplest common denominator, and work from there–that is all I am trying to accomplish with the question.


WW, you say that “everyone alive could agree that abortion is ‘bad.'” I see statements like that a lot and I always feel the need to jump in and say, Ahem, I’m sorry, but that’s an incorrect assumption. I think you can see just from this diary alone the evidence for an opposite conclusion.  Lots of people do not think it’s bad.
I, for instance, do not think it’s bad, and that is probably because I don’t share the religious and/or philosophical beliefs of those who do. I’m not here to argue those beliefs, I just want to let you know that it isn’t true that “everyone alive could agree that abortion is bad.”

You know, I went through what I wrote again, and I can’t find a single instance in which I said that abortion was “bad”.  I did say that it is not the best option, in several different ways.  So unless I missed it, I guess I just don’t have anything to say about this.


What is a man’s role in your eyes?  How would you feel about making vasectomies readily-available and covered by insurance (in my own relationship, it was not covered and we had to pay out-of-pocket to have it done)?  Do you see such a program as a moral imperative in the interest of preventing pregnancy until the man is ready and able to father children, or does the moral burden for preventing pregnancy fall onto the woman?

I really wish that vasectomies were readily available and covered by insurance.  I was going to get one, but our last child came c-section, so my wife decided to have things taken care of on her end while they were in there.

As I’ve stated before “I can say that in my opinion, the male shares equal responsibility (or should, at least) for every single thing that results from the act, with exception of the things that he cannot–the actual bearing of a child until birth.  Anything less on the part of the male in the scenario is unacceptable.”  I mean that, every word.  I was quite promiscuous when I was young, and I can say a few personal things here.  One woman became pregnant, and it was the only time I wasn’t prepared (it figures).  I was 18, and in love with someone else–doesn’t say much for where I was at at the time, and I’m not making any excuses.  What she wanted to hear from me was that I loved her and wanted to marry her, but I told her the truth.  I also told her that I thought she should have the child and give it up for adoption.  She refused, and asked me to help pay for the abortion, which I did.  Not a good thing, but there it is.  Another woman, who I was in love with, became pregnant, and I was happy–but I was also in trouble with the law.  We did not end up together, but I was there for her as much as I could be (being incarcerated for a time) and always after.  We had, hands down, the best “situation” with having a daughter that was part of both of our lives.  When our daughter was four, her mother got married, and I encouraged her to go to friend of the court–something that had not been necessary.  She did not want to, but I convinced her, and when she went I had my daughter’s birth certificate changed to reflect that I was her father.  I have never for a minute regretted my daughter, and I miss her now so much I can at times barely function.  I now have three little ones at home, and I love them above all others just as I did their big sister.  So I have a little bit of experience, shall we say, despite the fact that below you state that I have no rights when it comes to a child I’ve helped conceive:


I give “not a nod of respect” (your words, but not necessarily how I would phrase it) to how anyone else feels about it morally because another person’s moral point of view does not supercede mine when it comes to my body and my rights, nor should it trump any woman’s.  I am completely and utterly unapologetic about my unwillingness to put another’s views before my own in this regard…and in regards to me and my rights, you have NO ground to stand on.  None at all.

From what I read here, you put your rights above all others, not women’s rights.  “…unapologetic about my unwillingness to put another’s views before my own in this regard…and in regards to me and my rights, you have NO ground to stand on.”  You see, I’ve never tried to trample your rights.  The problem here is this:  You assume (in fact, boldly state) that your rights take precedent, which is in fact the same thing you accuse me of doing.  None of us gets to decide for the other, we have to reach a concensus and move from there.  I never claimed to have ground to stand on in regards to you, personally, and you rejecting any rights I may have out of hand is unacceptable.  Neither of us is more important than the other, and neither of us has the power, responsibility, or authority to decide for the other.  However, when we choose to discount the viewpoint of another, we’ve done a disservice to them and lessened our argument in the bargain.

How about talking about the war, or the economy, or the state of modern education?  How about government corruption (i.e. is it there and what should be done about it, as well as who is culpable and who is not).  I have no interest in anti-choice voters, or even choice-ambiguous voters (since there is nothing that I would be willing to compromise on to try and sway them), but if we discuss other areas maybe we can find common ground for dialogue.

There is much to discuss, and I would love to, and will when I can.  I will say, though, that imho it is a good thing that your disinterest in “…anti-choice voters, or even choice-ambiguous voters” does not extend to the majority of the Democratic party.  I do not think that any election will ever be winnable for the Dems without some of them.

[new] MI fact check on “free” contraception (4.00 / 3)
this is from the University of Michigan, Olin Health Center

Thanks for writing to Bodyline! We are assuming that you are wondering where you can get free birth control pills, and not other forms of birth control such as condoms, etc.

Planned Parenthood offers birth control pills for $12-$19 dollars a month, where you would also have to pay for an office visit.
The number in East Lansing is 333-6744 and in Lansing is 351-0550. Some doctor’s offices will give out a couple months of birth control pills as free samples, and then you pay for the rest. Otherwise, you could try getting an extended supply from your own local clinic. Hope this information helps, and don’t hesitate to write Bodyline again with any more questions or concerns you may have!
The following is from the Planned Parenthood, Northern Michigan online store:

Where you can purchase pill refills, condoms and other Planned Parenthood products online, 24 hours a day.
Pricing example:
One pack (month) of your current prescription.
Price: $ 17.00
Low cost birth control, to be sure. But then there’s the problem of locating a clinic. Even if there was free birth control in Michigan, (which I cannot verify at all) access is an important factor.
PP Houghton closes doors

 After two years of highly charged debate over the presence of a Planned Parenthood office in downtown Houghton, the center closed its doors last week.
 “While we recognize the need for affordable family planning services in the Copper Country, our Houghton Center simply hasn’t served enough clients to justify the monthly costs to keep it going,” said Executive Director/CEO of Planned Parenthood Northern Michigan Scott Blanchard.
Protestors opposed to the clinic walked the sidewalks outside the clinic most weeks for the two years the clinic was in business. Groups like Copper Country Pro-Life found fault with the organization’s pro-choice stance, and specifically with its dispensing of emergency contraception and referrals to abortion clinics.
Some feel that the protestors had an effect on clients to the clinic, therefore causing its closing.
Students who were using Planned Parenthood for low-cost contraceptives or STD testing are encouraged to visit their website at http://www.PPexpress.org where they can continue to order their prescriptions.
At last count there were 29 Planned Parenthood mailing addresses in the state of Michigan,  a state with a 2004 population estimate of 10,112,620.
By the way, no offense but at least two of your facts appear to be hearsay.

Our Word Where the women kossacks went
[new] Re: Living in a House Divided (4.00 / 2)
In all fairness, since you didn’t come prepared for a discussion on abortion, the following is from the Detroit Health Department site:
The Detroit Health Department offers free family planning and birth control to all, regardless of insurance status, ability to pay or age.   Free pregnancy testing is also available.  Parental consent is not required for minors.  All services are confidential.
Birth control services and free pregnancy testing are available at all Detroit Health Department health centers.  You can call for an appointment.  Most of the time, same day appointments can be arranged at one of our health centers.  The Herman Kiefer Family Health Center also accepts walk-ins for family planning and pregnancy testing.  If you are pregnant and uninsured, a referral can be made for prenatal care.
It might be “city-related” versus rural, but this shows that the services do, in fact, exist.
[new] Re: Living in a House Divided (none / 0)
It might be “city-related” versus rural, but this shows that the services do, in fact, exist.
Thank for the reference. I would love to know who funds this. Detroit is a good place to have such a service, it is the large city which has, as I recall, the greatest number of low income per capita residents in the country. Clearly if we wish to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus the number of abortions these sliding scale services should be far more widespread.
My point in addressing his claim that such services are nationwide was in part to point out that this just isn’t true. At least the only the only places I know of where contraception is easily available to the poor is in a few large cities.
* [new] Re: Living in a House Divided (none / 1)
Yes, I certainly thought that original comment was painted with one big ol’ industrial sized brush. And I agree with you – if there’s anywhere for those service to exist, that’s a damn good place for them.
(pssst . . .as an aside, the broadly brushed comment is what prompted me to look into the services. I’ve never heard of such a thing, and I was admittedly surprised with my findings. I can’t imagine these same services duplicated throughout the country – especially in places like the rural south.)

Again, thanks to those of you who did this research–I appreciate it.  All I can say is, as I stated before: “…as far as I can see, even now, if you live in the states and you want free contraceptives, they are available.”


* [new] Re: Living in a House Divided (none / 0)
“Very few professional woman have this problem.”
Funny you should mention that. There’s a whole different level of power and choices I rarely see discussed. Specifically, I know firsthand of two “professional women”, both married, and both of whom had husbands who didn’t want children. And yet, through miracles of biblical proportions, both of those “professional women” got pregnant and subsequently gave birth to the child. Later on, the cause of those “miracles” (or perhaps “accidents”, if you prefer) came to light, when both of the women confided in me that they purposely got pregnant without the knowledge of their husbands.
While maybe not the norm, there seems to be a bit of one-sided power in that equation. And a lack of choice for one of the parties in each of those marriages.  
     Good day!

I think the above sheds some light, offers a little perspective.  Talk about having the final say, against the will of those involved–I think the ladies hold the keys in this scenario, don’t you?  I also think you would have a hard time lining up two people in the country who would be willing to admit that they think these women did something “wrong”–but let the men in such a scenario admit they poked holes in condoms to accomplish the same thing, and….well, I think you can see where I’m going.  


* [new] I’ve said this before (none / 0)
and I’m going to keep saying it:
When a man sticks his penis in a woman HE IS CHOOSING TO POTENTIALLY BECOME A FATHER. He is surrendering HIS future to the vagaries of hormones, latex and the phases of the moon. Oh, and he’s surrendering TO HER.
That’s it. That’s his time to “choose” … he surrenders after that point. After that, the choices are the woman’s to make. His only choice after that point is: is he a man of honor who lives w/ the results of his choices, or is he a bully and a coward who refuses to do so?

I’ll say this: When a woman allows a man to stick his penis in her, she is choosing to potentially become a mother.  She is surrendering to all listed above, and to him.  Imho, a man does not then give up all rights.  Again, I am not saying that I think the law should be changed so that woman can’t get an abortion–I’m saying that you are painting with way too big a brush.

Ok, I guess that’s it, I tried to get to everybody that I couldn’t get to when the comments were happening.  I haven’t drafted this at all, I don’t have time, so I hope I didn’t say anything that I didn’t mean too.  I’m not going to have time to get involved here, and I apologize–I rarely post, but when I do I think it important to respond to what people have to say.  I didn’t expect to get on this topic, I’ve tried to lay out what I think in response to what all of you wrote.  I still don’t understand why any of you really care what I think about all this anyway, but here it is, from the “for what it’s worth” department.

I did get some response to the actual points I was trying to make in the initial diary, and will post separately in future about those.

I do appreciate all the input–I learn and grow here at BT, just as you do.  All the best.