Fandango’s Flashback Friday — October 30

Wouldn’t you like to expose your newer readers to some of your earlier posts that they might never have seen? Or remind your long term followers of posts that they might not remember? Each Friday I will publish a post I wrote on this exact date in a previous year.

How about you? Why don’t you reach back into your own archives and highlight a post that you wrote on this very date in a previous year? You can repost your Friday Flashback post on your blog and pingback to this post. Or you can just write a comment below with a link to the post you selected.

If you’ve been blogging for less than a year, go ahead and choose a post that you previously published on this day (the 30th) of any month within the past year and link to that post in a comment.

This was originally posted on my old blog on October 30, 2007. I think, given that Amy Coney Barrett, a far-right conservative, was just sworn in as the newest Justice of the Supreme Court, it’s a great time to flash back to this post. Barrett is an outspoken opponent of Roe v. Wade, and the Supreme Court is about to hear cases on abortion. With Barrett’s addition to the high court, it now has a 6-3 conservative majority, and that increases the likelihood that abortions may, once again, be declared illegal in the United States.

Pro-Choice Isn’t the Same as Pro-Abortion

I am becoming quite annoyed by the labels people use to describe their positions on the abortion question. They are “pro-this” and “anti-that,” making it seem like it’s a black and white issue, which it clearly is not.

When someone claims to be “pro-life,” for example, does that imply that being anything else is “anti-life”? When someone says they’re “pro-choice,” does that also mean that they’re “pro-abortion”?

The debate over abortion is a highly divisive one in which people feel intensely passionate. Unfortunately, it seems that most people on both sides of the issue who openly express their opinions are intractable in their positions. For the record, I am “pro-choice.” But that does not make me, or anyone who supports a woman’s right to choose, “pro-abortion.”

I believe that abortion should be a last resort for women, but a resort nonetheless. Who but a woman who finds herself with an unplanned, unwanted pregnancy is in the best position to assess the situation and the impact upon her life, evaluate the available options, and decide what the best course of action is? It is no doubt a highly personal and agonizing decision to have to make and I think there are very few who take lightly the decision to have an abortion.

What right do those who oppose abortion have to deny a woman a lawful course of action simply because it is against their religion, beliefs, or morality for a woman to have an abortion?

For those whose religious or moral beliefs are such that they oppose abortion, the answer is simple. Don’t have one. But don’t deny the choice to others who might not feel the same way or share those same beliefs. Don’t picket and protest outside of Planned Parenthood clinics in order to harass, intimidate, and try to shame those who are seeking to examine all of their available options.

19 thoughts on “Fandango’s Flashback Friday — October 30

  1. Mister Bump UK October 30, 2020 / 3:34 am

    I think you’re right in that people become entrenched. In my mind, it therefore becomes an issue which there is no point debating. People either believe that the rights of the woman trump (your favourite word 🤣) those of the foetus, or they think the opposite, and thereafter, never the twain… It’s a stalemate.
    My own view is based more on equality. The would-be father has the right to walk away from the encounter. Sure, there might be paternity suits down the line, but ultimately he has the right not to be there. So why should the woman not have those same rights?

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Paula Light October 30, 2020 / 7:42 am

    Also, the abortion rate goes down during Democratic admins. Maybe women have better access to birth control and/or feel less pessimistic about raising a child…

    Liked by 2 people

  3. annieasksyou October 30, 2020 / 9:13 am

    Absolutely, Fandango. As you know, I wrote about this topic recently in my post “Expanding the Definition of Pro-Life.” And then more recently, I saw a Nicholas Kristof Op-Ed in The NY Times saying essentially the same thing —and referring to some of those I cited as well. The Zeitgeist?

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Marleen November 1, 2020 / 6:24 pm

    Seems to me hypocrisy is the feature (for a majority of the “pro-life” people), the draw, not a perceived flaw… the honey, not the bug or fly in the ointment. This is becoming more clear, in a number of ways, lately (and has become so in recent years). In the last couple months, a supposed pro-life person wouldn’t let me speak from my pro-life “record” (which I think triggers them dumbfounded).

    And then I, additionally, learned about a case in 2005. Therein, Scalia bantered as to whether “shall means shall” or not. He decided it did not, in order that to his own liking it would be decided there was no neglect that could be identified in a law enforcement department refusing a woman’s repeated attempts to have a restraining order enforced. Her daughters were murdered, and who cared?

    Liked by 1 person

  5. leigha66 November 5, 2020 / 8:58 pm

    Excellent post. I too am pro-choice. I think if I were faced with that situation I personally could not go through with it, but it should be my choice to make. And those cases of rape, incest and one where the pregnancy threatens the mother’s life… which life is more important? I truly hope we don’t make it illegal. It would just be another step backwards.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Fandango November 5, 2020 / 10:43 pm

      I think that with Amy Coney Barrett now on the Supreme Court, it’s only a matter of months before Roe v. Wade is overturned and abortions will no longer be legal in many states.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Marleen November 5, 2020 / 11:11 pm

        The weird thing is, I think, there will still be approvals for certain situations. Therefore, it seems better to leave the “approval” (or not) up to the individual most involved. Of course, some people don’t think there should even be exceptions… at all. Let them decide that for themselves. There was a time when I had life insurance and wouldn’t have allowed an abortion. But, now, I can see why someone else would decide otherwise in their life.

        Bottom line — like you said — pro-choice isn’t the same as pro-abortion.

        I knew someone in college who was pregnant with twins. A month or so after I met her, one was dying. The toxins were endangering the other one. So, this person who was very much against abortion went ahead with an abortion of the one to save the other. I think some people don’t accept that such decisions are real. They think it couldn’t be possible something like that would ever come up. They put unforeseen circumstances out of mind.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.