Axe Swipe

Seriously, what DO they mean by "Choice"?

It's not a choice for the unborn, they get no say in the matter.

It's not a choice for the father who may actually want a child. Radical feminism has convinced women that men must have no say in the matter whatsoever.

The frightened, confused and often ill-informed women who go into abortion clinics or other "Pro-Choice" centers are not provided information on ALL of the options available to them besides abortion so that they cannot make a educated and well-formed decision. Therefore, they are not provided with a choice, because they are not necessarily aware of the alternative options in regards to their unborn baby.

So what do they mean by "Choice" and for whom do they think gets to make it?

While I'm writing on this subject, I would like to respond to a few of the classic arguments that are constantly thrown out by "pro-choice" women.

1) "Until men can get pregnant, they have no say in the matter"

Well, if men could get pregnant, then seriously, what would we need women for? The very nature of this argument is fallacious, since man has proven time and time again that anything that does not serve a uniquely desirable purpose is either destroyed or left to destruction and the femal gender would have become extinct ages ago. Just look to China for an example. They are having to import brides due to the unavailability of Chinese brides, a situation that has been created  by China's single-child policy and the ability of parents to abort their baby just because it's a girl.

As it is, it takes two people, a man and a woman to create a baby, no matter what method is used (natural, IVF, etc.) and if a man has no say in whether the baby he helped create (intentionally or not) gets to be born or not, then he should be making 100% absolutely, positively certain that he sperm is not coming into contact with any woman or her eggs. Which means keep it in you pants boys.

I also pity any man who marries a woman who holds this belief, because he is likely to be emasculated in short-order by his radical feminist wife and will either spend his life miserably married to her or eventually divorced from her and damaged goods to other women.

2) "Men can keep their hands off my uterus/ovaries/reproductive rights"

In which case, they should be looking forward to either a long life of celibacy or lesbianism.

At the same time they should be pushing for legislature prohibiting any male doctor from performing any kind of abortion, since it involves him making medical decisions or recommendations that do have a direct correlation to your uterus/ovaries/reproductive rights as well as literally putting his hands on them. I would really support this since I'm willing to bet that the majority of doctors performing abortions are men.

3)  "Abortions should stay safe..."

Except there is nothing safe about abortion. Surgical abortions just like any other surgery has risks such as cuts/nicks to internal organs/body parts causing infections, internal bleeding and a visit to th eemergency room at best and death at worst. Chemical abortions have their own unique set of risks to include allergic reactions, chemical-induced hemmhoraging, cramping and again a possible visit to the E.R. at best or death at worst.

4) "...and legal"

Keeping abortion legal simply reinforces the false notion that abortion is morally acceptable. When laws are in place that ban immoral acts, the general population is generally deterred from performing that act. Granted, there will always be that fringe that will act in defiance of the law, but the percentage of women who suffered or died each year while having an "illegal" abortion before the Roe v. Wade decision is lower than those who suffered or died from "legal" abortions after Roe v. Wade.

5) "Why should I be punished/burdened with children"

Simply, because they are the ones who are going to wipe your butt and take care of you in your old age, should you live that long. Analysts keep talking about how Social Security will not be able to support the increasing number of retirees because it will run out of money. Why? Because we have aborted our replacements in the work-force who should be contributing to the Social Security fund. Half of the people who should be working and contributing to Social Security today never made it out of the womb alive.