Pajiba

As a pro-choice, reproductive justice activist, all this imagery does is make me dig my heels in further. I'm never more committed to my movement than after I see this dude or any of his ilk on TV, or down at the clinic I volunteer for.

W.
T.
F.

...nuff said.

Gimme 3 minutes in a room with this asshole...

According to CNN, as of last week Terry had purchased ad time in 13 markets. Eight markets will air his ads pregame, and five markets will run ads during the game: Ada, Okla.; Grand Junction, Colo.; Paducah, Ky.; and Joplin and Springfield, Mo. -- from the Slate link

Anyone know what the 8 markets are that will have the pregame ads? I don't think it applies to my market, but I would like to be prepared to change the channel.

(Also, his name is Randall Terry. Terry Richardson is that fashion photographer guy)

F this dude. Creep.

Classy. Well-made. I mean, I'm guessin' Obama is going to have a tough fight ahead of him to keep the Democratic Party's nomination...

So GoDaddy can't show boobs but this guy can show this?

Blah blah blah, abortion. Blah blah blah, abortion. Blah blah blah, abortion.

Who cares if that's what it looks like? Is it your baby? Is it your fetus? Then you don't have a fucking say in the matter. You're not the one that has to carry it, raise it, or provide for it.

As Jay so eloquently puts it in Dogma, "A woman's body is her own fucking business."

Let's be crystal clear about this guy. He's a lifelong Republican who switched parties this year so that he could run these ads against Obama as a Democrat.

Amberlark, how do you know those are aborted fetuses other than because they're being represented as such by people with an obvious agenda? They could be still births, the products of miscarriage, or props made for the commercial.

Also, the imagery associated with almost any surgery is something most people find disturbing. I don't want to watch open heart surgery or a kidney transplant because it would turn my stomach, but "because it looks icky" isn't a reason to outlaw or question if people should have those procedures.

There are several mistruths in the ads. First of all he says President Obama "promotes" abortion. Not true. Then he calls abortion "murder". Not true based on legal or scientific standards. Then he claims aborted remains are sitting in the sewers and landfills of America. Not true: there is a required disposal protocol that is used that does not involved flushing or dumping.

There are however, well-documented cases of live babies' bodies being found dumped by girls who were denied family planning services due to guys like him. I doubt there will be a follow-up ad addressing that travesty.

I figured someone would clarify things for me. Your American politikin' is strange and confusing to we simple Canuckifuckistanies.

KatSings, I couldn't agree with you more. I had a miscarriage several years ago and these images are horrific for someone like myself to see.

The only reason I watched the first five seconds was to prepare myself for changing the goddam channel should I see this come on my television.

Nobody want to look at the images because they are unpleasant and visceral - and if we are honest, we would not ahve the same reaction looking at cancerous tissue or a smoking-damaged lung; but EVERYBODY knows that the Constitution protects the procedure that generates these unpleasant images. That 'knowledge' is pragmatic a/o feminist a/o based on Roe/Casey.

The principle you support does generate these images, so live with them and defend them; don't ruen a blind eye. Happily, contraception COULD keep this to a minimum.

Why are so many of the most loud and obnoxious anti-abortionists dudes? I'm sorry, but until you have to suffer the very real consequenses* of childbirth, you don't get to tell me or any other woman we can't have safe abortions.

You don't like abortions? Don't have one. But you're an asshole if you restrict access to safe abortions performed by trained medical professionals.

H/T to Evie for a (rarely seen) rational arguement from the pro-life side.

I also like your juxtaposition between someone who is 'pro-life' vs. someon who's just 'anti-abortion.'

This prick is definitely all Part B up there, just stomping his feet on his apple box, but providing no real knowledge or legitimate alternative.

I find it laughable that they could run these adds and yet we all experienced Nipplegate.

If that's the loophole, where do I send my donation to the Skits for President fund?

I can only imagine what the completely uncensored campaign ads that networks are legally obligated to run will look like. Although I recommend Fox & Friends mornings show as a better time slot than the Superbowl.

Skittimus/Wendel '16

I continue to read much about people being stalked, raped, and killed for having been associated with abortion clinics.
Women who merely were seen going into a clinic being stalked, followed, and raped or killed at their homes.
Doctors, nurses, even secretaries stalked and killed.

They are all for life yet they don't oppose the killers who do some of the most heinous crimes imaginable. The killer/rapists actually believe it is justified.
F-them and their BS

So this would be the Randall Terry who doesn't pay his child support, yeah? The one who advocates for bombing clinics where women get routine medical care (check the stats, people, that's what most folks go to PP for, not abortions). Fuck that guy.*

This ad has NO place being aired during the Superbowl, a time when folks usually have their families around and no one wants to be talking about reproductive rights. There are times and places, and I agree the conversation should be had, but this bullshit is not about conversation; it's about getting attention. No one should be rewarded for springing this sort of thing on unsuspecting people.

* and anyone else who thinks I should have died for a zygote, especially those who presume to moralize about my trauma.

Unless you meant "just the extremists committing the violent acts".

Because, clearly, fuck those guys. My apologies if I read too much into your pronoun.

And, for the record, I feel the same way about graphic horror movie trailers. They should not be aired on the networks during prime time. My kid should not be given nightmares so someone else can garner attention. Because if this is allowed, how can you argue against profanity in prime time? Or slasher series being shown in the 8:00 slot? If this is okay, then all arguments for family programming periods are shot to hell.

What. the. fuck. even.

Wow, this ad is going to go down great with hot dogs and beer. It won't be completely ill-timed AT ALL.

The insincerity of this is what's sickening, he's clearly playing up to the rabid, knee-jerk reactionists. Not an ounce of actually caring about the issue, just pandering to American audiences. It's more offensive for how repetitive it is (seriously - this stuff has been recycled for years, I swear I've seen that bit with the two curled up in a different ad TEN YEARS AGO), and delivered as convincingly as a shitty actor on their first read-through.

I take heart in the hope that one day, maybe even centuries from now, but one day issues like racism, abortion and sexual discrimination will have bred out and people of that time will regard the people of today with the same sense of disbelief that we reserve for the people who used to think black communities were less than human. It makes me smile to think that one day abortion will be safe and respected and treated with dignity and when a girl hears that women of today were once humiliated, bullied and shamed into a forced sentence, that she won't be able to believe it.

H/T to Evie.

I'm still boggled that networks are even like, "Should we or shouldn't we?" about airing this commercial. Yes, they're in select areas, but STILL.

I live in one of the 5 markets mentioned as showing this during the SuperBowl. This is outrageous. I am working to find out whether the local affiliate has any choice in airing this (it seems like they don't) or if I can at least turn this into a local controversy so that the local news will at least be able to inform us of exactly when this will be shown so that we have the choice of looking away.

1 in 3 women in the U.S. will have an abortion. About 50,000 women have had an abortion in the U.S. since 1973. Abortion is a common and necessary medical procedure. There are vast and varied reasons for why a woman choses to have an abortion.

I am a volunteer and board member at an abortion clinic. I have not had an abortion but I several women I know and love have. I trust women to make the best decisions for themselves and their families.

This comercial is not appropriate for family television, period.

"Convenience", Mark, really? That's why women decide to have abortions? Not because they can't afford the thousands, *thousands* of dollars it takes to nurture an infant to term? (see below). Not because they have a family history of birth defects and they don't want to have a baby that will suffer and die prematurely? Not because they were raped? The only thing "convenient" about your argument is that you don't have a uterus, and therefore not having an abortion is an easy decision for you to make. It's not so easy for those that do, and shame on you for thinking it's such a trivial choice.

http://children.costhelper.com/baby-delivery.html

Seriously Mark, all I see when I read your post is "blah, blah, blah". That's it. I read it and understood the words and sentiment, but I'm so sick of these statements. It's not because I feel guilt when I see the images in this commercial, I don't. Those fetuses aren't viable outside of a woman's body (until 24 weeks or so), so a woman's body is pretty important. Having a body means that she has a mind of her own, a mind she uses to make choices. So while this fetus is in her body she can decide if she wants it there or not. You have no say in the matter. Thank goodness.

My question, Does a fetus have the right to my body? Does a woman have any rights to her own body? A body that supports, develops and carries this fetus? From what your saying, I'm guessing it's no, the fetus is more important. Or a woman's choice about her actual life is less important than a developing fetuses "potential life"? That always makes me wonder about the feelings someone with your argument has about women in general. We can't make these choices for ourselves, so you should make them? No thank you.

Well, I expected people to ignore the main arguement I made, so I'll ignore the hysteria in your responses. I'll just clarify that I'm talking here about abortions of convenience, and abortion as contraception, NOT issues of health. That's a different issue alltogether.

Tell me once again that your choice to afford a more comfortable lifestyle is more important than another person's life. Tell me the shape of your body and its condition for 9 months is more important than the body being ground up inside of you.

I also resent the idea that not having a uterus makes me any less qualified than you to discuss ethics or morals. It's not only a person capable of committing a crime who's entitled to have an opinion or judgement on that crime.

I'm with Paddydog (yet again) in that my husband is from a 3rd world country where abortions are very hard to come by and back-alley is the name of the game. I appreciate your views, Evie, but I also thank my God that I never had to make this kind of decision for myself and I further pray (and vote) that my daughter will never have to either.

Donating to Planned Parenthood reminder.

Sick-fucking-whackadoo.

My body. My business. I'm not saying it should be the norm, not as birth control or a convenience. BUT, it SHOULD NOT be denied across the board as an option. And, I'm sorry, but men be damned. If it does not DIRECTLY affect you, it's none of your damn business. YOU are not carrying a baby. YOU will not go thru the hormonal and body changes and pain of childbirth. The woman carrying the child will.

In this day and age, birth control SHOULD be readily available to ANYONE, ANY AGE, who is sexually active, so abortion should not be used as such. However, in cases of rape/molestation/danger to the mother...how can you deny these women this choice? Are all these pro-lifers going to take on all the children born in these situations? Of course not. So, they end up unwanted or unable to be cared for by mothers who are too young, or physically unable. They are in orphanages or foster homes, or worse.

We are not YET a third-world country, ruled by religion, where women are considered 3rd or 4th class citizens. People like this would make this happen. I, for one, would not look good in a burqa.So, fuck you very much, Mr. Terry. Stay out of my uterus.

I wrote out a longer post, but it was somehow violating one of the commenting rules and I don't feel like retyping everything, and it's safe to say there probably isn't anything I was going to say about abortion that hasn't been said before. Anyway:

I'm not exactly sure you had a main argument in your first post, Mark . That being said, I don't believe your opinion is negated because you're a man. While I do believe that women have more at stake, your lack of ability to fully empathize doesn't invalidate your opinion. However, I feel like I should point out that your argument of, "It's not only a person capable of committing a crime who's entitled to have an opinion or judgment on that crime," is just a tad inappropriate, since abortion is fully legal in the US.

Personal views aside, I don't think this commercial should run because it is exploitative and not suitable for children who might be watching. There is a time and a place for educating people about the pros and cons of abortion, but a 30 second Super Bowl spot is not the appropriate way to go about it.

These people do not give a fucking shit about life! All they care about is the fetus and once that fetus has become a living being then you are on your damn own unless you become in so much pain then suddenly you are important and you have to take every medication, treatment and surgery available and if you are in a coma then you have to stay plugged-in! They make me sick, all of them!

And, I'm sorry, but men be damned. If it does not DIRECTLY affect you, it's none of your damn business. YOU are not carrying a baby. YOU will not go thru the hormonal and body changes and pain of childbirth. The woman carrying the child will.

Everybody is affected by abortion because everyone has been a fetus at some point, almost everyone has half the ingredients to produce a fetus, and almost everyone will eventually be responsible for at least one fetus at some point in their life. It's one of the few things that everybody has in common.

In this day and age, birth control SHOULD be readily available to ANYONE, ANY AGE, who is sexually active, so abortion should not be used as such. However, in cases of rape/molestation/danger to the mother...how can you deny these women this choice? Are all these pro-lifers going to take on all the children born in these situations? Of course not. So, they end up unwanted or unable to be cared for by mothers who are too young, or physically unable. They are in orphanages or foster homes, or worse.

Abortion will always be used as a form of birth control, so it's not like you can pretend it's not part of the argument.

Granted, I actually am in favor of abortion. But that doesn't mean I don't recognize that the concept of trimesters are meaningless. It's a very serious matter to me because I know that any way you slice it, your ending a life, but at the same time, access to abortion is the only guaranteed method to prevent poverty, prevent someone being born with genetic diseases like Tay-Sachs and Trisomy 18, and to prevent victims of rape from going through the trauma of having a kid as a result of their assault.

It's important, but abortion is always going to be ugly, is always going to end a life, and always going to be used as a form of birth control. Don't pretend any different.

i'm a mom..watching this video made me cry and want to adopt any and all unwanted children, i want to tell anyone thinking of aborting their baby that i will take that baby and love him/her to the best of my ability..in reality..i know that that would be impossible and i still believe it's a woman's right to chose.

At this point I would like on the part the State of Missouri to humble apologize. On occasion the more rural parts of our fine state produce individuals who to put it as delicately as I can take a great deal of pride in their self righteous belief that they

Sorry about that, computer glitch let me continue. that they have a FUCKING CLUE. Please excuse Mr. Terry, you see in the area of the state the he comes from they would say the best part of him ran down his momma's leg.

Dude, It's a reaction to the shitty, disgusting tactics. It's not like their response to the video is "Holy shit, that's awesome, let's make more of those dead fetuses!". It's "Holy shit, that's disgusting and exploitative and it just increases my support of the other side of the debate."

Also, no one supports abortions. For example, I support gay marriage, and I get a good feeling every time I hear about a gay couple finally being able to legally get married. I get no such feeling when I hear about a woman getting an abortion. I think that it's the woman's body and she has the choice on whether or not to bring that pregnancy to term, but that doesn't mean I think abortion is a great thing.

Well, it's 2:30 in the morning and I'm already on this page, so I might as well leave a comment. And if the past is any indicator I'm coming to this at the end of the comment blitz so my opinion won't be ready by too many.
Just so any readers know, I'm a man and since I have to fall on one end of this I suppose I'm pro-life, even though I really don't like the term, since it comes off as a "holier than thou" attitude so I guess I'll say I'm anti-abortion. I'm more conservative than liberal (but I'm really closer to the middle of the political spectrum) and I plan on pursuing a career in church ministry once a church decides to hire me. Yay! Now all my background is out there so those of you that want to can crap all over it.
I'm not a radical. I have never participated in a picket rally of an abortion clinic, or a funeral, and I don't own a shirt that says "God hates fags." Those people literally make me sick to my stomach.
I struggle with the abortion issue. I believe fetuses are living people so aborting them is something that I find to be morally wrong. That being said, I also believe there are a number of situations where abortion is not only appropriate but that it can be the best solution for that situation. I haven't had any kids, but I'm reaching the age where I'm looking back at the hundreds of thousands of dollars that my parents have spent on me or for me and I'm realizing that having a child is a far more enormous responsibility than I can even fathom until I have one. So I understand that not everyone is up for it, physically, emotionally, mentally or financially. I also know that for many young women there are other options to abortion. There are a number of non-profit organizations whose sole purpose is to help any mother who decides to take her pregnancy to term and then the organization helps the mother either find parents to adopt or they assist the mother in taking care of the child. However, I realize that there are a number of reasons why a pregnant woman might decide not to make use of said organizations.
I think, essentially, my stance would have to boil down to this: I believe that there are times when abortion is not only justified, but a good decision, regardless of my personal moral stance on the issue. It isn't my place to shove my morals down some pregnant girl's throat because she's making a decision that I disagree with. And, the idea that outlawing abortion clinics will fix the situation is preposterous. As others have mentioned before, when there isn't a safe way to get an abortion, some women will still go the back alley route which can be incredibly dangerous. So really, for me, any change to the status quo would, in my thinking, endanger lives rather than save them.
PS I do take some offense to those who say men shouldn't have a say in the argument or that they shouldn't have a say in the woman's choice. That sounds wrong, but hear me out. The fact that I won't ever physically give birth doesn't really exclude me from the conversation. I may be prone to rambling but I think my opinion is fairly well-thought-out, and I have given some considerable thought to this issue, so counting me out just because I have a penis seems a little... judgmental? sexist? I dunno it's late I'm not sure what I'm going for there. As for the choice itself, I believe that the final call belongs to the mother/pregnant woman. She shouldn't be forced to make a decision that she doesn't agree with especially when it does concern her body. That being said, I think that the father should at least be able to have his opinions heard. I know that if I were in a situation like that, I would definitely want her to know how I feel about the issue as a whole and the issue relating to her specifically.

AND PS. And. God. I noticed that just as my comment was posting, too. Curses.

Well said Yossarian.

"I continue to read much about people being stalked, raped, and killed for having been associated with abortion clinics.
Women who merely were seen going into a clinic being stalked, followed, and raped or killed at their homes.
Doctors, nurses, even secretaries stalked and killed."

Citation needed.

"I take heart in the hope that one day, maybe even centuries from now, but one day issues like racism, abortion and sexual discrimination will have bred out and people of that time will regard the people of today with the same sense of disbelief that we reserve for the people who used to think black communities were less than human.

Yes. People who think that foetuses are less than human will be regarded with disbelief, if things go right. The very metaphor you use shows the way things should go --> more caring and less dehumanising rather than away from that.

And, I'm sorry, but men be damned. If it does not DIRECTLY affect you, it's none of your damn business. YOU are not carrying a baby.

Exactly. And if racism does not DIRECTLY affect you, it's none of your damn business. And murder. And dumping chemical waste. From now on only people directly involved in things get a say.

"It's pretty simple really: abortion can be legal, safe and medically sanctioned or it can be bleach douches, coat hangers and backstreet butchers. Either way, women will continue to terminate their pregnancies (as they have done for thousands of years) because it is the WOMEN who have to make that decision."

It's pretty simple really: murder can be legal safe and sanctioned or it can be hired killers, illegal guns and backstreet executions. Either way murder will still happen (as it has for thousands of years) because irrelevant reason blah WOMEN.

There are sensible pro-choice arguments, these are not them.

Thank you, AngelArm45, for a very well-thought out comment. As for some of the rest of you, well....you should never argue with a crazy mind.

I guess AngelArm's comment expressed everything that has to be said on the abortion issue. I'm female, I'm not religious, I never had a child (and never will). The pictures shown in this abominable TV spot speak of pain inflicted for everyone involved (fetus/embryo, pregnant woman, father, family, doctors, nurses). No one likes abortions. It seems the only people who refuse to understand that are conservative religious male politicians in the US.

And all the rest has been said by George Carlin years ago already or written by one Reverend Carlton Veazey.

Also, can I presume that a TV spot featuring that dead, mutilated cat on the front porch will be aired right after the abortion spot? To counterweight things? Ahh, the USA. The place where "psychotic politics" becomes more and more of a pleonasm each year. (Or would that be a tautology? I can't tell them apart.) Central European politics are positively sane and benign in comparison.

"saying "I don't think people should just start using it as contraception" is ridiculous if you don't believe it's a baby. Why do you care what people use as contraception if you take that factor out of the argument?"

Yep. It's like anti-abortion people who accept leeway for rape or incest. It's either a human or it's not. If you pick one, be consistent. (Unless you are ok with infanticide in cases of rape or incest... in which case I guess they are still consistent)

Ender and becks, people who're pro-choice and/but anti-abortion usually refer to those sorts of abortions that take (a lot) more than just a morning-after-pill. We mean the real surgeries that hurts and sometimes leaves one with lasting damage. Now I'm not a gynaecologist or biologist, but I think it's safe to assume that an abortion shouldn't be raised to "standard casual contraceptive" - if only because it's unhealthy for the woman.

That term "pro-life" is such a fucking bullshit label to hide behind. "I´m strictly pro-life." Well aren´t you just the cusp of humanity! It´s so commendable to be "pro-life" as opposed to people who think a woman should be able to decide what´s happening to her own goddamn body and therefore are clearly "pro-death". Fuck off!

@cinekat Our commercials may not show baby leftovers on prime time but still those limp and withered rosary-waving fuckheads with their signs are standing in front of the abortion clinic on Fleischmarkt I walk past every day, harrassing people.

My husband and I are now having our first child...but this is not my first pregnancy.

I was raised by a single, alcoholic, abusive father. He has tried to kill me twice. I finally, finally, made it to foster care when I was a teenager.

My brother was not so lucky.

I am so tired of arguments about how people 'should' be: people shouldn't have sex until they are married (this, of course, presupposes that you are married to an emotionally healthy person who is not abusive); people who are raped shouldn't take their negative feelings about the experience out on their child; people should be better/stronger/faster and virtuous in all ways.

Well, people should also be good parents.

The truth is children are not precious to everyone. I gave up wishing that my father would be a good parent - or at least, not a horrible one - after my brother's second suicide attempt. Because even as a child I knew that wishing does not make it so, and I knew that I had to face the world as it was if I was going to survive and not go insane.

The truth is that love is not enough. I can't tell you how many children are abused by parents who insist they are good parents because they love their children.

But why abortion? Because I was terrified that I would be exactly like my father as a parent. Not only is this fear justified but it is shared by many people who were abused as children. Add the emotional element of rape to that and I had visions of being the mother who drowned all her children in a lake.

Abortion - terminating a pregnancy - is a nuanced ethical issue and cuts to the most elemental questions: what is life? sentience? consciousness?

It is not reasonable, or scientifically supported, to me that humanity (because that is what this is really about) starts at conception. And, supposing it did, why one death is morally objectionable while another is morally acquitted. We as a society understand this.

All I can say is that if everything evangelical Christians believe is true, that I will have to stand before my maker and have my sins laid bare, that I would be at peace with my decision; that I could not possibly endure had I become the monster of my own parent.

My deepest apologies for the length of this comment.

@cinekat I really just wanted to emphasize that we Austrians are not all enlightened either – in fact I wouldn´t even put us in the top half of European countries on an enlightemnent scale. I applaud you on the effort of arguing with those people and probably raising your blood pressure into a dangerous range in the process.

Rooks, elective plastic surgery can be extremely dangerous as well. We aren't condemning that.

Hayden, your comment moved me almost to tears. I know it wasn't your intention to win this thread, but you just did in my eyes.

(((hugs)))

"Eventually I realize that it has nothing to do with life, rather, the argument fundamentally boils down to control over those deemed lesser beings. One cannot value life if they are willing to watch desperate women die in excruciating pain and stripped of dignity to obtain control over their bodies in a procedure that is otherwise safe and in some instances medically necessary."

**Yes, and Pro-choice arguments fundamentally boils down to control over those deemed lesser beings. One cannot valye life if they are willing to watch innocent babies injected with caustic chemicals and cut up while still in the womb.** Sarcasm.

I started to write that as a mockery of your bald-faced lying about the motives of the Pro-life people, and I'm still against this bullshit rhetoric ("No you do it because you hate goodness and don't care about people" "No you hate more and care less about innocents") but interestingly there actually is an inequality between the arguments made by Pro-choice and Anti-abortion people.

(Many) Pro-choice arguments actually explicitly deem foetuses "lesser beings" - alive, but not truly human, and demand control over their very life or death. Most Pro-life arguments explicitly deem women and foetuses equal with a slight edge for the woman in cases where her life is threatened.

So what I appear to be saying is, watch your bullshit rhetoric you cretinous half-wit. Making up "evil" reasons why 'the enemy' are doing it is a stupid political tactic, but it's especially egregious in cases where your bullshit psychologising (based on what? your personal experience of their 'real' motives? peer review that shit why don't you?) actually describes the explicit platform that many people who agree with you are arguing from.

Sorry at 11.24am I said @Becks when I meant @Rook

A 15 year old girl came to our local clinic after an attempted abortion. She had been assaulted previously & in an effort to terminate with an unknown foreign object, her uterus was perforated as was the adjacent bowel. She was in fulminant sepsis & was taken for urgent laparotomy. The infection was overwhelming. She was shocky so we closed & decided to make her as comfortable as possible. The family took her home. When we inquired with a local aid worker as to what had become of her, we learned she was thrown in a local dump. Perhaps sharing this makes me a half wit cretin, but I don't think these stories are in ads. I honestly should have known better than to enter into any argument like this, but after 6 years of reading this site, it needed saying, if only because I still have nightmares about this and similar cases.

ENDER ...

if the commenter had excepted rape, incest or a threat to the
mother's life, it would have made much more sense to me. these
circumstances exist in relatively few cases, however , and he used
the phrase " a number of situations " where an abortion would be MORE than appropriate. that was vague enough to make me draw
the conclusion that he was playing to both sides of the issue. i wish
he had been more specific.
i agree with your comments about referring to the people on
one side or the other as " the enemy ". this issue is divisive
enough without further heat generated by extreme language.
of all the social issues we confront, this is the most difficult to
discuss rationally . actually i should say civilly.

John, I firmly believe that people should be able to have open heart surgery, brain surgery, bowel surgery and any other kind of medical procedure they have decided on. Heck, I think folks should be able to get their liposuction and breast implants and all manner of body modifications, too. That doesn't mean I want to watch it.

I did want to watch my own c-section, but the doctors wouldn't take down the screen for me because (wait for it) they thought it would be too disturbing. I'm still pissed off about that, and it was 16 years ago. Would I want to see a c-section or even a regular birth during the Superbowl? No. And I'll bet you don't want to, either.

Not only am fine with eating meat, but I have watched graphic videos of how food gets to the supermarket. I have also taken part in slaughtering and dressing chickens and pigs. Doesn't mean I want to see videos of it while I'm watching football. And I sure don't want my kids to be subjected to that experience without warning.

Snake:
To be honest, I wish I had been more specific too. This will sound like an excuse, but I wrote that entire huge comment in one sitting late at night/early in the morning and I made the mistake to post it without proofreading it. Saying that I believe there are a lot of situations where abortion is the best choice was incorrect. Any time where it's physically dangerous for the mother or if the mother has been raped and can't handle the pregnancy for one reason or another are examples of specific instances where abortion might be the best solution. There may be more situations, but I can't think of any specifically.
To condense my previous comment: I personally find abortion morally wrong, but I don't presume to tell/force anyone to make a choice that they don't want to make. The only person who can make that choice is the mother. I also understand that if abortion were made illegal, it would only worsen the situation leading to even more dangerous conditions to pregnant women.
Another PS:
Regarding this statement:
"talk about not wanting to offend anyone !! i wonder how he would
handle " living people " who have emerged from the womb. what
kind of situations would merit killing as the " best solution "?"
I a CCW license which allows me to legally conceal a firearm. I carry said firearm everywhere I am legally able to. I do not do this for any reason other than to defend myself if my life is threatened. I have not had that happen, and I pray it never does, for a number of reasons; primarily because I do not want to take the life of another human being. I cannot stress this enough. The absolute last thing I ever want to do is end someone's life. It is the absolute last resort if I am in danger for my life. But I feel more comfortable having that option available to me in case it's the only option (similar to how there are other options available to pregnant women who decide not to keep the baby for whatever reason). But I carry a firearm so that I'm prepared if that situation ever does occur. Long answer to a short question but there you go.

AngelArm45 ...

i did notice that your initial post was written in the wee small
hours. thanks for the explanation. i agree with the exceptions
you outlined above and would add incest.

(pt. 2: For some reason Pajiba wouldn't tell me, I was not allowed to post this comment as a whole.)

So are you one of those people who are unable to remember that other opinions exist if you disagree with them morally? Like you're so het up with "abortion's not wrong so the remorse is unnecessary" that you've forgotten people exist who think that abortion is wrong?
Oh, I haven't forgotten about them. I just found that there's no basis for their position, i.e. they're simply wrong. And since their arguments always stay the same (unfounded and guided by scripture and "feeling in the heart" as they are, mostly blind to and/or ignoring the whole picture and the poor woman who has become their battleground), we have nothing more to talk about.

Consequently, they're wrong to pressure women into thinking that they've committed a capital crime (since, if the words "capital crime" are to mean anything, they haven't) and make them feel bad about having made a decision – especially when it was a good, reasonable, well thought through decision.
And again: How is it fair? The pro-lifers on the internet never seem to be interested in hearing the whole story or in finding out what circumstances the woman found herself in. What hardships and agony she had to go through. Even if the testimony says that the decision was made on medical reasons, that the mother's life was in danger and/or that the child would be very deformed at birth - the pro-life forum-vultures are there, completely disregarding all these perfectly good reasons, completely disregarding how the woman must have felt about it, never respecting her decision or her reasons. They're just there, spewing their bible verses all over the forum, trying to instill remorse. Sometimes succeeding.
(In this context, these testimonies are probably very interesting. Go check them out.)

I've spend way more time on this than I wanted to. I really hope this is the last comment I have to write to you, Ender. The bottom line is that we really agree, anyway ("let's try to keep abortions rare"), and in regards to the other aspects, no one will change the other's mind anyway. Luckily we don't have to.

Kind regards from Europe.

snake, thanks for the regards. If you read my... eh, essay-comment..., (which you obviously haven't done before replying) you'll find I gave reasons why it's simply wrong to think of abortion as something morally/ethically detestable and/or something that can or should be compared to and punished like first degree murder (the way people commonly do). Because it's a sleepless night, I'll expand on the points I made already. Just for you. Because you're worth it.

If you're not willing to accept embryology and it's findings, and base your ethical instincts on them and go from there, the whole debate will just end up in pseudophilosophical, religiously inspired, emotionalized waffle and scare, the result being spots like the one you'll enjoy during the SuperBowl. People will talk about the "sanctity of life" (which we made up...) and "souls" (same there) and "crimes against god" (...and same again). At this point in a discussion, I sometimes like to act as if I were deeply embedded in Jewish religious tradition and didn't believe that a child gets its soul before its first breath (the way that, I understood from browsing the internet, many people do). Nothing quite like arguments from religion to bring even the most heated and passionate dispute to a complete standstill, is there? Religious beliefs get one nowhere on this issue. One of the two parties has to be wrong, but both say that they have a god on their side. (The same god, no less.)

[To all the Jews reading this: If that's not what you actually believe and find your standpoint distorted, I apologize. Imagine I had written "Norse paganism" or something instead, the point would still be valid.]

To seem literate (and to resolve the standstill), some will then grab for science and say something like "well, the zygote contains DNA, that means, there's the beginning of a genetically unique human being" - as if it logically followed that the zygote therefore is a human being and should have human rights. Or they'll point out that it (the tissue/zygote/embryo) is human life - sure it is. That doesn't mean it's a human being yet. It seems people have problems grasping that there's a difference - another reason why pro-life-people are also fervently opposing stem cell research.
But I'm practically quoting, so go straight to the source (this guy).

Now, if you will please take the time and forward any arguments that I have overlooked so far, and try to prove me wrong, I'd be delighted.

Sincerely,
Rooks