Notes

I'm going to rant about pro-life vs pro-choice, so if you don't want to hear my rant then you've been warned.

I read something recently where someone said that if a woman is raped, it is her right to have an abortion, but if she chose to have unprotected sex that resulted in a pregnancy, that she should "own up to her mistakes," that "it's her fault this time" and "she has to take responsibility."

Can I just say, SINCE WHEN IS IT IN ANY WAY OKAY TO BRING A LIFE INTO THIS WORLD AS A METHOD OF PUNISHING A PERSON FOR A CHOICE THAT THEY HAD EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE?

Pregnancy should not be used as a punishment, to make people "take responsibility" for the "mistake" of having unprotected sex.
A woman can choose to have unprotected sex. Is it the safest idea, considering the risk of STDs? No. Can she get pregnant? Yeah, of course. But by saying that forcing a women to go through pregnancy makes a her "take responsibility" for unprotected sex, you are saying that a woman's sex life should be subject to regulations and disciplinary measures. A woman's sex life is NOT your business: as long as both parties are consenting, that is between THEM and does not involve YOU. Tbh, that goes for everyone's sex lives. You may not agree with their choice to have unprotected sex, but it was not your decision to make. But, for argument's sake, if we're really going to "punish" people for having unprotected sex, then what is the man's punishment? If the baby is put up for adoption (in a flawed adoption system, might I add), the father does not experience the "punishment" of permanent physical changes that comes from carrying a child, they do not experience the physical tolls of pregnancy and labor, they do not have to change their lifestyle to help keep the baby healthy. If you are going to say it is a mistake to have unprotected sex and that it is deserving of punishment, then what's the man's punishment? I'll wait.

And you can't claim to be "pro-life" if you want to say that pregnancy is the punishment for having unprotected sex. That devalues the life of the child, as you are viewing them simply as an instrument of "discipline" instead of a life that deserves to be wanted and celebrated. A woman who is forced to have a child is highly unlikely to celebrate that life.

The pro-life argument also suggests that an embryo/fetus (an embryo is considered a fetus at around week 11, which is towards the end of the first trimester. Most abortions occur in the first trimester, and many of the abortions that occur later in pregnancies are performed when the mother or fetus' life is at risk) is a life, a person. As "personhood" is a complex construct, an embryo/fetuses status in this regard is very much dependent on personal, often spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof), NOT scientific fact. Just as with freedom of religion and the separation of church and state, one group's spiritual beliefs on a subject should not dictate others' beliefs or actions. If your religion views a group of cells as a person, then I have good news: no one is forcing you to get an abortion! But your beliefs cannot control another person's autonomy. You do NOT have the right to decide what other people can and cannot do based on your beliefs, which are not based on science but rather on something akin to spiritualism.

For argument's sake though, let us say that an embryo or fetus IS a person (after all, even if someone does not believe in this definition of personhood, they cannot deny that these cells have the potential to eventually become a human). This person is dependent on the person they are growing inside of. However, CERTAINLY they do not have the right to force the other person to support their life without their consent and at their expense. What gives the embryo/fetus more rights than a woman? Are women really such objects in your eyes that their bodies belong to everyone but themselves? Along this same line of thinking, no third party has the right to force a woman to use her body support another life without her consent and at her expense, either. I read a perfect example of this once, where someone compared it to organ donation: you would not force someone to donate an organ (or blood, even) to another individual in order to save the other person's life, even if the other person was their child. People have the right to choose what happens with their own body. They can choose to have unprotected sex. And they can choose to prohibit their body from being used as a "life support mechanism."

If someone wants to bring a life into this world and has the means to, then good for them. If someone wants to adopt, then cool. If someone gets pregnant unintentionally and decides to keep the baby, then nice. But if someone gets pregnant unintentionally, even if it is the result of a choice they made that people may disagree with, they should not be forced to bring a life into this world. Our bodies belong to us, not to the human race.

Keep your opinions off of our bodies and your misogyny off of our rights.
Thanks <3