http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/02/i-couldnt-turn-my-abortion-intoart/?

ref=opinion
This article by a liberal feminist shows the hypocrisy and lack
of logic of pro-abortion advocates. She says she wants her daughters to have th
e option of having an abortion, even though she readily admits it's a horrible t
hing and causes harm to the mother in many ways. Of course she never mentions t
he harm it does to the unborn baby, which is even worse since that baby never ha
s a chance to live at all. But if you acknowledge that abortion will always har
m the mother in a variety of ways, then why should it still be legal and an opti
on for your daughters? If you care about your daughters and wanna protect them
from something that harms them, then the only logical reason you would advocate
that thing being legal is if the alternative is as bad or worse.
But in the case of abortion, what's the alternative? There are two: keeping t
he baby and raising it, or giving it up for adoption. No sane person could argu
e that either of these two options are in any way harmful to women, and therefor
e aren't as bad or worse than abortion.
Is pregnancy inconvenient? Yes. Is it embarrassing when it wasn't intended? Y
es. But that pales in comparison to the harm abortion does to women and their u
nborn babies. Furthermore, at some point personal responsibility has to be a pa
rt of the equation for women, just as it does for the men who get them pregnant
and leave (with the exception of rape of course). If you don't wanna have a bab
y, don't have sex, it's that simple. Or at least use birth control, and if that
fails, which is rare, you have to take that risk into account beforehand. Havi
ng an abortion is taking the easy way out and trying to avoid the consequences o
f your mistake. We all make mistakes in life and many of us often try to avoid
the consequences of them because that's human nature, but in this case it involv
es another life. Everyone involved in a woman's abortion, the bf who pressures
her to get it, her family if they do that as well, the abortionist, and the woma
n herself are trying to remove the consequences of her mistake from her life (al
l with their own motives) by taking the life of an innocent unborn baby.
Why does the baby have to pay the price for her mistake, and the
actions of opportunistic, immoral, or predatory men? The baby didn't ask to co
me into the world under these circumstances, that was the woman's choice (in mos
t cases) not the baby's. But the baby is there anyway, and trying to ignore it
or pretend it doesn't exist or is just a blob of tissue doesn't make it any less
human or any less real. Plus, women always regret denying the existence of the
ir child because it is part of them in every way possible, physically, emotional
ly, and spiritually. By doing that, they strike a blow to the core of their own
identity, which is motherhood. Although not every woman becomes a mother, ever
y woman has the potential to be one, and all women deep down have the innate ins
tinct or desire to be a mother. Whether they choose to recognize that instinct i
s another story. By destroying the life inside her, a woman is denying herself
the chance to be true to her biological instincts and use a God-given power that
's greater than any other power on Earth, which is the power to bring a new life
into the world. Women hold the keys to humanity and to our survival as a speci
es, because if they couldnt bear children, that would be the end of us as a spec
ies.
Unfortunately, most women who have abortions are young, naive, and under
a lot of different pressures to have the abortion, and they either aren't aware
of the horrors and scars that lay ahead, or think they're not as bad as trying
to raise a child alone.
This is all the more reason to protect them from thes
e dangers, (shown to greatly increase risk of breast cancer, inc rates of suicid

e, mental illness, future miscarriages, infertility, all sorts of psychological

issues, intense guilt and sadness, and many other diseases and more) (this doesn
't even take into account how many abortionists have been caught abusing women o
r being so obsessed with making money that they're careless and make mistakes th
at permanently hurt the women) and the only way they can be protected is by maki
ng abortion illegal (the myth about this leading to back alley abortions has alr
eady been debunked, I can provide an article on it if anyone doesn't believe me)
.
Feminists can be pro-choice (in the true sense of the term) and pro-life
at the same time. By making pregnant women aware of adoption, keeping the chil
d, or waiting to have sex until marriage, you're giving them the choices they de
serve to make their own decision, the one that's best for them, instead of focus
ing on one thing (abortion) and pressuring them to do that as liberals currently
do. The former is being truly pro-choice, the latter is being anti-choice and
forcing your agenda on women. Language has power and often influences behavior,
so it's time we take back the language in the abortion debate and define the te
rms of the debate on our terms, not in the terms of the abortion industry and th
eir activists.
Being against abortion isn't anti-woman. How could being against a procedure th
at hurts women in so many ways, and the industry and abortionists who use disadv
antaged and often abused women to make huge profits for themselves, be considere
d anti-woman? That's called backwards logic. I'm pro-life because I know that
abortion is the worst option for women and that having a baby is never a curse,
and is always a blessing, regardless of the circumstances surrounding it. Just
ask all the teens and adults alive today who are survivors of failed abortions o
r rapes. Furthermore, you can't be anti-baby or pro-abortion, and be pro-woman.
It's not possible because a woman and her baby have a strong bond, whether the
woman acknowledges it or not, and anything that hurts her baby hurts her, espec
ially for the women who do acknowledge that bond and even cherish it. Anything
that destroys or diminishes a woman's maternal instincts and ability to give lif
e is anti-woman, and that's exactly what abortion does. For that reason, anyone
who supports abortion is anti-woman and anti-life, whether they realize it or no
t.
If she really cared about her daughters, this feminist would want abor
tion to be illegal and would encourage them to either adopt or keep the child if
they ever had an unintentional pregnancy. So why is she still advocating for a
bortion, despite the millions of women whose lives have been ruined or at the ve
ry least have permanent emotional, physical, and spiritual scars from it? It's
because she identifies as a feminist more than she does a mom. People who've bo
ught into the radical feminist ideology are brainwashed by it and make it part o
f their identity, no doubt compensating for insecurities and other emotional iss
ues they've had since they were young. Also, they often use it to fill a void i
n their life, either from a lack of meaningful relationships, a lack of meaning
or purpose in their life (often from having no relationship with God), or not ha
ving a sense of accomplishment from what they've done and are currently doing in
their life so far.
If she cared about her daughters more than her ideology, she'd p
ut her feminist ideology aside and do what's best for her daughters, and not jus
t them but all women in the country, and advocate for saving sex til marriage, a
nd for the women who don't do that, for either keeping the baby or giving it up
for adoption. Something that destroys babies and scars women for life and has t
he potential to destroy their spirit should never be an option for women. That'
s what abortion does, and if we truly want what's best for women, we'll advocate
for actions that empower and build them up, not hurt them and tear them down.
We can start by making abortion illegal and promoting adoption and marriage.