So Mr. and Ms. Clinton are going to be Grandparents. I wonder if Bill will become the seriously deranged over protective grandfather if he has a granddaughter. But seriously, I would congratulate Chelsea, her husband, and the Clinton elders for this.
I rarely discuss my views on abortion. Really, I do not like the prospects of it. I think it gets used too often as a way out, but my views are irrelevant. Guys need to pay very close attention to what I am about to say. For the foreseeable future, we are not going to be getting pregnant, we will not be carrying a child around for up to 9 months, and we will not give birth to said child. So, you know what our rights are? Outside of giving your opinion to a woman who is pregnant with your child, zero. You have no say, you have no right.
Now, the pro-life side is apparently taking exception to Ms. Clinton calling her potential grandchild a baby, rather than a fetus, that it is not compatible with being pro-choice. Actually, I think it is. I often interchange the two depending on the subject at hand. When I am arguing pro-choice I use the term fetus. When I am congratulating someone on their pregnancy, I often say congratulations. If and when someone has my child, I might very well use the same terms as Ms. Clinton. I mean really, its different when its some other persons child, or a child that will carry forward your legacy.
Again its human nature. When we are unaffected by something we can depersonalize it. When we are affected we tend to personalize it. That is nothing knew. The problem with the pro-life segment of the population is that they are unable to distinguish between the two. Everything dealing with a fetus is personal.
While I might not like it, abortion is a deeply personal choice, one I am not qualified to make, nor do I have any right to make it for someone else. That is why I side with the pro-choice segments of the population. But there is the other thing, a drop in crime rates associated with legalized abortions. Turns out children who are born into households where they aren't wanted, or cannot be properly attended to, drain the system. They are often abused, and neglected. They often turn out to be abusers, addicts or criminals.
But that brings me to my next pet peeve with the pro-lifers. They are so concerned about the life of the "baby" when the mother is pregnant, but after its born? Yeah, the same ones that want to cut virtually all spending on social programs. Brilliant idea. Cut things like Planned Parenthood, welfare, and various other outlets from government spending, force parents to raise children they may or may not be ready for a child. Sometimes, they realize the mother realizes that she cannot properly take care of another child. No, you would rather force that child into a crappy life. Whats that? Adoption? Yeah, that is a nice sounding alternative to abortion. But that child might eventually figure it out. That child will then have to wonder why Mommy didn't love them enough to keep them. Plus the resentment born from a lifetime of possible crap. Its not always a happy ending people. Just keep that in mind while you talk about adoption. There is no white knight in shining armor. Life sucks, and who are you to say who you subject to it. You would rather enforce your beliefs on others, including any child born, starve it, subject it to cruelty beyond imagination, And then bitch that it is a drain on the system. At least, until it turns out half way alright and can go to war. Then, you praise it as a hero, going off to fight your dirty little war, until it comes home mentally and physically scarred. Then you want to cut benefits to soldiers, and treat it like crap once again.