Given that with "restrictions" there are already more than a million abortions a year, how many more would you like to see? Do you have a goal in mind?

uhmhmm and, as to Mishima...the goal is to have a society in which choice is the default position. Look it up...when gvt restrictins are fewer, abortions are least.

r.

To quote the late, great George Carlin..."isn't that interesting."

mishima666, my opinion is that every woman should be able to terminate her pregnancy as she sees fit.

And until every pro-lifer control freak makes every attempt to fertilize the egg EVERY time they have sex they need to shut the fuck up about what other people do with their bodies.

A clever cartoon with a serious point. If Zimmerman can "stand his ground" every time he feels threatened, why not everyone else, any time, anywhere? I'm reminded of the famous line from "Taxi Driver": "You talkin' to ME?"

FarLeft writes: " . . . my opinion is that every woman should be able to terminate her pregnancy as she sees fit."

Leaving aside politics and laws and rights and clinics for a moment, at a simply personal level, do you find any irony at all in the concept of abortion?

Recently millions of people bought cans of tea and bags of Skittles and walked around in "hoodies" because of the death of a single black teenager. They protested night and day over what they believed was a gross injustice. But that same teenager, had he been aborted before birth, would have died without a single tear or whisper of protest from many of the same people who were recently outraged over his untimely death. And yet, at all stages of development, he was the same being -- Trayvon as developing human in the womb, as a developing child, as a developing teenager. Had he been aborted, it would have been the future Trayvon who died, not a kangaroo or sea urchin. If we could somehow put hoodies on human fetuses, would that save them?

Aborted fetuses are human beings in the early stages of development, the great majority of which would have grown up to be men and women with their own dreams and aspirations. But lacking just a few months of development, they are judged to be disposable, fodder, we see in this post, for a cartoon joke about gun owners, that the editor will no doubt judge to be witty and suitable for the cover. But I am reminded of a line from Shakespeare, used in a different content, but equally appropriate here: "His jest will savour but of shallow wit, when thousands weep more than did laugh at it."

Mishima, an egg is not a chicken and an acorn is not an oak tree. By the same measure a mass of undifferentiated tissue is NOT a human being.

A fetus is not a human until it can escape the uterus and survive. Until then it's a failed embryo.

And thanks for the "wall of type". It just proves you're unable to make a simple point.

I'm wondering how Mishima feels about teaching sex ed in high schools and offering free condoms... If your concern, Mishima, is truly that the fetus is already a full-fledged being in utero, will you help stop unwanted pregnancies from happening?

Farleftside, your suggestion is a brilliant one. I'd absolutely donate money to "Women Tired of Conservative Bullshit"

FarLeft> Just goes to show "killing" is only a matter of perspective doesn't it?

Great cartoon... all by itself, it makes quite a statement of the current environment.

The law has to apply equally to everyone, so there we go! Great cartoon with meaning.

I'm in favor of both "Women tired of Conservative Bullshit" and "Stand Your Ground" at women's clinics. =o)

rated

Mishma if you knew that pregnancy itself is a life threatening condition would that make any difference to you? Would it also make any difference if you knew that most women who have abortions already have children and are choosing to get food into the mouths of the babies that are already out in the world?

FarLeft writes: "And thanks for the "wall of type". It just proves you're unable to make a simple point."

How about this: I didn't like your cartoon because it uses the killing of developing humans to make a joke. Simple enough?

Cassie writes: "I'm wondering how Mishima feels about teaching sex ed in high schools and offering free condoms."

I don't have a problem with sex ed, in high school or junior high. I don't think we need to hand out condoms in schools. Condoms are already widely available.

Dolores writes: "Mishma if you knew that pregnancy itself is a life threatening condition would that make any difference to you?"

Yes. I don't see anything immoral about performing an abortion when the woman's life or health is at risk.

Dolores: "Would it also make any difference if you knew that most women who have abortions already have children and are choosing to get food into the mouths of the babies that are already out in the world?"

According to the Guttmacher Institute [GI] 61 percent of women having abortions already have one or more children. This figure is based on a sample of women having abortions, and I don't know what is the statistical significance of that number. Also, it is likely that the number is overstated, since (according to the GI.) women of prime childbearing years are overrepresented in the sample. But I think it's safe to say that probably over half of the women having abortions already have one or more children.

But here we get into the area of personal responsibility for both men and women. According to the GI 85 percent of women getting abortions are unmarried. Fifty-four percent of women getting abortions had used some form of birth control; typically the birth control failed because it was inconsistently used.

Anyone -- male or female -- who for whatever reason is unable or unwilling to have a child should either a) not engage in vaginal intercourse, or b) use birth control consistently. This alone would eliminate hundreds of thousands of abortions every year.

I'm not a fanatic about abortion, and I believe there are situations in which abortion is morally justifiable. But we've gone far beyond those. We have developed in the culture a view that a developing human is nothing more than a "blob of cells." Interestingly, any time we want to engage in indiscriminate killing, we first dehumanize those who are to be killed in order to avoid the pangs of conscience that would otherwise accompany the killing.

Three of the main curses of so-called "civilization" are genocide, slavery, and warfare. All three of those typically proceed by first dehumanizing the individuals to be eliminated. So I'm not surprised to see the same kind of dehumanization when it comes to abortion.

Note that I'm not saying that abortion should be illegal. With Roe v. Wade and forty years of jurisprudence based on it, that boat has already sailed. Abortion is legal, and that's that. But I think people need to reflect on what happens to us as a civilization when developing humans are dehumanized. In countries around the world abortion is now used for sex selection, with millions of female fetuses aborted. With echoes of the eugenics movement, special needs children, such as those with Down Syndrome, are now routinely aborted. I think it is fair to ask if this is really the kind of society we want.

Life begins at the dinner before the movie!! The Bible says so!

As for stand your ground- God invented guns for a reason!

We conservatives know what's right and just who to shoot! We should not be questioned by liberal commies!

great idea..

Mishima's post and the essential silence after it is demonstrative of the typical failing here. Mishima wrote a considered, well-reasoned reply and, so far, no one has answered it with an equivalent response. Too many comment threads are here not reasoned, civil debates but people who have taken a stance that they hold tight to but can't defend and so they end up yelling past each other.
I don't agree much with Mishima but at least in this case, he has made the most reasonable argument.
I look forward to someone who thinks differently explaining some of the more difficult facts/figures, particularly the late term abortion issue.

Traveller, women don't have late-term abortions frivolously. They have them because their lives are in danger and thus must be kept legal.

End of story.

My response to mishima666 is to be simply perplexed by someone who will state on one had that abortion is a legal procedure deemed protected under our constitution, yet argue that it should not be allowed on the other hand as killing a future human in the womb. When mishima666 begins to tie abortion to morality, it always and without fail becomes that person's morality that wants control the morality of others. I strongly prefer that women be trusted with their own health decisions, and (gasp) their own moral decisions.
r./

No one here has claimed that women have late term abortions frivolously. I'm absolutely pro-choice. However, I can certainly understand Mishima's objection with the frivolity of the subject, even though I think we all understand that such frivolity does not extend to women who are actually having the procedure done. I don't necessarily think the topic should be off limits, particularly to a cartoonist, but I think his sensitivity is legitimate. I differ somewhat with his views on potential human life vs. actual human life.

More importantly, when Mishima made his point, there were assumptions made about his related views concerning issues like opposition to birth control. I run into this phenomenon a lot on OS: Because I express a particular view I hear (or read) assumptions about what other knee-jerk positions I hold. He's responsible for what he says, not what anyone assumes he thinks.

In short, I agree with the post's content but with Mishima's approach.