The reason I find it difficult is that I cannot get my head around the idea that some people think a woman should be forced to bear a child against her will. That this is still a debate in our country is to me the most blatant illustration of women's lowly status. Honestly. If some guy can overpower me and leave me pregnant against my will, and then the state can force me to bear that child and spend most of the rest of my life caring for it, then, am I really any better than a slave? I don't think so.
So I'm pro-choice.
Incidentally, I don' t know much about the Freakonimics books or their authors, but I happened to flip through one a couple of months ago and came across a chapter contending that the reason for the sudden, precipitous drop in the crime rate in the 1990s was down to the legalization of abortion. They linked the low incidence of crime to fewer unwanted children growing up to be criminals. So, you know, if just actually granting women sovereignty over their own lives isn't enough for you, there's lower crime to boot. But the sovereignty is enough for me.
That's all. Below is a nice story. Go read it.


Thank you, Ann.
Posted by: Jessica Freely | January 27, 2010 at 12:27 PM
Thank you for telling the truth and saying it short and sweet and to the point. Being human requires choice, the ability to decide, not to be treated like a farm animal.
Posted by: Annherendeen | January 26, 2010 at 05:09 PM
Thanks Lawrence.
Posted by: Jessica Freely | January 26, 2010 at 12:38 PM
That was very concise. You make hard topics look easy.
The point made in Freakanomics was generally that giving women "sovereignty over their own lives" allowed them to make good choices about their ability to raise children.
I thought Freakanomics was interesting because it made me think a lot about how people choose parts of their lives. When contrasted with Malcolm Gladwells books about how people react to their environment, it makes for some very interesting social science.
LK
Posted by: Kapture | January 26, 2010 at 10:01 AM