Abortion

Let`s start an internet flamewar. Because I doubt there are any pro-life
people on this website, I ask you the following:

How can a woman want to eventually become pregnant and carry the fetus to
term yet when she gets pregnant now have an abortion and not see the
contradiction? How is one fetus deserving of life and the other not? It seems
to me a real feminist wouldn't want her body being "used" by a fetus ever and
wouldn't want to become pregnant.

If these pro-choice women want to become pregnant now they should get their
tubes tied AND use hormonal birth control, a barrier method w/ spermacide, and a condom everytime they have sex. If they ever want to become a parent they should adopt.

Yes, women can get pregnant through having sex and then carry and birth a child.  But a woman is a person, a full human being with sentience and independance--which a fetus is not--not just a baby factory.  Sex *is* a pleasurable activity and an expression of affection between people; it's as much psychological as it is physical.  It's about making children, but it's not *only* about that, at least not to everybody.

Kindly remember that not everybody shares the Christian view of sex, nor are they obligated to--religious affiliation is a choice that somebody has to make, and if you're American the Constitution says that the government isn't supposed to force you into the religion that they think you should choose. 

Besides, if you respect humanity so much, why reduce people to nothing but slaves to their biological functions?  The pro-life movement basically says to women--whether consciously and intentionally or not--that they're not important as people but only as a carrier for a baby.  Needless to say, this makes many women uncomfortable and unhappy.

Besides, "if you don't want a baby, don't have sex?"  We're not just talking about a bunch of irresponsible teenagers here.  There are adult women who are responsible enough to know that they can't provide for/don't want a child; some of them are married.  Why is it okay for you to tell them that they're not allowed to have a physical relationship with their committed partner/husband?  Sex is a vital part of a romantic relationship in our society--sexual problems can complicate or ruin a relationship just as much as money or personality problems.

Adoption is a better alternative for the child in the sense that they're alive, but we live in the real world.  Unfortunately, *not* all children are wanted.  And people tend to want a child that's actually blood related to them.  Look how many people who have trouble having children spend a fortune on fertility treatments or surrogate mothers/fathers rather than adopting some poor kid already here that needs a family.  And it's sad to say, but if a mother who doesn't want her baby isn't white, it's more likely her child will go unadopted--white children tend to be far more in demand (at least they used to, and I haven't seen statistics indicating that's changed--if somebody can point me to any reliable ones, I'd be glad).  And what about women who have genetic disorders, illnesses or drug problems that they pass through to their children?  Not as many people want to adopt a child with those sorts of problems, as it's a much more difficult commitment than raising a 'normal' child.  Yeah, there are people who want children and have trouble having them, but that doesn't mean every, or even the majority of, unwanted children will actually be adopted.

And as has been said, most pro-choice people don't advocate abortion as birth control.  Planned Parenthood, for example, provides a lot more than abortions, they provide safe-sex information and resources, and counseling.  All of which has been shown in studies and in multiple countries to prevent spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies/abortions better than abstinence only education.