That Body Isn’t Yours…

After rerunning my post on abortion and choice, someone AGAIN attacked my reasoning that the government already tells us what we can and can’t do with our bodies. They disputed that and asked me to tell them how.

I’ll tell you all here in a post and if I’m wrong… just tell me I’m wrong.

The government says you can’t kill yourself. I am assuming that killing yourself is connected with the “body,” but I suppose one could dispute this considering you lose the soul as well. And where do lost souls go?

We have suicide prevention hotlines, psychiatrists have requirements I believe for if you say you will cause bodily harm or kill yourself ( I don’t know what those rules are since I’m not one, but I saw a movie once. Actually I lived it.) and that again is connected with the body.

Oh… we aren’t done. Did you forget the terminally ill that are in pain constantly all day and yet aren’t allowed to kill themselves? You must not read Yahoo or CNN or… any website. Those are the stories that get you. You want me to feel sorry for the woman in a case of abortion, and remember we are speaking of the ABORTION and not what caused her to be pregnant. I grant there are extreme cases that require extreme measures. But I also have stated that the government has always controlled our bodies and I’ll continue to prove why that statement is valid.

You can’t smoke cigarettes in the United States legally till you are 18 and in some states 21. That is a restriction on your ability to do something to your body. That is why the measure is in place and it isn’t because the Government wants you to buy a pack of gum instead. It is specifically due to the product and the body. Reason two my statement is true.

Can’t get a tattoo on your body till you are a certain age and that is because it is your body. And the government is telling you what to do with it by telling you that you can’t. Or is it because tattoos cause you to suddenly die at the age of 84… maybe that’s it!

In public school you are told to wear certain things and what not to wear. What not to say and do. Did we all forget the dress codes? The schools are run by the government, so that’s the government again telling you what to do with your body.

Do I need to keep going?

Are we getting the point yet?

YES the government can tell you what to do with your body in the case of abortion because they aren’t only talking about your body. They are speaking for the body inside of you and your right to kill that body. Just like the government says you can’t just take your dog outside and shoot it. Oh but that is an animal right? Suddenly you care?

I said this in a comment and I stand by it. I will stop caring about abortion when women don’t need anything from men to get pregnant. On that day I won’t care about abortion… I’ll simply feel sorry for the ones that use it as a convenience and an after thought. Seeing life as an after thought is a shame to me. But humans have always done shameful things.

-Opinionated Man



Jason C. Cushman


74 thoughts on “That Body Isn’t Yours…

  1. I think abortion is such a complicated issue. I could never get one, and I agree that it can not be used as birth control, but is it really fair for the government to deny the women the right to get one? I have mixed feelings about this, but I believe the woman deserve the option, but with that said there would have to be very strict regulations.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Agree : ) There is absolutely no need for abortion. There are Safe Haven laws or adoption if one doesn’t want to raise a child. A baby can be delivered eary if there are complications for the mother. For those that are raped, there is the Plan B or “morning after” pill.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Pingback: “That Body Isn’t Yours…” | See, there's this thing called biology...

  4. Dayum. Maybe you don’t need a lawyer after all…
    This is the part where i usually get snarky and say stuff that’s unrelated but ffs ppl if you believe in something for reals, make sure ya know why and how to back yourself up in a debate if you’re going to engage. Derp!
    Or else you get schooled by this guy…ouch. Ppl, you so silly. Xo

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I agree with you.. in certain case yeah abortion might be needed in the case of child rape or rape period.. in case of the woman’s life.. but it should never be used as birth control.. that’s my opinion..

    Liked by 3 people

  6. I had a post written out in reply to this, then the internet ate it sigh.

    I didn’t dispute that there is government involvement in our lives (and in fact, to a degree, it’s necessary). I asked in what context you consider said involvement reasonable. In respect of law-making, where is the line drawn?

    It’s interesting that you mention tattoos, and alcohol, and smoking. All of these things have expiration dates – there comes a point where the age limits on these things cease to apply. The control of these things applies primarily to minors, who cannot make informed choices.

    In respect of suicide, even if it’s enshrined in law that someone shouldn’t kill themselves, this doesn’t mean the government can actually enforce this. In practice, nearly anyone can choose to end their lives.

    For what it’s worth, euthanasia should be legal.

    Which is why I will support anyone’s right to choose, and this extends to abortion. I have a daughter myself, but if my wife had said to me she wanted an abortion, that would have been her choice, for it is her body that undergoes the most change (in fact, it’s only her body that undergoes physical and hormonal changes, mine won’t). It’s my wife who would have to give up other plans she may have had. It’s usually the woman’s life that undergoes the most dramatic change due to parenthood.

    You may want to check out a woman’s perspective on this –

    Liked by 1 person

    • As a father myself of two daughters.. I’d strongly dispute your statement that the woman’s life is the only one that mainly undergoes a dramatic change. I cook, daily. I clean, daily. I do laundry. I work 40 hours a week. I am a father and a husband and I have my views because of what I am and how I was brought up. Thanks for the link, but after 35 years my opinion ain’t changing today or tomorrow.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Your are right in that everything Jason pointed out has an end point. However, all of those things affect only one life – that of the individual. When it comes to abortion it affects two lives, that of the mother and that of the child. Yes, it is a child, not a lump of tissue. It has a heartbeat, a hand with fingers and a thumb, which it sucks. It feels pain, and reacts to external stimuli. In every biological sense it is a human being. That occurs the moment the first strands of DNA are formed, at tha point it has no other option but to develop into a human being.

      Choice? Yes, the mother has choices. All of those choices are available up to the moment of conception. Afterwards there are two human lives involved, not one. Afterwards, should the woman decide she does not want the child she created there are choices. Between conception and birth the only choices are deliver or murder. Period.

      If people do not consider it a life, then why is it if the woman and child are killed in an auto accident on the way to the abortion center the driver is liable for two lives?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Up until so many weeks there is no heartbeat – and to put it bluntly, there is a stage where the foetus is nothing more than a clump of cells.

        There are also plenty of locations and circumstances where the man pressures the woman into unprotected sex, or contraception is not available due to cultural reasons. The choice is denied to the woman, yet she is expected to carry the baby. Is that reasonable to you?

        Liked by 1 person

          • But sex isn’t always a choice though is it? Historically women have been viewed as property and objects to fulfil the needs and desires of men. Their right to choose when, where and how they have sex denied to them. The woman’s right to use (or have their partner use) protection has historically not been a consideration. In many ways, it still isn’t. We have a society that sexualises and objectifies the female body, even going as far in some cases as to expect women to keep babies that are the product of rape, because the woman’s rights are a non-issue. She doesn’t exist, except to have and raise children.

            There are cultures which have in the past (and still do) make it difficult to access contraception, and it is ironically those same cultures that protest abortion.


          • Name the cultures, here in the US, modern times, which allows abortion but not contraception.

            Women here are as active in wanting/asking for sex as men. These days it is considered part of the normal dating cycle, and, unlike in the past, there are many forms of birth control available to both sexes so as to make an unintentional pregnancy not possible.


          • But there are still factors in play, even in the US, where women are pressured into sex, and unprotected sex at that, and hang the consequences. Women are still objectified and sexualised every single day (to say nothing of what happens elsewhere in the world).

            Here in the UK, as recently as 2004, the Catholic Church was speaking out against contraception.


            The issue was never with cultures that allow abortion and contraception. It’s with situations where contraception is not allowed yet abortion is not an option. It’s about women being forced or pressured into unprotected sex. It’s about the hypocrisy of forcing women to submit for pleasure and then facing admonishment for daring to want a say in how they use their own bodies. Yes, women are more active in wanting sex (as much as men is debatable, and women face social stigmas in doing so), but it’s still men that place pressure on women for sex, it’s men who run organisations like the Catholic Church (which as mentioned, has been opposing contraception right up to recent times), yet, it’s women who suffer. 70,000 women die every year because they don’t have access to safe and legal abortion facilities. Women are 14 times more likely to DIE during childbirth than if they sought an abortion, yet I don’t see the pro-life movement mentioning either detail.


        • You do realize that foetus is incorrect and that it’s latin for baby. I like how people try to depersonalize it with medical jargon.


          • No, I think it’s rather telling that the favorite word used to medicalize a human being actually means the word they are replacing. You have to excuse me, I’m a word person.


          • Appeal to emotion. A popular method of the pro-life side. What have you to say of the 70,000 women who die every year because they cannot access safe abortion facilities?


          • I actually don’t believe it should be illegalized altogether for that exact reason. On the other hand, I despise the use of it as birth control and no minor child should be given access without parents knowledge and permission. Those that dismiss abortion as a minor decision are perpetuating an attitude of devaluing life.


          • I don’t believe abortion is undetaken lightly and certainly not as a measure of birth control. It may be the case that for some it’s regarded as such a method, but I refer you to the position I took with Modern Theologian earlier – birth control has historically been stigmatised by major religions, with the Catholic Church voicing its opposition to it as recently as 2004. Protestants are more leinient but still voice opposition from time to time, Orthodox Jews are also against it to various degrees. There is also the widespread sexualisation and objectification of women that makes it clear a woman is a sex object, which hardly helps.

            Perhaps the most compelling point is one I saw raised on Twitter recently – a woman can have an abortion in cases of rape – which means it takes her being violated in order for her to have any say in what happens to her body. That’s a sorry state of affairs.


          • Not sure how you can make that assumption, but I think it’s pretty arrogant of people to oppose birth control. No method is 100% effective. Please at least tell me you’re not into forced vaccination since you seem to advocate freedom to make our own medical decisions.

            Liked by 1 person

          • What assumption am I making? Religious objections to contraception are a fact, and they strip away choices and options available to women until they are faced with only one choice – one they did not and could not make for themselves. Vaccination is an entirely different topic, though I would say that if you are anti-vaccination that you are not pro-life – or rather, pro-life when it suits you.


          • The assumptions I refer to are that women to make the decision to abort lightly (I’m sure it goes both ways.) And I am neither pro or anti vaccine. I am anti-forced vaccination, there’s a difference.


          • Then are you not guilty of the same assumption? If I am wrong then please forgive me, but the implication of your previous post was that getting an abortion was comparable to putting on a condom.

            Define forced vaccination. There is also a difference between a measure taken to provide a vital herd immunity (if vaccination doesn’t take place, even in small quantities, it can lead to the spread of otherwise neutralised diseases) and abortion.


          • Obviously, condoms don’t pose a risk, as a matter of fact, they reduce the risk of STDs. If you think there aren’t women (or girls) who use abortions as birth control, I think you’re a bit naive.
            Herd immunity is a lovely idea, but doesn’t actually work in reality. When you get vaccinated, it only prevents symptoms. You can and do carry the illness and can then unknowingly spread it (cause you don’t even know you have it.) For the most part (cause there are some vaccines I think are important, I just don’t think anyone has the right to require me to get them,) I think supporting you immune system is much healthier and more effective.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I never claimed there weren’t women who would use abortion as a means of birth control. I dispute the idea that this is widespread. Abortion is however, a much riskier means of birth control as it is a highly invasive procedure, unlike condoms and other methods, yet as I have already mentioned, the Catholic Church (and certain Jewish denominations) oppose all forms of birth control. What choice does this leave a couple?

            Herd immunity actually does work. If 90-95% of the population is vaccinated against measles, it will provide herd immunity against the disease. It’s not flawless, but it’s better than not vaccinating against it.

            If people aren’t vaccinated, the disease can spread more easily (especially in cases like measles). It can more easily mutate.

            Key case in point, young children are too young for some vaccinations, but if older children and adults are vaccinated the disease is far less likely to spread to them. It is contained and controlled. For more info:


            Vaccination has virtually eradicated smallpox, which once had a 30% fatality rate.

            Where herd immunity fails it is the result of the ‘free rider’ problem. This is where individuals choose not to get vaccinated and rely solely on the immunity of the ‘herd’. If the number of free riders grows, the chances of the spread of disease also grows, and poses problems for those who cannot get vaccinated for medical reasons. There are (ironically, given their pro-life stances) objections to vaccination within both Christian and Muslim denominations, which for me is hypocritical. You cannot be pro-life and yet be prepared to expose your children and loved ones to deadly disease, on the grounds of faith.


          • Except that there have been outbreaks in populations that are 100% vaccinated.
            Natural immunity (which is life long,) is always superior to vaccine induced immunity (which bypasses much of the immune system like mucous membranes, skin, gastrointestinal tract, etc.) It only provides temporary protection from symptoms, thus the need for boosters.
            And like I said, any religion who is anti-birth control is arrogant. No birth control is 100%. People would do well to question these dogmas and whether they match their core values and beliefs.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Herd immunity takes time to develop, but it is worth it. Prior to the smallpox vaccination, that disease had a 30% fatality rate, as I already mentioned. In some areas this rose to 50-75%. Our immune system wasn’t combating this, yet after vaccination the disease has been virtually eradicated. The spread of measles in the US has dramatically fallen since vaccination was introduced, spiking only in areas where people have refused to be vaccinated (or cannot be vaccinated, due to other conditions). The effectiveness of vaccination as a public health measure is well-known, and smallpox and measles are but two examples of diseases that can kill or cripple that no longer threaten us en masse, because of vaccination. The scheme works. It is a proven means.


          • Your first two sentences contradict each other. Unfortunately there ARE people that view abortion as whimsically as a weekend appointment. You either believe those people exist or you don’t. I do because I know of such people. The worst example makes a case right? Those are the ones we hate and it happens far more frequently than you obviously care to admit here, which is fine because that’s the opposite of your position. What stands out though is you keep throwing numbers at us to back your position that the woman’s view here is the one being persecuted. Where’s your number of the innocent, unborn children killed each day and year? Where is that number since you want us to consider 70,000 so much. Of those 70,000 how many were mothers willingly? You also don’t know that because you can’t possibly know that. Most mothers think it’s worth it. That’s why they have sex and have kids. Your number doesn’t make me suddenly think women hate childbirth or having kids. It just makes me think you only view one sided info on this topic.


          • With all due respect, my opening sentences (which I admit could have been better phrased) were intended to counter the implication that abortion is treated as a whimsical act in the majority of cases, which I don’t believe to be the case. It was unfair to suggest that abortion is comparable to slipping on a condom – but that was the impression I got from Michelle’s statement. Perhaps that is unfair on Michelle, and she didn’t intend it that way.

            I don’t know how many abortions take place annually, but just as you are right in that I don’t know the reasoning behind them, you can’t make a definitive statement on that either. With due respect, the second half of your statement is an emotive plea, defining the embryo as a child when, biologically (and I’m sorry if this sounds harsh) there is no comparison to what an embryo is and what the mother is. One is a cluster of cells, the other is a fully formed, thinking and feeling human being that is being told she has no rights. How many of those 70,000 women who died wanted to get pregnant? You’re right, I don’t know, but if they were prepared to risk their lives to seek an abortion then I would imagine they felt they had no other choice.

            Liked by 1 person

Share your opinion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s