Voices of Choice - Rev. Howard Moody

Known as the Harriet Tubman of the abortion rights movement, Reverend Howard Moody created an extensive network of clergy members and abortion providers in the period before abortion was legalized. He explains in this clip how his group researched potential abortion providers to whom ministers and rabbis could refer women. Find out more at http://www.prch.org. (Video excerpted from the 2003 documentary Voices of Choice produced by Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health)

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• abortion
• nonprofit
• pro-choice
• reproductive
• health

[dbohls]

I effectively refuted the idea that there is *never* a reason for abortion, and made no claims about how common it is for any particular reason for abortion. Don't put words in my mouth. You also live in a black and white world.

[rebelmars]

To the Bible-quoters all over youtube:

If you don't believe in abortion, then you most definitely should not have one. If YOUR religion says it is wrong, then that's for you to weigh.

But -- Is it too much of a stretch for you to remember that every human being is NOT the same religion as you??

[neokilroy]

Seems more like "Voices of Assholes" to me

[bcmasta1returns]

Thou Shalt Not Kill, Reverend.

[AR15Militant]

What a p.o.s.

[Bumblybee256]

@helmuthoorn wow, spectacular fail.

[helmuthoorn]

Although l enjoy debating on a sensible and adult level l propose that we shall agree to disagree on this issue.

But thank you anyway for taking the time and the effort to engage in a debate.

Peace.

[Bumblybee256]

@helmuthoorn Yes, but just because everyday life contains risks doesn't mean we are obliged to undergo unecessary risk. 'ownership of fetus' is irrelevant- it is using her body and if she does not want it there it has no right to do so. It IS a gender issue because you are passing judgement on a hardship you will NEVER know but moreover it is a matter of autonomy. The interests of a person are not comparable to those of a fetus and it is an insult to women to claim otherwise.

[helmuthoorn]

NO !!!

That is just the way in which liberal ideologies are reducing human beings to biological entities.

Every occupation and every physical condition performed or undergone by us in this life carries inherit risks. lf we would avoid every risk we would not be alive, or life would not be worth living.

And again; a womans body IS definitely her own, but this also the case with the life she carries.

This is simply a question of fundamental human ethics and morals, far surpassing any gender issue.

[Bumblybee256]

@helmuthoorn because that's what it amounts to. You don't believe a woman has the right to control her own body.

Regardless of 'facilities' pregnancy and childbirth carry inherent risk. Women still die from complications in developed nations so your point was wrong.

You clearly do not because you believe it's ok for women's bodies to be used against our wills.

[helmuthoorn]

Whatever gives you the idea that any pro life advocate reduces the value of a human being to an organ of reproduction?

ln the case of Sierra Leone l was referring to the limiited acces to medical facilities overthere, which has a negative effect on natal care and medical care in general.

Furthermore l consider women as fellow human beings and as such each unique and irreplacable in their individual personalities.

Her body IS indeed her own, but so is the life growing within her.

[Bumblybee256]

@helmuthoorn Yes, that's the POINT of abortion. I only said Sierra Leone had the highest rate, not that they are the only women who die.

Because you seem to think her body is not her own and exists for the use of a fetus if it should exist. In other words, you cant think much of her.

What do you mean 'count ourselves lucky'- how many kids have you given birth to?