No, they don't
READ the ENTIRE post. Don't cherry pick it.
Look at all of it.
If I say the cells are to be respected, HOW does that contradict me saying that the cells are not equal to the life of the mother?
What I had said was that a person should weigh such a decision on ALL the factors, be educated about it and not weigh it on a biased perception or dismissal.
No I am not disputing the thing about respecting cells and the life of the cells not being equal to the mother.
Its what I pointed out here:
And I would think that this would be what created the confusion on what you really believe:
"An expectant mother carrying a child that decides to abort a FETUS is what upsets me."
And then this:
"If a woman learns she's 2 weeks pregnant and after careful consideration, decides she must abort- I cannot hold that against her."
They contradict each other.
In other words you are saying that you think a woman should be able to have an abortion but then you say it upsets you that an expectant mother would decide to abort. This is what makes it difficult to know if you are actually pro choice or not and perhaps the source of the misunderstanding. I mean its supposed to not be difficult to avoid pregnancy and the stats show most women have never had an abortion yet mistakes are made, life can throw a variety of issues and problems that would make one necessary.
Then I pointed this out as perhaps some of the source of misunderstanding in addition to the above:
NF: My OPINION is that a person preventing pregnancy is entirely different from a person deliberately removing a life that has begun.
(Yes-- I think that a few cells should be respected but in all honesty -- It would be for what they represent- not what they are at that moment.
It is not a person, though it will become one. And does not carry the respect granted to a person.)
Okay so what is the difference between a person preventing a pregnancy and a person aborting save that the person preventing a pregnancy doesn't need to abort?
Then you say this:
"If a mothers life is in danger (For some odd reason) and the choice comes up to sacrifice those cells or thte mom- them cells gotsta go."
Is it that you think a woman for example shouldn't have an abortion if say she cannot afford a child or is emotionally unprepared or simply doesn't want one? Because I believe that Bells would agree that a woman should be able to have an abortion for whatever reason she feels makes it necessary and that that is what is called pro choice.