What do you think?
Rate this book
Abortion Is a Woman's Right
Why abortion rights are central not only to the fight for the full emancipation of women, but to forging a united and fighting labor movement. Photos. Now in an upgrated edition with enlarged type. Also available in Spanish
Paperback
First published December 1, 1985
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
September 6, 2016
Had the Israelites not crafted their idol so quickly Moses wouldn't have come down Mt. Sinai with only Ten Commandments.
In a Biblical trivia fact God was in mid sentence of Commandment 11: "Mind thine own damn business" when Moses held up a hand and asked for a rain check to go melt down the Golden Calf. God being a busy deity was unable to reschedule.
And that's the only religious viewpoint I'm going to entertain on the topic of abortion.
This pamphlet makes a quick case for abortion because nothing else needs to be said. It doesn't seek any advice from Biblical precedent, or hallowed texts and for that it ought to be admired. It exposes how controls over abortion don't protect anyone- but they do coerce and control everyone.
This pamphlet shows that well.
Now for my own opinions on the matter.
I have no time for scientific funding on the timeline at which insemination and ovulation produce an individual. I think that sort of thing has been dealt with better by philosophers. But there was a really great post on Facebook positing a scenario whereby a Petri dish with a fertilized embryo and an infant were thrown up in the air and you could only catch one that anyone would rightly catch the baby. I'd argue further that one would almost instinctually catch the baby because your brain recognizes that a Petri dish's contents regardless of what they are is not a child regardless of what your local Christian fundamentalist says.
It's been said that men contribute 50% of their genetic material which is true. But men don't contribute 50% of their body and there is no law requiring men to spend 50% of their time raising the child either.
Women however have to hold a child for nine months and are for all intents and purposes legally required to care for a child or at least see to it that the child is passed off to someone who will. Therefore any argument that justifies men having a say into whether a woman chooses abortion or not purely based on the genetic is illogical.
It's even more illogical when you have say the late Antonin Scalia: pseudo-voyeurist and Porky the Pig reenactor salivating at the opportunity to put Original Intent into the bedroom of every sexually active woman in the country whether or not he himself ever meets, much less sleeps with them. Having then Scalia plus every garden variety dumbass or intellectual man pose their claims to a fifty-fifty share of every woman in the country's reproductive decisions is just absurd.
"No one ever expects the Spanish Inquisition!" indeed.
Remember, I say all this as a man. That doesn't make me enlightened or a feminist (though don't misinterpret I support feminism I hope that I could be considered an ally since I don't think that I could rightly claim to be a feminist as a man, but that's a different story), it's just logical. I don't have a womb, and I don't have any say about someone else's womb. My recommendation for those who don't like abortions is: don't have an abortion, and mind thine own damn business.
In a Biblical trivia fact God was in mid sentence of Commandment 11: "Mind thine own damn business" when Moses held up a hand and asked for a rain check to go melt down the Golden Calf. God being a busy deity was unable to reschedule.
And that's the only religious viewpoint I'm going to entertain on the topic of abortion.
This pamphlet makes a quick case for abortion because nothing else needs to be said. It doesn't seek any advice from Biblical precedent, or hallowed texts and for that it ought to be admired. It exposes how controls over abortion don't protect anyone- but they do coerce and control everyone.
This pamphlet shows that well.
Now for my own opinions on the matter.
I have no time for scientific funding on the timeline at which insemination and ovulation produce an individual. I think that sort of thing has been dealt with better by philosophers. But there was a really great post on Facebook positing a scenario whereby a Petri dish with a fertilized embryo and an infant were thrown up in the air and you could only catch one that anyone would rightly catch the baby. I'd argue further that one would almost instinctually catch the baby because your brain recognizes that a Petri dish's contents regardless of what they are is not a child regardless of what your local Christian fundamentalist says.
It's been said that men contribute 50% of their genetic material which is true. But men don't contribute 50% of their body and there is no law requiring men to spend 50% of their time raising the child either.
Women however have to hold a child for nine months and are for all intents and purposes legally required to care for a child or at least see to it that the child is passed off to someone who will. Therefore any argument that justifies men having a say into whether a woman chooses abortion or not purely based on the genetic is illogical.
It's even more illogical when you have say the late Antonin Scalia: pseudo-voyeurist and Porky the Pig reenactor salivating at the opportunity to put Original Intent into the bedroom of every sexually active woman in the country whether or not he himself ever meets, much less sleeps with them. Having then Scalia plus every garden variety dumbass or intellectual man pose their claims to a fifty-fifty share of every woman in the country's reproductive decisions is just absurd.
"No one ever expects the Spanish Inquisition!" indeed.
Remember, I say all this as a man. That doesn't make me enlightened or a feminist (though don't misinterpret I support feminism I hope that I could be considered an ally since I don't think that I could rightly claim to be a feminist as a man, but that's a different story), it's just logical. I don't have a womb, and I don't have any say about someone else's womb. My recommendation for those who don't like abortions is: don't have an abortion, and mind thine own damn business.
September 25, 2019
A good researcher always reads books from different points of view and avoids bias. I've looked into this issue along with many like it, one can never learn enough. This was a communist pamphlet from the sixties, not really a "book". Some parts of the book were interesting like the interview with Canadian Dr. Morgantaler, but many other parts were illogical.
Far too many times, in this book, they go on constant attacks against religion and family, more than they discuss medicine and logic. They then continue to fight for their point of view by slandering the Pope and the Catholic Church.
This pamphlet promotes individualism and hate more than it promotes family, love, medical research, tolerance, and understanding. Then again, that's communism.
Far too many times, in this book, they go on constant attacks against religion and family, more than they discuss medicine and logic. They then continue to fight for their point of view by slandering the Pope and the Catholic Church.
This pamphlet promotes individualism and hate more than it promotes family, love, medical research, tolerance, and understanding. Then again, that's communism.
March 19, 2016
A Communist pamphlet on abortion. It was interesting seeing them try to tie abortion into an attack on capitalism. This was very short, and really wasn't worth buying. But it did have an interesting interview with Dr. Morgantaler, a Canadian abortionist. Still i wasn't expecting such a short "book" (really a pamphlet)
September 4, 2014
A Solid Communist pamphlet from the 80's discussing the importance of Roe V Wade and the Hyde Act.
Recommended for anyone interested in Women's Liberation.
Recommended for anyone interested in Women's Liberation.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews