Abortion

[hydrargyrum]

Colbert's response to Mourdock's comment; I hope they do follow his advice. (Warning for some slightly graphic speech.) Apology to those not in the US, as I don't know any video link other than the one on his website.

 

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-r...-s-rape-comment

[loudwhitenoise]

Cant read anymore. Wanting to cry, rage, and hire people to punch idiot politicians in the face until they open their minds to common sense.

[Brite]

I may be christian but it drives me insane that they bring in religion in politics, expecting everyone to feel the same way they do about it. And make real christians look terrible

[philpot123]

I may be christian but it drives me insane that they bring in religion in politics, expecting everyone to feel the same way they do about it. And make real christians look terrible

Are laws against murder bringing religion into politics? If the pro-life position is correct, laws against abortion are on par with laws against murder.

[Shienvien]

I think GhostChilli meant the "pregnancy from rape is something god wants" argument more specifically, not the pro-life stance in general.

 

In other words, if you insist something should be done because god would prefer it so, not because it benefits humans, it is bringing religion to politics.

[philpot123]

Oh okay, gotcha. Well, even then... Perhaps it's not a legitimate foundation for policy making, but I don't believe they should be prevented from speaking their opinion just because they are a politician. Even if their opinion is weird, stupid, idiotic, whatever. I doubt you would support that either, but still. We can get all up in arms about the retarded things politicians say, but in the end they have a right to say them, and it's our responsibility to address the stupid ones with a firm "get out" at the ballot box.

 

Not that my/your vote matters anyways, but that's a different issue.

[Brite]

Oh okay, gotcha. Well, even then... Perhaps it's not a legitimate foundation for policy making, but I don't believe they should be prevented from speaking their opinion just because they are a politician. Even if their opinion is weird, stupid, idiotic, whatever. I doubt you would support that either, but still. We can get all up in arms about the retarded things politicians say, but in the end they have a right to say them, and it's our responsibility to address the stupid ones with a firm "get out" at the ballot box.

 

Not that my/your vote matters anyways, but that's a different issue.

If politicians say "It's what God wants" period, not matter what the topic, it's bringing in religion. And that..let's just not go there

[Tazzay]

I'm just gonna leave this here.

 

Pregnacy from rape: something that god intended.

 

Pretty much sums up my feelings. "Rape was god's intention"? Ridiculous... "

Edited November 1, 2012 by Tazzay

[Slaskia]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/judge-coul...-have-abortion/

 

What?

[HeatherMarie]

........ what the freaking freak. *shakes head*

[brairtrainer]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/judge-coul...-have-abortion/

 

What?

I do not think that the court should force an abortion on the woman. However, what I became more concerned about is the fact that the mother was noted to have the mental and social capacity of a six year old.

 

I'd rather have the state and courts go through a re-evaluation and make sure that this is really her choice and not her complying to what mommy and daddy want (if her mother and father are pro-life and therefore influenced her to carry the child then we have a problem.) I think the state should look into her guardianship but not, even if guardianship is revoked from her parents not force her to have an abortion.

 

That's my take on the matter.

[Kestra15]

I do not think that the court should force an abortion on the woman. However, what I became more concerned about is the fact that the mother was noted to have the mental and social capacity of a six year old.

 

I'd rather have the state and courts go through a re-evaluation and make sure that this is really her choice and not her complying to what mommy and daddy want (if her mother and father are pro-life and therefore influenced her to carry the child then we have a problem.) I think the state should look into her guardianship but not, even if guardianship is revoked from her parents not force her to have an abortion.

 

That's my take on the matter.

The problem in this case is if the woman actually has understanding of the situation at hand. Does she have the capacity to understand what is going on? If she has mental capacity of a six year old as the article claims then she wouldn't be able to understand what pregnancy is (or even what conception was, so chances are it was rape by definition), be able to cope with the stresses of pregnancy, and thus having her go through the pregnancy would in fact impede on her mental and physical well-being.

 

It's unheard of to take such things to a court of law, especially when there is a debate between the medical staff and those with PR for the woman as to what is the best course of action for her. Note that it makes no mention of her physical disability and focuses mainly on the shock value of 'forcing sterilisation' on the woman. What are the physical implications of carrying the child to term, for mother and for child?

 

Given that the news article in question, and the one it quotes, do not seem the most reliable of sources, I would rather not pass any final 'judgement' on this story just yet.

[Brite]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/judge-coul...-have-abortion/

 

What?

*facepalm* .... no comment

[brairtrainer]

*Le bump*

 

So I just realized I have the most awesome English teacher ever, we spent the first 15 min of class talking about the strides being made politically and he even said that he was amazed at how fast it was moving because of young people turning out. And after hearing him denounce Akkin, and the others who were hung up on the rape thing some of my faith in humanity has been restored. Nice to find that even in the demographic that most republican's are in there are still plenty of supporters for women's rights. (Though I go to an all woman's college so that may be skewed somewhat)

[Rosedamai]

An interesting study about what happens to women who are denied abortions

 

When a woman is denied the abortion she wants, she is statistically more likely to wind up unemployed, on public assistance, and below the poverty line. Another conclusion we could draw is that denying women abortions places more burden on the state because of these new mothers' increased reliance on public assistance programs.

 

Unfortunately, when it comes to domestic violence, being denied an abortion makes a really big difference. Turnaways were more likely to stay in a relationship with an abusive partner than women who got abortions. A year after being denied an abortion, 7% reported an incident of domestic violence in the last six months. 3% of women who received abortions reported domestic violence in the same time period. Foster emphasized that this wasn't because the turnaways were more likely to get into abusive relationships. It was simply that getting abortions allowed women to get out of such relationships more easily. So it's likely that these numbers actually reflect a dropoff in domestic violence for women who get abortions, rather than a rise among turnaways.

 

This pattern of violence is also part of a larger pattern that shows turnaways are more likely to remain connected to the fathers of their children. Obviously, this isn't always a good thing, as the violence statistics reveal. But even in the vast majority of cases where violence isn't involved, Foster noted that these men aren't living with the turnaways. The researchers asked women about cohabiting with partners, and found that men were no more likely to live with a turnaway who'd borne their children than they were to live with a woman who had an abortion. "The man doesn't stick around just because you have the baby — that's the crude way of putting it," Foster said.

 

In other words, the Turnaway Study found no indication that there were lasting, harmful negative emotions associated with getting an abortion. The only emotional difference between the two groups at one year was that the turnaways were more stressed. They were more likely to say that they felt like they had more to do than they could get done.

 

None of this translated into clinical depression. "Abortion and depression don't seem directly linked," Foster said. "We'll continue to follow these women for five years, though. So we might find something else down the line."

 

If you look at all this data together, a new picture emerges of abortion and how the state might want to handle it. To prevent women from having to rely on public assistance, abortions should be made more widely available. In addition, there is strong evidence that making abortions available will allow women to be healthier, with brighter economic outlooks. By turning women away when they seek abortions, we risk keeping both women and their children in poverty — and, possibly, in harm's way from domestic violence.

[Zaxian]

A terribly sad story about what happens when abortion is illegal: Woman dies after abortion request 'refused'.

[brairtrainer]

A terribly sad story about what happens when abortion is illegal: Woman dies after abortion request 'refused'.

Zaxian you have just affirmed why we need abortion to remain legal. Really this should be left to a woman's choice, which is what the pro-choice movement is about, being able to choose if you carry the pregnancy or not.

[Slaskia]

Small follow up on the link Zaxian posted: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/11/15/i...er-woman-death/ (yeah I know you guys hate Fox)

 

Only somewhat related to the topic, but I thought it may be interesting: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/can-5-hour...-heart-attacks/

 

Possible 'go to' method if abortion gets made illegal? (technically they should have used 'miscarriage' in the title...)

[Happyface]

I laughed a little bit at the phrase "spontaneous abortion". Maybe if they used the term "miscarriage" in the title...

Anyways, would that even be an effective way to intentionally cause a miscarriage? The article says there are only 90 filings (if I read it correctly?) for heart attacks and miscarriages.

Edited November 15, 2012 by Happyface

[Slaskia]

I should have stated that as 'goto method for very desperate women' to that, sorry.

[Brite]

Zaxian you have just affirmed why we need abortion to remain legal. Really this should be left to a woman's choice, which is what the pro-choice movement is about, being able to choose if you carry the pregnancy or not.

There will always be nutjobs that don't care if a woman will die, she must stay with that pregnancy. Hmm, way to be pro-life..

 

Speaking of, one of the priest at an old church I use to go to was pro-birth because I asked the question, "What if she would die from it?" He said "Still no abortion, you don't kill a life to save a life."

 

W-w-w-w-w-what??!!! *Head desk*

 

I asked him how that was pro-life. He ignored me since then.

Edited November 16, 2012 by GhostChilli

[Emeraldmay]

This thread seems to be pointing out extremist pro-lifers everytime I check on it, so I thought I'd balance it a bit.

 

Warning for language and upsetting content: http://gargaro.com/newsquotes.html

 

(Some of the quotes could be taken as being upsetting, so be warned)

Edited November 19, 2012 by SockPuppet Strangler

[Fuzzbucket]

This thread seems to be pointing out extremist pro-lifers everytime I check on it, so I thought I'd balance it a bit.

 

Warning for language and upsetting content: http://gargaro.com/newsquotes.html

 

(Some of the quotes could be taken as being upsetting, so be warned)

 

Indeed. That's sick.

Edited November 19, 2012 by SockPuppet Strangler

[hazeh]

Most of those were very extreme, though there were a few that I didn't think were all that horrible.

 

 

The "rejected fetus" and economy comment towards the bottom, for example. I think if a couple is waiting years to adopt a child, they're either waiting for the "perfect" kid and aren't willing to parent the ones that are available, or something is off with their status as an adoptive couple and social workers and whatnot simply don't want to chose them over better candidates.

 

There are always more children than adoptive parents. If there weren't, we wouldn't even have this issue.

[babybluefire]

There are parents with money only willing to take a perfect baby. There are also parents with less money and can be very hesitant to take a baby with major medical issues that they cant pay for. Universal health care or severe reforms to the current system could help clear that issue up.

 

 

 

 

My spouse and I would love to adopt. But the straight up costs can be higher then putting a child threw a few years of university. Some of our friends are in the middle of the adoption process. A very nice pastor and his stay at home wife. Any child they ever have will be loved and spoiled. But the whole money thing is slowing the process down to the point where they are considering trying to get pregnant and risk miscarrying again. Small church pastors don't exactly have loads of cash in the bank.