Abortion

[vintageandroid]

Aingeal, I am so sorry that happened to you. That is a horrible choice for a little girl to make. But please try to remember--you were a child, you did what you thought was best at the time, with what knowledge you had.

[Spelunker]

Any "school" that would impose its ideals on a 12 year old to the point where she would carry out of pressure is sickening and horrible.

 

Aingeal, I'm so sorry. I can't imagine how it would feel to carry.

 

Also, that El Salvador case is just ILLOGICAL. The pro-life movement is about saving the babies, but if the babies aren't viable, then what's the point of forcing a woman who's SUFFERING for the baby to carry it? Some sort of twisted morals?

[angelicdragonpuppy]

There is no point, counting back from the moment of birth, at which it magically becomes okay to kill a living human being. Whether said human is nearly fully developed at 9 months, might or might not be able to survive on its own at 7 months, or just a wee little clump of cells at a few weeks--it's a human. Killing an innocent human is murder. Plain and simple.

[Infinis]

Also, that El Salvador case is just ILLOGICAL. The pro-life movement is about saving the babies, but if the babies aren't viable, then what's the point of forcing a woman who's SUFFERING for the baby to carry it? Some sort of twisted morals?

I'm not sure they really care, or actually realize it. And that's exactly it - it's about saving the babies. The mother is frequently overlooked or disregarded entirely. I don't understand why, because the fetus wouldn't even be there if it weren't for a mother.

 

There is no point in carrying it, but given that basically all of the arguments against abortion are based in a religion that marks it as a sin in all cases, that might be why (I say "basically all" because I've yet to find a logical argument against it that isn't based in religion). So, yes, technically, it is twisted morals. Maybe not "twisted" insofar as "outdated," though.

[vintageandroid]

There is no point, counting back from the moment of birth, at which it magically becomes okay to kill a living human being. Whether said human is nearly fully developed at 9 months, might or might not be able to survive on its own at 7 months, or just a wee little clump of cells at a few weeks--it's a human. Killing an innocent human is murder. Plain and simple.

It must be nice to live in such a simple black-and-white world. Unfortunately, things aren't always that cut and dried. Did you read about the twelve-year-old upthread whose baby died anyway? Did you read about all the many women whose bodies are utterly destroyed and whose quality of life is drastically reduced, if they even still live? Did you read about all the people who would literally rather die than live through a pregnancy, including myself? I guess you think we probably should if such a thing should befall us, so . . . y'know, that sucks.

 

I disagree with you that a clump of cells is a human. Most zygotes are flushed out of the system without anyone even noticing, for example. And a fetus can't live on its own but rather feeds off the mother--why does she matter less than the thing that doesn't even have a centralized nerve system yet?

[NobleOwl]

There is no point, counting back from the moment of birth, at which it magically becomes okay to kill a living human being. Whether said human is nearly fully developed at 9 months, might or might not be able to survive on its own at 7 months, or just a wee little clump of cells at a few weeks--it's a human. Killing an innocent human is murder. Plain and simple.

So, if that clump of cells becomes a tumor is it still human? What if it becomes a parasitic mass? Or a calcified mass? There is no guarantee a fetus will become human until after the legal cut off.

 

 

[Spelunker]

It must be nice to live in such a simple black-and-white world. Unfortunately, things aren't always that cut and dried. Did you read about the twelve-year-old upthread whose baby died anyway? Did you read about all the many women whose bodies are utterly destroyed and whose quality of life is drastically reduced, if they even still live? Did you read about all the people who would literally rather die than live through a pregnancy, including myself? I guess you think we probably should if such a thing should befall us, so . . . y'know, that sucks.

 

I disagree with you that a clump of cells is a human. Most zygotes are flushed out of the system without anyone even noticing, for example. And a fetus can't live on its own but rather feeds off the mother--why does she matter less than the thing that doesn't even have a centralized nerve system yet?

This. Going through a pregnancy, though a physical impossibility for me at this point in my life, would kill me. Maybe not literally, but the high-stress life I live from doing various advanced classes would be completely incompatible.

[KageSora]

There is no point, counting back from the moment of birth, at which it magically becomes okay to kill a living human being. Whether said human is nearly fully developed at 9 months, might or might not be able to survive on its own at 7 months, or just a wee little clump of cells at a few weeks--it's a human. Killing an innocent human is murder. Plain and simple.

So... What happens when carrying the child to term will end in a dead mother and dead fetus?

 

Please explain how to resolve that. I suppose just allowing them both to die since letting two people die a natural death instead of saving one life by murdering another is better?

 

Also please tell me how to resolve the following without "murder":

 

The mother has a phobia of pregnancy. The mother is also suffering from depression. Birth control fails, and the mother ends up pregnant. Not only is her phobia causing her intense mental distress, but she is taking medication for her depression that will likely harm the fetus. If she goes off the medication, she is at high risk for suicide--which is increased by the added stress of her phobia.

 

Or this:

 

The mother hates children, cannot stand them, and does not possess the ability to bond emotionally with a child in the way generally assumed mothers do. The mother does not have the money to support a child, much less go through the absolutely not free process of putting it up for adoption (where there's no guarantee it will ever be loved anyway). Birth control fails, and the woman is now saddled with what she views as a parasite and a blight on her life, that she cannot love and now actively hates and will not ever love.

 

Or this:

 

Mother is raped, ends up carrying a child as a result. She reacts to this by being reminded of the horrific trauma she endured every single day she carries what she views as an abomination inside her. If she gives birth, her rapist can have visitation rights or custody of the child and she will now be forced to see her rapist again and again, knowing that he's possibly going to raise the child to be a monster just like him who will in turn put another girl through the hell she endured.

 

 

Sure, those are more extreme examples. But fully plausible. They are also plausible in less extreme versions, such as no phobia but suffering a medical condition requiring medication that is harmful to a fetus--that will either kill or cause severe birth defects (and if cost is already a problem, raising a disabled child is infinitely more costly than raising a fully healthy child which is already obscenely costly). What will you do then? Force the mother to give up her potentially life-saving medication or allow the fetus to die/be born severely disabled and force a mother who never wanted it to raise it or chuck it into a system where it might never be wanted? (Since most people want healthy babies and don't want to adopt a kid that needs intense, costly medical care).

 

 

 

Additionally, if you are in favor of outlawing abortion then you must support the following:

• Legislation that requires all persons not barred by a medical condition to be organ/blood/plasma/etc. donors. Personal choice does not factor in, they MUST donate. No ifs, ands, or buts unless they possess a medical condition that would make their donation dangerous (such as infections disease, certain medication usage, etc.). After all--these donations can save lives, and therefore it would be wrong to allow death to happen if somebody can have their blood or bone marrow or a kidney taken from them to save the life of another, even if that person didn't want to donate.
• Legislation making it 100% legal for another human being to be hooked up to the body of a non-consenting individual to use their body to support their own.

[Spelunker]

Thank you, KageSora. Those are perfect examples of no black-and-white way out.

[NobleOwl]

Mother is raped, ends up carrying a child as a result. She reacts to this by being reminded of the horrific trauma she endured every single day she carries what she views as an abomination inside her. If she gives birth, her rapist can have visitation rights or custody of the child and she will now be forced to see her rapist again and again, knowing that he's possibly going to raise the child to be a monster just like him who will in turn put another girl through the hell she endured.

 

My daughter is a rape baby. My brother decided to rape my girlfriend. I literally had to hold her during flashbacks, stop her from physically harming herself, watch as she fought her own body to try and heal from broken ribs and legs. After our daughter was born, my brother sued for custody TWICE.

[Spelunker]

Your brother is a [[less polite word for donkey, and a not-so-polite word for a pile of excrement]].

 

I'm sorry that happened, nobleowl. Do you still speak to him?

[Riverwillows]

I consider myself to be one of the most gentle people, by design. I try very hard to stand in another's shoes, to be fair as I can. Yes, I have a temper, and you don't know "beotch" until you've seen me pushed too far. It is this reason I try to be it's polar opposite as best I can.

 

That said, I am tired of being called a murderer. Oh yes, I have, many times, and by people I wouldn't have dreamed it from. And because of religion, there are many young girls who feel they have no other choice. Are these young girls murderers too?

 

I cannot believe how many people I know, that won't let schools teach about sex, yet condemn young teens when they get pregnant because they didn't have enough info, and then condemn them for being pregnant, so they sneak abortions, which they are also condemned for. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

And I don't want to hear people say "....well, sex education should be taught in the home, not school..." because it ISN'T TAUGHT AT ALL!!!! Either the parents wrap themselves in a tight little bubble of cotton candy and puppy dog tails, that their little 13 year old baby is still so innocent and couldn't possibly be at that stage yet, or they believe somehow their kid will absorb sex education thru osmosis with heavy bible readings, or some other such nonsense.

 

Bottom line, these kids are NOT being educated at home, not properly, and their parents WON"T let them get it at school, then wonder how their precious little infant got themselves in the family way. It's one of the biggest hypocrisies I know of. THEN they are condemned when they see the only way out is abortion.

 

And what about people like me, living below the poverty line, blinded by love, only to find themselves totally alone and betrayed. So, we are murderers too?

 

So I and so many other people, who weren't given any other way out, are murderers. Both secular law, and biblical law says murderers must be killed, stoned.

 

All those who view it as black and white, here is a rock. I won't flinch. Are you going to throw it?

Edited May 2, 2013 by Riverwillows

[NobleOwl]

Your brother is a [[less polite word for donkey, and a not-so-polite word for a pile of excrement]].

 

I'm sorry that happened, nobleowl. Do you still speak to him?

Only when I can't help it. It makes visit to the rez rather difficult at times.

[Kestra15]

There is no point, counting back from the moment of birth, at which it magically becomes okay to kill a living human being. Whether said human is nearly fully developed at 9 months, might or might not be able to survive on its own at 7 months, or just a wee little clump of cells at a few weeks--it's a human. Killing an innocent human is murder. Plain and simple.

If something isn't viable, it can't live. And if it can't live, it cannot be alive, ergo it cannot be a human being. A little clump of cells is not viable and certainly can develop into something other than a human being, thus until such time as it becomes viable and will certainly develop into a human being and nothing else, it is not human nor alive, this it cannot be murder. Plain and simple.

 

[Obscure_Trash]

Perhaps the scariest thing you'll read today [possible tw for pharmaceutical deceit]: http://25.media.tumblr.com/265cc0a045cdbdf...9gfho1_1280.png

 

Between this and my own pharmaceutical troubles today, I have no hope left right now. Blah.

[Spelunker]

Eep! That is scary. Seriously, that's not a joke.

[KageSora]

Perhaps the scariest thing you'll read today [possible tw for pharmaceutical deceit]: http://25.media.tumblr.com/265cc0a045cdbdf...9gfho1_1280.png

 

Between this and my own pharmaceutical troubles today, I have no hope left right now. Blah.

Aaaaaand people like him should then be forced to pay for all costs of raising that child until it is 18.

 

s like him don't deserve their goddamn job.

 

If you found out that he lied and sold you something different, though, couldn't you sue him for that?

 

Too bad his profile information doesn't list where he works publicly, I wonder how his employer would react to that sort of behavior?

Edited May 3, 2013 by KageSora

[Obscure_Trash]

Aaaaaand people like him should then be forced to pay for all costs of raising that child until it is 18.

 

s like him don't deserve their goddamn job.

 

If you found out that he lied and sold you something different, though, couldn't you sue him for that?

 

Too bad his profile information doesn't list where he works publicly, I wonder how his employer would react to that sort of behavior?

I would certainly hope so, but by the time she found/finds out, it may be too late for her to terminate the pregnancy (I'm not sure of Australia's abortion laws/the laws where she lives). =\

 

I tried friending him to see if he'd accept me and I could find his employment information, but no response thus far. I do really wish his employer could be contacted. Who knows how many female-bodied he's done that to?

[KageSora]

I would certainly hope so, but by the time she found/finds out, it may be too late for her to terminate the pregnancy (I'm not sure of Australia's abortion laws/the laws where she lives). =\

 

I tried friending him to see if he'd accept me and I could find his employment information, but no response thus far. I do really wish his employer could be contacted. Who knows how many female-bodied he's done that to?

I hope somebody finds out so that they can report him, there absolutely HAS to be something illegal about LYING to a customer. Even if they're allowed to deny a customer (some places can?) I would think flat-out lying about what you're selling is gotta be at the very least worthy of termination.

 

 

Even if she can't terminate the pregnancy, I would REALLY hope that she could still sue his ass off, at the very least.

 

Hey! He should totally be hooked up to this for a few hours.

 

[7Deadly$ins]

I would certainly hope so, but by the time she found/finds out, it may be too late for her to terminate the pregnancy (I'm not sure of Australia's abortion laws/the laws where she lives). =\

 

I tried friending him to see if he'd accept me and I could find his employment information, but no response thus far. I do really wish his employer could be contacted. Who knows how many female-bodied he's done that to?

It's a terrible thing, the woman should have been contacted (probably had her info) and his employers should be alerted. But, actually, he did say that he accidentally did it. I take his second post as more of a joke. It's a pretty poor form joke, but still.

[KageSora]

It's a terrible thing, the woman should have been contacted (probably had her info) and his employers should be alerted. But, actually, he did say that he accidentally did it. I take his second post as more of a joke. It's a pretty poor form joke, but still.

Considering his attitude in the posts, I more got the impression that "accidentally" was more "I did it on purpose but I'm saying it was an accident". Possibly as a "well if anybody informs my employers it was an accident not on purpose" attempt at covering his ass--not sure how they'd handle it being an honest mistake vs. intending to deceive the customer.

[Obscure_Trash]

Considering his attitude in the posts, I more got the impression that "accidentally" was more "I did it on purpose but I'm saying it was an accident".  Possibly as a "well if anybody informs my employers it was an accident not on purpose" attempt at covering his ass--not sure how they'd handle it being an honest mistake vs. intending to deceive the customer.

This was also how I interpreted it. I would think that if it was an actual accident he wouldn't be:

a) casually joking about it

calling himself a savior of lives

and c) seemingly completely unworried about what that woman could go through as a result of his "mistake"

 

He could very well just see it as a harmless, funny mistake, as you said, but either of these cases don't describe a man who deserves to be anywhere near that field of work.

Edited May 3, 2013 by SockPuppet Strangler

[KageSora]

This was also how I interpreted it. I would think that if it was an actual accident he wouldn't be:

a) casually joking about it

calling himself a savior of lives

and c) seemingly completely unworried about what that woman could go through as a result of his "mistake"

 

He could very well just see it as a harmless, funny mistake, as you said, but either of these cases don't describe a man who deserves to be anywhere near that field of work.

Agreed. If he's going to treat it so casually, then he really needs some sensitivity training at the least, as well as some damn good education on what that women may very well be forced to go through as a result of his "mistake". He really doesn't deserve that job.

Edited May 3, 2013 by KageSora

[Riverwillows]

Saw a great sign on the net today, totally what I think:

 

 

 

Yeah...why do they???

[anmiller86]

This is such a huge gray area for me. I know that I could never have one myself unless the pregnancy would surely kill me and leave my 2 children motherless. I would end a pregnancy in that situation. It wouldn't feel fair or right to leave my Husband to tend to 3 kids by himself. I would consider having one if the child was going to have terrible quality of life (I am not talking about Downs, I'm talking completely unable to speak or care for her/himself ever) but I don't know for sure, never been there.

 

I don't like abortion used as birth control, and I actually have heard this happens, though I realize this is the minority. I don't agree with abortions past the first trimester pending medical emergency.

 

However, I think that abortion should be legal. And I think it's a decision that a person should never be forced into making. A person very near and dear to me was pushed VERY heavily into abortion, and this was after she decided to keep the baby, and it was past 12weeks and as it was family it really hurt me. I'm sure it hurt her more, though, and I still love her just as much.