Abortion

[KageSora]

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I think all pro-lifers/pro-birthers are that irrational; I'm sure many of them are intelligent people who just don't know all the facts yet. But the politicians who are pushing this BS are the ones I'm talking about. After some of the they've said, I think it's pretty obvious that they will never see reason.

Ah yeah, the politicians are a lost cause.

 

I don't think it's because they can't understand them--I actually think they understand the facts very well. But acknowledging those facts and that religion has no place in the state (here in the US, anyway) doesn't actually win them the votes they're looking for, so they're happy to ignore them and twist them and say crazy stuff to get the votes they were hoping for.

 

I mean, if a woman is forced to have a kid, and she can't afford to raise it, that helps keep her in poverty. And that kid, raised in poverty, has a greater chance of getting an inferior education. And poorly educated masses mean sheep to be controlled with empty words, sheep who won't realize how they're screwing themselves over supporting such people if they can't have their eyes opened.

 

So, naturally, it works in their best interest to keep people poor, and to force women to pop out kids.

 

And then the people who are genuinely concerned for the unborn children are just following people who don't care about the kids, they just care about staying in power.

 

And that's just really sad. :/

 

 

(No, I don't have much faith in a lot of politicians on both sides. But by spreading awareness we, as people, can make informed decisions and try to fix the problems in our system)

[Kai]

I don't think offering a few absurd politicians statements and implying that all of them are similar is very productive.

[brairtrainer]

Rick Perry Calls Second Special Session To Pass Abortion Restrictions

This is one of those times I'm glad I don't live in another state(though OH has had its share of scary abortion legislation.)

 

If I was in TX I'd be finding my way to the capital building and protesting too, absolute limits mean nothing to mother nature when it comes to dieseases, and if you prevent all abortions after 20 weeks then you're likely to see higher death rates.

 

While I'd commend a bill that requires abortion centers to be better equiped, the bill itself better also be providing the funding as well as a timeline to help bring abortion clinics into compliance safely and with minimal risk to people who need their services.

[BlitzDrake]

From every "pro force a birther" I've seen, I've noticed that all of them say the same thing; God doesn't approve of it. So is there any other logic backing these people other than a religious perspective?

[Syaoransbear]

I still hold out hope that some of them can see reason.  I mean, I used to be pro-birth but then people showed me facts that I realized really weren't able to be argued with--well, not reasonably anyway.

That's true for me too, sort of. I wasn't exactly pro-birth, but I was one of those very inconsistent people that was like "I believe in pro-choice but only under specific scenarios such as rape or when there are health issues." Then I realized, well, that's not pro-choice at all.

 

I thought about it and realized my motives for thinking that way were punishment based. I thought women should just face the consequences. Now I'm super pro-choice. All I care about is women having control of their bodies at all times and being able to make the decision about whether or not they want to allow another being access to their bodies. I became this way when I realized that not allowing women the choice to have an abortion would be taking away rights from the mother about her own body, and giving more rights to that woman's body to the fetus than any other fully developed human has in the world, even the owner! And frankly, that's completely ridiculous. Fetuses should not get ownership over someone else's body.

[MendezLightning]

Personally, I'm pro-choice. I think that if woman doesn't believe that she can look after a child - due to financial issues or otherwise - it is ultimately her choice to make; she's the one that will be carrying it around for nine months and then giving birth to it.

 

And I think that people who villainise these women need to realise that it's not a walk in the park for them. There's a reason why people says that parenthood starts at conception for a woman: immediately, they were consumed by unconditional love for their child. They love their child - and I think that some people are extremely insensitive when they think that women that have abortions hate their child.

[catstaff]

And I think that people who villainise these women need to realise that it's not a walk in the park for them. There's a reason why people says that parenthood starts at conception for a woman: immediately, they were consumed by unconditional love for their child. They love their child - and I think that some people are extremely insensitive when they think that women that have abortions hate their child.

Maybe for some women, that is true, but no, not all women are immediately consumed by unconditional love for their fetus. I never did, not for the one I aborted and not for the one I had, either.

 

Now, maybe some of that is that I'm ASD and therefore wired a little differently, I don't know. All I do know is, the difference between aborting and keeping, for me, was my circumstances at the time. (And for the record, both pregnancies were the result of birth control failure.)

 

When I aborted, I'd found out I was pregnant just after getting away from an abusive relationship, had no job and no steady place to live because the guy kept trying to find me. I couldn't support myself let alone a child, and I had no desire to have any sort of permanent connection with the guy.

 

When I had the baby, I was in a good relationship, good enough that marriage and children had already been discussed. I had a good job at the time and so did he. Yes, the pregnancy was a surprise, but our consensus was that since we'd already planned on making things permanent, we'd just continue with it and make it work, which we did.

 

Either way, I can safely say that while I didn't hate the potential child in either case, I didn't love it either. Not when I first found out I was pregnant, and in the case of the one I had, not until a few months after giving birth.

[Infinis]

What exactly does the Texas legislation entail? From what was reported on the news the other night, I understood that the bill would ban abortions after 20 weeks, require the physician to have admitting privileges to a hospital w/in 30mi, and have clinics updated to fit modern surgical standards.

 

Banning abortion after 20 weeks I don't agree with, but the other two are just good medicine and I don't know why anyone could possibly disagree with those. Those clinics should already be up to surgical standards and the physician should have admitting privileges in cases of emergencies. To be perfectly honest, if we want to make abortion safe for women, then our clinics must be up to proper standards. Clinics that are not up to standards SHOULD be closed until they can be updated to fit standards. :x

 

I understand that funding to update is an issue - however my question is why were they not built up to standards in the first place?

 

From every "pro force a birther" I've seen, I've noticed that all of them say the same thing; God doesn't approve of it. So is there any other logic backing these people other than a religious perspective?

 

This is something I have noticed as well and I have yet to see a completely non-religion-backed argument against abortion.

[Alpha Gryph]

From every "pro force a birther" I've seen, I've noticed that all of them say the same thing; God doesn't approve of it. So is there any other logic backing these people other than a religious perspective?

Some people just aren't comfortable with the fact that a potential person is being aborted. They equate it to murder, which isn't necessarily religiously motivated.

[brairtrainer]

What exactly does the Texas legislation entail? From what was reported on the news the other night, I understood that the bill would ban abortions after 20 weeks, require the physician to have admitting privileges to a hospital w/in 30mi, and have clinics updated to fit modern surgical standards.

 

Banning abortion after 20 weeks I don't agree with, but the other two are just good medicine and I don't know why anyone could possibly disagree with those. Those clinics should already be up to surgical standards and the physician should have admitting privileges in cases of emergencies. To be perfectly honest, if we want to make abortion safe for women, then our clinics must be up to proper standards. Clinics that are not up to standards SHOULD be closed until they can be updated to fit standards. :x

 

I understand that funding to update is an issue - however my question is why were they not built up to standards in the first place?

 

 

 

This is something I have noticed as well and I have yet to see a completely non-religion-backed argument against abortion.

Infinis one of the issues is that TX cut funding to planed parenthood, already closing down most of the centers in TX. Also, only 5 centers in all of TX are within range of a hospital. TX is huge and largely rural.

[diannethegeek]

What exactly does the Texas legislation entail? From what was reported on the news the other night, I understood that the bill would ban abortions after 20 weeks, require the physician to have admitting privileges to a hospital w/in 30mi, and have clinics updated to fit modern surgical standards.

 

Banning abortion after 20 weeks I don't agree with, but the other two are just good medicine and I don't know why anyone could possibly disagree with those. Those clinics should already be up to surgical standards and the physician should have admitting privileges in cases of emergencies. To be perfectly honest, if we want to make abortion safe for women, then our clinics must be up to proper standards. Clinics that are not up to standards SHOULD be closed until they can be updated to fit standards. :x

 

I understand that funding to update is an issue - however my question is why were they not built up to standards in the first place?

 

 

 

This is something I have noticed as well and I have yet to see a completely non-religion-backed argument against abortion.

The Texas Medical Association, the Texas Hospital Association and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists all say that it's unnecessary and will not raise the standard of care women are already receiving in these clinics. And remember, not all abortions are surgical procedures. The TX bill doesn't differentiate between a surgical abortion and a chemical one.

[Fuzzbucket]

Under the proposed law, a woman taking the morning after pill would have to go to one of these centres. And that means hundreds of miles for very many of them.

[KageSora]

Banning abortion after 20 weeks I don't agree with, but the other two are just good medicine and I don't know why anyone could possibly disagree with those. Those clinics should already be up to surgical standards and the physician should have admitting privileges in cases of emergencies. To be perfectly honest, if we want to make abortion safe for women, then our clinics must be up to proper standards. Clinics that are not up to standards SHOULD be closed until they can be updated to fit standards. :x

Among other things, what if the only clinic within 100 miles is shut down because the abortion doctor is refused admitting rights because the hospital doesn't give them to "baby murders"?

 

And, as others have said, it's not exactly necessary in every single instance. If a patient is an emergency patient, they'll end up taken to the hospital in an ambulance--I can't imagine the hospital would be like "nope, sorry, not sending you an ambulance, they gotta die because BABY MURDER". Actually, yeah, I can imagine some hospitals doing that--but then that's on the hospital for not giving a damn about saving lives.

 

 

Also, from what I understand, some of these clinics also employ people who are like family doctors and such, thus shutting down the clinics would deprive men, women, and children of access to their primary healthcare sources and force them to find a new doctor elsewhere.

Edited June 28, 2013 by KageSora

[HeatherMarie]

We have 5 different "clinics" (non-abortion-related) in my town, most of them urgent-care or similar, with doctors trained and qualified to do any number of different medical procedures.

 

From my understanding, NONE of them are tied to the (only) actual hospital in this town.

 

I really see no logical or medical reason why a certified abortion doctor ALSO has to be connected to a hospital in a CERTAIN AREA. Frankly, that just sounds like something they are throwing in there for no reason other then to make it even HARDER for women to get abortions.

[brairtrainer]

http://news.yahoo.com/perry-filibuster-sta...-175240836.html

 

Seems like the fight isn't over even though the bill is dead. You'd think the supporters would get the message.

[Dr. Paine]

http://news.yahoo.com/perry-filibuster-sta...-175240836.html

 

Seems like the fight isn't over even though the bill is dead.  You'd think the supporters would get the message.

Except the bill isn't dead. Perry's called another special session, to start July 1st, to get the bill going again, so the fight can't be given up just yet. (Maybe something's changed in the last 24 hours, but if so, I just haven't seen it yet and I apologize.)

 

The fight needs to keep going, or this is going to screw over a lot of Texans-- Marie hit the nail on the head, saying that the restrictions are in place not for 'safety', but rather to shut down a good... what, 30-36 of less than 50 places in Texas that provide abortions.

 

....

 

Unless the supporters you were talking about were the supporters of the bill? I'm so sorry if I misunderstood, I just woke up and my brain's still laggy

Edited June 28, 2013 by Dr. Paine

[brairtrainer]

Except the bill isn't dead. Perry's called another special session, to start July 1st, to get the bill going again, so the fight can't be given up just yet. (Maybe something's changed in the last 24 hours, but if so, I just haven't seen it yet and I apologize.)

 

The fight needs to keep going, or this is going to screw over a lot of Texans-- Marie hit the nail on the head, saying that the restrictions are in place not for 'safety', but rather to shut down a good... what, 30-36 of less than 50 places in Texas that provide abortions.

 

....

 

Unless the supporters you were talking about were the supporters of the bill? I'm so sorry if I misunderstood, I just woke up and my brain's still laggy

I meant the supporters of the bill sorry to make that confusing.

 

Technically the bill is dead, according to procedure anything not passed by the sessions end is dead.

 

What they are planning to do is resubmit the bill (with or without changes is unknown) and after it moves through committee it will once again be put to a vote. What I was saying was that the filibuster+ the people speaking out against it should have been a sign to lawmakers that the people don't want this bill.

[KageSora]

I meant the supporters of the bill sorry to make that confusing.

 

Technically the bill is dead, according to procedure anything not passed by the sessions end is dead.

 

What they are planning to do is resubmit the bill (with or without changes is unknown) and after it moves through committee it will once again be put to a vote. What I was saying was that the filibuster+ the people speaking out against it should have been a sign to lawmakers that the people don't want this bill.

Can't find the link right now, too tired to look (been way too long since I last slept), but apparently Perry said something that basically translates to "the louder the protest, the more we know we're representing them" or something stupid like that.

 

So, they don't actually care.

[Dr. Paine]

Can't find the link right now, too tired to look (been way too long since I last slept), but apparently Perry said something that basically translates to "the louder the protest, the more we know we're representing them" or something stupid like that.

 

So, they don't actually care.

@Brair: Alright then Sorry again!

 

@Kage: This? Where it basically boils down to 'no means yes'?

 

/shudders because THAT IS SO NOT THE IMPRESSION TO SEND

[KageSora]

@Brair: Alright then Sorry again!

 

@Kage: This? Where it basically boils down to 'no means yes'?

 

/shudders because THAT IS SO NOT THE IMPRESSION TO SEND

Ah, yeah, that's the quote.

 

No, if the opposition is screaming louder, that doesn't mean you're doing something right. It absolutely does not.

 

But then, our culture has a history of assuming no = yes where women are concerned. :/

[Veratrum]

I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the USA a woman* has less rights to her body than a dead body. There are laws that protect your body from being used in any way you don't want it to be used if you're dead. They can't force you to donate anything, even if it could save a thousand lives. You also can't desecrate remains.

 

And yet, in many places, this unborn fetus is allowed to use your body to grow, even if you don't want it to be there. And now they're trying (in Texas at least) to make an abortion illegal to get, or at least apply a whole lot of restrictions.

 

My stance is that a woman should have control of her own body; if she wants to get an abortion, she should be allowed to get an abortion. Even if you don't agree with it. It's a human rights issue.

 

I saw a post on tumblr the other day that made quite a bit of sense. Went along the lines of: "If I had a baby in one hand, and a petri dish of cells that could make a baby, and I drop them both and you could only save one, which would you choose to save? If you truly believe that a bunch of cells holds as much life as a baby already born, it will be impossible for you to choose. You would have to flip a coin to decide."

 

That was the gist of it, anyway.

 

*when I say woman, I am not including trans women. That's a different case entirely.

Edited July 2, 2013 by Veratrum

[KageSora]

Veratrum--that's exactly why the claim of "we think the fetus is equal to the woman" is really... It doesn't work. You're literally taking away rights from the woman that you assign the dead in order to allow the fetus to live. You are literally giving the fetus more rights than any living or dead person, including the pregnant woman.

 

 

I saw a great post on Tumblr:

 

"The reason a fetus has more rights than a woman is that it could still be born male."

 

Makes you think. :/

[siliconrose]

Why do you do it if you're going to abort it?

 

Because you were raped. Because your birth control failed. Because you can't use birth control due to medical reasons. Because you didn't think you could get pregnant because doctors told you it was impossible. Because someone sabotaged your birth control. Because you don't know how sex and babies work.

 

Because the fetus is killing you. Because the fetus won't survive the birth anyways. Because if the fetus was born, the life it would live wouldn't be worth living.

[Banuk]

I, personally, dislike small children with the passion of a thousand suns. Asking me to look at pictures of them and imagine if they didn't exist is not going to sway my sympathies or change my point of view in any way, shape, or form, other than make me angry that people still think I need to LOVE LOVE LOVE children because I have a uterus.

 

I am asexual and currently have no interest in pursuing a relationship of any sort at this time. If I were to EVER get pregnant it would be because I was raped. Why is it fair that I should have to carry some rapist's child to remind me every day of just how much I was violated, just because YOU think that said child is more important than I am? Not to mention that I am in no way in any sort of mental state suitable for raising a child. I would honestly sooner die than have to put up with some snot-nosed rapist's brat for eighteen plus years all because someone else thinks that child is more important.

 

I don't even care if it's murder, and I don't care what anyone else would say if I were to get an abortion. This is MY body. Not yours. Not some male politician's. Not some person that loves children. MINE. I should be able to say what goes on in it regardless of what anyone else thinks.

 

You don't like abortions? Don't get them. Don't try to tell other people what to do and what to think.

Edited July 2, 2013 by Derranged

[Destiny Arts]

Why do you do it if you're going to abort it?

 

Because you were raped. Because your birth control failed. Because you can't use birth control due to medical reasons. Because you didn't think you could get pregnant because doctors told you it was impossible. Because someone sabotaged your birth control. Because you don't know how sex and babies work.

 

Because the fetus is killing you. Because the fetus won't survive the birth anyways. Because if the fetus was born, the life it would live wouldn't be worth living.

is it really going to kill you or it die? How can you know? Is it not a life?