Abortion

[whitebaron]

Your wife is very lucky. I used to work for a doctor - and I can assure you that even doing THAT won't guarantee avoiding pregnancy.

Of course not, but thats not what I said, either.

It just goes as a reminder, that when you already know you are quite fertile, you can take even more precautions or go to the movies instead.

[prairiecrow]

Also, re: the Pill, gotta point out that certain prescription meds, over-the-counter meds, and herbal remedies interfere with how well it works, AND that the Pill can affect how other meds work. I can't take the Pill because when I do, it knocks out the effects of my antidepressant meds. (Good thing I got my tubes tied, eh? )

[Fuzzbucket]

Of course not, but thats not what I said, either.

It just goes as a reminder, that when you already know you are quite fertile, you can take even more precautions or go to the movies instead.

But you may NOT know that you are fertile (or even "quite fertile"! - don't forget that there are myths around that suggest you can't get pregnant until you are married ) - that was my point. Whatever the little blue strips etc say. They, too, are not 100%. Though going to the movies is not an adequate bonding substitute, not to mention it often leads to - sexual activity afterwards !

 

This kind of thing is exactly why we need FAR more detailed sex ed !

 

My mother in law used to say that anyone who married without testing their sexual compatibility first was extremely stupid. She was a smart lady. And hardly one of today's "promiscuous uncaring youth" - she died a few years back at the age of 80 something.

[brairtrainer]

On the subject of birthcontrol and other methods:

 

I've just found out that if bc doesn't give my sister migranes it causes her to have other mental issues.

 

Meaning likely hood I'll be able to handle hormonal birth control of any kind has been lowered yet again e.e.

 

Really I had decent sex ed (if I compare to the abstinince only and scare tactics education) but the non-hormonal methods I've had to read up on, which is nessicary if I want to remain in good health.

 

Also the rythem method wouldn't work, as soon as I am around other menstrating people I get messed up, my body can't handle starting at the same time as someone else (basically my body fights 'sincing').

[Fuzzbucket]

On the subject of birthcontrol and other methods:

 

I've just found out that if bc doesn't give my sister migraines it causes her to have other mental issues.

 

Meaning likely hood I'll be able to handle hormonal birth control of any kind has been lowered yet again e.e.

 

Really I had decent sex ed (if I compare to the abstinince only and scare tactics education) but the non-hormonal methods I've had to read up on, which is necessary if I want to remain in good health.

 

Also the rythem method wouldn't work, as soon as I am around other menstrating people I get messed up, my body can't handle starting at the same time as someone else (basically my body fights 'sincing').

You are not your sister.

 

The pill is a big part of why I am now so deaf (otosclerosis is hormone dependent; who knew ? - very few at that time, and it only hits those who are already genetically susceptible) - but it didn't do the same to my sister, who even had one MORE child than I did.

 

But there's always the IUD. NO-ONE should be relying on the rhythm method.

As that wise doctor used to say - "it can just about work for the regular as clockwork woman - as long as nothing kicks off a change in her cycle. Sadly, actually having sex can do that..." !

[HeatherMarie]

I actually consider waiting until marriage a very bad idea, and would honestly advise people to try at least once before marriage. Getting married first and then finding out that they are completely incompatible in that regard is a sad thing (and will positively ruin the relationship if both have at least remotely high sex drives).

I have to agree here. The only real benefits I can figure out in "waiting until marriage" is the idea of being pure, and the knowledge that neither of you could have an STD.

 

I'm not going to touch the "being pure" part. The STD thing can be taken care of with tests. But getting legally and spiritually married, vowing for life, and then finding out that you aren't compatible at *all* sexually? What you've basically just done is condemn *both* of you to a sexless life forever, unless you just immediately divorce. Or raise the likelyhood that one of you will end up cheating.

 

And when I say sexually compatible, yeah it's great to like the same type of stuff in bed, but there are also people who *literally* cannot have sex together, due to genitalia size differences and such.

 

Can you have a happy marriage with no sex? Of course you can. Do I think it's a little irresponsible to not think about compatibility before you jump into the marriage pool? Yeah, I do.

[Bex]

^ I agree with this completely.

 

My hubby and I were together for 12 years BEFORE we got married. We definitely tried just about everything in the bedroom before deciding to get married, and together we discovered that we are both bisexual and polyamarous, and that I am his dominant and he is my submissive.

 

I can't even imagine how many people are miserable with their married life because it turned out that they could not satisfy each other in bed. Forget vanilla heterosexual sex. There are so many kinks out there, what if you found out your hubby was a crossdresser and you hated it?

[brairtrainer]

@Fuzz

 

What I meant about the issues with my sister is that I've strongly been told not to attempt hormonal bc unless she finds one that works for her or I take it in patch form.

 

Due to me not having a job and other issues (including having a pro-life mother who thinks bc is a gateway to me having sex, and three other women in my famliy who have problems with bc pills) I feel strongly when people want to take away others right to abort because, '...you could go on the pill.' Heck even more because I have no way to pay for it (including and iud) because it would be considered elective bc.

 

The only way I could convince my parents to help me pay for something like that is if I can convince my mom to let me do it to show it won't harm my sister (the one reason she hasn't been fitted with an iud yet is her's and my dad's prejudice. My dad said that if I had the information and would go through getting one in and then handled it fine he could see trying it for my sister, but that's another story.)

[Brite]

You are not your sister.

 

The pill is a big part of why I am now so deaf (otosclerosis is hormone dependent; who knew ? - very few at that time, and it only hits those who are already genetically susceptible) - but it didn't do the same to my sister, who even had one MORE child than I did.

 

But there's always the IUD. NO-ONE should be relying on the rhythm method.

As that wise doctor used to say - "it can just about work for the regular as clockwork woman - as long as nothing kicks off a change in her cycle. Sadly, actually having sex can do that..." !

IUD's are excellent and are as effective as female sterilization. That is IF it's in place right. A lot of women don't check the strings (with certain IUD's) and assume everything is fine. Most if not all pregnancies with IUD's occur because they had no idea it became dislodged. I check my strings EVERY time I shower because I'm that paranoid. You don't need condoms (unless you have multiple partners) but I recommend them because IUD's make you a bit more prone to infections..

 

IUD is the closest thing I can get to sterilization, hopefully I can talk my doctor into, but I doubt it

Edited January 8, 2014 by GhostChilli

[Bex]

^ IUDs are not an option for many women.

 

There are a lot of doctors out there who refused to give IUDs to women who have never had kids. I ran into this problem several years ago. I begged my gynocologist to let me have an IUD because I never want kids. She said that since I hadn't had kids before, the risk of my IUD having complications was slightly higher than if I had kids before, so she wouldn't give me one. Many gynos share this view.

 

I ended up getting pregnant and needing an abortion instead. :/

 

I looked into this issue and it seems that this is more of a problem in highly religious states (if you're in the USA anyways). I am unfortunately stuck in Texas, but I have friends in progressive place like Canada who have never had issues getting an IUD.

[Brite]

^ IUDs are not an option for many women.

 

There are a lot of doctors out there who refused to give IUDs to women who have never had kids. I ran into this problem several years ago. I begged my gynocologist to let me have an IUD because I never want kids. She said that since I hadn't had kids before, the risk of my IUD having complications was slightly higher than if I had kids before, so she wouldn't give me one. Many gynos share this view.

 

I ended up getting pregnant and needing an abortion instead. :/

 

I looked into this issue and it seems that this is more of a problem in highly religious states (if you're in the USA anyways). I am unfortunately stuck in Texas, but I have friends in progressive place like Canada who have never had issues getting an IUD.

I am in texas and got one. Go to women clinics. I've never had kids, and my gyno let me have one.

 

Edit: There are complications, such as it coming out and tremendous pain. The reason why it's easier for women who have had kids is because the uterus is use to objects inside. I'll admit when it was being put it, my uterus FREAKED out and actually gave me labor pains trying to get it out of me. It got use to it after an hour. But man was it painful..

Edited January 8, 2014 by GhostChilli

[Bex]

^ It's not always that easy. For example, I found several providers who would be willing to do it, but none of them were on my provider list with my insurance. So my option at that point was to pay full price for one. Even at Planned Parenthood, they quoted me nearly $600 for an IUD, and it wasn't even the one I wanted. I cant use a Mirena so I need a copper IUD, and Planned Parenthood didn't offer them. Granted, $600 is cheaper than having a child, but not everyone has that much cash lying around.

 

I know all about the complications, but providers in the deep south tend to play them up whereas providers in other places play them down. Here, they try to make it sound like you're IUD is guaranteed to fail if you haven't had kids before. I'll take that pain over having an abortion any day.

[Kestra15]

My hubby and I were together for 12 years BEFORE we got married. We definitely tried just about everything in the bedroom before deciding to get married, and together we discovered that we are both bisexual and polyamarous, and that I am his dominant and he is my submissive.

 

I can't even imagine how many people are miserable with their married life because it turned out that they could not satisfy each other in bed. Forget vanilla heterosexual sex. There are so many kinks out there, what if you found out your hubby was a crossdresser and you hated it?

This. IT's why I find the concept of no sex before marriage a hideous idea; sex is a big part of a relationship (I certainly find it an important component of any of my own relationships) and waiting until marriage to find that you are incompatible in the bedroom is a massive error. And frankly, with the age of first marriage increasing and so little social taboo on having responsible sex when you are of age prior to marriage, it does continue to be little more than an archaic method of control from heavily-paternalistic societies.

 

But I recognise I'm straying off-topic a bit so will leave it there.

[Htt71]

Yeah, sexual compatibility is a pretty huge thing in a relationship. (B-whaaaat? He's agreeing for once?) The problem for me is my religion advises against it. I think it's fine, but I'm still trying to be a good Catholic. So where I stand on this is pretty neutral, plus I shouldn't really get a say in someone's sexual life eh? (Well... Unless they're not even at the age usually where sex is fair game, the adult age. That's where it's a problem for me.)

 

Though, I think we're straying from the topic of choice lol.

 

[edwardelricfreak]

I feel like religions would be best if they have everyone's well-being in mind. Instead, quite a few sex-shame and also treat women like dirt.

 

I'm not against religion. I just wish it was more open. I LOVE the teachings of loving thy neighbor and other GOOD things, but there are some ridiculous things I can't stand.

 

Because there are GOOD religious people out there, even ones who oppose abortion.

[Htt71]

Yeah, so many people I've Catholics a bad rep. Mainly due to some of the more radical people, and of course... The priests who are child molesters... But, I love being a catholic!

Edited January 9, 2014 by Htt71

[Brite]

Try to keep the religion chat in the religion thread.

 

Htt71, have your views on this topic changed at all? I'm curious.

[edwardelricfreak]

And there's nothing wrong with that. Personally I would consider you (general) a good Catholic if you did certain things that, while they may go against the teachings, are better for everyone in general.

 

*slowly trying to nudge back to fully on-topic*

 

I think the main thing that many religious people aren't grasping is that pro-choice aren't pro-abortion, they just want the woman to have control of their body and to choose. Most religions (and societies) are patriarchal, so they place more importance on men than women.

 

Also, it's misleading to say you're pro-life if all you want is the fetus (and sometimes the mother) to live, and then not really care about it once its actually born (or even when it's an adult).

 

So, a little rehashing, but related to the religion bit.

[Htt71]

Meh...

Honestly I see the other side of the argument, but I literally just can't quite deal with the immorality it sometimes has associated with it. Now, I'm not slandering anyone, but I still believe it is a bad thing. I think the mother should be helped along the way in any way possible should she choose to have the baby, but if she chooses to abort the baby I believe she should be given that much and no more. I'm trying to encourage without forcing, but I know I'm still going to get paragraph long explanations on why I'm wrong in every way, so why bother here eh? Anyways, that's my standpoint.

 

If you have questions of comments I'll try to get back ASAP, but sometimes I just need a break from this topic. I went berserk and went on a 2 day posing spree, but I needed a break. So, I'll be less frequent (mostly), but you'll sill hear from me now and then.

 

(Bonus comment: I honestly think my opinions would be more accepted here if I were a woman, lol, just saying. It's fine if a woman wants to disagree with abortion, but heavens forbid a man tell any woman their opinion! I didn't mean this offensively, I just meant it as a little comment, sorry if you took offense, and please direct all of your hatred towards me then.)

 

You people are awesome, and happy debating!

Edited January 9, 2014 by Htt71

[whitebaron]

 

And when I say sexually compatible, yeah it's great to like the same type of stuff in bed, but there are also people who *literally* cannot have sex together, due to genitalia size differences and such.

actually, thats a myth. Unless you have a condition that prevents sex with everyone, theres no such thing - after all, even very tiny women can give birth - and thats a lot bigger than even "very big" men.

[Htt71]

Wow, how much would that suck eh? You it married so you can enjoy life's wonders together and now are religiously free to have sex, and you find out you're incapable of it. Talk about a slap in the face.

[Obscure_Trash]

I think the mother should be helped along the way in any way possible should she choose to have the baby, but if she chooses to abort the baby I believe she should be given that much and no more.

Wait - what? So if a pregnant person makes a responsible decision for themselves and that responsible decision ends up being an abortion, then they suddenly don't deserve any support? Help? Care? Love? Only if that responsible decision (or irresponsible decision! or being forced and actually having no choice!) is giving birth, then they deserve all of those things?

 

Ouch. =\

 

I honestly think my opinions would be more accepted here if I were a woman, lol, just saying. It's fine if a woman wants to disagree with abortion, but heavens forbid a man tell any woman their opinion!

 

Nope. I encourage any women or anybody with a uterus who is anti-choice to confront their internalized misogyny or misogyny. I don't care about anybody's personal opinion on it, but when they want to force their opinions on others, when they want laws to reflect their belief, I take problem with that. Your gender nor sex is not a get out of jail card for legislating someone else's body, nor is it a way to brush off legitimate concerns being brought up about your beliefs.

Edited January 9, 2014 by SockPuppet Strangler

[KageSora]

(Bonus comment: I honestly think my opinions would be more accepted here if I were a woman, lol, just saying. It's fine if a woman wants to disagree with abortion, but heavens forbid a man tell any woman their opinion! I didn't mean this offensively, I just meant it as a little comment, sorry if you took offense, and please direct all of your hatred towards me then.)

Actually, for me, I didn't even realize you had a male gender sign until somebody else referred to you as male. I don't pay attention to those when disagreeing with people, unless they specifically comment in a way that's clearly from a standpoint of somebody who has no idea what they're talking about because they don't have a uterus.

[Htt71]

Well sock, I personally don't believe in most cases it is a responsible decision. I promote those who promote life, I'm not saying people who are pro-choice promote death, but they do reinforce it by offering it with open arms. I think in a perfect world every baby is born and loved and can be cared for, but this isn't a perfect world. So I try to do my best to help those who want to love the life forms they've created, and in the process I get a lot of disagreement from the other argument. That's just my opinion.

 

(Also, please ignore typos, I'm on my phone... It doesn't work well. Thanks.)

 

And responding to Kage, that's probably one of the most mature things I've heard today, faith in humanity restored lol.

Edited January 9, 2014 by Htt71

[KageSora]

I wouldn't call it mature so much as unobservant, actually. That, and the gender signs we use here aren't always biologically accurate--just because a person prefers to be known here as male doesn't mean they're not physically female. And the reverse is true, too. (Hence why I can argue from the standpoint of a person who has a female reproductive system despite the male gender sign I have listed here).

 

 

Personally, I feel that to be truly pro-life, you not only need to want to preserve as much life as possible, but to take into account the quality of life. That's how I can personally feel that I'm pro-life while still being adamantly pro-choice and advocating abortion as needed (as determined by medical professionals and/or the pregnant individual in question).

 

I'd much rather have a potential life lost and one at a decent quality than have two potential lives existing but at a lower quality level.