Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Cecona said:

I’ll say this, no matter the terminology it doesn’t change the importance of abortions /contraceptives being available to those that need them. To me the term makes no difference as to what it is: Human or nonhuman, parasite or beneficial. It’s still a potiental life that could perish before birth (or right after in some cases) and does not trump the already established life of the mother that is suffering.

 

and what happened/s in the past or in under developed countries does not, and should not determine what we do or how we treat already born babies. The whole dowry thing is out dated and impractical in modern society, it only made sense back when marriage was about territory/land/property/slavery.

 

I know you are trying to argue where the line is and when it becomes not okay, but it’s been stated countless times that it’s about viability. An already born baby is viable, one still developing its spine and nervous system is not.

 

can i just say bless this post. The semantics thing is tiring, man; there will always be places that use other definitions. It doesn't make definitions that come before it incorrect 🙄

 

I dont even need to make my own response because I agree with this 100%

Share this post


Link to post

Any life can perish any time, be it before, during or way, way after birth. Take smokers, which have an increased risk of dying all of a sudden. Should we be allowed to kill them so others don't have to suffer their unhealthy fumes?

 

I'm not fighting abortion or a woman's right of choice. I'm fighting the semantics that get used excessively in this thread, declaring an unborn child non-human and, in essence, worthless. Because I feel that neither is true, and should be taken into due consideration when deciding to have an abortion. Because, no matter how much the odds are in the unborn child's favor or not, an abortion ends a life.

Share this post


Link to post

I can sort of buy what you say, olympe - my issue is with people who call abortion MURDER  because the second you do that, semantics WILL kick in. An early abortion doesn't end a life, it prevents the development of a potential life.

Share this post


Link to post

of course when a woman is considering abortion the thought of ending a potential life is present, and it’s what makes abortion such a big issue. It’s not taken as lightly as we are discussing it when a woman is actually considering it. It’s a very big and important decision, with possible physical, psychological, and/or emotional effects on the mother. In the end it is what the woman decides is best whether that be keeping it or terminating. And if abortion is best it should be easily accessible as early as possible. 

Edited by Cecona
Wording

Share this post


Link to post

Exactly. I had one; it was actually an easy decision as such, as the alternative was so dire - but even so. I did vaguely wonder about telling the father, but was afraid of what might happen next.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎9‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 3:08 AM, Fuzzbucket said:
  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

This was very long and said nothing we don't all know. I am still interested in the WHY of your arguments. Is it religious ? Why would you want to force desperate women into a back street when their legal choices are taken away ? Abortions will still happen; they are still needed by some - like it or not.

 

 

Actually, after reading her posts about her history with illness and having to have a hysterectomy? That for her it's about she wants to have children and can't grasp why other women can't. So for her it's a matter of living vicariously through another's pregnancy. When faced by those women that would choose differently, to terminate what she considers 'a woman's reason for being', that of having children? She equates it to murder, as she feels the doctor 'murdered' her chances to carry a fetus to term. 
 

Just my opinion, but I'm thinking it's pretty much on track there. 

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Fuzzbucket said:

Actually to be fair to olympe - while I don't see that bringing in breast feeding is relevant here - there are far too many places in the world where there simply isn't any alternative to feed the baby - no goat's or other animal's milk. Not even clean water.But the mother's breasts in those circumstances can simply dry up and shrivel.... Horrible.

 

 

 

Breastfeeding is actually in a decline in third world countries, resulting in the deaths of over 4,000 babies a day because of bottle feeding among the poorest. It's being tracked by UNICEF and IBFAN, and they're trying to reverse it by encouraging the mothers to return to breastfeeding.....Most of the issue has to do with the use of unsanitary water sources, using it to add to either the formula mixtures that they've been given by the hospitals or charities, or to the animal's milk to make it stretch further. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, olympe said:

@AlicornsPrayer: Yes, there are many ways to try to avoid getting pregnant without abstinence - but how reliable are these methods? As you stated yourself, breast-feeding isn't very reliable at all. Neither are most herbal contraceptives, because you need a certain dose of the active component, which varies greatly with herbs, depending on the used subspecies, season of harvesting, area of harvesting, climate in the year of harvesting, number of parasites the plant has to fight (and the species of said parasites), amount of time the herb has ben stored, which parts of the plant have been harvested (like young leaves vs. older leaves), even the time of day the herb was harvested... You get the idea, there're just too many variables. And, considering that even nowadays with our perfected chemical formulas and processes, contraceptives are not 100% safe, it's safe to assume that they weren't back then, either. As a result, unwanted pregnancies were most definitely a thing. Now think about how dangerous abortions used to be without the proper medical care we all know and appreciate -  under these circumstances, it was in the best interest of a woman (and her survival) to rather kill a newborn than have an abortion. (Plus, there was always the chance that the child was male...)

 

 

Actually, the one's I listed are very reliable. And much of the same techniques used today, just in synthetic form in the birth control used to prevent unwanted pregnancies as well as abortives by the medical profession. The biggest concern back in the day was infection, due to unsanitary conditions actually. Which aborting or not, was what every woman faced afterwards. Which isn't a likely outcome in today's society, thanks to our advances concerning sanitary conditions provided by legitimate medical professionals. Now back street alleys and coat hanger abortions? Most of the women die due to unsanitary conditions that lead to excessive bleeding, fevers, etc....

 

Hence the reason that regardless of one's personal feelings on the subject of abortion, it should be kept legal to afford women safe conditions and professional medical assistance that makes those concerns nearly non-existent to begin with. 

Share this post


Link to post

Breastfeeding CERTAINLY isn't reliable. One of my nieces will testify to that. Nor are condoms, the pill or even the IUD (I read a horrifying story of someone with a coil whose pregnancy had to be aborted as the embryo got all tangled up in it. Ghastly.)

Share this post


Link to post

I'll testify to the condoms being less than 100% reliable. 😛 And you won't believe how many times I've heard of the three-monthly injection with MPA failing. As a matter of fact, most unplanned pregnancies among my acquaintances are attributed to that. What makes you believe that herbal remedies are perfect, if even their synthetic counterparts have a failure rate of several percent?

 

That being said, excessive bleedings don't usually stem from unsanitary conditions, but from severing a major blood vessel. Which is bound to happen if you literally use a coat hanger to abort.

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, olympe said:

I'll testify to the condoms being less than 100% reliable😛 And you won't believe how many times I've heard of the three-monthly injection with MPA failing. As a matter of fact, most unplanned pregnancies among my acquaintances are attributed to that. What makes you believe that herbal remedies are perfect, if even their synthetic counterparts have a failure rate of several percent?

 

That being said, excessive bleedings don't usually stem from unsanitary conditions, but from severing a major blood vessel. Which is bound to happen if you literally use a coat hanger to abort.

 

So will my older daughter :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

@FuzzbucketDoes she have living proof, too? ;) 

And, before you worry: My daughter knows about that, and that she was still welcome. I think I even told her the story where I was attending genetic counseling (due to the thrombozythemia), which happened to be at one of those places where you can get counseling for abortions, too. The woman behind the counter where I made the appointment remarked that I was "cutting it close", implying that I was going to go for an abortion. At that moment, I felt like hopping over the counter and give her a very hard-hitting piece of my mind. (Of course, I resisted. She was just doing her job and even trying to look out for me, even though it wasn't needed. And I never was the sporty type anyway.) I also chose a name for my girl that's a very strong statement in that "welcome" direction - her name translates to "beloved".

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, olympe said:

@FuzzbucketDoes she have living proof, too? ;) 

And, before you worry: My daughter knows about that, and that she was still welcome. I think I even told her the story where I was attending genetic counseling (due to the thrombozythemia), which happened to be at one of those places where you can get counseling for abortions, too. The woman behind the counter where I made the appointment remarked that I was "cutting it close", implying that I was going to go for an abortion. At that moment, I felt like hopping over the counter and give her a very hard-hitting piece of my mind. (Of course, I resisted. She was just doing her job and even trying to look out for me, even though it wasn't needed. And I never was the sporty type anyway.) I also chose a name for my girl that's a very strong statement in that "welcome" direction - her name translates to "beloved".

 

She exists. She does know that she wasn't exactly intended to at that point in time... :)

 

I did point out - after some thoughtful "friends" at school told her she was an accident, that I could have aborted her if I hadn't wanted to keep her. That seemed to make it OK. She does know - now, but not when she was 8; I thought that was too early... - that I had had an abortion before she was born.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 9:33 AM, olympe said:

I'll testify to the condoms being less than 100% reliable. 😛 And you won't believe how many times I've heard of the three-monthly injection with MPA failing. As a matter of fact, most unplanned pregnancies among my acquaintances are attributed to that. What makes you believe that herbal remedies are perfect, if even their synthetic counterparts have a failure rate of several percent?

 

That being said, excessive bleedings don't usually stem from unsanitary conditions, but from severing a major blood vessel. Which is bound to happen if you literally use a coat hanger to abort.

 

I didn't say they were 'perfect'. Don't put words into my mouth I didn't say or even imply. I said they were very reliable, but that doesn't mean 'perfect' in any sense of the word. Just like with any contraceptive, how well it works depends on the person and how they administer it. It's 'success rate' is in the same range as condoms, birth control pill, and IUDs. If the individual doesn't use it properly or irregularly? Then it's 'success rate' reflects that. Also, if you noted in what I actually did say in regards to each individual plant? Most were also used as abortives. And as such, they were reliable too, if taken in the right doses....Of course, as I also pointed out? Too much could also kill the woman, as well as the fetus. 

There's no such thing as a 'perfect'  contraceptive except for abstinence. Unfortunately, there's no such thing as 100% abstinence either.

 

In fact, in most states that teach 'Abstinence Only' programs, those states have more unintended births, as well as most of those being young teens. They're also the states with the most restrictive abortion laws, as well as the highest number of abortions had by the women even if they had to travel to other states to abort or lose work days in order to go to the few clinics that offered abortions....And let's not forget, those states also being the biggest benefactors of the welfare system due to low wages and at poverty level populations....

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎9‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 4:28 PM, Fuzzbucket said:

Breastfeeding CERTAINLY isn't reliable. One of my nieces will testify to that. Nor are condoms, the pill or even the IUD (I read a horrifying story of someone with a coil whose pregnancy had to be aborted as the embryo got all tangled up in it. Ghastly.)

 

 

I agree. Never said it was, just said it was one of the things women of ages ago believed worked. And as I said just a bit ago? There's actually no 100% reliable way to prevent pregnancy. I also know several young women that now have uterine cancer thanks to IUDs or those extended birth control that's inserted under the skin. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AlicornsPrayer said:

Just like with any contraceptive, how well it works depends on the person and how they administer it. It's 'success rate' is in the same range as condoms, birth control pill, and IUDs. If the individual doesn't use it properly or irregularly? Then it's 'success rate' reflects that. Also, if you noted in what I actually did say in regards to each individual plant? Most were also used as abortives. And as such, they were reliable too, if taken in the right doses....Of course, as I also pointed out? Too much could also kill the woman, as well as the fetus. 

There's no such thing as a 'perfect'  contraceptive except for abstinence. Unfortunately, there's no such thing as 100% abstinence either.

 

In fact, in most states that teach 'Abstinence Only' programs, those states have more unintended births, as well as most of those being young teens. They're also the states with the most restrictive abortion laws, as well as the highest number of abortions had by the women even if they had to travel to other states to abort or lose work days in order to go to the few clinics that offered abortions....And let's not forget, those states also being the biggest benefactors of the welfare system due to low wages and at poverty level populations....

Seriously, birth control failing is not only a matter of not using it all the time.

Take the pill every day, and if you're unlucky, you'll need medication that interferes with it. (Antibiotics are famous for causing the pill to fail. Less famous, but still effectively interfering with the pill are antacids, anticonvulsants or St. John's wort.) Or a simple stupid stomach bug that causes diarrhea.

You may not be aware of this fact, but condoms can burst, even if you keep them away from sharp and/or pointy things, do not keep them in very high or very low temperatures and take care to remove any air from them. (Trust me, I know this from experience.)

Also, it's pretty much impossible for a woman to use an IUD irregularly or improperly. XD 

 

And, as you pointed out: Too much of an abortive has a high risk of killing not only the embryo, but also the mother. So, it was probably common sense to go through pregnancy and labor and then kill the newborn because it posed less risk to the mother. (Not that I'd advocate that, but it seems like it was the lesser of two risks.)

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, AlicornsPrayer said:

 

I didn't say they were 'perfect'. Don't put words into my mouth I didn't say or even imply. I said they were very reliable, but that doesn't mean 'perfect' in any sense of the word. Just like with any contraceptive, how well it works depends on the person and how they administer it. It's 'success rate' is in the same range as condoms, birth control pill, and IUDs. If the individual doesn't use it properly or irregularly? Then it's 'success rate' reflects that. Also, if you noted in what I actually did say in regards to each individual plant? Most were also used as abortives. And as such, they were reliable too, if taken in the right doses....Of course, as I also pointed out? Too much could also kill the woman, as well as the fetus. 

Bolding by me. The bolded parts imply quite strongly that contraceptives failing is the fault of the person - usually the woman - using them either wrongly or not at all. Which is totally not the only reason contraceptives fail. 

 

Did you know that the information you're given with any kind of medication gets updated infrequently? You read the same text time and again, and every once in a while (yearly? every couple of years?) you get an update with new information that - surprise! - wasn't known beforehand. Oops?

 

And, regarding IUDs - last time I checked, they were implanted by medical staff. But, of course, if something goes wrong because the thing isn't in the right place, it's obviously the woman's fault. After all, she should have had the darn thing checked every time she intended to have intercourse. 😕  

 

24 minutes ago, AlicornsPrayer said:

And sorry, but it isn't 'common sense to go through pregnancy' if the woman wasn't wanting to have a baby. If that was the case? Then we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place, would we? Because obviously women were and are willing to risk their lives to end a pregnancy, hence the reason abortion needs to remain legal, available, and safe to begin with. Because the alternative is women who don't want to continue a pregnancy, are denied the legal and safe access to an abortion? DO indeed risk their lives on illegal and risky abortion methods that result in their deaths....And history proves that women have and will go to those exact lengths to begin with. 

Actually, it is common sense if a) the risk of dying is less and b) it's socially acceptable - which seems to have been the case in ancient Greece, as well as some other modern countries. Which is not a point against making abortions available, it's just what happened in the past or still happens in some places.

Share this post


Link to post

Can I get the source for your claim that women back then would rather give birth and kill the newborn than take an abortive herb? Because if my memory is correct, giving birth was just as deadly if not more so because of the lack of proper medical procedures. It was common for women to bleed out or have other such complications that would result In their death.

 

also, like any medication those herbs would be tested and the doctors would know around how much a woman should take to abort the fetus but not kill her. even animals such as wolves will purposely eat abortive herbs to abort their litters.

Edited by Cecona

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, AlicornsPrayer said:

 

 

Yes, I'm more then aware of all those instances of managing how to get pregnant while on birth control. That falls under the 'not 100% reliable part. Also how I had both my sons. It's also one of the methods they use to help women who can't get pregnant easily, and is referred to as the 'pregnancy cocktail'. Birth control, antibiotics, and steroids together. PMSL! But that still falls under the woman's responsibility, as they do give you the information along with the pills, that inform you of this possibility....If you're not reading your information that comes along with your prescriptions? That simply falls on you, as the doctors informing you immediately isn't a given until it's too late. And yes, was my fault I didn't read my medicine interaction packet, thus the result of my first son. But considering I was married and wanting to have a child? It wasn't anything I was worried about to begin with and actually was happy to find out I was pregnant. The ex wasn't, neither was his church going mother....Who both spent the next 7 months trying to talk me into aborting my child cause 'her baby boy wasn't ready to be a father yet'....As to my second son? He was planned for the most part and I was more then willing to take the cocktail. As I'd been told I'd never carry a child again, due to a tubal pregnancy that resulted in a miscarriage before my second son being conceived. 

 

 

Women can only know as much as the doctors know, or the people making the birth control knows, etc etc. Women do not and *can* not know every single possible way that birth control, condoms, etc can fail, because *no one* knows that. As @olympe pointed out, new things are being discovered all the time, and new information about something may not be readily available to everyone right away. So yeah, sure, if a woman deliberately doesn't read or listen to any information at all and then does something that is already known to make birth control/etc fail, then sure it's on her. But if something happens that she was never informed was a risk to the birth control, if it fails because of something that no one *knows* will make it fail.... You can't push that off onto the woman. NO birth control is 100% even if every single thing is done correct and every single warning/caution/information is followed exactly. That's not the woman's fault. 

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Cecona said:

Can I get the source for your claim that women back then would rather give birth and kill the newborn than take an abortive herb? Because if my memory is correct, giving birth was just as deadly if not more so because of the lack of proper medical procedures. It was common for women to bleed out or have other such complications that would result In their death.

 

I don't  have a source just now as I have to go out in a minute, but my mother - a classical scholar - told me this YEARS ago, about the Greeks - it was, she said, because you couldn't tell sex before birth, and they wanted to keep boys (even if the woman didn't want to carry) and bump off the girls. I'll look later.

 

17 hours ago, HeatherMarie said:

 

Women can only know as much as the doctors know, or the people making the birth control knows, etc etc. Women do not and *can* not know every single possible way that birth control, condoms, etc can fail, because *no one* knows that. As @olympe pointed out, new things are being discovered all the time, and new information about something may not be readily available to everyone right away. So yeah, sure, if a woman deliberately doesn't read or listen to any information at all and then does something that is already known to make birth control/etc fail, then sure it's on her. But if something happens that she was never informed was a risk to the birth control, if it fails because of something that no one *knows* will make it fail.... You can't push that off onto the woman. NO birth control is 100% even if every single thing is done correct and every single warning/caution/information is followed exactly. That's not the woman's fault. 

 

Absolutely. My abortion followed condom failure, and so did my first daughter. And I was SCRUPULOUSLY careful, especially the second time :lol:  - and I also had (um) lots of times between where it all held up. I know two women who had multiple pill failures, too - and their OB/GYN told them that with some women it simply doesn't work because of their own hormonal levels. Not to mention that it was YEARS into common use of the pill that they discovered taking certain antibiotics with it nullified its effects.

 

It simply is not true that everyone can avoid conception if they Really Try, or that anyone can manage an abortion on their own. (For the record, in case anyone needs to know, vast amounts of gin don't work, nor does deliberately throwing yourself down the stairs.)

Edited by Fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/23/2018 at 8:04 AM, Laryal said:

This page doesn't make any sense at all. First the nurse said that the baby's heart were beating, then there's a video of a late abortion where they slice and dice the fetus before getting it out.

 

I keep hearing about late abortions with induced labour where a preemie is left to die but I also keep hearing about the frequent slicing and dicing. Which is it? You can't have both, that's impossible.

 

On 8/26/2018 at 3:52 AM, Astreya said:

Well, some of the staunched anti-abortionists in the USofA show that an abortion is only evil as long as they do not have to get rid of unwanted kids they begat on their mistresses themselves: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/25/a-republican-theme-on-abortions-its-ok-for-me-evil-for-thee

Not only in USA. Here's a collection of stories from doctors and nurses that had to deal with anti-abortionists that wanted an abortion themselves.

 

Edited by CatCreature

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CatCreature said:

This page doesn't make any sense at all. First the nurse said that the baby's heart were beating, then there's a video of a late abortion where they slice and dice the fetus before getting it out.

 

I keep hearing about late abortions with induced labour where a preemie is left to die but I also keep hearing about the frequent slicing and dicing. Which is it? You can't have both, that's impossible.

 

 

Not only in USA. Here's a collection of stories from doctors and nurses that had to deal with anti-abortionists that wanted an abortion themselves.

 

They are talking about all abortions not just one an she was talking about an abortion that the baby was still alive an she could not help which is very sad. There are aborted babies still that are alive an they just leave to die in a pan.:(

Edited by Laryal

Share this post


Link to post

@Laryal

If it was a single case - well, accidents can happen.

I just read an article in a German newspaper today where a priest wrote about unnamed children that died - and she talked about babies that were normally born, but sick and left by their  parents to die namelessly in the hospital, one of them after 20 days of suffering. I think in cases like that, an abortion probably would have been much more merciful.

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, Cecona said:

Can I get the source for your claim that women back then would rather give birth and kill the newborn than take an abortive herb? Because if my memory is correct, giving birth was just as deadly if not more so because of the lack of proper medical procedures. It was common for women to bleed out or have other such complications that would result In their death.

 

also, like any medication those herbs would be tested and the doctors would know around how much a woman should take to abort the fetus but not kill her. even animals such as wolves will purposely eat abortive herbs to abort their litters.

Sure, no problem. I'll just go back around 22-23 years in time and look which book on ancient Greek culture I was reading for that presentation I did on women's rights in ancient Greece... Sorry, but it's been a very long time ago, I don't have the materials any more and don't even remember the author. However, I recall reading that one souce, which was the translation of a letter from a (high-ranking?) soldier to his wife congratulating her on her pregnancy - and giving her very clear instructions to keep the baby and present it to their family/neighbors/society as a whole (?) if it is a boy, but leave it out to die (in some piece of pottery - was it a vase, an urn or something like that?) if it is a girl. The way this was phrased made it very obvious that this was not considered an unusual order, either. (Woman's right: Do as your husband says - and kill your newborn if he so desires. :() So, unless you can tell the gender of a baby before birth (without modern technology), the child had to be born before the worth of its life could be evaluated.

Share this post


Link to post

I’m not talking about babies being left to die because they are a girl. It’s a whole different story if the child is being left to die because of its sex, than if a woman, not wanting the child no matter the gender, decides to give birth which could kill her in the process and let the newborn die, than to take abortive herbs which could easily be measured out for her and is much less likely to kill her in the process. You made the claim that women back then gave birth and let the child die rather than abort, because they could die from the herbs.  There was no mention of it being because of the babies sex, you claimed it was because they could die from the abortive herbs. Yet you seemed to fail in realize that even today giving birth puts the mothers life at risk, and back then there were no blood transfusions or emergency surgery to save the mother.

 

I don’t dispute the claim baby girls were left to die in Ancient Greece, I dispute the claim Ancient women would rather give birth and leave the baby to die than take herbs and medication to induce miscarriage/abortion which I believe had a much lower death rate.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.