Abortion

[prairiecrow]

but it seems naive to think that pregnancy is the ultimate of suffering, which is how you all seem to be making it sound.

1) Not everyone is saying that.

 

2) For me and other women like me, who have a severe phobia of pregnancy, it IS "the ultimate in suffering". I got pregnant twice due to contraceptive failure, and if I hadn't been able to procure an abortion I would have killed myself rather than carried the babies to term. And that's not even touching the case of women with pre-existing health conditions who could very well be killed by trying to have a baby.

 

What you call "naive", I call "informed".

Edited February 12, 2012 by prairiecrow

[Brite]

What does "pro-abortion" mean to you?

 

Someone who hates kids and pregnancies and wants them all dead. They also don't care about either life. Pro-choicers are constantly called this by pro-birthers. Because it's like some people said, they only see black and white and think that a woman who has an abortion is evil and hates kids.

 

 

However, there are worse things that can happen, much worse things, than carrying a child to term.

 

Think again. Talk to one of my friends who I just found out was very afraid of pregnancy and CAN'T support a pregnancy with her weak body from a inheirited disease. To her, getting pregnant would spell death for her because abortions aren't allowed where she is and she can't try the whole "starve yourself, hurt yourself until it's out" technique because stress would kill her body. So it's death either way for her.

Edited February 12, 2012 by GhostChilli

[elderberrysyrup]

Someone who hates kids and pregnancies and wants them all dead. They also don't care about either life. Pro-choicers are constantly called this by pro-birthers. Because it's like some people said, they only see black and white and think that a woman who has an abortion is evil and hates kids.

 

 

 

 

Think again. Talk to one of my friends who I just found out was very afraid of pregnancy and CAN'T support a pregnancy with her weak body from a inheirited disease. To her, getting pregnant would spell death for her because abortions aren't allowed where she is and she can't try the whole "starve yourself, hurt yourself until it's out" technique because stress would kill her body. So it's death either way for her.

I don't necessarily believe such people are truly that hateful as to depict the 'other side' as such a terrible thing. I likely think that it's not so much 'you hate children!' as much as 'there's a better way'. At least, that's how I've seen more reasonable pro-life arguments go.

[Alpha1]

No it wasn't because attempting to reduce mandatory spending != giving no thought to people after they are born. It's such a completely different thing that it doesn't even compute.

 

What "mandatory spending" do they want cut? Why do they want to cut social programs, but they won't budge on programs that serve them? Military spending is high, and many don't want to see that cut either. Oh right -- it satisfies the Israel-firsts. Speaks volumes.

 

There's certainly something to be said about the elephantine behemoth that is known as the political third rail, but this isn't the thread to say it in.

 

In other words, seniors have significant influence in what goes on in Washington.

 

No it doesn't. As Fuzz said, pro-legalizing-abortion is for the legalizing of abortion. Pro-abortions means "Oooh abortion, YAY!" and that's why people who disagree with pro-choice stance use it to paint that stance as an "oooh abortion, yay!" stance.

 

There are terms of art, but this is not one of them. To use pro-abortion to mean pro-legalized-abortion is to participate in the undermining and obfuscation of the language.

 

It's called political framing. Each side will try to pick labels they think portrays their views best. We've got labels in politics like "birther" and "truther". Nothing new.

 

Merriam Webster and other dictionaries haven't changed pro-abortion to "Oooh, yah! Abortion!". Getting worked up over someone suggesting pro-abortion = loving abortion is silly. Many of them don't argue "Ooooh abortion, yah!". They'll argue that it's just sophistry.

 

Pro-abortions means "Oooh abortion, YAY!" and that's why people who disagree with pro-choice stance use it to paint that stance as an "oooh abortion, yay!" stance.

 

Dammed if you do. Dammed if you don't.

 

'Mr. Santorum said he believes pro-choice advocates are far too "cavalier" about abortion.

"We have 1.2 million of them every year in America," Mr. Santorum said. "When I hear the left and the pro-choice folks saying abortion should be rare. Oh, really, 1.2 million, almost 25 percent of all children conceived in America. That's not rare by any stretch of the imagination."'

[Princess Artemis]

What "mandatory spending" do they want cut?

This is so off topic it's ridiculous. There is a US politics thread around here somewhere.

 

It's called political framing. Each side will try to pick labels they think portrays their views best. We've got labels in politics like "birther" and "truther". Nothing new.

 

Yes it is, which is why I'm making an effort to point out the frame so people who might not be aware of it can think through it. Insisting the definition of politics rather than natural English is the correct one doesn't help people think clearly.

 

Each side will also try to pick labels that subtly skew thought against their opponents.

 

Dictionaries are for denotation only, but to fully use a language, one must be aware of connotation as well. Not only does 'pro-abortion' not denote 'pro-legalized-abortion', it does denote 'in favor of abortion', 'a proponent of abortion'...and connotes someone who thinks abortion is great. This isn't sophistry; this is what the words really mean, and since this is used to politically frame the proponents of choice in a bad light, pro-choice and pro-abortion aren't the same thing, though they sometimes coincide. Which is pretty much what I already said.

[Kestra15]

even if it is not gory it still has no real use other than get extra $$ out of people that are already jumping, or walking can't see anyone pre.

...or perhaps the point of ultrasound is to check up on the baby's health?

[Rosedamai]

...or perhaps the point of ultrasound is to check up on the baby's health?

Xhunter was rebutting the point that zephyrgirl had made saying that it should be mandatory for women seeking abortions to look at ultrasound images of their fetus- in which case the mother would be completely uninterested in the health of said fetus.

 

Kestra, I've a question- I've heard that sex-selective abortions can happen from week 10. Is this true?

Edited February 12, 2012 by ylangylang

[Kestra15]

Xhunter was rebutting the point that zephyrgirl had made saying that it should be mandatory for women seeking abortions to look at ultrasound images of their fetus- in which case the mother would be completely uninterested in the health of said fetus.

Okay, I misunderstood your point :~)

[Fuzzbucket]

No it doesn't. As Fuzz said, pro-legalizing-abortion is for the legalizing of abortion. Pro-abortions means "Oooh abortion, YAY!" and that's why people who disagree with pro-choice stance use it to paint that stance as an "oooh abortion, yay!" stance.

 

There are terms of art, but this is not one of them. To use pro-abortion to mean pro-legalized-abortion is to participate in the undermining and obfuscation of the language.

Thanks for that, Princess ! I am so anti such obfuscation it isn't true.

 

Ideally every child conceived would be a planned and wanted child. Ain't never going to happen. And as a society we have to deal with that. Legal abortion on demand is a PART of that solution. So is adequate funding for mothers who find themselves pregnant and who really cannot cope - BUT WOULD LIKE TO.

 

Abortion isn't easy. But it MUST be available to anyone who needs it.

[Rosedamai]

Ideally every child conceived would be a planned and wanted child. Ain't never going to happen. And as a society we have to deal with that. Legal abortion on demand is a PART of that solution. So is adequate funding for mothers who find themselves pregnant and who really cannot cope - BUT WOULD LIKE TO.

 

Abortion isn't easy. But it MUST be available to anyone who needs it.

*Claps, cheers, and whistles*

[BabyBladeDragon]

I have thought about Abortion and it's a complicated situation. I honestly would want to consider adoption way before taking my own child's life no matter what the curcumstance was on how I got pregnant in the first place. That's just my opinion. Plus, in adoption you can choose if I'm not mistaken, to stay in contact with the couple or family to see how your baby is really doing and developing.

[xhunter]

I have thought about Abortion and it's a complicated situation. I honestly would want to consider adoption way before taking my own child's life no matter what the curcumstance was on how I got pregnant in the first place. That's just my opinion. Plus, in adoption you can choose if I'm not mistaken, to stay in contact with the couple or family to see how your baby is really doing and developing.

that is if your lucky to find a family that can take care of the child. no matter what we all hope adoptions are rare for a lot of those children and you and your child might be waiting years to get a family, though that does not always mean that the child will get what it needs. the best luck a mother that is giving up a unwanted or unneeded child would be giving it to family if family is willing to take it.

 

many people would consider adoption as a far better choice though there is already too many children in the system making it very hard to get them a home and most of those families looking to adopt are looking for the perfect little bundles of joy. though i don't see how they can be bundles of joy their noisy, unruly unless your able to make them behave now, and have too many germs for my liking.

[Alpha1]

This is so off topic it's ridiculous. There is a US politics thread around here somewhere.

 

This was about whether pro-life advocates would do enough for unwanted babies. It's not off-topic.

 

Yes it is, which is why I'm making an effort to point out the frame so people who might not be aware of it can think through it.  Insisting the definition of politics rather than natural English is the correct one doesn't help people think clearly.

 

Each side will also try to pick labels that subtly skew thought against their opponents.

 

Dictionaries are for denotation only, but to fully use a language, one must be aware of connotation as well.  Not only does 'pro-abortion' not denote 'pro-legalized-abortion', it does denote 'in favor of abortion', 'a proponent of abortion'...and connotes someone who thinks abortion is great.  This isn't sophistry; this is what the words really mean, and since this is used to politically frame the proponents of choice in a bad light, pro-choice and pro-abortion aren't the same thing, though they sometimes coincide.  Which is pretty much what I already said.

 

Does "pro-choice" or "pro-life" tell you anything? No, but everyone knows it refers to the legalization of abortion.

 

The people who are vocal about it being interpreted as "someone who thinks abortion is great" are pro-choicers.

 

Here's an example:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abortionist

 

a person who performs or induces abortions, especially illegally.

 

LOL They're "pro-choice" doctors? Can't use that pesky word abortion.

 

 

Unsurprisingly, no response on what Santorum said. The pro-choice side can be quite apologetic. That hurts the side more than any lame smear.

 

 

 

[Fuzzbucket]

Does "pro-choice" or "pro-life" tell you anything? No, but everyone knows it refers to the legalization of abortion.

 

The people who are vocal about it being interpreted as "someone who thinks abortion is great" are pro-choicers.

 

Here's an example:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abortionist

 

a person who performs or induces abortions, especially illegally.

 

LOL They're "pro-choice" doctors? Can't use that pesky word abortion.

 

 

Unsurprisingly, no response on what Santorum said. The pro-choice side can be quite apologetic. That hurts the side more than any lame smear.

 

"Everyone knows" - maybe MOST in your circles do, but MANY also see it as suggesting thinking abortion is simply a good idea.

 

AND - maybe - also - many in the US do - but in many countries it is already legal and one can still be pro choice, anti-abortion and the rest. The term used for legalising abortion would mean exactly nothing in the UK, for instance. Because it IS legal.

 

"Pro-life" - in the UK at least - does, however, tend to be used for trying to prevent people getting abortions EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE LEGAL - by putting pressure on pregnant women who go to clinics.

 

Language matters. So does the fact that we have an international forum here, and the US view of something may not hold up elsewhere. I bet some people here will have been very surprised to learn that it IS illegal in some states.

 

I am pro-choice but I do NOT think "abortion is great" and I would never call myself pro-abortion.

[Princess Artemis]

Does "pro-choice" or "pro-life" tell you anything? No, but everyone knows it refers to the legalization of abortion.

 

 

Yes it does tell me something. Pro-choice tells me the person is a proponent of choice. Pro-life tells me the person is a proponent of life. That they often oppose one another tells me, in their opposition, that proponents of choice are pro-choice over life if it comes to that, and proponents of life are pro-life over choice if it comes to that. That's not so hard; information is, in fact, conveyed! That's why this thread is filled to the brim with people trying so hard to pinpoint the times they can, in conscience, call a fetus 'life' and arguments over when, where, and how choices were made if they were made at all and if they can be made again at a later date.

 

ETA because it can't be stressed enough: This is not meant to disparage anyone or mis-characterize their views. "If it comes to that" is the extreme point where people really very rarely dwell, it's not the everyday issues that surround this debate :/ Choice and life are both extremely valuable and I'd be hesitant to say they they mean as much without one another.

 

ETA Again: Really, my position on it most closely resembles Fuzzbucket's, I think. No matter my own opinion on the matter (which is quite pro-lifey!), it's something that ought to be available as I have very little interest in having the government legislate according to my morality--freedom for all and all that. So that makes me pro-choice. That sure as hell does not make me pro-abortion.

 

"Everyone" does not know the debate is about the legalization of abortion because that's not all the debate is about, now is it? The debate is also about choice and life, who gets to make the choice when, or if the choice was made well before there was any new life on the scene, and when that new life is a new life.

 

Here's an example:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abortionist

 

a person who performs or induces abortions,  especially illegally.

 

LOL They're "pro-choice" doctors? Can't use that pesky word abortion.

 

Looks like it's taken on the hue of a slur. Slurs, no matter what some people would have others believe about their use, always, regardless of intent, carry that payload with them. That's why connotation is as important as denotation. Not sure why you would do something silly like call them pro-choice doctors when that's not what they are.

 

Unsurprisingly, no response on what Santorum said.

 

I didn't even read it. If you're looking for a response, maybe someone else will oblige you on that one.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[Fuzzbucket]

Yes it does tell me something. Pro-choice tells me the person is a proponent of choice. Pro-life tells me the person is a proponent of life. That they often oppose one another tells me, in their opposition, that proponents of choice are pro-choice over life if it comes to that, and proponents of life are pro-life over choice if it comes to that. That's not so hard; information is, in fact, conveyed! That's why this thread is filled to the brim with people trying so hard to pinpoint the times they can, in conscience, call a fetus 'life' and arguments over when, where, and how choices were made if they were made at all and if they can be made again at a later date.

 

ETA because it can't be stressed enough: This is not meant to disparage anyone or mis-characterize their views. "If it comes to that" is the extreme point where people really very rarely dwell, it's not the everyday issues that surround this debate :/ Choice and life are both extremely valuable and I'd be hesitant to say they they mean as much without one another.

 

ETA Again: Really, my position on it most closely resembles Fuzzbucket's, I think. No matter my own opinion on the matter (which is quite pro-lifey!), it's something that ought to be available as I have very little interest in having the government legislate according to my morality--freedom for all and all that. So that makes me pro-choice. That sure as hell does not make me pro-abortion.

 

"Everyone" does not know the debate is about the legalization of abortion because that's not all the debate is about, now is it? The debate is also about choice and life, who gets to make the choice when, or if the choice was made well before there was any new life on the scene, and when that new life is a new life.

 

 

 

Looks like it's taken on the hue of a slur. Slurs, no matter what some people would have others believe about their use, always, regardless of intent, carry that payload with them. That's why connotation is as important as denotation. Not sure why you would do something silly like call them pro-choice doctors when that's not what they are.

 

 

 

I didn't even read it. If you're looking for a response, maybe someone else will oblige you on that one.

ACKSHERLY - I am SO pro-life in the sense that I mean it. Pro every child that is born being wanted and supported by society - having a LIFE, as opposed to a living hell - and their mothers also.

 

But I am also pro having the choice not to have an unwanted child.

 

And I am DEEPLY not pro-birth in the sense that it seems to be meant in discussion. (Birth trumps all, like)

 

And I am NOT pro-abortion in seeing it as a really good wheeze let's all have a go.

[Princess Artemis]

ACKSHERLY - I am SO pro-life in the sense that I mean it. Pro every child that is born being wanted and supported by society - having a LIFE, as opposed to a living hell - and their mothers also.

 

But I am also pro having the choice not to have an unwanted child.

 

And I am DEEPLY not pro-birth in the sense that it seems to be meant in discussion. (Birth trumps all, like)

 

And I am NOT pro-abortion in seeing it as a really good wheeze let's all have a go.

That's why I said "mostly closely resembles" : ) It's not the same position at all when the hairs are split, but it resembles it more closely than other positions I've seen recently.

[babybluefire]

I have thought about Abortion and it's a complicated situation. I honestly would want to consider adoption way before taking my own child's life no matter what the curcumstance was on how I got pregnant in the first place. That's just my opinion. Plus, in adoption you can choose if I'm not mistaken, to stay in contact with the couple or family to see how your baby is really doing and developing.

Adoption only works if the baby is white cute and healthy. Other wise its off to the joys of foster care for them.

 

 

 

I miscarried a wanted pregnancy. The best way to determine health of a baby is via ultra sound. I can tell you just how traumatizing it is to see an ultra sound when it shows something you cant have. In my case no more heart beat and adorable little wiggling arms. Just a dead blob.

 

 

For someone who was raped or has a health issue preventing her from being able to carry a baby to the point of viability much less term watching an ultra sound of a baby they just cant have is not just trauma, its torture.

 

 

[Princess Artemis]

For someone who was raped or has a health issue preventing her from being able to carry a baby to the point of viability much less term watching an ultra sound of a baby they just cant have is not just trauma, its torture.

I think people forget how ingrained it is in human biology to find baby-shaped things cute and attractive and needing-to-be-nurtured. That's no more emotional than a heterosexual's attraction to the opposite sex is emotional, but it sure does evoke emotions along with it. Ultrasounds of fetuses are the ultimate in baby-shaped pictures!

 

I'm sorry for your loss.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[Brite]

I think people forget how ingrained it is in human biology to find baby-shaped things cute and attractive and needing-to-be-nurtured.

 

Forget? I've never found it attractive and neither have the women with phobia's of small children and pregnancies. They certainly wouldn't fine their worse fear cute and attractive.

[prairiecrow]

Forget? I've never found it attractive and neither have the women with phobia's of small children and pregnancies. They certainly wouldn't fine their worse fear cute and attractive.

Agreed. Frankly I find babies and small children disgusting and am highly reluctant to even touch one.

 

However, it IS fair to say that most human women find babies and small children attractive and are inclined to hold them, cuddle them and care for them. The fact that exceptions exist doesn't disprove the rule.

[Kestra15]

I think people forget how ingrained it is in human biology to find baby-shaped things cute and attractive and needing-to-be-nurtured.

Not really...

 

 

Genuinely, it's a little-discussed thing but most guys really don't feel paternal instincts the moment a child pops out. I believe it was at least half of fathers (privately) admitted that they didn't feel instant connections to their children, and that they saw them at birth the way I do - something that will only ruin your life.

[Syaoransbear]

Babies just look like giant versions of pinky mice that I used to feed to my snakes.

[Kestra15]

Babies just look like giant versions of pinky mice that I used to feed to my snakes.

Fantastic observation. I like.

[Dr. Paine]

Not really...

 

 

Genuinely, it's a little-discussed thing but most guys really don't feel paternal instincts the moment a child pops out. I believe it was at least half of fathers (privately) admitted that they didn't feel instant connections to their children, and that they saw them at birth the way I do - something that will only ruin your life.

Beautiful summation of how I view babies- both the comic and what you said.

 

Yes, I can see the appeal of having children. But I see it as putting a crapton of time and money into something that will more likely than not be worth it. I don't know, I might change as I get older. But for now, if I want a drooly derpy creature to train and love me, I'll get a puppy.

 

Or a snake. A snake would just be awesome.