Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

That kind of depends on what facts you're looking for.

 

Are you looking for facts on stages of fetal development? Facts that define when a human life begins (those will *always* be subjective to some degree)? Facts about women's physical, emotional, or mental health before and after choosing or not choosing abortion? Facts about what some of the common misinformation given by both sides is? Facts about what kind of parenting or adoption alternatives are available? Facts about women's health in countries where abortion is forbidden, mandated, or optional?

Ah, duh, forgot to be more specific. The dangers of posting when over-tired, I suppose. xd.png

 

 

Facts about misinformation from both sides and facts about health are really helpful and what I need most, but I'd also love help finding good information on the current state of the adoption system, not quite sure where to start looking for that. The pro-life stuff is always "There are more people wanting to adopt than there are kids in the system!"

 

 

...No. There are more people wanting to adopt than there are IDEAL kids in the system.

 

 

 

 

 

Also, seriously thinking of moving to Canada, too. sleep.gif'

Share this post


Link to post
Wait... Wha-? How...? Um... AZ, I don't get you. I really, REALLY don't get you. You're a beautiful place, AZ. I would know. I lived within your state lines for 2 years. But, this... just... I guess all that beautiful landscape draws attention away from all that ugliness that is running the state. Welp, looks like all my hopes of moving back have been dashed.

Yeeeah... I have a friend from Arizona, and this is just the most recent in a long line of legal censorkip.gif they've pulled or tried to pull in the last couple of years. She's so disappointed in her state! sad.gif For example, there's the basically legalized racial profiling that permits random illegal immigrant checks of citizens in the street...

Share this post


Link to post

i don't think abortion is right. Someone who does that is killing an innocent who will never see the light of day. But at the same time, the world IS becoming too populated.

Share this post


Link to post
i don't think abortion is right. Someone who does that is killing an innocent who will never see the light of day. But at the same time, the world IS becoming too populated.

And what happens if they don't "see the light of day" ? Your second statement is a far worse reasoning...

Share this post


Link to post

If you are gonna have sex, BE RESPONSIBLE for God Sake.

 

There are instances I do agree with abortion though. Rape, health of the baby or mother.

I guess what floors me is several of these bills do NOT make exemptions for the above. I'd go out on a limb to say most pro-lifers are at least reasonable enough to agree with the above. And I know more than a few Republicans that are just, confused as hell, as to why their party is going down this road. But, again, this is similar to prohibition. Little group gets people in primaries. General election, people vote on a party line without researching who they are electing. And poof! You get a hard-liner in office. When people want someone that is pro-life, does the average person feel they need to look past just that word? 1 in 3 women in the miliarty are raped. Gov won't provide help for abortions. Citation

 

Adding to our list of current legislation, we've got Mississippi pushing through a bill specifically designed to close the only clinic in the state. Citation We've got Wisconsin striking down the equal-pay act and pushing abstinence only education, among other things. Citation This is how things look from a purely graphical standpoint.

user posted image

 

The only push-back news I've seen is Coke and Pepsi being forced to pull out of ALEC due to their support for various conservative agendas. But that was due to Trayvon Martin, not the various reproductive issues or Limbaugh. Citation

 

Being in the US, we see a lot of saber-rattling about Muslim culture and how they treat women. A big one is stoning women for adultery. But, the whole aspirin between your knees comments and the one like the above about being responsible... Isn't this, in effect, the same thing? By removing access to abortion, for ANY reason, even if a woman's life is in danger? The end result of both is death for having sex, but just for women. That seems severe but yet, some of these lobbying groups and our presidential nominee have stated that ever married couples should not be having sex unless they mean to have a child. Video

 

I guess what scares me is I'm not sure how far the moderate Republicans will follow the party down this slope. Very few have spoken out against all this. What does it say about us they they feel they have to do this to keep their jobs? sad.gif

Edited by Vhale

Share this post


Link to post
i don't think abortion is right. Someone who does that is killing an innocent who will never see the light of day. But at the same time, the world IS becoming too populated.

and what of the suffering of the mother and child? a mother that can't afford it can't provide for it and the adoption system can't handle the ones that have been idea there for years. most of those kids never get adopted and get sent away when they hit 19 years or so, lot of them get shipped around till they have a open room for it. abortion is the greatest one of those 'innocent' kids can get. and its not like its always the woman's fault it takes two to make a child.

 

i believe people pushing the pro-life side should go visit their local boy and girls homes, not saying that all don't go their. and learn how much of those kids are on proscription drugs, they need a adoption awareness day for children and animals maybe more people would be responsible and vote more responsible. there is nothing worse than voting for someone or something that you have no clue about.

 

i'm not even going to say anything about the last law passed that you all brought up. that is just sicking, makes you wander if those people think women are more than walking concubines.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd go out on a limb to say most pro-lifers are at least reasonable enough to agree with the above.

 

If by "reasonable" you mean "inconsistent," yes, there are many inconsistent pro-lifers in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
http://rt.com/usa/news/arizona-bill-conception-abortion-387/

 

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/2r/adopted/s.2036jud.pdf

 

I'm speechless. Completely and utterly speechless. I just can't even comprehend how this bill is even allowed to exist.

I'm not sure what part of it left you speechless -- the main thrust of it is to outlaw abortion after 20 weeks gestational age. (Which I thought you were more-or-less in favor of, personally if not legally.) The method mentioned is the standard one for calculating gestational age.

 

I read through it -- it adds a few extra requirements as precautions for the mother's health: mandating proper disclosure of all possible risks, honesty about stage of fetal development, proper FDA-approved methods of drug administration, proper monitoring post-abortion whether surgical or medical, an ultrasound that the mother may opt to see or not see, with a printed image she may keep or not keep, and a 24-hour reflection period after they are given all the information, so that they won't be told a bunch of new things and then rushed into surgery. Having read the stories of many women who have had abortions, these all seem like issues that they raised, and wished had been addressed.

 

The crux of the bill is simply to say that abortion after 20 weeks is illegal, based on the risk to the mother and the strong evidence that a fetus can feel pain at that age. I realize it opens the door for further legislation to be passed, but I think I'm missing something here -- maybe something sneaky that I didn't catch when I was reading it? What are the worst things about it? I'd like to become better at reading between the lines. Ugh, politics.

Share this post


Link to post

From what I gather, it's making it illegal to abort a fetus 18 weeks after conception instead of 20 weeks after conception, because the fetus is then considered protected 2 weeks before it's even conceived.

Share this post


Link to post

Apparently that's already the way we calculate gestational age, though -- from the last period. So... it's really not that different from what we already do?

Share this post


Link to post

The crux of the bill is simply to say that abortion after 20 weeks is illegal, based on the risk to the mother and the strong evidence that a fetus can feel pain at that age.  I realize it opens the door for further legislation to be passed, but I think I'm missing something here -- maybe something sneaky that I didn't catch when I was reading it?  What are the worst things about it?  I'd like to become better at reading between the lines.  Ugh, politics.

There is no credible evidence that 20-week fetuses can feel pain. The neurological wiring simply isn't developed enough.

 

The "risk to the mother" is absolute BS- abortion, even at that stage, is far safer than carrying to term. They also try to claim evidence of psychologial effects of abortion- quite simply, there's nothing that backs that up.

 

Some other problems with the law include the following:

 

- Although there are (narrow) exceptions for the mother's life, there are none for her health.

 

- 20 weeks is close to the minimum for diagnosing many fetal abnormalities.

 

- 24-hour waiting periods do nothing but make abortions harder to obtain- abortion clinics are few and far between in many areas, and women frequently have to take time off work, arrange transportation, etc. Requireing two seperate trips makes it much harder to make arragements.

 

- Requiring an ultrasound adds to the cost of the abortion- putting it even further out of reach of poor women.

 

There's also the fact that the 20-week cutoff violates Roe v Wade.

 

 

7Deadly$ins is right about the gestational age, though. Unfortunatly, the focus on that (non) issue has drawn atention away from the myriad actual ways this bill is horrible for women.

Edited by DarkLadyNyara

Share this post


Link to post

So, question for those on the pro-life side.

 

My mother's friend had been trying to get pregnant with her husband for YEARS. When they finally got pregnant, a couple months into the pregnancy they discovered that the fetus had a genetic abnormality that would make it impossible for the fetus to survive outside of the womb. Inside of her womb it was pretty much a normal healthy growing fetus, but once he was born he would have died.

 

Do you believe this woman still has to carry to term, or would you accept her choice for termination?

Share this post


Link to post
So, question for those on the pro-life side.

 

My mother's friend had been trying to get pregnant with her husband for YEARS. When they finally got pregnant, a couple months into the pregnancy they discovered that the fetus had a genetic abnormality that would make it impossible for the fetus to survive outside of the womb. Inside of her womb it was pretty much a normal healthy growing fetus, but once he was born he would have died.

 

Do you believe this woman still has to carry to term, or would you accept her choice for termination?

Please stop saying pro-life as if pro-CHOICE people were against life.

 

I am pro-life and pro-choice and anti political control of my body.

 

And yes, I would accept her choice to terminate. I would accept it even the baby would survive and be perfectly normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Please stop saying pro-life as if pro-CHOICE people were against life.

 

I am pro-life and pro-choice and anti political control of my body.

 

And yes, I would accept her choice to terminate. I would accept it even the baby would survive and be perfectly normal.

I believe the question was posed this way because some pro-lifers would say yes, she has to carry to term, even though the baby will die.

Share this post


Link to post
I believe the question was posed this way because some pro-lifers would say yes, she has to carry to term, even though the baby will die.

I know - but pro-life is NOT the same as anti-abortion - even though some controlling organisations would like us to think that.

Share this post


Link to post
I know - but pro-life is NOT the same as anti-abortion - even though some controlling organisations would like us to think that.

Right. Thank you. I hate how each nickname makes the other side look bad -- the flip sides being "anti-life" or "anti-choice." And there's more than two sides! Except that politicians keep polarizing it.

 

I believe that a fetus is a human life. I also believe that there are understandable circumstances in which an abortion is the better choice, or even necessary. I also believe that, while an abortion is often a difficult and saddening choice that leaves a permanent scar, there are certainly reasons why a woman might take all the negatives into account and still choose to have one. I believe, as I am not those women, I can't make that choice for them. I believe that the media voice for both "sides" tends to pressure women to conform to their POVs and to obscure facts or present false information. I believe that termination of a full-term fetus is very clearly killing a baby, while it cannot truly be labeled a baby at the start of the pregnancy. I believe, for those reasons, that full-term abortions should be outlawed, except in the case of major health risks to the mother or of clear health issues of the fetus, such that it is not going to survive outside the womb. I believe that we ought to emphasize safe sex and a good, comprehensive sex education program, and that would do more than anything else to cut down on the number of unnecessary abortions. I believe that any woman opting for an abortion should be provided with a safe, professional medical environment, full information about the fetus, the surgical or medical procedure, and possible physical, mental, or emotional health repercussions, plus access to affordable or free counseling post-abortion. I believe that too many abortion clinics treat their own service rather mechanically, and don't take into account that there is an individual human, quite possible a grieving, stressed, or even abused human, on the other end of their surgical instruments. I believe that women shouldn't be guilt-tripped by people who were not in their shoes. I believe that often, women who have abortions aren't imagining their fetus as just a ball of tissue -- having read a lot of first-hand accounts, they more often than not believe it is a child or at least a potential child, and, accepting that knowledge, are still choosing to go through with the abortion -- and that people need to recognize that these women have gone through a difficult process and need love and support, not chastisement or fire and brimstone. I believe we have a culture of silence around abortion, because women who have had them feel that they can't speak up honestly, as one 'side' wants them to feel like horrible murderers and the other 'side' wants them to feel as if they've done nothing significant, no more than a minor surgery. I believe that the majority of people aren't on either 'side,' but that we find it too difficult to explain nuanced views, in light of the media depiction of the two camps; everyone is too readily labeled.

 

So then, am I "pro-life" or "pro-choice?" I don't think that either 'side' would welcome me with the whole of my views.

Share this post


Link to post

I believe you are pro-life and pro-choice, like me - simply because you seem to judge each case on its own merits - and don't think abortions should be banned outright.

 

I think the "other side" is simply anti-abortion. That is what they are against, essentially, and that is what they should be called. They aren't PRO anything at all, unless pro-control is something to be proud of, to be pro.

Edited by fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post

If they're anti-abortion then aren't you anti-life?

No - I am VERY pro-life. But that is pro-LIFE. Life encompasses far more than existence, for me. Education, shelter, food, love.... A lonely starving child left without education, without toys, without anything much, in a damp room while his mother has to go out to work to scrape a few pennies together - that is not a kind of life I would wish on any child. But it is the kind of life many more children would have if their struggling mothers had not been allowed to terminate an unplanned pregnancy. Far too many kids live that kind of life as it is.

 

I don't actually see your two options as in any way equivalent. I am not ANTI anything but the denial of choice. They are very anti abortion, and would love to ban it altogether. No-one is forcing them to have an abortion; why should they be able to force me not to ? Live your own life, by your own principles, not the lives of others.

 

Edited for typefails.

Edited by fuzzbucket

Share this post


Link to post

No - I am VERY pro-life. But that is pro-LIFE. Life encompasses far more than existence, for me. Education, shelter, food, love.... A lonely starving child left without education, without toys, without anything much, in a damp room while his mother has to go out to work to scrape a few pennies together - that is not a kind of life I would wish on any child. But it is the kind of life many more children would have if their struggling mothers had not been allowed to terminate an unplanned pregnancy. Far too many kids live that kind of life as it is.

 

I don't actually see your two options as in any way equivalent. I am not ANTI anything but the denial of choice. They are very anti abortion, and would love to ban it altogether. No-one is forcing them to have an abortion; why should they be able to force me not to ? Live your own life, by your own principles, not the lives of others.

 

Edited for typefails.

And there we have it, the real deffinition of pro-life. These "Pro-lifers" participating in the movement...some don't care what happens to the child after it's born. Hense pro-birth. A pro-lifer came to one of my neighbor's fosters who was forced to leave soon back to the orphanage (god knows why. I haven't been told. And the system is hell) and said "You know congress cares about you, which is why you are here. So you can have a life" and the child said back "If they cared about me and my suffering peers, we would have a REAL life. They only cared about us in mommy's tummy. If this is what you call life, I choose death."

 

 

Edit: I think the reason the boy had to go back to the orphanage is because the fosterers were running too low on money and had to give up a few fosters. Bless their hearts.

Edited by GhostChilli

Share this post


Link to post
Please stop saying pro-life as if pro-CHOICE people were against life.

 

I am pro-life and pro-choice and anti political control of my body.

While I totally understand what you're trying to say, I will point out that the dictionary definitions of these terms are pretty much how society means them when they say them:

 

Pro-life

adj.

opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life.

 

Pro-choice

adj.

supporting or advocating legalized abortion.

 

So I think Hazeh's question was what she meant by dictionary definition.

 

Although I'll also say, I don't understand the method of trying to point out possible exemptions in a pro-lifers belief system to get them to change or 'see the error of their ways'. In the cases I've seen this used, people are usually trying to Beg the Question, going for some sort of Misleading Vividness, or Appeal to Pity. Which is not the right way to debate with someone, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post

 

So I think Hazeh's question was what she meant by dictionary definition.

 

Yep, that's pretty much what I meant. It was posed to the people that consider the pro-life to be anti-abortion whatever, I simply chose the term that most people are familiar with because I didn't want to step on anyone's toes when trying to ask that question to them.

 

Can't please everyone, it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Yep, that's pretty much what I meant. It was posed to the people that consider the pro-life to be anti-abortion whatever, I simply chose the term that most people are familiar with because I didn't want to step on anyone's toes when trying to ask that question to them.

 

Can't please everyone, it seems.

NO !!! xd.pngxd.png

 

I wasn't getting at you actually, it is the people that say that being pro-choice makes me a murderer I object to.

 

Socky - I object very much to those as as DICTIONARY definitions. I'd like to know who write the dictionary. It is the agitators on the anti-choice side who have worked very hard to see them defined that way - and it is very very wrong in terms of -linguistics and etymology.

 

Pro - in favour of.

 

Life: well - there's a good lot about that further up the thread. But Pro-life does not equate to anti-abortion.

 

Pro-choice - that means in favour of people being able to choose. ANYTHING. It does NOT only refer to abortion. I am now officially deeply displeased. Watch your backs, dictionaries....

 

Share this post


Link to post

I agree; even the names of which 'side' you choose is meant to provoke a reaction, setting us up for emotional arguments rather than debates. 3x

Share this post


Link to post
I agree; even the names of which 'side' you choose is meant to provoke a reaction, setting us up for emotional arguments rather than debates. 3x

So who wrote that dictionary... mad.gif

 

*is very suspicious*

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.