Abortion

[gerryh]

Re: RE: Abortion

It's a societal choice, gerry. Western society, as a whole, has decided that abortion should be legal and available. The laws very from country to country and in Canada we have no law at all, but that has been the overall decision.

If you are uncomfortable with it, that's fine...nobody is forcing you have an abortion.

If that is so, then it is a selfish choice and like many other "societal" choices it is a wrong choice. Just because the majority say it is what they want, or is best does not make it so. I can site many instances throughout history where society's choice was wrong and has since been righted.

 

[zenfisher]

Re: RE: Abortion

If that is so, then it is a selfish choice and like many other "societal" choices it is a wrong choice. Just because the majority say it is what they want, or is best does not make it so. I can site many instances throughout history where society's choice was wrong and has since been righted.

Hmmm...so you want the minority, to tell the majority of society how they should base their moral decsions. That is why it is set up as a choice. There is something inherently wrong with a minority telling the majority how things should be. We've been fighting that, since the majority of us were all serfs, eons ago.

Lady C..

I do not deny that I present emotional arguments. This is an emotional issue, no matter how clinical one tries to make it. You must admit, however ...by introducing your niece into the argument...you were also injecting a little emotion yourself. I'm not critisizing...I'm just saying.

Tibear...

I admit I have been quick to categorize Anti -abortionists as overly religious. It was a generalization


I still see choice as the more important of the issues surrounding abortion.

 

[tibear]

Zen,

Hmmm...so you want the minority, to tell the majority of society how they should base their moral decsions.

Are you talking about abortion or SSM???

Pea,

I'm still waiting for your answer about when you recognize the fetus as human from a scientific standpoint. It appears as if your avoiding me, when in fact you are the one who asked to have a scientific and logical debate.

 

[zenfisher]

Re: RE: Abortion

If that is so, then it is a selfish choice and like many other "societal" choices it is a wrong choice. Just because the majority say it is what they want, or is best does not make it so. I can site many instances throughout history where society's choice was wrong and has since been righted.

This is what I was talking about Tibear. That's why I lead off with the quote. In particular... "Just because the majority say it is what they want, or is best does not make it so." ...Our (humankind) history is riddled with small groups of people, that inflict their will on the majority of its population. That to me is the bigger issue in the abortion debate..

 

[tibear]

Zen,

So your talking out both sides of your mouth. If it is the minority telling the majority then it is wrong because we are a democracy, however if it is a majority telling the minority then the majority could be wrong and leading the minority down the wrong path. Interesting logic.

Ensures you don't lose an debate but still don't see what scientific or logical kind of arguement it is.

Pppeeeaaaaaa,

I'm still waiting for your scientific and logical debate regarding abortion. I'm beginning to think your afraid to debate the issue through science and logic. That couldn't be case, could it?????

 

[tibear]

Who better to speak about abortion and its implications than women who have actually gone through the procedure and attest to the various problems that arise as a result.
http://www.helpafterabortion.com/

Here is some of their commercials talking about the problems they encountered after they had abortions and the fact that the pro-choice organizations are doing nothing to help these women during these very difficult times.
http://www.virtuemedia.org/post-abortion-healing.htm#

 

[peapod]

I never said I wanted to debate you with science and logic tibear, I said the rev and vanni refute you with science and logic. I do believe that life begins a conception...not "personhood" which is something that you want to impose on others based on the morality of a book of myths and story telling.

I will tell you for the last time...I believe in the right of a women to make her own choice about her life and circumstances. If she chooses to have an abortion that is her business not yours or mine. I believe these words said by someone else sums it up for me.
"No thoughtful person denies that the fetus is a potential person and that it looks increasingly human as it develops from a fertilized egg to a full-term fetus ready for birth. What we oppose is stopping legal abortion by legislating personhood at so me moment before birth."

Your agenda is not about helping women, its about shaming them with guilt instead of compassion, Although I know you think its about compassion its not...its about you trying to impose your morality based on a book of myths on the rest of us. Its a religious agenda not a human one.

Now once and for all tibear you know how I feel. Its none of your business or mine what a women does with her body. Stop trying to force your "morality" based on a your religion onto the rest of us. And you have showed that "morality is based on your book.

Thats my final answer to you on this matter..

 

[Cosmo]

I was avoiding this thread like the plague but seem to have crawled out of the wrong side of the nest this morning.

The abortion answer is incredibly simple in my mind. There are two points. I believe it was the Rev that made the comment first, but I reiterate: If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one.

The second is that men have no right and no say on the topic. When you can get pregnant you earn the right to decide. Till then, mind your own body and keep your laws and recriminations off mine.

Abortion is a woman's issue, plain and simple. We are the ones who ultimately make choices regarding our bodies. The sperm donor has a right to discuss the topic with the woman he impregnates, but in the end she is the one who makes the choice. Our bodies, our business. It's always amazed me that there are male anti-abortionists. Pregnancy is a female issue. Period.

The term "pro-life" applied to anti-abortion philosophy has always bothered me greatly. I am unfailingly pro-life ... I support life-enhancing paths. Sometimes that path includes abortion. There were a great many years in my life where pro-life meant considering my own life first.

A quote I particularly like:
"Whether or not abortion should be legal turns on the answer to the question of whether and at what point a fetus is a person. This is a question that cannot be answered logically or empirically. The concept of personhood is neither logical nor empirical: It is essentially a religious, or quasi-religious idea, based on one's fundamental (and therefore unverifiable) assumptions about the nature of the world." Paul Campos, professor of law at the University of Colorado. (2002)

It was taken from an interesting site:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_over.htm

Presents both sides of the issue quite well.

For those of you who would like to jump on me with religious arguments, please note I refuse to engage in them because I do not believe the bible can answer this kind of complicated question. It is too ambiguous and carries no sway with me.

 

[tibear]

Pea,

Well if its your intent to change minds than I suggest you try a new a new approach. Since you cannot refute on logic and science, what tools will you be using??

From this quote, I assumed (I know, I know what they say about assume) that you wanted to have a logical and scientific discussion. I guess once I refuse to have a moral discussion with you you have no valid standing.

As for saying mine is religious agenda, again for the 1000th time, I've never, ever said anything about religion or quoted the bible. I've tried to show from a scientific, logical and sometimes emotional statepoint how life begins much earlier than birth. And how a so-called "advanced" civilization can deal with a difficult situation by killing their most vulnerable and helpless.

However, I guess you don't want to think about those children because it hurts too much.


Cosmo,

The second is that men have no right and no say on the topic. When you can get pregnant you earn the right to decide. Till then, mind your own body and keep your laws and recriminations off mine.

Abortion is a woman's issue, plain and simple. We are the ones who ultimately make choices regarding our bodies. The sperm donor has a right to discuss the topic with the woman he impregnates, but in the end she is the one who makes the choice. Our bodies, our business. It's always amazed me that there are male anti-abortionists. Pregnancy is a female issue. Period.

Does this mean that if a male doesn't want the baby and you decide that he doesn't have to pay for support, since it was solely your decision???

As for your quote from Prof Campos, he deliberately left out from a scientific standpoint when determining when a fetus is a person. Ultimately, as RB and many others on this forum have contended, isn't science the only basis that should be used when deciding such things as these??? Scientifically, there is alot of evidence that the fetus is human long before it ever takes its first breath.

Have you noticed that vast majority of the organized pro-life movements are female? Would you also dismiss these ladies??

What about the woman who have had abortions and now regret their decision and are upset with the pro-abortion organizations that didn't give them the full information before they had their abortions, and then when they were having difficulty with their abortion decision had the pro-abortion associations turn their backs on them. This is giving life??? From whatever angle you look at the pro-abortion side in these situations, they are reprehensible.

 

[Twila]

Does this mean that if a male doesn't want the baby and you decide that he doesn't have to pay for support, since it was solely your decision???

The male had the option of preventing an unwanted birth with either abstinance or male birth control. If he's opted to practice neither once the sperm leave his body, they are no longer his. Course this is just my opinion.

Tibear, you brought up women who've had abortions and later regretted them. What about the women who've had abortions and don't regret them?

And what about the stance that many here have made regarding being responsible for your activities. If the woman had an abortion and regretted wouldn't they then just have to deal with it since it's a choice they made?

I hope none of that came off as sounding angry. I'm not. Not even emotionally charged.

 

[Girl82]

Touchy subject.
I think banning abortions will only lead to unhealthy illegal abortions. It's a right that should not be taken away.

 

[peapod]

You assumed wrong. But lets put it this way...

tibear please show me documention, historical and factual, and proof that your this heartfelt concern for fetus and mother was apparent before a women had a choice to have an abortion.

Please show me the clinics, offices literature and just all the good works anti-choice people were doing before there was pro choice. Please show me when women were being butchered in back allies what the right to life people were offering...I would like to know...or did it even exist at all????

You see the hypocrisy? I do So why don't you just try being honest for a change, your "morality" comes from religious beliefs that you are trying to impose on us. The least you could do is be honest about it.

Ehm...the sun is shining big time here So ehm...I think I will spend my lunch hour with a really sweet man (beautiful teeth and smile) we will probally talk about reindeer waiting for trains and we will be doing all this dangling our feet as we sit on the edge of the planet discussing peaches.

ciao baby

 

[gerryh]

Re: RE: Abortion

The male had the option of preventing an unwanted birth with either abstinance or male birth control. If he's opted to practice neither once the sperm leave his body, they are no longer his. Course this is just my opinion.

Interesting...... what about the female abstaining too? It does take 2 to make a baby. She has also opted to take the chance of impregnation.

And what about the stance that many here have made regarding being responsible for your activities. If the woman had an abortion and regretted wouldn't they then just have to deal with it since it's a choice they?

Yes, taking responsibilty for your actions. Such as the action of having sex with the possible consequence of getting pregnant. The responsible thing is NOT to murder the baby.

I hope none of that came off as sounding angry. I'm not. Not even emotionally charged.

I can believe that, since it appears most pro-choicers take the attitude that the baby growing inside the womb is nothing more than a cancerous collection of cells to be disposed of in what ever manner is deamed appropriate at the time. Has everyone seen what the different types of abortion look like? Have you all seen the "product" of those abortions. Heard what the different "procedures" entail? Posting these things shouldn't be a problem since we are just talking about a "medical" procedure....right?

 

[gerryh]

Touchy subject.
I think banning abortions will only lead to unhealthy illegal abortions. It's a right that should not be taken away.

Of course..... the hell with the baby's rights.... kill it.... it doesn't mean anything..... better to do that then risk getting fat or being inconvenienced in some way.

 

[Girl82]

Touchy subject.
I think banning abortions will only lead to unhealthy illegal abortions. It's a right that should not be taken away.

Of course..... the hell with the baby's rights.... kill it.... it doesn't mean anything..... better to do that then risk getting fat or being inconvenienced in some way.

When an abortion is performed the 'fetus' is not considered to be a human being it doesn't even have heartbeat. When you eat an egg are you actually eating a chicken? I don't think it's anyone's choice except for the person carrying the fetus at the time, which would be the mother.

 

[gerryh]

Touchy subject.
I think banning abortions will only lead to unhealthy illegal abortions. It's a right that should not be taken away.

Of course..... the hell with the baby's rights.... kill it.... it doesn't mean anything..... better to do that then risk getting fat or being inconvenienced in some way.

When an abortion is performed the 'fetus' is not considered to be a human being it doesn't even have heartbeat. When you eat an egg are you actually eating a chicken? I don't think it's anyone's choice except for the person carrying the fetus at the time, which would be the mother.

Excuse me? It doesn't even have a heartbeat? Are you for real? The heart is beating at week 6. Week 10 the baby has hands feet, fingers, toes, and most of the internal organs are begining to function. It has facial features. The nervous system is responsive.

Most abortions occur between 12 and 15 weeks. Maybe I should post some pics.

 

[tibear]

Twila,

No offence taken.

I happen to agree with taking full responsibility of one's actions. This includes all men who "get" their partners pregnant. However, this would also apply for the woman. Noone put a gun their head to have sex(OK in .00001% of the time, there may be a gun involved). Why does our society feel that since we can't come to a consensus regarding when a fetus becomes a child that it is alright to kill all of them regardless of anyone's believes.

Remember at one time, only whites were considered human in the US. Even today, there are still some groups of people(KKK, white supremists, and other crazy groups) who don't believe that non-whites are fully human. It would be ludicrous for a country to say that since the population couldn't agree whether non-whites were really human that all non-whites wouldn't have protection under the law.

I know its a bit of a stretch, but I wanted to make the point loud and clear. i.e. There is a disagreement as to when a fetus should have rights and because of that the fetus has absolutely no rights.

As for the fact that some woman don't have any regrets regarding their past abortions. Your right, some woman don't have any regrets. However, shouldn't our laws take into consideration these woman who quite frequently fall into deep depressions, drugs and alcohol, suicide attempts, failure to conceive, increased risks for various cancers, etc. Instead it seems that all of the risks are ignored and anyone/group who questions this procedure are instantly categorized as religious zealots.

 

[Twila]

Why does our society feel that since we can't come to a consensus regarding when a fetus becomes a child that it is alright to kill all of them regardless of anyone's believes.

I'm guessing that society is not concerned with individuals. We don't govern ourselves as a society. We govern ourselves individualistic. If we worked together as a society I believe abortion would not enter anyones mind as an alternative. However, we (as a group, not you and I individually) seem to want to have our own space ( 4 bedroom house with large yard ought to do it) our own vehicles (2 suv's per house) and we want to make our own decisions on our own lives as if nothing we decide has any repercussions to the whole.

Maybe the borg from startrek were on to something. lol

However, shouldn't our laws take into consideration these woman who quite frequently fall into deep depressions, drugs and alcohol, suicide attempts, failure to conceive, increased risks for various cancers, etc.

Some would argue that. Although if a woman had an abortion and then couldn't conceive that might take care of alot of problems later.....Would be could advertising for some groups. Are these conditions because of abortions? Can it be proven that they didn't have these conditions before the pregnancy?

Instead it seems that all of the risks are ignored and anyone/group who questions this procedure are instantly categorized as religious zealots.

I can't say I've called them that. I'd consider some to be over zealous if they are deciding for me what I can and can't do with my body. And definately Religious Zealots if they tell me I can't because I'll go to hell because the bible, according to them, says so. Yes, all the risks should be told to pregnant women before they decide. But as I've stated in the end the decision to have or not to have is mine and not some one who gets to walk away from it.

 

[tibear]

Pea,

Here are but a few of the websites from some unwed mother homes that have been around a while. Check out the dates of their founding. Some go back into the 1800's!!!

http://www.mmhome.org/history.htm
http://www.bonniesplace1.com/Christy.html
http://www.fargo-history.com/hospitals/crittenton.htm
http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/women/html/wh_022300_maternityhom.htm

Granted some of the early homes were created to help the woman convert to Christianity but whatever the reasons they came forward and gave these woman food, shelter and love when no one would.

So your assertion that the religious groups don't and didn't care about the woman until the babies started to die is simply wrong.

Please do research before posting.

Pea, quite bringing up the "butcher shops in the back alley", I've already showed the evidence that more woman die today as a result of abortions, then ever died from these "butchershops". So using your arguement, we should outlaw abortions today because we would actually be saving more woman's lives without abortion than with it.

 

[tibear]

Twila,

we want to make our own decisions on our own lives as if nothing we decide has any repercussions to the whole

We may want to do that but there are all kinds of examples of laws which are made to ensure that these situations don't exist. Drinking and driving is a perfect example. Many people believe there is nothing wrong with getting absolutely hammered and then driving home. However, society says that any decision you take that hurts others is a decision that you are not allowed to make.

As stated earlier in the post, it is simply a problem with the existing government that refusing to discuss the scientific facts as to when a fetus gains human status. They know it is a powder keg and simply refuse to discuss the matter. I equate it with not discussing incest in a family, everyone is uncomfortable with the situation but noone wants to talk about it and hope that it will simply go away. Meanwhile children are being hurt and noone appears to care.

Quote:
Instead it seems that all of the risks are ignored and anyone/group who questions this procedure are instantly categorized as religious zealots.


I can't say I've called them that.

I wasn't referring to you. However, the same cannot be said for the majority of posters on this forum.