Abortion

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
peapod said:
Jerry,

In regards to this statement.
Most abortions occur between 12 and 15 weeks, Maybe I should post some pics.

I will lodge my request with andem that you not be allowed to post your pictures. I suggest that anyone else offended by this tatic do the same.


Why would you or anyone else that has taken the "pro-choice" position, be offended by pictures of what has been described here as "just a mass of cells similar to cancerous growth", or what is not "human" or not a "baby".

It would be no different than showing a dammaged heart, or a tumor, or dammaged lungs from smoking......right? We're not talking about anything that was really "alive" now are we?
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Gerry...I'm not so easily shocked as some here:

I've watched doctors doing liposuction procedures on the Learning Channel, and yet I'm not willing to deny people their right to "trim the fat"...

I've been in the delivery room during the births of my children, and the horrors that I witnessed with my first didn't stop me from being there for the second and third...

...and I have seen pictures of abortions, but they have no power to shock me into denying women the right to choose...so I say, do your worst Gerry with what blunt tools you have available...
 

Cosmo

House Member
Jul 10, 2004
3,725
22
38
Victoria, BC
tibear said:
Using your condition regarding the fact that I've never required an abortion do I don't have the right to voice my opinion. Could I then say that since you've never fought in a war they you don't have any right to talk about wars???? Kind of a stupid condition isn't it.
What I find stupid is that I could easily be called upon to fight a war. I have the equipment. You, if you are male, could not have a baby. When you can have a baby, I'll entertain this argument. Till then, no point.

As for the woman who give their child up for adoption, I agree it is the ultimate show of love. But isn't this what we should be striving for.
Not necessarily, Tibear. I don't presume to know what is right for someone else so I cannot "strive" to control her actions.

I like to think of abortion like a child's education. We force every child to get an education regardless of whether they want it or not.
What a dim-witted argument, Tibear. C'mon, even you should be able to come up with something better than this?? Child's education???? Abortion has nothing to do with children. It has to do with a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body. The only argument you could put forth here is when a fetus becomes a human and we can debate that till the cows come home.

Instead of killing the child, it is in the best interests of the child and mother that the child lives.

Lets look at the situation with loving eyes instead of self-centeredness.
First of all, it is not your place to decide what is in my best interest. Period. There is no argument that can convince me of that. I am a mature, rational, sensible adult. The best interest of the mother is up to the woman. If the fetus is not yet viable, it does not receive the same consideration in my opinion.

Self-centred? Perhaps. I call it enlightened self interest, actually. The past 10 years have given me the gift of a kind of maturity where I've discovered that looking after myself is one of the greatest gifts I can give those around me. When I am whole, healthy and content (physically and mentally) I have a far greater store of love, support and energy to lavish on the people I love. Self centredness has received a bad rap for no good reason.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Vanni Fucci said:
Gerry...I'm not so easily shocked as some here:

I've watched doctors doing liposuction procedures on the Learning Channel, and yet I'm not willing to deny people their right to "trim the fat"...

I've been in the delivery room during the births of my children, and the horrors that I witnessed with my first didn't stop me from being there for the second and third...

...and I have seen pictures of abortions, but they have no power to shock me into denying women the right to choose...so I say, do your worst Gerry with what blunt tools you have available...


Considering the attitude you have taken, I did not expect you to object. I want to know the WHY of the "pro-choicers" that do object.
 

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
Why would you or anyone else that has taken the "pro-choice" position, be offended by pictures of what has been described here as "just a mass of cells similar to cancerous growth", or what is not "human" or not a "baby".

Well Jerry its like this...the haida nation know the raven as a trickster. Ravens are very good at this. I object to you posting your pictures because the RTL is famous for trying to design pictures to incite and revolt people, even if they have to alter, enlarge and mislabel. I have reported my feelings to andem, its his site and his decision. And if you do get to post your pictures, you better make sure that they are legit...because my doctor is just down the road, and I will ask her to look at them.
 

zenfisher

House Member
Sep 12, 2004
2,829
0
36
Seattle
Its fine with me...providing of course I get to show some of the living conditions children in let's say Brazil, Mexico , Haiti, the homeless in the US & Canada.Let's consider people living in abject poverty because their choice is do I buy food or birth control. Is that what you really need or want to see ? Can I bring in pictures of what happens when a minority decides to assert its rights over the majority. Look at Iraq... The Baath Party imposed its will over the majority of the people...look at the shape its in now. Can I introduce the pictures of torture we as a species are capable of inflicting on each other?

Do'nt worry I have no intention of Introducing such images. I have respect for the other members on this forum. That is what is the real crux of this issue. The minority asserting its value over the majority.

The "prolifers" ( who I assume, must be breatharians from the preferred title) do not want to take into the quality of life as an issue. They have lofty goals ... adopt EVERY potential child that a Mother my not want. That is fine...but then why are there so many full orphanages? Why are we seeing instances on the news of people who have adopted children, starving them ? They seem willing to accept it is fine to let people suffer through their existence.

The prolifers seem to value life over freedom. Yet humankind's history is filled with people fighting for their freedom. We send people off to die to defend ( We send them off to die for less noble reasons as well) our rights and freedoms. Yet, prolifers fail to acknowledge that defending your country, is killing too.

Why is it when we punish people, that, in the majority, of circumstances we take away their freedom. We deprive them of their right to choose ? Rarely do we put them to death. Is it because we know that restricting someone's freedom or choice is a greater punishment than killing them?

It is because we value freedom more than life. We will fight for freedom or choice. We will deny freedom or choice as punishment. Therefore isn't the more important issue in this debate the right to choose?

As I have said before, it is a highly charged emotional issue. Presenting pictures may not be the way to win hearts and minds of the people on this forum.
 

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
I could go up to the university here and do some research and also on the computer about the big business of illegal abortions as back-alley so called doctors were able to milk huge fees from desperate women. Organized crime ran the notorious abortion mills.
I am sure there are many stories I could post some here.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Here is a link showing full colour pics of the different stages of pregnancy, right from the begining to birth. Please note the development between 8 and 12 weeks and then between 12 and 20 weeks. Please remember that abortions are legal upto 20 weeks in Canada AND after under "special" circumstances. Also note that there is measurable brain wave activity at 8 weeks and the baby CAN feel pain by 12 weeks.


http://www.wprc.org/trimester1.phtml


Note, these are NOT post abortion pictures. Yes, the site is a "pro-choice" site but this info and these types of pics are easily verifiable from non "biased" sources.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
peapod said:
I will get back to this after I have a lattie and a jest :p

I went to the site...the first picture is a lie.or should I say a raven trick....you are not a very good trickster jerry.

http://eileen.250x.com/Main/FET_DEV.PIC/Babyin~1.htm


That's one hell of a site to send someone to. My pop-up blocker went banana's.......wanted to install an active-x app........all kinds of crap..... to be expected from a site that is full of crap.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Re: RE: Abortion

Reverend Blair said:
I had no problems with the site Peapod linked to, Gerry. You should switch to a different browser.


I had no problem either.... but then I've got thinks locked up pretty tight., difference between you and I is I do know what a site is trying to do even if it is unsuccessful. Others may not be so lucky.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
Oh trust me Gerry, I know when things are going on. That's part of the reason I switched browsers.

Just to get get back to the "fetus in condom" thing though...I have seen that refuted several times. There are several other pictures/stories used by the anti-abortionists that are also questionable at best.

Before PhotoShop I wouldn't trust any picture not on Polaroid. Since PhotoShop I won't trust any photograph.
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Not unlike fanatics of every stripe, the anti-choice folk use disinformation and hyperbole to further their dictatorial agenda. When reality is inconveniently not in their favour, they will doctor it up and present it as fact. And when they can't do that...they make threats...

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9-2-95/threat.html

this is a pro-life site...please take note of the link at the bottom...

I'M OPPOSED TO ABORTION, BUT HOW CAN I IMPOSE MY MORALITY ON SOMEONE ELSE?

...the language doesn't get any plainer than that...
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Re: RE: Abortion

Reverend Blair said:
Oh trust me Gerry, I know when things are going on. That's part of the reason I switched browsers.

Just to get get back to the "fetus in condom" thing though...I have seen that refuted several times. There are several other pictures/stories used by the anti-abortionists that are also questionable at best.

Before PhotoShop I wouldn't trust any picture not on Polaroid. Since PhotoShop I won't trust any photograph.


That one I don't have a prob with.... The reason for my posting of the link was the developmental steps not the "sensational" pic. I could have used up the bandwidth and just cut and pasted what I wanted off the page. I had thought I was clear as to what I posted the link for.

I will admit that the "pro-life" (and I will get into that "co-opted" term later, as it has been brought up) sites can have "questionable" material, but so can the "pro-choice" sites. I could cut and paste from medical journals the same info plus pretty descriptive narratives of the different abortion techniques employed today along with the subsequent "difficulty's" associated with each procedure.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Vanni Fucci said:
Not unlike fanatics of every stripe, the anti-choice folk use disinformation and hyperbole to further their dictatorial agenda. When reality is inconveniently not in their favour, they will doctor it up and present it as fact. And when they can't do that...they make threats...

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9-2-95/threat.html

this is a pro-life site...please take note of the link at the bottom...

I'M OPPOSED TO ABORTION, BUT HOW CAN I IMPOSE MY MORALITY ON SOMEONE ELSE?

...the language doesn't get any plainer than that...


Let's look at that IN context rather than out of context like you just presented. Here is the entire quote
‘I'm opposed to abortion…
But how can I impose my morality on someone else?’

In that statement, replace the word "abortion" with anything else you're opposed to. Like "I'm opposed to racism, but how can I impose my morality on someone else?" or "I'm opposed to rape, but how can I impose my morality on someone else?"

Sounds pretty ridiculous, doesn't it? Why can we impose our "morality" on someone when it comes to racism or rape? Because there's someone else involved. Raping isn't a "choice" a rapist makes in a vacuum - it involves a victim whose life will be altered forever because of that rape. Racism isn't a "choice" made in a vacuum, either. The actions of a racist storekeeper defending his "choice" to do what he wants with his store involve blacks who are unjustly kept from shopping there. The issue here is not "private morality" but civil rights - keeping innocent people from becoming victims.

What about abortion? Is it a matter of private morality, like deciding which church you're going to attend, or is it a matter of public morality - a matter of civil rights? If there's a victim involved, it's a civil rights issue.

Is there a victim involved in abortion? There are many who say that there is not...that the preborn child is just a mass of tissue, a part of the woman's body.

If this were the case, then no one would have any reason to oppose abortion any more than they would oppose tonsillectomies or appendectomies. But is that the case?

Developments in the science of fetology have given us greater opportunities than ever to learn about the preborn. We know that the baby has a completely different circulatory system than the mother, and often a different blood type. He or she has a completely different genetic code. We know that by the 21st day after conception the baby's heart has begun to beat [1]. Brain waves are detectable by day 40 [2], and movement also begins around this time [3]. By eight weeks, when a woman generally discovers she's pregnant, all body systems are present [4]. One doctor, operating on an ectopic pregnancy at eight weeks, discovered an "extremely alive," perfectly developed little person, vigorously swimming in his environment with a "natural swimmer's stroke."[5] The preborn child is unmistakably human, unmistakably alive, and unmistakably distinct from the mother.

Does the baby feel pain in an abortion? The pain mechanism has been found to be functioning in the preborn child as early as 45 days after conception. Abortion does cause pain.[6] In the film, "The Silent Scream," an actual first-trimester abortion is seen via ultrasound. The baby can be seen repeatedly moving to dodge the abortionist's suction instrument, and her heart rate doubles. As she is dismembered, her mouth opens in a silent scream. Abortion is violence - against preborn children, and against the women in whose bodies the violence takes place.

What about a woman's right to chose? It is not "choosing" that is ever an issue, but rather what is chosen. Women, like men, have the right to choose many things. We can choose our careers, where we wish to live, whether or not to engage in sexual activity, etc. However, like the racist or the rapist, we have no right to make choices that infringe upon the basic rights of others. An abortion is an act of violence which victimizes another human being, and thus is not a valid "choice."

So what would be wrong with being "personally opposed' to abortion? Well, why are you opposed to abortion? It must be because abortion takes the life of a preborn child...otherwise, there would be no reason to oppose it So how can you say "I'm opposed to taking the life of an innocent child, and I wouldn't do it myself, but I can't stop you from taking that life"? When we oppose something because it hurts someone else, we don't want anyone to do it."Personally opposed" is a cop-out.

So what's the answer to the abortion problem? Solving our problems with violence against innocent women and their children is no solution. We need to work for laws that protect the lives of all human persons, including the preborn.

But that alone isn't enough. We need to work for non-violent solutions for women with problem pregnancies. Thousands of Birthright offices, Crisis Pregnancy Centers and other pro-life help centers across the United States are providing women with the resources, support and friendship that they need to get their lives back on track. Thanks to these centers, hundreds of thousands of women each year find solutions to their pregnancies that they and their babies can live with.


Just a tad diffrent than the way you put it accross. As for your first link. Ah yes, horrible threat. A threat that is NOT a threat as long as society continues on it's way. It only becomes a "threat" if one thinks that abortion will be made illegal retroactivly. The "threat", as you call it, is to use leagal means to take legal action.

Also note the following quote from the same article.

"There's no threat in the fax but it's just nasty," Editor Jerome Kassirer told Reuters. "But things have happened before in relation to this issue and I think it would have been irresponsible for me not to do that [add security]."

So the editor did not even consider it a real threat.

You will have to do much better than this. Should I also post "threats" made by "pro-choice" against "pro-life" organisations?
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Is there a victim involved in abortion? There are many who say that there is not...that the preborn child is just a mass of tissue, a part of the woman's body.

If this were the case, then no one would have any reason to oppose abortion any more than they would oppose tonsillectomies or appendectomies. But is that the case?

No that is not the case, because the anti-choice crowd do not know when to keep their noses out of other people's business...I wonder if they have any notion at all about doctor patient confidentiality, or the reasoning behind it...and the rest of the article is just more of the same deceitful tripe that the anti-choice movement will drudge up to support their unsustainable position...

...and the other link was provided to demonstrate how the anti-choice folks will use hyperbole (chemical assassins) and intimidation to try and convince the masses of their own warped morality...

Is intimidation not considered to be a threat by the pro-life movement?

...and just what threat could a pro-abortion person make...open up another clinic? I haven't heard in the news any pro-abortion folk killing doctors that support the pro-life movement...bombing RTL rallys or any such anti-social activities like that...so I'm kind of interested in these threats by pro-abortion people...so perhaps you could post some links...
 

Mediana

Nominee Member
Oct 15, 2004
78
0
6
La Belle Province
Cosmo said:
Self-centred? Perhaps. I call it enlightened self interest, actually. The past 10 years have given me the gift of a kind of maturity where I've discovered that looking after myself is one of the greatest gifts I can give those around me. When I am whole, healthy and content (physically and mentally) I have a far greater store of love, support and energy to lavish on the people I love. Self centredness has received a bad rap for no good reason.

Do tell, does your lavishing love on other people ever involve self-sacrifice -- or is it always contigent on your interests coming first?

What you consider being whole, I consider being barren and superficial. If you ask parents if their children make their lives whole you'll get a definition of love, support and energy that burns a thousand times brighter than your little me, me, me bulb. And yes, self-sacrifice goes hand-in-hand with raising children.

But then, its probably not in your nature to understand such things.
 

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Mediana said:
Do tell, does your lavishing love on other people ever involve self-sacrifice -- or is it always contigent on your interests coming first?

What you consider being whole, I consider being barren and superficial. If you ask parents if their children make their lives whole you'll get a definition of love, support and energy that burns a thousand times brighter than your little me, me, me bulb. And yes, self-sacrifice goes hand-in-hand with raising children.

But then, its probably not in your nature to understand such things.

The subject is whether we should, or should not allow people to deny women the right to have an abortion.

Personal character attacks are counter-productive and disruptive to the discussion at hand...