Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A real life scenario that actually doesn't happen besides maybe a handful of times to the tune of an exceptionally small % of occurrences is not the best way to decide policy. Why not use some equally rare example of how an abortion is killing someone that will grow up to cure a form of cancer and save thousands of lives or killing an unborn baby prevents another person from growing up and being a doctor and provided healthcare to the poor. Both of these are possibilities, the second more likely than the first, but I am not using them as a reason to further restrict abortion like you are using similar rare examples as a means for unlimited access to abortion.
A real life scenario that deserves to be considered, in the light of restrictions which in and of themselves restrict a handful of potential abortions.
My example really happens. Poor women in rural areas do get pregnant, and do choose abortions. Your examples are all what-if's.
And I'm not arguing rare real life scenarios to support unlimited access to abortion.
I'm arguing that women are intelligent, responsible, and moral creatures. As such, they should have the right to make decisions regarding their own bodies.
I am SO sorry that I cannot give you another rep point for the above.
I am so weary of reading posts that imply that the great majority of women who have abortions do so with the same amount of soul-searching involved in making a dentist appointment.
YES, some women do treat having an abortion very casually, and many abortions are the result of casual and consensual sex. However, that is by no means true for ALL women, and I just wish that more people would realize that.
The situation of a couple who decides to terminate a pregnancy due to a VERY severe birth defect or a devastating inherited disease when they had been looking forward to having a healthy son or daughter is very different from that of a 21-year-old "party" girl who became pregnant and doesn't know which of her partners was the father. (And I am not saying this to condemn the "party girl" -- although I think such behavior shows very poor judgment -- but to say that pregnancy/abortion situations are not all the same.)
Thank you. In the case of a late-term abortion, it is absolutely devastating. An abortion at twenty-two weeks is a complex procedure and just the physical recovery takes several days at a minimum. The emotional recovery is something else entirely. Nobody just goes on with life as if nothing happened. In fact, I think very few women who've had an abortion at any stage are capable of going on with life as if nothing happened.
Why not use some equally rare example of how an abortion is killing someone that will grow up to cure a form of cancer and save thousands of lives or killing an unborn baby prevents another person from growing up and being a doctor and provided healthcare to the poor. Both of these are possibilities, the second more likely than the first, but I am not using them as a reason to further restrict abortion like you are using similar rare examples as a means for unlimited access to abortion.
This (in bold) is the exact same argument that the bio mother of my two adopted special needs kids (severe behavioral and emotional problems) made to my (our) daughter when "bio mom" became pregnant with her seventh child out of wedlock. My husband and I adopted our kids at the ages of four and six, after she lost custody for severely neglected them. (I will not repeat all the details of my sad story again on this thread, though.)
This person is and was a felon, lifelong welfare recipient, and drug addict (first cocaine, then meth), but she went on to have four more kids (one of whom died in infancy) after her first three were taken from her due to EXTREME neglect. Yet, when my (our) daughter asked her why she didn't have an abortion after the doctors told her that carrying her last child to term would very likely kill her (it didn't), she said, "Well, what if this baby grows up and discovers a cure for cancer?"
Now, never mind the fact that all of her other kids have almost no chance of even being accepted to a good university or the fact that she had not kicked her drug habit, gotten a job, or even stayed out of jail for more than a few months -- no, she was not going to risk killing another Jonas Salk! Yes, I know that it is not impossible for her to give birth to a future neurosurgeon or Mother Teresa, but which is more likely for her or someone like her -- giving birth to someone who will benefit mankind or giving birth to another child who will end up in jail?
And, no, I am not an advocate for eugenics! (I only bring this up because with so many people, if anyone brings up cases like my child's bio mother, they will immediately leap to the conclusion that s/he is suggesting involuntary sterilization or abortion for poor people!)
Last edited by katharsis; 05-14-2015 at 04:24 PM..
A real life scenario that deserves to be considered, in the light of restrictions which in and of themselves restrict a handful of potential abortions.
My example really happens. Poor women in rural areas do get pregnant, and do choose abortions. Your examples are all what-if's.
And I'm not arguing rare real life scenarios to support unlimited access to abortion.
I'm arguing that women are intelligent, responsible, and moral creatures. As such, they should have the right to make decisions regarding their own bodies.
You can never know the real life impacts on society that abortion has because the people making those impacts are never born.
Like I said before, I support woman making the decision for themselves after they have been given information/counseling on all the options available (roughly 3 hours total) and a short waiting period of 3 days. Then they can pay for the elective procedure if they so choose. I'm not even married to the 20 week Mark, I could see pushing it to 22-24 as the latest time sans medical complications. Above is just common sense.
However, in the four times I've served jury duty in the past, and the fifth time I was called, there was no such option. You REALLY need to become aware that just because things are done a certain way in your backyard, that people live in other parts of the country, and the rules are different in different places. Where I live, it is mandatory when you are called to jury duty to attend the jury duty orientation. A warrant will be issued if you don't attend. The only acceptable excuse for not attending is death or impending death. At that time, the judge asks people who wish to be excused from duty to raise their hands and explain why. In front of everyone else. I've heard people claim to be deaf (the courts have various equipment to assist the hearing impaired), or to be hardcore racists (the courts will consider their racism if the defendants should happen to of a different race from the potential juror), or to be related to police officers (that will also be considered if a particular police department is involved in a case), or to be too poor (not an acceptable excuse), or too sick (pending a doctor's report, illness will be considered), or to speak no English (the court will advise the potential juror if no acceptable translator can be found), and so on.
I just went to Feyetteville district court's website and they allow you to postpone to "another date in the near future". You just have to fill out the back of the JIF (I assume this is the jury summons)
Last edited by shooting4life; 05-14-2015 at 04:24 PM..
You can never know the real life impacts on society that abortion has because the people making those impacts are never born.
Like I said before, I support woman making the decision for themselves after they have been given information/counseling on all the options available (roughly 3 hours total) and a short waiting period of 3 days. Then they can pay for the elective procedure if they so choose. I'm not even married to the 20 week Mark, I could see pushing it to 22-24 as the latest time sans medical complications. Above is just common sense.
Let me give you an example of what happens. My ultrasound was scheduled for my twentieth week, which is the standard because it allows for the best diagnostics and dating. I was just shy of twenty-one weeks, according to the ultrasound. After diagnosis, it took several days to see a pediatric neurologist for confirmation. A couple of days later I got a second opinion. At that point, my husband and I reluctantly determined that abortion was our best option. Another day passed while we waited for the local hospital board to review and deny our appeal for a medical abortion. At that point, I was up against the 22-week limit for my state. A three day waiting period once I located an alternate provider would have put me beyond the state limit. I don't know how gov't is expected to regulate these things. When does the three-day waiting period begin?
You can never know the real life impacts on society that abortion has because the people making those impacts are never born.
Like I said before, I support woman making the decision for themselves after they have been given information/counseling on all the options available (roughly 3 hours total) and a short waiting period of 3 days. Then they can pay for the elective procedure if they so choose. I'm not even married to the 20 week Mark, I could see pushing it to 22-24 as the latest time sans medical complications. Above is just common sense.
You can never know the impact of children who were never conceived either. But you can know that a child without severe special needs will have a better life than one with one. So to me it makes sense to substitute a severe special needs potential child with one who will be conceived in the future by the same parents.
I don't know, I think where the disagreement comes in between me and pro lifers is that I see the life slot so to speak as the important part, not the individual who fills that slot.
People really fail to look at the joy of having x amount of million healthy births and choose to focus on the 100000 abortions in stead. Really I see no difference between a child that was never conceived and an aborted child. Likewise I don't care how something died, but rather the quality of life during the time it lived.
Let me give you an example of what happens. My ultrasound was scheduled for my twentieth week, which is the standard because it allows for the best diagnostics and dating. I was just shy of twenty-one weeks, according to the ultrasound. After diagnosis, it took several days to see a pediatric neurologist for confirmation. A couple of days later I got a second opinion. At that point, my husband and I reluctantly determined that abortion was our best option. Another day passed while we waited for the local hospital board to review and deny our appeal for a medical abortion. At that point, I was up against the 22-week limit for my state. A three day waiting period once I located an alternate provider would have put me beyond the state limit. I don't know how gov't is expected to regulate these things. When does the three-day waiting period begin?
I would say the waiting period begins when you first contact a doctor/facility about an abortion. The. The abortion must take place within a certain window afterwards, say, 30 days, if not then another 3 day wait/counseling is needed (unless the delay is from medical complications preventing the abortion at that time).
If a woman is up on the hard deadline of let's say 22 weeks for arguments sake, and the three day wait would push her over, then she could get a court order allowing the abortion to take place before the end of the 3 days.
Like my previous post, I am talking about healthy babies/mother, not severe medical conditions to either.
Who exactly do you think is getting abortions at that late date? And how long do you think a court order would take? That seems like an unfair burden to me. With every day that passes, the procedure becomes more complex and the emotional toll more devastating. I was a well-informed patient; I knew exactly what I was doing and why. No woman seeking a medical termination post twenty-weeks needs a waiting period to ensure she knows what she's doing. She knows. Believe me. She knows.
You can never know the impact of children who were never conceived either. But you can know that a child without severe special needs will have a better life than one with one. So to me it makes sense to substitute a severe special needs potential child with one who will be conceived in the future by the same parents.
I don't know, I think where the disagreement comes in between me and pro lifers is that I see the life slot so to speak as the important part, not the individual who fills that slot.
People really fail to look at the joy of having x amount of million healthy births and choose to focus on the 100000 abortions in stead. Really I see no difference between a child that was never conceived and an aborted child. Likewise I don't care how something died, but rather the quality of life during the time it lived.
That is an interesting take, I don't agree with it, but it is different.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
