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.
tamale, I have forgot more about abortion and the process than you will ever learn... Unless you too have been a trauma, flight nurse working in the ER for the last 28 years as well.
Which would give you a very narrow view of the whole picture regarding abortion.
If you were an obstetrician, specializing in difficult pregnancies, THEN you would be an expert on late term abortion, an ER nurse? .....not so much.
BTW, what percentage of women having a legal abortion ever end up in the ER?
......the reality is that the typical abortion patient these days is a
twenty-something single mother of color.
And you chose to ignore this:
Quote:
Loss of access for poorer women seemed to be the sole reason for this troubling
trend, which led to an explosion in unplanned pregnancy, and therefore abortion.
While poor women have seen a spike, women in the middle class continued to see
unplanned pregnancies decline.
Here you see a perfect example of the way pro-lifers cherry pick stats to further their anti-choice agenda.
Poor women of color have more abortions because they lack easy access to birth control. FACT
Yet, pro-lifers think closing the largest birth control provider to the poor, Planned Parenthood, will reduce abortions in that demographic.
.....you more than likely would have supported slavery.
You look at both as "sub-human".
Not to mention the fact that you're a disgusting human being.
Well, I support Planned Parenthood. I think they do a lot of good things.
If you want to consider me a disgusting human being, that's your right. Certainly my family, friends, neighbors, work colleagues, etc. would disagree with you.
I believe abortion will always be with us - legal or illegal. If I was a woman I would rather opt for a safer legal abortion than one of those back alley procedures.
So you are really that naive. Wow, well alrighty then.
btw, the document was not national right to life document, it was a scientific study commissioned by a country who is a little bit less inhibited than the U.S. Scientists. Of course you would know that if you were paying attention and investigated the 'book'. It is not what people want to believe to be true, but what science has proven, since 1967 --- by the first country(s) to make abortions legal, and they are not as squeamish (abortions were not legal in the U.S. until 1973) as the U.S., they tell it like it is. But you don't want to know that, because the actual science won't 'justify' the right to kill, and does not back up your claims, 'no one gets hurt' in the procedure. (not to mention with your claims that I am linking to national right to life stuff, you're not reading, looking, paying attention, but going off half cocked)
I then went on it include (one nrl) partial birth abortions which was a current event headline during the Bush (do you recall) admin years. I gave the skinny on that situation, medical vs politics. (NPR, is not national right to life) If the baby was not alive, the medical procedure would not require killing of the baby while in the womb, now would it. Also with the damage to the cervix, is the leading cause that woman are unable to get pregnant after an abortion. Which goes to (another theory of mine) lower fertility rates, world wide, linking that to the mount of abortions preformed.
Now people can use their common sense here or they can keep on researching 'science' hoping that something will pop, that will justify their actions of the killing of their babies. For me though, I understand that Homo Sapiens are no different than the rest of the animals categorized by science that roam this earth. Except maybe in two areas:
1. Homo Sapiens, justify their actions through moral reasoning.
2. Homo Sapiens, are the only species on this planet that can cause their own extinction.
With that said, this population control piece of legislature, where as, women out number men 2 to 1. That which was created by men so as to manipulate women (it's your choice women, now see) just may come back and bite the men in the buttocks, in the end. Time tells, all things.
From the first conversation on record by Adam and Eve, men will back down from the taking of their responsibility for their actions, every time; the battle of the sexes ... goes way back.
In this link YOU provided, not once is abortion listed as a significant reason for women having fewer children.
{BTW, damage to the cervix must be extremely rare in legal abortions, in fact, I have never seen it singled out as a significant problem anywhere. You know what else can put an end to a woman's fertility? Pregnancy gone wrong. That must be a very uncomfortable fact for you.}
Here is the reason for lower birth rates, in a nutshell, according to YOUR link:
Quote:
The global collapse in fertility rates and rise of feminism is not the slow
diffusion of a new idea, or a mechanistic response to aid workers handing out
condoms. This is the breaking of a logjam. The logjam of a patriarchy that has
suddenly lost its purpose.
Patriarchy.......is that what you want women to go back to? Really?
"Don't you worry your pretty head, little lady. Now, you just run along, cook dinner and tend to the children and leave the thinking to us men."
Poor women of color have more abortions because they lack easy access to birth control. FACT
"Poor women of color have more abortions because they lack easy access to birth control. FACT."
Nonsense.
Maybe poor women of color [and other women] choose not to spend $$$ on bc, but 'lack of easy access to' bc isn't an issue in 2015 USA. Then there are the men. I suppose poor women of color [and other women] are sexually attracted to men who also lack 'easy access to' bc ?
"Poor women of color have more abortions because they lack easy access to birth control. FACT."
Nonsense.
Maybe poor women of color [and other women] choose not to spend $$$ on bc, but 'lack of easy access to' bc isn't an issue in 2015 USA. Then there are the men. I suppose poor women of color [and other women] are sexually attracted to men who also lack 'easy access to' bc ?
Money isn't the only thing that denies easy access.
Which would give you a very narrow view of the whole picture regarding abortion.
If you were an obstetrician, specializing in difficult pregnancies, THEN you would be an expert on late term abortion, an ER nurse? .....not so much.
BTW, what percentage of women having a legal abortion ever end up in the ER?
My guess, less than 1%.
Annie annie, annie, My God you people just want to argue not debate. And I would wager you don't even care about the facts do you. I have a wife and kids I can argue with. Please read the posts here so you don't look more foolish. Ok? Who the F is debating difficult pregnancies. Do you even know what the topic of this thread is. Get a clue....
Here you see a perfect example of the way pro-lifers cherry pick stats to further their anti-choice agenda.
Poor women of color have more abortions because they lack easy access to birth control. FACT
Yet, pro-lifers think closing the largest birth control provider to the poor, Planned Parenthood, will reduce abortions in that demographic.
Annie, obviously again you haven't read this whole thread. I would even say I am a pro-choice person as long as it can be done in the first few weeks. before that zygote grows. I am talking just a few weeks.
Don't box everyone together. Take that label you want to put on people you don't even know and put it well, I will be polite.
Annie annie, annie, My God you people just want to argue not debate. And I would wager you don't even care about the facts do you. I have a wife and kids I can argue with. Please read the posts here so you don't look more foolish. Ok? Who the F is debating difficult pregnancies. Do you even know what the topic of this thread is. Get a clue....
Difficult pregnancies as in late term abortion to protect the life of the mother, which has been discussed in this thread. Didn't think I had to spell it out.
Now, instead of deflecting, tell us exactly why an ER nurse would be an expert on abortion, as you have claimed.
Annie, obviously again you haven't read this whole thread. I would even say I am a pro-choice person as long as it can be done in the first few weeks. before that zygote grows. I am talking just a few weeks.
Don't box everyone together. Take that label you want to put on people you don't even know and put it well, I will be polite.
Are you also posting as Ellis Bell? That is who I was responding to.
Wasn't commenting on your personal view of abortion.
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.
