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 question for the PC crowd: If science discovers a "gay" gene, can we abort for sexual preference of our children?
Yes, thought ethicly it could be arguable that such a motive would be distasteful (some would say the same about aborting Down Syndrome fetuses, yet the majority of Americans say they'd abort a Down Syndrome fetus, and almost all do now days), the mother has an interest in terminating pregnancy because pregnancy is inherently risky and burdensome, the fetus has fewer compelling interests, and so on. I would imagine that medical groups would probably create guidielines regarding termination of gay fetus pregnancies, were such a thing come to pass, in the same way that many advocacy groups are pressuring medical groups to create more guidelines viz a viz the termination of Down's Syndrome pregnancies, to counter the prejudice against Down's Syndrome.
Nobody is saying abortion is good, it's just often the lesser of two evils.
One of the individuals involved in this medical procedure can't speak.
Though it's safe to assume they can feel pain and terror.
They're not people. Until a fetus is viable outside of the womb, it's not a person. And the law of the land is that abortion is legal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaykay
Well, this has obviously turned into another contentious thread debating abortion ad infinitum.
The deal here is simply that abortion in the country is a monstrously controversial procedure. No matter what side you come down on, I think you have to admit that. It's just plain wrong for people (myself included in this group) who believe abortion is taking a life to be forced indirectly to support it with tax dollars.
Another of the multitudes who didn’t bother reading saganista’s post about the funding for Planned Parenthood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by camping!
Which costs more morally and ethically?
If you believe in abortion, then hey --- you fund it.
I don't.
I would much rather my tax dollars were spent elsewhere......how about helping seniors afford their medication? Rehabilitation for the disabled as opposed to just ware housing them. Drug rehab and job counseling for felons......maybe give them a viable option to quit the cycle of addiction and crime......there are lots and lots of places my money can go.
And lets not forget.....when Roe v Wade first happend, contraceptives were not fool proof by any measure, and they were difficult to get to boot.
Now they aren't. They are everywhere and they are affordable. PP needs my tax dollars to shoot up a teen full of depo provera? Hey have at it! Abortion isn't the only option out there now to prevent a pregnancy. Not by a long shot.
I’d rather my tax dollars not support any war, corporate welfare, public schools, etc. But they do.
Contraceptives are still not foolproof, they are expensive and out of reach to some people. Guess what Planned Parenthood provides? Birth control on a sliding scale. Very nice of them that way. You can look at one of my earlier posts where I posted their statement.
Don’t want an abortion, don’t have one. It’s still the law of the land.
Quote:
Originally Posted by camping!
I answered your question, but to make it as clear as possible yes, I will pay for eighteen years, but then so will the bio dad. And hey, maybe the mom will actually have a job too! One nevers know.......
Pipe dreams. Who do you think has a legal procedure to terminate a pregnancy? Only poor people or the underclass. I see what your issues are now. Anyone who doesn’t want their pregnancy to continue to term is obviously “less than” to you. After all, they’re scum who don’t work.
How do you get a bio dad to pay, how do you necessarily find him? What if he has no money? I don’t want to pay for 18 years. If you want to pay solely, go ahead, don’t put my money into the mix.
Yes, God forbid anyone use birth control prior to conception or utilize adoption after birth......
Why be forced into carrying a fetus full-term if you don’t want to? Abortion is a legal procedure in the US. Your point is moot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by camping!
Maybe PPs focus is too much on abortion as to providing low cost birth control (which I do know they do, maybe they need to be much more vocal about that part of their business)
As to dealing with the reality that we have, yes abortion will always be present....it always has been always will be. But to expect it to be tax payer funded is beyond the pale. PP is a business, let it operate as a business or as a hospital when they have people who cannot/will not pay. Why ask it from the government in the form of a medicaid payment? Because truly, if an abortion was medically necesary it would be performed by a gyn at a hospital or out patient surgerical center, not pp.
So, lets let PP figure it out. They seem to make a hefty profit, maybe they could set up their own indigent fund.
PPs focus is NOT on providing abortion. It is the intolerant, uneducated and ignorant people who make that their focus. But the facts seem to get in the way for some of you.
PP is a not for profit business, unlike most hospitals these days. Treatment is made on a sliding scale by a person’s ability to pay.
camping, you obviously know nothing about PP. I would suggest you read their charter and learn a little about them before you spout off patently ignorant and uneducated comments about them.
Do you feel this way about all hospitals that provide abortion services or is there a particular reason why you single out an organization that provides comprehensive services supporting women’s health?
There’s a bigger agenda here.
A fetus is not a person. It goes to definition. Yours is different from mine. Live by yours, I’ll live by mine. It’s the law of the land, like it or not.
Your post No. 59 responding to DontH8Me:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LNTT_Vacationer
What happened to choice?
Isn’t that what you want to deny many women? A tiny bit of hypocrisy here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by camping!
Of course I can feel compassionate and even empathy for a woman seeking an abortion. The women I've known who have had abortions never walked away without regrets. What I am saying is that abortion is not as clean cut a solution as it may appear. PP would be serving women much better to be lowering the cost of contraceptives, perhaps having some kind of payment plan......I don't know. I do know that as an organization that is for womens reproductive rights they ought to be fighting to make abortion a rare choice to have to make, not a de facto one.
As far as rape and incest, as horrific as those cases must be....they are in actuality very rare. A more common abortion patient is going to be a woman in her twenties or thirties.
Again, PP supplies exactly what you think they should supply. Again, how can you condemn an organization if you know nothing about them. You really might want to read before you speak, why not start here: Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zonababe
We have a lot of children awaiting adoption in this country. They aren't babies and they aren't being adopted. The pro-lifers have yet to solve that problem.
They’re only pro-life until birth; a better description would be either anti-choice or the fetus-people.
I went to an ob/gyn whose office was in a Catholic hospital, he had no problem prescribing me the pill.....also, when my mother was in a precarious pregnancy with one of my brothers her ob/gyn told her that his first priority was to save her life, the baby would be second. She was his patient....this was 44 years ago and at a Catholic hospital. I'm not doubting everything you wrote, but I don't believe that it is as difficult to obtain the pill then it may have been twenty plus years ago.
And no matter what, condoms are readily available, everywhere. And a lot safer for preventing STDs.
Catholicism preaches that the fetus comes first, the woman second. Then they were receiving federal aid and you would not find this “liberalism” in a catholic hospital today.
Also, it’s none of your business what people choose to use or not use in this personal issue. Key word being personal.
But why tax dollars? PP is making a mint, not to mention what they garner in donations......why do the truly destitute have to pay anything but a nominal fee? Where is the compassion in that? Believe me, I understand that in a business bills must be paid. But if your business promotes itself as a champion for womens reproductive rights.....well, time to step up and prove it.
Again, you show your willful ignorance of an organization that you are demonizing. Planned Parenthood provides womens health on a sliding scale. Try to about an organization before you take off on it. The annual report, linked above, shows all sources of income.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibcwife
If you would like to see just how rediculious this statement is, I would invite you to go to this website and watch the ultrasonic video of an 11 week baby being aborted. You tell me after you watch that the baby didn't feel any pain or that he/she was unconscious during the procedure!!!!! The baby is crying!!! Two of the leading PP abortionist quit what they were doing when they saw this!
Please see my link What does an early abortion look like? (http://www.abortion.org.au/abortionpictures.htm - broken link). This is what a 7 week abortion looks like. No need to sensationalize.
fetusperson.htm (http://www.abortion.org.au/whenhuman.htm - broken link) scroll down a little to the Carl Sagan descriptions.
Oooh, are you one of the people who stands on street corners with your placards of extremely blown up photos trying to scare little kids?
It would be better if you found a reputable link. This looks quite wingy to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by camping!
Where did she say that? How is being upfront that sex does have consequences a bad thing? Even pro choice women will allow that abortion does have ramifications that lasts a long long time, as does keeping a baby or giving a baby up for adoption. Not easy solutions, any of them.
As for the rest of her post, how is empowering women that their self worth isn't joined to how many men they sleep with? You don't have to be part of the taliban for gods sake, to want young women to not feel pressured to 'hook up' with whatever guy at whatever party to feel accepted.
Sex is complicated. The complications of sex even more so.
It’s none of your business what a woman does with her body and your decision to judge them because of the choices they make. They don’t need your condescension.
I know quite a few women who have aborted. Most of them have had no ramifications. Or is this part of the most recent garbage that the anti-choice movement is pushing. Here’s a link to the latest sleaze that is being attempted: Ms. Magazine Online.
A fetus is not a person. It goes to definition. Yours is different from mine. Live by yours, I’ll live by mine. It’s the law of the land, like it or not.
The law of the land is clear. One commits murder of a human and/or fetus if he/she kills with "malice aforethought." Of course, there are caveats that murder does not apply during abortion, by a physician or is consented to by the mother.
An utter illogical position. . . but the killing of innocent life isn't logical; only convenient and barbaric.
They're not people. Until a fetus is viable outside of the womb, it's not a person. And the law of the land is that abortion is legal.
With increasing medical technology that fine line is moving every day. Viability is now considered to be over 23 weeks, with babies surviving at 21....I believe you stated erroneously that viability wasn't until 28 weeks. Way to own up to your misstatements, chielgirl.....
Another of the multitudes who didn’t bother reading saganista’s post about the funding for Planned Parenthood.
If I was wrong, I will apologize for the error, unlike some people who don't even bring their mistakes up.
I’d rather my tax dollars not support any war, corporate welfare, public schools, etc. But they do.
And you don't like it, do you? Why do you get to say so, but if people don't like funding abortion mention it they are villified?
Contraceptives are still not foolproof, they are expensive and out of reach to some people. Guess what Planned Parenthood provides? Birth control on a sliding scale. Very nice of them that way. You can look at one of my earlier posts where I posted their statement.
So, how can contraceptives be out of reach yet PP provides them on a sliding scale? No PP near a person? Every drug store has condoms, and they are cheap, well, cheaper then an abortion.
And again if you would read threads in their entirety, I had it explained to me that some women cannot afford contraceptives at all. In those cases I believe that PP should provide it for free.
Don’t want an abortion, don’t have one. It’s still the law of the land.
When did I say I wanted one? When did I dispute it was the law of the land? I have said that abortion will always be legal, or do you not read posts that just may agree with you?
Pipe dreams. Who do you think has a legal procedure to terminate a pregnancy? Only poor people or the underclass. I see what your issues are now. Anyone who doesn’t want their pregnancy to continue to term is obviously “less than” to you. After all, they’re scum who don’t work.
What? Where do you get that? If you read threads in their entirety instead of cherry picking phrases that solidifies the perception that anyone who doesn't agree with you is somehow a classist you would see that I was responding to someone else (who is pro choice) insinuating that every abortion performed was saving the tax payers money in welfare benefits. I don't believe it, and that was the point I was making. The only issues I have are with procedures that cause pain to the baby.
w do you get a bio dad to pay, how do you necessarily find him? What if he has no money? I don’t want to pay for 18 years. If you want to pay solely, go ahead, don’t put my money into the mix.
Wait a minute, didn't you just get on my case for assuming that only poor women have abortions? Whos the classist now?
Fifty-four percent of women who have abortions... Forty-six percent of women who have abortions ... Eight percent of women who have abortions
Not to attack those statistics, but 54% + 46% + 8% =108%
Quote:
but the killing of innocent life isn't logical; only convenient and barbaric.
Convenient and Barbaric for any woman to not delivery a baby when pregnant? Every time? We'll never get an accurate count of whether or not it is true, because Medical Records are private....
But you can call me Barbaric all you want. I chose life - I chose to live a wholesome life with my daughter and husband. Rather than to have a child and leave my husband with two children and no bread winner. Guess I was being selfish.
And for all those who claim how horrible the normal abortion goes - I will tell you first hand how it really goes:
1) I didn't get put under for mine. Many women do, though. Instead, I got a local anesthetic that made a weird ringing in my ear. Throughout the entire process, one of the nurses was there purely for "companionship" and comfort. She was a really nice person.
2) They suctioned everything out. Almost sounded like a vaccuum cleaner.
3) I got put in a room in a big comfy chair to relax. I got a nice warm blanket, ginger ale, and gold fish. I stayed there for about 30 minutes to relax and ensure that I didn't become anemic.
4) I drove myself home.
As for the "baby" - the clump of cells was donated to EVMS so that they can use it in their research.
Now, even though it was AMA for me to continue with the pregnancy, insurance would not cover a penny of the abortion. So, I had to make the choice to either get it done at the hospital for about $1K or at PP for $200. I chose the cheaper route.
Partial Birth abortions that are frequently mentioned by anti-choice groups are rare in occurence. It's actually illegal in many states unless there is a medical necessity to do so.
And in honesty, my tax dollars fund many things that I do not agree with. But I'd rather a hundred dollars go towards the funding of abortion, than the thousands an unwanted child would use.
CONTRACEPTIVE USE
• Fifty-four percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method (usually the condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant. Among those women, 76% of pill users and 49% of condom users report having used their method inconsistently, while 13% of pill users and 14% of condom users report correct use.[9]
• Forty-six percent of women who have abortions had not used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant. Of these women, 33% had perceived themselves to be at low risk for pregnancy, 32% had had concerns about contraceptive methods, 26% had had unexpected sex and 1% had been forced to have sex.[9]
• Eight percent of women who have abortions have never used a method of birth control; nonuse is greatest among those who are young, poor, black, Hispanic or less educated.[9]
• About half of unintended pregnancies occur among the 11% of women who are at risk for unintended pregnancy but are not using contraceptives. Most of these women have practiced contraception in the past.[1,10]
Not so sure that they would use it, or use it correctly in the first place. I think that a depo shot, as someone mentioned earlier, would be the best preganancy control for married couples. But there are so many side effects. (Weight gain, water retention just to name a few) Honestly, I think that abstinence should be taught in the schools again. There were alot fewer abortions and births out of wedlock when these things were taught. Call me old fashion, but hollyweird has made sleeping around a thing that everyone does. And a baby before marriage is more the norm on tv these days... on and off screen in hollywood. Which has a trickle effect. Sorry... but that is just the way I feel.
If we could teach our kids in schools from before kindergarden up that sex is something that one should hold sacred, turn the tv off.... and teach them how to say no and mean it that would do more to keep the unwanted preganancies down than we know. But it has to start at home. Mothers need to be there for their kids. Even when the kids get old enough to take care of themselves. To help protect their kids.
But if a woman does use birth control, uses it correctly, and still becomes pregnant, then it's okay for her to have an abortion? I mean, it's okay when Susie whose father has been visiting her room at night and becomes pregnant to get an abortion, but not okay for Lucy since she's an adult having sex with her boyfriend. It's okay for DeeDee because she was brutally raped and then unable to obtain the morning-after pill, but not okay for Sheila since she's married and has five kids already. Do we take abortion on a case by case basis, pass judgment on the woman and determine who's entitled and who's not? Or do we just pass judgment on all the women who make this choice, as immoral, disgusting humans who don't even deserve to have a child? And who gets to judge, who gets to take the decision out of the woman's hands because they are morally superior to anyone who would consider an abortion? Do these morally superior people also get to make other decisions for us, like which treatments we should undergo when we're diagnosed with cancer, or when people should be institutionalized for mental illness? Do these people with more highly evolved moral sensitivity know what I should have for dinner tonight, or what kind of car I should drive, or would they like to go through my closet to make sure I'm not wearing anything sexually provocative that might increase my risk for being assaulted or raped? Like I've said before, abortion is a deeply personal choice. The women who choose abortion have compelling reasons for their choices, and the people who sit in judgment need to be a little more generous and compassionate, a little more human.
Catholicism preaches that the fetus comes first, the woman second. Then they were receiving federal aid and you would not find this “liberalism” in a catholic hospital today.
Prove it....drs are individuals too, and ultimatley they make their own decisions. Some will adhere to such policies, other will not.
Also, it’s none of your business what people choose to use or not use in this personal issue. Key word being personal.
Did I say it was my business? My only beef was in funding it.
No, sadly it isn't. But pregnancy occuring from rape is, and that is what I was stating. According to the link you provided, 5% of all unprotected one time sex results in pregnancy. They then estimated that would be 3200 +/- pregnancies. Of that number you do have to take in account how many of those women were already on the pill or depo shot etc..., how many of those women were sterile due to tubal ligation or menopause, and finally how many women how reported the rape was immediatly given the morning after pill? The figure provided is too high with the variables I mentioned.
Again, you show your willful ignorance of an organization that you are demonizing. Planned Parenthood provides womens health on a sliding scale. Try to about an organization before you take off on it. The annual report, linked above, shows all sources of income.
How did I demonize pp? By asking that they do more for the indegent women in their care?
Please see my link What does an early abortion look like? (http://www.abortion.org.au/abortionpictures.htm - broken link). This is what a 7 week abortion looks like. No need to sensationalize.
fetusperson.htm (http://www.abortion.org.au/whenhuman.htm - broken link) scroll down a little to the Carl Sagan descriptions.
And just what do you think an abortion of a 14 week fetus look like?
Oooh, are you one of the people who stands on street corners with your placards of extremely blown up photos trying to scare little kids?
Nope, I find those people to be loud, arrogant, and pretty much unlikeable.
It would be better if you found a reputable link. This looks quite wingy to me.
It’s none of your business what a woman does with her body and your decision to judge them because of the choices they make. They don’t need your condescension.
How was I being condescending? But saying I have empathy for them? Read posts all the way through....stop giving in to your knee jerk reactions to demonize and marginalize people who just may have a different view then yours. You just may learn something. I know I have.
I know quite a few women who have aborted. Most of them have had no ramifications. Or is this part of the most recent garbage that the anti-choice movement is pushing. Here’s a link to the latest sleaze that is being attempted: Ms. Magazine Online.
I'm glad for those that didn't have ramifications. But some do, and to dismiss their very real pain is rather heartless and judgemental of you. (I'm not referring to the article, the last thing this country needs is more psychobabble litigiousness).
But here is a very real physical side effect that perhaps you would like to learn more about.....Ashermans Syndrome. Its scarring of the uterus that is caused by a D&C, I know a lot about it, because I have it. I belonged to an international community of women who all have it, and some got it from abortions, others after miscarraige. There was no judgement there, just women helping women. So, this is why I take great umbridge in you trying (rather desperately) to paint me as a judgemental fundimentalist bible bashing lunatic. I am not. I've painted nobody as evil, nobody as horrible, nobody as trash or scum. And disagreeing about something as controversial as abortion or gay marriage or the Iraq war doesnot make the people who you are disagreeing with evil. I know this, do you?
I took your statements and addressed them. One by one, I did not cherry pick. Did I now call you evil. No, I addressed your comments.
Strange that you're responding to items that were not originally written by you.
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.
