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.
Posting non stop, yet can't define what she thinks about abortion.
I'll assume what I posted previously, based on your posts and definitions: You believe that abortion is OK until delivery.
Is that true? Hint: It's a yes or no question.
Lol no it isn’t a yes or no question. Is the baby severely ill? Is the moms life in danger? Unless I am involved personally or am a doctor with access to the medical records then I trust the woman to make her best decision based on her feelings.
Posting non stop? Gee you’re right there with me denying women to have their own minds and ability to make a choice if it isn’t the one you would make.
Lol no it isn’t a yes or no question. Is the baby severely ill? Is the moms life in danger? Unless I am involved personally or am a doctor with access to the medical records then I trust the woman to make her best decision based on her feelings.
Posting non stop? Gee you’re right there with me denying women to have their own minds and ability to make a choice if it isn’t the one you would make.
Ok, then I'll define:
Elective abortions just because. No one is sick, injured, hurt. Mother's life is not in danger.
....AND ..... GO!!!
*crickets*
I mentioned the nonstop posting because you have NOT ONCE, explained your own opinions on abortion. Lots of parroting, the law, it's her decision, I'm not one to say .... that's all crap.
Because if that is TRULY how you feel, you are 100% pro killing the baby until the second he or she takes their first breath of air.
Correct, but read the entire thing. 10% is directly attributable to the abortion itself. The balance is attributable to the mental effects of having an abortion. The shame, the guts, the low self esteem.
In other words, 81% are mentally worse off after having an abortion than if they didn't. Case closed. Science has spoken. You believe in science right?
That is not what the study says. Not case closed.
Pregnancy in itself causes "mental defects". Hormonal changes, all sorts of emotions. So does birth. Approximately 70-80% of women who give birth also suffer from depression or mental effects. Ten to 15% suffer severe clinical depression.
Did that one study take into account the women's mental health before the abortion? The circumstances of the abortion? Was it late term, was the pregnancy wanted but the abortion for health issues? Did the women's relationships with her partner and family have a bearing on her mental state at the time of the abortion? How does abortion compare to miscarriage or still born? How does this study compare to the 6 other studies? What do they have in common, what is different?
If you had waited to have an abortion until the 20th week, knowing you legally could and the unborn baby looks like a baby, has a head, arms, legs, feet, hands, fingers, toes, fingerprints, over 2 million of her own eggs and can feel pain, would you be more affected by that? Would it have given you pause at that point in time?
I ask the question because that is the basis of the thread. When should a woman have the right to do as she wishes with her own body and when should she not? Things change as the unborn baby grows. She is not always just a bunch of unrecognizable and unfeeling cells.
Elective abortions just because. No one is sick, injured, hurt. Mother's life is not in danger.
....AND ..... GO!!!
*crickets*
I mentioned the nonstop posting because you have NOT ONCE, explained your own opinions on abortion. Lots of parroting, the law, it's her decision, I'm not one to say .... that's all crap.
Because if that is TRULY how you feel, you are 100% pro killing the baby until the second he or she takes their first breath of air.
So there you go. Heard you LOUD AND CLEAR.
Elective abortions late term doesn’t happen. Late term are done for severe medical complications. I am not privy to a woman’s personal reason to abort so I don’t judge them or their reasons. First trimester I support for any reason as I have repeated said. Unlike a dogs pregnancy a woman has the ability to think and feel for herself, her desires takes precedent over a peanut sized fetus. 2nd trimester as I also have no info on her personal life, medical or financial information I will again trust her judgment. Not sure how I can more clear as I and many others have said. Pro choice, I have no need to judge or dictate to any woman
It's odd, though, as she flaunted her description as just a clump of tissue or cells as a reason why the abortion was fine. As if when the baby was more developed, the appearance would matter.
Just a weird argument to use when she literally doesn't care what stage of development the baby is. She needs a different argument, since that one has been dismantled.
From the 1600's up until the 1800's, abortion was completely legal in the United States. It was not until after that it was restricted. So which way would you prefer? The legal abortion rules prior to the 1800's or the rules after 1800's?
What makes you like one law over another?
If we get the law changed to no abortions after 12 weeks, will you like that law more or less? What about when we get it changed to 6 weeks? What about when we get it banned completely? Which law will you prefer?
Are you aware it was actually the liberal states that initially started restricting abortions, starting with Connecticut in 1861? Not exactly conservative bible thumper territory. Read the history in the link I posted.
"1821 – Connecticut: The first restrictive law on abortion was passed, making it illegal for a pregnant woman to receive or take any type of “poison” intended for miscarriage. Contributing to this was the popularity of pennyroyal and other such drugs, which taken incorrectly or at too high a dose, caused death."
Your incorrect. the US followed British common law which restricted the time limit on abortion to quickening. That is pretty much the same as Roe v Wade.
It's odd, though, as she flaunted her description as just a clump of tissue or cells as a reason why the abortion was fine. As if when the baby was more developed, the appearance would matter.
Just a weird argument to use when she literally doesn't care what stage of development the baby is. She needs a different argument, since that one has been dismantled.
Nothing has been dismantled. You are arguing with yourself, shrug.
Do you recognize that abortion kills the baby or do you play with language to avoid acknowledging that outright?
Honestly? Depends on who I'm talking to. If I were talking to my buddies in the band, GWAR, I might call myself a baby killer if I had an abortion. I'm not shrinking from that language in horror. Words don't really twist me up like that. If I were talking to my sister in law who had a mid term miscarriage, and who is raising small children now, no, I would not use that kind of language because I am sensitive to HER FEELINGS, and really I wouldn't likely bring up the subject at all. And also honestly? When I was pregnant and vibing with hormones, and when I was raising babies myself, I was less supportive of abortion rights than I am now, although I was always at least somewhat pro choice. I found the idea pretty repugnant though. But I can recognize that as an EMOTIONAL BIAS, which is what you're trying to hard to trigger by saying, "baby baby baby murder murder death kill puppies aah!" Sorry, not all of us are that delicate in the feels. But I generally do not go around trying to trigger people emotionally into agreeing with me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00
This is such a silly, easily disproven lie.
My oncologist was the first call I made after I discovered that two forms of birth control failed (even though I had also been told chemo rendered me infertile). At two years post cancer, he was the one who suggested an abortion and given where I was in the pregnancy, he recommended going to Planned Parenthood because I could get it faster than working through the hospital system.
When I went to Planned Parenthood, I explained the situation AND WAS STILL COUNSELED ABOUT OTHER OPTIONS, including some support options to help with the lengthy bed rest I would need. Of course, those support options didn't come anywhere close to making pregnancy either financially viable or a reasonable health trade-off for me. But if they had been for another woman, they would have been counseled about it.
Planned Parenthood isn't the boogyman you've been ignorantly led to believe.
PP did the test that confirmed my first pregnancy. Despite the fact that I was poor and only 19, they did offer counseling, and it was not geared towards, "Ya know, we can take care of that for ya!" They just asked me if I would like a counselor to speak with me about my options. I said no, that as I had known I was pregnant for some weeks, I'd already given it thought and decided I wanted to keep the baby. So they gave me referrals and instructions for prenatal care at a clinic near where I lived at the time.
The one thing that I have always wished, is that instead of marching around trying to trigger people with their dead baby signs and harassing women on the street, that instead those folks were actively pro adoption advocates who were willing to encourage women in seeking that alternative. Giving women support in seeking other paths, rather than just shaming. Seriously, if the shame were dropped...if women didn't have to worry about anyone shaming them for having had sex and gotten pregnant, if women could make decisions in an environment without any of that crap, you might in fact get more adoptions going. A real difference might actually be made. And it would also be really nice to have more faith that adoptions and the foster system weren't full of abuse, neglect, trafficking and molestation. That would be cool, too.
Instead, the group that I used to see outside of a PP I once worked near, featured men whose main motivation seemed to be that it gave them the excuse to yell nasty things at women. Real life trolls. Not even just women going in or out of PP either, but random women on the street. What a fun way to spend a Friday afternoon, screaming misogynistic insults at strangers and telling them that they are going to hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile
I already told you I saw it. Clump of cells. Nothing more nothing less.
Did you know that many women are not affected by an abortion?
I once miscarried at 5 weeks. It was a slightly heavier and crampier than usual period. Nothing to see there. The only difference between that and the kind of abortion given before 12 weeks (pills) was that I didn't have to seek it out, it just happened. I didn't feel any kind of loss. There was nothing but relief.
That's probably pretty ghoulish to the "omg babies!" folks. But I'm also not really that hung up on the general sacredness of every human life. I'm more ethically centered on the capacity for suffering. I don't believe that a brain dead adult with a heartbeat must be kept alive on machines, alive at all cost. I think that euthanasia should be an option for the suffering terminally ill. Including infants, actually, of the sort born with conditions that mean that the parents are told "Your baby is very likely to die in hours, days, months, maybe a few years, but they will definitely be suffering the entire time." There is a mitochondrial disorder that causes fast decline to a point that a child will be in an induced coma on a ventilator for however long they live. I support the right for a parent to make a heartbreaking choice to let them go instead.
So even if a tiny tadpole "baby" can swim away from something, does not prove to me that they are fully feeling and sentient. Not more than a creature that I would use as fish bait, a minnow or something. In that moment, they do not have the processing capacity that a BABY has. And if a BABY is born with a brain less functional than that of an invertebrate, doomed to a painful existence, zero quality of life, and an early death....all of which causes massive suffering and extreme expense that destroys the family's financial security ('cause that's how we do here in Murica) with NO likelihood at all of any kind of a life as a functioning human for that infant... Yeah, I'm not one to argue to intervene and save its life. Some parents might. That is their choice. But they should not have to.
I don't think that suffering is always noble. And I don't think that life is always better than death at any cost.
Not even human life.
After 1,032 posts in this thread, here is what we have discovered.
Golden Pine Tree is the ONE AND ONLY person who believes in the woman's right to decide what to do with her own body.
Everyone else here does not believe the woman has a right to decide. We all believe she has the right to do certain things we allow her to do and only within a certain timeframe.
We have discovered the extreme hypocrisy of many who claim to be pro-choice, because they all have limitations to that free choice which means they are not for the woman's right to control her own health. Everyone is using their own moral compass and imposing it on the woman.
We have discovered many people will do mental and language gymnastics in order to avoid answering simple questions, because they know if they answered the questions their hypocrisy will be even more exposed.
We have discovered people who claim an unborn baby is just a bunch of unrecognizable tissue and should never be a consideration are completely hypocritical because every single person except Golden Pine Tree believes something changes as the unborn baby grows and therefore they feel it is critical to take the woman's right to decide her own health away from her.
We have discovered many people try to play both sides of the coin which is completely hypocritical.
In the end, every single person posting with the exception of Golden Pine Tree believes a woman can only do what is dictated she can do and the only difference between us all is what are the timeframes for that.
It's been fun and enlightening. Enjoy denying the facts and denying science.
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.
