abortion

[Cassin]

Mandatory birth control sounds a bit communist. People would freak out.

 

[timbo]

Can you convince me that somebody who decides to allow a rape victim the oppertunity to have an abortion and avoid a life time of humiliation and shame, after she has already been shamed in the worst way a woman could be, hasn't taken their own ego out of the equazian in making that decision? doubt it

Forcing such a woman to give birth just so your views can take precedence over her mental health comes across as selfish, not to mention authoritarian and misogynistic.

I hate to sit here and slap you over the head with information 3 times in a row, but rape/ incest related abortions make up less than 1% of the total procedures. Your only argument doesn't make a difference 99% of the time. The vast majority of abortions have nothing to do with rape OR the health of the mother!

 

[s.a.f]

Is'nt it the womans choice? :whistle:

 

[timbo]

Is'nt it the womans choice? :whistle:

Very clever, but no. If what I am arguing is true, and there is possibly a human being inside the mother's womb, then why is it considered the mother's choice whether it lives or dies? Does the mother have a choice to kill the baby at 11 months old? Do I have a choice to kill you? No! It's called murder. A person's life should not be ended on another persons volition, even if it's the mother.

 

[CCS]

A fetus is a baby unless it's to be aborted. :shakehead:

so is a seed a tree?

I think the biggest thing that made me change my views on abortion was the simple question: "What if you're wrong?" It seems like if you're not sure whether it's a human life or not, why not err on the side of caution? Because if you're wrong, you would have been a part of the largest genocide in the history of the world.

Obviously life starts when the brain is capable of consciousness. For most, this is a 6 or 7 months in the womb. 5 months is a very safe bet.

Surely you agree that an embryo is not a person. The vast majority of abortions are early. Let's just outlaw partial birth abortion and keep the early stuff legal.

 

[CCS]

Bekim...a cross between Borat and Boris Johnson.

I've mentioned before my proposal to tackle the issue of abortion.

All females at birth/puberty undergo a simple procedure to temporarily defertilize them, mechanically or otherwise.

This procedure is easily reversible at the time when the patient decides to have a child.

I think this is logically sound because only perhaps 1 in 10,000 instances of sexual intercourse are for procreation.

Otherwise active contraception needs to be applied almost everyday or so. Reducing that to perhaps a handful in ones' lifetime saves a ton of money, resolves the controversy of abortion and means all children are born wanted.

I might be missing something, does anyone see why this would be unworkable?

Sounds like HM. Very nice, but not in existence yet.

 

[CCS]

Can you convince me that somebody who decides to allow a rape victim the oppertunity to have an abortion and avoid a life time of humiliation and shame, after she has already been shamed in the worst way a woman could be, hasn't taken their own ego out of the equazian in making that decision? doubt it

Forcing such a woman to give birth just so your views can take precedence over her mental health comes across as selfish, not to mention authoritarian and misogynistic.

I hate to sit here and slap you over the head with information 3 times in a row, but rape/ incest related abortions make up less than 1% of the total procedures. Your only argument doesn't make a difference 99% of the time. The vast majority of abortions have nothing to do with rape OR the health of the mother!

I hate to slap you over the head with information, but third trimester abortions are less than 1% of abortions. 85% are 1st trimester. Women who don't want kids typically get an abortion early when it is cheap. They pay big bucks for later abortions if it has birth defects or something.

 

[CCS]

Is'nt it the womans choice? :whistle:

Very clever, but no. If what I am arguing is true, and there is possibly a human being inside the mother's womb, then why is it considered the mother's choice whether it lives or dies? Does the mother have a choice to kill the baby at 11 months old? Do I have a choice to kill you? No! It's called murder. A person's life should not be ended on another persons volition, even if it's the mother.

Agreed, but I think you should do some serious thinking about when personhood actually begins before you go force women into an 18 year commitment. At what stage in the womb do you think there is a person there?
At conception?
When there are finger nails? (10 weeks)
When there are nerves in the arm? (6 weeks)
When there is a developed brain with brainwaves (6 months)
Birth?

 

[CCS]

Mandatory birth control sounds a bit communist. People would freak out.

Yes, but not if they were allowed to turn it off at will. You'd just be setting the default condition for people who are too lazy to go get it. If they really want to unsterilize themselves at any moment, they can do it.

I believe people should have to have a password on their credit report to stop fraud. It is called a credit freeze. Anyone can get it, but must request it. Most don't know about it. I think it should be done for everyone, and then they should be allowed to go back to the old way if they really want to. Communist? I think not. Its called paternalistic libertarianism.

I believe in the same thing for marriage contracts. The state sets up a default contract for anyone to use if they want to get married in a hurry at vegas. It is designed by experts. But if you really want a different contract, the two of you can draft and bring in your own. You don't have to use the suggested one.

Same with landlord tenant contracts. The state should have a default that is valid in the absence of a written contract that specifies the differences.

 

[somone uk]

Bekim...a cross between Borat and Boris Johnson.

I've mentioned before my proposal to tackle the issue of abortion.

All females at birth/puberty undergo a simple procedure to temporarily defertilize them, mechanically or otherwise.

This procedure is easily reversible at the time when the patient decides to have a child.

I think this is logically sound because only perhaps 1 in 10,000 instances of sexual intercourse are for procreation.

Otherwise active contraception needs to be applied almost everyday or so. Reducing that to perhaps a handful in ones' lifetime saves a ton of money, resolves the controversy of abortion and means all children are born wanted.

I might be missing something, does anyone see why this would be unworkable?

Sounds like HM. Very nice, but not in existence yet.

:whistle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrauterine_device
could be a good investment in the uk to cut the amount of teenage pregnancy and thus child tax credits

free and encouraged IUDs for all
(i know the catholic church calls it abortion but lets not let them be detrimental to our economy)

 

[s.a.f]

Because he's a troll. :dunno:

 

[Jacob]

According to WHO and Guttmacher, approximately 68,000 women die annually as a result of complications of unsafe abortion; and between two million and seven million women each year survive unsafe abortion but sustain long-term damage or disease (incomplete abortion, infection (sepsis), haemorrhage, and injury to the internal organs, such as puncturing or tearing of the uterus).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_abortion

^^^ thats what your argueing for a return to.

WHO and Guttmacher? Not exactly neutral on the issue are those two? For example..."Guttmacher, which is the research arm of Planned Parenthood and conducted the study with money from the pro-abortion Hewlitt Foundation, examined data from 13 countries to come to its conclusions."

Here in the USA..."The National Center for Heath Statistics reveals that before 1941, there were over 1,400 abortion-related deaths. Yet after Penicillin became available to control infections, the number of deaths was reduced in the 1950's to approximately 250 per year. By 1966, with abortion still illegal in all states, the number of deaths had dropped steadily to 120 and was at just 25 when abortion was legalized nationwide in 1973.

Statistics from the agency afterwards show that the number of abortion deaths rose in 1974 and 1975, despite abortion's legality."

Also.." The world's largest abortion provider, International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), has recently acknowledged an alarming "surge" in maternal deaths in South Africa, challenging the pro-abortion mantra that liberal abortion laws decrease maternal mortality.

Maternal deaths increased by twenty percent in the period 2005-2007 in South Africa, a country that since 1996 has had one of the most permissive abortion laws on the African continent.

While deaths attributable to HIV/AIDS account for the biggest portion of maternal deaths in South Africa, IPPF acknowledges that a portion of deaths are "due to complications of abortion" in a country where the procedure is legal and widely available."

junk science/propaganda movie. Claims from a few pro-life doctors don't equal indisputable established fact.

No it isn't junk science. The film- propaganda? Why..because it shows a "fetus" fighting for "it's" life?

Nobody is disputing whether or not a fetus will turn into a human given enough time , so it's hardly surprising that it would start to develop human features.

The real issue in this debate is whether not you think morals and ethical priorities should be guided by selflessness or selfishness.

Can you convince me that somebody who decides to allow a rape victim the oppertunity to have an abortion and avoid a life time of humiliation and shame, after she has already been shamed in the worst way a woman could be, hasn't taken their own ego out of the equazian in making that decision? doubt it

Forcing such a woman to give birth just so your views can take precedence over her mental health comes across as selfish, not to mention authoritarian and misogynistic.

No, the real issue is whether killing of these developing human beings(as you now admit to) is just fine, because of "choice".

Can you convince me that a woman who has an abortion for the reason you indicated won't suffer as well? You act like killing the baby will kill the pain and suffering caused by the rape. Abortion can make things even worse for that girl/woman. But as someone else keeps pointing out here, those situations are not anywhere near the bulk of why abortions take place.

Fetal development at 12 weeks

The fetus measures about two and a half inches and starts to make its own movements. You will start to see the top of the uterus above the pelvic bone. Your doctor may hear the baby's heartbeat with special instruments. The sex organs of the baby should start to become clear.

 

[Jacob]

Agreed, but I think you should do some serious thinking about when personhood actually begins before you go force women into an 18 year commitment. At what stage in the womb do you think there is a person there?
At conception?
When there are finger nails? (10 weeks)
When there are nerves in the arm? (6 weeks)
When there is a developed brain with brainwaves (6 months)
Birth?

Actually there doesn't have to be an 18 year commitment. There's adoption. There can be a lifetime of regret if aborting as well.

There's a developing person there at the moment of conception. A sperm..a million sperm...cannot on their own create a developing human being. Your questions there are very good ones. All of them show signs of an obvious human being developing there. Just the definition of abortion shows you it's the ending of a life. It's a termination. You don't use terms like that if' it's not something that is alive.

 

[The Gardener]

In a world where there are global food shortages, high levels of carbon pollution, high levels of poverty and reliance on an increasingly broke governmental structure, overcrowded cities, and a rapidly approaching peak oil issue, why should we FORCE women to be having children that they can't afford or don't have the resources to care for?

This planet is well past its organic carrying capacity. Better to cull down the population in ways that make sense, or we'll find ourselves in a situation where the cull will be much more brutal and chaotic.

 

[timbo]

In a world where there are global food shortages, high levels of carbon pollution, high levels of poverty and reliance on an increasingly broke governmental structure, overcrowded cities, and a rapidly approaching peak oil issue, why should we FORCE women to be having children that they can't afford or don't have the resources to care for?

The problem isn't actually a food shortage, there is just a major flaw in the way resources are distributed throughout the world. As of 2006, there are an estimated 1 billion overweight people in the world compared to 800 million malnourished people. That's not a food shortage my friend.

This planet is well past its organic carrying capacity. Better to cull down the population in ways that make sense, or we'll find ourselves in a situation where the cull will be much more brutal and chaotic.

I'm sorry, but are you trying to convince me that even if abortion is killing a human being, that it's alright because of overpopulation?

 

[The Gardener]

The starvation, and my comment about food shortages, specifically pertains to the reliance on hydrocarbon fertilizers to perform high yield agriculture. As the price of oil continues to increase, and as the water-intensive methods of western agriculture continue to deplete fresh water sources, the unsustainable nature of our food supply will reveal itself.

Overpopulation is real and needs to be dealt with. Whether you mandate birth control, or allow pregnant women who do not want to have a child the option to terminate a pregnancy, etc... this needs to be addressed.

Is abortion killing a human being? Yes, after a trimester or so it probably is. But, with no life experiences, no sense of "self" formed, no emotional bonds, etc, I think this is a completely different situation from that of a fully grown human being killed.

 

[HughJass]

Can you convince me that somebody who decides to allow a rape victim the oppertunity to have an abortion and avoid a life time of humiliation and shame, after she has already been shamed in the worst way a woman could be, hasn't taken their own ego out of the equazian in making that decision? doubt it

Forcing such a woman to give birth just so your views can take precedence over her mental health comes across as selfish, not to mention authoritarian and misogynistic.

I hate to sit here and slap you over the head with information 3 times in a row, but rape/ incest related abortions make up less than 1% of the total procedures. Your only argument doesn't make a difference 99% of the time. The vast majority of abortions have nothing to do with rape OR the health of the mother!

and if 1%= 30,000 women?

 

[HughJass]

The starvation, and my comment about food shortages, specifically pertains to the reliance on hydrocarbon fertilizers to perform high yield agriculture. As the price of oil continues to increase, and as the water-intensive methods of western agriculture continue to deplete fresh water sources, the unsustainable nature of our food supply will reveal itself.

Overpopulation is real and needs to be dealt with. Whether you mandate birth control, or allow pregnant women who do not want to have a child the option to terminate a pregnancy, etc... this needs to be addressed.

Indeed, abortion is a lot less ugly than hundreds of people macheteing each other to death over the last bag of rice or millions dying from a pandemic.

 

[HughJass]

Here in the USA..."The National Center for Heath Statistics reveals that before 1941, there were over 1,400 abortion-related deaths. Yet after Penicillin became available to control infections, the number of deaths was reduced in the 1950's to approximately 250 per year. By 1966, with abortion still illegal in all states, the number of deaths had dropped steadily to 120 and was at just 25 when abortion was legalized nationwide in 1973.

so you have no problem with coathangers, as long as-

a)there is some antibiotics around
b)only 25 women die a year

No it isn't junk science. The film- propaganda? Why..because it shows a "fetus" fighting for "it's" life?

it's there to elicit an emotional response. There is no evidence a fetus can feel pain.

No, the real issue is whether killing of these developing human beings(as you now admit to) is just fine, because of "choice".

who said it was 'fine'? your adjective, not mine.

'choice'......you act like women are discarding these things like tissues simply because they can. You honestly don't see the decision being motivated by a little more than simply an individual exercising her choice? That just demonstrates further contempt for women- you think they wouldn't be anymore conflicted over the decision then they would be when trying to decide between the red dress over the blue one.

Can you convince me that a woman who has an abortion for the reason you indicated won't suffer as well?

You act like killing the baby will kill the pain and suffering caused by the rape

.

And forcing her against her will to give birth to something that shares the DNA of her rapist will be good for her mental health?

I'm not sure if I'd have the courage to ask a woman that question.

Abortion can make things even worse for that girl/woman.

Only if she is surrounded by idealogues telling her she should hate herself for having an abortion, which I'm sure you would be one of.

Besides, that is your opinion only. Call me crazy but I hardly think the victim would believe that the opinion of a stranger would be more important than her own- do you make a habit of letting other people make choices for you in your life? do you make a habit of letting other people tell you what is good for you and what isn't it?

I just don't see there being large groups of rape victims out there being traumatised by the decision they made about whether or not to keep it.

But as someone else keeps pointing out here, those situations are not anywhere near the bulk of why abortions take place.

Irrelevant.

If you force a women to give birth when she doesn't want to, be it for reasons of a carelessness over contraception, accident, change of financial circumstances or rape, then you're punishing her to satisfy your own idealogical bent.

 

[Bekim]

Bekim places order for the meats skewer

this uncle say is best for job possible different methods for goat

uncle also work in pets foods factory

Bekim