Gov. Jerry Brown signs bill to increase access to abortions [W:148]

[nota bene]

well, if we are arguing from the perspective that a fetus IS human, I'm not sure they are comparable. 1) the death penalty deals with a person who has run afoul of the legal system (the fetus totally lacks such ability), and regardless of what you think of war, it's rather necessary at times and the killing occurs within the context of a larger violent conflict. So clearly the law of self preservation comes into play

PS I'm against the death penalty due to the fact there is never a 100% means to remove doubt from our legal system and our jails are rather effective

And that is only one reason to oppose the death penalty. There are others.

Trying to compare abortion to the execution of a felon who's committed a capital offense or to war doesn't work because the circumstances are so wildly different. Silly to try to compare when there is so much to contrast.

Trying to compare humans to insects or even dogs or dolphins seems just as silly. What makes humans different? Well, consider who (not what) is thinking about all of this and posting their written opinions about it? Let me know if there is a mosquito or lamprey or doggie in disguise as a human posting here at DP.

 

[phattonez]

Do try to keep up, k? Read what I quoted to see what I was responding to.

Oh I did, and I used your logic to reach an absurd conclusion, showing that your argument doesn't work. Sensation of pain is not what makes murder wrong.

 

[vesper]

Trying to compare humans to insects or even dogs or dolphins seems just as silly. What makes humans different? Well, consider who (not what) is thinking about all of this and posting their written opinions about it? Let me know if there is a mosquito or lamprey or doggie in disguise as a human posting here at DP.

Never ever heard someone compare a fetus to insects before. That was a new one for me. Back in the seventies women were told that a fetus was just a blob of cells. It was after that abortions soared in the 80's. In the nineties better science allowed more complete studies and put that notion to rest. I personally believe because of the new found knowledge is why inpart the 90's abortion rates really started to decline. Today with the wonderful world of technology they are able to operate on a small fetus to correct some birth defects and have discovered that anesthetic needs to be administered because the fetus reacts to pain much earlier in its development than what was "thought" to be the case less than a decade ago. All this knowledge I believe is having an effect on the moral conscience of some single women to choose birth over abortion and may explain in part the soaring increases in births out of wedlock. It will be Science that will ultimately prove abortion to be an act of barbarism.

When I read that in the year 2013 almost 50% of all pregnancies are unintended and so many conceived because they were not using their birth control as directed or no birth control at all the month they conceived, and that 50% who seek abortions each year have had previous abortions showing a growing behavior of recklessness you have an OMG moment over what amounts to stupidity and can not be defended.

 

[minnie616]

...and that 50% who seek abortions each year have had previous abortions showing a growing behavior of recklessness you have an OMG moment over what amounts to stupidity and can not be defended.

Correction:

Most women who have abortions have had no previous abortions (52%) or only one previous abortion (26%).

Since Birth Control is not perfect and most women are fertile for over 30 years the likelihood of one or two unintended pregnancies is very high even when a woman is using birth control.

A pro-life woman on this board posted this link from the National Abortion Federation:

MYTH: Women are using abortion as a method of birth control.

In fact, half of all women getting abortions report that contraception was used during the month they became pregnant.1 Some of these couples had used the method improperly; some had forgotten or neglected to use it on the particular occasion they conceived; and some had used a contraceptive that failed. No contraceptive method prevents pregnancy 100% of the time.

If abortion were used as a primary method of birth control, a typical woman would have at least two or three pregnancies per year - 30 or more during her lifetime. In fact, most women who have abortions have had no previous abortions (52%) or only one previous abortion (26%).5
Considering that most women are fertile for over 30 years, and that birth control is not perfect, the likelihood of having one or two unintended pregnancies is very high.

National Abortion Federation: Women Who Have Abortions

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Correction:

Most women who have abortions have had no previous abortions (52%) or only one previous abortion (26%).

Unless I am reading that wrong, you presented a 2% difference and the real number was 48%, not 50%. Which is rather meaningless, to say the least

 

[minnie616]

Unless I am reading that wrong, you presented a 2% difference and the real number was 48%, not 50%. Which is rather meaningless, to say the least

vesper also said that 50% had previous abortions with a s meaning multiple abortions previously ...
I was correcting the whole statement and putting it back in context with the correct stats.

I was also pointing out that birth control does fail at times.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

vesper also said that 50% had previous abortions with a s meaning multiple abortions previously ...

Huh? I read it as 50% have had abortions in the past, with no indication on how many each individual had (some had multiple abortions others did not)

 

[minnie616]

Huh? I read it as 50% have had abortions in the past, with no indication on how many each individual had (some had multiple abortions others did not)

And what do you think vesper meant when she said showing a growing behavior of recklessness ?

 

[vesper]

Correction:

Most women who have abortions have had no previous abortions (52%) or only one previous abortion (26%).

Since Birth Control is not perfect and most women are fertile for over 30 years the likelihood of one or two unintended pregnancies is very high even when a woman is using birth control.

A pro-life woman on this board posted this link from the National Abortion Federation:




National Abortion Federation: Women Who Have Abortions

According to the Guttmacher Institute's most recent report,

• Each year, two percent of women aged 15–44 have an abortion. Half have had at least one previous abortion.[2,3]

References they give for these stats are

2. Jones RK and Kooistra, K., Abortion incidence and access to services in the United States, 2008, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2011, 43(1):41-50.

3. Jones RK et al., Repeat abortion in the United States, Occasional Report, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2006, No. 29.

You can reference them yourself at the bottom of the page where you can click on them and will be instructed how to obtain a copy.

Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

And what do you think vesper meant when she said showing a growing behavior of recklessness ?

I'm not sure what that has to do with my previous post. But it's normal to refer to a mixed group like that in the plural.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

According to the Guttmacher Institute's most recent report,

• Each year, two percent of women aged 15–44 have an abortion. Half have had at least one previous abortion.[2,3]

References they give for these stats are

2. Jones RK and Kooistra, K., Abortion incidence and access to services in the United States, 2008, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2011, 43(1):41-50.

3. Jones RK et al., Repeat abortion in the United States, Occasional Report, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2006, No. 29.

You can reference them yourself at the bottom of the page where you can click on them and will be instructed how to obtain a copy.

Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States

As stated, a 2% difference in this context is rather meaningless. I'm not sure why you two would even feel a need to dispute each other over it.

What you two take from those numbers is something entirely different, and I highly doubt either of you is going to see your arguments succeed or fail over that small degree of difference that can likely be accounted for in the margin of error

 

[vesper]

As stated, a 2% difference in this context is rather meaningless. I'm not sure why you two would even feel a need to dispute each other over it.

What you two take from those numbers is something entirely different, and I highly doubt either of you is going to see your arguments succeed or fail over that small degree of difference that can likely be accounted for in the margin of error

I assure you my response to Minnie was not to squabble over a couple of percentage points but to help her understand that she was not seeing her own study as actually validating what I stated earlier and that because 50% of those who abort each year, have done so in the past AT LEAST ONE TIME and points to a pattern of irresponsible behavior.

 

[minnie616]

According to the Guttmacher Institute's most recent report,

• Each year, two percent of women aged 15–44 have an abortion. Half have had at least one previous abortion.[2,3]

References they give for these stats are

2. Jones RK and Kooistra, K., Abortion incidence and access to services in the United States, 2008, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2011, 43(1):41-50.

3. Jones RK et al., Repeat abortion in the United States, Occasional Report, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2006, No. 29.

You can reference them yourself at the bottom of the page where you can click on them and will be instructed how to obtain a copy.

Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States

Thanks for providing your source.
I stand corrected. Yes, according to the Guttmacher Institute half had at least one abortion.

But I still agree with the fact that birth control is not 100 percent effective even when used properly and one to two unexpected would not be usual during a woman's fertile lifetime.

 

[minnie616]

As stated, a 2% difference in this context is rather meaningless. I'm not sure why you two would even feel a need to dispute each other over it. ...

And yet you squabble when I point out that less than .08 percent of legal abortions in the USA occur after viability and that they are the extremes cases.
Where the woman's life or irreparable damage to major bodily function would take place if the pregnancy continued or the fetus would be stillborn or would only live a few hours or minutes.

And you dispute that figure because of the Gosnell case even though what he did was NOT legal.

There are only 4 doctors who perform legal abortions after viability in the USA and they are performed for the extreme cases I was referring to .

 

[Scrabaholic]

Oh I did, and I used your logic to reach an absurd conclusion, showing that your argument doesn't work. Sensation of pain is not what makes murder wrong.

All you did was post something totally irrelevant to my post.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

And yet you squabble when I point out that less than .08 percent of legal abortions in the USA occur after viability and that they are the extremes cases.

If you're referring to the fact that I said those numbers were questionable, then the two incidences are not even comparable. Here you're disputing the claim of 50% by pointing to another figure that says 48%. With the viability number, my argument is based on those numbers being self reported with no means to reliably audit them.

One is speaking to an insignificant statistical difference, the other speaks to the accuracy and means of actual data collection, and the absence of a reliable process to verify them

And the reason I cite the Gosnell case is because it demonstrates how unreliable the current reporting method is, through extensive govt fact finding and reporting (the evidence gathering process and court proceedings)

I'm honestly unsure how or why anyone would even try to equate the two when they are so obviously different, speak to completely separate issues, and exist on disparate contextual plains in how they shape the meaning of the data under discussion.

 

[francois60]

The late term abortion issue is like the voter fraud issue in that it's rare simply because in the states where it happens the most, the governments are uninterested in finding out how bad the problem is.

 

[minnie616]

The late term abortion issue is like the voter fraud issue in that it's rare....

And there is a difference between legal and illegal abortions.

Voter fraud is illegal also.

 

[phattonez]

All you did was post something totally irrelevant to my post.

If you can't understand the nature of my argument then you're not worth talking to.

 

[nota bene]

I was also pointing out that birth control does fail at times.

When used responsibly and correctly, it hardly ever does. The failure is generally on the part of the human rather than the contraceptive method. And when you're on the Pill and your partner uses a condom....

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

When used responsibly and correctly, it hardly ever does. The failure is generally on the part of the human rather than the contraceptive method. And when you're on the Pill and your partner uses a condom....

Let's assume your average woman makes her sexual debut somewhere around 18 years old (which is being conservative), and completes menopause at 50. Let's further assume she has a couple partners she stays with and has sex with for a year or two each, and gets married at the national average --27 -- and has sex at least a couple times a week from that point until menopause.

Let's assume she has a couple kids, conceived quickly and without problems, but uses birth control always in between.

So this is an utterly typical woman, in terms of her sexual and reproductive history.

Over the course of her sexually active and fertile life, she will have as many as 400 individual opportunities to get pregnant, and she will be sexually active during the overwhelming majority of them. And more likely than not, she will not know exactly when each of those opportunities is occurring.

If she uses the pill, she will have nearly 11,700 opportunities to make a mistake, and even the most vigilant woman will make many over the course of 32 years. Since she is probably not aware of her exact moment of ovulation -- which could occur in any one of her inevitable failures -- any one of these mistakes could be the one that lands her with an unwanted pregnancy.

Even if she is not on a user error-prone method -- say, an IUD or even a tubal -- the chance for failure is always present. Some women with tubals become pregnant 10 or 20 years later due to their body reversing it, or the clips coming off.

And then let's factor in what we call "reality." That most people are not utterly typical, that most people change contraception several times, and that most people will not perfectly plan every single sexual action they ever make within a 30 to 40 year time span, because humans just aren't perfect.

Quite frankly, it is a miracle and a testament to people's dedication to contraception that there isn't more unwanted pregnancy than there is.

 

[francois60]

And there is a difference between legal and illegal abortions.

Voter fraud is illegal also.

Sure. I was just observing that when pro-choice advocates say late term abortion is rare, it's often used as an excuse to not bother to make it illegal. Except that it's not as rare as they think, because doctors aren't reporting their illegal abortions.

 

[minnie616]

Sure. I was just observing that when pro-choice advocates say late term abortion is rare, it's often used as an excuse to not bother to make it illegal. Except that it's not as rare as they think, because doctors aren't reporting their illegal abortions.

Most doctors would not preform an abortion past 20 weeks gestation let alone past viability ( the limit of viability is 24 weeks gestation ) except in extreme cases not only because it illegal and they could lose their license but because after 20 weeks gestation the danger to the woman's life is much higher and they do not want to assume the liability.

Once 20 weeks gestation occurs the skull of the fetus is no longer pliable and certain highly trained techniques have to be used to prevent damage to a woman's uterus and life threading complications can occur.

Therefore only highly trained doctors are given licenses to preform legal abortions past the 20 week gestation mark.

And as I have said many times there are only 4 doctors in the USA who are licensed to perform legal abortions past 24 weeks gestation.

So are there any other abortions doctors as unethical and crazy as Gosnell? ... Maybe but I betting there are less than handful because most doctors in the USA ...even unethical , crazy ones would not chance the liability let alone , losing their license and going to jail just to perform an illegal abortion when there plenty of legal abortions to keep them in business .

 

[francois60]

Hopefully. The reason Gosnell was able to operate so freely is because Pennsylvania made a decision to stop inspections of clinics.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Most doctors would not preform an abortion past 20 weeks gestation let alone past viability ( the limit of viability is 24 weeks gestation ) except in extreme cases not only because it illegal and they could lose their license but because after 20 weeks gestation the danger to the woman's life is much higher and they do not want to assume the liability.

Once 20 weeks gestation occurs the skull of the fetus is no longer pliable and certain highly trained techniques have to be used to prevent damage to a woman's uterus and life threading complications can occur.

Therefore only highly trained doctors are given licenses to preform legal abortions past the 20 week gestation mark.

And as I have said many times there are only 4 doctors in the USA who are licensed to perform legal abortions past 24 weeks gestation.

So are there any other abortions doctors as unethical and crazy as Gosnell? ... Maybe but I betting there are less than handful because most doctors in the USA ...even unethical , crazy ones would not chance the liability let alone , losing their license and going to jail just to perform an illegal abortion when there plenty of legal abortions to keep them in business .

what's to chance? Gosnell was required to keep records of many of the illegal abortions he performed and was able to doctor the data by a slight altering of the angle that he measured the fetus at, and was self-reporting on this instances without any means to be reliably audited. hence, the data about the the number of such abortions is not reliable.

Not sure what you don't understand about that

Most doctors would not preform an abortion past 20 weeks gestation let alone past viability ( the limit of viability is 24 weeks gestation ) except in extreme cases not only because it illegal and they could lose their license but because after 20 weeks gestation the danger to the woman's life is much higher and they do not want to assume the liability.

You simply DO NOT KNOW THIS. Numerous doctors did not report Gosnell after treating numerous patients for injuries (some leading to death) caused at his clinic, despite such being in contradiction to both professional conduct and PA state law. In fact, during the grand jury investigation, they were able to only uncover 1 such report