If a woman's right to terminate were overturned

[Orion]

Adoption is difficult for a reason. The state can't control who reproduces, that would be unconstitutional; but it can decide who is fit to be a parent if they want to receive children who are wards of the state. I think the foster care system is flawed and fraught with corruption, but I'm not sure that I agree with easing the restrictions. Children are sold into slavery every day around the world and they are sourced from all countries, including western ones; there are religious families who pride themselves on having 15 adopted children for their flock, but some of them are unhealthy and crazed (not all mind you, I've seen some beautifully organized families that have helped a lot of children).

I don't see adoption as the mandatory alternative to abortion though. It still deals with bodily sovereignty. Just like we can't stop people from reproducing, we can't stop people if they want to terminate a pregnancy. Pregnancy and child birth still carries risk to life, no matter how small in the modern world, and those risk should be weighed by the mother.

 

[OKgrannie]

Originally Posted by OKgrannie
Abortion isn't pretty, but neither is childbirth. It's very expensive and difficult to rear a child. It's also expensive and difficult to give birth.

The difference is abortion takes a life, birth is the next step in a new life developing. Both may be hard, but both have the opposite outcome.

You're missing the point, which is that adoption may be expensive and difficult for a reason. Why should we endeavor to make adoption EASIER and less expensive than bearing and birthing a child? If you really want a child, you will make the necessary sacrifices, if you don't want a child, you shouldn't be forced to that sacrifice.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Adoption is difficult for a reason. The state can't control who reproduces, that would be unconstitutional; but it can decide who is fit to be a parent if they want to receive children who are wards of the state. I think the foster care system is flawed and fraught with corruption, but I'm not sure that I agree with easing the restrictions.

Which do you suppose does more harm, bad parents abusing the adoption system or the government keeping children from being adopted into real families? I see a valid argument in favor of tight controls of adoption, but I have to wonder about those children who are never adopted and age out of the system as wards of the State. The State can do many things well and I probably believe in its power more than most, but it is no substitute for a stable and permanent family.

Children are sold into slavery every day around the world and they are sourced from all countries, including western ones...

And because the people who do this are affluent, nothing tends to happen to them. This is one instance in which I think the appropriate State response is to make a ****ing example instead of focusing on rehabilitation.

... there are religious families who pride themselves on having 15 adopted children for their flock, but some of them are unhealthy and crazed (not all mind you, I've seen some beautifully organized families that have helped a lot of children).

Maybe not the healthiest thing, but do you see this as fundamentally different than the people who have 15 biological children for the same purpose, besides the fact that you believe that the latter cannot be prevented?

I don't see adoption as the mandatory alternative to abortion though. It still deals with bodily sovereignty. Just like we can't stop people from reproducing, we can't stop people if they want to terminate a pregnancy. Pregnancy and child birth still carries risk to life, no matter how small in the modern world, and those risk should be weighed by the mother.

That is why I am opposed to banning abortion regardless of the state of adoption-- that and I believe in the principle that most people know what is best for their own families more than outsiders will or can.

 

[Orion]

Which do you suppose does more harm, bad parents abusing the adoption system or the government keeping children from being adopted into real families? I see a valid argument in favor of tight controls of adoption, but I have to wonder about those children who are never adopted and age out of the system as wards of the State. The State can do many things well and I probably believe in its power more than most, but it is no substitute for a stable and permanent family.

I am admittedly not totally familiar with the adoption process. I've met a few people who were in the midst of it and heard some of their experiences. My understanding is that they want placement to be the most compatible it can possibly be, and insure that there are not "give backs" later. Once people adopt a kid, it's their kid. Part of the reason the process is so lengthy is to test your true willingness to have a child.

And because the people who do this are affluent, nothing tends to happen to them. This is one instance in which I think the appropriate State response is to make a ****ing example instead of focusing on rehabilitation.

The rich getting a free pass on breaking the law is nothing new, but for what it's worth I agree with you.

Maybe not the healthiest thing, but do you see this as fundamentally different than the people who have 15 biological children for the same purpose, besides the fact that you believe that the latter cannot be prevented?

The fact that it cannot be prevented in a biological scenario is essentially the only reason why I would want to permit it to happen. Families that have litters frankly are disgusting to me and I don't think it is healthy for individual children to have to compete with a dozen siblings for parental affection. Not that I have any scientific basis for that belief. If it weren't so contentious and impossible to do, I would be totally okay with the state controling reproduction; note that I place all of the emphasis on the former. Societal degeneration has become a recent concern of mine.

That is why I am opposed to banning abortion regardless of the state of adoption-- that and I believe in the principle that most people know what is best for their own families more than outsiders will or can.

Agreed... and also, I think abortion decreases societal degeneration.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

I am admittedly not totally familiar with the adoption process.

Neither am I. It's merely a point to consider.

My understanding is that they want placement to be the most compatible it can possibly be, and insure that there are not "give backs" later. Once people adopt a kid, it's their kid. Part of the reason the process is so lengthy is to test your true willingness to have a child.

Certainly a noble aim, as indeed once you have adopted a child it is your child and giving it back is as loathsome as abandoning any child you've sworn to raise.

The fact that it cannot be prevented in a biological scenario is essentially the only reason why I would want to permit it to happen. Families that have litters frankly are disgusting to me and I don't think it is healthy for individual children to have to compete with a dozen siblings for parental affection. Not that I have any scientific basis for that belief.

See, I hold the opposite belief that larger and more tightly-knit families are healthier; growing up with numerous siblings and cousins teaches both independence and interdependence and being lavished with too much parental attention leads to neurosis and dependency. I don't intend to pry, but I am now curious as to the size and nature of your family growing up; I was the elder of two children and nevertheless still the victim of parental neglect, and I freely admit that my perception is colored by this experience.

If it weren't so contentious and impossible to do, I would be totally okay with the state controling reproduction; note that I place all of the emphasis on the former. Societal degeneration has become a recent concern of mine.

Welcome to the Dark Side. :kitty:

My objection to State intervention in reproduction is not that it's impossible, but that it is pointless and would prone to be hijacked by population growth zealots, when I believe that steady population growth is one of the signs of a healthy society. The only form of intervention I support is the mandatory sterilization of anyone deemed an unfit parent; people who abuse their children should not be allowed to have more.

Agreed... and also, I think abortion decreases societal degeneration.

Likewise agreed, though I would view high rates of abortion as a symptom of societal degeneration.

 

[Orion]

See, I hold the opposite belief that larger and more tightly-knit families are healthier; growing up with numerous siblings and cousins teaches both independence and interdependence and being lavished with too much parental attention leads to neurosis and dependency. I don't intend to pry, but I am now curious as to the size and nature of your family growing up; I was the elder of two children and nevertheless still the victim of parental neglect, and I freely admit that my perception is colored by this experience.

I have an older sister, that's it. I did have lots of cousins around in my younger days, and my parents had lots of siblings so that gave me lots of aunts and uncles to have around. I do agree that bigger families can be more supportive and conducive to raising children, but I don't know... nature obvious gave us the capacity it do it either way and that diversity has given us strength. Some people put all their eggs into one basket and others have many baskets.

Welcome to the Dark Side.

You are partly to blame but funny enough around the time when I was neck and neck with you in those eugenics debates, I had a few of those going on IRL (I have politically minded friends) and on other forums. It got the thought process working. I haven't really had deep discussions about it lately but I have kept my mind opening and have been looking around at society, and you know, I do think we are degenerating genetically.

My objection to State intervention in reproduction is not that it's impossible, but that it is pointless and would prone to be hijacked by population growth zealots, when I believe that steady population growth is one of the signs of a healthy society.

At risk of starting a debate with you, I don't think a booming population is healthy when it threatens resources and increases competition to absurd levels and in turn placing the focus on selfishness instead of community.

The only form of intervention I support is the mandatory sterilization of anyone deemed an unfit parent; people who abuse their children should not be allowed to have more.

Which goes back to my admission of the problems of creating such policy, and who is at the helm of it.

Likewise agreed, though I would view high rates of abortion as a symptom of societal degeneration.

Can you explain that one to me?

 

[rivrrat]

The primary reason I could never give a kid up for adoption is because I spent so many years in adoption homes and with foster kids. No way could I do that.

 

[VanceMack]

Up thread I was asked if I wish I'd been aborted. I didn't answer, but I think I will now.

Being raised by two mentally ill people, undiagnosed and untreated, in my own special hell. Would I wish I'd never been born? I really don't know. There's always been a lot of pain and ugliness in my family.

Ever see Donnie Darko?

There's a world of difference between what we think and hope will happen, and what actually does transpire.

I wont bore anyone with my tale of woe. What I WILL tell you is that Ive gone from what I grew up in to a halthey, powerful, and positive 28 year marriage, 4 children, several grandchildren, multiple degrees, and careers where I think I do some good in the world. My children are grown and strong, productive members of society. There is no telling what good may be done by them and by our grandchildren.

I know a LOT of very good therapists and victims advocates that are very effective in helping others, primarily due to their ability to grow from their own life experiences.
Yesterday doesnt dictate tomorrow, unless of course yesterday is a slaughtered child destroyed because they were unwanted or inconvenient. Then tomorrow is pretty well set for that child...and all they may have influenced.

 

[BDBoop]

Thank you, Vance. I know. I'm very high-functioning, all things considered. Life is good, I raised my daughter, had a marriage, have grandchildren. For the most part I'm happy.

 

[BDBoop]

I'm really happy to know you're not a therapist.

Well if you want to know the answer as to whether or not you wish you were born, kill yourself. If you succeed, I'm willing to say you wish you were never born. But if you can't do it, it's another story.

So what is it, can you hold that razor blade to your wrists and jerk? Or would you go on and try to make the best of the life you've had?

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Can you explain that one to me?

Higher rates of abortion indicate either more social aversion to raising a family or less material capacity. Either one is a troubling sign.

 

[Goshin]

So you prefer the women to die right along with the embryo? BTW baby is a term of endearment, you might as well call it a little sweetie, it would be about the same.

Regardless of the legality of it, abortions happen. Rich countries, poor countries, they happen. In countries where it is legal, its generally a very safe procedure. In countries where it is not safe women often die, to the tune of 70,000 a year.
Do you really want American women to be added to that list? Really??

Unsafe abortions kill 70,000 a year, harm millions | Reuters

I wonder if you would feel differently if you thought that was your sister or your own daughter whose life was at risk.

.

Been there, done that. A female relative whom I half-raised (in the absence of her father) was the subject; practically a daughter to me. Was asked to pay for an abortion when she got pregnant by some scumbag she was dating. Refused. Was asked to drive her to the clinic and bring her back home. Refused. Yes it was heart-wrenching but my belief that abortion is wrong isn't merely skin-deep, it is bone-deep.

To my mind I was being asked to participate in the murder of an innocent baby, because the erstwhile parents had been irresponsible and didn't want to reap the consequences. Aiding in the deliberate murder of inconvenient babies is something I will not do. She pleaded and cried... I cried too, because this girl is much beloved to me... but in the end I said "I'm sorry, but I cannot help you with this. I'm sorry you're in this fix, but it isn't the baby's fault, and I fear you will regret doing this. I can't be a part of it."

That was over a decade ago. She now has two young boys, and has told me more than once that she wishes she hadn't had that abortion. She has dreams about her aborted baby and wakes up crying, and says she will live with a troubled conscience all her life.

I tried to spare her this. I guess that makes me an evil tyrant who hates women, huh.

 

[iangb]

" I'm sorry you're in this fix, but it isn't the baby's fault, and I fear you will regret doing this. I can't be a part of it."

That was over a decade ago. She now has two young boys, and has told me more than once that she wishes she hadn't had that abortion. She has dreams about her aborted baby and wakes up crying, and says she will live with a troubled conscience all her life.

I tried to spare her this. I guess that makes me an evil tyrant who hates women, huh.

I would lay the blame for making women feeling guilty for having an abortion squarely at the feet of pro-lifers, yes. You don't see many pro-choicers calling people 'molesters' and 'murderers' for having an abortion.

 

[MaggieD]

Higher rates of abortion indicate either more social aversion to raising a family or less material capacity. Either one is a troubling sign.

I'd add to this that the higher rates also reflect it's having much less social stigma today. Cultural values have changed.

I would lay the blame for making women feeling guilty for having an abortion squarely at the feet of pro-lifers, yes.

I hope you're wrong. I would like to think that many women give serious consideration to that decision and 'feel guilty' because they are terminating their own child. To that other group of women who use abortion as a form of birth control, nothing makes them feel guilty. We are left with the hope, though, that they live with regret.

General question -- Why is it family and friends are asked to mourn with a young woman who has a miscarriage...and she mourns too...yet if that same young woman elects to have an abortion, we're to shrug our shoulders and say, "Oh, well." ?

Further, when we mourn with that young woman, we say things like, "I am sooo sorry. I can't imagine how you must feel." Perhaps we should say the same thing when we find a young woman has had an abortion. If that engenders guilt, then so be it.

My God!! -- If I saw puppies being aborted, I would cry my eyes out. You would ask me not to be emotional when it's a human life?

 

[iangb]

I hope you're wrong. I would like to think that many women give serious consideration to that decision and 'feel guilty' because they are terminating their own child. To that other group of women who use abortion as a form of birth control, nothing makes them feel guilty. We are left with the hope, though, that they live with regret.

WRT the bolded; That's my point. You hope that they feel guilty/regretfull, whereas I hope that they get on with their lives. I don't see anything to be guilty/regretful about, beyond the fact that it's upset a certain section of society who I don't agree with (I can still regret upsetting them, even if I don't agree with them).

General question -- Why is it family and friends are asked to mourn with a young woman who has a miscarriage...and she mourns too...yet if that same young woman elects to have an abortion, we're to shrug our shoulders and say, "Oh, well." ?

Because a woman who has a miscarriage is being denied what she wants, and was in the process of getting. It's like being sad upon learning that a cheque for you has been destroyed in the mail; you aren't sad for what you've lost, you're sad for not getting what you might have had - and the fact that the cheque had been posted was an indication that you could have had it.

Further, when we mourn with that young woman, we say things like, "I am sooo sorry. I can't imagine how you must feel." Perhaps we should say the same thing when we find a young woman has had an abortion. If that engenders guilt, then so be it.

My God!! -- If I saw puppies being aborted, I would cry my eyes out. You would ask me not to be emotional when it's a human life?

I don't consider a ZEF to be 'a human life' for the majority of pregnancy; as such, nothing is being lost beyond the potential for life. It's no worse than weeping over the sperm trapped in a condom.

EDIT: In fact, we say incredibly similar things upon learning that someone is sterile (against their wishes). All that is being mourned is the denial of potential, not the removal of something actual.

 

[rivrrat]

I hope you're wrong. I would like to think that many women give serious consideration to that decision and 'feel guilty' because they are terminating their own child. To that other group of women who use abortion as a form of birth control, nothing makes them feel guilty. We are left with the hope, though, that they live with regret.

I can't fathom why someone would feel guilty or live with regret. I CAN fathom a life of regret if I had NOT had an abortion, though.

But, I guess people can feel guilty and regretful about any number of things. /shrug.

General question -- Why is it family and friends are asked to mourn with a young woman who has a miscarriage...and she mourns too...yet if that same young woman elects to have an abortion, we're to shrug our shoulders and say, "Oh, well." ?

Because in the case of a miscarriage of a WANTED pregnancy, you are mourning a LOSS. The woman mourns the LOSS of something she desired. Her friends and family mourn that loss with her as they would anything else. (a good job she wanted, a house she wanted, etc, etc) An abortion is not a loss, it's getting rid of something undesired. There is nothing to mourn.

Further, when we mourn with that young woman, we say things like, "I am sooo sorry. I can't imagine how you must feel." Perhaps we should say the same thing when we find a young woman has had an abortion. If that engenders guilt, then so be it.

There's no guilt. Would you tell a person who took antibiotics to rid themselves of bacteria or parasites, "I'm so sorry, I can't imagine how you must feel"? No, because what happened was a GOOD thing. You would only tell someone you are sorry if they are unhappy with what happened. Which of course is possible with abortion, as it is with anything else. But it's ridiculous to assume that just because someone had a medical procedure done they are unhappy about it.

 

[Goshin]

I would lay the blame for making women feeling guilty for having an abortion squarely at the feet of pro-lifers, yes.

I would lay the blame for it on the fact that they chose to do something even many pro-choice people say "Personally, I wouldn't do it myself, but..."

Terribly sorry that I can't pat someone one the back and say "It's okay"... but I don't believe it IS okay and I'm not going to lie for the sake of your feelings.

At the time of the abortion, I didn't blast and damn my semi-daughter over it, nor belabor that I thought it was baby-murder... I just said "You know how I feel about this." Afterward, I never mentioned it even once until she mentioned her regrets and remorse, and instead of ripping on her or going "I told you so", I tried to comfort her as best I could.

You don't see many pro-choicers calling people 'molesters' and 'murderers' for having an abortion.

Um, DUH.... because you support it. :doh

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Higher rates of abortion indicate either more social aversion to raising a family or less material capacity. Either one is a troubling sign.

Both . . . we've had various threads that discuss people's loss of interest in raising a family (the thread about 'married couples without children are happier than married couples with children)

And of course all threads pertaining the the economy over the years - how it's less possible to raise a family on one income. How people on welfare are loathed . . . and so on.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I would lay the blame for making women feeling guilty for having an abortion squarely at the feet of pro-lifers, yes. You don't see many pro-choicers calling people 'molesters' and 'murderers' for having an abortion.

I used terms like that - all the time (I am pro-choice)
And pro-choicers got pissed with me. . . took the time to point out that

When you use those terms you're obviously trying to offend. It is a medical procedure. Guilt already is there, no need to encourage more.

 

[Goshin]

Because in the case of a miscarriage of a WANTED pregnancy, you are mourning a LOSS. The woman mourns the LOSS of something she desired. Her friends and family mourn that loss with her as they would anything else. (a good job she wanted, a house she wanted, etc, etc) An abortion is not a loss, it's getting rid of something undesired. There is nothing to mourn.


There's no guilt. Would you tell a person who took antibiotics to rid themselves of bacteria or parasites, "I'm so sorry, I can't imagine how you must feel"? No, because what happened was a GOOD thing. You would only tell someone you are sorry if they are unhappy with what happened. Which of course is possible with abortion, as it is with anything else. But it's ridiculous to assume that just because someone had a medical procedure done they are unhappy about it.

Riv, you know I love ya. You're one of my favorite posters, even if we disagree on a good many things. I just can't fathom, though, how you can equate a multi-celled living organism with human DNA, which if left alone for 9 months emerges as an undeniable human being with full rights to life, with a bacterial infection. I like to pride myself on having a very active and vivid imagination, but that comparison is just beyond my capacity to understand or say anything but "WTF??"

 

[iangb]

I would lay the blame for it on the fact that they chose to do something even many pro-choice people say "Personally, I wouldn't do it myself, but..."

Terribly sorry that I can't pat someone one the back and say "It's okay"... but I don't believe it IS okay and I'm not going to lie for the sake of your feelings.

At the time of the abortion, I didn't blast and damn my semi-daughter over it, nor belabor that I thought it was baby-murder... I just said "You know how I feel about this." Afterward, I never mentioned it even once until she mentioned her regrets and remorse, and instead of ripping on her or going "I told you so", I tried to comfort her as best I could.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming you specifically - although you were certainly part of a larger whole.

Um, DUH.... because you support it.

Indeed I do. My point was that, because you don't support it, you passively make people feel guilty about doing it - and in fact, some pro-lifers actively try to make people feel guilty about doing it.

My (extended) point is that your first concerns were not for your relative; they were for a collection of cells growing inside her which she did not want; you did not support her. I wouldn't call you an 'evil women-hating tyrant' over it, but I would certainly disagree with your priorities - and I would certainly call mild hypocricy when you say that 'you tried to spare her all this', when the 'all this' is something which you have had a part, alebeit a passive one (compared to some of the pro-lifers on here, and who she will have experienced) in creating.

EDIT: Yes, some of the above is over-the-top hyperbole; I can't possibly know the details of your situation. There's a core of truth in it, though.

I just can't fathom, though, how you can equate a multi-celled living organism with human DNA, which if left alone for 9 months emerges as an undeniable human being with full rights to life, with a bacterial infection. I like to pride myself on having a very active and vivid imagination, but that comparison is just beyond my capacity to understand or say anything but "WTF??"

A zygote is no more an organism than a sperm cell is. Human DNA does not indicate individuality. As such, a ZEF is part of the woman's body until it is aware that it has a body of it's own (or, biologically speaking, until it reaches viability).

 

[MaggieD]

I don't consider a ZEF to be 'a human life' for the majority of pregnancy; as such, nothing is being lost beyond the potential for life. It's no worse than weeping over the sperm trapped in a condom.

You call this a zef. I call this a baby. (24 weeks...legal limit in Illinois)

You call this a zef. I call this killing a baby.

The twains will never meet.

 

[VanceMack]

Thank you, Vance. I know. I'm very high-functioning, all things considered. Life is good, I raised my daughter, had a marriage, have grandchildren. For the most part I'm happy.

And the sad truth is that some dont turn out as happy and/or stable. Always to sides to every coin and the rare occasion where the coin lands on its side. Most of it is truly what you make of it.

Still...Im glad to have you around!

 

[VanceMack]

I would lay the blame for making women feeling guilty for having an abortion squarely at the feet of pro-lifers, yes. You don't see many pro-choicers calling people 'molesters' and 'murderers' for having an abortion.

Thats convenient for your position...but it doesnt change the fact that MANY women suffer from emotional trauma...women who have been supported throughout the abortion process. While I would be the first to condemn those that get in the face and yell and scream at a scared young women making the most difficult and frightening choice in her life, I also wont blame their psychological duress on others. Many womne question their decisions as mothers and it haunts them for the rest of their lives...often to very horrible ends. Some...its a hard thing but one they have come to peaceful terms with. And others just dont care.

 

[iangb]

You call this a zef. I call this a baby. (24 weeks...legal limit in Illinois)
You call this a zef. I call this killing a baby.
The twains will never meet.

What do you call this?

(Human zygote)

Or these?

(A. Cat embryo, B. Cow embryo, C. Horse embryo, D. Human embryo.)

Images are powerfully manipulative - especially images of things right on the edge. Beware them.

Thats convenient for your position...but it doesnt change the fact that MANY women suffer from emotional trauma...women who have been supported throughout the abortion process. While I would be the first to condemn those that get in the face and yell and scream at a scared young women making the most difficult and frightening choice in her life, I also wont blame their psychological duress on others. Many womne question their decisions as mothers and it haunts them for the rest of their lives...often to very horrible ends. Some...its a hard thing but one they have come to peaceful terms with. And others just dont care.

Firstly; If there was no pro-life belief that 'an abortion kills a baby', I find it very hard to believe that there would be anywhere near as much emotional trauma as you indicate. There would be some regret fro 'what might have been', but that's no different from making any other life-changing decision.

Secondly; I can't find figures quickly now, but I seem to remember that the prevailing response in women who have had an abortion is one of relief, not of guilt. I'll see if I can find the source again.