Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”[W:589]

[Bodi]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

You lie.



Please don't pretend you aren't forcing your support for aggressive killing on those who oppose its legality.

Agressive Killing!! AGRESSIVE KILLING!!!

:roll:

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

Agressive Killing!! AGRESSIVE KILLING!!!

:roll:

You're aggressively killing me.:lamo

 

[Bodi]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

Why? I bet our medical science is rather developed for growing embryos in incubators.

Then if you want to take that removed/aborted embryo and pay for it to grow and live in a lab and then care for and raise the eventual kid call for that legislation.

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

Then if you want to take that removed/aborted embryo and pay for it to grow and live in a lab and then care for and raise the eventual kid call for that legislation.

There are a few on this board who have indicated that artificial wombs will push R v W so far back that abortion will be illegal. Somebody feeds them this crap and they accept it without comprehending the logistics of such an enterprise. Yet they 100% stand by their assertions.

 

[Bodi]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

There are a few on this board who have indicated that artificial wombs will push R v W so far back that abortion will be illegal. Somebody feeds them this crap and they accept it without comprehending the logistics of such an enterprise. Yet they 100% stand by their assertions.

Oh, I was just going off the logic, or anti-logic, as it were... I am not in favor of changing how it is now at all.

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

Oh, I was just going off the logic, or anti-logic, as it were... I am not in favor of changing how it is now at all.

Yup, I was just showing that there are a few "touched" folks out there that think that is a probability.:lamo (in a WTF kinda way)

 

[Bodi]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

Yup, I was just showing that there are a few "touched" folks out there that think that is a probability.:lamo (in a WTF kinda way)

There are so many better things these people could be doing with their times too...

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

There are so many better things these people could be doing with their times too...

I have always thought that if someone was dead set against abortion - to the point they really and truly believe it to be murder or aggressive killing or such - a phenomenally better use of their time would be to rally for improved and more available/accessible birth control for men and women and/or improved options for under-resourced women - that at least would be pragmatic. Useful. Probably helpful.


But this pie in the sky crap and the "you are a murderer" BS is just not helpful and detrimental to the cause of reducing abortions.

 

[maquiscat]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

There are a few on this board who have indicated that artificial wombs will push R v W so far back that abortion will be illegal. Somebody feeds them this crap and they accept it without comprehending the logistics of such an enterprise. Yet they 100% stand by their assertions.

I'm one of those who have brought up artificial wombs, and at no point have I stated that they should make abortions illegal. I have asserted that artificial wombs, along with a transfer procedure equal or less physically traumatic than an abortion, would allow the father to prevent an abortion but not a termination of the pregnancy. What logistics am I missing out on?

And no, I honestly don't expect medical science and technology to advance to that point in my lifetime, although it is possible, given the rate that many fields are advancing.

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

I'm one of those who have brought up artificial wombs, and at no point have I stated that they should make abortions illegal. I have asserted that artificial wombs, along with a transfer procedure equal or less physically traumatic than an abortion, would allow the father to prevent an abortion but not a termination of the pregnancy. What logistics am I missing out on?

And no, I honestly don't expect medical science and technology to advance to that point in my lifetime, although it is possible, given the rate that many fields are advancing.

I think the major logistic you are missing out on is that clearly the transfer of the embryo or fetus would be amazingly more difficult/traumatic than abortion. To transfer the embyo or fetus without damaging it all would probably involve actual surgery. Open and cutting for the woman. Major anesthesia risks and recovery from a surgery that would be a C-section of sorts. Otherwise you would have to develop some procedure that would widen the cervix to a size large enough to retrieve the placenta/fetus et all without a slight bit of damage. Sounds pretty damned involved on the woman's side.

What is just plain silly to me is that rather than these pie in the sky things that clearly would cause the woman more harm - why is the energy not placed on better (and available/accessible/safer) birth cntrol for women and ESPECIALLY men. What has really has had an impact on decreasing abortions is the advent of long term more reliable birth control methods. The problem is that the people who need it most (too rich for Medicaid/too poor for insurance) cannot financially afford such methods (around 800 up front - from what I understand, no sliding scale for these procedures at Planned Parenthood)

 

[maquiscat]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

I think the major logistic you are missing out on is that clearly the transfer of the embryo or fetus would be amazingly more difficult/traumatic than abortion. To transfer the embyo or fetus without damaging it all would probably involve actual surgery. Open and cutting for the woman. Major anesthesia risks and recovery from a surgery that would be a C-section of sorts. Otherwise you would have to develop some procedure that would widen the cervix to a size large enough to retrieve the placenta/fetus et all without a slight bit of damage. Sounds pretty damned involved on the woman's side.

You are locked into ideas that would be within our lifetime. I'm thinking beyond that. For all we know transporter technology may become reality. Something else may come up. Technology of the future is not necessarily imaginable in the comparative past. Do you really think anyone could really have imagined tablets and dvd's and 3D printers in say 8th century AD? I am not even going to try to figure out how it can be done. And before you say it can't be done might I remind you the same was said about flying, landing on the moon, breaking the land sound barrier, and so many other things.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

You are locked into ideas that would be within our lifetime. I'm thinking beyond that. For all we know transporter technology may become reality. Something else may come up. Technology of the future is not necessarily imaginable in the comparative past. Do you really think anyone could really have imagined tablets and dvd's and 3D printers in say 8th century AD? I am not even going to try to figure out how it can be done. And before you say it can't be done might I remind you the same was said about flying, landing on the moon, breaking the land sound barrier, and so many other things.

Doesn't that theory involve blasting apart what is being teleported and then putting it back together again at the desired location?

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

You are locked into ideas that would be within our lifetime. I'm thinking beyond that. For all we know transporter technology may become reality. Something else may come up. Technology of the future is not necessarily imaginable in the comparative past. Do you really think anyone could really have imagined tablets and dvd's and 3D printers in say 8th century AD? I am not even going to try to figure out how it can be done. And before you say it can't be done might I remind you the same was said about flying, landing on the moon, breaking the land sound barrier, and so many other things.

Here is where all of that fails. If a society is so advanced they could teleport an embryo from the woman to an artificial womb, they most certainly would have figured out how to safely and reliably prevent unwanted pregnancy. So can we get out of this artificial womb in the context of abortion debate silliness?

 

[iguanaman]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

:yes:

That's exactly what I was about to say. The man should be able to veto any abortion he wants -- just as soon as he physically takes over & assumes responsibility for the pregnancy.

Fair enough.

How long in the future will it be before men can gestate children? 100's of year's. Meanwhile we will just keep it the way it is. You'd have all kinds of wacko's claiming it was their child anyway. The idea is just too ludicrous to address. Do we really need a warning label on all vaginas stating that you may have to give up your rights if you enter? Sometimes I think men are all insane, including me of course.

 

[Doppelgangirl]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

How long in the future will it be before men can gestate children? 100's of year's. Meanwhile we will just keep it the way it is. You'd have all kinds of wacko's claiming it was their child anyway. The idea is just too ludicrous to address. Do we really need a warning label on all vaginas stating that you may have to give up your rights if you enter? Sometimes I think men are all insane, including me of course.

:lamo

Sadly, in this day and age??? :yes:

 

[Henrin]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

Here is where all of that fails. If a society is so advanced they could teleport an embryo from the woman to an artificial womb, they most certainly would have figured out how to safely and reliably prevent unwanted pregnancy. So can we get out of this artificial womb in the context of abortion debate silliness?

The problem with his argument is that it would involve blowing apart the fetus and then using entirely different atoms from the surrounding environment at the destination to recreate it. You can't very well save the fetus by killing it and then creating an entirely new fetus just like it at a different location.

 

[JayDubya]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

The problem with his argument is that it would involve blowing apart the fetus and then using entirely different atoms from the surrounding environment at the destination to recreate it. You can't very well save the fetus by killing it and then creating an entirely new fetus just like it at a different location.

O I C WUT U DID THAR.

Yeah, technically Kirk et al are being killed every single time, and a new Kirk is made.

Which is funny because it means that any civilization with a teleporter can literally just mass clone a soldier and then teleport over as many copies of that one guy over as their warp core would allow.

Yes, I know they have tried in minor ways to technobabble their way out of that reality, but the Thomas Riker created via "teleporter accident" belies all of that.

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

The problem with his argument is that it would involve blowing apart the fetus and then using entirely different atoms from the surrounding environment at the destination to recreate it. You can't very well save the fetus by killing it and then creating an entirely new fetus just like it at a different location.

The actual problem with the teleportation argument is that it is massively delusional.:lamo

I have no clue who feeds some of the prolifers this crap....but he should be a used car salesman specializing in Pintos.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

The actual problem with the teleportation argument is that it is massively delusional.:lamo

I have no clue who feeds some of the prolifers this crap....but he should be a used car salesman specializing in Pintos.

I think it's more ignorant than delusional. Blasting things apart at a molecular level is not like the Star Trek universe, but more like a great way to cause an explosion. Science will NOT be able to get around the reality that forcing things apart in such a fashion is like a scene from a Micheal Bay movie.

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

I think it's more ignorant than delusional. Blasting things apart at a molecular level is not like the Star Trek universe, but more like a great way to cause an explosion. Science will NOT be able to get around the reality that forcing things apart in such a fashion is like a scene from a Micheal Bay movie.

I will buy that it is ignorant.:2wave:

A few have repeated this concept. I wish I knew where that concept came from. I cannot believe folks bought into it,:lamo

 

[Bodi]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

:lamo

Sadly, in this day and age??? :yes:

Why? She can just have an abortion if she does not want to raise the child on her own.

 

[maquiscat]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

The actual problem with the teleportation argument is that it is massively delusional.:lamo

I have no clue who feeds some of the prolifers this crap....but he should be a used car salesman specializing in Pintos.

Oh do please show me anywhere where I have ever espoused a pro life legal position. Provides links. While I do admit to a personal pro life stance, I do not ever condone it to become law, because I recognize that my reasons are religious in nature and such should never be a basis of law.

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

Oh do please show me anywhere where I have ever espoused a pro life legal position. Provides links. While I do admit to a personal pro life stance, I do not ever condone it to become law, because I recognize that my reasons are religious in nature and such should never be a basis of law.

I was speaking to the prolifers that have espoused that point.

 

[maquiscat]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

I was speaking to the prolifers that have espoused that point.

You did so within the context of my sub point, so I'm sure you can see how that was directed at me. You specifically referenced the transporter idea. I grant that it was the only thing I could think of as a possibility, but I also noted that those of a relative future develop ideas and technology beyond anything of those in the relative past could even imagine. My point still stands; should there be both artificial womb technology AND medicinal technology/procedures that are equally or less traumatic than an abortion (by that time they have most likely made abortions even safer than today), then the woman's right shift away from abortion and to only termination of the pregnancy, and the father has a chance to continue the development of the offspring.

 

[year2late]

Re: Keith Ablow: “Men should be able to veto women’s abortions”

You did so within the context of my sub point, so I'm sure you can see how that was directed at me. You specifically referenced the transporter idea. I grant that it was the only thing I could think of as a possibility, but I also noted that those of a relative future develop ideas and technology beyond anything of those in the relative past could even imagine. My point still stands; should there be both artificial womb technology AND medicinal technology/procedures that are equally or less traumatic than an abortion (by that time they have most likely made abortions even safer than today), then the woman's right shift away from abortion and to only termination of the pregnancy, and the father has a chance to continue the development of the offspring.

In the context of this forum there have been whackadoodle statements by several that have included artificial wombs pushing back R v W back to zygote - making viability outside womb not an issue therefor abortion all but illegal. When I bring up how the hell they are going to get the ZEF out teleportation gets brought up. Seriously.

I know who the folks are, not you. I was initially trying to figure out if you brought into the whackadoodliness....and you do not.

But the bottom line is that any procedure (be it abortion, maintenance of the pregnancy,or teleportation ( ) has to be agreed upon by the patient.

I will say this again. These conversations are silly to me. What actually really and truly in our reach in our lifetime is available accessible safe high quality long term birth control for men and women. Why that is not the focus is beyond me.