Seeking Clean Discussion and to Understand Pro-Choice Stance (2 Viewers)

[minnie616]

So you want to abort in case you might get sick? I totally disagree.

Not really what I said. If a woman lacks proper insurance and proper access to quality medical care and has poor social resources, she will be more at risk for a poor health outcome.

It makes pregnancy a greater risk for her. She is the only one who can judge what resources she has and what risks she is willing to take.

It would be the same reason that a person might put off major surgery to do so at a time when he is better resourced and less apt to succumb to complications.

Just because you may value an embryo or fetus as a full fledged person, does not mean she is required to do so and risk her life to continue a pregnancy. Pregnancy complications can be quite abrupt with little time to act.

Who is to judge what is life or death situation for a pregnant woman? You? A bureaucrat? Religious leaders? Look what happened to that Dentist in Ireland. She needed an abortion and signs pointed to a failing pregnancy, but those interpreting the law said they had to wait. By the time they agreed, she was in the throws of death and needlessly died as a result of folks valuing her fetus over her.
Woman dies after abortion request 'refused' at Galway hospital - BBC News

I agree.

I just want to add that in 2004 about 25 percent of women who sought an abortion wanted the abortion for medical reasons.

From Table 2 2004
Page 113 of the following:
The woman answered she sought an abortion in 2004 because:

Possible problems affecting the health of the fetus ... 13 percent of time

Physical problem with my health ... 12 percent of the time.

https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/journals/3711005.pdf

 

[year2late]

I agree.

I just want to add that in 2004 about 25 percent of women who sought an abortion wanted the abortion for medical reasons.

From Table 2 2004
Page 113 of the following:
The woman answered she sought an abortion in 2004 because:

Possible problems affecting the health of the fetus ... 13 percent of time

Physical problem with my health ... 12 percent of the time.

And realistically, many that SHOULD be counted as medical/health reasons are not. If you lack insurance that allows you to go to experienced practitioners and well regarded facilities is you health not at risk? If you are housing insecure and pregnant and are living in an unsafe situation....is your life not more at risk while pregnant?

Both you and I had positive outcomes to our complicated pregnancies because we had strong social support and high quality insurance that allowed us to access quality facilities without pause.

 

[year2late]

Wouldn't that fall under life threatening?

All of which can happen BEFORE an abortion can be done at a time to prevent bodily damage or death.

An abortion after a stroke or heart attack still leaves the woman with a stroke or heart attack.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Then keep you knees together.

Why should I if I have no issue with aborting should my contraceptive method fail?

 

[ocean515]

Those articles are about renters.

If you note, one of the links relates to "guests". It's in the link title, so...…...

 

[minnie616]

And realistically, many that SHOULD be counted as medical/health reasons are not. If you lack insurance that allows you to go to experienced practitioners and well regarded facilities is you health not at risk? If you are housing insecure and pregnant and are living in an unsafe situation....is your life not more at risk while pregnant?

Both you and I had positive outcomes to our complicated pregnancies because we had strong social support and high quality insurance that allowed us to access quality facilities without pause.

Agreed. We were both young and in good health when we became pregnant and had good social support and high quality insurance.

Kate Middleton ( wife of Prince William ) also was young in good health, she had good resources when she first became Pregnant. During her pregnancy with Prince George she had to be hospitalized because of complications with
Hyperemesis gravidarum.

Mine lasted my whole pregnancy- until childbirth.

I was so sick and weak , I was had to stay at home. I was very faint and could barely get from one room to next without someone supporting me physically.
My husband had to take over
the housework , laundry and cook for himself.
He supported my physically and emotionally and drove me to my doctor appointments.
He was very concerned about my health.
He supported both of us financially
I could barely eat a few crackers or dry popcorn ( no oil)or keep a sip of water down

I became so anemic my doctor was afraid I would bleed to death during childbirth. He set up delivery room with a complete blood transfusion for me.
When they wheeled me in the delivery room , I did not know if I would live to see the baby or even know if I had a boy or girl.

Hyperemesis gravidarum is a condition characterized by severe nausea, vomiting, weight loss, and electrolyte disturbance. Mild cases are treated with dietary changes, rest, and antacids. More severe cases often require a stay in the hospital...

Why is this happening to me?

The majority of pregnant women experience some type of morning sickness (70 – 80%).Recent studies show that at least 60,000 cases of extreme morning sickness called hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) are reported by those who treated in a hospital but the numbers are expected to be much higher than this since many women are treated at home or by out patient care with their health care provider.

It is believed that this severe nausea is caused by a rise in hormone levels; however, the absolute cause is still unknown. The symptoms of HG usually appear between 4-6 weeks of pregnancy and may peak between 9-13 weeks. Most women receive some relief between weeks 14-20, although up to 20% of women may require care for hyperemesis throughout the rest of their pregnancy.

Read more :

Hyperemesis Gravidarum: Signs, Symptoms and Treatment

 

[AlphaOmega]

All of which can happen BEFORE an abortion can be done at a time to prevent bodily damage or death.

An abortion after a stroke or heart attack still leaves the woman with a stroke or heart attack.

Well following your logic the woman can elect to not have sex BEFORE everything and that solves both problems.

 

[wolfsgirl]

Maybe. Depends on how long they have been there.

Also, legal or not, it might be difficult to get law enforcement to help you throw someone out into a life threatening blizzard, especially if you gave them permission to be there in the first place.

Bottom line. Probably yes to eviction, but not a cut and dried as you think.

How to Evict a Roommate: 14 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow

Legal Removal of Unwelcome House Guests

In my state it requires a 3 day notice then they must vacate. IF that is the rules for a property even if I don't live in that property, why should I not be allowed to evict someone from my body.

 

[wolfsgirl]

Then keep you knees together.

Keep your sperm to yourself.

But I noticed that you skipped the part about how I have more control over property than I do my body according to these laws.

 

[ocean515]

In my state it requires a 3 day notice then they must vacate. IF that is the rules for a property even if I don't live in that property, why should I not be allowed to evict someone from my body.

Perhaps. On the other hand, into a blizzard where they could die? Hmmmm.

I haven't questioned your right to evict someone from your body. However, are you sure you want to refer to "it" as "someone"?

 

[wolfsgirl]

Perhaps. On the other hand, into a blizzard where they could die? Hmmmm.

I haven't questioned your right to evict someone from your body. However, are you sure you want to refer to "it" as "someone"?

The other side has been saying that a fetus is a person from conception. I am pointing out that even if it were legally a person there is no requirement for me to house it, or provide life support with my body for it.

And yes you can evict even in a blizzard, there are no weather restrictions for legal eviction in my state.

 

[Lursa]

I'm new to this forum and posting here because, where I generally post, topics related to religion and politics are forbidden. This place is advertised as a fairly friendly discussion spot, so I'm hoping to have a civil and 'in good faith' discussion about abortion.

---

There is one controversial thing I assume are true for religious reasons. And another that I don't think is really up for debate, but folk can contest it if they wish. I'll call them axioms in my discussion since, for the purposes of this conversation, I consider them axiomatically true.
1) Life begins at conception. That is, upon conception, it is a living human being.
2) In general, we do not have a right to cause someone to die. E.g., murder is bad.

.

It's not murder, and we accept killing with justification all the time: in self-defense, in war, abortion, assisted suicide, for some examples. WHat they have in common is that all are justified killing. In these cases, we have a right to make the decision.

So your post premise is not true, it's not founded on any truth agreed upon by consensus.

Why do you get to decide what another woman considers 'ruining her life?' Or the govt?

How do you justify using the force of law to make her remain pregnant while risking her life, her health, her ability to protect her family and fulfill her responsibilities to her dependents (kids, elderly, disabled? Most women who have abortions already have at least 1 kid). How do you justify her not being able to fulfill her commitments and obligations to her employer, her church, her community, society, etc?

And how do you justify the govt forcing women to remain pregnant against our will?

The born and unborn cannot be treated equally under the law. It's not possible. If it is, please explain how. No one has done so yet. It's not possible ethically either.

What do you think making abortion illegal means? If you make a law(s), dont you have to enforce them? In a manner that is Constitutional? How can that be done?

These points are both ethical and legal in nature but also important, they are all related to practical application in society. How can it be done So please explain your answers with that in mind.

 

[year2late]

Well following your logic the woman can elect to not have sex BEFORE everything and that solves both problems.

Sure she can. But that does nothing to eliminate the right to have an abortion.

What is next, slutshaming?

 

[Logician Man]

Curious as to how so many males seem to have such opinionated stances on women's bodily autonomy, yet it is the females who 'legally' retain their personal bodily autonomy. ( as it should be ). Wonder why this is ? It's certainly not because males are more nurturing in general than females. That's for damn sure.

 

[jaeger19]

That's what I am asking you pro choicers. I am getting contradicting answers. It appears none until birth...according to you. Unless of course someone besides the mother decides to kill it...then it apparently does have rights according to you. Which is it. Does it have rights or not?

The mother has rights. Which means that if someone without her consent.. harms the fetus inside her.. they can be held responsible.

If you need a simpler analogy. My cows don't have rights... but if you hit one with your car.. you can be held responsible.

 

[Lursa]

The mother has rights. Which means that if someone without her consent.. harms the fetus inside her.. they can be held responsible.

If you need a simpler analogy. My cows don't have rights... but if you hit one with your car.. you can be held responsible.

Basically, when you read most of those 'fetal homicide' laws, they treat the unborn very similar to property. Not persons. They take the mother's interests and/or the states interests into mind, not the unborn's.

 

[jaeger19]

Basically, when you read most of those 'fetal homicide' laws, they treat the unborn very similar to property. Not persons. They take the mother's interests and/or the states interests into mind, not the unborn's.

Exactly. At the end of the day.. anti abortionists are just trying to pull any justification they can for dictating what THEY think is best for a woman and her child.

And its sure as heck isn't about "life"... cuz they don't give a crap if forcing a continued pregnancy causes the death of the woman and her fetus...

 

[AlphaOmega]

The mother has rights. Which means that if someone without her consent.. harms the fetus inside her.. they can be held responsible.

If you need a simpler analogy. My cows don't have rights... but if you hit one with your car.. you can be held responsible.

Not for murder.

 

[jaeger19]

Not for murder.

So?

Seriously it a moot point. AS I have already pointed out. If you go shoot my dad for no reason.. its murder.

When I take my dad off lifesupport because he is suffering.. or have the doctor administer a lethal dose.. to end his suffering... its not murder.

IF you purposely kick my wife in her pregnant belly with the intent of killing our child.. its murder.

IF my wife and I decide that her pregnancy is just to risky and is going to kill her.. and we abort the fetus. its not murder
IF my wife and I discover that the fetus is severely compromised and will only suffer if taken to term.. and we abort the fetus...its not murder.

Its about self determination. WE understand that people have the right to self determination.. whether that's to live.. or to die. When its a situation in which a person cannot speak for themselves.. then society and the law.. generally understands that its the family that is the one that speaks for that person. NOT a government official.

Whether that's me deciding whats best for my dad.. when he is on life support.

Or me deciding whats best for my wife and the fetus she is carrying. In pregnancy.. that right of self determination is especially important because there are TWO lives involved.. not just one.

YOUR position.. would 1. Violate the right of a fetus/embryo/life.. whatever term you choose... to have their parents speak for whats best for them
2. Would violate the right of the mother.. to make the decision of whats best for herself..

This.. "well its murder if a person hits pregnant woman"... is a meaningless argument. Its just a smoke screen for anti abortionists to violate the rights of BOTH the woman and the fetus... by deciding for both of them.. what THEY think is best..

 

[AlphaOmega]

So?

Seriously it a moot point. AS I have already pointed out. If you go shoot my dad for no reason.. its murder.

When I take my dad off lifesupport because he is suffering.. or have the doctor administer a lethal dose.. to end his suffering... its not murder.

IF you purposely kick my wife in her pregnant belly with the intent of killing our child.. its murder.

IF my wife and I decide that her pregnancy is just to risky and is going to kill her.. and we abort the fetus. its not murder
IF my wife and I discover that the fetus is severely compromised and will only suffer if taken to term.. and we abort the fetus...its not murder.

Its about self determination. WE understand that people have the right to self determination.. whether that's to live.. or to die. When its a situation in which a person cannot speak for themselves.. then society and the law.. generally understands that its the family that is the one that speaks for that person. NOT a government official.

Whether that's me deciding whats best for my dad.. when he is on life support.

Or me deciding whats best for my wife and the fetus she is carrying. In pregnancy.. that right of self determination is especially important because there are TWO lives involved.. not just one.

YOUR position.. would 1. Violate the right of a fetus/embryo/life.. whatever term you choose... to have their parents speak for whats best for them
2. Would violate the right of the mother.. to make the decision of whats best for herself..

This.. "well its murder if a person hits pregnant woman"... is a meaningless argument. Its just a smoke screen for anti abortionists to violate the rights of BOTH the woman and the fetus... by deciding for both of them.. what THEY think is best..

Wrong. If someone kicks your pregnant wife and the unborn dies. It is not murder according to the pro choice. If that is not true you guys should discuss it in a clean manner.

 

[Crusader13]

The 'unborn' are a convenient group of people to advocate for.
They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn.

You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn."
- Dave Barnhart

Wtf kind of nonsense is this? Comparing innocent children to prisoners or illegal immigrants is a new low even for the left.

None of those groups you mentioned are in danger of having their brain sucked from their skull or dismembered or being left to decompose in a bucket of acid. Excuse us for having priorities. Maybe next time you or your family are being threatened with violence you'd feel better if the police went to the local orphanage instead of helping you.

Don't like it? What then of the left who tirelessly fights for privileged women or trans folk who's biggest problem is literally pennies on the dollar or not being called what they like. Meanwhile all those groups you mentioned take a back seat in the leftist echo chambers.

 

[Idiometer]

Nonsense. Getting kicked in the belly is not a choice.

"I don't care! I believe Putin!" -- Donald J. Trump

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Wtf kind of nonsense is this? Comparing innocent children to prisoners or illegal immigrants is a new low even for the left.

None of those groups you mentioned are in danger of having their brain sucked from their skull or dismembered or being left to decompose in a bucket of acid. Excuse us for having priorities. Maybe next time you or your family are being threatened with violence you'd feel better if the police went to the local orphanage instead of helping you.

Don't like it? What then of the left who tirelessly fights for privileged women or trans folk who's biggest problem is literally pennies on the dollar or not being called what they like. Meanwhile all those groups you mentioned take a back seat in the leftist echo chambers.

How about you answer the points as they were presented instead of setting up a straw man?

Maybe next time YOUR family is threatened with violence you'll actually have the balls to admit it was someone in your own family doing the threatening. Your whiny rhetorical McGuffin doesn't impress me.

The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? Is anyone allowed to compare the plight of the unborn to them?
They ARE born, and since you insist on framing this as left versus right, the ASSHOLES on the right have apparently decided that poor people who get sick should just go find a quiet place to die.

You are not excused. You ARE an excuse. Your argument is an excuse. A LAME one.
You're not excused because the moment an infant is born, you on the right start screeching about how both mother and child are criminals for mooching, and you can't wait to run to the "Escalade driving welfare queen who you saw buying steak in the supermarket with her EBT card", as if every person who ever asked for help buying food is a professional criminal.

You're not pro-life, you're PRO-BIRTH and you don't give two ****s if the child being born is going to live two days of sheer agony due to birth defects which cannot be overcome, you don't care if the woman was impregnated by a rapist and you don't care it was her father who raped her, you only care about the vagina being under your control.

We can't sink to a NEW LOW because you on the right set the bar for all time. And you just reinforced your position at the bottom of the barrel by starting off your hysterical crap-fest by implying that all immigrants are illegal.

"...and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn."

 

[prometeus]

None of those groups you mentioned are in danger of having their brain sucked from their skull or dismembered or being left to decompose in a bucket of acid.

The reason for that is that aborting conservatives who make moronic posts is still illegal.

Excuse us for having priorities.

You are excused, not stay the **** out of other people's lives.

 

[Noodlegawd]

And here come the dodges and personal insults. A classic sign that you are out of logical arguments.

Thanks for playing!

I don't need more logical arguments. The ones I've already made are just fine.