"We want to outlaw abortion in Oklahoma"

[EdwinWillers]

Ok. So what? Let's assume you're correct. What's wrong with the "convenience" of not having to lug around another organism inside your body for 9 months, and not having your body permanently altered against your will?

No need to assume, so let's start with your first premise - that of having to "lug around another organism inside your body for 9 months." That "organism" as you so graciously put it, is a human being - now I realize you probably disagree with that, having already called it an "organism," that in your way of thinking it is just an annoying mass of brain-dead tissue with no greater value than the few cents' worth of water that comprises the bulk of its mass - a "fetus" if you prefer. But that "organism" is precisely what you and I once were, and everyone else here once was. Go figure, huh? We all originated from a lump of annoying, brain dead tissue to become.... us.

Your second premise - "having your body permanently altered." Well, ok - but isn't that a tad hyperbolic? Sure, mothers undergo some physical changes, but you make it sound like she's been morphed into some sort of grotesquely disfigured monster. Some of the most attractive, radiant women I've ever seen were pregnant - possessing an indescribable "glow" - a "radiance" that no model could ever duplicate. You do pregnant women a disservice, imho, by calling them "permanently altered."

Your third premise - "against your will." Now c'mon. Really? Have all pregnant women been raped? Have all pregnant women become pregnant against their will? Is that how you think sex works?

Finally, did you actually read my post, or is it some tactic of debate of yours to extract the word "convenience" from it's original context to put into your own fabricated one? The one who's three premises we just debunked?

The word "convenience" as I used it refers quite obviously to wanting to enjoy the pleasures of sexual congress without having to worry about its potential consequences. In other words, if they do get pregnant, they want to be able to abort the baby so they don't have worry about the consequences of having one. Abortion is the "convenience." And of course, this is what the statistics show, without equivocation - the vast majority of women who agreed to an abortion did so for convenience' sake. Oh, they've concocted all manner of rationalizations - but they all boil down to the same thing, don't they?

 

[EdwinWillers]

Nothing wrong w/ convenience.

There is when the "convenience" is the taking of another human life to spare your own "ravaged" experience.

I never said I was the only one affected by pregnancy. Nor did I say the world revolves around me. smh

No? I could've sworn your comment... - and I quote:

Mighty CONVENIENT that your body will never be ravaged by pregnancy and childbirth, eh?​

...was attempting to make "convenience" all about me - by juxtaposing yourself, a female, whose body could be thus affected by childbirth with mine, which can't.

 

[Noodlegawd]

No need to assume, so let's start with your first premise - that of having to "lug around another organism inside your body for 9 months." That "organism" as you so graciously put it, is a human being - now I realize you probably disagree with that, having already called it an "organism," that in your way of thinking it is just an annoying mass of brain-dead tissue with no greater value than the few cents' worth of water that comprises the bulk of its mass - a "fetus" if you prefer. But that "organism" is precisely what you and I once were, and everyone else here once was. Go figure, huh? We all originated from a lump of annoying, brain dead tissue to become.... us.

Your second premise - "having your body permanently altered." Well, ok - but isn't that a tad hyperbolic? Sure, mothers undergo some physical changes, but you make it sound like she's been morphed into some sort of grotesquely disfigured monster. Some of the most attractive, radiant women I've ever seen were pregnant - possessing an indescribable "glow" - a "radiance" that no model could ever duplicate. You do pregnant women a disservice, imho, by calling them "permanently altered."

Your third premise - "against your will." Now c'mon. Really? Have all pregnant women been raped? Have all pregnant women become pregnant against their will? Is that how you think sex works?

Finally, did you actually read my post, or is it some tactic of debate of yours to extract the word "convenience" from it's original context to put into your own fabricated one? The one who's three premises we just debunked?

The word "convenience" as I used it refers quite obviously to wanting to enjoy the pleasures of sexual congress without having to worry about its potential consequences. In other words, if they do get pregnant, they want to be able to abort the baby so they don't have worry about the consequences of having one. Abortion is the "convenience." And of course, this is what the statistics show, without equivocation - the vast majority of women who agreed to an abortion did so for convenience' sake. Oh, they've concocted all manner of rationalizations - but they all boil down to the same thing, don't they?

You didn't actually "debunk" my premises. You just demonstrated that you didn't understand them. Would you like to try again, this time with a little honesty, and save me the trouble of responding to you twice? Or should I shred your response as is?

The word "convenience" was the lynchpin of your whole point. Forgive me for focusing on it. Your word games notwithstanding, the only thing "convenient" about getting an abortion is that it allows the patient to avoid 9 months of unwanted pregnancy and all the risks, loss of productivity, permanent changes, and discomfort associated with it.

 

[Gaius46]

Your third premise - "against your will." Now c'mon. Really? Have all pregnant women been raped? Have all pregnant women become pregnant against their will? Is that how you think sex works?

Agreeing to have sex doesn’t mean you’ve agreed to become pregnant. Pregnancy is a possible outcome but most people, most of the time, have sex for reasons that have nothing to do with wanting a child.

 

[EdwinWillers]

You didn't actually "debunk" my premises. You just demonstrated that you didn't understand them. Would you like to try again, this time with a little honesty, and save me the trouble of responding to you twice? Or should I shred your response as is?

The word "convenience" was the lynchpin of your whole point. Forgive me for focusing on it. Your word games notwithstanding, the only thing "convenient" about getting an abortion is that it allows the patient to avoid 9 months of unwanted pregnancy and all the risks, loss of productivity, permanent changes, and discomfort associated with it.

Really? How was I being dishonest?

And yeah, like it or not, I did debunk your premises.

And my use of the word "convenient?" Spot on. And thank you - for just proving it by providing some of the more common rationalizations (i.e. convenient excuses) given as reasons for getting an abortion. Abortion IS the convenience - and denying that is the epitome of dishonesty.

But, "discomfort?" Really? That's a new one. "Yes, let's abort the baby, because I don't want the... discomfort." smh

 

[Arlette]

You didn't actually "debunk" my premises. You just demonstrated that you didn't understand them. Would you like to try again, this time with a little honesty, and save me the trouble of responding to you twice? Or should I shred your response as is?

The word "convenience" was the lynchpin of your whole point. Forgive me for focusing on it. Your word games notwithstanding, the only thing "convenient" about getting an abortion is that it allows the patient to avoid 9 months of unwanted pregnancy and all the risks, loss of productivity, permanent changes, and discomfort associated with it.

Word. Tells you exactly what he thinks about women. Like, am I gonna have an abortion today or order a pizza.

 

[lurchadams]

Hands down the number one reason why abortion is "necessary" for most is convenience (what most will call "social and economic reasons")- so they don't have to pay the consequences for having had sex and managing to get pregnant in the process.

Statistically, that's about 96.5% of all reasons. All other reasons add up to about 3.5%. Source

I'm not sure we want to know where you pulled you stats out of! Let me ask you this: Lets say Greg Abbot has a girlfriend. Lets say Abbot gets her pregnant. What do you think he's going to do? Make sure she carries the fetus to term? Heck, no. He's going to put his babe on a plane to New Mexico and have that thing aborted toot sweet. You know this.

These right-wing anti-abortion laws are all about oppressing the less fortunate. That's all Republicans can do now. Attack the weak.

 

[lurchadams]

Net result of this and every other law of it’s ilk is that most women who want an abortion will go to another state to get one and those who can’t because they can’t afford it will either do it illegally or have the child. If you can’t afford to drive to the next state you certainly can’t afford to raise a child. So the kid and mom are pretty much doomed to poverty. Eff’in brilliant.

Absolutely. Republicans are all about oppressing the less fortunate and antagonizing people who's lifesyles they hate.

Republicans suck so hard.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Agreeing to have sex doesn’t mean you’ve agreed to become pregnant. Pregnancy is a possible outcome but most people, most of the time, have sex for reasons that have nothing to do with wanting a child.

Do you honestly think I don't know that? I mean, c'mon. You're an infinitely smarter person than that to come up with that argument.

I daresay the vast majority of people who engage in sexual intercourse do so purely for the pleasure of it. Even married couples.

But Gaius, that's not the point - while one aspect of your point is absolutely spot on, another is also miles off target - the point is that IT CAN HAPPEN, regardless one's "agreement" or assent to get pregnant.

Pregnancy is the natural risk of having sex. To engage in sex, the participants acknowledge said risk - at least to some degree, whether they imagine it'd happen to them or not - if they've agreed to anything in agreeing to have sex, they've also agreed to the risk that it could lead to pregnancy.

 

[Noodlegawd]

But, "discomfort?" Really? That's a new one. "Yes, let's abort the baby, because I don't want the... discomfort." smh

More dishonesty. "Discomfort" was part of an entire sentence full of other more serious downsides of being pregnant and giving birth. The fact that you would extract the least consequential of them and ignore the rest speaks volumes of your opinion on this subject.

But I bet you couldn't be bothered to send a day's pay to Sallie Struthers to help save an actual fully-developed child with a functioning brain stem from starving or dying of dysentery, let alone giving up weeks of income and carrying around 10-30 pounds of extra weight for months to save one that hasn't even been born yet.

 

[Arlette]

More dishonesty. "Discomfort" was part of an entire sentence full of other more serious downsides of being pregnant and giving birth. The fact that you would extract the least consequential of them and ignore the rest speaks volumes of your opinion on this subject.

But I bet you couldn't be bothered to send a day's pay to Sallie Struthers to help save an actual fully-developed child with a functioning brain stem from starving or dying of dysentery, let alone giving up weeks of income and carrying around 10-30 pounds of extra weight for months to save one that hasn't even been born yet.

Anti choicers must be made of different stuff. I wanna know how much it bothered them not being born before they were born. I know it didn't bother me any

 

[EdwinWillers]

I'm not sure we want to know where you pulled you stats out of!

Why? I cited the source, it won't bite you, if that's what you're afraid of; but there are plenty others, like Guttmacher for example - numbers vary slightly, but not significantly.

Let me ask you this: Lets say Greg Abbot has a girlfriend. Lets say Abbot gets her pregnant. What do you think he's going to do? Make sure she carries the fetus to term? Heck, no. He's going to put his babe on a plane to New Mexico and have that thing aborted toot sweet. You know this.

These right-wing anti-abortion laws are all about oppressing the less fortunate. That's all Republicans can do now. Attack the weak.

It'd be a profound breath of fresh air if lefties would abandon even a skosh of their own hypocrisy to apply that same logic to their "pet" laws. Laws like, oh I don't know - gun laws.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Anti choicers must be made of different stuff. I wanna know how much it bothered them not being born before they were born. I know it didn't bother me any

I bet the atoms that made up the fetus that turned into Edwin would have been pretty pissed if they didn't get the chance to participate in this conversation had his mother chosen to abort, and were merely relegated to being part of a toaster pastry, or an aardvark.

 

[EdwinWillers]

More dishonesty.

Well then, stop it.

"Discomfort" was part of an entire sentence full of other more serious downsides of being pregnant and giving birth. The fact that you would extract the least consequential of them and ignore the rest speaks volumes of your opinion on this subject.

Now that's not true, is it? I addressed the gist of of your list, acknowledging your having mentioned them - and actually thanking your for doing so as it proved my point about "convenience."

The comment about "discomfort" was an afterthought - such a trivial excuse I'd never seen before, so forgive me if I had to make mention of it.

But I bet you couldn't be bothered to send a day's pay to Sallie Struthers to help save an actual fully-developed child with a functioning brain stem from starving or dying of dysentery, let alone giving up weeks of income and carrying around 10-30 pounds of extra weight for months to save one that hasn't even been born yet.

What's any of that got to do with the price of tea in China?

 

[EdwinWillers]

Anti choicers must be made of different stuff. I wanna know how much it bothered them not being born before they were born. I know it didn't bother me any

Who's "anti-choice?"

I'm 100% pro-choice.... before conception.

 

[Arlette]

I bet the atoms that made up the fetus that turned into Edwin would have been pretty pissed if they didn't get the chance to participate in this conversation had his mother chosen to abort, and were merely relegated to being part of a toaster pastry, or an aardvark.

Something. But the unborn are morally uncomplicated. You can protect 'em and it doesn't cost you a penny. They can make any naturally born asshole feel good about him/herself

 

[Court Jester]

Good for Oklahoma! I hope they impose the death penalty on anyone who murders a baby as well. Public executions hopefully, I know I would attend.

I am so sick of all of excuses on why it is okay to kill a developing human being for convenience that whatever punishments a state can impose on fetal murder, I am 100% fine with that.

 

[JMR]

As far as abortion goes - the "mitigating reasons" put forth most frequently - i.e. rape, incest, safety of mother, and to a lesser extent the "future quality of life of the child" - such reasons honestly account for just a fraction of the reasons most provide for getting one. And this is indisputable (despite the fact that contrarians for abortion will dispute whatever facts don't comport with their world view).

Why is it necessary to provide a reason?

 

[lurchadams]

Why? I cited the source, it won't bite you, if that's what you're afraid of; but there are plenty others, like Guttmacher for example - numbers vary slightly, but not significantly.

It'd be a profound breath of fresh air if lefties would abandon even a skosh of their own hypocrisy to apply that same logic to their "pet" laws. Laws like, oh I don't know - gun laws.

LOL "leftie hypocrisy". Yeah. I just showed you an example of right-wing hypocrisy - but nice try, dude

How about that TN Congressman who was all about "pro life" but when he got his girlfriend pregnant, what do you think he did.

It's the righties who are trying to impose their will on everyone my friend. We're trying to protect all the rights you guys are trying to rob from us.

Oh, here's your congressman, by the way

https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/07/24/desjarlais-pro-life-congressman-who-urged-abortions-for-ex-wife-and-mistress-is-running-again

Yeah, tell us more about all that "left wing hypocrisy" you're trying to sound the alarm about

 

[Noodlegawd]

Well then, stop it.

Now that's not true, is it? I addressed the gist of of your list, acknowledging your having mentioned them - and actually thanking your for doing so as it proved my point about "convenience."

The comment about "discomfort" was an afterthought - such a trivial excuse I'd never seen before, so forgive me if I had to make mention of it.

What's any of that got to do with the price of tea in China?

Here, let me requote it for you, in case it was obscured by the some odd filter in your brain that stops you from seeing things you don't want to have to address:

"risks, loss of productivity, permanent changes, and discomfort associated with it"

 

[JasperL]

I was responding to the OP's comment about the video and specifically, "why abortion is necessary." The reasons for abortion are many - and invariably subjective - but the statistics clean up a lot of such subjectivity, making the discussion more objective - and hence the point I made.

But re your question on the purpose of abortion laws - "to protect" or "to punish" - the obvious answer is.... "yes."

But that too is a subjective question; and it also depends on the law and one's interpretation of its supposed purpose. One might similarly ask if laws against murder are "to protect" or "to punish." Unlike what we see in many abortion arguments, we rarely get the question "don't laws against murder punish the battered housewife [who committed it]?" Ostensibly, there being mitigating reasons for committing murder, ergo, murder laws are somehow wrong - at least in those circumstances - and not discounting the fact that some reasons are in fact legitimate. That said, I don't have the statistics, but I daresay safety (battered spouse) isn't the number one reason people commit murder.

As far as abortion goes - the "mitigating reasons" put forth most frequently - i.e. rape, incest, safety of mother, and to a lesser extent the "future quality of life of the child" - such reasons honestly account for just a fraction of the reasons most provide for getting one. And this is indisputable (despite the fact that contrarians for abortion will dispute whatever facts don't comport with their world view).

The one thing that always hangs me up with anti-abortion legislation is the guys passing these laws know, 100%, that if their wife/daughter/mistress ever wants an abortion, she'll get it. They have the money to send them to a state or country where it's legal, and it WILL get done. All these laws do is, yes, punish the poor who don't have options, cannot travel across three states, afford the lodging, time off, etc. That's it.

Pre-Roe in my area, there was a doctor well known to the wealthy and connected who'd 'handle' abortion, very discreetly. So the powerful didn't care whether abortion was 'legal' or not in this area - they knew it was for them, and that's what mattered. Whether some poor woman got one was her problem.

 

[Hamish Howl]

Hands down the number one reason why abortion is "necessary" for most is convenience (what most will call "social and economic reasons")- so they don't have to pay the consequences for having had sex and managing to get pregnant in the process.

Statistically, that's about 96.5% of all reasons. All other reasons add up to about 3.5%. Source

What should there be any consequences for having sex?

 

[JasperL]

LOL "leftie hypocrisy". Yeah. I just showed you an example of right-wing hypocrisy - but nice try, dude

How about that TN Congressman who was all about "pro life" but when he got his girlfriend pregnant, what do you think he did.

It's the righties who are trying to impose their will on everyone my friend. We're trying to protect all the rights you guys are trying to rob from us.

Oh, here's your congressman, by the way

https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/07/24/desjarlais-pro-life-congressman-who-urged-abortions-for-ex-wife-and-mistress-is-running-again

Yeah, tell us more about all that "left wing hypocrisy" you're trying to sound the alarm about

My comment above was describing hypocritical assholes like that guy. He's down the road from me. Total piece of dog crap.

 

[Noodlegawd]

What should there be any consequences for having sex?

Bible thumpers hate sex. Except when they do it in secret to children.

 

[lurchadams]

My comment above was describing hypocritical assholes like that guy. He's down the road from me. Total piece of dog crap.

Yep, and wasn't it adorable that our friend, @EdwinWillers feels hypocrisy is an issue only with people "on the left".