Tell you what, Champ. This isn't a good thread for plays on words or humor. I'm not sure which one yours is, but it'll rub a lot of folks the wrong way.

Might want to back off on this one, or let us know what your real feeling is.

As to mine, there should at least be consideration for the mother's health/survival.

um, i am serious. i said in a previous thread, any mother who wanted an abortion should be given the death penalty.

and this is my opinion

thx for lookin out though, bro :cool:

Okay, although I am Pro-Life, I also try to be fair. I did not read what either Planned Parenthood or the Pro-Life people have on this topic, I read the actual wording that the Senate bill includes: Partial Birth Abortions

This states several times that this procedure is not used when the life of the mother is in jeopardy - which is why I wanted to read the text. In every case of abortion for the concern of the life of the mother that I've ever heard of, it has been within the first trimester - which is not when partial birth abortions happen.

For those of you who have NOT read Pro-Life literature, or have spoken to someone very knowledgable on the topic, very few Pro-Life doctors would refuse an abortion on the grounds of the life of the mother (ie: tubal pregnancy, cancer). That's a scare tactic used by Pro-Abortion Advocates which doesn't ring true in real life situations.

Obviously, I find this a victory for a more humane United States.

I think abortions are good. This one more move by the Radical Relgious Right to impose their views on everyone.

Re: Re: Re: Weigh In: Senate Passes Ban on Late Term Abortion
 

This case won't make it through the Supreme Court. States have proposed similar laws, but were struck down by the Court if they didn't take the woman's health into account. I can't imagine why this would be different.

Very, very few abortions are "partial birth" and those that are have a variety of reasons behind them. The three most common are threats to the woman's health that are not identified until late in the pregnancy, fetal abnormalities that are (often) not identified until late in the pregnancy, and denial that she is pregnant/inability to deal with the pregnancy. Many times, young girls, those who become pregnant as a result of rape or incest, those who don't have correct information about pregnancy ("you can't get pregnant your first time"/"pulling out is an effective method of birth control" etc. myths), or simply those who aren't emotionally or financially ready to deal with the possibility that they're pregnant will deny it or just don't know that they're pregnant. This kind of situation can lead to fetal abnormalities or complications with the pregnancy -- i.e., the girl who thinks she isn't pregnant because she only had sex once and she used a condom so she keeps on partying like a rock star and the baby develops deformities because of her alcohol consumption.

I'm not so worried that this bill is outlawing D&X abortions, but more worried because I've heard the language of the bill will make it easy to chip away at more and more abortion rights. The fact that there is nothing about the woman's health taken into account is also somewhat frightening.

Of course these are cases that you've heard of. Hundreds of thousand exist and I think you can acknowledge that. I can also pretty much assume that you haven't heard about the details on every single case ( I highly doubt just about anyone would).

It is not always easy to tell if a woman's life might be at risk and there are instances when they find out the health of the mother could be at stake if she gives birth while she has passed her first trimester.

Either way, the situation could present itself at any given time.


Say that this bill sticks, I guarantee you we will begin to see many more "illegal abortions" that threaten the safety of many involved. (Much like the controversy of such abortions which were on the rise prior to the Roe v. Wade ruling.)

I think abortions should be manditory. There are way too many people in the world. We need to take control of our population. You should only be allowed to breed if it can be genetically proven that you're children won't screw up society for the rest of us.

:o

If this bill passes - I hope to God it doesn't - I can definatley see underground abortion clinics. Just like Prohibition in the 20's but instead of speakeasy's, there will be medical clinics.

You can't legalize morality. What is right for you, isn't right for someone else. I would see this bill being passed as nothing more than republican agenda.

All that aside - I DO however believe this procedure is barbaric and it honestly turned my stomach when I learned about it in school. It is very rarely used, but it some rare cases it is the mother's ONLY option.

Some other things to think about:

~There is a triple screen blood test done between 15 and 19 weeks that tests for birth defects such as down's sydrome. It is a positive/negative test and if there is a postive reading, then an amniocentisis is done to find out the exact defect. Lets say you find out after an amnio that your baby has down's syndrome. You and your spouse already have 3 children and were planning on closing up shop when this pregnancy popped up. You are finacially strapped and feel you could not care for a down's baby adequately. Would you continue the pregnancy?


~You find out at your 5th month (18-22 week) ultrasound that your baby's brain has not developed at all and the child you are carrying will be stillborn. Would you continue the pregnancy?


I ask because just like there are rare cases - these are REAL life situations. These are real cases that every pregnant woman fears. It is easy for the proponants of this bill to be gung-ho about an anti-abortion victory - but they need to come speak to the couples that have struggled with miscarriages and infertily for 10 years, finally get pregnant and find out their baby will be stillborn. Then I would like them to say what is more humane. A late term abortion, or forcing a mother to carry a fetus to birth and then put them through the agony and grief of losing a child all over again.

I am 1000% pro choice and I can see how a ban is a good idea. HOWEVER, and I am quick to say, HOWEVER, the issue for some pro-choice folks is the "give them an inch, they'll take a yard." They don't want to have this be a law because then it will make the NEXT law, whatever that may be, easier to pass. And then the next thing you know, Roe v Wade is overturned. Which is a huge fear of many people and some people think is very very close to happening.

So, I can see their point in not wanting this to be passed.

OP,

To me, your comment is scary.

It's not much of a jump in my mind from "Ethnic Clensing" and "Master Races."

How would you decide who will screw up society and how? Who would make the decision? Using what criteria?

I don't want to see us go anywhere close to there.

I disagree with this bill because even if it did include a line about 'mother's health' they would probably try to tack on all sorts of regulations etc.

As much as I disagree with third-term elective abortion - the decision for a D&X abortion should be made between a doctor and the woman. They know the situation best and what level of risk the woman is willing to have.

I agree. I don't think anybody thinks D&X abortions are pretty. But neither is any other kind of abortion. We shouldn't ban them on the basis of how ugly they are. Illegal abortions certainly aren't any prettier than D&X abortions, and that's what we're looking at if this bill goes through.

I think what a lot of people fail to acknowledge or don't know is that when there is a clause that the woman's health must be taken into account, it does not just mean the woman's physical health, but her emotional health too. If the woman is going to be emotionally unable to care for a baby with down's syndome, for example, that would be a legitimate reason for an abortion. Or if she's a college student who would have a nervous breakdown if forced to carry a baby to full term (like me! haha), that would probably also be legitimate.

The problem that too many pro-lifers don't want to acknowledge is that this bill isn't going to cut down on the number of abortions one bit. People will either just have them earlier or they will have them illegally.

What does D&X stand for?

To clarify something in the first post, partial birth abortions are not performed after the 3rd month, they are performed after the 2nd Trimester- which is not 3 months.
Abortion breaks down like this:
1-12 weeks (you actually cannot get an ABORTION until at least 6 weeks but there are pills like RU486 you can take). this is the FIRST trimester and usually is D&C. A D&C Is the same procedure they use on women who have endometriosis and other complications. It is a common procedure used for OTHER THAN ABORTION purposes.
12-24 weeks- there are about 3 forms of abortions used... if the fetus is still early (more like 12 weeks than 15) they can still use D&C. Usually they use a mixture of giving the woman meds to make her dialate, then having her come back and do a D&C this causes a "miscarriag/abortion" type deal.
There is another method I don't really remember but is relatively new.
for 24-40 weeks there is partial birth abortions. Not many doctors will perform these, even at "abortion clinics". They are not pleasant and doctors have both moral and medical reasons for not usually performing these.

I am a prochoice advocate, but at the same time unless there is a HUGE problem with the baby or the mother's life is in danger, I don't think partial birth abortions are okay. My own opinion. But I don't want them "banned" because I know there are times when a woman would try to have a "back alley" abortion and that is too risky... keeping them legal keeps women and babies safe. Imagine a woman going for an illegal partial birth abortion, the woman gets severely injured and the baby is born alive with HUGE defects because of it? I don't want that happening either!

I have known 3 people in my life that had abortions, and it wasn't easy for any of them, and their reasons all differed... one of them I helped her research everything from adoption to abortion before she made her choice (this was years ago).

As for the religious side, leave that to the woman and God because none of us know how they reconcile (if they do) that. But I don't think it is any of my damn business.