Abortion Tour?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by Rudey
How about the freaks that decide they should have the right to an abortion 6 months into it? Let me guess, they have the right to partial birth abortions too.

-Rudey

Not unless their life depends on it.

[irishpipes]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
I actually edited my post b/c I don't agree that being pro-life is imposing your views on anyone else. The fetus isn't yet a "someone else" to me.

Anything can be debated. It NEEDS to be debated so that old men in dark suits won't pull the wool over everyone's eyes.

But then the debate is no longer about abortion - it is about the fetus and what it is. I can't see myself ever believing that a fetus at any stage of development is NOT a human life. I am certain that there are zillions of people whom I could never convince and are equally determined that it is a soul-less mass of cells. If they believed otherwise, the procedure in question wouldn't be called an abortion, but murder or infanticide or something else, because aside from a few truly evil people, I don't believe a person would intentionally kill their own child, a human being. So, in my thinking, people who have abortions or believe in the right to have them, must believe that the fetus is not a person. To me, that is the real debate.

[Rudey]

Who in here is for aborting at any stage no matter what?

What do people think of people like that?

-Rudey

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by irishpipes
I would interpret your example as giving the fetus the same protection, not greater or lesser, than the woman.

Okay -- let's say that prohibiting abortion provides the same protection to the fetus that allowing abortion provides the woman. Why should the fetus be entitled to the same protection as the woman carrying it?

[irishpipes]

Originally posted by valkyrie
Okay -- let's say that prohibiting abortion provides the same protection to the fetus that allowing abortion provides the woman. Why should the fetus be entitled to the same protection as the woman carrying it?

So that is the unresolvable question. Of course I have my answer, but why bother posting it? You know what it is, and you choose to disagree. I know your answer, and I choose to disagree. The 2 sides will never agree on this. Ever.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by Rudey
Who in here is for aborting at any stage no matter what?

What do people think of people like that?

-Rudey

But see Rudey, abortion at 3rd trimester is illegal in most states if the baby can survive by breathing on its own...

I have seen children alive having to be forced into partuition [sp?] at 5 months.

I have seen a friend decide to have an abortion at 6 months because she found out her child she was carrying had a gross genetic abnormality, which could cause severe retardation, anencephaly [sp?] and barely any internal organ development if born--and if not born stillborn...

And I have seen my godfather, an OB/GYN having being put under the gun by congress during the the Clinton Administraton because he was accused of doing one too many abortions--forget the fact that the pro-lifers were counting "spontaneous abortions"--miscarriages and that the women could not keep the child in the womb for reasons folks have not really understood...

So, it doesn't matter what folks say, I think folks change when they walk a mile in one's shoes and are in the situation exactly what they will do...

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by irishpipes
But then the debate is no longer about abortion - it is about the fetus and what it is.

So, in my thinking, people who have abortions or believe in the right to have them, must believe that the fetus is not a person.

The debate is still about abortion. There are different angles to both sides of debate. Some people come from a religious angle, some come from the angle of the unborn's rights, some come from the angle of adult responsibility, some come from the angle of the physical and emotional toll it takes on women, etc.

Many people believe the fetus is alive and breathing and still believe in a woman's right to choose. Afterall, women's rights to terminate a pregnancy if their lives are in danger is often not disputed. That is considered a justifiable abortion in the eyes of some.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by irishpipes
So that is the unresolvable question. Of course I have my answer, but why bother posting it? You know what it is, and you choose to disagree. I know your answer, and I choose to disagree. The 2 sides will never agree on this. Ever.

You say all of this to say what? LOL.

You don't wanna discuss the topic anymore? LOL. It isn't hard to figure out that such social issues are neverending debates. You know that before you even get started.

[Rudey]

What I'm getting at is people that want an abortion in any case at any time. I don't mean if all of a sudden in the 8th month a baby that would come out dead would be aborted to also save the mom's life. There are people like that in this thread.

-Rudey

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
But see Rudey, abortion at 3rd trimester is illegal in most states if the baby can survive by breathing on its own...

I have seen children alive having to be forced into partuition [sp?] at 5 months.

I have seen a friend decide to have an abortion at 6 months because she found out her child she was carrying had a gross genetic abnormality, which could cause severe retardation, anencephaly [sp?] and barely any internal organ development if born--and if not born stillborn...

And I have seen my godfather, an OB/GYN having being put under the gun by congress during the the Clinton Administraton because he was accused of doing one too many abortions--forget the fact that the pro-lifers were counting "spontaneous abortions"--miscarriages and that the women could not keep the child in the womb for reasons folks have not really understood...

So, it doesn't matter what folks say, I think folks change when they walk a mile in one's shoes and are in the situation exactly what they will do...

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by Rudey
What I'm getting at is people that want an abortion in any case at any time. I don't mean if all of a sudden in the 8th month a baby that would come out dead would be aborted to also save the mom's life. There are people like that in this thread.

-Rudey

I also don't know many women who would say, "Whoops, I'm 8 months pregnant, I don't think I want this baby anymore, so I'm gonna go out and get an abortion, today, Yippeee for me!!!"

I do think that a long time ago, when abortion 1st became legal, that that is what people thought and there were VERY FEW women that actually did have those kinds of abortions with that kind of thinking--which I believe are technically called, partial birth abortions in medical terminology.

But, I think majority of women who actually decide to undergo abortion procedures have seriously thought about its implications are usually get those procedures in the early first trimester--under 8 weeks... In fact, I think it is an insurance liability thing for most clinics and doctors to do abortion procedures no later than 8 weeks--because of all the complications that can occur--i.e. infections, etc.

Hayle, if I was an OB/GYN, I wouldn't want to be car bombed for performing abortions on demand--meaning the mother popped up and said she hates the baby inside of her and wants an abortion, but the child is very healthy... Then have my malpractice insurance be all jacked up. EFF that. I wouldn't do them for being scared of being sued left and right. And most OB/GYN's have some of the highest malpractice insurance rates out there.

Now, if the mother's life is in danger--such as untreatable gestational diabetes, hypertension that is so high that she does actually stroke out, or any number of other complications--which IS THOUGHT TO DIRECTLY AFFECT FETAL DEVELOPMENT, then I would think it would be my duty to assist this woman with her reproductive choices as she sees fit. That is how Western medicine is practiced in this country and folks need to understand that if a healthcare professional is trained and can do something about it and does not do anything about it, it is a failure on the whole medical establishment to protect life at all costs...

And YES, this debate is about sacrificing the one to protect the many...

The 2nd trimesters are the questionable ones for some people. And the 3rd trimesters are where most of the laws are enacted to prevent infanticide.

However, with current technology, from baby heart monitors to establishing how a woman handles herself during pregnancy, I think that most "RESPONSIBLE WOMEN" would have little need for abortion unless there is something truly and grossly wrong with the baby--meaning the baby is dead in the womb... And any dead material that is NOT REMOVED from the womb will cause infection and that chit hurts...

[Rudey]

What about a woman who decides she doesn't care if she gets all the proper tests until 6 months into the pregnancy? A woman who showed no responsibility in birth control and sex and now with an abortion?

The fact is that there are women out there like this. There are women that also want the right to kill a baby in the 9th month and possibly even after the birth. http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...e&pagenumber=4

-Rudey

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
I also don't know many women who would say, "Whoops, I'm 8 months pregnant, I don't think I want this baby anymore, so I'm gonna go out and get an abortion, today, Yippeee for me!!!"

I do think that a long time ago, when abortion 1st became legal, that that is what people thought and there were VERY FEW women that actually did have those kinds of abortions with that kind of thinking--which I believe are technically called, partial birth abortions in medical terminology.

But, I think majority of women who actually decide to undergo abortion procedures have seriously thought about its implications are usually get those procedures in the early first trimester--under 8 weeks... In fact, I think it is an insurance liability thing for most clinics and doctors to do abortion procedures no later than 8 weeks--because of all the complications that can occur--i.e. infections, etc.

Hayle, if I was an OB/GYN, I wouldn't want to be car bombed for performing abortions on demand--meaning the mother popped up and said she hates the baby inside of her and wants an abortion, but the child is very healthy... Then have my malpractice insurance be all jacked up. EFF that. I wouldn't do them for being scared of being sued left and right. And most OB/GYN's have some of the highest malpractice insurance rates out there.

Now, if the mother's life is in danger--such as untreatable gestational diabetes, hypertension that is so high that she does actually stroke out, or any number of other complications--which IS THOUGHT TO DIRECTLY AFFECT FETAL DEVELOPMENT, then I would think it would be my duty to assist this woman with her reproductive choices as she sees fit. That is how Western medicine is practiced in this country and folks need to understand that if a healthcare professional is trained and can do something about it and does not do anything about it, it is a failure on the whole medical establishment to protect life at all costs...

And YES, this debate is about sacrificing the one to protect the many...

The 2nd trimesters are the questionable ones for some people. And the 3rd trimesters are where most of the laws are enacted to prevent infanticide.

However, with current technology, from baby heart monitors to establishing how a woman handles herself during pregnancy, I think that most "RESPONSIBLE WOMEN" would have little need for abortion unless there is something truly and grossly wrong with the baby--meaning the baby is dead in the womb... And any dead material that is NOT REMOVED from the womb will cause infection and that chit hurts...

[AKA_Monet]

Originally posted by Rudey
What about a woman who decides she doesn't care if she gets all the proper tests until 6 months into the pregnancy? A woman who showed no responsibility in birth control and sex and now with an abortion?

The fact is that there are women out there like this. There are women that also want the right to kill a baby in the 9th month and possibly even after the birth. http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...e&pagenumber=4

-Rudey

Well, I don't know what the legal, medical or psychiatric professions says about all those instances. I know there are women out there that think that way, but I don't know any of them so I cannot respond to that with any kind of authority.

From an emotional standpoint, personally, that kind of woman I would not want to be around who has little regard for what she has done--for that kind of woman to be that disturbed. So, from an emotional standpoint, personally, not only should she be allowed to NOT bring another person into this world, she also outta be sterilized to make sure that that lunacy does not continue.

But there are 12 year olds out there that make those kinds of decisions. And those kind of "girls" obviously have other issues that go way beyond access to abortion or not. And I would be more afraid of endangering an innocent life after the birth and giving full custody to someone that emotionally unstable, than allowing her to wallow and suffer the consequences of her actions...

Those are my personal opinions and have no bearing on the legal, medical or psychiatric issues of abortion.

And really, most bonafide, qualified and professional healthcare providers will not do abortions at 9 months... We are not talking about the illegal ones here... We are talking about the professional ones.

Just in my area, a serviceman just returned from his tour in Iraq to find that his 21 year old wife killed their 18 month old daughter and stuffed her into a trash bag because the mother could not deal with the loneliness of being away from her husband and having to move to a new base from Tennessee. The mother also tried to kill their older child, but that child survived. The serviceman was the one that found the baby girl... No bearing on abortion... But it shows was ignorance does to the upbringing of children...

In my opinion, in the future, we may have to give licenses for folks to sexual reproduce and some folks should never be allowed to contribute to the gene pool... But, then there is another freedom down the tube for us--pun intended...

That sounds rather nazi-ish. But so is this conversation... In my opinion...

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by irishpipes
So that is the unresolvable question. Of course I have my answer, but why bother posting it? You know what it is, and you choose to disagree. I know your answer, and I choose to disagree. The 2 sides will never agree on this. Ever.

I don't necessarily know your answer. Do you believe that the fetus is a living person and that ends the discussion?

[AKA_Monet]

Rudey,

What is really going on? What are the stats? Is that your question outside of the anecdotal stories and exceptions to the case?

Personally, I do not know that data, nor do I really care, because really, I am the furthest one to have an abortion outside of some psycho rapist raping me...

And if one does and is actually successful in the impregnation of me (given my age and other female related issues), then hey, I'd probably keep the child, because I am in that place in my life... And I am different in my thinking that I was 5 or 10 years ago...

Besides, my husband would probably kill this looney tune with his 40 Cal Smith and Wesson--if not my brother and father in-law or my own brother and father and all of my paternal uncles...

[Rudey]

Originally posted by AKA_Monet
Rudey,

What is really going on? What are the stats? Is that your question outside of the anecdotal stories and exceptions to the case?

Personally, I do not know that data, nor do I really care, because really, I am the furthest one to have an abortion outside of some psycho rapist raping me...

And if one does and is actually successful in the impregnation of me (given my age and other female related issues), then hey, I'd probably keep the child, because I am in that place in my life... And I am different in my thinking that I was 5 or 10 years ago...

Besides, my husband would probably kill this looney tune with his 40 Cal Smith and Wesson--if not my brother and father in-law or my own brother and father and all of my paternal uncles...

Monet,
I just reject the argument of "it's my body and I can do whatever I want, whenever I want to it".

The fact is that it's not just your body that is effected.

Many people that are OK with abortions are not OK with late-term abortions, for the reason that it's not just the mother's body anymore.

Heck even if it was your body, laws regulate what you can do to it. We stop people from commiting suicide, ban drugs, and regulate the tattoo industry.

Also I find it interesting that a lot of women refer to someone getting an abortion as a mother while rejecting the notion that what they carry is a baby and a child. At the very least, it is a potential for life and at some point society deems it to be life itself.

There are other circumstances that you bring up but I don't like the "Killing two birds with one stone" approach. If there are women getting raped, more of an effort should be put into stopping that. If there are women's live being in danger through a birth, then more money should be put into research to prevent that. And if there are 12 year olds getting knocked up, someone needs to stop that from happening period. Abortion shouldn't be used as the stone that solves all these problems as well as ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Also, many women who are not in poverty, never been raped, nor participated in incest, bring those issues up as an emotional ploy. If we were to ask them "OK would you be willing to allow abortions for women who suffered that legal and for yourself illegal, would you accept?", I doubt they would accept. This is akin to the whole "They're killing women and children" argument to tug at someone's heart strings.

-Rudey