Abortion Discussion

[Hammster]

MOD HAT ON




Stay on topic and don't flame.

Easy as pie.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[Archivist]

And it's mature to think you should be able to kill someone because they inconvenience you by existing? To blame the rapist's other victim and kill them? To think you can be as irresponsible as you want with no real consequences because you can just have an abortion later? That all sounds very childish to me...

In what way was the woman who was the victim of a rapist "irresponsible?"

 

[AirPo]

In what way was the woman who was the victim of a rapist "irresponsible?"

She had the nerve to be a woman.

 

[Radrook]

Where are all my previous posts?

 

[Archivist]

Where are all my previous posts?

I didn't take them!

 

[Radrook]

It is if you're going to claim it is murder - that is, the illegal types of killing. This is pretty typical behavior, though - make a crazy claim and then run away when asked to back it up. I wish I were more surprised than I am, but I've come to see it as normal. It is one of the many reasons that I find myself supporting the pro-choice side. At least they don't have to make stuff up to make their case.

No one is making anything up. It is a biblically-expressed view which you simply disagree with.
Any view that contradicts what the Bible tells us is considered Satanic. Since your view about the status of life in the womb doesn't harmonize with the biblical view it automatically falls under that category. Expecting Christians who believe the Bible is inspired of God to calmly accept your view when their sacred book condemns it is irrational.

BTW
The ones making things up are the human courts which feel that they can supersede God's clearly-expressed views concerning the sacredness of prenatal life and become a law unto themselves.

Jeremiah 10:23

“O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.”

King James Version (KJV)

 

[Root of Jesse]

Who is "advocating" an abortion? I am simply saying that the choice remain with the rape victim. That isn't "advocating" anything.

Well, you are saying that the fetus has no choice...It seems you're advocating that.

 

[Root of Jesse]

You mean in latin they can't distinguish between the two? That's crazy! An easy solution to the debate I suppose, which you are trying to suggest.

Please notice I actually said "like a parasite." I agree with you that it is not a parasite because if it were an actual parasite it would be a living being, which it is not. (Although you think it is - another way the "pro-life" position is demonstrated to be wrong.)
It is VERY PARASITIC in that it attains all it sustaining substance from its host, the pregnant woman to which it is necessarily physically attached.

It's hard to believe that there are Christians living who would go back to the pre-Christian way of living...

 

[redleghunter]

And another, to which I have linked previously finds that over 95% of women who have procured abortions do NOT regret their decision!

How strange that we never hear you people quoting those numbers!

What was the participation rate for the study?

 

[jayem]

There are laws that a Doctor has to provide treatment and medical care to a patient, and there are laws that a mother or caretaker has to provide care and assistance to her young. It would fall in this category.

Your analogy is spurious. In the first place, physicians are only obligated to provide emergency care to whatever degree is possible under the circumstances. And they have no obligation to deliver any care outside their training or expertise.

But more to the point: no one is required to donate part of their body to someone else. And in pregnancy, a woman essentially donates her uterus for use by another individual. Who also makes a physiologic demand on her heart, lungs, kidneys, and other organ systems. This is completely different from the situation after delivery. A newborn makes no physiologic demand on the birth mother's body at all. It will thrive perfectly well under anyone who delivers proper care. That's the crux of the issue--pregnancy involves a woman's body. It's a well established bioethical principle that adult persons of sound mind have autonomy over their own bodies. That's the basis for the legal doctrine of informed consent. Of course, autonomy isn't absolute. Imprisoned felons surrender much of their autonomy. And persons can be required to submit to drug or DNA testing. But criminalizing abortion from the moment of conception onward, effectively suspends a woman's bodily autonomy without due process.

Look, I get it that abortion is ethically questionable. And actually, I kinda agree that terminating a pregnancy for less than rape, or medical reasons is morally suspect. But laws that revoke a woman's right to make decisions about her own body--even temporarily--are worse. They're just too authoritarian and give too much power to the state. As wrong as abortion may be, criminalization at all stages of pregnancy is a greater wrong. And it's not necessary, because there are other and better ways to reduce the practice.

 

[redleghunter]

I was criticised in another discussion for pointing out the lies that one contributor was promoting. Yet, consider.......

We are told by these people that "most" or "many" women are traumatised by their decision to abort.

This is a lie. More than 95% of women procuring abortions report satisfaction with their decision.

We are presented with images of 'typical' abortions involving fully formed foetuses being removed from the womb.

This is a lie. The vast, vast majority are performed in the very early stages of embryonic development. But they don't make as good pictures, do they?

We are told how dangerous abortions are; that they are far more dangerous than the risks of childbirth.

This is a lie. Performed by professionals, abortions are extremely safe. More women die each year from birth complications than from botched abortions. 14 times as many.

We are told that most people want abortions stopped.

This is a lie. Worldwide, there is a majority acceptance of the procedure as a legitimate alternate form of birth control.

Desperate, dishonest people who must resort to lies to promote their selfish desires.

Do you have the peer reviews from this study?

 

[redleghunter]

Hi Steve, your study appears to be flawed!

Go here to see the review that belies the conclusions drawn by the study you've referred us to.

You will also discover that your study's "claim of declining regret and declining negative reactions to abortion is also at odds with Brenda Major’s two year longitudinal study .. that found that there was a trend of decline in relief and increase in negative emotions over the two year period." See Major B, et al. Psychological responses of women after first-trimester abortion. Archives of General Psychiatry. 2000: 57(8), 777-84.

I will agree with you about this though, we are a desperate lot, desperate to see an end to the genocide that has taken 58,000,000+ lives to date in the United States alone.

It's interesting to note that you characterize Pro-Lifers as having "selfish" desires. I'm not sure what "selfish desires" you could possibly be referring to in this case, but it seems to me that someone who chooses to take the life of their own child for the sake of convenience is the very definition of "selfish".

Yours and His,
David

The drop out rate in both studies is telling.

I would defer to the people and organizations which minister to the needs of women post abortion. Which your link is one of a group who helps women with their psychological and emotional needs.

 

[Archivist]

Well, you are saying that the fetus has no choice...It seems you're advocating that.

But the pregnant woman can make a choice, the fetus cannot. Further the fetus is occupying her body. If the fetus is a result of a rape, as I have been discussing, that occupation is without the pregnant woman's permission and perhaps against her will.

 

[redleghunter]

Please address my post first. Why should a rape victim be forced into nine months of involuntary servitude to carry a fetus that was produced against her will to term? Why should she be forced to deal with all the complications of pregnancy up to and including possible death to deliver the product of a violent act? Do you support slavery in all cases or just in cases involving rape victims?

I already commented I reject the notion of servitude as you frame it. That is why I asked if you saw non rape situations as potentially perceived by a woman as servitude. If so then your servitude theory applies to the 99% category of women seeking an abortion outside of rape and imminent death.

You are a Christian. What became of Joseph's servitude in Egypt?

 

[Root of Jesse]

I was criticised in another discussion for pointing out the lies that one contributor was promoting. Yet, consider.......

We are told by these people that "most" or "many" women are traumatised by their decision to abort.

This is a lie. More than 95% of women procuring abortions report satisfaction with their decision.

We are presented with images of 'typical' abortions involving fully formed foetuses being removed from the womb.

This is a lie. The vast, vast majority are performed in the very early stages of embryonic development. But they don't make as good pictures, do they?

We are told how dangerous abortions are; that they are far more dangerous than the risks of childbirth.

This is a lie. Performed by professionals, abortions are extremely safe. More women die each year from birth complications than from botched abortions. 14 times as many.

We are told that most people want abortions stopped.

This is a lie. Worldwide, there is a majority acceptance of the procedure as a legitimate alternate form of birth control.

Desperate, dishonest people who must resort to lies to promote their selfish desires.

The lies are in your post. You cannot prove that 95% of women procuring abortions report satisfaction with their decision. I doubt that even 10% of women who procure abortions even report. But we do know of many cases where an abortion went bad, and women had to be rushed to the hospital, that women have died from having abortions, and that years later, women have regretted having an abortion.
It may be true that most abortions are performed in the early stages of a pregnancy, but that does not give detrement to the fact that many abortions do involve fully formed fetuses. Where would PP get their organs to sell???
Any procedure performed by competent doctors will be safer than same performed by incompetent doctors or by non-doctors. The fact is that there aren't enough competent doctors willing to kill fetuses, so abortion clinics have to use non-doctors with some perfunctory supervision. Regarding your statistics, we all know how statistics lie-just look at unemployment rates and climate change statistics.
How is it selfish to ask that created children be allowed to live. How is it unselfish to kill a child you participated in the creation of. (Remember that most rapes do not produce fertilization!). How is it unselfish to use abortion as a form of contraception, which the vast majority of abortions are?

 

[redleghunter]

You want me to take seriously a publication which screams loudly at the top of the page...

"Caught on tape - Planned Parenthood trafficking in body parts!"

I think I'll pass on that one!



How very interesting. This, from YOUR source.......(my underline)

• 
  
  
  • Major has published a number of studies on abortion with an emphasis on attributing negative psychological effects of abortion with lack of social support and stigma caused by anti-abortion protests. In violation of APA ethics rules on data sharing, however, she has refused to allow other researchers to examine her data despite accusations that she has misrepresented and selectively reported her findings.[4]

Because, if you were the slightest part honest, you would acknowledge that your primary interest is not the care of women. It is entirely about driving your religiously inspired agenda.

But we've seen the examples of the honesty, haven't we?

No comments on the sample drop out rate? Significant in both studies.

 

[Root of Jesse]

But the pregnant woman can make a choice, the fetus cannot. Further the fetus is occupying her body. If the fetus is a result of a rape, as I have been discussing, that occupation is without the pregnant woman's permission and perhaps against her will.

So, because a being has the lacks an ability, they should be denied their rights? That speaks loudly to those who were brought to the US as slaves, doesn't it? They didn't have the ability to fight for their freedom, so they should have been kept as slaves until now, right?

 

[redleghunter]

http://www.lifenews.com/2009/11/03/int-1371/

http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/studentsforlife/cost.html

That now makes three studies in opposition to the 95% study. The interesting point from the University of Otago study is their use of medical records and not solely interviews.

 

[redleghunter]

I feel that the sources here may be one sided and that's not good for an argument really from what I have learned at least when presenting a case.

Yes attack the source of reporting.

The studies are well footnoted for reference.

 

[Julie.S]

Yes attack the source of reporting.

The studies are well footnoted for reference.

They come from sources that I would not use in an argument. Unless I was writing a paper on a topic and I nedded both sides.