Abortion Discussion

[redleghunter]

I assume you've been to see SW #7?? We went to see it Sat afternoon, the wife isn't really a Sci-Fi fan but she really liked the movie... I've seen the other 6 and found myself speculating out loud what was going to happen next, she finally elbowed me and told me to shut up I was spoiling the movie...

Yes good movie.

 

[SteveB28]

What was the participation rate for the study?

I would direct you to the 'Strengths and Limitations' section of the study, wherein the author compares this rate with similar longitudinal studies. It stands up very well.

You have, of course, read the study in detail?

 

[SteveB28]

The lies are in your post. You cannot prove that 95% of women procuring abortions report satisfaction with their decision.

That study does exactly that.

I doubt that even 10% of women who procure abortions even report.

Argument from incredulity. What you choose to doubt has no bearing on reality.

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.

And those anecdotal examples are very much in the minority.

It may be true that most abortions are performed in the early stages of a pregnancy,

90% is hardly a "may be"!

but that does not give detrement to the fact that many abortions do involve fully formed fetuses.

A few.

Where would PP get their organs to sell???

You've just lost all credibility.

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.

Wrong. Consult the statistics, rather than your own prejudices please.

Regarding your statistics, we all know how statistics lie-just look at unemployment rates and climate change statistics.

Poisoning the well, red herrings. You've got them all!

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?

I've already explained why earlier. I don't feel inclined to waste my time on you.

 

[SteveB28]

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

Again, had you read the study in detail, you would realise that there are valid, reliable statistical instruments which were used to compensate for the 'drop outs' as you call them.

I'm beginning to doubt that you have bothered to read the study. The author goes into some detail on this point.

 

[SteveB28]

That is an excellent question considering there are right about 1 million per year...

And, of course, you've read the process by which participants were recruited, haven't you?

 

[redleghunter]

Again, had you read the study in detail, you would realise that there are valid, reliable statistical instruments which were used to compensate for the 'drop outs' as you call them.

I'm beginning to doubt that you have bothered to read the study. The author goes into some detail on this point.

The drop out rate is telling regardless of the touted original sampling.

Why? Because later drop outs may provide evidence for later regret.

 

[OrthodoxForever]

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

She wasn't there are two distinct examples in that post, 1 unprotected consensual sex, and the other rape, rape being the one about killing the other victim

 

[SteveB28]

The drop out rate is telling regardless of the touted original sampling.

Why? Because later drop outs may provide evidence for later regret.

You haven't read it have you? You are completely ignorant of the methodology employed, yet feel qualified to criticise.

Honesty? Integrity?

Please.

 

[OrthodoxForever]

Sorry about that. Just trying to emphasize.
With "IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO ABORT BABIES. There is never a baby in a womb!" I was just trying to point out that you should not be so self-contradictory. In case you don't know it, the big lie (repeated at every opportunity) is that the fetus is a baby. That is about the only argument you have, to constantly repeat that basic falsehood in every way possible.

IT IS NOT TRUE, oops, sorry, It is not true that any of my arguments don't hold up. I challenge you to point to one of my arguments and tell me what's untrue about it.

So far it just seems like you're redefining terms. You define baby as being by definition outside the womb, I don't because there's very little developmental difference whether inside or outside after a certain point in pregnancy so it seems irrational to treat he/she as a precious little human life one minute and something less than human just prior to that moment based only on their location.

 

[redleghunter]

And, of course, you've read the process by which participants were recruited, haven't you?

Depends on the screening criteria for the candidates of the study.

I was part of an organization for a number of years which employed surveys to determine effectiveness of the program of instruction. When I was given supervision I reviewed the Inspector General reports on the previous supervisor's watch.

He apparently handed out surveys to willing customers and a finding that certain customers were targeted for their enthusiasm with the program.

The screening criteria is very important and so is the motivation of the study group.

 

[redleghunter]

You haven't read it have you? You are completely ignorant of the methodology employed, yet feel qualified to criticise.

Honesty? Integrity?

Please.

Understand you must make these discussions personal.

 

[Cearbhall]

No, not me.....God
Jeremiah 1:5

Which is irrelevant to the law.

 

[SteveB28]

Understand you must make these discussions personal.

You haven't read the study have you?

 

[SteveB28]

Depends on the screening criteria for the candidates of the study.

I was part of an organization for a number of years which employed surveys to determine effectiveness of the program of instruction. When I was given supervision I reviewed the Inspector General reports on the previous supervisor's watch.

He apparently handed out surveys to willing customers and a finding that certain customers were targeted for their enthusiasm with the program.

The screening criteria is very important and so is the motivation of the study group.

Please show how any part of your red herring story relates to this study. Or were you simply attempting to 'poison the well'?

 

[tiglathpileser]

So far it just seems like you're redefining terms. You define baby as being by definition outside the womb, I don't because there's very little developmental difference whether inside or outside after a certain point in pregnancy so it seems irrational to treat he/she as a precious little human life one minute and something less than human just prior to that moment based only on their location.

This argument shows the desperation of the pro-aborts for the simple reason that one will say it is a baby at this point, another will say at that point and yet another will say it is a baby at a third chosen point. Which makes it very clear they make up their narrative a s they go along depending on the question they are asked. Like when I held up a photo of an aborted baby that looked no different to a baby that had not been aborted. I asked "Is this a baby?" The chairman, a woman who had had an abortion said "It depends on the situation."

It is silly to suggest that a baby who is in the womb is not a baby until it has been out of the womb for one minute as the baby in the womb is exactly the same as the baby out of the womb at that point. For all the intelligence that the pro-aborts claim to have, they come up with such a weird scenario.

 

[tiglathpileser]

How can something that is not alive move, grow, perform somersaults, and suck their thumbs? You need to take biology 101!

Another one of those thinkup the answer depending on the question pro-abort responses. Their chosen method of avoiding the truth is denial, hoping that no one will notice the obvious. Fortunately their war on babies is losing momentum as abrition numbers are declining and baby killing facilities are closing at a rate of knots. In addition, there are more young people against abortion that for it. The first time ever. Looks like the leaders of tomorrow are going to be against abortion so the future is good.

 

[SteveB28]

Thankyou for your opinion. Duly noted and filed in the round filing basket.

Oh, not mine. That was the opinion of one of those "founders" you've been misrepresenting.

 

[Uncle Siggy]

You haven't read it have you? You are completely ignorant of the methodology employed, yet feel qualified to criticise.

Honesty? Integrity?

Please.

So were "YOU" the one who did the study/ies or the interviews of all the women??? (With 50+ million abortions on the books that's a lot of women to talk to)...

So do you think all the interviewees were up front and honest with you???

 

[Uncle Siggy]

The R word again.

Yeah quite a few people seem to have issues with the "R" words, especially the "responsibility" one. For some "r"eason they love to "r"ationalize all the ways they don't want to be "responsible". It's simply "r"evolting!!!

 

[SteveB28]

So were "YOU" the one who did the study/ies or the interviews of all the women??? (With 50+ million abortions on the books that's a lot of women to talk to)...

So do you think all the interviewees were up front and honest with you???

Yep, I think I'm the only one here that's bothered to actually read the study.

But then, you lot couldn't afford to read it, could you? Because it would clearly show how grossly wrong your position is.

Better to throw stones from a distance, right?