Abortion: The Real Reason Why States are Passing Laws Against It

Desk trauma said:

Why? If what Christians say about the afterlife is true you would be in paradise right now had you been aborted.

Click to expand...

Because im grateful to be alive in this world, though it can be difficult.

tall73 said:

It is not my analysis. Here, you can see it from Planned Parenthood if you like:

Birth Control Methods & Options | Types of Birth Control

Click to expand...

I’m not sure why you posted that. As you can see, there are a number of birth control methods that are almost 100% effective. The data you are ignoring is the data that shows that accesss to free birth control and education can cut unplanned pregnancies in half or more.

“A new study by investigators at Washington University reports that providing birth control to women at no cost substantially reduces unplanned pregnancies and cuts abortion rates by a range of 62 to 78 percent compared to the national rate.”
Access to free birth control reduces abortion rates | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

Contraception in The Netherlands: the low abortion rate explained. - PubMed - NCBI

I’ll rest my case there.

Sparagmos said:

I’m not sure why you posted that. As you can see, there are a number of birth control methods that are almost 100% effective. The data you are ignoring is the data that shows that accesss to free birth control and education can cut unplanned pregnancies in half or more.

“A new study by investigators at Washington University reports that providing birth control to women at no cost substantially reduces unplanned pregnancies and cuts abortion rates by a range of 62 to 78 percent compared to the national rate.”
Access to free birth control reduces abortion rates | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

Contraception in The Netherlands: the low abortion rate explained. - PubMed - NCBI

I’ll rest my case there.

Click to expand...

Maybe the goal isnt less abortions, but more teen pregnancies carried to term.

St_Worm2 said:

Hi Zephcom, a "religious dogma" telling us that it's wrong to intentionally kill an innocent human being cannot be, "engraved in American law", at this point in time, because it has been part of American law since this country was founded.

Click to expand...

Who told you this?

Abortion was never regulated until the latter half of the nineteenth century and then only because the midwives were taking business from male doctors.

David Cabrera said:

Since they are more than one, they are human beings not "a human being".

Click to expand...

I thank ye for the grammar lesson attempt but I did phrase it as “Are they each all ‘a human being’?”

So...what is your opinion as to what should be done with these embryonic “human beings”?

W2L said:

Didnt we ban partial birth abortions? If so then we have restriction in place already that control women's sexuality. So we can control women's sexuality.

Click to expand...

No. Partial birth abortions were only used in specific cases. In those cases the mother actually wanted to keep the child but it had died or there were other complications. The only reason people attempted to ban it was because of politics.

thecolorsblend said:

I see it as improving society. If that means “controlling women’s sexuality”, eh, whatever. I can roll with that.

Click to expand...

Yes. It is amazing how many men are certain they should control other peoples sex lives instead of their own. If only they had as much concern for the 1 in 5 women who will be raped in their lifetime.

Hi all,

I wrote in an earlier post:

miamited said:

That the world, in general, is not going to ascribe to the law of God in these things or any other such things. But the believer understands that it is not his job to 'save the world'. It is his job to keep himself from sin. To teach the love that God has for each one of us through His Son, Jesus. But to keep the world from sin isn't a part of our job description.

Click to expand...

I just wanted to take a moment to expound, as I understand it, upon that thought.

Christians, not all of course, seem to have this idea that they're going to save the world by making the world stop sinning. I've read the Scriptures through a number of times, and I don't find that to be some important teaching of the Scriptures. The Scriptures tell us to go out and show the love of Christ and preach the gospel. Baptizing and teaching all those who would believe. So, I find that this idea that Christians should get downright militant in making worldly governments kowtow to God's law, is a bit misguided.

As I understand it, we are to teach others to love God and to know God through the proclamation of the truth that we are all sinners and yet while we are all sinners, God sent His Son that we might have forgiveness for our sin. Now, once someone believes that, then yes, we should train them up in the truth of God and what He asks of them. But trying to throw the entire world or an entire nation under the bus by making the laws of that nation to be inline with the Scriptures...I don't think the Scriptures show that such an effort is ever going to gain much ground.

When one come to faith in Jesus, then that one is expected to be born again and that is when they should willingly want to keep the law and the truth of God in their heart. All others need not apply and we need not waste our efforts trying to get the lost to live by the law and truth of God. We need to teach the lost about Jesus and then allow the Holy Spirit to change that single individual's heart so that they will desire to keep God's commands.

This attitude of making the laws of man to fall in line with the laws of God, seems to be an evangelical position, for the most part. This has never worked. Even in Israel, this idea of an entire nation following the law of God seems to have fallen apart. By the time that Jesus arrived in Israel, he was pretty clear with them that they had put away the laws of God for the law of men. That they were all white-washed Sepulchers filled with dead men's bones. That they traveled over hill and dale to convert someone and then made that someone a dog of hell worse than they were themselves. This is Israel!!!!!!! Do we really even hope to imagine that we're going to be successful at such a task?

So, let's make abortions illegal. Hey, if that's what the majority of the people of this country want to do, then as a democracy, I say let's do it. But, keep in mind that making abortion isn't going to save a single soul for the kingdom of God unless and until one believes the truth of God and His offer of salvation through His Son, Jesus. But, I say let's back off as 'christians', and let the world decide what it chooses to do concerning the issue. We can certainly make our individual concerns known, but we don't need to get militant and demonstrate at public forums about it.

Or, let's let abortions remain legal and continue to share the love of God through the proclamation of the Gospel of salvation through His Son and let the chips fall where they may as regards abortion. If God wants those aborted fetuses to share in His kingdom, then He's big enough and powerful enough and has the authority to make that a reality whether that fetus was aborted or not.

Now, it's a totally different manner of handling the issue among those who are enjoined with us as brothers and sisters in the faith. We should definitely instruct those who are a part of us, that killing a child is not in keeping with God's desires for us. We should also instruct those who are among us that having sexual relations in situations where such an eventuality would even come up, is also not in keeping with God's desires for us. But we're never going to be successful in doing any good in the world by making the laws and commandments of God, the rule of the land here on earth. No one is going to get saved because they didn't have an abortion.

That's my two cents regarding the issue. I think that we'll be doing a lot more for the kingdom of God by the proclamation of His Gospel, rather than trying to make the world follow God's laws and commandments.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

Belk said:

Yes. It is amazing how many men are certain they should control other peoples sex lives instead of their own. If only they had as much concern for the 1 in 5 women who will be raped in their lifetime.

Click to expand...

Let’s try staying on track here, this thread is about abortion, not rape.

thecolorsblend said:

Let’s try staying on track here, this thread is about abortion, not rape.

Click to expand...

Let's try actually caring about women instead of controlling them.

W2L said:

Didnt we ban partial birth abortions? If so then we have restriction in place already that control women's sexuality. So we can control women's sexuality.

Click to expand...

Hi W2L,

Really? You believe that because there are laws regarding partial birth abortions that we can control women's sexuality. Perhaps you mean 'women's choice in what they do if they find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy'. But that some law controls women's sexuality seems a bit far fetched to me.

According to Dictionary.com:

sex·u·al·i·ty
/ˌsekSHo͞oˈalədē/
noun

1. capacity for sexual feelings.

I'm not sure that laws concerning abortion have much to do with a person's capacity for sexual feelings.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

Pommer said:

I thank ye for the grammar lesson attempt but I did phrase it as “Are they each all ‘a human being’?”

So...what is your opinion as to what should be done with these embryonic “human beings”?

Click to expand...

Making sure in vitro doesn't risk their lives, would be a good start.

jayem said:

Do numbers make a difference when invoking a moral argument? If you accept that terminating a pregnancy, in some uncommon circumstances, may be necessary to preserve the mother's life, then you're admitting that when push comes to shove, the already born are a little higher on the moral spectrum than the unborn.

Click to expand...

Nice try bro, but I say it is an unfortunate part of the procedure. The goal of it is trying to save both but unfortunately the unborn dies. It is different from an abortion where the goal is to kill the unborn.

Sparagmos said:

Those numbers look great. When combined with the rhythm method, or using double protection, the risk of pregnancy is very low. Look at the difference proper use makes!

Click to expand...

We agree proper use is very important. And double methods are even more effective.

However, if you had 100 women, all using proper method, having sex while each time using a male condom then over a year you would have two pregnancies. And after two years you would have four pregnancies, etc.

rjs330 said:

Citation needed

Click to expand...

For which part? That the OP is indicating pro life folks want a theocracy

The only citation possible is the OP.

zephcom said:

If that is right, is there any reason to think that will be end of their desire get their religious dogma engraved in American law? Are we headed for a Christian version of the Taliban?

Click to expand...

If you meant that it is not clear that all pro-lifers want a theocracy, that is calling into question the assertion of others, which they will need to substantiate. Just because the OP raises the question whether it may all be a plot to control women, does not mean that it is. That will need to be demonstrated by those making that claim.

FenderTL5 said:

You can count me as a pro-life person who is on board. I am staunchly pro-life, which for me includes the issues of abortion, capital punishment and euthanasia.
However it also also overlaps into issues of poverty, health care, war, guns, immigration, and protection of minorities. I try to look at every issue through the lens of life being sacred, all of it.

As this applies to abortion, I don't think government should be funding it (and it doesn't). otoh, I DO see this as a huge healthcare issue; pre/post natal care as well as the woman's healthcare pre/post pregnancy. Then there's the issues of poverty and increasing inequality in the economics of our country. Let's face it, abortion legal or not, will always be an option for those with enough means. For that matter, 'affordable healthcare' is commensurate with wealth/income in the USA.

70% of abortions are by those who claim to be Christians (Lifeway Research, SBC) and a majority are kept silent/secret (Christian Post article on the same research). The blatant hypocrisy on this issue is appalling to me. Even when Focus on the Family tries to spin it positively, the conclusion remains “if nobody is willing to say, ‘We’re going to help you through this,’ it’s hard for them to rationally say they should keep the child.”
Which gets back to your point; society and even more the church needs to address the underlying issues.
If Christians wanted to reduce abortions by more than half, they'd stop getting them and start being pro-life and not merely (hypocritically) anti-abortion.

Click to expand...

Yes. I have met a few Christians who believe as you do. Mostly here on CF. The problem is that your voices seem to be few and far between and they certainly are not in the political pro-life movements we see. If they were I think we would have a much better society and my respect for Christians would go up immensely. One of the best men I had the honor of knowing was a Christian who lived his faith rather then trying to legislate it.

David Cabrera said:

Making sure in vitro doesn't risk their lives, would be a good start.

Click to expand...

It would seem that you might need to read up on in vitro fertilization.

Typically, a woman is given medications that allow her ovaries to produce more than one mature, (ready to be fertilized) eggs. 2-15 eggs are placed in a nutrient bath and sperm are actively “injected” into each. This results in fertilization of none, some, most or all of the eggs.
Non-fertilized eggs are discarded.
After a course of the hormones (that she would have produced naturally as if the fertilization had occurred within her body), an embryo is implanted within her uterine lining. If the embryo “takes” she becomes pregnant. Some don’t, but not to worry, there’s more back in the lab, and the procedure is attempted again.
If it does take, the woman is now pregnant and the rest of the fertilized ova are kept in cold storage, or discarded.

Belk said:

Thank you for your honesty. It is good to see what we have long suspected but most pro-life people deny. This is about controlling women's sexuality.

Click to expand...

It really is! This is part and parcel of patriarchy. The control of female sexuality ensures the continued subjugation of the female. The ultimate control of female sexuality is in the rape culture. Patriarchy is perhaps the most insidious evil humanity has ever inflicted on itself.

Belk said:

I did not say that. What I said was limiting abortion via legislation is about controlling women's sexuality. Obviously this is not true in all cases but it is true enough.

Click to expand...

Limiting abortion in the womb is about preventing children being killed.

If because of that women decide that they wish to have less sex, use more protection, or anything else, that is up to the woman involved, and any partner that may be in the relationship.

If you are fertile then sex is always something that can lead to pregnancy, even with contraception. Christians didn't cause that to be reality.

I used to be pro life until I actually tried to get people to address the issues underlying why women choose abortion.

Click to expand...

They should be addressed. Poverty, lack of parental bond, etc. are all highly correlated with abortion, as well as with poor outcomes in level of education, wealth, etc.

However, if you are pro life because you think that the life of children in the womb is important, than how does the way some other person views things change that view? The child is important or not. And you can still strive to change people's minds on the question of addressing the needs of others.

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of pro life people who have been on board with the idea. The rest shunned me and accused me of being a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Click to expand...

There have been a few in this thread alone.

FenderTL5 said:

You can count me as a pro-life person who is on board. I am staunchly pro-life, which for me includes the issues of abortion, capital punishment and euthanasia.
However it also also overlaps into issues of poverty, health care, war, guns, immigration, and protection of minorities. I try to look at every issue through the lens of life being sacred, all of it.

As this applies to abortion, I don't think government should be funding it (and it doesn't). otoh, I DO see this as a huge healthcare issue; pre/post natal care as well as the woman's healthcare pre/post pregnancy. T.

Click to expand...

Just to put a number to that, the average cost of an abortion per Planned Parenthood is $350-950 in the first trimester.

How much does it cost to get an abortion?

The cost of having a baby is around 10,000, and then of course, you have a baby to take care of after that.

How much it costs to have a baby in every state, whether you have health insurance or don't