Abortion: How does it effect your vote

[Honkytnkmn]

sorry it posted again

 

[Guttermouth]

I prefer pro-choice candidates because I find their position more consistent.

The irony to me is that the conservative pro-life position on abortion results in more abortion. The idea that being pro-choice means you are pro-abortion of pro-murder is not only false, it is insulting. We all would love it if there were never another abortion and, in fact, liberal pro-choice people are more likely to support social policies both to reduce abortion and support needy children than “pro-life” conservatives.

Pro choice folks seem to take propaganda as fact and spread it without study. For example, they claim Obama voted to allow abortion survivors to die because he wants those babies to die. They ignore or don’t know that he supported the legislation, but opposed it because he felt it was poorly written and would be overturned as unconstitutional. He wanted something better than the zealots who use his votes against him, and they use it to promote a lie. Why would honest people do that?

To me, hard-core pro-lifers live in a world comprised of shades of gray, and pretend all is black and white. Take a single case where a woman’s life would be threatened by carrying her baby to term. Would they presume to decide who should live or die? Would they force her to commit suicide rather than terminate her pregnancy? You or I cannot decide that for her. And take so-called partial-birth abortion. What if a fetus is dead and this is the safest way to remove it? They ignore that, and pretend it is about some nut-job dismembering a full-term, healthy baby. No one supports that. What we support is the idea that reasonable people make reasonable decisions based on their faith and the advice of their doctor. Worried about someone killing a term fetus that is totally healthy in a mother who is totally healthy? Me too. So work with people like me to stop it. Living in extremes of black and white prevent that.

Pro-lifers' main argument is based on their religion, which they would force me to observe, apparently. Sorry, I wont. I don’t believe that conception is equal to a person. My little toe is human, but it isn’t a person. When it becomes a thinking, feeling, self-aware toe, then you can argue it is a person.

Pro lifers also don't cry out about fertility treatments. They say conception equals people, but they will stand quietly by while millions of "people' are created and disposed of by the wealthy, then call a poor and pregnant teen a murderer if she aborts her fetus at 6 weeks.

And I find religious arguments are inherently self contradictory. The Christian’s goal is eternity in heaven with Jesus Christ. If you believe an aborted fetus is a person, you either believe that God would send a soul who never walked this earth to hell, which is pretty horrible, or you believe He would send that soul to heaven. If an aborted fetus will result in peace for all eternity in Heaven, then abortion sounds like a pretty cool deal to me.

 

[kermit]

I am mildly pro-choice in that I don't feel that I have the right to choose for other people, but I would rather they choose life.

I don't consider abortion much in deciding a candidate. The reality is that short of an amendment abortion is not going away.

 

[Wyzaard]

And again, as I usually have to point out to the anti-abortion crowd:

Pro-choice candidates who call for better resources, education, and equality for women will LOWER the number of abortions being performed far more than the anti-abortion candidate who will DO NOTHING to end abortion or ameliorate the conditions that cause women to seek abortions in the first place.

Right-wing politicians use the abortion issue as a carrot to sucker their supporters into voting them and their harmful socio-economic policies in. Don't fall for it!

 

[Matthew_18:14]

And I find religious arguments are inherently self contradictory. The Christian’s goal is eternity in heaven with Jesus Christ. If you believe an aborted fetus is a person, you either believe that God would send a soul who never walked this earth to hell, which is pretty horrible, or you believe He would send that soul to heaven. If an aborted fetus will result in peace for all eternity in Heaven, then abortion sounds like a pretty cool deal to me.

Guttermouth,

I will have to take your statements one by one. To many arguments to work with at once. So by this argument we would be just as well off to kill a child that was just born. They would be going to heaven, so we would be doing them a favor? Is this correct?

Aaron

 

[Matthew_18:14]

Pro choice folks seem to take propaganda as fact and spread it without study. For example, they claim Obama voted to allow abortion survivors to die because he wants those babies to die. They ignore or don’t know that he supported the legislation, but opposed it because he felt it was poorly written and would be overturned as unconstitutional. He wanted something better than the zealots who use his votes against him, and they use it to promote a lie. Why would honest people do that?

Guttermouth,

Here, I would just have to say, that every time Obama makes an excuse for a position it seems like those who believe, or want to believe in him, have no problem writing off his positions. It seems to me that his votes speak for themselves. He has made one vote that is anti-abortion in anyway. How do you explain his 100% NARAL acceptance.

Aaron

 

[Wyzaard]

It seems to me that his votes speak for themselves.

He would work for social policies that would lower the number of abortions that would be sought. I'm still waiting for your response to my query.

 

[reverend B]

And again, as I usually have to point out to the anti-abortion crowd:

Pro-choice candidates who call for better resources, education, and equality for women will LOWER the number of abortions being performed far more than the anti-abortion candidate who will DO NOTHING to end abortion or ameliorate the conditions that cause women to seek abortions in the first place.

Right-wing politicians use the abortion issue as a carrot to sucker their supporters into voting them and their harmful socio-economic policies in. Don't fall for it!

they will.

 

[Guttermouth]

Guttermouth,

I will have to take your statements one by one. To many arguments to work with at once. So by this argument we would be just as well off to kill a child that was just born. They would be going to heaven, so we would be doing them a favor? Is this correct?

Aaron

I don't know. I appears that each Christian's perspective on sin and one's worthiness for heaven is different. I don't claim to understand this contradiction, I am simply pointing out it exists. Many have told me abortion is wrong because the fetus, having not asked forgiveness and been saved, is tainted by original sin and would go to hell. Others find that horrible and say all babies go to heaven. I don't believe in the soul, or heaven, or hell....

 

[Guttermouth]

Guttermouth,

Here, I would just have to say, that every time Obama makes an excuse for a position it seems like those who believe, or want to believe in him, have no problem writing off his positions. It seems to me that his votes speak for themselves. He has made one vote that is anti-abortion in anyway. How do you explain his 100% NARAL acceptance.

Aaron

I would have 100% acceptance, too, and I am against abortion. And I find your claim that I am making excuses insulting. I read the transcripts of the votes in question. Complete transcripts. Did you? Or did you just form an opinion based on something you heard somewhere?

 

[JustOneWay]

Bush is pro-choice. He believes it is ok in the case of rape or incest. There is no in between.

Then Bush sure fooled a lot of pro-lifers into thinking he was pro life.

 

[Matthew_18:14]

Pro-lifers' main argument is based on their religion, which they would force me to observe, apparently. Sorry, I wont. I don’t believe that conception is equal to a person. My little toe is human, but it isn’t a person. When it becomes a thinking, feeling, self-aware toe, then you can argue it is a person.

Guttermouth,

Pro-life can be a philosophical question as well. We do not have to go into religion to find out that people think murder is wrong. It is right there in the law books. We would not have laws against murder in less we thought it was wrong. The same can be said of abortion if the argument is made that the baby that is conceived is human. There is no need to even bring religion into it.

Your little toe is part of your human body, but it is inherently not a human being. It is of a human being, but does not have the capacity to ever become one. You can chop it off and you would still be considered a human being, but your toe would not. You can remove all of your limbs and you are still a human being, but your limbs would not. An embryo can and will, if allowed, grow all of the same body parts that you have. This makes it a human being. It has that capability if allowed to mature.

Aaron

 

[Matthew_18:14]

I would have 100% acceptance, too, and I am against abortion. And I find your claim that I am making excuses insulting. I read the transcripts of the votes in question. Complete transcripts. Did you? Or did you just form an opinion based on something you heard somewhere?

Guttermouth,

I should have worded that post in another way. I'm frustrated in the fact that whatever Obama says everyone takes him for his word. His voting record for abortion has been pretty set. I don't deny that he could be telling the truth, but I also wouldn't put it past any politician to vote against something and then give an excuse. And to answer your question, no, I haven't read the transcripts, but Mr. Obama has said himself that he would support abortion rights. I do not know what more proof you need. His saying that he will provide more help for these individuals is the standard claim that all politicians make. If you vote for me I'll get you this and solve your problems. Unfortunately I do not see that happening.

Here is an argument that I made in another thread. Completely hypothetical situations.
1.) Father who smokes who tells his kids not to smoke.
2.) Father who doesn't smoke that tells his kids not to smoke.
Which of the kids is more likely to smoke (by the way Philip-Morris did a study that proved the father who smokes is more likely to have kids that smoke)?

I'd vote for number one.

So we say we are against abortion, but will vote for the man who supports it in every way he can. Some kids will listen and not get abortions, but there will still be a lot who don't listen because it can't be that bad if the president thinks it is okay.

Major oversimplication, but never the less, you can see where I am going with this.

Aaron

 

[Guttermouth]

Of course a toe is not a person or a potential person. But the point being made is that all tissue is not a person. An early term fetus is not a person. It is human, like my toe, but it is not a person. I do believe there is a point at which a fetus is developed enough that it should be preserved. But of course there are exceptions to that. I would not force a woman to carry a 30 week fetus with no brain. Hard core pro-life people would force her to carry and give birth to her dead baby. I find that cruel. A fetus, no matter what week of development, but with no brain, is not a person. It is human, but not a person.

Similarly, I believe that an undeveloped, early term lump of human cells is not a person, and if a woman doesn't want to keep it. I don't see how I could force her to. The only way I could see someone feeling they should force her to is because of religion and, as I said, even that is contradictory.

 

[Matthew_18:14]

It just shows fetuses have reflexive ability, not conscious experience of pain. And even if they could feel pain, I doubt they would be able to comprehend it as much as an adult rabbit would, considering their limited understanding and experiences.

platzapS,

I can now argue that we can kill people in a coma. We don't know if they feel pain, we don't know if they have conscious thoughts, so we are allowed to kill them. They can't speak for themselves and we can't determine there brain activity means anything.

Just wondering. Have you ever seen the silent scream video. It might be something you would want to see.

Aaron

 

[Matthew_18:14]

Of course a toe is not a person or a potential person. But the point being made is that all tissue is not a person. An early term fetus is not a person. It is human, like my toe, but it is not a person. I do believe there is a point at which a fetus is developed enough that it should be preserved. But of course there are exceptions to that. I would not force a woman to carry a 30 week fetus with no brain. Hard core pro-life people would force her to carry and give birth to her dead baby. I find that cruel. A fetus, no matter what week of development, but with no brain, is not a person. It is human, but not a person.

Similarly, I believe that an undeveloped, early term lump of human cells is not a person, and if a woman doesn't want to keep it. I don't see how I could force her to. The only way I could see someone feeling they should force her to is because of religion and, as I said, even that is contradictory.

Guttermouth,

I would have to disagree totally with that determination. These are cells that have the capability of becoming everything that you need. It has all the genetic makeup that is ever needed and it is completely unique. Your toe has the same genetic makeup, but it would not be capable of growing a heart.

And if we want to look at the facts you will discover that pretty much every abortion occurs after the fifth week, at which point the baby has developed a heart. It is no longer just a lump of cells it has already started growing the parts it needs to survive on the outside. Just a thought.

Aaron

 

[Guttermouth]

Guttermouth,

I should have worded that post in another way. I'm frustrated in the fact that whatever Obama says everyone takes him for his word. His voting record for abortion has been pretty set. I don't deny that he could be telling the truth, but I also wouldn't put it past any politician to vote against something and then give an excuse. And to answer your question, no, I haven't read the transcripts, but Mr. Obama has said himself that he would support abortion rights. I do not know what more proof you need. His saying that he will provide more help for these individuals is the standard claim that all politicians make. If you vote for me I'll get you this and solve your problems. Unfortunately I do not see that happening.

Here is an argument that I made in another thread. Completely hypothetical situations.
1.) Father who smokes who tells his kids not to smoke.
2.) Father who doesn't smoke that tells his kids not to smoke.
Which of the kids is more likely to smoke (by the way Philip-Morris did a study that proved the father who smokes is more likely to have kids that smoke)?

I'd vote for number one.

So we say we are against abortion, but will vote for the man who supports it in every way he can. Some kids will listen and not get abortions, but there will still be a lot who don't listen because it can't be that bad if the president thinks it is okay.

Major oversimplication, but never the less, you can see where I am going with this.

Aaron

See, you still don't get it. I am against abortion, and would fight for abortion rights in any way I can. I respect Obama for being anti-abortion, and fighting for the right of a woman to have one if she so chooses. The pro-life cause is not about limiting abortion, reducing abortion or any other shade of gray. As you said, it is for criminalizing ALL abortion, For imprisoning doctors and women over abortion. For taking a woman who makes a very difficult decision that may very well involve her own physical health, and throwing her and her doctor in prison for it.

As long as the discussion about abortion is about throwing people in prison for having one or performing one no matter the circumstance, I expect people like Obama to fight for abortion rights in any way he can.

Fact is, you don't know how Obama feels about it. I believe he feels a lot like me. Like he wants to do everything he can to make abortions end, while recognizing there are exceptions. I know he wouldn't want to imprison a woman and her doctor for aborting a brain-dead 16-week fetus.

 

[Matthew_18:14]

I don't know. I appears that each Christian's perspective on sin and one's worthiness for heaven is different. I don't claim to understand this contradiction, I am simply pointing out it exists. Many have told me abortion is wrong because the fetus, having not asked forgiveness and been saved, is tainted by original sin and would go to hell. Others find that horrible and say all babies go to heaven. I don't believe in the soul, or heaven, or hell....

I think we could move past the arguments because they don't make a difference it what really matters which is whether or not that baby that is forming is a human being. If it is a human being then it should have every right that every other human being does. I would argue that it is a human being and am here to prove that. Discussing what one religion says over another does not matter a hill of beans if we are trying to determine whether the baby is human.

I just wanted to point out a contradiction, but if you do not believe in heaven, or hell the point was wasted. Sorry.

Aaron

 

[HannahBanana]

"Try sticking an infant with a pin and you know what
happens. She opens her mouth to cry and also pulls
away.
Try sticking an 8-week-old human fetus in the palm
of his hand. He opens his mouth and pulls his hand
away.
A more technical description would add that
changes in heart rate and fetal movement also suggest
that intrauterine manipulations are painful to the fetus."
Volman & Pearson, “What the Fetus Feels,”
British Med. Journal, Jan. 26, 1980, pp. 233-234

“Lip tactile response may be evoked by the end of
the 7th week. At 11 weeks, the face and all parts of the
upper and lower extremities are sensitive to touch. By
13 1/2 to 14 weeks, the entire body surface, except for
the back and the top of the head, are sensitive to pain.”
S. Reinis & J. Goldman, The Development
of the Brain C. Thomas Pub., 1980

“Real time ultrasonography, fetoscopy, study of the
fetal EKG (electrocardiogram) and fetal EEG (electroencephalogram)
have demonstrated the remarkable
responsiveness of the human fetus to pain, touch, and
sound. That the fetus responds to changes in light intensity
within the womb, to heat, to cold, and to taste
(by altering the chemical nature of the fluid swallowed
by the fetus), has been exquisitely documented in the
pioneering work of the late Sir William Liley — the
father of fetology.”
Willke, J & B, Abortion: Questions & Answers,
Hayes, 1991, Chpt. 10

A few examples. Obviously more research could be done, but these are the things that I found when checking online.

Aaron

You honestly think that two 28-year-old articles and one 17-year-old article count as valid proof of your points?

Here are three links that prove that the fetus cannot feel pain until at least 20 weeks gestation (and yes, all three links are to recent articles or studies on the matter)

http://discovermagazine.com/2005/dec/fetus-feel-pain/
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/315/7116/1111/c
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/24/h...l=1&adxnnlx=1190325437-OPbi3QHbcK8oYFcRURF0LQ

Oh, and my being pro-choice doesn't affect my vote at all, since I know there are many more important issues to be dealt with in this country, such as the dilapidated health care system and the laughable education system. As proof of that, I'll be voting for Ron Paul in November, and he's about as pro-life as you can get.

 

[Matthew_18:14]

See, you still don't get it. I am against abortion, and would fight for abortion rights in any way I can. I respect Obama for being anti-abortion, and fighting for the right of a woman to have one if she so chooses. The pro-life cause is not about limiting abortion, reducing abortion or any other shade of gray. As you said, it is for criminalizing ALL abortion, For imprisoning doctors and women over abortion. For taking a woman who makes a very difficult decision that may very well involve her own physical health, and throwing her and her doctor in prison for it.

As long as the discussion about abortion is about throwing people in prison for having one or performing one no matter the circumstance, I expect people like Obama to fight for abortion rights in any way he can.

Fact is, you don't know how Obama feels about it. I believe he feels a lot like me. Like he wants to do everything he can to make abortions end, while recognizing there are exceptions. I know he wouldn't want to imprison a woman and her doctor for aborting a brain-dead 16-week fetus.

Guttermouth,

If the law was overturned, which I think requires the Supreme Court, then they would have to use the legislative branch, which is how it should have done in the first place, to create laws for circumstances where it would not make sense to prosecute the doctor and woman. But my stance has, and probably always will be, that the doctor should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and if we look back at cases before Roe v Wade was enacted, you would find that most women were never charged with anything. The doctor was the only one charged because the woman would testify against him/her.

Aaron