Abortion

[CSmrw]

I guess I'm delusional.

But consider the following: You were once a 5 week old embryo.
Other than the experiences you've had since then, how is killing you then any different than killing you now?

I think you can answer that one yourself. If you want to have these debates you have to be careful which terms you choose, because I can start reeling off dezons of ways it's "any" different.

 

[flicka]

No, I seriously want to know. If somebody put together a site that says I personally respect X women, and you did the math, I'd like to know.

I don't need a website. You are here, and unless you are in isolation in a cave somewhere I assume you have encountered women in your life. I also make the assumption that you do not automatically DISRESPECT woman that you meet but if I am wrong on that assumption please tell me.

Now I'm thinking women like your aunts, neighbors, coworkers, classmates, etc. Your favorite teacher in high school perhaps? My point is you can't know who has/hasn't had an abortion.

 

[loriersea]

I don't need a website. You are here, and unless you are in isolation in a cave somewhere I assume you have encountered women in your life. I also make the assumption that you do not automatically DISRESPECT woman that you meet but if I am wrong on that assumption please tell me.

Now I'm thinking women like your aunts, neighbors, coworkers, classmates, etc. Your favorite teacher in high school perhaps? My point is you can't know who has/hasn't had an abortion.

Along those lines, what people who say that a fetus is a person, and thus abortion is murder, are saying is that women who have abortions are murderers. That means that if your mother, aunt, neighbor, coworker, classmate, friend, or favorite teacher had an abortion, you believe that they committed an act that is the moral (and that you believe it should be the legal) equivalent of murder. They should be serving the same sentence that someone who took a newborn and hacked it up into little pieces and dumped it in the trash should serve.

And yet, I don't know anyone who honestly thinks that. Would you trust a person who had an abortion to babysit your child? To teach their kindergarten class? To watch your dog for a weekend? Would you trust a person who murdered a child to babysit your child? To teach their kindergarten class? To watch your dog for a weekend? If there is any difference between those two answers, why, if you honestly believe that abortion is murder?

If a fetus is a person, and killing a fetus is murder, and it should be considered such by the law, then somewhere between 1/5 and 1/2 of American women SHOULD be serving sentences for murder. They should be in prison right now, alongside people who stabbed 6-year-old children to death. Is that really what people think? Do you (and that's a general "you," not you flicka ) really think that a person who aborts an embryo at 7 weeks gestation (5 weeks development) and someone who drowns a two-year-old are honestly committing the same act?

 

[DieHappy]

I'm not talking about wire coathanger, home abortions. Even in states where it was illegal, most abortions still took place in medical facilities or inconspicuous buildings. Even if it was performed by a doctor in a hospital, it was still an illegal abortion which factors into the bottom line number. I would also like to add, that one third of the states in the US offered legal abortion prior to 1973, but were heavily restricted; however, some people flew in under the radar, citing "health reasons" for terminating a pregnancy. It is impossible to accurately calculate how many of these "legal" abortions were actually illegal, outside of individual state laws. Now, onto the numbers:



Now, as far as 1.5 million abortions per year, that's an inflated number. I confess, I didn't visit the link in the OP, but I am curious as to when that information was gathered. According to the CDC, in the year 2000 there were 857,000 abortions performed in the United States. I believe they only collect and compile abortion data once every four or five years.

I am also curious if the percentage rate of pregnanices that end in abortion were calculated keeping in mind the number of pregnancies that end in miscarriage or stillbirth every year. The fact remains, more than half of all pregnancies in the United States, every year, will result in a live birth.

Ok. I'd really like to know where these numbers are coming from because they are, to me, unbelievable.
But let's work with them. You just said that there 50% more abortions before Roe than in the year 2000. This means several things.
1: You shouldn't be scared of Roe being overturned. In fact, you should support it because it was bad case law. Overturning Roe would, apparently, not decrease the availablility of abortion because before Roe there were more.
2: You should be encouraged that getting abortion out of the limelight will make it safer.
"Reardon's response documented the newest record-based research proving that the risk of death associated with abortion is actually higher than that associated with childbirth, miscarriage, or not being pregnant. These are the only studies to examine pregnancy-associated mortality related to abortion and childbirth using a common standard and methodology. He also documented that women face higher risk of psychiatric illness following an abortion and noted the lack of any evidence that couples who abort a baby due to fetal anomalies experience any psychological benefit. He concluded his remarks with the observation that proponents of abortion have failed to document any benefits of abortion that outweigh the known risks, either in general or specifically for those women who face a concurrent illness. Citing: Reardon DC, Hoeldtke NJ, Marchetti P, Greene MF, Ecker JL. "Abortion, Health, and the Law," N Engl J Med 2004; 350:1908-1910, Apr 29, 2004. Correspondence[font=Arial,Helvetica]"
If there were really 50% more abortions pre Roe, you'd think we'd have heard about the deaths. I can only assume that these abortions were somehow safer since we can only find evidence about a couple of deaths.
3: More choice, right? More abortions = more choice in the minds of the planned parenthood sycophants. I'd think repealing Roe would be a great thing.
[/font]

 

[DieHappy]

If you can knowingly destroy your own baby, I can't respect you as a person. No excuses.

Totally agree. It's a weakness of character.

 

[DieHappy]

For example, do you find it at all devestating that Africa, which is responsible for less than 20% of the worldwide births a year also boasts the second largest maternal mortality rate in the world? They have only 20% of worldwide births, but a whopping 45% of maternal deaths worldwide occur there? China makes up 60% of the world births, and 55% of the worlds maternal deaths? Compare that to developed countries, which have 11% of the world's births per year, but make up less than 1% of maternal deaths? In the US, the maternal mortality rate is 1 out of 3,700. In Africa, the maternal mortality rate is 1 in 16, unless you've had multiple births, where for your second child it's 1 in 10, your third child 1 in 8, and by your fifth child it's 1 in 2. In China, the mother mortality rate is 1 in 65. In developing countries, 13% of maternal deaths are girls under 16. And in developing countries, the biggest cause of death, 40% are killed because of birth asphixia because less than 40% of births in third world countries are attended by persons knowledgable in deliviering babies... Meaning, the baby suffocates during birth. When was the last time you heard this happening in the US? 45 out of 1,000 babies die right at birth, and another 100 out of that 1,000 die within the first year of complications from birth or pregnancy, and an estimated 12 million children in third world countries die from curable illness each year, and that's not including those who die from malnutrition and starvation.

So you can't honestly sit here and tell me that people who are in third world countries, who have no means of birth control and because of that have a maternal mortality rate of 1 out of 16, have a good thing going. Especially knowing that your wife who's had 7 children would most likely be deceased from childbirth, and at least one of your children lost.

How would leaglized, on demand abortion help any of this?

 

[DieHappy]

That's absurd. Abortions did NOT number in the thousands before Roe. ALL estimates about how many abortions occurred before Roe are only estimates,

Which I've seen numbering in the thousands. Show me a better one.

but every estimate by anyone who is not deeply invested in the pro-illegal abortion cause indicates that abortions occurred with great frequency before abortion became legal.

On second thought, don't. I'll converse with Kat. She's not as heavy handed with the insults.

 

[DieHappy]

But to argue that an embryo at 5 weeks gestation is a person and to kill it is murder is nothing more than delusional.

Still pretty heavy.

 

[DieHappy]

Yes, I was once a five week old embryo. I was wanted. That's what matters.

Why does being wanted affect the biological status of the embryo? What if your mom aborted you and then a week later changed her mind? Would it be ok and then a week later turn to murder?
This is what I meant before. Reasonable people will accept that the 5 week old embryo is a human life but still argue for abortion rights because they crave power over life and death.

 

[DieHappy]

So you believe, then, that having a miscarriage is the same thing as losing a child? You believe that there is NO difference between miscarrying at four or five or six weeks gestation and having your born child, who you have held and loved and known as a person (because they have a personality, even if they are only a few hours old), die?

Yes, though one would hurt a lot more, they are both a loss.
There's huge difference between my grandmother dying and some other 80 year old woman from the same nursing home. One hurt like hell, the other I could care less about. That doesn't mean one was a life and the other wasn't.
Life has a definition, and whether you accept it or not, that is the definition.

 

[loriersea]

This is what I meant before. Reasonable people will accept that the 5 week old embryo is a human life but still argue for abortion rights because they crave power over life and death.

I don't crave power over life and death, and I don't want anyone else to have that power. The only people I see craving power over life and death are those that would like to revive the once-booming back-alley abortion industry and see women bleeding to death too afraid to get help at the emergency room, rather than allowing them to abort a six-week-old embryo safely and legally.

 

[DieHappy]

Now I'm thinking women like your aunts, neighbors, coworkers, classmates, etc. Your favorite teacher in high school perhaps? My point is you can't know who has/hasn't had an abortion.

But I lose nearly all of my respect for her when I find out. (doesn't mean I stop interacting with her or trying to befriend her, I just can't trust her to make a good decision anymore)

 

[DieHappy]

I don't crave power over life and death, and I don't want anyone else to have that power. The only people I see craving power over life and death are those that would like to revive the once-booming back-alley abortion industry and see women bleeding to death too afraid to get help at the emergency room, rather than allowing them to abort a six-week-old embryo safely and legally.

You can't have it both ways. Either pre Roe abortions were rare, or they were extremely safe.

 

[loriersea]

But I lose nearly all of my respect for her when I find out. (doesn't mean I stop interacting with her or trying to befriend her, I just can't trust her to make a good decision anymore)

But, would you think, for example, that a woman who had an abortion should be barred from working with children? Should she not be allowed to be a teacher, for instance? Should a person who has murdered a child be barred from working with children? Should they be allowed to teach?

You can't have it both ways. Either pre Roe abortions were rare, or they were extremely safe.

Because you say so? That's a false dichotomy. I'm not saying that every other woman having an illegal abortion died. However, VERY conservative estimates (made by people who would like to see illegal abortions again) say that around 300 women died each year from illegal abortions. Liberal estimates (from those who do not want to see illegal abortions) say that around 10,000 died. (And those numbers are both just for the U.S.) Obviously, those numbers are highly variable depending on what year we are talking about. Before antibiotics, the death rate would have been very high. The 10,000 a year number comes from a 1930 study, and represents deaths before penicillian was widely available. The numbers probably dropped a great deal after that, but we can still come up with some guesses are averages. If we assume that the truth is somewhere in between those two, I think we can assume that somewhere between 1,000-3,000 (and that's being very generous to the conservative estimate and erring on their side) died each year from illegal abortions. Despite the fact that more women have abortions now that abortion is legal (whether it be many more women, as some would argue, or somewhat more women, as I think is more accurate), that many women each year do NOT die after having legal abortions. In fact, a study by the CDC found that, between 1972 and 1987 (all abortions in the study were legal), only 240 women died as a result of those abortions, and we can only imagine that, now that abortions generally occur earlier in the pregnancy than they did then, thanks to better technology and more sensitive home-pregnancy tests, those numbers are even lower now. So, at the very least, women are dying at a 10-fold LOWER rate (going by the most conservative estimates) than they were before abortion was legal, and if they were in fact have far fewer abortions before Roe, are dying at a much, much, much lower rate.

 

[JulySheMustFly]

I think abortions are an essential evil in a civilized nation. I think all means should be taken to avoid them, but I would rather see my frightened sister, daughter, best friends go to a doctor where things are sanitary and done with safety in mind than the fscary things that could happen if roe was overturned. What does need to be done is a tightening of the rules regarding who, when, etc. on abortions.

 

[katautumn]

Ok. I'd really like to know where these numbers are coming from because they are, to me, unbelievable.

Well, the numbers for the year 2000 were put out by the CDC based upon their collected data from abortion providers. The estimate of how many illegal abortions took place come from various sources, such as hospital records and personal testimonies of women who sought illegal abortions prior to 1973.

But let's work with them. You just said that there 50% more abortions before Roe than in the year 2000. This means several things.
1: You shouldn't be scared of Roe being overturned. In fact, you should support it because it was bad case law. Overturning Roe would, apparently, not decrease the availablility of abortion because before Roe there were more.

The fact that the need for abortion has decreased since 1973 is encouraging and that it was a vital and crucial court decision in the interest of women and families. I am glad the numbers have decreased. I would love to see them go down substantially once again. I don't want to see more abortions. In fact, I would love to see the need for them eradicated altogether, but until that day comes it needs to remain legal.

2: You should be encouraged that getting abortion out of the limelight will make it safer.

Even if abortion were made illegal, it wouldn't eliminate the need for it nor the controversy surrounding it. And it wouldn't necessarily make it safer. My grandmother had a legal abortion in the 1960's in a hospital in New York. She almost bled to death at the hands of an unskilled surgeon. Even in a sanitary, legal environment her life was put in jeopardy because most medical schools did not offer adequate training on how to perform abortion procedures out of fear of prosecution. If abortion were made illegal on a national scale, the number of skilled doctors in the field would dwindle as the next generation of med school students would not be offered studies on abortion.

"Reardon's response documented the newest record-based research proving that the risk of death associated with abortion is actually higher than that associated with childbirth, miscarriage, or not being pregnant. These are the only studies to examine pregnancy-associated mortality related to abortion and childbirth using a common standard and methodology. He also documented that women face higher risk of psychiatric illness following an abortion and noted the lack of any evidence that couples who abort a baby due to fetal anomalies experience any psychological benefit. He concluded his remarks with the observation that proponents of abortion have failed to document any benefits of abortion that outweigh the known risks, either in general or specifically for those women who face a concurrent illness. Citing: Reardon DC, Hoeldtke NJ, Marchetti P, Greene MF, Ecker JL. "Abortion, Health, and the Law," N Engl J Med 2004; 350:1908-1910, Apr 29, 2004. Correspondence[font=Arial,Helvetica]"

[/font]
[font=Arial,Helvetica]Impressive use of a medical study, but unfortunately there are some implications here. Dr. Reardon's essays and "studies" on abortion, from my extensive research, can only be found on anti-abortion biased websites. My best guess would be that he held to the pro-life stance, which would obviously blindsight him to the inaccuracies found in his works. He is vague in his mentioning of abortion being more dangerous to the woman than live birth or miscarriage. It is true that third-trimester abortions carry almost the same fatality rate as maternal death rates from complications during a full-term birth; however, almost 98% of abortions occur before 20 weeks into gestation, most before 12 weeks. These abortions carry a substantially lower fatality rate than live birth.[/font]

Is there a risk of depression associated with abortion? Absolutely, just as there is a risk for post-partum depression after giving birth. Lest we should forget that Andrea Yeats drowned her four children while she was in the throes of post-partum depression.

If there were really 50% more abortions pre Roe, you'd think we'd have heard about the deaths. I can only assume that these abortions were somehow safer since we can only find evidence about a couple of deaths.

There were many deaths directly related to illegal abortion. The fact is, we don't know just how many there were because they were never documented.

3: More choice, right? More abortions = more choice in the minds of the planned parenthood sycophants. I'd think repealing Roe would be a great thing.

People said the same thing about the prohibition. Did outlawing alcohol eliminate drinking? No. It increased crime due to bootlegging and gang-related activities. Drinking was forced underground and eventually the lawmakers realized that making what they considered an "immoral practice" illegal did nothing to prevent it.

 

[flicka]

But I lose nearly all of my respect for her when I find out. (doesn't mean I stop interacting with her or trying to befriend her, I just can't trust her to make a good decision anymore)

Tis a pity you will never find out. Even more a pity you must live with the knowledge that you might be being fooled by every woman you know because they will never disclose such personal information to you. Or worse, that they might lie to your face knowing your personal views.

 

[suzybeezy]

Closed for staff review