I don't care if you think abortion is wrong.

[Lisa0315]

Wow... we've got a new breed of fundy on this board.
The kind that asks for explicit evidence.
Receives explicit evidence.
Then continues posting in the same thread saying no evidence was given.
I mean before they would wait until another thread to make that claim in hopes of appealing to the peanut gallery.
So bearing false witness is ok as long as you think it's for Jesus?


Anyway...
People keep asking for the point of illuminating others of the fact that a fetus is a parasite. It's because as anti-choicers attempt to deny women of their reproductive rights they paint this picture of the unborn as this beautiful bundle of joy. For a woman that wants a child I'm sure this is the case. As for an unwanted pregnancy it's important to understand precisely the relationship the unborn human has with it's host. A fetus absolutely ravages a woman's body during pregnancy. Because of this no one should be forced to go through this without their consent. No human, born or unborn has the right to live inside you, feeding off your biological resources without your consent. In the civilized world we don't enslave a person's body to support the life of another.

And again, as Electric keeps attempting to clarify - calling it a parasite says nothing to the worth of the fetus. It's being biologically accurate as to what the fetus does. Just because the word has negative connotations in someone's mind doesn't make it any less true.

The fetus is not a parasite. Period.

Look at what you have written. "No human, born or unborn has the right to live inside of you, feeding off your biological resources without your consent."

Hate to tell you this, but consent was given when the method of procreation was accomplished. You act as if the fetus magically appears inside a woman against her will.

A parasite seeks out the host. A fetus is brought to the womb by the action of the parents.

Take responsibility and stop acting as if the fetus is the problem. Unprotected sex and failure of birth control methods is the problem. The fetus does not OVERCOME the host and force itself upon the mother.

It is ridiculous and beyond dehumanizing. The very act of calling a fetus a parasite is immoral in of itself.

Lisa

 

[IzzyPop]

The fetus is not a parasite. Period.

Look at what you have written. "No human, born or unborn has the right to live inside of you, feeding off your biological resources without your consent."

Hate to tell you this, but consent was given when the method of procreation was accomplished. You act as if the fetus magically appears inside a woman against her will.

Except in cases of rape. Or in cases where birth control failed. I have a 42 year old friend whose tubal ligation didn't take and she got pregnant. She had just been married. Her youngest,a 19 year old, had just moved out of the house. She did everything in her power to not get pregnant. Did she give consent to having a high risk pregnancy and care for a child until she was in her 60's?

A parasite seeks out the host. A fetus is brought to the womb by the action of the parents.

Take responsibility and stop acting as if the fetus is the problem. Unprotected sex and failure of birth control methods is the problem. The fetus does not OVERCOME the host and force itself upon the mother.

To create an anaolgy that I know you will like even less: That is like saying that lung canser is not the problem, smoking is. There is some validity to that. But once the cancer (or unwanted fetus) is there, it becomes the more pressing problem. The how of its intrusive arrival is reduced to a lesson for others.

It is ridiculous and beyond dehumanizing. The very act of calling a fetus a parasite is immoral in of itself.

Lisa

Defend that one, please. How so? A fetus cannot be harmed in any way by calling it a parasite. Or a pain in the neck. Or a litany of other derogatory terms. It has no comprehension of language, and at the stage we are talking about, no emotions. How can calling it a name that you find uncomfortable be immoral?

 

[WatersMoon110]

That's the whole point. When a person decides to have sex, they are giving a baby permission to be there. Since one of the functions of sex is to create life, then the very act itself is saying, I am ready for a baby. If that's not what they are thinking in their head, that's what their actions are saying.

I disagree. People who have heterosexual vaginal sex are essentially consenting to the possibility that they might get pregnant. But I don't feel that this means they must carry that pregnancy to term.

But then, it's just your opinion against my opinion in this matter, and there is no logical or legal argument that can prove either of us right or wrong.

I hope that when you have sex, you feel the way you claim that people should (I know that I feel the way that I stated). But why should everyone be forced to follow your opinion in this matter?

Since the sexual act is designed for intimacy in which the fruit born of that intimacy would be a baby, then they are giving permission for a child to be there. If I plant a seed in the ground, I am by that very act, giving a tree and all its fruit permission to be there.How ridiculous it would be to say that I put the seed in the ground, but I didn't give it permission to grow into a tree.

But planting a seed is a purposeful act, intending to grow some species of flora from that seed. The equivalent would be when a couple decides to try for a baby, and has unprotected sex with that intention.

I feel that the idea of randomly dropping seeds from a fruit one is eating is more like a couple having (hopefully protected) sex for pleasure, bonding, fun, etc. The seeds fall, some might grow, most will not. If they grow in a place where they would not thrive, or where they might cause damage (like right next to one's foundation), it is best to remove them (either killing them or moving them where they can live better).

 

[WatersMoon110]

The fetus is not a parasite. Period.

Except for all of the perfectly valid possible definitions of "parasite" which can include unborn humans (and other mammals).

Look at what you have written. "No human, born or unborn has the right to live inside of you, feeding off your biological resources without your consent."

Hate to tell you this, but consent was given when the method of procreation was accomplished. You act as if the fetus magically appears inside a woman against her will.

By your logic, you seem to be saying that people are intentionally getting pregnant, then getting abortions for the "fun" of it.

If a couple had consented to carrying a pregnancy to term, they would not be looking for an abortion! Obviously, they don't feel they have consented to this, despite your opinions on the matter. Most couples take at least some precautions against getting pregnant (though the majority of them are, unfortunately, not always as consistent about their contraceptive methods as one would hope), showing that they obviously are trying not to get pregnant, and so do not consent to carrying a pregnancy to term.

A parasite seeks out the host. A fetus is brought to the womb by the action of the parents.

Most parasites find their way into their hosts through means other than their own will - usually through contaminated food. I think that saying that a given parasite "seeks out" their host is giving such organisms far too much credit. Like an unexpected pregnancy, a parasite is picked up through an activity that the host usually does not get negative results from.

Take responsibility and stop acting as if the fetus is the problem. Unprotected sex and failure of birth control methods is the problem. The fetus does not OVERCOME the host and force itself upon the mother.

I'm sure that's very helpful to say to pregnant couples seeking abortion ("well you shouldn't have had unprotected sex or had your contraceptive methods fail").

Yes, precautions against unintentional pregnancy should be taken. But, unintentional pregnancy will happen (all contraceptive methods have a failure rate), and that needs to also be looked at as a separate issue.

It is ridiculous and beyond dehumanizing. The very act of calling a fetus a parasite is immoral in of itself.

Why? A certain poster in here has often referred to many born humans as "parasites on society". Is that statement immoral?

I understand that you don't like the term "parasite" being applied to unborn humans (and, frankly, I don't like it much either). But to say that it is immoral to use this term (which by many definitions can apply to unborn mammals) is, in my opinion, a bit silly.

 

[godismyabba]

First, yes I am a Christian, and yes, I believe abortion is wrong. I just want to interject a personal experience.

My older sister was 13 and pregnant. My parents talked her into having an abortion. She is so scarred from this, physically and emotionally. Thing is, when she did it, she wanted it. She didn't want to go through a pregnancy and have to give it up. She wanted her "life" back. It was years later that she really started having problems with this. My point is, only the person that is having the abortion (other than the actual baby) will be the one to "handle" the aftermath.

Next, when I was pregnant, they did a sonogram at about 6-7 weeks. You could allready see the formation, and the heart was beating. I was so amazed that this was possible to see. I had another sonogram about a month later, and it looked like a little person: arms, legs, head. For me, that solidified that this is a person.

I won't ever tell anyone what they should or should not do based on my own morals. God will be the judge of that, not me. The only thing I can do is ask: what would convince you to have the baby? Do you need more resources, more support? If it's just the inconvenience of being pregnant, I am so heart broken. But I also know that some people don't know the alternatives. If given every available alternative, would they make a different choice? I feel like my responsibility is to be there for that person if they do decide to make a different choice. And to love them even if they do go through with the abortion. They are not beyond forgiveness and love. I can't imagine ten years down the road regretting this like my sister did. How do you change that? My prayer is that someone who is considering an abortion will have the love and support to make a different choice, but that is only my prayer. I can't condemn someone who has the abortion, I've made so many mistakes of my own. I have enough to answer for.

Anyhow, sorry so long of a response... In His Grip, Melissa

 

[levi501]

The fetus is not a parasite. Period.

Right, it's not a parasite because the idea of it makes you sad.
We all know the truth is contingent on how it makes Lisa feel.
How very rational of you.

Look at what you have written. "No human, born or unborn has the right to live inside of you, feeding off your biological resources without your consent."

Hate to tell you this, but consent was given when the method of procreation was accomplished. You act as if the fetus magically appears inside a woman against her will.

It's your opinion that the woman gave consent by having sex.

And it's an absurd opinion.
Electric continues to use a spot on analogy. For those that drive are they consenting to get in an accident because they know there's a chance one may occur? Or how about leaving the front door of my house open. Am I consensting to letting anyone that wants to walk inside?

You see in the real world, not every time two people have sex are they consenting to having a lifeform grow inside them.

A parasite seeks out the host. A fetus is brought to the womb by the action of the parents.

It's painfully obvious you want more added to the deffinition of a parasite to exclude a fetus, but this simply isn't a requirement.

Honestly it makes sense that it wouldn't be. Parasitism describes the relationship between the host and the parasite. Any other distinction, species or otherwise, is superfluous to that relationship.

Take responsibility and stop acting as if the fetus is the problem.

Unprotected sex and failure of birth control methods is the problem. The fetus does not OVERCOME the host and force itself upon the mother.

Just because someone didn't choose to live inside another doesn't automatically grant them the right to.

You do your side an injustice by reducing the problem down to competing non-choices... the childs non-choice to be conceived versus the woman's non-choice to be pregnant.

The debate should be whether a fetus by it's nature has the right to live inside another against their will.

It is ridiculous and beyond dehumanizing. The very act of calling a fetus a parasite is immoral in of itself.

Lisa

More appeal to emotion. Color me unimpressed.
Again, I'm sorry biology makes you sad, but this has no impact on the facts.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I would say the term parasite used to describe the unborn child is quite enough evidence to prove that at least some people on here do not value the life of the unborn. I have never known anyone who valued the life of a parasite.

I hadn't gotten into that exchange about nomenclature but it does not support your conclusions whatsoever. Your comment there would appear to be sour grapes over the fact some are not swayed by the emotional "But it's a bay-bee" claptrap the antiabortion forces dole out.

When some Spanish settlers fled from Karankawas (CANNIBALS) on Galveston Island IN THE 1500s many had arrow wounds which became "fly-blown" when insects laid eggs in their wounds. The developing maggots cleansed the wounds of toxins and helped some survive. We all have thousands of parasites which benefit us. It's only the big bad ones like tapeworms which harm us.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I didn't realize that there was so much anti-abortion hooplah going on right now. I'm so disconnected.

Time for another donation to Planned Parenthood!

We sent a special contribution to PPKM (Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Missouri) to fight the politically motivated legal problems they are having with the corrupt anti-abortion District Attorney Phill Kline and i would urge all to do the same, especially those opposed to abortion who are honest when they rhetorically distance themselves from extremists in their movement.

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

Just to interject (and I'm a liberal Pro-Life person who supports a woman's right to choose) the medical definition of fetus or embryo is not classified as parasite. A parasite is usually a different organism getting nourishment from another or different species. Usually it causes harm. Normally a pregnancy doesn't cause medical harm. (of course there are cases when it does and that should be looked at differently)

I'm just concerned because people in this thread who are pro-choice seem to be creating just as a volatile argumentative atmosphere as the strongly pro-life side because of their language. If you plan to debate you should know calling a fetus a "parasite" is going to inflame--just as much as some of the terms that pro-life people use about the pro-choice movement.

I do have a question though for some in the completely pro-choice movement here: In many states if a person murders a pregnant woman that person is charged with murder--not only of the mother but of the fetus or unborn child. Which I have seen many people approve of. Why is this? Why is it when a person murders a mother who is pregnant the fetus is seen as a child but in other ways its called a "parasite".

I'm not trying to be argumentative or a pain but this is something I would really like to understand from someone else's point of view. Help please?

Thanks for any responses in advance...



p.s. don't bother getting hot and bothered and telling me "well a women shouldn't be forced to carry a child she doesn't want--its her choice!!!! I understand that and I support choice so don't lump me in with people who don't support a woman's right to choose)

 

[levi501]

The only thing I can do is ask: what would convince you to have the baby? Do you need more resources, more support? If it's just the inconvenience of being pregnant, I am so heart broken. But I also know that some people don't know the alternatives. If given every available alternative, would they make a different choice? I feel like my responsibility is to be there for that person if they do decide to make a different choice. And to love them even if they do go through with the abortion. They are not beyond forgiveness and love. I can't imagine ten years down the road regretting this like my sister did. How do you change that? My prayer is that someone who is considering an abortion will have the love and support to make a different choice, but that is only my prayer. I can't condemn someone who has the abortion, I've made so many mistakes of my own. I have enough to answer for.

I think that's great you want to help...

Lets start with first paying the total sum of what it'll cost to raise that child to 18 years. You can put it in escrow. Next, how about you cover all medical bills. You'll need to take out an insurance policy to cover any medical issues she has from carrying the child to term and giving birth. This includes resulting side effects, with a large lump sum payment for some of the more rare yet devastating issues that can result, such as infertility, disability, and death. After that, I'm thinking gym trainer and then various plastic surgeries. Is it also a requirement that she breast feed the child? Ok, you may need to pony up some funds for breast augmentation.

 

[WatersMoon110]

I do have a question though for some in the completely pro-choice movement here: In many states if a person murders a pregnant woman that person is charged with murder--not only of the mother but of the fetus or unborn child. Which I have seen many people approve of. Why is this?

Personally, I don't agree with fetal homicide laws. I don't think that laws should be made because people are feel emotional about a given issue, but rather should be based on logic and ethics.

Anyway - fetal homicide laws are usually based on two conditions, that the unborn human be beyond medical viability (though this is not always the case - it depends on the State's law in question) and that the pregnant woman wanted to keep the unborn human.

Why is it when a person murders a mother who is pregnant the fetus is seen as a child but in other ways its called a "parasite".

Because these two statements are based on emotion and not on logic, obviously. *grin*

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

Thank you for your response WatersMoon.

I understand your POV about fetal homicide laws--and I really agree with your last statement in your post.

 

[IzzyPop]

Just to interject (and I'm a liberal Pro-Life person who supports a women's right to choose) the medical definition of fetus or embryo is not classified as parasite. A parasite is usually a different organism getting nourishment from another or different species. Usually it causes harm. Normally a pregnancy doesn't cause medical harm. (of course there are cases when it does and that should be looked at differently)

I'm just concerned because people in this thread who are pro-choice seem to be creating just as a volatile argumentative atmosphere as the strongly pro-life side because of their language. If you plan to debate you should know calling a fetus a "parasite" is going to inflame--just as much as some of the terms that pro-life people use about the pro-choice movement.

I do have a question though for some in the completely pro-choice movement here: In many states if a person murders a pregnant woman that person is charged with murder--not only of the mother but of the fetus or unborn child. Which I have seen many people approve of. Why is this? Why is it when a person murders a mother who is pregnant the fetus is seen as a child but in other ways its called a "parasite".

I'm not trying to be argumentative or a pain but this is something I would really like to understand from someone else's point of view. Help please?

Thanks for any responses in advance...

I think the reason is two-fold. The first has to do with our legal culture. Prosecutors get rewarded for putting people behind bars. The more charges they can throw at a suspect, the greater the chance of a conviction or plea bargain. Add that to the cultural importance we place on children and prenant mothers, it gives a huge lever for the prosecution to use in a jury trial.

The second has to do with the intent of the mother. I have a hard time believing that a prosecutor would charge the assailant if the mother was killed on her way to an abortion clinic to terminate the pregnancy. But if the parents were wanting to keep the baby, then it holds more value, and prosecuting for the murder would actually make a bit of sense. It is a shade of gray that can be uncomfortable to people trying to keep it black and white.

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

Thanks Izzy for your response.

 

[levi501]

Just to interject (and I'm a liberal Pro-Life person who supports a woman's right to choose) the medical definition of fetus or embryo is not classified as parasite. A parasite is usually a different organism getting nourishment from another or different species. Usually it causes harm. Normally a pregnancy doesn't cause medical harm. (of course there are cases when it does and that should be looked at differently)

First, you're pro-choice. Not pro-life. C'mon say it outloud. It's ok, it isn't a dirty word. Pro-choice versus pro-life is a political distinction. Many, and actually most pro-choice people I have met would never consider an abortion.

Second, you have your facts wrong. A fetus is a parasite and does cause harm to the host. Always.
Here's a list for you:

Normal, frequent or expected temporary side effects:

• exhaustion (weariness common from first weeks)
• altered appetite and senses of taste and smell
• nausea and vomiting (50% of women, first trimester)
• heartburn and indigestion
• constipation
• weight gain
• dizziness and light-headedness
• bloating, swelling, fluid retention
• hemmorhoids
• abdominal cramps
• yeast infections
• congested, bloody nose
• acne and mild skin disorders
• skin discoloration (chloasma, face and abdomen)
• mild to severe backache and strain
• increased headaches
• difficulty sleeping, and discomfort while sleeping
• increased urination and incontinence
• bleeding gums
• pica
• breast pain and discharge
• swelling of joints, leg cramps, joint pain
• difficulty sitting, standing in later pregnancy
• inability to take regular medications
• shortness of breath
• higher blood pressure
• hair loss
• tendency to anemia
• curtailment of ability to participate in some sports and activities
• infection including from serious and potentially fatal disease (pregnant women are immune suppressed compared with non-pregnant women, and are more susceptible to fungal and certain other diseases)
• extreme pain on delivery
• hormonal mood changes, including normal post-partum depression
• continued post-partum exhaustion and recovery period (exacerbated if a c-section -- major surgery is required, sometimes taking up to a full year to fully recover)

Here are normal, expectable, or frequent permanent side effects:

• stretch marks (worse in younger women)
• loose skin
• permanent weight gain or redistribution
• abdominal and vaginal muscle weakness
• pelvic floor disorder (occurring in as many as 35% of middle-aged former child-bearers and 50% of elderly former child-bearers, associated with urinary and rectal incontinence, discomfort and reduced quality of life)
• changes to breasts
• varicose veins
• scarring from episiotomy or c-section
• other permanent aesthetic changes to the body (all of these are downplayed by women, because the culture values youth and beauty)
• increased proclivity for hemmorhoids
• loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis==> origin of the old saying "one baby, one tooth" or the loss of calcium cost the woman her dental health)

Here are occasional complications and side effects:

• hyperemesis gravidarum
• temporary and permanent injury to back
• severe scarring requiring later surgery (especially after additional pregnancies)
• dropped (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies, and other pelvic floor weaknesses---11% of women, including cystocele, rectocele, and enterocele)
• pre-eclampsia (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of pregnancy, associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 - 10% of pregnancies)
• eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death)
• gestational diabetes
• placenta previa
• anemia (which can be life-threatening)
• thrombocytopenic purpura
• severe cramping
• embolism (blood clots)
• medical disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either mother or baby)
• torn abdominal muscles
• mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication)
• serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis)
• hormonal imbalance
• ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)
• broken bones (ribcage, "tail bone")
• hemorrhage and
• numerous other complications of delivery
• refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease
• aggravation of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions (e.g. epilepsy is present in .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism and treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency of seizures)
• severe post-partum depression and psychosis
• research now indicates a possible link between ovarian cancer and female fertility treatments, including "egg harvesting" from infertile women and donors
• research also now indicates correlations between lower breast cancer survival rates and proximity in time to onset of cancer of last pregnancy
• research also indicates a correlation between having six or more pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease

Here are some less common (and serious) complications

• peripartum cardiomyopathy
• cardiopulmonary arrest
• magnesium toxicity
• severe hypoxemia/acidosis
• massive embolism
• increased intracranial pressure, brainstem infarction
• molar pregnancy, gestational trophoblastic disease (like a pregnancy-induced cancer)
• malignant arrhythmia
• circulatory collapse
• placental abruption
• obstetric fistula

Here are a few more permanent side effects:

• future infertility
• permanent disability
• death.

I'm just concerned because people in this thread who are pro-choice seem to be creating just as a volatile argumentative atmosphere as the strongly pro-life side because of their language. If you plan to debate you should know calling a fetus a "parasite" is going to inflame--just as much as some of the terms that pro-life people use about the pro-choice movement.

Well when the pro-life side starts dealing in facts and stops pretending that pregnancy is a welcomed walk in the park I'll stop feeling the necessity of driving home this biological fact.

I do have a question though for some in the completely pro-choice movement here: In many states if a person murders a pregnant woman that person is charged with murder--not only of the mother but of the fetus or unborn child. Which I have seen many people approve of. Why is this? Why is it when a person murders a mother who is pregnant the fetus is seen as a child but in other ways its called a "parasite".

It's been said over and over again that the term parasite and parasitism is an accurate description of the relationship the fetus has with the mother. This says nothing as to the worth of the child.

The rest of this is off topic but I'll say I don't believe a person should be charged with double homicide.

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

First, you're pro-choice. Not pro-life. C'mon say it outloud. It's ok, it isn't a dirty word. Pro-choice versus pro-life is a political distinction. Many, and actually most pro-choice people I have met would never consider an abortion

First of all, don't tell me what I need to do or what I am. I am pro-choice being that I support a woman's right to choose. However I am pro-life (and not just pro-life as far as abortion goes--I'm anti-death penalty and anti-war) as personally I do not think abortion is the best route to go and do not agree with it morally and would personally never do it. I do believe that life begins at conception, howwever as another poster said I realize that other people may not think like me and they deserve to make their own choice. I also think however a lot of pro-life people need to stop yelping about birth control, condoms, and proper sex education being given to teens and they really need to stop inhibiting adults from getting birth control as this would obviously stop or slow down abortions (less people getting pregnant--less abortions)

Second, you have your facts wrong. A fetus is a parasite and does cause harm to the host. Always.

I don't have any facts wrong. I've read the medical definition of parasite, fetus and embryo. Have you? You are simply using words to [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] people off.

Here's a list for you:

Quite a list. Of course not every pregnant woman gets all of those. Or even gets half of them. And I do not know why you bothered to list c-section or episiotomy being that not all labors result in those. It doesn't always happen and you act as if it does. According to that list --by having two children I must be on death's door (especially being one of t hose where delivered via c-section) Your list of rare side effects is VERY RARE. You are as bad as Renton and Avatar. You don't want to debate the issue or even look at realistic facts. You want to inflame things as much as possible. There is no need for it--on either side.

Well when the pro-life side starts dealing in facts and stops pretending that pregnancy is a welcomed walk in the park I'll stop feeling the necessity of driving home this biological fact.

I think a lot of pro-life people realize that pregnancy can sometimes be a real pain and not that comfortable. However, again you are behaving no better than the certain pro-Lifers who demand that you see things their way. You are not giving them anything that would convince them that life doesn't begin at conception and to persuade them concerning to agree with your opinions about abortion. You are giving them more fuel for their fire. If you want people to really take what you say with any seriousness drop the attitude and stop going down to their level.

It's been said over and over again that the term parasite and parasitism is an accurate description of the relationship the fetus has with the mother. This says nothing as to the worth of the child.

But obviously not proved to everyone's satisfaction. (including mine)

The rest of this is off topic but I'll say I don't believe a person should be charged with double homicide.

I'm personally undecided about double homicide laws. Its something I really struggle with.

 

[godismyabba]

Lets start with first paying the total sum of what it'll cost to raise that child to 18 years. You can put it in escrow. Next, how about you cover all medical bills. You'll need to take out an insurance policy to cover any medical issues she has from carrying the child to term and giving birth. This includes resulting side effects, with a large lump sum payment for some of the more rare yet devastating issues that can result, such as infertility, disability, and death. After that, I'm thinking gym trainer and then various plastic surgeries. Is it also a requirement that she breast feed the child? Ok, you may need to pony up some funds for breast augmentation.[/quote]

I meant alternatives, such as adoption. There are lots of people who are willing to "pony up" the insurance and the cost of raising the child. If they die or become disabled due to the pregnancy, they can get disability and social security. Gym trainers and various plastic surgeries are moot point, if the person makes a minimal effort to care for themselves they won't need it. I know a lady that has eight children and looks better than I do, and I've only had one. If they take care of themselves non-pregnant, they will take care of themselves pregnant as well. As for breast augmentation, I have never heard of any woman that wants to have an abortion due to saggy breasts. Gravity is going to do that just fine eventually.
Find a better arguement, this was not a very good example of "alternatives". Are you telling me if a woman knew all of this would be paid for (plastic surgery, cost of raising, ect.) that she would have the baby? Give me a break. Usually the issues run much deeper than the "physical". It's usually economic and emotional issues that cause a woman to decide to abort. Those can be dealt with through adoption and counseling.
Melissa

 

[levi501]

First of all, don't tell me what I need to do or what I am. I am pro-choice being that I support a woman's right to choose. However I am pro-life (and not just pro-life as far as abortion goes--I'm anti-death penalty and anti-war) as personally I do not think abortion is the best route to go and do not agree with it morally and would personally never do it. I do believe that life begins at conception, howwever as another poster said I realize that other people may not think like me and they deserve to make their own choice. I also think however a lot of pro-life people need to stop yelping about birth control, condoms, and proper sex education being given to teens and they really need to stop inhibiting adults from getting birth control as this would obviously stop or slow down abortions (less people getting pregnant--less abortions)

Then you should clarify that you don't mean "pro-life" in the political sense. That when you say it means something totally different from what others recognize it as.

I don't have any facts wrong. I've read the medical definition of parasite, fetus and embryo. Have you? You are simply using words to [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] people off.

Yes. I as well as others have posted it here in this thread as well as cited other threads that talk about in far greater length.

Quite a list. Of course not every pregnant woman gets all of those. Or even gets half of them.

And I never stated that they do or suggested otherwise.
Did you miss the headings that suggested the frequency in which these side effects occur?

And I do not know why you bothered to list c-section or episiotomy being that not all labors result in those.

Because it's an occassional side effect of pregnancy.

It doesn't always happen and you act as if it does.

No I don't. Where did you come up with this?

According to that list --by having two children I must be on death's door (especially being one of t hose where delivered via c-section) Your list of rare side effects is VERY RARE.

The list doesn't suggest that at all. It quite clearly lists the frequency of the vairous side effects. You pretending rare equates to often is pure fantasy and unfounded.

You are as bad as Renton and Avatar. You don't want to debate the issue or even look at realistic facts. You want to inflame things as much as possible. There is no need for it--on either side. I think a lot of pro-life people realize that pregnancy can sometimes be a real pain and not that comfortable. However, again you are behaving no better than the certain pro-Lifers who demand that you see things their way

"realistic facts"? so you admit that your disbelief in them doesn't somehow make them any less of a fact.

Your post is simple emotional appeal coupled with an ad hominem. The problem with your little comparrison is that I don't simply ignore counter arguments or exclude other facts like those you're attempting to demonize me with.

You are not giving them anything that would convince them that life doesn't begin at conception and to persuade them concerning to agree with your opinions about abortion.

Oh, I see... you're under the misguided assumption that I think I can convince radical fundies to change their ways. No, they're probably lost. It'll take years of self relfection and introspection to fix what they're afflicted with.

Oh btw - life does begin at conception. I don't dispute that and find it rather silly for those that do.

My stance is the mother right's supercede that of the unborn child.

You are giving them more fuel for their fire. If you want people to really take what you say with any seriousness drop the attitude and stop going down to their level.

You thinking you have your finger on the pulse of those that read these threads is laughable with your tendency to respond so emotionally.

But obviously not proved to everyone's satisfaction. (including mine)

Yah, go figure. Funny how when people are faced with evidence that doesn't support a pre-conceived idea they'll simply deny it and reassert without evidence of their own to the contrary. Crazy right?

 

[godismyabba]

First, you're pro-choice. Not pro-life. C'mon say it outloud. It's ok, it isn't a dirty word. Pro-choice versus pro-life is a political distinction. Many, and actually most pro-choice people I have met would never consider an abortion.

Second, you have your facts wrong. A fetus is a parasite and does cause harm to the host. Always.
Here's a list for you:



Well when the pro-life side starts dealing in facts and stops pretending that pregnancy is a welcomed walk in the park I'll stop feeling the necessity of driving home this biological fact.


It's been said over and over again that the term parasite and parasitism is an accurate description of the relationship the fetus has with the mother. This says nothing as to the worth of the child.

The rest of this is off topic but I'll say I don't believe a person should be charged with double homicide.

The above "side effects" you listed are not caused by a fetus only. Many of the symptoms you listed here can be experienced by a non-pregnant woman. It's called hormones. Many of the symptoms can also be experienced by males. Guess what, a side effect of sex is pregnancy. Maybe we should concentrate on not getting pregnant. Maybe we can ban sex (please say no!).. there are ways to prevent this little "side effect".. don't have sex or both partners use birth control.

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

Then you should clarify that you don't mean "pro-life" in the political sense. That when you say it means something totally different from what others recognize it as.

No offense but I do not have to clarify anything to you. I explained what I felt pro-life was in my first post. (that it was not merely a political sense)

Because it's an occassional side effect of pregnancy.

Having an episiotomy is a far to routine procedure done by doctors who are too stuck in their own ways (and sometimes without some women knowing about it) to "help" a woman get the child out without "tearing" instead of helping her try other birth positions to aid in birth. Some doctors just do it as routine. It is not necessarily caused by being pregnant or the pregnancy in of it self. A C-section is not a "side effect" but a sometimes medically necessary procedure. My c-section was due to having a large (10lb at birth) baby. Not just being pregnant. To say these are "side effects" is somewhat dishonest.

No I don't. Where did you come up with this?

You listed a laundry list of side effects and things that happen to a women (or could) happen to a woman when she is pregnant. You are comparing a fetus to a parasite and then list these "side effects" of the "parasite". That's a bit over doing it is it not?

Your post is simple emotional appeal coupled with an ad hominem. The problem with your little comparrison is that I don't simply ignore counter arguments or exclude other facts like those you're attempting to demonize me with.

Apparently someone disagrees with you and you accuse them of attacking you with ad hominem attacks. Maybe you should educated yourself on what ad hominem means because I never attacked you. I disagree with your argument, so will you drop the "Woe is me--I'm a martyr for the pro-choice cause" for god's sake! I'm sorry others have demonized you but don't take out your discontent and annoyance with those in the pro-life movement out on me because I didn't do a damn thing to you.

Oh, I see... you're under the misguided assumption that I think I can convince radical fundies to change their ways. No, they're probably lost. It'll take years of self relfection and introspection to fix what they're afflicted with.

More fuel to the fire. You expect people to respect your opinion and your views and you refer to those who think differently as "lost". Real gentleman you are.

Oh btw - life does begin at conception. I don't dispute that and find it rather silly for those that do.

I think rather we disagree what kind of life it is at conception. Or rather what it should be called...

You thinking you have your finger on the pulse of those that read these threads is laughable with your tendency to respond so emotionally.

Apparently you do not know an emotional response and what it is. Maybe you should re-read Renton and Avatar or better yet re-read your own response. They have emotional response. YOU have an emotional response. Your attempt at trying to flame me and compare me to those in this thread that act that way is laughable and does not show anything good about your character--all it shows is that you get ticked when others don't just fall down and agree with you. I interjected my opinion with kindness. You answered with an attitude.

Yah, go figure. Funny how when people are faced with evidence that doesn't support a pre-conceived idea they'll simply deny it and reassert without evidence of their own to the contrary. Crazy right?

And you accuse me of ad hominem attacks?

Your above statement goes both ways you know.

In any case if your evidence was strong enough in my opinion then I would have the guts to stand up and say "Ok, you are right, I was wrong". But your evidence has not convinced me that a fetus is a "parasite" so I choose to hold to my stance until I feel that this point has been properly proved. Crazy that I should actually stick to my guns huh...

Now see if you can try to respond to my post without being completely rude....